Defenders 'disappearing from view'

[Les Hammond]

A couple of examples:

Two tanks approach a wood but cannot see the two AT guns therein because they are in cover.
The AT guns open fire, revealing themselves.
The tanks return fire.
In the ensuing back and forth exchange of rounds, lets assume one of the AT guns falls silent, either due to being destroyed, suppressed, opting to hold fire and play dead or by bugging out. Having stopped firing, the gun is now just a heavy weapon in cover and although it could well still be in place, there might only be a slightly trampled area of undergrowth.

An SPG is shelling an AT gun which is firing on friendlies from a wood. There are no other targets the SPG could be firing at.
The AT gun holds fire to play dead.
Should the SPG keep firing at the AT gun position ‘to make sure’ or should it assume the AT gun has bugged out or been destroyed? Should the ‘playing dead’ tactic always result in the attacker ceasing fire in this example?

The SPG & tank PLAYERS know exactly what the situation is in the wood but does anyone apply a rule to prevent this kind of knowledge abuse?

6mm France 1940

http://les1940.blogspot.co.uk/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/386297688467965/

[Katie L]

Deal it damage tokens for the hits… face down. Some of them are “close call”, some are “weapon kill”, some are “crew kill” that reduce performance. They only get looked at next time the gun wants to activate (which might be to scarper, shoot at you or whatever).

If nothing happens, it’s up to whoever’s shooting at it to keep trying if they want to make sure it’s dead not just heads-down.

Neither player knows whether it’s dead until either the SPG gets close enough or the controlling player tries to use it… even then, they could have a free look at the damage tokens. They know if it’s dead, but they don’t have to tell you… it could still be waiting…

 

[Whirlwind]

How are you deciding that the AT gun is “playing dead”?  Is this a command tactic or a morale outcome?

[Not Connard Sage]

The importance of infantry supporting tanks is sometimes forgotten 😉

 

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Etranger]

Tricky, unless you’re using umpires and blinds so that the players can’t actually see for themselves. In reality it’s likely that the ambushing ATG position(s) would be plastered with fire & then cautiously approached once deemed to be adequately neutralised by suppressing fire.

I like your mechanism Katie. Unfortunately not all gamers would cope with the uncertainty!

[MartinR]

If you are using hidden movement etc, the gun “hiding” becomes a viable tactic. In an open game where the players can see everything, it largely comes down to the mechanics of your spotting and speculative fire rules. The tactic mentioned would work in WRG as it had fixed spotting distances so units could literally drop out of sight by ceasing fire (unless within the minimum spotting distance) , but not in CD where once units are Spotted they stay spotted unless they move back out of sight. If your rules allow area fire on terrain features (some do, some dont) the gun has nowhere to hide in any case.

"Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

[Les Hammond]

Thanks for the input, people!

Katie L wrote:

Deal it damage tokens for the hits… face down. Some of them are “close call”, some are “weapon kill”, some are “crew kill” that reduce performance. They only get looked at next time the gun wants to activate (which might be to scarper, shoot at you or whatever).

The uncertainty is a good especially for solo play but then…I will have seen the ‘other guys’ dice rolls anyway 🙂

Whirlwind wrote:

How are you deciding that the AT gun is “playing dead”? Is this a command tactic or a morale outcome

More because of continuous suppression. I suppose if you assume there are always ‘secondaries’ when targets are finally destroyed then attackers can stop pummelling the area and move on.

MartinR wrote:

In an open game where the players can see everything, it largely comes down to the mechanics of your spotting and speculative fire rules. The tactic mentioned would work in WRG as it had fixed spotting distances so units could literally drop out of sight by ceasing fire (unless within the minimum spotting distance), but not in CD where once units are Spotted they stay spotted unless they move back out of sight. If your rules allow area fire on terrain features the gun has nowhere to hide in any case.

Speculative fire is allowed and am using fixed spotting distances at the moment, which I have just changed to variable & somewhat random but I think I will have it so that ‘once revealed, stays revealed, unless it backs into full cover’

The ATGs are sighted, so they aren’t going to have a nice time if they try to pull out. The tanks are going to … fire until they see ammo exploding, bits of gun flying, or actually see the crews as dead.

Once something such as a tank or an SPG is firing direct onto a target that has been spotted, even if in a woods, you are not going to easily lose sight of it through binoculars or gun sights.

I think I’ll always allow attackers to see when the target is destroyed (secondaries, etc) and for the target to stay located even if not firing and beyond normal ‘heavy weapon in full cover’ spotting distance, so long as it is still on the tree line.

6mm France 1940

http://les1940.blogspot.co.uk/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/386297688467965/

[willz]

I used to play “ambush rule ” when playing WW2, one/ two units could be used as ambush groups hidden on table.  When they fire they were exposed but AFV / Tanks could move (normally backwards) without a loss of firing bonus.   I see no reason why it would not work for ATG’s limbering up and moving after firing or infantry for that mater.

[Author]

Posts