I hate these super-mobile MGs !

For english-speaking players... Feel free to "enlist" and join the Landships! community

I hate these super-mobile MGs !

Messagede santino » Lun Mai 05, 2008 10:49 am

I was really shocked to see that heavy machine guns could move and fire as freely as infantry ! They can even attack in close assault, giving their bonus to the resolution... My imagination is large, but not enough to see how you can run, fire and CC with a 140 lbs beast !!! Modern assault rifles would not make a better job... Moreover, many MGs in strongpoints were fixed, unable to move in the scale of an assault.

To sum up, a great point of disappointment for me, that makes infantry assaults something nonsense, when you see MGs running and firing everywhere, in attack and in defense ( hit and run tactics : pinning fire... run to the next trench hex... pinning fire... etc... )
Avatar de l’utilisateur
santino
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 211
Inscription: Sam Avr 26, 2008 6:32 pm
Localisation: Strasbourg

Messagede Arnauld » Lun Mai 05, 2008 11:41 am

According to the doctrine of the early years, MG was supposed to advance in combination with infantry.

In the facts, this job was impossible to do...

Perhaps, Perry wanted to put in practice this doctrine :roll:

NB : Santino wrote this message in english, just to have the Tichy's support !!!!

COWARD !!!!
Run ! The Devil is coming !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Arnauld
Administrateur
 
Messages: 921
Inscription: Lun Aoû 20, 2007 7:44 pm
Localisation: Angers

Messagede santino » Lun Mai 05, 2008 5:35 pm

Well I respect the dreams of the author... but this is no science fiction game... or is it ? :roll:
Avatar de l’utilisateur
santino
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 211
Inscription: Sam Avr 26, 2008 6:32 pm
Localisation: Strasbourg

Messagede Tichy » Lun Mai 05, 2008 8:36 pm

Number one: With Lanships basic rule, Infantry does not run. They actually walk or use "assault" movement in ASL terms.

As said in IM rules, MG platoon may never run or gain benefit from running.

In terms of platoon carrying MG - it should be dismounted and weight distributed among troops, even though I believe even whole assembly can be moved but slowly. Dismounting takes time I agree as HMG/MMG in ASL, however, unit can move with MG.

It is a question if, for example road or trench benefit should be forfeit from MG platoons. And Offensive Fire forfeit from MG platoon on the move. About this I am not sure of.

Ask Arnauld to hand you a copy of IM and Landships infantry rules combined if you want to check the movement rules.
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Tichy
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 176
Inscription: Sam Avr 19, 2008 6:12 pm
Localisation: Poland / Finland

Messagede santino » Lun Mai 05, 2008 8:54 pm

I used the word "run" as an image... a pejorative one ( we only play with the basic rules ). In French, I would have said "grouiller" ( difficult to translate ) :wink:

Still, real WW1 MGs couldn't follow the pace of an infantry assault and fire in the same time, especially across trench lines. And I don't see how they could have been usefull in an assaut ( I just imagine the guys throwing the MG in the ennemy trench to break their ennemies' bones ^^ ). If it had been possible, we would know about it. And MG 08 would still be in use in modern armies in regard of such an exploit :roll:
Avatar de l’utilisateur
santino
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 211
Inscription: Sam Avr 26, 2008 6:32 pm
Localisation: Strasbourg

Messagede Tichy » Lun Mai 05, 2008 9:11 pm

Well, simple solution for section of corrections:

I. "MG Platoon may not fire in Offensive Fire Phase if moved in the turn. MG may fire normally on next Defensive Fire Phase"

II. "MG Platoon may not gain benefit from road or trench movement, movement cost is as of terrain in the hex, ignore road and trench presence on the hex for movement purposis."

Edit, one more:

III. MG Close Assault bonus only applies to the defending side. MG platoon counts as numerical difference for both sides

Above can be as "Optional Rule, Historical practices".
Dernière édition par Tichy le Lun Mai 05, 2008 9:41 pm, édité 1 fois.
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Tichy
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 176
Inscription: Sam Avr 19, 2008 6:12 pm
Localisation: Poland / Finland

Messagede Arnauld » Lun Mai 05, 2008 9:41 pm

No Santino, we are using the standard rules ! Not the basic ones !

(and that's why L! is better than ASL - it is so easy to learn that people think it is basic rules !!)
Run ! The Devil is coming !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Arnauld
Administrateur
 
Messages: 921
Inscription: Lun Aoû 20, 2007 7:44 pm
Localisation: Angers

Messagede santino » Mar Mai 06, 2008 7:13 am

Good precisions, it was roughly what I thought about it... by the way, did someone tell the designer that he was dreaming ? :roll:
Avatar de l’utilisateur
santino
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 211
Inscription: Sam Avr 26, 2008 6:32 pm
Localisation: Strasbourg

Messagede Tichy » Mar Mai 06, 2008 7:41 am

Well, I presume that you are aware that reducing MG assaulting benefits does shift the balance very heavily to the defending side. It does so effectively time wise and to balance out the shift, more game turns are needed (2-3, depending on the scenario) to allow attacker to make relatively slow progress, dealing with every piece of resistance one at the time.

In reality that was the case and progress was usually slowed down enough to allow fresh reinforcements to deal with incoming attack.

If game length is not altered, it makes advance not only desperate act but game becomes rather attempt to "lose with grace" as there is no longer true changes for any earlier attack to succeed (realistic, yes indeed - enjoyable in game terms or balanced, no).

It has to be taken into account that in later cases with Infantry Support Weapons, units ability to operate with equipment can not effectively be reduced as it will eat out the advantages.

However, we are discussing here about Rommel in the Argonne -scenario and the prospects of MG Platoons in that scenario. In other scenarios this aspect of MG is not as striking.
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Tichy
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 176
Inscription: Sam Avr 19, 2008 6:12 pm
Localisation: Poland / Finland

Messagede Tichy » Jeu Mai 08, 2008 5:19 pm

I've formulated optional rule for historical practices. Feel free to use. Rules will make MG as formidable weapon of defense and bring forth Tank as mobile firing platform even more than before.

"Historical Practices

MG Platoon ability to commit the assaulting combat was not as impressive as shown in the basic rules. MG Platoons main weapon, weighting nearly 140lbs was not weapon of great mobility. Due to this reason players may elect to use following rules that set restrictions on MG mobility and use in assault.

7.3.1 MG Platoon may not fire in the Offensive Fire Phase in the same turn it moved or spend MP. MG may fire normally on next Defensive Fire Phase.

7.3.2 MG Platoon does not receive road or trench movement bonus. Entry along Trench or road cost 1MP per hex entered.

7.3.3 Only defending MG Platoon receives benefit in close combat. MG Platoon does count as numerical difference and as normal platoon and may be used to satisfy loss normally."
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Tichy
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 176
Inscription: Sam Avr 19, 2008 6:12 pm
Localisation: Poland / Finland

Messagede Arnauld » Jeu Mai 08, 2008 5:38 pm

It sounds good !

It is very too bad that the designer doesn't reply !!!! Very good ideas in this forum !!
Run ! The Devil is coming !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Arnauld
Administrateur
 
Messages: 921
Inscription: Lun Aoû 20, 2007 7:44 pm
Localisation: Angers

Messagede Tichy » Jeu Mai 08, 2008 5:52 pm

Well, on the other hand. I believe that rules can be developed, consolidated and fine tuned without consent of the author.
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Tichy
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 176
Inscription: Sam Avr 19, 2008 6:12 pm
Localisation: Poland / Finland

Messagede Arnauld » Jeu Mai 08, 2008 5:56 pm

Tichy a écrit:Well, on the other hand. I believe that rules can be developed, consolidated and fine tuned without consent of the author.


I play ONLY wih OFFICIAL rules !! :twisted:
Run ! The Devil is coming !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Arnauld
Administrateur
 
Messages: 921
Inscription: Lun Aoû 20, 2007 7:44 pm
Localisation: Angers

Messagede santino » Jeu Mai 08, 2008 6:11 pm

I like your option... and I'll play it as often as I shall be allowed to by my opponements :wink:
Avatar de l’utilisateur
santino
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 211
Inscription: Sam Avr 26, 2008 6:32 pm
Localisation: Strasbourg

Messagede Tichy » Jeu Mai 08, 2008 7:17 pm

Arnauld a écrit:
Tichy a écrit:Well, on the other hand. I believe that rules can be developed, consolidated and fine tuned without consent of the author.


I play ONLY wih OFFICIAL rules !! :twisted:


Make sure that santino plays "Rommel in the Argonne" or any other MG heavy assault with those optional rules as German and he'll have loads of fun. :D

Well you do remember, there are number if rules that certainly need to be agreed upon as they are not as clear as they should be. That is called "fine tuning". To be consistent with the interpretations in the future, they should be typed down. :)
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Tichy
Renault FT-17
 
Messages: 176
Inscription: Sam Avr 19, 2008 6:12 pm
Localisation: Poland / Finland

Suivante

Retourner vers International Landships!

Qui est en ligne

Utilisateurs parcourant ce forum: Aucun utilisateur enregistré et 0 invités

cron