Re: DS3 design (long)

[Forwarded by Roger again]

John Atkinson wrote:

>>Unless you do something drastic about the structure of the game turn,
>>you'll need to cut the game turn to around *1* minute to allow
vehicles 
>>reasonably realistic combat movement and fire rates - and even then
you'll

>>seriously underestimate the movement rates of units out of contact
with 
>>the enemy (eg. rear-area reserves or relocating artillery batteries).
>
>On the other hand, any military operation includes a significant amount

>of time sitting around doing very little. I am always amused by 
>wargames that have infantry moving at max movement rate for extended 
>periods of time. You can't imagine how tiring it is to do that.  
>Infantry should have a 'combat speed' that they can keep up for a short

>time and a 'patrol speed' that they can keep up for hours.  If you want

>to properly simulate infantry tactics.

AFAIK the amount of time most infantry soldiers can keep up "combat
speed"
is on the order of 1 DS2 turn (15 minutes) or less, so we only really
need
"patrol speed" for sustained movements - short-term bursts of faster
"combat" movement are either averaged out by halts during the same game
turn
or covered by the extra moves allowed in Close Assaults. However, DS2's
current maximum infantry movement rates (using Travel Mode movement
along
roads) are rather less even than real-world *patrol* speed!

>Vehicles don't have the same limits, but anyone who has ever done a 
>field exercise knows how much time vehicles spend sitting around 
>waiting for something else to happen,

This is a limitation in the *C4I* systems use however, not in the
vehicles'
actual movement capabilities - and it is also precisely what the current
"military revolution" is intended to fix: reduce the time spent "sitting
around" by improving the units' situational awareness. To allow DS to be
generic, it should ideally model these C4I limitations via the
command&control rules - *not* via the movement rules.

>>>iii) DS2 caps all ranges at 6000m because that is the sea level 
>>>horizon on Earth. Why? Not all battles are fought on a flat plain at
sea 
>>>level.  If I am on a hill, ridge or escarpment, I should be able to
shoot
at 
>>>targets 7, 8, or more km away with a laser.
>> 
>>Yep. Unless of course there's some minor terrain feature blocking the
>>LOS - and it doesn't take much: minor undulations of the ground, minor

>>copses, a few scattered houses, hedges... none of which is big enough
to 
>>show up on the DS2 gaming table, but they nevertheless influence the 
>>battle.
>
>Again, this is where actually going out an dinking around cross country

>would be helpful. Microterrain can hide fairly significant things

Bingo. That's exactly what I'm talking above... note that "fairly
significant things" can include pretty much anything, at least up to
tank
platoons :-/

(FWIW I'd count Ryan's "big ditch hidden in field of tall grass" as DS
"Cultivated" terrain rather than "Open", thus automatically limiting the
speed at which vehicles could cross it.)

>>to 15 mph if they're GRAV or FAST GEV, otherwise 10 or 12 mph". In
>>today's real world rear-area HMWs can road-march at 60 mph, and FTR 
>>can road-march at 45-50 mph.
>
>Uh, that I have to disagree with.  Can road march in theory and can 
>road march safely are two seperate concepts.

Good point, but which of these two marching rates do you use when you're
rushing reserves to block a threatening break-through - the safe one, or
the
maximum one? Same for artillery trying to get out of the beaten zone of
incoming counter-battery fire?

>Even if you accept that an M113 is slow tracked, we did NOT race around
>at 45-50 mph.

As you said, an M113 isn't exactly "Fast Tracked" :-/ And as the earlier
replies have shown, there are quite a few cases where vehicles *do* rush
around at max speed.

>At least in US practice, 45mph is what the governor on the M-1 is set 
>at for the maximum.

I know. Some of the Eastern and Euro tanks can go a bit faster however,
thus
the "45-50" mph figure.

>Realistic road march speeds are closer to 30-40 mph
>even for a wheeled convoy.

Please tell my friendly local armoured regiment that... I've been
overtaken
by their convoys quite a few times over the past years, in spite of
driving
at 60+ mph myself :-/

>>visibility considerations - in DS the latter are more likely than the 
>>former since transporting the troops to the battle isn't represented 
>>in the game)
>
>Unless your scenario design includes these considerations.  :)

Sure, but you pretty much have to write the rules for it yourself - DS2
doesn't have any rules for getting your troops to the battlefield. In
fact I
don't know *any* DS2 player - including myself, or even you (John A.) -
who
takes transportability into account when designing DS2 vehicles... yet
it
has had a massive impact on the design of today's military vehicles.
(Just
look at all the MBTs designed to fit through standard-width railway
tunnels,
or all the lighter vehicles where the width and height were limited by
the
need to fit inside a C-130 :-/ )

>>IIRC TOW-armed Hummers usually have 6 missiles available, but then
>>they can't fit very much else inside.
>
>And it is also a non-trivial endeavor to reload them, like the Bradley.

Yep. (That's another advantage of gun-missile launchers over bolted-on
ones
- the gun-launchers are much easier to reload under armour <g>) 'Course,
if
the unit is in a turret-down combat position it won't take it very long
to
find that safe spot :-/

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
 What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry