Prev: Re: [GZG] What are the pitfalls of standardised forces? Next: Re: [GZG] What are the pitfalls of standardised forces?

Re: [GZG] And now for something completely different...

From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@g...>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:56:06 +0300
Subject: Re: [GZG] And now for something completely different...

On 7/11/08, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Suppress the enemy infantry. Move the APC up close to the building,
infantry
> deploy there where they're not easily attacked with the APCs for cover
and
> place their demo, take cover, demo and then enter. Having some
breaching
> mechanism on the APC's themselves OR on a support vehicle would make
it even
> smoother (which they may have done, I'm only extrapolating from the
sparse
> reports I heard).

On most compounds in the Middle East, the gates will fly across the
courtyard if you ram them with an APC.	No demo needed.

Or so I've heard.

John
-- 
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again.  We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l


Prev: Re: [GZG] What are the pitfalls of standardised forces? Next: Re: [GZG] What are the pitfalls of standardised forces?