Re: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs

[Adrian <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John beat me to the punch with a response, but I have a comment or two to 
add...


> > Is it reasonable to have each ACR equipped soldier carrying 1 IAVR?
>
> Sure.  Depending on your PSB, IAVR can be pretty lightweight.

Why have the guided rocket launcher gunner lose his rifle? You could have 
the rocket gunner also carrying a rifle, no?  Or some other personal 
weapon.  No reason that trooper shouldn't have a personal weapon to use 
when not firing off the missile launcher.

Or by "substitute" do you mean "one of my rifleman figures is replaced by a 
figure with a rocket launcher"?  In which case, again quite reasonable.

How about "dual purpose guided light rocket launcher", and have both 
anti-armour and anti-aircraft missiles as part of the standard load, 
particularly if in a high-threat air environment?

You could keep the rocket launcher as a standard part of the platoon's gear 
- soldiers like to have something that goes *bang* to take out bunkers, 
tanks, enemy gun emplacements in buildings, etc.


> > That brings up a scenario.  A platoon of infantry/cavalry in associated
> > MICVs, the organic artillery vehicle (locked down), and a heavy tank, are
> > travelling on a road in mountainous terrain.  They are ambushed by 2(?) dug
> > in squads.  Victory conditions: eliminate 3 vehicles and escape with no 
> more
> > than 20% wounded/killed.
>
> Depends on vegetation, cover, and distance from the attackers to the
> kill zone, as well as the reaction of the dismounts and their ability
> to get to the enemy.

From a game-mechanics point of view, the problem you run into is with balance.

The rules say that an IAVR is a support weapon. So, you can fire it with 
the squad's rifle fire the same way you can use a SAW.

That doesn't help the attackers much against armoured vehicles since the 
impact of a squad's fire is based on the impact of the rifles and not the 
support weapons.  In your scenario, what you might see happen is that the 
attackers pop off a few rounds of IAVR to get the enemy force infantry to 
deploy, and then blast the dismount infantry with massed IAVR fire.

I've tried giving one IAVR per trooper in games in the past, and had 
"canny" players dump all of them in a single round into a (troop squad) 
target.  So, out of the 8-trooper squad, you have one rifleman fire and add 
in the SAW and six IAVRs.  That uses them all up, but makes for a really 
devastating round of firing (against infantry)...

Now, your mission objective is to eliminate 3 vehicles, which means that 
the focus will be on them, but giving one IAVR per trooper means that the 
attackers will have 14 to 16 IAVR.  That's a lot of rockets - four firing 
per turn for four turns.

I would suspect what you might have happen is exactly what John says - 
either the attackers will win outright in the first turn or two, or they're 
toast.  Handing out lots of IAVRs, in my experience, makes for a more 
"unpredictable" game.  Nothing wrong with that, mind you, if you like 
unpredictability.  Lots of IAVRs will push the game results out to the 
extremes (which can be fun).  In a non-campaign game, there is no reason 
for the troops to hold onto weapons that in other circumstances they might 
want to be careful about using up all at once, so you'll see players happy 
to dump all their ordnance on targets without concern about what happens next.

> >I'd assume firing an IAVR takes an action so no more than 2 could fire 
> without an action transfer.

Yes, and yes.  Unless the IAVR is being used to fire in support of the 
squad's rifle fire, in which case you can fire as many as you like (as long 
as there is a regular rifle firing somewhere in the squad).  They add in 
firepower support dice, but impact is per the rifles.

> > All vehicles are hover and can't reach the attackers.
> Once the artillery disengaged the travel lock and started direct
> firing at the attackers, it would be pretty ugly.  If they can kill
> the enemy in the first turn they win.  Otherwise they are going to
> loose.  Ambushes of targets with this much mismatch in capabilities
> are either over quickly or don't work out real well.

Well, I can't speak to real life, but in Stargrunt II this certainly holds 
to be true, unless the attackers get really lucky or the defenders are 
unlucky (or are played really badly).

I've run ambush scenarios like this a few times, and it usually seems to 
work out best for the ambushee...



_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l