RE: [SG] Scenario with engineers

-----Original Message-----
From: tlsmith@micron.net [mailto:tlsmith@micron.net]
Subject: Re: [SG] Scenario with engineers

>My concept for the scenario is that the road is indeed mined, and a
rear
>guard has been left to cover it (after all, what good is a mine field
that
>is not covered?). I am thinking one or two squads possibly with mortars
on
>dedicated call. Any comments on the size and composition of the
covering
>force either in real tactical or game terms?

Well, assuming the recon force is the lead elements of an advance, the
opponents will probably be a screen as part of a security force for a
defensive position or stay behind/delaying forces for a withdrawal. If
the
opposition is expected to have armour or mech mobility the screen should
be
well armed with anti-armour weapons and less of the mortar fire support.
Against a foot advance, the emphasis should be on anti-infantry type
weapons; do away with PIG or GMS and just have SAWs and mortar support.
I
would recommend either light APCs or 4WD type vehicles located in a hide
to
the rear to enable a quick withdrawal; on table or off will depend on
your
table size. You would want them either right behind your position or
well to
the rear.

Remember that a screen/delaying force MUST NOT become decisively engaged
by
the enemy. Their objective should be to impose delay by causing the
advance
to bog down in battle drills, preparation for assaults etc.

Two squads with two SAW each, no GMS or PPG but perhaps 1d4 IAVR per
squad
and perhaps only 2 or 3 mortar fire missions, at least one of which must
be
smoke would sound about the right balance. Quality definitely not Green.

Have fun,

Owen G