Re: do GMS/P troopers carry ARs?

Brian Quirt wrote:

> > > Consider that the majority of SAW figures in the GZG range are
> > > equipped with an articualted harness of some sort;
> >
> >	My Stormtrooper figures don't have articulated harnesses, so are
> > they exempt? <g>  Seriously, a generic set of rules can't make those
> > kinds of assumptions.
>
> Granted, but then again in a generic rules set we can't assume too far
> the OTHER way either....

    I think giving a guy 2.5 minutes to grab a fallen comrade's weapon
is
already going too far the other way.  But since that's the smallest
imcrement
of time we can actually measure (it's the approximate length of time
that
action takes) I have no choice.  Causing a whole squad to spend another
action, and therefore spend a total of 5 minutes, is far into the
extreme.

> > > move to him
> >
> >	We don't know that he doesn't have an assistant gunner at his
side.
>
> We don't know that he DOES, either.

    No, we're pretty sure that he does.  The figures in SGII are never
exactly
where the men are located.  They serve only as a marker of the nexus of
activity for each individual.  Even if there isn't a man who is
designated as
assistant gunner, there is someone near him who has the job of picking
up the
gun should the gunner fall in combat.

> I suppose that the reorganize action
> is only necessary if you don't have an assistant gunner (who can
either
> be an assistant gunner OR contribute to the squad firepower- that
seems
> a reasonable restriction).

    Again, that's not how I see it happening.  Even without a designated
assistant, soldiers today are trained to grab the support weapon.  I
just
don't see how we need to have a specialized action for this routine
situation.

> > > (The squad will have been suppressed from effective fire so the
troops
> > > will have dispersed hitting the deck)
> >
> >	The squad might not actually go to ground, just because they get
a
> > suppression marker.  If the target squad's next action removes the
> > suppression, you can argue that, in reality, they took the hits, it
> > slowed them a bit, but they never went to ground.  The suppression
> > caused by the effective fire may already take into account adjusting
to
> > the new "chain of command."
>
> That's an issue that can be debated forever without resolution-
EXACTLY
> what do suppressions mean actually happened. Come up with a ruling for
> your group, use it, and figure out the consequences.

    I agree that we could talk in circles about what exactly any of the
game
mechanics represents.  Which is exactly why I argue for allowing the
switch
for no cost.  It's just assumed to occur within the normal game
procedures.
The threshold for me is that the soldier doesn't have to be ordered to
do it.
That's why I think it doesn't have to occur as part of a seperate
action.

> > > distribute any of their own specialist kit, remove the Gunners'
> > > harness and any special sighting/firecontrol etc check weapon for
> > > damage (quick electronic diag set?) and then finally get it into
> > > action.
> >
> >	Again, this might be the case, but in reality, how long with
this
> > take?  Even if this procedure fits your background, will the whole
squad
> > really need to halt while one guy straps on the SAW?
>
> Maybe. Maybe not. Probably depends on your background, and on how
> specialized the SAW is (eg. an IPG might take more time to get back up
> than an LMG or equivalent- you probably want to check CAREFULLY for a
> malfunction before using a plasma gun).

    The procedure may or may not take a great deal of time, but no
matter what
you decide, it doesn't take the whole squad.  That's why a reorganize
isn't
appropriate.  You might want to say that the support weapon can't come
back
on-line for a specified number of actions, but limiting the squad's
actions
seems unrealistic.

> > > I actually like the idea of the Re-Org action; puts the platoon
> > > commander under a little more pressure; 2 Section has taken
> > > casualties...why hasn't his SAW opened up to support 3 Section....
:-)
> >
> >	Again, the squad already took some time with the remove
suppression
> > action, I don't think they need to blow a whole activation (Which
could
> > be 5 minutes!) on getting the assistant gunner to pick up the SAW.
>
> I think this one can be argued either way, so should probably be left
as
> a house rule.

    Well, of course we're talking about a house rule.  But why does the
conversation have to end there?  Why aren't you willing to look at the
situation closer?  Why even bother discussing anything on the list? <g>

-Mike

--
Michael Sarno

http://vietnam.isonfire.com
Check out the Charlie Company Discussion Group:
Info, resources, and links for RAFM's miniatures
skirmish wargame of infantry combat in Vietnam 1965-1972

"Tradition refuses to submit to the small and
 arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen
 to be walking about."
 -G.K. Chesterton