Re: do GMS/P troopers carry ARs?

adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca wrote:

> But right now the weapon is just OUT.  There isn't *any* mechanism for
> recovering lost special weapons.  Owen (who I tend to agree with here)
> isn't arguing that it takes lots of time, just one reorg action -
which
> isn't that much time, really.  Sure it's easy to say "but the guy next
to
> him just grabs the saw and starts rockin' and rollin', but if the
weapon is
> a hopper fed gauss machinegun with a battery pack, or a plasma
projector
> with a battery pack, or ..... etc.

    But again, that's what the dice are there to do.  You have to roll
to
remove the suppression.  What exactly does that represent?  I argue it's
getting the squad back into fighting condition.

> Maybe one reorg action isn't unreasonable.

    But the support weapon still cannot fire until the leader
successfully
removes a suppression.	So now you're talking about a whole activation. 
It now
becomes completely impossible to have any support weapon immediately
back
on-line without the intervention of the PL.  This just is not the way
the
present military works and doesn't seem to be the way any sci-fi fiction
represents the action.

> >> ....and the last one may have been a typo on your part but a Re-org
is
> >> one Action only and as I said earlier it will be approx 2 and a
half
> >> minutes.
> >
> >    No, I'm counting the average time to use BOTH the remove
suppression
> >and re-org actions.
>
> But the issue of getting the weapon going is unrelated to the
supression.

    I disagree.  Removing the suppression could take several actions. 
This is
exactly what is represented by the remove suppression action.

> You can reorg while supressed,

    You can only re-org while suppressed if you are in cover.

> and besides, there may not be *time* right
> NOW to grab the weapon 'cause we gotta bug outta here... mabye they
carry
> their buddy with them and get it later.

    Wait a minute, didn't you just argue that the weapon is strapped to
their
buddy and will take some time to remove from him?

>  In any event, what Owen is arguing
> for is the expenditure of one action, for a reorg, which does allow
you to
> do all the other stuff a reorg allows anyway... it isn't like the ONLY
> thing the squad is going to do is grab the SAW...

    But you're forcing the squad to take that re-org when all the player
might
want to do is get the SAW back up and running.	Picking up a SAW when
the
gunner goes down is something that grunts are trained to do.  It
wouldn't
require another action.

> >    Yes, it is gospel, according to St. Jon, chapter 2. <g> 
Seriously,
> >it's in the book as the average.  Now, I don't think that every
action
> >takes 2.5 minutes.  It's simply the average.
>
> This is one of those "well sort of kinda maybe" situations.  What Jon
> actually says is that for games where measuring time is actually
important,
> like in a campaign scenario where the arrival of reinforcements is a
timed
> event, then take the turns to work out to be appx 5 minutes.

    Right, which is as good a place as any to start reality checking.

> Here's another way of looking at it.	Right now, as the rules stand,
if
> your SAW gunner goes down as an unknown casualty, the only way to find
out
> what happens to him is to use a reorg action to check your wounded.

    What is an "unknown" casualty?  The hit either causes a wound or a
kill.
Now the trooper may die from the wound, but it still isn't "unknown."

>  He may
> be dead, he may be stabilized.  But just 'cause the SAW goes out of
action,
> doesn't necessarily mean that the gunner is toast and it's time go get
> someone else on the job.  The squad leader doesn't know right away. 
Maybe
> the gunner is stunned.  Maybe dead.  Mabye tripped and fell.	Maybe
the
> weapon is jammed.

    Right, but the SL doesn't need to know, just the guy next to the
gunner
needs to know.	If the gunner goes down and you're the closest guy to
the SAW,
pick it up and use it.	That's standard training.

>  But the rules takes this unknown situation into account
> with the "unknown casualty" result, and the necessity of finding out
what
> actually happened by using a reorg action.

    There isn't an "unknown" casualty result.  The re-org simply allows
the
grunt to be medically treated.	As I stated in a previous post, I'd
argue that
a good house rule is the weapon is toast on a hit with a kill result. 
Thnis
doesn't require anybody treating the casualty to operate the SAW. 
Treating the
casualty while you're in the middle of a firefight is something that
soldiers
are taught no to do.  They're trained to keep fighting and leave the
wounded to
the medics.  A rifleman has his job and a medic has a completely
different
job.  Now, if there's a lull in the fighting and you're not actually in
a
firefight, sure grunts are trained to treat the wounded.

> How about this:
>
> If a special weapon gunner goes down and is killed outright, then the
> weapon is assumed to be either destroyed, or damaged beyond reuse in
the
> current fight and maybe returnable to service after maintance (after
the
> battle).  The hit on the gunner packed a real punch...

    This is what I recommended previously.  I still think it's a good
rule.

> If the gunner is an "unknown" casualty, then the weapon may be
recoverable.

    I still don't know what an "unknown" casualty is.

>  The squad undertakes a reorg action (as it would to check any of it's
> wounded).  If the gunner turns out to be a "stabilized" wounded, then
> another model may take up the weapon.

    But a medic gets a better chance to stabilize than does a grunt. 
And
specialized medical units have an even better chance.  Why would better
medical
attention result in better weapons salvage?

> >    This is another reason why I argue against the extra re-org
action.
> >No one is talking about the procedure of picking up and using a
weapon
> >lasting over 5 minutes.  However, we can all imagine a guy dropping a
> >conventional SAW and having his buddy pick it up and start firing
within
> >a few seconds.  If the average is some kind of arithmetic mean or
> >median, that little scene I described would cancel out dozens of time
> >when it would take 5 minutes to get the support weapon going, and
would
> >create an average closer to 2.5 minutes.  Thus, the remove
suppression
> >action would be more than enough to cover the average.
>
> But the supression and the reorg actions represent completely
different
> things, and, more importantly, this doesn't account for the fact that
the
> weapon may in fact be damaged beyond use.  With this system, a squad
is
> going to be able to keep the special weapon going down to the last guy
> standing as long as they can unsupress and stay calm... irrespective
of
> what the gunner got hit with...

    No, if the gunner is killed outright, the weapon is toast.

-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