Re: WWII Stargrunt

In article <3.0.5.32.20000304105113.00860550@aros.net>, Don Greenfield
<gryphon@aros.net> writes
>	Lately I've been toying with the idea of playing some WWII squad
level
>games using some of the 15mm figs I have access to.  I thought I saw a
>Stargrunt/WWII conversion somewhere on the Web, but I can't seem to
find it
>anywhere. Am I dreaming this? If not, could some kindly soul send me
the
>link? Thanks. 
>
>
>
>Don
>

There was some discussion on this list a while back. here's what I can
find. Also, try here

http://www.l-25.demon.co.uk/index.htm

****************************************************************

Rather than buying a WWW II ruleset I thought why not use Stargrunt, the

first fruits of this idea lie below. I am not sure how well the command 
& control system fits but I guess quite well, even if I have to make 
everything worse (yes, even the SS!).

STARGRUNT II
WW II WEAPONS
Weapon		Range	Firepower Impact Example
Pistol		Close	1	D4	<= 9 mm P
Heavy Pistol	Close	1	D6	.45, .455
Shotgun Close	1	D10	12-Bore Pump
SMG		Close	3	D8	MP-40, Thompson, Sten...
Carbine 		1	D6	M1 Carbine
Machine Carbine 2	D6	M2 Carbine
Assault Rifle		2	D8	StG 44
Bolt-Action Rifle		1	D10	Kar 98k, SMLE...
Automatic Rifle 	2	D10	FG 42, BAR
SAW			D6	D10	Bren
LMG			D8	D10	MG34, MG42
MMG			D10	D10	Vickers, .30 Browning
HMG			D10	D12	.50 M2HB
Anti-Tank Rifle 	1	D12	Boys
Panzerschrek		D10	D12*
Panzerfaust		D10	D10*
Bazooka 	D10	D10*

These are just a few quick ideas, untested and untried. I think there 
are maybe too many of them but better too many than too few.
I am not very happy with SMGs.

************************URL************************
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1070/index.html
************************URL************************
<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1070/index.html">Home 
Plate</A>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
#! rnews 3414

In a message dated 97-08-28 06:53:27 EDT, you write:

> Rather than buying a WWW II ruleset I thought why not use Stargrunt,
the 
>  first fruits of this idea lie below. I am not sure how well the
command 
>  & control system fits but I guess quite well, even if I have to make 
>  everything worse (yes, even the SS!).
>  
>  STARGRUNT II
>  WW II WEAPONS
>  Weapon		Range	Firepower Impact Example
>  Pistol		Close	1	D4	<= 9 mm P
>  Heavy Pistol 	Close	1	D6	.45, .455
>  Shotgun		Close	1	D10	12-Bore Pump
>  SMG			Close	3	D8	MP-40, Thompson, Sten...
>  Carbine		1	D6	M1 Carbine
>  Machine Carbine	2	D6	M2 Carbine
>  Assault Rifle		2	D8	StG 44
>  Bolt-Action Rifle	1	D10	Kar 98k, SMLE...
>  Automatic Rifle	2	D10	FG 42, BAR
>  SAW			D6	D10	Bren
>  LMG			D8	D10	MG34, MG42
>  MMG		D10	D10	Vickers, .30 Browning
>  HMG			D10	D12	.50 M2HB
>  Anti-Tank Rifle	1	D12	Boys
>  Panzerschrek D10	D12*
>  Panzerfaust		D10	D10*
>  Bazooka		D10	D10*
>  
>  These are just a few quick ideas, untested and untried. I think there

>  are maybe too many of them but better too many than too few.
>  I am not very happy with SMGs.

I've been toying with ideas for WWII Stargrunt as well, so thought I'd
throw
in my thoughts.  I've seen a suggestion somewhere to give the US M1
rifle a
FP of 1.5 since it was a clearly better rifle than that used by the
other
nations.  Not sure if I think that is worth the effort.  I'd also change
the
AT rocket values around a bit.	The panzerfaust had the largest warhead
of
the three but was the least accurate.  The Bazooka's warhead was
smallest.
 The bazooka would not penetrate the frontal armor of most German tanks
and
had trouble with the side armor on many.  I seem to recall that the
bazooka
was even more accurate at ranges than a panzershreck, but it's probably
not
worth modelling.  My values:
Weapon				   Firepower	   Impact
Panzerfaust			      d8	       d12*
Panzerschrek			   d10		    d10*
PIAT					 d8		  d10*
Bazooka 			     d10		d8*

Some thoughts

Brian

In a message dated 97-08-30 02:34:23 EDT, you write:

<< I've seen a suggestion somewhere to give the US M1 rifle a
 FP of 1.5 since it was a clearly better rifle than that used by the
other
 nations.  Not sure if I think that is worth the effort. >>

Just to throw my nickle in -->	The M-1 was an excellant rifle easily
worth a
full 2, BUT as US Army training did not emphasize combat training. [ See
S.L.A. Marshall's historical opion on this for confirmation]  So in the
early
part of the war a US squad only put out as much firepower as a bolt
action
squad because so few men [about half or less than in an equal numbered
German
squad] were firing (1942 or so). 
Now by the time Normandy was over  the ETO (European Theater of
Operations)
was running a quikie Advanced Infantry course before feeding
replacements
into the line (Refer to Omar Bradly & et al) so the US squads (mostly
combat
veterans) had their firepower way up.

Also in 42 the squads were slotted for 11 men - 1BAR, 1 Thompson, 9 M-
1s.  by
late 44 to the end there were in practise only 9 slotted with 2BARs and
1
Thompson and 6 M-1s ( and only rarely did they acheive this. Sometime
after
Paris Patton (3rd Army) issued his men Panzerschrecks and Panzerfausts
instead of the Bazooka because they were better weapons and they had
captured
wharehouses full of them in France. 

Ifyou were to ask me to write a scenerio I would give a fresh (from the
states) unit a full 10/11 men and a firefactor of 1. If we were doing
the
bulge with veteran troops the squads would have to be 6/8 and a
firefactor of
2.

Early war plt: 35 men --> 5men in command stand - LT(carbine),
Srgt(Thompson), 3 runners(M-1s) of which one would have the radio.
3Squads
w/10 men 1 BAR, Thompson (Sargent) 9 M-1s.[M-1 FF:1]

Late war vet plt. 24men  --> 3men in command stand - Lt(carbine), sgt
(Thompson/ M-2), radio man (M-1)   3squads - 1 sqd 2BARs, 1 Tommy gun, 2
M-1s
(marksmen); 2/3 sqds - 2BARs, a tommy gun, 5 M-1s [M-1 FF:2]  note: 2
manuever sqds and one firesupport sqd.[this one would have the bazooka,
or
panzerfaust] or maybe even a 30 cal Lmg.

If you think that a late war US plt was a rather wicked combat team, you
would be correct. If you look at them early in the war (being green
morale)
you might not envy them and you can see why the Brits kind looked down
on
them. As near as I can determine, the longer a division was in a combat
zone
the closer it resembled a late war plt, so a 1st division outfit might
be
closer to a late war plt as early as Sicily. A new division, such as the
one
on the Schnee Eiffle that got overrun at the start of the Bulge, might
resemble an early war plt as late as Dec 1944.

If you are real interested here is a book that might help with US
performance
in WWII, "Closing with the Enemy" by Michael D. Doubler   University
Press of
Kansas ISBN 0-7006-0675-0

Well, here we go, I'll get my tail burnt but what the hey......

Is the M1 worth a 1, a 1.5 or a 2? You've got to ask yourself how Jon
based his criteria of the FP factors in teh first place. Is it a
combination of the weapons rate of fire (ROF), calibre of projectile,
weight of ammunition, sights on the weapon and any others you might
think of? Civlian, hunting and bolt action rifles get a FP1 right? Lo
tech assault rifles get a FP2. Personally I think that a FP of 1 is
still appropriate. 

My logic is based on the averaging of factors that contribute to the
weapons FP in the rules. This isn't skirmish wargaming and the effect of
the weapons in a group is really what we are trying to simulate. Given
that then...................

The M1 uses a 30-06 cartridge, so less ammunition is likely to be
carried than a lighter calibre rifle. The open sights are average
(please, the Brit .303 SMLE was sighted and capable of firing out to an
excess of 1,000 yards so we are probably going to get lots of arguments
about weapon accuracy). The operation of the weapon is semi automatic,
so you can argue a higher ROF than the Mauser. Although the magasine
only holds 7 rounds(?) so compared to the 303 which holds 10 it would
balance the faster ROF, except perhaps at very close range such as urban
or perhaps jungle. 

To add further to muddy the argument compare the firepower of the M1 and
303 to the German assault rifle of '44, this is pretty much what the
AK47 was modelled on. This would undoubtably have a higher FP than the
M1 or 303 or Mauser. But would not warrant a FP of hiogher than 2. So I
really think that it leaves the M1 back at the FP 1.

Owen Glover
IT Services

Regards
-- 
Thomas Heaney