Prev: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations Next: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations

Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 17:51:33 +0100
Subject: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations

>I tend to put the artillery unit on a side table, or behind the 
>baseline.  I also put out ammo tenders, AA/ADS, CBS, command, and 
>any other assets in the unit.	In the event that there a counter 
>battery mission, I want to be able to actually move the minis if 
>they're gonna scoot. 
>Besides, it's a miniatures game.  I want miniatures. :)

Excellent! As producers of miniatures, that's what I like to hear!  ;-)

On a serious note, all the responses to this question do give me some 
guidance as to whether it is commercially worth us making actual 
minis of heavy artillery, SLAM vehicles and such which are never 
likely to appear on the Main Table in a typical game.

Jon (GZG)

>That all said, I play in 6mm and do DS, not SG.
>>  Just a quick question to all, related to this subject:
>>  When you use off-table artillery (in any game system or period), do
>>  represent it by actual minis kept behind the baseline, or does it
>>  exist on paper? With my commercial hat on, obviously I'd rather that
>>  used models for it, so we can sell the arty pieces and stay in
>>   ;-) This is, I guess, the major reason why FoW (for example) uses
it's odd
>>  logarithmic ground scale compression and insists on all artillery
being on
>>  the table - so folks have to buy and deploy the models for it.
>>  for both aesthetics AND our sales, there is a good case for saying
>>  off-table assets should be modelled on a little "sub-table" diorama
>>  the player's baseline. Doing this also means that things like
>>  counter-battery and airstrikes against enemy artillery can actually
>>  gamed out using the normal rules rather than abstracted, if you so
>>  Jon (GZG)
>>>  I've seen one of Ryan's CB fire missions before, they're brutal. :)
>>>  However, much of this will depend on the type of battle you're
>>>  On a sparsely inhabited planet, you're probably not going to have a
>>>  army on the ground; the force represented by the DS army could well
>>>  the entire thing. In that situation I might not have the luxury of
>>>  deploying my artillery far behind my lines, because I'd want my
>>>  force to be able to cover them and the small force would be easy to
>>>  maneuver. So there would be a valid rationale for having the
>>>  deployed on-table.
>>>  Robert Mayberry
>>>  On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Ryan Gill <>
>>>  wrote:
>>>>  On Jul 8, 2008, at 7:02 PM, Ground Zero Games wrote:
>>>>>  The simplest way is probably to say that off-table assets have to
>>>>>  penetrate off-table defences (area defence and counterbattery
>>>>>  systems), but on-table support has to be dealt with (or not) by
>>>>>  on-table defences (close-in point defence).
>>>>  Except that flies in the face of the doctrine of putting your
>>>>   battery forwards and your main support fires to the rear. That
>>>>  the rear guns are further away from MOST of your enemy's counter
>>>>  battery guns and your counter battery guns have more chances to be
>>>>   range of the enemy counter battery guns. Personally, I think a
>>>>  class should denote range, but generally for simplicity, I'd
>>>>  1. man portable mortars to be tabletop only 2 towed and or SP tube
>>>>  artillery to be table top plus off table 3 off table to be
>>>>  Table for range. PLUS Depending on desires, MULTIPLE artillery
>>>>  could be called on for a given mission if spotted by an artillery
>>>>  observer element. This would parallel something that at least the
>>>>  British could do in WWII. Basically organize a stonk or fire
>>>>  using a battery, A regiment, an AGRA, a whole Corps, or every tube
>>>>  that's in range. Getting the upper orders called down on you was
>>>>  kept a LOT of germans from shooting at the British Observer
>>>>  (You REALLY didn't want to piss him off). Essentially, you
activate as
>>>>  many units as you want and place those counters on the target as
>  >>> want. They're all activated and do what they're going to do
(shoot and
>>>>   scoot or fire and sit pat). Resolve multiple battery's barrage
>>>>  at the same time as you would one. This allows you to more
>>>>  control the difference between a harassment mission, a
>>>>   mission or one in which you want it DEAD (a material mission).
>>>>  _______________________________________________ Gzg-l mailing list
>>>  _______________________________________________ Gzg-l mailing list
>>  _______________________________________________ Gzg-l mailing list
>John K. Lerchey
>Assistant Director for Incident Response
>Information Security Office
>Carnegie Mellon University
>Gzg-l mailing list

Gzg-l mailing list

Prev: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations Next: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations