The 5-5 German Paratrooper MG Thoughts

[triangular_cube]

Did you put a note on the OOB documentation when there is an alternate counter available? I didnt know I could be digging for those, but I am still learning vassal as I go.

Whenever there has been an alternate, I have referenced it in the extension notes.

All the more reason to read through those. Thanks.

[saracv3]

Maybe I should just make a big counter sheet.

Required numbers of which would be helpful. Like number of Heer HMGs in the game that has the most. Otherwise my max number will be 14.

But the firepower is only the first part of the equation. Since HMGs and the NZ MG unit, a 6-4 rated unit, are two step units, shouldn’t the 4-5 paratrooper weapon be a two step unit?

I like the idea of a revised counter sheet, but the back of the counter might be. 2-5, pretty weak, but every point counts.

[plloyd1010]

But the firepower is only the first part of the equation. Since HMGs and the NZ MG unit, a 6-4 rated unit, are two step units, shouldn’t the 4-5 paratrooper weapon be a two step unit?

I like the idea of a revised counter sheet, but the back of the counter might be. 2-5, pretty weak, but every point counts.

I guess I don't know what you are talking about. Are you trying to make 3 step units? The Luftwaffe Para MG is 9-5, reducing to 5-5 (sticking with the counter sheet here). Are you saying it should 3rd step, being reduced again to 3-5 or 2-5?

[saracv3]

No, maybe I misunderstood your previous post about paratrooper MGs as one step units. If they’re rated at 5-5 or 4-5 (4-5 sounds reasonable) it’s fine. If rated a 4-5, I’m arguing that although this is a reduced rating, it could be a two step unit. The full two step unit is 4-5; if it loses a step it becomes 2-5.

Or maybe I simply misunderstood your original errata note in which you stated that beginning w Army at Dawn, (designed by Mike Perryman who also designed Crete, a more recent game) the Luftwaffe paratrooper MG was 5-5 and Crete paratroopers should also have 5-5 rated MGs. The reason that I use the term “MG” is because this reduction in value takes it away from HMG status. The reason. I brought up the 6-4 NZ MG.unit is due to the fact that this is a two step unit but different from the NZ HMG, which is rated 8-4.

My other thought about the a Paratrooper HMG/ MG questions. Is that this unit may have been stronger in 1941 than 1943. In 1941, the paratrooper arm was considered elite, but did it lose that status after Crete,, when Hitler told Student that, “... The day of the paratrooper has passed....” [paraphrase]

I don’t know if I am as clear as mud.

[saracv3]

Many months have passed since the previous posts were written. Another question has arisen pertaining to t his thread. My assumption is that the 5-5 MG is the full strength value of t the revised German HMG as Peter has set forth in errata when using 9-5 German Para. MGs. But upon review, Peter never said to change the full strength value from 9-5 to 5-5. He simply reiterated that the 5-5 reduced value is the correct value for reduced units. Scenario #34 in Crete calls for both full strength and reduced strength paratrooper MGs are listed in the OOB. It seems logical that 9-5 values are full strength and 5-5 values are reduced strength.

The 4-5 reduced strength value is seen in Dishonor before Death paratrooper HMGs. I don’t know about other games, supplements or extensions. However, Crete was released in December 2019, so it is quite recent. If 5-5 is the value of a full-strength unit, Peter’s revised counter sheet would be welcome.

[plloyd1010]

...upon review, Peter never said to change the full strength value from 9-5 to 5-5. He simply reiterated that the 5-5 reduced value is the correct value for reduced units. Scenario #34 in Crete calls for both full strength and reduced strength paratrooper MGs are listed in the OOB. It seems logical that 9-5 values are full strength and 5-5 values are reduced strength.

The 4-5 reduced strength value is seen in Dishonor before Death paratrooper HMGs. I don’t know about other games, supplements or extensions. However, Crete was released in December 2019, so it is quite recent. If 5-5 is the value of a full-strength unit, Peter’s revised counter sheet would be welcome.

I actually said reduced German HMG units should be 4-5. This is based on an apparent design philosophy, probably from Brian Kipple, as to how detrimental casualties and disorganization would be on different types of personnel units. Infantry, as in mostly rifle armed or personal weapons, had its halved strength rounded up. I presume this is because most firepower comes from the squad and platoon automatic weapons. When someone operating or supporting LMG, BAR or whatever is hit, one of the riflemen is likely to fill in. Heavier weapon units (HMG/MMG/WPN) don't have so many extra guys around. Hence I surmise that is why they were originally rounded down when reduced.

I have less concern about full strength ratings of personnel units. They seem to be mostly arranged in 3 to 8 point structure of mutual relativity, HMG/WPN units normally get about 4 more points relative to the infantry. How one feels about numbers of men and automatic weapons of a platoon, relative to other platoons of its ilk, will determine how on feels about the unreduced strength. For me, a 9-5 for a German HMG is okay.

[saracv3]

...upon review, Peter never said to change the full strength value from 9-5 to 5-5. He simply reiterated that the 5-5 reduced value is the correct value for reduced units. Scenario #34 in Crete calls for both full strength and reduced strength paratrooper MGs are listed in the OOB. It seems logical that 9-5 values are full strength and 5-5 values are reduced strength.

The 4-5 reduced strength value is seen in Dishonor before Death paratrooper HMGs. I don’t know about other games, supplements or extensions. However, Crete was released in December 2019, so it is quite recent. If 5-5 is the value of a full-strength unit, Peter’s revised counter sheet would be welcome.

I actually said reduced German HMG units should be 4-5. This is based on an apparent design philosophy, probably from Brian Kipple, as to how detrimental casualties and disorganization would be on different types of personnel units. Infantry, as in mostly rifle armed or personal weapons, had its halved strength rounded up. I presume this is because most firepower comes from the squad and platoon automatic weapons. When someone operating or supporting LMG, BAR or whatever is hit, one of the riflemen is likely to fill in. Heavier weapon units (HMG/MMG/WPN) don't have so many extra guys around. Hence I surmise that is why they were originally rounded down when reduced.

I have less concern about full strength ratings of personnel units. They seem to be mostly arranged in 3 to 8 point structure of mutual relativity, HMG/WPN units normally get about 4 more points relative to the infantry. How one feels about numbers of men and automatic weapons of a platoon, relative to other platoons of its ilk, will determine how on feels about the unreduced strength. For me, a 9-5 for a German HMG is okay.

Hooray! But you only answered half my questions. To summarize, we use the 9-5 rating for HMGs and Para. MGs. And the reduced strength rating will now be 4-5. BTW, infantry 1/2 strengths in Dishonor are rounded down. US paratroopers go from 5-3 full strength to a 2-3 half strengt. SS strengths go from 7-3 to 3-3.

[plloyd1010]

 BTW, infantry 1/2 strengths in Dishonor are rounded down. US paratroopers go from 5-3 full strength to a 2-3 half strengt. SS strengths go from 7-3 to 3-3.

Not exactly. Grenadiers get an extra -1 when reduced. I think the formula for grenadiers and vanatori is 1/2 rounded up, minus 1. That makes reduced GREN 2-3, VAN 2-2 and SS GREN 3-3.