Bombardment units in assault hexes

[cjsiam]

So why are we trying to take this system and make it closer to ASL? One of the beautiful things about PG is that there are not a lot of complex situational rules.

Situation came up in game with a french 75mm howitzer and Inf in a town hex....Assault happened.....The french survived and had an activation...
The french 75mm could do nothing--- started the discussion....(or something close to that...)

The ability to FIRE at enemy in hex was questioned....given had they been tanks, it would have been ok, but as INF--it's not...

Just because the system is defined as it is---does not mean it's either right or inviolable.  When a deficiency is identified, or something discovered
which was overlooked---one can ignore it (to the detriment of the simulation...) or try and address it within the mechanics provided (ideally).
We have situation in game mechanic where Hvy weapons are classified as either DF or BF capable---to the exclusion of abilities they clearly had
(and I'm not going to talk about 88mm AA guns doing BF fire....I just won't...) ...
as the Saipan example above demonstrated---tain't necessarily so.... 

that is all.
For many "RAW" maxis it will be non-sequitur....others who would think it addresses a kink in the system might House Rule it....
That's what's great about cardboard (and VASSAL) sims....we can address these things if we like...

[triangular_cube]

So why are we trying to take this system and make it closer to ASL? One of the beautiful things about PG is that there are not a lot of complex situational rules.

I tend to agree. The system already incorporates most of what is talked about in broad strokes representative of it's scale. Smaller close support guns already have direct fire ratings instead of indirect ratings. Those smaller yet, including all of the mini mortars mentioned above (outside of the few oddball cases) are already rolled into the INF and HMG units. You can still simulate the infantry screen you guys seem to want by screening from one hex away. Depending on how crucial your big guns are its probably already worth it to do so. If you want to leave your arty vulnerable to close assault to get the open sights column shift its a tradeoff, otherwise safely put them in the back of the town. 

You guys are theory crafting about custom rules specifically for 75mm guns at this point. To what effect? Every unit in the game could have a special rule about something or other. Its unneeded chrome that is trying to force a squad level game out of PzG, which is fine, I guess, but why not play an actual squad level game on a squad level map if you are hyper focused on the intricacies of assault combat in one single hex?

Mini rant over. I get you all can play your games the way you want and that's okay. Its certainly the opposite of what I enjoy about PzG though. 

Question though, since you are proposing a 2 for 1 exchange between bf and df. Aren't you just introducing as many if not more distortions to fine tune around a 75? An M-7 is now just as combat effective in assault as a StugIIIG? The crew from a 105 battery is more combat effective than a platoon of late war US Armored Infantry?

Assaulting is hard enough on the attackers in this system, I'm pretty okay with leaving the big guns vulnerable in close combat. its up to you to keep them safe before the enemy closes to 100 yards.

[cjsiam]

So why are we trying to take this system and make it closer to ASL? One of the beautiful things about PG is that there are not a lot of complex situational rules.

I tend to agree. The system already incorporates most of what is talked about in broad strokes representative of it's scale. Smaller close support guns already have direct fire ratings instead of indirect ratings. Those smaller yet, including all of the mini mortars mentioned above (outside of the few oddball cases) are already rolled into the INF and HMG units. You can still simulate the infantry screen you guys seem to want by screening from one hex away. Depending on how crucial your big guns are its probably already worth it to do so. If you want to leave your arty vulnerable to close assault to get the open sights column shift its a tradeoff, otherwise safely put them in the back of the town. 

You guys are theory crafting about custom rules specifically for 75mm guns at this point. To what effect? Every unit in the game could have a special rule about something or other. Its unneeded chrome that is trying to force a squad level game out of PzG, which is fine, I guess, but why not play an actual squad level game on a squad level map if you are hyper focused on the intricacies of assault combat in one single hex?

Mini rant over. I get you all can play your games the way you want and that's okay. Its certainly the opposite of what I enjoy about PzG though. 

Question though, since you are proposing a 2 for 1 exchange between bf and df. Aren't you just introducing as many if not more distortions to fine tune around a 75? An M-7 is now just as combat effective in assault as a StugIIIG? The crew from a 105 battery is more combat effective than a platoon of late war US Armored Infantry?

Assaulting is hard enough on the attackers in this system, I'm pretty okay with leaving the big guns vulnerable in close combat. its up to you to keep them safe before the enemy closes to 100 yards.

pretty fair perspective.....there are probably fewer guns where the situation would arise than we think at this point.
your comment about keeping them out of harms way is the solution for BF units....Trouble arises of course when your
only AT is those BF units....but, that's a scenario puzzle to be solved....

Appreciate everyone's insights....looks like it's not worth the chrome handling given the actual number of times this might be the case...
and encouraging you to NOT put your BF forces up where they can get jumped is completely in keeping with Doctrines....
Heck, the Marine Arty in Saipan had marines defending them.....but they were probably in Jungle....not quite as nice defensively.

ok, return to your normal programming.

[plloyd1010]

I'm more in favor of the in-hex bombardment approach, as there is already precedent for that. Admittedly I did point out the approximate BF to DF exchange, but it isn't the route I would go. When considering things like this, I sometimes run alternating narratives in my head.

   Lt. Jonesy breathed a guarded sign of relief. The last few minutes had been a desperate fury close shoot from what seemed to be all directions at once as his platoon tried keep the enemy away from the guns, barely 20 yards behind him now. The gun crews did their best help, but with only carbines, pistols and ramrods, he wasn't sure how effective they had been. At least he could admire their courage in the moment.
   He asked Sgt Smitty, the gunnery sergeant beside him, if they might place a shells among the enemy, whom he could see regrouping for another attempt. "No sir", was the reply, "Rule 12.52 prevents us from doing so."
   Jonesy sighed, he could see tanks moving in behind the enemy infantry. As he looked on with resignation the sergeant perked up. " Sir! I see tanks!" "So do I", replied Jonesy in a weary voice. "You don't understand sir. We can shoot at those!", came the enthusiastic shout from Sgt. Smitty.
  "WTF you talkin' about Smitty?"

Or

   Lt. Jonesy breathed a guarded sign of relief. The last few minutes had been a desperate fury close shoot from what seemed to be all directions at once as his platoon tried keep the enemy away from the guns, barely 20 yards behind him now. The gun crews did their best help, but with only carbines, pistols and ramrods, he wasn't sure how effective they had been. At least he could admire their courage in the moment.
   He asked Sgt Smitty, the gunnery sergeant beside him, if they might place a shells among the enemy, whom he could see regrouping for another attempt. "We could sir, but it is a risky proposition." came the reply.
   "Well Smitty, desperate times call for desperate measures. Give it a try!", Jonesy ordered, and prayed for Smitty get a 6 for his follow-up check.

[triangular_cube]

I'm more in favor of the in-hex bombardment approach, as there is already precedent for that. Admittedly I did point out the approximate BF to DF exchange, but it isn't the route I would go. When considering things like this, I sometimes run alternating narratives in my head.

   Lt. Jonesy breathed a guarded sign of relief. The last few minutes had been a desperate fury close shoot from what seemed to be all directions at once as his platoon tried keep the enemy away from the guns, barely 20 yards behind him now. The gun crews did their best help, but with only carbines, pistols and ramrods, he wasn't sure how effective they had been. At least he could admire their courage in the moment.
   He asked Sgt Smitty, the gunnery sergeant beside him, if they might place a shells among the enemy, whom he could see regrouping for another attempt. "No sir", was the reply, "Rule 12.52 prevents us from doing so."
   Jonesy sighed, he could see tanks moving in behind the enemy infantry. As he looked on with resignation the sergeant perked up. " Sir! I see tanks!" "So do I", replied Jonesy in a weary voice. "You don't understand sir. We can shoot at those!", came the enthusiastic shout from Sgt. Smitty.
  "WTF you talkin' about Smitty?"

Or

   Lt. Jonesy breathed a guarded sign of relief. The last few minutes had been a desperate fury close shoot from what seemed to be all directions at once as his platoon tried keep the enemy away from the guns, barely 20 yards behind him now. The gun crews did their best help, but with only carbines, pistols and ramrods, he wasn't sure how effective they had been. At least he could admire their courage in the moment.
   He asked Sgt Smitty, the gunnery sergeant beside him, if they might place a shells among the enemy, whom he could see regrouping for another attempt. "We could sir, but it is a risky proposition." came the reply.
   "Well Smitty, desperate times call for desperate measures. Give it a try!", Jonesy ordered, and prayed for Smitty get a 6 for his follow-up check.

You can add narrative to any game rule to reduce it to absurdity. It doesn't lead us anywhere. Even the most basic rules make no sense when you transplant them from an abstract environment to a real one. Just look at movement. Two soldiers are in a standoff across a field. Neither wants the other to cross. Soldier A shuffles his feet and moves to the left an inch while adjusting his posture. Soldier B now has free reign to run to Soldier A's right and go on through for 15 minutes. When later asked why Soldier A allowed Soldier B to pass unharmed, he simply responded "I already moved for my turn".

[plloyd1010]

You can add narrative to any game rule to reduce it to absurdity. It doesn't lead us anywhere. Even the most basic rules make no sense when you transplant them from an abstract environment to a real one. Just look at movement. Two soldiers are in a standoff across a field. Neither wants the other to cross. Soldier A shuffles his feet and moves to the left an inch while adjusting his posture. Soldier B now has free reign to run to Soldier A's right and go on through for 15 minutes. When later asked why Soldier A allowed Soldier B to pass unharmed, he simply responded "I already moved for my turn".

Since  my poor creative writing skills do not seem to have adequate illustrated the problem, try this. At ranges under 200 meters, HEAT (or large HE) are operational capable and effective against point targets in motion. HE is non-function against area targets at under 200 meters. Is such a situation reason able. If so, why. If not, what could be done about it? If solution is found, would it become canon? (Not likely.)

[cjsiam]

I'm more in favor of the in-hex bombardment approach, as there is already precedent for that. Admittedly I did point out the approximate BF to DF exchange, but it isn't the route I would go. When considering things like this, I sometimes run alternating narratives in my head.

   Lt. Jonesy breathed a guarded sign of relief. The last few minutes had been a desperate fury close shoot from what seemed to be all directions at once as his platoon tried keep the enemy away from the guns, barely 20 yards behind him now. The gun crews did their best help, but with only carbines, pistols and ramrods, he wasn't sure how effective they had been. At least he could admire their courage in the moment.
   He asked Sgt Smitty, the gunnery sergeant beside him, if they might place a shells among the enemy, whom he could see regrouping for another attempt. "No sir", was the reply, "Rule 12.52 prevents us from doing so."
   Jonesy sighed, he could see tanks moving in behind the enemy infantry. As he looked on with resignation the sergeant perked up. " Sir! I see tanks!" "So do I", replied Jonesy in a weary voice. "You don't understand sir. We can shoot at those!", came the enthusiastic shout from Sgt. Smitty.
  "WTF you talkin' about Smitty?"

Or

   Lt. Jonesy breathed a guarded sign of relief. The last few minutes had been a desperate fury close shoot from what seemed to be all directions at once as his platoon tried keep the enemy away from the guns, barely 20 yards behind him now. The gun crews did their best help, but with only carbines, pistols and ramrods, he wasn't sure how effective they had been. At least he could admire their courage in the moment.
   He asked Sgt Smitty, the gunnery sergeant beside him, if they might place a shells among the enemy, whom he could see regrouping for another attempt. "We could sir, but it is a risky proposition." came the reply.
   "Well Smitty, desperate times call for desperate measures. Give it a try!", Jonesy ordered, and prayed for Smitty get a 6 for his follow-up check.

You can add narrative to any game rule to reduce it to absurdity. It doesn't lead us anywhere. Even the most basic rules make no sense when you transplant them from an abstract environment to a real one. Just look at movement. Two soldiers are in a standoff across a field. Neither wants the other to cross. Soldier A shuffles his feet and moves to the left an inch while adjusting his posture. Soldier B now has free reign to run to Soldier A's right and go on through for 15 minutes. When later asked why Soldier A allowed Soldier B to pass unharmed, he simply responded "I already moved for my turn".

I think this means we need a foot shuffling rule....

No---but, seriously, Movement over 15min is an issue of response for sure....one does not move....simple as that...
Shuffle your feet and you're undone.....
Though in actuality there would be lots of shuffling about, but nothing that took more attention off watching for movement for
the platoon---conversely, command communicating to all the squads that we are moving left 200yards takes everyone's eyes off
the prize and focus shifts to moving to next covered position---and someone moves while you're doing it...
Stories abound....

[cjsiam]

You can add narrative to any game rule to reduce it to absurdity. It doesn't lead us anywhere. Even the most basic rules make no sense when you transplant them from an abstract environment to a real one. Just look at movement. Two soldiers are in a standoff across a field. Neither wants the other to cross. Soldier A shuffles his feet and moves to the left an inch while adjusting his posture. Soldier B now has free reign to run to Soldier A's right and go on through for 15 minutes. When later asked why Soldier A allowed Soldier B to pass unharmed, he simply responded "I already moved for my turn".

Since  my poor creative writing skills do not seem to have adequate illustrated the problem, try this. At ranges under 200 meters, HEAT (or large HE) are operational capable and effective against point targets in motion. HE is non-function against area targets at under 200 meters. Is such a situation reason able. If so, why. If not, what could be done about it? If solution is found, would it become canon? (Not likely.)

Personally, I quite liked your creative approach and the reductum Absurdum therein...
And your summary here is the genesis of my ?? about why my 75s can shoot tanks but not impact INF in the hex...
Though---I do prefer the conversion to DF approach---as you are no longer dropping LOTS of shells from above, but probably
fewer shells well directed directly at victims....it's more directed (less probability of friendly fire)....

There continues to be the differentiation (in my mind) between things like 75s and 105s and 150s...or even soviet 122s....I'm thinking these
larger guns would be more unwieldy in these kinds of Direct Fire/bombardment in hex roles....
But, then....we are polishing chrome....

Some kind of ability of these units to respond is clearly (I think) called for...but the best implementation, I don't know....

More adventures of the Sgt. and his men are surely in order though...

[leonard]

I keep thinking of giving « simple » inherent Direct Fire capability to any unit having BOTH Bombardment and AT fire. The inherent DF would be equal to the AT stats of the unit.
Soviet 76.2mm would have 5-6 DF
Soviet 85mm AA would have 7-8 DF
German 105mm would have 5-6 DF
German 88mm would have 8-9 DF
Mortars, Rockets and NW would only get 1 in assault

[Grognard Gunny]

If you look at it realistically, the actual engagement range is really only 100 yards or less. I would suspect that Mortar/Arty crews would be either getting ready for hand to hand combat or fighting off the bad guys with small arms OR getting ready to get outta there.

Firing in that small an area could be hazardous to one's health. (On the other hand.... self preservation, ya know!) Let's assume that MOST troops would not jeopardize their buddies' lives and would use common sence.

So..... I'd say that the more explosive stuff would be best used in the adjacent hexes.... which the assault has to come from anyway.

GG