Quote from: Last Hussar on 20 October 2015, 09:54:55 PM
Rob - If you've got bullets pinging around you, you tend not to care what fired them or what calibre they are - you tend to react the same.  

Mmmmm  

The power of the round is more important than the calibre. 9mm parabellum rounds are not as powerful as NATO 7.62*51 rounds. You can see this simply in the size.
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-62029165/stock-photo-nato-cartridge-ak-bullit-and-mm-round-isolated-against-background.html

A 9mm round will not stop every man especially if he's a bit excited. It has been known in desperate situations that people shot with pistols did not realise it until they calmed down. This is not to belittle 9mm pistol rounds which are deadly, but a full power round such as a 7.62 NATO, .30, .303, German 7.9 will knock you down however excited you get.

When behind cover with rounds hitting it the suppressing effect is in direct proportion to the power of the round that hits it. Full power rounds hitting the cover will sound and feel as if someone is hitting it with a sledge hammer. So you will not react the same, you are less likely to stick your head up and fire back because the full power rounds feel more dangerous although they will all potentially kill you. They will also go through single red brick walls and of course breeze/cinder block. You can put a hole into a red brick house wall that a man can enter through with 2-300 rounds using a GPMG. Some cover will protect you from pistol rounds, especially at longer ranges, but will not be any protection at all against full power rounds.

I'm not trying to be a smart arse, but anyone that has been in the army in the '80's or earlier will know what I mean. This is the sort of information that gets lost with time. Modern weapons do not use these full power rounds because you can fire the modern rounds such as 5.56mm quicker and more accurately. You can also carry a lot more ammunition than the old full power rounds.

Cheers Rob  

Not trying to troll or anything, (honest - I save that for Orcs and FSN), but you make it sound like "That's only 9mm, think its safe to move". 

I'm not denying that you can tell the difference, I just can't imagine making a decision based on that difference.

One thing reading accounts of chaps being shot at, if it;s big enough to notice it's big enough to count. Except in certain rare occasions where highly motivated troops are willing to chance it anyway.

I don't know CoC though - was it a suppressing fire, in which case as long as there's enough it's calibre is likely irrelevant, or "killing fire" where it's punching through the "safe" wall and causing casualties - in which case the bigger more powerful rounds are probably much more effective as that 9mm is likely just splattering off the front instead of punching through?

Quote from: toxicpixie on 22 October 2015, 08:41:06 AM
I don't know CoC though - was it a suppressing fire, in which case as long as there's enough it's calibre is likely irrelevant, or "killing fire" where it's punching through the "safe" wall and causing casualties - in which case the bigger more powerful rounds are probably much more effective as that 9mm is likely just splattering off the front instead of punching through?

The situation was a French section of 12(?) men taking cover in a mud built farm building. We allowed them to knock a whole through so they could shoot out and because of this declared it light cover. They came under fire from two German sections each including an MG34. This continued for a number of phases until the French were suppressed and nearly wiped out with the remnants retreating.

All well and good; I think in real life the effect of nearly 20 riflemen and two MG34s firing at a mud built building would be disintegration of the building. However the effect of using MP40 SMGs instead would not be so dramatic and I was slightly disappointed to find in the rules no difference in effect.

TBH I can't see much problem with the result - if the MGs and SMGs are all firing then it's all extra suppression and the MGs will likely be the ones causing the "real" casualties, but everything is contributing. No one being shot at who notices the incoming seems inclined to differentiate by calibre - WW2 especially, every time anyone gets shot at by small arms the eye witness testimony is that everything was an MG34/42! Much the same as every German tank was a Tiger...

I've seen pictures of a mud-brick house that had been the target of an attack by the owner of the photos' unit somewhere in Kuwait/ Iraq. According to the guy showing me the pictures, the house was "hosed" by the 25mm cannon and machine-guns of four Bradleys as they approached then subjected to suppressing fire as a team approached and assaulted the building. The building was visibly knocked about but still very much standing and three of the occupants survived to leg it to a motorcycle and side-car and race over a nearby rise before anyone thought to shoot at them.

Doesn't sound much different to what you're describing, to me.  

Quote from: Last Hussar on 21 October 2015, 07:53:44 PM
Not trying to troll or anything, (honest - I save that for Orcs and FSN), but you make it sound like "That's only 9mm, think its safe to move". 

I'm not denying that you can tell the difference, I just can't imagine making a decision based on that difference.

It's really the other way around, in that for killing in the open full power rounds are too powerful, its overkill. This is why modern armies have moved away from these powerful rounds to smaller rounds that they can carry a lot more of. You do not get the same impact on the target but you can compensate theoretically with more rounds.

To illustrate from a different angle: I knew a corporal who was in patrol company (B company, 2 Para) at Goose Green. Troops on both sides were using similar weapons except the Argentineans had some Browning .50 calibre machine guns. Now 2 Par especially in this action are so gung-ho they possibly take casualties they don't need to if they were to act more cautiously, but they ended being pinned down for hours by the relatively slow fire of the .50. In pre Falklands British Army theory the .50 is far less efficient than a GPMG on a tri-pod. But the power of those .50 rounds had a pinning effect on the Paras out of proportion to the number of rounds actually fired.

2 Para were so impressed they kept the captured .50s and wouldn't turn them in after the war. Interestingly since the adoption of the new 5.56mm calibre the British Army has found that if its troops come under fire from more than 500 metres they have real difficulty in suppressing the fire with the 5.56 weapons. They have to rely on 7.62 GPMGs or the 50 calibre  Brownings all infantry battalions are now equipped with.

Rob

Oddly enough the .50 cal was supposed to give the Americans fire superiority over the Germans with MG34/42's - they found the opposite; one of the reasons behind switching to GPMG style weapons post war.

I know 2 Para "hoovered up" stuff from the Falklands, but didn't know they'd kept those .50 cals

The smaller calibre versus larger calibre argument is one that's likely to run and run. I think the lethality issue is settled (any modern bullet will do horrible things) but the range part is still up for grabs, although small arms fire over that distance is still rare in comparison to close in fire (in current experience in the field, anyway); probably enough to make sure there's something in a "real" rifle or heavier calibre available within the company area or even battalion?

1) What ruleset do you use in your last game? WRG Armour and Infantry 1925-1950 (pub. 1973)
2) What armies were confronted? WW II Late War British and Late War Germans.
3) Did you feel comfortable with the ruleset? - Yes
4) and... was the first time do you use the ruleset? - No, although last used in the early 1980's.
5) How many players were in the game? 1

The rules worked quite well and speeded up as I a) remembered stuff and b) by repetition. It was much better when I noticed that 1cm = 100yds for 6mm. Before then everyone was getting Auto KO'd as I used 1mm = 1yd! Things were getting neutralised all over the place.

Link to a copy of the WRG set for this interested - http://www.wrg.me.uk/WRG.net/History/OLDWRG/WWII.pdf

Rob - not got the rules in front of me, but don't SMGs have shorter ranges?

Also A Kill isn;t a death or wound - its a bloke becoming combat ineffective, maybe hiding in a 'funk'.  He doesn't care about caliber, just that they are out there.  Also note more experienced troops are harder to get a kill/shock on - probably because they CAN differentiate!

1) What ruleset do you use in your last game? FogR
2) What armies were confronted? Huegonot vs Mapuche
3) Did you feel comfortable with the ruleset? - Yes
4) and... was the first time do you use the ruleset? - No
5) How many players were in the game? 3 Don Avis can Pete Simpson and I.

Don won 25-0, he had one charge that went spectacularly well, broke into our back field, and proceeded to much his way through anything that got in the way!!!
Still a great game.

Quote from: Last Hussar on 22 October 2015, 10:19:22 PM
Rob - not got the rules in front of me, but don't SMGs have shorter ranges?

Also A Kill isn;t a death or wound - its a bloke becoming combat ineffective, maybe hiding in a 'funk'.  He doesn't care about caliber, just that they are out there.  Also note more experienced troops are harder to get a kill/shock on - probably because they CAN differentiate!

I do not have a set of the rules but I will get them, because they are so good. I didn't have any SMGs, the cover thing was a query. From memory I do beleive SMGs do have a shorter range but get more dice to throw than a rifle (1 ) but less than a belt fed LMG (8 ) and a magazine fed LMG (6 ). You get a bucket full of dice to role either for the whole section or a team within the section when firing. Hits were always 5,6 at 'effective' range. Kills for each hit ranged from 3-6 for no cover and 5-6 for light cover. My query was over the kills part. Every nation in WW2 used full power rounds in rifles and MG. They used pistol rounds in pistols, SMGs and U.S. carbines, these were much less powerful and would have trouble going through the cover I was firing at (mud built farm building) whereas a full power rouind wouldn't.  

1. Impetus Baroque

2. ECW Parliamentarian with Covenanter Allies v. Royalist

3. Yes as I have played Impetus since it first appeared

4. This was the first time I'd played, but not my opponent.

5. Two.

This was an extremely entertaining game. My opponent is an official playtester for the rules. Many of the mechanisms were very familiar, however opportunity is treated differently, and in my opinion much better, than in the original rules. It is possible to respond to an enemy unit doing something by taking a discipline test. If you pass you can countercharge or fire, but if you fail you do nothing, but do not become disordered. I found this made the game flow much more smoothly and made it more exciting. It still has the roll off to see who can activate a command, and that can make for some hard decisions. Would my opponent try to rescue his isolated militia, rapidly being closed on by the Scots, or would he go for my cuirassiers, who had dropped to a VBU of 3 and were disordered. Neither, as I won the roll and pulled my cuirassiers back out of trouble after rallying them. My guess is we might see the finished product at the end of 2016.

Rob - That's my take on 'kills' in wargames in general, rather than official policy in CoC.  Its the only thing that makes sense, give the horrendous kill rate in most wargames.  Thats part of the reason I like Black Powder, you effectively do hits against morale rather than actual kills/wounds.

Quote from: Last Hussar on 25 October 2015, 12:07:52 PM
Rob - That's my take on 'kills' in wargames in general, rather than official policy in CoC.  Its the only thing that makes sense, give the horrendous kill rate in most wargames.  Thats part of the reason I like Black Powder, you effectively do hits against morale rather than actual kills/wounds.

This is my whole point. A full power round that has just thumped into your cover, or gone through it, is more likely to suppress you than a low power round that you didn't know had hit the wall in front of you.

In a similar vein but fitting in with what you have said. I think even in today's warfare morale (or what you perceive is happening) is more important than the physical effects. 


Rob

Played four games of FOGR this weekend at the BHGS doubles this weekend, using a non-standard list (Mapuche), we came third out of 8, only one point behind second! 

Congrats Lemmy.

1) What ruleset do you use in your last game? Blitzkrieg Commander
2) What armies were confronted? Mid war Soviet v German
3) Did you feel comfortable with the ruleset? - Yes
4) and... was the first time do you use the ruleset? - No
5) How many players were in the game? 6

On going battle at least another night in it, based upon the attack by the 11th Panzer Division on Sowchos 79 on December 8th 1942. The collective was
being defended by elements from the 1st Tank Corps.

Quote from: mad lemmey on 25 October 2015, 09:42:23 PM
Played four games of FOGR this weekend at the BHGS doubles this weekend, using a non-standard list (Mapuche), we came third out of 8, only one point behind second! 

Well done that man, and his double