10-21-2009, 03:47 AM
Pages: 1 2
10-21-2009, 07:15 AM
Hi Eric,
I'd like to play. I'll take ROK/USA
Just let me know.
César
I'd like to play. I'll take ROK/USA
Just let me know.
César
10-22-2009, 12:18 AM
Excellent, I'm at work tonight, but I'll get you the first turn ASAP.
I'll use the standard VM recommended optional rules, but I've been wondering if the artillery set-up rule is really appropriate for the MC series. It makes sense to use it for the PzC era, but set-up procedures would have improved by 1985 and the MC series also has 3 hour turns. I would welcome any opinions about this from forum members.
I'll use the standard VM recommended optional rules, but I've been wondering if the artillery set-up rule is really appropriate for the MC series. It makes sense to use it for the PzC era, but set-up procedures would have improved by 1985 and the MC series also has 3 hour turns. I would welcome any opinions about this from forum members.
10-22-2009, 12:40 AM
alaric99x Wrote:Excellent, I'm at work tonight, but I'll get you the first turn ASAP.
I'll use the standard VM recommended optional rules, but I've been wondering if the artillery set-up rule is really appropriate for the MC series. It makes sense to use it for the PzC era, but set-up procedures would have improved by 1985 and the MC series also has 3 hour turns. I would welcome any opinions about this from forum members.
From my experience artillery units from this time could be set up & firing well within 3 hours - so I don't use the artillery set up rule.
10-22-2009, 03:22 AM
Well, both sides have a very high setup % (because it is modern warfare after all -- so that aspect is factored), so only bad luck would keep them from getting deployed quickly, but that's not really the point.
The reason Artillery Setup should be used (as suggested) is that the unit does expend movement in the turn that it deploys (unless it is a Heavy Artillery unit) so you cannot consider that it is setting up the entire turn in which it deploys; it might start setting up in the last 5 minutes of the turn for all we know. Then again, it could be rationalized that the guns should always be setup in the second turn, but just because they are setup does not mean they would be ready to accept fire missions. So it comes down to, they might be ready, they might not be ready. But that is why Artillery setup rule is suggested (it adds a level of uncertainty).
SPG type artillery (and all Allied artillery for that matter) can indeed setup in one turn (allied) because their setup is 90%. This places an intentional advantage for the allies. So, the main reason for use of the Artillery Setup is to give the allies a slight advantage since their towed guns can also setup in one turn, their SPGs always setup next turn, but the NKPA might take two. Still, if people don't want to use that optional rule then fine, but the NKPA will be moving and deploying their artillery at an somewhat unrealistic rate.
The reason Artillery Setup should be used (as suggested) is that the unit does expend movement in the turn that it deploys (unless it is a Heavy Artillery unit) so you cannot consider that it is setting up the entire turn in which it deploys; it might start setting up in the last 5 minutes of the turn for all we know. Then again, it could be rationalized that the guns should always be setup in the second turn, but just because they are setup does not mean they would be ready to accept fire missions. So it comes down to, they might be ready, they might not be ready. But that is why Artillery setup rule is suggested (it adds a level of uncertainty).
SPG type artillery (and all Allied artillery for that matter) can indeed setup in one turn (allied) because their setup is 90%. This places an intentional advantage for the allies. So, the main reason for use of the Artillery Setup is to give the allies a slight advantage since their towed guns can also setup in one turn, their SPGs always setup next turn, but the NKPA might take two. Still, if people don't want to use that optional rule then fine, but the NKPA will be moving and deploying their artillery at an somewhat unrealistic rate.
10-22-2009, 04:02 AM
VM's comments reminded me that in the specific case of K85, my opponent & agreed to turn off artillery set up to balance things a little bit more towards the NKPA side, otherwise we would have gone with VM's suggested rules entirely. (This was some time ago)
10-22-2009, 05:10 AM
Hi Ed, thanks for the clarification. It makes more sense now to go along with the options you recommended for this scenario.
10-22-2009, 05:17 AM
Yeah, if you want to give the NKPA an advantage then by all means turn it off. I have played a PBEM campaign as the NKPA in the _Alt, and I didn't see any need to give the NKPA an advantage, but that is all relative of course. ;)
10-22-2009, 06:27 AM
I agree.
NKPA don't need any help. In my last _alt game it took me less than 50 turns reach decisive victory with NKPA.
NKPA don't need any help. In my last _alt game it took me less than 50 turns reach decisive victory with NKPA.
10-22-2009, 06:55 AM
I agree too, just asking for opinions.
OK, Cesar, I'll start with the VM recommended options.
OK, Cesar, I'll start with the VM recommended options.
Pages: 1 2