Share
Go down
avatar
RichardC
Posts : 114
Join date : 2018-02-12
Location : Sydney, Australia
https://coldwarhot.blogspot.com.au/

Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:41 pm
I've had some changes suggested to me through topics here and discussions on my blog. Before making them I wanted to post the up here and see what people thought.

Suggestion 1
Change the Assault Rifle entry in the rules to read "NATO Assault Rifle"
Add "WARPAC Assault Rifle" to the list. Max Range 20" and RoF 2 out to 20"

The question came through my blog on how to differentiate between the shorter range "spray and pray" AK family against the longer ranged, slightly more accurate NATO assault rifles. The option above is my proposed way to deal with it. It gives the WARPAC assault rifles more fire power up to 20", but give NATO an advantage at longer ranges.

I'm not sold 100% on the necessity of this change, but I think it's quite simple and should be easy to remember.

Suggestion 2
Reduce the RoF for the LMG from 3 down to 2 as per standard BG rules
Reduce the RoF for the SAW down from 5 to 4 or even 3.

I'm in complete agreement with reducing the LMG RoF but would appreciate commentary on the SAW - and whether it should be reduced to 3 or 4.

If we get any other small arms suggestions we can but them in this thread.

Thanks

Richard
avatar
Piers
Admin
Posts : 192
Join date : 2018-02-12
http://battlegroupwargame.forumotion.com

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:08 pm
I think you need to consider the two together.

LmGs become a Soviet assault rifle.

I think differentiating assault rifles is perhaps not needed. The law of equivalence should apply. Plus it should perhaps be more to do with troop quality than anything?
Strombones
Posts : 29
Join date : 2018-02-27

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:41 pm
If I had a vote I would say keep assault rifles the same. A 7.62 may not be quite as accurate as the NATO 5.56 but can make the range nevertheless. Having your Soviet fire teams helpless against NATO troops at 20-30 doesn't sound like a lot of fun either.
nickdives
Posts : 61
Join date : 2018-02-12

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:00 am
I think Piers is correct troop quality and trg should play a big part in the effective application of fire, otherwise you go down another rule set system where a conscript section with no trg can fire as effectively as a fully trained section.
CAG 19
Posts : 27
Join date : 2018-02-12
http://www.cag19.blogspot.co.uk

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:18 pm
IMHO no major driver to change from the entry in the BG original rules. Smaller caliber means more rounds carried without need for constant resupply. So more shots can be made over time not just delivering Full Automatic with every shot.

1 = Rifles - includes the non automatic FN
2/1 = Assault rifles - M16/AK etc
2 = LMG with a magazine - LSW/RPK/L4A1/C2 etc
3 = Belt fed SAW
5 = Belt fed MG with a crew requirement - GPMG/M60/PKM.
6 = MG3/HMG (only because the MG3 is the only one with a ROF significantly higher than the others listed) the HMG ROF is due to the impact effect of the heavier round
7 = Any MG on a Tripod unless you want to keep the MG3 advantage


nickdives
Posts : 61
Join date : 2018-02-12

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Wed Feb 28, 2018 9:32 pm
We would train with a section shoot up to 400 - 600 metres.
Smee106
Posts : 12
Join date : 2018-02-17

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:40 am
If you want reduce the rof of the SLR then increase its range and accuracy as nickdives said section fire was longer than both the AK and 5.56mm. Battle sights on the SLR were 300m
CAG 19
Posts : 27
Join date : 2018-02-12
http://www.cag19.blogspot.co.uk

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Mon Mar 05, 2018 2:36 pm
The SLR isn't any more accurate than a .303 No4 rifle. It was brought in as a result of the Korean experience.  The 300m often quoted is the individual riflemen capability. Above individual shooting All armies including the Soviets practice engaging above battle shooting ranges with grouips of shooters.  Soviets getting out of BMPs at 50m and firing from the hip is in a nuclear scenario. Dismount outside of direct fire range and use fire and manouver was practised.  IMHO BG should be about the rule of equivalences. With too many factors/special characteristics you risk going down the Challenger 2000 route
nickdives
Posts : 61
Join date : 2018-02-12

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Mon Mar 05, 2018 5:48 pm
"Soviets getting out of BMPs at 50m and firing from the hip is in a nuclear scenario." and for suitably heroic "I serve the Soviet Union" propaganda films!
Smee106
Posts : 12
Join date : 2018-02-17

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

on Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:40 pm
The 300yds was the range that most combat took place at hence it being classed ‘battle’ and we were told that we should expect that to continue.

As for being as accurate as a No 4 that had an effective range of 550yds and a version was still being used as a sniper rifle, it also didn’t hold 20 rounds in its mags and couldn’t be fired as fast or as accurately in rapid fire.
Sponsored content

Re: Small Arms - some suggested changes

Back to top
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum