Technical tank killer

[BuShips]

Well, to take us down memory lane a bit, Matt has ruled in the past that an IED cannot be placed on your own vehicle as it would be an "attack" and thus not permitted. As Paladin said earlier in this thread, you could house rule or change the rule to allow it.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/p...stdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=ied&start=30

 

[cordas]

Well, to take us down memory lane a bit, Matt has ruled in the past that an IED cannot be placed on your own vehicle as it would be an "attack" and thus not permitted. As Paladin said earlier in this thread, you could house rule or change the rule to allow it.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/p...stdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=ied&start=30

Well that clears that up.

 

[BuShips]

Well, to take us down memory lane a bit, Matt has ruled in the past that an IED cannot be placed on your own vehicle as it would be an "attack" and thus not permitted. As Paladin said earlier in this thread, you could house rule or change the rule to allow it.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/p...stdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=ied&start=30

Well that clears that up.

Maybe Matt was being politically correct in his answer without needing to face the issue directly, eh? Clever. :wink:

 

[The Old Soldier]

Until the card is errata. It doesn't matter squat what Matts says.

 

[BuShips]

Until the card is errata. It doesn't matter squat what Matts says.

Yupp, Matt's even said that so he's covered there, too. :wink: Like I said- clever. :lol:

 

[cordas]

To clever be half, half the time I feel, but hey thats me as well.

 

[DamageInc.]

SVBIEDs are being used a lot more than you might realize. they are a strategic asset for the insurgency, one of the few weapons the possess that can destroy bridges and buildings. Many are being used in multiple style attacks with several hitting a target to clear out defenses and allow one to get through. One of the largest looses of life at once time occured when SVBIEDs hit an american patrol base that was lightly defended, taking it by surprise. They are indeed used against military targets.

They are a preplanned weapon however. It takes time to build a VBIED and find a driver willing to kill himself. Sometimes they roll around looking for targets to hit, but most of the time they would be brought to a battle to attack a specific target.

SVBIEDs ? I know what you mean but not sure what the acronym stands for......

I just think my idea would be a cool variant for the technicals. I stand whole heartedly behind my stance that they should NOT be touted as suicide weapons, as I could see how it could offense and hurt to people for a number of reasons. There is no need for it when a simple not so futureistic solution can be found. This to my mind is similar to the debate held here regarding dressing in Arabic dress and taking prayer mats to a convention and doing a praying to Mecca act before each battle. Arabic dress is fine, but the praying is just un-nesicary and could cause un-needed offense.

SVBIEDs means Suicide Vehicle Borne IEDs. I agree that it is a very touchy subject. Not only is suicide looked at very differently in the Western cultures than in the Middle Eastern, it is also a very sore topic for many people because of the wars, myself included. That being said though, in a way I think it helps bring to light the tactic that actually exists and a mindset that is a reality.

I wouldn't mind personally, but I can't speak for everyone. My post was more to reinforce that it is something being used against military targets, but is more of a preplanned weapon than anything else. although the technology is simple, even radical religions can't just pull someone off the strett to kill themselves.

As for the prayer deal, unless you are Muslim, you should not kneel on a mat and pray to Mecca. That's insulting to Muslims, making light of a religion, and makes the person that does it look like an under educated jackass. It's like someone bringing a Jesus shrine and holy water to a gaming event.

 

[BuShips]

Until the card is errata. It doesn't matter squat what Matts says.

Cordas, I think what TOS is saying above is that even though Matt was quoting the rules as written by indicating that you cannot make a Charge attack on your own vehicle, TOS is remembering that the unit cards override those very rules. The card does say "any model of Size 2 or more" so you can use your method until the card is updated. TOS is using the official ruling as to how to use the cards. :wink:

 

[The Old Soldier]

Bingo!

I was the one of those that mentioned the Charge thing in that thread. Errata it one way or the other.

 

[MaxSteiner]

I just think my idea would be a cool variant for the technicals. I stand whole heartedly behind my stance that they should NOT be touted as suicide weapons, as I could see how it could offense and hurt to people for a number of reasons. There is no need for it when a simple not so futureistic solution can be found. This to my mind is similar to the debate held here regarding dressing in Arabic dress and taking prayer mats to a convention and doing a praying to Mecca act before each battle. Arabic dress is fine, but the praying is just un-nesicary and could cause un-needed offense.

I dont think it matters what route is taken to try and distance it from suicide bombing, people are going to assume they are suicide bombers. Its a car driving up to something and then blowing up, what with the windows being blacked out on the vehicles anyway noone will be able to see the difference.
Anyone who is likly to be offended by the thought of a miniature game painfully reflecting whats currently going on in the real world isnt going to be playing BF:E anyway

 

[Xorrandor]

I wouldn't mind personally, but I can't speak for everyone. My post was more to reinforce that it is something being used against military targets, but is more of a preplanned weapon than anything else.

Seems we agree, we just need to figure out what a "standard game" is. I consider the army lists to cover standard troops and a standard scenario to be two patroling forces meeting each other. I would call a preplanned ambush weapon a scenario-specific item, that doesn't need to go in the army lists. Same thing for emplacements like razor wire and minefields. You can give point values for these things, but it just helps balance out the scenario during the design phase. IMHO, YMMV.

 

[cordas]

I would imagine the MEA milita list isn't really a straight up and up army.... they are more suited to ambushes and guerilla fighting. Also this is set a bit in the future when these will be organisied forces fighting each other, I would consider them to be closer to the Veit Cong than the insurgents they currently are in Iraq (but not the same). With proper supplies, a reasonable command structure and communications, and the ability to organise large scale fights invovling advanced tactics and the use of assets (such as my proposed technical tank killer).

 

[Xorrandor]

I would imagine the MEA milita list isn't really a straight up and up army.... they are more suited to ambushes and guerilla fighting. Also this is set a bit in the future when these will be organisied forces fighting each other, I would consider them to be closer to the Veit Cong than the insurgents they currently are in Iraq (but not the same).

Agreed. I don't recall if you can do this in a campaign game, but there should be some method by which you can skew scenario choice toward ambushes. That would make it much easier to use militia forces like the MEA militia armies, and any other similar armies that come up. Trading off direct control of the area for greater amush potential, perhaps. Might make the campaign annoying, though, trading off playing games where you get crushed with games where you crush the opposition.

 

[dyssnowman]

Well, to take us down memory lane a bit, Matt has ruled in the past that an IED cannot be placed on your own vehicle as it would be an "attack" and thus not permitted. As Paladin said earlier in this thread, you could house rule or change the rule to allow it.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/p...stdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=ied&start=30

I find this very odd since it was Mongoose Alex that had first told me about the tactic and he said that it was commonnly done in the office.

As far as it not being "politically-correct" to have some kind of a suicide bomb, this is a WARgame that we are talking about. In fact, while we are at it, why are people worried about what happens to the driver of the truck? If you insist that he dives out of the truck before the bomb goes off, does that mean that everyone that is shot in the game gets up when it is over and shakes hands? Sorry, but it just sounds like a rather silly concern in my opinion. After all, this is just a game.

 

[cordas]

I would suggest that "suicide" bombs will be regarded in the same way by some (maybe even many) war gammers as being as bad taste / down right unacceptable as painting WW2 Germans up as SS from certain divisions and using all the markings and such. Again I say this can and will cause UNNESSICARY hurt and offence to some, especaily when we are playing in a near future setting (some of which is roughly based on real events happening now) that allows us to avoid these issues.

Yes its a WARgame, but as its about WARS, you know those things that are happening in the real world where real people loose their lives or have their lives (and the lives of those who love them) destroyed I fail to see why a little common decency is so alien to some..... Fortunatly none of those who I love have been affected by suicide bombings, but as I have family who are serving in Afganistan at the moment, and other members who are to due to go back to Iraq this year.....

 

[dyssnowman]

...but as I have family who are serving in Afganistan at the moment, and other members who are to due to go back to Iraq this year.....

Which I very much respect, and give my prayers for their continued safety and my thanks for their efforts.

The thing that confuses me on this issue is the fact that by creating a remote controlled technical armed with a bomb, you have created a means for the MEA to safely deliver a car bomb to their target. It has no crew, so they are safe once the bomb is activated and it is on its way to kill its target. What you are describing and dressing up in hi-tech gadgetry is effectively a car bomb.

To create rules to field a "safe" car bomb and then bring up the concept of beomg politically correct in any way seems very much flawed to me. If the concept of a suicide car bomb is offensive (which I can understand and sympathize with), how is a robot car bomb any different?

If you could explain your reasoning, I would appreciate.

 

[The Old Soldier]

It doesn't matter if the bomb was delivered by a Fool that want to destroy himself, or by a Artillery round fired miles away, nor by a remote robot, the EFFECT is the same, people die. (It could be said that one less fool that killed himself means one less bomb to be delivered)

This on the otherhand is a game, no one dies, the plastic soldiers right themselves with the helping hand of the players and go back on the shelf for parade review, till the next game.

Political correctness taken too far becomes foolishness.

 

[cordas]

The method of delivery is important to some people. Why should it make any difference that re-enactors dressed up as SS and Hitler Youth at Salute, wasn't that just people re-enacting something that happened in history? Suicide bombings are a real horror weapon, and some people will find the use of them in a game as offensive. So why do it?

 

[The Old Soldier]

What upset some at the Show with the SS thing, was it was at a SHOW in the first place. It may have a place, but it would be at a re-enactment where people would expect it to be, or in a museum.

We're talking about a game. If it bothers someone, then they don't have to play the game. If you were depicting a car bomb that killed civilians for the sake of terror, then you may have a point. BUT, we are talking about a game where you could pretend to have your toy truck blow up, it removes other toy soldiers. Combatants vs. combatants. If you want to live your life worrying about what other people may think, then fine, but you will never be happy.

 

[katadder]

I wouldn't mind personally, but I can't speak for everyone. My post was more to reinforce that it is something being used against military targets, but is more of a preplanned weapon than anything else. although the technology is simple, even radical religions can't just pull someone off the strett to kill themselves.

you never heard of proxy bombs? its what the IRA and like used as they dont go for suicide bombings. take a family hostage. force one of them to drive a vehicle loaded with explosives at a vehicle checkpoint (whilst someone keeps watch from a distance). the person forced to drive has no choice as they are dead anyway, but at least they save their family otherwise they all die.
not hard to get a driver this way for a suicide bomb.