the Warriors...
- Thread starter Zarr
- Start date
Not sure about the Mongoose version for carrying capacity but in the real world the Warrior has a crew of 3 driver, commander and gunner with a dismount section of 7 men in the rifle sections. The Platoon command version has a crew of 3 driver, commander and gunner with a dismount command section of 4. There are 3 rifle sections and 1 command section in a platoon.
Martin
Martin
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
Not sure about the real one, but I'd think that the BF:EVO version would carry a full squad for gameplay purposes, same for the other IFVs.
Lorcan Nagle
Mongoose
it's total passengers.
I am begining to believe from some of the mails regarding BFE that this game is pure science fiction not a serious projection of military technology over the next 15 to 20 years. If the figure ratio is 1 to 1 i.e. one miniature equals one man, one tank etc them there is no way you are ever going to get a dismount section of 8 men in a real Warrior not without a total rebuild by GKN which would be so costly as to be unthinkable as it is the projected model has a 40mm main gun plus a 7.63mm chain gun thats bulky hardware. The only way I can see 8 dismounts would be for the vehicle commander to dismount and fights on foot or the British army starts to recruit dwarfs in to the infantry sections. To have the Warrior commander fight on foot would be a total waste of the mans training and would leave the Warrior incapable of fighting unless the commanders role is taken over by some AI component. Realistically I can see the dismount squad being reduced to 6 men with the increase in fire power over the next decade and the difficulty of recruiting. Modern sections have been reduced from WW2 levels of 10 and 12 men to 8, 7 and 6 men (West German Marders only have 6 dismounts in section). Therefore with two 8 men section boxes and a command section you would have 19 figures 3 x 6 is 18 therefore you could do it that way and still have a figure spare. More realistic than making a man walk because he does not have a seat.
Dropping Team 2 of PLA which is all infantry, non anti-tank gives you 30 pts for 3 guys. Using your math that makesa grunt worth 10 pts.Zarr said:
Droppig Team 2 of the British which is 4 troops of infantry, non anti-tank gives you 75 pts. Making them 19 pts by your calculation method of straight division.
That's closer to two to one than your original suggestion.
Just picking up on ths point (and not taking sides in the particulars of the debate since my expert chums at work who are actually working on the Warrior upgrade are on their hols at the moment)...
I don't see why a set of rules necesarily has to be one or the other, and surely the goal of the game designer working in a vaguely historical background (or even a non-historical but literary or cinematographic / TV background such as B5 or Star Trek) is to strike an appropriate balance of game/simulation whilst remaining true to the facts of the background. During the development of VAS I was "accused" of beinga "simulationist" because I wanted the rules and data to be "right" (i.e. not giving units capabilities that they didn't have), although at all times I was striving to maintain the level of playability of the rules as they stood. I don't see why a set of rules that emphasises the "game" aspect can't be as realistic as possible. The "game" element surely relates to the mechanics rather than the accuracy of the data therein. I have had several sets of naval rules published which, when comapred with other sets like "Harpoon" and "Command at Sea" would definitely fall intothe "game" end of the market rather than the "simulation" since the mechanics emphasise fast play and fun, but the data supporting the rules was as accurate as I could make it.
I agree that the rules should reflect reality as much as reasonably possible, but I can understand why Mongoose chose to increase the Warrior's troop capacity. If they went with a capacity of 6 or 7 troops, it would mean dividing fireteams or only putting 1 team in each Warrior. Dividing fireteams would increase the amount of times a model is out of command. It would also lead to more arguments over which transport had which exact models. If you only put 1 team in each Warrior, it would cost a lot to field an armored force, both in money and in points value.
The historical\modern wargaming scene is full of complex simulationist systems. Battlefield Evolution seems to be more of a simple fast played game.
The historical\modern wargaming scene is full of complex simulationist systems. Battlefield Evolution seems to be more of a simple fast played game.
Perhaps it would be worth knowing how the British Army operates its teams. Wne I did my small unit tactics training and FIBUA we worked in sections divided down into two teams of four plus a "gun group" of two with the LMG. How are things run now? The rules ought to be able to reflect that.
Do fire teams have to have 4 members? Why not two teams of 3, or a 3 and a 4?
Incidentally, the last time I was in a Warrior there were plenty of stowages for LAW-80 as well as the seven troops. Brit infantry sections really ought to have integrated use of NLAW.
Paladin...man if I were a Brit soldier I would not be happy with your math either...one Brit is worth 2 PLA grunts...ouch!...
the game could have been designed to make the PLA very numerous on the board...and the game could have been balanced...
it is easy to design a game and make all fations equal numerically with a slight twist on abilities...but when you bring history or reality into a game in any way shape or form...you open yourself up to critical review via the facts...
the game could have been designed to make the PLA very numerous on the board...and the game could have been balanced...
it is easy to design a game and make all fations equal numerically with a slight twist on abilities...but when you bring history or reality into a game in any way shape or form...you open yourself up to critical review via the facts...
maybe the human wave effect will be only visible in a strategic view? sorta like in Medieval 2-you can't have more than X slots of units in a battle, but ther's no stopping you form producing 20 of those armies filled with *snort*infantry(which is only good at holding catsles and cities, no sane man would try to fight an open battle with those lousy,useless peasants and burghers!...whoops, got a bit carried away :lol: ). same with PLA->there isn't such a great difference on tactical level between the inf.types to warrant a big discount, bu during a campaing you may start with 2x as many inf as oponent,or smthing.
i'm sure that the PLA in their try to become more up-to-date would get rid of the stupid man-wave tactic. it worked in IIww for the russkies, but now?
i'm sure that the PLA in their try to become more up-to-date would get rid of the stupid man-wave tactic. it worked in IIww for the russkies, but now?
