WaW: Optional HE Round rule to test

[Agis]

Hi everybody,

HE Rounds - since the release of WaW HE or the lack of it was discussed countless times.
Personally I still think that LZ covers the HE effect well enough for the aspired game effect,
but what about the following optional rule I was toying around for a long time:
:idea:
Any AFV (yes I know some did not...) is presumed to have AT and HE ammunition.
Whenever an AFV targets an infantry unit with its main gun it can decide to use HE rounds.
When a HE round is used triple the LZ and lower any Damage Dice that uses a
D10 to D6 and any DD that uses a
D6 to D6-2.
Any additional weapon traits are not used.

Added after wkehrmans post below:
Before the battle, the player fielding a unit capable of firing
AP and HE rounds must decide whether it will be used in the
antitank or anti-infantry role.
To change the Ammunition type during the battle, a Ready
action must be performed.

Example: A German PzKmpf IV Ausf. H is shooting at a dug in Infantry unit
with its 7.5cm L48 anti-tank gun. The commander decides to use a HE round.
Since the 7.5cm L48 anti-tank gun uses a D10 the weapon profile looks now:
7.5cm L48 anti-tank gun 48" D6 LZ/3"

Please bear in mind that this will shift the game balance towards vehicles again.
But with the Take Cover rule (unofficially) established I think it worth considering.

Any feedback welcome! :wink:

 

[wkehrman]

I think there are many problems; foremost among them is that you violate the KISS principle which otherwise seems to govern the system. Having playtested ammo types in a different system, this will open the door to all manner of micromanagement. How many rounds of each type? What about WP rounds? Were there cases in which a vehicle loaded nothing but AP or HE? What about changing targets from one turn to the next, i.e., I fired at infantry turn one, but I switched targets to a tank in turn two? Was I clarvoyant enough to load the right ammo every time?

What happens when an HE round is fired into certain types of cover (trees, for example)?

Optional / advanced rules is exactly the right place to put it, along with a list of "No HE Rounds" vehicles and guns.

 

[Agis]

I think there are many problems; foremost among them is that you violate the KISS principle which otherwise seems to govern the system. Having playtested ammo types in a different system, this will open the door to all manner of micromanagement.
How many rounds of each type?

Not relevant, KISS and ignore it.

What about WP rounds?

Not relevant, KISS and ignore it.

Were there cases in which a vehicle loaded nothing but AP or HE?

Not relevant, KISS and ignore it.

What about changing targets from one turn to the next, i.e., I fired at infantry turn one, but I switched targets to a tank in turn two?

Hah, I knew I had forgotten something! Thanks! :wink:
Please add the following:
"Before the battle, the player fielding a unit capable of firing
AP and HE rounds must decide whether it will be used in the
antitank or anti-infantry role.
To change the Ammunition type during the battle, a Ready
action must be performed."

Was I clarvoyant enough to load the right ammo every time?

See above!

What happens when an HE round is fired into certain types of cover (trees, for example)?

Not relevant, KISS and ignore it.

Optional / advanced rules is exactly the right place to put it, along with a list of "No HE Rounds" vehicles and guns.

The list is up to the player IMO.

 

[Rabidchild]

I like your proposed addition Agis and think it falls within the simplicity of the basic rules. Don't worry about all the extras like ammo consumption or other ammo types.

In fact, I think the ready action to switch ammo types takes away from the simplicity of the rules you posted. If it takes a ready action for an 88 to de-elevate and seek a ground target, certainly that's more time and a bigger decision than the loader switching an HE for an AP. Plus if I have 3 tanks next to each other, will I remember what they fired at last turn?

 

[Agis]

I like your proposed addition Agis and think it falls within the simplicity of the basic rules. Don't worry about all the extras like ammo consumption or other ammo types.

In fact, I think the ready action to switch ammo types takes away from the simplicity of the rules you posted. If it takes a ready action for an 88 to de-elevate and seek a ground target, certainly that's more time and a bigger decision than the loader switching an HE for an AP. Plus if I have 3 tanks next to each other, will I remember what they fired at last turn?

Hmm switching the AA / non AA role of the 88 needs 2 ready actions.
So 1 should be OK.
Otherwise you are of course right, it makes it a bit more complex.
As said at the very beginning of this topic, IMO the current rules are OK as they are.
But HE was a hotly debated issue right from the start, so I would like to get as much feedback as possible on this one.

 

[hithero]

Why should it take an action to switch ammo, doesn't the commander just order which to use?

With the short game length there is no need whatsoever to micro-manage ammo, you will probably only fire off half a dozen rounds anyway.

I've use simple rules for HE right from the begining, just by having a 2" blast and damage like the original Evo from d6-1 to d6+1 depending on calibre, work's treat, more realistic and does not upset game balance.

 

[DaWarbossMI]

Well.... K.I.S.S. is a great concept in gaming. I like that for myself since I'm: 1. an idiot, 2. have the attention span of a two year old, 3. have a memory like Swiss cheese, and 4. play soooo many game systems I can't keep them straight...

That being said...

KISS is, simply put, the core rulebook for both Modern and WaW. The very premise of an open system like the Evo system is that any non-Mongoose rules are not official and optional. I'm in favor of adding as many supplemental rules as one would like, as long as all players agree. EVERY, non-Mongoose supplement (even my own Exploding Goat, Apocalypse-Z) is a complication subtracting from the KISS-ability of the Evo core game (check out the zombie Mindless trait... I can barely figure the thing out and I helped write it!!! ).

Also.. the very nature of World War II was not KISS in any way shape or form. Technology developed so quickly and, in many cases, so haphazardly, that its nigh impossible to keep a simple, yet historically accurate and varied rules system. It can be done, to be sure, but you loose some of the flavor of WWII. Anyone familiar with the German equipment will know that simple was NOT on the menu. If you want simple...try Russians.... "OK comrade... we're almost out of bullets... take 1000 men and give them 300 guns and only 3 bullets each... now charge the entire German line!!" (pretty simple...)

Just my two cents...

I'm all for the HE rules (hell, it ain't like I'll remember them anyway!!! :lol: )

Jay

 

[Agis]

Hmm, so the barest KISS valid HE rule would be this:

Whenever an AFV targets an infantry unit with its main gun it can decide to use HE rounds.
When a HE round is used the LZ is increased to 3".
Any Damage Dice that uses normally a
D10 to is lowered to D6 while any DD that uses a
D6 is lowered to D6-2.
Any additional weapon traits are ignored while using HE rounds.

Example: A German PzKmpf IV Ausf. H is shooting at a dug in Infantry unit
with its 7.5cm L48 anti-tank gun. The commander decides to use a HE round.
Since the 7.5cm L48 anti-tank gun uses a D10 the weapon profile looks now:
7.5cm L48 anti-tank gun 48" D6 LZ/3"

 

[Rabidchild]

Looks great :!:
Keep it just like this is my vote.

 

[wkehrman]

Sorry, Agis, you misunderstood my philosophizing with actual critique.

It is my understanding that part of the reason for doing this is that you are trying to give people what they want.

HE Rounds - since the release of WaW HE or the lack of it was discussed countless times.
Personally I still think that LZ covers the HE effect well enough for the aspired game effect,
but what about the following optional rule I was toying around for a long time

My concerns were more predictive in nature. How far are you willing to go to keep us happy? You have a simple game with simple rules--the Fire Zone is a great idea, there are no ammunition depletion checks. I really think you need to protect that as much as possible. New weapons systems (like the US 60mm mortar, perhaps?) are one thing, they flesh out the game. Once you open the rules up to (over-)complication, they're open to it and every one of us with a petty gripe about some thing or another (like US equipment :lol: ) is going to expect you to change this or that.

All that being said, I would agree with your initial assessment that the Lethal Zone takes care of the issue in the most KISS-like format. I do like the modification you made after my original comments. Your concern that this is going to balance things towards vehicles gets offset if one have to declare his or her AFV's role.

 

[Agis]

Sorry, Agis, you misunderstood my philosophizing with actual critique.
snip...

Ahh, the joys of non verbal communication! :wink:
Thanks for putting this straight. 8)