AFV Rate of Fire

[Paul_RS]

Bit of a reality argument here.

Turns in ASL are approximately 2 minutes. There you are with your Tiger 2, sitting in Potsdamer Platz in May 1945 watching as a swarm of SU 76's trundle towards your position. Buttoned up you hold your fire, boom... miss due to BU mod, motion and target size mods. The coloured die isn't a 1. What to do...intensive fire? Meanwhile the swarm of su76's continue to approach, move behind and destroy you. Realistic?

AFV crews in WW2 could, as far as have read, theoretically fire in the region of 10-20 rounds over that 2 min period subject to crew quality and immediate in turret ammo storage area. Is a 1 RoF for most AFV's realistic?

I know there are forum members who have served in armoured units. Is a Rate of fire of 1 realistic in terms of the speed in which a tank crew could lay down aimed shots at a specific target(s)?

Thoughts?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

You also have to take into account that one To Hit DR does not necessarily mean that just one round has been fired.

Chapter C, Footnote 8:
"The two minute Game Turns of ASL, combined with the To Hit system mechanics, require that each “shot” fired on the gameboard actually represents the firing of an unspecified number of rounds within that time span. A “hit” means only that at least one of those rounds found its target. In reality, several such rounds may have struck the target and had an effect—a “hit” that eventually scores a KIA/MC on several units in the same hex can often be assumed to have been caused by several well-placed rounds..."

 

[Honza]

A King Tiger with an ROF of 3 and a 10-2 AL! Goodbye SU76's.

 

[Philippe D.]

ROF 3 would let you go from an average of 1.2 shots per turn (barring Intensive Fire) to 2 shots per turn (again, barring IF). While it definitely increases the danger factor of a strong AFV in the game (and a Tiger with a -2 AL definitely is something to fear - I am facing just that in a PBeM game right now), it doesn't let a single Tiger kill a "swarm" of opponents reliably.

All reality arguments are severely limited, anyway, and ASL rules are not designed this way. ASL doesn't make you track individual shells; there is nothing in the rules that says a single TH roll corresponds to a single shell shot. I guess in most situations, real life tank commanders couldn't know for sure that their shot had killed the opponent, so most likely they'd go on pouring more shots at it once it has stopped and was not immediately returning fire. And so on and so on.

ROFs should be seen as a relative thing, and in the game, typically are (roughly) inversely proportional to the caliber (and low calibers even have the Multiple Hits bonus - another instance of "you make a single TH DR but actually fired several rounds").

I find my situation as one who really knows very little of actual weapons, armor, and any kind of real-life military thingies a rather comfortable one - I just take the rules as they are, don't worry about how realistic they really are, and enjoy the feeling of the game. In the game, a Tiger with a competent Armor Leader and some Infantry to screen it, is a really tough nut to crack - the feeling is mostly right, and I'm happy with it

 

[robh91]

I think several things lead to the situation you describe - not just ROF.
First a lot of scenarios have boards with jammed in terrain meaning a lot of actions are at very close range, where swarming can take place.
Second, the other side of the coin to the RoF argument is that vehicles tend to be able to move a large number of hexes each turn.
Third, there is little "penalty" for moving at maximum speed. I imagine in real life a lot of movement would be quite slow and measured to allow time to spot hidden enemies (and avoiding obstacles) which would then allow evasive/reactive action (reversing/firing/deploying smoke) to take place. Ian Dalglish wrote an interesting article in an early issue of CH magazine deserving how difficult it was for AFV crews to operate and spot the enemy.
Fourth, with the tendency to have near perfect knowledge of your opponent's positions (other than HIP units) AFVs can often safely scoot around terrain to ambush defenders from behind with little fear. I'm sure in real life tank commanders would always be very fearful of hidden LATW and would avoid moving close to any woods/buildings unless they had been first scouted by friendly infantry. I think some type of LATW "sniper check" mechanism that targets AFVs moving in such a manner could be an effective deterrent. Perhaps allow the defender to secretly nominate a certain number of concealment terrain hexes as "LATW" sniper check hexes. If a vehicle moves within say two hexes of such a hex then a possible "LATW attack check" roll is made at the defender's discretion - on a one off basis. If the nominated hex is controlled by friendly forces then no future checks can be made.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

What I think is less realistic is a swarm of SU-76 charging a King Tiger in 1945.

 

[Paul_RS]

What I think is less realistic is a swarm of SU-76 charging a King Tiger in 1945.

But the system encourages it

 

[Paul_RS]

You also have to take into account that one To Hit DR does not necessarily mean that just one round has been fired.

Chapter C, Footnote 8:
"The two minute Game Turns of ASL, combined with the To Hit system mechanics, require that each “shot” fired on the gameboard actually represents the firing of an unspecified number of rounds within that time span. A “hit” means only that at least one of those rounds found its target. In reality, several such rounds may have struck the target and had an effect—a “hit” that eventually scores a KIA/MC on several units in the same hex can often be assumed to have been caused by several well-placed rounds..."

I know. It's a game versus reality argument and I understand the design intent. I've played quite a lot of the Combat Mission PC game and the modelling is quite different, most gun duels on the Eastern front are undertaken at much longer ranges for example. Different beasts, I readily concede, but representing the same historical situations. I struggle to believe that a season tank crew operating reasonably efficiently would fail to score hit an Su76 over a 2 minute firing period.

 

[Paul_RS]

ROF 3 would let you go from an average of 1.2 shots per turn (barring Intensive Fire) to 2 shots per turn (again, barring IF). While it definitely increases the danger factor of a strong AFV in the game (and a Tiger with a -2 AL definitely is something to fear - I am facing just that in a PBeM game right now), it doesn't let a single Tiger kill a "swarm" of opponents reliably.

All reality arguments are severely limited, anyway, and ASL rules are not designed this way. ASL doesn't make you track individual shells; there is nothing in the rules that says a single TH roll corresponds to a single shell shot. I guess in most situations, real life tank commanders couldn't know for sure that their shot had killed the opponent, so most likely they'd go on pouring more shots at it once it has stopped and was not immediately returning fire. And so on and so on.

ROFs should be seen as a relative thing, and in the game, typically are (roughly) inversely proportional to the caliber (and low calibers even have the Multiple Hits bonus - another instance of "you make a single TH DR but actually fired several rounds").

I find my situation as one who really knows very little of actual weapons, armor, and any kind of real-life military thingies a rather comfortable one - I just take the rules as they are, don't worry about how realistic they really are, and enjoy the feeling of the game. In the game, a Tiger with a competent Armor Leader and some Infantry to screen it, is a really tough nut to crack - the feeling is mostly right, and I'm happy with it

Yes it is game, when all said and done. But one that purports to give insight into the tactical challenges of small unit combat in WW2. The system as it stands makes some historically recorded armour v armour actions almost impossible to replicate without extensive SSR's.

 

[von Marwitz]

The system as it stands makes some historically recorded actions almost impossible to replicate without extensive SSR's.

It is debatable wether 'replicating' an action is really the objective of the game.
The truth is, ASL can't because it is not a simulation.
The replication of a 'historical' situation based on an ASL scenario (in turn based on a historical situation) is what might happen in your imagination while playing the game but not in the game itself.

For that reason, the whole 'Hill 621' discussion does not lead anywhere IMHO. The only point that I grant might be gained by insisting on a historical situation to base a scenario on is that this might enhance the immersion factor for some (leaving out the field of hypothetical battles).

von Marwitz

 

[Jazz]

Yes it is game, when all said and done. But one that purports to give insight into the tactical challenges of small unit combat in WW2. The system as it stands makes some historically recorded armour v armour actions almost impossible to replicate without extensive SSR's.

It is about playing a game and not replicating history.

If you want to try to force the system to replicate your conception of what history was, have at it. Consenting adults can do as they wish in the privacy of their game room.

That being said, do not expect to be able to travel much beyond your circle of gamers and play that attempted replication.....which is OK. Whatever puts lead in your pencil is just fine.

 

[Augie]

I played a lot of AH's Tobruk when I was a teen in the 70s. Tobruk was very simulation-like compared to ASL. Each turn was about 30 seconds (? I think). Shots were based on historical ROF. IIRC, In that game, every shot was rolled for a hit, and every hit rolled for where it landed (lower hull, upper hull, turret, gun mantel, track, barrel, etc.). Then every shot rolled for effect. Detail included tracking the number of rounds left in your tank and if any of your crew were injured (potentially reducing your ROF, or disallowing the use of BMG, etc). Not only did you have to roll a lot for every gun tube, but 2 pounders and 40mm bofors had a ridiculous ROF and hence rolls. Lots of dice were rolled every turn for every tank fired, frequently with no effect or marginal damage. FYI - they had similar details for infantry, literally tracking on paper every single soldier casualty the squad suffered (and its impact to firepower). My gaming buddy and I loved Tobruk, but then we found SL - and never touched Tobruk after that. Of course ASL came out later, and I moved onto that.

ASL gives you the tank combat feel and effects, with an efficient gaming system. If you ever play Tobruk, you may be enamored initially with the detail, but it will quickly become insufferable with all the dice rolling and recording keeping - the fun factor is lost during the realism playing, but results are essentially the same as ASL.

BTW - Tobruk's lack of realism in other areas is also astounding. For instance, Smoke never missed and completely blocked all LOS.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

This is one area I feel conflicted about, so here are some thoughts.

One account of Indian tactics against Pakistani tanks was a 3 shot sequence, one likely short, one likely long and one hopefully on target. They likely learnt that from the British and others. That was with post war, though pre-laser rangefinder, tanks.

ASL 'clear' ground can contain many small dips and rises and small obstructions that could affect a gunner's tracking of a target, but not enough to be brush, etc in ASL.

The battlefield has so many real, immediate distractions as well as the need to watch out for potential extra or imagined threats.

The SU-76 swarm may only become visible in the last 10-20 seconds of a 2.5 minute/150 second turn.

A normal crew may have episodes of panic or fumble fingers while a 8-1 plus crew not only might have a better gunner but the whole crew may cope with the stress better.

A Tiger gets 2.4 shots per 2.5 minute turn, not 1.2, excluding IF or 4.4 per turn with IF. 2 player turns per game turn.

Switching to a new target can mean starting your whole ranging shot sequence from scratch.

The large MP possible for many vehicles may have partly driven by the need to differentiate different vehicles speeds. Too short a time span and too many vehicles would have had identical MP.

2.4 or 4.4 shots at a T-34 m41 when it travels 680m (17 hexes) does seem too low.

ASL treats direct to/from and transverse movement identically with regards to TH DRM. I feel this is wrong.

 

[Yuri0352]

I played a lot of AH's Tobruk when I was a teen in the 70s. Tobruk was very simulation-like compared to ASL. Each turn was about 30 seconds (? I think). Shots were based on historical ROF. IIRC, In that game, every shot was rolled for a hit, and every hit rolled for where it landed (lower hull, upper hull, turret, gun mantel, track, barrel, etc.). Then every shot rolled for effect. Detail included tracking the number of rounds left in your tank and if any of your crew were injured (potentially reducing your ROF, or disallowing the use of BMG, etc). Not only did you have to roll a lot for every gun tube, but 2 pounders and 40mm bofors had a ridiculous ROF and hence rolls. Lots of dice were rolled every turn for every tank fired, frequently with no effect or marginal damage. FYI - they had similar details for infantry, literally tracking on paper every single soldier casualty the squad suffered (and its impact to firepower). My gaming buddy and I loved Tobruk, but then we found SL - and never touched Tobruk after that. Of course ASL came out later, and I moved onto that.

ASL gives you the tank combat feel and effects, with an efficient gaming system. If you ever play Tobruk, you may be enamored initially with the detail, but it will quickly become insufferable with all the dice rolling and recording keeping - the fun factor is lost during the realism playing, but results are essentially the same as ASL.

BTW - Tobruk's lack of realism in other areas is also astounding. For instance, Smoke never missed and completely blocked all LOS.

I played a lot of AH Tobruk in high school before receiving SL as a Christmas gift. Loved Tobruk for the detail and the North Africa theme. After learning SL/ASL, I never went back. My only real complaints with Tobruk were the lack of terrain features on the map and especially the near total invulnerability of the frontal armor of Panzer III's to the 37mm and 2 pounder guns. Also, can you imagine having to use the infantry casualty note pads in a Stalingrad CG?

 

[Paul_RS]

It is about playing a game and not replicating history.

If you want to try to force the system to replicate your conception of what history was, have at it. Consenting adults can do as they wish in the privacy of their game room.

That being said, do not expect to be able to travel much beyond your circle of gamers and play that attempted replication.....which is OK. Whatever puts lead in your pencil is just fine.

Whoaa there, calm down sunshine. I thought I was having a reasonable sensible discussion on this thread until I read this. But hey, whatever puts lead in your pencil..

sheesh

 

[Robin Reeve]

If only someone had corrected "two minutes" to "some amount of time"...

 

[Jazz]

Whoaa there, calm down sunshine. I thought I was having a reasonable sensible discussion on this thread until I read this. But hey, whatever puts lead in your pencil..

sheesh

<shrug> I am calmer than you could possibly imagine. I made a reasonable reply to your original post. Play as you see fit. It is your call. Just making sure you are aware of some of the implications.

If that does not qualify as a reasonable reply.....oh well.....

 

[bendizoid]

ASL is a infantry game with tanks thrown in.

 

[Proff3RTR]

Bit of a reality argument here.

Turns in ASL are approximately 2 minutes. There you are with your Tiger 2, sitting in Potsdamer Platz in May 1945 watching as a swarm of SU 76's trundle towards your position. Buttoned up you hold your fire, boom... miss due to BU mod, motion and target size mods. The coloured die isn't a 1. What to do...intensive fire? Meanwhile the swarm of su76's continue to approach, move behind and destroy you. Realistic?

AFV crews in WW2 could, as far as have read, theoretically fire in the region of 10-20 rounds over that 2 min period subject to crew quality and immediate in turret ammo storage area. Is a 1 RoF for most AFV's realistic?

I know there are forum members who have served in armoured units. Is a Rate of fire of 1 realistic in terms of the speed in which a tank crew could lay down aimed shots at a specific target(s)?

Thoughts?

Yes totally, Challenger 2 with 3 part ammunition can still fire off static 6 rounds a min, also it depends on the loader, an experienced loader would be able to load more, ASL is as we all know very abstract, a Tiger with even a mediocre loader would be able to get at least 6 rounds off in 2 mins, a lot more I bet in reality.
the problem we have is we would then see almost real life kill ratio's jump up on the game board, a single Tiger sitting at 1,500 (37.5 Hexes)meters firing off at 10 T 34-M43, all 10 T 34-M43 dead.

ROF 1 is IMHO designed for the game, and nowhere near realistic, if we bumped up the ROF we would have to see a lot more allied armour on the table to take on the 'Big Cats', especially in Russia mid war.

 

[Proff3RTR]

This is one area I feel conflicted about, so here are some thoughts.

One account of Indian tactics against Pakistani tanks was a 3 shot sequence, one likely short, one likely long and one hopefully on target. They likely learnt that from the British and others. That was with post war, though pre-laser rangefinder, tanks.

ASL 'clear' ground can contain many small dips and rises and small obstructions that could affect a gunner's tracking of a target, but not enough to be brush, etc in ASL.

The battlefield has so many real, immediate distractions as well as the need to watch out for potential extra or imagined threats.

The SU-76 swarm may only become visible in the last 10-20 seconds of a 2.5 minute/150 second turn.

A normal crew may have episodes of panic or fumble fingers while a 8-1 plus crew not only might have a better gunner but the whole crew may cope with the stress better.

A Tiger gets 2.4 shots per 2.5 minute turn, not 1.2, excluding IF or 4.4 per turn with IF. 2 player turns per game turn.

Switching to a new target can mean starting your whole ranging shot sequence from scratch.

The large MP possible for many vehicles may have partly driven by the need to differentiate different vehicles speeds. Too short a time span and too many vehicles would have had identical MP.

2.4 or 4.4 shots at a T-34 m41 when it travels 680m (17 hexes) does seem too low.

ASL treats direct to/from and transverse movement identically with regards to TH DRM. I feel this is wrong.

Paul's first sentence is called Bracketing, first shot short (gunner adjusts), second High (Commander smacks gunner on back of his head and gunner readjusts), 3rd TARGET!! (commander and whole crew breath a sigh of relief that they live another day (gunner does not get a good kicking from the whole crew for being a blind cloth eyed mutt).