Anything new in RS?

[KED]

Will the Japanese get their own engineer units? Paratroopers? Will the Marines get engineer units?

 

[olli]

Will the Japanese get their own engineer units? Paratroopers? Will the Marines get engineer units?

Just checked for you and the answers are no, no and .... no

 

[Srynerson]

Will the Japanese get their own engineer units? Paratroopers? Will the Marines get engineer units?

The only "new" squad types in RS (as compared with what was previously in CoB/GH) are the Marine paramarine/raider squads that were previously published in Operation Watchtower. Maybe LFT will be nice enough someday to do Japanese paratrooper squads the way they previously did early Fallschirmjaeger counters.

 

[dlazov]

Technically they are all new counters, larger font and fresh off the presses.

 

[KED]

I don't get it. Both had dedicated engineer units that could handle DC and FT with a bit more skill than the average soldier. So I guess the Chinese don't have them either. What was the reason for not including them?
When Hollow Legions is re-printed will the Italians get dedicated engineers? What about the Fins?

 

[Srynerson]

I don't get it. Both had dedicated engineer units that could handle DC and FT with a bit more skill than the average soldier. So I guess the Chinese don't have them either. What was the reason for not including them?
When Hollow Legions is re-printed will the Italians get dedicated engineers? What about the Fins?

No core modules have specific assault engineer squads. You only get those in HASL modules. In regular ASL, assault engineers are simply handled by SSRing an existing squad type as being "assault engineers" per H1.22. (The German 8-3-8 squad is described in A25.12 as representing "combat engineers," but the rulebook then goes on to specifically say that even that squad type is "not automatically considered [an] Assault Engineer[] . . . ." (emphasis added).)

 

[witchbottles]

I don't get it. Both had dedicated engineer units that could handle DC and FT with a bit more skill than the average soldier. So I guess the Chinese don't have them either. What was the reason for not including them?
When Hollow Legions is re-printed will the Italians get dedicated engineers? What about the Fins?

They were included, it is the "E" class of unit in every Nationality's counter mix.

As so many different OoBs and T/O existed in the restructuring of Marine Divisions during 1941- 1945; ASL had to draw the line somewhere. They drew it with all Marine units being adequately trained to operate a FT or DC; and 3 separate counter mixes and a couple of SSRs to illustrate different armament patterns. I would vehemently disagree with every Marine SMC / MMC being adequately trained to operate a FT. Such is simply ahistorical. That said, it is likely similar for the SMCs of every nationality that are allowed to without penalty ( they are elite, all SMCs). So the Designer is left to SSR such use in or out to meet the needs of the design.

(Ask a FT trained Marine what happens when one sits on the phosphorous ignition disks that went into the weapon ( they were perfectly sized and packaged to store in one's cargo pockets on the Utility trouser; the largish pockets allowing cargo to roam freely within its confines meant it was easy for drift to land just below the back on one's thigh when sitting down in an amphtrac or a duece and a half. End result was invariably the same.)

KRL, Jon H

 

[KED]

No core modules have specific assault engineer squads. You only get those in HASL modules. In regular ASL, assault engineers are simply handled by SSRing an existing squad type as being "assault engineers" per H1.22. (The German 8-3-8 squad is described in A25.12 as representing "combat engineers," but the rulebook then goes on to specifically say that even that squad type is "not automatically considered [an] Assault Engineer[] . . . ." (emphasis added).)

I understand why the designers did this. But in some cases it can be a problem. This can be true in scenarios that include engeneers but all squad types are the same. This would let any MMC pick up and use lost DC and FT without penalty.

 

[KED]

They were included, it is the "E" class of unit in every Nationality's counter mix.

As so many different OoBs and T/O existed in the restructuring of Marine Divisions during 1941- 1945; ASL had to draw the line somewhere. They drew it with all Marine units being adequately trained to operate a FT or DC; and 3 separate counter mixes and a couple of SSRs to illustrate different armament patterns. I would vehemently disagree with every Marine SMC / MMC being adequately trained to operate a FT. Such is simply ahistorical. That said, it is likely similar for the SMCs of every nationality that are allowed to without penalty ( they are elite, all SMCs). So the Designer is left to SSR such use in or out to meet the needs of the design.

(Ask a FT trained Marine what happens when one sits on the phosphorous ignition disks that went into the weapon ( they were perfectly sized and packaged to store in one's cargo pockets on the Utility trouser; the largish pockets allowing cargo to roam freely within its confines meant it was easy for drift to land just below the back on one's thigh when sitting down in an amphtrac or a duece and a half. End result was invariably the same.)

KRL, Jon H

The Marines are a big problem IMHO. They often appear with all the same squad types and all kinds of DC and FT. This is also true of the Japanese and Chinese. While I don't have a big problem with DC usage FT usage seems to be a problem to me.
I see RS as a lost opportunity to address this problem. It would not have hurt MMP to include 10 to 12 dedicated engineer MMC to the 4 National OOBs. (Early USA/PA units) The rule changes would be simple. Non engineer MMC can use DC but with penalty. Non engineer MMC should be prohibited from using FT unless designated as Commandos. If an engineer MMC is KIA a FT survival check should be done. A dr of 1-3 it stays on board, a dr of 4-6 its eliminated. Just a thought.
I would also like to see all 50cal MGs require a crew MMC to function without penalty. But that's another subject.

 

[witchbottles]

I understand why the designers did this. But in some cases it can be a problem. This can be true in scenarios that include engeneers but all squad types are the same. This would let any MMC pick up and use lost DC and FT without penalty.

not quite true. There is a non qualified penalty for any non - elite MMC trying to use a DC or a FT. So not ANY MMC can pick them up and use them without penalty.


KRL, Jon H

 

[KED]

not quite true. There is a non qualified penalty for any non - elite MMC trying to use a DC or a FT. So not ANY MMC can pick them up and use them without penalty.


KRL, Jon H

In a late war PTO scenario using USMC 7-6-8 MMC this is true. Unless of course all USMC MMC in the scenario oob are considered assault engineers. In this case I have no problem with DC useage but the FT does.

 

[KED]

OOP! DP!:nuts::nuts:

 

[witchbottles]

In a late war PTO scenario using USMC 7-6-8 MMC this is true. Unless of course all USMC MMC in the scenario oob are considered assault engineers. In this case I have no problem with DC useage but the FT does.

Yes I did note my general agreement that USMC MMCs chould not be allowed freedom of use of FT as a general rule. The FT used a phosphorous ignition disk that contained pellets of fulminate of mercury embedded into the disk surface. when pressure ( air pressure in this case) is applied, the fulminate of mercury pellets rupture, and due to the chemical composition, ignite upon contact with air. This ignition in turn ignites the phosphorous disk. The basic premise is simply a slowed down reaction that is chemically similar to gunpowder igniting in a centerfire ammunition cartridge. ( In the FT case, propellants are not harnessed carbon and potash burn gases, being the major difference.)

So sitting down with one or more of these things under your thigh onto a hard wooden seat was usually sufficient to result in a nice trip to a USN Hospital burn ward with 2nd and 3rd degree burns across the back of the thigh and buttocks. A wholly unpleasant experience, one would think.

Given that improper installation of the ignition disk could likewise result in a flash ignition of gases prior to their reaching the combustion can in the nozzle, it seems a bit ludicrous to assume that just anyone untrained could pick up these things and make them work / function correctly in a stressful combat environment without using some form or method to reflect the desperation in the act.

I am wholly perplexed at how said Italian or Russian or German 6+1 (or worse wounded IJA 5+2) SMC can pick one up and use it without any penalty as well. I am fairly confident that there has never been any in depth FT training provided in 95% of any officer training courses ever devised in the 20th Century.

KRL, Jon H

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Non engineer MMC can use DC but with penalty. Non engineer MMC should be prohibited from using FT unless designated as Commandos. If an engineer MMC is KIA a FT survival check should be done. A dr of 1-3 it stays on board, a dr of 4-6 its eliminated. Just a thought.
I would also like to see all 50cal MGs require a crew MMC to function without penalty. But that's another subject.

All of this is easy enough to SSR in should a designer wish to do so - a much better solution (IMO) than changing the rules that would impact alot of older scenarios.

 

[KED]

Yes I did note my general agreement that USMC MMCs chould not be allowed freedom of use of FT as a general rule. The FT used a phosphorous ignition disk that contained pellets of fulminate of mercury embedded into the disk surface. when pressure ( air pressure in this case) is applied, the fulminate of mercury pellets rupture, and due to the chemical composition, ignite upon contact with air. This ignition in turn ignites the phosphorous disk. The basic premise is simply a slowed down reaction that is chemically similar to gunpowder igniting in a centerfire ammunition cartridge. ( In the FT case, propellants are not harnessed carbon and potash burn gases, being the major difference.)

So sitting down with one or more of these things under your thigh onto a hard wooden seat was usually sufficient to result in a nice trip to a USN Hospital burn ward with 2nd and 3rd degree burns across the back of the thigh and buttocks. A wholly unpleasant experience, one would think.

Given that improper installation of the ignition disk could likewise result in a flash ignition of gases prior to their reaching the combustion can in the nozzle, it seems a bit ludicrous to assume that just anyone untrained could pick up these things and make them work / function correctly in a stressful combat environment without using some form or method to reflect the desperation in the act.

I am wholly perplexed at how said Italian or Russian or German 6+1 (or worse wounded IJA 5+2) SMC can pick one up and use it without any penalty as well. I am fairly confident that there has never been any in depth FT training provided in 95% of any officer training courses ever devised in the 20th Century.

KRL, Jon H

Restrict SMC usage to HEROS and 8-0 leaders or better unless designated as commando?

 

[KED]

All of this is easy enough to SSR in should a designer wish to do so - a much better solution (IMO) than changing the rules that would impact alot of older scenarios.

You have made a good point about older scenarios. It would be nuts to change them all. But it would be interesting to see some of this implanted in the future.

 

[witchbottles]

Innovative SSR's are , as Klas notes, THE way to go to model for effect ( what you are doing here.)

I can name at least 4 ASL players of some note that have told me at one time or another they enjoy a well - written SSR that affects leaders in some fashion.

( There simply are not too many leader specific SSRs out there, comparatively speaking.)

I would restrict SMC usage of a FT w/out non qualified use penalties to heroes / heroic SMCs, or leaders attached to (XX) Unit ( identified in the OoB as Commandoes / Assault Engineers/ Pioneers / Sappers / JASCO / Sturmtruppe etc.) Simply speaking, I highly doubt even Erwin Rommel could have picked one of these things up and used it effectively without some instruction. I have no doubt at all that there is no way Gen Roy Geiger, USMC could have used one without some instruction. Col " Red Mike" Edson, sure, he probably could use it well with a simple look over and recollection of range memories. and so on.

P.S.
( JASCO) is the correct USMC terminology for specially trained assault forces that were assigned to the first 3 waves of every landing from Roi- Namur on in the PTO. acronymic for Joint Assault Company; it's T/O included bazookas, FTs, DCs, 30 cal MGs, SFCP teams for NOBA, FAO teams for close air support relay, infantry, light tanks and gun armed HTs. ( The AFVs by Saipan were organized into a "tank platoon" of variable strength but well modeled as 3 M3A1 light tanks and 2 75 Howitzer armed HTs.) Manpower should be around 135-150 men; so say at full force 12-14 squads, 668 at least. should have 4 SMCs that are all the equivalent of combat engineer trained, as are the MMCs. 3 MMGs , 3 Baz 44s, 1 -2 FT, 2-6 DCs, a radio, that would be where I'd start for a JASCO.

A bit more punch than a line Marine Company Jul 44 T/O. much less punch than a Marine combat Engineer Company Jul 44 T/O.

KRL ,Jon H

 

[KED]

Innovative SSR's are , as Klas notes, THE way to go to model for effect ( what you are doing here.)

I can name at least 4 ASL players of some note that have told me at one time or another they enjoy a well - written SSR that affects leaders in some fashion.

( There simply are not too many leader specific SSRs out there, comparatively speaking.)

I would restrict SMC usage of a FT w/out non qualified use penalties to heroes / heroic SMCs, or leaders attached to (XX) Unit ( identified in the OoB as Commandoes / Assault Engineers/ Pioneers / Sappers / JASCO / Sturmtruppe etc.) Simply speaking, I highly doubt even Erwin Rommel could have picked one of these things up and used it effectively without some instruction. I have no doubt at all that there is no way Gen Roy Geiger, USMC could have used one without some instruction. Col " Red Mike" Edson, sure, he probably could use it well with a simple look over and recollection of range memories. and so on.

P.S.
( JASCO) is the correct USMC terminology for specially trained assault forces that were assigned to the first 3 waves of every landing from Roi- Namur on in the PTO. acronymic for Joint Assault Company; it's T/O included bazookas, FTs, DCs, 30 cal MGs, SFCP teams for NOBA, FAO teams for close air support relay, infantry, light tanks and gun armed HTs. ( The AFVs by Saipan were organized into a "tank platoon" of variable strength but well modeled as 3 M3A1 light tanks and 2 75 Howitzer armed HTs.) Manpower should be around 135-150 men; so say at full force 12-14 squads, 668 at least. should have 4 SMCs that are all the equivalent of combat engineer trained, as are the MMCs. 3 MMGs , 3 Baz 44s, 1 -2 FT, 2-6 DCs, a radio, that would be where I'd start for a JASCO.

A bit more punch than a line Marine Company Jul 44 T/O. much less punch than a Marine combat Engineer Company Jul 44 T/O.

KRL ,Jon H

Now that's what I'm talking about! Nice post!

So we do need 12-14 dedicated engineer MMC.

 

[witchbottles]

Now that's what I'm talking about! Nice post!

So we do need 12-14 dedicated engineer MMC.

Perhaps we may yet see them in BFP's Peleliu ( where I'd reasonably expect to find them, IMHO. I have no foreknowledge that this might be the case.) Beign a HASL and modeling this force at this specific time frame. Otherwise, as far as PTO goes, there is a couple of things cooking CH way on this that one might find some AE's appear in the countermix at some point. I much doubt you'll see it from MMP however any time soon, nothing PTO is floating aroudn inthe pipeline there ( yet) that I am aware of. That said, I am aware of 2 pending MMP full submissions PTO focused that may yet see getting pipelined at some point and either of them could / should / may include such.

If I was to do it in a counter run, it would be with MMC's 12 x 668 , 12 x 768 2 x 558; and then their associated HS's.

KRL, Jon H

 

[jrv]

Maybe LFT will be nice enough someday to do Japanese paratrooper squads the way they previously did early Fallschirmjaeger counters.

A set of Japanese paratroops came in BFP's Blood and Jungle.

JR