Arab-Israeli ASL

Gunner Scott

Elder Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
13,272
Reaction score
1,978
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
I would not worry too much about enjoying Gen 48, the hobby is slowly dying, people are moving on to other things or are just tired of the online back biting that seems to permeate this hobby and forums, no one new posts here, its just the same old hate again and again by the same people from 20+ years back.

I also really enjoyed Gen II from CH, is it perfect? No, but than again is VotG perfect or Fisting budda perfect? No they are not and have their fair share of both production (counters falling apart and dark map) and balance problems. (CG's unbalanced and a fair chunk of unbalanced scenarios). But I'm not gonna come in here and say, oh this or that was not playtested or dont buy those products because even though all three products do have their quirks, all three products are fun to play.

So the bottom line is just have fun playing whats out there and dont worry about the internet game nazis, they just pop into these threads because their wives most likely wear the pants and they dont lol.

Scott

I really enjoyed the two scenarios of genesis II I played.

(ducks as he waits for bullets to fly towards him)

But I must admit I do love asl being in other than WW2 settings which I view as a compliment to the rules
 

Jeffrey D Myers

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Messages
908
Reaction score
321
Location
ABQ, NM, USA
Country
llUnited States
As I walk through
This wicked world
Searchin' for light in the darkness of insanity.
I ask myself
Is all hope lost?
Is there only pain and hatred, and misery?

And each time I feel like this inside,
There's one thing I wanna know:
What's so funny 'bout peace love & understanding?
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,004
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
You missed a comma! Elvis C. is not happy, as it changed the VC of his "scenario." ;)

Eats shoots and leaves.

Eats, shoots and leaves.
 

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,216
Reaction score
1,020
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
When the park rangers warm you about poison ivy, don't leave the trail!
We have a similar saying here in the states: when sleeping with a stranger, use a condom to avoid the clap.
 

Srynerson

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
2,605
Reaction score
366
Location
Denver
Country
llUnited States
If I was doing a master's degree or Ph.D in psychology, I think it would be an interesting exercise to explore the mental block many ASLers have against applying the system outside of WW2 strictly defined. While it's often rationalized by reference to the rules, it's not objectively justifiable on a scenario-by-scenario basis at the scale ASL represents -- there were plenty of tactical level engagements into the 1960s where all the combatants were equipped with functionally the same kinds of small arms used during WW2 and no AFVs, OBA, or air support involved.
 
Last edited:

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
13,092
Reaction score
7,867
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
If I was doing a master's degree or Ph.D in psychology, I think it would be an interesting exercise to explore the mental block many ASLers have against applying the system outside of WW2 strictly defined. While it's often rationalized by reference to the rules, it's not objectively justifiable on a scenario-by-scenario basis at the scale ASL represents -- there were plenty of tactical level engagements into the 1960s where all the combatants were equipped with the functionally the same kinds of small arms used during WW2 and no AFVs, OBA, or air support involved.
I would not call this a mental block but rather a focus of interest. ASL rules may work for numerous engagements outside the WW2 framework, but maybe people just prefer publishers to focus on WW2 which matches their prime interest, rather than to dissipate their limited resources on side-shows from their perspective. At least this would be my personal POV.

For the record:
There's enough TPPs around to serve everyone's needs as I see it. So I am all fine if they take up any demand that might be out there. But I'd prefer that MMP sticks to WW2 concering ASL (or at least does not go beyond KWASL).

von Marwitz
 

louis743

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
64
Reaction score
18
Location
Pensacola, FL
Country
llUnited States
I would not call this a mental block but rather a focus of interest. ASL rules may work for numerous engagements outside the WW2 framework, but maybe people just prefer publishers to focus on WW2 which matches their prime interest, rather than to dissipate their limited resources on side-shows from their perspective. At least this would be my personal POV.

von Marwitz
I think there is something else here. A couple of years ago before his passing, wasn't Ian Daglish working on an Action Pack covering a hypothetical Sea Lion campaign? Some responded negatively in that they did not want to play hypothetical engagements. But if it was a group of 4-6-7s and some SW vs some 4-5-7 and SW on board 10, what did it matter if board 10 was in the north of France or north of London? Apparently to a lot of people it mattered quite a bit.

If it is an interesting tactical puzzle what's the problem?
 
Last edited:

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,547
Reaction score
966
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
If I was doing a master's degree or Ph.D in psychology, I think it would be an interesting exercise to explore the mental block many ASLers have against applying the system outside of WW2 strictly defined. While it's often rationalized by reference to the rules, it's not objectively justifiable on a scenario-by-scenario basis at the scale ASL represents -- there were plenty of tactical level engagements into the 1960s where all the combatants were equipped with the functionally the same kinds of small arms used during WW2 and no AFVs, OBA, or air support involved.

Hell, most engagements.
 

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,547
Reaction score
966
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
But, then you add in the chrome we all love, helicopters, ATGM, radios down to the squad level or lower...

And it gets more complicated.
 

GeorgeBates

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,116
Reaction score
988
Location
Live at Budokan
Country
llJapan
radios down to the squad level or lower
This is where things do become problematic in porting the game system past the mid-50's. You can always create a set of rules for the missiles and other new weapon technologies, but it's the enhanced communications that will change how infantry performs.
 

Yuri0352

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
2,025
Reaction score
1,006
Location
25-30 Hexes
Country
llUnited States
I would not call this a mental block but rather a focus of interest. ASL rules may work for numerous engagements outside the WW2 framework, but maybe people just prefer publishers to focus on WW2 which matches their prime interest, rather than to dissipate their limited resources on side-shows from their perspective. At least this would be my personal POV.

For the record:
There's enough TPPs around to serve everyone's needs as I see it. So I am all fine if they take up any demand that might be out there. But I'd prefer that MMP sticks to WW2 concering ASL (or at least does not go beyond KWASL).

von Marwitz
I would be curious as to which, if any conflicts the major (MMP, BFP) ASL publishers regard as 'sideshows '. When I consider the massive and apparently never-ending amount of Eastern Front/post-1943 NW Europe ASL content being produced, even the PTO seems like a 'sideshow' from their marketing standpoint.

Personally, I don't agree with the negative opinions regarding the complexity of adding 1960's era weapons to the ASL system. After all, this is a system which already includes NOBA, cave complexes, sewer movement, and remote controlled Goliath demolition vehicles. I imagine that any ASL 'er who has an understanding of these rules should be well capable of understanding and using helicopters, ATGM's, FAC's, man-portable SAM 's, etc. Based upon statements from MMP, it sounds as if the jets and FAC 's are going to be a part of the KWASL module (as well they should).

Obviously, people are going to buy / play whatever they are most interested in. Some folks will abstain from playing 1950 or later ASL content because they are perfectly content with WWII scenarios and modules. Personally I think that time has demonstrated the versatility of the ASL rules system, and I am certain that the KWASL module will one day prove that this game is just as capable of portraying combat in the 1967 middle east/Vietnam as it has been for the many theaters of WWII.

Who knows, maybe the inclusion of night vision equipment rules could simplify some aspects of those night scenarios.
OK, maybe not.
:)
 

Yuri0352

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
2,025
Reaction score
1,006
Location
25-30 Hexes
Country
llUnited States
This is where things do become problematic in porting the game system past the mid-50's. You can always create a set of rules for the missiles and other new weapon technologies, but it's the enhanced communications that will change how infantry performs.
Respectfully, I beg to differ in regards to 'enhanced communications ', specifically in the 1960's era context. Having had plenty of personal experience with using 1960-70 era U.S. made comms gear, I can assure you that these radios are not enough of a technological leap from WWII to significantly alter the ASL experience. And certainly not enough to diminish or enhance the effect of the omniscient, all-seeing ASL player.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,723
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
I wholeheartedly agree with Yuri. I however would say the problem is not that '60s comms gear adds additional capability to '40s troops but that ASL's godlike view in effect brings back 21st century level comms to the 1940s.
 

King Billy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
1,323
Reaction score
143
Location
Australia
Country
llAustralia
The AMX-13 was used by the Israelis and the Egyptians (who put the turret on Shermans). The AMX-13 gun is said to have been based on the Panther gun (75LL) but from what I understand could not fire AP ammo, being limited to HEAT for anti tank fire. Anyone have any info on how effective the HEAT round was? Would you just use the normal. 75mm HEAT TK number?
The Indians also used AMX-13s against the Chinese and against Pakistani M-48s.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,723
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
As far as I know the AMX-13 75 fired AP, HEAT and possibly APCR. The subsequent AMX-90 used a medium pressure gun, similar to that used on the AML-90 armoured car. Due to it's lighter construction, lower peak chamber pressure and subsequent lower muzzle velocity maybe the "90" only had HEAT as an effective AT round.

I must warn that my knowledge of post war tanks is nothing as good as for WW2 tanks

Another thing to consider is that WW2 HEAT rounds typically only penetrated 1 to 2 times the calibre of the round. Post war development has upped that considerably and today might be in the range of 8 times the calibre. Various methods and designs were developed to increase penetration. One method was to put inert concentric 'spacers' that acted a bit like a Fresnel lens.

For '50s to early '60s I would guess a factor of 3 to 4. So I would be very wary of using the existing ASL WW2 HEAT values.
 
Last edited:

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
5,724
Reaction score
3,560
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
This is where things do become problematic in porting the game system past the mid-50's. You can always create a set of rules for the missiles and other new weapon technologies, but it's the enhanced communications that will change how infantry performs.
Not really so sure that this is especially true as the US Army at least still relied upon the SCR series of radios well into the 60's & even used somewhat in the early 70's. Its primary means of communication well into the 80's still relied upon wire commo, primarily for security and reliability reasons. The AN/VRC or AN/PRC "solid state" radios weren't used in large quantities in many ground units until about 1965 when the Viet-Nam War and its resultant logistical needs brought large quantities of newer equipment into the field. In fact even in 1969 I was trained to calibrate tube radios with an oscilloscope and we relied upon HF AM RATT (Radio, Auxiliary Tele-Type) rigs well into the 80's replete with a punched tape readout. Even the vaunted back-packed AN/PRC-25 (Prick 25 to most of us), was barely considered solid state and indeed was not actually a solid state radio until the the AN/PRC-77 was adopted (Identical in looks, usage and revilement for those that had to carry it), and it was usually also, erroneously, called the Prick 25.
 
Top