(B23.423) Light Mortars

revaddict

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
212
Reaction score
0
Location
Lincoln, NE
Country
llUnited States
Does B23.423--which prohibits 5/8" Mortars from firing from a non-rooftop building location--also apply to Light Mortars (i.e. 1/2" counters), or can Light Mortars fire from within a building?
 

Commissar Piotr

War Pig
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
11
Location
Kista
Country
llSweden
Hi Guys

B23.423 not only prohibits 5/8" Mortars, the rule states:

"Mortar fire, and MG/Gun attacks vs Aerial targets, are not allowed from a non-rooftop building Location."

I agree that one might be confused by the heading of the rule but this line is quite precise on all other accounts and that is what counts after all.
IOW, all mortars are prohibited from firing from a non-Rooftop building Location.
 
Last edited:

CPRad

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
766
Reaction score
0
Location
New Brunswick Canada
Country
llCanada
RE:Firing 2 Light mtrs

Hi;

I have a question. If I have one squad with two light mtrs. I want to fire them both at the same target hex ... do I take two different TH DR rolls (one for each mtr)and then combine the FP for one effect roll on the target hex?

Thanks

Larry
 

Chas Argent

Play to the end.
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
6,251
Reaction score
443
Location
Catonsville, MD
Country
llUnited States
No; they are resolved separately.

Note that if the squad fires its inherent FP, then any target acqusition they may have gained with the mortars is automatically lost; see C6.5.
 

CPRad

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
766
Reaction score
0
Location
New Brunswick Canada
Country
llCanada
RE:L mtr

Chas Argent said:
No; they are resolved separately.

If you only knew how I roll in my games ... you'd understand when I say ..that sucks ..

But hey I appreciate the reply... ; -)
 

wiretwister63

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
Country
llUnited States
are the dice in ASL loaded I have not rolled less than a six in three turns of this senario yet!!!!
 

da priest

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
8
Location
Lebanon, Mo., turn r
wiretwister63 said:
are the dice in ASL loaded I have not rolled less than a six in three turns of this senario yet!!!!
Check the dice carefully, someone was found with dice that only had 4,5, and 6 on them. :dead:
 

CPRad

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
766
Reaction score
0
Location
New Brunswick Canada
Country
llCanada
wiretwister63 said:
are the dice in ASL loaded I have not rolled less than a six in three turns of this senario yet!!!!

Nay .. I thought so too but just for kicks I've tried rolling my own dice at home along side the VASL rolls and I end up pretty much the same.

Hey if we played each other I bet the scenario would end up being the least bloody ever played ..... is there a medal for that : -)
 

Carl

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Location
South Carolina
Country
llUnited States
Chas Argent said:
No; they are resolved separately.

Note that if the squad fires its inherent FP, then any target acqusition they may have gained with the mortars is automatically lost; see C6.5.
Actually, in the case provided, one squad, two SW Mortars, once the squad fires the second Mortar, ACQ is lost from the first mortar and vice versa. And here is something I had forgotten about:

"...or they fire Inherent FP/SW or use Interdiction..."

I had not been under the impression that Interdiction was an option left to the Interdictor. A10.53 doesn't leave this impression but C6.5 certainly does.

Carl
 

Chas Argent

Play to the end.
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
6,251
Reaction score
443
Location
Catonsville, MD
Country
llUnited States
Well, I was referring more generically to any squad manning a Mortar, but I have never, frankly, noticed Interdiction as a reason for losing Acquisition either. Hmmm.....
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
28
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Because of these restrictions I never give a squad a SW MTR, only HS. [EXC: playing a Nationality that does not allow Deployment and the scenario designer did not add any HS to the OB - a big mistake IMHO].
 

Carl

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Location
South Carolina
Country
llUnited States
WaterRabbit said:
Because of these restrictions I never give a squad a SW MTR, only HS. [EXC: playing a Nationality that does not allow Deployment and the scenario designer did not add any HS to the OB - a big mistake IMHO].
Not a mistake for the Russians from what I can tell from the books. Throwing HS into the mix just to allow someone to carry MTRs around is just bypassing the nationality characteristics of the RB (IMHO).

Along that line, a great book is "Tank Rider: Into the Reich With the Red Army" by Evgeni Bessonov. A book that only could have come out as a result of the the end of the Cold War.


Carl
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
28
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
I am going to have to disagree with your analysis here. Take for example, a Russian Rifle Company from 1942-44 (prior to the 50mm mortar falling into disuse in 1943).

Company
1xCompany HQ
3xRifle platoons
1xHMG squad
1x50mm Mortar squad of two mortar teams

Rifle Platoon
1xPlatoon HQ
4xSquads
1&3 armed with​
1x7.62mmMachine Pistol​
2x7.62mmLMG​
6x1891/30 Rifle​
2&4 armed with​
1x7.62mmMachine Pistol​
1x7.62mmLMG​
7x1891/30 Rifle​

Obviously this is a “on paper formation” since it is unlikely that any squad would have more than one LMG at any given time.

The point I am making here is that the mortar platoon in earlier TO&E had three mortar TEAMS (not squads) assigned to the company; the 1942 TO&E had two mortar TEAMS (not squads) teams assigned to the company.

Any scenario that doesn’t assign a HS/Crew to man each 50mm mortar or HMG/MMG is probably not accurately representing the Russian TO&E. In general, I think that any scenario OB should include a 1-2-7 crew for each HMGs/MMGs/MTRs/ATRs/PSKs/BAZs/etc. assigned to that side's OB (essentially, G1.611 should apply to all nationalities). I think it better represents the tactical doctrine of these types of weapons. This is quite common in other WWII games of similar scale (Command Decision for one).

In fact, the big weakness of ASL is that it doesn't include TO&E for each nationality in Chapter H. It would facilitate both DYO and scenario design. Perhaps the mythical Chapter I will include such things. :rolleyes:
 

CPRad

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
766
Reaction score
0
Location
New Brunswick Canada
Country
llCanada
WaterRabbit said:
Any scenario that doesn’t assign a HS/Crew to man each 50mm mortar or HMG/MMG is probably not accurately representing the Russian TO&E. In general, I think that any scenario OB should include a 1-2-7 crew for each HMGs/MMGs/MTRs/ATRs/PSKs/BAZs/etc. I think it better represents the tactical doctrine of these types of weapons.

edited text ....

I agree with the about. I'm trying to understand the military principle of firing a mtr. I can't see the reasoning for a squad of say 10 guys not being able to fire two tubes on target at the same time.

Can someone explan why in ASL mtr are so weak or clumsy to operate? Why do we have to roll two TH# and loose the acq ?

Thanks.
 

alanp

Philosopher of ASL
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
3,019
Reaction score
109
Location
Alki Point
Country
llUnited States
Citing 'realism' stuff doesn't work when explaining ASL rules.

Mortars are great and highly effective. I've lost 3 half-tracks--some with passengers--in one fire phase to one lt. mtr. before. Ask Karl about a recent playing of 'Defiance on Hill 30'; my mortar took out 2.5 squads as they entered the board. A RoF of '3' makes up for any lost acq., IMHO, and the 'wasted' half-squad is worth it.

Used within the rules, all sw are effective. The lt. mtr. is something (like, OBA maybe) that can make or break a scenario if your dice are hot. Giving the player more 'realistic' options would un-balance the game/game mechanics. There's really no other explanation. Although I'm sure someone will come up with one. :)

my 2 cents. . .

Alan
 

The Purist

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,004
Reaction score
96
Location
In my castle by the sea, Calgary, AB
Country
llCanada
I suspect this may have to do with another of the 'abstractions' that were necessary to make ASL work.

One could possibly come up with a half dozen explanations, all plausible, for losing aquisition. Just as likely, another person could come with the same number of reasons as to why the squad should keep aquisition.

As to providing half squads for each Lt Mor, is it just me or have not the more recent releases of 'offcial' MMP scenarios been doing just that?

As has been mentioned in many other posts and lists, not all 'reality' checks are passed by the ASL systems. I highly doubt that any game with the scope of ASL could ever be absolutely historically accurate and still be playable.

Just my opinion. Cheers.
 

Carl

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Location
South Carolina
Country
llUnited States
CPRad said:
I can't see the reasoning for a squad of say 10 guys not being able to fire two tubes on target at the same time.

Can someone explan why in ASL mtr are so weak or clumsy to operate? Why do we have to roll two TH# and loose the acq ?QUOTE]

First, a squad can fire two SW mortars in one fire phase. Nothing in the rules disallows it. It just isn't as effecient as one SW mortar per squad or dividing up the squad into two HS. One can come up with a "reality" explanation for the mechanics and that explanation may or may not reflect your personal reality. It is what it is.

(For the sake of completeness the argument is that a squad represents one group of guys being led by one man. Acquisition represents more than just "I've fired once and now I know the range and deflection better" and factors in the squad's leader's input into the firing decision. If he's directing one mortar, he's not directing the other. Dividing into HS assigns two sub groups with respective group leaders who can devote their attention to the one mortar.)

As for clumsiness, I don't find the mechanics particularly clumsy so not sure where you're headed there. Whether they are weak or not depends on how you use them. They are particularly weak against a pillbox and a King Tiger. They are devestating to a whole platoon in a woods line. Just as an ATR is particularly weak in certain circumstances and works as good as an 6 pdr in others.

Hope this helps.

Carl
 

Carl

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Location
South Carolina
Country
llUnited States
The Purist said:
As has been mentioned in many other posts and lists, not all 'reality' checks are passed by the ASL systems. I highly doubt that any game with the scope of ASL could ever be absolutely historically accurate and still be playable.
The challenge in my mind is that there is no one version of "reality". Likely the ASL situations would represent pure fantasy to a veteran of Desert Storm. But then weapons and doctrine have changed since WWII. Also, a veteran of WWII might also think ASL represents pure fantasy. But since the vet was only a squad member and not looking at the larger scope of the action, the perspective is a bit off. Let alone trying to match doctrine to practice for Russian or Japanese nationalities.

And each historical situation is unique with unique OB (not matching doctrine or TO&E) and terrain, etc. etc. etc.

Thus the ASL compromise. Works for me.

Carl
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
28
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Carl said:
Throwing HS into the mix just to allow someone to carry MTRs around is just bypassing the nationality characteristics of the RB (IMHO).
This was the point I was responding to with my "realism" argument. I was pointing out that "Throwing a HS into the mix" is not bypassing nationality characteristics -- it is based upon solid TO&E research. (And obviously, specific instances will supersede the this general approach -- but they should be the exception, not the rule.)

A20.5 is a much more abusive way to bypass nationality characteristics. Using a prisoner to chain deploy is listed in "The Big Black Book of ASL Sleaze" v2.0.

alanp said:
Citing 'realism' stuff doesn't work when explaining ASL rules.
Wasn't really explaining rules here -- more design philosophy. However, ASL is a WWII simulation -- some degree of realism is required, otherwise it is just a fantasy game and we might as well allow squads to throw fireballs and teleport. :D

As "The Purist" has pointed out, the trend in scenario design, as well as campaign design, is more along the principles I laid out in my previous post.

CPRad: An explanation along the lines your are looking for is provided by Footnote 5 of Chapter A. It discusses this Squad/HS issues in terms of portage, but the principle remains the same for SW use.
 
Last edited:

The Purist

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,004
Reaction score
96
Location
In my castle by the sea, Calgary, AB
Country
llCanada
Speaking from personal experience (in the dim and distant pass, as it were), the tripod and tube of a mortar are not all that heavy or cumbersome and one man does the carry for each piece. The heaviest piece is the base plate, these buggers can cause no small amount of pain. :eek: Add to the mortars weight the need to carry enough mortar bombs to make the thing effective and I think all can see why an assembled 50mm or 60mm Mor. weighs as much as it does. Even carrying parts of a dismantled mortar and ammo is (overall) quite cumbersome and this is shown quite well in ASL in that a squad (or HS) double-timing does not get the full benifit due to lower IPC.

Overall, I think the rules for both light and medium mortars work quite well. :thumup: I always try to remember that I am not controlling all events on my cardboard battlefield. There are things happening 'in the the backgound' that I do not see represented on the map or that I have no control over (the often mention Omniscient Player Syndrome).
 
Last edited:
Top