william.stoppel
Elder Member
If it goes well I could see several. Push the bounds of ASL beyond the mid 1930’s -mid 1950’s.Very true, but I can see an expansion module coming…
If it goes well I could see several. Push the bounds of ASL beyond the mid 1930’s -mid 1950’s.Very true, but I can see an expansion module coming…
...or even some of the Wars of African Independence could fall under these expansion modules...If it goes well I could see several. Push the bounds of ASL beyond the mid 1930’s -mid 1950’s.
How many levels needed to represent Orthanc and how many turns for personnel to reach the top level? for example. RF meets Manila meets Minas Tirith . . .For half a second I thought I read this:
I am curious to see how/if they represent a high-density Middle Earth urban area.
And, boy, I was curious to see how they'd do that...
von Marwitz
'67 should work. I think '73 is too far. Too many guided weapons that have flight/guidance times the take up an appreciable amount of the theoretical 3 minute ASL turn.1973 could make a good module. AIW covered a great deal of the topic as part of the PB-PL line. The ASL format would too.
wait, what?the theoretical 3 minute ASL turn
Sorry....two minutes, which is even more to the pointwait, what?
Phew. I was afraid we'd changed something again. Or that I'd phased between universes again.Sorry....two minutes, which is even more to the point
Agreed. Put ‘48 up for preorder this year. ‘56 can wait to be piggybacked onto it.Expansions would add another five years of waiting.
For a MASL to work, I think it would have to focus primarily on infantry combat, with most vehicles relegated to OBAFV (Off-board AFV) mechanics.'67 should work. I think '73 is too far. Too many guided weapons that have flight/guidance times the take up an appreciable amount of the theoretical 3 minute ASL turn.
The rulz could be worked to make that possible, but I feel it would change the system so much as to not be ASL any longer.....
But vehicles and aircraft play such a huge role in modern warfare.For a MASL to work, I think it would have to focus primarily on infantry combat, with most vehicles relegated to OBAFV (Off-board AFV) mechanics.
The Siege of Jadotville is just screaming for an ASL scenario treatment....or even some of the Wars of African Independence could fall under these expansion modules...
Semper Fi!
Scott
Which would no longer be ASL as we know it today, which is my whole point.For a MASL to work, I think it would have to focus primarily on infantry combat, with most vehicles relegated to OBAFV (Off-board AFV) mechanics.
I have to disagree regarding 'flight and guidance times' for ATGW's.'67 should work. I think '73 is too far. Too many guided weapons that have flight/guidance times the take up an appreciable amount of the theoretical 3 minute ASL turn.
ATGW is really just a long-range DC, where the "Placement hex" is the launch site, and the SMC/MMC guiding the missile must survive all fire defensive fire in order for the "DC" to be successfully placed on the Target hex. Earliest versions required the firer to stand up and watch the missile fly in order to guide it to the target - CE and Hazardous Movement all in one.I have to disagree regarding 'flight and guidance times' for ATGW's.
In my personal experience, the amount of time for even a first generation AT guided missile to be fired, guided to, and impact its target is about the same for a projectile fired from a mortar, and in many cases, less (depending of course on the range to the target).
The frequently mentioned theory that AT guided missiles are in some way too complex to be included in the ASL game system seems to be based more upon opinion regarding enjoyment of the game rather than actual fact. Although the ATGW is a complex weapon design, the truth is that these weapons are much easier to use and far more effective than the towed AT guns that are currently in the game, and which have largely been replaced in the inventories of late 20th century armies.
Aircraft are already covered abstractly in ASL. Modern vehicles are more likely to operate at longer distances than infantry combat, at least for MBTs [EXC: urban combat], so creating a type of off-board armor fire might be appropriate. And just as smaller Guns have a presence on-board in ASL, so smaller AFV can still have a presence in the modern era.But vehicles and aircraft play such a huge role in modern warfare.
Are you suggesting that infantry-only scenarios aren't ASL as we know it today?Which would no longer be ASL as we know it today, which is my whole point.
Not even close. Just saying that the changes you suggest for incorporating modern AFVs would change it beyond what I consider ASL to be.Are you suggesting that infantry-only scenarios aren't ASL as we know it today?