Contested Lands (1948 Arab Israeli) module

[Eagle4ty]

There's already some fudging in engagement ranges systemically within ASL at the present. IIRC the typical armor engagement ranges in encountered in Western Europe were about 400m-800m whereas those in Russia (especially in Southern Russia-Ukraine) were about 600m-1100m and those in the desert were, I would guess, would have been comparable or perhaps even greater. I would venture a pretty good guess based upon my experience, that most engagement ranges in ASL are between 80m to 400m (2-10 hexes). As for ATGMs the flight times were about 11 seconds out to 1200m for early Saggers with an additional 5-10 seconds of acquiring targets and prepping the weapon system to fire; all easily within the time frame of an ASL turn. The greatest difficulty that I envision with the rules as they are now, is replicating the tactics used against ATGMs. The Isrealis would learn to look for the dust kicked up by the rocket ignition and bring their MGs to bear to suppress the gunner and even in some cases to detonate the missile system before impact. As it stands now, this would limit the defending armor unit from firing any weapon systems on the defending AFV from any other hex. Not a good representation of the fluid nature of their tactics.

 

[Gordon]

I imagine some adaptation of the Gun Duel rules to reflect reaction fire versus the ATGM launcher unit (assuming it was "spotted") could do the trick.

 

[JRKrejsa]

How soon before people start calling it, Contested Lambs?
Had to have been a popular food among both sides…

 

[PresterJohn]

I have two questions. Is the ASL rule book the best (includes vague parameters like fun and realism) approach to the battles of "insert time period of one of several Arab-Israeli wars"?
And also what period and region of armed conflict does the ASL rule book produce the best results? For best results use for "x" battles. Where and when is "x"?

Ultimately, should I invest in something that might not be the best use of the ASL rule book? My feeling is that the module focusing on the 1948 conflict will be quite good, but beyond that period, significant variance will be found between best and second best.

 

[Stewart]

Ultimately, should I invest in something that might not be the best use of the ASL rule book? My feeling is that the module focusing on the 1948 conflict will be quite good, but beyond that period, significant variance will be found between best and second best.

Are there other forms of AI combat at the tactical level.
LnL and others. check that out...there are bound to be others...

ASL tank combat is kinda garbage tbh

 

[fenyan]

IDF by James Day is definitely the best approach for armor battles. Back in the day, the WW2 versions Panzer/Armor/88 were outshined by Squad Leader.

 

[PresterJohn]

Being a little bit pedantic, but I think ASL is below tactical, at least as far as "modern" warfare goes. Sub-unit tactics is certainly a thing, because junior leaders study and practice it, but it's really a large scale gang fight and glorious fun when depicted in cardboard using ASL. And that's probably the reason that armour in ASL has a poor reputation by some. I think "tactics" happens on a slightly larger scale. In the WW2 era it's companies of infantry and squadrons of armour, and from the 50's onwards it's troops of AFVs and platoons of infantry (with up to a battalion or two on the board).

 

[Eagle4ty]

I have two questions. Is the ASL rule book the best (includes vague parameters like fun and realism) approach to the battles of "insert time period of one of several Arab-Israeli wars"?
And also what period and region of armed conflict does the ASL rule book produce the best results? For best results use for "x" battles. Where and when is "x"?

Ultimately, should I invest in something that might not be the best use of the ASL rule book? My feeling is that the module focusing on the 1948 conflict will be quite good, but beyond that period, significant variance will be found between best and second best.

I really don't see any big problems to overcome representing the French efforts against the Viet Minh in French Indo-China or even against the Algerians in Algeria. Smaller county conflicts in the 60's or even the 70's could be within the realm of do-able utilizing the existing rules with a minimum of SSRs or other new rules.

 

[PresterJohn]

Sure, representing combat in what is essentially a guerilla war with ASL rules is possible, but is it the best use of ASL. And conversely, what is the absolute best use of ASL? What sort of combat scenario goes right at the top of the gaming totem pole for what ASL does best. For example use ASL when the combatants use squad size manoeuvrer units. Don't use ASL for a conflict where the fighting is between a bunch of half squads because the ASL rule book will push the players to combine their half-squads to get the benefits of full squads, like higher broken morale or assault fire. A weak example but there can be reasons to not use ASL rules for a gaming scenario. My point is to be mindful of those reasons and stay close to what ASL does best.

 

[hongkongwargamer]

Re

Sure, representing combat in what is essentially a guerilla war with ASL rules is possible, but is it the best use of ASL. And conversely, what is the absolute best use of ASL? What sort of combat scenario goes right at the top of the gaming totem pole for what ASL does best. For example use ASL when the combatants use squad size manoeuvrer units. Don't use ASL for a conflict where the fighting is between a bunch of half squads because the ASL rule book will push the players to combine their half-squads to get the benefits of full squads, like higher broken morale or assault fire. A weak example but there can be reasons to not use ASL rules for a gaming scenario. My point is to be mindful of those reasons and stay close to what ASL does best.

RE Half Squads or Fire Teams - “The Halfing” by Aaron Cleavin in ASL Journal 11 is a great read.

 

[footsteps]

Sure, representing combat in what is essentially a guerilla war with ASL rules is possible, but is it the best use of ASL. And conversely, what is the absolute best use of ASL? What sort of combat scenario goes right at the top of the gaming totem pole for what ASL does best. For example use ASL when the combatants use squad size manoeuvrer units. Don't use ASL for a conflict where the fighting is between a bunch of half squads because the ASL rule book will push the players to combine their half-squads to get the benefits of full squads, like higher broken morale or assault fire. A weak example but there can be reasons to not use ASL rules for a gaming scenario. My point is to be mindful of those reasons and stay close to what ASL does best.

Quick & Dirty Spitballing ideas:

Fireteam (Squad-equivalent for stacking/SW usage per regular ASL rules)


Reduced Fireteam (HS-equivalent for stacking/SW usage per regular ASL rules)


Just ideas to discuss.

 

[Larry]

A HS that retains assault fire bonus ...

 

[footsteps]

A HS that retains assault fire bonus ...

(Semi-)Automatic rifles become standard, rather than "new-tech".

 

[kevin.kenneally]

Will there be plenty of AFVs/ACs and Trucks of many variants as well?

 

[Gordon]

Oooh, a separate "Transjordan Trucks" module.

 

[daniel zucker]

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.

and air power & helicopters would need to be relegated to even more abstract mechanics also. keep the game playable.

 

[daniel zucker]

Oooh, a separate "Transjordan Trucks" module.

no more Dutch trucks???

 

[Futbol]

Wait... hasn't Critical Pit done all of the above conflicts already?

 

[Robin Reeve]

Wait... hasn't Critical Pit done all of the above conflicts already?

They even generated conflicts of their own... with their customers.

 

[sswann]

Wait... hasn't Critical Pit done all of the above conflicts already?

At least 3 - 4 times.