Designers' Response to the Desperation Morale Review of Forgotten War

[Justiciar]

I recall, as another example, the Centaur Dozer puzzle you solved, sending a pix of it in action...even it was only 1 they had. There were some other vehicle ones...Oxford Carrier, yeah think that too.

Break.

On yahoo I think it was posted up content (like sample pictures, or files)...but not conversation dialogue as I understood it. So only part of the FW stuff will be lost. The chat should??? remain visible. Ken was the moderator he might know better, and maybe can "capture" the dialogue.

 

[Kenneth P. Katz]

1. That a projectile can penetrate a target does not mean that it necessarily will penetrate a target, particularly in the case of WWII-era HEAT.
2. That a projectile that penetrates armor will necessarily destroy the target.
3. That high overmatch between the projectile and the armor translates into a high probability or certainty of catastrophic target destruction.

Example: Firing a PF at an AF 1 target. In ASL, if the PF hits, the high probability is that the target becomes a flaming wreck. In reality:
a. The PF warhead might not fuze.
b. The metal slug might be malformed.
c. The warhead might fuze and the metal slug does penetrate the armor but it doesn’t hit anybody or anything of significance.

"The ASL armor penetration rules (C7) are fundamentally flawed and unrealistic in that they significantly misrepresent the actual interaction between ammunition and vehicle targets."

I'm interested in the specifics of this statement. What is flawed and why?

 

[Blackcloud6]

1. That a projectile can penetrate a target does not mean that it necessarily will penetrate a target, particularly in the case of WWII-era HEAT.
2. That a projectile that penetrates armor will necessarily destroy the target.
3. That high overmatch between the projectile and the armor translates into a high probability or certainty of catastrophic target destruction.

Example: Firing a PF at an AF 1 target. In ASL, if the PF hits, the high probability is that the target becomes a flaming wreck. In reality:
a. The PF warhead might not fuze.
b. The metal slug might be malformed.
c. The warhead might fuze and the metal slug does penetrate the armor but it doesn’t hit anybody or anything of significance.

Thanks. I would not disagree with this. The only point is does rolling a TK of 12 cover those possibilities? So then what was the dude rate or inability to do damage after penetration rate of the various WWII HEAT rounds? I think your rules for the M6A3 are justified. Their failure in early combat in Korea is well documented and there were problems with it in WWII. One problem was the shape of then wind cap could cause it to yaw at impact thus causing the jet to mal-form or not hit the armor optimally. The sloped armor of the T-34/85 would make this more likely to happen.

I worked at TACOM as a threat analyst supporting combat vehicle programs and did a lot of work on defeating RPG warheads. As antiarmor weapons developed and different types come out it becomes more difficult in game terms to work out their ability to affect the target and for the target to defeat them. How complex do we want the game to become? The player is really concerned with did I kill or not, or did I lose my tank or not. For most of the typical anti armor weapons of WWII the game works. As to HEAT, I would surmise that if it penetrates the WWII tank it will most likely do enough damage to either take out the tank or cause the crew to poop and want to leave. WWII armor did not have much to with interior design for survivability [EXC US Army wet stowage] nor fire suppression. So maybe, outside of analysis of dud rates, the 12 dud is likely appropriate.

A technical note. HEAT does not form a slug, it forms a plasma jet that is extremely hot. The Explosively Formed Penetrator or EFP is what forms a slug and also uses a shaped charge but one of a different shape and size, and is slower, relatively speaking. When I retired it was not still fully understood what the shaped charged jet is doing to armor: is it eroding the armor, punching a hole, burning a hole or hydrostatically cutting the armor? It happens so fast and scientists were still trying to figure it out. I took some course from the Royal Military College of Science in the UK on HEAT. It is quite interesting stuff. I even had courses from Dr. Manfred Held from Germany who started out on studies post WWII of the Panzerfaust and it’s affects. Interesting stuff.

 

[pswede26]

I always appreciated your willingness to engage others, but that goes to the point Ken was making. If there is a criticism, from anyone, that the team worked "in isolation" it just wasn't so. Having witnessed the deep discussions in the yahoo group, I was quite impressed, and usually at a loss to contribute since the ground was always so ably covered. The only significant contribution I remember making was to pass on a research paper from the Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery museum regarding VT fuzes (in other words, just a middle-man). Mostly I just watched and learned. It's a shame yahoo is pulling the content out of the groups, seems a shame all that discussion will now be lost.

Michael, the discussions topics aren't completely lost. I kept an archive of everything when I became one of the core designers.

 

[Joelist]

Overall I don't mind Forgotten War. If I had an issue with it the issue is more in the extremely large number of other products required to play the scenarios.

As to the reservations the design group has with Chapter C, I too would like to see the issues explained. I agree with their reservations with the way HEAT is handled (I do think the PF and PSK are significantly overpowered in the game) and also think there are some issues with the To Hit DRMs that punish historical tactics.

 

[pswede26]

Mark took issue with the CPVA leadership. Someone posted on Facebook that Ken's response didn't adequately address Mark's concern. As one of FW's designers, I wanted to share some thoughts I provided on ASL's Facebook page regarding CPVA Leadership

As Ken mentions in our response to Mark, you can't look at individual rules or aspects of the Chinese. They were designed holistically. Everything was based on CPVA tactics: closing with and enveloping the enemy...in mass. We didn't want the CPVA played like the other nationalities. A common tactic in ASL is to use superior firepower to whittle down the enemy before closing in. ASL leadership modifiers (your -1, -2, and -3 modifiers) reward this tactic. Playing the CPVA that way is mostly ahistorical. The Chinese leaders didn't focus their leadership on directing firepower (and that's not saying they ignored it). Their leadership was primarily focused on moving large numbers of soldiers toward an isolated enemy, enveloping it, and then killing it...especially at night. That was their tactic. Effective leadership is extremely important to the CPVA...especially when moving. It's why you see more Chinese leaders than normal in scenarios...directing movement.

 

[Joelist]

Mark took issue with the CPVA leadership. Someone posted on Facebook that Ken's response didn't adequately address Mark's concern. As one of FW's designers, I wanted to share some thoughts I provided on ASL's Facebook page regarding CPVA Leadership

As Ken mentions in our response to Mark, you can't look at individual rules or aspects of the Chinese. They were designed holistically. Everything was based on CPVA tactics: closing with and enveloping the enemy...in mass. We didn't want the CPVA played like the other nationalities. A common tactic in ASL is to use superior firepower to whittle down the enemy before closing in. ASL leadership modifiers (your -1, -2, and -3 modifiers) reward this tactic. Playing the CPVA that way is mostly ahistorical. The Chinese leaders didn't focus their leadership on directing firepower (and that's not saying they ignored it). Their leadership was primarily focused on moving large numbers of soldiers toward an isolated enemy, enveloping it, and then killing it...especially at night. That was their tactic. Effective leadership is extremely important to the CPVA...especially when moving. It's why you see more Chinese leaders than normal in scenarios...directing movement.

Good points. In fact I would say that ASL rewards ahistorical tactics no matter the nationality with the leadership modifiers. I have experimented with a modification to how Leaders work - basically what it does is instead of the leadership modifier affecting the IFT shot it is the number of hexes excluding the one the Leader occupies that can participate in a Fire Group (minimum one and this Fire Group cannot Cower). It still needs tweaks but does help move things away from the "Death Star" tendencies.

 

[Justiciar]

Overall I don't mind Forgotten War. If I had an issue with it the issue is more in the extremely large number of other products required to play the scenarios.
.....

You cannot design modules to the lowest possible dominator....which is what?...and doing so would then unhinge the treatment of the subject matter you are designing.

ASL is for better or worse a keep up with product type game system*. To gig a given ASL item b/c it relies on 4-5-6 other ASL items is simply to not understand the universe you are gaming in, and to want to go back is just not happening.

 

[Richard Weiley]

So then what was the dude rate ....?

The Dude abides.

 

[Blackcloud6]

The Dude abides.

Damned iPad!

 

[pswede26]

Kenneth, thank you for responding. As someone who started playing ASL with Pete Dahlin and Jess Ward when they were stationed at Fairchild AFB (Pete was a navigator on a B-52) and having read three books on the Korean War, I was perplexed and annoyed by many of Mark’s comments.

The Forgotten War is my favorite ASL module since Red Barricades/Code of Bushido. I’m glad you took the time to answer the criticism. It just feels right when reading the rules and playing the scenarios.

Rob... I miss those days playing ASL with you and Jess. Good times indeed!

 

[Gordon]

The Dude abides.

It really tied the room together.

 

[Roy]

My only issues with FW are personal issues that I am having with ASL in General. I'm not interested in new unit types, I've got over 25,000 friggin' counters and don't need any more. Seems to me there could have been a way to model the CVPA with units we already have and change the behavior of them, like give them -1 to adjacent shots after closing the distance. Someone thought pine woods terrain change would be a good idea and I've played exactly one scenario with them and I think it's stupid. Now we have 'steep hills' ......yay. I expect to get the same enjoyment from that as I do pine woods.
Someone wasn't happy with the penetration values in the good ol' ASL we've been playing for decades, so we need a grudge rule to scratch someone's itch.
Third party stuff all have new boards, counters, grudge rules and it's wearing thin on me.
Sorry to be a grouch. As I said, these are personal issues I am having with new stuff. I applaud Ken and his cohort for finally getting the module out. I can't inagine the amount of work one puts into these things. I opened my box and the first thing that came to my mind was great, more counters..... yay, pages of rules for a few scenarios. If anyone asks me to play one of these scenarios, I have to read more friggin' rules. Fantastic.

I know I am a very minority voice. For me it's nothing but scenario packs, journals and action packs (which unfortunately always include more boards. Yay) from now on. If I can't use the 25,000 counters and 80 sumthin' boards I already have, I don't need it.

Btw, Ken. Thank you for taking the time to respond to Mark. It was interesting to read the thoughts behind your creation.

 

[hongkongwargamer]

If I can't use the 25,000 counters and 80 sumthin' boards I already have, I don't need it.

Someone upstream is unhappy that too much of other modules are needed to play FW, so some (if not all) your 25,000 counters and 80 sumthin' boards will be used - you NEED this. Look forward to your AARs dude. I look to play more Korean War in 2020 myself!

Btw, Ken. Thank you for taking the time to respond to Mark. It was interesting to read the thoughts behind your creation.

Yes - and I am learning so much from the other responses on this thread as well.

 

[JRKrejsa]

Very interesting discussion.

I can add that if you play the CPVA with their historical tactics, they can be very effective...

 

[Mr Incredible]

Next time a module is up for design, maybe people who want input should sign up.

In much the same way I trust my wife to do something for me, I have no right to complain if she doesn't do it the way I wanted. I had the opportunity to do it myself.

 

[hongkongwargamer]

Next time a module is up for design, maybe people who want input should sign up.

In much the same way I trust my wife to do something for me, I have no right to complain if she doesn't do it the way I wanted. I had the opportunity to do it myself.

I learned over the years that the more criticisms my project gets, the more my project matters.

Imagine not getting any criticisms at all, none.

 

[Joelist]

MMP does not exactly have an open signup process for this stuff.

My only quibble was that not only do you need several Core modules (which I have no objection to) for the scenarios you also need several Action Packs; not all of which are in print. How about having Core module scenarios limited to needing stuff published in a Core module?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Offer to help proofread could only be an email away.

 

[Bad Dice]

Offering to help, period, is a great way to get involved. I did some PT work for FW. I've done PT work for other modules as well, plus some AP stuff. I helped Ken with some last-minute proofing not too long before FW came out. It's so much easier to criticize when you haven't had your hand in the effort; not so much so when you pitch and and actually contribute.

It's also a lot more rewarding, and a lot more productive. Anyone can complain about the menu; but if you had a hand in cooking dinner your perspective changes significantly, and if you're even a little thoughtful you get a better understanding of the process, if nothing else. At any rate, actually getting involved, vice building your own fragment of empire and attempting to become a sand-castle despot thereby is much more productive than not, overall.

Something for us all to remember.


BD