+- PG-HQ Forums (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms)
+-- Forum: Panzer Grenadier (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Panzer Grenadier Rules (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: LOS increase in Towns (/showthread.php?tid=755)
Pages:
1
2
RE: LOS increase in Towns - zaarin7 - 03-01-2014
Okay got that and missed it from the earlier conversation. Hope this is cleared up in 4th ed. IMHO I believe the units should get +1 under the circumstances described but acknowledge it's not clear.
RE: LOS increase in Towns - campsawyer - 03-01-2014
(03-01-2014, 03:12 AM)Poor Yorek Wrote: Alan,
Well, tell it to Doug. I merely quoted (and tried to infer a rationale for) his application of the matter since your definition of self-spotting is at odds with Doug's use of the term in the cited AAR. Of course, his casual use in an AAR is not the same thing as speaking ex cathedra.
Given the likely frequency that this occurs, however, perhaps someone with contacts at APL might suggest a definitive clarification of this matter vis-a-vis the 4th Ed rules (if not already done).
Quote:As long as it is not "Vertigo enhanced observer" you'll do just fine
Hrmm, does this get the +3 col shift for a proximity fuse? Splatter damage? ewww
Zaarin7: Regarding leaders, the game leader counters obviously don't count actual officers, but, in game terms, represent game-effective leadership (albeit at times the counters do represent an individual). Put another way, they're the officers (or NCO's) that "matter" in game terms. So an artillery battery unit without a leader counter isn't suggesting that there isn't an LT probably "there," but in game-effective terms, that unit functions differently than one that does have an accompanying leader. I gather than Vince and I agree that a "leaderless" artillery or mortar unit can spot from the enhanced elevation of trees/buildings if in such a hex, but there is a difference of opinion regarding whether that constitutes "self-spotting" from the pov of gaining the +1 col shift. My point was that Doug's AAR seems to suggest that is the case, but it is not clear whether that is canonical.
Like everything with PG is it left up to us to ponder.
RE: LOS increase in Towns - armyduck95 - 03-01-2014
Well guys, you definitely took me up on the question.
1. As for BF, I would be willing to give a Bombardment unit the +1 and extra spotting distance from the buildings because though the weapons are at ground level, a spotter from that unit/platoon who is organic to that unit has direct LOS for the bombardment and is pretty much talking the guns onto a directly lay.
2. For Personal Weapons/INF/HMGs- that get the benefit of extended spotting as their weapons can be placed at those high levels in the buildings. (though, they never range too far to matter).
As far as 8.42 is concerned it does not restrict receiving the additional 6 hexes of spotting by unit type. So AS WRITTEN, an AFV can receive the extra 6 hexes of spotting and if it can spot the target, it has a LOS to the target, and therefore can fire on the target if it is within range (i.e. 14 hexes)...it may be a loophole that 4th ed addresses.
RE: LOS increase in Towns - leonard - 03-07-2014
We (I play PG ftf, mainly ) use the following house rule for town upper levels :
Imagine a town hex in line with several field hexes. The infantry type units in the town hex (inf, eng, HMG) can spot an enemy unit in a field two hexes away despite the intervening field hex because they can be considered to be at upper level of the town hex. They may choose to actually fire at that enemy unit but if they do, they can be targeted by the enemy at the upper level for the duration of the turn. We usually just remember which units took such an opportunity but it is otherwise easy to mark them with a Fire/Move counter with a special orientation.
As long as the units in the town hex don't fire specifically using a high position, they can't be targeted at the upper level.
RE: LOS increase in Towns - nicky_longbranch - 07-15-2014
When I was in Iraq as a combat medic we had a few Forward Observers with their fire support officer attached (1st Lieutenant) to our Infantry Company(B co 1-26 IN, Ramadi 05). I think that the gun chits would have these highly trained specialized FOs intrinsically applied, therefore why couldn't one spot for its unit and give it the self spotting column bonus, it does not matter who pulls the cord on the gun itself, as the "Gun Bunnies" are usually very good with their equipment and how to use it, but no so much when it comes down to where and when to fire, (Get Order,pull string, Go Boom!!) all ranges and commands are issued by the FSO, or in a pinch, an FO, who is usually not with the guns themselves, as that would waste their precious skill set. Their is no reason why an FO or FSO wouldn't try to get to a higher elevation and spot for his guns, especially inside a village where getting high is easier than climbing a tree.
~Nick
RE: LOS increase in Towns - zaarin7 - 07-15-2014
Nick first all thank you for your service. Second the W W II artillery organisation for most armies is as far removed from you are familiar with as your service rifle is from a trap door Springfield. The closest artillery organisation to modern times and the most advanced for W W II was the US Army's.
RE: LOS increase in Towns - vince hughes - 07-15-2014
Nick,
I was in the British Army in the early 80's. Even now, when I hear of and see the different equipment now compared to the 80's its staggering, let alone comparing to 39 and 45. Just think. Steel helmets v kevlar. Lightweight webbing v our old what was it? Hessian type material mulched together. Bullet-proof vests, firepower, technology. Cripes, I was even using puttees when I joined ....Tanks admittedly not as much advance comparitively as I think the late model Chieftan would stand up well even now. But artillery delivery and access, not to mention missiles for example are far far better.