+- 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: BM-13 deployment (/showthread.php?tid=651)
Pages:
1
2
BM-13 deployment - campsawyer - 10-24-2013
Looking at the SSR's for BM-13, they make no mention of the deployment of the BM-13 from the "moving" side to the "firing side". So the question becomes should the BM-13 be required to unlimber like a gun or just flip over after moving with a possible movement cost? Thoughts.
One historical point, it seems that the Soviet crews prided themselves on the ability to quickly fire the rockets are well as reload or be ready to move to avoid counter-battery fire.
RE: BM-13 deployment - vince hughes - 10-24-2013
(10-24-2013, 12:26 PM)campsawyer Wrote: Looking at the SSR's for BM-13, they make no mention of the deployment of the BM-13 from the "moving" side to the "firing side". So the question becomes should the BM-13 be required to unlimber like a gun or just flip over after moving with a possible movement cost? Thoughts.
One historical point, it seems that the Soviet crews prided themselves on the ability to quickly fire the rockets are well as reload or be ready to move to avoid counter-battery fire.
The 'Stalin's Organ' is not greatly modelled in PG no matter what is decided here. You'll see why below.
My first thought would be that if there was no need for a flip of any sort, then it would not have a firing side and a moving side. So obviously something has to be done as far as readying to fire.
For deployment, we used the normal flip rules. It's worth noting that as well as the crews of the rockets, you also had the drivers, an equal amount of replen vehicles and some maintenace vehicles that actually followed the firing units around. If the unit moves, these guys would all have to jump out thereafter, get to the rockets, calculate arc to some degree and mechanically put the weapon in the ready to fire position.
Now I have heard that such batteries could be ready to fire on order within 7-8 minutes. Whether this includes the aiming, whether this includes driving to a spot and getting everybody out and priming the weapon, I don't know, but it would suggest that best case scenario (given a PG 15 minute turn) is that in any turn it 'flipped', it would only be able to move half its MP's for a total 4 MP's.
However, where the BM-13 is a bit 'mythical' in PG is the amount it does actually fire. It could deliever its rounds in seconds, perhaps 10-20 seconds dependent on the size of the racks and number of rocketsupon them (there were many variants). However, to re-load the thing back up could take up to 50 minutes.
Personally, with a flip side, I think at best, it could move 4 MPs and then flip over-and at worst, take a turn to flip over.
RE: BM-13 deployment - campsawyer - 10-25-2013
Your points about the reloads are good, I was mainly considering just the deployments. I am thinking these should be considered like portee's from the NA campaigns. They don't really need to unlimber/limber to move, they just move to there spot in open turn then fire. If they want to move to another hex on the next turn they can just flip over and move.
But as a counter-point to this is, if the expending of movement points represents getting out of the trucks and doing a minimal setup to fire, shouldn't it be required to expend a point.
RE: BM-13 deployment - Hugmenot - 10-25-2013
I've played a scenario or two involving them. I ruled it took a whole activation to flip them, the same as for 81mm mortars for example.
RE: BM-13 deployment - campsawyer - 10-25-2013
(10-25-2013, 12:54 AM)Hugmenot Wrote: I've played a scenario or two involving them. I ruled it took a whole activation to flip them, the same as for 81mm mortars for example.
Couldn't this be thought of at self-propelled artillery? Albeit, rockets instead of guns, but it is still mounted on the trucks and does not require unhooking and unlimbering.
RE: BM-13 deployment - vince hughes - 10-25-2013
(10-25-2013, 02:22 AM)campsawyer Wrote: Couldn't this be thought of at self-propelled artillery? Albeit, rockets instead of guns, but it is still mounted on the trucks and does not require unhooking and unlimbering.
Alan,
I believe the firing side and moving side of the vehicle is there for a reason. By that, it must need to flip. It would be quite strange having these creatures move to 1 hex, fire move away the next turn, fire etc
As I say, like Daniel, I had them use the 'flip' rule a la mortars because they DO have a flip side. If this was not needed, I think they would only have one side.
Another killer clue to the 'flip' argument is that on the firing side, their movement is 0, implying to me that they must become stationary and get themselves ready.
Going back to doctrine, these things apparently did not flit around battlefields loosing off shots every couple of hundred yards. According to wiki (easiest to check) - Once they had loosed off all their rockets they would re-locate 10km away or so to avoid counter-battery as per Soviet manuals ?
As always - Keep it simple
RE: BM-13 deployment - Hugmenot - 10-25-2013
I see no point of having a movement ready and fire ready sides if that was the case; one side with a special rule similar to that of the M18 would suffice.
RE: BM-13 deployment - campsawyer - 10-25-2013
(10-25-2013, 03:03 AM)vince hughes Wrote:Understand all that you say, I just find it hard to justify SPA and portee not having to do the same thing.(10-25-2013, 02:22 AM)campsawyer Wrote: Couldn't this be thought of at self-propelled artillery? Albeit, rockets instead of guns, but it is still mounted on the trucks and does not require unhooking and unlimbering.
Alan,
I believe the firing side and moving side of the vehicle is there for a reason. By that, it must need to flip. It would be quite strange having these creatures move to 1 hex, fire move away the next turn, fire etc
As I say, like Daniel, I had them use the 'flip' rule a la mortars because they DO have a flip side. If this was not needed, I think they would only have one side.
Another killer clue to the 'flip' argument is that on the firing side, their movement is 0, implying to me that they must become stationary and get themselves ready.
Going back to doctrine, these things apparently did not flit around battlefields loosing off shots every couple of hundred yards. According to wiki (easiest to check) - Once they had loosed off all their rockets they would re-locate 10km away or so to avoid counter-battery as per Soviet manuals ?
As always - Keep it simple
RE: BM-13 deployment - campsawyer - 10-25-2013
(10-25-2013, 03:13 AM)Hugmenot Wrote: I see no point of having a movement ready and fire ready sides if that was the case; one side with a special rule similar to that of the M18 would suffice.
I agree, but that seems odd that it is just for BM-13's and not other SPA's and portee's
RE: BM-13 deployment - vince hughes - 10-25-2013
(10-25-2013, 03:42 AM)campsawyer Wrote:(10-25-2013, 03:13 AM)Hugmenot Wrote: I see no point of having a movement ready and fire ready sides if that was the case; one side with a special rule similar to that of the M18 would suffice.
I agree, but that seems odd that it is just for BM-13's and not other SPA's and portee's
Perhaps the portees were a fix for something as simple as counter-space on the sprue (counter-tree). That was they could get all the counters in they needed .. who knows the inner workings of APL
