"moving infantry, harder to hit?" Topic

some rulesets give a penalty to firing against a moving target. I understand that rule when you fire against vehicles, but when the moving target is infantry, shouldn´t be easier, as the moving infantry is a taller target than a static infantry? after all, each static squad would be lying in the ground, so they should be a harder to hit target.

Moving targets are definitely harder to hit with aimed fire, unless maybe very close. However, troops running, for example across the front of an MG firing fixed lines is just as likely to run INTO the fire…

Static troops, by the way are either hugging the ground, ie not exposed at all (the object of suppression) or else poking heads up (or more correctly around) cover to observe and return fire.

Lying prone makes use of low cover and gives in most cases a better firing platform but if the ground cover is more than about 12 inches… can't see can't shoot…

Moving targets are much harder to hit than targets that are stationary. My wargame rules penalize based on movement and target size.

A "hit location die" shows the part of the target that is hit. A standing or running figure that is fully exposed, a man behind cover is partially hidden.

Mike "Bunkermeister" Creek
bunkermeister.blogspot.com

Usually, yeah. Try hitting a moving target from 450 yards vs. a static target and you'll see why. The same applies for closer ranges.

However moving through an artillery barrage is extremely detrimental to health, approximately 20 times more lethal than lying down.

It really depends what level of engagement you are talking about, individually it is extremely hard to lead and hit a moving target at any sort of range, however units which are moving are inevitably exposed to fire, and the more exposed units are, the more casualties they suffer. This can be mitigated by dispersion and use of terrain, but ask the British infantry in July 1916 or the French in April 1917 if moving magically made them harder to hit. 60k and 90k casualties in a single day each respectively.

Given the difficulty of hitting moving targets with aimed fire, it might be observed that the majority of casualties against moving units are inflicted by area fire weapons – mortars, artillery and machineguns. Modern units have a lot of area fire weapons, evne rifles can be considered area fire weapons if employed en masse – they have beaten zones etc.

I guess the thing is, however hard it is to hit a moving target, it is easier than hitting someone lying down in full cover as the former target is exposed and the latter isn't. Even if they are moving by rushes, they are still visible for a few seconds and there is the potential to hit them. Weight of fire will largely determine if and how long those rushes are. Someone standing still in the open is dead meat though.

I think the point is someone using cautious movement, crawling, dash between to bits of cover etc will be harder to hit than someone just charging across ground , not statioanary standing as opposed to standing run etc think of a street somone moving down the edges using the garden as cover etc will be far harder to hit than someone running down it. The only time running in the open could be ok is between cover … In wargame terms when they come into Los and out of Los in one action

The Rate of Fire rules covers this quite well which was a surprise as when I read the modifiers it seemed odd

It is also worthy to notice that a moving target is a lot easier to spot in the first place than a stationary target (especially a stationary target taking cover).

Any movement naturally attracts attention from the human eye.

Any movement naturally attracts attention from the human eye.

It sure does. I've spotted many a person by night when they moved, that while stationary were quite near invisible.

Hitting a moving target depends on how much distance the target moves. If you have time for calculating deflection its not all that much harder than a stationary target. If you have automatic fire available you can make the target walk into your fire with a couple of shots.

Martain Raiper

20 times interesting fact, where did you get it please

Lord Ghee

If a target is stationary then even if only his head is exposed I can take my time to aim and hit him.

If he is dashing from cover to cover then I have only (if he knows how to handle himself) a few seconds to notice him, train my sights on him, predict where he will be in the fraction of a second between me squeezing the trigger and the round reaching him, and finally squeezing the trigger.

pedrobear has it !!!!!

Why not just include this in the dice roll from the start instead of having a whole separate modifier. Just take into account that guys will always try and survive and run, zigzag, crouch, go prone, use cover and on and on. Why are we always trying to separate everything so much and force us to use so many markers and and extra die rolls and ultimately bog it all down so much. Isn't it pleasant to start and finish something and replay it if necessary then get back to our families at a decent hour? Maybe not….

Frankly, movement and cover effects are not a mere +1 on the die roll. The effects are intimately linked with distance from target to shooter and are exponential +2 squared; +3 squared etc. A good set of rules often has to resort to a CRT to deal with this.

mjc

If a target is stationary then even if only his head is exposed I can take my time to aim and hit him.

Presuming that you can spot that head in the first place. And that the target is keeping his head up long enough for you to complete taking the aim. Never mind the possibility that the target might be returning fire.

If he is dashing from cover to cover then I have only (if he knows how to handle himself) a few seconds to notice him, train my sights on him, predict where he will be in the fraction of a second between me squeezing the trigger and the round reaching him, and finally squeezing the trigger.

And what is he doing between those dashes?

The key to the question is: harder to hit … with what? Aimed fire or area fire? flat trajectory or high trajectory? Single shots or automatic fire? Frontal fire or flank fire? Small arms or artillery? In short -- it depends!

I agree with Ghostdog. An stationary target usually is not a very dumb guy standing tall or quiet in the same position waiting to be shot by me and a running guy is much easier to spot. A battle is not a fair were you have to shoot the moving wood ducks to get a prize.

Besides a moving enemy is an enemy not shooting effectively at you, an "stationary" guy may be pouring fire on your position making your aim poor or non-existent.

"20 times interesting fact, where did you get it please"

John Salts exhaustive compilation of WW2 British Operations Research data.

Upon further reading it seems I overstated the case, for a given weight of 25pdr fire, casualties are 10 times greater for targets 'in the open' (presumably lying down) than against those in slit trenches.

There is a study of 3" mortar bomb lethality which rates the benefical effects of lying down vs standing up in a mortar barrage as reducing casualties by 6 times – both against targets in the open.

If those ratios are maintained then it means that area/HE fire is approximately 60 times more effective against targets standing up than those in slit trenches (from a casualty pov), which is presumably why people choose to lie down when under shell fire… Ground undulations tend to provide more cover against small arms fire as such cover is often very directional. Vastly lighter concentrations of shell fire are required to cause neutralisation of course.

"Why are we always trying to separate everything so much and force us to use so many markers and and extra die rolls and ultimately bog it all down so much."

Quite right, Squad Leaders '-2 vs targets moving in the open' is quite adequate for me. In SL low is a good roll, and even though it uses 2D6, -2 is a hefty penalty, quite sufficient to discourage uncovered movement without lots and lots of prep fire first.

I'm with Combatpainter on this.

Yes, all you need to do is differentiate between tactical (which does involve rushes etc) movement vs non tactical movement aka 'march mode'. A being stationary.

Of course, any given piece of terrain can only accmmodate so many people moving tactically as there are a limit on the number of folds in the ground. Higher troop density will, in these cases, lead to more target exposure and rather heavier casualties.

I am surprised how many do not take into account enemy supressive fires, as if they were like a deer waiting to be shot (Whether that deer is moving or not).

Most of the time, in combat, soldiers on both sides are throwing as much lead at the enemy as they can in the hopes that they will go away (Whether they are moving or not). If I rememeber the stats correctly only two men in a squad of ten actually bothers to aim at anything, most just throw bullets in the direction of the enemy. Basically unaimed area fire.

I believe the question was intended to be on small arms fire only.

I'm with Combatpainter on this.

Me too, 100%, way to go, combat painter!!!!
--
Tim

Surely it depends on the scale of unit you game at. a 7 man skirmish – moving individuals harder to hit. 10 man section moving vs another 10 man section firing in general direction with LMG fire in support- movement exposes them to random stuff. Very few soldiers actually aimed in WW2.

My first real wargame was AH Tobruk,moving in the open is suicide when there are lots of automatics at hand.I guarentee it wasnt aimed fire that tore through the throngs of Soviet infantry who charged arms linked yelling urrah.My pal from elementary schools dad was an mg-34 gunner ,he told me about changing barrels and crying in disbelief of the horror.

I quoted on another thread a few months ago a GI in NW Europe who said he only fired "like on the range" (i.e. aimed) one time in the entire war (however long he was in it, few months anyway), and that was to pick off an LMG that had his squad pinned down. I'm guessing that was pretty typical. Most of the time you just pointed your rifle in the general direction of the enemy and blasted away (if you fired at all).