"Old School WW2 rules: Am I being too fiddly?" Topic

I've written a set of WW2 rules in the same vein as the Don Featherstone 18th Century rules. Normally you would get to roll 1 die for every 5 points shooting. I am contemplating how to handle combat when the number of points do not divide by 5. Points are as follows: Rifleman 1 SMG 2 LMG 3 HMG 5.

If the total points do not divide by 5 evenly, there are 2 options I am considering.

1) Like the pioneers: 3-4 points throw 1 extra die. 1-2 points are discounted.
2) 1-4 points throw a half die. That is the final result after all modifiers are applied are halved (round up) for that die only.

I am leaning toward #2 because you get a distinct differentiation between a single LMG vs a single HMG in combat other than range. OTOH #1 works because the HMG will still have considerably longer range than the LMG which will allow for more accuracy at longer range.

So which would you prefer?

Thanks

John

Why not keep it really simple and ignore all fractions? Depends if the points are affected by range or not.

IRL one MG is reckoned to be worth between 9 and 40 rifles. US Army field exercise manuals had them as 14.

If you want to use an extra dice, how about only counting scores which are equal to or less than the number of excess points, so 1 extra point can only ever score a 1 anyway?

If you want to use an extra dice, how about only counting scores which are equal to or less than the number of excess points, so 1 extra point can only ever score a 1 anyway?

Hmmm…that's a pretty darned good idea. So here is the thing. There is a deduction per die based on range. So lets say you have 12 men firing at short range. That calls for a deduction of 2 per die. It will yield 0-4 casualties per die. Close combat range is -1 per die. That would mean a maximum of 5 casualties in the best of combat situations.

So the problem with your method is that if I roll a '1', for 1 figure, I won't hit anyway. Maybe the amount could be the cap…as it maximum amount of casualties caused? You have the right idea. I am looking to resolve this as simply as I can.

John, not knowing all your mechanics, I have 2 thoughts,

Make the SMG and LMG the same value, they are both high fire suppression weapons, differentiated only by range.

This would allow you to drop your values by 1' which would allow the HMG to have a value of 4.

This shrinks the range of remainders and may encourage you to simply round all fractions UP.

Make the SMG and LMG the same value, they are both high fire suppression weapons, differentiated only by range.

Sound advice. Maybe 3 points per LMG/SMG. If they fall under determined attack, the enemy should get wolloped pretty good with the SMG and LMG firing on them. They are really to be used with the rest of the squad though a German player would still be able to form a support group (MG-42) and a maneuver group (everyone else).

This would allow you to drop your values by 1' which would allow the HMG to have a value of 4.

I think this could use some testing. An HMG is usually employed as a stand alone weapon. 5 points is exactly 1 die of hits.

I am starting to lean towards rounding. 3-4 points add a die and ignore 1-2.

I had the same problem when I adapted Featherstone's American Civil War rules. Gave one die for five men and deducted pips form each die for range. For troops that did not divide up equally I simply gave them a die and deducted 3, the maximum for most small arms fire.

In the modern period this doesn't work out well with the multiplicity of weapons. I'd simply give MG three dice- always-- until eliminaed and SMG two dice for five.

It's not like this has to be rocket science-- the soldiers are only representations of a lot more men.

Only my opinion but I would go for option 1 as it is easier to work out and is more in the spirit of rolling a die for casualties. Option 2) has a calculation (divide by 2) where you already have a different division (divide by 5). I think not having a divide function when rolling for casualties will flow better and be easier to remember. Martin's idea is pretty good too and it worthy of more thought on whether it is a better alternative.

If you want to use an extra dice, how about only counting scores which are equal to or less than the number of excess points, so 1 extra point can only ever score a 1 anyway?

Did Featherstone's Horse and Musket with basically this system.

Each volley group had a firing factor 5 at short, 4 at medium, 3 at Long range. Ignore any die over the firing factor. Total the scores of those equal or less than firing factor. The odds & ends group's firing factor couldn't exceed the number of figures. Any further modifications are done to the firing factor, not the dice.

Only my opinion but I would go for option 1 as it is easier to work out and is more in the spirit of rolling a die for casualties. Option 2) has a calculation (divide by 2) where you already have a different division (divide by 5). I think not having a divide function when rolling for casualties will flow better and be easier to remember

Which is absolutely what I am going for Shaun.

Martin's idea is pretty good too and it worthy of more thought on whether it is a better alternative.

I like Martin's idea a lot. I'm not sure how I could make it work with my system though.

Each volley group had a firing factor 5 at short, 4 at medium, 3 at Long range. Ignore any die over the firing factor. Total the scores of those equal or less than firing factor.

This does not address the relative bloody nature of Don's rules. Where in some of his rules, he deducted 0 in cc, 1 for short 2 for medium and 3 for long from the dice I am taking an extra -1 so -1 for cc, -2 for short, -3 for medium and -4 for long. I crunched the numbers and it gives a pretty good spread for where I think the casualty rate should be.

Then change it to:

CC: 5
Short: 4
Medium: 3
Long: 2

It works out the same. e.g. Long range (-4) roll a 6= 2 hits, 5 = 1 hit. everything else =0. The firing factor system: 1=1 hit, 2= 2 hits. Everything else = 0.

"So the problem with your method is that if I roll a '1', for 1 figure, I won't hit anyway. Maybe the amount could be the cap…as it maximum amount of casualties caused? You have the right idea. I am looking to resolve this as simply as I can."

OK, two options:

1. just go with it, odd fractions are going to miss automatically in some cases, but an excess of e.g. 4 is still going to have a chance.

2. Turn the arithmetic around. Subtract the difference between the fraction and five from the dice score. e.g. if you have a surplus of 3, then the difference is 5-3 = 2. Throw your dice and subtract an extra 2 on top of your range mods, so at short range you'll still get 1-2 hits on a 5 or 6 respectively. One lonely rifleman is still only going to get a hit in CC on a 6 though.

Ah, that is what Happy Little Trees has proposed. I think.

It works out the same. e.g. Long range (-4) roll a 6= 2 hits, 5 = 1 hit. everything else =0. The firing factor system: 1=1 hit, 2= 2 hits. Everything else = 0.

I should have caught that. It's all in presentation. I think I am losing my mind!

BTW, I think I might like your method better than mine just because it removes all arithmetic from combat in terms of actual resolution.

1. just go with it, odd fractions are going to miss automatically in some cases, but an excess of e.g. 4 is still going to have a chance.

The rules are up on my blog. For now I am going with rounded fraction just because it is easy. After some play-testing, I'll see how it feels. link