"Rules with smart bombs and other funnies" Topic

I'm getting into moderns gaming, but I don't know much about any of the rules sets. Do any systems take smart bombs, UAVs and other high tech stuff into account?

I'm building a hack for Hero System to include all this stuff for war gaming, but it might be easier to just buy a rule set that already has all this stuff included.

Doesn't Force on Force have a bunch of this stuff?

The main problem I think, is that it tends not to make for very interesting gaming:

Either the enemy has modern AA units and blows the drones out of the sky
OR
The enemy does not have modern AA and is blown to pieces by the drones.

As far as balancing out, I imagine they'd be a good fit for a random mechanic:

1D6
1-2: Not available or not authorized due to political ROE concerns

3: Drone fired at the wrong targets off-table. Next game, the insurgents get 1D6 additional fighters due to angry locals.

4-6: Drone available, authorized and on-target. Resolve as a really big missile in your rules of choice.

What I'd love to see in general actually is an asymmetrical system where the regulars can have all the support in the world but the more they use, the higher their victory threshold becomes.
The insurgents have almost nothing but also have no limitations on what they can do with what they do get.

FoF permits drones but really as an eye in the sky preventing hidden movement, rather than aggressive/offensive action.

If you are looking at Predators with Hellfire then you might be better looking at something in 1:300

FoF permits of those on your scenarios, but that will not give «balanced» or whatever that means scenarios.

The UAVs could be used for surveillance but also to attack, using Hellfires or other systems – but don't expect a fun scenario with that…..

Faustnik

I don't know about losing interest. Part of this comes from wanting modern combat to feel like it is, part from the fact that I used to play role playing games where all kinds of crazy stuff might happen in a game.

I made a version of the Copperhead M712 projectile for Hero System, and I can say at least creating (rather crudely due to my limited knowledge of the rules) the weapon was fun and thinking of the possibilities it might offer for gaming. Creating scenarios around these weapons systems can be part of the fun. I was thinking in terms of skirmish missions when writing my stuff out for a Hero hack to play special forces actions and asymmetrical warfare games out.

Having a team of Delta operators infiltrating behind enemy lines and using a laser designator to paint a high-value target while insurgents are closing in on the team could be a tense and fun experience. I even accounted for the in-flight time of the weapon so it has a proper delayed contact before the big kaboom. Maybe setting up and playing the scenario ends up being a disaster, but at least I'd have fun planning for it :)

Having crazy stuff happen in games is what Force on Force does well, IMO. The Fog of War mechanic works well--they don't happen too often, but enough so that I makes the events random and exciting!

I'm working on a set of modern platoon-level rules including UAVs, primarily RQ-11, RQ-5, and ScanEagle-type light tactical UAVs. Standoff attacks from heavier UAVs and helicopters are also included; guided artillery and manned fixed-wing CAS have not yet been done. More a factor of me finding time to write the rules, than anything else.

Might I suggest building things like this into the pre-battle things that happen?

Especially if you are looking at a pseudo-RPG type of game where you may have a build-up before the encounter begins?

The major thing PGMs do is reduce the likelihood of a miss, or decrease the area of effect.

For example, a standard 155mm M107 shell has a CEP of ~267m. The XM1156 Precision Guidance Kit (aka Course Correcting Fuse) tightens that to 50m, and the M982 Excalibur tightens that up even more, to 6m.

Stargrunt by GZG and its derivatives cover opposing hi tech forces reasonably well with various opposed die rolls varied by relative tech level and troop quality.

Thanks for the information and suggestions, everybody.

Most weapons of this type that are likely to survive on the actual battlefield will have to have a standoff range of at least 5km by now. That means they will never appear on most normal wargames tables so add very little. Most of them are used at the Forward Edge of Battle where AA is less prevelant or well behind the battlefield. In such cases as has been said, they don't make much interesting gameing. Again surevelance is positioned so far to the rear, its generally not going to appear on table. very small drones for survelance are so small and so high up that they would not really be worth depicting on the table, only the effect. Even than a well trained unit moving tacticaly in dence terrain my not be spotted quickly iu.e. in normal game timeframes.

Really you have toi decide whether you are playing an actual wargame or a fantasy novel.

Note not even our games do we depict ground surveylance radars which have been around for years, on table. When you have founmd the role for them, then is the time to address drones.

The main Sabresquadron rules for release later this year will include these items. We will allow stand-off weapons to be fired from units operating away from the wargames table.

sabresquadron.com/index.html

It is easy enough to incorporate super weapons, but you need to design scenarios where much of the game is actually finding a suitable target for them.

You can't really drop a 2000 pounder on every single compound in Afghanistan…

You can't really drop a 2000 pounder on every single compound in Afghanistan…

Not that the US didn't try…

But usually it was 500lb or 1000lb bombs, the 2000lbers were for when the US wanted to send a message. At least according to a friend of mine who was an Aviation Ordnanceman on a carrier.

GPS-guided artillery and mortar shells mean that you can only fire one round instead of a battery 3.