| UshCha | 07 Mar 2022 3:04 a.m. PST |
It has taken us years to unlearn the rubbish that Featherstbne clones taught us about real warfare. One of the things we have only just started to get to grips with is AGL's (Automatuic Grenade lanuncher)and proably Artillery generally. You can have all the right rules but still not have the strategic grasp of where and when to committ them. As such we have been laggardly on really getting to grips with AGL's. In the small area fire regieme what is a reasonable danger close didtance for an AGL. Typically for bigger artillery somewhere around 200m is the closest you would risk if in the open. Would an AGL shooting over open sights from say 1000m be signifificantly less. (that is line of shot zone, the left and right would be much less)? |
79thPA  | 07 Mar 2022 7:20 a.m. PST |
Featherstone was not trying to recreate "real warfare" -- he knew that he was playing a game with toy soldiers. |
| gunnerphil | 07 Mar 2022 8:31 a.m. PST |
Since Featherstone, and others of his generation fought in WW2 I suspect then knew the effects of real war. |
| microgeorge | 07 Mar 2022 3:18 p.m. PST |
"It has taken us years to unlearn the rubbish that Featherstbne clones taught us about real warfare". Lost me on the first sentence. |
| UshCha | 08 Mar 2022 2:54 a.m. PST |
microgeorge, 79th PA got it I guess, pure fantasy dressed up as history. Even age 14 I realised any connection with the real world was entirely accidental and proably an oversight on his part. While he popularised Toy soldiers he did nothing for the amature student of history. The only reedieming issue was some bits on terrain, Lional Tarr's Stalingrad: our current buildings were inpired by his work. |
| deephorse | 08 Mar 2022 9:18 a.m. PST |
Featherstone's poorly written AGL rules have been the bane of my wargaming life. Thanks for highlighting his failure in this regard. |
| Wolfhag | 08 Mar 2022 1:30 p.m. PST |
UshCha,
Here is a link that the US Army discusses it. PDF link Distances for certain weapons: PDF link There are many variables for Danger Close, mainly combat and peace time. I think in combat it's best to walk it in closer and closer in 25-50 yard corrections. The distance depends on how desperate you are and what cover the friendlies can take. With overhead cover you could call in a light mortar barrage on top of your position. The AGL's are normally 30-40mm grenades so you could drop them pretty close to friendly troops. I think you are being a little harsh on Featherstone, he was state of the art back then. Things change. I think we should all judge a game based on the designers intent, goals of the game and if they are achieved or not. Did Featherstone claim to have developed games that teach about real warfare or a playable and abstracted set of rules to have fun playing with your toys and use your imagination? I'm not that familiar with him. You can't criticize a Porsche 911 because it lacks off road capability. Wolfhag |
| UshCha | 09 Mar 2022 2:28 p.m. PST |
Wolfhag, to me If I could see the faults at 14, it was pretty poor, so I have few words of praise. |
 Legion 4 | 11 Mar 2022 6:59 p.m. PST |
|
| andresf | 30 Mar 2022 6:24 p.m. PST |
Genuinely curious: can you elaborate on what you consider the "rubbish" lessons that Featherstone favored? I want to see the argument to form my own opinion. (I'm guessing it cannot simply be about AGLs or danger close distances, since none of that is criticam for any set of wargame rules, realistic or otherwise). |
| UshCha | 31 Mar 2022 11:35 a.m. PST |
Featherstone clones assumed single speeds for tanks and infantry, tanks being about twice that of infantry. Clearly on a road a tank is capable of far faster speeds and on very good going off road.
There were no credible command and control restrictions within the system.
Such things as buttoned up and unbuttoned were not addressed. |
ponders nirvana.