HE

[Sean Clark]

Is the current 'think ' 2 squares for HE rather than 4?

Also, if 1 square hit is visible amd has no smoke...can the 2nd square be smoke filled?

[martin goddard]

This is  one of those  being  reviewed at the moment Sean.

My present stance/idea is that HE cannot go into smoke by either deviation or intention. This would either mean the deviation is ignored or the HE is lost. I am open to ideas.

Only 1 of the HE squares must have enemy in it.
This does allow players to put HE on enemy bases in the hope that it will deviate on to a much better but hidden target. This is no great risk (1 in 6) and therefore will not get a special prohibition.

HE must always be side by side squares.
HE now hits with 4D6 instead of 3D6.

I think players use HE 5 out of 6 games.
It is the most popular asset at the moment.

Probability of a base being killed if in the woods when hit by HE.
4D6, Probability of a 6 = .7.
Probability of a base then dying after having been hit= .7 x .16= .102 = 1/10th

If the base is in the open with no cover or taking cover. .7 x .5= .35 = 1/3rd

In woods and buildings you might lose a base. In the open you probably will lose a  base.


martin

[Moggy]

I feel that if enemy were present in the square before the smoke landed then it should be allowed to put he down onto that square. Just because you cant see the squares current state of occupancy should stop a potential target being a potential target. An objective doesnt cease to be an objective just because it has smoke on it. HE is a very limited resource.

Derek

[Colonel Kilgore]

I feel that it would be strange to prohibit HE deviating into smoke.

Simon

[martin goddard]

It obviously needs  further work

I will do that

martin

[Colonel Kilgore]

We could look at this the other way around: the explosive force of the HE dissipates any pre-existing smoke?

So we don't have HE and smoke co-existing, it's just that it's the smoke that goes, instead of the HE?

Simon

[John Watson]

Or does the battle smoke from the HE add to the existing smoke to make it last longer?
John

[Colonel Kilgore]

Or does the battle smoke from the HE add to the existing smoke to make it last longer?
John

Now you're making it more compliicated again, John 

Simon

[Moggy]

If you watched some film of explosions it immediately becomes obvious that it isn't just a flash. Clouds of debris and dust fill the air. A case could almost be made for the effects of smoke could be applied to any square hit by HE.

I wouldn't include light mortars here as these generate a much smaller bang. I would include Med Mortars if more than 1 shot applied to the same target.

This could have an effect of simplifying the smoke rules as well as they wouldn't be needed.

Another thing to consider is the timeframe. What time does a turn represent?  I would suggest that a medium explosion would fill the air with gunk that would persist for up to a couple of minutes if not more but could disapate in a brisk wind quicker.  Also what does the actual smoke round do and what is made from. I am no expert here but weren't they various forms of phosphorus? Even the venerable 2" British Mortar was made to fire WP rounds for smoke effect. Against unprotected infantry this can be devastating.

Derek

[Smiley Miley 66]

One of my concerns with Smoke stopping HE. The Gamey person then has the opportunity to pop a couple of smoke bombs on some of their Squares, knowing that the opponent in their Asset turn Cannot put HE on those possible Squares ?
Miles

[Colonel Kilgore]

I'd agree, Miles...

Simon

[martin goddard]

PBI has the  troop son the table so will need to compensate for that.
Understandably players want to hit the troops in the smoke but they are proceeding on the basis that they know they are there. In reality they do not know they are there.
If such logic is used then any HE should roll a random dice to see where it is targeted. Maybe on that empty wood over there?  Maybe on a square which the enemy were in last turn?

Roll 2D6 for each building or wood square visible. Highest score must be fired at? There might be some enemy there.

Imagine the howls from players.

martin

[Stewart 46A]

But didn't commanders but smoke down to hide their troops when advancing from enemy fire?

Sobutting smoke down on or in front of own men is fair but it may disperse at the end of your Turn.

Stewart

[Colonel Kilgore]

And on that basis, one should be able to lay smoke wherever one wants to (subject to deviation of course)?

I think that works for me!

Simon

[Sean Clark]

Yes agreed. Smoke is there to confuse and obscure your troops. Fair points.

I think Miles' point about players dropping smoke on their own troops to protect them from HE proves the argument. That's what the smoke was for. I get it now.