I'm not implying it would be a good idea to add additional JLs, merely trying to figure how Rich got the Force Rating so badly wrong (if indeed it is wrong and I haven't made a mistake myself).Archdukek wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:16 amContrarius,
I wouldn't try to infer anything about additional JLs from the Difference in calculated Force Ratings. It might be that he considered it initially but arithmetic has never been Rich's strongest suit or it may be a typo.
6D6 is way too powerful for a BAR type weapon team, it is not an LMG and should be at a disadvantage when operating against a squad with one.
Agreed 6D6 does seem too powerful for a BAR, compared say with a Bren. But are we comparing like for like? It is a BAR (@3D6) + 3 team members (@1D6) giving 6D6 in total for the four man team (which, after all was the team's historical composition, not 3 men as stated in the lists). Or for consistency with the Belgian weapon, 4D6 for a two-man crew (no. 1 and no. 2), plus 2D6 for the no.3 and no.4 carbine-armed ammo-bearers, which still comes out at 6D6.
Do bear in mind that the standard SMG gives you 4D6 at close quarters, and the BAR fires effectively to 18" not 24" like an LMG. Also the issue of how many of those ammo-bearers are actually firing their weapons somewhat disappears when you consider that in WWII only 15-20% of infantry were willing to fire their rifles in combat (Grossman, On Killing, 1995).
At an absolute minimum the four man team must do 4D6 of damage or there is little point in having it over 4 riflemen (only the advantage of rerolling 1s). So, the options are really 6D6 total or 5D6 total for the whole four-man Team, sliced whichever way you prefer into operators and additional riflemen.