Medical Orderly as Spotter

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4135
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by Seret »

Well, some wargamers seem to live by "If it isn't specifically forbidden in the rules, then it must be allowed". Sam Mustafa wrote a good piece in WSS77 about how frustrating this is for rules designers, a sentiment Rich seems to agree with. Where I disagree with Rich is that he suggests this is a new trend, while I think it was always thus.

Suffice to say that if you're approaching TFL rules from that angle you're probably barking up the wrong tree, possibly in the wrong forest, on the wrong continent. Their motto is "Play the period, not the rules", after all.

mgluteus
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:02 pm
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by mgluteus »

Seret it is NOT new!@ Some 30 years ago (and I remember it like it was yesterday), in a game of The Sword and The Flame, my opponent insisted that he could charge me while prone because the rules didn't say he couldn't!

Dick Bryant

Viso
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2015 2:33 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by Viso »

Gents, thank you for the discussion, much of which has been helpful to our gaming group. Over the past 6 months, we've invested ourselves heavily in the CoC rules set and there has been a lot of learning. But CoC seems to have captured our attention as the preferred WWII skirmish game.

Rather than develop our own house rules in isolation, our group has adopted the stance of referring to this board when we've had questions (when the rules required some interpretation or clarification). Often, we'll find an old post or two that will provide helpful guidance. Sometimes, we'll feel the need to post the question.

No doubt, this has produced what can seem like silly questions. Rest assured, there will probably be more.

But we continue to appreciate both the passion and the patience demonstrated by those who respond. So thank you again for helping us out.

BLabrum^
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 4:06 am

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by BLabrum^ »

I fear this question will keep coming back in the same or different forms - e.g. a tank should not be able to spot for the infantry's light mortars; clearly, it can rank amongst friendly units but spotting for the PBI's light mortars would seem not in their job description - as much not or even more so than the sniper. What about that support infantry gun crew, they have the skill set but if the spotting unit is restricted to the core platoon (as has been suggested in this thread) they do not qualify (even another support light mortar team would not qualify. What about a support infantry section? If there are to be limitations on the friendly unit definition for spotting for light mortars and the like then there should be more in the way of official guidelines. As many units are in question, it is not just a loophole, more like a full barrage with or without spotting.

batesmotel34
Posts: 426
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by batesmotel34 »

The rule as written now is simple.If any friendly unit can see the arget, the mortars fire at it as at close range rather than effective. While it may be frustrating in the heat of a game, is it really worth trying to complicate the rules to slightly reduce the already limited effectiveness of light mortars? I suspect not.

As the person who complained about a sniper being able to spot that prompted the prior topic about snipers spotting, in hindsight I suspect it's not really worth complicating the rules for. By all means, when playing a friendly game feel free to agree with your opponent if there are specific units you think should not be allowed to serve as spotters.

Chris

p.s. The Swrod and the Flame are definitely not the type of rules that encourage you to play the period rather than the rules, unlike TFL's. They are fun to play but realism is not their strong point.

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by john de terre neuve »

Hi Chris,

I have been thinking about this whole issue for a couple days now. As I have had said frequently in my posts, I really know very little about weapons and how they are used. I also have never been in a military force or even touched any guns . I know many of you know a great deal about different weapons and have served in the military. I really value your knowledge base and experience.

At the same time I want to play a game, and most games need fairly clear guidelines to play. Otherwise they are not really much fun. In the last year I had to stop playing CoC with a guy I liked because he just would not even abide by rules that were clearly laid out in the rulebook. The explanation was always that is not historically correct. But historically correct is really a personal opinion not a certainty. I never could be right in these situations and it seemed to me that historically correct always favoured my opponent (my personal opinion).

I appreciate the tension between having a ruleset that accurately depicts warfare at a very granular level and at the same time is simple to play. I think CoC does a superb job of this. It, I believe, rewards the correct tactics.

At the same time how combat, firing, movement etc are resolved are not tactics but are game mechanisms. Of course one wants the mechanisms to be accurate but at the same time one wants them to be simple and easily remembered. They want to reflect the period, i.e. the TFL mantra of playing the period not the rules.

Of course every situation can not be covered in the rulebook and common sense has to prevail. At the same time though common situations should be dealt with in a uniform way. I believe a tank blowing up, what a light mortar team can see etc etc are pretty common situations and really should not be subject to individual player interpretation. I agree they may not accurately depict how things actually work or worked but they are only mechanisms. The game is about tactics and having a good day out.

Unfortunately, I still unsure about what the rulebook says in respect to the specific rule to which you refer but I do agree it simplifies things if all friendlies can act as spotters.

It would be nice if the debates we all have would be around what the rulebook actually says rather then what the rulebook should say!

John
Last edited by john de terre neuve on Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Derek H
Posts: 1253
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:50 pm
Location: Musselburgh, near Edinburgh, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by Derek H »

john de terre neuve wrote:Hi Chris,
It would be nice if the debates we all have would be around what the rulebook actually says rather then what the rulebook should say!

John
Two different debates, both worth having.
All the Lard News in one place - Lard Central http://www.netvibes.com/lardcentral
Pimping my blog - Dereks Wee Toys http://dereksweetoys.com/

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Medical Orderly as Spotter

Post by john de terre neuve »

Derek said:
Two different debates, both worth having.
Yes I agree. I believe, however, that I will preface all further questions I have with either rulebook interpretation or personal opinion!

It is interesting for me to look back at all the questions I have asked on the forum and to see what type of answer I have received. In respect to Dux Brit, almost all the answers can be categorized as the former but with CoC, I would bet the the latter is much more likely.

Harder to be an expert on what happened over a 1000 years ago, I suppose.

John

Post Reply