I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

fabambina
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:00 pm

I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by fabambina »

So by now I assume it's pretty obvious that this is dead. But, I am still very interested in this project.

Does anyone have any of the notes or info from this test project? Does anyone know who does and can ask about them? If we could just get what they had, we can work with it. Maybe others can finish it.

Besides weapon stats and such, what does this community feel are the challenges when trying to adapt the IABSM rules to the cold war gone hot? If we can't get any data from the old developers, can we start from scratch and redo it?

User avatar
Sadurian
Posts: 182
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 10:03 am

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by Sadurian »

Off the top of my head you are looking at ATGMs and improved shaped-charge ammunition, true gun stabilisation and auto-loaders.

Depending on your period you might also be looking at ERA, spaced and compound armour which would complicate the armour charts and possibly require a greatly increased range of penetration/armour (not a huge task using IABSM rules).

Infantry have better communications and obviously more unit firepower. Depending on the period they might also be tougher to reflect body armour.

Artillery support will be faster and more reliable. Air support will need to include helicopters and (possibly - depending on the period) RPAS ('drones'). An unopposed air strike or dedicated artillery barrage has the potential to wipe the battlefield clear of functioning troops - not with nukes but with the likes of FAEs and large cluster munitions.

Armour will be very vulnerable to 'smart' weapons but could conversely have active protection systems which degrade incoming missiles and rounds.

Really the post-WW2 period needs dividing into manageable chunks to avoid a long and rambling ruleset trying to do everything at once. A set covering up to about 1970 would be the first generation, 1970 to 1990 [Yom Kippur to end of Cold War] would be the next, and post-1990 the final one (so far). Obviously there would still be a lot of technology that overlaps but for the most part you could ignore it.

Achtung Minen!
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:53 pm

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by Achtung Minen! »

I'm basically finished with my 1978 German Civil War supplement, but I hope to release it in the Christmas Special. I am happy to talk about it till then, however. One thing I did was I tried to make everything backwards compatible with WW2 IABSM, since there were still a lot of WW2 era vehicles and weapons floating around, even in 1978.

kula66
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:51 pm
Location: ENGLAND

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by kula66 »

I'd be interested to hear details of the ATGM mechanics you've used.

Achtung Minen!
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:53 pm

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by Achtung Minen! »

I kept it pretty simple, really. No strike dice reduction for range, no firing over water features, minimum ranges (a lot of the Cold War guided missiles had around 500m minimum range). All HEAT weapons have an asterisk on their strike dice number which indicates they get a +1 on each strike die to penetrate armour (i.e. front on 4+, sides on 3+, rear on 2+). Of course, reactive armour also protects on a +1 (i.e. 4+) per die vs HEAT, which leaves HEAT at a disadvantage (since a HEAT weapon generally rolls fewer dice in comparison to a normal AP round).

Do you think it needs more detail than that? There's still plenty of time for me to playtest the supplement some more before the XMas special.

kula66
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:51 pm
Location: ENGLAND

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by kula66 »

The fundamental difference that I (personally) would like to see modelled is the longer flight time allowing some sort of reaction from the target ... This means lower ROF for missile units. From all the videos coming out of Syria, flight times can be 20-30 seconds, and that's for some very modern high speed 3rd gen missiles at very long range.

The first gen ATGMs had to be flown to the target and I would imagine that's pretty difficult when the enemy has time to fire back ... so I wonder if there is some neat mechanic that could be used to model this? Perhaps allow variable levels of target reaction depending on the range etc. Or you could allow a variable number of cards to be drawn between launch and impact or allow a target reaction card ... who knows, not something I've thought about and I'm not sure how other modern rule sets model this.

PS> I used to play ASL so the technical detail appeals ... YMMV :)

User avatar
TroubleAtTheMill
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:50 pm
Location: Peterborough, UK
Contact:

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by TroubleAtTheMill »

Given the slight level of abstraction IABSM works at, you could easily implement this by not rolling to hit when the missile is launched but when it reaches the target (stick a suitable card in the deck, perhaps?). Which means if (and this being IABSM that's an IF) the target gets to activate in the interim, it can choose to take actions that reduce the to hit roll....
Mike Whitaker
Blog: http://troubleatthemill.blogspot.com/
Podcast: The Miller's Tale (see blog)
Club: http://www.peterborough-wargames-club.org.uk/

Achtung Minen!
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:53 pm

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by Achtung Minen! »

Well, a 20 second delay would indicate a target around 3 kilometers (i.e. the maximum distance for most Cold War guided missiles). Given the ground scale of IABSM, most tables offer a maximum distance of about 500 meters. A further problem is many guided missiles couldn't fire under 500 meters.

If you wanted to model something that could fire on a standard IABSM game table (like the AT-4 Spigot, which would have a minimum range of 12"), then it would cover the length of the table in under 3 seconds. I would say if this needs any special rule, then the missile hits its target after X number of cards have been turned subsequent to the ATGM team's card, where X = every 12" (or part thereof) to the target. This represents about a half a second per card. So if the target is 20 inches away, the enemy can fire at the ATGM team and void the missile if they get a platoon card (and successfully hit the ATGM team... not an easy task) in the next two subsequent card turns.

Now if you are playing IABSM in a different scale, this changes things. I could include a table to cover this, if you think it would be useful?

kula66
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:51 pm
Location: ENGLAND

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by kula66 »

Very valid point on ATGM ranges, scales and size of the table ... I guess ranges with more modern FCS and weapons are going to bean issue.

Archdukek
Posts: 4817
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: I Ain't been Nuked, Mum!

Post by Archdukek »

I know nothing about the period so forgive me if these suggestions are daft, but reading these posts two thoughts occurred to me. Assuming you are sticking to the current IABSM groundscale or thereabouts :

1) Could you treat ATGMs as a form of pre-game barrage, a gauntlet of fire which armoured assets have to run before they appear on the table. So your planned armoured support might literally go up in smoke.
2) Could you designate areas of the table which are covered by the enemy's off table ATGM assets where there is a risk of attack if the appropriate card is drawn. A bit like the use of off table AT guns in some of the CoC Pint Sized Campaigns.

John

Post Reply