GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
7,854 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
22 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

MBT (second edition)» Forums » Variants

Subject: 4 CMBG Ideas rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Richard Morey
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
I’m trying to create units for use with the 4 CMBG.

Information obtained thus far from various web sources and Kenneth Macksey’s First Clash indicate 8 81mm mortars at the Mech Inf Bn level. While they have associated M113 transport, they are not vehicle mounted ala the US M125A2. I’m trying to figure out whether to make the 81mm mortars “Crew-Served Weapons” or treat them as “Towed Weapons” in a manner similar to the Soviet NSV HMG or SPG-9? (Incidentally, anyone know why the NSV HMG is a separate towed weapon while the similar sized US M2 HMG is treated as Crew-Served?) Either way I would use the Offensive Information from the mortar portions of the M125A2 card and either the Defensive Info from the Squads card or that from the NSV HMG.

Another question that arises is the issue of mortars at the Company level. Macksey makes a passing mention of 60mm mortars at the company, and some images associated with 4 CMBG on the web also reflect 60mm mortars. Does anyone know if 60mm mortars were part of the 4 CMBG Maneuver company TO&E, and if so how many? When I served as a Fire Support Officer for a US straight-leg infantry company during the time period covered by the game we had three 81mm mortars at the company level as well as the four 4.2s at BN. I would treat the 60mm company mortars as “Crew-Served Weapons.”

Here is the proposed 60mm mortar Offensive Information extrapolating from the M125A2 data: Max range is approximately 1,800m. So, at 100m/hex that yields a max rang of 18. The other ranges are derived by applying the same proportions as on the M125A2. “F” is one less than for the 81mm mortar (minimum of 1). I added an HE ammo limit of 8 since these are being ‘man-packed,’ though if there is an associated vehicle that can be skipped.

The point value is harder to derive. I came it from two directions:

1) The US Artillery Batteries card assigns a point value of 40 to a Light Unit (presumably 105mm). Divided by the six guns in the Battery this yields an individual point value of 6.7/tube. The 107mm mortar (M106A2) having similar values would have a point value of 6 or 7.

2) The difference in point value between an M113A2 and M106A2 should lie in their primary difference, the addition of the 107mm mortar to the M106A2. 53 (M106A2) – 47 (M113A2) = 6.

The two methods produce a point value for the 107mm mortar of 6. The 81mm and 60mm would be in the same ball park. I have chosen 6 points for the 81mm and 5 points for the smaller, and less effective 60mm.

Also, did the 4 CMBG Mech Cos have extra HMGs, or did they rely solely upon those mounted on the M113s?

For the Recon element Lynxs, I plan to use M113A2 with a reduced carrying capacity, similar to the Bradley CFV v. IFV, as the stats for the M113 and those of the M113 ½ do not appear to be significantly different. For other “Crew Served Weapons” I’d leave the HMG and LAW; Treat the Carl Gustav as an AT4, and the Blowpipe as Stinger A. I guess I’ll just have to wait for publication of FRG for the Leopard.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morey
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
It looks like I'll have to refigure the Blowpipe. It has a shorter range and different guidance system that Stinger.

I'm setting max range at 35 with the other ranges set in the same proportion as the Stinger A. GP factor remains the same as Stinger A an Grouse. There is no "CM" value as Blowpipe is operator guided via wire as per the earlier model ATGMs. Instead of a "CM" value, Blowpipe automatically misses if suppressed and suffers a -10 if "under fire." AS an aside, does anyone know what the number associate with the "MA" is for? I can't find it in the rules, but assume it is a GP modifier if the target is outside the firing unit's front (60 degree) arc. Blowpipe is MA not MT.

I've also created M113 1/2 Lynx, and M19 Mortar ("Towed Weapon") data cards.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Day
United States
Ellicott City
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zychik wrote:
Incidentally, anyone know why the NSV HMG is a separate towed weapon while the similar sized US M2 HMG is treated as Crew-Served?

It's not. If you're referring to the HMG listed on card Um-8B that isn't the US M2 (note that it doesn't list any AP related information as does the NSV or the M2 mounted on an M113, as one example). The HMG on the crew served data card are multiple sustained fire M240s.

Other thoughts:

1) Light artillery batteries are not 105mm, they're mediums.

2) The 2 CMBG mech infantry company fielded 3 60mm mortars.

3) No additional M2 machineguns.

4) The Leopard C1 is equivalent to the Leopard 1A3. That model is represented in FRG.

You may also decide to wait for the “official” expansion. That’s coming up for the series.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morey
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Thanks, Jim.

If 105s are Medium, what constitutes Light Artillery?

Would you treat the 60mm as "Crew Served" or would you assign them "Towed" counters?

As to the "Official" version for 4CMBG, any idea on potential release dates?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Surdu
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Curious why the Canadians were chosen as the next expansion over say France the Dutch or Belgians? Even the Swedish forces despite lack of presence in Germany but they have some really interesting armor. Canadian Brigade? Meh......may be a while before that P500 reaches goal. ;-)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Russo
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Aegis_777 wrote:
Curious why the Canadians were chosen as the next expansion over say France the Dutch or Belgians? Even the Swedish forces despite lack of presence in Germany but they have some really interesting armor. Canadian Brigade? Meh......may be a while before that P500 reaches goal. ;-)

From my perspective:
1) 4CMBG was most requested out of all the factions you mentioned. Search BGG and CSW, "4CMBG" pops up in the first few weeks of MBT being announced.

2) Most of 4CMBG equipment is already in the database.

3) 4CMBG was the reserve for the USA sector, so the storyline and Soviet Opfor fits the MBT module.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
True North Gamer
Canada
GTA
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think including the 4CMBG is a very good idea.

Canada may have a smaller military but their forces were always there when needed. Canadian soldiers fought in WW1, WW2, Korea, Gulf War, and now in the Afghan / Iraq region. I think it would be nice to see their units in a wargame.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Donnelly
Canada
Unspecified
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ardennes4412 wrote:


3) 4CMBG was the reserve for the USA sector, so the storyline and Soviet Opfor fits the MBT module.


Actually, it was the CENTAG reserve, and exercised contingencies to work with both US and German corps. The game expansion would therefore work well with both MBT and FRG.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Neukom
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mb
Aegis_777 wrote:
Curious why the Canadians were chosen as the next expansion over say France the Dutch or Belgians?


I am not the designer, and I am not in his head, but my guess is that the best answer to your query would be:

Kenneth Macksey's First Clash . . .

(https://www.amazon.com/First-Clash-World-War-Three/dp/085368...)

:-)




Mark
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joel Tamburo
United States
Justice
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
While happy to see the Canadians I still am waiting for IDF.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Surdu
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes of course, I understand why the Canadiens may have been relevant to the European theater but my question was more focused on interesting gameplay. For the game system, IMO, it would be more fun to add say the Swedes for all the interesting armor they fielded. I guess if more people wanted this addition in market polls is one thing. Again, just my personal preference so likely won't bother getting this one. If I really care to simulate Canadian armor I will just substitute British or German tanks, for example, since they dont have a lot of indigenously produce tech. Even the Cougar, I believe was based on a Swiss vehicle.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Surdu
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes!.....and the IDF would be great to include, "updated" for the 1980's! :-)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Neukom
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mb
The First Clash Effect


Dennis:

Have you ever read First Clash?

It has an “OMG I need to design scenarios from this book!” kind of effect on people.



Mark





1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.