Re: [WW] Automatic Fire vs. Human Wave

[mock@springmail.com]

I think the suppressive fire rules were designed for more cautious tactics than a human wave attack - they're better as part of fire-and-movement than holding the line against a massive charge.  I haven't done any math, but it seems the odds of catching a bullet during a human wave attack are higher than the chances allowed for in the rulebook.

A thought:  for human wave attacks, make the save a reflex save against getting hit - if you fail, you take a bullet.  If you fail critically, you buy it.  (In truth, it's not good reflexes that keep you from getting hit in that situation - it's sheer luck - but I can't think of another way to reflect that).

If you're into dice rolling, make the nearest soldiers make Will saves not to take cover (and thus lose their next action) when their buddy gets hit.  




On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:33:30 +0200 Arne Reuter <reuter@tse-online.de> wrote:

HI!

Going through our DAK weaponry, I was wondering how to deal with a
"human wave" charge on the receiving end of the MG.

If in one combat round 50 soldiers were charging within the range of
the MG, they could do 120 feet. The Machine Gunner (1st level, no
Rapid Shot feat) could only attack (and probably kill) one target!

Withing five rounds 45 of them would have reached and overrun the MG
emplacement.

As we know from WW I, the machine guns in effect ended this as a
feasible tactic.

Any ideas how to resolve this?

Mit freundlichen Gruessen,

Arne Reuter

--
TSE GmbH Neue Medien, Hovestr.14, 48351 Everswinkel
Tel: +49 2582 66180            FAX: +49 2582 661833
WebDesign & WebMarketing   http://www.tse-online.de
SIMSL       http://www.schlemmen-im-muensterland.de
Muenster Spielt!      http://www.muenster-spielt.de



To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
	unsubscribe weirdwars
as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.