Mortar crews - combat effective troops?

[undercovergeek]

Hi all,

im playing a PBEM with a British Para company and man do you get a lot of mortars. My question is, is it right historically and/or ethically to use these teams as vanilla combat guys once the mortars out of ammo?

Are they as effective as a standard squad member or do they have a penalty imposed?

[womble]

There's no "not a rifleman" penalty. Any handicap will be down to their personal weapons and ammo loadout once their crew-served weapon is empty. Otherwise they'll be as good as any other team with those experience, motivation, fitness and leadership values. In some situations, some mortar crews might even function better than a straight rifle team: if they've got SMGs and carbines instead of rifles and they're fighting at close quarters, for example.

[Baneman]

Hmm, CM1 didn't let you use them at all once they were out of ammo, but penalised you points-wise if they got killed.

CM2 doesn't seem to count "Guns" and "Mortars" as extra, points-wise. Perhaps it should ?

It's already gamey enough when you take those empty ammo-bearers and have them buddy-aid a nice weapon and run off like an LMG-team

[Broadsword56]

It's not the least bit gamey to use 60mm mortar crews as regular infantry when they've shot off their mortar ammo. It happened all the time IRL. In the US Army, for example, they were part of the 4th (Weapons) platoon and as trained as any other soldier in the front-line rifle company. When casualties depleted the ranks of the first three platoons, the mortar crews and ammo bearers would be the first place the company would grab warm bodies to throw into the line. They're going to suffer if they don't have M-1s, but send them somewhere to pick some up and they'll get the infantryman's job done. Plus they usually carry binoculars too.

[black_prince]

There's no reason for mortar crews not to be used as riflemen if you feel it is expedient. After all, they're basically infantrymen who have been given some additional specialist weapons training. As Broadswoard states above, IRL extra riflemen would often be scrounged from wherever they could be found, including the weapons platoon.

[John Kettler]

Baneman,

Weapon crews and AFV crews were double the points of infantry in CMx1, so it was very much in your interest, especially in a ROW tournament, to evacuate them if at all possible, so as to avoid capture. I once won a battle this way.

(in the NABLA system, outperformed others who played the same side for that scenario http://mail.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=95400&page=16),

and I had the most remarkable transport to do so you've ever seen--a King Tiger with no main gun or coax MG!

Overall, I agree with the arguments put forward and the sentiments expressed, but we do need a read from BFC on the issue. I recall that putting the weapon crews into regular infantry combat was an iffy proposition because of their value, but sometimes, you had no choice. Don't recall whether such crews were credited with more than pistols, even though there are plenty of pictures showing weapon crews on guns and such with slung rifles and carbines.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Baneman]

I'm happy to defer to those better read than me on the subject, I always imagined that their specialist training would make them an expensive waste to use as straight line infantry.

I tend to squirrel them away on Hide once they're out of ammo ( ideally on a VL, admittedly ), with the exception of the aforementioned Ammo-bearer-LMG-team

[undercovergeek]

I'm happy to defer to those better read than me on the subject, I always imagined that their specialist training would make them an expensive waste to use as straight line infantry.

I tend to squirrel them away on Hide once they're out of ammo ( ideally on a VL, admittedly ), with the exception of the aforementioned Ammo-bearer-LMG-team

on the subject of VLs, to save me starting a new thread, is there anyway in game to recognise that youve captured a VL? ive never, ever valued the 'but CM1 did it this way' arguement, or used it, but IIRC the VL changed to your flag above it

[womble]

...is there anyway in game to recognise that youve captured a VL?

Nope, short of being certain you've looked in every building, under every stone and behind every bush. There's no systematic notification.

[undercovergeek]

Nope, short of being certain you've looked in every building, under every stone and behind every bush. There's no systematic notification.

arse - thanks anyway

[sburke]

arse - thanks anyway

LOL here let me put my cig out in your drink before I thank you for buying this round.

Actually the answer isn't 100%. For touch objectives you do get notification. For straight VL's you don't. If you did it would essentially give you info you would otherwise not have - that an unseen enemy unit is nearby. In the first SoTH hill scenario you have some objectives (and large ones at that) that are labelled "secure xxxxx". The point being you are going to have to sweep the objective to make sure it is clear. A significant portion is wheatfield - and at night. It is pretty hairy. That is essentially true of most VLs. You really do want to sweep the area to make sure there are no hold outs especially in HTH play.

[A Canadian Cat]

You really do want to sweep the area to make sure there are no hold outs especially in HTH play.

And if you captured it with any kind of time left sweep it again. And if you find you have some more spare time later - sweep it again

[Sgt Schultz]

The only difference other than basic personal weapons load, is that the actual mortar teams have to lug around an empty mortar everywhere they go.

They work just fine in all types of combat, but are not the most mobile, agile or robust of the infantry choices.

They will plug a gap, but I wouldn't use them on a charge up a hill, unless they have abandoned their mortar.

[JonS]

I always imagined that their specialist training would make them an expensive waste to use as straight line infantry.

In that you would be quite correct. But sometimes needs must when the devil wills.

I tend to squirrel them away on Hide once they're out of ammo ( ideally on a VL, admittedly ), with the exception of the aforementioned Ammo-bearer-LMG-team

Yep, that's all quite reasonable, and I tend to do the same. Usually, I only use the mortars and ammo bearers as riflemen when my plan has turned to poos, my inspired leadership has wrecked my infantry formations, and those mortar sections consistute my only remaining effective "reserve".

Edit: and I echo Sgt Schultz' points about mortar crews in the game.

[Childress]

Weapon crews and AFV crews were double the points of infantry in CMx1, so it was very much in your interest, especially in a ROW tournament, to evacuate them if at all possible, so as to avoid capture. I once won a battle this way.

As were jeeps & trucks (to discourage gamey maneuvers). The pressing question is: are these penalties operative in CM2? There appear to be some 'eminences grises' with an interest in maintaining the opacity of the final results screen. I suspect some Islamist splinter group. Or maybe the Bilderbergers.

[JonS]

The pressing question is: are these penalties operative in CM2?

They can be. It's up to the scen designer.

[Michael Emrys]

They can be. It's up to the scen designer.

What about QBs though?

Michael

[JonS]

Dunno. Don't care. QBs are fantasy anyway, so they may as well have fantasy scoring too.

[Vanir Ausf B]

By that logic we could do away with scoring in QBs altogether and let players argue about who won. Actually, that would be far more "realistic". Scoring is fantasy no matter if it's for QBs, scenarios or campaigns.

[JonS]

By that logic we could do away with scoring in QBs altogether and let players argue about who won.

Sounds fine to me

I don't play QBs, so I'm totally the wrong person to ask about QB scoring

[Vanir Ausf B]

They can be. It's up to the scen designer.

I understand it can be done, but is there any scenario you can think of in which all crew-served weapons and vehicles are assigned extra value?

[JonS]

Yeah; all of mine.

It's a fairly subtle effect though. Generally I allocate a certain percentage of the total points pool to Unit Objectives. Then I subdivide that pool amongst various formations, present, depending on how big the scenario is. So, "A Company" might be one unit obj, "B Company" another. Then I total up the number of units in each unit obj, and in the whole scenario. I divide the total points pool by the total number of units, which provides an avg-pts-per-unit. Then I multiply that number by the number of units in each separate fmn. Finally, I arbitrarily adjust up or down based on how important I think each element is in /this/ particular scen. Generally that means that HQ elements, armoured elements, and support weapon elements get elevated worth, while regular infantry gets depressed.

I also usually round to the nearest 5 or 10 points, just for neatness

The net result is that HQ elements, for example, are worth more points per unit AND because those units are on average much smaller than regular infantry units each man in an HQ element is worth more than a regular rifleman. The same applies to support weapons elements and tanks, for the same reasons.

###########

Concrete example time:

Assume the points pool for Unit Objs is 600pts.

Assume that the enemy force is made up of:

U1 = Bn HQ (HQ, XO, 2 x Jeep = 4 units)

U2 = A Company HQ (HQ, XO, 2 x Jeep = 4 units)

U3 = 1 Platoon (HQ, 3 x Rifle squads = 4 units)

U4 = 2 Platoon (HQ, 3 x Rifle squads = 4 units)

U5 = 3 Platoon (HQ, 3 x Rifle squads = 4 units)

U6 = 4 (Wpns) Pn (HQ, 3 x mortar squads, 2 x MMG squads, 2 x jeeps = 8 units)

U7 = Tank Platoon (HQ + 3 tanks = 4 units)

In total that's 32 units, so on average each unit is worth 600/32 = 18.75pts.

U1 = Bn HQ : 4 x 18.75 = 75pts

U2 = A Company HQ : 4 x 18.75 = 75pts

U3 = 1 Platoon : 4 x 18.75 = 75pts

U4 = 2 Platoon : 4 x 18.75 = 75pts

U5 = 3 Platoon : 4 x 18.75 = 75pts

U6 = 4 (Wpns) Pn : 8 x 18.75 = 150pts

U7 = Tank Platoon : 4 x 18.75 = 75pts

now I want to up the value of the weapons, tanks, and HQ elements:

U1 = Bn HQ = 100pts

U2 = A Company HQ = 85pts

U6 = 4 (Wpns) Pn = 180pts

U7 = Tank Platoon = 100pts

So that's an additional 25 + 10 + 30 + 25 = 90 points allocated to these units, and which has to come off the infantry, so the final breakdown is:

U1 = Bn HQ = 100pts

U2 = A Company HQ = 85pts

U3 = 1 Platoon = 45pts

U4 = 2 Platoon = 45pts

U5 = 3 Platoon = 45pts

U6 = 4 (Wpns) Pn = 180pts

U7 = Tank Platoon = 100pts

And thus each tank is worth 25pts, while each man in a rifle platoon is worth about 1 point. Each man in the weapons platoon is worth about 3 points, while each man in Bn HQ is worth about 10pts.

[Doug Williams]

Dunno. Don't care. QBs are fantasy anyway, so they may as well have fantasy scoring too.

This gave me a chuckle. The whole game is fantasy, Jon. We are all highly unlikely to die while playing this game, unless it is from having a heart attack because we sit on our arses too much.