What do you think?

Gun Transport: This vehicle may transport one squad and one gun. To limber the gun, the vehicle must be in the same hex as the gun and the squad (the squad may be in an antrenchment and may leave the entrenchment as part of the action). As one action, place both the gun and the squad entering the vehicle on the off-board transport marker and fatigue both the gun and the squad. To unlimber the gun, as one action, fatigue the gun and the squad leaving the vehicle and place both the gun and the squad in the same hex as the vehicle. If there is an empty entrenchment in the hex, the squad may enter the entrenchment as part of the entrenchment.

Gun Emplacements: Guns may be placed in entrenchments during setup. These guns may not leave the entrenchment during the game. Guns may still not enter empty entrenchments during the game. Guns in entrenchments may be operated by squads in other entrenchments in the same hex.

They look workable to me. Could allow them to set up in Pillboxes, Buildings and Bunkers in the same way.

Hefsgaard said:

That was my idea as well, and it would correspond to historical uses of guns. In some cases, even tanks were dug in or concealed inside buildings.

I have added to Gun Transport:

Both limbering and unlimbering provoke Opportunity Fire, either at the gun or at the squad, but not at the transport.

Looks like it will work.

I dont get why towing vehicles was introduced in the first place. These seems like nice rules. However, a question, an MG squad, should it be able to fire at both the AT gun AND the infanteri?

On a more practicle note, you got to design a prety specific situations for transporting AT guns would be used in the first place. Dont get me wrong, I love the rule, and I would love to see a scenario where towing AT guns with half-tracks (or trucks???) would be smart, but if you dont design for it in the firts place, the AT guns would most probable be stationary....

The thing I run into alot is the need to advance the guns as the battle moves either to attack or retreat. These infantry guns where not that hard to handle. They could be moved pretty quicly by a skilled team. Which brings up the point that gun teams where usually specially trained for that job and not just any old infantry had access to them. Also remember they usually had a dedicated vehicle (or 2 in the case of the british) to carry ammo and serve as a tractor. In a fixed position the gun would be dug in and the ammo supply dug in with it then the vehicle sent to the rear.

Cyscott1, in which scenarios do you want to move the AT guns? Cuz, the scenarios I have played with AT guns, moving the AT guns was out of the question. I'm just currius, cuz I want to see the situation where movement of AT guns would help.

These things come up in scenarios I design. Here is an example of one where you need to move guns, maybe more than once. www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/44645/the-battle-for-monte-cassino

Grand Stone said:

Either the gun or the squad, not both.

Grand Stone said:

Except if the AT guns come in as reinforcements... then you need to tow them or they will be next to useless.

Grand Stone said:

I am working on a scenario of Kampfgruppe Walther's attempt to cut Hell's Highway during Market Garden. The defenders get dug-in AT guns and AT guns as reinforcements and the attackers also bring their own towed 88 to the party.

The scenario should be in the playtesting section here on the site in a week or so.

Cyscott1, that was a big scenario and I can definitively see that moving AT guns might be needed there. So i definitivly see that moving AT guns might be usefull in some situations.

First nice rule well written. i think the machine guns op fire response should effect both the gun and the infantry as you are targeting 2 different units.

on the Russian front you will want to move at guns all the time as scenarios ebb and flow.

BJaffe01

BJaffe01 said:

That would clash with the one-attack-one-target design philosophy of ToI. The exception are are attacks, but they are not used for Op Fire.

And you only get to attack once in response to a single action.

hmm i do get that but this is a special case but for ease of play targeting one or the other is fine.

BJaffe01

BJaffe01 said:

Ease of play and as few exceptions to the core rules as possible were the idea.

That said, I agree with you. In my opinion, infantry fire, especially HMG fire, should be an area attack. The more squads bunch up in a hex, the easier a target they are for enemy squads. And in the time span that a turn here represents, an HMG would certainly also put a few rounds into any trucks close to the squads it is firing at. What damage an MG could do to an AT gun is not clear to me, though (.50 cals aside).

Remember though that you are targeting exposed members of a squad in an effort to kill or suppress vs. targeting the weak points of the gun which may not be located where the crew is ducking.

If it was an area attack, then we're talking.

7times7is49 said:

Which points of a gun are vulnerable to MG fire? And can you really target these points from three hexes away?