S F

S F (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames

Message

cockney -> S F (6/23/2007 1:37:39 AM)
are there any rules as to SF units for example the Long Range Desert Patrol Group (for-runners of the SAS) and the Chidits?

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: S F (6/23/2007 2:08:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cockney are there any rules as to SF units for example the Long Range Desert Patrol Group (for-runners of the SAS) and the Chidits? SF? Chidits? My guess is that these are small unit formations. WIF is essentially a corps level game with divisional units added for 'flavoring'. But if you can elaborate on your question, I (or someone else) can give you a better answer.

Neilster -> RE: S F (6/23/2007 7:58:26 AM)
Special Forces. Off the top of my head I can think of Italian frogmen (as an optional rule). In general the scale of WiF is too coarse to justify special forces being modelled. The example above is an exception because they could take out capital ships. Cheers, Neilster

michaelbaldur -> RE: S F (6/23/2007 9:43:00 AM)
the commando marine div....

cockney -> RE: S F (6/25/2007 1:36:37 AM)
S F (special forces ) the use of SF as in the LRDPG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Desert_Group was to cut supply lines and and take out air fields behind enemy lines, like paras they would be out of technical supply but in practice used local produce and foraging as well as stealing enemy forces supply. the chindis did this but on a brigade scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chindits can appriciate that due to scale the LRDPG (company strength 120 men) wouldn't work, but if in a phase declare a SF attack to flip a HQ, would that work?

Neilster -> RE: S F (6/25/2007 2:41:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cockney S F (special forces ) the use of SF as in the LRDPG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Desert_Group was to cut supply lines and and take out air fields behind enemy lines, like paras they would be out of technical supply but in practice used local produce and foraging as well as stealing enemy forces supply. the chindis did this but on a brigade scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chindits can appriciate that due to scale the LRDPG (company strength 120 men) wouldn't work, but if in a phase declare a SF attack to flip a HQ, would that work? It's not part of the game mechanics and MWiF basically implements the existing board game. HQs represent quite a large conglomeration of command, logistics, support and combat units. It's not like like a band of hard nutters in heavily armed Chevrolet trucks could sweep out of the dunes and disrupt all of that, as cool as those cats were. Cheers, Neilster [image]local://upfiles/10515/5FFB126ECCBC44CD84EF25BB4271168F.jpg[/image]

composer99 -> RE: S F (6/25/2007 6:26:09 PM)
Outside of special forces being represented within the purview of Frogmen, Marines, Paratroopers & Alpine (MTN) units, I suspect that WiF/MWiF is simply too large a scale for much in the way of Special Forces activities. Some of them might also be subsumed in the Intelligence rules, although I do not recall at present if those are being implemented in MWiF or not.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: S F (6/25/2007 9:23:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: composer99 Outside of special forces being represented within the purview of Frogmen, Marines, Paratroopers & Alpine (MTN) units, I suspect that WiF/MWiF is simply too large a scale for much in the way of Special Forces activities. Some of them might also be subsumed in the Intelligence rules, although I do not recall at present if those are being implemented in MWiF or not. Intelligence rules are part of MWIF. However, I might disable them when playing solitaire, so I do not have to figure out how to optimize their use by the AIOs.

cockney -> RE: S F (6/26/2007 11:27:07 PM)
like like a band of hard nutters in heavily armed Chevrolet trucks could sweep out of the dunes and disrupt all of that, as cool as those cats were. Cheers, Neilster [image]local://upfiles/10515/5FFB126ECCBC44CD84EF25BB4271168F.jpg[/image] [/quote]

cockney -> RE: S F (6/26/2007 11:28:55 PM)
bit of a fopar, forgot to add I like your quite!

Neilster -> RE: S F (6/27/2007 7:51:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cockney bit of a fopar, forgot to add I like your quite! Or even a faux pas about a quote [;)] Cheers, Neilster

Jimm -> RE: S F (6/27/2007 11:02:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cockney the chindis did this but on a brigade scale we once discussed using Chindits basically as a special partisan unit, which is not unlike what they were in effect.

michaelbaldur -> RE: S F (6/28/2007 12:12:55 AM)
I think the chindits are included in the indian para ...

coregames -> RE: S F (6/28/2007 2:41:18 AM)
Couldn't any DIV that is MAR, MTN, PARA or SKI and has more than one strength point (cream of the crop) represent a special forces unit? That plus frogmen as mentioned already. Of course, if an operation is undertaken at ranges within 100 km, special forces would be subsumed by the corps involved.

composer99 -> RE: S F (6/28/2007 5:37:56 PM)
I suspect to some extent you are correct - the specialty unit divs in particular could easily be considered to incorporate special forces units as part of their makeup.

WiFDaniel -> RE: S F (7/12/2007 1:04:06 PM)
Besides frogmen, the most obvious special units is Engineers. When playing the 2D10CRT, they have tremendous effect on combat across or river or against factory cities. Another special unit is the magic US TRS than flips into a 15 ships port. AFAIR, port attacks can't sink it. Daniel

composer99 -> RE: S F (7/12/2007 6:11:57 PM)
The naval supply unit of which you speak adds 10 to the naval unit stacking limits of a minor port. I do not believe that it counts as "special forces" as such, given that these are usually some type of small-scale specialized combat unit, but it certainly is a special unit. Whether or not it can be subject to port strikes or not would require a check of the pertinent rules. As it is a ship in a port, my first instinct would be to believe that you can port-strike it. Of course, as a US player I would want to make sure that my NSU-enhanced ports are safely out of reach of or well-defended against port strikes and/or invasions.

Froonp -> RE: S F (7/12/2007 6:17:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: composer99 Whether or not it can be subject to port strikes or not would require a check of the pertinent rules. As it is a ship in a port, my first instinct would be to believe that you can port-strike it. Of course, as a US player I would want to make sure that my NSU-enhanced ports are safely out of reach of or well-defended against port strikes and/or invasions. 22.4.13 says : ******************************** 22.4.13 Naval supply units (SiF option 69) (...) Turn the unit face down and move it adjacent to the port to mark the port as upgraded. You can now stack an extra 10 or 15 naval units at that port (the unit indicates which). The naval supply unit no longer counts against stacking at that port and may not be chosen as a target during port strikes. If it is overrun, it must rebase in the same manner as all other naval units in the port. ******************************** So, no, once they are used to expand a minor port, they are not port attackable.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: S F (7/12/2007 8:44:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp quote: ORIGINAL: composer99 Whether or not it can be subject to port strikes or not would require a check of the pertinent rules. As it is a ship in a port, my first instinct would be to believe that you can port-strike it. Of course, as a US player I would want to make sure that my NSU-enhanced ports are safely out of reach of or well-defended against port strikes and/or invasions. 22.4.13 says : ******************************** 22.4.13 Naval supply units (SiF option 69) (...) Turn the unit face down and move it adjacent to the port to mark the port as upgraded. You can now stack an extra 10 or 15 naval units at that port (the unit indicates which). The naval supply unit no longer counts against stacking at that port and may not be chosen as a target during port strikes. If it is overrun, it must rebase in the same manner as all other naval units in the port. ******************************** So, no, once they are used to expand a minor port, they are not port attackable. A better wording would be "while they are in use to expand a minor port" since they can switch back a forth every, even moving to a different minor port.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.640625