4e Mechanics & Rules Discussion

[Heffe]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Thanks for the link, Heffe. Fenhorn is a mod, but is he an official FL spokesperson? I haven't spent as much time on that forum as you have, but my impression is that he is not.

If his interpretation is correct, 40mm grenades, at least, are severely nerfed. They have a blast power of D (which only does 1 damage on a successful damage roll). On an indirect (?) hit (i.e. the hex was targeted, not an individual person), the Ref rolls two d6s to determine blast damage. Since you can't push that roll, it has only a 31% chance of doing any damage whatever to enemies within that hex.

That's super low, wouldn't you say? It kind of negates even rolling a successful HW attack with the GL, I would argue.

Here's why I asked this question in the first place. I was soloing a firefight. The Blue Force grenadier rolled a hit on a hex occupied by two prone OPFOR*. I rolled the 2d6s, showing no sixes. So, the two OPFOR in the targeted (and hit) 10m hex escaped injury from a 40mm exploding within same.

If I'm reading this rule correctly, being prone makes one completely immune from a level D blast:

PRONE: If the target is prone, the blast power is reduced one step.

Since D is the lowest level blast, reducing it one step means no blast at all? Or would that mean rolling only one d6? (That would lower the chances of the hit doing any damage to 17%)

Unless the design intent was to nerf 40mm grenades, I think Fenhorn must be wrong (or I'm still missing something).

-

Agreed that he is a mod, but my understanding is that his words carry weight in terms of rules/gameplay. Also as a mod, I imagine he has the ability to check with the team directly in case any answers aren't as clear. With that all said, I don't think there would be any issues asking again about your particular issue - I definitely agree that the system when it comes to explosions is wonky.

We may have talked about it before, but my best example of how explosions are weird in 4e is the 25mm cannon firing HE rounds. Currently, if a PC is wearing a plate vest and gets hit square in the chest with a 25mm HE round, he would have to roll CUF, but otherwise he'd suffer no injury unless additional successes are rolled by the shooter.

The 25mm HE round does 4 dmg with a +2 armor modifier. The plate vest has 2 armor, bringing the total damage mitigation to 4. Even with the blast rating of D, because blast dmg is handled separately to direct damage, it would all be mitigated by the vest as well (it's unclear if the blast damage hit location would be rolled separately from the direct damage hit location).

In any case, I can't imagine that makes any sense from a real world perspective. You can abstract things, but it just feels off. I do think the FL team should have taken some more time considering how explosions are handled - there's a lot of room for improvement on armor modifiers especially.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Heffe

With that all said, I don't think there would be any issues asking again about your particular issue - I definitely agree that the system when it comes to explosions is wonky.

Ok. I've posted the question on the FL forum.

Originally Posted by Heffe

We may have talked about it before, but my best example of how explosions are weird in 4e is the 25mm cannon firing HE rounds. The 25mm HE round does 4 dmg with a +2 armor modifier. The plate vest has 2 armor, bringing the total damage mitigation to 4. Even with the blast rating of D, because blast dmg is handled separately to direct damage, it would all be mitigated by the vest as well (it's unclear if the blast damage hit location would be rolled separately from the direct damage hit location).

Yeah, I remember that discussion. I could see the above making sense if we were talking shrapnel from a 25mm HE round. Kevlar body armor should be able to stop most small fragments- that's its main purpose. But you're absolutely right- a direct hit from a 25mm round would almost certainly prove fatal (or in game rules terms, prompt a Critical Hit roll, at the very least) to anyone wearing 90s-era ballistic armor.

Originally Posted by Heffe

In any case, I can't imagine that makes any sense from a real world perspective. You can abstract things, but it just feels off. I do think the FL team should have taken some more time considering how explosions are handled - there's a lot of room for improvement on armor modifiers especially.

Agree 100%. Unless FL publishes errata Explosions rules updates (highly unlikely, given Tomas' stated position on errata in general), I think I'm going to have to house rule this one. I'm going to apply both: Direct Damage = shrapnel; Explosion Damage = blast.

I'm not sure that armor should be effective against blast damage. From what I've read about IED explosions in Iraq and Afghanistan, blast wave/overpressure/concussive effects typically bypass body armor altogether, sometimes even killing without leaving a mark on the victim.

-

[Heffe]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Ok. I've posted the question on the FL forum.



Yeah, I remember that discussion. I could see the above making sense if we were talking shrapnel from a 25mm HE round. Kevlar body armor should be able to stop most small fragments- that's its main purpose. But you're absolutely right- a direct hit from a 25mm round would almost certainly prove fatal (or in game rules terms, prompt a Critical Hit roll, at the very least) to anyone wearing 90s-era ballistic armor.



Agree 100%. Unless FL publishes errata Explosions rules updates (highly unlikely, given Tomas' stated position on errata in general), I think I'm going to have to house rule this one. I'm going to apply both: Direct Damage = shrapnel; Explosion Damage = blast.

I'm not sure that armor should be effective against blast damage. From what I've read about IED explosions in Iraq and Afghanistan, blast wave/overpressure/concussive effects typically bypass body armor altogether, sometimes even killing without leaving a mark on the victim.

-

That's what I've read as well. Direct fire damage is already pretty lethal in game - I think your house rule would just bring explosions into that same arena. If you make any further changes, can you let us know? I'd be interested in how you find the adjustment.

[Raellus]

New clarification question regarding rolled hits, hit location, cover, and CUF. The scenario is as follows:

Target is in a ditch, only upper body is exposed. PC rolls a hit. Hit location die shows legs. Since the target's legs are behind cover (due to the shot angle, several meters of earth), no damage is done. Is this correct, so far?

Now, since the PC rolled a hit, but no damage was done due to the hit location result and target's cover, does the enemy roll CUF or not?

-

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Raellus

New clarification question regarding rolled hits, hit location, cover, and CUF. The scenario is as follows:

Target is in a ditch, only upper body is exposed. PC rolls a hit. Hit location die shows legs. Since the target's legs are behind cover (due to the shot angle, several meters of earth), no damage is done. Is this correct, so far?

Now, since the PC rolled a hit, but no damage was done due to the hit location result and target's cover, does the enemy roll CUF or not?

-

I would. That bullet struck the ground right in front of that soldier. Alternately, you could add a Difficulty Shift to hit and just roll for exposed locations only.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Ok. I've posted the question on the FL forum.



Yeah, I remember that discussion. I could see the above making sense if we were talking shrapnel from a 25mm HE round. Kevlar body armor should be able to stop most small fragments- that's its main purpose. But you're absolutely right- a direct hit from a 25mm round would almost certainly prove fatal (or in game rules terms, prompt a Critical Hit roll, at the very least) to anyone wearing 90s-era ballistic armor.



Agree 100%. Unless FL publishes errata Explosions rules updates (highly unlikely, given Tomas' stated position on errata in general), I think I'm going to have to house rule this one. I'm going to apply both: Direct Damage = shrapnel; Explosion Damage = blast.

I'm not sure that armor should be effective against blast damage. From what I've read about IED explosions in Iraq and Afghanistan, blast wave/overpressure/concussive effects typically bypass body armor altogether, sometimes even killing without leaving a mark on the victim.

-

Your assessment of Overpressure Blast damage is reasonably accurate. I say reasonably because sometimes armor does help. M1 Abrams Tanks would INTENTIONALLY roll over small IEDs in Iraq and suffer no real damage from the blast. Alternately, in WWII, the Japanese survived 14" & 16" gun barrages in their bunkers without injury. However, an AH-1 Cobra in Vietnam suppressed an NVA IFV in a rice paddy with 2.75" Rockets. The vehicle was basically only cosmetically damaged but all the occupants were found dead inside from the overpressure blast of the rockets.
I would say VEHICLE armor should be rated at a reduced level for Blast effects damage. Body armor would be worthless from blast damage.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I would say VEHICLE armor should be rated at a reduced level for Blast effects damage. Body armor would be worthless from blast damage.

Good point. That's what I meant, but I should have been more clear.

-

[Heffe]

Originally Posted by Raellus

New clarification question regarding rolled hits, hit location, cover, and CUF. The scenario is as follows:

Target is in a ditch, only upper body is exposed. PC rolls a hit. Hit location die shows legs. Since the target's legs are behind cover (due to the shot angle, several meters of earth), no damage is done. Is this correct, so far?

Now, since the PC rolled a hit, but no damage was done due to the hit location result and target's cover, does the enemy roll CUF or not?

-

They would, yes. From the Player Manual pg 67:

"If you are hit by enemy fire (even if the damage is fully deflected by armor or cover), or if one or more ammo dice in a failed attack against you show, you must immediately make a coolness under fire roll."

In this instance, it wasn't just that the ground causes no damage to be done. Rather, the ground itself is counted as a type of "cover", and would thus impart additional points of armor to the PC. Sandbags seem like somewhat of an equivalent, so I'd think the ground would reduce the amount of damage taken for the hit by at least 4 points (probably a lot more, given that the ground is thicker than sandbags and the angle of attack). As a result, no damage actually penetrates the armor/cover to the player, but it does still count as a hit, and therefore CUF would still need to be rolled.

[kcdusk]

Agreed, I'd roll for CUF.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Heffe

That's what I've read as well. Direct fire damage is already pretty lethal in game - I think your house rule would just bring explosions into that same arena. If you make any further changes, can you let us know? I'd be interested in how you find the adjustment.

After some discussion, and a helpful video link, over on the FL 4e forum, I've reconciled to the fact that, IRL, 40mm HE rounds are less deadly than I thought they were. As a result, I think I'm going to accept the 4e M203/explosion/HW rules as written, and just take the -2 to aim for individual [human] targets. That way, on a hit, the target takes at least the M203 damage, before even rolling for Blast D damage. Anyone else in the same hex will roll for Blast D damage only.

I think my only house rules re explosions (so far) will be that for a prone target, I drop only one D6, and for a prone target in an enclosed space, like a bedroom for example, I roll both D6 to account for overpressure.

-

[Heffe]

Originally Posted by Raellus

After some discussion, and a helpful video link, over on the FL 4e forum, I've reconciled to the fact that, IRL, 40mm HE rounds are less deadly than I thought they were. As a result, I think I'm going to accept the 4e M203/explosion/HW rules as written, and just take the -2 to aim for individual [human] targets. That way, on a hit, the target takes at least the M203 damage, before even rolling for Blast D damage. Anyone else in the same hex will roll for Blast D damage only.

I think my only house rules re explosions (so far) will be that for a prone target, I drop only one D6, and for a prone target in an enclosed space, like a bedroom for example, I roll both D6 to account for overpressure.

-

I just watched that same video a few mins ago, and I think your approach is probably the best way to do it.

One thing that I learned from watching the video was that the fragmentation from the 40mm HEDP seemed to have focused downrange from the shooter in a bit of a cone. There was a bit of fragmentation back toward the shooter as well, but the bulk seemed to follow the path of the grenade itself. I don't know why, but in my head I always imagined those types of explosions having the fragmentation spread out in more of a sphere rather than having so much of the blast focused in one direction like that.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Heffe

One thing that I learned from watching the video was that the fragmentation from the 40mm HEDP seemed to have focused downrange from the shooter in a bit of a cone. There was a bit of fragmentation back toward the shooter as well, but the bulk seemed to follow the path of the grenade itself. I don't know why, but in my head I always imagined those types of explosions having the fragmentation spread out in more of a sphere rather than having so much of the blast focused in one direction like that.

I think that might be due to the HEDP round's shaped-charge warhead, which should, in theory, focus most of the blast towards the nose/impact fuse of the grenade. HEDP is designed to defeat light armor. I suspect, but have yet to find a source to confirm or refute, that a "vanilla" HE round would produce slightly more blast/shrapnel, and that said would disperse a little more evenly, compared to HEDP.

Would anyone with RL 40mm grenade experience please weigh in?

-

[Raellus]

Next questions:

GROUP AMBUSHES: Ambushes can be carried out by a
group and against a group of targets. This follows the
usual rules for stealth – the person with the lowest
RECON skill level rolls for the attackers, while the target
with highest RECON skill level rolls for the targets. If you
succeed, you get all of the top initiative cards, equal to
the number of fighters on your side – i.e. if there are
four attackers, you get cards #1 to #4. You can distribute
these as you see fit. The target(s) draws initiative from
amongst the remaining cards.

WAYLAYING: If you lie in wait for an enemy to attack them
as they pass, roll RECON to set up the ambush. This is a slow
action. If you spend a stretch (5–10 minutes) or more to
set up, you get a +2 modifier. If you spend a shift or more,
you get +3. You can push the roll as normal. Record the
number of you roll.

For Group Ambushes, the rules are clear that you use the lowest Recon score among the attackers. Does this mean that if a party member doesn't have any skill in Recon, you role their Attribute only? Or, does it mean to use the lowest score from among PCs that actually have any Recon skill at all? In other words, what does "lowest" mean? None, or lowest actually score (eg. Recon D)? I'm guessing, it's the former, but hoping it's the latter.

Second, in the Waylaying rules, does the following still apply? "The person with the lowest RECON skill level rolls for the attackers." The Waylaying rule follows the Ambushing rules, but doesn't refer directly back to them, so It's not clear. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?

-

[Tegyrius]

I would interpret it as the same in both cases. Your least-stealthy team member is the gating factor. If that's the dude with AGL D and no Recon, well... better hope you brought overwhelming force in lieu of overwhelming surprise.

(Also, I would consider waylaying a subset or special case of ambushing for rules purposes because the "Waylaying" header is a third-level header under the second-level "Ambush" header - i.e., subordinate in layout/design terms.)

- C.

[kcdusk]

AMBUSH and WAYLAYING are two of the most important rules for me. Every encounter uses them, especially playing solo. And the consequences of avoiding a contact, verse walking into an ambush is huge.

To be clear; the rules are used a lot, and they have high significance. I'm still playing through a number of engagements to see how comfortable i feel with them before deciding how i feel about the rules. I worry about these mechanics more than player creation or weapon stat rules.

I agree with Tegyruis above.

I'm lucky my PC has high AGL and RECON. This is partly because he's travelling overland on foot, on his own, behind enemy lines. So needs to be highly skilled in this area.

Raellus: I'd post a scout ahead of your party. Allows a player to take on a more significant role, and mirrors real life of an experienced group putting someone out front.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

I would interpret it as the same in both cases. Your least-stealthy team member is the gating factor. If that's the dude with AGL D and no Recon, well... better hope you brought overwhelming force in lieu of overwhelming surprise.

That's what I was afraid of. Unless everyone in the party has at least INT C, Recon C, the odds of surprising any group of "vanilla" Soviet soldiers (INT C, Recon C) is going to be less than even, every time.

The only way of improving the odds is to spend at least 5 minutes preparing to Waylay an approaching enemy. That time isn't always available. i.e. Successful hasty ambushes are probably not in the cards.

Originally Posted by kcdusk

Raellus: I'd post a scout ahead of your party. Allows a player to take on a more significant role, and mirrors real life of an experienced group putting someone out front.

Absolutely. My concern is situations where the whole party is together, including its least stealthy (Low INT, Low/No Recon) members. IMHO, it's not realistic for every party member to have minimum INT C, Recon C (not without neglecting other important and/or oft-used skills, at least).

-

There are a few ways to generate positive modifiers from help, so maybe that could be used here.

I mean, if I, as an IT professional with little to no Recon skill, am out tromping around the woods with a Marine Scout/Sniper, I would expect him to 'help' me by telling me to Shut Up, Walk Slower, Stay Behind Me, Watch Where You Put Your Feet, Turn Off Your Flashlight, Watch To the Right, This Hand Signal Means Stop, This Means Go Prone, etc. Probably delivered with profanity, but you get the point. I wouldn't be operating with level 0 Recon when I was operating with him.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Spartan-117

There are a few ways to generate positive modifiers from help, so maybe that could be used here.

Great point. I was imagining pretty much what you described, but forgot (again) about the Help mechanic. Thanks for the reminder.

So, for an attempted Waylaying, with 5 minutes of prep (+2) and several characters helping (+3), the group Recon roll would go from a single D6 (INT D) to a D12 and a D6, correct? Or since the PC with the lowest Recon skill has a 0 in same, would those modifiers only apply to the Attribute score?

-

[kcdusk]

So your starting from a RECON D6 with +5 modifiers.

so D6 turns into D10 + D10. Remember there is a line somewhere that says, or recommends, that you increase or decrease each dice alternatively. You don't just add modifiers to one or the other up to D12, then swap over and start increasing the other.

It might be you go from D6 to D12 + D6. But the odds of D10 + D10 i think are greater for the same modifiers. Does that make sense?

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by kcdusk

So your starting from a RECON D6 with +5 modifiers.

so D6 turns into D10 + D10. Remember there is a line somewhere that says, or recommends, that you increase or decrease each dice alternatively. You don't just add modifiers to one or the other up to D12, then swap over and start increasing the other.

It might be you go from D6 to D12 + D6. But the odds of D10 + D10 i think are greater for the same modifiers. Does that make sense?

Yes, thank you. I'd forgotten the rule about balancing dice. When rereading said rule just now, it clearly states that if you don't have a particular skill, you use a positive modifier to step it up to D6. So, you are right- in the above scenario, one would roll two D10s. I like those odds a lot better!

-

[Raellus]

Do successful Close Combat (i.e. melee) attacks trigger CUF rolls? I would assume so, but I can't find anything definitive in the Close Combat or Damage rules. The Suppression rules read:

If you are hit by enemy fire (even if the damage is fully deflected by armor or cover), or if one or more ammo dice in a failed attack against you show , you must immediately make a coolness under fire roll.

"Hit by... fire" strongly implies that this only applies when shot, or hit by an explosion. What about a fist, club, hatchet, bayonet, etc?

-

[Heffe]

Top of page 67 on the right hand side:

"Only firearms, heavy weapons and explosions can trigger suppression--not close combat attacks or attacks with bows and thrown weapons."

[kcdusk]

Agree with Heffe.

I don't think a hit in HTH would generate a CUF.

However, a CUF check could work like "stun" does in other games? You essentially go full protection mode, unable to strike back.

[Raellus]

Thanks, Heffe. I hope I'm not annoying anyone with these questions for which the rulebook states definitive answers.

Originally Posted by kcdusk

I don't think a hit in HTH would generate a CUF.

Mike Tyson would probably have something to say about that, but I'm fine with it.

Next question- it's more of a scenario, really, but I want to make sure that I am understanding and applying the relevant rules correctly.

The party vehicle, a BTR, it hit by an shaped charge IED (Blast power B, 3 direct damage). The IED rules state that shaped charges do +1 damage and have a crit level 1, but blast effects are stepped down by one (from blast B to C) for anything not receiving direct damage. So, this shaped charge IED does 4 direct damage.

The BTR has side armor level 4. 4 damage fails to penetrate. I roll vehicle hit location and look at the "did not penetrate" column. The hit location is 9: Commander.

So, the PC riding in the vehicle commander spot- in this particular case, the team sniper with the unit's best Recon score- takes 4 damage and, since the crit level of a shaped charge is 1, automatically takes a crit. I roll on the hit location die and torso is the result. The PC was riding with his torso exposed, so I don't have to worry about cover rules for him (see my next question). Anyway, the vehicle "commander" takes 4 damage to the torso. I roll on the crit table for torso and he lucks out with "broken collar bone". I roll two D10s for blast damage and neither shows targets, so he escapes blast damage (which would likely have killed him).

EDIT: Just looked at the vehicle hit location/component table again. Commander is listed on the penetration side. For 9, on the non-pen side, it reads Ricochet. So, if I'm reading the rules for Ricochet Component Damage correctly, the lookout doesn't take direct damage. Instead, I have to roll CUF for everyone riding "exposed". I rolled for the "commander" and he passed. That's a big swing from a 4 damage torso Crit broken collarbone to no damage at all.

Which of the two interpretations above is correct?

Now, besides rolling CUF for all exposed passengers, I roll Blast C damage. The driver had only his head exposed. I rolled hit location for him and it came up torso. Since his torso was behind cover, does he take damage? The gunner (inside an armored cupola) and a couple of PCs riding upright in the air guard hatches are in the same situation, so this question applies for them as well.

Last, but not least, since the shaped charge IED did not penetrate, and the vehicle damage location was Commander, the BTR doesn't actually sustain any damage, correct?

Odd result, if so, but I can roll with it.

-

[Raellus]

The reason I asked is that, for the last 3 weeks, I've been running a solo campaign with the 4e rules, to learn them through application.

I've written the campaign so far in narrative form, including Ref's notes to talk through how I applied the pertinent rules. If you're curious, the campaign log can be found here:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread....ed=1#post92322

See post #12 to see how I applied the Shaped Charge IED rules queried above.

-

[kcdusk]

Page 67 of the players manual says if you are hit by fire, and fail a CUF, you must drop prone and loose both actions next turn.

I've found sometimes hitting a NPC, not doing damage (body armour) or very little damage, and the NPC fails their CUF and drops prone. Now, he can often be out of my LOS and so by failing his CUF it feels like he can gain an advantage of being harder to hit (due to being prone) or being out of LOS completely.

Sometimes i think i'd rather hit and kill. Or have the PC pass their CUF. Thoughts?

The only other thing i can think of is, if a NPC fails CUF and goes prone. Can my PC cover ground to get to them knowing the NPC looses their actions next turn? This also raises the question of if my PC knows they are suppressed or not to risk moving towards them.

[Raellus]

An enemy failing CUF and going prone behind full cover could be a problem (like the scenario you mentioned), but there are a couple of ways that you could take advantage of it.

Have a PC set up over-watch on the spot. When the bad guy rears his head, you're ready to pop him before he can regain the initiative.

If the suppressed enemy's position it's within 50m or so of a PC with good mobility, have said PC rush to within hand grenade range and frag him.

Fire and maneuver.

-

[kcdusk]

Something i like about V4.0 in combat, is how the to hit dice and ammo dice work.

A skilled operator rolls D12+D12 and is likely to get a hit, or get multiple successes (>10), with a single shot/bullet.

An unskilled operator rolls D6+D6 plus a handful of ammo dice. The result is maybe a hit (rolling a 6), maybe a suppression. But a boat load of ammo expended, truely spray and pray.

I think this reflects reality well. (Less bullets more hits) verse (lots of bullets and less likely to hit).

I feel like in V4.0 that generally, i see my characters and NPCs using much more bullets than previous editions. I've found this a good thing for two reasons. One, during battle ammo runs low and mag change are needed. Add a tense pause in combat!

Secondly, it does mean burning through ammo that you really do need to start worrying about how many rounds you can carry on your person due to weight. And how many actual magazines do you have? I used to have 100 rounds on me. But now i need to break it down to how many full magazines i have.

Whats a "normal" number of magazines to carry? 4? 6? 8? While on patrol for example.

[Homer]

I hope this helps- everything I’m writing is based on the pre-MOLLE days, but the round counts still hold for MOLLE.

Basic load for the M16/M4 is 210 rounds, 7x30 round mags, or 2x ALICE pouches. Anecdotally, riflemen in some light/airborne/air assault infantry may carry 300-360 rounds (10x30 rd mags) in 4xALICE pouches. The 249 basic load is 600 rounds in 3x200 round hardpacks with 2x SAW pouches. Again, this may be increased in some units by an additional 200-400 rounds or more, normally carried in additional SAW pouches or a “rigger made” pouch. The additional SAW belts are normally in 100 round soft pouches (aka nutsacks). Doctrinally the basic load for a 203/320 is 24 rounds (20 HE/HEDP and 4 ILLUM) carried in a grenadier vest (18 rounds-14/4 with some versions). This varies greatly based on mission requirements, with fewer grenades being carried for short duration patrols, or additional grenades carried on belts, clip on packs, etc. An M60/240 would have a basic load of 600 rounds in 6x100 round belts which are packed in cotton bags with a carrying strap. Sometimes these are carried in SAW pouches, repurposed butt packs, or unit made ammo bags- one unit anecdotally going so far as to have “rigger made” ammo bags held on slings that allowed the AG to feed the gun from the prone with the ammo bearer carrying more in an assault pack and unit members to drop the bags at the support by fire position as they moved up. Extra 7.62 belts are normally carried by the AG and ammo bearer or distributed around the patrol (P for plenty with MG ammo). The gunner usually doesn’t patrol with the full 100 rounds on the gun, but carries a 20-40 round “starter belt’ with the AG to feed the rest upon contact. For a raid or ambush, belts may be linked together to form a 200 or more round belt for continuous fire. Gunners may carry an M9 with 3x15 round mags, but pistols have a tendency to get scarfed up by LTs, senior NCOs, and the battalion staff if MTOE isn’t enforced (plus that’s extra weight; and the 9mm is really a woobie for most fights). SDMs with 7.62mm weapons usually carry between 100 and 180 rounds in 5-10 20 round mags carried in 2-4 ALICE pouches. If a breaching shotgun is carried, usually a dozen rounds will be carried in an ALICE pouch plus a full magazine in the shotgun.

The amount of ammo carried is a continual compromise between likelihood of contact, availability of resupply, and difficulty of movement. Ammo pouches may also be repurposed to carry frags/smokes especially in thick vegetation. Or be modified to carry radios or personal medical kits (with a prominent Red Cross paint markered on pouch). 200 round SAW pouches often find their way to secondary purposes as NVG, admin, or demo pouches.

AT4’s, LAWs, demo, pyro, and claymores as required. Normally at least one AT4 in a fire team. Riflemen are supposed to carry 4xfrags. Frags, smokes, and other grenades are normally issued and adjusted mission dependent. Gunners and MG crew, medics, SDMs, and leadership/specialist personnel tend to carry fewer or no frags but carry smoke and pyro. In urban warfare or when assaulting a fixed position expect to see extra grenades carried in claymore bags, saw pouches, or 2qt covers on a sling.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by kcdusk

Page 67 of the players manual says if you are hit by fire, and fail a CUF, you must drop prone and loose both actions next turn.

I've found sometimes hitting a NPC, not doing damage (body armour) or very little damage, and the NPC fails their CUF and drops prone. Now, he can often be out of my LOS and so by failing his CUF it feels like he can gain an advantage of being harder to hit (due to being prone) or being out of LOS completely.

Sometimes i think i'd rather hit and kill. Or have the PC pass their CUF. Thoughts?

The only other thing i can think of is, if a NPC fails CUF and goes prone. Can my PC cover ground to get to them knowing the NPC looses their actions next turn? This also raises the question of if my PC knows they are suppressed or not to risk moving towards them.

I have been party to a House Rule in MUTANT: YEAR ZERO that would work for you here...

The rule involves a "Success with a cost" or "degree of failure" rule.

Whenever you are confronted by a natural obstacle (no opposed roll), you set a threshold of 3, 4, or 5 for a failed roll. IF the PC/NPC fails within this margin, they can try the task again with a DIE REDUCTION for the next attempt. So...
A PC tries to climb a chainlink fence with a Threshold of 3. If they fail but roll a 3, 4, or 5, they are still hanging on the fence and can roll next round.
In the case of your CUF test, a failure with a 4 or 5 could result in a go-prone response, BUT on a 2 or 3, they just stand there screaming like a woman in a 50s horror movie.

For opposed tests like trying to intimidate an enemy soldier you ran into on the road, you must BOTH fail your rolls. IF your rolls are HIGHER than the NPC's rolls, you may try to intimidate them again. IF their failed rolls are higher than yours, NOTHING you will ever do will intimidate them until circumstances change per the GM.