Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 06, 2021, 09:00:46 PM

Login with username, password and session length


We Appreciate Your Support


Author Topic: Using Rapid Fire for Korean War  (Read 408 times)

Offline Inkpaduta

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Mad Scientist
  • *
  • Posts: 993
Using Rapid Fire for Korean War
« on: October 11, 2021, 05:51:42 PM »
I am thinking about using Rapid Fire for the Korean War.
As there is no official supplement what changes or additions would
you make from the WW2 rules to make it more for the Korean War?

Offline vtsaogames

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1119
    • Corlears Hook Fencibles
Re: Using Rapid Fire for Korean War
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2021, 07:50:04 PM »
Don't really know Rapid Fire, but the war should be in two phases: early, with the North Koreans as a Soviet-style army with a brigade of T34/85s, and later with Chinese light infantry and not much armor.

US infantry should have 75mm recoiless rifles, 4-6 per battalion. Early 2.5 inch bazookas had trouble beating T34/85s. Later 3.5 inch bazookas routinely took them out.

EDIT: was looking at a 2nd Division report from October 1952 and noted Chinese two-division attack said to have 14 tanks in support.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2021, 11:29:08 AM by vtsaogames »
And the glorious general led the advance
With a glorious swish of his sword and his lance
And a glorious clank of his tin-plated pants. - Dr. Seuss

My blog: http://corlearshookfencibles.blogspot.com/

Offline SirRoystonPapworth

  • Student
  • Posts: 15
Re: Using Rapid Fire for Korean War
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2021, 06:58:44 PM »
If you can get hold of it, there was once a Rapid Fire Korean War supplement. It's quite comprehensive, but very hard to get hold of.

Offline redrob

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 111
Re: Using Rapid Fire for Korean War
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2021, 09:20:40 PM »
Please bear in mind that regardless of what you read about the 2d Division report there were never any tanks deployed by the Chinese Army in the Korean War. Any AFV's 'seen' by Americans are almost certainly tracked artillery - SU76 (and not SU85 or 100)

Offline vtsaogames

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1119
    • Corlears Hook Fencibles
Re: Using Rapid Fire for Korean War
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2021, 12:10:18 PM »
Thank you for that. I can see how soldiers might count any tracked enemy armor as tanks. They didn't have any wargamer treadheads in the line.

Reading SLA Marshall's "The River and the Gauntlet" about the battle of the Chongchon River 1950, in the early phase of the Chinese intervention, the Chinese operated at night - no US air support. The US forces held high ground while the Chinese often flowed through low ground, infiltrating enemy positions. Chinese played bugles and sometimes flutes at night, causing nervous troops to open fire and give away their positions. US night fighting tactics improved later. And of course the Chinese had a massive numerical advantage in infantry.

By the time the 2nd Division had to retreat, Marshall says 10,000 Chinese were along the retreat route. That is the gauntlet part of the title.

A neighbor's uncle was captured in that retreat. He died in captivity. His remains were only returned in the last decade. My father-in-law served in the 2nd Division but fortunately in 1952. He came home to raise a family, including my wife.


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
Last post September 27, 2008, 02:21:13 PM
by The Black Rider
2 Replies
Last post September 27, 2008, 10:39:24 PM
by Lowtardog
2 Replies
Last post March 08, 2010, 03:02:21 PM
by Smokeyrone
8 Replies
Last post November 21, 2017, 09:45:56 PM
by Marine0846
17 Replies
Last post December 05, 2021, 11:32:23 AM
by Harry Faversham