Bolt Action U.S. Marines and shotguns

[Doug E]

Yes they can have shotguns.  No, I can't find any thing.

Not only is it not in the rule book (2nd edition) but they didn't even seem fit to mention them in the Island Assault book.  I don't have an "Armies of" book, so maybe it's in there?

I read online where some random person said the range is 18 inches and they get one shot, but didn't cite a reference.  This seems to combine the worst of both worlds, lacking the firepower of an SMG, and lacking the range of a rifle.  Can someone please enlighten me?  Thanks.

[voltan]

Yup 'armies of' book, the main bit you're missing is that they have the assault special rule but yes, 18" and one shot.

Though this may all change as third edition is coming out soon with many new and barmy rules, probably.

[Doug E]

Thank you for that information, Voltan.  I'm starting to assemble and paint my Marines now - and wondering if the shotguns are worth having.  I guess I'll leave a few unarmed and wait until the 3rd edition rulebook comes out to see if it affects the decision.

Meanwhile, if anyone has an opinion or any insight to share, please do!

Thanks again.

[Cat]

I prefer to build platoons and play scenarios along historical lines.
 
Officially in 1944 Regimental HQ had 100 12 gauge shotguns, but in practice anybody could make use of them.  Some front line troops liked them because so much fighting in the Pacific was at close quarters in tight terrain.  Many were used by rear echelon guards and sentries (if they find themselves in fight, it's likely to pop up right on top of them).
 
If you're laying out jungle terrain for the board, then shotgun range won't be much of a limitation.  If you're doing a landing scenario, then seems unlikely there would be a lot of folks grabbing a shotgun when they hit the beach.  But still, rule of cool for a gutsy NCO.
 
Legit optional weapon to include or not include for a bog standard Marine platoon.
 
For my [still unpainted] Seabee force, I went with Marine list to work from and included shotguns for thematic reasons for nominally rear area troops who are prepared to fight and shotguns stashed in their work vehicles has the right flavour.

[Doug E]

Thanks, Cat.

I do like the idea of sticking to the historical - for the most part - and there is something inherently bad-ass about using a shotgun in close quarters.  I guess my main gripe would be that the stats should be more similar to the SMG - a shorter range but with two shots per turn.

The effective range of 00-buckshot is 50 - 100 yards (50 yards for accuracy, 100 yards for a lucky hit with enough velocity to cause death or serious bodily injury).   You're pumping out nine .32 caliber lead balls each round, and at close range might go through one victim to hit things or people behind them. 

Without splitting hairs, the range for SMG is similar.

---

I love the idea of having some Seabees for the Pacific theater as well.  I think that's where I could have the most fun doing something I normally find tedious - painting.  And putting together a vehicle of some sort - like a bulldozer with a machine gun mounted on it - or maybe more than one - though I doubt that's historically accurate.  I've not seen it in any pictures.

I'm curious if you have a source for Seabee (or Sailor) figures specifically or if you're just using Marines.  Are you going with all one uniform (either OD green or the blue Navy dungarees?) or mixing them up?  I would definitely have at least one with OD trousers and a blue dungaree shirt - and if I could find a pith helmet that would be even more awesome.  I dream about having another who is shirtless, with a large tattoo on the chest and a couple of smaller ones on the arms.  (In most pictures I've seen of WW2 Seabees at work, very few were wearing shirts.)



The Chief, of course, would have a coffee cup in one hand.

[CapnJim]

If you are not doing this for tournaments, and just to play scenarios, you could have a house rule where shotguns do +1 to their damage rolls at point blank and short range...

[Cat]

When I was digging about for info, I found this historical TO&E and one player's list built from it.  I came up with a slightly different build, but working from the same TO&E.
https://imgur.com/a/bolt-actionseabee-hq-co-weapons-section-w6t0X
 
I'll have to dig through the stash to see what all I came up with for minis.  I know I got 2 boxes of Warlord Marines, and have a bunch of Army heads for swapping in, plus an assortment of metal minis
 
If you search for images of seabees, you will find that a wide potpourri works just fine.
 
Mixing heads gives a lot of flavour — plain army helmets in green, some in navy blue, either might have a camo net, some might have camo covers.  Plenty of soft hats — Marine HBTs, boonie hats, Navy dixie cups (I got some heads from Shapeways).
 
Rolled up sleeves galore.

My painting plan is lots of blue dungarees and lighter blue shirts, but some greens mixed in.  Heavy on the blue mix really helps them stand out and a reprieve from painting so many OD units.
 
By the end of the war, there were integrated Seabee units operating near combat zones.  They did not see combat action, but certainly could have.
 
No machine guns on bulldozers, but they will certainly have MMGs on Dodge trucks, or an HMG on a 1.5 ton truck.  I picked up a DUKW for them.  Depending on campaign, LVTA2s or LVT4s gave support, and LCMs on the beach.
 
Also, while not on the official TO&E, a scrounged up flamethrower for brush clearing work is quite appropriate.  Seabees ran heavy on cumshaw acquisitions!
 
After I collected this stash, then the pandemic hit, and I haven't gotten back to Bolt Action since the beforetimes.  Might roll around again...
 

[Cat]

Warlord just posted a preview of changes coming to the force building.  This does not address particulars down to the shotguns for Marines level, but gives some useful overall indicators.  Many old force compositions will likely port over reasonable intact.
https://warlord-community.warlordgames.com/bolt-action-third-edition-army-composition/?__s=dh341wfcd9dibiiv2ff5

The old Generic Reinforced Platoon selector is gone.  A Rifle platoon with a minimum of 2 squads is required.  Rather than the old individual support weapons being attached, now additional types of platoons can be added, max of any 1 other type per Rifle platoon.  This makes more historical sense than the old way.
 
That structure certainly works well for building a historical Seabee force with two different Weapons platoons that might be assigned.
 
The Company Weapons Platoon includes a section of 2 60mm mortars and a section of 2 MMG.  So any or all of that could be assigned (historically at least) in support of a Rifle platoon. 
 
The Weapons Platoon from the Battalion Headquarters Company includes a section each of 2 20mm AA guns, 2 81mm mortars, and 2 MMG.  Again, any or all of that could be assigned (historically at least) in support of a Rifle platoon.  I suspect these assets would typically be assigned by section type where needed.
 
So, 1 Rifle platoon coud be supported by either one of the available Weapons platoons.  2 Rifle platoons could be supported by both of them.  That's a lot of assigned support, but presumably our heroes find themselves at the thick of the action and in desperate need.
: 3

For competitive play, it remains to be seen if the lists will accommodate the historical mix of weapons seen in many Weapons platoons.
 
I always build my units on historical lines, and then shake them out into game requirements on the odd occasions when that matters.

[carlos marighela]

The usefulness of shotguns in combat is a contentious topic and personally I think they are overated as anything but a PDW. It's true that they can provide a quick reaction in close terrain but that trades off against factors like buckshot, the most common load having issues penetrating heavy foliage at times. At the point where you have maximum dispersion of the shot there can be issues with guaranteed lethality and at times even rendering the enemy hor's de combat. Less than ideal although, to be fair, issues of lethality often arise with pistol calibre rounds in such things as SMGs as well. Fine at pistol ranges, not so good beyond it but definitely better than a pistol, save for annoyances like weight, length and ammunition carriage.

As pointed out above, WW2 era shotguns are a bit of a one trick pony. They might be an OK option for someone popping up 25-30 metres down range but beyond say 50-100 metres they are beginning to look like a decidely sub-optimal choice.

Plastic shotgun shells weren't a thing until well after the war (late '50s/1960's?). Before that the shell cases were cardboard, sometimes waxed, sometimes not. Cardboard shells could swell in  damp, humid environments and that's not a good thing if your shotgun won't cycle or even load.

Most modern armies that utilise shotguns have them primarily for other purposes like breaching weapons or use of non-lethal rounds.  They also have their use for guarding prisoners.

It's interesting to note that the Australian Army, probably the most heavily experienced army in terms of 'jungle warfare' (New Guinea, SW Pacific, Malaya, Borneo and Vietnam) largely eschewed the use of combat shotguns. It's true that they saw some limited use in Malaya by Commonwealth forces but they weren't seen as a particularly desirable combat weapon.

[Doug E]

Reading the newly released intelligence report from Warlord Games, I've only been able to figure out three things.

First, all assembly and painting should come to a halt - until I can figure out what I'll need to have if I intend to play this entirely new game.  Second, if I want to play this new game it looks like I'll need to put together a company instead of a platoon.  (Is this really just a scam, to get us to buy more stuff?)  Third, I won't throw out the Second Edition rule book just yet.

[carlos marighela]

Warlord Games using a tried and tested GW strategy to shift more units? Perish the thought. 

[Doug E]

If you are not doing this for tournaments, and just to play scenarios, you could have a house rule where shotguns do +1 to their damage rolls at point blank and short range...

When the "house rules" involve a list of pages from the Third Edition, a list of pages from the Second Edition, a few pages of errata and house rules from various sites online, and a page of stuff I thought up myself.  Thursday and Friday will be a seminar on the rules, we'll play a game on Saturday from 0900 to 1500 (with a 30 minute break for lunch at 1200), and debrief in the late afternoon.  Now taking applications for referees and judges. 

[Doug E]

Warlord just posted a preview of changes coming to the force building.  This does not address particulars down to the shotguns for Marines level, but gives some useful overall indicators.  Many old force compositions will likely port over reasonable intact.
https://warlord-community.warlordgames.com/bolt-action-third-edition-army-composition/?__s=dh341wfcd9dibiiv2ff5

The old Generic Reinforced Platoon selector is gone.  A Rifle platoon with a minimum of 2 squads is required.  Rather than the old individual support weapons being attached, now additional types of platoons can be added, max of any 1 other type per Rifle platoon.  This makes more historical sense than the old way.
 
That structure certainly works well for building a historical Seabee force with two different Weapons platoons that might be assigned.
 
The Company Weapons Platoon includes a section of 2 60mm mortars and a section of 2 MMG.  So any or all of that could be assigned (historically at least) in support of a Rifle platoon. 
 
The Weapons Platoon from the Battalion Headquarters Company includes a section each of 2 20mm AA guns, 2 81mm mortars, and 2 MMG.  Again, any or all of that could be assigned (historically at least) in support of a Rifle platoon.  I suspect these assets would typically be assigned by section type where needed.
 
So, 1 Rifle platoon coud be supported by either one of the available Weapons platoons.  2 Rifle platoons could be supported by both of them.  That's a lot of assigned support, but presumably our heroes find themselves at the thick of the action and in desperate need.
: 3

For competitive play, it remains to be seen if the lists will accommodate the historical mix of weapons seen in many Weapons platoons.
 
I always build my units on historical lines, and then shake them out into game requirements on the odd occasions when that matters.

It seems I'm inclined to be less optimistic than you - probably because I couldn't make any sense of this teaser they just released.  It looks to me like our "army" will be closer to a company (or two) than a reinforced platoon.  I wonder if they had anyone playtest these new rules, or was it all thought out in the mind of someone to whom it all made sense at the time?  Like they were more concerned with "security" so they couldn't risk letting anyone play it to see how it worked.

My complements on the things you found (the Seabee TO&E and those pictures) - I'm always looking for stuff like that, but have less skill at finding it.  I'm still wondering how their combat organization related to their construction organization.  Were Seabees assigned to squads and teams at random?  If they put all electricians in one unit, all equipment operators in another, etc. that would be easier for administrative purposes, but would make no sense operationally - risking loss of everyone in one particular specialty.  Not that it matters for Bolt Action purposes, just curious.

[Doug E]

Warlord Games using a tried and tested GW strategy to shift more units? Perish the thought. 

Not thinking that at all.  Surely they learned their lesson when they saw all those 40K players revolt and refuse to buy any more Games Workshop products. 

--

I appreciate you sharing all that insight - in particular the folly of cardboard shotgun shells in damp environments.  As I indicated above, in light of the confusion over what little we know of the Third Edition, I think it's best to just cease all assembly and painting until more is known / understood / tested.

[carlos marighela]

The trouble with skirmish games is that for attack/defence you are likely going to want a suitable ratio of attckers to defenders. Doctrine suggests and minimum of three to one but even if you cut back to two to one you are still looking at a company minus, unless your enemy is going to be section sized. Not everything is a meeting engagement. I've resigned myself to having a company minus for most of my forces.