Modern Spearhead

Continuing the discussion...

Back in Journal 51 Mark Bevis responded to my previous article on MSH (Modern Spearhead) and my replies to some of his ideas and thoughts… As it has now been some time (2 years or more) since that article I thought I'd write some more on the subject, outline some of what I have been up to, and reply to Mark's recent comments as well.

As I write this I am in the process of building a completely new Soviet 1982-86 era Motor Rifle Division from scratch, along with an additional Tank Regiment as well as a British Mechanised Brigade and am intending to build a German or Belgian Brigade and a small US 'Task Force' to accompany them.

Having signed up to the SOTCW Journal sometime ago, and being a co-author of Modern Spearhead, I had taken an interest in Mark Bevis’ review of MSH (Modern Spearhead) in Journal 38, and his on going series of articles since then. Mark has raised some good points, proposed some very sound “house-rules”, and otherwise raised some issues for topical discussion!

In the following article I have made a general response to Mark’s thoughts in his review, some specific responses to his proposed rules changes and house-rules, and in conclusion some links to useful MSH related websites (the latter not reproduced here as they are now obsolete - Ed).

The following rules additions/amendments are things we have considered:

2.0.2 Training

In the modem period the differing levels of professionalism and training throughout the world has a significant impact on combat ability. Whilst the existing rules reflect this in the order system and artillery response table - it is not reflected where it counts most - in combat! The morale ratings reflect it in close assaults only, but as it stands an Ethiopian with a 1950s bazooka shoots as well as an SAS man with a laser guided Hellfire. Thus for any scenario one force (of part of a force) should be designated as Better Trained which improves their direct fire response.