Editor in Chief Bill | 21 Feb 2011 6:44 p.m. PST |
In a recent issue of the Journal of the Society of Twentieth Century Wargamers, there was a write-up of an historical encounter in which a British Sherman surprised and engaged in a ramming attack on a German King Tiger. If you wanted to play this as a skirmish-level scenario, which ruleset would best handle any opportunities for tank ramming? |
Battle Works Studios | 21 Feb 2011 7:39 p.m. PST |
Perhaps one of those 40k-to-WW2 ports that have cropped up over the years? They certainly like ramming with AFVs in the Grim Darkness of the 1940's. :) |
Mr Pumblechook | 21 Feb 2011 8:12 p.m. PST |
TFL's Troops Weapons and Tactics has rules for it. Results can vary, from either or both tanks being damaged or out of action, depending on relative size (measured by armour levels) |
redbanner4145 | 21 Feb 2011 8:21 p.m. PST |
I think Battleground WWII has a ramming rule. |
Warlord | 21 Feb 2011 8:30 p.m. PST |
Well it happened; you can find rules for it in Frontline Command WWII. You have to make a morale test, the armor of the both vehicles and speed play a part, and size does matter. |
Kampfgruppe Cottrell | 21 Feb 2011 8:38 p.m. PST |
I second BGWWII. Realistic in that it is hard to get the crew to do it and the resulting crash usually damages both pretty good. Brian |
John the OFM | 21 Feb 2011 9:14 p.m. PST |
Here are some experimental Flames of War ramming rules, from the New Zealand Nationals. PDF link Note that you have to run out of ammo first. You don't just throw your gage on the ground. |
Repiqueone | 21 Feb 2011 9:46 p.m. PST |
Well, if it happened once in all of documented military history, we must have a rule that covers several pages with calculations of mass, velocity, angle of collision, up or downhill, turret facing forward or aft, and ambient temperature versus quality of steel. Too bad the commanders of the day didn't understand that this tactic would prove so important to the outcome of the battle and war, and dispense with guns in lieu of seatbelts, and armor piercing poles on the front of tanks. If we keep it up, GW tank rules will start to look tame! And some say that there are no good realistic scenarios yet to be written! |
goragrad | 22 Feb 2011 1:04 a.m. PST |
Tractics had some ramming rules as well – usual comparison of weight, speed, angle, etc. Think we used them once in a game. Insofar as to how often it happened in real life, here is an piece from the Battlefield Russia site - link (it is a posting of a 1996 piece by 'Hero of the Soviet Union, Marshall (Tank Arm) O. Losik" for 'Military Knowledge' (magazine?)) In it he claims that – The practice of tank ramming became especially prevalent in 1943. For instance, during the battle of Prokhorovka on July 12, Soviet tankers engaged in approximately 20 ramming actions, while over the entire 50 days of the Kursk battle over 50 instances of tank ramming were recorded. While ramming was typically used to destroy light and medium armored vehicles, at times even the heavy Tiger and Panther tanks fell victim. A direct hit by a Soviet tank typically put German machines out of action as their armor plating ripped open, their tracks tore and their road wheels warped. there is also the claim that some tankers made multiple ramming attacks in a single day or battle – There are instances of a single tank crew performing multiple ramming actions. During the defense of Moscow in November of 1941, the KV tank commanded by Hero of the Soviet Union A. Bosov rammed 4 enemy machines, while on July 12, 1941 a KV tank driver N. Tomashevich rammed 3 German tanks in an engagement near Luga while rescuing the tank of his commander, Lieutenant-Colonel Vjaznikov. The tank of I. Rogozin rammed the enemy three times near Krivoj Rog, while machines of 2nd Lieutenant I. Butenko and 1st Lieutenant P. Zaharchenko did so twice. (of course it may just have been some tankers explaining why the fenders/track skirts were damaged when they got back to base – Commander -' What ever happened to your nice new T-34?' Tanker (who smashed into a hay wagon after a few too many with the SU-76 crew) – 'Well you see there was this Tiger tank on the road and we were so close
' Back to the article, it states that there was actually training in the Russian Army in WWII on how best to ram. And from the other side in the East - picture picture picture picture Some images of a Stug III that either rammed or was rammed by a T-34 at Kalinin in 1941 (one site showing the pictures states that the Stug crew rammed because the L24 75mm didn't have the penetration to take out a T-34, another site feels that the T-34 was the 'rammer' as it is under the Stug). |
John D Salt | 22 Feb 2011 2:46 a.m. PST |
Repiqueone wrote:
Too bad the commanders of the day didn't understand that this tactic would prove so important to the outcome of the battle and war, and dispense with guns in lieu of seatbelts, and armor piercing poles on the front of tanks.
There's always the Rammtiger. And I bet the Culin hedgerow device could give you a nasty nip. All the best, John. |
Deserter | 22 Feb 2011 3:09 a.m. PST |
|
Martin Rapier | 22 Feb 2011 3:50 a.m. PST |
Ramming was also an approved form of air-air combat in the Red Airforce. Anyway, wrt the OP, I'd just use our usual tactical rules and fudge it with a morale test or similar. |
quidveritas | 22 Feb 2011 11:40 a.m. PST |
Hmmmm. Ramming other tanks did indeed happen -- both enemy and friendly. IMO, the major issue isn't what happens to the tank. Its what happens to the crews. A net collision of 70 mph will be fatal to all concerned if no airbags or seat belts (that's 35mph each in a head on collision). A net 50 mph collision will likely be disabling where the crews are concerned. 35mph -- (just guessing here) would probably adversely affect about half of the crew members 20mph in a tank is going to throw the crews around -- probably not killing anyone but certainly mess them up for a turn or two before they can resume 'normal' operations. It's the old M x V squared formula here. Unlike your Volvo, a tank is big on the mass component so the 'hit' is going to be substantial even at lower speeds. |
Matsuru Sami Kaze | 22 Feb 2011 1:59 p.m. PST |
Battleground WWII requires: 1 Pass a half Gut Check (morale) 2 Begin at least half your movement length away from the target in order to generate enough momentum to damage the target 3 Refer to the chart for damage Main gun barrel can be damaged if hit. Damaged track can be locked. There are two charts. One that cross references the sizes of rammer and target and a To Hit roll. The other Chart is the damage chart. Both tanks roll on the damage chart, if hit. D20 roll = 17-20: No damage 13-16 roll: Slight track damage, -2 speed, 4 actions to repair 9-12 roll: 1/2 speed 'til 6 actions to repair track, gut checks for crew 5-8 roll: tracks twist off roller, 8 man actions required to fix. Gut check for crew 1-4 roll: Tracks and links sheared apart. Permanent damage. Gut checks for crew |
Mobius | 24 Feb 2011 5:44 p.m. PST |
Panzer War has ramming as well as crushing rules. |
Chris PzTp | 25 Feb 2011 12:58 p.m. PST |
I started writing my rules over 20 years ago. For the first 5-6 years I threw into them averything I read about, including ramming. I had read about the ramming done it at Kursk. At some point I decided that my rules were way too bloated and I cut out tons of stuff, including ramming. I once had a opportunity to ride in a Hetzer. I was amazed at how cramped and noisy it was, things you read about but can't really appreciate until you experience them first hand. One thing that really suprized me was how exhausting it is to ride in one of these things. You are contstantly being dashed against sharp metal surfaces. The ergonomics were terrible. every muscle in your body tenses up in an effort to keep yourself from being knocked about, and this gets very tiring fast. So I can't imagine someone intentionaly raming the tank, due to the thought of what it would do to your body. Of course, if you're adreneline is pumping, your paniced, 'berzerked,' or watever, I suppose anything is possible. people do all sorts of unimaginable things in combat. But I'd think that ramming must have been a very unusual split second impulsive decision, not something they set out to do with any forethought. If you could compile stats I's bet that ramming was more common in air combat than tank combat, though that conclusion defies logic. To answer the origianl question, however, I would say to just add a special rule to whatever rule set you already like the best. it could simply be a percent chance to hit that's mosified by the speed of the oponent (positive if they're stopped). The roll could be thought to incorporate that chance of the crew losing their nerve. |
Dasher | 01 Mar 2011 7:44 a.m. PST |
OGRE Miniatures (Steve Jackson Games, lamentably OOP) |
leatherneck | 06 Mar 2011 9:04 p.m. PST |
i enjoyed the battleground wwii ramming rules.i played other wii games and i think these are the best that i've have seen.AND bgwwii rules let you know if the tanks get stuck together.and they Take size into account too. |
number4 | 07 Mar 2011 11:25 a.m. PST |
Ramming was probably a lot more common than many of us think. Given the very poor visibility from a buttoned up vehicle, accidental collisions are just as likely in a closely fought action. |