D A THB | 23 Aug 2014 9:10 p.m. PST |
Hi, I am just playtesting these rules using my Early WW2 figures, before I spend up on new figures and Tanks. I find that Artillery guns are unable to damage Tanks, and Tanks themselves are just able to damage but not destroy other Tanks. Seems a bit at odds with what I have read so am thinking of doing some mods. Either reduce armour by one point or force a bogging check when failing by one point. The alternative is to try The TFL rules but would these give the same results? I aim to do Palestine 1917 and Villers Bretonneux 1918. |
Privateer4hire | 23 Aug 2014 10:38 p.m. PST |
Tanks have front armor not higher than 2 and most are 1. Greater than 16" away increases this to effectively 2 or 3. Artillery and tank guns both have AT6 and FP 4+. At long range an armor 2 tank needs at least 3 to tie to avoid a bail (dmg marker) or potentially destroyed on a 1-2. At short range, the same tank needs 4 to tie. The armor 1 tanks need 4 and 5 respectively just to bail (dmg). Shooting at tanks that aren't bogged or bailed halves ROF but since tanks and arty all have ROF 2, you always get 1 shot per big barrel. German tanks can never be better than Trained so are hit on 3+ before distance and cover (hard to find the way the missions deploy most tanks) are factored in. Brit tanks can be Trained or Vet so 3+ or 4+ hits. Looks like fairly decent odds to me just doing the math-hammer. YMMV. |
monk2002uk | 23 Aug 2014 10:38 p.m. PST |
Artillery was the nemesis of tanks, without question. A field gun could tear through a tank and the photos of knocked out tanks (as opposed to broken down ones) were almost always the result of direct fire from field artillery. Far less common was Minenwerfer fire, followed by the even less common dedicated anti-tank guns in the last months of the war. If the rule is written in the way that you describe then it is not correct IMHO. The tank versus tank rule sounds pretty fair, though crews would bail in these circumstances even if a tank was not destroyed as such. Robert |
Privateer4hire | 23 Aug 2014 10:46 p.m. PST |
Good points. In Great War, tanks don't bail per se. They receive dmg markers and can have up to 2. Collecting a 3rd wipes the tank completely. Start of the tank owner's turn, he rolls a die for each dmg marker on a tank for a skill check. Each success repairs and removes a dmg marker. Tanks have an artificial saving grace in that anyone shooting at them halves their ROF. |
D A THB | 24 Aug 2014 3:25 a.m. PST |
Oh dear we seem to be talking about different rule sets? I am referring to "The Great War" rules by Warhammer Historical. I think Privateer4hire is talking about the "Great War" supplement by Battlefront. I was playing on an 8x6 table with 28mm models which I found was too large. With a movement of 6" and testing for bogging each move it was almost impossible to recreate Villers Bretonneux. My only British gun tank (MKIV Male) bogged on the fourth move. The ranges of guns was also too small so I am assuming that these rules are meant for 6x4 tables. I was about to try "Contemptible Little Armies" when my suburb had another power cut. (second time this week) So I gave up and when around to the girlfriends to get warm as its winter here, This is the second time I've tried these rules and am still not taken with them. CLA was a set we played about 8 years ago and had lots of fun with, so may get the nod of approval before trying "Through the Mud and the Blood". |
monk2002uk | 24 Aug 2014 5:00 a.m. PST |
The bogging rule should be significantly amended for Villers Bretonneux. Tank reliability had increased a lot by then but the main improvement was in choice of terrain. No more use of heavily fought over and boggy terrain. The ground around VB was firm and level. The occasional shell hole could be a problem, causing one of the A7Vs to be abandoned. Robert |
Privateer4hire | 24 Aug 2014 9:23 a.m. PST |
Sorry about the confusion. The bogging term made me think it was the Flames of War new release for Great War. |
Privateer4hire | 24 Aug 2014 12:29 p.m. PST |
Sure but that'd be like discussing terrain effects with your opponent before the game. Obviating the argument phase of the turn is not what wargaming is about, is it? :) |
D A THB | 24 Aug 2014 1:48 p.m. PST |
Thanks for the couple of points raised which are helpful for writing the scenario. I had a read of CLA and found not much difference in ranges and the movement could be more restricted. A.T could work better though. |
D A THB | 24 Aug 2014 5:56 p.m. PST |
Just had a look at the Bolt Action Mods which look more like what I want. I already own most of the Books so it makes sense to go with those rules. |