Help support TMP

"A Question Regarding Micro-Armour" Topic

13 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the SF Discussion Message Board

Back to the Modern Discussion (1946 to 2006) Message Board

Back to the Micro Armour: The Game Message Board

1,102 hits since 9 Dec 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Covert Walrus09 Dec 2017 3:37 p.m. PST

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but here we go -

Does anyone know where the measure point is on the US Army microscale wargames vehicles? Center point, or to the edge of the miniature?

Mark 1 Supporting Member of TMP09 Dec 2017 4:29 p.m. PST

Are you asking regarding the specific ruleset Micro Armor: the Game?

Or related to any one of the several rulesets that the US Army has used in various locals over the years to train with microarmor?

Or just in general?

(aka: Mk 1)

Covert Walrus09 Dec 2017 5:45 p.m. PST

More the second option, but it *would* be useful to find out what the general consensus as to target location is in *all* such games including Micro-Armor.

Thanks for the prompt answer too :)

Personal logo Dances with Clydesdales Supporting Member of TMP09 Dec 2017 6:21 p.m. PST

I use Command Decision for micro-armour, in it's various versions. this is from the latest version.

Command Decision Test of Battle(CD4): Page 13 Rule 1.3 Playing Conventions

"All measurements are made from and to the following locations"

"The closest point of a vehicle (excluding the gun barrel)"

"The closest point on the edge of a personnel stand (including gun crews)"

Mark 1 Supporting Member of TMP09 Dec 2017 7:04 p.m. PST

I don't know enough about the rules the US Army used in training at Knox or Leavenworth to answer. Would surely like to know more, and will stay tuned to see if any TMPers who used those rules chime on on the subject.

Most rulesets I have seen go one of three ways.

1) If the stand / base size is set in the rules (ie: "Figures should be mounted on 20 x 40mm bases") they often measure from the edge of the base.

2) When the stand / base size is not set in the rules (might be suggested or some range provided as a guideline, or might not be even that much) then range is often described as measured from the edge of the stand for infantry weapons, and from the edge of the vehicle model's hull for vehicles. In my experience this is the most common.

3) Occasionally range is measured from the center of the stand or the model. With tanks this is sometimes described as from the center of the turret rather than the hull (as the turret might not be located in the center of the hull).

Best I got. Hope it helps.

(aka: Mk 1)

VonTed09 Dec 2017 8:06 p.m. PST

It's a 6mms vehicle….. 😁

Durban Gamer10 Dec 2017 4:27 a.m. PST

If you use a grid, the issue goes away.

Mark 1 Supporting Member of TMP10 Dec 2017 2:13 p.m. PST

If you use a grid, the issue goes away.

Indeed it does. And that may well be the solution some gamers prefer.

But let us consider the ground scale and weapons to see the other side of the issue.

Most game rulesets used for 6mm WW2 or modern miniatures gaming on 1:1 unit scales (one model = one vehicle) suggest either a 1:1000 or 1:2000 ground scale. At 1:1000 one inch = approx 25 meters. At 1:2000 one inch = 50 meters.

How small do we want our grid to be? 12 inches? Less?

At 12 inches we are looking at a minimum resolution of 300 to 600 meters for our combat resolution. Make the grid finer, even all the way down to a 4 inch grid (~100mm), and we are still looking at 100m or 200m as our minimum resolution.

If I am working with infantry stands and trying to come up with a range band for thrown weapons or short-ranged weapons (like SMGs, or rifle grenades), a resolution of +/- 600m, 300m, 200m, or even 100m is a pretty tough pill to swallow. At least for those of us who want to see how our infantry fight progresses, rather than just to see how our die roles worked out.

Yes, I can understand the perspective that says "long range, short range, and close contact" as range bands. That works reasonably well for those who want to see how their game progresses without the details of how the combat takes place.

When you get down to ranged fire by the infantry, some gamers are perfectly content with a measuring resolution of +/- 100%. Others may prefer to have higher resolution than +/- 200m on range measurements when many of their weapons have an effective ranges of less than 200m.

I prefer to know that as a tank advances from a distance of 150m down to 50m it will make it's way into panzerfaust range (conversationally ~60m). With a grid my only information is that it is somewhere between 200-400m, or somewhere between 0-200m.

And measuring from the edge of stands vs the center of stands, when the ground scale is 1:2000, and the stands are larger than 20mm in size, might make a difference of 40m in my measured range to the target.

So it might not be a factor in some games, but I can certainly see how it is a factor in others.

(aka: Mk 1)

Wolfhag12 Dec 2017 7:14 a.m. PST

I normally use a scale of 1" = 25m with micro armor or 1/144 scale models. At that scale, the tank would take up a footprint of about 1/4 of an inch. I measure from the front of the hull on the model or edge of the infantry stand so the distance is the same using any scale model.


Legion 412 Dec 2017 3:01 p.m. PST

I don't know enough about the rules the US Army used in training at Knox or Leavenworth to answer.
I can't remember … old fart

But our Bde Cdr at Benning had me order from GHQ our Mech Hvy Bde, a USSR MRR & Tank Bn. I didn't buy them myself(!) we used the system for procuring non-standard items. I was with the Bde Log Section and he knew of my predilection for that kind of stuff. He was also my Mech Bn Cdr in the ROK. So we knew each other well.

The Bde S-2[Intel] Section mounted them in Plt strength on heavy card board(?). The US in Green and the USSR in Brown. So yes, we got paid to play with toys bought with tax payer money … evil grin

Wolfhag12 Dec 2017 6:09 p.m. PST

It may have been this one: link


Covert Walrus31 Dec 2017 1:22 p.m. PST

Thanks for that, guys, it was most helpful.

The Dunn-Kempf looks complex but certainly realistic – The curtain idea is one that makes some computer based RTS look slack :)

Mobius01 Jan 2018 6:55 a.m. PST

I would use the center of the turret (if there is one) or the center of the superstructure if there is not.
Since scale-wise in Panzer War the vehicles are 7x too big the tank would be much smaller then It appears on the table. Maybe the size of a M60 turret cupola.

Infantry stands are a little different. There you can use the center edge of any facing.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.