"Chain of Command optional rule : weak armour" Topic

I've been bothered by the capacity of the Panther tank to withstand flank shots in the otherwise excellent CoC rules by the Too Fat Lardies, even though you can find lots of accounts that the mighty big cat was fairly toast when it was hit in the fank or rear by a bazooka rocket or an AP shell even from the humble 75mm Sherman gun…
Consequently, I'm thinking of adding an optional "weak armour" rule to reflect this vulnerability, even though I'm usually loathe of tinkering with a rules system (more complexity, danger of imbalance…)
So, do you think the issue needs to be addressed at all?
And if yes, which of these 2 options would you prefer?

- If hit in the flank, roll damage as if hit in the rear (damage on 3,4,5,6 instead of only 4,5,6). Save normally on 5,6.

- If hit in the flank,roll damage normally on 4,5,6. But any hits on flank or rear are saved only on a 6 instead of 5,6.

Thanks for reading the post, and any contribution you wish to make. Cheers.

I think you have a good point. It's really just a tweak on the heavy armour characteristics for a Tiger. If it can get a benefit for thick side armour, why not a disadvantage for weak side armour. Go for it, I say.

Does CoC have the saves for damage on armor all be the same? If yes, then use damage on the 3 to 6 to keep things as simple to recall as possible.

How much weaker was the armour compared to other tanks that you are not proposing a 'weak armour' category for, e.g. Shermans and T-34s?

Yea, seems like the Panther's flank armor, based upon memory off the top of my head (very dangerous I know), should be about the same as that for a Sherman or T-34.

How does CoC handle those?

Just looked this up on-line, and appears the Panther's flank armor is slightly better than that of the T-34/76 and Sherman, but slightly inferior to the flank armor of the T-34/85, so I would compare the CoC ratings to those.

From the front quarter though, still, the Panther's armor should still be quite good, due to both its sloping, and the angle-off fire, which combined together might make shots bounce off, or at least be ineffective at penetrating it.

So, I'd say to use your revised, lower, flank shot modifier, the attacker should have to be at, or behind a line delineated from the front of the Panther's glacis, and extending outwards from either side of that. Same goes for the turret's side armor, though obviously, the facing of it will be in play here if it is rotated from the gun pointing straight ahead.

As to your rules mods, your first option changes the rating by 33%, whereas the second one makes a 50% change, so keep that in mind when comparing to the other tanks in CoC.

Good questions : basically, if you hit your target in CoC (like in Wat), you inflict 1 hit on 5,6 if from the front, on 4,5,6 if from the flank, and on 3,4,5,6 if from the rear. You always save a hit on 5,6.
So, if a Sherman with an AC damage capacity of 7 dice hits a Panther in the flank, you roll 7 damage dice and then 11 save dice for the Panther. Since it takes 3 simultaneous hits to have an instant destruction, and you can recover a lot of non lethal damage, it's extremely hard to kill a Panther with a Sherman even from the flank which should not be (not an expert on armour thickness, but I read enough examples of Panther destroyed by flank hits by Shermans…). Since a Sherman has an armour of 6, if you fire a nother Sherman's gun at its flank, you can see you'll easily destroy it since it has but saves.

For simplicity's sake my first inclination is to simply reverse the "Heavy Armour" rule from the Tiger, and let the attacker strike the side as if it was the rear.

Possibly also consider the optional rule for improved AT strike rolls (4+ v. front, 3+ v. side, 2+ v. rear). Increased firepower will favor the lighter units by improving their chances of dealing damage, whereas the big cats were likely going to brew them up regardless if they hit and so don't benefit much from the change.