1939 Poles errata

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Post Reply
andysyk
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:13 pm

The main problem is that the lists are not consistent in what a LMG/SAW Team is. If you go by the period manuals which specify the roles of all men in a LMG Team and then compare them to the written lists in the Blitzkrieg book there is no common reference. So if we take all men given the role of Gun Commander, No.1, N0.2, ammo Bearers: (All standard Infantry)

Belgian Manual 6 Crew*, . COC One Gunner, 5 Riflemen. FP Dice 4 + 5 + 11
Dutch Manual 2 Crew*, COC 2 crew, 9 others FP Dice 5 + 9 = 14 (Bit different here, whole squad) Also cant find manual at moment so not sure..
French Manual 6 Crew*, COC 2 crew, 4 riflemen. FP Dice 6 + 4 = 10
British Manual 3 Crew*, COC 3 Men. FP Dice 6
German Manual 3 Crew*, COC 3 Men FP Dice 8
Italian Manual 4 Crew*, COC 3 Crew, 1 Rifleman FP Dice 6 + 1 = 7

*for the LMG Group, all with roles which preclude them from acting as Riflemen


So in COC a FM.30 requires 1 crew, Lewis 2 crew, FM 24/29 2 crew, BREN 3 crew, MG34 3 crew, Breda 30 3 crew.
Not going to go into the merits of the different weapons here.. although I do think the FM 24/29 and especially the Breda 30 are overrated as 6D6 weapons.

However the closest example in the above to the Polish 4 man team is the Belgian 6 man one above it uses same weapon and has even more ammo carriers than the Polish, yet is allowed to fire all men in addition to the gunner, so why cant the Polish do the same in game?. Why do some weapons require more crew even though they use the same in game stats.

As Ive said in my posts above I think if youre an ammo carrier -or any other member of a LMG team, you've no business carrying out your own private little war but in COC the Belgians can, why not the Polish?

Above it was noted with a lot of agreement that a squad with a BREN should have an advantage over a squad with a BAR, going by the above would you rather have a British Rifle Section 10 men total 13 dice or Belgian Rifle Section 13 men total 16 dice. No advantage at all for having a BREN. Knock the three extra men off the Belgians and you have equal FP Dice.
Last edited by andysyk on Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Archdukek
Posts: 4638
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Archdukek » Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:24 pm

What the rules at present say, as per the published 1939 Polish list, is that a Polish squad contains a BAR with 3 crew putting out 3D6 of firepower, exactly the same as if they had rifles. They can continue to fire with 3 D6 until all the 3 crew are killed. To my mind that's more flexible than fielding them as riflemen. But each to their own.

What's under debate is whether that's an accurate reflection of the historic squad structure.
John

andysyk
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:00 pm

My point is that all nations specified in their manuals the amount of men required to keep that weapon in action. They job is to keep that weapon in action not engage the enemy, except in extremis. Thats why they are called ammo bearers etc. In some of the above COC lists these men are allowed to operate in the role of a rifleman rather than their primary role, this is not consistent. This is not historical structure/purpose, but they are official lists. In the case of the Belgians only one man is carrying out his historical role. Contrarius is arguing to maximise the Dice output of the Polish Team. I don't agree with it, its not historical but if its allowed for another Army why not the Polish.
If the debate is solely about the historical structure of the Polish Wz.28 Team and how it operates, its simple 4 men. Only the Wz.28 fires, the commanders commanding and the ammo bearers are ammo bearing.

gebhk
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:21 am

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by gebhk » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:29 pm

In 1939 at least, the German gun crew consisted of 4 men.

andysyk
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by andysyk » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:48 pm

Yes gebhk.
However, Im meaning the 1940 four Rifle Squad structure ZUG, because thats the one the COC 1940 Handbook lists.
In fact from then on the LMG team was not a seperate team as in the earlier Platoons. The Infantry Manuals are quite specific that the squad from then on should fight as a whole and the LMG members were not split from the Rifle members. So German squads on table should not have a Rifle Team and LMG Team they fought as a whole.
The Germans found having a seperate LMG and Rifle Team unwieldy in Poland and altered the Platoon Structure and Tactics accordingly.

User avatar
Arlequín
Posts: 1290
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 11:29 pm
Location: King's Vale Royal

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Arlequín » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:27 am

As Andy says, consistency is the issue. It's unfair to insist on correct gun team roles for one army and not another.

On the plus side a four-man BAR team costs no more than a two-man BAR team and can soak up twice the shock/kills. All things being equal a BAR team will still be rolling three dice long after a MG 34 has been silenced and of course it re-rolls ones as an AR.

If all the gun team are to be 'crew', then that drops the force rating another point too.

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 3934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Seret » Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:46 pm

Contrarius wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:14 pm
OK. Agreed the gun definitely requires a minimum of two crew. If we take 5D6 as our goal for the 4-man team
As the others have said, that's putting the cart before the horse. You shouldn't be writing your list to achieve a certain effect, you should be writing it to reflect what happened in real life.

The BAR is 3d6, there's no reason to change that.

Contrarius
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:35 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Contrarius » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:30 pm

Seret wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:46 pm
... You shouldn't be writing your list to achieve a certain effect, you should be writing it to reflect what happened in real life.

The BAR is 3d6, there's no reason to change that.
There IS reason to change that. There's an error the lists: it's a four-man crew not a three-man crew. Also Rich's interpretation introducing a one-man BAR crew was at least partly intended to buff the output of the BAR team which seemed underpowered compared to its rivals.

And anyway, the goal of this exercise is not just to reflect what happened in real life: it is to reflect what happened in real life *within the confines of a pre-existing system of gaming rules, while remaining consistent across several national army lists*.

5D6 is a suggestion, merely a suggestion, that sounds fair for the output of the entire 4-man team. (Compared to a US BAR operator + 3 men, which costs the same and will be putting out 6D6 for an inferior weapon.) This may be a little artificial but it seems to me a workable way to get the points system balanced again.

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 3934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Seret » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:52 pm

Contrarius wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:30 pm
There IS reason to change that. There's an error the lists: it's a four-man crew not a three-man crew.
A BAR is 3d6 no matter how many crew it has. 1-man crew is 3d6, 4-man crew is still 3d6. What's the issue is how many of the men in the gun team should be free to use their rifles to supplement that 3d6.
Also Rich's interpretation introducing a one-man BAR crew was at least partly intended to buff the output of the BAR team which seemed underpowered compared to its rivals.
Well, only Rich knows for sure, but being a little familiar with his priorities as a designer I doubt that was the reason he changed it. I strongly suspect it was because he was trying to reflect training and doctrine. He changed the German gun teams to 3 men for the same reason.
5D6 is a suggestion, merely a suggestion, that sounds fair for the output of the entire 4-man team. (Compared to a US BAR operator + 3 men, which costs the same and will be putting out 6D6 for an inferior weapon.)
I don't think there's any point in comparing one list to another. The only issue is how many of the four men in the gun team are crew and how many are riflemen. The only thing that should inform that decision is how the Poles actually operated. If it turns out their gun teams were somewhat inefficient, so be it. In the early war an awful lot of armies found that their pre-war assumptions and manpower decisions were just plain wrong after testing them in battle. That kind of inefficiency is just part of the historical context, so should be in the game.

Anyway, as mentioned above; large gun crews are actually a good thing. They cost the same in the CoCulator as small gun crews, but they're much more resistant to shock and casualties.

Contrarius
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:35 pm

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Post by Contrarius » Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:37 pm

If they cost the same (just three pts) then it’s certainly less of a problem. Except of course that 3D6 seems woefully underpowered compared with other BAR equivalents in other armies which served the same purpose. Some sort of consistency across lists is, in my view, important as it throws up numerous issues, esp when fighting non-historical opponents.

Been thinking a little about the purposes of a SAW, specifically what makes it better than the equivalent number of riflemen. Laying down covering fire seems to be one of the most important of these functions. I assume that the BAR team will provide cover over a 4” front - enough to interdict an enemy MG34 at least.

Post Reply