Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Post Reply
Cyrax
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 3:36 am

Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Cyrax »

Hey guys, so my friend and I are relatively new to Chain, and sometimes we have questions regarding rules that aren't 100% specific. Therefore, I'm going to make this thread and update it with questions we have as they come up in our games.

Our questions are as follows:

Q: In the German army lists, junior leaders are equipped with panzerfausts, but there are several variants. Which one are they most likely to carry unless otherwise specified?
A: "Generally I go for
1943 (late) - PF30
1944 - PF 60
1915 PG 100"

Q: Let's say a squad has line of sight on an enemy in the corner of a building, but the panzerfaust welding junior leader does not have line of sight. Would it not make sense for the team who can see the enemy be able to communicate to the leader informing him that there are enemies on the other side of a wall so he can fire the panzerfaust at the side of the building with troops on the other side?
A: "The JL could not order a PF to be used against a building. Only a Senior Leader can command its use against a non-vehicle target. See the next paragraph in 9.3.2 to that quoted by TT."
Last edited by Cyrax on Sun Feb 24, 2019 8:02 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7662
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Truscott Trotter »

The JL is not equipped with the Panzerfausts - anyone in the squad can fire it - it is a hypothetical representation of the AT firepower of a squad
p 41
9.3.2 SECTION ANTI‐TANK WEAPONS
Section anti‐tank weapons must be allocated to
the rifle Team within a Section or Squad. You
don’t need to track which individual soldier has it,
it is enough to know that it is with them and they
may use it when required.

The type is more difficult
Generally I go for
1943 (late) - PF30
1944 - PF 60
1915 PG 100
But that's my rationalisation

poiter50
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:23 am

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by poiter50 »

TT, I think you mean 1945 not 1915, otherwise the Brit WW1 armour is in trouble.
Truscott Trotter wrote:
Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:35 am
The JL is not equipped with the Panzerfausts - anyone in the squad can fire it - it is a hypothetical representation of the AT firepower of a squad
p 41
9.3.2 SECTION ANTI‐TANK WEAPONS
Section anti‐tank weapons must be allocated to
the rifle Team within a Section or Squad. You
don’t need to track which individual soldier has it,
it is enough to know that it is with them and they
may use it when required.

The type is more difficult
Generally I go for
1943 (late) - PF30
1944 - PF 60
1915 PG 100
But that's my rationalisation

Archdukek
Posts: 5145
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Archdukek »

If I recall correctly it's mid 1944 for the introduction of the PF60.

Just to add a further comment, the JL could not order a PF to be used against a building. Only a Senior Leader can command its use against a non-vehicle target. See the next paragraph in 9.3.2 to that quoted by TT.

John

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7662
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Truscott Trotter »

ooops yes 1945 :oops:
I always figures the CoC way of using PF's was to cut down on the record keeping - and to stop everyone having a PF

Archdukek
Posts: 5145
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Archdukek »

Truscott Trotter wrote:
Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:08 am
I always figures the CoC way of using PF's was to cut down on the record keeping - and to stop everyone having a PF
Agreed and it works well in practice. I have a few PF armed figures that I can add to the squad as a reminder which are then replaced with a rifleman when the supply is used up.

John

Cyrax
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 3:36 am

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Cyrax »

Makes sense. Thanks for the answers. Here's one more (found an in depth thread in a search).

Q: Do the StuG tank destroyers have a machine gun?
A: http://toofatlardies.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4310

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4118
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Seret »

Archdukek wrote:
Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:00 am
If I recall correctly it's mid 1944 for the introduction of the PF60.
More like late '44.

For all the big fights in the summer (Overlord, Dragoon, Bagration) the Germans would have the 30. You'll only start bumping into 60s if you're doing the pursuit battles in the autumn or the fighting over the winter (eg: the Bulge).

Effectively, since most wargamers are obsessed with Normandy to the exclusion of all other fighting I'd say the default should be the 30 for 1944 ;)

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7662
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Truscott Trotter »

I would allow it but then others wouldn't. ;) 8-)

My rationalization is the crew fires the main gun then gives a quick burst with the MG.

I read about a sherman firefly doing something similar although it was the TC doing the MG

Gun-Pit Paul
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat May 10, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Ongoing Rule Clarification Thread

Post by Gun-Pit Paul »

About the Pzf60, I have read that it did not appear until about Nov'44.

Post Reply