Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4029
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret » Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:15 am

Can you point me at the list you mean?

M72 should be HE 2 like any other infantry HEAT rocket. The performance of shaped charges against non-armoured targets doesn't scale up with calibre or performance against armour.

RPG-7 might be a special case, as it can throw HE/frag warheads, although they're much less common than HEAT.

dwtaylor0
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 7:21 am

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by dwtaylor0 » Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:15 pm

I was going off the arsenal list Arlequín put together:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/104 ... rsenal.pdf

By his own admission, it was a work in progress that kinda got abandoned:
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1195&p=11213#p11213

I've been using it since my own attempts to understand these things mostly resulted in a headache, but it's certainly open to critique and criticism. Hopefully Arlequín can chime in and give some of his thoughts/intentions.

Semi-related: one thing I've seen mentioned a few times in 'Platoon Leader: A Memoir of Command in Combat' by James R. McDonough is his belief that in addition to the M72s destructive power, he seemed to think it was also quite effective as a loud scary noise to rattle the enemy (my phrasing, not his). However, I don't have a sense if there is anything special about the M72 vs. an RPG/bazooka or whether having a chunk of explosives hurling toward you is an equally unsettling experience regardless of launcher.

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4029
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret » Wed Oct 01, 2014 7:25 pm

Those numbers are definitely way out of whack (sorry Arlequin!). The M72 has more HE dice than a pack howitzer!

In general HEAT warheads should be pretty lame in HE. Note the way that in WW2 CoC every infantry AT weapon has 2 HE dice, regardless of calibre and performance against armour. To put things in perspective, the actual shaped charge in the M72 weighs less than half of the one in the panzerschreck (around 300g compared to 650g). More effective needle holes in armour plate yes, bigger bangs no.

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

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Arlequín » Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:17 pm

:oops: Typo... likewise with the M67 and a couple of others... honest. :)

No argument here though, it was very much a work in progress. Even the raw AT values, while fairly accurate as far as penetration goes, are a real issue. As they are they give virtually zero survival to pretty much anything, yet we know that was not the case in the real world.

RPG-7 HE/Frag warheads etc, are fairly new innovations iirc, along with a number of other specialist warheads on other weapons. Seriously it was a minefield, even most WWII weapons got better ammo post-war. I think the only exception was the Centurion's 20pdr, which stuck with APBC.

The list really does need going over with a fine tooth comb, especially to determine 'what ammo' and 'when' in particular. By all means have at it though, I offered it up for it to be built on and I've been married, so being wrong is nothing I haven't experienced before.

;)

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4029
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret » Thu Oct 02, 2014 7:07 pm

Arlequín wrote:Even the raw AT values, while fairly accurate as far as penetration goes, are a real issue. As they are they give virtually zero survival to pretty much anything, yet we know that was not the case in the real world.
Agreed, I'd take stated armour penetration values with a huge pinch of salt. In theory the M72 can punch through something like 300mm or RHA, which is pretty dubious IMO. In reality I'd spec it so that it could destroy PT76s and was a threat to T-54s from the sides and rear.

Btw, the other thing that sticks out is the SKS being lumped in with the M1 carbine for limited range. The SKS fires the same cartridge at the same velocity as the AK-47, it should just be listed as a semi-automatic rifle. The M1 carbine fires a weird intermediate cartridge.

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

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Arlequín » Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:59 am

I did consider putting the SKS in with SLRs, but the cartridge is not the NATO 7.62 round either. In comparable terms the SKS sits between the carbine and the Garand (albeit the SKS has better ammo capacity), and well below the M14/FN in all possible comparisons.

The M1 carbine's poor reputation as a man-stopper has probably more to do with the skill of the shooter than the weapon and none of its detractors have ever volunteered to wear body armour and be shot by it when asked to back their criticisms.

:D

HEAT is problematic indeed and with virtually all weapons using it Post-WWII it can't be ignored. The way we approached it in 'Bush Wars' was to take a weapon's 'ordinary' penetration with AP rounds, as much as could be ascertained and use that as its AP.

HEAT rounds result in a lower save number for the defender on his armour save dice, so there is still some of that balance in CoC's abstract method between penetrating and saving. Survivability is reduced against HEAT rounds, but is not effectively an automatic kill, as would be the case if we used even the most conservative penetration figures against sloped armour.

Obviously that would in no way be realistic and indeed would make you wonder why APFSDS and DU Cores, and all that was ever developed if HEAT was that hot (no pun intended).

It's not perfect, but does not require any complicated additional rules to be created for it either, which is how we like it (I hope).

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4029
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret » Sat Oct 04, 2014 12:22 pm

The cartridge in the SKS is the same one as the AK47, and of comparable power to the 5.56mm of the M16. Out to 300m or so there's no real difference between those cartridges and the full power 7.62x51mm. If you're going to downgrade the SKS you should do likewise to the AK and M16. Personally I wouldn't bother, the differences in performance aren't big enough.

The SKS has plenty of punch. I once cut down a tree with one during a mad minute. Although IIRC there may have been a 12-gauge helping out...

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

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Arlequín » Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:20 am

I hear what you are saying, but it is still semi-auto and not full-auto. Okay you might put it in the same league as the Garand and the British L1 version of the FN (presuming we accept rates of fire are the most important factor), given that we are playing under 300m, but not the same as the M-16 and the AK surely?

Granted it may be more accurate than any weapon on auto and possibly even puts more rounds on target when all's said and done, but if we followed that train of thought, there would not be an 'assault rifle' class in the rules at all.

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4029
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret » Sun Oct 05, 2014 10:33 am

Yes, I'd put it in with the other semi-auto rifles.

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

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Arlequín » Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:33 am

So where does that leave the humble M1 carbine? Would it need a category of its own? What about the M2/M3 auto-carbines?

Given the ranges involved might they too go in with the Semi-autos?

:?

Post Reply