Early War Handbook Queries

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

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

Early War Handbook Queries

Post by Arlequín » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:58 am

Okay I'm not donning the black hat here or anything, the EW Handbook is excellent and clearly very well-researched, but a few things have jumped out at me.

1) The French 25mm has different AP ratings in the French and British lists, AP 5 on the French, but only 4 on the British.

2) Allied vehicle weapons intended as 'anti-armour' have a poor AP factor. The .50 Vickers was not too good, so its '1' is about right to me, especially as remaining stocks of AP were few and far between after production stopped in the Mid-'30s when the 15mm Besa was chosen for future use.

The 15mm Besa was comparable to the .55 Boys and both to the French 13mm. All three of these were within AP 3 territory with their developed AP rounds. Given that the German 20mm KwK 30 & 38 AP are also '3', the 13mm & 15mm (even the Boys) should be equal, because they were; despite being smaller rounds they had higher velocities. Even some of the wilder penetration data sets support this comparability.

3) The poor Panzer I had priority for the tungsten-cored SmKH round (also as used in the Panzerbüchse 38 & 39), each vehicle supposedly having 90 mixed into its standard load of 2,250 rounds, the rest being SmK and ball. Being twinned automatic weapons, compared to the Panzerbüchse, an AP of at least 1 seems fair to me to reflect the mix, but nada? In Spain they could and did take out T-26s from the side or rear at under 150m; not that they usually got that close.

4) The mighty PaK 36 is a bit over-powered at AP 5 surely? Okay it did have the first of the PzGr 39 rounds for France, but only some 7,000 were fired across all arms, compared to over 70,000 standard PzGr, which would only be AP 4 at best. In other words a specialised round, not a standard one. There wasn't even an improved round for the Czech 37mm guns until after the campaign was over, so they are definitely over-powered.

At present the German 37mm is equal to the British 2 pdr, when in reality it was equal to the French 25mm and 37mm SA38. Both the the 7.5cm KwK and IeIG 18 had better penetration than the 37mm, yet were both still inferior to the French and British 47mm and 2 pdr.

Across the board the German weapons are typically (but not always) one AP point higher than comparable foreign weapons.

None of these factors is a game-breaker of course, the place of things in the support tables will reflect what values have been assigned to them. My inner Early War Nerd will out though. Having reams of data to sort through makes comparisons hard, I know and I've only had to deal with a quite limited range in my own Interwar endeavours!

Now I've got that off my chest, I offer Rich my congratulations on an otherwise excellent publication. :)

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1620
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by Richard » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:26 pm

Afternoon Arlequin

All perfectly fair comments which we could debate at length. However, if anyone says :"What are the official stats for 1940" then they are the ones given. Ultimately, I have to mail my hat somewhere and have done so. Of course, if people prefer to adjust these based on their own reading of the situation then I would be the first to encourage that.

I would conceded that the British 1 pounder is a typo and should be 5, the same as the French weapon.

Cheers

Richard

OldNick
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:59 am
Location: Coventry UK

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by OldNick » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:51 pm

While we're on typos (for future impressions?) may I presume that a layer of gaffer tape was applied to the German "armoured card"?
Page 111, Reconnaissance Units, para 2.

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1620
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by Richard » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:53 pm

Feel free to do so Nick.

powermonger
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 1:16 am

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by powermonger » Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:14 pm

Possible errata: page 98, option for "red dice" is missing in the support options.

User avatar
sjwalker51
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:01 pm
Location: Sheffield, South Yorkshire

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by sjwalker51 » Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:43 pm

And so it begins....

The 48-hour phony war is over, Rich ;-)

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

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by Arlequín » Tue Sep 18, 2018 4:47 am

False alarm, stand easy. ;)

Having read it I'll be surprised if there's much nit-picking to be had in this book. I don't know anything much about the Belgians and Dutch, but the British, French and what little I know about the Germans, is rock solid to my eyes.

Murmering in the ranks about consecutive phases, mortar barrages and a few other niggles, should be quieted too. There may be a few adherents to hoary old myths that will need convincing about some things, but that will probably be about it.

There's nothing I didn't like and the only 'yeah, buts' are those in the post above. I'm sure nobody wants me to gush on for a few pages about what Rich got right and why though.

;)

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1620
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by Richard » Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:37 am

;) God forbid!

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1620
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by Richard » Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:46 am

That said, there are some annoying errors. At present we have the following.

Superior Junior Leaders. These are listed for German airborne troops. They shouldn't be. These are just junior Leaders. We were going to make them superior but in testing it really didn't make sufficient difference to make it worth it and, to be frank, when it did make a difference it make the Germans better than they should have been. Please scratch the word superior from those Junior Leaders.

Page 98, the lack of red dice in the support list is an error.

British tanks with a 2 pounder gun are listed as having HE of 4. They shouldn't be, they have no HE so we give them a factor of 1, the same as the 2 pounder AT gun. I know whey this happened, but it is still a bloody annoying (and inexcusable) error.

I think that's it so far. I am sure there will be more over the next day or so. The document was proof read over twenty times by different people but we still come back to the fact that stats on tables are almost impossible to proof read. What I will do in a few days time is correct the PDF document and send that out again by email.

Rich

moiterei_1984
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:07 pm

Re: Early War Handbook Queries

Post by moiterei_1984 » Tue Sep 18, 2018 8:04 am

If I may chime in here?

I have a question regarding the new rules for force moral on p.13 & 14
On page 13 it states:
In the main rules, when Force Morale is reduced to 2, a Jump-Off Point is removed from the table. This is no longer the case. Now, when Force Morale drops to the point on the Force Morale Track identified by the letter ‘J’, the player must immediately move one Section or Team to make contact with the friendly Jump-Off Point closest to them.
this makes perfect sense to me, but than on page 14 in the example it states the following:
A Green force starts with just four Command Dice. This falls to three dice when its Force Morale drops to 5, it Removes a Jump-Off Point when it falls to 4
Emphasis by me obviously.

I assume it should have referred to the new rule instead to the removal of a JOP?

Post Reply