At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

User avatar
Trailape
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Trailape »

OK,..
So after reading through the thread provided by John, I’ve concluded I’m just going to ‘house rule / muddle through using my own research and best guesses. Some points of contention have what I consider ‘Obvious’ answers (1 not 4HE for a two pounder Tank gun) and others are just beyond me so where in doubt I’ll take a stab.
I see / read that Rich intends to produce a PDF Errata at some point so that’s good news.
I AM MY BROTHER'S KEEPER

Archdukek
Posts: 5146
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Archdukek »

Hi Scott,
You're right about the 2pdr tank gun. Rich acknowledged that error in a post on the first page of that thread I highlighted. I quote:

"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."

John

User avatar
Emilio
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:43 pm
Location: Cee, Galicia, Northwest Spain
Contact:

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Emilio »

But there was a HE round for the 2pdr, at least from 1942 on. And it was used by armoured cars for sure.

http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index.php? ... &Itemid=58

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=303782

https://rommelsriposte.com/2015/12/13/2-pdr/

There is a book by Ian Hogg on allied artillery that describes the HE round. It is at my club (and my club is 94 kilometers from I live), so I can´t check it now, but I´ll take a pic from it as soon as I can.

P.S. Yes, I understand that the HE round was not given to tanks. And not was around yet in France 1940, but I read in many sites that it didn´t exist that I don´t understand why people continues to say that.

Morgan
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 12:39 pm

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Morgan »

I would personally prefer that costings for support options did not take into account "rarity"; I think that some of the published material sometimes applies that (eg: making the AVRE cheaper in Op Martlet because they were commonly available for that operation). That said, I do like the rule in the Blitzkrieg 1940 book whereby you can buy something from an allied list but for a greater price. Maybe I'm being inconsistent there.

Generally, though, if something looks a bit off, I usually run it through the CoCulator and go with that support cost.
Use the Consolidated Arsenal! It's here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... E/htmlview

User avatar
Trailape
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Trailape »

Morgan wrote:
Fri May 10, 2019 7:52 am
I would personally prefer that costings for support options did not take into account "rarity"; I think that some of the published material sometimes applies that (eg: making the AVRE cheaper in Op Martlet because they were commonly available for that operation). That said, I do like the rule in the Blitzkrieg 1940 book whereby you can buy something from an allied list but for a greater price. Maybe I'm being inconsistent there.

Generally, though, if something looks a bit off, I usually run it through the CoCulator and go with that support cost.
I agree completely.
I also really dislike the idea of giving Platoons certain weapon systems at a lower cost than every other platoon.
A good example is the German Pioneer Platoon accessing a Flamethrower per squad for 1 point!
That’s effectively 9 support points worth of ‘burny burn burn’ 🔥 cover neutralising death for 3 points!
Why not simply say “ pioneers get 6 free support points to spend on Flamethrowers,.. oh, and bucket of grenades! Enjoy”!
Note: I’m ignoring the Fact that the German pioneers can access Flamethrowers for 2 points whilst everyone else pays 3!
If the player is splitting the squad up to do pioneer tasks then they should get the grenades (allocated to the wire clearing and mine clearing teams) but when the platoon is simply being used as a beefed up Rifle Platoon (and gamers will use it EXACTY for that) then I’m sorry, it’s naff.
Now it’s fine for scenarios and campaigns but in friendlies and pickup games or (god forbid) tournaments it’s a killer.
Who would want to simply give up 6 support points to your opponent? It like saying “Hey, I’m running a US Armoured infantry platoon in late ‘44 so I get a free Sherman!
Or,
“I’m running British so I get a free FO and Pre Game Barrage because the Brits loved their indirect fire support”.
Maybe then people would use Pioneers when playing games that REQUIRE lines of wire and mines cleared rather than using them as traditional infantry with access to a special discounted arsenal only they can access.
I AM MY BROTHER'S KEEPER

Archdukek
Posts: 5146
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Archdukek »

Hi Scott,
I'd also be inclined to make the German Pioneer Platoon scenario specific and balance out the benefits by giving the opponent his pick of fixed defences, bunkers and the like for the Pioneers to practice their arts on. But not pick up games against regular defenders. :-)

John

User avatar
Trailape
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: At the risk of sounding like a d@#k,...

Post by Trailape »

Archdukek wrote:
Sat May 11, 2019 12:39 am
Hi Scott,
I'd also be inclined to make the German Pioneer Platoon scenario specific and balance out the benefits by giving the opponent his pick of fixed defences, bunkers and the like for the Pioneers to practice their arts on. But not pick up games against regular defenders. :-)

John
I agree,...
These guys were specialist used specifically to breach, brake and blast fortifications and bunkers.
I AM MY BROTHER'S KEEPER

Post Reply