Consolidated arsenal question

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Post Reply
User avatar
JOHN BOND 001
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 11:58 am

Consolidated arsenal question

Post by JOHN BOND 001 » Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:20 am

Should the Stug family of vehicles and the Hertzer be classed as LOW PROFILE in the coc calculator?
thanks JOhn

batesmotel34
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by batesmotel34 » Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:49 pm

Discussion of Stug and low profile ad nauseum here: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5812&hilit=hetzer+low

There doesn't see to be a really firm conclusion so probably your call is as good as any.

For what it's worth, StuG III is low profile in WAT while the Hetzer/JgdPz 38t is small.

Chris

User avatar
JOHN BOND 001
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 11:58 am

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by JOHN BOND 001 » Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:58 pm

Thanks Chris for the link, have read thru it.
Interesting you mentioned "What a Tanker' should one use the 'Features list' as a reference to gauge if the vehicle is Low Profile or small? I know that of the AP and Strike values are different compared to CoC but the Features list maybe helpful ?

Anyone's thoughts?

cheers John.

User avatar
MLB
Posts: 731
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by MLB » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:21 am

I took this picture when I was at Saumur a couple of years ago. One reason I took it was because I was surprised that the profile of the Hetzer was a similar height to the StuG. The Hetzer is certainly shorter in length and width but not as much as I was expecting. I'd say the Hetzer may well be classed as small when compared to the StuG but in terms of profile I would give it the same as the StuG.

Image

To make another comparison (and it's as if the curators in the museum anticipated this discussion when arranging the vehicles), here the StuG profile can be compared with the Jagdpanzer IV. Much like the Hetzer and StuG the Jagdpanzer profile height is almost the same as the StuG.

Image

Whatever decision you reach on profiles I'd say from these pictures the Hetzer, StuG and Jagdpanzer should all be rated the same.
The Tactical Painter https://thetacticalpainter.blogspot.com
Painting little soldiers for tactical battles on the table top

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6518
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:24 am

Which IIRC is what the wiki stats I quoted in the initial thread stated. 🙄

batesmotel34
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by batesmotel34 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:28 pm

Noting that the only vehicles in the rules classified as both low profile and small are various carriers for the British, I think we should be very reluctant to rate anything larger, e.g. a hetzer, as both low profile and small. (I haven't checked the consolidated arsenal to see if any AFV are beyond carrier types but this combination generally seems like something to avoid. In WAT, the two attributes have different effects (spotting versus a reduced chance to hit, so rating an AFV with both may make more sense there.

Chris

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6518
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sun Jul 14, 2019 8:07 pm

I didn't think anyone was suggesting the Stug or even Hetzer be rated small in CoC. Would need to check the stats on the Hetzer but IIRC small in CoC is based on width?

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 3910
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by Seret » Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:12 pm

JOHN BOND 001 wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:58 pm
Interesting you mentioned "What a Tanker' should one use the 'Features list' as a reference to gauge if the vehicle is Low Profile or small?
I wouldn't. Nick has applied a certain amount of "fudge factor" to the attributes in WaT. For example, the Hetzer is listed as "fast" even though it was woefully slow. It's not a mistake, he did it because he wanted people to use it to do shoot-n-scoot tactics and he thought "fast" would help with that.

So the lists in WaT aren't super-rigorous in how they apply things.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6518
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Consolidated arsenal question

Post by Truscott Trotter » Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:25 am

To add to the confusion in BK the Panzer II is low profile at 6'6" but the Stug A at 6'4" is not!
I think Rich had it correct in the MRB and the line about being smaller than him was Cooking Larger !! :lol:

Post Reply