Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1907
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by john de terre neuve »

Here is the full relevant section from the rulebook:
10.3.6 H.E. AGAINST BUILDINGS
H.E. fire from direct fire weapons or mortars will reduce any cover the target is in by one level. However, it will also potentially damage the structure.
A building will become unstable if any gun firing H.E. rolls three 6’s in a single Phase when rolling to hit the building or a Unit in it. Troops in an unstable building must evacuate the building before the end of the Turn. If they fail to do so before the Turn ends, they will roll 1D6 for each man inside the structure, losing one man to falling rubble for every 6 rolled. Any survivors will then be placed immediately outside any door of the building of their opponent’s choosing.
If four or more 6’s are rolled when rolling to hit the target, the structure will begin to collapse. Troops in a collapsing building will roll 1D6 for each man inside the structure, losing one man to falling rubble for every 5 or 6 rolled. Any survivors will then be placed immediately outside any door of the building of their opponent’s choosing.
In respect to cover from 1940 book:
Roll
Result
1,2 Building is on fire unstable
3,4 Building is Unstable
5 Building collapses. Reduced to rubble which counts as light cover
6 Danger UXB. The building is only lightly damaged, but an unexploded bomb is present
So I think what Mike did was legitimate and the rubble is light cover.

John

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1907
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by john de terre neuve »

Seret said:
Especially in the "Church on the Flank" scenario, if you deploy within LOS of the Germans, they'll just sit back and batter you into oblivion. Run a sort of reverse-slope type defence instead.
Let's hope I can figure it out!

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4149
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by Seret »

john de terre neuve wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 9:21 pm
Let's hope I can figure it out!
Bottom line is that his vehicle entry point is a sunken road, so he's got a hull-down firing position for the gun, and it's too far away to have any real chance of hitting it with a PIAT. If you deploy at the edge of cover he can hit you but you can't hit him.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8066
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by Truscott Trotter »

I hadn't see that bit in the BK 1940 book but as they are playing 1944........I would go with what makes sense - obviously need to discuss this before the game but the accounts I have read all say making rubble is making a mistake for the attackers so I see no reason to give them an unreasonable bonus!

PS No other WW2 rule set I have played (FOW, BA) has rubble as light cover either .....just sayin

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1907
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by john de terre neuve »

I agree we will have to have some discussion before the next game as the main piece of terrain is a large church that I presume is stone. It size alone would make it unlikey that it could be taken down in one phase and I agree that that the residual rubble in this case would likely be hard cover.

John

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8066
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Looks like hard cover to me
Image

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1907
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by john de terre neuve »

You make a good point TT, I have asked the question on FB!

custosarmorum
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by custosarmorum »

My understanding of places like Monte Cassino is not so much that the rubble provides equal to or better cover but rather it increased the potency of the defenders. For a large building complex like the monastery, reducing it to rubble makes the entire area defensible, not just along the perimeter. So instead of just breaching the walls (to use a more medieval turn of phrase), and driving the enemy to the next building, the entire square footage of the complex is now defensible which allow the defenders to fall back bit by bit and requires the attackers to fight for virtually every foot. Also, instead of have defenders firing from loopholes or windows, now all the defenders can fire effectively (especially important when considering units like Falshirmjäger with a good number of automatic weapons like MG42/FG42s). Part of the other problems sat MC was the difficulty of getting up the mount itself.

As to the photo and hard cover question, since there are only two classes of cover, I think the reduction to light per the 1940 handbook is a good compromise. Certainly, if there were other levels of cover (Medium?) it might fit into that category (much like bunkers as "particularly hard cover"), but with the two CoC has, it seems that making it light cover reflects the reduction of protection (which of course is offset by the increased firepower of not being reduced to firing only from doors/windows -- especially valuable if the building might not have windows on a given side or maybe only one).

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4149
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by Seret »

I think if we treat a stone wall or a sangar as hard cover, then rubble should be hard cover too.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8066
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Turn 4-Von Luck Campaign

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Seret wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 5:31 pm
I think if we treat a stone wall or a sangar as hard cover, then rubble should be hard cover too.
Hard to disagree with that logic....combined with making the area very difficult going .has the added bonus of discouraging random house demolitions

Post Reply