Problems with Tank guns.
- Thread starter cordas
- Start date
Tanks are inherently inflexible in an urban environment, and this is one of the ways we reflect that. Reactions are another. . .
GhostWolf69
Mongoose
msprange said:
So this rule should only apply when the battle field is distinctly URBAN???
/wolf
GhostWolf69
Mongoose
Mr Evil said:Slaps head and kicks the dead donkey just for the hell of it
Yeah I know it was a cheap shot half in jest. But sometimes I just love watching them squirm... :twisted:
Frankly I have no problems with this rule at all. It's simple, its clear, it's playable.
I don't need a "realism" reason since I'm only shuffling plastic. To me personally any argument is ok. Call it Balance, simulated effect... whatever. I don't really care.
/wolf
GhostWolf69 said:
Well, I think the rule won't come up when the battlefield isn't urban: try setting up on a blank 8-foot long table and see how useful that "infantry screen" tactic isn't
.I should have thought of the inflexibility argument: it's the same reason we don't allow riflemen to pick their targets, after all. And the only reason this is likely to be a problem is when the tank is on the move, and therefore only has one fire action available. Still, if you find this coming up a lot, maybe you will want to house rule it. As I say, I've only had something similar come up once, and the dice gods smote me for my temerity that time
.Lorcan Nagle
Mongoose
cordas said:
Not quite sure what you're trying to say in the second paragraph - my point is that if the tank creates a fire zone with its' main gun and coax machine gun and infantry are the nearest thing in the FZ - that represents the tank firing AT the infantry, not the vehicle behind it. Reasoning being that the coax points in roughly the same direction as the main gun. A Size 3 model is big enough that you can take your time to target it and fire at smaller targets closer at the same time, while size 2 isn't. there's no need to condense the coax's Fire zone, the fact that it has to be centred in the same place as the main gun's is limitation enough.
Actually the coax is usually pointing at exactly the same place the main gun is (thats what co- axial means). You can spray away with it but engaging one target with the coax and another with the main gun at the same time is usually not possible.
I'm not sure what Matt meant by his response, as I can't really see the logic there - unless there is something special about bigger than a man but smaller than an APC sized targets that tanks have problems with. It seems as if he agrees with the meat shield idea, in which case he must have been driving his new Jag with the windows down in a long tunnel and the fumes got him :wink:
I'm not sure what Matt meant by his response, as I can't really see the logic there - unless there is something special about bigger than a man but smaller than an APC sized targets that tanks have problems with. It seems as if he agrees with the meat shield idea, in which case he must have been driving his new Jag with the windows down in a long tunnel and the fumes got him :wink:
PilGrim said:
Here's how I'm reading it:
Your MBT just came around a corner (a Move action). Now, you knew the enemy were around the corner, so you did have the turret pointing in the right direction. But now you have a short period of time to identify all the targets, pick one, and fire. If you see something big, as in taller than the infantry, you fire on that. Otherwise, you take the first shot you get and go with it. You don't try to identify which vehicles (all shorter than the infantry, mind) belong to the enemy, and which ones are just cars parked along the road.
If you didn't just come around a corner, then you have two Shoot actions available, and the screen is not going to be looking too good after a round of MG fire. Now, if you get extremely unlucky you might not take the entire screen out (which is why I proposed my Hit The Dirt reaction), but that's getting unlucky. (If you're opponent is screening with a mob, then you probably won't shoot them all dead either, but in that case you might not be able to see the Shadow at all.)
Yeah, it breaks down a little, but the lack of ability to cover corners more than 10" away is a far bigger break in suspension of disbelief to me. I'm hoping that gets addressed in the main rulebook.
Yes and its easy to write a situation that goes the other way.
The rules as they stand are encouraging players to use infantry as meat sheilds for S2Vs...
Personally I have a problem with that its obvious I am in a not so small minority, but as I am beating a dead donkey and am getting bored of reading my own posts I will leave it at that. I will see what my fellow gamers say about it, and if they think its acceptable I will just grumble about them using cheesy tactics the same way they do when I park my Challies in cover.
The rules as they stand are encouraging players to use infantry as meat sheilds for S2Vs...
Personally I have a problem with that its obvious I am in a not so small minority, but as I am beating a dead donkey and am getting bored of reading my own posts I will leave it at that. I will see what my fellow gamers say about it, and if they think its acceptable I will just grumble about them using cheesy tactics the same way they do when I park my Challies in cover.
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
Well, like I said, your welcome to may a house rule, or ask your opponent if you can use said house rule. That said, I don't see a big problem.
Say infantry advance in front of the Shadow. Tank has LOS. First action open up with 2 MGs, second action Use the main gun alongside another mg. First action should clear out the infantry, leaving you a clear shot with the main gun.
A Abrams tank has a 36"/30" range with those machine guns. The Shadows max range is 40". If your concerned over the shadow, keep your tank in cover.
Counter his infantry with light vehicles and infantry of your own. I really see no problems, it is all part of the game.
Say infantry advance in front of the Shadow. Tank has LOS. First action open up with 2 MGs, second action Use the main gun alongside another mg. First action should clear out the infantry, leaving you a clear shot with the main gun.
A Abrams tank has a 36"/30" range with those machine guns. The Shadows max range is 40". If your concerned over the shadow, keep your tank in cover.
Counter his infantry with light vehicles and infantry of your own. I really see no problems, it is all part of the game.
they do have a weakness, they are one target, expensive and lower your shatter point so you're already penalised in a way for taking one, then you are penalised again for not being able to take out the main threat to it as theirs infantry in the way :?
someone mentioned GW rulings or something earlier, at least they ahve the common sense that infantry cannot block LOS to vehicles no matter what the infantry or how small the vehicle.
one thing you have to remember if you think of it as the infantry are not just standing their, thats their kind of area of control so they would be moving around, ducking, running etc whereas a vehicle an only move slowly up behind them. when a tank gun points in your direction down the street the infantry would all dive to the street sides, leaving the vehicle kind of stranded and dead unless it can reverse very quickly round a corner. soldiers on foot have far quicker reactions and ability to dive out the way than a vehicle. so you should be able to shoot vehicles no matter what their size if its only infantry between the shooter and the vehicle.
someone mentioned GW rulings or something earlier, at least they ahve the common sense that infantry cannot block LOS to vehicles no matter what the infantry or how small the vehicle.
one thing you have to remember if you think of it as the infantry are not just standing their, thats their kind of area of control so they would be moving around, ducking, running etc whereas a vehicle an only move slowly up behind them. when a tank gun points in your direction down the street the infantry would all dive to the street sides, leaving the vehicle kind of stranded and dead unless it can reverse very quickly round a corner. soldiers on foot have far quicker reactions and ability to dive out the way than a vehicle. so you should be able to shoot vehicles no matter what their size if its only infantry between the shooter and the vehicle.
as a point of interest, the Scimiter tank has had a rebirth as they have found they are better in an urban enviroment than a Chally due to mobility, and M1A2 crews have reported its hard to get a lock on them for tracking purposes. there is talk of a scimiter urban comat varient upgrade comming in due to tank crews exsperiance in Iraq. relevence well a scimiter would be classed as a size 2 vehicle. so far the bulldog is the test bed for some of the opgrades such as anti rpg armour, but the scimiter has been issued a engine upgrade already.
GhostWolf69
Mongoose
Just a couple of reasons I could think of:
1. Civilian vehicles, like the technicians are simply packing machineguns etc. They hardly qualifies as a prioritized target for Armor. Other Armor units that can blow your own armor to bits DO qualify. Simply making the crew alot mor motivated to track and fire at that target.
2. If you believe ene for a second that tracking and acquiring a fast moving target like a personal transport that size is just as easy as tracking another much slower armor unit... you have never been inside one of these things. I have. And I say the rule is VERY realistic. So cut down on the whining and "realism" argument. And bite the bullet, will you? We all want units that can do everything... but hey... it's a game, we can't all get what we want.
If you want to win all the time, don't blame the rules for loosing every now and again, instead of trying to find a way to improve your play "inside" the rules. That's my advice.
Personally I try to only question rules when I think they are unclear or contains internal contradictions, that make me not understand them.
Rules that are clear, simple and easy to follow, I don't have a problem with. And if they are stupid enough to piss me off I have two options: Stop playing the stupid game or Change the rule myself.
/wolf
1. Civilian vehicles, like the technicians are simply packing machineguns etc. They hardly qualifies as a prioritized target for Armor. Other Armor units that can blow your own armor to bits DO qualify. Simply making the crew alot mor motivated to track and fire at that target.
2. If you believe ene for a second that tracking and acquiring a fast moving target like a personal transport that size is just as easy as tracking another much slower armor unit... you have never been inside one of these things. I have. And I say the rule is VERY realistic. So cut down on the whining and "realism" argument. And bite the bullet, will you? We all want units that can do everything... but hey... it's a game, we can't all get what we want.
If you want to win all the time, don't blame the rules for loosing every now and again, instead of trying to find a way to improve your play "inside" the rules. That's my advice.
Personally I try to only question rules when I think they are unclear or contains internal contradictions, that make me not understand them.
Rules that are clear, simple and easy to follow, I don't have a problem with. And if they are stupid enough to piss me off I have two options: Stop playing the stupid game or Change the rule myself.
/wolf
In trying to help cordas and his topic out, I found the link below. It may not help in the least, but it is very interesting reading. So far I've just skimmed over it, but it is on tanks in urban combat. I recommend all players of Battlefield Evolution to have a read. There might be stuff in it to interest Mongoose as well, for future game use. It's 6MB, so dial-up be warned.
http://www.cgsc.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/gott_tanks.pdf
One quote from the "book" is "...tank commanders were encouraged to fight with their hatches open for rapid target acquisition." This was in the 1970's BTW. In BFE, I'm assuming the tanks are "buttoned up" from the way that the rules are written, and for play balance it makes sense.
One thing is for sure. If you look at the tanks in the game and their larger gun tube calibers (meaning longer barrels) it only becomes more difficult to traverse that now even longer gun tube around in an urban environment. What I'd say is "play the rules as written" but with the following house rule. If the Tank has seen the Size 2 vehicle for at least one previous Action and it hasn't moved, then I'd have an agreement around the table that the tank can engage the vehicle with its main gun, ignoring any intervening infantry. Call it the "Target Fixation = +1 to Size rule" :lol:. Think of it as spending a Ready Action before it can fire. If the target model moves, it defaults back to the rulebook as written. So to fire on it in the second Action of the turn the tank would have had to have moved into LOS in a previous turn. It's not what the rules say, but it does allow a bit of common sense to leak through. I'd take that and run with it cordas, because I do not think that you are going to get a rules change any time soon. Just make sure that as you size up your target that it isn't sizing you up as well. :wink:
http://www.cgsc.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/gott_tanks.pdf
One quote from the "book" is "...tank commanders were encouraged to fight with their hatches open for rapid target acquisition." This was in the 1970's BTW. In BFE, I'm assuming the tanks are "buttoned up" from the way that the rules are written, and for play balance it makes sense.
One thing is for sure. If you look at the tanks in the game and their larger gun tube calibers (meaning longer barrels) it only becomes more difficult to traverse that now even longer gun tube around in an urban environment. What I'd say is "play the rules as written" but with the following house rule. If the Tank has seen the Size 2 vehicle for at least one previous Action and it hasn't moved, then I'd have an agreement around the table that the tank can engage the vehicle with its main gun, ignoring any intervening infantry. Call it the "Target Fixation = +1 to Size rule" :lol:. Think of it as spending a Ready Action before it can fire. If the target model moves, it defaults back to the rulebook as written. So to fire on it in the second Action of the turn the tank would have had to have moved into LOS in a previous turn. It's not what the rules say, but it does allow a bit of common sense to leak through. I'd take that and run with it cordas, because I do not think that you are going to get a rules change any time soon. Just make sure that as you size up your target that it isn't sizing you up as well. :wink:
well matts thoughts were on an urban environment. now if a tank pulls into a street with troops advancing down it in front of a shadow the troops will scatter to the street sides but what does the shadow do? it cant get out the way like troops can and will just be sat in the middle of the street crapping itself as it dies. one trooper standing in the way wont protect it in the slightest.
