Sherman speed (WaW)

B

Blue Devil 88

Mongoose
Where did you come up with the movement rates for tanks?

A Sherman and a Sherman Firefly are the same tank except armament. Both had a speed of 24-26 mph(15-20 mph/cross-country). Why does the Firefly gain an inch of speed?

Also why is the Sherman slower than most German tanks when it was about equal in speed on the road? A Panzer IV had a speed of 21-25 mph (10 mph/cross-country). A Tiger had a speed of 23-25 mph(5-10 mph/cross-country). Examining these facts the Sherman has an advantage in cross country.

Is this a misprint?

Yours in the bocage,

Justin
 
I posted this same question some weeks ago and the response referenced Wikipedia! :x :x :x

*EDIT*

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=35395

And that was it!

Probably what happened was that someone somewhere looked at the ORIGINAL M4's speed, which actually was less than the Tiger's, the M4A3 in the book was a considerable improvement.

House rule and reverse the Tiger and Sherman.

Also, while you're at it, give the M16 a turret rather than the FaF.
 
Also, use the proposed breakdown rule for German tanks from that thread!

Also probably apply breakdown rules to certain other tanks (notably early British, such as Crusader I, II, Matilda II). Perhaps draw up slightly different charts for the different theatres...
 
After reading the posts by wkehrman on the thread he provided there is still the problem of a British Firefly having a 4" movement vs. an American Shermans 3" of movement. Why the difference?

There was talk on that thread of cautiousness on the Americans part but no army was generally more cautious that Monty's. I think vehicle movement in this game must be reconsidered using cross country movement.

There is an excellent well documented (not Wikipedia) site on WWII vehicles that has a lot of stats on the vehicles. It is used by ASL players. It is http://www.wwiivehicles.com

Yours in the Bocage,
Justin
 
"This is a GAME" doesn't always fly, particularly when real world data is available. It's one thing to compare a Minbari Sharlin to an Earth Alliance Warlock (see: Babylon 5: ACTA) where the relative performance is largely the product of the imagination. In that case, "This is a game" works provided play balance is not abused. In the case of an historical minis game, you can't get too carried away. The historical gamer is a different breed of cat from the SF/Fantasy gamer.

The criticisms below should be understood in the following context. Much of the game data appears well researched, which only makes these sorts of errors stand out more clearly.

The M4A3 Sherman should have a movement of 4", not 3". Neither Matt nor Agis have provided a suitable defense for the existing numbers. Agis used Wikipedia which is hardly a rock solid defense, and Matt's response had several American armor commanders turning over in their graves. The book does have other errors. The M16 MGMC is listed as having a forward firing arc rather than a turret for the quad .50 cal mount. The P-47D is listed as having 6 rather than 8 .50 cal MGs. The 60mm mortar is missing entirely from the TO&E of both the American Armored Infantry and the American Parachute Infantry, despite the fact that it was a platoon level weapon.

The long and short of it is this, in many cases, errors appear that are not hard to fix. There is nothing preventing you from fixing these errors. IF your local gaming group is of a kind where that sort of fix is not permitted, well, you have my sympathies.
 
wkehrman said:
"...Agis used Wikipedia which is hardly a rock solid defense...
Click to expand...

Sorry - I have to put this straight: As said in the topic you linked, I only used Wiki to answer "on the fly" while at work.

For the army lists I used many, many more sources, some of these are contradicting each other. Especially when real life stats are translated into game stats, there is always a bit of guesswork included.
Just today while working on the Soviet vehicle compendium I noticed that one sorce says the IS-3 got a rear turret mounted MG, while other said no rear MG.
As far as the Sherman is concerned I still think that the current values represent the "typical " movement correctly.
 
Agis said:
Just today while working on the Soviet vehicle compendium I noticed that one sorce says the IS-3 got a rear turret mounted MG, while other said no rear MG.
Click to expand...

I ran into that as well! I wonder if we are unknowingly using the same resources? :)
 
I've never seen an IS-3 with a rear MG. IS-2 had one, so thats probably the source of the cnfusion.

If the Russkies are getting the IS-3 are the Brits going to get the Centurion Mk1?
 
DM said:
I've never seen an IS-3 with a rear MG. IS-2 had one, so thats probably the source of the cnfusion.

If the Russkies are getting the IS-3 are the Brits going to get the Centurion Mk1?
Click to expand...

Let's give them the Tortoise whilst we're at it!

Heck, haven't the Germans got the Maus already?

:roll:
 
Again why does the essentially the same tank (Sherman and Sherman Firefly) have different movement rates?

The it's a game does not hack it. If Mongoose wants historic miniature gamers to play this game they need to fix these small problems as there are many WWII miniature skirmish systems on the market.

I just bought this game at Historicon and this problem can easily become a reason miniature wargamers will not buy the rules.

The rule system is good but the movement specs need some help. I thank my Texas friend for pointing out other physical historical problems with other vehicles.

Yours in the Bocage,
Justin
 
Blue, we've been having the same problems here. Some veteran historical guys turn their noses up when you have things like that. Some guys you'll never please, but others would consider getting into the game but they want it to feel like WW2 and not just "bowling for casualties" like they call FoW and 40k.

There's plenty of stuff to complain about, but it won't do any good. "It's a game, not a simulation" is the motto and the game was designed under that umbrella to make a game that is fun, but not based on reality. I compare it to chess being loosely based on anceint warfare. This game is loosely based on WW2.

Seems like most folks just make up house rules (which shouldn't be necessary IMHO) to correct the problems. It would take a major rewrite of the army lists to make this into a solid WW2 tactical game.

Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating a super high detailed game where you keep track of every little thing and have modifiers for your modifiers - and need a protractor to calculate your angle of deflection to get a modifier to your tank on tank shooting. I am wanting to see this game come off with more of a period feel. Our games have been artillery duels and tank battles from across the board for the most part. My infantry did not fire a shot in the last game - they took cover from long range MG and rocket fire while my tanks and mortars ripped up the German army from across the board.

This is such a great core system, I love the mechanics, it's a shame that it has been made into WW2 lite. It is an abstract game, pure and simple.

Mongoose is making this an open source game soon, where anyone can write expansions and place the 'official' seal on them. I suspect that we'll see a few rewritten army lists then - and we can pick the one that suits our own individual tastes. Who knows, I may give it a shot myself.

I hate to rant like this, but I keep reading posts like yours - if it were only one or two people talking that would be one thing but to have this many people speaking up... I hope Mongoose will take it under advisement that perhaps a change is in order?
 
Blue Devil 88 said:
Again why does the essentially the same tank (Sherman and Sherman Firefly) have different movement rates?
snip
I just bought this game at Historicon and this problem can easily become a reason miniature wargamers will not buy the rules.
Click to expand...

Different weight, different armour, different armament - sounds like an essentially different tank to me... :wink:
The difference is 1", if you like the Fireflys 4"/8" better - use it on all Shermans. It is your game after all.

But not to buy the rules because you disagree about 1" in a tank movement value???
:shock: Phew! Somehow I am having difficulties to believe it...
 
Agis said:
But not to buy the rules because you disagree about 1" in a tank movement value???
:shock: Phew! Somehow I am having difficulties to believe it...
Click to expand...

I've seen blood fly over less.

(But then, we do have some pretty intense playtesting sessions here at Mongoose).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Please Mongoose Fix the Vehicle Handbook
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
8K
tytalan
T
B
Richelieu using Mongoose Traveller 2300AD Aerospace Engineer’s Handbook
Replies
0
Views
4K
Bryn the 2300AD guy
B
G
800 points US vs Japanese
Replies
2
Views
8K
dacis2
D
Geir
What's the point of a large bay?
2
Replies
20
Views
9K
AnotherDilbert
A
L
AAR: 800 pts USN vs IJN
Replies
3
Views
5K
dacis2
D
Back
Top