What ?? AK-103 can kill a tank ??? Noob Q # 2

[peeNpoop]

I was reading some older posts here and someone said "hell yea as long as your 6 inches above the target and within 15 inches you get +2 to all damage dice against armour, that have reduced save to the side and rear ". :shock: So if you are up higher, then someone with an AK-103 can possibily target [ 6 + 2 height bonus] and cause a failed armour roll on a M1A2 tank ? Or easier if it's hit from the sides or rear. :?: That's kinda pushing the non-realisim fell a bit too far don't you thuink ? :? A squad of MEA could kill the durn thing !

 

[The Old Soldier]

Play the game with the basic rules for awhile, until you get your Main Rule Book. The chance small arms even from a elevated position will harm the MBT is very slim.

At best if the player rolls a 6 they could TARGET the MBT. That means a possible hit. Since the MBT has a armor save of +2/+3 the chance that it might take 1 hit of damage is slim. Even if it did, the MBT would have to fail 5 saves before it was destroyed. Chance of that happening is like me hitting the lottery.

So start playing. Soon you will learn real fast that a MBT is a powerful anti-personal weapon of destruction.

 

[PilGrim]

Strange but true (or so I am told :lol: )

An M1 was lost in Iraq when small arms punctured a rubberised fuel container on the rear deck-( the containers have self sealing capabilities so this is not as dumb an idea as first appears). The crew traversed the turret to engage and in doing so compressed the blivet, causing the fuel to be forced out of the holes - straight into the top grill of a gas turbine. This caused a fire in the engine compartment

Crew bailed and survived, but the tank was KO'd and recovered later

 

[peeNpoop]

"against armour, that have reduced save to the side and rear "
Why would that be ? Why no bonus against a technical or a humvee ?


Whoa, wait a minute does that bonus apply to infantry targets to ? Time to get the troops up on the roof :!:

Strange but true (or so I am told :lol: )

An M1 was lost in Iraq when small arms punctured a rubberised fuel container on the rear deck-( the containers have self sealing capabilities so this is not as dumb an idea as first appears). The crew traversed the turret to engage and in doing so compressed the blivet, causing the fuel to be forced out of the holes - straight into the top grill of a gas turbine. This caused a fire in the engine compartment

Crew bailed and survived, but the tank was KO'd and recovered later

I'd call that one 50/50

 

[Pietia]

"against armour, that have reduced save to the side and rear "
Why would that be ? Why no bonus against a technical or a humvee ?

Because the softskin vehicles have pretty much the same armor all around, while the top armor of armored vehicles have much thinner armor on the top than anywhere else.

Whoa, wait a minute does that bonus apply to infantry targets to ?

No, it does not. Infantry targets are not "armour with reduced save to the side and rear" :lol:

Ah - to damage (get a single failed armor save) the Abrams with assault rifle fire from elevated positions you need 18 shots on the average (1 in 6 will reach the target, then 1 in 3 will penetrate the side/rear/top 3+ save). 12 shots to damage the Type-99...

 

[Kristovich]

Ah - to damage (get a single failed armor save) the Abrams with assault rifle fire from elevated positions you need 18 shots on the average (1 in 6 will reach the target, then 1 in 3 will penetrate the side/rear/top 3+ save). 12 shots to damage the Type-99...

In the meantime said MBT does some healthy house-cleaning :lol:

 

[Col_stone]

When numbercrunching, you're supposed to ignore the fact that you have an opponent :lol:

 

[Richgo22]

And. . . it is a game. . .

 

[lutz]

I thought it was a -1 armour save from above instead of additional damage ?
And only with D6 weaponry not AT ones ?

 

[Pietia]

It is +2 to damage. For ALL weapons.

 

[lutz]

It is +2 to damage. For ALL weapons.

Really ..well that certainly seems like the tactic to challenge the mighty Challenger with [ or at least try to ]
So if 2 tanks are approaching and a PLA squad wants to cover both, When you split the squads fire into 2 FIRE ZONES do you discard the 2 dice before or after you roll them ?

 

[Col_stone]

I'd say before.. otherwise it's not really a drawback

 

[peeNpoop]

Man, elevated troops are a killer. Tried a few game with it. In 2 seperate games 4 MEA with elevated Aks killed a WZ-551 with only 2 shoot actions that had gotten too close to them. I think taking buildings down might become a priority [ Though the PLA guy did have bad armour rolls all night ]

I knew you could split into fire teams , didn't know you could split into different fire zones. :shock:

 

[lutz]

I'd say before.. otherwise it's not really a drawback

Unless the splitting of fire is the drawback ? It could be after, sure would be nice to get rid of those 1s.

 

[The Old Soldier]

I'm not really following you guys. :?

Yes, if in a elevated position the MEA can hurt a WZ-551. They would need to roll 6s modified by the EFP to get the 8 they need to target the vehicle. Then the WZ-551 would have to fail 3 armor rolls of 3+ before it was destroyed. Sure it COULD happen, but that would be a rare case.

If you want to, to make it more in line with reality. Just, say only weapons that could NORMALLY target the vehicle can use the bonus. Thus RPGs and weapons like them would be the only ones that could do damage. Hey, it is your game after all.

As for the split fire, I'm again not sure what your aiming for. You can split fire with a team or unit, but each FZ created above the 1st one will have you lose 2 dice. Spliting your fire comes in handy when you have two seperate targets that take very different Target and Kill numbers, OR to create a extra FZ that target a different area you couldn't reach with regular weapons. 8)

 

[lutz]

So if you want to make 3 fire zones from 1 squad the 2nd and third FZ each lose 2 dice ? That's pretty severe ! :shock: And they are lost before you roll or you pick which ones to lose after you roll :?

Your reality idea seems tomake good sense

 

[The Old Soldier]

So if you want to make 3 fire zones from 1 squad the 2nd and third FZ each lose 2 dice ? That's pretty severe ! :shock: And they are lost before you roll or you pick which ones to lose after you roll :?

Your reality idea seems tomake good sense

Yep, that is how split fire works. You get to decide which dice are lost before you roll them.

 

[peeNpoop]

I like the reality rule too.

2 dice per zone over the first 1 . You can't split the 2 dice between the zones like 1 dice from zone 1 one dice from zone 2 it has tom be 2 dice from a zone ? Hmmmm, that would seem to make it less appealing tactical option them imho.

 

[The Old Soldier]

I like the reality rule too.

2 dice per zone over the first 1 . You can't split the 2 dice between the zones like 1 dice from zone 1 one dice from zone 2 it has tom be 2 dice from a zone ? Hmmmm, that would seem to make it less appealing tactical option them imho.

No, You can. I'll give you a example.

Unit 1 fires on Unit B, they also decide to fire on Unit C that is outside the original FZ . So, they split fire. Unit one has a total of 8 dice to roll. Since they split fire they loose two of the dice. We assume they choose to lose two rifle dice. That leaves them a total of 6 dice. BEFORE THEY ROLL, they can choose to fire what ever number of those dice they want into each of those Two FZs. The player chooses to place 4 dice in one FZ and 2 in the other. ROLL the dice for each FZ seperately.

It is really simple.

 

[peeNpoop]

Ohhhhhhhh, okay gotcha ! thanks.
And if you want a third fire zone you lose another 2 dice equaling 4 dice lost and you lose 6 dice if you want a 4th fire zone ?