German half tracks with turrets

[Stewart 46A]

From what has been suggested
My thoughts

4AP per shot
HE effect single square
Auto pin
No effect against vehicle with armour 5 plus

Stewart

[Smiley Miley 66]

When I said HMG option, you made a list on the previous post listing a number of shot options? 0.7 hits, 0.9 hits etc per shot.

"An LMG at a crowded square gets 4D6 per shot. This  gives 0.7  of a hit.
An HMG at a crowded square gets 4D6 per shot with a re-roll. This gives 0.9 (roughly) of a hit"

But something like Stewart has come up with would be a workable start ?
Without trying it out ?
As we know it's a balance of getting the effect of a High rate of shots at a target square, without it seemingly blasting one stand to bits ? That would be unrealistic?
You start going too far up the scale of 6-7-8 etc D6 per shot ? It would start to be seemingly impossible to miss ? That then starts making it a super weapon ?
Instead of Auto pin, Roll for a pin ? This would be put on if you hit , but not kill ? Maybe? To make it slightly different from HE-Mortar hits ? That way no hit's archived no pinning effect ? Otherwise it would be an Overkill ?

That would then be 8 D6 for 2 shots with a possible re-roll ?
Possible pining result if Hit ?
As Stewart said no effects on Armour 5 plus

Would that be an Overkill ? Or about right as it's only a relatively small calibre weapon with a high rate of fire.
12.5mm upto 40mm ! Would probably be multiple barrels ?
 Miles

[martin goddard]

"AA turret a non starter in the rules !
Cost a lot of points but would never archive its potential! "

This is a bit annoying, now that I have announced that PBI is all finished and ready to go out.

Stewart and Miles had these AA rules a year ago (December 2023).


Looks like I will have to keep on working on PBI and cancel the publication announcements.


martin

[John Watson]

Or start planning PBI 2035?
John

[martin goddard]

Good thought John.
I am annoyed, but will take a breath and suggest some numbers that are not silly.


Waiter "What meal would you like sir"
Customer "something nice"
waiter " I will bring you steak and chips"
Customer "No I said something nice"
waiter "how about the fish?"
Customer "that is just silly. I said something nice"
waiter " you can have ham, mutton or sausages maybe?"
Customer "you are still being silly. I refuse to answer that question. I want something nice"


PBI can wait a while, no great problem.
We all have the playtest versions to use at PBI days.

We have AK and sci fi to work on.  AK is nearly finished apart from the scenario testing.  That might be
a good one to get out in February?

martin

[Stewart 46A]

Ok, I never considered fielding AA guns and looking at this discussion I thought it was a weapon that hadn't been considered using in a ground attack roll.
A opportunity to gat AA guns in the new PBI rules due out next year.

But looking in the current rules AA guns are covered nicely and cover all the questions asked, dos t matter if it's 20mm hand pulled our 40mm vehicle mounted.

See pages , 22, 92, 102, 123, 128, 129

Stewart

[John Watson]

I was always under the impression that AA was only used against ground troops as a matter of desperation and as a matter of choice. Perhaps this is why most of us wouldn't consider it. It also makes me think that it is perhaps not the best choice of weapon, rather a last resort. There is, of course, an exception (there always is) and that is the 88mm, but again the Germans only turned to it when they discovered their 37mm could not damage the Matilda. Once they did they realised what a great A/T weapon it was.On the rules I think Stewart may be right. Already covered.
John

[martin goddard]

AA was usually used for aircraft targets.

Late in the war the US used their AA against some ground targets. Although the US ended up with more equipment than men to use it. Same for their navy.

The nice looking German AA was 20mm based. The German rate of fire was not that high. Usually 50 rounds per minute per piece in action.The problem for the Germans is that their AA used 20 round magazines. Thus a 4 barrelled AA would need enough men to quickly change 20 round magazines (x4 for 4 barrelled quads). A bit dangerous and accident prone to change whilst shooting. Overheating barrels could be easily changed, but that still delays shooting. In the same way that Brens and MG34/42 changed barrels. This led to a reduced shoot rate, as that was better than replacing barrels mid session.

AA weapons were mostly very exposed to small arms fire. ie a group of 6 men standing tall and close together alongside their AA.  The US half track version had  slightly better protection. The bofors was also a stand tall in a tight bunch problem.

martin

[Colonel Kilgore]

That's a nice summary, thanks Martin.

The crew protection point probably speaks volumes - these guns weren't intended for such a role!

That's not to say that they weren't used as such (e.g. German AA at Arnhem caused lots of casualties among certain groups of paras when used in a ground role), but maybe we can agree that this is the exception rather than the rule?

I think the PBI rules have the use of AA covered in general, which always leaves the door open to scenario-specific tweaks for those that want them (e.g. as has been done with coastal guns).

I vote that this latest version of PBI as a general ruleset is done, and that we don't delay publication any further 

Simon

[Stewart 46A]

I agree Simon,
Development of these rules has lasted longer than most recent prime ministers

Stewart

[martin goddard]

Trying to keep everyone happy I suggest:-
Shoots as normal tank gun.  ie cost 4AP.  Therefore it will probably get two shots.

Each square shot at counts as if hit by off table artillery.
i.e
1. Each item hit with 4D6.
2. Auto pin
3. Armour gets a save as per normal off table HE . Can limit this to armour 5 as Stewart says.
4. Can shoot at same square twice, or two different squares.
5. Increase AA vehicle/gun cost due to this being better than the existing HMG 16D6 with re-roll effect.

I am trying hard on this one. Please don't label my suggestion as "silly".


martin

[Colonel Kilgore]

Are we taking these as a suggestion for a "house rule" Martin?

I fear that if we change anything in the rules as written, the whole thing will need a full proof-read (or two) to ensure that all references still work following this "simple" tweak.

Simon

[Stewart 46A]

If the AA rules are in the new edition as written in the last edtion then keep as written , they were/are good enough
No need for a re-write

Stewart

[Sean Clark]

I'm confused.

But looking forward to the new PBI.

[John Watson]

I think your suggested change Martin is way too strong. It effectively gives off table HE to a roving unit on table. I'd leave things as they are. As someone said " Publish and be damned".
John