Pendraken Miniatures Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
17 December 2017, 04:09:25 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
We're now stocking a range of Spray Varnishes which are available at all the UK shows.
245139 Posts in 14865 Topics by 2068 Members
Latest Member: Rubbsalot
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Pendraken Miniatures Forum
|-+  Pendraken Rules!
| |-+  Blitzkrieg Commander
| | |-+  BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] Go Down Print
Author Topic: BKC-III Decision Reached - Please Read!  (Read 11092 times)
Dr Dave
Lieutenant
*
Posts: 230


« Reply #105 on: 17 November 2017, 08:08:33 AM »

It was deadly. weapons always are Smiley

Now about it knocking out a carrier: being knocked out in the game doesn't necessarily mean destroyed. they could pull out in the face of stiff resistance, the crew may bail etc...

With you on lumbering, it needs to join the dodo!

Deadly - yes, good point!  Grin

With the carrier being ko'd by rifle/MG fire, don't forget that it's at 600m and the suppression rule is back in there as well. And the same applies to a sdkfz 232 the big 8 wheelers AND an Archer. If the distance was 5cm I'd be fine with it I think, but only vs open topped?
Logged
petercooman
Major General
*
Posts: 4601


Blessed is the mind too small for doubt


« Reply #106 on: 17 November 2017, 08:23:49 AM »

Well that is how we play it, only vs apc's like the carriers, m3 halftrack etc...

I do admit it's a keyword that should not be lightly distributed among the vehicles, and really feel it should never be given to a tank (like a pzI)
Logged
ianrs54
Playtester
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 5916



WWW
« Reply #107 on: 17 November 2017, 09:47:38 AM »

Intriguing discussion.  The only mortar I have any experience of was the 81mm British  with two main offensive bomb types - HE (about 9lb and Phosphorus)  The 81mm HE mortar bomb is NOT compatible with a 25lb or 105mm (33lb) artillery shell . 

The SOP - if caught in the open  when subject to being mortared was to mount APCs and bug out of the killing zone.  This would have  included Saracens and Humber Pigs with not a lot of roof armour (8mm plate?)  Even Rovers clad in Makralon offered protection from mortar attack. As proved in Operation Banner.
I would speculate the Japs had 1940s era percussion fuse and the HE of around 9lb would have thrown the bomb case fragments about 25-30 meters.
Would that amount of blast have ruptured the 12mm roof plate of a Lee with gravity providing the only velocity?

The open/removed side hatch theory gives a viable explanation.  I would give APC/AFV room armour the benefit of the doubt against mortars in my own games. (1)

As to incorporating a GPMG belt feed into BKC rules- its already set up for such an assumption with your existing troop type AP. Vets and elite will have enough chill pills in them change belt feed from ball to the black tips (or WW2 AP belt). Green and Conscripts won't.   Wink   

Footnote
(1) There was a special 81mm mortar round  called a Merlin developed in the early 1980s. Was it ever issued? Rumour was it could mallet a T-62  Applause
   



a) the mortar bomb has an equivalent HE filling, as the shell/bomb walls are much thinner, due to lower firing stress, most of the shell weight in a 25pdr is metal. Also the 25pdr shells were not steel but cast iron, cost reasons.

b) Late mark lees had the side hatches welded closed, or (very late) made without em. 

c) Merlin, not issued as it was I) expensive, ii) havled the range. iii) was huge and cumbersome.


IanS
Logged

FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF HURRAY
Sunray
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1513


« Reply #108 on: 17 November 2017, 10:54:51 AM »

Thanks for this Ian.  Your point on artillery shell structure is well made. The weight is indeed the total weight of the round. I would  stress however - from personal experience - that's its not HE "blast" that does the damage - its that very shrapnel of the casing.  ( Otherwise bits of me would have been plastered over Corporation Street Belfast back in 72  Smiley) .  Hence the higher potential  damage from artillery with more and heavier hot metal flying, than the relatively thin casing of a mortar bomb- despite similar charge of HE filling.


Can't comment on the Lee- I suspect these might have been ex-USA with cupola turret removed ? Did they come direct or were they passed on from  Middle East units after Torch ?

Yes, the Merlin was big - but rumour was it was "smart"  ?  Might have been cost - not liked by men in suits.   
Logged
toxicpixie
Major General
*
Posts: 3753



« Reply #109 on: 17 November 2017, 11:35:19 AM »

On a side note, as it's modern - the Merlin concept came good about ten years back. Look at the Swedes, and Strix launched from their really high numbers of 120mm mortars. Their armoured infantry effectively has dozens of non-LoS top attack smart homing launchers with a really high rate of fire. Should go through even a modern Russian Tank Regiment in minutes. Some massively armoured Leo's to pin them a few minutes, then hundreds of smart munitions plastered all over the top of them.

Rinse, repeat, then unless the Leo's to roll back over the border.

Now, whether it works in practise, and they could afford enough Strix's, and they work as advertised, and...
Logged

I provide a cheap, quick painting service to get you table top quality figures ready to roll - www.facebook.com/jtppainting
Sunray
Brigadier
*
Posts: 1513


« Reply #110 on: 17 November 2017, 04:19:42 PM »

 Given the choice between open topped APC and one with overhead armour (8mm ),  only those with a death wish would go with the open topped.  At the BKC level of abstraction I would give some credit to overhead protection-  History is on the side of this argument.  Any open topped should be classed as  "vunerable". 
Logged
toxicpixie
Major General
*
Posts: 3753



« Reply #111 on: 17 November 2017, 04:28:09 PM »

Even the US TD's started to get extra top armour in WW2 didn't they? Like a parasol of steel with a gap around the sides to keep visibility high...

Not sure on level of abstraction needed - you could use "Vulnerable" to refer to both open topped vehicles AND lightly built, early war stuff like Tankettes, or you could have both "Vulnerable" AND "Open Topped" but they're tending to the same thing so on simplicities sake I might drop one or the other. If small arms/MGs etc can now get suppressive hits versus AFVs again then tankettes etc on three hits and six save are pretty duff already and might not need further vulnerability Cheesy
Logged

I provide a cheap, quick painting service to get you table top quality figures ready to roll - www.facebook.com/jtppainting
Dr Dave
Lieutenant
*
Posts: 230


« Reply #112 on: 17 November 2017, 07:11:33 PM »

I'd always considered a "vulnerable" aspect to be already there with the bonus for close assaulting OT and the 5+ for arty and mortar hits.

I think allowing infantry at their maximum range to do anything more than suppress is a bit far fetched. OT or not, no one chucks a grenade more than 20m, definitely not 600m!  Shocked

And that was what was missing from BKC2: suppressive fire. It's back in BKC3, but only for troops with no AT attacks. It needs to cover troops with no AP as well. 2pdr solid shot passing through a truck does have an effect.  Wink
Logged
John Cook
Lieutenant
*
Posts: 185



« Reply #113 on: 02 December 2017, 03:34:32 AM »

Light artillery and medium mortars, such as the British 25pdr and Japanese 81mm mortar mentioned here, are most effective against troops in the open.  The 25pdr has an HE filler of 1.8 pounds and the Japanese Type 97 mortar a filler of 1 pound.  Unless one of the rounds fell inside an open APC, or airburst above it, the passengers and crew were relatively safe.  They were only effective when used in numbers. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!