Pendraken Miniatures Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
15 September 2019, 03:41:03 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Blitzkrieg Commander IV is now available here!
283736 Posts in 16914 Topics by 2189 Members
Latest Member: MartinKnight1333
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Pendraken Miniatures Forum
|-+  Pendraken Rules!
| |-+  Blitzkrieg Commander IV
| | |-+  BKC-III
| | | |-+  Machine Gun Consistency
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Machine Gun Consistency  (Read 1765 times)
Big Insect
Captain
*
*
*
Posts: 475


« on: 04 December 2018, 03:53:04 PM »

Looking at the BKC lists - as I am now having to do on a daily basis to convert across to BKCIV, I am coming across consistency/continuity issues specifically around machine guns.

I can see that an HMG platoon will bring down more firepower than a tank platoon - but I'm finding that there appears to be little logic around standardizing the ranges of units.
At the level of abstraction we are playing at - can we opt for a 'standard' AP factor for vehicle mounted machine guns?

Also - US 0.50 cal HMGs - is there any agreement on a standard range and standard AP/AT ratings please - as I look at 2 vehicles, both armed primarily with .50cals and they might have different AP factors and ranges.

Any thoughts please folks

Thanks
Mark
Logged
petercooman
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 5537


Blessed is the mind too small for doubt


« Reply #1 on: 04 December 2018, 04:12:04 PM »

Can you give an example? Might be easier if we know wich ones are not consistent with the rest. Maybe there is a reason they are different?
Logged
Steve J
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 7391


« Reply #2 on: 04 December 2018, 07:44:22 PM »

I agree, some examples would be useful.
Logged

http://wwiiwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/

2017 Paint-Off - 2 x Winner!
mad lemmey
Count
*******
*
*
Posts: 19738



« Reply #3 on: 04 December 2018, 08:08:44 PM »

Solid and metallic?

Oh, that's not what you mean by consistency...
Logged

Chekov's Gun, Occam's Razor, and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle walk into a bar. You won't believe what happens next!

2016 Pendraken Painting Competion Participation Prize  (Lucky Dip Catagory) Winner 😎
Kiwidave
Major
*
Posts: 585



WWW
« Reply #4 on: 04 December 2018, 09:42:37 PM »

Mark,

Are you refering to MG-only armed AFVs?

Co-ax (etc) MGs are factored into the +1 attack at 20cm versus soft targets. AFAIK the AP stats for AFVs is the HE capability.

Dave
Logged
Dr Dave
Major
*
Posts: 735



« Reply #5 on: 04 December 2018, 10:22:39 PM »

That’s curious, though perhaps not all that surprising?

I’d go back to bkcII. As far as I recall there are no inconsistencies there.
Logged

“In war possession of ground is nine tenths of the law,
And the infantry are the bailiff’s men”
Leon
Viscount
******
*
*
Posts: 15910



WWW
« Reply #6 on: 04 December 2018, 11:05:21 PM »

I’d go back to bkcII. As far as I recall there are no inconsistencies there.

These are the BKC-II lists that are being used in BKC-IV.
Logged

www.pendraken.co.uk - Home to over 3500 products of shiny 10mm goodness!
www.minibits.net - MDF bases, Vallejo paints, I-94 decals, Red Vectors MDF buildings, Crossover Miniatures, Militia Miniatures and more!
petercooman
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 5537


Blessed is the mind too small for doubt


« Reply #7 on: 05 December 2018, 07:40:36 AM »

Mark,

Are you refering to MG-only armed AFVs?

Co-ax (etc) MGs are factored into the +1 attack at 20cm versus soft targets. AFAIK the AP stats for AFVs is the HE capability.

Dave

Yes, that's what i thought. That's why i wanted an example,to clear that out.
Logged
Big Insect
Captain
*
*
*
Posts: 475


« Reply #8 on: 05 December 2018, 01:34:58 PM »

Sorry for the delay in responding folks - real-life getting in the way of important wargaming life  Cheesy Cheesy

So to answer some of the queries

1). do I mean purely MG armed AFV's - yes mostly - so a US White AC has an (AP) factor of 1/40 - which I am assuming is primarily the .50cal (although I am aware that they also carried a couple of lighter machine guns - pivot mounted) - so in instances of other light vehicles that are purely armed with a .50cal - such as certain Jeeps used by USA particularly in Armoured Recon formations, is it safe to assume that an (AP) score of 1/40 is the standard 0.50cal stat?
1a). I am also aware that a 0.50cal has a reasonable armour piercing capabilities - especially at short range - however, I am assuming that this is taken care of by the fact that firing the 0.50cal at an armored target will suppress it not cause actual casualties.

2). I am aware that the AP factor for a lot of AFVs - particularly MBTs that also have HE rounds - will include their hull, co-axial and roof mtd hmgs - but in an instance where the vehicle has no HE capability - so a British A9 might be a good example - then there needs to be a factor for the vehicles machine gun. If that is the case, then is there an agreement broadly on what that factor is (e.g. is it 1/30 for each hmg or an overall general AFV/MBT agreed factor)?
I am also interested in this issue because you have Early War tanks such as the T-28s with a host of HMGs etc but a 3/80 AP factor.

Does that all make sense? Or am I smoking something here  Wink Wink Wink

Many thanks
« Last Edit: 05 December 2018, 01:39:47 PM by Big Insect » Logged
petercooman
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 5537


Blessed is the mind too small for doubt


« Reply #9 on: 05 December 2018, 05:06:15 PM »


1). do I mean purely MG armed AFV's - yes mostly - so a US White AC has an (AP) factor of 1/40 - which I am assuming is primarily the .50cal (although I am aware that they also carried a couple of lighter machine guns - pivot mounted) - so in instances of other light vehicles that are purely armed with a .50cal - such as certain Jeeps used by USA particularly in Armoured Recon formations, is it safe to assume that an (AP) score of 1/40 is the standard 0.50cal stat?
1a). I am also aware that a 0.50cal has a reasonable armour piercing capabilities - especially at short range - however, I am assuming that this is taken care of by the fact that firing the 0.50cal at an armored target will suppress it not cause actual casualties.


Sounds good to me.



2). I am aware that the AP factor for a lot of AFVs - particularly MBTs that also have HE rounds - will include their hull, co-axial and roof mtd hmgs - but in an instance where the vehicle has no HE capability - so a British A9 might be a good example - then there needs to be a factor for the vehicles machine gun. If that is the case, then is there an agreement broadly on what that factor is (e.g. is it 1/30 for each hmg or an overall general AFV/MBT agreed factor)?
I am also interested in this issue because you have Early War tanks such as the T-28s with a host of HMGs etc but a 3/80 AP factor.



Bit of a strange beast that one  Undecided

Maybe the range was determined by the 'stability' of the firing platform or volume of shots or something?
Logged
Big Insect
Captain
*
*
*
Posts: 475


« Reply #10 on: 05 December 2018, 05:47:17 PM »

There are a lot of Early War & pre-War/between war tanks and tankettes that only have HMGs as weapons.

The T28 also has a main armourment that can fire HE so it can in effect have a long range AP effect but at closer ranges the mass of HMGs makes it a formidable anti-infantry weapon - it is really an Infantry Support tank rather than an MBT. This is covered by the +1 dice for under half-range shooting, however, i am tempted to give these early wars multi turreted HMG 'heavy' support tanks a +2 dice at under half range.

However, I suppose my real question here is - do we give the HMGs on AFVs a 1/30 AP factor as opposed to a 1/40 for .50cals Huh?

Thanks
Mark
Logged
Dr Dave
Major
*
Posts: 735



« Reply #11 on: 05 December 2018, 06:03:23 PM »

Id assumed it was 1/40 for an A9 etc AP from the desperate use of solid shot.

Then the +1 die for < 1/2 range and +1 the coax. So a jump to 3/20 in effect?

Or is it 1/40 for the very stable coax, then just +1 for < 1/2 range meaning 2/20 overall?

Now I’m confused.
Logged

“In war possession of ground is nine tenths of the law,
And the infantry are the bailiff’s men”
petercooman
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 5537


Blessed is the mind too small for doubt


« Reply #12 on: 05 December 2018, 06:36:45 PM »

I always assumed the +1 under half range was an accuracy thing  Undecided

The +1 for the mg under 20 should make it 3 dice total.
« Last Edit: 05 December 2018, 06:39:22 PM by petercooman » Logged
Ithoriel
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 6400



« Reply #13 on: 05 December 2018, 06:49:42 PM »

To take the T28 first off, I'd assume the 3/80 covers the artillery turret, +1 for half range covers odd bursts from the MGs.  The +1 firing at soft targets within 20cm covers more effective fire by the two MG turrets.

1/40 sounds OK for a .50 MG but it might also be OK for 2 .05 MGs depending on configuration, crew arrangements (if one of those MGs is manned by someone trying to command the vehicle, fire the MG and use the radio the extra firepower might not make the difference you might imagine looking at the armament alone!) and arcs of fire.

Lots to take into account to get an effect on the table which is a reasonable simulation of the real thing. Hats off to those of you working on this!

« Last Edit: 05 December 2018, 06:51:35 PM by Ithoriel » Logged

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is entirely optional!
Shedman
Playtester
Major
*
Posts: 698



« Reply #14 on: 05 December 2018, 09:04:35 PM »

If we were talking about an individual vehicle I would say it was worth the effort but as BKC is aimed at platoons and troops of tanks then probably the extra dice at close range covers most of it

For a base of mg-only armed tanks then probably the 3 @ 60 would suffice for AP ie a mobile MG and 1/30 for AT
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 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!