Assault Pak 40

[Itinerant Hobbyist]

I assaulted a pak 40 w two infantry stands, both on the flank, so the Pak 40 got 0 attacks, is that correct? CA 2 - 2 for each unit attacking on its flank or rear.

They were in gun pit/foxhole, so were hit on 6 in first round. Canadians only scored one hit out of all those dice. So the Pak 40 needed to move 1/2 step away. That seemed odd, I don’t think the troops would pull their PK 40 with from an assault. Didn’t they weigh 1500+ lbs?

[Steve J]

I don't have the book to hand, but I think the intention was for the crew to abandon their weapon, which seems the most logical outcome.

[Itinerant Hobbyist]

Agreed. I’ll also have to dig into the rules to find out.

[Ithoriel]

The infantry are close assaulting.

They win the combat 1 to 0.

They score double, or more, their opponents total.

PAK40 and crew are eliminated.

Bottom of page 41, assuming you are using BKCIV.

[Itinerant Hobbyist]

There’s an asterisk that says if it’s 1 hit to 0 or 2 hits to 1 that you use the middle row result...if I’m reading that correct.

The infantry are close assaulting.

They win the combat 1 to 0.

They score double, or more, their opponents total.

PAK40 and crew are eliminated.

Bottom of page 41, assuming you are using BKCIV.

[Itinerant Hobbyist]

Now that I read page 36, fall back, it appears any dug in troops or guns may not fall-back...but I may not be correct in applying those rules to assaults since they’re a unique combat process.

[Big Insect]

You are correct - dug-in guns (& that includes AT guns) cannot fall back (regardless of the cause) so are destroyed in the scenario you have outlined.

This is to reflect the fact that the crew would just retire (run) in an assault situation as you describe and the gun would be lost.

Cheers
Mark