Churchill Crocodile

[Cross698]

In the British List the Crocodile is not "TOUGH" unlike the Churchill Mk VII. Is this to reflect the armoured trailer?

[Big Insect]

Yes.
Hits on the trailer will usually KO the tank (apparently) and I suspect that any other AFV flame-throwers are all equally vulnerable.

Cheers
Mark

In fact I did at one point consider the idea that an exploding fuel trailer would also suppress (automatically) all other units (friends & foe alike) within 5cms. But that might have been seen as a bit too granular.

[Cross698]

Thanks. The drivers were trained to negotiate the tank in such a way as to keep the trailer protected, so you could argue that the movement of a Crocodile was only 10cm, rather than 15cm. Well the German Players at our club will be happy! :-

[fsn]

Hits on the trailer will usually KO the tank (apparently) and I suspect that any other AFV flame-throwers are all equally vulnerable.

I thought that the Crocdile was designed so that if the trailer was disabled it could be disengaged from within the vehicle, and the Churchill could then fight as a normal gun tank.

[Dr Dave]

Yep, the trailer can be ditched and you're left with what is a mkVII minus the bow MG.

I assume that the trailer is low profile if it is being targeted and hence making the Churchill non-Tough?

[Cross698]

Can you target the trailer separately? Probably easier to just have the stats as it is. The armoured fuel pipe went under the tank and then came up into the firing position and believe the trailer could be disconnected from within the tank. Certainly the Bobbin had charges that could be operated from inside the tank. I suspect the Churchill was safer than the Panzer III flame tank or any other tank that had the fuel contained within the body of the tank. But although dodgy either  , at least the Churchill had good armour.

[Big Insect]

Nope - you cannot target the trailer separately! The cheek 

Far to granular for what we are looking to achieve.

It's triggered an interesting thought though ... I wouldnt want to be an Infantry unit assaulting a Crocodile or any other AFV flamethrower unit ... as the risk of self-annihilation would probably have been quite high 

[Cross698]

Perhaps a template explosion! Any unsaved hit roll one dice and on a score of 6 it goes up! Could be the basis of a scenario!

[Dr Dave]

Perhaps a template explosion! Any unsaved hit roll one dice and on a score of 6 it goes up! Could be the basis of a scenario!

So you can't target the trailer. But Jerry does get the benefit of it not being as well armoured as the tank -  like he is targeting it, except without the disadvantage of it being low. I'd point out that it's a troops of 3-4 vehicles all having their trailers targeted. Is it drifting from a bttn / brigade level game into skirmish?

[Cross698]

Well FWC does have suggested skirmish rules!

[Raider4]

. . . I'd point out that it's a troops of 3-4 vehicles all having their trailers targeted.

Well, it could be. I've always looked at it as 1:1 on vehicles/guns etc., and 1 stand = 1 section/squad for infantry.

Otherwise the vehicle units don't make any sense to me.

[Wulf]

Everything you ever wanted to know about the Churchill Crocodile...

 

[Cross698]

Very good. Bovington is a great museum.

[Dr Dave]

Since the trailer is the source of its vulnerability in the rules compared to a normal mkVII if it dumped the trailer after flaming it would revert back to being tough.

[Wulf]

Very good. Bovington is a great museum.

I added another video