$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 104.16

6,533 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
41.2% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

PanzerBlitz» Forums » Variants

Subject: Bridges... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Dennis Kochan
msg tools
mb
Hello...

How about bridge classifications. You can find this aspect in many computer games and board games too! Basically, you have classifications that allow certain types of units to 'use' the bridge if they are within the parameters of the bridge.

So, we have... Light, Medium and Heavy bridge classes.

Light... all 'foot units' can use this bridge class.

Medium... all 'foot units' and 'non-armored' vehicles can use this bridge class.

Heavy... all unit types may use this bridge class.

You can also add 'damaged/destroyed' bridges if you like.

This would require no additional markers or counters. Simply designate any bridges on the map as to type. These designations can be included in the scenario description.

Dennis
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Kovacs
United States
Elyria
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Panzer Leader has three types of bridges - permanent, truck, and tank. Permanent bridges are those depicted on the mapboards and can only be destroyed by engineer units. Truck and tank bridges are temporary bridges placed by bridgelaying units that can be destroyed by direct and indirect fire as well as engineer units (takes one turn less to destroy a temporary bridge). Truck bridges cannot be used by any AFVs except for halftracks; anything can use a tank bridge.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Fitt
Thailand
Chang Mai
flag msg tools
My thoughts --

1] As he said PL already has such bridges.

2] The heaviest tanks should be limited to permanent bridges.

3] Some armored cars should be able to use 'truck' bridges.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Hernandez
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmb
Truck and tank bridges do appear in the PB booklet, with a lot less detail than in PL.

Regarding armored units and truck bridges, I would allow the following to use truck bridges (note that most of these are not in the game but are found either in PL and its variants, certain PB variants or the IMSTRAT counter sheets):

1. The Universal ("Bren") carrier and similar vehicles. India pattern wheeled carriers.
2. Tankettes, for instance the Italian L3, the T-27 and the various small amphibious tanks the Russians had.
3. The Renault FT in all its incarnations (the Russians built some); all British light tanks; the Panzer I and II; the T-26, T-30 and T-40; all Marmon-Herrington light tanks including the M22 Locust; all French AMR and AMC vehicles; French light tanks; Japanese light tanks; the Italian L6; probably the LT-35 and 38 (Panzer 35(t) and 38(t)); the PzJg 47. The Lynx is a Panzer II.
4. All British-built armored cars except the AEC; the M8 Greyhound and M20; all German light armored cars (e.g. the SdKfz 221 series and the SdKfz 250/9), Russian light armored cars; Japanese light armored cars; all French and Italian armored cars.
5. Halftrack and full-track APCs, including platoon leader variants; halftracks armed with medium mortars or light AT guns (under 50mm); the US M13/14 and M16/M17; the SdKfz 2 kettenkrad.

Jury is out on:
6. US M3, M5 and M24 light tanks, including the M8 HMC; also the T-50 and later Russian light tanks, as well as the SU-76; BT-series tanks; the British A11 "Matilda Junior"; the GW 38M.
7. The SdKfz 231 and 234 series heavy armored cars; the US-built Staghound; Japanese heavy armored cars; Russian BA-10/32-series armored cars.
8. Possibly certain heavier armored cars used by minor nations.
9. Gun-armed halftracks such as the SU-57, the M15 and most AA halftracks other than types armed with machine guns only, also the SdKfz 4/1 "Maultier".
10. The Marder I, II and III.

Not allowed on truck bridges:
11. AEC armored cars, and the Boarhound.
12. The Diana, and any halftrack armed with an 88mm gun or larger.
13. The Finnish BT-42.
14. The Hetzer.

Armed trucks, armored or not, are still trucks and so can use truck bridges. This includes the Russian "M-13" unit in the supplementary booklet. The DUKW is a truck. I would not allow trucks towing/hauling the heaviest guns (200 mm or larger) to use truck bridges.

This list is not exhaustive (I left out most of the minors), and while seemingly complicated, common sense is used for the categories. Corrections are welcome.

Foot bridges and their construction can be scenario special rules. Machine gun and medium mortar units can cross a foot bridge. The rules might allow very light gun units (e.g. the French 37mm infantry gun) and motorcycle infantry to cross a foot bridge.

If working with the original counter set, then the Lynx may cross truck bridges, the Hetzer may not, and the jury is out on the SU-76, GW 38M, Marder, Maultier and German armored cars.

Phil
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Kochan
msg tools
mb
Hello....

Interesting responses as always, in which good points and information has been presented.

My purpose was to lay out a basic variant that could be applied to both PL and PB. And in this way have some uniformity in the rules between the two games. The key point that I was trying to get across was the designation of bridge 'types' for existing scenario's. By doing this you can really change the primary 'mission' of the units by either enhancing or restricting their ability to maneuver relative to the bridges.

If for instance you have all 'heavy' bridges then your forces ability to maneuver around the map is unlimited. But, if you reduce the capacity of one or all bridges, then you force the players to adopt a different strategy, one based on limited maneuver. Sorry about not making that issue more clear.

Dennis
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Hernandez
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmb
I know the British had a bridge classification system and marked their vehicles according to which bridges they could cross. I don't know where to find that, but it may be useful to you.

Phil
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Kochan
msg tools
mb
Hello....

Good point, now that I think about it, aren't there various sorts of weight class markings on vehicles? I would guess that each 'force' had their own system...

Does anybody have any 'links' or references that can be used to compare or categorize such data?

Thanks much for the input!!!

Dennis
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert McConnell
United States
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hey Dennis, try these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Load_Classification, http://library.enlistment.us/field-manuals/series-3/FM19-4/A...,
and "Smart Bridge": http://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/531084/.
I used to use FM 3-34 (Military Vehicle Route Classification manual) back in the day. This may be TMI (too much information), but it gives you a very good idea of the planning that goes into military movements. All NATO vehicles have vehicle weight numbers painted or mounted on their "bumper" (tanks don't have bumpers BTW ). Hope this is helpful/useful to all of our PanzerBlitzers out there.

Bob


dgk196 wrote:
Hello....

Good point, now that I think about it, aren't there various sorts of weight class markings on vehicles? I would guess that each 'force' had their own system...

Does anybody have any 'links' or references that can be used to compare or categorize such data?

Thanks much for the input!!!

Dennis
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Kochan
msg tools
mb
Hello...

Thanks for the interest in this subject. Since we are unlimited as to what extent we pursue this subject, I'd like to suggest that it be kept as simple as possible. Though, while still having enough detail that it potentially could make a difference in the 'play' of any given scenario.

So, things like a limited number of bridge 'classes' would be in line with keeping it simple. Then we could classify vehicles as to their weight-class which would then determine their limitations as regards using bridges.

So, maybe just three to start with. Light, Medium and Heavy. Of course all foot traffic can cross any weight-class bridge. 'Penciling in' the weight-class of a unit on the unit list will give a quick and easy reference. I think that within a short time, anyone playing the game will quickly remember the units and their corresponding weight-class.

The biggest advantage will be one of 'limitation'. By having to use the appropriate bridge that the unit requires to be able use it, there will be an impact on any given scenario. By 'channeling' the movement of the units relative to a bridge can completely change a scenario. And by experimenting with different weight-class assignments the effect on scenario's is not fixed. Essentially, or potentially, adding at least two more 'scenarios' for each modification as to weight-class of the bridges in any given scenario.

Admittedly its not perfect, but its a start. I hope that one and all can see the potential effects of what is a very simple modification to the game.

Also, thanks for the links to the information sources...

Dennis
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.