Recommend
14 
 Thumb up
 Hide
40 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Tide of Iron» Forums » General

Subject: Tank tactics rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: Tactics [+] TOI [+] [View All]
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
I want to write something about tank tactics. Before going into tank to tank tactics, I want to write something about tanks versus infantry. Sometimes the victory objectives are directly coupled to tanks, but more often than not, its up to the infantry to take the victory objectives.

Tank versus Infantry

Advantages Tanks

1. Protection. Most enemy infantry has only range of 1 versus tanks. Which means most infantry cannot damage a tank 3 hexes away or more. At 2 hexes they are at long range, and the probability of damaging any tank is low.

Thus, if you have tanks, and the enemy does not, your tanks are safe!
And this is so regardless of which tanks you have.

2. Firepower: Most tanks have 6 in firepower versus infantry. Which is fair enough. But, just as important, concussive firepower. 9 in firepower versus infantry is a lot and neglect the entire cover-bonus for buildings.
And often, buildings are your main source for cover.

Due to concussive firepower, if the enemy has lots of tanks, you are probably better of staying in woods. (entrenchment in wood is excelent)


But tanks also has a few disadvantages which may not be that obvious.

1. Tanks cannot enter houses. This means, that any victory objective in a building cannot be taken by tanks. Secondly, this also means that the hexes BEHIND the buildings cannot be attacked. It may be very tricky for the tanks to get into firing view. And lack of line of sight is far better protection than any cover!

2. Tanks cannot assault. This means that if you NEED to take a hex, you need to kill every single enemy first, then use something else to enter the hex.

So, tanks, stay at distance, use your impressive firepower and time to take out the enemy. The better time you have, the more advantage to the tanks.

So, the other way around, do you have any options to fight back using infantry?

1. You may have an anti-tank specialist. It can be irritating to the enemy. An irritation moment. At least if the enemy does not have panther/Tiger.

2. Don't underestimate the 4 in firepower any infantry has versus a tank. You can do a fire & movement action, get 2 in firepower and versus a 'none-super tank' you have a small but fair odds of doing damage. If you then can continue and get the initiative next round, you can fire with 4 dices at point blank range, which is more than enough to damage most tanks. This is obvious a very aggressive move, as an infantry next to tank, isn't probably going to stand fighting for very long. But if you can do 'fire & movement' combined with 'fire' afterwards, it can be a shocking and nice move.

3. Double Mortars: don't underestimate the power of a double mortar to take out tanks! 4 dices versus typical 4 dices in armor, to all tanks in the hex => more powerful than it seems.

4. Artillery!

5. Slow down. You may not necessarily NEED to kill the tanks to win. A infantry in the way, slows down a tank. A hex with a infantry cannot be occupied by a single tank alone in 1 round.

6. Anti-Tank guns: these are really tricky to use & play.
-Cannot move (for all practical purposes)
-need both a fresh infantry and a fresh anti-tank gun to use.
If you place them a poor hex, the enemy may just ignore it. Place it to easily, the enemy may take it out using any method they like.
In the desert warfare they are better since they in that setting has better effective protection. But in general, don't expect an anti-tank gun to to much good.


Tank Versus Tank!

Tank versus tank warfare. The most effective way of eliminating tanks, is to use your own tanks. But how?

Let me put down a few tricks, if playing German.

Tricks:
1. Sweet spot! Most Late German tanks has range 8, while most allied tanks have range 6. Thus if you position your tank at 7 and 8 hexes from the enemy, this is your spot! Then you can easily attack enemy tanks and stay fairly safe from them firing back. If the enemy has set up so that this is possible, and keeps on firing at you without moving into a better position, just smile. A good enemy will not let this opportunity arise.

2. Fire & movement as last move, win initiative, FIRE!
If the enemy has already activated, this tactic is so powerful. Requiers you to win the initiative, which may be very very important in tank versus tank situations. Any (late) German tank has good firepower and good ods of doing damage. If you have two of them, the probability to heavy damage an opponent is huge.

3. If you have panther/Tigers: then you typical have less amount of them. The trick to using panther/Tigers is to note that a sherman doing fire & movement action has a very low probability of doing damage. So low that you can almost ignore that threat. Secondly, a single sherman firing at full firepower, still does not have a great ods of doing damage. Thus, if you can move your panthers/tigers so that it only attacks one or two enemy tanks at a time => huge advantage to the panthers/tigers.

4. Note also that Panther/tigers are difficult to destroy using
-single and double mortars, artillery, bazookas, heavily damaged enemy vehicle. So don't be too afraid of these super tanks.

5. Note also that a Panther itself has a good probability of damaging an enemy with a fire & movement action.

Tricks for the allies

1. How to take out a tiger/panther?
Move to point blank, win initiative, fire and hope for the best.
At point blank range the odds are better.

2. How to take out a tiger/panther trick 2.
Move four Shermans and surround the enemy, expect to loose one of your tanks as a sacrifice. Then, CABOM, with combined fire.

3. How to take out a tiger/panther trick 3.
M10! With its penetration effect, a panther is reduced to a regular tank.
(note that the M10 is single purpose tank: take out enemy tanks)
M10 even have fair odds of damaging an enemy supertank in a fire & movement action.

4. Combined fire!

5. Never ever stay in the 7-8 hexes from a German tanks. Don't let that happen ever. If they move into that range, move your tanks.

6. You typical have MORE tanks than the Germans. Sacrifising 1 tank to take out 1 is a thus a good deal! If you don't have more tanks than the Germans, expect to loose the tank-fight anyway, and decide how to use your tanks accordingly.



19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
In general I will also like to add that it's a better strategy to try to lightly damage two times to get one heavy, compared to try to get one heavy in one go.

Thus I would say that firing two panthers two times is better than firing two panthers once in a combined fire.

Combined fire is better used if you have trouble damaging in the first place.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bill jaffe
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
good article. if you watch the movie Fury you will see the 4 Shermans vs 1 Tiger in action, it's very cool sequence.

The East front is where Tank Tactics change due to the T-34, KV-1 and SU-122 all having decent armor, but they also have the range and fire power issues

bill
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
Good point Bill. The Russian tanks have fun stats.

In the case you have T-34 and KV-1 versus Panzer III, the Russian has the better hand. And I would love to have more scenarios in that category. In this case the Russian benefit isn't as extreme as the regular panther/tiger benfit versus Shermans, but still neat.

Versus panzer IV, panthers and Tigers, the T-34 and KV-1 instead of Shermans changes things slightly but not to much. The T-34 is by far a more FUN tank compared to the sherman, with its 7 in movement. Its far easier to pull of some of the fanzy moves. And in addition it has +1 armor.

The KV-1 is darn slow though. I like it, but if I could choose I'll take the T34 any day. However, I like the 'odd' tanks which are different.

The SU-122 on the other hand is a game changer. It is just 'breath-taking' with it's amazing anti-infantry stats. It can one-shot kill entire squads at amazing distances. I would definitively use it mainly as an infantry hunter.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
First of all, great to see tactics articles from another fan as well!

What do you mean by "anti-tank guns having better protection in the desert"?

Funny you should mention combined fire specifically in a separate post. My next tactics article will focus on combined fire.

I've just finished designing an Eastern front scenario pitting panzer II's, panzer 38 (t)'s and panzer III's against KV 1's, T 34's, T 26's and BT 7's which I will be fine-tuning and submitting to 1A to use as they see fit shortly.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
One addition to this great article on tank tactics: where high speed tanks, such as the T34, also shine is in their ability to use overrun. As a tank must expend one movement point per enemy squad located in a hex, overrun is difficult to pull off for slow tanks such as the KV1 even if there's only a single enemy squad present in a hex. The latter would have to start its move at most two hexes away and will then end up adjacent to the hex just having been overrun. Not something you would want for reasons Hss explained above. A T34 with its move of 7, however, could start from as many as 5 hexes away (or 4 and avoid ending up adjacent to an enemy squad which may not be pinned anymore at the beginning of the next round and then if your opponent has the initiative...well, you get my drift). Of course, the T34's intentions are also far more obscure than when a KV1 slowly moves towards your squad...

Note btw, that squads in pillboxes, entrenchments and trenches cannot be affected by a tank's overrun ability!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
In day of the fox and that alike, the tanks has range 6 and firepower 6. Effectively the AT guns are far harder to destroy in that setting, cuz the enemy tanks are of lower quality. In that setting AT-guns are far better asset. The AT-guns, both allies and German has both longer range AND better firepower compared to the tanks. Which makes them a good tool.
(example scenario: Fall og Tobruk in Days of the fox)

Later, when the German comes with Tigers, Panthers and even Pancer IV, the AT guns are easily destroyed. Example: Gela beachhead in Design Series I.


What stats did you use for the panzer II's and panzer 38 (t), T-26 and BT 7's? I'm in favor of setting official stats for them, so that the stat for them do not change from scenario to scenario.



http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/657320/custom-scenario-encou...

I also would like a pdf version of this scenario. It's on my 'want to play list', but it would be so much easier if I had a printable version of it with nice maps.


Last, if you want a great tank battle, try
'To Save Bastogne' in Design Series.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Grand Stone wrote:
In day of the fox and that alike, the tanks has range 6 and firepower 6. Effectively the AT guns are far harder to destroy in that setting, cuz the enemy tanks are of lower quality. In that setting AT-guns are far better asset. The AT-guns, both allies and German has both longer range AND better firepower compared to the tanks. Which makes them a good tool.
(example scenario: Fall og Tobruk in Days of the fox)

Later, when the German comes with Tigers, Panthers and even Pancer IV, the AT guns are easily destroyed. Example: Gela beachhead in Design Series I.


What stats did you use for the panzer II's and panzer 38 (t), T-26 and BT 7's? I'm in favor of setting official stats for them, so that the stat for them do not change from scenario to scenario.



http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/657320/custom-scenario-encou...

I also would like a pdf version of this scenario. It's on my 'want to play list', but it would be so much easier if I had a printable version of it with nice maps.


Last, if you want a great tank battle, try
'To Save Bastogne' in Design Series.


Thanks. Yes, you're definitely right about AT guns being less vulnerable in the DoTF expansion. Just wasn't sure what you meant initially.

I used the stats from the link below (initially I used slightly different ones in some cases, but for the very same reason you just mentioned-not wanting them to differ from scenario to scenario-) I kind of decided I'd be using the stats as provided in this link:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/102579/tournament-iron...

1A has "official" stats for the panzer 38(t), which I'm not sure I'm allowed to disclose here at this point, though.

Yes, I know To Save Bastogne. It's one of the, if not THE, best TOI scenario I've ever played. Very balanced and fun!

Bill designed Encounter at Dubno, so perhaps you could send him a pm...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nathaniel Beck
United States
West Allis
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Grand Stone wrote:

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/657320/custom-scenario-encou...

I also would like a pdf version of this scenario. It's on my 'want to play list', but it would be so much easier if I had a printable version of it with nice maps.


I did create a map file for Bill's scenario:
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/1137089/kaiser33

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
Looking at the stats, I see this could be a very fun tank battle. With crappy tanks on both sides, intermixed with few 'ok' ones for the Germans and a few 'great ones' (for its time) for the Russians.

However, these stats deviates from the official stats to much for a few standard tanks in my view. Giving the KV-1 thick armor is too much for example.

But taking them as guidelines anyway, I like many of these tanks. BT-7 for example, having great speed, good anti-infantry fire (almost as good as any other tank) but almost no armor. The panzer II has 3 in armor (a bit suppriced) but crapp firepower.

However, maybe for these set of tanks, concussive firepower should only be +2 to range and firepower?
Lesser concussive firepower... Just a thought!

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
Kaiser33 wrote:
Grand Stone wrote:

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/657320/custom-scenario-encou...

I also would like a pdf version of this scenario. It's on my 'want to play list', but it would be so much easier if I had a printable version of it with nice maps.


I did create a map file for Bill's scenario:
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/1137089/kaiser33



Oh, tanks a bunch. That makes easier at least
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Grand Stone wrote:
Looking at the stats, I see this could be a very fun tank battle. With crappy tanks on both sides, intermixed with few 'ok' ones for the Germans and a few 'great ones' (for its time) for the Russians.

However, these stats deviates from the official stats to much for a few standard tanks in my view. Giving the KV-1 thick armor is too much for example.

But taking them as guidelines anyway, I like many of these tanks. BT-7 for example, having great speed, good anti-infantry fire (almost as good as any other tank) but almost no armor. The panzer II has 3 in armor (a bit suppriced) but crapp firepower.

However, maybe for these set of tanks, concussive firepower should only be +2 to range and firepower?
Lesser concussive firepower... Just a thought!



Agreed on the panzer II. I initially played with armor "2", which seems more appropriate. I do suppose the list may be work in progress, though. Then again, the panzer II F did have better armor than the panzer II C, so if it's the Ausf. F, then it may well be justified. That is, however, a problem as it makes the panzer II's too difficult to deal with, relatively speaking, so I might just stick to "2" after all.

I did use the thick armor trait for the KV1 in the scenario, actually, as a scenario special rule, even before coming across the list. I both feel it is merited for the time period and I didn't want the Germans to score extremely lucky hits either.

Also agree on the concussive firepower stats. As I said, I hope the author considers it a work in progress. Perhaps something we as a TOI community could do: come up with tank and vehicle stats that aren't as yet officially in the game so that at least, when a certain proxy is used in a scenario, people would be using the same stats as much as possible. The list can well be used as a starting point.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
But was the KV1 actually as hard and though as the Tiger?
For all practical purposes the thick armor reduces the damage by
(#armor dice rolled at 5+)+1

The +1 is in average the same as 3 dices, but it may be worth more than that. Because the +1 is guaranteed one result while 3 dices may be zero or it may be 2 or even 3. I think the guaranteed one is better than 3 dices, at least in most case, at least when it matters, when the number of attack dice has troubles penetrating.


Thus, thick armor increases the effective armor by at least 50%, which is a huge increase. All I'm saying, is that this is a completely different vehicle from the official KV-1

I'm actually for giving it thick armor, but then reduce its armor to maybe 4 or something...


Concussive firepower +2 would be a great rule. The T70 for example, has -1 in firepower versus infantry. But still add 3 versus infantry in buildings. So as an anti-infantry tank, its almost as good as anything else. It's still a tank with it's protection versus infantry as all other tanks, and still has almost the same firepower. For the T70 that may be justified for all that I know. But if we want to introduce something which isn't that effective, Concussive firepower +2 is the way to go.

From a gaming perspective, with armor 2 for the Panzer II, the panzer II would be significantly different and weaker from the panzer III, as we want. We want it to feel obsolete, and with 2 in armor, it will.
The panzer II deserves a official stat someday.


An other issue, to think of is that the official panzer III etc. has 6 in movement, while in that list it has 5. I have no objection to that, but if intermixing official with none-official house rules, you should
think about it. Should the panzer II have the same movement as the panzer III? I say yes.


Another idea is a combat vehicle with some sort of movement bonus ON roads. It would definitively be fun. Cuz it will make roads more important, and it would be über cool. Maybe a rule for the BT-7? Maybe the standar 'truck' rule for bonus movement would be to much. But 7 in standard movement, but every 2 movement on roads give you a bonus movement on a road. Every 3 movement counts as 2. To complicated?


Towing rules for AT guns on roads could also be fun. 1 action to hook the AT gun to the vehicle, 1 or more action to move, which on roads could be done with full or almost full movement, 1 action to unload and setup. Moving the AT gun in combat, will still be stupid, as it will take 3 turns doing nothing and ready to fire on the 4th turn. But it will
allow a scenario where the AT guns starts hooked up to a vehicle, out of position to do anything, and setting up the AT-guns into position is a key issue of the scenario.




 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Grand Stone wrote:
But was the KV1 actually as hard and though as the Tiger?
For all practical purposes the thick armor reduces the damage by
(#armor dice rolled at 5+)+1

The +1 is in average the same as 3 dices, but it may be worth more than that. Because the +1 is guaranteed one result while 3 dices may be zero or it may be 2 or even 3. I think the guaranteed one is better than 3 dices, at least in most case, at least when it matters, when the number of attack dice has troubles penetrating.


Thus, thick armor increases the effective armor by at least 50%, which is a huge increase. All I'm saying, is that this is a completely different vehicle from the official KV-1

I'm actually for giving it thick armor, but then reduce its armor to maybe 4 or something...


Concussive firepower +2 would be a great rule. The T70 for example, has -1 in firepower versus infantry. But still add 3 versus infantry in buildings. So as an anti-infantry tank, its almost as good as anything else. It's still a tank with it's protection versus infantry as all other tanks, and still has almost the same firepower. For the T70 that may be justified for all that I know. But if we want to introduce something which isn't that effective, Concussive firepower +2 is the way to go.

From a gaming perspective, with armor 2 for the Panzer II, the panzer II would be significantly different and weaker from the panzer III, as we want. We want it to feel obsolete, and with 2 in armor, it will.
The panzer II deserves a official stat someday.


An other issue, to think of is that the official panzer III etc. has 6 in movement, while in that list it has 5. I have no objection to that, but if intermixing official with none-official house rules, you should
think about it. Should the panzer II have the same movement as the panzer III? I say yes.


Another idea is a combat vehicle with some sort of movement bonus ON roads. It would definitively be fun. Cuz it will make roads more important, and it would be über cool. Maybe a rule for the BT-7? Maybe the standar 'truck' rule for bonus movement would be to much. But 7 in standard movement, but every 2 movement on roads give you a bonus movement on a road. Every 3 movement counts as 2. To complicated?


Towing rules for AT guns on roads could also be fun. 1 action to hook the AT gun to the vehicle, 1 or more action to move, which on roads could be done with full or almost full movement, 1 action to unload and setup. Moving the AT gun in combat, will still be stupid, as it will take 3 turns doing nothing and ready to fire on the 4th turn. But it will
allow a scenario where the AT guns starts hooked up to a vehicle, out of position to do anything, and setting up the AT-guns into position is a key issue of the scenario.






OK, a couple of clarifications:

1.) Whenever an official stat already exists, I use that one.

2.) The KV 1 is an exception only in the sense that I added the thick armor trait for this scenario only. A because I wanted to prevent overly lucky shots and B because in fact I believe the KV1 WAS as hard a target to kill compared to a Tiger taking into account that we're talking of 1941 here; a panzer III certainly would have had as much trouble damaging let alone destroying a KV1 as a Sherman would to do the same to a Tiger a couple of years later. BTW, you'll be surprised how easy it still is for several panzer III's to repeatedly damage a KV1 WITHOUT this special rule (6 dice against 6 defence dice, so 50%!)

Furthermore, the panzer II doesn't only deserve its own stats, it deserves its own miniature! ;)

Yeah, BT-7 might be given the effective on roads bonus. I remember Uwe Eickert saying at a certain time (designer of the Conflict of Heroes series)that a BT7 was certainly very fast, but mainly on roads. In terrain the T34 was apparently much better/ faster.

As for towing rules...:whistle:
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
boersma8 wrote:
Grand Stone wrote:
But was the KV1 actually as hard and though as the Tiger?
For all practical purposes the thick armor reduces the damage by
(#armor dice rolled at 5+)+1

The +1 is in average the same as 3 dices, but it may be worth more than that. Because the +1 is guaranteed one result while 3 dices may be zero or it may be 2 or even 3. I think the guaranteed one is better than 3 dices, at least in most case, at least when it matters, when the number of attack dice has troubles penetrating.


Thus, thick armor increases the effective armor by at least 50%, which is a huge increase. All I'm saying, is that this is a completely different vehicle from the official KV-1

I'm actually for giving it thick armor, but then reduce its armor to maybe 4 or something...


Concussive firepower +2 would be a great rule. The T70 for example, has -1 in firepower versus infantry. But still add 3 versus infantry in buildings. So as an anti-infantry tank, its almost as good as anything else. It's still a tank with it's protection versus infantry as all other tanks, and still has almost the same firepower. For the T70 that may be justified for all that I know. But if we want to introduce something which isn't that effective, Concussive firepower +2 is the way to go.

From a gaming perspective, with armor 2 for the Panzer II, the panzer II would be significantly different and weaker from the panzer III, as we want. We want it to feel obsolete, and with 2 in armor, it will.
The panzer II deserves a official stat someday.


An other issue, to think of is that the official panzer III etc. has 6 in movement, while in that list it has 5. I have no objection to that, but if intermixing official with none-official house rules, you should
think about it. Should the panzer II have the same movement as the panzer III? I say yes.


Another idea is a combat vehicle with some sort of movement bonus ON roads. It would definitively be fun. Cuz it will make roads more important, and it would be über cool. Maybe a rule for the BT-7? Maybe the standar 'truck' rule for bonus movement would be to much. But 7 in standard movement, but every 2 movement on roads give you a bonus movement on a road. Every 3 movement counts as 2. To complicated?


Towing rules for AT guns on roads could also be fun. 1 action to hook the AT gun to the vehicle, 1 or more action to move, which on roads could be done with full or almost full movement, 1 action to unload and setup. Moving the AT gun in combat, will still be stupid, as it will take 3 turns doing nothing and ready to fire on the 4th turn. But it will
allow a scenario where the AT guns starts hooked up to a vehicle, out of position to do anything, and setting up the AT-guns into position is a key issue of the scenario.






OK, a couple of clarifications:

1.) Whenever an official stat already exists, I use that one.

2.) The KV 1 is an exception only in the sense that I added the thick armor trait for this scenario only. A because I wanted to prevent overly lucky shots and B because in fact I believe the KV1 WAS as hard a target to kill compared to a Tiger taking into account that we're talking of 1941 here; a panzer III certainly would have had as much trouble damaging let alone destroying a KV1 as a Sherman would to do the same to a Tiger a couple of years later. BTW, you'll be surprised how easy it still is for several panzer III's to repeatedly damage a KV1 WITHOUT this special rule (6 dice against 6 defence dice, so 50%!)

Furthermore, the panzer II doesn't only deserve its own stats, it deserves its own miniature!

Yeah, BT-7 might be given the effective on roads bonus. I remember Uwe Eickert saying at a certain time (designer of the Conflict of Heroes series)that a BT7 was certainly very fast, but mainly on roads. In terrain the T34 was apparently much better/ faster.

As for towing rules...whistle


Then we are on same page.

6 attack dice versus 6 defence dice is not entirely 50/50 as a draw will result in no damage. But it's still a good odds of damage yes.

The problem is that a single panzer III would have significantly more problems damaging a KV1 than a sherman a Tiger. But a KV1 with 4 in armor and thick armor would be approximatly the same as a Sherman versus a tiger, and would be significantly harder than the regular rules for the KV1.

The BT7 with some kind of fast road movement=> fun!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bill jaffe
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
i know we are working on a towing rule for the optional rules set.
in 1941-42 KV-1's should have thick armor since other than 88's everything else the German's had would tend to bounce off, of course the facing rules we are also working on will help show that.
oh yeah something special for the BT-7 and later the M-18 need to done.
yeah i'd like to do an official stat sheet for a lot of unpublished tanks, just need more time than i have

bill
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
skinsfan wrote:

yeah i'd like to do an official stat sheet for a lot of unpublished tanks, just need more time than i have

bill


Well, maybe this document can be taken as a starting point and all 1A would have to do would be to approve of certain stats and call them official, maybe after a discussion on this forum, for two tanks at a time per week or something along those lines. Just a thought. It'd move things along and get some discussion going.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kandras 78
Hungary
flag msg tools
Avatar
skinsfan wrote:
i know we are working on a towing rule for the optional rules set.
in 1941-42 KV-1's should have thick armor since other than 88's everything else the German's had would tend to bounce off, of course the facing rules we are also working on will help show that.
oh yeah something special for the BT-7 and later the M-18 need to done.
yeah i'd like to do an official stat sheet for a lot of unpublished tanks, just need more time than i have

bill


Bill,

Let me kindly suggest you to check out my humble and age old set of Experimental Rules Vol.1. containing stats and special abilities and attributes for 69 vehicles.Hope you might find some worthy ideas to complement your efforts. Let me share you two examples regarding your current dilemmas.

For the KV-1 (and other heavily armoured vehicles not as tough to get the Thick Armour) I would suggest to consider using the 'A Nut Hard To Crack': When a vehicle with the A Nut Hard To Crack attribute is attacked, the controling player may add a +1 modifier to one of the results on the armour dice.


For the BT-7 and M-18 (and all extremely fast tracked vehicles) I would suggest to use the 'Agile/Rapid' attribute:A vehicle with the Agile attribute receives +1 bonus movement point when it is activated with an advance order. The same is true for a vehicle with the Rapid attribute but in this case the bonus is +2 movement points.




1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Kandras78 wrote:
skinsfan wrote:
i know we are working on a towing rule for the optional rules set.
in 1941-42 KV-1's should have thick armor since other than 88's everything else the German's had would tend to bounce off, of course the facing rules we are also working on will help show that.
oh yeah something special for the BT-7 and later the M-18 need to done.
yeah i'd like to do an official stat sheet for a lot of unpublished tanks, just need more time than i have

bill


Bill,

Let me kindly suggest you to check out my humble and age old set of Experimental Rules Vol.1. containing stats and special abilities and attributes for 69 vehicles.Hope you might find some worthy ideas to complement your efforts. Let me share you two examples regarding your current dilemmas.

For the KV-1 (and other heavily armoured vehicles not as tough to get the Thick Armour) I would suggest to consider using the 'A Nut Hard To Crack': When a vehicle with the A Nut Hard To Crack attribute is attacked, the controling player may add a +1 modifier to one of the results on the armour dice.


For the BT-7 and M-18 (and all extremely fast tracked vehicles) I would suggest to use the 'Agile/Rapid' attribute:A vehicle with the Agile attribute receives +1 bonus movement point when it is activated with an advance order. The same is true for a vehicle with the Rapid attribute but in this case the bonus is +2 movement points.






First of all, I had a look at these before and they're really great! As I said above, 1A could use your and others' work and start from there. That should greatly reduce the amount of work involved in coming up with official stats. When official stats already exist, I'd stick to these as much as possible unless they are somehow clearly flawed.

For the KV1 I would go for scenario special rules or operation cards which could make it differ from the current official stats, which I believe are more than fine for the level of detail provided in TOI in general. I mean, it really doesn't need to get any better protected than it already is against panzer IV's, Tigers and Panthers. However, in a 1941 scenario it's far easier in the game than it was in reality for a panzer III to damage a KV 1 or a T34 for that matter. In this case, a scenario special rule or op card could be used. I'd like an op card with the agile effect, though! Would be fun!

BTW, this is exactly why some "official" stats would be great: lots of fans have come up with stats for a large variety of new vehicles (and guns), but they will invariably differ here and there. Then when people make their own scenarios (like I do) they often come up with slightly different stats yet again. Uniformity would be nice here! (-;
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ides of march
msg tools
I really liked András's rules. A heap of work. I play tide for the WWII feel but I am not adverse to tweaking it for the sake of simulation. As long as it creates exciting play and less arguments. It is a board game after all and not a super-computer simulation of WWII.

At my gaming sessions there are usually 4 or more players. Oftentimes there is a new player. These players catch on fast and usually start rolling fat stacks of sixes and then get absorbed by the command points and initiative calls. The game is much simpler than SqL and it moves through and gets a result one way or another. Done well, it recreates a company sized battle in an afternoon (2-3hours) up to battalion level over a day or two (6-8hours).

In tide, objectives are clearly on the board, as if they've been called in by some idiot commander further up your chain of command. This creates a lot of WWII feel for me together with the decks (i.e. the fog and fortunes of war factors). You never really know what's coming next, with exception of the enemy's reinforcements.

IMO Tide is great for combined arms games and can be used for tank battles. I think we all agree it does a reasonable simulation of the Normandy dynamic, i.e four Shermans versus a Tiger. If Shermans operate under "mass confusion" and have no combined fire they must close to one hex range to take it down. The Fury ammunition counters create the simulation feel of firing smoke and HEAT rounds.

Trouble is we still don't feel like tankers playing the game. There is nothing in the system to force you to face. Turrets are not free to move etc. Fire and movement is too restrictive to allow for "shoot and scoot" hull-down, dug-in and defilade positions. snore

Yes we have been through this stuff before on other forums and there are probably no easy fixes. Although András's rules propose some easy fixes and small changes that are really very good.

Right off the bat: reassigning dice rolls. In our gaming sessions we use larger dice with nation logos (German crosses, British roundels). The attacker rolls attack dice and the defender rolls their defense dice, simple fun and interactive. I reckon everyone who plays the game probably does this kind of thing but I may be wrong?

Curently, tanks in Tide remind me of Fritz Zwicky's term for the other astronomers at Mount Wilson: spherical bastardswhistle i.e. tanks "..appear as bastards when viewed from any side.."

András's rules suggest flank and rear armor re-rolls. Excellent idea and it works! Overall, it makes German tanks a little weaker. Most allied tanks still get taken out with one shot. But now you are thinking about facing, protecting flanks (with a building) and moving from one position to another (i.e. tactically). You feel a lot more like a tanker.

András's German armor stats may be a little on the high side, for example 19dice attack for the 88mm L43 guns. I would say 15/16 should be the highest in the game and if you need more put the "Tank Ace" card in the mix. 15 let's you kill at range (these rules were published before fury and tank ammunition rules too).

Increased range for certain weapons can add to the sweet-spot action although it is hard to LOS at really long ranges in most Tide scenarios. You need longer board setups with high ground at the rear. Increased range allows accurate German AT guns and armor to dominate the ground. On a simulation front this is good as often the only counter is artillery, airstrikes or infantry (as it was historically).

There are many other rules worthy of mention regarding Lee/Grants, rate of fire etc, some of which are now in the game such as tank riders and infantry using tanks as cover.

I would definitely play the flank and rear re-rolls in a tank on tank scenario.

Maybe our challenge is to design a really good tank on tank scenario for Tide, battles such as Avaranches, Bluecoat, Ponyri, Hochwald, Balaton perhaps (something I haven't really tried). Maybe some extra Tank actions in the mix. I would also consider play testing a tank ace card that allows that tank an additional action per round.

Stu
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ides of march
msg tools
Looking at Panzer II I have to say the armor should be 2 not 3. 1 value for its thin-ness and another 1 for its small size and mobility. One of my group argued for it to be higher than a panzer I but our group now has consensus that Panzer I is 2 but fragile, Panzer II has armor II.

As for concussive, anything under 70mm diameter should have a reduced HE concussive effect (smaller round less charge). Furthermore, you could argue that longer barrels such as firefly and 76mm Sherms shouldn't get any concussive effect (alongside a few of the German tanks). The short barreled Sherm was the chosen gun for tank versus infantry. Lower velocity therefore possibility to fire high explosive round. After all, why did tank formations from both sides always have a mixture of barrel lengths?

I haven't played the SU-122s too much yet, but in my opinion a "10" is shockingly powerful against infantry. This seems way too high (higher than the 6inch 150mm sig33 Stug). That's a score of +13 against infantry in a building. These fat stacks against infantry should be reserved for the Stalingrad stielgrenaten, Sturmtigers and 8inch tracked Russian guns dragged into Berlin.

Please Su-122 should be a 7 against infantry and a 6 for indirect fire (i.e. suppressive). It should be a 10 against armor with a very short range i.e. 5 hexes.

I may be wrong here but I am not sure it was any big game changer during the war. It is true that its HE round could blow the turret off a tiger at 300 yards. Vasily Krysov's account at Kursk described this happening numerous times, so 10 versus tanks (range 5), 7 versus infantry (range 5). I am not sure about indirect fire and its traverse I would have to do some research.

I always thought that the game changer was the Su-85(and later T34/85). Also, roughly 1,000 Su-122s were built compared to 14,000 SU-76s. The Bare-arsed Ferdinand was actually favored in the street by crews, who simply jumped off if it got hit. Open-top also meant better communication with the troops on the ground. I quote from the wiki (cringe...)

"The SU-76M had a large number of ammunition types. They included armour-piercing (usual, with ballistic nose and subcaliber hyper-velocity), hollow charge, high explosive, fragmentation, shrapnel and incendiary projectiles. This made the SU-76M an excellent multi-purpose light armoured fighting vehicle."surprise

SU-76 now sounds totally cool, we need more ammunition rules! laugh:

Hss Hss, have you checked out the Excel sheet yet? I would be really happy if everyone puts forward their 2 cents worth, wish list or crit of all the stats. Even if there is a new colum added for side armor (the Panther's was quite weak). When it finally has the consensus it should go to 1A (or we all just agree to use it).

Stu


boersma8 wrote:
Grand Stone wrote:
Looking at the stats, I see this could be a very fun tank battle. With crappy tanks on both sides, intermixed with few 'ok' ones for the Germans and a few 'great ones' (for its time) for the Russians.

However, these stats deviates from the official stats to much for a few standard tanks in my view. Giving the KV-1 thick armor is too much for example.

But taking them as guidelines anyway, I like many of these tanks. BT-7 for example, having great speed, good anti-infantry fire (almost as good as any other tank) but almost no armor. The panzer II has 3 in armor (a bit suppriced) but crapp firepower.

However, maybe for these set of tanks, concussive firepower should only be +2 to range and firepower?
Lesser concussive firepower... Just a thought!



Agreed on the panzer II. I initially played with armor "2", which seems more appropriate. I do suppose the list may be work in progress, though. Then again, the panzer II F did have better armor than the panzer II C, so if it's the Ausf. F, then it may well be justified. That is, however, a problem as it makes the panzer II's too difficult to deal with, relatively speaking, so I might just stick to "2" after all.

I did use the thick armor trait for the KV1 in the scenario, actually, as a scenario special rule, even before coming across the list. I both feel it is merited for the time period and I didn't want the Germans to score extremely lucky hits either.

Also agree on the concussive firepower stats. As I said, I hope the author considers it a work in progress. Perhaps something we as a TOI community could do: come up with tank and vehicle stats that aren't as yet officially in the game so that at least, when a certain proxy is used in a scenario, people would be using the same stats as much as possible. The list can well be used as a starting point.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
I enjoy lots of your tanks and vehicles, and your thoughts.
I must add that I am no expert on WWII. I just like this game as a miniture game and the setting happens to be WWII. So I can say whether I find things fun or not, how realistic it is, well,... that is not up to me to decide .


However, I enjoy playing scenarios, and I would like the vehicles to be indentical to the vehicles stats as they were play tested. I don't want to re-balance all scenarios 'my self' before playing them. Therefore, for the vehicles with does has official stats, should have the official stats. My 5 cents.

I think a early war tanks could be very fun. Then you have a mix of 'ok tanks' and horrible tanks.

The proposed stats for the panzer II is then
---
6 in movement (equal to the 6 for panzer III and IV)
2 in armor
Infantry fire: range 5, firepower 4
Tank fire range 5, firepower 3

Concussive firepower +2
Sturde
Overrun
---

BT-7
7 in movement. (i propose some fast on roads ability in addition)
1 in armor
Infantry fire: range 5, firepower 5
Tank fire : range 5, firepower 3

Concussive firepower +2 (???)
Overrun
Sturde
---

T26 (version C in your file)
6 in movement
2 in armor
Infantry Fire: range 4, firepower 4
Tank fire : range 6, firepower 4.

Concussive firepower +2
overrun
sturty
---

All of these sound fun to add and play with, specially if you add in panzer III, panzer IV, T34 and KV1 into the mix.

Should you use your T34 to eliminate the puny panzer II, or knock out the real threat first?

All of these are also not imune to MG fire...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ides of march
msg tools
Early War Tank Combat, and PzIIIs versus KV1
Although German Panzer III and II tanks were not very powerful, quite often they won incredible battles due to quality radios, combined fire and better training (accurate shooting).

We play these battles with "no Tank Radios" on Soviets. Germans on other hand should be allowed to combine fire from anywhere on the board together, i.e. no fire-group adjacent hex combined fire rules.

You may have read about the single KV-2 that held up a panzer division for two days etc (it was bombed by Stukas), or the KV-1 that received over 150 hits from a company Panzer IIIs. There is no doubt KVs imposed extreme terror. Kolobanov's KV platoon took apart an entire column of Panzer IIs, IIIs at Krasnogvardejsk.

On the subject of Bad Tanks:
BT7s and T26s made up a large portion of Soviet tank force in Barbarossa so must be on the list, along with larger formations of BA-10M cars. They may seem like poor tanks and that is precisely what they were.

I included the T35 (parade) tank on the list because they were all committed to combat in the defense of Moscow (and lost). Some broke down and were abandoned, others destroyed in combat. Note this tank has three turrets, three attacks!

Don't forget, Wittman started in one of those Stugs with the low velocity gun, not to mention the riveted Czech tanks like the 38t. Longer barreled PzKfz IIIs came later and German tanks had no anti-freeze in 1941-42. You had to light a fire under them to start!

Revising the Rules and Changing Stats on Vehicles:
As for your comments re changing the stats on existing vehicles, the 1st edition FF version if the game was prone to terribly imbalanced scenarios.

There must have been a lack of play-testing and if you search back through earlier posts on BGG you will see what I mean. My feeling is that Fury of the Bear probably had the least but I may be wrong? Normandy has 10 Sherms combining fire on a single tiger in Goodwood (why even have a tiger if it disappears on move 2 at long range), I could digress...

This is why the spreadsheet got going. 1A Games is re-releasing these Days of the fox (and hopefully the others) with all important scenario tweaks. That is why the SU-122 should be fixed asap.

As someone who has played Tide quite a bit, I would be interested to know what others think now that Stalingrad is out? After all I don't want to waste any more time criticizing everyone's amazing (and incredibly hard) work developing the game to this point. It's just that I feel the game has really matured and now deserves our attention (lovin).

Infantry Killers
My group has been playing a while now and we really enjoy the infantry killing AFVs. We have been playing Sherman Calliope, Sturmpanzer and Churchill AVRE at infantry firepower "8". And, believe me, this makes them potent infantry killers with +3 Concussive firepower.
My feeling is that firepower 10 for Su-122 and Sig33 is too high. 10 makes a battery of 2 SU-122s surefire infantry killers at long range, which they weren't historically.

The biggest infantry killer in our games has been the Sturmtiger at "12" against infantry. As for the StuH Sig.33, I like the stielgrenate but I would not make it more effective than a Sturmtiger. I still need to revise our stats for the later russian guns. I think my table shows a 6 for Infantry Attack on the SU152 and ISU 152, should definitely be an 8. (sorry everyone)

Russian Tank Killing
Btw, on the subject of stielgrenaten, the first stielgrenaten were developed for that tiny 37mm PAK 36 AT gun. Wasn't it shot out from the barrel like a rocket propelled grenade and had an antitank charge on the end? Maybe it was only Spring 1942 but it could be a game inclusion for your early Barbarossa scenarios when the KV-1 rips up all the panzer IIIs?

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
As far as official stats are concerned; yes, I do believe the SU 122 is too strong. If not for historical reasons, then certainly from a balancing point of view, that is when your opponent ís (almost) infantry only. The Creating the Korsun pocket from FoTB is the best example of this, I believe.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hss Hss
Norway
flag msg tools
I don't enjoy combined fire at all and want it removed from the game. My 5 cents

Yes, the original scenarios were horrible. The same with the ones in fury of the bear. Normandy, did have a great deal of good scenarios either.
The two last regular scenarios where ok though. Put the tigers at long range and they can kill quit a few shermans before they are destroyed.
Don't ever move the king tiger in that scenario though!

Creating the Korsun pocket is a very nice introduction scenario, where you play the German and the newbie the Russian. The newbie will win.
A SU-122 can single can kill entire squads in one shot from any distance. Don't you ever let it fire a single shot, and stay BEHIND the buildings, not in them. So, if you meet me with a SU-122, don't you expect it to fire any time during the game.

So sure, I agree that the firepower of SU-122 may be to good, but it is what it is, and isn't going to change. Hopefully we will get rebalanced
scenarios for fury someday, but they will probably use range 10, firepower 10. Range 10 and firepower 8 would have been more than enough.

A lot of the scenarios in Days of the Fox, Stalingrad, the design series and the new wave are balanced and fun for both players. (two different things). There are also quit a few fan-based scenarios which are fun.

We should be making a fan based scenarios book. Where only great and approved scenarios are included.


The Stalingrad expansion is by far the best expansion ever. Some good scenarios and The SMG specialization and the unarmed restrictions are the two best specialization every made. Give them to the defender, and it promotes an aggressive defender. A simple FAQ would improve it further.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.