Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
09-27-2013, 11:10 AM,
#11
RE: AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
Some Basics on Armor in Panzer Grenadier, from my research for the Relevant AFV Rules on the Unit pages.

Any unit with a printed armor defense value (even a value of 0) is an Armored Fighting Vehicle (AFV) (Rule 1.2 Definitions). All AFVs are Combat Units and are activated by Tank Leaders (Rule 3.3)

There are two specialized types of AFV with their own activation rules:
• APC (Armored Personnel Carrier) – They may be activated by regular leaders and tank leaders (1.2, 3.34, 4.3, 5.43).
• Armored Cars – All have their own armored car leaders, who can only activate armored cars (6.85).

There are units which are NOT AFVs, despite some of them having armor values. These units are explained in various Game and Scenario Book Special Rules, and include (for now):

Prime Movers – Transports which only transport Towed units and/or leaders (May not carry personnel units). May or may not be armored (armored models are open-top). All are mechanized.
Armored Transports – These are not combat units and are therefore not APC’s, and they can transport all types of transportable units (5.6) so they are not Prime Movers. They suffer the same vulnerabilities in combat as open-top AFV’s (see 7.61). All are mechanized.
Unarmored Weapon Carriers – These are unarmored halftracks (Bufla and Sk7/2) or fully-tracked vehicles (Karl siege mortar) with mounted weapons. All are mechanized, except the BM-13 (Katyusha rocket launcher mounted on a truck). They are weapon units, not AFV’s, so they are never efficient and can not be activated by tank leaders.
Portees – Trucks with mounted Anti-Tank guns, Anti-Aircraft weapons, or artillery. Stack as combat units. Move like trucks, but fire like guns. Do not limber or unlimber. Have the truck’s -1 armor value. Truck and gun are treated as a single unit, and do not transport other units.

Anything else with an armor value (even a value of zero) is an AFV and is activated by Tank Leaders.
Reply
09-27-2013, 12:46 PM,
#12
RE: AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
Clarifying and summarizing what has gone before
  • Moves like transport type used in the portee configuration (We have ½track & PM portees.)
  • Cannot unload the gun
  • May not transport other units (presumably not leaders either)
  • Activated like transport, self, stack or infantry leader
  • Stack as a combat unit
  • Killed or otherwise affected by fire as per the transport armor type (-1 vs. AT fire if mount is a truck or unarmored PM)
  • Not eliminated as collateral damage
  • Not subject to loaded transport fire penalty
  • Armored portees are open topped

Treated as an exposed gun for DF & BF? I don't know, they seem to die fast enough. How long would you expect a truck portee to last in tank combat?

Now a monkey wrench: Can truck mounted portees dig in? They aren't transport anymore.
... More and more, people around the world are coming to realize that the world is flat! Winking
Reply
09-27-2013, 08:08 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-27-2013, 08:09 PM by Brett Nicholson.)
#13
RE: AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
All duly noted though I did read up on the portee's, apparently a lot of them could unload if they chose to. But I think I have everything cleared up on those and the self-propelled artillery now. On another note, while researching odd weapons, I read that the Soviets actually used anti-tank dogs against German armor. Now that would make for an interesting playing piece! Of course they didn't work that well, some of the dogs with anti-tank mines strapped to them ran from enemy fire back to Soviet lines and actually detonated them on Soviet personnel and sometimes their own tanks. The Soviets claim about 300 German tanks were eliminated this way which was most likely a bit overblown. I think it would make for at least a scenario special rule where they may have actually been successful ... imagine a mobile minefield, not motorized or subject to anti-tank fire that could randomly go in any direction and detonate at any time but that is well off topic here. Thanks for a the support again -Brett N.
Reply
09-27-2013, 10:53 PM,
#14
RE: AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
There is a scenario with them in Eastern Front
Reply
09-28-2013, 12:08 AM,
#15
RE: AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
(09-27-2013, 10:53 PM)vince hughes Wrote: There is a scenario with them in Eastern Front

Amazing, one more incentive to make that my next boxed set! Have you played that one? Also, are they able to affect both friendly and enemy units? I guess I will hopefully find out soon enough on my own. German shepherd sticky bombs -genius!
Reply
09-28-2013, 07:56 AM,
#16
RE: AFV units with indirect fire or: what makes a tank a tank?
(09-28-2013, 12:08 AM)nebelwurfer9 Wrote:
(09-27-2013, 10:53 PM)vince hughes Wrote: There is a scenario with them in Eastern Front

Amazing, one more incentive to make that my next boxed set! Have you played that one? Also, are they able to affect both friendly and enemy units? I guess I will hopefully find out soon enough on my own. German shepherd sticky bombs -genius!

The problem with the A/T dogs was as I understand they were trained by reward system to run under AFV,s. Of course the AFV's used for training were Soviet So when the dogs when released in anger they ignored the German tanks and ran back towards friendly lines. Mayhem then ensued with most of the dogs having to be shot by the Russians.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)