Drako's Tanks House Rule - Tank Classes

[CWO Marc]

@drako9374:

On a complete side note, I am really curious to see what you all think about the German SturmTiger. Mainly I am curious about what CWO Marc and Ichabod have to say about it but everybody is welcome to comment on it. I personally don’t know a lot about it. Just that it had a very large mortar style short barrel cannon and, if I’m not mistaken, was supposed to replace the StuG line of assault guns that were being engineered more towards attacking enemy tanks instead of infantry support. Like the StuG III Ausf. A, was geared more towards infantry support but later StuG IIIs were more towards fighting tanks. So Germany needed to replace them. Enter the SturmTiger. However, I could be wrong.

I have a very busy day lined up today, so for the moment I only have time for a quick initial comment on this.  My feeling is that getting into the nitty-gritty of how two very specific German armoured vehicles compared to each other is getting too far ahead of what you should be looking at first, which is the general concept of how general classes of fighting machines are supposed to represent and how they should be modeled in A&A.  In other words, I think it’s premature to focus on whether the SturmTiger should be considered an assault gun or a tank destroyer relative to the Stug III assault gun (and even more specifically the Stug III Ausf. A, which is an even finer gradation) before you’ve settled the larger question of what function tank destroyers and assault guns in general are supposed to play in the game.  Remember that in Global 1940, there are many different sculpts (one per nation) that are used to depict each unit type, but that they’re all considered to have identical performances under the rules, despite the fact that they don’t always depict actual models that were actually equivalent in WWII.

[Ichabod]

Argothair,

I would play with this house rule as is in order to war game it…just finding the different sculpts so that one could clearly see the difference between a light tank and a med. tank might be a challenge. I got into too much of a discussion over tank destroyers vs. self-propelled artillery instead of sticking to your house rule idea.

Further comments:

Perhaps you might want to consider the Heavy Tank costing 10 or 11 IPCs. Reason being if the Tank gets 1 free hit and its attack roll is as high as a Strat bomber or a Tac. bomber, then it’s actually almost better than a plane. King Tiger IIs were expensive tanks…so were the IS-2 Stalin tanks. At a cost of 8 IPCs, it might become a “broken” unit (meaning people only buy this one single unit) rather than a mix of units.

Did you drop permitting mech to blitz when paired with a tank? Or is it implied that it has to pair (but by saying “no” you mean it can’t blitz by itself). What about requiring Light tanks to pair with at least a mech. or another Light tank in order to blitz?

I’d request to let the Mech. Artillery pair with infantry also for supporting infantry attack rolls at 2. Mech. Infantry fight dismounted, just like normal infantry. I think this additional advantage is fair because of the higher 5 IPC cost. I can imagine a modern Paladin howitzer supporting mech infantry just the same as infantry.

Mech. today and back then have Armor Personnel Carriers, but other than the crew (driver, truck commander, and gunner which is usually a machine gun or the modern day Bradley which has more firepower), the infantry squad in the back dismount.

Respectfully,
Ichabod

[Argothair]

Hi Ichabod,

Yes, the sculpts are definitely a challenge! You might wind up having to use paint or chips or stickers to indicate the different tank classes, rather than unique sculpts, especially for a playtest.

I agree with you on the Mech. Artillery supporting Reg. Infantry. – you’re correct both as a matter of mechanics and history!

I recommend dropping Mech. Inf’s ability to blitz, yes. For simplicity / ease-of-use, I’d like to see only tanks be able to blitz. That said, if you prefer allowing Mech. Inf. to blitz with support from a tank (any tank), that’s not going to break this variant; it’ll still work.

Notice that even a huge stack of Heavy Tanks only soaks a combined total of 1 free hit. Unlike 3 battleships, which will soak 3 hits, 3 Heavy Tanks will only soak 1 hit, so I’d be surprised if people only buy that one single unit at 8 IPCs. Unlike planes, heavy tanks can’t be used to attack or defend ships, can’t transport themselves across sea zones, can’t be used for efficient light trading, and have only 2 movement. That said, I considered pricing heavy tanks at $9, and if you might even be able to get away with a cost of $10 if you feel strongly about that.

[CWO Marc]

An idea that might be useful to consider is this one, which would help keep within reasonable limits the potential for excess complexity in introducing new specialized house-ruled units.  The basic idea would be: all the player nations in Global 1940 (except China, of course) would all have access to all the standard unit types that exist in Global 1940, but only some nations would have access to specialized house-ruled units.  This would get around the problem mentioned earlier in this thread, which is the “where will I get a sculpt to represent (for example) an ANZAC heavy tank?” problem.  Answer: ANZAC won’t get a heavy tank, because they had no such weapons in WWII (which is why no such sculpt exists in the first place).  The two most likely candidates for heavy tanks (to continue with this example) would be Germany and the USSR, which both conveniently have heavy tank sculpst in A&A 1941.  Likewise, the old-style German Panther sculpt from the early A&A editions can plausibly be used to represent a Jagdpanther tank destroyer, since it looks appreciably different from the current Panther sculpt.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Argothair:

Here’s one idea for a set of units for 1940 Global with relatively simple rules and three types of tanks:

| Unit Type | Cost | Attack | Defense | Move | Blitz | Special Ability |
| Reg. Infantry | $3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | No | n/a |
| Artillery | $4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | No | +1 atk for 1 paired reg. inf. |
| Mech. Infantry | $4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | No | n/a |
| Mech. Artillery | $5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | No | +1 atk for 1 paired mech. inf. |

|

| Light Tank | $5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | Yes | n/a |

| Medium Tank | $6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | Yes | +1 atk for 1 paired tac. bomber |
| Heavy Tank | $8 | 4 | 3 | 2 | Yes | Your entire stack absorbs 1 free hit in 1st round of combat if enemy has any tanks |

I may not have the balance entirely right, as I’m not a Global 1940 player, but the key idea is that categories of units match up with a particular ability. All tanks can blitz, and only tanks can blitz. All artillery can give +1 attack to an infantry, and only artillery can do that. All mechanized units can move exactly two spaces, etc.

If my numbers are right, then light tanks will be inefficient for the price unless you really need that third unit of speed – instead of paying $10 for a pair of light tanks that get 4 pips on offense and 2 pips on defense, you could pay $9 for a mech. inf. and mech. art. that get 4 pips on offense and defense.

Medium tanks are exactly as written in standard 1940 Global, except that they do not support blitzes for mechanized infantry.

Heavy tanks are inefficient for the price unless you’ve (a) got a fairly large stack to work with, e.g., mix in 1 heavy tank with 3 or 4 smaller tanks, and (b) know you’ll be facing some enemy tanks. Note that no matter how many heavy tanks you have in a stack, you can only absorb 1 free hit per territory per turn.

Suppose you have a budget of $48 to buy tanks. Six heavy tanks would give you 24 pips of offense, 18 pips of defense, and an effective 7 hit points, as long as you’re facing at least 1 enemy tank. That’s a terrible deal, though, because for the same price you could get eight medium tanks, giving you 24 pips of offense, 24 pips of defense, and 8 hit points. An interesting mix (assuming you buy only tanks) is to get 1 heavy tank, 5 medium tanks, and 2 light tanks. For the same $48, that buys you 23 pips of offense, 20 pips of defense, 9 hit points, an advantageous replacement schedule (if you take some hits, you lose the light tanks first, which are cheaper to replace, and can catch up to your front lines faster) and the ability to pick up a far-away territory now and then with your light tanks.

Light Tank with 3 moves seems over-stretched, and an oddity in A&A roster.
Probably you can keep balance with a 4 IPCs unit like this:

Light Tank
A2 D1 M2 C4, can Blitz and gives blitz to Mech Infantry or Mech Artillery paired 1:1.
No additional bonus.
|

[GeneralHandGrenade]

I posted earlier in this topic about an expansion set from HBG ( Bring in the Heavies) to check out the rules. As far as sculpts go they have 12 different types of sculpts;

America- M36 JACKSON heavy tank destroyer, M6 medium tank, T28 super heavy tank.
Germany- VK1602 LEOPARD light tank, JAGD E-50 tank destroyer, JAGD TIGER heavy tank destroyer, TIGER !!§ medium tank, VK4502 medium tank, MAUS super heavy tank
Japan- Type 3 HO-NI 111 tank destroyer, Type 2 HO-RI heavy tank destroyer, Type 5 CHI-RI heavy tank destroyer.

In the OOB game there are 15 sculpts ranging from mech infantry to heavy tanks. I don’t see anywhere that you can order these pieces without purchasing the game, perhaps you could persuade them to part with some.

Unfortunately those are the only 3 nations involved in this game so you would still have to find sculpts for the other nations.

[drako9374]

@CWO:

@drako9374:

On a complete side note, I am really curious to see what you all think about the German SturmTiger. Mainly I am curious about what CWO Marc and Ichabod have to say about it but everybody is welcome to comment on it. I personally don’t know a lot about it. Just that it had a very large mortar style short barrel cannon and, if I’m not mistaken, was supposed to replace the StuG line of assault guns that were being engineered more towards attacking enemy tanks instead of infantry support. Like the StuG III Ausf. A, was geared more towards infantry support but later StuG IIIs were more towards fighting tanks. So Germany needed to replace them. Enter the SturmTiger. However, I could be wrong.

I have a very busy day lined up today, so for the moment I only have time for a quick initial comment on this.  My feeling is that getting into the nitty-gritty of how two very specific German armoured vehicles compared to each other is getting too far ahead of what you should be looking at first, which is the general concept of how general classes of fighting machines are supposed to represent and how they should be modeled in A&A.  In other words, I think it’s premature to focus on whether the SturmTiger should be considered an assault gun or a tank destroyer relative to the Stug III assault gun (and even more specifically the Stug III Ausf. A, which is an even finer gradation) before you’ve settled the larger question of what function tank destroyers and assault guns in general are supposed to play in the game.  Remember that in Global 1940, there are many different sculpts (one per nation) that are used to depict each unit type, but that they’re all considered to have identical performances under the rules, despite the fact that they don’t always depict actual models that were actually equivalent in WWII.

Just to try to clear things up a little. I wasn’t trying to represent them in A&A, I have no plans to do so.(Other than the StuG III being used a tank destroyer sculpt.) Just with how you and Ichabod were talking about the different vehicles earlier made me curious to see what you two knew about it from a historical view and what your opinions were on it as a military weapon, not as a game piece or mechanic. Just recently I also stumbled upon a German weapon that was never built. I didn’t know that it was even thought of. Although given Hitler’s obsession over large things, I should’ve known that something like this would’ve been dreamed of by somebody. The P.1000 Rat and the P.1500 Monster, absolutely huge vehicles. Again I’m not going to represent them in game, I just wanted to make a note of them.

So back to the game and my house rules. After posting this I am going to go back to them, read them, and make any changes I feel will be necessary. Like someone said earlier, they are just house rules, you can make them however you want. If I don’t add or take away something that you feel like should be then, of course, you can take them and make them your own and make those changes yourself. I appreciate the feedback from every one.

[CWO Marc]

I don’t really know enough about the SturmTiger to offer any useful comments, but I have some stuff in my personal library about one of Germany’s superheavy tank projects, the Maus, which actually did produce one fully-functional vehicle plus a second hull with a dummy test turret.  The Maus was in my opinion a colossal (in both senses of the word) waste of development resources, and the result could more properly be described as a mobile bunker than anything else.  Little thought seems to have been given to crucial practical details such as how it would be transported over long distances (it was so wide and heavy that the train carrying it would have to take a circuitous route to avoid all the tunnels and bridges that were not capable of accommodating it).  And while it would certainly have been able to out-gun and out-armour (though certainly not outrun) any Allied tank of WWII, the Allies would undoubtedly have dealt with it from the air rather than with ground forces.  Its topside armour might perhaps have able to stand up to cannon fire from ground-attack aircraft (I don’t know about that aspect of its design), or perhaps even to rocket fire from ground-attack aircraft, but no amount of armour could have protected it from a weapon that the Americans started using late in the war: napalm.  A lumbering behemoth like the Maus would have been an easy target for ground-attack aircraft carrying napalm bombs, which would have turned the inside of a steel tank into an oven in a matter of minutes.

[A Former User]

Have question, what does a A&A tank unit represent?  Wouldn’t it be a division level unit?  A tank division is made up of several types of armor (not including all of the support troops).  This rule would presume the units are down to the battalion level.  Is that right?

[CWO Marc]

There’s no official answer that I know of.  A&A is such an abstracted game that, in one sense, it would be meaningless to say that game unit X corresponds to real-world military (or naval) formation Y.  Given the scope of A&A Global 1940, however, the various unit types on the map would roughly correspond to large formations if we were to assume that the allocation of units in the rules corresponds to real WWII numbers.  As an example, Germany’s invasion of the USSR was carried out with over 150 divisions – so from that perspective, the small number of sculpts on the actual board could at best only correspond to army groups.  At that level, it shouldn’t even be possible to differentiate between the components of the army groups, nor even of their consitutent armies or corps; the highest-level tank formations in WWII were, I think, armoured divisions and (one level further down) tank brigades.  So one way to look at the game would be to imagine that we’re not actually seeing the military formations themselves, but rather a patchwork picture showing some of the elements of those formations, with some of these elements being high-level ones and others being lower-level ones (like tank brigades).