An online community for Command Decision

Command Decision - Test of Battle Forum Index -> Rules Questions

Front/Flank ajudication
Goto page 1, 2  Next
  Author    Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Bill Owen
Brigadier


Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 1879
Location: Soca, Uruguay
Front/Flank ajudication  Reply with quote  

The rules indicate measuring from the closest point on the stand (excluding a gun barrel) and I recently played a game where we measured from the gun mantle to gun mantle. This meant we had to be about 1 inch closer than otherwise to spot a concealed vehicle (6" because of snow now became 5"). I think that this is a house rule that we should dispense with. Is anyone else playing this way still?

Anyway one of the things that was a bigger problem was the amount of flank shots that our heavy tanks suffered from the US gun line that was concealed just 5" away. The rules now have a 90 degree angle for determining the front vs. flank. And the rules indicate clearly that you have the front/flank angle lines intersect the front corners of the vehicle. But what the rules do not say is whether the firer hits my flank must be entirely in the flank angle or just have a tiny part of his front intersected by the front/flank arc.

I think we played as if only took a tiny part of the firer's stand to consider it a flank shot. But since the game had changed from CD3's wide 120 degree frontal angle, I was thinking that the firer's front had to be fully in the flank arc. Which is it?
_________________
ICD Wargame Club's motto "ICD, do you?" CD aids currently at: www.g-design.us/cd ...eventually all aids will be found at wargamecampaign.blogspot.com

Post Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:41 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jake Strangeway
Lieutenant General


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 3565
 Reply with quote  

Bill,

We play that the firer has to be completely beyond the 90 degrees in order to get a flank shot.

Jake

Post Sun Jan 10, 2010 11:02 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bill Owen
Brigadier


Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 1879
Location: Soca, Uruguay
 Reply with quote  

That's a beautiful thing! Thanks!
_________________
ICD Wargame Club's motto "ICD, do you?" CD aids currently at: www.g-design.us/cd ...eventually all aids will be found at wargamecampaign.blogspot.com

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:03 am   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dave
Lieutenant Colonel


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 708
Location: UK/France - St Omer
 Reply with quote  

Jake,

Is your interpretation a house rule? Smile

I thought, but am probably wrong, that in RAW, you can fire from any point on a firing stand to any point on the target. So if the firer fires from a point on his stand outside of the front arc, its a flank shot.

Regards
Dave

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:38 am   View user's profile Send private message
Bob_Mackenzie
General of the Army


Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 5410
Location: UK
 Reply with quote  

I agree with Dave - with trepidation as disagreeing with Jake on rules is usually a bad idea....
_________________
http://www.testofbattle.com/upload/bob/

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:24 am   View user's profile Send private message
Jake Strangeway
Lieutenant General


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 3565
 Reply with quote  

Hello guys,

This is just the way we have played, not the RAW. RAW any shot from outside the front arc is considered a flank shot, and since LOF is identical to LOS (with 2 exceptions that don't apply here), and LOS is traced from any point to any point, then technically if any tiny part of your vehicle is past that 90 degres you get a flank shot.

In my opinion, this can lead to very silly instances where 99 percent of the firing tank is in the front arc of the target, but a single corner happens to be past that 90 degrees (or vice versa).

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:05 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dave
Lieutenant Colonel


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 708
Location: UK/France - St Omer
 Reply with quote  

>>In my opinion, this can lead to very silly instances where 99 percent of the firing tank is in the front arc of the target, but a single corner happens to be past that 90 degrees (or vice versa).

Jake,
Indeed, or vice versa. So with your house rule, 99% of the firer could be in the flank, and just a little corner in the front arc, and you would count it as a frontal shot.

I dont know whether this is very silly or not. Smile

The line has to be drawn somewhere, of course, but its interesting to know that you dont play RAW.

IIRC, during the playtest stage of ToB the frontal arc was reduced from 120 degree to 90 to give more flank shots. Do you, and the designers (as I understand you frequently game with them), feel that this was a mistake?

Dave

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:42 pm   View user's profile Send private message
glenn_kidd
Sergeant Major


Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 267
Re: Front/Flank ajudication  Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by Bill Owen:
. . .
Anyway one of the things that was a bigger problem was the amount of flank shots that our heavy tanks suffered from the US gun line that was concealed just 5" away. The rules now have a 90 degree angle for determining the front vs. flank. And the rules indicate clearly that you have the front/flank angle lines intersect the front corners of the vehicle. . .


The flank shot rule is another tradeoff in rule design. Under the old system flank shoots were quite rare yet anecdotal evidence seems to suggest they were far more common. Most tankers would probably want the protection of a Tiger over a Panther but in CD and with veteran players, flank armor was rarely a factor. The 90% rule was a trade off, with a tank platoon at 90% or more, enough of the tanks in the platoon can be assumed to be revealing their flank.

Glenn E. Kidd Cool
_________________
Glenn E. Kidd

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:47 pm   View user's profile Send private message
Jake Strangeway
Lieutenant General


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 3565
 Reply with quote  

Dave,

I can't speak to what Frank or Glenn were thinking on this - to be honest it hasn't really come up (believe it or not) in my games with them.

Also, when we game it is pretty friendly - we look at the tank and make a call - I can honestly say that we haven't looked up the flank rule in quite a while, so all I can say is that this is how we have been playing.

Going forward, I can't say whether my group will conform to the current rules or keep going as we have been.

Usually when we get a disagreement between RAW and how we have been playing it (because we assumed it was one way, having played it that way for a long time, and then something makes us look it up, and we find out we were incorrect) we conform to the wording in the rulebook.

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:50 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dave
Lieutenant Colonel


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 708
Location: UK/France - St Omer
 Reply with quote  

Jake,

Using your interpretation shifts the balence back somewhat to the frontal armour. The game does actually play differently when you do that.

For those that game in 20mm these effects will be even more pronounced.

As Bill discovered, it was relatively easy to get a flank shot at closer ranges as the size of the firing and target stands and the range affect the geometry.

Regards
Dave

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:22 pm   View user's profile Send private message
Jake Strangeway
Lieutenant General


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 3565
 Reply with quote  

Dave,

Oh absolutely it changes the way the game works - again, the way we have been playing it so far is incorrect as far as the RAW goes. RAW, if any point is past the front arc, it is a flank shot.

The more I discuss this, the more I think I will bring it up the next time we play and see what the consensus is (which will probably be to use RAW).

As for those who still play in 20mm, well, a good therapist could assist them Wink

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:34 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Alan
Chief Warrant Officer


Joined: 18 Oct 2006
Posts: 308
Location: Medway, Kent UK
 Reply with quote  

Rather than measuring from any point from the firer, how about simply from any point within the firing stands 'Arc of Fire' to any point on the targety stand ~ would that then reduce the ambiguity?

Alan

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:47 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Jake Strangeway
Lieutenant General


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 3565
 Reply with quote  

Alan,

With tanks, who have a 360 degree arc of fire, any point on that tank is within its arc of fire, which means that it still means that a single corner of the tank past that 90 degree frontal arc still counts as a flank.

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:55 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
pnzr12
General


Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 4161
Location: Mississippi
 Reply with quote  

We tend to use the old 120 template, it is very handy and transparent to boot. Very good tool. Before we even brake out the template we usually let the ref make the call.

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:16 pm   View user's profile Send private message
Matthew
Lieutenant


Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 458
Location: Ross-on-Wye, UK
 Reply with quote  

I've always used the centre of the stand, so if >50% of the stand is to the flank then it is a flank shot.

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:29 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
  Display posts from previous:      
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2  Next

Last Thread | Next Thread  >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

phpBB Template by Vereor