Restricted Arc inconsistencies

Started by Ariete, 31 August 2021, 02:00:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ariete

I noticed that the Restricted Arcs rule seems to be applied very haphazardly in the lists. I have not made a definitive list but I have spotted a few.
There seems to be some contradictions with the use of Restricted Arc on some vehicles which would otherwise pass the Ergonomic Command test as emphasised by the PzIII & PzIV vehicles too.
The Matilda I v Pz I both 2 man crews, the Pz I is restricted but the Matilda I isnt.
The Valentine I, II, IX, X & XI's and Crusader III as all had the commander acting as loader. with 2 man turrets.
I am sure there are plenty more in the lists.
Ariete

Big Insect

Hi there

Restricted arc is about more than just a physical restriction, be it in the size or composition of the crew, or location or arc of the primary weapons, it is also doctrine related.
Also do remember that a single 'unit' in play is actually a number of vehicles fighting in a formation.
So unlike other sets of rules (such as Flames of War for example) even tanks with full 360 degree traversal will not necessarily get wider arcs of fire.

However, we can review the restricted arc's you've highlighted when we next review the BKCIV Errata

many thanks

Mark
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "outside of the box" thinking.

Ariete

Morris CS9 is missing from British Army North Africa they were to command vehicles for the Rolls-Royce cars
Italians Balkans 1940 the M13/40 is missing Centauro Division
I dont think the M11/39 was deployed outside Italy until it was shipped to North & East Africa [will need to be confirmed]
Italian off table artillery the 149mm is missing and all Italian off table artillery ended up being used in the direct fire direct support role.

Steve J

IIRC the M11/39 was used in the Albanian-Greek conflict.

Ariete

Its listed in the Italian v French list 1940 which is clearly wrong.
This site doesnt mention their use in the Balkans at all. But the M13/40 was used there, https://comandosupremo.com/fiat-m11-39/
nor this one https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/italy/carro_armato_medio_m11-39.php
My Italian reference books make no mention of service in the Balkans either.
M13/40 links here
https://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/italy/Carro_Armato_Medio_M13-40.php
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/293578469441103415/ The Battle with Centauro Division on 6th January 1941. There are a few more pictures of M13/40 deployed to Albania and Greece from late 1940.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/131st_Armoured_Division_Centauro
George F. Nafziger - Italian Order of Battle: An organizational history of the Italian Army in World War II (3 vol)
John Joseph Timothy Sweet - Iron Arm: The Mechanization of Mussolini's Army, 1920-1940
Also the Signal publication, Riccio book and the Osprey confirm the M13 in Albania and Greece in Dec 1940-41 and deployment against Yugoslavia


paulr

Welcome to the forum Ariete :-h

Good to see some well referenced posts :)
Lord Lensman of Wellington
2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2022 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2023 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Ariete

This book details the Italian armoured units and campaigns and confirms that the M11/39 was not used outside Italy, Libya, Egypt and East Africa.
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Iron_Hulls_Iron_Hearts/F5t8AwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
The preview gives you the references including dates they operated.

Ariete

That of course meant the M11/39 was only used in Egypt and East Africa and Libya. The essential word got eaten