CWC-II Army List Errata/Suggestions (Open)

[Huey]

USA
Helicopters
In the notes I can buy 4 Transport helicopters.
But in the lists I can only buy 1 UH1...
In fact I can never buy All of my helicopters of one type.  Is this intentional?

Cheers  H

[sultanbev]

With the Arab States list, I believe that the Jordanians had 105mm Centurions from 1970

This is something I have had difficulty confirming. Currently my notes say:
From 1972 the Centurion Mk7 were upgraded to Mk7/2 with 105mm L7 guns. These were in the 40th Brigade. It is not known if the Mk5 were upgraded to 105mm at the time of the 1973 war.

[flamingpig0]

This is something I have had difficulty confirming. Currently my notes say:
From 1972 the Centurion Mk7 were upgraded to Mk7/2 with 105mm L7 guns. These were in the 40th Brigade. It is not known if the Mk5 were upgraded to 105mm at the time of the 1973 war.

It  is in Arabs at War: Military Effectiveness, 1948-1991 (Studies in War, Society, and the Militar) (Studies in War, Society, and the Military) Kindle Edition
by Kenneth M. Pollack


"In 1970 it boasted 70,000 men, of whom two-thirds were Jordanian Bedouin and the remainder either Palestinians or other Hadari. As always, the Bedouin dominated the armored formations, several infantry brigades, and most of the officer billets in the combat units, while the Palestinians manned the technical-support branches and the enlisted ranks of the other infantry brigades. The army had replenished its tank strength with 300 of the latest American M-6os and improved British Centurions (equipped with new engines and the outstanding L7 105-mm gun)"


I don't know enough about Centurions to say if he is right or not

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Well the L7 was designed to fit the 20pdr mount. Would need to change the ammo racks. The engine swap indicates that it's refering to the Tariq upgrade.

[Big Insect]

USA
Helicopters
In the notes I can buy 4 Transport helicopters.
But in the lists I can only buy 1 UH1...
In fact I can never buy All of my helicopters of one type.  Is this intentional?

Cheers  H

Hi Huey

The thing about the army-lists is that they are primarily a guide and an attempt 'stop' players creating unrealistic forces - such as a US force that is only M1s, with all the supporting infantry in Helicopters, for example. But they are not as proscriptive as in some other sets of rules.

Most CWC players tend to base their forces on historical Orders of Battle (OOBs) and use the lists and points system as a way of balancing games, so that it isn't all about putting all your 'toys' out to overwhelm your opponent - no matter how much fun that is 

I'd suggest that if you have a specific US formation you are wanting to create, the best thing to do is use the OOB and build your own list to that. I very often use a 1985 US Airborne. With that I use far more helicopters than the maximums - and also use more Sheridan's than the list would normally allow, but I am very careful not to take any other units that are not part of the formation, or that did not support it, no matter how tempting that might be.

I'm playing in a game on Saturday (25th June) coming up and I'll be using a 103 Dutch Recce company - this is a weird mix of Leopard A2s; Lynx and M113 M&C upgraded APCs, with elite infantry units, - all in Recce Support mode - plus a bridging unit. It's a fun small force - designed specifically for armoured recon in-force - but it bears little relationship to the Dutch NATO list (although all the component parts of it are in the list). It is based on a great resource - a full Dutch OOB that is on-line: https://www.orbat85.nl/reference/unit-organisation-and-equipment.html

Hunting across the web will find you more of these sorts of assets.

Hopefully that is helpful? As an aside I intend to put out a US Airborne list (along with a US High Tech Light Infantry list - another of my favorites) once I have the bulk of the core lists published. However, if you want me to ping you my Airborne list - message me directly on the forum (with your email address) and I will send it across to you.

Cheers
Mark

[JcDent]

In the case of a concentration, even with Chemical weapons, the process work exactly the same way as HE works - number of guns/air craft x number of hits, per unit under the template.

Right, my bad. So if I roll with concentrated attack with three MLRS units, I'm rolling 3x6 - 18 dice per unit in the target area?

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Thats correct, our moderator has managed 66 dice per model before now.   

[Big Insect]

Right, my bad. So if I roll with concentrated attack with three MLRS units, I'm rolling 3x6 - 18 dice per unit in the target area?

Yes - as stated that is the correct way of doing it.

There are some limitations applied to Air-strikes, where you can choose to focus all attacks in the zone on a single unit (rather than on all the units in the zone). This increases the numbers of attack dice further (see Page 58)- but you cannot do that with area denial munitions such as: Chemical, Napalm, Thermobaric or Smoke (not that you'd probably want to deliver your Smoke that way  )

The game is primarily orientated towards Off-table artillery and once you get the hang of it and use your FAOs, boosted by a +1 from your Recce - you can cause havoc with them - I've see a whole Soviet MRR where the infantry had dismounted to attack a small defended village (with a handful of stalwart Canadian infantry defenders in it) get totally annihilated by repeated off-table artillery, called in by the Canadian FAO and his supporting Recce, both also in the village. Without their infantry the soviet BTR-60s were sitting ducks to the Canadian IATWs.

Hope that helps.
Cheers
Mark

[Superscribe]

Hi Mark. In PDF all Soviet tanks from T54 through to T80 save on 4, including those with Composite Armour. The rules state Composite Armour save on 5+ against frontal attack from ATGW. Are stats listed correctly, as surely Composite Armour should be an improvement, with a better save factor rather than a worse one?!

[Gwydion]

P.50 - 'Units hit by ATGW do not get armour saves, unless they have composite or explosive reactive armour' [my italics]

So tanks without Composite armour will not get ANY saves against ATGW - so the armour does convey an advantage. (the list saves are against other munitions hits - apds etc)

(P.91 - Special abilities says the composite armour save against atgw is only against frontal attacks)

I think!
Someone may be along in a minute to correct me.

[Superscribe]

Hi Gwydion.

Ha I missed the no saves v ATGW so now makes sense 😊😅

[Big Insect]

P.50 - 'Units hit by ATGW do not get armour saves, unless they have composite or explosive reactive armour' [my italics]

So tanks without Composite armour will not get ANY saves against ATGW - so the armour does convey an advantage. (the list saves are against other munitions hits - apds etc)

(P.91 - Special abilities says the composite armour save against atgw is only against frontal attacks)

I think!
Someone may be along in a minute to correct me.

Not at all Gwydion ... spot on ... the nuances of combining types of armour will be the thing that drives me to my grave I am sure 

[Matt J]

No T-62 in the Arab states list?

[Big Insect]

Thanks Matt

No obvious reason why it was omitted - that looks like a copying error - we'll get that rectified.
The states will be the same as the Soviet list T62, but with a 1973+ date :

T-62 |100 | AFV |25|6/95|5/60|4|4|-/9| 1973+ R/IR (Syria and Egypt only)

Thanks
Mark

[HogansHeroes]

The Swedish Type 66 Infantry Brigades used the Strv 74 for recon after 1970. Could the Strv 74 be added to the recon list for the Swedes (it is currently under armour)?

Also Swedish Type 66 Infantry Brigades sometimes used tractors and trailers to motorise. Could these be added to their transport options, mostly just for flavour? It could just be a slightly slower truck (maybe speed 15?).