Qüestions after first quick reading

[BTM]

Hi all from the (not so sunny) Balearic Islands!

I'm BTM and the last years I've been painting pendraken miniatures for our game club (mostly XVIII and XIX centuries and SCW). I've been playing CWC1 for years and, recently, I've bought a pdf copy of CWC2.
First of all, congratulations tot Pendraken and all the people who worked on that rulebook! I can't wait to try it on the tabletop.
After a quick reading, I've a pair of qüestions. I apologize in advance if they have been asked before.

1.Since attacks are now separated in AP and AT column, is still useful the (H) howitzer rule? I find it confusing reading the army lists. Maybe a note (don't get +1 die for firing at half range) will be enough. I've found units that have their AT range halved and still an H appears (halving it twice). FE. Arab bmp-1 has 4/50H (that seems correct, since CWC1 bmp1 had the same point cost and range of 25 cm vs AFV), while soviet BMP-1 has 4/25H (12,5 cm range vs AFV, 250 meters). The same happens with british PIAT (10H and 5H, 2,5cm range). I've found other RRs and IATWs with odd AT ranges, but I can't recall wich now.

2.Some soviet ATGW have the MCLOS rule. Does it mean that they hit targets in the open at 6s? If affirmative, Can they hit targets not in the open (7+)?

3.This one looks an errata. Arab list should have T-62 listed (at least for Syria from Yom Kippur). IDF list has a captured version.

Thanks a lot and congratulations to the team!

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Firstly welcome, remember to take the frog pills.

Rule 1 - if you think its wrong change it.....

Howitzer rule is to reflect less accurate weapons firing direct. It could be ignored if you adjust the AT range.

Assume that like several other sets of rules 6 always hits, reqardless. Otherwise roll 2 die sequentially, if first is a 6 then second is 4+ you have 7, 5+ 8 and 6 9. Pinched from WRG 1925-45 from the 70's.

[Leon]

First off, welcome to the Forum! 

Big Insect can comment directly on the rules, but I'll put a quick link to the latest army lists here: https://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,21713.0.html  I would need to check but some of those queries might have been adjusted in the PDF versions.

[Steve J]

Welcome on board from (for once) a very warm and sunny Bristol .

[BTM]

Hi!

Thank you!

These pdf versions are the ones that have different AT ranges for the same unit depending on the list. (Arab bmp 50H and soviet bmp 25H, PIAT...lack of T-62 in arab list).

[Gwydion]

I see the Arab list still includes the T-10.
I thought we decided back on the old forum that it was never exported?

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

I see the Arab list still includes the T-10.
I thought we decided back on the old forum that it was never exported?

There were certainly a few IS-III in the Egyptian Army, it's illustrated in Vangaurd 23 - Soviet heavy tanks by Zaloga. A much more reliable source than either myself or Mr Bevis...

The late mark ISIII is very similar to the T-10 visually, indeed it is an upgrade with name changed since Uncle Joe was a tad out of favour after 52/3

[sultanbev]

There is a whole book on the T-10 now, by James Kinnear & Stephen Sewell, it confirms the only deployment was in the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia, as part of the 95th Heavy Tank Regiment of 9th Tank Division.
The book does have a qustionable statement repeated twice, claiming the APDS round introduced to the T-10M in 1967 was FSAPDS. I've always understood it to be APDS. Other than that the book is very good, including details on many of the prototypes built on the chassis.
https://ospreypublishing.com/uk/soviet-t10-heavy-tank-and-variants-9781472820525/

As an aside, I did recently find out the T-10 deployment in GSFG, written up in MicroMark list R146M:

3rd Shock aka 3rd Combined Arms Assault Army:
   1 Heavy Tank Regiment: 4 Battalions@ 31x T-10M (up to 1979 at least)
8th Guards Army:
   1 Heavy Tank Battalion (to 1979 at least): 31x T-10M
20th Guards Army:
   6th Independent Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (East Berlin)
                  (62x T-10M & 120x T-54 in 1974; 141x T-64 by 1989)
                  2 Tank Training Regiments@ 31x T-10M, + medium tanks in 1974
notes
c) In 1974 there were an additional 190x Is-2m and ISU-152K in GSFG.

Mark

[Raider4]

The late mark ISIII is very similar to the T-10 visually, indeed it is an upgrade with name change . . .

And an extra road wheel.

[Big Insect]

Hi there - thankyou for your questions - my comments are listed below in-line:

Hi all from the (not so sunny) Balearic Islands!

I'm BTM and the last years I've been painting pendraken miniatures for our game club (mostly XVIII and XIX centuries and SCW). I've been playing CWC1 for years and, recently, I've bought a pdf copy of CWC2.
First of all, congratulations tot Pendraken and all the people who worked on that rulebook! I can't wait to try it on the tabletop.
After a quick reading, I've a pair of qüestions. I apologize in advance if they have been asked before.

1.Since attacks are now separated in AP and AT column, is still useful the (H) howitzer rule? I find it confusing reading the army lists. Maybe a note (don't get +1 die for firing at half range) will be enough. I've found units that have their AT range halved and still an H appears (halving it twice). FE. Arab bmp-1 has 4/50H (that seems correct, since CWC1 bmp1 had the same point cost and range of 25 cm vs AFV), while soviet BMP-1 has 4/25H (12,5 cm range vs AFV, 250 meters). The same happens with british PIAT (10H and 5H, 2,5cm range). I've found other RRs and IATWs with odd AT ranges, but I can't recall wich now.

> The issue around the Errata to do with the 'H' ranges has been picked up in the CWCII Errata thread.
We need to keep the 'H' effect for various reasons - just reducing the 'H' ranges does not resolve all problems.
There is also no point in comparing CWCI & CWCII points costs - as CWCII points have been adjusted for various reasons. The whole RCLR/IATW ranges issue has again been discussed at some length in the errata. Ranges are not necessarily manufactures ranges but are often effective ranges - based on tactical doctrine etc. The knock-on effect of extending some IATW ranges has an impact on comparisons with MBT guns - which could otherwise become ridiculously long on a c.6x4 plating table

2.Some soviet ATGW have the MCLOS rule. Does it mean that they hit targets in the open at 6s? If affirmative, Can they hit targets not in the open (7+)?
> No - you cannot hit any target on a +7 (not with one d:6)

3.This one looks an errata. Arab list should have T-62 listed (at least for Syria from Yom Kippur). IDF list has a captured version.
> it is a known Errata - as is the erroneous inclusion of the T-10 

Thanks a lot and congratulations to the team!

Many thanks
Mark

[Big Insect]

Hi!

Thank you!

These pdf versions are the ones that have different AT ranges for the same unit depending on the list. (Arab bmp 50H and soviet bmp 25H, PIAT...lack of T-62 in arab list).

Yes - there is a continuity issue across some lists - it is a known Errata and is on the list for a 'fix'.
You'll find the same with some of the Sherman stats. It comes from having a number of different list contributors working on different lists with the same tanks/weapons in them. The 'Continuity' project will resolve this.
With the BMPs if it is a longer range it should have an 'H' by it.

Thanks
Mark

[BTM]

Thanks a lot to all of you!
Great community 

[Big Insect]

Hope you enjoy the game BMT - we are a friendly bunch (usually) and there are no rules/list question that are too 'silly' to ask.

Kind regards
Mark

[BTM]

Thanks again Mark!