 |
|
The armed half-track - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: The armed half-track (/showthread.php?tid=52513) |
The armed half-track - Montana Grizz - 08-15-2009 Chuck asked in another thread, if half-tracks were armed for offensive or defensive reasons :chin: I suppose that would depend upon your concept of what constitutes an offensive demeanor in a given situation. I can certainly see a loaded half-track approaching enemy infantry, unloading and then using their machine gun to support an advance (offensive?) I don't see them being used alone as assault vehicles or as stand alone spotters, but am willing to play a scenario where those things are agreeded upon. The half-tracks don't hold up well versus even the small AT guns and many enemy infantry units at close range. This really shouldn't be a point of contention, but rather an option to be agreed upon by contestants. Pat RE: The armed half-track - Mike Abberton - 08-15-2009 Actually if you're playing with extreme assault ON, the whole half-tracks-in-assaults thing becomes less of an issue, IMHO. Since the old surround-and-capture and repeat is nowhere near as effective in most situations. Add to that the increased VP value of HTs, enhanced capabilities of AT guns, and other changes now and HTs become less of a game-changing asset than they were in the past. Mike RE: The armed half-track - Montana Grizz - 08-15-2009 I believe that to be true Mike. I often pick on HT's used as offensive units. I've noticed that I don't have much of a chance of destroying tanks in a hex with a unit that has an effective fire value of 2, while I can often take out a HT in the same hex with the same fire value because of the HT's light armor. I played one scenario where I accumulated almost 200 points in destroyed HT's. The result was a minor victory instead of a draw. Pat RE: The armed half-track - Larry Reese - 08-15-2009 All your half-tracks belong to us.... LR RE: The armed half-track - Jason Petho - 08-15-2009 Larry Reese Wrote:All your half-tracks belong to us.... *laughs* Awesome! Jason Petho RE: The armed half-track - Trojan - 08-16-2009 If it can shoot at stuff surely you can use it how you like? I can understand how trucks oughtn't to be used as surrounding units in an assault, but a bunch of halftracks with mounted machine guns could be relatively formidable if you were trying to retreat through them? As for using them to spot with I'm open to being educated on this. Is there a historical precedent for this? RE: The armed half-track - K K Rossokolski - 08-16-2009 Trojan Wrote:If it can shoot at stuff surely you can use it how you like? I can understand how trucks oughtn't to be used as surrounding units in an assault, but a bunch of halftracks with mounted machine guns could be relatively formidable if you were trying to retreat through them? I agree with you. As for historical precedent, I reckon there is a historical precedent for just about anything in warfare. RE: The armed half-track - Wolfman - 08-16-2009 AARGH! Havent we been here before? (Many times  ) I have allways stuck by the principle of if it has an assualt value you can use it as you wish, no assault value and house rules apply.
RE: The armed half-track - Glint - 08-17-2009 Something occurred to me, regarding this debate. If you were holding a bridge against the enemy, i.e, Arnhem, would the defending army not block the bridge with whatever units it could, (lorries even?) to stop the enemy getting across? (If, of course, it was imperative to the defending action) ? RE: The armed half-track - Glint - 08-17-2009 I agree with you KK, anything should go in warfare, unless an opponent states otherwise before playing a game as ROE. Glint |
){kind=link}