Author | Topic |
Zalamence

Posts: 196
Registered: June 2010
|
|
|
Clexton27

Posts: 3408
Registered: February 2007
|
|
|
Phread

Posts: 1777
Registered: December 2008
|
|
|
jdrommel

Posts: 981
Registered: March 2006
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Sat, 28 September 2013 08:38

|
 |
Hi Zalamence,
I will try to answer to your question.
Hobart's Funnies were conceived to facilitate landing operations for the liberation of Europe, that means the Normandy landings.
Each funny tank had its own function against a particular obstacle but no one was conceived to cross railroad.
The only one you can use to cross railroad easily is (in the equipment pack) the Assault Bridge. But remember that it was conceived to cross ditches or trenches but not railroad.
I hope this answer helps you,
yours,
Jdrommel.
|
|
|
JJAZ

Posts: 768
Registered: May 2008
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Sat, 28 September 2013 12:48

|
 |
I wonder how much of these each battalion got and how many landed on those first days.
Is there somewhere info with exact numbers of units for each ship?
J.
|
|
|
Clexton27

Posts: 3408
Registered: February 2007
|
|
|
JJAZ

Posts: 768
Registered: May 2008
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Sat, 28 September 2013 18:47

|
 |
Thank you Mr Stevens
|
|
|
Zalamence

Posts: 196
Registered: June 2010
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Mon, 30 September 2013 12:55

|
 |
So neither bobbin nor fascine really fits as representative "railroad-crosser". The railroad still plays a major role in the scenario, so I'll try and see if bridge could be used. I think I'll use the rules for bridge first, and if that doesn't work, let the Churchills just ignore railroad hexes.
|
|
|
Sgt Storm

Posts: 930
Registered: December 2006
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Mon, 30 September 2013 21:12

|
 |
I seriously doubt that railroad tracks impeded tank travel in real life to the degree modeled in M'44 if at all. So bear that in mind. I'm sure someone will disagree.
|
|
|
Sgt Storm

Posts: 930
Registered: December 2006
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Mon, 30 September 2013 21:13

|
 |
Sgt Storm wrote on Mon, 30 September 2013 15:12 | I seriously doubt that railroad tracks impeded tank travel in real life to the degree modeled in M'44 if at all. So bear that in mind. I'm sure someone will disagree.
|
What I mean by that is, I would simply use a house-rule that they don't impede armor movement or they reduce remaining movement by 1.
|
|
|
Phread

Posts: 1777
Registered: December 2008
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Tue, 01 October 2013 09:15

|
 |
Sgt Storm wrote on Tue, 01 October 2013 08:12 | I seriously doubt that railroad tracks impeded tank travel in real life to the degree modeled in M'44 if at all. So bear that in mind. I'm sure someone will disagree.
|
Railway tracks on the flat - like at a road crossing - might not impede tanks, but consider how railways are usually built on embankments for there is only a gradual change in gradient. A railway embankment or cutting would indeed impede tanks.
|
|
|
Achtung Panzer

Posts: 1150
Registered: December 2007
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Tue, 01 October 2013 16:20

|
 |
And remember 'scale' - we're talking also about the extras of buildings, rolling stock etc. that surround railways - particularly in urban areas. It's not about single tanks crossing a railway line.
This debate lead to a claim that moving 'onto' a railway meant entering the hex, but moving 'along' a railway should not impede Armour movement. The FAQs cleared this up.
|
|
|
Sgt Storm

Posts: 930
Registered: December 2006
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Tue, 01 October 2013 17:41

|
 |
Well I for sure am no tank or railroad expert, and I have read of tanks having problems with some embankments and not with others. I find it hard to believe that (as a general rule) a single obstacle (lets say in non-urban area) warrants the complete stoppage of the unit as is the case with a forest or built-up area, because in those areas there are many obstacles.
That's why I think the affect should not necessarily be equivalent to a forest or town hex, i.e., its a matter of degree of affect in M44. I would have to research the issue to be convinced the impact is that large (but I won't because I'm not that interested, but maybe the OP will).
In any case, this is a rule that can probably be modified by special rules based on the historical circumstances, more so than other terrain types, particularly if you know the railroad did not actually impeded movement that much.
|
|
|
Zalamence

Posts: 196
Registered: June 2010
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Tue, 01 October 2013 18:52

|
 |
Fictional scenario
The reason I brought this up was because I wanted to hear some opinions on different accesories, and I was also wondering if fascine could be a reasonable option (I let the commander choose the accessories, just like in the EP scenario book) for, say, mine digger and petard mortar.
|
|
|
Achtung Panzer

Posts: 1150
Registered: December 2007
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Tue, 01 October 2013 20:22

|
 |
Sgt Storm wrote on Mon, 30 September 2013 20:13 |
Sgt Storm wrote on Mon, 30 September 2013 15:12 | I seriously doubt that railroad tracks impeded tank travel in real life to the degree modeled in M'44 if at all. So bear that in mind. I'm sure someone will disagree.
|
What I mean by that is, I would simply use a house-rule that they don't impede armor movement or they reduce remaining movement by 1.
|
I actually quite like this idea.
|
|
|
van Voort

Posts: 656
Registered: August 2011
|
Re:Hobart's Funnies and Railroad
|
Thu, 03 October 2013 15:21

|
 |
As Phread says, a railway is not much of an obstacle
But any earthworks for it - embankment or cutting - certainly are.
|
|
|
Zalamence

Posts: 196
Registered: June 2010
|
Re:Armor and Railroad (+Hobart's Funnies)
|
Thu, 03 October 2013 15:41

|
 |
Lots of interesting conversation about armor and railroad in general. I changed the name of the topic.
If railroad affected armor movement like Sgt Storm suggested, it would be like beach hexes, wouldn't it? That makes the improvement/house-rule even better and maybe more realistic without complex new applications.
|
|
|
van Voort

Posts: 656
Registered: August 2011
|
Re:Armor and Railroad (+Hobart's Funnies)
|
Tue, 08 October 2013 03:37

|
 |
You also need to ask yourself how much of the hex is really railway.
M44 has a deliberately abstract scale, but for example, on a map that was Pegasus sized you can argue that the whole hex would be railway.
However on larger scales that is not going to be the case, and most of the hex will not be railway and the same terrain as the surrounding areas.
Mind you the same is true of roads and rivers
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2629
Registered: October 2004
|
|
|