Forum Replies Created

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 82 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Empress Miniatures French paratroopers #165388
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you very much. Viet Minh are just about ready. Lots of variety in uniforms and equipment too.

    Robert

    in reply to: Naval – German destroyers #164871
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    The WTJ 3D printed models are very good. Here is an example of Turgut Reis, a German Brandenburg Class battleship, formerly SMS Weissenburg. She was purchased by the Ottoman navy in 1910, along with her sister ship Hayreddin Barbarossa (formerly SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm). Both ships provided naval gunfire support for the Ottoman amphibious assault at Şarköy during the Balkan Wars. This model is 1/1250 scale.

    Robert

    in reply to: 3D printed Cold War Soviet infantry #164412
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    The files are part of a Kickstarter (see here).  There are three figures that can be downloaded for free. I think the others will be available in about one week’s time (ie. 15th November-ish 2021).

    Robert

    in reply to: 6mm Babō-saku #163648
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    How would the floating horizontal bits print?

    Given the scale then the distances between the bindings on either side will be small enough to permit the bindings to act as the supports.

    Robert

    in reply to: 6mm Babō-saku #163615
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you for posting. By the look of the fence, it wouldn’t have needed supports. Nicely sculpted.

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war Germans #162972
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thanks, Tony S. Camouflage can hide a multitude of sins. You can see the difference with the German anti-tank rifle crews. Both team members needed the mosaic pattern as well. Even at 15mm, the different helmet style is apparent (IMHO).

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war Germans #162850
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you. I used a right old mix of colours for the German uniforms, including Feldgrau from Vallejo, AK Interactive,  and the two sets of triads from Wargames Foundry. Standard grey colours were used too, especially for trousers.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162379
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    A 37mm infantry gun was used by the French, Americans, and the Austro-Hungarians. The French/US version was manufactured by the same company, Puteaux, that made the Main Gun for the Renault FT17 but had a lower muzzle velocity (about 50% less). Here is my suggestion, based on the Type 95 37mm used on the Japanese light tank:

    WEAPON: 37MM IG/ATG
    ARM: –
    ACC: -1
    PEN: -3
    HE/EFF: 1/1 SQ

    These stats will work for the German 37mm anti-tank gun too.

    The Granatwerfer fired HE and smoke. It is equivalent to the 50-60mm Mortars, 2″ Mortar category, with 3 Attack Dice and no Kill Potential. The smoke round will be two stand-widths long.

    Flammenwerfer teams operate as Assault Engineers, getting the +1 bonus in Close Combat.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162378
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Mortars next. There were three main types of mortar from a Crossfire perspective, though many more were used at various times. To keep it simple and to match the Battlefront Great War offerings, the main types were: Stokes mortar (British, French and US); French 58mm Type 2 (nicknamed ‘Crapouillot’); and the German rifled leichte Minenwerfer (lMW), which fired a 76mm projectile. Later versions of the lMW were able to fire directly as an anti-tank weapon:

    Here are some stats; first the German light Minenwerfer used in direct fire mode:

    WEAPON: LIGHT MINENWERFER [Direct fire mode]
    ARM: –
    ACC: -2
    PEN: -2
    HE/EFF: 4/2 SQ

    The Stokes mortar and light Minenwerfer used in indirect fire mode are classified as Mortars & Guns to 82mm/ 3″ Mortar, which have 4 Attack Dice and a Kill Potential of 1 Squad.

    The Crapouillot could fire a bomb with 10 kg of explosive, twice the weight of a Stokes mortar bomb. This would put it in the Guns 85mm+ /Mortars to 120mm/ 4.2″ category, with 4 Attack Dice and a Kill Potential of 2 Squads.

    There was a 4″ calibre Stokes mortar, used by the British and the Americans. It could fire a 4 infantry stands long Smoke Screen. It was not used to fire HE bombs but could fire gas and thermite bombs, neither of which are relevant to Crossfire IMHO.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162377
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Now for the French medium tanks, which are a little bit more tricky because of their Main Guns. The Renault FT17 has already been covered off previously, having stats defined the Crossfire Data Sheet. The later versions of the Schneider (such as supported the Big Red One [US First Division] in the assault on Cantigny) and St Chamond carried spaced armour to provide more protection. The front ends of both tanks had sloped armour too. It is hard to gauge, however, the degree of armour protection from a Crossfire perspective but it could be reasonable to argue for something akin to the T-26 rather than the FT17.

    The Schneider had two MGs, one on either side, plus a short barrel low velocity 75mm Main Gun. The latter could be regarded as equivalent to the Main Gun on the Panzer IVD.

    The St Chamond had 4 MGs and a forward-firing high velocity 75mm Main Gun, basically the French IG 75/MM in the Crossfire Data Sheet. It operated in an assault gun mode, able to engage German anti-tank guns at distance for example. This is less important, however, from a Crossfire perspective. St Chamonds supported the AEF in some engagements such as the assault on Montfaucon during the Battle of the Meuse-Argonne.

    Based on the above, here are the proposed tables:

    WEAPON: SCHNEIDER; ST CHAMOND
    ARM: 2/1
    ACC: -1
    PEN: -2
    HE/EFF: 4/2 SQ

    The first versions of the Schneider and St Chamond would be ARM 1/1.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162373
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    The Borden MG Autocar is pretty straightforward too. It had two MGs that could be aimed independently.

    WEAPON: BORDEN MG AUTOCAR
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: –
    PEN: MACHINE GUN
    HE/EFF: 4/1 SQ

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162372
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Armoured cars next. There are six types for starters but the basic principles can easily be applied to any others. The armour was not significantly better than the Renault FT17. The six, with variants, are:

    WEAPON: AUSTIN AC; PEUGEOT AC (MG); WHITE AC (MG); MINERVA AC; ROLLS ROYCE AC; LANCHESTER AC
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: –
    PEN: MACHINE GUN
    HE/EFF: 4/1 SQ

    WEAPON: PEUGEOT AC (37MM); WHITE AC (37MM)
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: -2
    PEN: -2
    HE/EFF: 2/1 SQ

    The Austin had two MGs in independently rotating turrets. Peugeot had either a single MG or a 37mm Main Gun but not both. The White armoured car had a 37mm Main Gun and an MG, facing in opposite directions. Minerva had either one or, sometimes, two MGs. Rolls Royce and Lanchester armoured cars both had a single MG.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162370
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    The captured British MkIV Beutepanzers were typically female variants, as these were more common and therefore more likely to be captured but also there was a shortage of the 57mm gun, which was given priority for use in the A7Vs. Beutepanzers had a forward-firing MG and two MGs on either side. Some had a forward-firing T-Gewehr anti-tank rifle. This suggests the following:

    WEAPON: MkIV FEMALE BEUTEPANZER
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: –
    PEN: MACHINE GUN
    HE/EFF: 4/1 SQ

    WEAPON: MkIV FEMALE BEUTEPANZER WITH ATR
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: -2
    PEN: -4
    HE/EFF: 0 SQ

    In the Beutepanzer armed with an ATR, the MGs can also fire independently of the ATR.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162368
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Now to the British MkIV and MkV heavy tanks. Armour-wise, I don’t think there was much improvement between the two versions. The MkV tanks were slightly faster, had better steering, and better reliability. None of these advantages really count on a WW1 Crossfire battlefield IMHO. The female variants were armed with a forward-firing LMG and two LMGs on either side.The armour wasn’t much thicker than a Renault FT17. This suggests both female versions are:

    WEAPON: MkIV FEMALE
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: –
    PEN: MACHINE GUN
    HE/EFF: 4/1 SQ

    WEAPON: MkV FEMALE
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: –
    PEN: MACHINE GUN
    HE/EFF: 4/1 SQ

    The male versions had one forward-firing LMG and one LMG on each side, plus a 57mm low velocity Main Gun on each side. For the two Main Guns, the stats for each one will be:

    WEAPON: MkIV and MkV MALE
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: -2
    PEN: -2
    HE/EFF: 2/1 SQ

    These tanks are the one case where I would treat each LMG as an MG, which can fire with the Main Gun on the same side or fire independently from the Main Gun as per A7V.

    Two MG stands can dismount from a destroyed tank, subject to the Kill and Suppressed rules for the A7V and MkV* crews.

    The MkIV and standard MkV tanks did not carry extra stands.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162367
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    The A7V was a very interesting, and much underrated, tank from WW1. There are several aspects that are important from a Crossfire perspective. Although the side armour thickness was roughly that of the Renault FT, the front armour was 50% thicker again. Almost all A7Vs had a front-mounted 57mm gun. This was a low velocity weapon, similar to that used in the British Mk Male tanks. The stats for the A7V main gun will, therefore, work for the British 57mm too. The only exception was A7V ‘Gretchen’, which went into its first battle with two front-facing MGs, in addition to the 6 MGs that were standard on all A7Vs – 2 each on either side, and 2 facing to the rear. Unlike the Whippet, each MG had its own crewman/gunner.

    Going back to the Crossfire Data Sheet, the equivalent WW2 tank in terms of a low velocity 57mm gun is the Japanese Type 89. Its ARM stats reflect the stronger front armour of the A7V too, giving us something like this:

    WEAPON: A7V
    ARM: 2/1
    ACC: -1
    PEN: -1
    HE/EFF: 2/1 SQ

    The A7V (as well as the Schneider, St Chamond and British Male heavy tanks) had a Main Gun and multiple MGs. This is where the Advanced Rules 2. comes into play (p. 44). I have copied the original text and made some changes to reflect the A7V :
    – The vehicle must remain stationary the entire Initiative to fire either the Gun or [one or more] MG[s].
    – The vehicle may fire both the Main Gun and the MG[s] in a single action, and may do so as a Firegroup. [In practice, this was unlikely to happen because of the 45 degree arcs of fire preventing the Main Gun from having the same target as any of the MGs but in a British male heavy tank, each main gun and an MG would have overlapping arcs of fire. The A7V MGs on one side of the tank could participate in a Firegroup.]
    – OR the Main Gun may fire at one target and the MG[s] at [other targets].
    – If the Main Gun does not produce a Kill or a Suppression, the Initiative shifts.
    – Firing the MG[s] with the Main Gun does not entail a loss of Initiative if it misses.
    – If only the MG[s] fire[s] in an Action (and not the Main Gun also), Initiative is lost if the MG[s] fail[s] to Suppress the target. If it does Suppress the target, it is entitled to fire again.

    There are two other important features of the A7V to consider. First is the ability to dismount the equivalent of MG stands if the vehicle is destroyed. This capability was similar to the Schneider, St Chamond, and British heavy tanks. It is akin to the rules on APCs in Crossfire, as per Sections 11.1.2 and 11.2.1. Specifically for the A7V, I would recommend that an A7V can dismount 3 MG stands if destroyed, subject to:
    – Receiving a number of Kills to the MG stands equal to the EFF of the gun that destroyed the tank; and
    – Any remaining MG Stands are Suppressed on the spot.

    The second feature is that the A7V had enough room to carry the equivalent of two Squads in addition to its normal crew complement. In essence, the A7V was able to operate as an APC as well as a tank. If a player chooses this option then the two extra Stands can be dismounted as one step per Initiative (but cannot Mount again), within one stand of the A7V.

    The British MkV* also operated as a combined APC/tank, so the second feature of the A7V would apply to the MkV* as well except that the stands would be MG stands.

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162354
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    The British Whippet Medium A tank had roughly the same armour thickness as the Renault FT. It carried up to 4 Hotchkiss machine guns but, in practice, could only fire one at a time due to only having one gunner in the cramped crew compartment. So the stats are the same as the Renault:

    WEAPON: WHIPPET MEDIUM A
    ARM: 1/1
    ACC: –
    PEN: MACHINE GUN
    HE/EFF: 4/1 SQ

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162351
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thanks, MartinR.

    There are two other weapons that transfer directly from the Data Sheet, such as the French 75mm field artillery gun that was also used by the American Expeditionary Force:

    WEAPON: IG 75 MM
    ARM: –
    ACC: -2
    PEN: -2
    HE/EFF: 4/2 SQ

    The Russian 76mm infantry gun (not the high velocity anti-tank gun), which was used by the Germans as well in WW1, has the same stats as the French 75mm.These stats are the same for the WW2 German 76mm infantry gun as well. Based on the alignment across the three WW2 infantry guns in the Data Sheet then I recommend that the same stats are used for the following in WW1:

    Russian Putilov 3″ field gun
    German 3″ infantry gun, based on captured Russia field guns
    German 75mm and 77mm field guns (75mm used by Ottomans for example)
    French 75mm field gun (used by Americans)
    British 18 pounder field gun

    The German light Minenwerfer can have the same stats for its use in direct fire mode as an anti-tank gun. The indirect fire capability cross-links with the mortars rules, so I will deal with this aspect separately.

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war Germans #162342
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Anti-tank weapons. First, the late war 37mm anti-tank gun from Battlefront Miniatures:

    And the T-Gewehr anti-tank rifle. These are Peter Pig WW2 German anti-tank models modified to look like the WW1 T-Gewehr:

    Robert

    in reply to: Crossfire and WW1 #162335
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Another weapon system that we can lift directly from the Data Sheet is the German AT rifle. The T-Gewehr was not the same as the German WW2 AT rifles but the differences are not really significant IMHO. This means we can go with the following stats:

    WEAPON: ANTI-TANK RIFLE
    ARM: –
    ACC: -2
    PEN: -4
    HE/EFF: 0 SQ

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war Germans #162333
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    I like the Peter Pig figures, especially the more recent ones. Lots of variety now, though there are a few gaps in the WW1 range. The Americans are completely absent, so I have used Battlefront for them. French mortars needed sourcing from Battlefront as well.

    Something to kick up a Sturm, providing close support for infantry colleagues – the Peter Pig infantry gun:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war Germans #162316
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    No German force would be complete without Flammenwerfer. The men are from Peter Pig. The flame is from Armorcast:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war Germans #162289
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you very much, Steve. Some of the support weapons, including MG08s:

    Minenwerfer:

    And Granatwerfer 16s, which are actually from the Peter Pig WW2 range so the small hand-held mortars of WW2 rather than the spigot Granatwerfer. I painted some of the helmets with the WW1 camo pattern to help disguise the WW2 shape:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162264
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Here are more photos of the Schneider tanks from Battlefront:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162225
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    St Chamond tanks from the 15mm Battlefront range:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162221
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you. Here are Peter Pig French machine gunners:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162206
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    French spigot mortars from the Battlefront range:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162191
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Two Renault FT17s from the Battlefront range:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162158
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you. Here are two more French late war infantry platoons:

    The Peter Pig 15mm French 37mm infantry gun:

    And an interesting set, comprising QRF ACW engineers with Peter Pig French headswaps and a Battlefront Schneider tank. The French used engineer teams with their tanks following the experience in Chemin des Dames battles of 1917:

    I will provide some further information about Crossfire and WW1, though very few adaptations are needed.

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162037
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you.

    Armorcast produces an amazing range of firing effects, particularly for sci fi. The service from the USA to the UK was prompt.

    Here are French artillery, also from Peter Pig:

    Robert

    in reply to: 15mm WW1 late war French #162025
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Flamethrower teams from Peter Pig. The flame is from Armorcast:

    Robert

    in reply to: Turner Miniatures 6mm figures #161155
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    British Napoleonic riflemen from Turner Miniatures:

    Robert

    in reply to: Achtung! Englischer Panzer! #161082
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Oh, the shame. Thanks, Iain. My sons are more into Bolt Action – at least that is my excuse… Plus I can use the dimensions to create a 3D model in 6mm

    Robert

    in reply to: What a Tanker! #161075
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Here is his 1/32 tank from Scalelink. She is a Mark IV female, named ‘Flirt II’ (formally ‘F4’).

    The model was missing several parts. I tried contacting the manufacturer but never got a reply. So it was out with the CAD software. Here is the part that sits under the top of the track at the rear. The photo-etch part was scanned. The image helped to get the size of the new part sorted:

    Here are the parts in the slicer software, which is used to create the 25 micron horizontal layers that the 3D printer builds the models with:

    Robert

    in reply to: What a Tanker! #161071
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you, Mark.

    Robert

    in reply to: Achtung! Englischer Panzer! #161046
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you, Ian. Much appreciated.

    Robert

    in reply to: 28mm Seabrook armoured lorry #160924
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you, Andrew. There isn’t a WW1 variant of Bolt Action published by Warlord Games. I use the v2 rules pretty much as is (I am the ‘Robert’ who contributed to the thread and others on WW1 in the Bolt Action Forum). Warlord Games has shifted their WW1 products to one of their recently acquired companies, which has a line of WW1 French infantry figures as well.

    Robert

    in reply to: 28mm Seabrook armoured lorry #160872
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Thank you, Rod. The model is primarily for use in wargaming. I enjoy playing Bolt Action for WW1. In-between times, she is on display.

    Robert

    in reply to: Russian WW1 infantry #160650
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Here is the whole squad:

    Robert

    in reply to: Turner Miniatures 6mm figures #160491
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    Prussian fusiliers from the Turner Miniatures range:

    Robert

    in reply to: Turner Miniatures 6mm figures #160330
    Robert Dunlop
    Participant

    A very good match, yes. For both Baccus and Adler IMHO.

    Robert

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 82 total)