Assault on Willengen: 14 August 1984 / Northag Playtest

Win or lose, post your AARs here....
User avatar
Boroda
Site Admin
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:13 am
Location: SE London, UK

Re: Assault on Willengen: 14 August 1984 / Northag Playtest

Post by Boroda » Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:46 am

Thanks for posting this Fred. Great pictures and, as ever, an informative and fair write up. Thanks for hosting!
-----
ATB

Chris S

"Wargamers aim to fight battles in a completely different way to the Military. The Military try to out number the enemy as much as possible; we try to make it as even as possible."

User avatar
mausmann
Site Admin
Posts: 942
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 11:50 am

Re: Assault on Willengen: 14 August 1984 / Northag Playtest

Post by mausmann » Mon Apr 30, 2018 6:05 pm

Hincmar wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:10 am
Thanks for that - very useful. Tends to reinforce the thoughts about (a) scale perception (b) the need for width on the board and (c) possibly introducing (scenario driven) limits to the number that can be deployed in a game. Will give it some thought.
I think it was Simon who intimated that circa 83/84 the Bundeswehr was still mainly fielding Leo 1s, at around 80% of total force. Making the Leo 2A4 restricted or unique etc etc be a solution.
Greatness is not in where we stand, but in what direction we are moving. We must sail sometimes in the wind, and sometimes against it, but sail we must, and not drift nor lie at anchor.

User avatar
SABOT
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:59 pm
Location: Normandy

Re: Assault on Willengen: 14 August 1984 / Northag Playtest

Post by SABOT » Mon Apr 30, 2018 6:43 pm

Great report and i can sense a great deal of effort has gone into this.

If you are taking suggestions/info in the spirit of being helpful I can throw in some user experience.

Chobham is fitted to the MBT in packs - it is not total coverage and is covered by spaced armour. Therefore look carefully at the shape of areas such as the hull and you can work out where it is/is not fitted. Leopard 2 is a poor design when taking into account this aspect. As is M1.

The rest of the armour has to tolerate hits and again,Leopard gives up a lot of armour weight in place of being fast. In essence, its a sports car. Leo I is a death trap. The use by Turks stands to criticism but does not hide the fact that overall the level of protection is poor. Add to this the fact that the quality of the chobham ‘given’to both Us and German army was always (and still is ) inferior to that fitted to Chally.

In gunnery terms there is no advantage to firing at the same target subsequent to a miss with KE. The technique with KE is to fire a three round technique to overcome dispersion. You cannot follow tbe fall of shot and cannot adjust your aim. Different for CE where a typical engagement can take on average three rounds to hit e.g. Plus - Minus - Target! Approx 4% Tangent elevation correction is made for each subsequent round fired to achieve a bracket.
Fin .... Tank on!

Post Reply