Schneider, St Chamond and A7V question.

[twrchtrwyth]

Or more specifically the re-rolls they have to make to cross trenches and for the A7V, soft ground. Does this mean the driver of the vehicle must pass 2 score checks or the vehicle bogs down? Are bogged down vehicles immobile until the driver passes a score check, or 2 in the case of the above vehicles, or does the immobility last the rest of the game?

[Westfalia Chris]

Or more specifically the re-rolls they have to make to cross trenches and for the A7V, soft ground. Does this mean the driver of the vehicle must pass 2 score checks or the vehicle bogs down?

That is the intention - if either of the score checks fails, the vehicle is bogged down. I admit it could be phrased more clearly. I wanted to emphasize the problem the short tracks incurred on the overlong armoured hulls, and running some statistic calculations, I found that just adding penalties to the rolls didn't differenciate the tanks enough from the more mobile rhomboid thanks or those with sufficiently long running gear (e.g. Renault FT-17 or LK-II, which don't get the +1 modifier for heavy tanks due to their size - remember that the Holt tanks also get this modifier).

Are bogged down vehicles immobile until the driver passes a score check, or 2 in the case of the above vehicles, or does the immobility last the rest of the game?

Alright, that one highlights an oversight on my part, in that when editing the final version of the basic rules I did not clearly specify what a failed terrain roll for a vehicle means.

Basically, if you pass the test (or tests for the Holt-based tanks), the vehicle keeps moving as normal. However, if the respective test fails, the vehicle is "bogged down", which should have effects depending on the situation and usually the judgement of an umpire. I would suggest the following:

• If the test is "simply failed", i.e. you miss the target threshold specified, the vehicle comes to an immediate stop. You may, however, attempt a score check in any subsequent turn, which, if successful, allows the vehicle to move on at Speed Level 1 (or 6").
• If, however, your score check comes up a double one, the vehicle cannot be disentangled during the course of the game and is, in effect, immobilised. In a campaign environment, I would suggest that if you do not lose or draw the engagement (i.e. as opposed to your opponent winning), you may recover the vehicle and use it in future games. This "snake-eyes effect" should also apply to unbogging rolls (i.e. the driver only manages to drive it deeper into the mud).

As for the specific problem of trenches, I think that the Holt tanks are penalised sufficiently by the test re-rolls. So, you can try to "unditch" the vehicle by attempting a score check in any type of terrain (mainly to keep the game moving).

You may of course impose harsher penalties.

[twrchtrwyth]

Thanks Chris. A couple more questions.

What does Holt mean? Is this just a term for tracks that don't run the entire length of a vehicle?

After a failed (not a 'critical' failure, snake eyes) terrain test by a Holt type tank, does it need to pass 1 or 2 terrain/score tests/checks to free itself?

[Westfalia Chris]

Thanks Chris. A couple more questions.

What does Holt mean? Is this just a term for tracks that don't run the entire length of a vehicle?

It refers to an American type of tracked tractor, which was originally used by the British army as, well, a tractor:



Rather than designing a dedicated running gear system like the British designers did for the Mk. I+ tanks, both the French and German designers (discounting the FT-17, which was similar but different) simply used the Holt running gear (unchanged for the St. Chamond and Schneider, "stretched" for the A7V) and added an armoured body on top.

The main problem was that, while the running gear's design itself was sound, it was too short for the bodies (particularly the St. Chamond, which had rollers at the front and back to help with unditching, but which proved of little use). The stretched gear on the A7V was similarly unsuited for the heavy body, although it proved to be more efficient while travelling on roads and similar solid ground.

After a failed (not a 'critical' failure, snake eyes) terrain test by a Holt type tank, does it need to pass 1 or 2 terrain/score tests/checks to free itself?

Unsure on that myself. Again, at the risk of sounding like a politician, I'm leaning towards "it depends upon the situation". Generally, I would say, yes, keep rolling the double dice, as unditching the stuck vehicle is probably even more complicated than avoiding getting stuck in the first place. Maybe you could roll a single test if all track touches ground, and two if the tank got stuck across a trench (and some of the track is "hanging" in mid-air).

The key point is, if possible, try to avoid driving the tanks into mud in the first place (not really helpful, I know, on the western front).

[Plynkes]

Holt is now called Caterpillar Inc. (or 'CAT' if you prefer the marketing men's trendy rebranded name).

[twrchtrwyth]

Thanks Chris. I think that I'll stick with the Holt tracked vehicles always having to pass 2 score checks, for bogging and un-bogging. Good advice avoiding mud.

@Plynkes, Would infantry wearing Cat boots require 2 terrain checks?

[Westfalia Chris]

@Plynkes, Would infantry wearing Cat boots require 2 terrain checks?

I would be more interested in what it takes to shave the cats required to make the boots.