|
Post by loyalist on Dec 28, 2015 1:38:54 GMT
Was a model created for the Wolseley tank described in the BEF supplement? There's no image but according to the stats it has a 3 lb. coil gun and 2 Tri-barrel guns like the Kitchener tank.
Any idea if it was to have 3 turrets (hard to picture with 2 as large as those on the Kitchener) or a large turret with all guns mounted in it?
My second question is about points for the Lloyd Command vehicle in the rule book. It's Both listed at 175 pts each. That's more than a single Imperial tank (90) or a Kitchener tank (115). In the rule book the Cardigan Infantry Carrier was also listed at 175 pts but that was corrected to 90 pts each or 180 for three in the Errata. Do you think the Lloyds were supposed to be less than 175 pts each but the error was missed? Even considering the Field Commander (25 pts) is aboard one and it's easier to issue orders to all units from a Lloyd, the cost seems too high to me.
|
|
|
Post by Quendil on Dec 28, 2015 9:19:37 GMT
Was a model created for the Wolseley tank described in the BEF supplement? There's no image but according to the stats it has a 3 lb. coil gun and 2 Tri-barrel guns like the Kitchener tank. Any idea if it was to have 3 turrets (hard to picture with 2 as large as those on the Kitchener) or a large turret with all guns mounted in it? My second question is about points for the Lloyd Command vehicle in the rule book. It's Both listed at 175 pts each. That's more than a single Imperial tank (90) or a Kitchener tank (115). In the rule book the Cardigan Infantry Carrier was also listed at 175 pts but that was corrected to 90 pts each or 180 for three in the Errata. Do you think the Lloyds were supposed to be less than 175 pts each but the error was missed? Even considering the Field Commander (25 pts) is aboard one and it's easier to issue orders to all units from a Lloyd, the cost seems too high to me. There was no model for the Wolseley. I was thinking of having the tank around the size of a MKIV with the Tri-barrel as side sponsons and the coil gun on a turret.
The Lloyd command tank can issues orders to all BEF units so does not have to be in range like the command squad. But it still seems expensive. I haven't played mine yet but will probably reduce the cost to 150 or 125.
|
|
|
Post by Death From Above on Dec 28, 2015 10:56:39 GMT
Sadly no. A couple of folks on the old forum suggested I take a stab at making one, based on my custom units from the BEF '15 project. I always resisted since it seemed inevitable AD would do it at some point.
However with them now going silent it's jumped to the top of my to-do list, ahead of my Martian Royal Reaper Tripod and BEF Land Strider.
Stay tuned for more info on this once I get it started in the new year.
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Dec 28, 2015 13:38:47 GMT
Tri-barrel guns in sponsons makes sense for a Wolesley tank. They'd have to be forward facing and elevating but non-rotating - otherwise the sponsons would be ridiculously wide. MK IV seems right.
For the Lloyd command tank I'd use the lower value, though even 125 seems expensive for what it does.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Dec 30, 2015 18:07:26 GMT
1- I'm using the Zvezda T-35 five turreted 25mm tank for that figure. Available from Michigan Toy Soldier online or other companies that carry Zvezda. The model as presented will need be modified to accommedate the tribarrels. I agree that the tribarrels would really be too large for good turn radius on the turrets. To that end I present : WolslyB tank @225pts/element = 1 Unit Speed 6" Defense 5 Armor 11 Spec: Fire Suppression System [7+ to save vs one hit each (ei 4 hits = 4 rolls)] 3pdr Coilgun Range 60" +5Power RF 1 Special: no Barrage; Coilgun rules (pg 140 under Imperial Tank); Turreted (2) 1pdr Coilgun Range 40" +3Power RF3 Special:no Barrage; Coilgun rules (pg 140 under Imperial Tank); Turreted (2) HMG Range 30" +1Power RF3 Special; Turreted Note that this verison maintains the high rate of fire for its secondary guns (vs Tribarrels), but still has a possible 'lockup' on the weapon - a bit more a problem as you do have an added 10" of range with these puppies. One thing I like about a 'fan forum' is that I can feel comfortable listing other providers for models; always felt a little bad when listing other than Old Glory/Renedra/AD products on the old forum (because Old Glory producted their figures btw).
2- The errata pdf for these specifically changes the Cardies to 90pts each, bringing the standard platoon (3) to 270pts. There is some discussion about the command version being mispriced, with a valid agruement that the British Command Squad cost should be added, then the FC cost if its the command for the whole BEF force. I contend that the Cardie Command vehicle is substituted for the British Command Squad. Looking at Svens excellent TO&Es on pages 134/135, we find the Infantry Company with a Lloyd Cardigan Command vehicle, a Cardigan Carrier, a HMG Squad (carried by the carrier) and Flivver (extra staff, supplies, etc) which might be missing its Armored status picture. The Tank Company has 2 Armored Flivvers, presumed one to be the radio truck and the other staff. The Recon. Company has a 'Lloyd' which I interpert as a Command Cardigan, with 3 addition Carriers for the 3 Infantry squads. Looking at the regiment, we find 2 Lloyd Command, 3 tanks, and strangely a single 'command stand' (BEF Command Squad). Looking at the Tank Regiment and its units, we again find Lloyd Commands in the correct positions, including the regiment unit. I build the BEF with Lloyd Command Cardigans, and used Old Glory WW1 figures to make up the Command Squad for use of bailouts. Page 64 specifies that a unit carried by a transport 'bails' if the transport is destroyed (very generous for flivvers but okay for armor i suppose). To that end, you should build some units for those commands bailing out of a destroyed Command Carrier, as they can still operate. 3- loyalist, Field Command status costs 30pts for all sides, including Martians.
4- Alternately you could use a Zvezda T-28, with its 3 turrets. Scratch mount the HMGs on the hull, sides or whatever. The 'short' 76mm main gun can be painted to look like a 'hot' coilgun, and you can either model tribarrels or use my 1pdr coilgun idea for the secondary turrets.
5- In both cases, using a 1/72 model (from Zvezda or others) will give you a good sized vehicle to represent the large Wolsley. Although the T-35/T-28 is available from Frontline (Flames of War), they are 'true' 15mm and look small against the regular AQ tanks. They also cost alot more per tank.
6- Be sure to check out the various WWII troops in Old Glorys "15mm" Command Decision and True North lines. The Belgiums in the True North have a Cardigan vehicle with a single turret, no side machine guns (a AQMF invention) that would work well for hauling any but the infantry crews and guns (as the infantry would use the side HMGs in battle). So hitch a 2pdr coilgun up for tow, with ammon and crew for said gun in the T-13. Look at Command Decisions Weapon Packs for some nice 18mm stand alone or vehicle mounted weapons.
7- Finally, all of the various troops from the Indian and Egyptian theaters can readily be represnted by Old Glory colonial lines, including the mounted cavalry and camelry. If you sign up for the Old Glory Army deal ($50 per year currently), you get 40% off - a really great savings on a huge line of miniatures that are 18mm/AQMF scale. That includes their excellent ships and buildings as well! I've found lots of stuff to use for AQMF with them.
It occurs to me that some might like to use the T-35 and T-28 tanks as they were originally outfited (IRL). With deathfromaboves Tripod Buster Shell, this is a reasonable idea. So, heres the stats for a 'standard' T-28 & T-35 based on IRL numbers, as well as a British outfitted with 'standard' guns.
T-28 1 Element @100pts Tank Spd 12" Def 7 Arm 8 Spec: IRL 1932; Ltd Ammo (roll natural '1', is out of main gun TB shells, may resupply in game) (1) 76.2mm/3" Gun: Range 30" +3*/+1Power RF 1 Spec: Ltd TBshell ammo (+3Power), if out use +1Power regular 3"; Main turret (2) HMG: Range 20" +1 Power RF 3 Spec: Turrets
T-35 1 Element @150pts Tank Spd 12" Def 7 Arm 8 Spec: IRL 1935; Ltd Ammo (see above) (1) 76.2mm/3" Gun: Rng 30" +3*/+1Pow RF 1 Spec: Ltd TB Shell (+3Power), if out use +1Power regular 3"; Main turret (2) 45mm/1.75mm Gun: Rng 30" +1Pow RF 2: Turret (equal to MkIV Hotchkiss) (2) HMG: Rng 20" +1Pow RF 3 : Turret
Hampton 1 Element @200pts Tank Spd 5" Def 5 Arm 11 Spec: Fire Suppression System [each hit taken may save on a 7+]; Ltd Ammo; may resupply (1) 17pdr/3" Rng 30" +3Pow*/+1Pow RF 1 Spec: Tripod Buster Shell (+3Pow) is Ltd Ammo, if out standard +1Pow; Turret (2) 3pdr/1.85" Rng 30" +1Pow RF 2 Spec: Turret (2) HMG Rng 20" +1Pow RF3 Spec: Turret
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Dec 31, 2015 23:15:07 GMT
If someone has a Kitchener tank could you post the dimensions of the gun? Specifically the diameter and length of the individual triple barrels, and the overall length of the entire barrel. I think I may convert a Mark IV to a Wolesley by removing the external connecting rods (assuming the Brits took the hull design and put a diesel-electric drive in it, using a steam turbine), making a new pair of sponsons with the triple barrel guns and placing them further forward, plus replacing the turret with a hemispherical one with the coil gun. All the 4" guns will go with the forward pair being replaced by HMGs. Sound like a reasonable conversion or should the Wolesley look more like a much larger Imperial tank? Must say I don't like any of the BEF vehicles that use the Imperial tank's toy-like chassis.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Jan 1, 2016 2:35:13 GMT
I strongly recommend you take a look at the 1/72 T-35 or the T-28 as shown at the Michigan Toy Soldier site. Its larger, its got 5 turrets and you can substitute a 1 pdr Coil Gun (see above in thread) for the tribarrels, gives a same RF and a powerful power bonus. I'd hang on to that MkIV unless you have a surplus of those. I've not found any resellers with those, you might not get another.
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Jan 1, 2016 4:25:57 GMT
I wasn't going to do anything drastic to the Mk IV - simply make another main turret and magnetize the new and old sponsons so the model can be a regular Mk IV if needed. I've read your suggestions for using larger scale models of Soviet multi-turret tanks and will take a look - I'm familiar with the T-28 and T-35.
Re Old Glory Command Decision figures, a friend has lots of them and they're noticeably smaller than the AQotMF figures. Bluemoon are said to be a close match at 18mm - those are what I'll use for cavalry.
I've checked the rule book and it gives the points for BEF Command units as 25 points in the table on page 53 and again in the BEF section on page 36. I didn't find anything in the book about Field Commander units costing more than any other command unit in a force. It woulkd be 30 pts for the US but there's nothing in the BEF section about a Field Commander being more expensive tan the 25 pt basic Command unit. I've tried several times to download the FAQ to check there but no luck so far - everything else downloads.
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Jan 1, 2016 4:26:17 GMT
I wasn't going to do anything drastic to the Mk IV - simply make another main turret and magnetize the new and old sponsons so the model can be a regular Mk IV if needed. I've read your suggestions for using larger scale models of Soviet multi-turret tanks and will take a look - I'm familiar with the T-28 and T-35.
Re Old Glory Command Decision figures, a friend has lots of them and they're noticeably smaller than the AQotMF figures. Bluemoon are said to be a close match at 18mm - those are what I'll use for cavalry.
I've checked the rule book and it gives the points for BEF Command units as 25 points in the table on page 53 and again in the BEF section on page 36. I didn't find anything in the book about Field Commander units costing more than any other command unit in a force. It woulkd be 30 pts for the US but there's nothing in the BEF section about a Field Commander being more expensive tan the 25 pt basic Command unit. I've tried several times to download the FAQ to check there but no luck so far - everything else downloads.
|
|
|
Post by terrance on Jan 1, 2016 4:31:28 GMT
If someone has a Kitchener tank could you post the dimensions of the gun? Specifically the diameter and length of the individual triple barrels, and the overall length of the entire barrel. I think I may convert a Mark IV to a Wolesley by removing the external connecting rods (assuming the Brits took the hull design and put a diesel-electric drive in it, using a steam turbine), making a new pair of sponsons with the triple barrel guns and placing them further forward, plus replacing the turret with a hemispherical one with the coil gun. All the 4" guns will go with the forward pair being replaced by HMGs. Sound like a reasonable conversion or should the Wolesley look more like a much larger Imperial tank? Must say I don't like any of the BEF vehicles that use the Imperial tank's toy-like chassis. The barrels are 7/8 inch (22 mm) long and each barrel is 1/8 inch (3 mm) outside diameter. The three barrels are mounted on a larger cylinder that mounts in the gun mount. This cylinder is 11/32inch in diameter (8 mm) which is just large enough to accommodate the three barrels. This cylinder is 7/32 inch (5.5 mm) and then steps up about a 32 inch in diameter to the part that attaches to the turret. The visible part of this "mounting" cylinder is about 3/8 inch (10 mm). A picture will help. I'll try to get one posted in the next day or so.
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Jan 1, 2016 4:37:50 GMT
Thanks Terrance, that's exactly the info I needed. I have photos of the guns and turret so can work something out for the sponson design. The sponsons will have to be deeper than those on the Mk IV, but possibly narrower. I'll do some preliminary drawings this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Jan 1, 2016 4:44:44 GMT
K - i only recommended the Equipment and Weapon Packs for the CD stuff btw. The True North figures are to scale. Please refer to page 63 for the overriding Field Commander rules. Every army has one in the battle. Will look for your conversion. Am really glad to see your work! Really nice. And I love the measurements also !! Very handy for conversions and checking similiar barrel designs (Spartian Dystopian has an arty piece with 3 barrels!)
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Jan 1, 2016 14:42:02 GMT
Added British armored cars - Heres 2 varients on BEF AC and a new one (sold to the Russians). Note that Old Glory is planning on adding both the Austin and Lancaster armored cars.
Austin-Putilov 1 Element @55pts Vehicle Spd 8" Def 5 Arm 6 Spec: two turrets HMG Rng 20" +1Pow RF 3 Spec: Turret Comments: sold and produced in Russia
DefiantR 1 Element @85pts Vehicle stats same but added weapons - (6) 7" Rockets Rng 40" +4Pow RF1 Spec: Salvo 2; front arc fire Comments: rockets mounted on running boards, 3 to a side of the vehicle.
SpectreR 1 Element @70pts Vehicle stats same but added weapons - (6) 5" Rockets Rng 30" +3Pow RF1 Spec: Salvo 2; front arc fire Comments: rockets mounted on running boards, 3 to a side of the vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Jan 1, 2016 20:45:10 GMT
Old Glory also has WWI British cavalry 'coming soon' in the Blue Moon range. I emailed them re whether they'll have lancers but no reply yet. I see in the rule book that British cavalry without lances have grenades for +2 but are only 5 points cheaper than lancers with explosive weapons with +3 (55 vs 60 pts).
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Jan 1, 2016 21:44:37 GMT
Yes, as noted earlier, I like using the Old Glory lines of colonials for my British (and Indian/Egyptian) cavalry, as they are good scale and have a nice mix of lancers. I too am curious about the 'coming soon' cavalry for all the 4 nations listed, as I currently am working on Prussian Uhlans and colonial type lances for the Germans, who did have lancers, still used late war IRL on the Russian front (vs the various Cossacks, etc. out that way). Perhaps using Cossacks from the various Old Glory lines will work in some instances. I think the mix of color and pagentry of the Indian cav with their British command looks good for the explosive lance troopers - and thus the low cost of 'native' troop lancers with adhesive lances.
|
|