ATR on table C7.7

kcdusk

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
636
Reaction score
14
Location
Australia
Country
llAustralia
My ATR has just fired and hit the hull of a half track.

My to kill die roll is 1 > the kill number.

C7.7 says if HE then this results in immobilisation.

An ATR doesn't feel like a HE weapon. in fact it uses the AP to kill table. So am i right in thinking the HE 1 > TK# doesn't apply here?

Also, after another few minutes of reading the rule book i think C7.41 says a non-HE hit 1 > TK # causes a possible shock against an AFV. But in my case its a half track. is a half track an AFV?

Thanks for any replies.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,207
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
ATRs use the AP To-Kill table [C13.2].

All vehicles with armor are armored fighting vehicles (AFVs) [D1.2].

JR
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
14,498
Reaction score
10,503
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llUkraine
Remember, that if hit into the rear, the target's AF is reduced by one.
Also remember, that the TK of the ATR might be improved by (short) range.

ATRs can be quite useful against halftracks.

von Marwitz
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,793
Reaction score
5,815
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Remember, that if hit into the rear, the target's AF is reduced by one.
Rather : the Basic TK# is increased by one (EDIT C7.21) - otherwise firing at a rear AF of 0 would lead to some problematic rules debates...
 
Last edited:

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
288
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Rather : the Basic TK# is increased by one (D7.21) - otherwise firing at a rear AF of 0 would lead to some problematic rules debates...
I don't think AF 0 starts a troublesome debate, or else possibly I'm starting the troublesome debate :) now... but AF 0 is not an unarmored vehicle (if that's where you saw the debate headed). There are AFVs with AF 0, the US halftracks are rotten with them. ... 0 confers invulnerabilty to small arms, unarmored doesn't. Edit....

Ahhhh I see I missed your point... you see the rules debate happening around a -1 armor (0 from the rear)... Got it.

But as long as we're being precise... it's C7.21:)
 
Last edited:

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,793
Reaction score
5,815
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
I will edit my post, with the correct letter to the rule reference.
 
Top