Cromwell VI and VIII and British Multi-Applicable Vehicle Note S

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
I feel bad asking this question because it seems to violate common sense, and yet this is ASL, so here goes.

The Cromwell VI and VIII (both of which have an overscore 95* MA on the counter) are covered in British Vehicle Note 20, which mentions that they both actually had a 94mm gun "which was designated 95mm to distinguish it from the weapon used in the older, obsolete CS tanks." Then we are referred to Multi-Applicable Vehicle Note S, which says"
"The 94* can fire only Smoke—not HE or AP. Smoke fired by the 94* or 76* is not subject to C8.9 Depletion, as signified by "oo Smoke" on the counter [EXC: the 76* of the Tetrarch CS, Matilda II CS and the Churchill I has s9 and non-depleteable HE when used in a scenario set after 10/43; increase their BPV by 10 points for such use]. The 76* and 94* have a maximum range of 50 hexes—as signified by "[50]" on the counter. "
My confusion is: the VASL counter for the Cromwell VIII looks like this:
21864

which does not have "oo Smoke" or "[50]" on the counter, but neither does the counter that's shown in Note 20. But "s9" does not mean "infinite Smoke", so what gives?
Furthermore, The "CS6" differs from what's on the back of the counter in Note 20, but AGREES with what's in the CS column of the British Vehicle Listing, so I don't know which to believe.

Beyond that, one would assume that Note S applies to this vehicle, even though the counter says the MA is 95mm vice 94, but if the tank fires HEAT, should one use the 94mm HEAT TK # of 11 or the 95mm HEAT TK # of 16?

Questions abound.

Edit - Bret asked the same question about the Cromwell VI last year: here
 
Last edited:

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,594
Reaction score
989
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
Br Vehicle Footnote S makes no mention of 95mm and thus is NA re the "95" mm ASL counter and is IMO an error re the Chap H Br Vehicle note #20 on p H56 [Footnote S should be deleted from Br Veh Note #20 IMO.]

See instead Br Vehicle note #8 on p H53 and maybe also note #2 on p H52.

Hope that helps.
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
Thanks Wayne. I concur, but it sounded like a Q&A for MMP, so I sent off the question.
 

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,594
Reaction score
989
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
If it =is= a chap H error, it goes all the way back to 1eASLRB I believe -- chap H pages from the original WoA module.
 

apbills

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
931
Location
Pewaukee, WI
Country
llUnited States
The last part of note S is:
"In an armoured regiment or tank battalion equipped with British-built tanks, the HQ of each squadron officially contained two CS tanks. Many of the early CS models could fire only smoke. Other types, which could fire HE, usually carried only a small amount of it in accordance with British tank doctrine. The later versions carried more HE and less smoke."

This would explain the smoke depletion number as those are not both over and underscored. It also jives with the text of the note regarding calling it a 95mm vs a 94mm for the later tanks.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,778
Reaction score
7,202
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I think the MAVN S is there for those two vehicles - but only because the historical part of the Note applies to them - not any of the rules parts. It was like that in WoA - hence why it was ported into FKaC.
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
I think the MAVN S is there for those two vehicles - but only because the historical part of the Note applies to them - not any of the rules parts. It was like that in WoA - hence why it was ported into FKaC.
Great, but going back to the original post, you can hopefully see the source(s) of confusion. If I'm pointed to a MAVN, I expect all of it to apply to the vehicle, not just the historical part. Particularly when the difference between "94mm" and "95mm" is entirely arguable, given that VN 20 strongly implies they're physically identical.

One might expect the players to sort things out when the counter clearly does not say "oo Smoke" or "[50]", but I think somebody should weigh in on what the correct HEAT TK # should be: 11 for 94mm or 16 for 95mm? (Man, that one extra mm sure packs a wallop :) )
 

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
5,383
Reaction score
1,735
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
One might expect the players to sort things out when the counter clearly does not say "oo Smoke" or "[50]", but I think somebody should weigh in on what the correct HEAT TK # should be: 11 for 94mm or 16 for 95mm? (Man, that one extra mm sure packs a wallop :) )
One silly millimeter longer ...

 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
Received a response from Perry to the submitted question:

Q: Does Multi-Applicable British Vehicle Note S apply to the Cromwell VI and VIII (British Vehicle Note 20)?

A: Only the historical part applies.

will cross-post to the Perry Sez thread
 
Top