Hatten in Flames Campaign Sz G

[Davidgamer]

I believe I am missing any reference to Sz and G, I would appreciate any guidance.
A. Roll on H 1.42
B. You are not seeing the rule in HF. (Please note rule #)
C. You don't get them.

 

[jrv]

I believe I am missing any reference to Sz and G, I would appreciate any guidance.
A. Roll on H 1.42
B. You are not seeing the rule in HF. (Please note rule #)
C. You don't get them.

Sz and G are only available by SSR [D11.1, D11.21]. If a scenario or CG does not specifically include them, they are not available. You could optionally include them if you and your opponent agree. Sz probably wouldn't make a big difference, but G are in my opinion are very powerful.

JR

 

[Davidgamer]

Sz and G are only available by SSR [D11.1, D11.21]. If a scenario or CG does not specifically include them, they are not available. You could optionally include them if you and your opponent agree. Sz probably wouldn't make a big difference, but G are in my opinion very powerful.

JR

Thanks

 

[jrv]

There was an earlier thread about sz/gyrostabilizers in hatten: http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/index.php?threads/hatten-schurzen-gyros.148278/. Sz were not used because of lack of evidence in photos. You can't figure out gyros with photos. There is a longer discussion on their historical use.

JR

 

[Andrew Rogers]

Just to reiterate the earlier comments ... from a German perspective, there are enough photos of German Mark IVs in Hatten-Rittershoffen (from the 21st Panzer Division) to argue with confidence that there was no Sz in Hatten. From the American perspective, on the balance of probabilities, the Shermans from the 14th Armored Division did not use (or take advantage of) gyros during this engagement. The factors that are built into this assessment are:

1. newly arrived unit, which had a mixed training record
2. no reference of the use of gyros (or something similar) from the first hand accounts of the US tankers who fought at Hatten
3. no reference of the use of gyros from the 'History of the 14th Armored' during Hatten, which was written straight after the war based on extensive unit journal records and first hand accounts of the soldiers who fought in the division

Andy Rogers (Hatten designer)
www.hatten1945.com

 

[Gordon]

Just curious, are there any/many unit histories where stabilizer use was called out either positively or negatively? It would seem to me like looking for differences between unit histories calling out use or non use of other standard components of the vehicle.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

I have to agree with Gordon on this. Using Gyros on M4s would have been what is now called "Standard Operating Procedure" and thus likely be overlooked in AARs, unless they were a significant problem. The old adage of "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" applies. I'm not saying the reverse either, just simply that use of Gyros or not remains unknown.