Anti-personnel Rating – Revising Crossfire Anti-tank Rules 4

I think tanks should be scary so my latest attempt at revising Crossfire’s tank rules does that … makes tanks grunty. You will see I’ve made tanks, much, much more punchy compared to the standard rules and other Gun vs ARM matrix house rules. While I’m about it I’d also like to fix up a few other weaknesses. For a start I would strengthen lighter guns – I’m very conscious that the Soviets continued to use the 45mm anti-tank gun through out the war and where other weapon systems were abandoned or improved, these stayed in use. Aside from the fact the Soviet had a lot of them, I can only assume the Soviets also saw these as having continued utility. As far as I can see the light anti-tank guns flipped to being used as anti-personnel weapons, something which standard Crossfire makes them unsuitable for. So far this is all terribly speculative and I’m just playing around with possibilities. But I do think it is good enough worth a try.


Existing rules and house rules

As usual I want to look at what already exists before looking at what could be.

Standard Crossfire tanks/guns shooting at infantry

Standard Crossfire gives guns a number of dice to hit, like infantry, and a KILL Potential. If the gun gets a natural KILL, then the KILL Potential comes into effect, suppressing a number of nearby stands up to the KILL Potential. This is exactly like indirect fire.

Here are some examples:

Standard Crossfire Examples
0/0SQ German 3.7cm Pak 35 ATG
1/1SQ British 2 Pounder ATG;
German 5.0cm Pak 38 ATG;
Japanese Lt Tank 95;
Soviet 45/46 and 45/66 ATG
2/1SQ British 6 Pounder ATG, Matilda, Churchill IV with 6 pdr or 75mm;
Japanese Medium Tank 89 and 97;
Soviet T-26
3/1SQ British Valentine with 6 pdr, Cromwell I
4/2SQ British 17 Pounder ATG, Sherman Firefly;
German 7.5cm Pak 40 ATG, Panzer IV, Panzer V;
Soviet T-34/76, 76/41 ATG, IG 76;
US Sherman 75mm
5/2SQ British Churchill V and VIII (both with 95mm);
German 8.8cm Pak 43 ATG; Panzer VI;
Soviet T-34/85, SU-85;
5/3SQ British Sherman IIB 105mm;
German 15cm gun;
Soviet KV-2, IS-2, SU-122, SU-152, ISU-122 and ISU-152

Steven’s current house rules for tanks/guns shooting as a fire group

Personally I find the standard vehicles rules make tanks underpowered compared to a HMG stand. At most they get 4d6, like a HMG, and they only shoot once an initiative. I think tanks should be more potent than a HMG. In my Armour House Rules I let both the main gun and machine guns shoot as a fire group (this is also an option in the standard rules). That means tanks often shoot with 4d6 for their main gun and 4d6 for the machine guns. That is quite punchy. And I give them unlimited shooting, like infantry.

As a reminder in my Armour House Rules, I rated a vehicles machine guns as:

  • 4 = 2+ hull/turret mounted MG;
  • 3 = 1 hull/turret mounted MG;
  • 0 = LMG carried inside fighting compartment;
  • – = none.
  • Specialist AA machine guns are not included in this total.

Note: This scheme is probably too generous for the Sherman Firefly. It didn’t have a hull machine gun but did have a coaxial machine gun, so gets a 3d6 for the machine guns.

Steven’s house rule on direct fire into structures

In my Armour House Rules, targets in structures (Buildings, Building Complexes, Bunkers/Hard Points) or in Entrenchments or Prone do not get the -1d6 Protective Cover Bonus from Direct Fire HE weapons. Bunkers still get the -1 pip though.

Monster-2857 Boom - The Monster has a shot
Monster-2857 Boom – The Monster has a shot

Removing all those fiddly little rules

Effectively, my structure rule gives the tanks/guns an extra 1d6 when shooting at structures. If they get that bonus all the time, they don’t need the special rule.

The tank fire group rule – allow vehicles to shoot with both main gun and machine guns – is also a complicated way to give the vehicle more fire power. A simpler way would just give them more dice on a single whole vehicle roll. I do the maths below but basically a hull machine gun gives a +2d6 modifier to the gun rating.

The higher number of hit dice replaces the need for KILL potential. But the thing about the KILL Potential is it allows hits to spill over onto other stands. So I’m thinking about replacing the KILL Potential rule with a similar house rule. Something like, if a single tank/gun gets more than 3 hits on an enemy stand, the hits above 3 are applied to other enemy stands within a stand width of the original target. So an KV-2 with an ultra-heavy 152mm gun is likely to have a splash effect, but it ties back to the hits not a different rule. That feels right.

Summary so far: We can remove the need for all the fiddly little extra rules – KILL Potential, my structure house rule, and the tank fire group rule – by giving tanks/guns have sufficiently big enough fire power. Simple. And simple is almost always best. But maybe I need a new “splash” rule, which could also apply to indirect fire.


Using calibre bands for tank/gun shooting at infantry

Well, luckily my Revised Calibre Bands gives me bigger numbers.

Standard Crossfire Examples Calibre Band Anti-personnel Rating
0/0SQ German 3.7cm Pak 35 ATG Super Light Gun (to 44mm) 3d6
1/1SQ British 2 Pounder ATG;
Japanese Lt Tank 95;
German 5.0cm Pak 38 ATG;
Soviet 45/46 and 45/66 ATG
Ultra Light Gun (45-64mm) 4d6
2/1SQ British 6 Pounder ATG, Matilda, Churchill IV with 6 pdr;
Japanese Medium Tank 89 and 97;
Soviet T-26
3/1SQ British Valentine IX with 6 pdr
British Cromwell I Light Gun (65-84mm) 5d6
4/2SQ British 17 Pounder ATG, Sherman Firefly;
German 7.5cm Pak 40 ATG, Panzer IV, Panzer V;
Soviet T-34/76, 76/41 ATG, IG 76;
US Sherman 75mm
5/2SQ British Churchill V and VIII (both with 95mm);
German 8.8cm Pak 43 ATG; Panzer VI;
Soviet T-34/85, SU-85;
Medium Gun (85-104mm) 6d6
5/3SQ British Sherman IIB 105mm;
German 15cm gun;
Soviet IS-2, SU-122, ISU-122
Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 7d6
Soviet KV-2, SU-152, and ISU-152 Ultra Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 8d6

Consolidated shooting roll

A completely different way to to get the anti-personnel rating for a vehicle is to combine the shooting for the main gun and machine guns into a single shooting roll. My current house rule has the main gun and machine guns shooting as a fire group. I did a bit of maths and found that shooting with 3d6 (main gun) then 3d6 (machine guns) is about the same effectiveness as a single 4d6 attack. And a tank shooting with 4d6 (main gun) then 3d6 (machine guns) is about the same effectiveness as a single 5d6 attack. A 4d6 for both main gun and machine guns is roughly the same as 6d6. So if I replaced the dual ratings (main gun and machine gun) with a single consolidated anti-personnel rating I would get the following approximations.

Consolidated shooting roll
(based on fire group with Main gun and machine guns)
MISS PIN SUPPRESS KILL Retain Initiative Examples
1d6 Group
1d6 67% 33% 0% 0% 0%
2d6 Group
2d6 44% 44% 11% 0% 11%
3d6 Group
2d6+2d6 20% 59% 20% 1% 21%
3d6 30% 44% 22% 4% 26%
3d6+2d6 13% 53% 28% 6% 34%
4d6 Group
4d6 20% 40% 30% 11% 41%
4d6+1d6 13% 46% 30% 11% 41% Japanese Lt Tank 95
3d6+3d6 9% 46% 33% 12% 45%
4d6+2d6 9% 44% 33% 14% 47% British Matilda;
Japanese Medium Tank 89 and 97;
Soviet T-26;
5d6 Group
5d6 13% 33% 33% 21% 54% Soviet SU-85; SU-122; SU-152
4d6+3d6 6% 38% 35% 21% 56% British Cromwell I; Valentine IX with 6 pdr; Churchill IV with 6 pdr; British Sherman Firefly1;
6d6 Group
4d6+4d6 6% 31% 35% 30% 65% German Panzer IV; Panzer V;
Soviet T-34/76;
US Sherman 75mm
6d6 9% 26% 33% 32% 65%
7d6 Group
5d6+4d6 9% 25% 35% 40% 75% British Churchill V and VIII (both with 95mm); Sherman IIB 105mm
German Panzer VI;
Soviet KV-2; T-34/85; IS-2; ISU-122; ISU-152;
7d6 6% 20% 31% 43% 74%

Notes:
(1) My existing Balagan Data Sheets for Crossfire are generous to the Sherman Firefly giving it 4d6 main gun and 4d6 machine guns. It only had a co-axial machine gun so should be 4d6+3d6.

Using that conversion would allow me to convert all the main gun and machine gun combinations into a single, usually bigger, number of dice. Vehicles, and guns, would be rated 0d6 to 7d6 for anti-personnel fire.


Comparing Calibre Bands and Consolidated Shooting Roll

In some places calibre bands give similar results to consolidating the shooting from the fire group. But in other cases they give quite different results. So I thought I’d put the examples side by side and see if I can learn something.

Vehicle Calibre Band Calibre Band Shooting Consolidated Shooting Roll
(based on fire group with Main gun and machine guns)
Comments
British
Matilda Ultra Light Gun (45-64mm) 4d6 4d6 Same
Valentine IX, Churchill IV or Cromwell I
(all with 6 pdr)
Ultra Light Gun (45-64mm) 4d6 5d6
Sherman 75mm Light Gun (65-84mm) 5d6 6d6
Sherman Firefly Light Gun (65-84mm) 5d6 5d6 Same but I think this is too generous
Churchill V and VIII
(both with 95mm)
Medium Gun (85-104mm) 6d6 76d
Sherman IIB 105mm Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 7d6 7d6 Same
German
Panzer IV
Panzer V
Light Gun (65-84mm) 5d6 6d6
Panzer VI Medium Gun (85-104mm) 6d6 7d6
Japanese
Lt Tank 95 Super Light Gun (to 44mm) 3d6 4d6
Medium Tank 89 and 97 Ultra Light Gun (45-64mm) 4d6 4d6 Same
Soviet
T-26; Ultra Light Gun (45-64mm) 4d6 4d6 Same
T-34/76 Light Gun (65-84mm) 5d6 6d6
T-34/85 Medium Gun (85-104mm) 6d6 7d6
KV-2 Ultra Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 8d6 7d6
SU-85 Medium Gun (85-104mm) 6d6 5d6
SU-122 Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 7d6 5d6
ISU-122 Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 7d6 7d6 Same
SU-152 Ultra Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 8d6 5d6
ISU-152 Ultra Heavy Gun (105-124mm) 8d6 7d6
USA
Sherman 75mm Light Gun (65-84mm) 5d6 6d6

Okay, what did I learn from that exercise? Consolidated roll emphasises machine guns (or lack of). Calibre bands emphasises the big gun. Kind of predictable really.


Modifiers to Calibre rating

Not all guns are the same, even if they are the same calibre. And not all vehicles were the same, even if they had a similar gun. That means some vehicles need to their their anti-personnel firepower modified.

Poor or absent HE

Some tanks/guns will have inferior anti-personal fire. For example, the Sherman Firefly had poor HE (and no hull machine guns) so should get a lower anti-personnel rating, perhaps deducting 1d6 making 4d6 anti-personnel rating (rather than 5d6).

The British 2 pounder ATG didn’t have HE rounds. So perhaps it should also count as inferior and take a 1d6 penalty making an 3d6 anti-personnel rating. I’m disinclined to disadvantage them further because evidence from the 1948-49 war in Israel suggests infantry found anti-tank rounds from this gun were terrifying. And terror is as good as damage in war.

2 man turret

Some tanks had too few crewmen in the turret and the commander had to do double duty as a loader. The most famous example is the Soviet T34/76, but there are loads of others. I think I’ll ignore that for anti-personnel fire.

Machine guns

Calibre bands are a good starting point, but I suspect vehicles with plentiful machine guns should get +1d6 or those without should get -1d6 or perhaps even -2d6.

For example the anti-personnel ratings for a Sherman 75mm are:

  • 4/2SQ in standard Crossfire
  • 4d6 + 4d6 in my current armour house
  • 5d6 for a Light Gun (65-84mm) using calibre band
  • 6d6 if I convert 4d6 + 4d6 into a single consolidated roll

The question is, in my revised tank rules, should the Sherman 75mm get 5d6 or 6d6.

Right, that suggests if I want to retain the killing power of Shermans compared to my current house rule (4d6 + 4d6 = 6d6) then I’ll need to bump up the calibre band (5d6) and the supporting machine guns are a good excuse. But maybe 5d6 is okay. I think I’ll assume the anti-personnel rating for a calibre band has good machine guns.

Which brings us to vehicles without machine guns. The SU-122 and SU-152 lacked machine guns. But the ISU-122 and ISU-152 had them. I reckon the absence of machine guns should give a -2d6 modifier to the anti-personnel rating.

In addition to poor HE, the Sherman Firefly lacked a hull machine. That could warrant a -1d6 modifier making 3d6 (originally 5d6). I like that: the Sherman 75mm gets 5d6 and the Firefly 3d6.


Observations

You might be wondering why I’ve revised anti-personnel fire when the goal is to revise anti-tank fire. Well, I think this helps me reach my Design Goal of simpler rules and grunty tanks.

So far it is looking good. I think more to hit dice for tanks/guns will give the effect I want. The Revised Calibre Bands get close but need to be modified for tanks/guns with superior/inferior anti-personnel fire. The modifiers I’m thinking of are:

  • -1d6 for poor or absent HE
  • -1d6 for coaxial machine or missing hull machine gun
  • -2d6 for missing both coaxial and hull machine guns

I think I need a new KILL Potential house rule to replace the one in the rules. Extra hits above 3 splash onto enemy stands within one base width. Won’t happen often but could be fun.

Note: the above ratings are not set in stone for these vehicles. I’ll lock it down in a later post.

5 thoughts on “Anti-personnel Rating – Revising Crossfire Anti-tank Rules 4”

  1. Hi Steven. Although I am a very recent returner to Crossfire, I do think that this looks like a very good idea. I am in the process of painting up some Winter War Soviets and Finns and would be interested to know if you have any thoughts on whether the rules credit the Finns with their excellent anti-tank close assault ability using molotov cocktails, crowbars and satchel grenades etc?

    Cheers

    Simon

    Reply
    • I don’t know anything about the Finns so I’ll talk in general.

      In CF some troops are given a bonus on close combat. The most common are Assault Engineers. They get +1 in close combat, both against infantry and tanks. They get this bonus because of flame throwers, satchel charges, and what not. Did the Finns have comparable troops? Were they in separate units or integrated in platoons. I know the Japanese had tank hunters both integrated (one squad per platoon) and separate dedicated tank hunter units.

      Actually, maybe you just have a look at my musing on Japanese tank hunters: Japanese Tank Hunter Teams in Crossfire.

      Without knowing anything about the Finns I think it unlikely they should have a universal tank hunting ability. I suspect it should be more specific.

      And you might find that just “Veteran” status does the trick.

      Reply
      • Thanks Steven. From what I have read they seem to have been specialist squads with molotovs, satchel charges, bundles of grenades and even crowbars to prise the tracks off. Looking at the rules, there seems to be enough as written to give the Finns a good edge, especially given that the attacks were in forests and tanks could easily bog down off road. Do you give tanks reactive fire the same as infantry squads?

        Cheers

        Simon

        Reply
        • Yes, standard Crossfire and both versions of my house rules, allow tanks to reactive fire.

          Reply

Leave a Reply