The Commander Series Forum

What if these weapons were treated as "AT 0" (Zero) rather than "AT -" (n/a)

..and they got a +1 for half range and +1 for flank fire?

Just a thought to keep me from doing my job at work.

For some field testing - What do you veterans think the cost of this kind of ATMG "upgrade" would be?

I also figure, to keep thing simple the AT0 should be the same for units differing in AP value, say a Support MG and a AFV .50/12.7mm using the range as per standard MG? AT0/60 for infantry HMG and AT0/40 for AFV HMG.

Although they do have separate values it would not be too fiddly to bump it up 10cm or so it this was deemed more "realistic".

Maybe???

Imagine the screaming and wailing when my carefully concentrated HMGs take out a panther with flanking fire? There's enough explaining to do when I get the job done with AT rifles.

Not that I consider it an unreasonable result; it would just piss off some people.

Which might make it a good idea...

Good point lentulus - I'm the one that normally plays the Gerries in our group.

How do I delete my old posts??

Early war I could see something like this in play. But, Late War a .50cal or 12.5 MG is just going to really *HONK* a Panther or Tiger right off.

If it was used, you could also not apply the -1 armour save for flank shots, which would reduce the effectiveness of it in the latter part of the war.

I allowed this but only against armour that had a 6 save.

Even more simple...they are AT 1/20 (like a AT rifle unit) but results can only suppress, like in original BKC.

Good one, Deadmoon. I might steal that.