Jump to content


Photo

Minefields


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Dan Lewis

Dan Lewis

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 135 posts
  • LocationWake Forest North Carolina (near Raleigh)

Posted 13 April 2025 - 06:20 PM

Good Afternoon, 

 

Couple Questions:

 

Anti-vehicle attacks, Page 17.4 says "An HE attack of strength two is immediately worked out against that stand and any other stands within ½" of that stand" So that would be HE OV wouldn't it?. But what about infantry? 

 

Anti-personnel attacks. I would think it would be a FP attack, but only see the HE strength 2 mentioned. 



#2 Kenny Noe

Kenny Noe

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,063 posts

Posted 17 April 2025 - 12:40 PM

Conferring w/ Bob who usually doesn't come up for air until the weekends.   Should have an update soonest.



#3 Bob Benge

Bob Benge

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,231 posts
  • LocationLas Cruces, NM

Posted 17 April 2025 - 06:52 PM

Hi Dan! 

 

Coming up for air since my weekend just started.  ;)

 

You are correct that an HE OV of 2 is used vs. any vehicle. The rule "An HE attack of strength two is immediately worked out against that stand and any other stands within ½" of that stand." was worded this way since the types of stands could be of any type. Thus is an infantry and tank wander into the minefield and are both affected, then an HE FP attack of 2 vs. the infantry stand and an HE OV attack of 2 vs. the tank.


~ Bob Benge ~
ODGW Designer
Product Manager - Mein Panzer

#4 Dan Lewis

Dan Lewis

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 135 posts
  • LocationWake Forest North Carolina (near Raleigh)

Posted 17 April 2025 - 06:55 PM

Got it! Thanks for clearing that up for me! 



#5 Kenny Noe

Kenny Noe

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,063 posts

Posted 17 April 2025 - 07:30 PM

Dan,

 

Hi!   I was re-reading this and had to call Bob when I read his answer.    I called him (at dinner time) and we discussed.  The HE OV and HE FP values are never the same number.  There's a long winded reason for this and I can share later.

 

As for this particular issue we've agreed to modify the paragraph in the rules P 17.4 MINEFIELDS to the following.

 

MINEFIELDS
Engineers also lay mines. In Mein Panzer,
these minefields are considered to be a
mix of Antitank and Antipersonnel mines.
When any stand expends a Move Pip within
1" of a Mine Marker, they must roll to see if
they detonate the mines. Roll each time the
stand expends a Move Pip within range. On
a 1-10, the stand has struck a mine. An HE
attack with an OV = 2 or FP = 8 is immediately
worked out against that stand and any other
stands within ½" of that stand.

 

So in the example first given in a minefield attacks against vehicles are made w/ an HE OV 2 and attacks vs infantry are made w/ an HE FP 8.

 

Apologies for the confusion.



#6 Dan Lewis

Dan Lewis

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 135 posts
  • LocationWake Forest North Carolina (near Raleigh)

Posted 19 April 2025 - 04:37 PM

Wow...Thank you so much. 



#7 Mark 1

Mark 1

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 149 posts
  • LocationChicago-land Area

Posted 29 July 2025 - 09:47 PM

And perhaps this thread could use a bit of wargaming eye-candy...   

But this is added in part to illustrate an actual issue. And that is, that the mines section now is focused on hidden / unmarked minefields.  However, the great majority of minefields (at least in terms of the number of mines laid) were in fact marked minefields.  In which case there should be no concern for the radius from the marker, as any unit using a movement pip inside the marked edge of the minefield is attacked by the mines.

Terrain-Minefields-1.jpg

 

My first generation of minefields have been made with only 1-inch depth. But that was largely as an experiment in the modelling.  No reason that there could not be large tracts of terrain marked as minefields in front of prepared defensive lines.

 

-Mark

(aka: Mk 1)


_________________
Mark 1




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users