Armor Facing Effect?

[Montana Grizz]

If one were to draw opportunity fire by moving to a hex on one side of an armored unit, that unit would turn toward the unit it was firing upon. Could one then move another armored unit behind the oppositions unit and fire at it from behind? Or would the unit being fired upon automatically turn to face the unit firing?

Thanks,

Pat

[Dragoon]

The unit would only turn around if it was gonna fire an OP shot..if not it would just sit there.


Dragoon

[Tide1]

If I understand the q currectly it depends on the enemy tank having enough points to turn and fire. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't ;) I hope that answers it for you.

[Hawk Kriegsman]

[Huib Versloot]

Yes because tanks in CS all have their turrets welded to the hull...

Another example to show that the armor facing rule is best when it is ticked off

[Montana Mud]

[Don Fox]

""Yes because tanks in CS all have their turrets welded to the hull...""

I must say... one of the best lines I've seen written on this board in a long time! :)

[John Given]

:soap:

Lol, it's a shame that the turrets in the CS don't rotate - and the game takes into account the possiblility of a turret hit vs. a hull hit.

On the other hand, the armor facing effect represents (imho) the general facing of the entire platoon. I like the armor facing rule myself, and for one big reason - it encourages you to be more cautious with your armor by making the player remember the tactical position of his armored units vis-a-vis the enemy force. In other words, you can't rely on the pure thickness of your armor, and, you have to recognize that surrounded units are more vulnerable. Don't forget, tanks really do have relatively thin side and rear armor, so where's the problem?

Another reason I like the armor facing rule - the armor factor (as it appears on the infobox) only applies to the front. Having a panther with "13" armor all-around would just seem too powerful to me, AND, would remove some of the challenge of the game, since I would no longer have to worry about units sneaking up from behind.

In answer to the oringal question, yes, Hawk is right. It is a good example why I don't like op-fire, and the example you gave is a perfect example of what I like to do in a typical armored engagement:

1. If possible, get a weak armored unit to the rear of the suspected enemy armor location. It's helpful if you have more than one armored car platoon for this. Note: Good players will have security on their flanks, preventing this step.

2. Have the ac's more around, shoot, make as much fuss as possible in order to soak up maximum opfire.

3. Enemy tank(s) spin around to shoot it/them, revealing themselves during my turn.

4. My tanks now shoot the newly-revealed/spotted enemy tanks in the rear armor.

Sometimes, players will leave their op-fire on for SOFT targets with their tanks, meaning that infantry-type units can draw the op-fire of the enemy tanks (no need to use up your armored cars).

Just my 2 cents. :)

[K K Rossokolski]

Huib, I agree with Don -beautifully put!!

But I bet the English tanks have their turret rivetted!!

Cheers
KKR

[Huib Versloot]