Jagdpanther vs Tiger 1

[SteveT]

Jagdpanther vs Tiger 1: What am I missing?

Costs are 390, and 395.  So just for the extra 5 point  you get a turreted version of the same gun.

Feels like I’ve missed an Errata about it or something

 

[Master Chief]

And the option to fire a coaxial MMG to go with it 🤔

[Steeljackal]

It is the same with StugIV and Panzer IV, but:

1) At the time, in reality, turretless tanks had the advantage of costing less to produce, but in the game it is not reproduced correctly with the point cost.

2) On the other hand, the turretless tanks had the advantage of having a low profile, and being more difficult to hit. If you see vintage photos of a Jagdpanzer IV, you see that he is +/- as tall as a man! In fact, in other wargames (“what a tanker” or if I remember correctly  “Chain of Command”) they have a special “low profile” rule that makes them more difficult to hit and easier to cover. This was true for the Stug, Jagdpanzer and Hetzer, not the Jagdpanther which is very large and tall.

Going back to Bolt Action, the resin JagdpanzerIV that the Warlord sells is actually as tall as an infantryman, and as a result can use the same cover as an infantryman! Stug and Hetzer are slightly taller than an infantryman but slightly, and are still shorter than a tank with a turret, and consequently you can take advantage of the same cover as the infantrymen (and it is historically correct), this is a big advantage, for which the little difference in points between a StugIV and a Panzer IV is not a problem!

As for the Jagdpanther on the other hand, in my opinion, the problem remains, because for 5 points of difference the Jagdpanther has no advantage! In reality it had the advantage of being faster, and in fact for example in “What a tanker” it has the special “Fast” rule that allows it to move faster, but in Bolt Action there is nothing, and the little difference in points is not justified. My Jagdpanther will unfortunately stay in the box if I have the Tiger alternative.

[invisible officer]

Hmmm, a single Jagdpanther is against nature. 😉

Merkblatt 75a/20 from 14.6.44 stated that the use of single Jagdpanther was forbidden.  The minimum unit was four.

 

In attacks it was to bind enemy tanks from front to allow Panzer attacks from the flank.

“Fester Einbau von Jagdpanthern in die HKL. ist verboten.” ~  Use in front line in fixed Position is forbidden.   The Jagdpanther was a fast moving weapon and the Company was intended to form a hammer.  It was no defensive AT weapon. It needs a xxxx big table.

 

All that makes it nearly impossible to use it in BA.   Well, we have the problem with most arms in BA. Single gun models for typical battery arms, like 10,5 cm LeFh.

Ideally a company sized unit of Grenadiere would attack from table border, followed by four Jagdpanther. That would be a sight.

But normally we play with forces that look like stragglers. Remnants of true units.  A single Jagdpanther was taken out of the front as soon as possible.

 

Well, if you like a Jagdpanther the cost does not matter. 😉

[Nigel Heather]

1) At the time, in reality, turretless tanks had the advantage of costing less to produce, but in the game it is not reproduced correctly with the point cost.

This sort of thing is always a challenge. The danger is that you can keep adding extra detail but then you lose the simplicity of the gameplay. You go from a fast and free flowing gaming to having to pause and consult charts every time you fire.

There are plenty of rulesets out there which have much better differentiation between units and their armaments but a lot more management comes with the gameplay.

It’s a balance, it is a question of whether we are prepared to except some anomalies and compromises in return for a fast, simple and fun game.

Cheers,

Nigel

[Author]

Posts