Pendraken Miniatures Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
11 July 2020, 01:32:22 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
We've been producing PPE equipment for the frontline workers.
303278 Posts in 17753 Topics by 2247 Members
Latest Member: Adamwest
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Pendraken Miniatures Forum
|-+  Pendraken Rules!
| |-+  Blitzkrieg Commander IV
| | |-+  BKC-IV Rule Queries
| | | |-+  "Rear line" and "Fast" issues
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: "Rear line" and "Fast" issues  (Read 1323 times)
Dr Dave
Guest
« on: 21 April 2019, 09:06:31 PM »

Rear Line:
In the rear line rule it says that a unit:
Cannot move with 30 of the enemy
During initiative the unit must take a tactical move to achieve the 30 cm separation

Understand that this rightly applies to transport Lorries etc but what about their occupants? Can they disembark / deploy before being compulsorily carried off into the distance?


Fast:
I like this idea having a Honey Regt and a MC Bttn. So its -1 d6 to hit when moving, so if you had 4 fire dice it drops to 3. Im fine with that. BUT, does this only apply to opportunity fire; OR, can it be used when ordered fire is performed against a fast target that moved in the previous player turn. Does the Fast vehicle need to have moved its FULL move?
Motor cycles with a move of 25 are fast, but vehicles with the same or faster move are not. Whys that?

Thoughts and answers much appreciated
Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #1 on: 22 April 2019, 11:13:01 PM »

Rear Line

The passengers can dismount - that would need to be an Initiative action upon their individual account.
Good spot - we need to include that.
Likewise tows/limbered artillery/AA/AT etc can also be deployed as an Initiative action.
Will pick this up in the errata - likewise pretty much all Transports (unless specifically stated) will be Rear Line - unless they are half-tracks or some types of animal transports (camels being an example in question).

Fast
This is an interesting one as the Fast special characteristic is not just about speed - but a combination of mobility, speed and to a certain extent profile. Moving fast but having a large profile will more than likely negate the Fast capability.
Motorbikes and Motorbike & side cars (including Kettenkrads etc.) are interesting and caused us a few challenges generally. I originally had a stabilized move and shoot option for side-car machine-guns, but again playtesting and feedback from reviewers (who felt it was unrealistic) meant it was removed - despite there being some very well documented references in WW1 of offensive shooting on the move.
Aerosani are likewise an issue as they move at one heck of a speed and seemed to shoot very effectively in their forward arc ...

It's just a subjective thing ... if you have any obvious other candidates for Fast, do let me know?

Thanks
Mark
Logged
Dr Dave
Guest
« Reply #2 on: 23 April 2019, 08:51:33 AM »

Got it - and thanks.

The rear line thing I thought you'd want it the way you describe - but who has camels?

I like the idea of some units being fast - but you'd not count it if they were stationary or in cover surely? That was what I was after - your thoughts on how fast is fast for those few types that might qualify.

I'm tempted by X is "fast" so -1 die against it in opp fire so long as it has moved at least Y cm
Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #3 on: 23 April 2019, 10:53:09 AM »

Apologies - I forgot to cover your question about whether Fast applied if moving or not.

My original though was that all Special Abilities should apply at all times - as I hate book-keeping.

It might seem 'odd' but again I am of the view that whilst our 'Fast' motorcycles are not driving frantically around in circles whilst 'stationary' they can be laid on the ground or are such low profile as to make them almost impossible to see.
With Stuart tanks ... they are a lot bigger I agree, but I'd also make the observation that in Special Characteristics it states clearly that a unit with 2 characteristics that create the same effect (e.g. a -1 to hit) does not double that up to a -2 to hit.

I'll check the lists but I think (hope) that most of the Fast units also have Low Profile.
Whilst the Low Profile units are not necessarily Fast.

Does that make sense?

Mark
Logged
Dr Dave
Guest
« Reply #4 on: 23 April 2019, 11:04:40 AM »

Yes - makes sense. Though I'm not sure how you can lie a motor cycle combination down.  :-

I think that what you've created is a set of interesting special abilities. It's just a case of how and when to apply them to what things. The problem is that we use the words wargames rules - at which point people think that there is a right and an utterly wrong rather than choosing what works and leaving out what doesn't. It's a "Black Powder" framework type situation and some people simply cannot use those rules.
Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #5 on: 23 April 2019, 04:19:57 PM »

I agree Dr Dave & I also get the "cannot lay a sidecar combo on its side" bit ...  Wink

I am personally not in favor of the Black Powder approach - ideally Rules should be Rules - or it all ends in tears. It's why we tried Black Powder and also Dux Bellorum and found them 'wanting'.

However, there are some special circumstances in this instance - due to the BKCIII 'history'.
I'm probably being a lot more collaborative and tolerant than I'd normally be  Cheesy and also some of the issues that are surfacing are due slightly to me having to unravel certain aspects and rework them. But we will make some definitive judgments based on the surfacing errata and once these are out then it's up to individual players or groups as to whether they stick with them or not.

With CWC and also FWC it will (hopefully) be a lot easier as I'll have just the upgrades to do.

My intention with BKCIV was to try and create (or pull out from all 3 rules) a set of core game-play mechanism - hopefully as Pete had intended - and 'fix' these across all 3 time periods and also supplement them with specific period flavour elements. CWC will be interesting as there is already a debate about whether we close CWC off at the fall of Soviet Russia or continue it on through to 'today', as it can be argued that we are still now in another version of a Cold War. But as 'modern' warfare advances technologically can a single set of rules that starts back in 1945 really accommodate drones, cruise-missiles and cyber warfare adequately? Increasingly CWC is starting to look a lot like FWC in terms of some mechanisms.

As is the intention with Spanish Civil War - do we add a Korean War supplement between BKC and CWC that allows players to play that particular conflict - potentially using either set of rule? It's an interesting thought. There are those who view the Korean War as an extension of WW2 - others who view it as the first of the Cold War conflicts. There are also aspects of WW1 that bare a remarkable similarly to the later Korean War as well ... but that leads on to Great War Commander and chronologically before that Imperial Commander (a potential colonial warfare set).

All interesting stuff ...

Again - thank you for your positive active participation

Mark

« Last Edit: 23 April 2019, 04:23:11 PM by Big Insect » Logged
ianrs54
Playtester
General
*
Posts: 8005



WWW
« Reply #6 on: 24 April 2019, 08:14:35 AM »

Mark - dont start CWC til 1956 - 1st use of air-air missiles, SS10 entered service and the last M4 left US service.
Logged

FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF HURRAY

Muppet of the year 2019, and 2020
Dr Dave
Guest
« Reply #7 on: 24 April 2019, 11:15:27 AM »

I agree: Start it post Korea. Then a mini supplement / guide for Korea?

End CWC with GW1. After that too many armed drones and directed energy weapons.
Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #8 on: 24 April 2019, 02:23:17 PM »

We are all thinking on broadly the same lines chaps ... thanks
Logged
ianrs54
Playtester
General
*
Posts: 8005



WWW
« Reply #9 on: 25 April 2019, 09:06:54 AM »

Well I AM ALWAYS RIGHT  Cheesy Wink
Logged

FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF HURRAY

Muppet of the year 2019, and 2020
Dr Dave
Guest
« Reply #10 on: 25 April 2019, 09:24:20 AM »

Yes, WE are!  Wink
Logged
fred.
Lieutenant General
*
Posts: 5292



WWW
« Reply #11 on: 02 May 2019, 10:23:05 PM »

To bring Fast and Low Profile up again

Fast: -1d6 to hit with direct fire when moving
Low Profile: all direct shooting subtracts 1d6 from the attack value

There is also the note that no combination of abilities ... doubles a defensive factor.

To confirm this means that anything with both Fast and Low Profile is -1d6 to attack?
As mentioned above the fact that Fast only applies when moving, seems to be irrelevant, and rather hard to track.

I've only spotted two units with Fast, which don't have Low Profile, British A13 (for the BEF, not in North Africa) and Mongol Cavalry.

But as virtually everything that has Fast has Low Profile, it seems Fast is redundant as a rule, as you can only get -1d6 when being shot at, if you have both Fast and Low Profile, and there are only 2 units with only Fast, and I would question the A13.

Logged

2011 Painting Competition - Winner!
2012 Painting Competition - 2 x Runner-Up!
2016 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2017 Paint-Off - 3 x Winner!
Steve J
General
*
Posts: 8241


« Reply #12 on: 03 May 2019, 06:53:12 AM »

Without the rulebook to hand, I would have thought that the Low Profile would kick-in when the unit was stationary? I only see Fast as working when the unit actually moves and is subject to Opportunity fire. With the book in hand I could be talking absolute b*ll*cks!
Logged

http://wwiiwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/

2017 Paint-Off - 2 x Winner!
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #13 on: 03 May 2019, 01:58:05 PM »

Just as a general observation - the fact that a Special Characteristic might only occur once in the lists (or even not at all) is (in the nicest way) neither here nor there.
We will be adding more lists in future and also there are players who will want to change or augment the lists to better represent their own views of a units capabilities or characteristics by adding or removing special characteristics. Unlike FoW, BKCIV was not designed as a competition circuit set of rules (although I am not saying it couldn't be used as such).

On the matter of Low Profile and Fast - there are some units that are Low Profile, but not Fast. StuGs are a classic example of this. Some of the early tankette types are also Low Profile and in some of the proposed new lists the early ones are even classified as Unreliable. In fact, one of the lists in most need of 'correction' on this matter is the Italian lists, as a lot of the armour and some of the AT and IS Guns should have been Low Profile, but this slipped through the net.

On the Fast v Low Profile combo question - the two factors combined cannot make a unit impossible to hit - this is to avoid your motorbikes charging around with total immunity because they are Fast and Low Profile - as they could be a 7 to hit.
Fast units do not actually have to move or have moved to utilize the Fast ability. That is to avoid unnecessary book-keeping.
So yes, in a direct shooting situation your unit that is Fast and Low-profile is a single -d6 to hit.
However, and I have not specified this in the Special Characteristics section of the rules - as it was getting down deep into the detail of the design theory - where such a combination of Characteristics exists that would negate another, only 1 is costed in the points for the unit. So, other than causing a bit of confusion (apologies) there is no real harm in having both Low Profile and Fast on one unit. I am sure we have probably missed out a few larger vehicles that should be classified as Fast ... but somebody will no doubt draw this to my attention  Cheesy

I would also gently draw people's attention to a statement at the start of the Army Lists in BKCIV (Page 74):
"These lists are not designed to be an exhaustive reference guide, rather a framework of the forces available to you during your game".

Hope that helps ... and is not too 'defensive'  Smiley
Logged
Steve J
General
*
Posts: 8241


« Reply #14 on: 03 May 2019, 03:13:47 PM »

Quote
"These lists are not designed to be an exhaustive reference guide, rather a framework of the forces available to you during your game".

I couldn't agree more. I tweaked BKCII and will do with BKCIV to suit my view of gaming WWII. It may not be right, but it works for me, which afterall is what matters most.
Logged

http://wwiiwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/

2017 Paint-Off - 2 x Winner!
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!