CWC-II Rules Errata (Open)

[JcDent]

No it's +1 Die, not +1 to die roll. Represents the MG's

Oh! In this case, it would be really helpful if the notation in the tables and such was always Xd6, even when it's a 1d6. It's easy to get lost in a system where both target number and dice mods exist.

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Thats the way it's always been. If not blame Mark !

[Leon]

Oh! In this case, it would be really helpful if the notation in the tables and such was always Xd6, even when it's a 1d6. It's easy to get lost in a system where both target number and dice mods exist.

I've tried to stick to this type of system throughout so any missing ones are my fault there.  All dice adjustments should be xd6 so I'll keep an eye out for any others and get them changed.

[Leodis]

Evening all. as posted on the FB Group we had our first trial run last night.

It generated a few questions, which upon reading the thread have been answered elsewhere, so please ignore those text below copied from that post as I'm too lazy to type it out again.

"If you are going to playtest a game, why "Nott" do it with 7 players and three full Regiments. Rob N brought out the Poles vs the 11th Cav with Canadian and German backup.

A few questions."

1. End phase it says all sides remove hits, in the latest BKC only the active player does so, we find it adds an interesting aspect as if you carry over hits into your own turn you have to think about activation of those units if they are likely to be hit by reaction fire. Why the change?

2. General view, why are some artillery are only listed as on board, for instance the M109. After the retirement of the M110, the 109 is the only option for artillery for the Americans, so you don't get the option of any off board assets?

2a. Additionally Onboard artillery like the 122mm 2S1 have a max range of 100cm in the lists, but a M1A1 is 175?  The 2S1 has a RL range of over 15km? In the US lists, an M106 120mm mortar has a range of 200cm, whilst a M109A6 Paladin has a max range of 100? Paladins have a 25km range, or 40km if using the Excalibur round.

3. It suggests that attack helicopters use the stabilisation rules, but no listing  of the S rating is in the lists, or do we assume S2?

4. Do vehicles in BUA get the advantage of reduced attack dice due to the building type ie -2 for brick, or does that only apply to deployed forces as the example specifically mentions infantry? Does this also mean that if you fire a bazooka (3 dice vs AP) at a fortification, with the -3d6 per unit firing, the infantry inside is immune?


When tanks have twice the range as artillery, time for the tipex 

Continuing the fight next week.

https://www.facebook.com/LeedsWargamesClub/photos/pcb.5087366254684049/5087364711350870

Andy D.

[Big Insect]

Evening all. as posted on the FB Group we had our first trial run last night.

It generated a few questions, which upon reading the thread have been answered elsewhere, so please ignore those text below copied from that post as I'm too lazy to type it out again.

"If you are going to playtest a game, why "Nott" do it with 7 players and three full Regiments. Rob N brought out the Poles vs the 11th Cav with Canadian and German backup.

A few questions."

1. End phase it says all sides remove hits, in the latest BKC only the active player does so, we find it adds an interesting aspect as if you carry over hits into your own turn you have to think about activation of those units if they are likely to be hit by reaction fire. Why the change?
> Actually - in BKCIV there is an errata update that states that all player remove Hits at the end of the game turn. That is the correct way - it was an error in BKCIV that was corrected and is the way things worked in CWC-I and now in CWC-II.

2. General view, why are some artillery are only listed as on board, for instance the M109. After the retirement of the M110, the 109 is the only option for artillery for the Americans, so you don't get the option of any off board assets?

> You can use all Off-table artillery on-table, if you desire - with the exception of Naval Guns and MLRs.
As you point out below the MLRs have such a long range that they are not usually found anywhere near the front line.

However, I'm not quite sure why you'd want to do so?
On-table they don't fire as an area template weapon and can only target a single unit. Using the standard factors and ranges, as shown in the table on Page 52 in the rules.

But that's fine to do so, if you want. However, what I'd do is make sure that all the off-table artillery deployed on-table have the 'Rear Line' attribute and (unless they are Self-propelled) they should also be classified as Deploy and all should Restricted.

2a. Additionally Onboard artillery like the 122mm 2S1 have a max range of 100cm in the lists, but a M1A1 is 175?  The 2S1 has a RL range of over 15km? In the US lists, an M106 120mm mortar has a range of 200cm, whilst a M109A6 Paladin has a max range of 100? Paladins have a 25km range, or 40km if using the Excalibur round.

> this is where we have a rules mechanism to prevent miss-use of artillery as very powerful long-range AT guns on-table. If you look at Page 52 in the rules, you'll see that there is a table with standard factors for on-table artillery - all have 100cm range and all have an 'H' classification (so can only damage armour at under half range).
The rules are primarily designed for Artillery over 100mm to be fielded off-table. That way you don't worry about the ranges, which as you state are often so large that you'd need a table a kilometre wide to get the ranges to be vaguely realistic. There are a few exceptions to this - such as 120mm+ mortars - which are often deployed much closer to the front line. The Soviet SP-Guns are often fielded in close support of their armoured formations and so they are specifically picked out for this capability. Generally, pre-1990 NATO artillery, unless it was specific infantry support guns was not deployed in the same way.
NB: on-table artillery is not commanded by an FAO either - they must be commanded by the CO or an HQ.

3. It suggests that attack helicopters use the stabilisation rules, but no listing  of the S rating is in the lists, or do we assume S2?
> Please use S1 - this is an Errata.

4. Do vehicles in BUA get the advantage of reduced attack dice due to the building type ie -2 for brick, or does that only apply to deployed forces as the example specifically mentions infantry? Does this also mean that if you fire a bazooka (3 dice vs AP) at a fortification, with the -3d6 per unit firing, the infantry inside is immune?

> Yes - but in the case of the Bazooka you need to get close (under half-range) as you get the +1 d:6 for shooting at the Building/Fortification under half-range. You can also use the AT factors against fortification/buildings but are not restricted to half-range (as the H only applies against armour).  Does that make sense.


When tanks have twice the range as artillery, time for the tipex 

I understand your point - however, the game is primarily played in a way that most Artillery is deployed off-table.
As such, it means that off-table artillery effectively has no Maximum range on-table - it is just subject to its FAO (or CO/HQ in some instances) being able to have LoS to the target and to be able to spot it and call it in.
The reason that on-table artillery can only target a single unit and don't have an area template (unlike off-table units) is that on-table artillery units can be ordered to shoot during multiple turns in a game turn. As they are deemed to be shooting over open-sights. Off-table artillery has templates as they can only fire once per game turn.

Hope that makes sense?

Continuing the fight next week.

https://www.facebook.com/LeedsWargamesClub/photos/pcb.5087366254684049/5087364711350870

Andy D.

Hi Andy D
Thanks for the thoughts and observations - I've answered the questions in line in-bold above.
FYI - I am deliberately not on Facebook - so if you need further guidance please do come to the Forum.
We are looking at holding a weekend CWC-II 'Book Camp' later in the year - if you & the Leeds 'crew' would be interested - message me directly please?
Cheers
Mark

[Leodis]

Hi Andy D
Thanks for the thoughts and observations - I've answered the questions in line in-bold above.
FYI - I am deliberately not on Facebook - so if you need further guidance please do come to the Forum.
We are looking at holding a weekend CWC-II 'Book Camp' later in the year - if you & the Leeds 'crew' would be interested - message me directly please?
Cheers
Mark

Hi Mark.

I get the general idea, but we have several conflicting statements.

For example take a M109, according to page 52, they can be ordered against individual bases multiple times per turn depending on successful command rolls as per previous rules, which is fine. As large artillery, they get 5d6 per barrage.

On page 115 it says it has a AP of 4 & AT of 4 (no range mentioned). The PDF has been revised to say AP4/100 and AT4/100H, but this is irrelevant as the rule on page 52 says ignore the Army list values, but the rules or IG say use the AT value?

Therefore I read it that the page 52 rule is only to be used in direct fire situations, and indirect on board fire uses the AP and AT stats as directed by the IG rule, but with no range restriction and no AP round?

Also H was used in previous editions to indicate that attacks against armoured units could only be made at half range, as this are now separated, why have a H designation when you could just state the range, as in have AP 4/100 and AT4/50?

The M109 according to the list is not allowed offtable, but the equivalent 155 with the M198 has 4d6.

As all of the listed off table artillery with the exception of the MLRS was retired by 1992, not having the 109 available off board does seem a little strange.

So for the only conventional artillery system available to the US post Gulf War has 5d6/100 (direct) or 4d6 (4d6/100 &4d6/50 in the PDF)depending on how you read the rules, and no offboard capability at all.

As to the bootcamp, yes, we would be very interested, in fact we can host if required, as we own our own 3000sq/ft gaming centre, and Leon is more than welcome to repeat his trip down with the mobile store and sell his wares

Andy

[Smartbomb]

Also H was used in previous editions to indicate that attacks against armoured units could only be made at half range, as this are now separated, why have a H designation when you could just state the range, as in have AP 4/100 and AT4/50?

I think this is discussed in another thread. The AT (H) is that way so that an AT 4/50 H weapon would be usable to 25cm against armor, while the weapon would be usable out to 50cm against other hard targets like buildings, bunkers, etc.

[weredoomed2003]

Having discussed it with Andy, I think I get it now (??) and my options for my Polish 2S1s would be,
1. Remain off table and be requested only once per turn by FAO - as 122m would be an area template with 3 dice per model(either barrage or concentrated). 
2. Used as on-table requested multiple times by HQ/CO as allowed by command rules as if infantry guns.  This is where the rules/stats started to confuse me -  but I think I would use 3 dice per model hitting an individual target model.  According to the army list pdf the factor is 3/100, according to the Soviet list in the book it's 3 dice, according to the chart on p52 it's 4/100 H.  Surely when used as on table indirect fire there should be no range restriction  as that's just nonsense (indirect fire is indirect fire whether it's coming from on or off table?)  So I intend to use as 3 dice (as 122mm always gave been) - hitting an AFV on a six etc as per usual.
3. If firing direct fire - which should be rare and only in an emergency I would use the 3/100 and 3/100 H (in effect 3/50 against armour) - perfectly happy with a range restriction as this represents the flat trajectory open sight /poor direct targeting that a 2S1 is not exactly designed to do.

So for most of the time it's 3 dice off table via FAO with a template, 3 dice on table via HQ/CO at a model, and 3/100 or 3/100 H in direct fire.  And I can ignore the p52 table and any contradictory bits in the rules or rulebook army lists.

That makes it simple enough and to me works absolutely fine.

I'm not really bothered about minor bits in the army lists as the amount of data is so big and we'll always argue over things like availability.  So for example the Polish Warsaw Pact Grade 1 doesn't include Su-25s but my list for 1989 shows the Poles had them, so I just use the stats from the Russian list - not a problem and can be corrected via the pdfs if needed at a later date.

Looking forward to my bold counterattack next week when my T55s will slice through those pesky M1s.....

Must remember my Hinds are S1 and armoured if he tries to hit them with a vulcan...

Rob N

[Big Insect]

Hi Mark.

I get the general idea, but we have several conflicting statements.

For example take a M109, according to page 52, they can be ordered against individual bases multiple times per turn depending on successful command rolls as per previous rules, which is fine. As large artillery, they get 5d6 per barrage. > yes, but only for off-table fire - on-table artillery never gets a template. But I get that you understand that 

On page 115 it says it has a AP of 4 & AT of 4 (no range mentioned).
> the no range bit was an errata - corrected in the on-line list

The PDF has been revised to say AP4/100 and AT4/100H, but this is irrelevant as the rule on page 52 says ignore the Army list values, but the rules or IG say use the AT value?

> yes but in this example - the rules stats, Page 52 and the on-line army lists all have the same AP & AT stats (4d6). The range is governed by the fact that it is an on-table gun - all of which (should) have a range of x/100 for both AP and AT (but there may be specific exceptions).
NB: this is not an IG - unless it is specifically specified as such.

Therefore I read it that the page 52 rule is only to be used in direct fire situations, and indirect on board fire uses the AP and AT stats as directed by the IG rule, but with no range restriction and no AP round?

> No - the Rule on Page 52 applies to all on-table artillery (except IGs) and to both LoS and LOF shooting.

I see your point about LoF and AP rounds v LoS and AT rounds. As the logical approach is that AT rounds can only be fired over direct sights (not as dropping fire). However, with on-table artillery the AT stat actually represents heavier HE type rounds dropping on top of an armoured target. So there is no LoS/LoF comparison, unlike an IG. You use AT against armoured targets (that you want to cause Hits on) or can use AP against armoured target at the full AP range, that you want to attempt to Suppress (but not cause Hits against).

The M109 is not classified as an Infantry Gun (not in the same way as a 25pdr or Otto Melara might - for example) as it doesn't specifically carry direct LoS AT rounds*. But even if it was to be classified as an IG, most IGs have also had their on-table ranges restricted to x/100 | x/100H as well (but there are - as always - some exceptions).
This is specifically to stop larger calibre artillery being used as powerful AT guns - which is generally not how they were used (by NATO). Your on-table M106 (towed or SP) has factors of AP:4/100|AT:4/100H. It is therefore much more effective as an off-table asset.
*NB: I am aware that in Jan'16 there were tests firing of HVP ammo with an M109 Paladin - but that is - for now - outside the scope of the rules - although HVP ammo does exits in FWC

Also H was used in previous editions to indicate that attacks against armoured units could only be made at half range, as this are now separated, why have a H designation when you could just state the range, as in have AP 4/100 and AT4/50?

The M109 according to the list is not allowed offtable, but the equivalent 155 with the M198 has 4d6.

>You can use any on-table artillery over 100mm off-table - that needs a clarification note.
That is me making assumptions around understanding, apologies.

As all of the listed off table artillery with the exception of the MLRS was retired by 1992, not having the 109 available off board does seem a little strange.

> I agree - and I'll look at that - I suspect that some of the issues we had with the in-print lists have not been picked up in the on-line lists. I'll look into that. But, yes, it should be available off-table and on-table

So for the only conventional artillery system available to the US post Gulf War has 5d6/100 (direct) or 4d6 (4d6/100 &4d6/50 in the PDF)depending on how you read the rules, and no offboard capability at all.
> that is not the intention  I'll see what I can do to correct that. Although I suspect that as the US was very good at standardising equipment, it wont have the levels of diversity that we see on the Soviet or even Chinese lists.

As to the bootcamp, yes, we would be very interested, in fact we can host if required, as we own our own 3000sq/ft gaming centre, and Leon is more than welcome to repeat his trip down with the mobile store and sell his wares

Andy

Thanks Andy - comments in-line - in bold - above.

The fundamental principal around artillery (put Mortars to one side for now) is that the game is structured so that the vast majority of artillery should be bought as Off-table.
As such it fires once per game turn and uses templated area fire and is commanded by FAOs (& occasionally COs & HQs).

On-table artillery can fire multiple times per game-turn (as many times as it received a successful Command, or as an Initiative or Opportunity fire action) - but only fires at a single designated unit (it can potentially change its target with each order). No on-table artillery uses area templates.

NB: The 'H' on the on-table artillery is there (as it is with IATW & RR/RCLs) because you need to use the AT stats against fortifications and buildings and the 'H' doesn't apply against them, + you get the +1d6 under half-range if shooting AT at units in buildings and fortifications.
I suspect that I'll need to issue a clarification errata on this (as you are the 2nd person picking up on this).

Great idea on the offer of a boot camp venue - let me chat to Leon and others and see what we can arrange.

Cheers
Mark

[Big Insect]

Having discussed it with Andy, I think I get it now (??) and my options for my Polish 2S1s would be,
1. Remain off table and be requested only once per turn by FAO - as 122m would be an area template with 3 dice per model(either barrage or concentrated). 

> sounds like a good plan. Many players create an off-table 'artillery park' - with their off-table assets in it (artillery, helicopters, aircraft etc) - I use a small rectangular wooded tray that I've stuck some green felt on - it helps me to remember what I've got!!!

2. Used as on-table requested multiple times by HQ/CO as allowed by command rules as if infantry guns.  This is where the rules/stats started to confuse me -  but I think I would use 3 dice per model hitting an individual target model.  According to the army list pdf the factor is 3/100, according to the Soviet list in the book it's 3 dice, according to the chart on p52 it's 4/100 H. 
Surely when used as on table indirect fire there should be no range restriction  as that's just nonsense (indirect fire is indirect fire whether it's coming from on or off table?) 

> this is a long-standing rules mechanism - it is designed to stop players using their on-table artillery to dominate the table-top battlefield, in a way that they just wouldn't have done.
Soviet tac.doc did however have certain SP-artillery that was trained to right up in the battlefront, supporting the MRRs in an assault. But the range restriction is deliberate. But you can of course play the rules as you wish, as long as your opponent is happy with that  Generally, I've seen a couple of Polish players ditch most of their long-tube artillery and buy the big mortars for on-table effectiveness.

So I intend to use as 3 dice (as 122mm always gave been) - hitting an AFV on a six etc as per usual.
3. If firing direct fire - which should be rare and only in an emergency I would use the 3/100 and 3/100 H (in effect 3/50 against armour) - perfectly happy with a range restriction as this represents the flat trajectory open sight /poor direct targeting that a 2S1 is not exactly designed to do.

So for most of the time it's 3 dice off table via FAO with a template, 3 dice on table via HQ/CO at a model, and 3/100 or 3/100 H in direct fire.  And I can ignore the p52 table and any contradictory bits in the rules or rulebook army lists. > your choice on ignoring the AP distance  , but you are spot on this the rest of it

That makes it simple enough and to me works absolutely fine.

I'm not really bothered about minor bits in the army lists as the amount of data is so big and we'll always argue over things like availability.  So for example the Polish Warsaw Pact Grade 1 doesn't include Su-25s but my list for 1989 shows the Poles had them, so I just use the stats from the Russian list - not a problem and can be corrected via the pdfs if needed at a later date.
> easy enough to add in the Su-25s Rob - I'll add it to the list - I have also had some feedback about a couple of other specific Polish vehicles as well. Persionally, I wish I'd never bowed to pressure to put some 'example' lists in the rules book, as 'sods-law' there were going to be a few (!) errors in there - guaranteed.

Looking forward to my bold counterattack next week when my T55s will slice through those pesky M1s..... sounds like a good plan, plenty of off-table pre-planned Smoke is always a good idea in my experience.

Must remember my Hinds are S1 and armoured if he tries to hit them with a vulcan... - yes indeed. Enjoy the game

Rob N

[weredoomed2003]

Don't talk to me about smoke - I'm still ridiculed at the club for using smoke for my T55 attack about 10 years ago against M1s.  All I did was blind my own tanks whilst the M1s had thermal imaging.....it was very messy.....and I've still not lived it down.

[Big Insect]

Don't talk to me about smoke - I'm still ridiculed at the club for using smoke for my T55 attack about 10 years ago against M1s.  All I did was blind my own tanks whilst the M1s had thermal imaging.....it was very messy.....and I've still not lived it down.

     

[Big Insect]

Andy
What we are missing in the on-table artillery in the US list is the M101 & M102 Howitzer.

The stats for these are:

Gun, 105mm M101 45 ART:IG - 3 3 3 - -/- [6] Backstop, R, Towed, Munitions: HE, SMOKE, Chemical <1970

Gun, 105mm M102 50 ART:IG - 3 3 3 - -/- [6] Backstop, Air portable, Towed, Munition: HE, Smoke, Chemical >1966

The M102s are being replaced by the M119-series 105 mm howitzer - which is the British L118 light gun (see British or British Falkland lists). It entered US service in 1989 - and is also an Infantry Gun.

Hope that helps your lack of on-table US artillery.
TBF - we've probably got all the other types for Cold War games in the list already.

Cheers
Mark 

[Superscribe]

The Danger Close rules on P44 are new to CWC and allows either player to use on-table or off-table artillery to attack or defend themselves as part of a close assault.  It says that a 10cm diameter template is used for this and of course with this you could hit your own troops too! Normally only off-table artillery use HE templates for standard indirect fire, as on-table fire use attack dice against one specified target and no template. So now I'm confused! 

I understand why off-table artillery might use a reduced size template for this but not on-table artillery, as they do not use templates under any other circumstances. Is there any reason why on-table artillery use a template for this and do not attack a single target as normal, when using the Danger-Close rule? 

Lots of questions and good debates regarding CWC2 rules but my post above seems to have been missed. @Big Insect - your thoughts on this one?

[Superscribe]

No firing ATGW over water was in CWC1 rules, but several players must have felt strongly enough about this for the House rules, that can be found in  the files section in the CWC Facebook page, include a line that says ATGW can be fired over waterways up to 300mm wide.

Several of the other CWC1 house rules have found their way into the CWC2 rules, such as helicopter movement, and its a shame that the ATGW rule didnt! Although I believe 300mm is too wide for this, as far as I am concerned a canal or river that can be bridged by a MT-55 or Chieftain bridge layer (upto 100cm wide) should not affect ATGW firing across it. So I will continue to play the house rule, but amended to max 100mm.

Hopefully this rule will be oficially amended to allow a level of ATGW fire across narrow waterways 😊

@Big Insect - another subject I would be interested in your views about (also see my original post of 24th May).