Started by Big Insect, 24 May 2022, 09:29:44 AM
QuoteI admit it is a bit clumsy - but it seems to work ok.
Quote from: BTM on 01 June 2023, 06:28:14 AMHi, V1.1 says keep it low profile (v.1.0 said average, so it changed twice).
Quote from: Big Insect on 01 June 2023, 09:38:26 AMOK - let me check It might be that the other factors have been adjusted in CWC. Or are you referring to BKC?ThanksMark
Quote from: BTM on 02 June 2023, 08:11:49 AMBKC IV v.1.1 errata (latest) low profile. CWC average then?
Quote from: Big Insect on 02 June 2023, 10:12:58 AMI'll check that BKCIV v.1.1 errata - I expect there was some debate about all this - but Average is right for CWCII most certainly. The only real challenge with them being Average is having supporting transports (IFVs or half-tracks etc) being able to provide support fire over the top of them. But we can adjust that in the next set of errata. For now I would play both as Average.ThanksMark
Quote from: Andrew T on 19 September 2023, 09:57:15 PMI have a couple of rules questions please:P.67, Engineering, mentions that units with dozer blades can dig in and count cover as one better. Aside from this, are there any other rules or uses for dozer blades in the game, such as clearing obstacles?> Yes - You can use clear obstacles & create obstacles (5cm long) as an Initiative action for both Engineers and other units with dozer-blades. The Urban Warfare optional rules might also be of interest.P.69, Night Fighting, states that SL, IR & TI only come into play when fighting at night. Are there any other rules for night fighting, such as reduced visibility or command radius?> yes - there is more Night Fighting aspects in the Optional Rules - reduced visibility etc.Finally (for now!) I'm not sure whether this should be a Rules or Army List question, but I always think that if an army has IR/TI capability then FAO/FACs should have too. These units would be equipped with the best visual aids that that particular faction had in their arsenal. Would you agree and is there a succinct and tidy way to incorporate that into the rules? Perhaps in the Notes/Special Rules for an Army like the US it could say something like: FAO & FAC: IR from 1957, TI from 1980 (for example).> generally the way things work with Command units (FAOs/FACs) is that the better they are - in terms of both training and equipment etc. - the higher their CV will be (relative to other enemy units). In truth, the Command units are deliberately designed not to be that complex. Hence why we don't specify vehicle types etc. and only very rarely special characteristics.
Quote from: tankette on 11 October 2023, 10:40:44 PMWhere are the actual errata & clarifications hidden? Thank you.