Hidden Deployment

[richafricanus]

I'm not sure I entirely understand the concept of Hidden Deployment so a few questions about this rule:

1. The rules refer to formations, not units, being hidden.  So do I place one hidden marker for the formation and then the table at the top on p.60 tells me how many units I can include in that hidden formation, in addition to the CO/HQ and any recces and sniper units?

2. When the CO or HQ unit is hidden, presumably they can still try and activate non-hidden units?

3. Can part of the hidden formation be revealed but not all of it?  So a vehicle comes within 20cm of enemy so must be deployed but the infantry in the hidden formation can stay hidden?

Sorry for all the questions.  Trying to get to grips with the rules.

[Big Insect]

Answers in-line below:

I'm not sure I entirely understand the concept of Hidden Deployment so a few questions about this rule:

1. The rules refer to formations, not units, being hidden.  So do I place one hidden marker for the formation and then the table at the top on p.60 tells me how many units I can include in that hidden formation, in addition to the CO/HQ and any recces and sniper units?
> Yes
2. When the CO or HQ unit is hidden, presumably they can still try and activate non-hidden units?
> Yes, and you will be measuring your command distances from the hidden formation marker

3. Can part of the hidden formation be revealed but not all of it?  So a vehicle comes within 20cm of enemy so must be deployed but the infantry in the hidden formation can stay hidden?

>No - it's on an all or none basis as it's the marker that is used. Even if the units, within the marker are deployed further away from the enemy or physically out of sight. Again, it is a games mechanism and it is assumed that the formation, as a whole is discovered or revealed

Sorry for all the questions.  Trying to get to grips with the rules.

> Not a problem - please do not hesitate to ask questions. The challenge with a set of rules like BKC (or CWC) is that they have been around for a relatively long time (in wargames terms), with relatively little alternations needed; and a lot of 'Spanish practices' have built up over the years.
I am occasionally invited to go out to large club games and I attend when I can, but I often notice how different clubs or groups or individual players can interpret a set of wording very differently. Also, and often, as a longstanding player myself - its easy to 'know' how a rules mechanism works through experience or in your mind, but getting that across so that it is easily understood in a consistent manner by all, can sometimes be a challenge.
I am in the midst of rewriting Future War Commander (FWC) at present and from some of the playtests and proof reading its clear that what I've written might make sense to me, but not to others  Or, in a recent case, I had a mechanism all mapped out in my head but simply forgot to put the necessary explanation as to how it worked down on paper - so to speak.
So questions and clarifications are always very welcomed - and as with the Assets question its good to see how a new player reads the rules and if we can make it clearer - in errata and ultimately in the next edition - that is good for all players.

Cheers
Mark

[richafricanus]

Thanks Mark, that's helpful.  Having published a set of Napoleonic rules myself, I am familiar with the challenge of what seems clear to me is interpreted completely differently by someone else.

[Big Insect]

Thanks Mark, that's helpful.  Having published a set of Napoleonic rules myself, I am familiar with the challenge of what seems clear to me is interpreted completely differently by someone else.