Page 69 Minefields thiers no state line so you know how many dice to role against a mine field (artillery strikes) thier seems to be the space for it but unlike the other Fotifications no mention of what it is so as to resolve attacks ????, Barbed wire is a Vehicle 2 armour (page 70) Ill use that till I get some info!
Errata Thread
Peacekeeper_b said:
Snowshadow said:
Gimp said:
Dakkon426 said:
it makes sense that since cover is a fixed dame reduction per each incoming attack grenades would have to negate damage on the entire attack to work as described but i think they could have done a better job creating a system and describing it.
I'd have no issue with grenades negating cover for their attack dice, though the increase to two dice against Armor 2 is a little extreme.
The part that makes it a problem is that it negates cover for all of the other weapons from the attacking unit.
I agree with you on most points with the grenade issue.
Devils Advocate
I could see the removal of cover for all guns if it were meant to represent cover being disrupted, but then it should only reduce cover not negate it.
/Devils Advocate
And to be fair, no matter how much of a veteran you are if a tiny bomb lands near you most people lose their #$%. =D
IN ten years of afghan war, I dont know any troop who is comfortable and calm with a grenade by them.
Most people I know prefer to put something between them and the grenade, and to stay low, instead of standing up to get shot and hit by fragments. Grenade sumps are a nice possibility for a prepared position.
You won't be calm, but you can act trained.
Gimp said:
Peacekeeper_b said:
Snowshadow said:
Gimp said:
Dakkon426 said:
it makes sense that since cover is a fixed dame reduction per each incoming attack grenades would have to negate damage on the entire attack to work as described but i think they could have done a better job creating a system and describing it.
I'd have no issue with grenades negating cover for their attack dice, though the increase to two dice against Armor 2 is a little extreme.
The part that makes it a problem is that it negates cover for all of the other weapons from the attacking unit.
I agree with you on most points with the grenade issue.
Devils Advocate
I could see the removal of cover for all guns if it were meant to represent cover being disrupted, but then it should only reduce cover not negate it.
/Devils Advocate
And to be fair, no matter how much of a veteran you are if a tiny bomb lands near you most people lose their #$%. =D
IN ten years of afghan war, I dont know any troop who is comfortable and calm with a grenade by them.
Most people I know prefer to put something between them and the grenade, and to stay low, instead of standing up to get shot and hit by fragments. Grenade sumps are a nice possibility for a prepared position.
You won't be calm, but you can act trained.
Yup, I agree, dug those in many a foxhole in my time. But then you have to accept that cover does indeed protect against grenades. Its a viscious circle man!
Personally I prefer Dust Tactics cover system.
Errata issue - Recon boys recon ranger squad.
the squad is physically modeled with only two UGL's, yet the statline lists 4 within the squad. Can we get a clarification as to which is right?
personal note - as combat rangers are 1 ap more expensive then recon boys, yet trade the 30 cal for a bazooka and all have UGL's, i would take an educated guess that the recon boys do infact have 4, they just arnt modeled on 2 of the unit.
Fluff for the Allied Bazooka's mentions that only the M10 has an automatic reload system, but there I didn't see anything indicating that the M9 and M9-D have the "reload" special weapon ability.