Hey everyone,

So I guess there's been some ambiguity on what exactly UGL does to cover…the rulebook does imply that adding a UGL to an attack negates all cover for other weapon attacks as well, but I find that a little ridiculous (I'm an allied player, btw). Especially since you can now split attacks even further, UGLs are already powerful from their auto-suppression. I kind of understand why they did that, because I've had a hell of a time trying to house-rule how armor rolls and cover work when you have an attack that includes both normal and cover-negating weapons.

Because of that, I've been playing that all "bullet damage" is subject to normal cover rules, but grenades ignore it. The only problem with this is trying to keep a consistent method of applying the two damage types without having to treat it as two attacks and two armor rolls.

For example, lets say I attack an armor 2 squad that's in hard cover, and score 3 bullet hits and 3 grenade hits. Lets say the squad rolls a double hit on the armor roll.

Rule A:

I'd say the armor roll negates two bullet damage, and cover takes one more, then the grenades come through (total damage: 3)

Rule B:

…but my opponent would try to apply his armor roll to two grenades, and claim that the cover takes out two bullet damage (total damage: 2).

Rulebook rule:

Cover ignored. 6 damage - 2 armor (total damage: 4)

Now lets say I'm attacking an armor 3, DR unit in hard cover. I roll 4 bullet and 4 grenade. He rolls 3 armor save hits, and a DR hit.

Rule A:

Armor, DR and cover applied to bullets. Grenades get through. (Total damage : 4)

Rule B:

Cover takes 2 bullets, 2 get through. DR and armor knocks out all the grenades. (Total damage : 2)

Rulebook rule:

Cover ignored. 8 damage - 4 Armor/DR. (total damage : 4)

So on one hand, its pretty ridiculous to allow him to apply armor rolls to specific damage hits and weasel out of a few damage points…But on the other hand, I'm kind of doing the same thing by insisting that bullet be considered first…

Any ideas on how to handle this sort of thing? We're basically trying to tone down the UGLs a little bit without having to seriously slow down the game. As it is now we end up factoring out the different damage outcomes before arguing/agreeing on one. I obviously don't want to completely nerf myself, but I also don't want to have a situation where he's completely screwed just because I have a few UGL units in range.

how bout this because i've done similar things in dust tactics before. take your pool of dice that you would need for the UGL's and the pool of dice that you would need for any other weapons. keep them seperate. then roll one at a time, applying cover to the weapons that arent UGL's. then take the remaining successes into one pool and thats how much damage you've dealt before armour saves and such.

This is the way I see it. Since every weapon is a separate roll [as they don't always have the same */* rating] they are separate rolls, but one attack. Grenades make people move around to try and avoid their damage and so this movement makes them more likely to be seen or to expose themselves to the rest of the attack action. Thus it is representative of the loss of Cover. I personally have not seen the UGL or grenades be that big of a deal in the game yet, but a Sniper Team with a Spotter, makes all weapons fired from the team hit on Blanks [including their Grenades] and this means if you are within 6 inches of a sniper team they can really rock your world. However, most Sniper Teams don't want to be that close to the enemy anyway.

We always roll different weapons separate for that reason, but its actually not so much the cover itself thats the issue-its the armor rolls and which weapon hit(s) they get applied to, which determines what happens with the cover.

I guess the big argument is this: I'm saying that we factor the "normal" hits into the total armor/damage resistance/cover, then negate the cover bonus and apply whatever leftover armor/dr (if any) to the special weapons. My opponent is saying that since all attacks are technically simultaneous, his armor roll can absorb some/all of the grenade damage and thus the cover is still active when factoring in the normal hits after that. I'm inclined to say he's wrong and it sounds like that's the consensus here…

Kind of splitting hairs here, but I just want to keep the game smooth without much debate. I'm using UGL as an example, but I'm sure it will pop up elsewhere with multiple weapon attacks that include a special weapon.

The UGLs were actually a really big deal in our last game, he ended up with 4 squads inside a building, while I had 3 squads with UGLs in cover within range of it. Neither of us could do much damage to the other (outside the grenades). Plus, after getting a lot of suppression going on them I had plenty of time to just hang out and reload as needed.

I wish they had kept the 1 weapon line per target unit that Tactics had, this wouldn't even be an issue

basiclly its this….

unit A attacks unit B with 2 different weapons but targeted at the same unit

unit A rolls all attacks seperately. all attacks that can be affected by cover are pooled together and cover is removed from the pool

remaining successes are pooled together to determine how many hits unit B suffered.

unit B makes its armour save at that point when all successful hits are determined.

armour save does not apply to seperate weapons, only seperate units attacking

So if unit A and B were attacking unit C, then unit C would get a seperate armour save for unit A and C

The way it actually works is as such:

Unit A attacks Unit B. Unit A rolls all weapon line rolls separately. Unit B rolls armor if the attack action allows for it, then subtracts cover, again, as long as there is not a weapon or ability that negates Cover. Once all armor and cover that can be removed has been established and subtracted from the total pool of wounds for the attack, the remaining are applied to the troops that are legal targets to be hit. Any wounds that can not be applied to figures [due to being obscured] are lost. The unit then gains a Suppression marker. Not sure why this seems to be an issue.

If you feel the need to house rule UGLs and grenades the simplest idea is to simply remove their cover negation and keep the automatic suppression.

I am planning on doing more play-throughs first but I can see why people are concerned.

Hybrid solutions will become ambiguous which is why I think they went with one grenade stops all cover.

Grenades have been no problem for our games… the most annoying rule is with the axis adding Angela to a unit and the entire unit now ignoring cover and armour saves thanks to the sniper rule Allies can keep their Grenades… Angela ftw

Flamethrowers work the same way, right? So for BBQ Squad, they get flamethrower plus 4 shotgun plus 5 demo charges (I see they hurt infantry in Dust Warfare), and the enemy gets no cover save, right?

Good point mariettabrit, maybe it is a little early to go screwing with the rules…I'll let my axis friend figure out that combination on his own…

It's good to see folks are getting in tons and tons of games this early with various and numerous opponents. So much so that house rules are quickly becoming a necessity.

mariettabrit said:

oh snap… i must have that model.

How about this for quick and dirty:

burst weapons and grenades convert one point of cover into an armor roll.

Meaning, a unit in hard cover has +1 armor, and 1 automatic success due to cover.

Quick and Dirty, but effective and somewhat realistic, yes?

Here we can see how the burst / grenade thing simply hasn't been designed well, as it's causing problems and houserules already "in the wild".

Our group has logged about 5 games so far and UGL's have yet to become an issue. We haven't seen the need for a house rule or change yet.

Yeah, your recon boys with their UGLs are going to find themselves in trouble when they get overrun by gorillas who can't be surpressed, ignore cover with their attacks, and who can't be hurt by the recon boys' puny little knives.

I think this is another case where we read the rules and think in terms of Dust Tactics more than Dust Warfare. I'm finding that what might look like a problem on paper isn't one in the game, and then if something does seem like a problem in the game, it's because I'm still trying to play it like Dust Tactics.

I'm noticing a striking trend on this board, of people reading the rules and saying there's something wrong with the game, and people who've actually played several games saying they've had no problems at all. I know who I'll believe.

My UGL recon boys were massacred almost to a man by Heavy Recon Grenadiers in one round.

I am thinking that the sheer number of dice put down by HRGs and their rivals the Grim Reapers against infantry may seem like more of a balance issue in the long run.

BlackKnight1917 said:

But they are nigh useless against walkers. Make sure you're supporting your troops well.

I'm with you on this!

To be clear, I'm not saying there's something wrong with the game…I'd just like to do something for OUR games. I guess it becomes a different story with gorillas and HRGs, but then again we can't afford gorrilas and HRGs…pretty much playing with just the units in the first two core sets, and paper cutouts/unit standins are super clunky as far as LoS goes. From that perspective, I've been steamrolling everything with UGL units for the last 3 games. I know theres been a lot of hate for warfare in the forums, but I actually think its really solid. Just need to make a house rule or two for ourselves til we can get a few more units.

I'd find it telling if the "solution" to UGL problems is simply to go for Gorillas and undead who mostly ignore cover and suppression anyway…

That's the issue here, at least for me: the Axis shouldn't feel like he has to do it against UGLs.

if you feel the need for house rules due to the current platoon compesition on either side, that seems reasonable - though i dont think the general feeling is that UGL's are unfair, unbalanced or broken.

What people need to remember is that UGL's need to be reloaded, and that their damage output and ability to make an attack ignore cover results in an agressive ability for allied infantary when it comes to getting up close and personal.

Yeah, definitely houserule to your heart's content if you feel like you don't have enough units to have a balanced system.

If you want to proxy, maybe get a bucket of green army men or something.

As far as UGLs go, another thing to remember is that their range is only 12", which means that your opponent will often be able to react as soon as your team gets into range to use them.

I guess I just suggest playing a game or two (perhaps solo if you want to make sure things are right before introducing to friends) and just see how it all works out.