|
Post by ilprincipe on Aug 15, 2019 20:59:51 GMT
So, managed to get another couple of games in, both just as much fun as the first, and the game played more smoothly second time around and also thanks to your recent advice. Inevitably it did throw up a few more questions. Here they are, below. I'll be grateful for any advice about them that you guys can share. My first question is about the exact sequence of events for the In Sight test and specifically whether all of the figures in the active group that has triggered the test get to complete their moves before (a) taking their additional 2" moves and (b) taking the test. What I think I understand is: (1) From 7.1, groups activate one after another, in order of leader rep, with one group finishing all its actions and reactions before another can start; (2) Implied by 7.2 (I think), figures within the active group move (and perform other actions) one after another, with each figure completing all its actions [Q1 should this also be 'and reactions', as implied by 7.4.4?] before another can start. (3) From 7.6.2, the In Sight test is triggered as soon as any figure in a moving group comes into sight. (2) and (3) seem to imply, for example, that if a group of 3 figures moves as follows: A moves 7" and remains unseen, B moves 8" and comes into LOS, C has not moved at that point, the In Sight test is triggered and the affected group now comprises A & B, because C is no longer within 4" of the other two. Thus there are now two groups because it appears that C does not move until the In Sight test is resolved, along with any Reaction outcomes. So far I feel clear about this (but may also be totally wrong, of course) BUT THEN (4) 7.6.3 reads, "After the triggering group has moved up to two additional inches". Now the word "additional" here suggests that the whole group has already been able to make it's full move, so that, in the foregoing example, C could have rejoined A & B before any additional 2" moves are made and the In Sight test taken. Could someone tell me the correct interpretation on this point (even if it's neither of the above.
|
|
|
Post by ilprincipe on Aug 15, 2019 21:07:08 GMT
My second question relates to the use of Rocket Launchers, specifically that, unlike using a firearm, the shooter does not seem to have to test to get the rocket on target, i.e. table 7.9.10 is not used nor is there any equivalent of table 7.10.3 (getting a grenade on target - or fumbling it). Rather the rocket is assumed to hit the point of aim, the blast circle is placed accordingly, table 7.9.11 is consulted and carnage ensues. Have I got this right?
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Aug 16, 2019 2:48:35 GMT
My second question relates to the use of Rocket Launchers, specifically that, unlike using a firearm, the shooter does not seem to have to test to get the rocket on target, i.e. table 7.9.10 is not used nor is there any equivalent of table 7.10.3 (getting a grenade on target - or fumbling it). Rather the rocket is assumed to hit the point of aim, the blast circle is placed accordingly, table 7.9.11 is consulted and carnage ensues. Have I got this right? Sure. Move all figures in the group. When the first figure comes into sight of the enemy, the whole group can move 2" more, which could be back out of sight. After the In Sight is over they can move the remaining move.
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Aug 16, 2019 2:53:36 GMT
My second question relates to the use of Rocket Launchers, specifically that, unlike using a firearm, the shooter does not seem to have to test to get the rocket on target, i.e. table 7.9.10 is not used nor is there any equivalent of table 7.10.3 (getting a grenade on target - or fumbling it). Rather the rocket is assumed to hit the point of aim, the blast circle is placed accordingly, table 7.9.11 is consulted and carnage ensues. Have I got this right? Page 16 - Use Ranged Combat Table. So pas 0d6, miss them all. Pass 1d6 only one of targets is hit, the guy closest to the blast point. It's assumed that's the edge of the blast circle and only one guy bit it.
|
|
|
Post by ilprincipe on Aug 17, 2019 12:47:25 GMT
Hi Ed,
Many thanks again for replying so promptly to my questions.
Your answer to my question about the In Sight test clears up my confusion completely but unfortunately I don't understand your answer about the rocket launcher, so can I trouble you please for some further clarification?
Just to be clear, I'm referring to the current version of CR 2015, the one that you kindly added the additional NPC tables to, following my original questions.
Keeping that in mind, my confusion stems from a combination of:
(1) your reference to 'Page 16 - Use Ranged Combat Table' - in my copy p16 contains 7.9 Weapons Table, 7.9.1 Outgunned Rankings (including the table), 7.9.2 Tight Ammo, 7.9.3 Shooting and 7.9.4 Line of Sight. The page doesn't contain nor does it refer to the Ranged Combat Table. By itself, that's no big deal, my copy has 7.9.10 Ranged Combat table on p31, with most of the other tables, so I point this out only in case it indicates that I'm using a different version from you.
However ....
(2) immediately following this you refer to the use of Passing Dice in conjunction with the table ('So pas 0d6, miss them all. Pass 1d6 only one of targets is hit') but my version of the table doesn't use the Passing Dice approach, instead it compares the dice score + shooter Rep against Target numbers. So you see that I can't make your answer work for the version of the table that I'm using.
In fact your answer looks like it woould make most sense if you intended to refer to and perhaps slightly modify table 7.10.3 'Throwing a Grenade Table', which is on p19 of my version. Given how busy you must be running your business and answering millions of questions from noobs, I wondered whether your 'Page 16 - Use Ranged Combat Table' is a mistype of 'Page 19 - Use Grenade Combat Table' :-).
Anyway, thanks again for a great set of rules, which are a model of clarity, my questions notwithstanding. And please don't feel pressed to answer on a 24 hour turnaround, or at all, if life is getting in the way.
All the best, Chris (aka IlPrincipe)
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Aug 17, 2019 22:30:52 GMT
Oh, even easier that CR. Go to the Ranged Combat Table page 31. 3 to 7 Miss means no one hit. 8 - Second or higher target missed - so guy closest to the blast point is hit, rest missed. 9 - Third or higher missed- so 2 closest to the blast point is hit, rest missed.
Think this makes more sense!
|
|
|
Post by ilprincipe on Aug 18, 2019 8:25:25 GMT
That makes perfect sense, I'll go with that, so thanks again Ed. (We've another game planned for Tuesday night and someone's bound to field a rocket launcher, so we can try it out.) All the best, Chris
|
|
|
Post by ilprincipe on Aug 31, 2019 21:42:46 GMT
Hi Ed (and Floozie). This post isn't a question, I just wanted to take the opportunity to say thanks for your recent help and advice. After getting your feedback, we managed to get another game of CR in. A multi - player Vietnam game, featuring two fire teams and a heavy weapons team of Aussies trying to rescue the crew and some journalists from a downed Huey while fighting off determined VC PEFs. It was great fun. Fast, curious and pretty darned realistic. The big learning point was don't leave a long, clear fire lane ANYWHERE on the table unless you want to clear up a lot of dead bodies. So once again, many thanks. Regards, Chris aka IlPrincipe
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Sept 3, 2019 0:14:00 GMT
Hi Ed (and Floozie). This post isn't a question, I just wanted to take the opportunity to say thanks for your recent help and advice. After getting your feedback, we managed to get another game of CR in. A multi - player Vietnam game, featuring two fire teams and a heavy weapons team of Aussies trying to rescue the crew and some journalists from a downed Huey while fighting off determined VC PEFs. It was great fun. Fast, curious and pretty darned realistic. The big learning point was don't leave a long, clear fire lane ANYWHERE on the table unless you want to clear up a lot of dead bodies. So once again, many thanks. Regards, Chris aka IlPrincipe Yes, long fire lanes are not good!
|
|