-
Shrokins replied to the topic Why the Etna? in the forum Victory At Sea 5 years, 1 month ago
Hi Nat, as it’s a matter of taste whether or not non-historical vessels improve the game, some people would like the game more without them, and some would like the game more with them. For the first group, there’s bound to be some disappointment when half the big ships in a starter set are non-historical. If Warlord sold the ‘what if?’ ships…[Read more]
-
Nat replied to the topic Why the Etna? in the forum Victory At Sea 5 years, 1 month ago
I’d agree with you pair except for 1 fact… this is the 2nd edition of the game, having originally been made by mongoose.
So warlord have to cater for both returning /continuing players as well as openeing it up to those gamers who have never played a naval game.. it’s not a historical game – it’s a game based on history, the moment you put p…[Read more]
-
Rough Rider replied to the topic The battle of Fornovo – 1495 in the forum Pike & Shotte 5 years, 1 month ago
Great stuff JWB- very enjoyable read.
-
JW Boots started the topic The battle of Fornovo – 1495 in the forum Pike & Shotte 5 years, 1 month ago
My US based friend Rene with me and another friend based in NL played an online version of the battle of Fornovo. A truly wargames battje that, I think, is underrated… anyway. Please find the AAR here: https://janwillembootsblog.wordpress.com/2020/11/16/the-battle-of-fornovo-1495/
Note that strictly speaking this is off period Pike & Shotte…[Read more]
-
Tom replied to the topic Cavalry charge interactions with infantry special rules in the forum Black Powder 5 years, 1 month ago
Thanks Big Al – much appreciated. That’s what we thought but good to get an expert view!
-
Big Al replied to the topic Cavalry charge interactions with infantry special rules in the forum Black Powder 5 years, 1 month ago
1) Yes you are correct. The cavalry bursting through has caught everyone by surprise and they don’t have time to react in any way. The last paragraph of the section on Sweeping Advance and Charge is very clear – enemy can only hold their ground or turn to face if they are cavalry. Nothing vague there and very explicit!
2) The Combat is not a d…[Read more]
-
Tom started the topic Cavalry charge interactions with infantry special rules in the forum Black Powder 5 years, 1 month ago
Hi – a couple of questions we have come across during our Napoleonic games, when cavalry is charging infantry:
- The first is around how Sweeping Advance and charge (SAAC) interacts with Must Form Square. The rules for SAAC (p73) state that infantry cannot shoot or do anything in response. Am I right in assuming the infantry cannot form square,…
-
Tom's profile was updated 5 years, 1 month ago
-
ferg981 became a registered member 5 years, 1 month ago
-
Bill became a registered member 5 years, 1 month ago
-
Tom became a registered member 5 years, 1 month ago
-
Ian Wilson became a registered member 5 years, 1 month ago
-
Aynsley became a registered member 5 years, 1 month ago
-
Shrokins replied to the topic Why the Etna? in the forum Victory At Sea 5 years, 1 month ago
I’d have saved the speculative ships for Konflict 47 at Sea. The Etna would have a lava canon, and the Aquila could slash ships with its close-range robotalons.
-
Master Chief replied to the topic Spotter movement in the forum Bolt Action 5 years, 1 month ago
My understanding is that the motar’s firing on the same target must be continuous in order for the ranging to stay in effect.
If the spotter moved the following turn, it means the mortar did not fire that “following turn”, so the ranging should reset to 6 to hit.
-
SteveT replied to the topic Spotter movement in the forum Bolt Action 5 years, 1 month ago
Thanks. It was actually the book’s paragraph about Indirect Fire that causes my confusion. Because in the case of a mortar the shooter has not moved, even though the spotter might have. Which suggests the spotter moves and the mortar just carries on firing shells at the last known target?
-
Master Chief replied to the topic Spotter movement in the forum Bolt Action 5 years, 1 month ago
Bolt Action 2nd Ed page 71:
SPOTTERS
During a turn either the weapon crew can be given an order or the spotter can be given an order – but never both.
INDIRECT FIRE
In the following turn, if the shooter fires at the same target unit, and if the shooter has not moved from their position (i.e. it receives a Fire order), and if the target u…[Read more]
-
SteveT started the topic Spotter movement in the forum Bolt Action 5 years, 1 month ago
Mortar with Spotter.
If I give the spotter some kind of move order, can the mortar move too?
If I give the spotter some kind of move order, can the mortar keep up its indirect fire roll?
Thanks
-
Eumerin replied to the topic Bombers? in the forum Blood Red Skies 5 years, 1 month ago
There’s a card for the B-17 included in the American card pack. Warlord doesn’t currently produce a B-17 model, and there’s been no word on if or when they might make such a thing. But it shouldn’t be hard to find a model in the appropriate scale from a third-party company. Pairing one or more of those with the card in the American card pack…[Read more]
-
Eumerin replied to the topic Why the Etna? in the forum Victory At Sea 5 years, 1 month ago
Poor decision, imo. It’s inevitable that the “what-ifs” would show up. You’re going to have German players who want Graf Zeppelin, for instance, and are going to put her in the game one way or another. So Warlord will eventually release the models for those ships. And I won’t knock them for doing that. They’re catering to the customers in…[Read more]
- Load More
