Charles

Activity

  • Charles replied to the topic Can Guns Move and Shoot in V3 in the forum Bolt Action a month ago

    Overall this adding to my disappointment in V3. There doesn’t seem to be any consistency or editing. If they put a rule on one page that says all artillery is fixed and don’t list it in the unit profiles, it seems like they should have put one rule that says all machine guns and mortars are team weapons and not put that in each profile, or list…[Read more]

  • Charles replied to the topic Can Guns Move and Shoot in V3 in the forum Bolt Action a month ago

    Thanks. That clarifies it. I was used to seeing the fixed rule in the unit profile and now it’s not there. However, it’s very clear from the artillery section cited that they are all fixed.

  • I haven’t found an easy way to search the forum for past responses, so I apologize if this has been asked before.

    I’m just noticing that V3 and the new V3 German list no longer give AT, AA, or HE guns the fixed rule. That rule now only seems to apply to machine guns and mortars. If they don’t have this rule and the errata did not correct this as…[Read more]

  • Charles replied to the topic Soviet Dog Mines in the forum Bolt Action 3 months ago

    I read it as a a fur-coated panzerfaust too, which should mean we get a cover save if in cover when hit. My opponent tried to argue it’s not a shot, and you only get cover saves from shooting. However, it then seemed odd that a non shot that was actually a dog running with a load was somehow unhindered by all terrain types, even impassible. Also,…[Read more]

  • Charles started the topic Soviet Dog Mines in the forum Bolt Action 3 months ago

    I have a question regarding Soviet dog mines.

    The V3 rule on page 257 reads, “Dog mines: A dog mine is a one-shot weapon with a range of 18”.”

    I assume the unit represents a dog running towards a vehicle similar to the Japanese suicide anti-tank team. However, the Japanese unit is resolved like an assault. My question is do we treat a dog mine…[Read more]

  • That’s a very decent list for a British paratrooper Market Garden list. You’ll find it a bit challenging to play someone that has armor as you’ll have to get pretty close to knock them out with a piat or flamethrower, but that’s what makes it fun.

  • I missed these rules when Warlord first put them out. After reading them, they seem worth a try. I agree that if the officer can snap to all figures within 12″ then there’s no more random movement. Also, as each figure fights separately, it seems like cover would be harder to figure out if you’re partially in it.

  • We always assumed the French got one free artillery piece that has to be the same as the one you pay the points for. Someone just pointed out the rule say, “French Armies get one free Inexperienced or Regular artillery unit. This unit can be any anti-tank gun or field artillery piece in the French Army list (except for Heavy Artillery). This unit…[Read more]

  • I thought vehicles got a half advance rate reverse move, and recce vehicles got a full advance rate reverse move, and dual direction recce vehicles got a full run rate reverse move?

    As for a jeep with an MMG or HMG, that’s a tough call. You can now get it as a recce jeep but only with the MMG, but the HMG is enough to make 7+ vehicles think…[Read more]

  • Yes, when they work they’re great. However, if someone has even a little bit of flak or pintle mount mg fire, they have a pretty good chance of chasing the plane off. For more predictable damage, I think the artillery FO is better. It almost never hits its own side, and even if it doesn’t score a hit, it still usually leaves enough pins behind to…[Read more]

  • I use one sometimes because it’s fun, not because it’s always effective. Worst case scenario I’ve seen was a three round tournament where a player brought a US air observer. He got two strikes to arrive in each game. For five of the six strikes, he rolled a one resulting in him loosing a lot of his own troops. On multiple occasions, I’ve used one…[Read more]

  • Thanks for all the input. I’ll be refereeing a tournament in a few months and wanted to make sure I call this correctly. I have always read it and interpreted it the was Alessio put it, so I feel better seeing that. I had a more argumentative player argue the opposite recently in a friendly game. Sometimes Bolt Action errs on the side of…[Read more]

  • Thanks for the responses. You found what I was looking for under shooting on page 53. “Measure the distance between each firing model and the closest visible enemy model in the target unit.” means if part of the target unit is within the minimum distance, then the shot misses. At least I can point to a rule to make the argument.

    However, I can…[Read more]

  • Steve. I can see both sides of this argument, but it’d be nice if there was something that clarified it somewhere. I get your point, but that would mean the building (or unit) would have to be completely within the minimum distance before the rule applied. It seems like the rules would have said “completely” within the minimum distance, not just…[Read more]

  • I have a question about the minimum distance to fire an indirect round. I’ve tried searching the posts, but I’m not getting any results.

    Page 72 of the rule book reads, “These indirect fire weapons cannot be fired at targets within their minimum range (see weapons profiles), measured from the center of the weapon itself.”

    Here’s the argument.…[Read more]

  • Charles replied to the topic Dug In Rule in the forum Bolt Action a year ago

    Thanks. That’s what I was looking for. That clears it up.

  • Charles started the topic Dug In Rule in the forum Bolt Action a year ago

    The Dug In rule says a unit counts as down to represent having dug fox holes or piling up sand bags, etc. It makes no mention of terrain alteration. If I read it right, a unit can be dug in in the middle of an otherwise open good going area. My question is if a unit close assaults a unit that is in good going but is dug in, is it a simultaneous…[Read more]

  • Charles started the topic Indirect HE and Pins in the forum Bolt Action 2 years ago

    Page 71 of the rules say that “When firing HE shells using indirect fire, a 6 is required to hit, regardless of any modifier.” We have always played that even if you have several pins and pass an order test, the indirect HE still hits on a 6. The argument is on subsequent shots. One side says it drops each turn the HE shoots at the same target…[Read more]

  • Charles replied to the topic Infantry Assaulting Tanks in the forum Bolt Action 2 years ago

    As a follow up question to that, we have always played that when the rules call for a damage roll to be added to penetration, a 1 misses. Examples would be when +3 HE or +3 flamethrower hits a an inexperienced squad, it still misses on ones to damage. Otherwise, the rule would read you automatically kill all within the template or all hit by the…[Read more]

  • Charles replied to the topic Infantry Assaulting Tanks in the forum Bolt Action 2 years ago

    Thanks!

  • Load More