Activity
-
Charles replied to the topic Bolt action British Airborne army list in the forum Bolt Action 4 months, 3 weeks ago
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.
-
Charles replied to the topic Firefight! mods and house rules V 1.0 in the forum Bolt Action 4 months, 4 weeks ago
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.
-
Charles started the topic French Free Artillery Rule in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles replied to the topic M24 Chaffee versus M4 Sherman 75mm in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles replied to the topic Forward Air Observers for the US in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles replied to the topic Forward Air Observers for the US in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles replied to the topic Indirect Fire Minimum Distance in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles replied to the topic Indirect Fire Minimum Distance in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles replied to the topic Indirect Fire Minimum Distance in the forum Bolt Action 5 months ago
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]
-
Charles started the topic Indirect Fire Minimum Distance in the forum Bolt Action 5 months, 1 week ago
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 11 months, 3 weeks 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 11 months, 4 weeks 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 1 year, 2 months 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 1 year, 4 months 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 1 year, 4 months ago
Thanks!
-
Charles started the topic Infantry Assaulting Tanks in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 4 months ago
The following debate arose in a recent game.
An infantry squad of 12 men with anti tank grenades charged a stationary 8+ armor tank. He rolled 11 4’s, 5’s, and 6’s for a total of an 11 penetration. He then made a roll to damage and rolled a 1. I said that a natural roll of 1 is always a miss as explained on page 107. He argued page 107 only…[Read more]
-
Charles replied to the topic Assault Move Distance in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 6 months ago
Thanks!
-
Charles started the topic Assault Move Distance in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 6 months ago
This has probably been asked before, but I’m not finding a thread on this. How far can a unit assault if it is in rough or difficult going? We play that if even one figure of an infantry squad is in rough going, that squad is limited to a 6 inch move including assault. Some want to argue that if even one figure is out of the rough going and the…[Read more]
-
Charles started the topic Turn on the Spot Rule in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 1 month ago
At our local shop, the question keeps coming up of exactly how the turn on the spot rule works for universal carriers. The rule reads: “<b>Turn on the spot: </b>Can execute a full speed run rate ‘reverse’ finishing the move facing in direction of travel.” The questions are generally wondering if this can this only be used when executing a rec…[Read more]
-
Charles replied to the topic Clarification for playing Motorcycle troop correctly. in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 6 months ago
I keep trying to use a motorcycle squad too because the models are so cool. However, the rule could use a little more work to make it more playable. How do you interpret the part of the motorcycle rule where it says they can dismount as part of an advance move? Does that mean they can move 12″ at advance rate and then dismount another 6″ from the…[Read more]
- Load More