Activity
-
invisible officer replied to the topic Do intervening infantry give soft cover to armor? in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
One of many rules from original infantry game that now……. Sure, if you fire at an infantry unit another between you and target might inflict a problem.
But AT rounds against a tank? Hardly a problem to see and aim on it. And a human body against an AT round……
Even a lorry will not stop it. (OK , the motor block) In WW I a Germ…[Read more]
-
Nat replied to the topic Do intervening infantry give soft cover to armor? in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
So the AT gun has a clear line of sight at a tank and declears a shot, suddenly theres a unit in front of it….. but that doesnt matter?
(as it happens I do tend to play it that the mods are worked out when you roll to hit, & I make sure my opponent is aware that I can jump the riders off to infront of the tank and so hinder the clear shot)
-
Nat replied to the topic Aircraft Carriers – What's the point? in the forum Victory At Sea 2 years, 9 months ago
You’ve hit the biggest issue with WLPS & Carriers in my opionion after a number of discussions – the free flights (which is why all the community points systesm have a carrier discount)
Deep Deployment – after the FAQ has added about a page of extra rules, they’ve adminted that it doest work so ‘recommend you dont use it in tournaments’…. I…[Read more]
-
Nat replied to the topic Do intervening infantry give soft cover to armor? in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
yes….
which is why the wording of tank riders & its lack of timings/clarity is a problem….. because they dismount when the shot is decleared and found to be in range, so even though they are down if they go infront of the tank the shot now passes over them…so do you work out the cover when declearing the shot or when rolling the dice (so…[Read more]
-
Koin-Koin replied to the topic New player in the forum Beyond the Gates of Antares 2 years, 9 months ago
I’ve checked the links and I confirm Oliver’s issue.
The main page is loading fine but when clicking to any of the rulebook links, I’m redirected to the store loading the good page but instantly replaced by a 404 one.
-
Charge The Guns replied to the topic Byzantine Dismounted Bucellarri Complete! in the forum Hail Caesar 2 years, 9 months ago
Wow those are absolutely lovely 👍. I’ve always thought Byzantines make a good looking wargames army, and your forces are really proving that. This unit looks awesome. The long mail/scale armour (I guess actually designed for fighting mounted?) looks great here. I pity the barbarian hordes trying to break that shield wall.
-
Steeljackal replied to the topic Warplane Type Chart on Reference Sheets do not match Official Bolt Action Errata in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
1 – Strafing fighter,
2-3 – Fighter-bomber
4-5-6 – Ground-attack aircraft
Come from first edition rulesbook.
1-2 – Strafing fighter,
2-4 – Fighter-bomber
5-6 – Ground-attack aircraft
Is on second edition rulesbook. Fighterbomber is wrong.
1-2 – Strafing fighter,
3-4 – Fighter-bomber
5-6 – Ground-attack aircraft
Is corr…[Read more]
-
Nat replied to the topic Aircraft Carriers – What's the point? in the forum Victory At Sea 2 years, 9 months ago
I’d cry…. my list would need a fair bit of luck with the FAN torpedo rolls… BUT as my list is a 1943 list the teeth are pulled from that USN list (corsairs arent carrier capable, DP is half dice & Alaska isnt a valid selection) so I’d give it a go…..
-
Nat replied to the topic Commonwealth National Characteristics question in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
You either choice an army from the ‘armies of’ book and gain the 3 special rules, of which 1 is the free FO, OR you choice the specific commonwealth list
eg Indian army from duel in the sun removes the 3 British army rules and ONLY has the two in the duel in the sun (pg 23)
-
Nat started the topic 403 error when attempting to reply to a post in the forum General Discussion 2 years, 9 months ago
Getting a 403 access denied error when attempting to reply to a thread….
-
Nat replied to the topic Machinegun experten in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
Easy Army – whilest great, and recommended by warlord isnt(!) an official rules source & in fact is a single guy. There are a couple of rules issues, some are due to his interpretation (0-3 AT rifles in the soviet urban assualt platoon – EA has it as 3 not 9!) & others due to how the site is programmed (like the german MMG experten rule). So it…[Read more]
-
Nat replied to the topic Aircraft Carriers – What's the point? in the forum Victory At Sea 2 years, 9 months ago
RE: Kumano’s refit – Oh well thats what happens when you use BS and dont double check..meh :p …saves 30 points… thats 2 more bettys :p
Type 93 torpedoes with their extra range are a lot easier to use as 17″ is short range (+0)… but yeah at long range they become hard to use, and at extreme range almost impossible.
The basic stragergy for…[Read more]
-
Nat replied to the topic Commissioned date discrepancies in the forum Victory At Sea 2 years, 9 months ago
yeah… the refits could do with i) being clearer
ii) being proof read… I mean seriously the whole book should have been…I have a ‘small’ spreadsheet of over 200 issues with the stats blocks (missing info, blatenly wrong numbers, doubled up refits etc etc), & I gave up!
iii) dont even get me or enoich started on the points….. -
Nat replied to the topic Defensive fire (tank, armored car, etc.) question in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
Also the attacking unit must be over 6″ away or not have a rule that prevents reactionary fire, & must be in arc (if the weapon /team has the fixed rule)…
-
Steeljackal replied to the topic Defensive fire (tank, armored car, etc.) question in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
Same rules as infantry.
If target unit has not already taken an order in that turn, then can react opening fire.
-
Nat replied to the topic British National Characteristic Question in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
Up and at ’em It you dont have AT grenades.. its a mute point because you arent going to destroy the tank… if you do have AT grenades its a mute point as you dont take the tank fear test anyway…
Blood Curdling Charge; as said in the FAQ, its treated like being within 6″ of the target… so units in ambush still get to fire.
-
Nat replied to the topic Aircraft Carriers – What's the point? in the forum Victory At Sea 2 years, 9 months ago
the Mogami refit brings another 4 aircraft for scouting, and as the turrets bearly do anything for me the aircraft are a better propersition :p
re the Kumano – going off memory (& BattleScribe) as books at homeone of them gets its radar & +1 AA a year earlier than the other… its basically the Radar trait that the list is after.
-
Nat replied to the topic Commissioned date discrepancies in the forum Victory At Sea 2 years, 9 months ago
Just to append Enioch’s point:
If playing pickup games /non historical scenarios then you just take the names as sub-classes as there is no restrictions to only 1 of a name.
So for example the Mogami class heavy cruiser class had 4 ships, but you are not limited to only having 4 in your fleet. Only one of them had a massive refit that removed…[Read more]
-
Charge The Guns started the topic Auldearn 1645 – The Game in the forum Pike & Shotte 2 years, 9 months ago
<p class=”p1″>My latest blog post covers the Auldearn 1645 game that The Friends of General Haig played at Warlord Game’s Open Day. A hard fought game which went down to the last turn of the day. More pictures, and to see the result, visit: https://theviaregia.blogspot.com/2021/09/auldearn-1645-game.html</p>
-
Steeljackal replied to the topic US Chaplain selfmade in the forum Bolt Action 2 years, 9 months ago
Another pics
- Load More