Nat

Activity

  • Nat replied to the topic Guessing time! in the forum Victory At Sea 3 years, 9 months ago

    I’m guessing that due to the delays in shipping the Italians (pushed back 2 months now), and they are gearing up for general release of the BP 6mm American Civil War models, they are holding off until they can actually manufacture them.

  • Nat replied to the topic Future releases in the forum Victory At Sea 3 years, 9 months ago

     Träger B (Peter Strasser), Weser (Carrier on Hipper-class), – no stats for these……

    Can confirm that the stats of over 200 ships are in the rulebook….

    I doubt very much that warlord will sell the cards separate from the models…. they dont for other systems where there are competing manufactors

  • Lets you to ignore the re-roll hits from the evade order.

  • Not a warlord employee but I do help run the facebook group Victory at Sea Wardroom (unofficial) and try and help with questions… so here we go:

    The option to put a carrier in deep deployment doesnt alter the number of flights you can deploy – source Matthew Sprange (author of the game), via the VaS wardroom

    The ability to rearm on a off board…[Read more]

  • Hi Andrew,  the Q turret thing on the Nelson & Mogami has already been brought to warlords attention, as has the bombers (like all bar the Betty for the japanese) having lost their 4 DD per attack run limit).

    I submitted a list of questions & querries last week however if you write any that you find and email them to info@ warlord games.com we…[Read more]

  • Nat replied to the topic Playing Surface in the forum Victory At Sea 3 years, 9 months ago

    The game is model scale agnostic (ie it doesnt care about the size of your ships) so yeah switching to metric should work.

    As to a smallest Imperial size table… well I think a 4 foot square with the starter size fleets should work – if you feel its not quick working say your playing in morning mist and bring the horizon in to 25″ instead of…[Read more]

  • Nat replied to the topic Rules Question Thread in the forum Black Powder 3 years, 9 months ago

    No, you cant shoot through friendly skirmishers…your likely kill a couple!

  • Nat replied to the topic Räumboote in the forum Cruel Seas 3 years, 9 months ago

    They are nice looking boats there!

    I’m hoping that when May comes round the UK does open up for gaming again, then hopefully I can get some games in!…. And then we should be able to generate some traffic here in the water ways!

     

  • Nat replied to the topic SPQR 2.0 ? in the forum SPQR 3 years, 9 months ago

    And announced today in the warlord news letter…

  • Nat replied to the topic Heavy Machine Gun HMG in the forum Bolt Action 3 years, 9 months ago

    Its a heavy weapon.. all heavy weapons except flame throwers, shaped charges (panzerfausts etc) and HE are kennetic so lose energy.  However that rule is only applicable against armour, that is vehicles with a DV7 or more.

    Against softskins & infantry you only have the modifier of the weapon.

     

    So a HMG is always D6+1 against your panzer…[Read more]

  • No, it adds PINs so that the ‘on fire’ check which failure = destroyed is harder.

    Yes they caught fire easier from a spark, but had the same chance (roughtly speaking) of that spark happening.

    So basically you have a 1 in 2 chance of being blown up, & a 1 in 2 chance of having being bonced round… whilst being bounced round you have a chance of…[Read more]

  • Nat replied to the topic Chaplains in the forum Bolt Action 3 years, 9 months ago

    Ok… it was discussed here on the forums

    long story short… it looks like the chaplians quality dictates the roll required

  • Nat replied to the topic Chaplains in the forum Bolt Action 3 years, 9 months ago

    Good news is the Chaplains rules are the same in the DDay, BotB & New Guinea books….

    Bad news is, its exactly the same wording… and they dont like doing FAQ /Errata for the Campaign books 🙁

     

    Now I seem to remember it being discussed before either here or on one of the facebook groups…

  • Nat replied to the topic Great War in BRS? in the forum Blood Red Skies 3 years, 9 months ago

    … hmm lets spitball some ideas (with 0 prior thought on the subject!)for modern aircraft in BRS – speed is in 100s not 50s

     

    Jet 3 – 1970s + jets… additional rule, “after burners”…aircraft may add +2 to both min & max movement

     

    Missile card – each aircraft can have so many missile cards depending on type (ie harrier can allow you to…[Read more]

  • It landed here too… (UK).  A nice tome it is to

     

  • Nat replied to the topic Q about FAQ in the forum Bolt Action 3 years, 9 months ago

    @steeljackal – well put guv!

  • I agree its a nice change of scale of conflict …. unlike the 101 rules for land warfare!

    looking forward to the UK opening up again so I can get more than the couple of games I’ve played in… with both my IJN & Soviet Red Fleet!

  • going to say 3 things…
    1) the game is actually scale agnostic… in fact talking to some of the playtesters… they didnt playtest it at 1:1800 but at other scales they had at home…
    2) warlord arent the only manufactors… come join us in the Victory at Sea Wardroom (unofficial) group on facebook for more
    3) the bases arent that bad, I for one…[Read more]

  • Nat replied to the topic Q about FAQ in the forum Bolt Action 3 years, 9 months ago

    No its not clear, if its clear then there wouldnt be these questions…

    plus where are you getting 1 page scenario from?… we are looking at theater lists… now my wife (who doesnt do anything with wargamming or that much about history unless its about art)  just had a look and agreed that the rule says no artillery units and then said if AA…[Read more]

  • Nat replied to the topic Q about FAQ in the forum Bolt Action 3 years, 9 months ago

    Well  common sense isnt common :p … what makes sense to me (due to my time in the army) might not make sense to my brother who’s never served, so who do you write the rules for me or him?

    Saying i’m all right Jake (as you just did, saying you dont have an issue understanding it) IS the problem..  I read it when I got the Stalingrad book and w…[Read more]

  • Load More