Ridiculous weapons rules

[Peter]

I just read the article on the new US Army Army book and I have a question. Who comes up with something so ridiculous? The rules for weapons (number of rounds and distance) make no sense at all anymore.

A light mortar in V3 now has the same range (36”) as an MG42. In reality, a light mortar had a range of approx. 550m and was intended for indirect fire at short range. SHORT RANGE Warlord Games…. SHORT!!!
The MG42, on the other hand, had a combat range of up to 1500m.

The M2 50 BMG with the new US Army book has a range of 48! a shot count of 6 rounds! and Pen +1! So it now has the same range as a 20mm light auto cannon and 4 more rounds. Is that meant seriously?
The MG42 had three times the rate of fire at the same combat distance as the M2. In V3 it has a single shot more and 12” less distance.

Who comes up with these numbers? How were these numbers determined?

Is there any correlation at all or was it all randomly determined over a cup of tea?

The distances and shot numbers in V2 at least made some sense.

With V3 we have arrived in the 40K universe. Please Warlord Games. Stop this madness. Sit down together, throw V3 in the bin and start writing a sensible, comprehensible rulebook again.

This is what happens when you change rules just to be able to release a new product.

Comprehensible distances, number of shots, equalised point costs, sensible army special rules, revised cover and terrain rules. That would have been important. As well as new rules like the deviation from indirect fire.

Instead, fantasy numbers have been written down and sold as an improved edition.

[Nat]

… I humble recommend you look at  a system called chain of command by TFL (not Transport for London!) as Bolt Action doesnt seem to be the game for you…your comments (while with merit) are about the core fundimentals of how the system works… for what its worth (as Ive said else where) I’m focusing on other system and might leave Bolt Action behind for similar  reasons in that the game play doesnt fit with history as I know it.

Now BA has ALWAYS been a B&P game, with the weapon numbers and tank armour etc being hermoginised … its a comic book game not a historical simulation.  All bolt action & semi automatic rifles have the same range rate of fire etc.   Now a few weapon changes have been made for game play reasons / to make them more usable etc .. and yes unless you’ve played the previous editions for a while it can feel a bit strange in isolation.

[Peter]

I disagree with that. It’s no longer a B&P game. The second edition can be described as such. BA third edition plays like a different timeline or a kind of multiverse. It has absolutely nothing to do with reality. For that kind of game, WLG actually has Conflict 47.

If you even equate weapons that could hardly be more different, then you don’t need to use the original names. Where is the difference in the different nations then?

The LMG and MMG rule worked in the second edition. In the third edition, for whatever reason, the vehicle – MG rules were changed and so the weapon profiles had to be changed. But in the end, nothing fits anymore.

You could also say there are nations 1, 2 and 3 and weapons A, B and C. Some are green, some are brown, others are grey and everyone does the same. This is BA third edition.

What they have done with the minor nations is the absolute highlight. Copying and pasting and then publishing two pages of PDF. WLG might as well have said FU. That’s all it is.

The big mistake was that they didn’t change the rules because they didn’t work or because they wanted to make things easier. It was all about selling something and the result is that people lose interest in the game. I don’t know anyone who says that the third edition is better than the second.
Nobody in our tabletop club plays BA anymore and when you see the declining numbers at tournaments, that says it all.

I still play BA for fun but based on the second edition and with adapted rules. These are much more realistic and you know what? It works.

But I’ve also switched to CoC and already waiting for the second edition. The official BA as it currently stands is dead for me and WLG doesn’t see a penny from me anymore. I can also find books with so many mistakes at the flea market and at a lower price. I simply can’t take this company seriously any more. Sure, WLG used to be a name, but they haven’t developed at all. Why does Rubicon, for example, manage to release a really good Pak 40 in plastic and at WLG you get a bent piece of metal? The 90s are over WLG!

After six months, the quick reference sheet is still incorrect and WLG is unable to correct it. I currently know of no other company in the tabletop sector that is as incompetent as WLG.

BA second edition has brought me back to tabletop. However, this bad joke called third edition brought me to other game systems and manufacturers. At least that’s a positive thing about the third edition for me.

And none of this has anything to do with it being a B&P game. These are absolutely bad business decisions.

It’s just a shame that WLG didn’t listen to the players.

[L.T. Russell]

I hear you Peter.  I also disagree with Nat’s theory of a B&P/comic book game.  I play Bolt Action precisely because it’s a historically-based WWII game.  I don’t play Bolt Action because it reminds me of THE HAUNTED TANK or SGT ROCK or SGT FURY AND THE HOWLING COMMANDOS.  I play it because I’m looking for that balance between playability and detail.  I get the feeling that somebody with NO idea how weapons actually work, just arbitrarily make up these rules/stats….

[Author]

Posts