Still not clarified: rules for the DAK Aufklärungsgruppen

[Pete Gallenger]

Sorry to bring this topic up again, but Warlord doesn’t seem to have clarified on a satisying way, how Aufklärungsgruppen work ingame. Nor that that the rules for them are anyhow updated in the FAQ.

Yeah, I know this discussion: https://www.warlordgames.com/community/topic/aufklarungs-gruppe/

But unfortunately, it gives little answers and leaves me with a whole lot of questions:

1. Aufklärungsgruppen meant to be 1 unit of vehicles, providing 1 order die. Check.

2. The rules of transport vehicles rulebook page 217 should apply, according to a WG community manager. When this is the case, why isn’t that stated in the special rules section of the unit? The Kraftradschützensquad in the France campaign book has this stated.

3. They have a special rule called ‘Recon vehicle’. Is that a other wording for ‘Recce’? Or does that specify, that they are no transport vehicles?

3.1. If it means ‘Recce’: how transfers that to a unit of vehicles? Must the whole unit be out of sight then or only the targeted single vehicle?

4. Why isn’t that clarified in the FAQ? I see the design problems with vehicles in units, but that doesn’t mean they should be ignored officially (for now more than 2 years).

It would be nice, if someone of the WG staff can give us some insights on this topic, if there are some. If not, then just let us know and probably just ignore this (quiet cool❤) unit. But how things are, this unit is broken at the moment, with no proper official clarification.

 

• This topic was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Pete Gallenger.

[Zephire]

1. Aufklärungsgruppen meant to be 1 unit of vehicles, providing 1 order die. Check.

Hmmm, I went to Spiel in Essen little over a week ago and visited the Warlord stand, where my friend asked a similar question in regards to how Aufklärungsgruppen work ingame. We were given the answer that there’s an order die for each vehicle you take… And that each of the vehicles acts on it’s own…

Where did you get the information that states that it is played as 1 unit of vehicles?

[Pete Gallenger]

First unofficial source is the opinion of the community  manager in this discussion

Aufklärungs Gruppe

Second hint are the similar Kraftradschützen from the Battle of France campaign book. These are also a unit of vehicles, same experience level all vehicles etc.

And of course, getting 5 order die for 180 points would be insane. Plus, the Aufklärungsgruppe takes one AC slot, so 1 order die would be the normal approach.

But your case shows the problem right here: No official source and several ways of interpretation of these “rules”.  Just opinions in the end.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Pete Gallenger.

[Zephire]

Fully agree there Pete. Especially if the clarification on the question comes from a Warlord employee and seems to dismiss a previous one made from one of the colleagues.

[Nat]

The issue is a mix of …. warlord dont have the same authors for the campaign books, os htere is little consistancy between the books – either rules or units  &warlord try not to FAQ/Errata the campaign books

So, not having the books in question I would go with
1) IF its purchased as a single unit then it provides one order die & is activated at the same time.
2)If its a unit then the only way for it to work is the advance optional rules of transport units.
3.1 – if there is no written rule in the unit entry then I’d go with the core rule ‘rece’, and as such see answer one, its a unit in all respects (1 model can be targeted then the whole unit reacts, same as 1 guy in Line of Sight being targted by a mortar with all going down)

4) As said warlord have state they will not FAQ /Errata the campaign books,  this is because they see them as a framework for clubs and groups etc to expand and alter as they see fit…  (another reason why tournaments ban /disallow campagin books!)

From the FAQ…
[quote]With the few exceptions in the section below, there are no plans to consistently compile all errata and FAQs for these books.  Rather, only the major errata&FAQs will be covered.  This is because, even more than the rest of the BA range, these books are written in a spirit of fun and cooperation between the players. Some of the rules in them are fairly extreme and game changing (amphibious assaults, snow & ice, Maginot Line fortifications…), and to be honest the normal rules of BA struggle to accommodate such different situations and had to be pushed to the limit… and beyond! We assume therefore that players will resolve any conflict arising from rules included in these books in a friendly and fun manner, or roll a die and move on with the game. [/quote]

• This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Nat.

[Pete Gallenger]

As for the Errata for the campaign books: to be honest, sounds like a cheap excuse from WG to not include campaign books there. (In fact, they included them as well then 😄) I see, that WG doesn’t want bigger discussions on the campaign rules, but when there are obvious errors and critical lacks, they should be addressed there as well (what they obviously did in other cases).

No one expects the campaign content to be 100% valid with the rest of the rules, but the rules for each campaign book should be 100% understandable and work with the basic ruleset.

In this case it simply doesn’t, as everybody seems to look on that unit in a way he prefers. For example, Recce (if it means that) on bigger vehicle units (if it is one) just doesn’t work well without having some basic commitments. Leaving players completly alone with that is just not very professional for game designers in my opinion.

 

[Nat]

oh I agree totally… I think consistancy and clarity* is important between books (& factions in a game!)…. well…. lets just say I made my point clear to one of warlords authors**…. (and similarly warlord themselves, never did get an answer to that email about proof reading in their books :p )

*as in not needing a FAQ /errata to find out how to play a rule…

** I was NOT impressed with his answer of ‘if you can make it so most people can understand what you mean in 2 lines dont bother writing 6 so everyone knows what you mean’ or words to that effect…

 

• This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Nat.

[Pete Gallenger]

Haha, okay, that is unsatisfying, to say the least. So chances are bad that someone from WG will react or even read here, right?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Pete Gallenger.

[Nat]

Some of warlord do read these forums…. however if you email info@warlordgames.com  then one of the service guys will pass the question on to the rules team*… you should get an offical answer then.

*if they get asked enough they should put it in to the FAQ – they have with the VaS ones that I’m aware of

[Pete Gallenger]

I’ll try that. Thanks, mate!

[Paul Nettle]

I agree the wording is confusing, easpcially the use of “unit”.  “This unit can be taken as an armoured car choice”.  “Every unit … must be of the same experience level”.

I know this is just down to opinion but I reckon five order dice are correct.

But then army lists from this book are a bit bonkers.  My standard DAK platoon has five tanks in it (and no, it is not a Tank Platoon) and regularly faces a platoon with three Matilda tanks in it (which is also not a Tank Platoon).   As I said, bonkers is the norm.

 

[Pete Gallenger]

Clarification can be found in the new errata: They are seperate vehicles and the rules for vehicle units are optional.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 9 months ago by Pete Gallenger.

[Author]

Posts