v3 Known Changes

[Aidan]

Yeah I agree there should be more abilities for skill then just morale and staying alive longer.

Like the inexperienced mortars that everybody runs. How is it that a green mortar team fumbling for their shells, trying to figure out which side of the map the target is on, and accidentally ranging in on their own troops… has the same effectiveness of a veteran mortar team?

[L.T. Russell]

GREAT point, Aidan!  Brought back old memories from my National Guard service.  We had a mortar team who’d been together for 10+years.  They could drop a round right into your pocket!  Green crews from other companies would be dropping rounds completely outside of the firing fan, sometimes out of the impact area.  Same with machinegun teams.  A veteran team ALWAYS had their gun up, could clear a jam or reload in seconds, could hose you down at 1200 yards just from a bipod.  Green teams would have their gun assembled wrong, forgot parts and equipment, constantly had jams/malfunctions, and couldn’t clear them, etc….

[Nat]

The issue here is you are straying out of the hollywood movies of ww2 (which is what BA is) and into the simulation of ww2 which is covered by multiple other game systems…

Not to mention you end up with the missing / forgetting / mixing up of rules …if you know have 3 sets of firing rules for mortars (regulars, negative for inexp, positive for vets) you are exponentially increasing the turn length – and is totally the opposite direction the v3 is going in… that is decreasing the number of special rules and things you have to keep track of.

[L.T. Russell]

I’ll beg to differ, Nat.  While I understand the detail vs. playability argument, IMHO Bolt Action play is based on historical interest, hence all the Armies of and historical scenario books.  If all we wanted was Hollywood movies, all the scenarios would be named; FURY, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, A BRIDGE TOO FAR, SANDS OF IWO JIMA, CROSS OF IRON, etc, etc.  I’m merely suggesting the flip-side of the already existing green/inexperienced units penalty, to make the expense of veteran units more attractive….

I just saw the latest news on the +1 hit modifier for anti-tank guns.  So no, it’s not decreasing the number of special rules and things you need to keep track of, it’s just changing what they are.  There’re now two different rates of fire for machineguns, depending on whether they’re infantry carried, vehicle mounted or used in an AA role.  Are they trying to drive tanks out of Bolt Action?  Or totally move them to Achtung Panzer?  It’s hard enough to get a tank on the field in the first place….

I see that pistols no longer have “assault”.  Why?  What about shotguns?  Has the ridiculous range for shotguns been fixed?  Are German fallschirmjaeger still getting ripped off with their FG42s?  Which should be classified as automatic rifles, not assault rifles.  Questions, questions, questions….

[SteveT]

I agree L.T., Bolt Action is as good  as any other ruleset out there for resembling the kind of things that happen in battle. I’ve tried most of them. ASL was the most realistic perhaps,  but that is very bloated, and in the end it all comes down to much of the same thing.  I have never thought of BA as Hollywood—I find it gruelling to think about what we are simulating and IMO it works very well. There is another ruleset that has become trendy in recent years for being more realistic mostly because it has “correct sized units”, whatever that meant in depleted reality, but in terms of gameplay I find it repetitive  &  absurd and most of what the player does is predetermined by randomness. Or, anyone wanting  to go back to the 80s and measuring arcs of fire and angles of penetration is welcome, as it never achieved much more than BA does now.

But BA has quirks,   ambiguity,  and a badly written book.  I was hoping V3 would iron them out and leave the core rules intact. However, v3 looks to be a major change that risks breaking an established system. So far, V3 is not looking good for me. The thinly veiled attempts at simplification , as Wilber has mentioned,  are anything but, and v3 MIGHT well be heading toward ‘fun’ over substance. I will be using v2 for a long time yet anyway as I can’t see the point of even engaging with v3 until most of the army books are out, which is a year away. They have introduced it way too early.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Nat]

you’ll note that my comment was BEFORE WL released the sepecial rules TEASE

I highlight that all we have are teases…we dont know 80% of the rules… so it could be that there are massive changes, or it could be that they are highlighting the big changes and everything else is the same.. we dont know till september.

I do agree that depending on how expansive the get you by lists are, and what the army books bring that it could be a marketing folly to release the core book then the army books quarterly (it’ll be 18 months before they’re all out – now that is a What??? mid ’26 before everyone has a v3 armies of… book)

As to BA being Hollywood… this has been said (most recently by one of the US sales reps on the video about v3 reactions.) but its not a literal statement, its the vibe – BA is the like the hollywood films of ww2 more than the documentries of ww2

I mean … they have made scenarios for ‘eagle has landed’, and models for ‘saving private ryan’ & ‘kellys heros’

[Aidan]

L.T. Russell,

Thank you for your service sir. That sounds like a memorable experience for sure! Mortars have always been deadly in the right hands, so I’m hoping for a rule that gives indirect fire weapons a buff when using them as veterans.

And about the V2>V3 transition, I’m cautiously optimistic. The new platoon selector looks more realistic and pretty streamlined, and no more dakka Stuarts. Since all we have are teases right now I’m just putting my faith in the fact that Warlord will have some common sense with V3 and not over complicate things/add redundant rules.

[L.T. Russell]

Howdy Nat!  I haven’t seen the scenario for THE EAGLE HAS LANDED.  Is this something from the Seelowe or Gigant books?  IIRC, I’ve seen miniatures for M.A.S.H.  I’ve got some from CROSS OF IRON and I’ve seen some for the Sven Hassel books.  None-the-less, no one I know plays “Hollywood” scenarios….

Thanks Ian.  The cliche is that you don’t have to call me “sir”, I worked for a living.  L.T. is initials, not rank.  I had a great time in the Guard!  It was like a cool hobby that I made money at and now that I’m retired, I get a check every month….

What I’m waiting to see is hopefully for Bolt Action Version 3 to dovetail more with Konflikt 47 Version 2….

[Nat]

New updates
Superfical damage gets its own table – penetrating table not changed
Armoured transports only go bang due to proximity on a failed moral
new damage result ‘steering comprimised’ which lowers number of turns on the superficial table
new damage result ‘engine damage’ which slows a vehicle down on the superficial table
softskins do back to auto boom! on a damaging hit – no more rolling on a damage table
new vehicle rule – FAST

points changes on vehicles

• This reply was modified 1 week ago by Nat.

[Ghettotech]

“Reaction fire” is mentioned in one of the Screenshots…

[Stuart Harrison]

Reaction fire already exists (close quarters procedure, target reacts), so that mention doesn’t say anything either way about changes to reaction.

[Ghettotech]

But it was mentioned for AT-Guns fireing at Vehicles : All Anti Tank guns get an additional +1 modifier to hit vehicles when shooting with a fire order (including Ambush and reaction fire).

[Stuart Harrison]

When you fire using reaction to an assault, you receive a Fire order.  All that mention is evidence of is that your AT gun will get that +1 to hit if it shoots at a unit assaulting it.  There may well be changes to reactions, but that mention isn’t an indication of any change by itself.

[Ghettotech]

You get +1 when shooting at vehicles.

Can vehicles assault?

[SteveT]

See these sections:

Tanks Assaulting Infantry and Artillery

Tanks Assaulting Other Vehicles

[Author]

Posts