Activity
-
Mike replied to the topic 3rd vs 2nd in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 1 month ago
The one thing that has been noticeable is that assaults are not as good of an idea as they once were. Unless you need to gamble on a decisive result, advancing to point blank range and using shooting is more efficient. The negative benefit of assaulting is compounded when the defender is in cover. Still some armies like the Japanese with big sq…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Bersaglieri and french D1 & D2 tanks in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
A major and oft repeated criticism of Warlord I hear from gamers is that the rules should be either included in the rulebook or available as updated PDFs from the website.
Unit profiles ultimately end up in the army builder software packages that almost everyone I know uses, so there is no reason to buy a book for a unit profile. The problem is…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic QRS download in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
Try browsing BoardGameGeek Edition Quick Reference Sheet Bolt Action dated Oct 7, 2024
-
Mike replied to the topic Bersaglieri and french D1 & D2 tanks in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
It would be useful if Bolt Action produced a software program where players could introduce their own stats for a unit’s profile, and it would generate a cost. So, if you wanted to use some of the V2 books like Case Blue for the Italians, you could simply run their profile through the program to get the “cost” for the unit.
-
Mike replied to the topic QRS download in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
I used this one for now… I have not checked it, but it worked well in our game.
Bolt Action Third Edition – Quick Reference Sheet v0.7
-
Mike started the topic Mortars on Ambush in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
Can mortars go on ambush? Can spotters trigger than firing if on ambush?
-
Mike started the topic Japanese Baron casting in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
If you pair a mounted Japanese Company Commander with two “foot” soldiers. The Bolt Action army builder gives the unit “cavalry” as special rules, so does the whole unit operate as a cavalry unit?
-
Mike replied to the topic Missing troops in V3 in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
Steve T: Perhaps, it might make you feel better that to think you are allocating “kills” between the cover/ground and the soldiers. Those are mighty dead bricks. But it also means a more pins and quicker calculations with fewer modifiers for each phase. What we are finding a bit cumbersome is that in fact there are more modifiers than one mi…[Read more]
-
Mike started the topic Indirect Fire Question in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 2 months ago
Per page 101… “When firing using indirect fire, a 6 is required to hit, regardless of any modifier. In the following turn, if the shooter receives a Fire order and if the target unit has not moved from their position, a hit is scored on a 5+ (to count as ‘moved’, every model in the unit must end its move at least 2” away from the position of…[Read more]
-
Mike started the topic Reinforced Platoon in the forum Bolt Action 1 year, 3 months ago
With regard to building forces for V3 of Bolt Action, I wish the rules had preserved the old “reinforced” platoon as an option in conjunction with the new options of additional platoons. Both seem to make sense to me. I can see a platoon being given a mission with a “special unit” attached to provide some needed capabilities. I can also see an…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic War wagons in the forum Hail Caesar 2 years, 2 months ago
The Sea Peoples Hail Ceasar Warlord Supplement Biblical and Classical armies provides for Baggage Wagons with a base profile of 3/3/1/0/4+/6 and Special Stubborn rule. I think that is a good starting point.
I don’t see them “attacking”. So, you may opt not to let them attack and move at the wagon rate (same as infantry). Now, you have to de…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Epic and formations in the forum Black Powder 2 years, 7 months ago
While I don’t game, Epic scale, I have gamed with different base configurations. You and your opponent need to agree what constitutes the way to display a given formation. In the past, three “stand” units displayed a square formation as a “triange”, while two “stand” units displayed it with one stand facing forward and one backward. Given th…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Hail Caesar played with 15 mm miniatures in the forum Hail Caesar 2 years, 9 months ago
Like Big Al says, Hail Ceasar is pretty agnostic when comes to basing or castings, the most important thing is a consistent unit “footprint” (with frontage being more important than depth), since the rules work off of tiny, small, standard and large size units largely based on the “unit’s frontage”. But with that in mind, while I prefer painting…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Must Form Square in the forum Black Powder 2 years, 10 months ago
As I remember it, a unit can only make one charge response per turn. So since forming square is the unit’s response, it cannot respond a second time when charged by the French Infantry in hand-to-hand combat.
-
Mike replied to the topic Small Unit Actions in the forum Black Powder 2 years, 10 months ago
Yes and no. You can play a small unit game using the Black Powder game engine. In the French and Indian War supplement in some scenarios a standard unit is a company of 100-150 men. The Black Powder game engine is extremely flexible and with a few tweaks (which is what supplements do), you can emulate almost any sized engagement.
But it wi…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic French Old Guard too strong? in the forum Black Powder 2 years, 11 months ago
First, any unit with a 3+ morale save, that gets buffed up to 2+ is going to be tough to beat. In essence, it would take on average 24 hits to produce the 4 unsaved hits needed for it reach shaken. Historically, I am unaware that the Old Guard was every defeated in a close combat melee. But it is not invulnerable.
A more effective tactic w…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic charge distance in the forum Black Powder 2 years, 11 months ago
To get really nitpicky, you orders are “intentions” not charge moves. Even if you order a “charge”, from a technical perspective, it does not become a “charge” move unless you can contact the enemy. Instead, it is simply an intent to contact the enemy. You can technically declare an intent to “charge” an enemy you have no chance of re…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Forming Skirmish to Enter Woods in the forum Black Powder 2 years, 12 months ago
We don’t like the use of the word “skirmish” since that represents a combined formation and tactical doctrine. We prefer the word open order. We also display the formations differently. For us skirmishing is a more linear formation with supports in the rear. So, we show it that way. Open order is units maintaining the same formation but with…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Infantry Forming Square in the forum Black Powder 3 years ago
As Garry noted, there are new rules for forming square on pages 98-100 in the Clash of Eagles supplement. It provides bonuses to the Order test depending on how far the cavalry starts its charge. I like this rule, though as Garry notes above others don’t.
Part of the intent, I think of the rule was to force infantry in go into square when…[Read more]
-
Mike replied to the topic Manhandling Artillery in the forum Black Powder 3 years, 1 month ago
Yes, but it must pass a command order or be in initiative range of an enemy and is limited to one move per turn.
- Load More
