SteveT

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 145 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #189930
    SteveT
    Participant

    So it seems it is finally happening… September.

    #189896
    SteveT
    Participant

    The weapons chart at the back of the rule book lists HMG under Heavy Weapons, and not Small Arms.

    As far as I understand, a HMG at its long range is a penetration 0 weapon vs the front of armoured targets and would not qualify for pins.

    Hmm this is far from clear from the rules as written. See what Stuart says when he finds this.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by SteveT.
    #189749
    SteveT
    Participant

    You can balance them without any rules changes at all:

    Reduce their cost by 10 points.

    No reduction for those mounted on vehicles (who really shouldn’t be so effective firing through slits or on the move

     

    #189678
    SteveT
    Participant

    Yes, it is a very open to interpretation when they do not provided a list of option. Taking it to silly extremes, you could model a Russian sniper team with captured Panzerfausts or Assault Rifles, which might win you games but no friend :p

    #189485
    SteveT
    Participant

    The name of its entry in the Japanese forces book is something of a giveaway.

    “TYPE 97 CHI-HA MEDIUM TANK”. :p

    It mostly seems to be a criterion of which slot it gets put in armour lists, and/or how it was used, and yes, the bizarrely named “damage value”.

    Tank size occasionally crops up in some rules: like a tank ramming a building, or (from the optional campaign books) getting stuck in rubble.

     

    #189445
    SteveT
    Participant

    Each campaign book is  a bit different. The early ones  throw scenarios at you to pick and choose. Some campaign books present more balanced fights, while others tend to be a bit more historical  you get what you get and good luck!.

    Some later ones go for more a linked series feel, giving a very nice feel of events of the time. The very best one, in my opinion, is Stalingrad as you are fighting multiple battles over many sectors of a map whose changing  ownership has consequences, so it really is an ongoing and organic campaign.

    As Nat said earlier, BA is more open ended that some other games whose  ‘officialness’ dominates (looking at you Wizards of the Coast, and Games Workshop). If you go in for tournaments, I guess they would care more about such things, but even they commonly often use their own house rules and so on. I come form both open and closed types of rules and I know it can feel a bit “Can we do this? Can we have Russian fighting Russians in the jungle?” yes, if you want.

     

    #189442
    SteveT
    Participant

    Looks like some more Hungarian units incoming in the next Campaign book (Case Blue).  Good, good.

    #189431
    SteveT
    Participant

    I wouldn’t worry about that. It is just stuff like late war tanks or specialised troops should not be in early war lists. It wouldn’t make any sense to have the end war high tech stuff  steamrolling over 1941 opponents.  You can always avoid even these few restrictions if you go down the generic reinforced platoon rule that can include pretty much what you want, but that devolves into a min-max game and moves away from history.

    #189424
    SteveT
    Participant

    The new units in the Budapest book can be used in the Theatre Selectors in the Italy and Axis book, but some can only be used in later war ones.

    It’s a good book, gives you some nice options.

    3 new theatre selectors too:

    Carpathian Mountains Border Guards Reinforced Platoon
    Assault Artillery Battery Armoured Platoon
    Hungarian Armoured Field Division Armoured Platoon

     

    #189417
    SteveT
    Participant

    You need the Italy and Axis book. The Budapest book is scenarios plus quite a few good new units.

    I am starting a Hungarian army myself.

    • This reply was modified 8 months, 2 weeks ago by SteveT.
    #189364
    SteveT
    Participant

    Thanks Stuart. Replacing them with unarmed seems a bit silly. No pistols for you!

     

    #189343
    SteveT
    Participant

    Yes, I have based my Napoleonic light horse with 4 horses, 5 for heavy so you can immediately see what is what. For ACW 4 seems good.

    #189340
    SteveT
    Participant

    Thanks Al.  So when you did the ACW at 3 bases, did you use 3 bases for cavalry too?  How about artillery, did you go 1 or 2 bases per “unit”?

    Cheers

     

    #189245
    SteveT
    Participant

    Cheers!

    #189187
    SteveT
    Participant

    Thanks, Mike.

    It occurred to me that if bases were mounted so that one strip could be removed , 2 bases would be able to make a perfect square…

     

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 145 total)