Buildings and extra protection

Home Forums Historical Bolt Action Buildings and extra protection

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #191665
    Steiner
    Participant

    Dear Developers,

    I don’t get why the extraprotection rule has been removed in the 3rd Ed. It seems that buildings are useless now.

    Can you explain the reason behind this decision?

    Thanks

    • This topic was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by Steiner.
    #191699
    Peter
    Participant

    The reason is, that the rules are BS! The original V2 building ruels were really good and then WLG started the chaos until the point that they deleted the extra cover rules for buildings.

    It’s sad that they have no ideas for good rules.

    #191700
    Mike
    Participant

    Our group also thinks the building rules are broken at the moment.  In the current version they are a bit of a death trap.  They become even dumber when being targeted by something like a Nebelwerfer where every unit within 6″ of building comes under potential fire instead of within 6″ of the target (so, a single model (a spotter) in a 12″ square building expands the potential targets to a 24″ circle.  At least that is our understanding.  We are moving towards treating all template structures as rubble but allowing units to operate out of upper flaws including in actual rubble with second story floors.

    The one feature we do like is the ability of building to “collapse”, but that should be offset by providing slightly better cover than rubble.

    #191701
    Kar98k
    Participant

    Another idea is to use second edition building rules, or a combination of third and second edition. They were not all that careful when they went with third edition, and I think that’s why the building rules got the way they are.

    Overall, there are a few good things about the third edition, but the rules team 1) should had carefully read the FAQ and Errata from second edition, 2) should had been less haphazard with their “Cut and Paste” from older documents, and 3) should had double checked certain details.

    As a whole, at least 60 percent (or more) of the issues could had been avoided if the team taken more care at what they were doing because writing rules is not an easy thing to do, and certainly something that should have had more focus.

    • This reply was modified 5 days, 20 hours ago by Kar98k.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.