Forum Replies Created

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
  • Avatar photoMaraviglia

    Yeah, I can see that but I think that’s what I like. The terrain shouldn’t be too much of an issue either as I’ve got a reasonable amount for a small game and lots more on my paint table so it’s a good pairing.

    Currently I just need to tighten up my understanding (or settle on how I’ll play it) for a few rules.

    Avatar photoMaraviglia

    I’ve never used .io before but good to know, ta!

    I’m sure as I play it more I’ll get the hang of it, not to mention ideas of my own on how to tweak it, but I think it’s best to understand a system as fully as possible before breaking it!

    in reply to: TFL mud and blood HMGs #158968
    Avatar photoMaraviglia

    In the absence of any more definite answers these are my house I’ll be using for now. I’m sharing them here in case anybody else reading this thread finds them useful (and thanks to Robert Dunlop for the help getting this far) –

    HMGs in an off table support role can choose a position on a “side” table edge up to 6 inches ahead of your front line and across to any other edge as representative of enfilading fire from supporting friendly positions forward of your own.

    Off table HMGs can only fire sustained on a predetermined path.

    When on sustained fire remove the HMG’s card from the deck. The card is unnecessary while firing sustained.

    Ignore the line that says “HMGs on sustained fire do not suffer stoppages”
    Where appropriate, say off table HMGs represent multiple guns firing, stoppages can automatically unjam on the snifter card.
    Other sustained fire HMGs can attempt to unjam on the snifter card with 2 action dice. If it unjams on the first dice then it may fire on all units in its path as it normally would.

    A HMG that wants to change from direct to sustained or vice versa can only do so on the orders of a big man at the cost of one initiative.
    A HMG that has enemy within 12 inches or has been ordered onto direct fire has it’s card added into the discard pile ready to be shuffled in next turn. When it’s drawn it can change to direct fire without the need of a big man if it wasn’t already ordered to do so.

    HMGs should be considered to have AP ammo as appropriate for the year and supply of each army. They will only use AP ammo in direct fire.
    Changing the belt from one type to another takes two actions – one to remove the current belt and one to load in the new one.

    HMG barrages can be largely ignored as they would affect an area as large or bigger than a M&B gaming table. They could be integrated into a series of games or a multi table set up where the barrage can be used to effectively “cancel” one game/table by denial.

    in reply to: TFL mud and blood HMGs #158734
    Avatar photoMaraviglia

    Ta for that lot. Definitely food for thought.

    It seems in most situations I’ll just have to decide things based in what seems most likely to fit the scenario being played, which is quite sensible anyway really.

    in reply to: TFL mud and blood HMGs #158627
    Avatar photoMaraviglia

    Ta, that sounds quite useful. The stoppages part is probably the least defined part about this whole section. I definitely think that as written they’re supposed to be a constant state after they occur until cleared with another action dice but I dont know how appropriate that would be in some circumstances. I think I’ll just write up a pair of house rules and use whichever seems most fitting for the scenario being played.

    Similarly I think I’ll just ignore MG barrages unless plotting out a multi game campaign where the barrage can be essentially used to cancel out one game by denial.

    As for changing fire mode I think you may be right that no big man is needed but I think it might be right that with the use of one, even if restricted to the most senior  one around, that the gun could change mode where appropriate. I certainly think one should be required to start sustained fire as he directs the lane of fire.


    And with regards the tanks I’ve been reading a bit on these and found a few accounts of things like MGs ripping through the sides of British tanks, bullet splash incapacitating multiple crew members and even an officer testing a French tank with his pistol and the shot going straight through the front! Admittedly these are all single source accounts and I couldn’t find much to conclusively back up any one story but it did paint a definite picture of tanks not being as invulnerable as the crews would no doubt have wanted!

    So would you say AP ammo was common enough to be considered standard for all crews using direct fire in game terms? And from when would it be issued? I can largely sort this with some form of “supply roll” for appropriate teams in a game but I’m always keen to KNOW if I can.

    Again, thanks for the input.

    in reply to: TFL mud and blood HMGs #158594
    Avatar photoMaraviglia

    Thanks for that, it’s good to read a bit more information that agrees with (and expands on) what I knew and had heard since I asked about this. I definitely think I’ve got a handle on the positioning of off table MGs and their use now.

    It does still leave a couple of game based questions, though I don’t doubt anything you said about their use.


    So first is the stoppages part. As I understand it when you fire on an action die you get 6 shooting dice and if more of those are 1s than 6s there is a stoppage and the NEXT action dice used have to be to try and get a 5+ to clear it. On the turn you roll a stoppage you still apply the other results but have to unjam the weapon for further uses.

    If a weapon is firing at every unit that enters its line of fire and doesn’t have to wait for it’s card how does it ever get opportunity to have action dice to clear it? Possibly with 2 action dice on the snifter card but that leaves a potentially very long time for a “sustained” weapon to be unavailable. Even if the stoppages are a thing in sustained fire and they are diced for on the snifter card what is that line about sustained fire guns not suffering stoppages for?  Perhaps rolling for stoppages per target is literally just for that target and it automatically “unjams” for rolling against the next target(s)? If it said that sustained fire guns don’t roll to unjam and so only suffer stoppages for that particular action dice’s worth of fire that could work.

    I could see the lack of stoppages being representative of several weapons covering the same area and might be worth considering as an optional rule but it’s written quite vaguely.

    And again in game terms if a gun is on table and firing sustained when an enemy comes within 12 is the change to direct an immediate change on their initiative? On the snifter? On the orders of their immediate big man? On the orders of the most superior big man? Any big man?

    In regards to HMGs being used for direct fire being quite rare I imagine it would be but the game can also be covering scenarios where lines are a short distance apart and the MG is pretty much on the front or very early/late situations where the mobility of the sides has brought the guns closer to the action.

    As for the barrages, I only said it was a British tactic as I have a faded memory of hearing of British troops using similar tactics in WW2 but mostly because the Mud and blood rule book says “and were peculiar to the British army…” but I could certainly imagine other nations developing similar methods.

    Regardless, despite the mention of this there’s no example of how this could be implemented in a game other than to say it would prevent any movement in the affected area except for armoured vehicles. Even then though this raises questions of how vulnerable armour is to HMG fire. The AT table gives armour piercing MG ammo 1 strike dice (which I assume is 1 per hit from the 6 normal dice) but I’m not sure how common AP ammo is and if it should be considered a factor in direct, sustained or, potentially, barrage fire.

    So thanks for your reply but I’m still a little blurry on things in gameplay terms.

    in reply to: A "Burning sands" review #124246
    Avatar photoMaraviglia

    Thanks for the kind words everyone. I’m pleased it reads well as this was my first attempt at a review (and using a forum to boot)!

    As for the PDF debate – I’m also not much of a fan of them however they are useful in several ways. First if I’m out and waiting somewhere I can have a read on my phone, then there’s the option to print it out and finally the option to have it made into a book by some dedicated companies.
    Also in this case £6 for a rule set is just pretty good.

    And there was mention of gaming in other scales so to to chip in my tuppence worth on the subject – I think most games can be rescaled if you have the appropriate space. So using Burning sands as the example, everything is 15mm and uses 2ft x 2ft. If you want to use 28mm then i think its not unreasonable to round that up and call it 30mm which is now twice the size of the 15mm start point so just double all the values. 4×4 playing area, every centimetre is now 2 etc… The only downside is you’ll be missing out on using the rather nice official Burning sands range.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)