[Jon Winczek]

Yes,it is according to the FoF rules, but it changes scenario balance as I mentioned it.
Anyway that issue is not clearly explained in the rules and it is some unclear gap between classic AA and FoF.

Greets

[Jon Winczek]

You welcome,

yeah it is in TW book too – on p. 41 as you noticed 🙂

The sequence of chain reactions is set by designers so that is way of resolving that where NI units which lost reaction act before units that passed.
So in that combination IN unit who resolved all won reactions then is going to resolve failed reactions with diminished firepower/movement (so its harder part of reactions).

Greets

[Jon Winczek]

I think IN unit rolls only one reaction dice. All that chain reaction issue is pretty well covered with examples in FoF main rulebook starting from p. 65. I don’t know why but in TW rulebook that parts seem to be missing…

[Jon Winczek]

Hey

I think when you re exposed and NOT moved you get +1 in cover bonus, yet opponent has +1 firepower dice bonus. BUT regular exposed units must pass TQ test to get in cover bonus (irregulars must have pass TQ all the time to get in cover bonus regardless their exposed position or not).

Hope cleared a bit.

[Jon Winczek]

Yes I considered that too, but in EF book in army lists it is written as sniper (not DMR). However you re right as Mk11 is rather a DMR weapon so it is wise to assume that as DMR.

Greets

[Jon Winczek]

Thanks

[Jon Winczek]

Hey regarding hidden and elusive units but in conjunction with night fighting rules.

In Hunted Hunters scenario (Classified) there are 4 US teams and additional one scout team with night vision device. Scenario is set in night and night fighting rules apply. Only scout team has night vision device. Does only scout team benefit from NVD (engaging enemy without night fighting penalties) and each remaining unit acts on their own, i.e. night fighting penalty ?
Or are the scouts able to guide remaining units to spotted enemy – enemy is not elusive to scouts but for others also?

In my opinion according to rulebook the former option (no guiding) is right, but maybe latter option could happen in real battle…

[Jon Winczek]

Maybe it has been already written here but what is tactical scope of BotG, meaning whether it be squad based game (every figure is on its own – like Skirmish Sangin or Five men in Normandy) or platoon based game like AA and FoF?

Greets

[Jon Winczek]

It seems logical, just wanted to be sure. Thanks!

[Jon Winczek]

Thanks

[Jon Winczek]

Hey

So, when previously light wounded fellow is wounded again the first aid check is made at the beginning of the new turn. Then if 6 on D6 was rolled (FA check) does wounded become stunned and his old light wound perish and does unit loses his casualty penalty?

[Jon Winczek]

Hey

I think, there is no scatter for artillery or air strike attacks. All is related only to TQ.

It seemed strange for me, especially regarding artillery barrages, but I suppose that game designers probably assumed that modern artillery, when properly guided, is quite close to the point weapon type – in contrary to the WWII artillery.

[Jon Winczek]

In my opinion no, because units with cavemen casevac do not follow standard FoF rules for checking casualties according to rulebook p.135.

When you got casualty you immediately throw D6 to check if you re lucky enough to have your casualty being just stunned (6 on D6 needed) or your casualty is simply dead or wounded and is removed from play.

[Jon Winczek]

Yes I found it at p. 67.

Also there is a file, downloadable from Boardgamegeek, called “Force on Force Simplified” which contains essential rules extracted from chaotic FoF rulebook.
However they missed that rule with diminishing 1 inch of movement after first reaction (p. 69 in rulebook).

Greets

[Jon Winczek]

Hey, thanks.

regarding firepower of infantry AT weapons:

1. If infantry squad with RPG (Hvy. AP:3/AT:2(M) moves tactically (6 inches) and then fires with RPG into tank, it lost one FP die due to movement so it has now 1D AT firepower.

2. The same as above but regarding diminishing AT firepower; the same unit with RPG as above is non-initiative unit which reacts to enemy tank fire with 2D firepower. Then this unit is fired by another tank so reacts again, so now its firepower is 1D AT FP due to diminishing FP.

Is that above correct?

Greets

[Jon Winczek]

Yeah

I read again the whole given example from OP.

So in that second situation unit ‘B’ (initiative side unit) is firing at unit (non-initiative side unit)’1′ and both of them roll TQ dice to determine who fires first.Lets say that ‘B’ won that TQ test so it fires first and then ‘1’ fires back (if it is able to). ‘1’ can fire back because it returns fire to unit which attacked them (‘B’ unit).

Imagine situation where another additional units emerge on battlefield; ‘C'( initiative side) and ‘2’ (non-initiative side). ‘C’ takes position behind low wall and declares fire at unit ‘2’. Both units ‘1’ and ‘2’ have ‘C’ in their LOS and LOF. ‘2’ decides to react and to return fire. Theoretically ‘1’ could have reacted to ‘C’ also but as it previously lost its reaction so now it cannot react.

So tu sum up:

Non-initiative units that fail to win a Reaction test may not React for the remainder of
the turn and may only return fire if fired upon (a Reaction test is still made to
determine who fires first in the round of fire, though).

Hope its more clear now.

[Jon Winczek]

Hello

glad to see you again guys 🙂

[Jon Winczek]

Hey

1. Yes you can return fire.

2. True, you cannot react for the remainder of the turn if you failed to win reaction test.

[Author]

Posts