Forum Replies Created

Viewing 40 posts - 81 through 120 (of 1,982 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Squad Hammer Core for WW2 #131330
    Ivan Sorensen

    HoD does have more moving parts (tracking Support points, different combat rules for tanks).

    if the goal is to go simpler, I don’t think there’s anything to stop you in just using Core. Just divide things up into “light tank”, “medium tank” and “heavy tank” and its fine. Even a non-tank nerd can tell a Tiger is bigger than a Panzer II.

    Use the normal damage system. Obviously big tanks take 2 less damage. Long barrel guns on the model do +1 damage.

    I dont think you’d have problems “porting” elements of Democracy over. In fact the Support and damage systems were tested with basic Squad Hammer first. It just depends on how much (or little) detail you ultimately want.

    Grab Winter Hammer as well, for an example of (limited theater) ww2 hammer.


    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Starport Scum Question #131156
    Ivan Sorensen

    It’s not written so clear.
    Its intended to mean “Cannot fire, can take other actions at minus one die”.

    That being said, I know from emails I’ve gotten that some people allow firing at minus one for aces and heroes or for all characters.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: 5 Leagues Questions #131085
    Ivan Sorensen

    Trailsplash ?

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: 5 Leagues Questions #131054
    Ivan Sorensen

    Cheerios. Glad you are enjoying it and that you found the upgrade worthwhile.
    Answers below:

    Salvaging equipment
    Originally I intended this not to be possible, but as you say, it makes more narrative sense and I think most people play that you can.
    Do remember the rules for equipment damage though.

    Light, militia or no armor may dash +3″ total.
    The “standard dash” assumes Partial or Full armor.

    Looks right to me!

    The restriction is for XP specifically.

    No specific restriction no. The different challenge levels is just your starting position.
    Over time you could end up with all heroes (or all Followers..)

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: All quiet? #130919
    Ivan Sorensen


    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy – How do you deploy? #129959
    Ivan Sorensen

    I’ve always set up from the start and alternating, unless its an attack/defense, in which case I prefer setting up the defenders first.

    I do actually kinda like “beaming down” on first activation though. Like they are deploying from march.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Best Nordic Weasel Game for Judge Dredd? #129625
    Ivan Sorensen

    A friend is also working on a straight up cyberpunk “Hackers vs corp security” hack of Squad Hammer, which is nearing completion. Adapting some of that into Dredd shouldn’t be too hard.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy Tank MG question #129225
    Ivan Sorensen

    I am so sorry, this had been sitting in my email for a while and got lost 🙁

    * Vehicles only roll once for their machine gun fire (since realistically, the guns probably aren’t all able to line up an individual target). But if you have 3 MG’s (or 2 and one of them is a .50 cal) they do not suffer the increased target number that vehicle machine guns usually do.

    * Currently there is no minimum range.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy for Tanks vs Tanks only? #127593
    Ivan Sorensen


    I don’t think you should have any trouble there. Obviously tank warfare is a rather different beast, especially as in HoD, tanks don’t have hit points, but there’s enough detail in there that a platoon vs platoon tank battle (to start with) should be fun.

    I probably wouldn’t recommend it as a permanent tank simulation solution, but to get you started, absolutely.

    Hope that helps?

    Nordic Weasel Games

    Ivan Sorensen

    Sorry for the delay, I’ve been travelling.

    Once per “cause” outside of special scenario circumstances (such as a huge ammo stockpile).

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy- SMG squad costs #127068
    Ivan Sorensen

    The values were assigned with the assumption that their limited range would be balanced out by the assault advantage, so damage should be the same as the equivalent rifle type.
    Your values are fine.

    Speaking of points costs, I have been pondering that maybe the low end of the points scale needs to be wider, to allow more/better differentiation. Trying to fit all the infantry into, essentially, a 15 or so point spread is a little tight.

    Thoughts ?

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: NEis questions #126036
    Ivan Sorensen

    Cheers friend.

    You can only take the fixed 3″ move when you are “safe”.
    So troops advancing out of sight? Can use it.
    Troops moving up to the corner or a building? Can use it.
    Troops in the open? Have to rush.

    Now troops advancing on, say, a stone fence? I’d be tempted to say they are “safe” unless the enemy have troops on a roof top (for example).
    They’d still be visible to fire upon normally but would not take reactions.

    The way I view fire in the game is like this:
    Ordered fire (You spend activations to shoot) is the troops concentrating their efforts on something that is important to the mission, pointed out by their leader etc.)
    Reaction fire is spontaneous fire that happens to an obvious target.

    So a grunt rushes from cover to cover? Clear target, so someone is going to take some shots at him = Reaction fire.

    The same grunt in the open but stationary? Would be on the ground and hard to see. You can shoot at him in your turn (ordered fire) but he isn’t subject to reaction fire until he moves again.

    Hope thats clearer as far as the intentions?

    Absolute Timing – Yeah, it’ll go on the list for any future updates.

    Machine gun talk
    For me, the FG42 or BAR would be “light automatics” due to lack of easy-swap barrels and frequent reloading.
    The BAR was operated by a crew, though since you have to shift or lift the gun to reload, that’s less useful than for the Bren (f.x.).
    As fr as I know (which may well be wrong) the FG42 was operated mostly as a rifle, but since it has superior firepower to other WW2 weapons, it would get the LA designation.

    For game purposes, we do add the firepower of any crew figures, since it ended up being much easier in play (just count the number of men, then add any machine gun bonus for the squad).
    A more realistic / simulation option would be to increase the machine gun bonus but not allow the crew to fire.

    That’s easily done, the problem we ran into originally is that a lot of miniatures packs don’t give you proper loader/assistant figures for SAWs 🙁

    That’s a lot of imperfect answers but I hope it gives a bit of light into the muddy realm of game design compromises 🙂

    Nordic Weasel Games

    Ivan Sorensen

    Right, so I think “smoke” is something most games do kind of abstractly because it’s not that easy to piece together.
    Even reading period infantry manuals, its not that clear.
    (pun somewhat intended?)

    Infantry smoke is limited in real life by: Range (as far as you can throw the grenade, which on a gaming table isnt far), the fact that it takes a while to build up, limited ammo (1 smoke grenade per soldier seems typical) and the fact they don’t really produce that much smoke per grenade.

    I also noticed that soldiers accounts dont talk about smoke all that much, but I don’t know if that’s because they just take its use for granted and dont bother or because it wasn’t as useful as we tend to assume it must have been ?

    With those limits in mind, I felt that relying on mortars for smoke for a big advance seemed more realistic, while infantry can use their smoke capacity defensively.
    It also goes to emphasize the need for combined arms in the game.

    Of course all of this may well be wrong!

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: NEis questions #125918
    Ivan Sorensen

    Well I had a couple questions after we played our first game of NEiS V 2.0. We played badly and botched up quite a few rules. Understandable for a very first and rushed try. So I reread the rules up to before buildings, so to the end of page 26. I couldn’t find answers to my questions so I am not as blind as I think I am. It also brought up lots more questions. I went through the NEiS threads here which clarified only a couple questions and resulted in more head scratching. What follows is my questions, answers where I found them, and associated “what the” moments they might have raised. The last bit is of me being rules anal. I used to play against the world’s biggest rules lawyer so everything had to have only one interpretation or answer and in keeping with that thinking carrying on I present the last word.

    Cheers mate. Answers below.
    NEIS goes back a ways so it’s not a “water proof” in the writing as I might have liked today. I’ll certainly take these into account when the time comes to update things.


    1. Reaction Fire

    When does this occur, only during rushes or anytime a valid target presents itself? My example is my activated unit rounds the corner of a building. Standing there are my opponent’s forces. Since I am on an activation which allows movement and firing I can shoot at him.

    Can he reaction fire at me or only “normal” fire during his next activation assuming he is not exhausted?
    If he is exhausted can he still reaction fire?
    Are both fires simultaneous or does activation fire or reaction fire always go first?

    The relevant rule here is “Moving Cautiously” at the bottom of page 15. Troops moving into sight but within cover (for example on a building corner) do NOT trigger reaction fire.

    As you are getting at, reaction fire is specifically in response to a failed rush.

    Troops can reaction fire as long as they are not pinned down, even if Exhausted.

    Newer games of mine have a section that talks about timing, but NEIS predates that, so let me explain it here:
    My games always use what I all “absolute timing” which means everything is resolved as it happens.

    So lets say Trooper Jones shoots at your men, then I run across the street suffering reaction fire and those who make it want to shoot at you.
    Resolve Jones first, then move and resolve reaction fires, finally the survivors shoot back.

    2. Break check

    Is this conducted once for each leader’s unit at the end of a turn?
    Or is it conducted after each activation by any unit which took any adverse (pin, wound or kill) result?
    Based on a game example in TWW it appears to be the second above which means a unit can be subject to massive break checks in a single turn. In fact they can be subject to a break check after every single activation from either side during a turn if unlucky enough to be repeatedly under fire and taking effects.

    This may change in a future version since I am not 100% content with it right now, but the intention is that any time you take fire, you make a Break check.
    For units in cover, pressure only builds if you took casualties or have untreated wounded, so most break checks are passed automatically.

    Troops in the open are incredibly fragile, maybe a bit too much.

    I’d try it as written a couple times, but if its a problem, limit it to once per phase.

    3. Pin removal

    Do you have to activate the leader then do pin removals or not? So if you have two pins to remove does it cost 3 points or 2? I assume 3 if one of the pins is the leader.

    The leader does not have to be active himself to do pin removal.

    4. Do leaders activate for free

    Again based on an example from TWW it appears leaders can move for free. They only have to pay their own activation point if they wish to fire, unpin themselves (subject to the answer from above), or perform any activity from the action point cost table. If they wish to group fire they have to pay 2 activation points, one for their men and one for themselves.

    Correct. We assume leaders have enough initiative to move where they are needed.

    5. Reaction Fire

    Since the rules as written only cover fire against rushing troops this may answer 1 above. In reaction fire all rolls are for hits not pins and since they can only fire at targets which didn’t make their rush distance check those troops are already pinned. Does this apply in any way to 1 above as in the situation stated can you only generate “hits” and all troops now in LOS (and firing) are automatically pinned as they stopped without cover.

    If they rush and fail their rush roll (I say Im rushing 4 inch, but roll a 2) they are pinned automatically and we roll for hits.
    If they rush in the open and succeed in the rush roll, they dont get pinned but as they have no cover, I get to roll for hits (“advancing in the open” page 16)

    6. Morale, Casualties, and Stress leader casualties

    What constitutes a casualty for game terms and ?
    Are pinned troops casualties?
    Are treated wounded casualties?
    Are untreated wounded casualties?
    Are dead casualties?

    Casualties are wounded (regardless of treatment) and dead.

    Pinned are NOT casualties.

    7. Close Assaults and reaction fire

    Again reaction fire raises its ugly head. A unit being assaulted is allowed reaction fire, only if it can/cannot activate? Is the reaction fire before, simultaneous or after assaulting fire?

    Unless a given figure is Wounded or Pinned, they can always React.

    Absolute timing applies so move up, take reaction fire, then conduct the assault.

    Can you change the usage of “shock dice” to pin dice?
    Can you change the usage of “kill dice” to hit dice?

    I’ll certainly ponder that. The terms were chosen because I had an older game that used the same dice terms, but that may not be needed any longer.

    Please use one term for one thing. It makes clarity and life so much easier.


    You define a light automatic weapon and a SAW. How is an RPK much different from an M249? How would a bren gun rate? Is an MG 34 or 42 a crew served or SAW? When used bi pod or tripod? Belt fed vs magazine fed? Again being anal but it really becomes opinion. An MG 34/42 was treated as both a SAW and as a medium support weapon as were many post war machine guns, but in game terms how would a full size cartridge firing weapon be treated? I can see the division being X number of round magazine treat it as a light automatic and Y round magazine or belt fed as a SAW. If not used as a squad weapon but as a platoon or company level asset then it becomes a crew served weapon. Alternatively a light automatic requires one crew a SAW two but only 3 dice and a crew served two but four dice, dependent on trooper quality.

    As you suggest, it really depends on personal views.
    My take is that if an infantry squad is hauling it around and it’s used as part of that infantry team, its an SAW.

    If it’s deployed on its own with a big pile of spare ammo, then its “crew served”.

    That’s not entirely water-proof but I feel like it fits well enough.

    So in a WW2 context, I wouldn’t worry about a Bren vs DP vs MG34 personally. They’re all SAW’s.

    Some players feel strongly that the GPMG in the squad role should be superior option to a magazine fed weapon. If so, I might suggest +3 firepower but does not get the loader bonus.

    In that view: Bren +2, MG34 in squad role +3, MG34 on tripod and with linked belts +3 (+4 with loader).

    THAT BEING SAID, there’s probably a hundred arguments that could be made for why I’m wrong about that 🙂

    Hope the above helps and I hope your second outing with the rules is smoother!
    It’s a bit of a beast, compared to how a lot of other games work.

    Best wishes

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: A quick game example for No End in Sight #125911
    Ivan Sorensen

    No problem! I happened to be working on something when the email notification popped in!

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: A quick game example for No End in Sight #125907
    Ivan Sorensen

    Cheers friend.

    I assume you mean “how can the moving soldier shoot” in that example?
    If not, let me know and I’ll clarify.

    As written, the combat rules say “Active figures may fire all at the same group or may direct their fire against multiple targets and may fire before or after moving.”

    So lets say our soldier is behind a building and wants to rush across a 3″ wide street, to a building on the other side.

    Example 1:
    He can fire before he makes the rush, if he’s in sight of the bad guys.
    (as he may shoot before moving)

    Example 2:
    He cannot move half-way, shoot, and then move the rest of the distance.
    (As you must shoot before or after the move, not during)

    Example 3:
    If he makes the rush, he could stop at the corner of the other building and shoot from there.
    (As he may shoot after moving, and if the rush was a success, he isn’t pinned).

    I hope that helps?
    If not, let me know and I’ll see if I can clarify it more or draw something.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy- Silenced weapon teams #125801
    Ivan Sorensen

    Ill have to double check i didnt specifically say otherwise, but I always intended it to be possible yeah.
    Representing the senior sergeant running over and kicking everyone into gear!

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Dreams of Dragons. Nordic Weasel does an RPG #125420
    Ivan Sorensen

    Thanks gang. Thomaston – You should be able to see some of the advancement system in the preview, if I remember right.
    I picked the pages for preview pretty late last night so i might be wrong 🙂

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: All quiet? #124131
    Ivan Sorensen

    Right, so HoD basically changed everything and I think in hindsight, any future work would do better to be based on that or as compatible to it as possible.

    I’d be very interested in hearing what you have in mind.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: All quiet? #123927
    Ivan Sorensen

    The toolkit will be delayed for a while yet. I still haven’t resolved the difficulties I spoke of above and me trying to force it only resulted in sub-optimal material, unfortunately.
    I’m sorry this has ended up dragging out. As I said before, in part its because I didn’t anticipate that HoD would be so well received, which led me to go back and re-evaluate everything about Squad Hammer and its core aspects.

    Additionally, the RPG project I am working on has ended up being a tentacle monster of time sink, that I did not anticipate to be so extensive.

    The “special project” is a fan project that is definitely tied to a galaxy far far away. I’m seeing if I might get a hold of it.

    So holding pattern for now, which I apologize for.
    On a more immediate note however: I have largely come to the conclusion that the Support Points mechanic should be backported into Squad Hammer Core as an official system.
    What was originally intended as a fairly separate add-on has come I think to really emphasize the strengths of the system.

    How do you two feel about that? If so, that’s something that can happen fairly immediately so an updated version can be made available.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    Ivan Sorensen

    I just went for a walk and looked at the trees here, which are pretty young but are easily 30 meters tall.

    I think realistically any “forest” feature would always be a LOS block.

    Hedgerows and any wall substantial enough to show would probably offer concealment, unless you are some distance from it.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Twilight 2000 v2 Review #121714
    Ivan Sorensen

    We enjoyed playing the game for all the hardware and the fact it listed Danish troops in them!

    Some of the rules were a bit funky but we soldiered on. It was certainly a small influence for when I wrote NEIS.
    The cover is gloriously 80s too.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: A great week with the Hammer family of games #121713
    Ivan Sorensen

    Doesn’t get much closer than the game coming down to the last die roll!

    Your tables look outstanding too. Red gems for hit points lost?

    Nordic Weasel Games

    Ivan Sorensen


    I probably wouldn’t allow MG fire against fully enclosed vehicles as a general rule, though allowing them to try for a stun is reasonable for light vehicles.

    A HMG (like the American .50 calibre) CAN fire at vehicles, but with a very modest effect (suggest that it can fire as an anti-tank weapon but with penetration 1 only)

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: All quiet? #120168
    Ivan Sorensen

    Sorry, no, it’s not stalled but things do move around.

    The delay is due to three parts:

    First, I was worried that the toolkit was becoming too stiff and difficult to work with, in a way that didn’t fit the game system. So a lot had to be reworked to just be more friendly.

    Second, I was kicking around whether it’d be best broken into smaller booklets or done as one large one.

    Finally, I wanted ample time for HoD feedback and ideas to filter in, to evaluate which of those systems would be a good pick. F.x. Support points is something that almost everyone has been excited about.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Are game reviewers critical enough? #119691
    Ivan Sorensen

    The game in question had some bugs that needed fixing. Just stuff where testing hadn’t caught it because the guy running the game knew how it was “supposed to work”.
    Basically the sort of thing that experience teaches you to notice, but it was the guys first game writing.

    I’d say it was stuff that wasn’t that big a deal, the game certainly wasn’t broken and we fixed it all a couple days later, but apparently that was beyond the pale 🙂

    Mind, Im not protesting that we got beaten up a bit, but the wording of “criminals” stuck in my mind as being pretty funny.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Are game reviewers critical enough? #119689
    Ivan Sorensen

    I think wargame reviews are also a bit skewed because the people who like the game are the ones who are going to review it.
    Unless something is truly dire, we’ve all seen enough games that the reaction to a bad one is to shrug and move on.

    Or you bought the game to check out one mechanic or even just to read. I’ve certainly done that, so I wouldn’t really feel comfortable reviewing it.

    I did have a reviewer tell me that myself and the gentleman who’d written the game in question were criminals though 🙂

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy- cost of hit points #119686
    Ivan Sorensen

    Yeah, the costs are too low and do need to touched up.

    As you say moving from 6 to 7 is a big deal since it typically guarantees surviving one more hit.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: New post apoc game? Five Klicks from the Zone #119133
    Ivan Sorensen

    Cheers gang.

    It’ll be based on the Five Parsecs / Five Leagues structure, with a few tweaks in the game play.
    But close enough that if you know one, it shouldn’t be a big shock.

    The basic turn sequence etc. will be identical, combat will work as similar as possible and the campaign game will take a lot from Five Leagues.

    As you probably know, Im a big fan of Borderlands and Trigun 🙂

    Nordic Weasel Games

    Ivan Sorensen

    So originally infantry AT was intended work like any other tank shooting, using the same mechanics.

    At the time, I was going to have the range limited to 3″ or so, which seemed to interfere with the distances close assaults happen at, so infantry AT became an “assault” option instead, to avoid any weird situations, especially if both infantry and tanks are close to the attacker.

    I am starting to wonder if it should just be changed though, especially for the 6″ range gap.
    You’re not the first player to mention and wonder about it, so I think it’s something where the intention isn’t really executed well.

    I am trying to get a better ref sheet done, the current one is kinda garbage. My apologies.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: First Game of Shako to Coalscuttle! #118415
    Ivan Sorensen

    Sorry for the wait!

    For shock actions, “Units may perform only the Shock action and cannot perform any regular action.”

    That’s intended to also prohibit firing.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy – Gun Malfunction #118140
    Ivan Sorensen

    Apologies for a slight delay.

    Infantry AT gear isn’t factored in right now, a +5 or so for Panzerfausts would seem reasonable.

    The modifier for unable to fire is just a catch-all for any sort of situation that could occur in a scenario. Sorry it was confusing.

    Vehicles with weak cannon can choose to just rely on the machine guns instead (and I believe that is likely to have been the historical case as well in many cases)

    You are likely right that the time limits are a bit too long at the moment. I was worried about them being too short, if the players run into a rash of bad turns with limited actions, but I may have been over-cautious on that front.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Five Leagues from the Borderlands 2! #117302
    Ivan Sorensen

    I’m sorry to hear that!

    Obviously any given change will have ups and downs but I’d like to try and assure you that I didn’t make any changes that I didn’t feel would improve the game.
    I try to account for fan feedback but NWG has never been any sort of crowd-managed democracy 🙂

    For things like streamlining, what I did was try not to remove factors but change it so instead of having multiple, consecutive rolls things could be built into an existing roll whenever possible.

    To give an example instead of a separate post-battle table to determine if you suffered equipment damage, now it’s built into the injury table instead.
    A lot of the “roll a 6 for something to happen” things were moved to be part of other rolls.

    Consensus so far has been that the changes are an upgrade, but of course individual opinions will vary.

    If you are up for it, email me at [email protected] and I have a deal for you though.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Five Leagues from the Borderlands 2! #117189
    Ivan Sorensen

    Weapon styles were hotly contested as it seems for every person who loved them, someone hated them.

    I’d like to revisit the concept in the future, because I think it’s cool but I think the execution left a bit to be desired.

    Buying stuff we don’t need is the gamers curse 🙂

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Five Leagues from the Borderlands 2! #117167
    Ivan Sorensen

    This blog post captures a lot of it

    Give that a looksie, then if you have specific questions I’d be happy to answer those.

    In total, I think there’s over 70 individual things changed somehow, ranging from fixing a skill to whole new scenario options.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: First Game of Shako to Coalscuttle! #116868
    Ivan Sorensen

    Also, if a few of you want to pick this one up on the cheap (not that it wasn’t already quite cheap) You can get it for five bucks for a couple days.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: First Game of Shako to Coalscuttle! #116867
    Ivan Sorensen

    Glad you lot had a great time and I appreciate all the kind words.

    A few observations above that I just wanted to confirm:
    You can no doubt tell that Neil Thomas was a heavy inspiration. In a lot of ways “From Shako” was the result of that, merged with my own ideas about combat dice from developing FiveCore.

    My observation at the time was that being a little bit more “gamey” tended to get people more involved in the game.
    I figured if units can get worn down and you’re limited in your command abilities, then the game play can be a bit more dramatic and it’ll work out great.

    Combat is fairly deadly at the moment. The idea of rolling to confirm kills is a great idea and one I may keep around, if we ever get to do a second edition.
    It probably does need toning down slightly though the 1914 inclined gamer might enjoy them as they are!

    On the questions:

    1 The intention is that you make the formation change, then act as per the new formation. So you could form up and move off.
    The timing of the phases means you must charge before you can change formation, so if that’s the goal you have to be in the right formation on the prior turn.

    2 I’ve gone back and forth with how they’re meant to work. Your system seems as good as any.
    I think splitting the town into multiple sections might actually solve most of the trouble I kept bumping into.

    3 Yeah, there’s two models I hate to buy: Limbers and trucks. So I abstracted them out of the game.

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy – First Game #115400
    Ivan Sorensen

    Sure, and I could 100% see arguments why it should be the other way.

    The rationale I applied is that a combat situation may be pretty chaotic.
    So a tank is rolling through and blasting you.

    Well, the obvious answer is to have an AT gun knock it out, but firing an MG at the supporting infantry could help clear the area so you can assault it (f.x.)

    Ideally, it’d have to be within the same general area, but that’s hard to write a satisfactory rule for.

    I hope that makes sense!

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: C19th Colonial #115386
    Ivan Sorensen

    Anything involving
    A: French Foreign Legion
    B: Musketry

    Nordic Weasel Games

    in reply to: Hammer of Democracy – First Game #115382
    Ivan Sorensen

    Sorry about the delay!

    Still working on the tool kit, but there’s a couple small projects to do first. I didn’t want to “crowd” things too much

    1 The question was asked so I will pass it on. Does offensive and defensive support fire have to be at the same target the activated unit is attacking or is attacked by. Eg my infantry squad is fired upon by an enemy squad, I have an anti tank gun eligible to give support fire. If it support fires must it’s target be the enemy squad that fired or can it fire at a different more attractive target? I know the 6″ nearest target rule, let’s say that does not apply.

    They do not, though I am told that a lot of people either interpret it that way or opt to enforce that.
    The intention is that they can fire at whatever seems most valuable.

    2 Assaulting a half track with infantry without specialist AT weapons. This seemed to suggest a 10+ was needed, the same as against a proper tank. I thought a normal vehicle kill check minus armour value was perhaps more appropriate. What is intended?

    I’d use a kill check yeah.

    3 Do infantry anti tank teams have a range limit of 6″? Target has to be within assault range?

    So a lot of people have told me they want infantry AT to be able to shoot normally.
    As written right now, they’re strictly assault weapons.

    I imagine that will change, once I get the Polish update done.

    Nordic Weasel Games

Viewing 40 posts - 81 through 120 (of 1,982 total)