Search found 3547 matches

by Seret
Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:23 pm
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Scottish Corridor Scenario 1 Clarification
Replies: 1
Views: 109

Re: Scottish Corridor Scenario 1 Clarification

The game is a Patrol by default, but the Germans have the option of playing it as Probe instead. It's just a typo.
by Seret
Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:16 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: 1940 Petrol Station
Replies: 12
Views: 350

Re: 1940 Petrol Station

You're not dreaming, here it is:

http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=3226
by Seret
Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:02 pm
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Close Combat Questions
Replies: 21
Views: 393

Re: Close Combat Questions

Yes, that's the extra 6d6 the gun gets in close combat, Neal.
by Seret
Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:05 pm
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Close Combat Questions
Replies: 21
Views: 393

Re: Close Combat Questions

To be honest, dug in unsuppressed MGs behind intact wire is probably not a tactical problem you can really solve by just throwing bodies at it, as the recent visions of poppy fields should be reminding us. You need to win the firefight before you can assault a prepared position. Charging in from the...
by Seret
Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:15 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Close Combat Questions
Replies: 21
Views: 393

Re: Close Combat Questions

However, thinking about it - it is hard cover when being shot at no doubt, but is it the same as walls or a building for hand to hand, grenades and point blank fire?* I have often read of accounts where once the assaulter's got in close they leapt in to the trench and things got really messy for th...
by Seret
Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:17 am
Forum: What a Tanker!
Topic: Superficial Hits and Aim
Replies: 3
Views: 285

Re: Superficial Hits and Aim

Why is it that, because it was a tie, the firer must re-aim in order to take that second shot? At the risk of stating the obvious: it's because the target has moved. Yes, sometimes that works to the target's advantage, but that's just tough luck for failing to penetrate. Get around on their flank a...
by Seret
Sat Nov 10, 2018 8:52 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: 1939 Poles errata
Replies: 114
Views: 1534

Re: 1939 Poles errata

The BAR was in no way technically equivalent to a proper LMG. That's why Rich created a while separate category for it. The combination of small magazines located under the weapon and (most importantly) the lack of a quick-change barrel means it'll never, ever achieve the same practical rate of fire...
by Seret
Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:52 pm
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: 1939 Poles errata
Replies: 114
Views: 1534

Re: 1939 Poles errata

There IS reason to change that. There's an error the lists: it's a four-man crew not a three-man crew. A BAR is 3d6 no matter how many crew it has. 1-man crew is 3d6, 4-man crew is still 3d6. What's the issue is how many of the men in the gun team should be free to use their rifles to supplement th...
by Seret
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:46 pm
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: 1939 Poles errata
Replies: 114
Views: 1534

Re: 1939 Poles errata

OK. Agreed the gun definitely requires a minimum of two crew. If we take 5D6 as our goal for the 4-man team As the others have said, that's putting the cart before the horse. You shouldn't be writing your list to achieve a certain effect, you should be writing it to reflect what happened in real li...
by Seret
Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:18 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: 1939 Poles errata
Replies: 114
Views: 1534

Re: 1939 Poles errata

Sure, I agree with the 4-man gun team, but the question was whether some or all of the supernumeraries should be using their personal weapons. Personally I'd lean towards a crew of at least two on the gun, reflecting Polish training and doctrine. Which would be a max of 5d6 for the whole group. IMO ...