Search found 981 matches

by MLB
Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:38 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Covering fire in return
Replies: 5
Views: 1714

Covering fire in return

Can a section or team currently the recipients of covering fire put down covering fire themselves? I couldn't find anything in the rule book, but given they can fire (albeit with -1 pip modifier) I'm not sure it naturally follows that they can lay down covering fire, as that would imply they are fir...
by MLB
Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:26 pm
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Terrain and visibility
Replies: 11
Views: 3089

Re: Terrain and visibility

Not sure what you are saying here. CoC has no rule for lying down. One could presume units that are tactical or pinned are seeking greater cover and could be lying down, but that is not defined in the rules and there are no specific visibility rules for how or what these units can see. That said, I'...
by MLB
Fri Apr 08, 2016 11:40 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Terrain and visibility
Replies: 11
Views: 3089

Re: Terrain and visibility

It doesn't really matter if it's one field or more, look over a field of wheat, if the crops are all the same does another field of crops beyond separated by a road for example obscure your vision more? I'd suggest not. Well, that would depend. If I was lying down firing a LMG or a rifle team in a ...
by MLB
Fri Apr 08, 2016 11:30 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Terrain and visibility
Replies: 11
Views: 3089

Re: Terrain and visibility

two hedges though do increase the cover available. I notice that hedges seem to vary in their ability to block sight. Under what circumstances do you allow visibility over a hedge? The examples in the rule book have hedges blocking line of sight unless firer or target is directly behind, but you ob...
by MLB
Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:49 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Terrain and visibility
Replies: 11
Views: 3089

Terrain and visibility

Situation came up in a game last night where a section fired at a stationary target across two areas of crops (wheat) at a range of about 20". While we agreed the target was visible and would benefit from light cover, it did beg the question what is the situation in a scenario like the first one in ...
by MLB
Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:40 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Rifleman as opposed to crew
Replies: 15
Views: 4127

Re: Rifleman as opposed to crew

Last night I stumbled on an answer to my question in the rule book (something I'd missed earlier). Pg 10 in the section on teams it says "the riflemen are there to carry ammunition. In action these men may fire their rifles to add weight to the weapon team." That says my original inerpretation was c...
by MLB
Thu Apr 07, 2016 2:22 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Rifleman as opposed to crew
Replies: 15
Views: 4127

Rifleman as opposed to crew

I just wanted to clarify the difference between a man defined as crew as opposed to rifleman. A German LMG team is composed of one MG42 with two crew and a rifleman. A British LMG team is composed of one Bren with three crew. When it comes to firing, the German LMG team can fire with the MG42 and th...
by MLB
Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:18 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Removing shock
Replies: 7
Views: 2346

Re: Removing shock

Great thanks, that was how I'd understood the rule to play, but thanks for clarifying. After only a single game I'm really liking the way the playability of the rules doesn't prevent a good feel for the period. In my book that's always a good sign for a set of rules.
by MLB
Sun Apr 03, 2016 6:07 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Removing shock
Replies: 7
Views: 2346

Re: Removing shock

Thanks. On a similar sort of theme, assume I fire at a rifle team where I only have line of sight to three men from the team. I have a very successful fire phase and score four kills. I assume the fourth kill result is lost given I can't see more than three targets? However there is a also junior le...
by MLB
Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:25 am
Forum: Chain of Command
Topic: Activation rolls question
Replies: 24
Views: 6440

Re: Activation rolls question

Great, thanks. I'm getting there!