Prime Movers....that KMS again

[cjsiam]

So part of the issue may be that we are playing a EFdx scenario with PGV4.....

In Eastern Front KMS is a prime mover.

It has an Armor value of 0....but it's armored....

We come up with a situation where Can a MG fire through the hex with the KMS?
if it was an AFV---then the answer is yes....

it is an open-top armored transport---but does it count as an AFV?

the PGV4 1.2 section talks about AFV, APC....and I'm not clear.....

We did not allow the MG to fire through to the infantry on the other side of the KMS....  

Did we do it right?

(by the way it's the same KMS that caused all that hubbub about loading and firing...trouble maker)
cj

[plloyd1010]

I think it is an AFV, just as halftracks & other APCs are AFVs.

[Hugmenot]

1.2 Definitions

Armored Fighting Vehicle (AFV): Any unit with a printed armor defense value (even a value of 0). This includes self-propelled artillery, armored cars, special armored engineering vehicles, armored personnel carriers, and other similar vehicles. A tank leader may activate any of these.


The KMS is an Armored Fighting Vehicle. AFV's do not block fire (see 10.1).

By the way, I too had many questions my first two or three plays and then rules started to click.

[cjsiam]

1.2 Definitions

Armored Fighting Vehicle (AFV): Any unit with a printed armor defense value (even a value of 0). This includes self-propelled artillery, armored cars, special armored engineering vehicles, armored personnel carriers, and other similar vehicles. A tank leader may activate any of these.


The KMS is an Armored Fighting Vehicle. AFV's do not block fire (see 10.1).

By the way, I too had many questions my first two or three plays and then rules started to click.

Thanks Hugmenot....I've played quite a few more then two or three----these seem to be edge case where language is imprecise, or more 
details are needed to capture the particular scenario...

Rules writing is hard....

This is about the 7th tactical level WWII game I've played in some depth....
I'm liking it alot so far.
Unlearning ASL is a life long exercise.....the scares run deep....

[Hugmenot]

You can check a sample of my rules writing style in Land Cruisers if you own that module. It's a lot of work and I was constantly setting up situations to check clarity, completeness, and coherence.

I do test for other companies a few times a year and I am now pretty good at finding holes in the rules, even after games have been tested a lot.

There was a time when I wanted to write version 5.0 of the rules but no longer. I promised Shad I would post some illustrated examples of play on PG-HQ and I do intend to do so. Just not until late this year at the earliest.

I played a lot of ASL in the 80's and 90's (~200 scenarios) but sold everything in the great purge of '96. I have no intention to ever going back to full ASL because I no longer view wargames primarily as a competition and that's what I liked best about ASL (and M:TG).