4th Edition Rules - comment now or forever shut yer trap!

[enrique]

More proposals

6.72 Decapitation
I would add the rule of "Infantry Attacks":

"If the highest-ranking leader on a side is eliminated through any method other than compound demoralization or desertion,
then that side’s initiative drops by two for the next two turns after the current turn. Also, for the rest of the current
turn plus the two turns thereafter, all leaders on that side who are of the same type as the eliminated leader must make a morale
check whenever they wish to activate. Each such leader that passes his morale check may activate normally, but each one
that fails his morale check loses his action phase for the turn and has a MOVED/FIRED marker placed on him immediately. If the
highest ranking leader on a side is eliminated through compound demoralization or desertion, the duration of the
penalty is doubled (that side’s initiative drops by two for the next four turns after the current turn, and for the rest of the current
turn plus the four turns thereafter all leaders on that side who are of the same type as the eliminated leader must make a morale
check whenever they wish to activate). Note that in all cases, initiative cannot drop below zero.
This rule can only affect each side once per game. So for example, if the highest ranking German leader listed in scenario
instructions is an Oberst, then if the Oberst is eliminated and then a Major is eliminated later in the game, the Decapitation rule only
applies when the Oberst is killed".

7.63 Assault
I would apply the rule of the first and second editions: all AFVs are immune to "M" and "M #" results. They are only affected by "1", "2" and "3" results. Under the current rules AFVs are the weakest units in assaults: they do not take advantage of the leaders' morale modifiers and also suffer the effects of the small and portable AT arms (Panzerfäuste and bazookas)

8.2 Limiting Terrain (Hills)
Michael Murphy says: "Barring other terrain features, two units at the same level, and on the same hill, are not in limiting terrain with respect to each other. LOS between these units is limited normally by terrain and visibility. Units at the same level do not receive the -1 DF column shift for firing at each other.

I completely agree.

8.23 Terrain Artwork
I would apply here also the rule of "Infantry Attacks":

"A hex contains limiting terrain if all or any part of the hex is covered by limiting terrain artwork (woods, hills, fields or town)".

8.4 Elevation
I would delete this rule: "LOS is also blocked if it passes through two elevation lines of equal height and one of the hexes is lower than both elevation lines". After six years and near 200 plays I do not understand this sentence.

11.12 Crossfire
The current rule says: "+2 if the target is attacked this turn through two or more non-adjacent hexes." I would say: "+2 if the target is attacked this turn through two or more non-adjacent HEXSIDES."

15.3 Cavalry
Cavalry can dismount. I would add: "Dismounting uses up a unit’s entire action segment and movement allowance (it cannot fire or move to a different hex on the same segment when it dismounts); place a MOVED/FIRED marker on it once it is done dismounting. Remove the mounted piece and replace it with a standard infantry unit. Dismounted units cannot re-mount".

16.2 Diggin In
The rule says: "Activated, undemoralized units may "dig in" at any hex except ...". I would say: "Activated, undemoralized and UNDISRUPTED units may...".

[campsawyer]

Please add picture diagrams....

Is that okay to ask?

Yes, ok to ask. Are looking for pictures of the counter? If so, there is nothing designed yet. Just looking for other status markers that could be useful.

[Michael Murphy]

Please add picture diagrams....

Is that okay to ask?

That's the whole point to this thread, I do believe.

[Shad]

7.63 Assault
I would apply the rule of the first and second editions: all AFVs are immune to "M" and "M #" results. They are only affected by "1", "2" and "3" results. Under the current rules AFVs are the weakest units in assaults: they do not take advantage of the leaders' morale modifiers and also suffer the effects of the small and portable AT arms (Panzerfäuste and bazookas)

Love this. Yes yes yes.

Please add picture diagrams....

Is that okay to ask?

Yes, ok to ask. Are looking for pictures of the counter? If so, there is nothing designed yet. Just looking for other status markers that could be useful.

I think he was referring to diagrams illustrating certain rules, rather than marker sheet mock-ups.

[emperor_nero]

Yeah, sorry. I should have been more detailed. I suppose it would take more time and cost more money but it would be very helpful to new players to have diagrams of some of the rules, or possibly like a quickstart rule set that cuts out some of the complex stuff and will let a new player to get into the game quicker adding more rules as they feel confident with the current set.

[JayTownsend]

I haven't had a lot of time lately but here is one:

Placement of Wreck counters for not only Bridges and town hexes but also for Tanks/AFVs eliminated or reduced while traveling on a road hex.

[Michael Murphy]

I haven't had a lot of time lately but here is one:

Placement of Wreck counters for not only Bridges and town hexes but also for Tanks/AFVs eliminated or reduced while traveling on a road hex.

If the vehicle's can generate a wreck in a town or bridge hex it should also be capable of leaving a wreck in other terrain as well. How about when the target is in a woods hex or on an embankment? Shouldn't any restrictive terrain be eligible for wreck placement?

[campsawyer]

Yeah, sorry. I should have been more detailed. I suppose it would take more time and cost more money but it would be very helpful to new players to have diagrams of some of the rules, or possibly like a quickstart rule set that cuts out some of the complex stuff and will let a new player to get into the game quicker adding more rules as they feel confident with the current set.

Agreed, this would be nice. So more though in terms of presentation would be required.

Shad, you are good with the graphics, could you whip something up?

[campsawyer]

all AFVs are immune to "M" and "M #" results. They are only affected by "1", "2" and "3" results.

I am not comfortable with this one. I believe tanks are vulnerable in assault and a DIS/DEM result means more than being frightened by the enemy but damage that might be repaired over a short time.

If any change is required, I would be inclined to allow leader morale mods in assaults for tanks rather than diminishing results.

[tlangston28]

all AFVs are immune to "M" and "M #" results. They are only affected by "1", "2" and "3" results.

I am not comfortable with this one. I believe tanks are vulnerable in assault and a DIS/DEM result means more than being frightened by the enemy but damage that might be repaired over a short time.

If any change is required, I would be inclined to allow leader morale mods in assaults for tanks rather than diminishing results.

I think I agree with you here - I am not an armored expert by any stretch but I would imagine that the restricted view from within the tanks coupled with a limited close range direct fire (and here, I am assuming that the DF on tanks represents .50 Cal or equivalent MGs and possibly HE rounds) would make them susceptible to infantry that is able to get inside the defensive "fire" perimeter so to speak and drop grenades, attach satchel charges, sticky bombs or whatever else they would use.