Post by osiris on Jan 21, 2016 19:26:13 GMT -5
Here are the Season 3 rules (In yellow), valid from Jan 2016 through the 1st of july 2016, they claim to be community driven and re-evaluated every 6 months, here are my thoughts (In red) , but feedback from everyone local is more than welcome:
Recce
Alert and attentive recon elements are able to get out of trouble as quickly as they are able to get into it,
bringing valuable intelligence back to their commanders.
Armored Reece vehicles may not perform an escape move if they have already activated this turn.
Soft skin Recce vehicles are not affected by this change and use the rules for escape moves found in
the Bolt Action Rule Book.
Ok let me preface this with the comment that I think the Recce rules in general are poorly implemented in the game, even before these tournament house rules modify them... I see no major reason to limit the escape move of the few armored recce vehicles that exist, although it must have been an issue somewhere, so I also don't have any argument against it. This is one of those "if it aint broke, dont fix it" things to me, but perhaps that's jut a result of my local meta not making this an issue.
Ambush
A well laid ambush can catch even the most elusive of enemy units off guard.
Units on ambush may shoot at units that advance, run, or perform an escape move.
This seems like a pretty obvious clarification, if this wasn't already in the main rules, it should have been FAQ/Errata'd in.
Cavalry
During the war, cavalry found themselves caught between tradition and progress. While a charge from mounted troops could be devastating, the men who rode into battle often found themselves exposed with nowhere to run.
All infantry units mounted on horses get two attacks in close combat. Polish Lancers get three attacks in close combat. Note: This change affects all cavalry units.
Cavalry units cannot make an escape moves if they have already activated.
Ok, I understand that cavalry as written in the rules are fairly overpowered, but just gimping them in such a manner also seems to be a knee jerk reaction... I think there would be a better way to limit these units in game. To be honest, you could have left their rules alone, but increased their points cost considerably. This would represent the relative rarity of such units on the battlefields of WWII, because they would be less cost-effective and therefore more rare (and less able to be taken in large numbers) Also, this would balance out their in-game effectiveness, by making a more effective unit, cost more points. which is what points are supposed to be for in the first place...
One man Turret
The cramped confines of a one man turret made it difficult for the crew to coordinate fire and movement.
Units with the one man turret special rule who do not have a pin on them must make an order test before being issued an advance order. If they fail their order test they suffer a -1 to hit penalty to any shooting performed during their activation.
Seems reasonable, without looking in the main rulebook, I can't remember what the unmodified version of this rule actually says, but this seems a legit modification, and also provides a further incentive to purchase expensive veteran vehicles.
Fixed Weapons:
Fixed weapons have to be set up before they can start operating. This makes it nearly impossible to move and fire. However, once deployed, a trained crew could rotate the weapon to meet any new threat.
Fixed Weapons can rotate up to 90 degrees in place with an advance order and shoot at -1 to hit. Note that is does not apply to weapons firing indirectly.
Many have said this, this should be a standard house rule, to be honest, warlord simply needs to FAQ/errata this into their rules as it basically fits with all other units already in their game.
Anti-Tank and Machine Gun Teams:
Anti-tank guns and machine guns primary purpose was defensive. Crews would set them up in anticipation of an enemy attack. These guns were often well concealed, allowing them to fire on an unsuspecting enemy unit before they were detected.
If an anti-tank gun, anti-aircraft gun, heavy machine gun, or medium machine guns team starts [on] the game on the board, it can start the game in ambush. This does not apply to anti-tank gun, anti-aircraft gun, heavy machine gun, or medium machine guns mounted on vehicles. They can also start the game hidden using the rules for Hidden Set-Up rules found on page 117 of the main rule book.
Again, this seems pretty reasonable, and a more accurate representation of how these weapons were actually employed. It does not drastically alter the rules or the balance of the units. Again, I completely agree with this one.
Infantry MMGs:
The primary role of infantry MMGs was to lay down a wall of fire to prevent the enemy from moving or attacking.
All Infantry MMGs increase their ROF to 6; German MMGs are 7 with Hitler’s Buzz Saw.
I actually had put on the forums that ALL Machineguns should increase their rate of fire to 6 (I explained the math in a more in depth post) however I had argued that the differences between the LMG, MMG, and HMG, should have been penetration (0, 1, and 2 respectively) due to caliber. Although doing so would have rendered the anti-tank rifle totally obsolete in the game unless it was also increased to 3 penetration, which would have also been acceptable. So in general I dont have a problem with this, although I do wonder why LMG's and HMG's are left out....
LMGs:
The LMG provided a strong base of fire for the majority of infantry formations during the war.
LMG Cost is 5 points in infantry squads.
Well, if you leave it at only 3 shots (which seems ridiculously low for a fully automatic squad support weapon) I suppose the dramatic price decrease makes sense. I had seen many mathematical arguments for 10 points (which is HALF price already) for example, comparing it to two assault rifles: 10 points, but they gain the assault special rule and one additional shot, compared to the LMG which had no assault rule, one less effective shot, but additional range. I honestly think 5 points is too cheap for this weapon, they go from way too expensive to be worth it to way too cheap not to have it, both of those conditions are not good from a balance perspective...
Turntable:
Many AA guns were mounted on turntables so they could quickly traverse and fire at aircraft.
Anti-Aircraft Guns mounted on turntables have a 360 degree arc of fire and do not suffer the -1 penalty for moving and shooting. If they rotate to shoot they must turn the unit so that it is facing their target.
AA is such a joke in the game as it is, this rule would seem to have very little effect on gameplay, but even then I also don't see any reason not to have this rule, as again, it makes sense. IRL, even non-vehicle mounted AA guns could quick traverse...
Armored Open Top Vehicles:
Armored personal carriers came into their own during the War. Their primary purpose was to offer unprecedented protection to the men who were carried inside. Additionally, lightly armored tank hunters and artillery provided their crews with mobility and protection not enjoyed by their ground based counter parts.
When opened topped armored vehicles and passengers riding in open topped armored transports are shot at by small arms they do not necessarily received a pin. Inexperienced units always pinned from small arms fire, regular units receive a pin on a D6 roll of 4 or more, and veterans are not pinned by small arms fire.
Passengers of armored open topped transports check to see if they receive a pin separate from the vehicle.
This is exactly the same as the Errata'ed warlord rules of armoured vehicles, this makes sense and is an excellent addition to the basic rules.
Armored Transports:
Armored transport crew compliments were also trained on the use of their vehicle mounted weapons. These weapons were used to support and cover the infantry they transported.
Armored transports can fire one weapon while empty.
This also seems to make sense, I doubt the driver of such a vehicle is alone... but no mention of the auto-destruction if they are closer to the enemy than a friendly unit? (that was repeatedly discussed on the forums) I would have to see how this plays out to make final judgement, but so far it seems basically ok.
Vehicle Flamethrowers:
Vehicle flamethrowers were terrifying machines that spat hot fire at enemy strong points.
VFT have a 12 inch range and run out of fuel on 1 or 2.
VFT's already had a 12 inch range, read your Errata... So all this does is make them run out of fuel 1/3 of the times it fires (or 16.67% more often...) in a 6 turn game this is a ludicrously high chance especially for such a very expensive points investment for the weapon. I dont agree with this at all. See the next entry below for more:
Flamethrowers:
Even though they are extremely deadly, flamethrowers can be hard to wield and terrifying to handle. --wait... what? according to what? You watch too many movies, look at the legitimate battlefield statistics for these weapons...
All flamethrowers (vehicle and infantry) must roll a D6 when they attack and hit their target on a 3+. This roll is never modified and the unit must test to see if it runs out of fuel regardless of if it hits or not.
Ok, we ALL know flamethrowers need to be reduced in power, they are WAY too good in the base rules, although they are dangerous to carry and expensive in points. The "to hit" suggested in this house rule is not necessary, as it is basically already factored in to the following roll "to kill" basically if you fail to cause a wound/kill do you REALLY think that guy was hit with a gout of napalm flame?! Also veterans have a better chance of surviving the attack (taking effective cover, getting out of harms way) than inexperienced troops, the flat 3+ doesn't bother to take any of this into account. and honestly, the most DEVASTATING part of the flame-thrower rules, is AFTER they cause pin markers (usually multiple), the targeted unit needs a morale test or be COMPLETELY DESTROYED, even if only 1 or 2 guys in a large 10+ man unit are actually killed.... this simply does not make sense. The rules as written state that a unit must test or be destroyed after suffering a certain number of casualties.... there's no reason to have a flame-thrower cause an automatic test, simply follow the rules as they already exist... did the flamer thrower attack kill enough people in the unit? test. if not? no test. When the casualties start mounting around you, it makes little difference from where the death comes... only that it is coming... So basically: I understand the intent, but the implementation of this house rule is TERRIBLE, it bypasses existing game mechanics, and creates an arbitrary flat chance of an effect with no statistical analysis or reasoning.
Heavy and Super-Heavy AT guns:
Most AT guns were able to fire both AT and HE rounds to deal with enemy targets. Tanks played an important role in supporting infantry attacking defensive positions.
HE for heavy and super-heavy AT guns is increased to 1D6, unless their unit entry notes otherwise.
I can see making super-heavy a bit higher to represent the added firepower, but heavy should remain d3.... the purpose of these weapons in not to be mobile-multipurpose anti-vehicle anti-personnel in the game. They are meant to punch through vehicles. If you want anti-infantry shells, that's what howitzers are for... but honestly, even d3 hits can still hurt a squad, especially combined with the fact that the vehicle firing this weapon is probably also contributing machinegun fire. However, I do wonder why warlord drastically reduced the penetration values when fired in HE mode, it's still a powerful explosion filled with fast moving shrapnel and bits of whatever it hit...(or even phosphorus for specialized shells!) Overall however, I disagree with this change, again it bypasses some of the mechanics of the game... despite having a somewhat 'realistic' reasoning behind it. Although I could see adding it for the massive and points intensive "super-heavy" guns only (because why should they be the same as 'mere' heavy guns?).
Horse Tows:
Horse drawn limbers and carts formed the backbone of most armies during the war.
Any nation can use the Horse Drawn Tow found in the Ostfront book.
Yup. seems legit. only USA produced enough light transport vehicles to not really need horse drawn things in any appreciable numbers, but there's no reason why they COULDNT use them if they wanted or needed to...
Additional units:
Homebrew armybooks.... the bane of most modern wargames... No matter how well written, I object to these pretty much because of what they are... You want to play hungarians? fine use the german book, create your own platoon that fits their organization, perhaps create a 'historical selector', but leave the homebrew rules for friendly games, dont push them as 'tournament legal'...
The unofficial Ethiopian and Hungarian army list supplement PDF’s will be recognised in Season
3 of the Format.
drive.google.com/a/fairfaxmedia.com.au/file/d/0B_bdXINVeeuMcUR4MDFqcUh3Y2M/view
network.wwpd.net/pdf/Armies_of_Ethiopia.pdf
This is a living document!
This document has been developed by the community over the last 18months. Every 6 months we refine this set of rules adjestments. If you have feedback or suggestions please drop by the WWPD Bolt Action forums and add your ideas:
So you say, but I rarely see viable feedback to the suggestions there, and there are no real explinations as to what makes it into "cannon" and what does not... These are just house rules that are published from a large gaming group, and nothing more.
There are also several rules and balance discussions on the forums that are simply ignored completely by this 'ruleset'...
Recce
Alert and attentive recon elements are able to get out of trouble as quickly as they are able to get into it,
bringing valuable intelligence back to their commanders.
Armored Reece vehicles may not perform an escape move if they have already activated this turn.
Soft skin Recce vehicles are not affected by this change and use the rules for escape moves found in
the Bolt Action Rule Book.
Ok let me preface this with the comment that I think the Recce rules in general are poorly implemented in the game, even before these tournament house rules modify them... I see no major reason to limit the escape move of the few armored recce vehicles that exist, although it must have been an issue somewhere, so I also don't have any argument against it. This is one of those "if it aint broke, dont fix it" things to me, but perhaps that's jut a result of my local meta not making this an issue.
Ambush
A well laid ambush can catch even the most elusive of enemy units off guard.
Units on ambush may shoot at units that advance, run, or perform an escape move.
This seems like a pretty obvious clarification, if this wasn't already in the main rules, it should have been FAQ/Errata'd in.
Cavalry
During the war, cavalry found themselves caught between tradition and progress. While a charge from mounted troops could be devastating, the men who rode into battle often found themselves exposed with nowhere to run.
All infantry units mounted on horses get two attacks in close combat. Polish Lancers get three attacks in close combat. Note: This change affects all cavalry units.
Cavalry units cannot make an escape moves if they have already activated.
Ok, I understand that cavalry as written in the rules are fairly overpowered, but just gimping them in such a manner also seems to be a knee jerk reaction... I think there would be a better way to limit these units in game. To be honest, you could have left their rules alone, but increased their points cost considerably. This would represent the relative rarity of such units on the battlefields of WWII, because they would be less cost-effective and therefore more rare (and less able to be taken in large numbers) Also, this would balance out their in-game effectiveness, by making a more effective unit, cost more points. which is what points are supposed to be for in the first place...
One man Turret
The cramped confines of a one man turret made it difficult for the crew to coordinate fire and movement.
Units with the one man turret special rule who do not have a pin on them must make an order test before being issued an advance order. If they fail their order test they suffer a -1 to hit penalty to any shooting performed during their activation.
Seems reasonable, without looking in the main rulebook, I can't remember what the unmodified version of this rule actually says, but this seems a legit modification, and also provides a further incentive to purchase expensive veteran vehicles.
Fixed Weapons:
Fixed weapons have to be set up before they can start operating. This makes it nearly impossible to move and fire. However, once deployed, a trained crew could rotate the weapon to meet any new threat.
Fixed Weapons can rotate up to 90 degrees in place with an advance order and shoot at -1 to hit. Note that is does not apply to weapons firing indirectly.
Many have said this, this should be a standard house rule, to be honest, warlord simply needs to FAQ/errata this into their rules as it basically fits with all other units already in their game.
Anti-Tank and Machine Gun Teams:
Anti-tank guns and machine guns primary purpose was defensive. Crews would set them up in anticipation of an enemy attack. These guns were often well concealed, allowing them to fire on an unsuspecting enemy unit before they were detected.
If an anti-tank gun, anti-aircraft gun, heavy machine gun, or medium machine guns team starts [on] the game on the board, it can start the game in ambush. This does not apply to anti-tank gun, anti-aircraft gun, heavy machine gun, or medium machine guns mounted on vehicles. They can also start the game hidden using the rules for Hidden Set-Up rules found on page 117 of the main rule book.
Again, this seems pretty reasonable, and a more accurate representation of how these weapons were actually employed. It does not drastically alter the rules or the balance of the units. Again, I completely agree with this one.
Infantry MMGs:
The primary role of infantry MMGs was to lay down a wall of fire to prevent the enemy from moving or attacking.
All Infantry MMGs increase their ROF to 6; German MMGs are 7 with Hitler’s Buzz Saw.
I actually had put on the forums that ALL Machineguns should increase their rate of fire to 6 (I explained the math in a more in depth post) however I had argued that the differences between the LMG, MMG, and HMG, should have been penetration (0, 1, and 2 respectively) due to caliber. Although doing so would have rendered the anti-tank rifle totally obsolete in the game unless it was also increased to 3 penetration, which would have also been acceptable. So in general I dont have a problem with this, although I do wonder why LMG's and HMG's are left out....
LMGs:
The LMG provided a strong base of fire for the majority of infantry formations during the war.
LMG Cost is 5 points in infantry squads.
Well, if you leave it at only 3 shots (which seems ridiculously low for a fully automatic squad support weapon) I suppose the dramatic price decrease makes sense. I had seen many mathematical arguments for 10 points (which is HALF price already) for example, comparing it to two assault rifles: 10 points, but they gain the assault special rule and one additional shot, compared to the LMG which had no assault rule, one less effective shot, but additional range. I honestly think 5 points is too cheap for this weapon, they go from way too expensive to be worth it to way too cheap not to have it, both of those conditions are not good from a balance perspective...
Turntable:
Many AA guns were mounted on turntables so they could quickly traverse and fire at aircraft.
Anti-Aircraft Guns mounted on turntables have a 360 degree arc of fire and do not suffer the -1 penalty for moving and shooting. If they rotate to shoot they must turn the unit so that it is facing their target.
AA is such a joke in the game as it is, this rule would seem to have very little effect on gameplay, but even then I also don't see any reason not to have this rule, as again, it makes sense. IRL, even non-vehicle mounted AA guns could quick traverse...
Armored Open Top Vehicles:
Armored personal carriers came into their own during the War. Their primary purpose was to offer unprecedented protection to the men who were carried inside. Additionally, lightly armored tank hunters and artillery provided their crews with mobility and protection not enjoyed by their ground based counter parts.
When opened topped armored vehicles and passengers riding in open topped armored transports are shot at by small arms they do not necessarily received a pin. Inexperienced units always pinned from small arms fire, regular units receive a pin on a D6 roll of 4 or more, and veterans are not pinned by small arms fire.
Passengers of armored open topped transports check to see if they receive a pin separate from the vehicle.
This is exactly the same as the Errata'ed warlord rules of armoured vehicles, this makes sense and is an excellent addition to the basic rules.
Armored Transports:
Armored transport crew compliments were also trained on the use of their vehicle mounted weapons. These weapons were used to support and cover the infantry they transported.
Armored transports can fire one weapon while empty.
This also seems to make sense, I doubt the driver of such a vehicle is alone... but no mention of the auto-destruction if they are closer to the enemy than a friendly unit? (that was repeatedly discussed on the forums) I would have to see how this plays out to make final judgement, but so far it seems basically ok.
Vehicle Flamethrowers:
Vehicle flamethrowers were terrifying machines that spat hot fire at enemy strong points.
VFT have a 12 inch range and run out of fuel on 1 or 2.
VFT's already had a 12 inch range, read your Errata... So all this does is make them run out of fuel 1/3 of the times it fires (or 16.67% more often...) in a 6 turn game this is a ludicrously high chance especially for such a very expensive points investment for the weapon. I dont agree with this at all. See the next entry below for more:
Flamethrowers:
Even though they are extremely deadly, flamethrowers can be hard to wield and terrifying to handle. --wait... what? according to what? You watch too many movies, look at the legitimate battlefield statistics for these weapons...
All flamethrowers (vehicle and infantry) must roll a D6 when they attack and hit their target on a 3+. This roll is never modified and the unit must test to see if it runs out of fuel regardless of if it hits or not.
Ok, we ALL know flamethrowers need to be reduced in power, they are WAY too good in the base rules, although they are dangerous to carry and expensive in points. The "to hit" suggested in this house rule is not necessary, as it is basically already factored in to the following roll "to kill" basically if you fail to cause a wound/kill do you REALLY think that guy was hit with a gout of napalm flame?! Also veterans have a better chance of surviving the attack (taking effective cover, getting out of harms way) than inexperienced troops, the flat 3+ doesn't bother to take any of this into account. and honestly, the most DEVASTATING part of the flame-thrower rules, is AFTER they cause pin markers (usually multiple), the targeted unit needs a morale test or be COMPLETELY DESTROYED, even if only 1 or 2 guys in a large 10+ man unit are actually killed.... this simply does not make sense. The rules as written state that a unit must test or be destroyed after suffering a certain number of casualties.... there's no reason to have a flame-thrower cause an automatic test, simply follow the rules as they already exist... did the flamer thrower attack kill enough people in the unit? test. if not? no test. When the casualties start mounting around you, it makes little difference from where the death comes... only that it is coming... So basically: I understand the intent, but the implementation of this house rule is TERRIBLE, it bypasses existing game mechanics, and creates an arbitrary flat chance of an effect with no statistical analysis or reasoning.
Heavy and Super-Heavy AT guns:
Most AT guns were able to fire both AT and HE rounds to deal with enemy targets. Tanks played an important role in supporting infantry attacking defensive positions.
HE for heavy and super-heavy AT guns is increased to 1D6, unless their unit entry notes otherwise.
I can see making super-heavy a bit higher to represent the added firepower, but heavy should remain d3.... the purpose of these weapons in not to be mobile-multipurpose anti-vehicle anti-personnel in the game. They are meant to punch through vehicles. If you want anti-infantry shells, that's what howitzers are for... but honestly, even d3 hits can still hurt a squad, especially combined with the fact that the vehicle firing this weapon is probably also contributing machinegun fire. However, I do wonder why warlord drastically reduced the penetration values when fired in HE mode, it's still a powerful explosion filled with fast moving shrapnel and bits of whatever it hit...(or even phosphorus for specialized shells!) Overall however, I disagree with this change, again it bypasses some of the mechanics of the game... despite having a somewhat 'realistic' reasoning behind it. Although I could see adding it for the massive and points intensive "super-heavy" guns only (because why should they be the same as 'mere' heavy guns?).
Horse Tows:
Horse drawn limbers and carts formed the backbone of most armies during the war.
Any nation can use the Horse Drawn Tow found in the Ostfront book.
Yup. seems legit. only USA produced enough light transport vehicles to not really need horse drawn things in any appreciable numbers, but there's no reason why they COULDNT use them if they wanted or needed to...
Additional units:
Homebrew armybooks.... the bane of most modern wargames... No matter how well written, I object to these pretty much because of what they are... You want to play hungarians? fine use the german book, create your own platoon that fits their organization, perhaps create a 'historical selector', but leave the homebrew rules for friendly games, dont push them as 'tournament legal'...
The unofficial Ethiopian and Hungarian army list supplement PDF’s will be recognised in Season
3 of the Format.
drive.google.com/a/fairfaxmedia.com.au/file/d/0B_bdXINVeeuMcUR4MDFqcUh3Y2M/view
network.wwpd.net/pdf/Armies_of_Ethiopia.pdf
This is a living document!
This document has been developed by the community over the last 18months. Every 6 months we refine this set of rules adjestments. If you have feedback or suggestions please drop by the WWPD Bolt Action forums and add your ideas:
So you say, but I rarely see viable feedback to the suggestions there, and there are no real explinations as to what makes it into "cannon" and what does not... These are just house rules that are published from a large gaming group, and nothing more.
There are also several rules and balance discussions on the forums that are simply ignored completely by this 'ruleset'...
