Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
CAVBOSS

CAV: SO Errata

Recommended Posts

Well I had hoped we wouldn't have to do this but unfortuantely a couple of things didn't make it into the final book as planned. As a result we have a little bit of errata to publish.

 

CAV: SO Errata

Edited by CAVBOSS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that are printing the errata, in an effort to keep you from having to reprint the entire document, any further errata will be added as a separate page to the end of the current document. I have also added a black & white version with just the text for those wanting a more stream lined version.

 

CAV: SO Errata Text Only B&W

 

Update 12/31/2016

- Added Force Structure additions for Mortar Squads for all factions.

- Added additional clarifications for Infantry Mortars.

Edited by CAVBOSS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By CitizenCane
      Is Jamming an ECM signal an active process that must be maintained like current Electronic Warfare counter Measures or is it more like an EMP that just turns off ECM?
       
      In practice:
       
      If my Talon activates ECM to block Target-Locks, then my opponent successfully Jams my ECM with his warden, is my ECM gone until next turn or would it be back if I immediately destroy the warden that jammed my ECM on my next activation during that turn?
       
       
    • By Savage Coyote
      A few nights ago I managed to get a game of CAV in with MiniAddict and is son at Texas Toy Solider in Carrollton, TX.  Because of the three player nature we were faced with, his son and I were a team with each of us taking 3k points and MiniAddict taking 6.2k or so points!  We set up long ways on the table and the only modification due to the terrain type we had was to play "true line of sight."  Our terrain wasn't leveled well as it was more 40k/Fantasy terrain so this seemed to work.  Forces were all "mercenary forces" by the rules due to composition/unit types"
       
      Templar Mercenaries:
      2x Centurion
      3x Duelist
      Spartan
       
      Spartan
      5x Javelin
       
      ADON/Terran Mercenaries:
      2x Naginatas 
      2x Wolves
      2x Poltergiests
       
      6x Chieftains
       
      Ritter Mercenaries:
      4x Lion II's
      1x Cougar
       
      Catamount (Jaguar model)
      3x Puma's (blue Cougar models)
      Thug
       
      We also decided to use individual model activation with the cards as opposed to section activation.  

       
      So Turn one was pretty much everyone rushing forward and/or moving forward and activating ECM to discourage target lock pot shots.  The Templar force was a little more cautious in it's approach than our side I think.
       

       
      Turn 2 was really more of the same, though we had our first suppression with my Catamount suppressing the Spartan that had used it's ECM.  One of the Javelins Run 'n' Gun'd and dropped four damage on my Cougar while the heavy tanks dropped a Javelin on the far left side.

       
      For all intents and purposes, the game ended on turn three.  We were positioned to be able to do a lot of damage and lucked out in the card deck draws.  We had five or six cards turn in row.  I took charge, activated the Catamount, and fired off his Active Phased Array 2, which netted all of the forward Templar elements.  Next, two Chieftains raced up to the center Spartan (he's behind the rock in the center of the board) and killed him with medium PBG's.  Next, my Thug moved over to put six damage on the far right Shootist.  The Shootist attempted defensive fire and did maybe one damage.  Everything else that shot at the Thug missed (honestly I thought I was trading the Thug to severely hurt the Duelist!). My Lion II's move up and gain line of sight to the second Duelist and kill it with one burn out (marked with a yellow 1.). Three chieftains peel left and kill the second Spartan while the other two Chieftains race over the left side Duelist and inflict some damage.  Our heavy tanks move forward and kill the brave Javelin, while wiffing on the other.  In MiniAddict's defense, his dice were about as cold as you could get.  All night.  It was painful for him and honestly for us because, in situations he should have inflicted damage or killed something (my Thug should have been dead) he'd only hit once or not at all.  The only glimmer of light was one of his Centurions putting six damage tracks on one of my Lion II's.  So there was that.  My Puma's all used their ECM 2 and we moved on to Turn 4.


       
      Turn Four was mainly advancing and cleaning up for our side.  My Catamount activated APA2 again while my Thug brought down the Duelist (though he burned out and I retreated back around the corner before his Centurion could engage again.  My Lion II's advanced forward and brought the center Centurion down to six damage tracks while follow up Chieftain hits brought it to 12 damage tracks.  On the other side, the heavy tanks damaged the lone Javelin and the Chieftains played tag with the left side Duelist slowly wearing it down, though the Duelist did manage to kill one of them and severely damage the other.  I lost a Lion II to a Centurion but my other three soldiered on.
       



       
      We called it after turn five, as the Lion II's and three Chieftains finished off both Centurions, the Duelist fell to the LBG of the Puma, and the Javelin was smoked by a Poltergeist or Wolf.  All in all MiniAddicts cold dice made this a lopsided game!  There were a lot of lessons and questions for this game and we look forward to playing again! 

    • By Rob Dean
      TL;DR: I don't understand tightly linked figure and rules ranges.
       
      I was writing my Huzzah report for my blog this morning, and one thing led to another.  My collaborator and I agreed at the convention that next year's game(s) was(were) going to be something using the combined resources of our 16th century home cast 40mm projects.  So, yesterday I dug out my bags of castings to see what I should start working on, and, after blogging this morning I decided that the proper thing to do was to muster the troops on the table and see what I really had. (My last inventory is both hidden somewhere and probably suspect anyway.)
       

       
      So, there they are: 4 artillery pieces, 18 assorted cavalry stands, 10 stands of pikes and pike command, 5 stands of swordsmen, 4 stands of improvised converted crossbowmen, and 8 stands of musketeers. (Three need repairs, which I can do today now that I've had them laid out.)  
       
      The story that goes with these figures is this:
       
      I have been interested in the 16th century, and the warfare of the 16th century, for longer than I can remember.  It's probably a combination of being an early music enthusiast and being exposed to Sir Charles Oman's History of the Art of War in the Sixteenth Century at an impressionable age.  In the early years of the current phase of my interest in the miniatures hobby (starting around 1987, say) I would play 16th century games at the conventions when I could, but never started my own project, being intimidate by painting all those Landsknechts.  
       
      By the time our club, the HAWKs, had started in 1994, I was already casting some of my own figures from commercial molds.  Chris Palmer, also a member of this board, and I both had fairly extensive mold collections, including two non-compatible 40mm 18th century sets.  Mine were Prince August, and his Nuernberger Meisterzinn. He also had a Meisterzinn catalog.  I don't know much about Meisterzinn, but they were already a zombie company (things kept in production but no new products) by 1994.  They had a small range of 16th century molds, and I thought that it would be an interesting challenge to collect them, cast up some figures, and put a game together.  A set of rules called Armati had just come out, with a Renaissance section and provision for playing with a single stand as a unit, so I used that as the basis for my casting.
       
      It took, as these things do, a couple of years to get things done to the point of playing games with them.  Not long after that, Chris decided to build some 40mm Leonardo da Vinci machines to go with them, inspired by a number of games of Leonardo Plus which were run at the cons for a few years.  Those rules didn't suit our collections, though, so we ended up staging a game using home rules at Cold Wars in 1999.  
       
      After that, the figures got put away for a while, until Ross and I ended up in discussions about how difficult it would be to convert enough of the figures to form the basis of a 16th century English army (still using the longbow).  From there, we ended up deciding to put on a game in 2004 using a scenario from the Anglo-Scots Wars of the 1540s.  The siege of Haddington in 1548 was nearly a perfect match for our hodgepodge collections, with mercenaries from all over Europe participating on one side or the other.  Once again, we had to write rules to suit our collection of miniatures.  My pictures of that game are unfortunately pre-digital, and buried somewhere.  We even got an award from the convention for that one, because it was unusual and eye-catching.
       
      Since then, we dust them off every few years, revise the rules again to taste, and set to.  If I'm at home, I'm somewhat limited by my collection, but I can still put on a decent two player game:

       
       
      I still haven't managed to get to the Siege of Malta in 1565, but Ross wants to do Turks this next year, so we'll see what happens.
       
      Anyway, after all of that, my point and question is this:
       
      With my DIY background, I have a hard time understanding what seems to me to be the ever increasing trend of players buying into tightly linked figure and rules lines.  I see posts/listen to podcasts/conversations/etc. in which people grouse about the speed with which games come out and die, and how that renders their miniatures useless.  I may be a little odd, but it's not that unusual in the historical community to accept that the figures you buy are going to end up being used with many sets of rules, that you may need to write a set to match the size of your collection, and that you might want to work on something that you like the look of, because the figures are forever, but the rules are ephemeral.
       
      Thoughts?  Are you a new person?  Another grognard like me?
       
       
       
       
  • Who's Online   40 Members, 3 Anonymous, 0 Guests (See full list)

×