Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LPG

  1. LPG

    Firing arcs?

    Real life interrupted my stream of questions; resuming now, I think I've forgotten a few. But here's another long one: How exactly are Firing Arcs intended to work? The rules appear clear as written; but I have a knack for spotting ambiguities (and then picking the wrong interpretation as the "common sense" one...) p48: Front-mounted weapons have a 180-degree forward arc; arm-mounted weapons have a 180-degree left/right-facing arc "cav models may rotate their firing arcs up to 90 degrees left or right by twisting their torso" These are additive, correct? A model could, for example, fire its left-arm weapon at 4 o'clock (right, slightly behind) by rotating the torso 60 degrees to the left (facing 10 o'clock, opposite 4), putting 4 o'clock right on the edge of the Left firing arc? The rules seem clear on it, but the result is surprising; it seems to mean every weapon has a full 360-degree effective field of fire. A Left Arm "normally" points forward, but its firing arc lets it rotate towards the left all the way to pointing backwards; an extra leftward torso twist brings that to a 270-degree rotation. And pointing forward, a rightward torso twist gives the missing 90 degrees. (on the magic of bellar joints: looking at, say, a dictator, it seems a little odd that a left-mounted cannon can be twisted all the way around to pointing backwards, but can't be rotated to the right of straight-ahead at all...) It seems the rules only impact the ability to use left-, right- AND front-mounted weapons at the same time (are there actually rear-mounted weapons? I don't recall seeing any), when firing at a target in the rear half-circle. An opponent directly behind can be targeted by both left and right arm (each doing a 180 in opposite directions) without rotating torso - but then a front-mounted weapon can't be used; or, with a 90-degree torso twist, can be targeted by one arm and the Front, leaving out the other arm instead. I understand (and applaud) the benefits of an abstract system like this over specific per-model, per-weapon firing-arc values; it just seems like a rule that has so little impact it wouldn't change the game much if it didn't exist... (though I may some day be very glad or very annoyed to see an Ogre limited to firing 2 PBGs) And a lesser question: p58, "multiple targets": "a model may split its fire [...] provided that all of the targets are in the same firing arc". What exactly does that mean? - all targets must be within the Front 180degrees, or all must be within the Left 180degrees, or... etc? this much seems clear enough - but then which weapons can be used? only weapons matching the "chosen" firing arc, or any weapon in whose own firing arc a particular target falls? i.e. a dictator with 3 targets: A directly ahead, B slightly to its right, C slightly to its left - A, B and C are all in the same (Front) firing arc, so all 3 can be targeted. Without a torso twist, A falls in both Left and Right firing arcs, so both cannons could target it, as could the GM; only Right cannon can target B. So we can shoot, say, R at B, L at A, and GM at C. OR - A and C are in the Left firing arc, so can fire left cannon and GM at them, that's it. A torso twist could bring B into the Left arc too, but dictator doesn't have a 3rd left-mounted weapon, so there's no point. And a tiny question to close: the 90-degree torso twist is "once a turn"; is a twist "back to neutral" after firing implied? Or do we have to remember "this model rotated 70 degrees left to fire; until it's next activation, that's where it's going to be pointing"?
  2. Context: new to CAV (& the forum, & wargames in general); picked up the KS1 core mostly for paiting, picked up the rule book out of curiosity when it was offered; last weekend finally got around to trying out a basic dictator-vs-dictator game to get a handle on the rules. There were a number of points of confusion during play, which we just winged, but now it's time to clarify. More posts will follow; let's start with the cover rules. (if any of these points are plainly stated in the books and we just missed it, page & paragraph references appreciated!) 1) Is cover always symmetrical? I think this one is simple, but I'm double-checking it first since the rest relies on it. Given CAV B and CAV B standing in two particular spots, will the direct-fire cover modifiers always be the same, regardless of who's shooting who? Example: CAV A standing in light woods, CAV B in open terrain; CAV A firing at CAV B suffers light cover modifier, and so does CAV B firing at CAV A? Same for standing adjacent to a hill? 2) How does cover from hill-adjacency work? The text of the rules mentions line of sight exists but a cover modifier applies when a model is "adjacent" to an elevation lower than both attacker and defender elevations, but doesn't seem to say what that modifier is. Among the illustrated examples is one showing a CAV near an E1 hill, benefitting from light cover; but it's not clear how to extrapolate from this. a) CAV A on E0, near E1 hill, CAV B far away, standing on E0 b) CAV A on E0, near E1 hill, CAV B far away, standing on E2 c) CAV A on E0, near E2 hill, CAV B far away, standing on E0 etc. what's the general rule? 3) Does cover stack? a) CAV A standing in Heavy Woods, CAV B standing in Light Woods. What cover modifier is applied to direct-fire attacks from A to B? One source of Light Cover, one source of Heavy Cover, couldn't find a clear statement on whether we pick the heaviest cover or add both. b) CAV A standing in light woods, adjacent to heavy woods; CAV B in open terrain on the other side of the heavy woods. What's the cover modifier now? c) CAV A standing in heavy woods, on E0, adjacent to an E1 hill. CAV B standing some distance beyond the hill, on E0, in open terrain. Again, what's the cover modifier? Just higher of the wood & hill cover, sum, other? d) CAV A and B on E1, on opposite sides of an E2 hill, both within 1" of it. Again, does the advacent-to-hill cover apply once or twice? I'm hoping for definitive answers from CAVBOSS, but I'll be interested to know how others handle it (and if everyone handles it the same!)
  3. LPG

    Clarifications needed.

    This was going to be my next question, so thanks from me as well :) CAVBOSS may be interested in the reasons people misunderstand rules, so here's what I found confusing: - The Ranged assault and guided missile section (p57) tells us we can fire missiles as "part" of either a direct-fire or indirect-fire assault; it doesn't actually say how it gets used - The Ranged assault (p54) section reinforces this, indicating that an Indirect Fire assault can be made with either GMs or SA:IF weapons. - The Strike Point Roll section (p56) seems a little muddled on whether a strike point roll is something that applies to an assault or to a weapon. On the one hand, it's "weapon systems with the SA:IF" that "target a specific area"; but on the other hand, it tells us to make a strike point roll after declaring the strike point "for an indirect-fire assault". Since it's been established that a GM is used as "part" of the IF assault, this left me confused as to whether the strike point should apply to the GM. A GM requiring a strike point roll in one case but not the other made little sense to me; and drift on a non-AoE weapon seemed a little silly. So I'm glad to see the "sensible" interpretation is the correct one.
  4. Thank you! Most enlightening, with a couple of surprises I'd like to follow up on... Just a quibble on this. The bullet list tells what modifier each cover type has; what it doesn't seem to address is that "adjacent to E1 hill" is considered Light Cover (and E2 => Heavy). The Cover and Line of Sight Diagram shows it (CAV A to CAV C, CAV A to CAV G), but that diagram is presented as illustrating rules discussed elsewhere... I don't see an elsewhere. This is the big surprise. The impression I got from the book is just the opposite: p54, column 2, bullet 5: "the cover object is adjacent (within 1") to the attacking or defending model's base" To me that sounds like a clear "CAV A adjacent to E1 hill suffers cover penalty when shooting 'through' the hill". What am I misinterpreting? Does a hill not count as a "cover object"? (if not, that seems to only leave the examples as providing rules for hill cover...) Small surprise here; I don't see anything in the book that refers to the "attacker in a wood, but close to its edge, so no penalty" scenario. (example A vs F comes close, but it's defender in the wood). I'm happy to take your word over the book's, but is there a paragraph I skipped over? In fact, the "attacker or defender adjacent to a cover object" rule I quoted above seems to contradict it: if cover from wood applies even when I'm outside the wood, how can it NOT apply if I'm inside it? But it's already clear I've misunderstood that rule somehow. Final thought: thanks for the "important note"; that's a stacking case I should have thought about.