Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
16 Posts

Tide of Iron» Forums » General

Subject: Turretless example. P.9 and 10 optional rules. More confusion... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
The diagram on p.9 does not appear to match the one on p. 10. Assuming p.9 is right (I actually seem to recall that that's what was agreed upon after 1A sharing the draft for this particular optional rule with us), the turretless example does NOT appear to be correct. It seems to me that the following would apply rather than what is shown in the diagram:

* In order to target unit A the Stug would have to make a fire and move attack, as the vehicle is currently to the Stug's right flank (the booklet more or less says that).

* To fire at squad B, according to me, it would also have to make a fire and move attack, as it is currently NOT in the Stug's front arc (but in its flank arc instead, according to the diagram on p.9. No idea why it would still lose an additional 1 FP, after all, it would already be forced to use a fire and move action in order to target it.

* To fire at tank C, according to me, the same applies to squad B, I really do not see it to be in the Stug's REAR arc, when I cross reference it to the diagram on page 9...(if the Sherman is indeed positioned as shown it would target the Sherman's REAR ARMOR, but that's an entirely different story...).

* To fire at tank D, it can indeed use its full firepower, as its in the Stug's front atc. Apperently it even gets to add 1 to its firepower then.No idea why, as its not targeting the Sherman's rear and, according to p.9, a unit does not get to add firepower, but the target's armor is reduced instead when its rear is targeted, which again, IMHO, in this case, it is not.

I'd appreciate feedback from others. This is not my strong suit, vehicle facing rules, that is, but I can't see it any other way than described above.

It's also a real shame 1A didn't make sure all the scenarios were correct. For instance, there is one where the victory conditions speak of controlling 6 victory objectives and there are only 5 on the map. In the first contact Russia one, I don't see a victory objective marker on the map in the first place. And that;s just two very obvious ones.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Chapman
United States
Powhatan
Virginia
flag msg tools
Axis & Allies Developer and Playtester; War of the Ring Editor and Playtester
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The diagram only makes sense if the firing arcs are different from the targeting arcs, with everything in the rear 180 degrees being in the rear firing arc.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Krieghund wrote:
The diagram only makes sense if the firing arcs are different from the targeting arcs, with everything in the rear 180 degrees being in the rear firing arc.


I know for a fact that different firing arcs and values were discussed. Apparently two non-matching diagrams were posted.i also know that the diagram showing the firing arcs on p.9 was decided upon, meaning that t,he one on p. 10 must be the faulty one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Krieghund wrote:
The diagram only makes sense if the firing arcs are different from the targeting arcs, with everything in the rear 180 degrees being in the rear firing arc.


Yeah, rereading your post, I see what you're getting at. If this is indeed the intention (for firing arcs and targeting arcs to be different), they certainly should have specified and clarified. Now I have no idea if it's an error or intentional.

I sure do hope that someone involved in this, could respond to this thread and other ones, to clear up some of the confusion surrounding the bonus booklet both concerning the rules as well as scenario issues.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Beckett
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You are right Willem, page 10 is wrong unless I am completely missing something. We spent weeks on this one and the consensus was that to hit squad "B" should be a fire and move action.

I don’t know of any roll modifiers for the turretless vehicles. It was either full power, or a fire and move (half). I remember I loved it, tested it and enjoyed how simple it was.

I think part the problem here in this example (page 10) comes from the disparity of trying to define what the arcs were.

The example on page 9 uses the arcs that we tested. The example on page 10 uses one that we talked about but didn’t really like, in that the front arc was expanded to cover the front half.

I will dig out the graphics that we used back then and post them to show the difference.

---John
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Beckett
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok, I dug out my notes on this and the biggest problem I have is that they went back to the old idea of modifying the defense dice instead of modifying the attack dice. Modifying the defense dice creates too many problems when combined with other stats and rules, modifying the attack dice eliminates all of those. I am pretty sure we were all in agreement with this. How it changed back I don’t know. Note that in the following graphic examples, we were modifying the attack dice.

I don’t have any notes that makes any modifiers to the turret less tanks. This is something new to me, I know it was mentioned, but by just using the fire and move rule for anything outside of its firing arc was far simpler and made a lot of sense thematically.

The statement about using the least advantageous arc is also different than what we said.

Here are the notes as I understood we left it:

Diagram of 4 arc system:



Diagram of 2 arc system (for comparison):



Using the preferred 4 arc system this is what the target looks like up close:




So, in a nutshell, it is something like:


Vehicle Facings
The facings in on Vehicle armor are defined as “Arcs”. There are four arcs, one for each side, the front arc, and the rear arc. The two side arcs are treated the same in these rules, unless a special scenario rules directs otherwise.

The arcs define modifiers to an attack on the target vehicle in the following way, before rolling an attack against a vehicle observe the following modifiers.

If the firing unit is located within the Front Arc of the target vehicle, then the firing unit subtracts one attack die from the attack.

If the firing unit is located within the Rear Arc of the target vehicle, then the firing unit adds one attack die to the attack.

If the firing unit is located within the either of the Side Arcs of the target vehicle, then there is no modifier, roll the attack as normal.



Arc Determination:
The arc is determined by the hex border of the target hex. To determine which arc to use, trace the LOS from the firing unit to the target unit‘s hex.

If the LOS enters the target’s hex by crossing the hex border that is to the front of the vehicle, then the Front Arc is used.

If the LOS enters the target’s hex by crossing the hex border that is to the rear of the vehicle, then the Rear Arc is used.

If the LOS enters the target’s hex by crossing the hex border that is to either side of the vehicle, then the Side Arcs are used.




Spine Hexes:
The Spine Hexes are the hexes that are in direct line with the borders of the sides of the target hex (indicated by the grey hexes on the previous diagram).

Firing from a spine hex creates unique situations but all are easily handled.

Priority Rule: If the LOS to both the front or rear arcs AND one of the side arcs is open, Then the front arc and the rear arc have priority when determining which arc to use, players must always choose either the front arc or the rear arc over either side arcs.

If LOS is blocked by terrain in one of the two bordering arcs, then the other arc is used for the modifiers. This supersedes the Priority Rule. See the examples below.



Obstacles, Terrain, Card, and Scenario Effects:
There are effects from various Obstacles (such as minefields) and terrain, (such as a frozen stream), that can cause damage to a vehicle. In these cases, all facing modifiers are ignored. Roll any damage normally.

If damage is caused by Cards, then the facing modifications are ignored.

In the case of an obstacle, terrain hex, or card makes a rolling attack against a vehicle, then facing modifiers are ignored.

Area Attacks:
If the vehicle is the subject of an area attack, then all facing modifiers are ignored.

Optional Rule for obstacles, terrain, card, scenario effects, and area attacks: If players wanted to add some interest and excitement, they may, at their option, before rolling any attack dice; the defender rolls a single die, if the result is a “1” then the attack is taken on the Front Arc (-1 attack die), if the result is a “6”, the attack is on the rear Arc (+1 attack die). All other results are ignored.


Turretless Vehicles:
A turretless vehicle must take a fire and move action to fire at any targets outside of it’s front arc. For the purposes of defining the front arc, this would include all normal front arc hexes, as well as the adjacent spline hexes.
Note that this would prevent a turretless vehicle from making an op-fire shot outside of its front arc.




This is what I have, note that it is way different than what is presented in the booklet. Still, some of this might help (or just ignore the book and go with what we tested and know works).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Chapman
United States
Powhatan
Virginia
flag msg tools
Axis & Allies Developer and Playtester; War of the Ring Editor and Playtester
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It looks to me like this is what they're saying for turretless fire:

\ /
\ /
\ +1 /
\ /
\ /
-1 \ / -1
\ /
\ /
--------.--------

Rear


3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Beckett
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yep, and makes sense according to the example. However, In the last 13 months, I have never seen such a proposal. I would love to hear from any of the other play testers that can tell me that I must have slept through this one.


EDIT: Just found some notes mentioning this. The only difference was there was no Fire and Move penalty originally, it was a -2 modifier in that rear arc.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I believe having to make a fire and movement action is "punishment" enough, no need to toss around any more modifiers.and i have to say i actually like that rule very much!

Yes, i also remember lots of options being discussd and it seems in the end rather a mash-up got posted...

I will just stick to the facing rules as explained on page 9 and have them apply to both targeting and firing arcs.

Not sure though why altering defense dice based on where a vehicle is hit should be a problem. Could you refresh my memory? I kind of like the +1/0/-1 solition.

Would you know anything about the limbering rules and op fire? It also seems to me that, for the sake of consistency, limbering in the same hex should not cause op fire, while unlimbering should (similar to leaving an exiting pillboxes, entrenchments and trenches). Then again, i could actually live with the rule as written. After all, if you see an enemy in the process of preparing to fire at you with a big gun, you would be well advised and inclined to fire at them! The problem is, with so many blantant errors in the booklet, one starts wondering if things were actually intended as written or whether it is yet another error. I can certainly appreciate things must be a big turmoil at 1A at the moment and must have been for quite some time now, but the game, the fans and even 1A themselves deserve better than to have this be their final goodbye to TOI. I mean, who proofread this? So many mistakes are so incredibly obvious, it's almost impossible to miss them. Personally i only got to read the booklet once it got published on 1A's website and even after only glancing over it once I spotted numerous errors.

Having said that, there's a lot of good stuff in there too and nothing that can't be fixed, but still... this has plagued TOI from the beginning; in essence a superb game with product released for it that has always been less than top notch for one reason or another (unbalanced scenarios, rule books prone with errors, too litle chpice in different vehicles etc.). I can't help but think if this had been as it should have been from the get-go TOI might well have been just as popular as say memoir '44 and we would have been sevral more expansions down the road by now.

Well, i stil love the game and i can fix things myself-with the help of others- but this shouldn't be necessary!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
1stSarge wrote:
Ok, I dug out my notes on this and the biggest problem I have is that they went back to the old idea of modifying the defense dice instead of modifying the attack dice. Modifying the defense dice creates too many problems when combined with other stats and rules, modifying the attack dice eliminates all of those. I am pretty sure we were all in agreement with this. How it changed back I don’t know. Note that in the following graphic examples, we were modifying the attack dice.

I don’t have any notes that makes any modifiers to the turret less tanks. This is something new to me, I know it was mentioned, but by just using the fire and move rule for anything outside of its firing arc was far simpler and made a lot of sense thematically.

The statement about using the least advantageous arc is also different than what we said.

Here are the notes as I understood we left it:

Diagram of 4 arc system:



Diagram of 2 arc system (for comparison):



Using the preferred 4 arc system this is what the target looks like up close:




So, in a nutshell, it is something like:


Vehicle Facings
The facings in on Vehicle armor are defined as “Arcs”. There are four arcs, one for each side, the front arc, and the rear arc. The two side arcs are treated the same in these rules, unless a special scenario rules directs otherwise.

The arcs define modifiers to an attack on the target vehicle in the following way, before rolling an attack against a vehicle observe the following modifiers.

If the firing unit is located within the Front Arc of the target vehicle, then the firing unit subtracts one attack die from the attack.

If the firing unit is located within the Rear Arc of the target vehicle, then the firing unit adds one attack die to the attack.

If the firing unit is located within the either of the Side Arcs of the target vehicle, then there is no modifier, roll the attack as normal.



Arc Determination:
The arc is determined by the hex border of the target hex. To determine which arc to use, trace the LOS from the firing unit to the target unit‘s hex.

If the LOS enters the target’s hex by crossing the hex border that is to the front of the vehicle, then the Front Arc is used.

If the LOS enters the target’s hex by crossing the hex border that is to the rear of the vehicle, then the Rear Arc is used.

If the LOS enters the target’s hex by crossing the hex border that is to either side of the vehicle, then the Side Arcs are used.




Spine Hexes:
The Spine Hexes are the hexes that are in direct line with the borders of the sides of the target hex (indicated by the grey hexes on the previous diagram).

Firing from a spine hex creates unique situations but all are easily handled.

Priority Rule: If the LOS to both the front or rear arcs AND one of the side arcs is open, Then the front arc and the rear arc have priority when determining which arc to use, players must always choose either the front arc or the rear arc over either side arcs.

If LOS is blocked by terrain in one of the two bordering arcs, then the other arc is used for the modifiers. This supersedes the Priority Rule. See the examples below.



Obstacles, Terrain, Card, and Scenario Effects:
There are effects from various Obstacles (such as minefields) and terrain, (such as a frozen stream), that can cause damage to a vehicle. In these cases, all facing modifiers are ignored. Roll any damage normally.

If damage is caused by Cards, then the facing modifications are ignored.

In the case of an obstacle, terrain hex, or card makes a rolling attack against a vehicle, then facing modifiers are ignored.

Area Attacks:
If the vehicle is the subject of an area attack, then all facing modifiers are ignored.

Optional Rule for obstacles, terrain, card, scenario effects, and area attacks: If players wanted to add some interest and excitement, they may, at their option, before rolling any attack dice; the defender rolls a single die, if the result is a “1” then the attack is taken on the Front Arc (-1 attack die), if the result is a “6”, the attack is on the rear Arc (+1 attack die). All other results are ignored.


Turretless Vehicles:
A turretless vehicle must take a fire and move action to fire at any targets outside of it’s front arc. For the purposes of defining the front arc, this would include all normal front arc hexes, as well as the adjacent spline hexes.
Note that this would prevent a turretless vehicle from making an op-fire shot outside of its front arc.




This is what I have, note that it is way different than what is presented in the booklet. Still, some of this might help (or just ignore the book and go with what we tested and know works).:D


Actually artillery, mortars and airpower targeting the rear armor makes sense (if it is taken to also represent top armor). It does make certain vehicles, very, very vulnerable to such attacks (those with base armor 3 or lower). I might actualy have double mortars attack light and medium tanks on a regular basis in such a case. Not sure if this is desirable...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Beckett
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
boersma8 wrote:
Not sure though why altering defense dice based on where a vehicle is hit should be a problem. Could you refresh my memory? I kind of like the +1/0/-1 solition.


I do have the notes on this saved, but one thing I remember about using the defense values instead of the attack values was the potential for negative numbers, such as a vehicle with a low armor rating (half track) or using with many cards that already lower an armor rating. But to be fair, that is when everyone was talking about +2/-2 modifiers, and we were running out of numbers on the scale.

There was more we ran into. I’ll look at stuff and see what else I can find.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
1stSarge wrote:
boersma8 wrote:
Not sure though why altering defense dice based on where a vehicle is hit should be a problem. Could you refresh my memory? I kind of like the +1/0/-1 solition.


I do have the notes on this saved, but one thing I remember about using the defense values instead of the attack values was the potential for negative numbers, such as a vehicle with a low armor rating (half track) or using with many cards that already lower an armor rating. But to be fair, that is when everyone was talking about +2/-2 modifiers, and we were running out of numbers on the scale.

There was more we ran into. I’ll look at stuff and see what else I can find.


Ok. I'd appreciate that.

Just adding:" a vehicle's armor rating can never drop below 0", would of course also help (-;
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Beckett
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
boersma8 wrote:
Actually artillery, mortars and airpower targeting the rear armor makes sense (if it is taken to also represent top armor). It does make certain vehicles, very, very vulnerable to such attacks (those with base armor 3 or lower). I might actualy have double mortars attack light and medium tanks on a regular basis in such a case. Not sure if this is desirable...


Yeah, I remember that being tossed around a lot and it does make sense. I also remember talk of a card that had this this type of verbiage to use as a balancing aid.

We really had a lot of fun with the following optional rule that sort of addresses this:

wrote:
Optional Rule for obstacles, terrain, card, scenario effects, and area attacks:
If players wanted to add some interest and excitement, they may, at their option, before rolling any attack dice; the defender rolls a single die, if the result is a “1” then the attack is taken on the Front Arc (-1 attack die), if the result is a “6”, the attack is on the rear Arc (+1 attack die). All other results are ignored.


This was fun as it was a exciting little “press your luck” mechanic. Players could do it at their choice, anytime. It could be tweaked to allow the attacker to make the choice or the defender, however you want to play it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J. Beckett
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
boersma8 wrote:
Just adding:" a vehicle's armor rating can never drop below 0", would of course also help (-;


Pretty sure that’s what you were saying back in June

After looking at everything, I really didn’t have a dog in this race. The only problem that I wrote in my notes was a psychological one.

I had a small problem with having two similar mechanics (Turretless Tanks and Firing arcs) where one used the attack dice and the other used the defense dice. I felt that they should both use one or the other.

I was shooting for consistency more than anything, as this type of thing is exactly what causes players to reference the rulebook when they shouldn’t have to.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
1stSarge wrote:
boersma8 wrote:
Just adding:" a vehicle's armor rating can never drop below 0", would of course also help (-;


Pretty sure that’s what you were saying back in June

After looking at everything, I really didn’t have a dog in this race. The only problem that I wrote in my notes was a psychological one.

I had a small problem with having two similar mechanics (Turretless Tanks and Firing arcs) where one used the attack dice and the other used the defense dice. I felt that they should both use one or the other.

I was shooting for consistency more than anything, as this type of thing is exactly what causes players to reference the rulebook when they shouldn’t have to.


As for your last comment above, so true!

As for the first one; that is quite possible, even though I don't recall.

I believe the simplest and cleanest solution, while staying true as much as possible to the rules as currently written, would be to say that the diagram on p.9 is correct and that it applies to both firing and targeting arcs. Hence the diagram on p. 10 is faulty. I'd also say that +1 armor die is awarded when the front is targeted, the printed armor value is used when the side is targeted and one armor die is lost when the rear is targeted. Note that armor values can never drop below "0". (so basically as currently written apart from the final sentence cool).

When it comes to turretless vehicles I'd keep it as simple as possible, while, as I said, as much as possible staying true to the currently printed text in the booklet:

"When a turretless vehicle wishes to attack an enemy unit not inside its front arc of fire (see p. 9), it is forced to take a move and fire action. This is true whether it just rotates within the hex it currently occupies or moves out of it. When targeting a unit that's already in its front arc of fire, it may take a concentrated fire action with no modifiers to its attack dice (unless dictated by an op card, strategy card or scenario special rule)".
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bill jaffe
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
wow something seriously got crazily missed
in the example the description on a is right
b requires a fire and move action since Willem is correct that's outside the front arc it should not lose 1 additional fp
unit c also requires a move and fire action and based on the pic i think it should be able to fire in the rear arc
as for unit d yes your right it's not +1 fp it's supposed to be +1 defensive die, your firing on the strongest part of the armor

and you never reduce the armor value below 1 as stated in the facing rules description on page 8


as for the scenario issues i apologize as to errors that got by or older data that got used when i looked it had been fixed

bill
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.