Emery Gallant
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you have a squad with a range of 1 or 2; but a support weapon with a range of 7....

An enemy unit moving within 7 hexes of the the squad/SW cannot be fired on by the support weapon in op fire, because the squad can't fire on it....correct?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Warren Smith
United States
West Nyack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
BSG75CAG wrote:
If you have a squad with a range of 1 or 2; but a support weapon with a range of 7....

An enemy unit moving within 7 hexes of the the squad/SW cannot be fired on by the support weapon in op fire, because the squad can't fire on it....correct?


Incorrect. The rules wording would seem to support that interpretation, but the intent is that you must fire them at the same time, not at different Op Fire targets. The WaW FAQ addresses this specifically.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Foster
United States
Malibu
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Agreed. If you do fire the SW, the unit becomes ops complete tho. No infantry weapons op fire that turn after that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Warren Smith
United States
West Nyack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
So, here's a related question I just thought about.

When Op Firing, a target can be fired at once ONCE per hex. So, would this mean that, even if the target were within range of the inherent AP firepower of the infantry, that the Op Firing unit could only attack with either it's SW or with it's inherent, and thereby forfeit the other attack for the rest of the turn anyway?

Seems to be but I haven't played enough for it to have come up yet in actual play so hadn't thought about it. Maybe both SW and inherent are considered "one attack" for purposes of this rule?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Foster
United States
Malibu
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think one unit's attack per op fire (sw plus intrinsic) is how we should read it).

The AC rules say "that unit can attack the moving unit..." While it later says "one attack," I believe the intention is that it means "one unit's attacks." The sw rules seem to include this spirit too tho they are not definitive either. It certainly could be argued either way but if the "one attack" is taken literally it would force the unit to lose whichever attack it does not use. This seems a violation of the spirit of sws.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Warren Smith
United States
West Nyack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
CHF_90265 wrote:
I think one unit's attack per op fire (sw plus intrinsic) is how we should read it).

The AC rules say "that unit can attack the moving unit..." While it later says "one attack," I believe the intention is that it means "one unit's attacks." The sw rules seem to include this spirit too tho they are not definitive either. It certainly could be argued either way but if the "one attack" is taken literally it would force the unit to lose whichever attack it does not use. This seems a violation of the spirit of sws.


Yeah, that makes sense to me. Just hadn't thought about it before. Still waiting for an updated ruleset for this so hopefully this will be one of the clarifications.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Stosser
United States
Colorado Springs
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is one aspect of the WaW system that has always bugged me.

For example: An infantry platoon with an ATGM support weapon is approached by an enemy tank unit. The ATGM support weapon fires at it. Then, an enemy infantry unit approaches. Would the infantrymen just lay there without defending themselves (firing) just because a couple guys let off a MILAN a minute before? Not bloody likely!

I play with a house rule that support weapons can fire separately from their host unit. Simply put an Ops Complete marker on the one that fired first and place the unfired unit on top of those two counters.

Pretty simple and makes the game more realistic.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Stosser
United States
Colorado Springs
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bump.

Any other comments?

There are a lot more little fixes I know that would not complicate the game but give it a bit more realism. Anybody "game" for a new thread?
 
 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.