Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
16 Posts

No Retreat 4! Italian Front: 1943-45» Forums » Rules

Subject: The Never Ending Quest(...ions)! rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Wifbert Boye
Canada
flag msg tools
1. 26.2.2: Does the restriction that forts may not be built until Turn 4 apply only to "Line" cards, or does it extend to Cards 19 (Panzerstellung), 34 (Forced Labour) and 47 (Vietinghoff)? If the answer is that the restriction does not extend to those cards, then I suggest the limitation you speak of here: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/22269606#22269606 - should be added to the Errata.

2. Game turn: Cards 24 (Air Interdiction), 27 (Demolitions), 31 (Uneasy Alliance), 33 (Manpower Shortages) and 42 (Alphonse Juin) all refer to effects lasting a game turn. If a Major Offensive is underway, does this "game turn" equal one week or does it include all the weekly turns?

3. Card 17 (Commando Raid): The last item on the April 20th, 2016 Errata states the following "precision" for Card 17: "The Commando must land within 3 hexes of a LZ. You could use a LZ marker just for that purpose if you can spare one, and land within 3 hexes of it, but this does limit you to hexes nearby Landing Areas Hexes. Do not forget it’s an “Invasion” so you can only do the raid during a Major Offensive Turn (see rule 13.6)"

a. Does this negate the answers that were given about this card in the second post of this thread: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/22506583#22506583? - i.e. May it only be used during a Major Offensive that also allows invasions or is it only usable as indicated when it is combined with the Naval Outflank card?

b. In this thread: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21544899#21544899 you amended an earlier statement that a Commando Raid could be used to place a Landings marker. You now say it cannot. And yet if you have a "spare" Landings marker as indicated above, you could place it, then land the Commando near it, then move onto the hex the LZ points to (even in the same movement phase), and then because "it’s an Invasion", presumably develop that Landing marker into a Bridgehead. Correct?

c. Does a Commando landing on a coastal hex ignore EZOC when the only place it could have come from is an EZoC'd LZ hex (see attached picture)?

4. Errata: It was an understatement to refer to the Jan 14th, 2017 Errata as "two small changes" in this thread: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1751854/still-more-question... The supply change is major and the unsupported landings change for Commandos makes using them this way far riskier since they both have only one step until Turn 5. If we examine the April 2016 Errata, we see two signifcant changes that are not incorporated in the May, 2016 rules. These are: 2.11 Map Objectives and the "precision" on the Commando Raid card which significantly reduces its efficacy compared to what is printed on that card. (BTW of less import, the 12.2 A precision did not make it either.) I can undestand that the April 2016 errata may have undergone late changes that were missed only one month later for the "Living Rules" edit, but now it's over a year for those changes and close to four months after the Jan, 2017 changes. Isn't it about time the Living Rules got updated?

At any rate, more care is needed with what is published. FREX in the Commando "precision" paragraph, it is stated "You could use a LZ marker..." when it should say: "You could use a Landings marker..." Another example is 22.1 from the April 2016 Errata which states "if the fort already contains a German unit" and cross-references Rule 16.1. But 16.1 does not cross reference 22.1 so when I look at 22.1 and my opponent looks at 16.1 we end up with a misunderstanding.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifferboy wrote:
1. 26.2.2: Does the restriction that forts may not be built until Turn 4 apply only to "Line" cards, or does it extend to Cards 19 (Panzerstellung), 34 (Forced Labour) and 47 (Vietinghoff)?


You cannot build Forts at all until turn 4, as stated in the rules, so yes it extends to all the cards.

wifferboy wrote:

2. Game turn: Cards 24 (Air Interdiction), 27 (Demolitions), 31 (Uneasy Alliance), 33 (Manpower Shortages) and 42 (Alphonse Juin) all refer to effects lasting a game turn. If a Major Offensive is underway, does this "game turn" equal one week or does it include all the weekly turns?


Card 24 talks about a Player-Turn, not the complete game-turn.
The other cards lasts for the whole game-turn, as specified on the cards.

wifferboy wrote:

3. Card 17 (Commando Raid): The last item on the April 20th, 2016 Errata states the following "precision" for Card 17: "The Commando must land within 3 hexes of a LZ. You could use a LZ marker just for that purpose if you can spare one, and land within 3 hexes of it, but this does limit you to hexes nearby Landing Areas Hexes. Do not forget it’s an “Invasion” so you can only do the raid during a Major Offensive Turn (see rule 13.6)"

a. Does this negate the answers that were given about this card in the second post of this thread: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/22506583#22506583? - i.e. May it only be used during a Major Offensive that also allows invasions or is it only usable as indicated when it is combined with the Naval Outflank card?


It can be used on any regular turn, but you can only use a LZ marker with the Commando if part of a normal Invasion during an Invasion Turn

wifferboy wrote:

b. In this thread: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21544899#21544899 you amended an earlier statement that a Commando Raid could be used to place a Landings marker. You now say it cannot. And yet if you have a "spare" Landings marker as indicated above, you could place it, then land the Commando near it, then move onto the hex the LZ points to (even in the same movement phase), and then because "it’s an Invasion", presumably develop that Landing marker into a Bridgehead. Correct?



Yes, Correct.

wifferboy wrote:

c. Does a Commando landing on a coastal hex ignore EZOC when the only place it could have come from is an EZoC'd LZ hex (see attached picture)?


Yes.

wifferboy wrote:

Isn't it about time the Living Rules got updated?


I was thinking about updating them, but I don't think the changes warrant it yet: I just don't have the time to do it. It's a lot of work doing this "update". I want to wait some more. I will probably do it at the end of the summer.

wifferboy wrote:

At any rate, more care is needed with what is published. FREX in the Commando "precision" paragraph, it is stated "You could use a LZ marker..." when it should say: "You could use a Landings marker..." Another example is 22.1 from the April 2016 Errata which states "if the fort already contains a German unit" and cross-references Rule 16.1. But 16.1 does not cross reference 22.1 so when I look at 22.1 and my opponent looks at 16.1 we end up with a misunderstanding.


Ok, I take not and will look into it when I revise the "Living Rules" in a few months. Thanks for the tip, it is very appreciated!

BTW, do understand that I do this just as a hobby and that it is a humongous amount of work for almost no pay. I have a limited amount of time to work on these project, and this also takes almost all my regular gaming time and a good part of my "normal life". The Italian Front game was exceedingly difficult to make work well for some of the parts, and I can understand why there are so few games covering the whole campaign: this is why I decided to design one, but the reward was not at par with the thousands of hours I put into it (heck i had 66 versions just for the darn rules!). So I can assure you that I am doing my very best to make sure all is as perfect as possible.

BTW I just noticed that you rated NR "The Italian Front" game a "1"... Geee... You could at least have given me a "2"... cry

I am very sorry to see that you dislike the game that much. Hopefully my rule answers mitigated this, right?

Tell you what, if you have a Paypal account, I will gladly refund you the Design Royalties I made on the purchase of your copy of the game ($2.59), if not send me a geek mail and I'll send it to you by regular mail. Or if you don't have No Retreat! The Russian Front I can send you the updated edition for free: this game is much easier to play, and has about only a third of the rules (and less exceptions!) then NR4, I quite sure you will enjoy it a lot. meeple
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim K
United States
Palatine
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Regarding the game rating comments at the end: trust me, Carl, you have NRIF fans.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
htjester wrote:
Regarding the game rating comments at the end: trust me, Carl, you have NRIF fans.


Thanks. But this will NOT get you a freebie... Yet.

Seriously, I know that I somewhat mangled a few of the rules. neverthless some better game design abilities are slowly making their way into my stubborn brain, thanks in part to all the questions and comments I get here. meeple
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wifbert Boye
Canada
flag msg tools
licinius wrote:
wifferboy wrote:


3. Card 17 (Commando Raid): The last item on the April 20th, 2016 Errata states the following "precision" for Card 17: "The Commando must land within 3 hexes of a LZ. You could use a LZ marker just for that purpose if you can spare one, and land within 3 hexes of it, but this does limit you to hexes nearby Landing Areas Hexes. Do not forget it’s an “Invasion” so you can only do the raid during a Major Offensive Turn (see rule 13.6)"

a. Does this negate the answers that were given about this card in the second post of this thread: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/22506583#22506583? - i.e. May it only be used during a Major Offensive that also allows invasions or is it only usable as indicated when it is combined with the Naval Outflank card?


It can be used on any regular turn, but you can only use a LZ marker with the Commando if part of a normal Invasion during an Invasion Turn


This answer appears to contradict the errata which states: "Do not forget it’s an “Invasion” so you can only do the raid during a Major Offensive Turn (see rule 13.6)"

Are you saying during regular turns the Commando can land in any coastal hex? If so there was no need for the errata.

-----------------

I have played many games of No Retreat Russia and did ask several questions on its forum. It's a better game.

As for the rating, at the time I was frustrated with the poor rules organization and major errata (as I think I have conveyed), but I've modified it to match what the scale says, since obviously, I am trying to play it again.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for playing and rating NR1. In fact I feel honored that my two little games are the only ones you have rated on BGG up to now, it must mean something.

A commando must land within 3 hexes of an Invasion LZ during a major Invasion. The Commando Event card allows you to land anywhere, but you cannot put in a Landing Zone on the map when they land.

The official rules and errata are on the GMT web site, refer to these.

Rules:

http://www.gmtgames.com/noretreat4/NRIF_Rules2.pdf

2017 precisions (two items):

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/gmtwebsiteassets/noretrea...

Don't hesitate if you have other needed input, I'll be here to answer. Some AARs, if you have the time to post them, would be cool.

P.S: If you have anything good to say about the game, do let me know, too!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifferboy wrote:


...but I've modified it to match what the scale says, since obviously, I am trying to play it again.


The scale? I'm not sure I understand. Would you kindly post here what you have modified? Many NR4 gamers would probably be interested in seeing your take on this. meeple
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim K
United States
Palatine
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Carl, I think he means he modified his rating of NRIF to match the game rating scale. 1 is clearly too low since he intends to play again.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
htjester wrote:
Carl, I think he means he modified his rating of NRIF to match the game rating scale. 1 is clearly too low since he intends to play again.


Oh silly me. Thanks for the clarification. blush

Anyway, Wifbert, if I can do anything to alleviate your pain and discontentment, let me know.

BTW is Wifbert Boye your real name or just another internet personae? I usually don't like answering input from anonymous sources. I don't want to piss you off or anything, but I just find it a bit miffing. Sorry about metioning this if it's not the case. soblue
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wifbert Boye
Canada
flag msg tools
Yes - as Tim K said about the rating scale.

It's kind of funny that this forum chose to interpret my pseudonym the way it did. One of my friends said it refers to my golf game, but that is not the case (well... probably it is true in that fashion, but it wasn't meant to be...)

Anyway I have been on enough forums for long enough to learn that using my real name is not desirable and can lead to distasteful occurrences. In turn I try to avoid anonymously trashing or insulting others and using that as protection. I've provided honest opinions and if you choose to take offense or not respond to questions, well, all I can say is there's no malice intended and I'm trying to play the game as designed but having some difficulties.

I've made a lot of notes while playing to keep track of these question areas and I'm happy to share those or even offer my version of a rules revision that includes all the gathered clarifications and errata for you to consider as possibly a time-saver for the next rules revision. If it comes to that, we can correspond by real email where I do use my real name.

1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifferboy wrote:
Yes - as Tim K said about the rating scale.

It's kind of funny that this forum chose to interpret my pseudonym the way it did. One of my friends said it refers to my golf game, but that is not the case (well... probably it is true in that fashion, but it wasn't meant to be...)

Anyway I have been on enough forums for long enough to learn that using my real name is not desirable and can lead to distasteful occurrences. In turn I try to avoid anonymously trashing or insulting others and using that as protection. I've provided honest opinions and if you choose to take offense or not respond to questions, well, all I can say is there's no malice intended and I'm trying to play the game as designed but having some difficulties.

I've made a lot of notes while playing to keep track of these question areas and I'm happy to share those or even offer my version of a rules revision that includes all the gathered clarifications and errata for you to consider as possibly a time-saver for the next rules revision. If it comes to that, we can correspond by real email where I do use my real name.


Thanks for the answer!

Hey, I AM using my real name and am still alive.

On my side of the fence I have always looked with suspicion to people who hide their identities, as these are most often the troublemakers on the forums (not that you are one, of course!) sorry about that, must be the reverse of the problem you experienced... LOL!

Speaking about your Boargamegeek experience, you must be telling about other web forums, as you hardly posted much on BGG since you subscribed in 2012 (16 threads and 35 replies), I finb BGG pretty much without the problems you have stated above.

Anyway, it would be REALLY nice indeed to get your input for the next "living rules" version. Do geek mail me when you feel like it, I try to be online almost every day.

Say, if you are interested I can link you to all the rules and materials for my next game, No Retreat 3: The French and Polish Fronts, I would like to have your input on these if you can spare the time. And contributors that give substantial input are listed in the game's credits and you get a free copy of the game, too! meeple

Edit: BTW sorry about my bad English, I am French-Canadian and not 100% fluent, so sometimes I make mistakes and/or don't understand fully what is stated.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wifbert Boye
Canada
flag msg tools
OK - back to questions. A simple one - about the Commando restrictions for invasions that are at the end of the April, 2016 errata - were these not present in the original version of the rules and then were added to the May, 2016 version but the blue font was missed, perhaps?

I am planning a lengthy post about Card 17 and I'm trying to ensure I can frame my wonderment about this item as accurately as possible.

...and your English far exceeds my abilities in French (although I did take it in school)

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifferboy wrote:
OK - back to questions. A simple one - about the Commando restrictions for invasions that are at the end of the April, 2016 errata - were these not present in the original version of the rules and then were added to the May, 2016 version but the blue font was missed, perhaps?

I am planning a lengthy post about Card 17 and I'm trying to ensure I can frame my wonderment about this item as accurately as possible.

...and your English far exceeds my abilities in French (although I did take it in school)



Ooops... I await the storm!

I don't know about the blue fonts, these documents are made by GMT after I give them my instructions, it could be possible. I will check it out as soon as I am back home.

BTW can you at least give me your first name? Please?

As for the Commandos, please read my post from 7:12AM this morning.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wifbert Boye
Canada
flag msg tools
I've read all the posts religiously. I have downloaded all the latest published errata. It is some of these answers plus the errata that are creating apparent contradictions with Card 17 for me.

Then it occurred to me that perhaps the current wording in 13.6.5 wasn't there before and that's why the precision in the errata was required.

A better question might be: What does the Card 17 errata tell me that wasn't in the original rules?

Thanks,
Paul



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Paradis
Canada
montreal
Québec
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifferboy wrote:
What does the Card 17 errata tell me that wasn't in the original rules?


The errata is here on the GMT web site:

http://www.gmtgames.com/noretreat4/NR4_Errata.pdf

It tells:

Card #17. Allied Commando Raid (precision):

Rule [13.6.5], Commando units, says:
“Commando units can land in any coastal hex (i.e., any hex that has some dark blue sea terrain in it)
within three hexes of an LZ hex containing a Landings marker, unless under a “No Combat” marker. Their
movement stops in that coastal hex.”

The Commando must land within 3 hexes of a LZ. You could use a LZ marker just for that purpose if you
can spare one, and land within 3 hexes of it, but this does limit you to hexes nearby Landing Areas Hexes.
Do not forget it’s an “Invasion” so you can only do the raid during a Major Offensive Turn (see rule 13.6)

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wifbert Boye
Canada
flag msg tools
Does this mean that if I play Card 17 on the first week of a Major offensive with invasions allowed, then I cannot land the Commando in any coastal hex, I must land within 3 of a Landings Marker (which, BTW I can do anyway per the invasion rules)?

If the answer is "Yes" then what about the subsequent weeks?

If the answer is "No" then I cannot understand why "Card 17" appears in this part of the errata? Without Naval Outflank there is no way to place a 'spare' Landings marker during the movement phase. Normally, all Landings markers are placed during the Deployment phase which does not occur again until the next game turn, if I understand the Sequence of Play correctly.

So without playing Naval Outflank as well as Card 17, any 'spare' Landings Marker would have to be placed in LZ hexes in accordance with the invasion rules during the Deployment phase.
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.