Max Interax
United Kingdom

Hi
IG confuse me.
Is the followling correct?
Infantry vs IG at a distance Infantry (RR0  4) fire using FP which determines Fire Strength. The Fire Strength against an IG is modified by terrain, but not entrenchments. (Conceal has no effect on an IG, unless the IG has neither moved nor fired). The unboxed morale and KIA are used.
Infantry at close range Infantry could attack as above, but in addition they could use their inherent antiarmour FP of 1 per person. The attack is against the unboxed(?) morale and KIA. Is the attack modified by the terrain?
Ordinance against IG An AFV could attack using their boxed effect number against the IG unboxed value. Is the attack modified by the terrain? First the AFV must hit and then the base effect number is the ordinance boxed effect number + RR, without a RNC.
An AFV could attack the IG using the AFV unboxed effect number against the IG boxed value. (Note that the IG boxed value does not mean 'armour'. It is used when the IG is at a disadvantage.) Is the attack modified by the terrain? The ordinance must hit, and then the effect number is the ordinance effect number + RNC. (The RNC only is added if the ordinance could hit on a zero, AND the number indicates a hit)
Mortars, and Artillery These attack the IG's unboxed value. The effect is modified by the terrain, though not entrenchments. (Conceal has no effect on an IG, unless the IG has neither moved nor fired).
IG vs AFV The IG must hit, and then the effect number equals the IG effect number + RR (as above).
ATR vs IG I have no idea. Treat as ordinance?
I am sure that something is wrong here. Thank you for your help! Max


John McLintock
Scotland Glasgow Lanarkshire
"Roll dice and kick ass!"

MaxP wrote: Hi IG confuse me.
Is the followling correct? Here’s my take on it all.
Quote: Infantry vs IG at a distance Infantry (RR0  4) fire using FP which determines Fire Strength. The Fire Strength against an IG is modified by terrain, but not entrenchments. (Conceal has no effect on an IG, unless the IG has neither moved nor fired). The unboxed morale and KIA are used. Yes to all (cf. 34.4).
Quote: Infantry at close range Infantry could attack as above, but in addition they could use their inherent antiarmour FP of 1 per person. The attack is against the unboxed(?) morale and KIA. Is the attack modified by the terrain? Yes to infantry’s inherent 1 antiarmour FP/man (strictly speaking: ‘inherent boxed FP’). The attack will be against the IG’s boxed defences. Yes to TEM (cf. again 34.4).
Quote: Ordinance against IG An AFV could attack using their boxed effect number against the IG unboxed value. Is the attack modified by the terrain? First the AFV must hit and then the base effect number is the ordinance boxed effect number + RR, without a RNC. Yes to all (34.4 again).
Quote: An AFV could attack the IG using the AFV unboxed effect number against the IG boxed value. (Note that the IG boxed value does not mean 'armour'. It is used when the IG is at a disadvantage.) Is the attack modified by the terrain? The ordinance must hit, and then the effect number is the ordinance effect number + RNC. (The RNC only is added if the ordinance could hit on a zero, AND the number indicates a hit) Yes to all (34.4 again).
Quote: Mortars, and Artillery These attack the IG's unboxed value. The effect is modified by the terrain, though not entrenchments. (Conceal has no effect on an IG, unless the IG has neither moved nor fired). No to unboxed IG defences vs mortars. These are ordnance using unboxed Effect Numbers, which attack IG boxed defences (confusing, isn’t it?). Artillery is “other attacks”, hence it attacks IG unboxed defences (34.4).
Quote: IG vs AFV The IG must hit, and then the effect number equals the IG effect number + RR (as above). Yes (cf. 28.4 ORDNANCE ATTACK Vs AN AFV).
Quote: ATR vs IG I have no idea. Treat as ordinance? The ATR could contribute its 1FP to a standard infantry fire attack, in which case the IG’s unboxed defences are used. Or it could attack as ordnance, in which case the IG’s boxed defences are used (34.4).
Quote: I am sure that something is wrong here. Thank you for your help! Max
It seems to me that you’ve got most of it right. And yes, the occasional flipflop between boxed/unboxed versus unboxed/boxed is confusing. It’d’ve been better if boxed always attacked boxed, and unboxed, uboxed, likewise.


Richard Irving
United States Harrisburg Pennsylvania

MaxP wrote: Hi IG confuse me.
Is the followling correct?
Infantry vs IG at a distance Infantry (RR0  4) fire using FP which determines Fire Strength. The Fire Strength against an IG is modified by terrain, but not entrenchments. (Conceal has no effect on an IG, unless the IG has neither moved nor fired). The unboxed morale and KIA are used.
Both entrenchments and concealments can be played on a mixed IG/infantry group. These will apply to infantry only (if IG has not moved or fired concealments also apply).
Unboxed KIA/Morale/Panic values are usedunless the IG group is being flanked.
Quote: Infantry at close range Infantry could attack as above, but in addition they could use their inherent antiarmour FP of 1 per person. The attack is against the unboxed(?) morale and KIA. Is the attack modified by the terrain?
Unboxed and boxed FP attacks use separate RNC draws for resolution.
On attacks with inherent boxed FP, the IG uses BOXED KIA/Moral/Panic values.
Modifed by terrain, Yes. (All fire and ordnance attacks are modified by terrain per 6.42.)
Quote: Ordinance against IG An AFV could attack using their boxed effect number against the IG unboxed value. Is the attack modified by the terrain? First the AFV must hit and then the base effect number is the ordinance boxed effect number + RR, without a RNC.
The errata specifies only unboxed ordnance can be used by an AFV vs. an IG.
Quote: An AFV could attack the IG using the AFV unboxed effect number against the IG boxed value. (Note that the IG boxed value does not mean 'armour'. It is used when the IG is at a disadvantage.) Is the attack modified by the terrain? The ordinance must hit, and then the effect number is the ordinance effect number + RNC. (The RNC only is added if the ordinance could hit on a zero, AND the number indicates a hit)
IG would use BOXED values in defense, as it would would against ANY ordnance attack.
Quote: Mortars, and Artillery These attack the IG's unboxed value. The effect is modified by the terrain, though not entrenchments. (Conceal has no effect on an IG, unless the IG has neither moved nor fired).
IG would use BOXED values in defense, as it would would against ANY ordnance attack.
Quote: IG vs AFV The IG must hit, and then the effect number equals the IG effect number + RR (as above).
IG's all have bozed and unboxed effect numbers: Either may be used against an AFV and fired exactly the same way. Choose either Unboxed or boxed:  Unboxed: FS = Effect + TH RNC, if TH = "0N" vs. Morale & CE values  Boxed: FS = Effect + RR, vs. AFV Armor defense values.
Quote: ATR vs IG I have no idea. Treat as ordinance?
If the ATR is firing using its To Hit number, treat as ordnance. If using the ATR's 1 FP in a fire attack (usually with other weapons in the group), treat as a fire attack
Quote: I am sure that something is wrong here. Infantry guns are confusingI wish AH had used different symbology for the Morale/Panic/KIA values.
34.4 says you used BOXED M/P/K values, if IG is attacked by:  Unboxed ordnance: AFV, mortar, artillery or opposing IG. (boxed ordnance is not allowed vs. IG)  Flanking fire of any kind  infantry at RR5 using inherent "boxed" FP.  ATR used as ordnance.
Unboxed value is used vs. all other fire attacks, which works out to unflanked fire attacks.


Max Interax
United Kingdom

Thank you so much!
I will pass this on to the group I play with.



