Recent content by Philippe D.

If you like early war battles (or at least, battles low on heavy metal), Inor by LFT is an absolute blast. The CGs are light on chrome (they include mechanisms for reinforcement attrition/delay due to battery fire, and the longer CG has rules to simulate troop rotation on the French side, but...

Yeah, a 150+mm CH is likely to be the receiver's wurst nightmare. Until Random Selection picks the broken Conscript HS, of course. Also, a Snake DR is not necessarily a CH on the Infantry Target Type. If the Final TH DR is not <4, a subsequent dr is needed.

Just updated VASSAL and VASL to try out this extension. It seems quite nice. I noticed it doesn't seem to interact too well with the "Hideable Control Markers" extension, though. In my current DZ:SME campaign, I am using this extension to mark setup areas with the thick lines that normally line...

I don't think the rules worry about how the piece got there - it's a legal hex, so setup in there is allowed.

Yeah, that's what I do too. But then when the tank moves, sometimes the AL remains in place. Normally I see it and move the AL as well, but it's easy to miss.

At least VASL shows you the HIP unit, just more transparent. So you'd be even more likely to forget about the HIP AL in a FtF game! Now, occasionally I'll move the tank and leave the AL behind, and in a long battle I could forget which tank it was in the first place. So I'll try to think of the...

Hmm, that's pretty clear cut, and convincing. Thanks! (I believe that, since Night is only invoked by SSR, it should be the standard that Scenario Attacker and Scenario Defender roles be systematically attributed by SSR; it would be much clearer that way)

Scenario 4 in CG3 of DZ:SME is a Night scenario, and the scenario SSR state that: the Germans are the Scenario Attacker on map section Sa the Americans are the Scenario Attacker on map section Fa the Americans cannot use Cloaking This "dual" situation has strange aspects; I am understanding...

Last time I checked (that is, yesterday, I believe), the preorder was not possible from the LFT site (which is where I usually get my BFP products). Will it get there, or should I start looking for another (EU-based) option? (Of course this is more a question for Xavier and his acolytes)

Non-reality argument: When you "use" the option to change [V/T]CA instead of firing, you are at least giving up something in exchange for the CA change - maybe you could have hit something with that shot (and you're not risking malfunction or SAN by taking an artificial dummy shot). If your...

I've always seen it played as the "not necessarily" applies to both. Basically: once in a Woods/Building, you must stop unless your next hex is also a Woods/Building hex; same-building-ness or attached-woods-ness is irrelevant.

I have absolutely no problem with the AF products themselves (I just bought two of them). There are some design choices in their HASL modules that I would most certainly prefer went the other way, but then I am not a designer myself, so it's completely all right that they decide what they want...

"Benefit" is perhaps not the best choice of word. Being acquired is rarely beneficial to the target :) Without checking the wording of the rules: the Acquisition counter is placed upon the latest fired-upon unit(s); this is who it will be allowed to follow if they move. But, when firing, it can...

I did. I even almost made a joke of it, but thought somebody would point to me that copyright notices are not protected by copyright. (Are they? I don't know, and don't really care) Of course I will make scans and personal copies. It's just that I intensely dislike the blanket "you cannot do...

I just got the AF Orsogna box today - but it will be the last Advancing Fire product I buy, I'm afraid. On the second page of the Orsogna rulebook is this paragraph: I scan all my ASL scenarios, not just those printed on flimsy paper like AF does. I also scan HASL rules, because it's so much...