Forgotten War Q & A.

[jrv]

G18.1 "Chinese troops are of two distinct types: Nationalist ("G.M.D.") and Communist ("Red")." Since the CPVA forces introduce a third distinct type, it would seem likely that none of G18 applies to them. The CVPA of W7 are a different nationality in ASL terms. Also, if you a designing a scenario where the Chinese worry about CVP, I think you may have missed a memo.

JR

 

[Michael Dorosh]

G18.1 "Chinese troops are of two distinct types: Nationalist ("G.M.D.") and Communist ("Red")." Since the CPVA forces introduce a third distinct type, it would seem likely that none of G18 applies to them. The CVPA of W7 are a different nationality in ASL terms. Also, if you a designing a scenario where the Chinese worry about CVP, I think you may have missed a memo.

JR

I never said a word about Casualty VP.

I was discussing Victory Points.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Question - does A26.222 include the Korean War, specifically "at game end the VP value of captured Chinese Guns/vehicles is quadrupled; G18.44". I'm guessing no.

Correct.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Correct.

Thank you

 

[Kenneth P. Katz]

The NKPA T-34/85 counters are marked with A5⁴/6⁵ while the KPA vehicle listing table says under ammo, A6. Which is correct? Similarly for other NKPA AFV & guns.

JR

There are no KPA T-35/85 counters. There are additional Russian T-34/85 counters in Forgotten War, and the KPA uses Russians with some additional Chapter W rules. So the APCR load out of a T-34/85 in 1944 is irrelevant.

 

[Kenneth P. Katz]

But if you fire APCR, then you are not firing AP, so the total is the same.

I noticed that too. That's a lot of ammo to be carrying unlimited amounts of, then WP6 on top of that, too.

 

[Kenneth P. Katz]

In ASL terms, the CPVA are a different nationality than the GMD. The former is described in Chapter W, and the latter in Chapter G, and Chapter G does not apply to the CPVA except as explicitly stated in Chapter W.

Question - does A26.222 include the Korean War, specifically "at game end the VP value of captured Chinese Guns/vehicles is quadrupled; G18.44". I'm guessing no.

 

[wsrt]

ROK KW Early War Rules state no "special ammunition". Does that apply to AP/HE with a depletion number? Or, is it only applicable to APCR, HEAT, Smoke, etc?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

ROK KW Early War Rules state no "special ammunition". Does that apply to AP/HE with a depletion number? Or, is it only applicable to APCR, HEAT, Smoke, etc?

It applies to HE/AP as well - C8.8.

 

[xenovin]

Q: W 7.4222 states IPM Groups entering the board "are not required to use IPM during the Player Turn it enters the mapboard" but the later sentences and the example at the bottom of page W9 suggests to me that they are free to move on their first impulse but on subsequent impulse movements they need to form the IPM Group or else they must stop. So are they free to move without IMP on the entry turn or (per W 7.42) they must be using IPM? are they each considered their own individual IMP group per W 7.421? The first sentence of W 7.4222 seems confusing here.

 

[Justiciar]

In this case, they elected to enter as an IPM, having made that decision then their are the consequences that come with that and out lined in the EX at the bottom of the page.

Imagine all the units in the EX at the bottom of the page set up just off board on their turn of entry. The CPVA player could have said "because this is their turn of entry these guys can move freely by virtue of W7.4222." Each unit could then have gone off one at a time and moved 'normally' (like WWII). However, in this case the CPVA player for tactical reason decided to declare an IPM. It entered and what follows in the EX is the consequences of having entered that way, and which unit were forced to end their movement and why, and which could continue to use IPM that turn and why."

 

[jrv]

Q: W 7.4222 states IPM Groups entering the board "are not required to use IPM during the Player Turn it enters the mapboard" but the later sentences and the example at the bottom of page W9 suggests to me that they are free to move on their first impulse but on subsequent impulse movements they need to form the IPM Group or else they must stop. So are they free to move without IMP on the entry turn or (per W 7.42) they must be using IPM? are they each considered their own individual IMP group per W 7.421? The first sentence of W 7.4222 seems confusing here.

The ending on entry happens *only if a gap occurs*. For onboard units the appearance of an irreparable gap stops movement for the entire group entirely and immediately. When units are entering, those units that are offboard may continue to move until they enter the board. If no gap occurs the IPM Group may continue to move normally after entry.

JR

 

[xenovin]

The CPVA player could have said "because this is their turn of entry these guys can move freely by virtue of W7.4222."

so just to be clear, CPVA can choose to move without the restrictions of IPM on their initial turn of entry onto the board for their entire MPh. If so, the 2nd sentence of 7.4222 should start with something like "If entering under IPM", the restrictions in the later part of the paragraph are followed.

This is a pretty important divergence from the IPM restrictions so I just want to make sure I am understanding it correctly. Thanks!

 

[klasmalmstrom]

so just to be clear, CPVA can choose to move without the restrictions of IPM on their initial turn of entry onto the board for their entire MPh....

Correct.

 

[Justiciar]

so just to be clear, CPVA can choose to move without the restrictions of IPM on their initial turn of entry onto the board for their entire MPh. If so, the 2nd sentence of 7.4222 should start with something like "If entering under IPM", the restrictions in the later part of the paragraph are followed.

This is a pretty important divergence from the IPM restrictions so I just want to make sure I am understanding it correctly. Thanks!

Vinnie I think the first sentence of 7.4222 establishes the 'clarity' of the matter very simply "..is not required to use IPM during the Player Turn it enters the mapboard although it may choose to do so..." AND how that sentence ends matters "it may choose to do so." This alerts you to that fact that what will follow is about the rules for "if you do elect to do so."

2nd sentence then begins: "For the purposes of 7.422..." which is directing you to use of IPM...effectively just what you wanted, albeit written in a different way...and the consequences of your choice to use IPM.

 

[Mr Incredible]

Sort of a Q&A.

What would be latest date that a grenadier unit could appear?

Interested in the answer as I'm looking at an engagement in October 1951 on the Imjin River on a Commonwealth unit front. The unit war diaries refer to the Russian "burp" guns and "new Russian rifle". So it appears to be mainly Soviet armed.

Now the "burp" gun is obvious, less so the "new Russian rifle". Any idea what that might be. I'm thinking it would be Tokarev SVT-40 and it appears to be used in the squad like the BAR.

The diary makes reference to the profuse use of grenades by the Chinese in attacking, so was thinking there might be 4(1)7/3(1)7 squads mixed in with 627/527 squads.

 

[jrv]

Per footnote 32, the grenadiers "were largely phased out by 1953," so it sounds like 1953 is the latest date that a grenadier unit could appear.

JR

 

[Justiciar]

Sort of a Q&A.

What would be latest date that a grenadier unit could appear?

Interested in the answer as I'm looking at an engagement in October 1951 on the Imjin River on a Commonwealth unit front. The unit war diaries refer to the Russian "burp" guns and "new Russian rifle". So it appears to be mainly Soviet armed.

Now the "burp" gun is obvious, less so the "new Russian rifle". Any idea what that might be. I'm thinking it would be Tokarev SVT-40 and it appears to be used in the squad like the BAR.

The diary makes reference to the profuse use of grenades by the Chinese in attacking, so was thinking there might be 4(1)7/3(1)7 squads mixed in with 627/527 squads.

If you look at Seoul Saving 214 this is the same time period..so Soviet armed is correct.

"Grenadiers are a moveable feast"...but the closer one gets to 1953 the less they brought that too the table...

In 1951 they were more common than say the Outpost Battles of 1953...

So what you outline in your OP seems on course to my eye...

 

[Mr Incredible]

In the setup area for the Chinese forces there appear to be 3 areas:

Board 83 south of hexrow S and/or <=4 hexes from 81T4 for the first Chinese force

<=4 hexes from 81P10 for the second Chinese force

That then appears to have an overlap in set-up areas of 81P6 to 81T8 for the Chinese.

Just want to make sure I have that correct.

 

[jrv]

In the setup area for the Chinese forces there appear to be 3 areas:

Board 83 south of hexrow S and/or <=4 hexes from 81T4 for the first Chinese force

<=4 hexes from 81P10 for the second Chinese force

That then appears to have an overlap in set-up areas of 81P6 to 81T8 for the Chinese.

Just want to make sure I have that correct.

In what scenario?

JR