Forgotten War Q & A.

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I assume you mean in scenario 216 CENTURIONS REVERSE!

There are only two setup areas, not three:
Group 1: Set up on board 83, on/south of hexrow S, ≤ 4 hexes from 81T4:
Group 2: Set up ≤ 4 hexes from 81P10:

There is no "and/or"
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
 

Mr Incredible

Rod loves red undies
Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Messages
2,442
Reaction score
345
Location
Perth, Australia
Country
llAustralia
I assume you mean in scenario 216 CENTURIONS REVERSE!

There are only two setup areas, not three:
Group 1: Set up on board 83, on/south of hexrow S, ≤ 4 hexes from 81T4:
Group 2: Set up ≤ 4 hexes from 81P10:

There is no "and/or"
Oops, yes Centurions Reverse

What I meant to say is that the Group 1 appears to have two areas it can set up on Board 83 on/south of hex row S and/or ≤ 4 hexes from 81T4.

One does not overlap the other.

is that correct or should 81T4 be 83T4.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Oops, yes Centurions Reverse

What I meant to say is that the Group 1 appears to have two areas it can set up on Board 83 on/south of hex row S and/or ≤ 4 hexes from 81T4.
There is no "and/or" in the setup instructions.


is that correct or should 81T4 be 83T4.
I checked old (proofing, submission) files, and yes, it should say "83T4" - an error that snuck in.
 

Mr Incredible

Rod loves red undies
Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Messages
2,442
Reaction score
345
Location
Perth, Australia
Country
llAustralia
There is no "and/or" in the setup instructions.



I checked old (proofing, submission) files, and yes, it should say "83T4" - an error that snuck in.
That's why I was saying "and/or". "≤ 4 hexes of 81T4" is outside the "on Board 83 on/south of hex row S" area and wouldn't work without "and/or".

"Set up on board 83, on/south of hexrow S, ≤ 4 hexes from 83T4" makes a lot more sense.
 

Joelist

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
88
Reaction score
28
Location
Illinois
Country
llUnited States
Hi!

I am getting ready to try to play Scenario 210 and as such am trying to get the large number of special rules in effect straight. So far I THINK I have IPM straight. Steep Hills is proving more of a challenge as it seems rules are scattered across two chapters in this case. Basically what is confusing me a bit is how to adjudicate movement costs.

For example, an MMC moves up one level in Steep Hills. The hex being entered is Open Ground. It is not carrying anything. Weather is Ground Snow (per Scenario 210).

To me so far, the cost of entry here is 3 MP (1 doubled to 2 (per Chapter B Hill rules) +1 (per Chapter E Ground Snow Changing elevation). Is that correct?

Now if the MMC has 3 or more PP it literally cannot move up elevation because that hex now costs 7 MP (per W1.34 the usual 2 to move uphill is tripled to 6 and again 1 is added for Ground Snow)?

Also, are units in IPM subject to Straying? Can the Chinese use Human Wave even if there is no SSR for it? I confess to lack of familiarity with the PTO rules where some of this gestalt seems to come from.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,835
Reaction score
5,039
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Three MF to go up a hill in snow.

Four MF: one MF tripled (instead of doubled) plus one MF for snow. See the W1.34 EX. Even if it were seven MF a unit could make the move by using Minimum Move [A4.134].

Units using IPM are subject to straying per W7.4241.

The CPVA may not use Human Wave (the KPA may [W6.1]). The IPM rules use the Impulse Movement rules of D14.3, as do Human Waves and Banzais (which are based on Human Waves). There is nothing in the PTO rules that would help with the gestalt. If it helps you, Banzais are for the most part Human Waves that have different requirements for the minimum number of units. The Human Wave rules don't help that much either. Human Waves have a definite direction and have no restrictions on maintaining formation, while IPM has no direction but does have a requirement on maintaining formation. Vehicle Platoon Movement is about the nearest thing to IPM.

JR
 
Last edited:

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I am getting ready to try to play Scenario 210 and as such am trying to get the large number of special rules in effect straight. So far I THINK I have IPM straight. Steep Hills is proving more of a challenge as it seems rules are scattered across two chapters in this case. Basically what is confusing me a bit is how to adjudicate movement costs.
The Steep Hills rules are all in one chapter. What part are there that you feel are scattered?


Can the Chinese use Human Wave even if there is no SSR for it? I confess to lack of familiarity with the PTO rules where some of this gestalt seems to come from.
No. (Note that the rules for Chinese in section G18 has do not apply to the Communist Chinese.)
 

Joelist

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
88
Reaction score
28
Location
Illinois
Country
llUnited States
The Steep Hills rules seem to be a superset of Hills rules. Hence you have to go to Chapter B and Chapter W. And yes it reads and feels scattered.

Here's another question....I THINK that only one unit in an IPM group has to roll for Straying? And what if it fails the roll? Do you then roll the next unit under the same rule?
 

Joelist

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
88
Reaction score
28
Location
Illinois
Country
llUnited States
Three MF to go up a hill in snow.

Four MF: one MF tripled (instead of doubled) plus one MF for snow. See the W1.34 EX. Even if it were seven MF a unit could make the move by using Minimum Move [A4.134].

Units using IPM are subject to straying per W7.4241.

The CPVA may not use Human Wave (the KPA may [W6.1]). The IPM rules use the Impulse Movement rules of D14.3, as do Human Waves and Banzais (which are based on Human Waves). There is nothing in the PTO rules that would help with the gestalt. If it helps you, Banzais are for the most part Human Waves that have different requirements for the minimum number of units. The Human Wave rules don't help that much either. Human Waves have a definite direction and have no restrictions on maintaining formation, while IPM has no direction but does have a requirement on maintaining formation. Vehicle Platoon Movement is about the nearest thing to IPM.

JR
Thanks! Big oops! on the full portage example, glad you caught it :)
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
The Steep Hills rules seem to be a superset of Hills rules. Hence you have to go to Chapter B and Chapter W. And yes it reads and feels scattered.
Ok, I see what you mean - same as Jungle (Chapter G) that uses the Woods (Chapter B) rules.

No way around that when one rule uses another - unless duplicating alot of rules - which, IMO, is not a good idea, ymmv.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Here's another question....I THINK that only one unit in an IPM group has to roll for Straying? And what if it fails the roll? Do you then roll the next unit under the same rule?
You make one Movement DR (pass or fail) for the entire group.

W7.4241:
"Only one Movement DR (E1.53) is made for the entire IPM Group...."
 

Joelist

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
88
Reaction score
28
Location
Illinois
Country
llUnited States
You make one Movement DR (pass or fail) for the entire group.

W7.4241:
"Only one Movement DR (E1.53) is made for the entire IPM Group...."
Thanks. I think I need to go do something else for a bit....this is all blurring for me a bit.
 

Joelist

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
88
Reaction score
28
Location
Illinois
Country
llUnited States
Thanks to everyone here for the rules help. I will be diving into this in a couple of days. It should be fascinating with 45 squads against 10 in these hills, in the snow and with only 5 leaders for 45 squads using IPM :)
 

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,315
Reaction score
633
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
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.
SKS perhaps?

I have seen different information about their use in Korea.
The Soviets had them to pass out, supposedly tested in Berlin ‘45. And the SKS was already on its way out in Soviet units. (Being replaced by the AK.)
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Thanks to everyone here for the rules help. I will be diving into this in a couple of days. It should be fascinating with 45 squads against 10 in these hills, in the snow and with only 5 leaders for 45 squads using IPM :)
Note though that while the CPVA stay Cloaked they are exempt from taking the W7.423 NTC for not using IPM. I.e., while cloaked they really don't have to use IPM.
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,936
Reaction score
1,504
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Thanks to everyone here for the rules help. I will be diving into this in a couple of days. It should be fascinating with 45 squads against 10 in these hills, in the snow and with only 5 leaders for 45 squads using IPM :)
Besides what Klas noted, you will also soon as the CPVA be able to invoke the EXC of of W7.4231 and the last bullet point there for many of your troops if you find the need.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,835
Reaction score
5,039
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Gloster Hill, 217

The OB-given hero is converted to an 8-0 if it becomes "engaged in CC." What does that mean? In particular, is the hero engaged in CC if:
  • An enemy unit enters its hex, (e.g. Berserk during the MPh)?
  • An enemy unit enters to perform an Infantry OVR? If it does not convert at this point, per SSR 2 it has no FP. Because this is a SSR, this seems to override A11.14, where a SMC has one FP for attack & defense in CC. Is that the intention? If so, how are CC odds calculated?
  • An enemy unit makes an Infantry OVR attack.
  • An enemy unit is in its Location during the CCPh, but neither attacks the hero nor is attacked by it. No Melee forms.
  • An enemy unit is in its Location during the CCPh, but neither attacks the hero nor is attacked by it. A Melee forms.
  • An enemy unit attacks it during the CCPh but the hero does not attack. No Melee forms.
  • An enemy unit attacks it during the CCPh but the hero does not attack. A Melee forms.
  • The hero attacks but is not attacked during the CCPh. No Melee forms.
  • The hero attacks but is not attacked during the CCPh. A Melee forms.
  • The hero is concealed and does not attack nor is attacked. No Melee forms.
  • The hero is concealed and does not attack nor is attacked. A Melee forms, but the still-concealed hero is not a participant.
  • The hero is concealed and does not attack but is attacked. No Melee forms.
  • The hero is concealed and does not attack but is attacked. A Melee forms, but the still-concealed hero is not a participant.
If in any of the above, the unit has not engaged in CC and so is not converted, does it have one FP for CC per A11.14 if attacked/it attacks?

The OB-given hero, despite having no FP, still seems to be a hero. As such it can man a SW. In particular a hero can use a SW that ordinarily requires two SMC or a MMC by adding +1 to the IFT or TH as appropriate [A15.23]. Because this particular hero does not have a heroic DRM, the +1 would not be canceled by it, but otherwise the hero would be able use the weapon. Correct?

Per SSR 4 walking wounded units may remain secret until the penalties are applied. Are penalties considered applied if
  • The walking wounded unit moves one MF
  • The walking wounded unit moves three MF (it can no longer move, which might be considered applying a penalty)
  • The walking wounded unit declares double-time and moves three MF
  • The walking wounded unit chooses a rout target (because it has only three MF it can't choose hexes that would require four MF to reach, which might be considered applying a penalty)
  • A berserk walking wounded unit charges for three or fewer MF and reaches its target
edit: I removed couple of cases because they were not possible

JR
 
Last edited:

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
15,951
Reaction score
1,786
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I have a question about the Searchlight close combat example.

10.112 ATTACKS VS GMSL: A GMSL that is not in tow is attacked as if it were an Immobile (D.7), unarmored vehicle (D1.21) [EXC: Immobilization results has no eflect] With an Inherent crew (if manned), but it is not treated as a vehicle for Ambush purposes. When in tow, it may be attacked as if it were a trailer (C10.41). A GMSL is only an eligible Sniper target (A14.2) if it is currently switched on (10.2); a Sniper atmck dr of "1" malfunctions the SL, a "2" pins the manning Infantry.

EX: A GMSL (that is manned by a U.S. 2-2-7 infantry crew) and a U.S. 6-6-6 squad are in Melee with a KPA 4-4-7 squad. Sinoe the GMSL is treated as a vehicle, CC is sequential (A11.31). The KPA player chooses to attack the GMSL. The CCV is 5, and the CC DRM is -1 (-1 [no manned usable MG] -3 [unarmoured vehicle] +3 [escorting Personnel (2-2-7 crew and 6-6-6 squad)]). A CC DR of ≤ 5 eliminates the GMSL, and a DR of ≥ 6 has no effect.

Given that a GMSL is treated as an immobile vehicle should the net modifiers to the attack not be -2 with an additional -1 for immobile vehicle added in?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
2,480
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Given that a GMSL is treated as an immobile vehicle should the net modifiers to the attack not be -2 with an additional -1 for immobile vehicle added in?
The -1 DRM vs an Immobile vehicle only applies vs an AFV.

A11.61:
"...Any Immobile AFV is subject to a -1 CC DRM...."

CCT on the Divider:
*vs Immobile AFV (A11.61) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1
 
Top