Official Manila errata, aka The Manila Envelope

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,046
Reaction score
6,147
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
No, not buy anything. I meant the given RG, not the given CPP.
SSR CG11:
"I/HW RGs cost one additional CPP for onboard setup on CG Day of purchase.."

The RG given in the initial OB are not purchased - they are given. Don't think this is different from any other HASL.
 

Honza

The Art Of Wargames
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
13,519
Reaction score
2,219
Location
Oxfordshire
First name
Jan
Country
llCzechia
SSR CG11:
"I/HW RGs cost one additional CPP for onboard setup on CG Day of purchase.."

The RG given in the initial OB are not purchased - they are given. Don't think this is different from any other HASL.
Okay, thanks. So that means that the RG given in the initial OB DON'T have to pay the additional 1 CPP to set up on board.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,046
Reaction score
6,147
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Okay, thanks. So that means that the RG given in the initial OB DON'T have to pay the additional 1 CPP to set up on board.
Yes, I don't see that you would need to do that.

Is that the case in any other HASL CG?
 

Honza

The Art Of Wargames
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
13,519
Reaction score
2,219
Location
Oxfordshire
First name
Jan
Country
llCzechia
I'm not sure. Can't remember without checking the rules.
 

Bret Hildebran

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
4,846
Reaction score
1,063
Location
NE OH
Country
llUnited States
Poised to play SF15 No Greater Love which has a VC of "...and each stone building (not rubble) hex Controlled..." and am trying to figure out if Adobe Buildings (SF4.5) are considered stone for the VC? SF4.5 ends with "Otherwise, it is treated as a stone building/rubble."

Any thoughts?
 

ASLSARGE

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
1,750
Reaction score
1,007
Location
Arizona
Country
llUnited States
Poised to play SF15 No Greater Love which has a VC of "...and each stone building (not rubble) hex Controlled..." and am trying to figure out if Adobe Buildings (SF4.5) are considered stone for the VC? SF4.5 ends with "Otherwise, it is treated as a stone building/rubble."

Any thoughts?
No....just the stone building. If adobe met the VC it would have been stated so. Enjoy the scenario....very quick playing.
 
Last edited:

Perry

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,393
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
New SF errata (will be added to consolidated errata on our website shortly)

SSR SF10: line 1, replace “Hidden-” with “Non-hidden”. Last sentence, after “road” add “, shellholes, Palm Tree Stump [17.2]”.

SF17.2 second sentence, at the end add “and are treated as open ground (B1.) except as stated otherwise”.

Scenario SF2 Power Struggle On Provisor: In the Japanese setup instructions, after “hexes” add “[EXC: Fortifications]”.
 

Honza

The Art Of Wargames
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
13,519
Reaction score
2,219
Location
Oxfordshire
First name
Jan
Country
llCzechia
New SF errata (will be added to consolidated errata on our website shortly)

SSR SF10: line 1, replace “Hidden-” with “Non-hidden”. Last sentence, after “road” add “, shellholes, Palm Tree Stump [17.2]”.

SF17.2 second sentence, at the end add “and are treated as open ground (B1.) except as stated otherwise”.

Scenario SF2 Power Struggle On Provisor: In the Japanese setup instructions, after “hexes” add “[EXC: Fortifications]”.
LOL. Perry - that ought to be SSR SF5.... ;)
 

Perry

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,393
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
LOL. Perry - that ought to be SSR SF5.... ;)
Correct. :(

New SF errata (will be added to consolidated errata on our website shortly)

SSR SF5: line 1, replace “Hidden-” with “Non-hidden”. Last sentence, after “road” add “, shellholes, Palm Tree Stump [17.2]”.

SF17.2 second sentence, at the end add “and are treated as open ground (B1.) except as stated otherwise”.

Scenario SF2 Power Struggle On Provisor: In the Japanese setup instructions, after “hexes” add “[EXC: Fortifications]”.
 

Bret Hildebran

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
4,846
Reaction score
1,063
Location
NE OH
Country
llUnited States
I'll admit this is a relatively dumb question, but rules wise, I do not think it is covered, so...

SF23 Iwabuchi's Sarcophagus uses an SSR to turn the Agriculture Building (printed Level 2 with 2 staircases) into a L1 with no cellars per SSR 2: "Neither Level 2 nor SF Cellar Locations (SF4.4) exist in Building 2Y52, but stairwells still do."

Now normally this building has a rooftop per SF4.3 as a Stone building with a printed stairwell, which per that SSR it still is. So...Does 2Y52 still have rooftop locations? If so, what level are they? Level 2.5 like normal for that building? [In which case they probably are not accessible since L2 doesn't exist which makes it a relatively moot point] Or Level 1.5 since L2 locations do not exist?

Reading the Prelude/Aftermath, it sounds like the building was bombed out and crumbling which is likely why L2 and Cellars do not exist (and it may be a scenario balance thing as part of the VC is taking locations), so it likely does not make sense that rooftops are in play, but there is of course no rule saying rooftops are not in play just because Level 2 was SSR'd away.

Thanks for any thoughts...
 

Bret Hildebran

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
4,846
Reaction score
1,063
Location
NE OH
Country
llUnited States
Another one - what is the Adobe building TEM vs. Residual Fire?

SF4.5 reads "...has a +3 TEM vs all attacks by Small Arms Fire, MG, Canister, HEAT, IFE, and ordnance <= 37mm; it has a +2 TEM vs all other types of attack."

The index defines Small Arms Fire as "The inherent FP of any personnel counter and includes any Inherent SW" which technically would not include residual. Are we supposed to remember the origination of the residual to determine the TEM? Or was this an oversight in the Adobe rules? Or is it only supposed to be +2 intentionally?

Rules-wise I think it tracks to +2 today basically, but also don't believe that was the likely design intent...
 

ASLSARGE

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
1,750
Reaction score
1,007
Location
Arizona
Country
llUnited States
I'll admit this is a relatively dumb question, but rules wise, I do not think it is covered, so...

SF23 Iwabuchi's Sarcophagus uses an SSR to turn the Agriculture Building (printed Level 2 with 2 staircases) into a L1 with no cellars per SSR 2: "Neither Level 2 nor SF Cellar Locations (SF4.4) exist in Building 2Y52, but stairwells still do."

Now normally this building has a rooftop per SF4.3 as a Stone building with a printed stairwell, which per that SSR it still is. So...Does 2Y52 still have rooftop locations? If so, what level are they? Level 2.5 like normal for that building? [In which case they probably are not accessible since L2 doesn't exist which makes it a relatively moot point] Or Level 1.5 since L2 locations do not exist?

Reading the Prelude/Aftermath, it sounds like the building was bombed out and crumbling which is likely why L2 and Cellars do not exist (and it may be a scenario balance thing as part of the VC is taking locations), so it likely does not make sense that rooftops are in play, but there is of course no rule saying rooftops are not in play just because Level 2 was SSR'd away.

Thanks for any thoughts...
Basically, we tried to replicate what actually occurred. The entire building, after being subjected to intensive direct fire on the ground level, actually collapsed down one level. So, in ASL terms......level 2 becomes level 1.......level 1 becomes ground level. Printed Stairwells still exits as do the rooftop access. It is now a level 1 1/2 building with printed stairwells and the roof is accessible with those stairwells. Access to the cellars would have been eliminated with the floor above it collapsing.
 

ASLSARGE

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
1,750
Reaction score
1,007
Location
Arizona
Country
llUnited States
Another one - what is the Adobe building TEM vs. Residual Fire?

SF4.5 reads "...has a +3 TEM vs all attacks by Small Arms Fire, MG, Canister, HEAT, IFE, and ordnance <= 37mm; it has a +2 TEM vs all other types of attack."

The index defines Small Arms Fire as "The inherent FP of any personnel counter and includes any Inherent SW" which technically would not include residual. Are we supposed to remember the origination of the residual to determine the TEM? Or was this an oversight in the Adobe rules? Or is it only supposed to be +2 intentionally?

Rules-wise I think it tracks to +2 today basically, but also don't believe that was the likely design intent...
Keeping my response simple is best.
If the original fire attack was inherent FP, MG, AP/HE less than or equal to 37mm it is affected by a +3 TEM like a stone building. If the fire attack was > 37mm then it is affected by a +2 TEM. So, yes, you will need to remember which fire attack placed the Residual FP (placing the RFP counter immediately helps). I am confused by your comment that inherent FP not leaving Residual....the example in A8.26 clearly shows two examples of squads using their inherent FP to leave Residual FP. Maybe the term "small arms" is what is causing your issue?
 

JR Brackin

Cardboard Challanged
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
536
Location
North of Philly
Country
llUnited States
VC - SF9 - I am a little confused regarding the VC on this one. Are the three Rubble Hexes (3R68, 3S70, and 3W76) considered part of the 20 hexes of building Control or are they 3 hexes that must be Controlled along with the 20 hexes of Building Control?
 

ASLSARGE

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
1,750
Reaction score
1,007
Location
Arizona
Country
llUnited States
I assume you meant rubbled hexes 3R68, 3S72, and 3W77 (3S70 and 3W76 are not rubbled). Yes, those three hexes are considered part of the buildings so they are included in the 20 building hexes that must be Controlled at game end.
 

Perry

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,393
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
Below is some additional errata for Sword & Fire: Manila.

We will add this shortly to the existing errata on our website: https://mmpgamers.com/support/asl/Manila_Errata_v3.pdf

SF4.5:
line 4, after ”MG” add ”, Residual FP, Fire Lane”.

SF4.6: at the end, add “A Steel-walled building is treated as a stone building for Bog Check (D8.21) purposes.”.

Page SF3, after rule 4.9, add new rule: “4.10 FACTORIES: Each building on the SF maps that has ≥ one road/RR entering it is a Factory (B23.74). A non-rubbled Factory Location that has a road/RR entering it (EX: 4E16) is considered a Vehicular-Sized Entrance (B23.742). Rubble that is connected to a Factory (EX: 4M52) is Factory Rubble (B23.743).”.

SF9.11: last sentence, after “Accessible” add “(COT and FFMO as if open ground)”.
 
Last edited:

Perry

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
2,393
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
And I am making another request to use this folder for actual errata for S&F:M and comments thereon.
I think that will make it easier for players to find the errata.
Questions could go in the general questions section, or even in a specific S&F:M Questions folder (maybe the one in the MMP folder?) if users think that would be more useful.
 
Last edited:
Top