rreinesch
Elder Member
OtO-4: In the German OB, there should be 3 Marder IIs.
Onslaught to Orsha 2 Errata
- Thread starter rreinesch
- Start date
AZslim
Elder Member
OtO-14 Do the Germans really enter from the North...the same side as the Russians? Or should they enter from the south?
rreinesch
Elder Member
The Turn 1 Germans enter from the North side. In that scenario the Germans move first. It is basically the pause of a fighting withdrawal for the Germans.
Last edited:
AZslim
Elder Member
Thanks!
rreinesch
Elder Member
There is an error on the counter for the ISU-152. The physical counter should not have a superior side/rear turret indication. In OtO-04, 06, 07, 08, and 10, the ISU-152 counter representation should not have a superior side/rear turret indication.
Last edited:
rreinesch
Elder Member
Consolidated errata and sticky errata with an effective date of July 12, 2020 will be posted to the BFP website shortly.
apbills
Elder Member
I finally have gotten around to inputting more of these into electronic format and noticed this typo.
In the Sturmovik Example of Play 2, the bold text showing the add up of DRM for the HEAT round TK# probably was supposed to include "= 16" after the reference to C7.22.
Also, I noticed you have "cleaned" up some of the wording to use defined terms more. This is a good thing. In Example of Play 3, it states "Rocket Strafing Run vs Infantry". I don't think the term "Rocket Strafing Run" is a defined term, rather 'Rocket Strafing Attack" would be the correct defined term. I have seen where BFP changed the use of "Run" to "Attack" in its previous aircraft rules.
never mind my second paragraph, E7.401 does call it out as a Strafing Run.
In the Sturmovik Example of Play 2, the bold text showing the add up of DRM for the HEAT round TK# probably was supposed to include "= 16" after the reference to C7.22.
Also, I noticed you have "cleaned" up some of the wording to use defined terms more. This is a good thing. In Example of Play 3, it states "Rocket Strafing Run vs Infantry". I don't think the term "Rocket Strafing Run" is a defined term, rather 'Rocket Strafing Attack" would be the correct defined term. I have seen where BFP changed the use of "Run" to "Attack" in its previous aircraft rules.
never mind my second paragraph, E7.401 does call it out as a Strafing Run.
Last edited:
rreinesch
Elder Member
Yeah, for consistency it should be there. Though luckily the drms and references are still good.
rreinesch
Elder Member
OtO-11, SBR-3: The German Pillboxes cannot set up facing northwest or southwest.
gbartlett2001
Senior Member
Quick Question - In the Russian Reinforcement Group Chart - 70mm OBA - ID O1 is listed as Battalion Mortar - Is that correct?
In other CGs like RB/RO 70mm is listed as Light Artillery. My opponent is wondering if this is a misprint and perhaps this should be 80mm
Thanks, GB
In other CGs like RB/RO 70mm is listed as Light Artillery. My opponent is wondering if this is a misprint and perhaps this should be 80mm
Thanks, GB
Jude
Senior Member
OTO-14, is the sparse orchard counter in hex DW-9 Q9 really supposed to be in O9? Q9 is a road hex and O9 is an in season orchard. If so, it would help (slightly) with the LOS angles for tanks on the DD7 and DD17 hill masses. Thanks.
Larry
Elder Member
OtO-28 -- 1/2 MP road rate is NA for vehicles. What is the road rate for the trucks, 4 or 1?
Jude
Senior Member
OTO-19, should the final road coordinate in the Mission be Y9 instead of V9? V9 the last hex of a VP building outside the road. If it is V9, would W9 and X9 also be part of road perimeter since the LOS from Y9 bisects them? Thanks.
asloser
The Head Tuomo of the Finnish ASL Community
Hi, Quick question/confirmation on this. ITR-2 countermix has a OT-34/85 counter with limited AP with depletion number of 8. Onslaught to Orsha 2 has this vehicle with unlimited AP ammo. So the ITR-2 version is now obsolete? Or is the OtO Vehicle wrong?
Larry
Elder Member
BFP shows no errata.
The VASL counters on the extension file show the OTO version as A5 if 44 and A6 in 45. The ITR version is AP8 A3 if 44 and A4 if 45. Looks intentional.
The VASL counters on the extension file show the OTO version as A5 if 44 and A6 in 45. The ITR version is AP8 A3 if 44 and A4 if 45. Looks intentional.
asloser
The Head Tuomo of the Finnish ASL Community
Ok, I see. Then I have to be really careful when using this as the counter is not differentiating in any way in a scenario card.
Thanks!
sunoftzu
Senior Member
Quick question: In OtO-016 "Tangle At Tolochin", the Germans get a pair of 17cm K18 guns. According to their Ch H notes, these guns are RFNM, meaning that they can never change CA.
That seems harsh for a gun which is on a 360 deg mount, and severely limits it's tactical use. Is that the intention of the scenario, or was it meant to have the ability to turn ?
The references that I looked at seemed to suggest that it was used in a direct fire mode, could turn, and quite well for a very big gun.
John.
That seems harsh for a gun which is on a 360 deg mount, and severely limits it's tactical use. Is that the intention of the scenario, or was it meant to have the ability to turn ?
The references that I looked at seemed to suggest that it was used in a direct fire mode, could turn, and quite well for a very big gun.
John.
Eagle4ty
Forum Guru
It was intended as a long-range indirect fire weapon. Even if it could traverse, could the crew adjust the aiming stakes rapidly enough to engage other targets and use what other than the barrel for direct fire aim not to mention cutting the charges small enough to allow very short-range fire. All in all, a decent game mechanic to represent the difficulties these systems would face in a direct fire confrontation.