Poland in Flames Errata

[volgaG68]

The wz15nA and wz25 have their own, labeled dismantled MMG counter. The MMG counters for these weapons are also labeled. I am guessing the unlabeled dm counter goes with the unlabeled MMG counter.

JR

Good call! The first three dm MMG counters I pulled came out face up, and I assumed the backs were dm HMG. I see the difference now, and would wager your 'guess' as a certainty. Thanks.

 

[rreinesch]

BFP-110
The Polish at-start OB set up description should state "Set up on board BFP P within 4 hexes of a building and/or on board DW-5."

Version 20170922 of the errata is available from Boundingfire.com

 

[volgaG68]

INRE: BFP 149 "Kock Strong".....Group 1 set up on board 65, and may use HIP if in Concealment Terrain. Elements of the fourth 'open pool' may set up/enter with any of the other three Groups. Will any of these also be able to use HIP if set up with Group 1 (under the same conditions)?

 

[rreinesch]

The 'open pool' group, if it sets up with Group 1 may set up HIP in Concealment terrain just as group 1 does.

 

[Jon]

Question on scenario BFP133 "Over the Hills"

The Mission reads "The Germans win at game end by Controlling all four level 3 hexes of Hill 610 and the board 5a H17 Bridge"

Is this "Bridge Location" or "Bridge hex"? It matters as it is possible for the Germans to Control the Bridge location but not the Bridge hex

Cheers
Jon

 

[rreinesch]

Question on scenario BFP133 "Over the Hills"

The Mission reads "The Germans win at game end by Controlling all four level 3 hexes of Hill 610 and the board 5a H17 Bridge"

Is this "Bridge Location" or "Bridge hex"? It matters as it is possible for the Germans to Control the Bridge location but not the Bridge hex

Cheers
Jon

Correct. The bridge location is the point of interest in the hex for VP purposes.

 

[Jon]

Correct. The bridge location is the point of interest in the hex for VP purposes.

Thanks. perhaps errata should be issued to clarify this . Add "Location" after "Bridge" in the Mission Statement perhaps

Cheers
Jon

 

[Eagle4ty]

Thanks. perhaps errata should be issued to clarify this . Add "Location" after "Bridge" in the Mission Statement perhaps

Cheers
Jon

Given that they are two separate Locations (B6.1) there is really no need for an Errata as currently stated, but a further clarification may be helpful to some. The same could be said for control of a Pillbox in a certain hex if the VC requirements included control of the Pillbox but not necessarily the hex it is in.

 

[rreinesch]

In the rules included with PiF, on page BFP 6, the section numbering is repeated. The first 7.4 should be 7.3.

Version 20180514 of the errata is available from Boundingfire.com

 

[rreinesch]

BFP-109 the Pz IVC shows as having light ground pressure. It should have normal ground pressure.

Version 20180814 of the errata is available from Boundingfire.com

 

[mharviala]

In BFP131 Zboiska Heights the Poles set up on map rather far from the initial action, and the OB gives them 75mm ART and a wz 34 CZP presumably to tow it to the action. The ART however is h-d meaning it can't be towed by the halftrack. Is this intentionally correct?

 

[rreinesch]

In BFP131 Zboiska Heights the Poles set up on map rather far from the initial action, and the OB gives them 75mm ART and a wz 34 CZP presumably to tow it to the action. The ART however is h-d meaning it can't be towed by the halftrack. Is this intentionally correct?

The wz 34 CZP is capable of towing the ART and is there for that purpose.

 

[jrv]

The wz 34 CZP is capable of towing the ART and is there for that purpose.

Both the AH/MMP and the BFP versions of the 75mm wz. 02/26 are h-d. Per the index & the German ordnance listings key, a h-d ordnance may *not* be towed by a motorized vehicle even if the towing number of the motorized vehicle is sufficient. If the intention was to have the vehicle tow the ART, it sounds like an erratum of some sort will be necessary.

JR

 

[rreinesch]

Here a general clarification that was missed when we did the rules for PiF. Mapboard BFP O has a Ford printed on the board in hex Z5. This is covered in all respects as defined in B20.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Here a general clarification that was missed when we did the rules for PiF. Mapboard BFP O has a Ford printed on the board in hex Z5. This is covered in all respects as defined in B20.

In as much as fords are covered in the BOB, I really don't feel it needed to be addressed and was pretty self-evident. However, it's nice to give a heads up regardless.

 

[rreinesch]

We have some scenario errata.

BFP147 the PP obr 27 INF Gun should be the BFP version.

 

[buser333]

Went back and checked the original notes on this one and it is R-GG. So I don't see an issue with #1.

For #2, you are correct, it should >= 30. I'll get sticky errata out for that one.

I haven't pulled my physical boards to check, but unless the VASL map is wrong the playing area does appear to be Q-GG on Boards DW-4a/b in BFP122.

 

[rossssss]

BFP-109 "Training Day" uses the castle overlay BFP C-1 with the following SBR: "Building oQ4 is a one story building with Rooftops (B23.8) and Cellars (O6) in play; ..."

At what level are the Rooftops in this case?

Because Rooftops are normally only available in buildings with more than one level, determining their height is relatively straightforward: it's a half-level above the top-most level. A two-story building would have it's Rooftop at level 1.5 (a half-level above level one, the highest level); a building containing a playable level 2 would have its Rooftop at level 2.5, and so on. This conveniently even means that a building's obstacle height is equal to where its Rooftop level is, which makes intuitive sense.

The castle on C-1, with the SBR above, is a bit trickier. Are the Rooftops at level 0.5 (relative to the building itself, netting out the level 3 hill), since the highest level is level 0? Are they at level 1.5, a half-level above the obstacle height of the building? Are they at level 1, at the obstacle height level itself? The latter is the most intuitive, and I believe is the intended effect, but the SBR should probably be errata'd to be clear about the height. The ASL rules as written do not allow for a clear resolution of this particular SBR.

 

[rreinesch]

The normal rooftop rules apply, so the roof is at level 1.5, a half-level above the obstacle height of the building.

 

[rossssss]

Thank you!

For what it's worth, normal Rooftop rules would not be a half-level above the obstacle height of a building. A two-story building is a 1.5 level obstacle; its Rooftop is also at level 1.5 (not 2). Likewise, a building with a second level would be a 2.5 level obstacle, but its Rooftop would sit at level 2.5 as well. Normal Rooftop rules are effectively broken by the SBR that makes the building ground-level only, hence the question.

If "Rooftops are at Level 1 1/2 relative to the Level 3 hill" is the intent of the scenario, that works and should be stated in the SBR, because "normal rooftop rules apply" leaves you with the problems I outlined in the original post.