Valor of the Guards Q&A

[pward]

Unlike the Rifles and SMG formations which use the same entry color code, the HW are not designated as "Guards". This seems intentional to me. Unless errata is issued to change the purchase chart to read "Guards HW Plt", I would say the HW don't get the bump.

Then you would have to have separate lines for the yellow entry code (and brown?) that aren't guards formations. Using the RG code implies that all units purchased from that RG code.

Yellow doesn't mention any Guards units at all.

Red is "Elements of the 34th and 42nd Guards Rifle Regiments from the 13th Guards Division" then a non-guards "23rd Tank Corps, 62nd Army".

Orange is all "Elements of the 39th Guards Rifle Regiment".

Brown is all non-guards formations.

So the tank elements from Red are not Guards level formations. The Red and Orange are certainly Guards level formations for the Infantry. It's stretching the rules a bit with an assumption, but the Guns would likely be part of the Guards regiments or Divisions as well, if purchased from Red/Orange. Maybe not the AA Guns, but certainly the AT, ART and INF should stem from the infantry divisions/regiments. (Unless there were organic AT units in the armored formations...)

 

[Tater]

Then you would have to have separate lines for the yellow entry code (and brown?) that aren't guards formations. Using the RG code implies that all units purchased from that RG code.

If I am not mistaken, HW plt were usually an "attached" formation...that is a specialty unit...that could be assigned at regimental level. So the assumption that a HW plt assigned to a guards regiment must be Guards doesn't neccesarily follow.

So the tank elements from Red are not Guards level formations. The Red and Orange are certainly Guards level formations for the Infantry. It's stretching the rules a bit with an assumption, but the Guns would likely be part of the Guards regiments or Divisions as well, if purchased from Red/Orange. Maybe not the AA Guns, but certainly the AT, ART and INF should stem from the infantry divisions/regiments. (Unless there were organic AT units in the armored formations...)

This is all assumption. The only definitive information we have is that the infantry RG are designated as Guards on the purchase chart while the HW Plt's aren't. Until there is errata changing that the HW plt's aren't Guards.

 

[janusz.maxe]

If anything comes from a guards division, be it at regimental level, it's elite in ASL. Hell, it can also be "elements of guards army" I believe. The tanks with Red dot shouldn't be elite, as well as all th onboard stuff 14th (yellow dot). This eliminates all ART and INF-guns.

Left are the AT-assets of the Red and Orange groups, plus their heavy mortars.
Janusz

 

[pward]

If I am not mistaken, HW plt were usually an "attached" formation...that is a specialty unit...that could be assigned at regimental level. So the assumption that a HW plt assigned to a guards regiment must be Guards doesn't neccesarily follow.

Not sure how Dorosh would rate this guy, but here is an OB site I've looked at. The link takes you to the Soviet Rifle Division that would have been in place for VotG. At the Division level, there is an AT battalion, and an AA battalion. At the Infantry Regiment level, there is an AT company, an INF company, a mortar company (4x 120mm), and a MG AA company. In each infantry battalion: a MG Company, a Mortar company (6x 82mm) and an AT Platoon.

Care to tell me again how the HW RG wouldn't be from somewhere in the Battalion, if not the Regiment or Division?

The final settlement will come from Tom, but in the absence of his reply, it might be worth it to record where a HW Platoon was purchased from and track that during a CG.

 

[pward]

If anything comes from a guards division, be it at regimental level, it's elite in ASL. Hell, it can also be "elements of guards army" I believe. The tanks with Red dot shouldn't be elite, as well as all th onboard stuff 14th (yellow dot). This eliminates all ART and INF-guns.

Left are the AT-assets of the Red and Orange groups, plus their heavy mortars.
Janusz

Spot on for the ART and INF, they can't be purchased from Red or Orange groups. AA and AT can be, so it's a valid question for them. An increase to the APCR for the AT guns would be nice...

 

[Tater]

Not sure how Dorosh would rate this guy, but here is an OB site I've looked at. The link takes you to the Soviet Rifle Division that would have been in place for VotG. At the Division level, there is an AT battalion, and an AA battalion. At the Infantry Regiment level, there is an AT company, an INF company, a mortar company (4x 120mm), and a MG AA company. In each infantry battalion: a MG Company, a Mortar company (6x 82mm) and an AT Platoon.

I assume the "CATTLE", "BAKERY" and "RATIONS ADMIN" must all be "Guards" as well. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

OK, I was wrong...the Guards Reg had their own stuff. Doesn't change the fact that the HW Plt is not described as "Guards". Even if they should have been, I wonder if the CG's/scenarios were playtested with the ammo bump? If not, changing now would be a huge mistake.

Care to tell me again how the HW RG wouldn't be from somewhere in the Battalion, if not the Regiment or Division?

I am not the guy to argue with. All I am saying is that until there is an errata to change the "HW Plt" to "Guards HW Plt" they ain't "Guards". And unless they were playtested as "Guards" they probably shouldn't be changed.

 

[Tater]

Spot on for the ART and INF, they can't be purchased from Red or Orange groups. AA and AT can be, so it's a valid question for them. An increase to the APCR for the AT guns would be nice...

Maybe...but if wasn't playtested this way then they should not be changed.

 

[janusz.maxe]

Trenches doesn't connect to cellars, as in RB, but to ground level, right?
Janusz

 

[Tater]

Trenches doesn't connect to cellars, as in RB, but to ground level, right?

Wrong, they connect to the lowest level of the adjacent building hex. IOW, they connect to the cellar location unless there is no cellar location.

 

[pward]

I am not the guy to argue with. All I am saying is that until there is an errata to change the "HW Plt" to "Guards HW Plt" they ain't "Guards". And unless they were playtested as "Guards" they probably shouldn't be changed.

There is one HW platoon available to the Brown RG, which is definitely not Guards quality. If the Red and Orange are Guards, it would require a separate line to differentiate the two types. If you look to the parent regiment/division there is no problem with the Red+Orange units being from Guard quality units. (Other than record keeping in CG 4, to tell you where the one Brown HW Platoon's mortars are getting their ammo.)

Similarly, the Yellow AT battery for CG2/4, and the at start AA battery (also CG2/4) won't be Guards either.

In the course of a CG, how often has the added 1 depletion number made a real difference to the outcome of that particular scenario or the whole CG? Is that even measurable or noticeable in the course of the scenario or CG?

 

[Tater]

There is one HW platoon available to the Brown RG, which is definitely not Guards quality. If the Red and Orange are Guards, it would require a separate line to differentiate the two types. If you look to the parent regiment/division there is no problem with the Red+Orange units being from Guard quality units. (Other than record keeping in CG 4, to tell you where the one Brown HW Platoon's mortars are getting their ammo.)

Similarly, the Yellow AT battery for CG2/4, and the at start AA battery (also CG2/4) won't be Guards either.

In the course of a CG, how often has the added 1 depletion number made a real difference to the outcome of that particular scenario or the whole CG? Is that even measurable or noticeable in the course of the scenario or CG?

If the RG is purchased as the same RG# then they would have to be the same rules applied. Perhaps it was decided, as you say, that the bump on depletion wasn't worth the additional bookkeeping on which HW plt units were under which code so they decided to leave it out.

Regardless, by rule the HW plt are not described in the RG chart as being "Guards HW Plt". Which, BTW, they do describe the I1 and I2 RG as "Guards Rifle". If the "Entry Code" designation were enough to impart Guard status then why the need for I1 and I2 to be described as "Guards..."? The entry code is just that...an entry code. Until there is errata I don't see that playing any HW Plt as "Guard" is valid.

OTOH, this is a CG and the players involved are pretty free to handle it however they want.

 

[pward]

Regardless, by rule the HW plt are not described in the RG chart as being "Guards HW Plt". Which, BTW, they do describe the I1 and I2 RG as "Guards Rifle". If the "Entry Code" designation were enough to impart Guard status then why the need for I1 and I2 to be described as "Guards..."? The entry code is just that...an entry code. Until there is errata I don't see that playing any HW Plt as "Guard" is valid.

I1 is only available from Red and Orange, the Guards Regiments. I2 has a few purchases available from the Brown RG, which is not a Guards formation. The rest of I2 are from the Guards formations. I'm not sure how that affects WRT our discussion on the HW platoons, but I suspect it's to give 6-2-8 to the Brown entry code for some close range heavy hitters. In the Guards SMG platoon, the Guards status doesn't make a difference, since they don't have depletion numbers on any of their SW.

Meh, we can go round and round nit-picking and trying to interpret the intent of the designer, or we can wait to see what he says...

 

[Tater]

Meh, we can go round and round nit-picking and trying to interpret the intent of the designer, or we can wait to see what he says...

Going round & round with you is what I live for...

[cue Psycho with homo-erotic comment in 5...4...3...2...1...]

 

[Bob Miller]

Nah, you won't see Psycho in the VotGs thread. Too much technical mumbo jumbo for him here. Guy would get dizzy and puke if he followed these threads. Yellow vs Orange reinforcement groups, retained vs reserved..... etc. Last I saw Psycho two years ago at ALSOK he was trying to figure out the para drop in Operation Russelspring (whatever). Stroke notwithstanding, he's still re-reading the rules to determine which board his paratroopers landed on.

 

[janusz.maxe]

Somewhere i VotG rules (NRBH) there's something saying that Soviets may setup X% (I think it's 10) HIP. But since they are always attacker, and the rules say something like "attacker infantry uses cloaking" (ch.E) there is no option to setup outside cloak. Furthermore, I believe that cloak counters may not setup HIP.

Am I wrong, or is this VoTG HIP bonus useless?
Janusz

 

[Tater]

Nah, you won't see Psycho in the VotGs thread. Too much technical mumbo jumbo for him here. Guy would get dizzy and puke if he followed these threads. Yellow vs Orange reinforcement groups, retained vs reserved..... etc. Last I saw Psycho two years ago at ALSOK he was trying to figure out the para drop in Operation Russelspring (whatever). Stroke notwithstanding, he's still re-reading the rules to determine which board his paratroopers landed on.

He's gonna do that regardless of which thread he followed. :devious:

 

[janusz.maxe]

A curious detail. Since the German ability to salvage wrecks and reman them is a major ability in VotG, I'm thinking of sending a conscript HS out into the street to set fire to the Flakwagen I destroyed with small arms fire.

I've never fought a wreck before, so how do I do this?
No PAATC I think.
-2 partially armored
-1 no MG
-1 abandoned
-1 immobile

So base HS CCV is 3, 2 beacuase it's inexperienced.
2 and -5 DRM, and I need a final 1, so a DR of 6 or less will burn it, right?
Janusz

 

[James Taylor]

A curious detail. Since the German ability to salvage wrecks and reman them is a major ability in VotG, I'm thinking of sending a conscript HS out into the street to set fire to the Flakwagen I destroyed with small arms fire.

I've never fought a wreck before, so how do I do this?
No PAATC I think.
-2 partially armored
-1 no MG
-1 abandoned
-1 immobile

So base HS CCV is 3, 2 beacuase it's inexperienced.
2 and -5 DRM, and I need a final 1, so a DR of 6 or less will burn it, right?
Janusz

Or just control the location at the end of a scenario in which a counterattack is not declared.

JT

 

[IYAOYAS]

Somewhere i VotG rules (NRBH) there's something saying that Soviets may setup X% (I think it's 10) HIP. But since they are always attacker, and the rules say something like "attacker infantry uses cloaking" (ch.E) there is no option to setup outside cloak. Furthermore, I believe that cloak counters may not setup HIP.

Am I wrong, or is this VoTG HIP bonus useless?
Janusz

What you're referencing is footnote #5 (VotG25) in page V30. It says that the Russians can setup 10% HIP. Strangely enough, it's only mentioned in the footnote, not the actual VotG SSR. :nuts:

I think the Russian can forgo cloaking in order to setup HIP, but don't have a rules reference to back that up. Given how CG night scenarios are modified it seems reasonable.

 

[mgmasl]

VotG 3 SSR3

After the NTC has been rolled. Does the russian units out of LOS gain concealment, applying A12.22?

Miguel