Rulebook PDF Posted

[dungeonmasterjax]

Hi!
On the PDF's of the counters, sheet B1(F/B), I noticed that the orientation of the SH's, HWZ's, and MHWZ's are in the upper half of the hex while the remainder of the vehicles and infantry were in the bottom half of the hex. Is this intentional?

On the rules themselves, I have been very slow in going thru them, and hopefully I do not repeat what others have said.
I used Word for my notes, and will cut and paste to a new post following...

Yes, I used to be a printer and typesetter/proof-reader.

[dungeonmasterjax]

All right Mr. Steve, you asked…

You might want to ask someone who is colorblind to look over the rules, maps and counters to make sure they can ‘see’ everything correctly.
BTW: I like how you put 3D views of some of the 3D models in the rules. It will make assembly easier for some of the noobs. Plus they look good.
And I DO love the new look, artwork and layout of the rulebook! Great Job!

Now for the critiquing…

First, let me say that I try to look at this as a noob would. Not as easy as it sounds.

For those like myself who have bought the new system, but plan to continue using the miniatures (probably on the new maps!), I see where you have included Ogre Armor unit equivalencies on pgs. 23~24 (13.03), are these compatible with the OM points system, or should I continue to use those points?
In that vein, what are the Armor Unit values for Laser Towers and Turrets? Next on the list are LAD’s and Archaic Units… followed by Militia Infantry units?
I presume that targets such as Trucks and Command Posts have no cost, but what about Hardened CP’s and GEV-CP’s?

Maps:
2.00.2 Partial Hexes.
… Hexes that fall between maps will contain two numbers (four at the corners!). Such hexes can be referred to by either number. …
The Picture next to this section shows the North West corner of map S1. However the edge hexes shown only have one number in each. I understand how you are explaining that each partial hex, when connected to another map, will have two or more numbers in the newly created whole hex, but this might be confusing to others who look at a single map and see only one number.
A better picture might include two map edges for clarity.

2.01 Terrain types.
…The edges of hexes often depict bits of adjoining terrain types, but this is only to make the map look more realistic; these overlaps have no effect on play….
The picture above this rule section shows the Ridge terrain overlay. Perhaps there should be a comment about “with the exception of Ridges,”

2.02.1 Ridge hexsides.
… Only Ogres and infantry may cross ridge hexsides. …
The Reference Sheet says that Super Heavies may cross them.

2.03.01 Roads.
… Units which enter a hex on a road hex may ignore any movement penalties for the underlining terrain.
Maybe I’m just being too much of a rules nazi, but this seems a bit ambiguous or possibly confusing. Perhaps clarify that units that enter and exit a hex via the road may ignore underlying terrain effects.

2.03.3 Bridges.
… Note that any unit may cross a bridge. …
I’m guessing that Ogres and Super Heavies cross by simply crushing the bridge. Wouldn’t that destroy the bridge in the process?

3.01 Armor Units.
Maybe mention in the GEV section about how the pilots (GEV Jockeys) are considered unstable, like in the OM book. Always loved that bit of fluff. And maybe mention the sheer deadliness of the Howitzer.
A suggestion following the previous post by wjdecker (post #13) about the GEV-PC acronym. Perhaps call it a GEV Personnel Carrier (GEV-PC). An acronym for Truck such as TK could be easily confused with Tank, I would recommend leaving it as is.
Would a Cruise Missile Crawler be worth 18 Victory Points if destroyed before firing? And would it be worth 6 Victory Points after firing its missile?

3.02 Infantry Units.
If a 3 Squad Infantry unit is equal to 1 Armor unit for Victory Points (6 points), would a 2 Squad Infantry unit be worth 3 VP and a 1 Squad Infantry unit be worth 2 VP? This presumes that the unit was bought at the lower squad size at the beginning of the game (as per the scenario rules for MARK III ATTACK on pg 4 which allows for 20 strength points).
I would expect that the Marines would be worth twice the VP (12 points for a 3 Squad unit), and hope that this information will be forwarded to the online bonus materials for the HWT and ENG units.
BTW, will you be creating MAR-ENG units, or MIL (Militia) units?

3.03 and 3.05 Targets
What would the Victory Points be for the assorted units in these sections?
3.04 Ogres.
The last sentence is the first paragraph should be changed to: “See the Ogre Record Sheets (that came) in the box for more on the different Ogres.”
Any chance that there will be a record sheet for the mythical Mark VII Ogre?????
Maybe mention in the opening paragraph that the Ogre counters are 3D, since the train is mentioned as being two counters long. This because of rule 3.04.1, where you mention that “The capabilities of the Ogres are not shown on the counter.”
When will you be posting the Ogre record sheets for review and criticism? 

3.04.2 Ogre Components.
Missiles (M).
Maybe mention after sentence two that any or all Missiles can be fired at one time, at various targets, during a single fire phase. Or that this applies to all the ogres weapons, I couldn’t find that mentioned specifically.
Internal Missiles (IM).
… Destruction of a missile rack destroys on IM at the same time;…
Was this rule in a previous rule set (I must have missed it) or is this new? And if new, why did this change occur?

Page 9; Ogre types playable in this game include:

In the part about the Mark I Ogre, it gives the date of 2080 for when the PE began fielding them. The only other actual dates I have found in the rulebook are in the introduction, and they are non-specific, referring only to the century. Will there be an accompanying timeline to explain the history of the Ogreverse? If not, this is something of an oddity.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by dungeonmasterjax

Maps:
2.01 Terrain types.
…The edges of hexes often depict bits of adjoining terrain types, but this is only to make the map look more realistic; these overlaps have no effect on play….
The picture above this rule section shows the Ridge terrain overlay. Perhaps there should be a comment about “with the exception of Ridges,”

That picture above 2.01 goes with 2.00.3, describing overlays, which is right above it. It has nothing to do with 2.01. I suppose it could be construed as confusing...

Originally Posted by dungeonmasterjax

2.03.01 Roads.
… Units which enter a hex on a road hex may ignore any movement penalties for the underlining terrain.
Maybe I’m just being too much of a rules nazi, but this seems a bit ambiguous or possibly confusing. Perhaps clarify that units that enter and exit a hex via the road may ignore underlying terrain effects.

Except that units do not ignore underlying terrain effects. That would imply that they also get no defensive bonus (which isn't true). Only movement penalties are negated. What do you see as ambiguous?

2.03.3 Bridges.
… Note that any unit may cross a bridge. …
I’m guessing that Ogres and Super Heavies cross by simply crushing the bridge. Wouldn’t that destroy the bridge in the process?

All units cross bridges normally. Ogres and SHVYs do not crush bridges.

When will you be posting the Ogre record sheets for review and criticism?

Already posted, although I don't think this truly represents what will be in the box.

3.04.2 Ogre Components.
… Destruction of a missile rack destroys on IM at the same time;…
Was this rule in a previous rule set (I must have missed it) or is this new? And if new, why did this change occur?

Yes, it's always been like that:
G.E.V. 1st Edition, rule 8.07

Destruction of a missile rack destroys one missile at the same time; this is the only way a Mark IV missile can be destroyed before firing

[dwalend]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

If no, then it's version 1 (calculate odds against each squad individually)
If yes, then it's version 2 (allow defensive grouping)

The more I think about it, the more I'm leaning toward version 1 and calculating against each squad. The reason is this: the defensive grouping bonus comes from infantry being able to move around within a 1.5km space. Normally, I envision the infantry scrambling once the attack is declared (getting into foxholes, etc). I think infantry loses that ability when everyone is crammed onto an armor unit or sitting in a truck. It's a more focused attack, and everything on that unit is a sitting duck. Essentially, they are giving up defensive mobility for an increase in speed.

I'm in hearty agreement. I think we've hit bottom on 5.11.2.

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

Well, 12.08 is called "Spillover fire" in the sense that it's calling out the fact that lasers don't have any spillover fire. It is important, however, to call out how infantry is affected. What about changing 12.08 to:

12.08 Spillover fire. A laser attack does not give spillover fire on units stacked with the target. However, it does affect infantry riding on a unit as in 5.11.2

Maybe 12.08 should be titled "No Spillover Fire For Lasers."

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

And one last thing; how does terrain affect infantry that is riding on a unit? As I alluded to before, infantry lose some of their magic once they hop a ride. For example, I don't see them getting a triple bonus in town, because they aren't hiding in the buildings anymore. I think there needs to be a clarification on what terrain bonus they get while riding. I suggest they get whatever the bonus is for the unit they are riding, since that's the real target.

It sounds reasonable to make infantry vulnerable when riding, but I've never played with that rule. (It used to be easier for infantry to hop on and off of GEV-PCs and tanks.)

[dwalend]

Ogre Record Sheets:

Any reason not to make all of the PE Ogre sheet blue, including the MkIII and MkV?

Counter Sheets:

Does the red outline get printed, or is it just to show everyone where the cuts happen? The counters look like they are cleverly designed so that things will be fine even if the cut misses a bit... except for the red outline.

Should the superheavy have two 3/3s instead of a 6*/3 ?

The overlays look fantastic.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by dwalend

Ogre Record Sheets:

Any reason not to make all of the PE Ogre sheet blue, including the MkIII and MkV?

I didn't understand the differences in colors, either.

Should the superheavy have two 3/3s instead of a 6*/3 ?

If it does, you'd have to change the rules to reflect that. It doesn't make any more or less sense either way (although having two 3/3s would make the counter even more odd than it already is), so I think it's probably best left as-is. The asterisk is a simple indicator to remind people of the split capabilities.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by dwalend

Maybe 12.08 should be titled "No Spillover Fire For Lasers."

I think just "Spillover fire" is clear enough. The way mine reads (to paraphrase)... "Spillover fire: None". That way, the title text is consistent with other spillover fire references, and just clarifies that lasers do not have any spillover.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

As of a few minutes ago, the rulebook, scenario book, and reference sheet were ready to go to press. Daniel has been a huge help in this last round of checking - thanks, Daniel!

Congratulations! One step closer :-)

[philreed]

Rules, reference sheets, scenarios, counters, maps . . . these are all at print and completed. Thanks for the assist, guys.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by philreed

Rules, reference sheets, scenarios, counters, maps . . . these are all at print and completed. Thanks for the assist, guys.

I was really excited to get a chance to be a part of it. Glad I could help. It's really cool that you guys opened it up to us.