Official Rules Update and FAQ (Draft versions 1.01 - June 21)

[ColBosch]

"Disabled" doesn't denote damage to units. It shows that the crew is incapacitated. As seen in GURPS Ogre and other sources, every combat unit includes an AI that can undertake routine tasks, and even do a little fighting if need be. A "disabled" GEV is still hovering.

[GranitePenguin]

Here's a collection of AP and terrain-related questions that have come up recently that need to be added as errata and/or FAQ

AUs being affected by spillover from APs (a bug in the Video Game)

** 7.05.1 AP weapons. Some units have antipersonnel weapons, effective only against infantry (including special infantry types) and D0 units such as a regular (unarmored) CP. A unit may not fire AP at the same infantry unit more than once per turn, but any number of AP weapons may be used for that single attack.

Note: Any weapon may be used against infantry. AP weapons are useless against anything except infantry, targets with defense of 0, and other targets as designated in scenarios.

*** 7.12.2 Units affected by spillover fire. All units (friendly or enemy) in a hex are affected by spillover fire, except: (a) a unit’s own fire does not spill over onto it, and no spillover fire is calculated in an overrun; (b) separate spillover fire is not calculated for a tank and the infantry riding it (Section 5.11.2), and (c) Ogres and buildings ignore spillover fire.

Clarified by Steve:

AP should not be able to hurt tanks, period. Not in direct combat, not in overruns, not with spillover.

----

Q: Spillover fire from automatic road destruction? - Specifically, should friendly units take spillover from a unit in the same hex that is performing automatic road destruction?

Clarification from Steve:

No spillover.

----

Ramming INF with Ogres
Q. Does "ramming" INF count toward the "two rams per turn" limit?
A. No

Clarification from Steve:

Intent: "Ramming" only means rams vs. armor units, not infantry. Only two rams per turn because the Ogre probably has to waste some time and movement getting close enough to the ram targets to actually hit them.

Reducing infantry is not a ram. It was treated as a ram in earlier versions of the video game but that was an error and has AFAIK been fixed. Reducing infantry just represents getting close enough to take a free shot with your AP, which is why AP is required for this to work.

---

Q. Can AP guns be used to destroy terrain (auto or otherwise)?
According to 7.05.1, AP guns can be used only against INF and D0 targets. Does that also mean they can't be used for destruction of terrain?
A. Answer unknown

[Tim Kauffman]

Originally Posted by ColBosch

"Disabled" doesn't denote damage to units. It shows that the crew is incapacitated. As seen in GURPS Ogre and other sources, every combat unit includes an AI that can undertake routine tasks, and even do a little fighting if need be. A "disabled" GEV is still hovering.

If a unit takes a second D result...what happens to the unit? It gets Xed.

Is that second D result only affecting the crew again and this time it kills them, or is it damaging the vehicle only, or is it damaging the vehicle and the crew?

Quote from the rules:
"A disabled unit cannot fire or move; turn the counter over. If it receives another D result while disabled, it is destroyed."

...the unit is destroyed. It doesn't say the crew is killed and the vehicle is undamaged. It says the unit is destroyed. Which can only happen if the vehicle can also be damaged to the point of then being destroyed. Clearly there is some degree of vehicle damage occurring in a D result other than the crew gets knocked unconscious.
The video game has smoke coming off of D'ed units for example. That implies some degree of damage to the vehicle as well as the crew.

My suggestion was working within that framework to have a D'ed GEV lose it's ability to have its AI attack and also lose it's hovering ability while D'ed. The not hovering portion of the suggestion was really just semantics used to give a plausible explanation for it. Thus, one can ignore that explanation, but the suggestion to have a variant rule for GEVs that are D'ed not be able to use their AI to attack still stands.

If you want to use the variant rule, you can and it changes nothing from the original game because there are still GEVs that use the original rule, in this context the explanation is they would be early Last War GEVs...or even better, lesser skilled GEV Pilots. Then the official GEV Pilots, then the Aces that ignore all D results on them. ;)

[offsides]

Originally Posted by Tim Kauffman

If a unit takes a second D result...what happens to the unit? It gets Xed.

Is that second D result only affecting the crew again and this time it kills them, or is it damaging the vehicle only, or is it damaging the vehicle and the crew?

The first D represents a "near miss" where the crew got incapacitated while trying to dodge enemy fire. The second D represents what would have been a near miss, except the crew was unable to react due to being incapacitated. The onboard AI, whle decent, doesn't have the intuition to dodge a bullet, as it were, and thus the hit is close enough for a mission kill - the crew and/or vehicle sustains enough damage to render it ineffective.

In Ogre miniatures, the second and higher X's are listed as XX - indicating a direct hit that removes the mini from the board rather than leaving a burned out husk representing a mission kill. In this case 2 D's yield an X rather than an XX - the vehicle is still physically in existence, it's just no longer a useful combat unit.

The binary system of a counter being on the board/off the board is a vast oversimplification for gameplay purposes. In real life there's all sorts of things that will cause a mission kill, including just plain dumb bad luck; conversely there's also tons of things crews can do to get around problems and keep a vehicle in operation long enough to complete the mission and/or get home (chewing gum and bailing wire, anyone? :)). I totally get the desire to add more realism to Ogre, if nothing else it's fun to speculate. But from a gameplay standpoint keeping it simple and handwaving the reasons why it works the way it works makes a ton of sense.

[ColBosch]

Complexity =/= realism, anyway. Even if "D" results represented what Tim wants them to, I see no benefit in adding more special case rules that solve no actual problems.

[Mack_JB]

It's been stated before that the game proper isn't representing a real battle, but it is the battle as viewed from afar on the comm-screens at headquarters as the battle unfolds. If so, then individual crews are seldom known, nor are their particular special skills.

[Tim Kauffman]

Crfout
"Proposed - that GEV class vehicles, when disabled while on a water hex, are instead destroyed.

If the fans stop running, the hovercraft doesn't hover any more. It sinks. "

I don't think that a GEV should sink and be destroyed, but like the general concept that Imho may compliment the game. Hence the proposal:

* Low ranking pilots operating disabled GEVs cannot use their AI to attack while disabled.
(Or this could be early Last War GEVs).

* Official disabled GEVs can use their AI to attack while disabled.
(Or this Could be mid- Last War GEVs).

* Higher ranking GEV pilots (GEV Aces) ;) ignore all D results.
(Or this could be late Last War GEVs).

As GP mentioned, it doesn't matter what caused the D only that it happened. I agree. This proposal can exist with that in mind.

I do like the idea of maybe having early, mid, and late Last War versions of units.

Anyways, this is off topic any way, so I'll end my transmission here.

[GranitePenguin]

Another possible FAQ/errata: stacking limits and how they are applied to overruns.

Someone brought up the stacking limit of 5, but had an overrun situation where they ended up with 6 GEVs remaining after an overrun (i.e., in apparent violation of the stacking limit). The stacking limit is not an absolute (5.02.2), so having more than the limit is acceptable, but clarification on what that actually means is probably necessary.

[GuyMacon]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

Another possible FAQ/errata: stacking limits and how they are applied to overruns.

Someone brought up the stacking limit of 5, but had an overrun situation where they ended up with 6 GEVs remaining after an overrun (i.e., in apparent violation of the stacking limit). The stacking limit is not an absolute (5.02.2), so having more than the limit is acceptable, but clarification on what that actually means is probably necessary.

That would be me, in [ http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread...76#post2128976 ]. BTW, is posting here the best way to make sure that a bug report gets to the right people, or should I be doing something else?

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by GuyMacon

That would be me, in [ http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread...76#post2128976 ]. BTW, is posting here the best way to make sure that a bug report gets to the right people, or should I be doing something else?

bug reports should be emailed to Auroch Digital. This thread is for collecting items for the boardgame refresh of the rules, FAQ, etc.

There's a "send feedback" in the settings menu inside the game that should open the correct email address in your local mail client.