TWO QUESTIONS CREATED FROM TODAY'S GAME

[jdrew]

Exactly how does emplacements work? And do the grenade launchers benefit from FIST and LandWarrior systems?

Thanks
Jase

 

[Rob_A]

Rulesmasters.

 

[cordas]

Exactly how does emplacements work? And do the grenade launchers benefit from FIST and LandWarrior systems?

Thanks
Jase

1. They are buildings / structures, if you have the main rule book that pretty much gives all the details, if you have specific questions feel free to ask them

2. No, read the FIST / Land Warrior specail rule, it quite clearly states in both cases that it only works for the infantry rifles, not MGs or underslung grenade launchers as they are different weapons with their own rules and stats.

Feel free to ask questions thou its how we learn best

 

[lastbesthope]

The rules for emplacements are in the Advanced Rulebook. As for FIST & Land Warrior, no the benefits do NOT apply tothe Grenade launchers. On each card it specifically states which weapons get the benefit. AFAIK it is always ony the standard rifle used by the unit, not the UGL, not the machine guns, not the sniper rifles (SAS).

Play the rules as written :lol:

LBH

 

[The Old Soldier]

Just to clarify A rifle with the UGL is still a rifle. You still gain the FIST bonus unless you are firing the UGL on the rifle. UGL firing = NO Rifle firing = YES.

 

[jdrew]

Thanks . . . that is what we thought on the UGL, but we wanted to verify. And if I understand correctly . . . emplacements are basic scenery that you can place in your deployment . . . you get the +2 cover bonus and that is about it . . . right??

Thanks again,
Jase

 

[The Old Soldier]

Thanks . . . that is what we thought on the UGL, but we wanted to verify. And if I understand correctly . . . emplacements are basic scenery that you can place in your deployment . . . you get the +2 cover bonus and that is about it . . . right??

Thanks again,
Jase

Not exactly Emplacements do give you the cover bonus, but they are considered structures. Now I know some here will cry out I'm wrong, but Emplacements are not defined real well.

Here is a example: FOXHOLE

Size max 2, Target 8+, Armor 3+, Kill 12+, Ignore Armor roll 3, Value 25pts.

Now no where does it state what it means by Size max. All other structure you determine size by measurement, but not this. I would assume what is meant is the Foxhole is large enought to either cover 2" of ground or up to two models of size one, or 1 model of size 2. This would represent a small two man fire pit, or a deep light vehicle emplacement.

Other Emplacements have the following stats.
Small Bunker S4, T10, A2, K12, IAR6, 75pts.
Large Bunker S6, T10, A2, K14, IAR9, 150pts.
Fortified Military Structure S10, T10, A2, K14, IAR15, 250pts.

So the structures shouldn't be too big nor would they be tall. But they should be big enough to place up to the SIZE in models.

 

[cordas]

Thanks . . . that is what we thought on the UGL, but we wanted to verify. And if I understand correctly . . . emplacements are basic scenery that you can place in your deployment . . . you get the +2 cover bonus and that is about it . . . right??

Thanks again,
Jase

Yup you get the +2 cover bonus for being in an emplacement / structure as your models are in cover.

 

[cordas]

Now no where does it state what it means by Size max. All other structure you determine size by measurement, but not this. I would assume what is meant is the Foxhole is large enought to either cover 2" of ground or up to two models of size one, or 1 model of size 2. This would represent a small two man fire pit, or a deep light vehicle emplacement.

Other Emplacements have the following stats.
Small Bunker S4, T10, A2, K12, IAR6, 75pts.
Large Bunker S6, T10, A2, K14, IAR9, 150pts.
Fortified Military Structure S10, T10, A2, K14, IAR15, 250pts.

So the structures should be too big nor would they be tall. But they should be big enough to place up to the SIZE in models.

Not sure I understand you TOS, Are you saying that Size MAx should be about working out the maximum numbers of figures you can place inside them, or should be the maximum size that a small bunker for example can be?

Personally my reading is that the size max is that its the largest a certain emplacement can be.

i.e. I have a pre-built model of an emplacement, its meant to be a foxhole, what it is is a CD case modeled with sand bags and some other stuff to make a small fortified entrenchment. As it measures 5" long and 2" high, or just under 6" on the diagonal of longest side and height its classed as a Large Bunker, as its under the size 6" max.

Hmmm this does mean that a foxhole is just a scrape that only 1 man can really fit in.... mind you it is only 25 points and you get to place it exactly where you want.... Shame they didn't put in a few more emplacement rules to cover trenches and sandbag walls, similar to what they have in the old SST emplacement rules where you can buy lenghts of wall and stuff.

 

[jdrew]

I really feel we need clear rules defining emplacements, especially since some armies can buy more than others. I know this is part of the advantage of playing that army, but I don't see the advantage!!

thanks

 

[The Old Soldier]

Look at it this way. A Foxhole, is nothing more than a hole in the ground, maybe a small slit trench braced at best with a few sandbags. The thing would not be higher than the ground level itself. These would hold SIZE TWO worth of models.

Same for say a Small Bunker, can hold SIZE 4 worth of models. Either a tank emplacement, or a 4 man bunker. The reason this makes sense to me, is because the Emplacements already have all the characteristics pre-done. Where as, buildings you measure to find out their characteristics.

And yes, Emplacements seem to be very vague at best. Other than LOS, this is the worse part of the rules. BTW: I suggest giving a added bonus of +2 to armor saves for troops in emplacements.

 

[cordas]

Look at it this way. A Foxhole, is nothing more than a hole in the ground, maybe a small slit trench braced at best with a few sandbags. The thing would not be higher than the ground level itself. These would hold SIZE TWO worth of models.

Same for say a Small Bunker, can hold SIZE 4 worth of models. Either a tank emplacement, or a 4 man bunker. The reason this makes sense to me, is because the Emplacements already have all the characteristics pre-done. Where as, buildings you measure to find out their characteristics.

And yes, Emplacements seem to be very vague at best. Other than LOS, this is the worse part of the rules. BTW: I suggest giving a added bonus of +2 to armor saves for troops in emplacements.

It could be read to say that TOS, but it could also be read that Max Size is actually the maximum size a terrain peice can be to be classed as that type of emplacement.

Definatly agree with emplacements giving infantry an armour save, I would suggest maybe a 5+ save, rather than a 2+ bonus. I would think that the exposed places that are easy kills will also be those places that will be targets when figures are in cover also giving infantry some infantry a 3+ save just gives me 40K shivers :wink: , but either I would be happy with.

 

[The Old Soldier]

Yea I know it could mean size as in width and height, but it doesn't make sense to do that and give the model predetermined hit points. Just my thoughts on the matter. Again it is MP fault for being so vague.

 

[BuShips]

It could be read to say that TOS, but it could also be read that Max Size is actually the maximum size a terrain peice can be to be classed as that type of emplacement.

I'd guess that's their meaning, but it should also mean the troop capacity as well for that particular piece, unless it specifically stated that it was Size 2 but held only a Size 1 model. I look at foxholes on a battlefield also as previous artillery barrages that infantry can take advantage of.

I've been thinking that any arty attack should make several usable foxholes within the firezone of the attack. If it were tied to an attack, maybe even "friendly" arty could be used to prepare an amount of broken ground and foxholes in an open area for friendly troops to make use of when crossing the open area. Just a thought. This could be an interesting tactic when used along with Covered Advance. :idea:

Allowing artillery to change the terrain (and that is what it can do, indeed) during a game would make an interesting addition to the game, for surviving infantry could make use of the foxholes that you just provided them. :wink:

 

[cordas]

It could be read to say that TOS, but it could also be read that Max Size is actually the maximum size a terrain peice can be to be classed as that type of emplacement.

I'd guess that's their meaning, but it should also mean the troop capacity as well for that particular piece, unless it specifically stated that it was Size 2 but held only a Size 1 model. I look at foxholes on a battlefield also as previous artillery barrages that infantry can take advantage of.

I've been thinking that any arty attack should make several usable foxholes within the firezone of the attack. If it were tied to an attack, maybe even "friendly" arty could be used to prepare an amount of broken ground and foxholes in an open area for friendly troops to make use of when crossing the open area. Just a thought. This could be an interesting tactic when used along with Covered Advance. :idea:

Allowing artillery to change the terrain (and that is what it can do, indeed) during a game would make an interesting addition to the game, for surviving infantry could make use of the foxholes that you just provided them. :wink:

Some nice ideas there...... having artillery put down say D3 foxholes, the player who fired the artillery places the 1st foxhole and then take alternate turns to place any remaining foxholes within the FZ of the artillery.

As for the size issue, I really don't see how it can mean maximum number of models placed in it, and have that make any real sense when it comes to making and defining emplacements.

 

[BuShips]

I'm at a disadvantage as I don't have the book yet. Since foxholes are not much good without infantry in them, do the rules say much else than "Size 2" about them? If not, then TOS's remark that the rules are a bit weak there would make sense. As a comparison, what does the book say about the bunkers in regards to their Size against their capacity. If we knew that, then we could make some logical extensions to other "emplacements".

 

[The Old Soldier]

BuShips, If you go back some on this tread I gave a complete run down of all emplacement stats. That is all that is said about them. other than thier placement on the table.

Note you do not measure them to get the size, nor do you multiple by 1.5 to get the hit points. They are already predetermined with a cost to them. This suggest to me the Size is for what can be place IN them. Unlike other types of structures. I still want Emplacements to give the added bonus to Armor for the Troops makes both PLA and MEA troops worth placing in a emplacement, otherwise you might as well just use normal building, since they do not cost anything.

 

[BuShips]

BuShips, If you go back some on this tread I gave a complete run down of all emplacement stats. That is all that is said about them. other than thier placement on the table.

Note you do not measure them to get the size, nor do you multiple by 1.5 to get the hit points. They are already predetermined with a cost to them. This suggest to me the Size is for what can be place IN them. Unlike other types of structures. I still want Emplacements to give the added bonus to Armor for the Troops makes both PLA and MEA troops worth placing in a emplacement, otherwise you might as well just use normal building, since they do not cost anything.

Well, you are making sense. I've called for a BF:E FAQ several times. I'm thinking it's something MGP should get out to its customers and this stuff should be included. :idea:

 

[cordas]

BuShips, If you go back some on this tread I gave a complete run down of all emplacement stats. That is all that is said about them. other than thier placement on the table.

Note you do not measure them to get the size, nor do you multiple by 1.5 to get the hit points. They are already predetermined with a cost to them. This suggest to me the Size is for what can be place IN them. Unlike other types of structures. I still want Emplacements to give the added bonus to Armor for the Troops makes both PLA and MEA troops worth placing in a emplacement, otherwise you might as well just use normal building, since they do not cost anything.

Still not sure how your size mechanism will work on the table TOS.

Say I have an emplacement that is big enough to fit 2 Warriors in does that mean its a large emplacement (Size max 6, as it can fit 2 size 3 vehicles in)?
What about the fact that in the same space as I could squeeze 2 Warriors I could also fit 16 infantry models..... Which using your method means it should actually be a Fortified Military Structure with adjoining Large Bunker, giving you a total Max Size of 16.

 

[vitalis6969]

Based on the quoted writing of it, I would guess the same thing as TOS regarding the size of the fortification.

You pointed out nicely though how broken the description is.

I put out a second for a FAQ. There is too much muddiness in certain parts of the game.

-V