quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean-Khan
I wouldn't like to imagine the fight with 33 infantry units vs. 2 tanks [:O] Maybe the limit also encourages a little more variety to your army.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean-Khan
2 MG's and officer probably take 20 points or more, 8 basic infantry 24 points, so you'd have more than 50 points left for 5 remaining units... Well, this might not be enough for normal combat force, but to defend against an assault, yes. You'll surely want few machineguns and cannons there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by striderlotr

I might have miss read the rules but it looks like the axis or allies canbuild from any of their team mates. Can anyone else confirm?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jedijon

Okay, facing. I couldn't figure out if you used your front defense on the SINGLE side of the hex you were facing, or if it applied to the fron HALF of the hex? Anybody know.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Newtoncain

quote:

---

Originally posted by striderlotr

I might have miss read the rules but it looks like the axis or allies canbuild from any of their team mates. Can anyone else confirm?

---

I think (IIRC) 2 ways to build armies. Axis vs allies is one way.
The other German and Italian only, Japan only, Russian only and US,UK and the french cowards only.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
I can see there being a call for a historical version of the game for true grogs that will expand that limit and possible balance the tanks out so you don't have each side running around with more tanks that soldiers. This would also be possibly combined with some notes on units that never fought each other -- for example, I doubt a US Sherman ever faced a SIG33 in battle, by the time the Shermans rolled ashore in Africa the SIG33 was almost out the door.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulturedoodle
...wonder, though, whether many (any?) grognards will buy the minis for anything other than rebasing for use in other 15mm rulesets. Maybe...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulturedoodle

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
I can see there being a call for a historical version of the game for true grogs that will expand that limit and possible balance the tanks out so you don't have each side running around with more tanks that soldiers. This would also be possibly combined with some notes on units that never fought each other -- for example, I doubt a US Sherman ever faced a SIG33 in battle, by the time the Shermans rolled ashore in Africa the SIG33 was almost out the door.

---

Nice post. I wonder, though, whether many (any?) grognards will buy the minis for anything other than rebasing for use in other 15mm rulesets. Maybe...

But I did find the following in a source referencing the sIG33. This was the version mounted on a modified Pzkfw II chassis (but still mounting the 15cm gun).

"All were shipped to North Africa in 1942 to the 707 and 708 sIG Kp (SF) (heavy infantry gun companies). Took part in the Gazala spring offensive. Range of 4,700 meters."

Don't know how many were made, but it seems possible, maybe even probable, they were on the same battlefield with Shermans. [:)]

Regards,
Steve F.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Newtoncain



Cover is too powerful-makes the max damage you can do a disruption.

What are other peoples thoughts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fenyan

quote:

---

Originally posted by Newtoncain



Cover is too powerful-makes the max damage you can do a disruption.

What are other peoples thoughts.

---

I think cover is too random to rely on. Unlike other tactical games, you only have a 33% or 50% chance of gettting it. Whether cover is a good treatment of terrain, I'll wait and see after a few games. I do think it to be a neat idea.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NightMoor
Right off the bat, though, I gotta say, that Italian Carro Armato definitely looks like its going to be at least one of the "chase" rares of the set - way too cheap for what it does when you compare its stats and abilities (even including the chance to explode after just two hits) to the 35ish-pt juggernauts. We'll have to see how anti-tank units fare, but right now that thing looks like the rare that Axis players will hanker after to have multiples of (like, 4 or 5 even) in their army.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NightMoor
I'm liking that Russian command tank too - fast, solid, no soft flank, and even carrying ability for your favourite grunts, all for the cheapest of the "juggernauts" so far. Very cool :-).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulturedoodle

Russian command tank?

--Steve

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Newtoncain

I just can't see allowing myself to play a French (even the charbis) tank, Jap tank or Italian tank (to bottom feederish for me). Even if they have good stats.

Ok maybe a Charbis on an off day.

---

quote:

---

Russian command tank?

--Steve

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by XAos
"Sssh", your not meant to tell people that until after I have brought 4 cheap on ebay.[)][:o)]
Did you take into account that the M13/40 does not explode "After" being damaged, it explodes "Immediatly" the damage marker is placed, and hence might not get a shot in the assault phase that it is hit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NightMoor
In the description written by the retired army guy (Opening Salvo previews), he calls the T34/76 a command tank.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NightMoor
About the exploding ability, the rules state that markers don't take effect until you flip them over (remember, you only place face down markers to make it easier to remember who got hit during the assault phase), so I'm pretty sure the Armato can shoot back during assault. It just means it'll generally get killed off in return pretty often, while perhaps getting a single hit back at best...still, at that low price, with those decent attacks against vehicles and strong anti-infantry abilities, it might just be a steal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NightMoor

What I'm getting at is not whether you take the effects immediately or not, but whether a hit actually takes effect before the Casualty phase. This makes a big difference, because it appears, in the way the rules are written, that counters don't actually have any effect until you flip them up in the Casualty phase.

PG 12: "Hits, however, don't take effect until the casualty phase."

In this way, the Armato's drawback seems to only mean that you have a chance of killing the tank after just two hits (a significant drawback), and not that you can kill it in two hits AND do so without giving it a chance to fire back simultaneously. This makes sense to me, since units are supposed to be firing at each other simultaneously, so it shouldn't matter that you're going to blow up when the shell hits you, because you've already launched your own.

Still, this is definitely something that needs to be cleared up, I think.

---

quote:

---

When hit counters are flipped over during the casualty phase, a Vehicle with a face-up Damaged counter becomes “damaged.”

---

quote:

---

phase. The tank isn’t actually destroyed and taken off the board until the casualty phase.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by XAos
Also from the rules;
immediate: An immediate effect happens right away. Immediate combat results don’t wait until the casualty phase to take effect. I don't think "Highly Flammable" would have used a rules-defined word like "Immediately" if it meant "in the casualty phase". Which it could have said by just leaving out the word "Immediate".

Oh, well an answer to get in the FAQ, I guess...

---