I've been going through V78 (which I appreciate may not be in general circulation) in some detail.
There are a few general points on which I'll need Martin's decision before completing my task, which I thought would be useful to share here from a "wisdom of the crowds" perspective / general awareness of other play-testers.
I'll try to post by theme, so that people can quote specific posts when responding.
Simon
First up, Artillery.
Which is a pain from the rule-writing perspective, as it's effectively treated as a unit in many cases, other than it's a single base, doesn't contribute to fights and doesn't meet the minimum "6 points for a unit" criterion! I'm wondering whether it would be easier to say that Artillery is a unit, but simply state that it is an exception to the 6-point criterion?
Is it true that Artillery never count in a fight in any way (e.g. not even as "any other unit")? I think page 31 (section 15. Artillery) makes this pretty clear, but elsewhere it appears less so.
Is it possible to select Artillery as the "unit" that falls back in a Morale result of 1 or 2 fails? If so, and it retires off table, is it lost? My take is that any attempt to retire by Artillery should count as a loss, as per '3 or more fails' when the whole zone has to retire, but think that this is a potential loophole.
It is explicitly stated (page 57, 34. Movement) that Elephants and Chariots may not enter certain types of "difficult" scenery. Can Artillery (e.g. even if they are placed there initially or as part of a Flank March and never intend to move from there later)?
Can Artillery be reinforcements? Page 73 [38. Reinforcements] refers to both units and generals, but Artillery are neither...
Do Artillery count as one of the "magic 4" bases e.g. to occupy a zone?
Simon
Generals
There are a couple of places where it says that "each fifth hit" is placed on a General. Which could imply that the 10th and, 15th (?!) hits are also placed on a General. I think that this should read "the fifth" (in one place it says "fifth and only fifth", which I think is right). Am I correct?
When hits in excess of 2 per unit are placed by the inflictor (page 71, under Fighting saving rolls) "in any proportion the inflictor wishes", presumably the general can never take more than his initial one hit?
If there is a second general in a zone, can he be targeted by shooting and/or fighting, or is he invisible? The reference to "only the death of a first general in a zone counts" implies that the second general can be killed too, but it's unclear how hits could ever be placed on him.
Simon
Obstructed vs. Obstructing Scenery
There are instance of both terms. I feel that "Obstructing" should be used throughout. Thoughts, please?
Simon
Army Lists
Page 13 (6. Building an army) states that an adaptation from "one of the many lists available" is permissible, which contradicts the definition of Army in the Terms Used table on page 6, which states that the army must conform to one of the CK lists.
Simon
Points overspend, and the problem with Sandra
In '6. Building an army' (page 13), the Overspend section states that the opponent rolls a D6 to determine whether a base is lost.
In the example immediately below, Sandra rolls a 2 and therefore must remove a base. I think this should be "Sandra's opponent"?
I was also interested that the opponent in the example then selects to remove a Skirmisher base. I would be inclined to remove an Elephant, or an Elite / Veteran base. So this seems like a strange example?
More to follow later today...
Simon
Very thorough Simon. Thank you.
martin :)
Generals. After taking 10+ hits from Martin (how did that happen!?) I went to put the 5th and 10th hits on the general, but Martin told me a general only ever takes 1 hit. If there are two generals in a square I would suggest that the 5th hit goes on general 1 and the 10th on general 2.
Points overspend. I have not seen the example but would suggest that the owner of the overspent army should choose the lost base. Perhaps skirmish bases should be excluded from this procedure. So the base must be chosen from a proper unit.
Army lists. My understanding is that you have to use the structure of an army list but can represent it how you like. So if you believe that Vikings had chariots, pikemen and elephants you would put Viking figures on the table but use and conform to the Successor list. I do not subscribe to this idea but I can see the logic of it. After all you could use different coloured meeples to represent troop types if you wanted, but then it ceases to be wargaming to me.
Obstructing scenery. Consistency of language is surely part of the proof reading process. If something is unclear or contradictory I am sure martin will appreciate being informed.
Artillery. I would go for artillery never count as a unit for any purpose (so costing 6 points does not contravene the minimum unit points cost rule). I would also say that unless moved back in the movement phase by the owning player artillery forced to retreat or move away from the enemy are always lost (i.e. their crew is either killed or has run away).
All good spots Simon. I shall look forward to the next update.
John
Quote from: John Watson on April 10, 2023, 10:13:12 AM
Obstructing scenery. Consistency of language is surely part of the proof reading process. If something is unclear or contradictory I am sure martin will appreciate being informed.
Thanks John.
And the consistency thing is really the point of my posting here. I am making minor tweaks for typos etc. in the master document, but there are some points (such as this one) where I need to know which way to jump, e.g. I could decide that "obstructing" is correct and modify throughout the document, only to find that Martin had a preference for "obstructed", or indeed intended a nuance (unlikely in this particular instance, I admit) in which both are deliberate and distinct!
Simon
Battle tactics
Is it possible to choose 0 of one of the tactics? I don't think this is expressly allowed.
Simon
Casualties
I don't understand (page 20): "If a zone is wiped out, the casualty markers still fall back as above or fall back in the way other units have to". Should "zone" read "unit" in this sentence?
Unit disintegrating (page 20): chariots are not explicitly mentioned as disintegrating when they reach a half-base, but presumably they do too?
Simon
Shooting
In section 14. Bows (page 30), chariots (which can all shoot) are not included in the list of bow unit types, nor are they lumped in with skirmishers. What should they be counted as?
The example of artillery shooting on page 32 states that the target has no saving roll unless in woods or buildings. The following paragraph states that there are no saving rolls against artillery hits (which is how I've always played it).
Simon
Elephants
Section 17 (Elephants, page 34) states that only a single elephant can be killed by pursuit. Presumably that means that only one pair of pursuit dice may be placed on elephants in the first place (i.e. not that two pairs can be placed, but only one elephant can so die)?
The "Elephants disrupting cavalry and chariots" section on the same page specifically refers to elephants disrupting opponent cavalry.
The next section says that own cavalry units (up to one per elephant) are also negatively affected, with a "Maximum -2", but then that multiple elephants cannot affect the same cavalry unit (which presumably applies to both own- and opponent-elephant effects).
The last paragraph states that "an army with elephants will still be affected by an opponent who has elephants", but doesn't mention own-cavalry disruption.
I think I know what this all says, but find it quite confusing in the way it is presented.
I do wonder too why cavalry in armies with elephants are still scared by opponent pachyderms - I had understood that it was the novelty of the noise and smells that were the concern.
Simon
Special "extra hill"
Does the extra hill, if awarded, have to be placed or is it optional?
Simon
Scenario Aspects
C. Determination: when a general's gift is awarded, does one player choose which gift, or is it randomly selected?
D. Strength: when there is a second possible outcome (for armies with levy units), is it obligatory to take the levy option, or can the player choose the "upgrade trained to veteran" option instead, even if he has levies?
Simon
Fall-backs and blocked fall-back
Section 33, page 53.
If a single unit falls back as the result of a morale test, does it / can it take any casualties with it? If so, it might be important to note to which unit casualties belong
Section 33, page 55
Presumably the outcome for "Surrounded by opponents on all four sides" is equally applicable to a mix of sides being blocked by opponents and impassable scenery?
Simon
Movement
Page 57: Can artillery "enter wooded, building, rough hill and obstructed scenery zones" (explicitly excluded for elephants and chariots only)?
There are slightly different Movement tables on both pages 56 and 59 - presumably one or the other should be deleted?
Simon
Defensive measures
Section 45, page 83
Are stakes considered to be uni-directional in their affect?
There is a contradiction between "Once placed they cannot be removed" and "Any zone with these defences has them removed if any opponent units enter the zone"
In the latter case, if opponents assault into the zone but are immediately pushed back (i.e. they lose the fight), do the defences remain?
Simon
A whole bunch of thing here.
Thanks for finding them Simon.
It is good to air my thinking on the forum.
A lot of the work here is on clarification I think.
Good
martin :)
Artillery
Artillery is intended to be outside of all unit considerations.
If a zone loses a fight whether or not it falls back the artillery is lost.
I will remove the woods/buildings saves for simplicity (?).
Stakes
I have not looked at this at all, so I will get a look at that.
Fall backs
Falling back units do not have to take casualties with them because a morale test removes all casualties before any fall backs are imposed.
Elephants
The -1 is applied to all cavalry.
Some armies trained their horses to ignore elephants. It is too much detail (?) to list armies that do and do not react.
Generals
Only 5th hit and never any more.
Not sure whether the general 5th hit shoud be allowed for pursuit?
Obstructing scenery
I think obstructing is the word to go for. Maybe there is a better word?
martin :)
Thanks Martin. Simplicity is good :)
I like "Obstructing" for scenery too.
Simon