Additions, Omissions, Errata etc - please post here

[sediment]

Hi Ian,

So are there any differences in stat line between Bren, Scout, Cavalry and Universal carriers within the granularity of the game?  Alternatively, we could agree that Bren carrier or even Carrier is a good name for all of that type of vehicle?

As for Desert Storm, isn't that more that the armour was overrunning the recce because the recce were trying to do their job, while the armour was keen to press on and bypass the usual recce activity as they could scent a collapse of the Iraqi forces?  In our CWC games, recce units often leapfrog each other, one advancing while the next moves to a better position, all while the armour and mechanized boys press on as fast as they can. If recce do their stuff and boost a HQ, then the normal units get an orders advantage, which hopefully helps them overtake the active recce unit.  Next activation, it would need to roll high to get ahead again.

Cheers, Andy

[Dr Dave]

GW1: Pal of mine in a CVRT had his ride totalled on day 1 by a speeding CR1 

I'll shut up on the recce - each to their own. If it works it works. 

[Big Insect]

There is an omission around Recce Support.
Totally my fault. It was in my head and in my scribble-pad notes but didn't make it to the actual master copy.

All Recce Support should be classified as Independent - so no distance modifiers for Command. It is one of the reason why they are relatively so expensive.
NB: this is why some of the armoured cars (outside of the Recce Support section) are overpriced as well - as they have the intended Recce Support points cost incorrectly.

I got all excited about putting Recce and Recce Support into their own section of the lists and created havoc for Leon who was doing his level best to keep up with my evolving thinking.

It will be picked up in the Errata .... I was just hoping that you lot wouldn't notice it   fat chance!

Cheers
Mark

[Steve J]

Air Support Example p53
In the example it mentions American Mitchell bombers as the attacking air support unit. However, in the example, the attack tests for deviation, yet bombers can only be used as a Scheduled Attack and therefore do not deviate.

Italian L3/35 tankettes
These should definately be low profile. There is a case for making other Italian tanks Low profile, but will look at which ones later, if I remember!

Unreliable Special Ability
This could apply to quite a few early war tanks, such as the Italian L3/35s, some British tanks (I forget which one used in the Desert had a note apologising for the engine IIRC) etc. Personal preference will play a part I'm sure, but can make for some fun games.

Dig-In
I think this has been mentioned but it is missing from the rulebook.

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Mark - you have 2 dates for the M24 - one in Recce as 7/44 and one in tanks as correctly 12/44. Also the M8 Greyhound should be in Recce rather than the M5/M24's.  Yes the cavalry squadrons were supposedly recce units, but did very little of it, and used the M8's and Jeeps on those missions. Most  of the cavalry missions were flank security and rear area security. Also dont think the M20 was used by recce units, it was more often a command vehicle in the tank destroyer battalions.

M3 GMC - should have the exposed attribute, it is rather open.

You have omitted T10 and T19 GMC's used in Tunisia, T10 in regimental gun coys ? and the T19 as armoured division field artillery until the Priest replaced them.

M3 GMC should be in the British Italy list, armoured car rgts there used them instead of AEC III or Staghound III, frequently for indirect fire.

Hope those help, I'm still looking !

IanS

ps - good job.

[Dr Dave]

The cavalry shooting range of 10 is presumably firing when mounted and if they dismount they fire as infantry (range 30)?

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Ok - why are the British SP's less accurate than their towed ones, it's all the same fire control system ?

IanS

[Big Insect]

All helpful stuff chaps - keep it coming.

Some of the gun omissions Ian might be due to space restrictions (I don't have my PDF copy to hand to check) and/or a proliferation of calibers with very little differentiation at the scale we are playing at. But I'll take a look.
I know with the French list we had to cut back a lot of the artillery variants and likewise had to lump some of the AA together (20mm and 25mm for example) or we ran over onto another printed page for only a few lines of additional text, and also the differential was minimal.

The whole army list 'thing' is interesting, as personally I'd have opted for a few examples of standard type armies (say a mid-war US, German, Russian, Italian) in the printed copy and all the others available as PDFs. This allows for additions and edits after the print run and also greatly reduces the actual size of the rules books, which have a significant number of pages dedicated purely to lists. However, feedback was very vocal about including the lists in the printed book ... and that was 'our sponsors' choice as well 

But ... "you can please some of the people some of the time and none of the people all of the time and wargamers are just plain impossible ... so forget it!" 

[Cross698]

Is this an error???
Opportunity Fire is listed on P20, P37 and P40 of v4.
"A unit which is under assault and any unit within 10cm may open fire, (in v2 this was Response Fire).............The active player may not change his mind about assaulting once the inactive player declares opportunity fire.........."

If this is correct and Response Fire has gone and is now classed as Opportunity Fire, then I take it still minus 1 and cannot use initiative in your active phase?

P37 clarifies Opportunity Fire as per v2 plus Errata and that a unit can fire once.

Therefore if you are assaulted in your opponents Initiative Phase and the unit survives and the supporting units have used OPP FIRE, then if the units are assaulted in your opponents Command Phase, then none of the can fire if Close Assaulted! They cannot "opportunity Fire" as they can only do so once in the turn!

Is this correct???

Thanks
Andy

[Leonardo]

Hi I'm Leonardo. I have received the new BKC IV and thank to Leon for his courtesy. I have two questions about Army list.
1) Why jagdpanzer IV is not "Low profile" (It's 1,85m high). Only the last model was more high.
2) In russian Army list there are tanks like KV-1C, KV-1S and KV-85 tha have the same numbers of Hit and Save value like JS-2.
   in my opinion this is not correct. the JS-2 had more protective armour capacities. The KV-1S and KV-85 had a minor armor that
   KV-1 to improve velocity (infact "s" is for Fast).

[Dr Dave]

Remove the 37mm armed PzIII from the German Africa lists.

[Steve J]

How do Recce units give the +1CV to a unit? Is it automatic if the Recce unit is part of a Fixed Formation? If it is outside of a Fixed Formation, it mentions that the receiving unit makes a 'nominal' command roll, but what do they need to roll to get the +1CV?

Dave and I looked for any clues in our game last night, couldn't find any, so simply reverted to the BKCII distances. The only table we could find was for spotting hidden enemy units.

Please help clarify as we're confused .

[Dr Dave]

That's how they add +1, by rolling to spot the enemy unit. You need LOS for recce to be useful in this role in bkc4

On the bottom of p29 it says they can communicate with "any of the individual command units within that formation", but on p30 in the example box it says its the nearest. I think it is now meant to be the former since the recce unit has a radio and can choose who they speak to!

I think this means that in effect the recce unit could be next to a unit that can actually fire at and destroy the target, but the recce unit has to dice to spot the same target?

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Nearest was the latest iteration, although I have played it both ways. I've found the best use is to boost FAO/C so that you can actually get some fire support. One thing is not clear - does the boost apply for the 1st roll or all of them ?

[Steve J]

That's how they add +1, by rolling to spot the enemy unit.

If that's the case, it's not very clear, but thanks for the answer.