Close Combat

[Amra]

Still early games so I'm not sure if we're doing this right,
A tank is within 10cm of a dug in FAO
In the initiative phase it moves to contact, no one else can reach .
The tank gets 3dice (3 CA) plus 1 for attacking
The FAO gets 3 dice (3 CA)
Both hit on 4s, the tank saves on 5s the FAO on 6s

Is that right ? Does an FAO  defend ( as opposed to be overrun ) ? It kind of feels too equal ....

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

No quite.  dug in troops count as in cover for the 1st round, so the dug in FAO would be hit on 6's whilkst the tank woukd be hit on 4's assuming it's in open country, or 5's in a wood.

[Big Insect]

The reason the FAO hits back so effectively is a 'game mechanism' it is designed to discourage players focusing their attacks on Command units specifically (in the same way that you cannot target Command units with direct fire or use them as the target for indirect or off-table attacks).

As stated elsewhere the FAO is in effect a 'network of command' - which is a hard concept to get hold of when you have a tabletop unit in a field defense visible on the table - that network might include some defensive elements or be in an armoured vehicle (for example).

Ultimately in an FAO v an MBT combat it will usually end up with the FAO being knocked-out as the tank has more lives/hits.

[Amra]

Makes sense ,none of this is criticism, we are enjoying the games the rules provide

This particular FAO fought off the tank ,no doubt winning both the tank assault badge and iron cross !

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

And a large supply of Panzerfausten 

[Big Insect]

Makes sense ,none of this is criticism, we are enjoying the games the rules provide

I don't take any questions as criticism Amra  - always happy to help and clarify where I can.

Some of the core rules mechanism in the Commander series of rule can at first seem slightly odd or obsure, but there is usually a good game-play reason behind them.
I am please you are enjoying the rules 

Cheers
Mark