CWC-II Rules Errata (Open)

[Big Insect]

Hi, I just wanted to ask, what rules do letters A, R, and O stand for in unit notes/abilities?

The closest I can get is A for Amphibious and R for only fires in a 90 degree cone, which is weird for tanks.

I spent some time searching (case-sensitive, whole words) the rules PDF for it, but unlike S1, TI, H, I couldn't find anything that goes "marked by 'A'"

A = Amphibious capability (most AFV's only move at 5cm per turn in amphibious mode & some need to prepare to go 'amphibious').

R = Restricted vision - this is not just to do with the optics or equipment in a single tank, but also the number of crew. So a lot of Soviet/Chinese tanks/AFVs will have an 'R' designation, because of the lower numbers of crew who are fully occupied in loading and firing rather than 'observing'. It is also driven by tactical doctrine - so formations using Rigid Tac.Doc. are much more likely to be classified as 'R'. Also remember the rules are written on the basis that 1 model on the table represents a number of actual vehicles in real life and the doctrinal approach to how the formations are controlled and fight will also dictate the use of an R designation. Self-Propelled Guns are also often classified with an 'R', but not always.

O = Open-topped or Exposed (the two terms are basically the same) - so they are AFVs with either have no overhead armour, or what they do have is very thin and insubstantial.

Hope that helps
Cheers
Mark

[Superscribe]

You have said "we can adjust that in the next set of errata" What exactly is it going to say about this? Will it say that IFVs can shoot overhead of their dismounted infantry? Or something else?

When are we likely to see the errata pages, as there are many quite significant tweaks coming as a result of all the discussions held to date?

Regards

Chris

Hi Mark

When are the Errata pages due to be published please, as there are many significant tweaks coming, following all the discussions held to-date?

Rgds
Chris

[Big Insect]

Hi Mark

When are the Errata pages due to be published please, as there are many significant tweaks coming, following all the discussions held to-date?

Rgds
Chris

Hi Chris - the focus (to-date) has primarily been on the Army List 'continuity' project. As the majority of the lists are on-line now, it is simpler to update these as a mass batch. That work has been underway for many months now and will be the first thing to be released from an Errata perspective.
Following that will come the Rules Errata. But TBF this may not be as onerous or far-reaching as the army lists, as a lot of what appears to be Errata on the thread is actually clarifications. However, this process involves Leon & myself going through all the Rules Errata on the Forum - editing it down to its salient points and then inserting any changes/additions/corrections into the Rules PDF and then producing a separate down-loadable Errata sheet that can be printed off. That process has not started yet - as my focus has been on the lists. But will kick off once the revised Army Lists are published.
A long answer to a short question - apologies
Mark

[Jordi]

Hi a question.
Can a CO issue orders to off -table support if there' is no fac or faoon table (artillery and air).

[Jordi]

Sorry, perhaps my question about CO and their capacity of requesting  off-table support (artillery and planes) don't go here.

[Ithoriel]

Sorry, perhaps my question about CO and their capacity of requesting  off-table support (artillery and planes) don't go here.

Probably best as just a standard post as I believe (perhaps wrongly!) that the errata is trawled every so often when an update is planned.


Of course the fact that it is school holiday season in the UK, that there has been some very good weather here lately and that the Olympics are on may also be resulting in a rather slower response.

Alas, I don't play CWC so can't help with your actual question, sorry.

[Jordi]

Ok. Thanks.