Memoir '44 D-Day Landings Memoir '44 D-Day Landings

Forums

Search
Forums » Memoir '44 - English » Big Gun contradiction in rules?
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
Quit2
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 1049
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 01:57
That's also how I read it.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 03:49
Kelly's Hero wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 03:09

So it sounds like this to me:

If there is only one Big Gun, then the crosshair is removed when either the target or Big Gun move.

If there are more than one Big Gun, then remove the crosshair only when the target moves. (Unless you want to keep track of which crosshair belongs to which Big Gun - if so then you can remove the crosshair when either the target, or the correct Big Gun moves)

Am I reading this right?


Yep, that about covers it. Very Happy
      
sdnative
Senior Member
Colonel

User Pages
Posts: 442
Registered:
February 2009
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 05:31
rasmussen81 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 18:49

Kelly's Hero wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 03:09

So it sounds like this to me:

If there is only one Big Gun, then the crosshair is removed when either the target or Big Gun move.

If there are more than one Big Gun, then remove the crosshair only when the target moves. (Unless you want to keep track of which crosshair belongs to which Big Gun - if so then you can remove the crosshair when either the target, or the correct Big Gun moves)

Am I reading this right?


Yep, that about covers it. Very Happy


Can someone explain why a second Big Gun in another location would have the same sighting advantage as the actual gun that fired?
Or am I not following this thread correctly
Confused Confused Confused
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 05:59
sdnative wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 07:31

rasmussen81 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 18:49

Kelly's Hero wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 03:09

So it sounds like this to me:

If there is only one Big Gun, then the crosshair is removed when either the target or Big Gun move.

If there are more than one Big Gun, then remove the crosshair only when the target moves. (Unless you want to keep track of which crosshair belongs to which Big Gun - if so then you can remove the crosshair when either the target, or the correct Big Gun moves)

Am I reading this right?


Yep, that about covers it. Very Happy


Can someone explain why a second Big Gun in another location would have the same sighting advantage as the actual gun that fired?
Or am I not following this thread correctly
Confused Confused Confused


This thread isn't dealing with the realism of whether one gun could use the coordinates from another gun...that rule is clearly outlined in the Equipment Pack.

This thread was trying to figure out when the Guns lose the Target Markers.
      
Phread
Senior Member
Stiff Upper Lip

User Pages
Posts: 1772
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 06:49
Of course if all the big guns move in the same movement phase the the crosshairs should be removed
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 07:20
Phread wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 08:49

Of course if all the big guns move in the same movement phase the the crosshairs should be removed


True, but in that case you're just making it easier to remember...the rule would stay the same.

So if I move Big Gun A, I take back Token A. Then I move Big Gun B, and take back Token B, etc. But let's say I move Big Gun C, take Token C...and then change my mind. Now I move Big Gun C back, but I have to remember which Marker went with it. Rolling Eyes Overall, I think this ruling makes a lot of sense and officially allows people who like more detail to add it if they want! Cool

When I have a chance to play a battle with more than one Big Gun, I'll probably play the easy way and only remove the Markers when the target moves or is eliminated.

[Updated on: Wed, 24 October 2012 07:27]

      
Quit2
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 1049
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 08:51
sdnative wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 05:31


Can someone explain why a second Big Gun in another location would have the same sighting advantage as the actual gun that fired?
Or am I not following this thread correctly
Confused Confused Confused

Because the big gun that hit the target radioed in the exact location of the target to all other big guns. If it then also tells his own exact location to the others, they use trigonometry to determine the relative location from any other artillery unit.
Artillery officers had to be good at mathematics, or at least trigonometry ...
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 09:25
I remember that we have some members of the community who have served (or are serving) in the military. Malcolm was an Artillery man, so he could shed some light on this as well.

Has anyone else served in the military?
      
ad79
Senior Member
Major Howard

User Pages
Posts: 785
Registered:
September 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 21:52
The Roi-Namur overlord scenario from the Island Hoppers campaign in CB2 has 2 destroyers on the board, and hopefully stevens will soon feel the impact of these rules. Laughing

I guess this rule is in place because spotters that call in artillery help, will give the position to all artilleries in range of the position. And if the spotters know their own position and the range and direction to the target, it should be easy for a gun to hit it.

      
stevens
Senior Member
Omaha Victory

User Pages
Posts: 2940
Registered:
February 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 23:28
ad79 wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 15:52

The Roi-Namur overlord scenario from the Island Hoppers campaign in CB2 has 2 destroyers on the board, and hopefully stevens will soon feel the impact of these rules. Laughing

I guess this rule is in place because spotters that call in artillery help, will give the position to all artilleries in range of the position. And if the spotters know their own position and the range and direction to the target, it should be easy for a gun to hit it.




http://static.memoir44.com/lang/english/images/mm_compendium_command_14.jpg
One of the few times Stig where you will be able to actually use the Artillery Bombard card to order your Destroyers.
Since you have no Artillery you may issue one order. Since you are using Marine rules, you may issue two orders. So it is possible to order each Destroyer to fire ONCE by using the Artillery Bombard card. BUT ONLY IF THEY ARE IN THE SAME SECTION.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 23:42
Why "Only if they are in the same section"? Rolling Eyes
      
sam1812
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 2178
Registered:
August 2006
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 25 October 2012 03:56
Because in Roi-Namur, he's talking about the 1/3 of the OL board commanded by one Field General.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 25 October 2012 04:49
Ah, I see what you guys are talking about!! Cool Enjoy the game, gentlemen, and let us know how it turns out. Smile

[Updated on: Thu, 25 October 2012 04:50]

      
stevens
Senior Member
Omaha Victory

User Pages
Posts: 2940
Registered:
February 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 25 October 2012 13:56
rasmussen81 wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 22:49

Ah, I see what you guys are talking about!! Cool Enjoy the game, gentlemen, and let us know how it turns out. Smile


Yes, if Artillery Bombard was a card played by the CinC then it would be possible to fire from both Destroyers, but that would involve a rewrite of the rules and another FAQ entry, so I know you will skip out on that one Ras!
Laughing Laughing Laughing
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 6856
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 25 October 2012 15:47
stevens wrote on Thu, 25 October 2012 15:56

rasmussen81 wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 22:49

Ah, I see what you guys are talking about!! Cool Enjoy the game, gentlemen, and let us know how it turns out. Smile


Yes, if Artillery Bombard was a card played by the CinC then it would be possible to fire from both Destroyers, but that would involve a rewrite of the rules and another FAQ entry, so I know you will skip out on that one Ras!
Laughing Laughing Laughing


Yep! Very Happy Thankfully I don't have to do any of that. Razz
      
Achtung Panzer
Senior Member
Leutnant

User Pages
Posts: 1026
Registered:
December 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 26 October 2012 18:41
rasmussen81 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 19:40


Q. According to the new rules for Big Guns, all similar units (Big Guns, Destroyers, etc) from the same nation can benefit from the Crosshair Markers benefit of +1 die. If one Big Gun unit hits a target and a different Big Gun unit moves, do we have to remove the Crosshair Marker?
A. In scenarios with more than one Big Gun (or similar unit), the Cross-hair markers are not returned unless the target moves or is eliminated.


So, once again we see that although Memoir is an abstract game, the rules do relate to historical fact. As I posted earlier in the thread:

"Personally I see that the successfully targeted unit has its position radio'd around to Big Guns and Destroyers as appropriate. This is the only fixed point involving the target and firing units, so cross-hairs are not removed (and bonuses apply to all firing Big Guns and Destroyers) until the target unit moves or is destroyed.

The point here is the target, not the firer."
      
JFKoski
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 602
Registered:
October 2005
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Mon, 29 October 2012 18:41
For those interested, I made a face-to-face scenario after I got the Winter Wars, Air Pack and Terrain Pack expansions, involving 2 Big Guns. I was interested in another beach landing besides Normandy, but North Africa and Sicily had the Allies taking the beach and beach-head pretty decisively.

I found there was a beach landing in Holland, called Operation Infatuate 2. I made my scenario with 2 Big Guns, flooded fields, SWAs, Air Rules, Radar Rules and special landing craft rules. I tested it 6 times in 2011, and made modifications that should give the Allies a better chance in the current version.
http://www.daysofwonder.com/memoir44/en/memoire_board/?id=10965

Tyto_Alba wrote Assault on Walcheren island, also with two Big Guns and a Destroyer. I saw his before I finished mine, so they're fairly similar, though consistent with the historical descriptions I read.
http://www.daysofwonder.com/memoir44/en/memoire_board/?id=2910

I had to decide how 2 Big Guns should work, and chose separate target markers for each. But you can use the FAQ and the E.P. rules as you please. If you do play either, please leave an AAR in the appropriate scenario with which Big Gun rule you used.
      
Pages (2): [ «  <  1  2 ]     
Previous Topic:LoS with bunkers on hills in Expert mode
Next Topic:What they forgot to put into the EP
Goto Forum: