Forums

Search
Forums » Memoir '44 - English » Big Gun contradiction in rules?
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 11:19
Dear M44 Community,
Apologies if this has come up already, I could not find an answer to my concerns.
So the rules in the Equipment pack page 3, top, say: once a hex has a Cross-hair marker, all Big Gun units and War Ship
Destroyer units targeting the unit in this hex roll 1 additional die. Clear. Once a Big Gun zeroed in on a target, all Big Guns and War Ships can benefit with 1 additional die.
But later is says: All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves. Not clear.
If there is a Big Gun and a War Ship in a scenario, and the Big Gun zeroes in on a target, but the War Ship (which suppose did NOTHING so far) moves, WHY DOES THE BIG GUN HAVE TO LOSE THE CROSSHAIR MARKER?
Is it realistic?

      
50th
Senior Member
Armor Specialist

User Pages
Posts: 1417
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 13:54
kissmarci wrote on Fri, 12 October 2012 04:19

Dear M44 Community,
Apologies if this has come up already, I could not find an answer to my concerns.
So the rules in the Equipment pack page 3, top, say: once a hex has a Cross-hair marker, all Big Gun units and War Ship
Destroyer units targeting the unit in this hex roll 1 additional die. Clear. Once a Big Gun zeroed in on a target, all Big Guns and War Ships can benefit with 1 additional die.
But later is says: All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves. Not clear.
If there is a Big Gun and a War Ship in a scenario, and the Big Gun zeroes in on a target, but the War Ship (which suppose did NOTHING so far) moves, WHY DOES THE BIG GUN HAVE TO LOSE THE CROSSHAIR MARKER?
Is it realistic?




This is talking about target movement, which is also stated on troops card #3 and page 13 of the terrain pack book.

      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 14:08
I do apologize but you are not right.
Read carefully.
It says "All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves."
It = Big Gun.
But is there a way to track which Big Gun planted the crosshair marker?
Or regardless, once one of the Big Guns moves, the markers are removed?
This is the point of my question and confusion.
Thanks,
      
clexton27
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 3107
Registered:
February 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 16:19
Sir I think you have a reasonable question. Say a scenario has a Big Gun and a Destroyer for the Allies. The Destroyer fires at a target and hits it. Now according to the rules: both the Big Gun and Destroyer may benefit from the "ZEROED" in target. However, if either the Big Gun or Destroyer moves, what happens?
      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 16:24
Thank you, that is how I see this also.
I understand that if there are more than 1 Big Guns or a Big Gun and a Destroyer, etc. etc. in a scenario, then it is practically not possible to keep track who zeroed in on a target.
So once one hits, all benefits.
But this rule while may result in an unjustified gain, it also causes an unjustified loss: once any of the Big Guns or destroyers move, all markers are removed from the target.
Maybe that is the reason: we laugh together, we cry together, hm?
All because we are not able to keep track of who hit the target.
      
Zalamence
Senior Member
Bring Boys Back Home

User Pages
Posts: 120
Registered:
June 2010
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 16:41
Good question, I'm glad the number of scenarios where one side has multiple "zeroers-in" is small.

I suggest the Cross-hair marker won't be removed unless all units capable of zeroing-in move during the same turn.
      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 16:48
Hi,
Well, the number of OFFICIAL scenarios may be small but this problem also discourages anyone to create private scenarios with more than one Big Guns and the like.
Definitely begs for a house rule.
      
Sgt Storm
Senior Member
Lieutenant

User Pages
Posts: 905
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 18:58
kissmarci wrote on Fri, 12 October 2012 10:48

Hi,
Well, the number of OFFICIAL scenarios may be small but this problem also discourages anyone to create private scenarios with more than one Big Guns and the like.
Definitely begs for a house rule.



The easy solution is just play with separate target markers for each big gun and destroyer and ignore the new rule clarifications (house rule). That's what I am doing.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Fri, 12 October 2012 22:11
kissmarci wrote on Fri, 12 October 2012 18:48

Hi,
Well, the number of OFFICIAL scenarios may be small but this problem also discourages anyone to create private scenarios with more than one Big Guns and the like.
Definitely begs for a house rule.



You bring up an interesting question here and I'm curious to get to the bottom of it now. I see what you're saying and I suspect that your Big Guns wouldn't lose the targeting bonus if another big-gun-type unit moved...but I don't know how you would keep track of that kind of information.

I'll have to think about that more and maybe look into it a bit. Thanks for bringing this up! Smile
      
Achtung Panzer
Senior Member
Leutnant

User Pages
Posts: 1083
Registered:
December 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 11:23
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.

At least that's how I see it.

[Updated on: Sat, 13 October 2012 11:25]

      
Almilcar
Senior Member
Letters From Iwo Jima

User Pages
Posts: 910
Registered:
November 2011
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 12:08
Achtung Panzer wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 11:23

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.

At least that's how I see it.



You're right. There is no contradiction.

Equipment Pack Manual @ Page 3


The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex



As stated by Achtung, the point is the target.

[Updated on: Sat, 13 October 2012 12:08]

      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:07
To Sgt Storm:
Hi,
Yes, I think this is a very good solution in those few instances when there are more than one Big Gun type units deployed on one side.

[Updated on: Sat, 13 October 2012 22:13]

      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:09
To Jesse Rasmussen:
Thanks, I am honored that you think this is a relevant point. (Actually, it just came up for me after 2 days of constant reading of M44 rules from page 1 of the base game to the last page of Equip pack rules). A short para in the FAQ would be useful.

[Updated on: Sat, 13 October 2012 22:13]

      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:10
To Achtung Panzer:
I risk saying that I fully understand the context and I can also imagine how it works in real life. That is one thing, and the other is the rule if you rean on. Thanks for the comments.

[Updated on: Sat, 13 October 2012 22:14]

      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:12
Almilcar wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 12:08

Achtung Panzer wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 11:23

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.

At least that's how I see it.



You're right. There is no contradiction.

Equipment Pack Manual @ Page 3


The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex



As stated by Achtung, the point is the target.


Will you please read on the rules in Equip pack? When it says the crosshair moves when the Big Gun moves? Thanks.
      
50th
Senior Member
Armor Specialist

User Pages
Posts: 1417
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:36
"The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex. When the enemy unit moves or is eliminated, the Cross-hair marker is placed back on the hex with the Big Guns. All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves"

From the Equipment Pack book page 3!
      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:48
50th wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 22:36

"The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex. When the enemy unit moves or is eliminated, the Cross-hair marker is placed back on the hex with the Big Guns. All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves"

From the Equipment Pack book page 3!


Hi,
This is getting a bit weird but I guess we are reading the same paras. I can also highlight certain words in the text but that will surely not solve the mistery. I think a good house rule as Sgt Storm suggested is the solution. Thanks to all who helped clarify this contradiction.
      
Almilcar
Senior Member
Letters From Iwo Jima

User Pages
Posts: 910
Registered:
November 2011
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sat, 13 October 2012 22:54
kissmarci wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 22:12

Almilcar wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 12:08

Achtung Panzer wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 11:23

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.

At least that's how I see it.



You're right. There is no contradiction.

Equipment Pack Manual @ Page 3


The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex



As stated by Achtung, the point is the target.


Will you please read on the rules in Equip pack? When it says the crosshair moves when the Big Gun moves? Thanks.



The quote is from the Equipment Pack Manual @ Page 3, as indicated.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 06:02
kissmarci wrote on Sun, 14 October 2012 00:48

50th wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 22:36

"The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex. When the enemy unit moves or is eliminated, the Cross-hair marker is placed back on the hex with the Big Guns. All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves"

From the Equipment Pack book page 3!


Hi,
This is getting a bit weird but I guess we are reading the same paras. I can also highlight certain words in the text but that will surely not solve the mistery. I think a good house rule as Sgt Storm suggested is the solution. Thanks to all who helped clarify this contradiction.


The reason these players have highlighted those parts of the text is because it answers your question directly from the rules. Smile

Your question, if I understand it right, is "With the new rules for Big Guns where units can all benefit from the Crosshair Markers, what happens if one gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves...thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?"

The key that these guys are trying to show is that it doesn't matter if one of the Big Gun units move. The Crosshair Marker isn't taken off the target unless the target moves or is eliminated.

I hope this helps make things more clear. Cool
      
Zalamence
Senior Member
Bring Boys Back Home

User Pages
Posts: 120
Registered:
June 2010
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 13:44
I've always thought Cross-hair markers would return to firing unit if the unit itself moved. So destroyers may move and simultaneously be zeroed-in on target.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 16:00
Zalamence wrote on Sun, 14 October 2012 15:44

I've always thought Cross-hair markers would return to firing unit if the unit itself moved. So destroyers may move and simultaneously be zeroed-in on target.


I thought that if a Big Gun unit moved it lost its Cross-hair Markers as well, but then looking at the cards and rules made me think maybe I was remembering wrong.

Then I looked back at the FAQ and found the answer we all needed...if a Big Gun unit moves, all of the markers are returned! So the original question is a good one. Smile
      
sam1812
Senior Member
Brigadier General

User Pages
Posts: 2324
Registered:
August 2006
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 16:25
The FAQ Supplement specifies that Destroyers lose their crosshairs if they move, too.

But when the Supplement was published in September 2011, were there any Official scenarios with two Destroyers or Big Guns? How one gun moving would cause another to stop being zeroed in on a target is a mystery to me, which can only be answered by quantum entanglement.
      
Quit2
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 1214
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 16:32
The problem is, that before the EP, only the big gun that zeroed in on a unit had a bonus of the crosshair marker. The others did not. So if one big gun moved, you returned all markers from that big gun back to it.

Now things have changed: if one big gun zeroes in, the others get a bonus too.

They changed it because it was too difficult to track which crosshair marker belonged to which big gun.

I don't know the answer ... except: don't move big guns as long as you have crosshair markers on the board ... Wink
      
Sgt Storm
Senior Member
Lieutenant

User Pages
Posts: 905
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 21:41
50th wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 16:36

"The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex. When the enemy unit moves or is eliminated, the Cross-hair marker is placed back on the hex with the Big Guns. All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves"

From the Equipment Pack book page 3!


I think the crux of the problem in interpreting the rules is rule writers being free and loose with grammar. The OP (kissmarci) is correct in interpretation when taking grammar rules into consideration. The "it" in the last sentence should refer to "Big Gun" when instead it probably, mistakenly refers to "enemy unit" in the previous sentence. The correct sentence would be:

"All Cross-hair makers are also returned to the big gun unit when the enemy unit moves"

Or maybe not (having just read the last few posts)

Whatever...

[Updated on: Sun, 14 October 2012 21:43]

      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 21:48
Sgt Storm wrote on Sun, 14 October 2012 23:41

50th wrote on Sat, 13 October 2012 16:36

"The Cross-hair marker remains on the hex until the enemy unit moves or is eliminated from the hex. When the enemy unit moves or is eliminated, the Cross-hair marker is placed back on the hex with the Big Guns. All Cross-hair markers are also returned to the Big Gun unit when it moves"

From the Equipment Pack book page 3!


I think the crux of the problem in interpreting the rules is rule writers being free and loose with grammar. The OP (kissmarci) is correct in interpretation when taking grammar rules into consideration. The "it" in the last sentence should refer to "Big Gun" when instead it probably, mistakenly refers to "enemy unit" in the previous sentence. The correct sentence would be:

"All Cross-hair makers are also returned to the big gun unit when the enemy unit moves"

Or maybe not (having just read the last few posts)

Whatever...


I think you're probably right...part of the reason we have such a large FAQ for Memoir '44 is because of the grammar questions. There's no possible way, though, that rules can be written so clearly that there are no questions. For a game system as large as Memoir '44 and with as many rule books as there are, it's not surprising that we needed the FAQ. Cool

It's the perfect way for Richard to let us know what he had in mind when we aren't sure. Smile

[Updated on: Sun, 14 October 2012 21:49]

      
Quit2
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 1214
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Sun, 14 October 2012 23:01
I think that "it" actually means the big gun.
The rules state that the markers are returned when the enemy unit moves or is eliminated. Then they state that the markers are also returned when it moves.
If that it refers to the enemy unit, that last sentence is unnecessary, and if it would just be a repeat, that last sentence would not use the word ALSO.

So some clarification from Richard on the question from the OP would be appreciated. Can someone ask him?
      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Mon, 15 October 2012 09:17
Yep, would be nice to communicate it to him. What I did is submitted this Q on the onlince surface of DOW but dunno how long an answer takes.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Mon, 15 October 2012 10:09
In my normal conversations about the FAQ I can bring this one up. I wouldn't be surprised if he already knows about this thread, since he checks the forums when he has time. This doesn't mean that he actually has time to sit down and answer it, since he's so busy making great new expansions for us...but he'll know what I'm talking about when I ask. Cool

Can someone distill the issue into a clear and concise FAQ format question for me? Then all of us can make sure it's actually what we need an answer for and that it clearly covers the confusion. Smile

Thanks! Cool
      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Mon, 15 October 2012 10:19
rasmussen81 wrote on Mon, 15 October 2012 10:09

In my normal conversations about the FAQ I can bring this one up. I wouldn't be surprised if he already knows about this thread, since he checks the forums when he has time. This doesn't mean that he actually has time to sit down and answer it, since he's so busy making great new expansions for us...but he'll know what I'm talking about when I ask. Cool

Can someone distill the issue into a clear and concise FAQ format question for me? Then all of us can make sure it's actually what we need an answer for and that it clearly covers the confusion. Smile

Thanks! Cool


I think you already captured it quite well when saying:

With the new rules for Big Guns where units can all benefit from the Crosshair Markers, what happens if one gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves...thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?

I just would rephrase it like this:

According to the new rules for Big Guns all similar units (Big Guns, War Ship Destroyers) on the same side can benefit from the Crosshair Markers (rolling with 1 additional die). What happens if one Big Gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?
      
deemao
Senior Member
Captain

User Pages
Posts: 170
Registered:
March 2011
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Mon, 15 October 2012 10:34
Quote:


I think you're probably right...part of the reason we have such a large FAQ for Memoir '44 is because of the grammar questions. There's no possible way, though, that rules can be written so clearly that there are no questions. For a game system as large as Memoir '44 and with as many rule books as there are, it's not surprising that we needed the FAQ. Cool

It's the perfect way for Richard to let us know what he had in mind when we aren't sure. Smile


I think the opinion about the amount of misunderstanding and problems with this system origins from lack of language "sharpness" is true. On the otherside I must say that I think its not so hard to catch these things out. Im sure that Richard is working really hard on all of expansions, but this problem could be solved easily with better composition of the rules.

Yes I know we could be glad for all his work, but it doesnt mean that critics couldnt be said.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Mon, 15 October 2012 14:52
deemao wrote on Mon, 15 October 2012 12:34


I think the opinion about the amount of misunderstanding and problems with this system origins from lack of language "sharpness" is true. On the otherside I must say that I think its not so hard to catch these things out. Im sure that Richard is working really hard on all of expansions, but this problem could be solved easily with better composition of the rules.

Yes I know we could be glad for all his work, but it doesnt mean that critics couldnt be said.



As we can all see from the discussions we have, there are lots of different ways to interperate words. Something that I think is very clear, might confuse another person. Many rules are played just fine for years until someone new comes along with a unique 'take' on the words and suddenly we aren't as sure as we always were.

It's a lot harder to be clear than you seem to think. Because DoW only has one shot at it (once they print the rules they're stuck with it), we notice the mistakes more because they are in the FAQ. But think about how often we all have to clarify our views and ideas with each other here on the forum! Think about how often you have to clarify yourself when you're talking to someone!! Very Happy
      
JFKoski
Senior Member
Advanced Historian

User Pages
Posts: 603
Registered:
October 2005
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 05:18
I was disappointed to see a 2nd Big Gun or Destroyer benefits from an existing target marker in EP rules.

I created a scenario a while back with 2 Big Guns, called Operation Infatuate 2. I tested it by putting the cross-hair marker on the side of the target hex corresponding to the Big Gun that hit it. (It's not that hard.)

rasmussen81 wrote on Mon, 15 October 2012 08:52

Because DoW only has one shot at it (once they print the rules they're stuck with it), we notice the mistakes more because they are in the FAQ.

As you said, once the rules are written, it's hard to change the rule book. My guess is that you'd prefer to change your FAQ Big Gun entry (rather than the new EP rule), so that the target marker remains if the Big Gun or Destroyer that hit it moves or is destroyed.

[Updated on: Thu, 18 October 2012 05:27]

      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 05:23
JFKoski wrote on Thu, 18 October 2012 07:18

I was disappointed to see a 2nd Big Gun or Destroyer benefits from an existing target marker in EP rules.

I created a scenario a while back with 2 Big Guns, called Operation Infatuate 2. I tested it by putting the cross-hair marker on the side of the hex corresponding to the Big Gun that hit it. (It's not that hard.)

rasmussen81 wrote on Mon, 15 October 2012 08:52

Because DoW only has one shot at it (once they print the rules they're stuck with it), we notice the mistakes more because they are in the FAQ.

As you said, once the rules are written, it's hard to change the rule book. My guess is that you'd prefer to change your FAQ Big Gun entry (rather than the new EP rule), so that the target marker remains if the Big Gun or Destroyer that hit it moves or is destroyed.


As always, I'll do whatever I can to support Memoir '44...and the FAQ will reflect the rules as Richard Borg wants them. In the end, my preference actually has very little to do with it. Very Happy

I'll find out what Richard thinks and put that into the FAQ, and into the FAQ thread so we have access to the answer a lot sooner. Cool
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 05:35
kissmarci wrote on Mon, 15 October 2012 12:19


I think you already captured it quite well when saying:

With the new rules for Big Guns where units can all benefit from the Crosshair Markers, what happens if one gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves...thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?

I just would rephrase it like this:

According to the new rules for Big Guns all similar units (Big Guns, War Ship Destroyers) on the same side can benefit from the Crosshair Markers (rolling with 1 additional die). What happens if one Big Gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?


How about this?

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.

Does that make it completely clear? Confused Cool

[Updated on: Thu, 18 October 2012 05:35]

      
Almilcar
Senior Member
Letters From Iwo Jima

User Pages
Posts: 910
Registered:
November 2011
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 07:43
In my humble opinion, it shouldn't be a problem to remember which big gun/destroyer maintain the +1 bonus.

Particulary, I haven't seen yet any scenario with more than a couple or three assets able to benefit from this rule.

Having said that, we will stick to Richard's policy.
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 07:56
Almilcar wrote on Thu, 18 October 2012 09:43

In my humble opinion, it shouldn't be a problem to remember which big gun/destroyer maintain the +1 bonus.

Particulary, I haven't seen yet any scenario with more than a couple or three assets able to benefit from this rule.

Having said that, we will stick to Richard's policy.


The question is less about how we remember which one got the original hit...and more about the following:

Gun A hits a target. Now Gun A and B get the +1 bonus. The rules say (in the FAQ it is made clear) that if a Big Gun unit moves, the targeting marker returns to the gun. So if Gun B moves, does the marker return to the guns, or since Gun A found the range does it keep the bonus until Gun A moves or the targeted unit moves (or is eliminated).

That's the question we're trying to figure out. I hope that makes it more clear. Cool
      
kissmarci
Junior Member
Total Victory

User Pages
Posts: 22
Registered:
December 2008
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 09:18
rasmussen81 wrote on Thu, 18 October 2012 05:35

kissmarci wrote on Mon, 15 October 2012 12:19


I think you already captured it quite well when saying:

With the new rules for Big Guns where units can all benefit from the Crosshair Markers, what happens if one gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves...thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?

I just would rephrase it like this:

According to the new rules for Big Guns all similar units (Big Guns, War Ship Destroyers) on the same side can benefit from the Crosshair Markers (rolling with 1 additional die). What happens if one Big Gun hits a target and another Big Gun unit moves thereby losing the Crosshair Marker?


How about this?

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.

Does that make it completely clear? Confused Cool


Hi,
Feeling a little bit of ownership having started this thread (or am I overestimating my significance?
Twisted Evil ) I would say this question captures the essence of the matter quite well.
Let's get the answer!
      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Thu, 18 October 2012 09:37
kissmarci wrote on Thu, 18 October 2012 11:18


Hi,
Feeling a little bit of ownership having started this thread (or am I overestimating my significance?
Twisted Evil ) I would say this question captures the essence of the matter quite well.
Let's get the answer!


I think you should feel some ownership of the question! It was a good one and will get into the Official FAQ (when I finally get the next update finished), so that everyone can see what to do when this situation comes up.

If we're happy with the wording of the question, I'll send it off to Richard Borg this weekend and see what he thinks. He's a busy guy, working on lots of other important projects, but he does a great job of being involved with Memoir '44! I'll let you know what the answer is when I find out. Very Happy

Thanks again for coming up with this question and I hope we'll see you as a regular contributor to our discussions here! Cool

[Updated on: Thu, 18 October 2012 09:38]

      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7190
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Tue, 23 October 2012 20:40
Because of things coming up, I wasn't able to send Richard this question until yesterday...but he was extremely fast with his reply and we already have the official answer! Very Happy

Here it is:

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. If players want to add more detail and want to track which weapon zeroed-in, they can play the rules as normal and also return the marker when the appropriate Big Gun moves.


This question will be added to the FAQ thread and included in the next FAQ update. Cool
      
Kelly's Hero
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel

User Pages
Posts: 303
Registered:
April 2011
Re:Big Gun contradiction in rules? Wed, 24 October 2012 01:09
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?
      
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: