Author | Topic |
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Wed, 17 October 2012 18:06

|
 |
deemao wrote on Wed, 17 October 2012 07:08 | Hi Almicar, can you let me info about what page in CB2 is this Battle of Warsaw scenario? I dont have access to CBs right now. Thank you.
|
Sorry for the delay.
Page 81, Scenario 29 (1545) Battle of Warsaw
Chhers
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Fri, 02 November 2012 10:53

|
 |
I noted that the notes for Engebi Landings on DOW (Sc # 7) differ from those printed on Campaign Book 2.
In the Campaign Book 2:
The building next to the airfield is a Permanent Medal Objective (Turn Start) for the Allied player.
DOW site:
The building next to the airfield is a Permanent Medal Objective (Turn Start) for the Allied player. If the village is not captured, the Axis player records 1 Campaign Objective (campaign only).
As you can see there is an additional sentence added which affects campaign play.
|
|
|
ad79

Posts: 788
Registered: September 2007
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Sun, 04 November 2012 10:19

|
 |
The same is true for Roi-Namur overlord and Kwajalein. Online special rules differs from those in the book.
|
|
|
deemao

Posts: 175
Registered: March 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Sun, 04 November 2012 11:50

|
 |
Interesting, but we need first some word from authors. Where is true?
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
|
|
Clexton27

Posts: 3407
Registered: February 2007
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Sat, 20 April 2013 13:44

|
 |
Scenario 20 - Slim River
Date: January 07, 1941
I do think it should say January 07, 1942
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
|
|
deemao

Posts: 175
Registered: March 2011
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Wed, 17 July 2013 12:41

|
 |
Hello,
Scenario 42 - Take Falaise from the "To Falaise" campaign.
Conditions of Victory |
The 3 hexes of Falaise form a Temporary Majority Medal Objective worth 1 medal for whoever holds a majority of them. The Axis player controls the city at game start and thus has 1-medal headstart.
|
The Axis Medal is not present in any of the 3 aforementioned hexes, though I don't know whether this is intended or not. So not sure if it's a misprint.
Cheers
|
|
|
deemao

Posts: 175
Registered: March 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Wed, 17 July 2013 20:01

|
 |
Looks like it's a time for new update.
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Fri, 26 July 2013 20:42

|
 |
"Island Hoppers"
"Home Islands" Pages 43 & 44
Scenarios 13 & 14 |
Counter-offensive on Okinawa and Medeera Pocket, in the subtitle they state: "Marianas and Palau Islands - Operation Iceberg"
|
I think this is a misprint and it should say "Home Islands - Operation Iceberg"
Anyone to confirm please?
Cheers
|
|
|
deemao

Posts: 175
Registered: March 2011
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Wed, 23 October 2013 22:40

|
 |
and from another thread and poster:
In the Home Island campaigns I (marines) rolled leathernecks for what if roll. The description says I get to "promote" 2 infantry units in games that INVOLVE marines. In the Medeera Pocket scenario marine command rules are not in effect however there are marine units present on the board. I know this sounds very technical but from what I interpret from the description is that if there's at least one marine unit there I can use the leathernecks, and that it would specify that marine rules had to be in effect in the description in order to not have the leathernecks.
I would just like to know if im correct in thinking that I can place the leathernecks in said scenario?
|
|
|
g1ul10

Posts: 43
Registered: April 2013
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Sun, 22 December 2013 18:42

|
 |
Hi all. This is my first post and I hope I'm actually posting in the right place. Please be patient and forgive possible mistakes!
First of all I want to tank Deemao for the errata document. I'm playing the campaigns in CB#2 in these days and that document turned out to be extremely useful. I have a couple of questions about the campaign "Dropped in the Contentin"
As far as I understand, what is written at the beginning of the third item of "Part 4: Break Through Normandy" relative to the scenario at p.92 "Drop in the night: 101st", namely
The single American unit already on the map isn't mistake. It is from the earlier drop and it is as well specialized unit.
does also apply to the scenario at p. 90 "Drop in the night :82nd". In fact I was able to find it stated previously in this thread. Am I right?
I had more troubles with the second sentence
The Allied player cannot use reserved units, only paratroopers, bacause he does not have a base line
I was not to able to find this piece of information in the forum. Is this an official ruling? And if it applies also to the scenario at p.90, as it would make sense to me, does it mean that in the campaign "Dropped on the Contentin" the two Allied reserve tokens can be used only in the last scenario?
Thanks
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 23 December 2013 09:53

|
 |
g1ul10 wrote on Sun, 22 December 2013 18:42 |
I had more troubles with the second sentence
The Allied player cannot use reserved units, only paratroopers, bacause he does not have a base line
I was not to able to find this piece of information in the forum. Is this an official ruling? And if it applies also to the scenario at p.90, as it would make sense to me, does it mean that in the campaign "Dropped on the Contentin" the two Allied reserve tokens can be used only in the last scenario?
Thanks
|
Regarding the question, there is no official ruling but it seems that other scenarios in the past have applied the same policy.
If I can recall correctly, in this scenario Allies can't go beyond the line formed by the EXIT markers. Since the Reserve Units only can come through your baseline, you can't use them in this specific scenario.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Almilcar

Posts: 930
Registered: November 2011
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 23 December 2013 09:55

|
 |
g1ul10 wrote on Sun, 22 December 2013 18:42 |
As far as I understand, what is written at the beginning of the third item of "Part 4: Break Through Normandy" relative to the scenario at p.92 "Drop in the night: 101st", namely
The single American unit already on the map isn't mistake. It is from the earlier drop and it is as well specialized unit.
does also apply to the scenario at p. 90 "Drop in the night :82nd". In fact I was able to find it stated previously in this thread. Am I right?
|
Yes, that is not a mistake either. It represents an already paradropped, deployed unit.
Regards and Happy Holidays!
|
|
|
JFKoski

Posts: 603
Registered: October 2005
|
|
|
50th

Posts: 1593
Registered: October 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Sat, 08 February 2014 20:22

|
 |
I may be late on this, I just got my campaign book #2, on the errata sheet it says that "each of these costs 2 reserve tokens". Then it lists Elite Infantry, Veteran Star, and then Jungle Fighters. Is this correct?
|
|
|
g1ul10

Posts: 43
Registered: April 2013
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 21 April 2014 15:58

|
 |
P.60 Gemencheh Bridge the text below the title says "Operation Flintlock - Marshal Islands" while I think it should be "Bicycle Blitzkrieg - Mare Shinko Sakusen"
|
|
|
g1ul10

Posts: 43
Registered: April 2013
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Sat, 03 May 2014 09:49

|
 |
p.70-71 the title of these pages is "GRAND CAMPAIGN Rules" while I believe it should be "CAMPAIGN Special Rules". As far as I can tell, there isn't any grand campaign in CB2 about the invasion of Poland.
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
|
|
Jeronimon

Posts: 1942
Registered: November 2007
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 25 August 2014 20:13

|
 |
Rork wrote on Mon, 25 August 2014 17:36 | Another question came up today related to the Cut of the Cotentin scenario.
Quote from the scenario briefing: "The Allied player must hold at least one of these objectives to win the game." What happens if the Allied player eliminates all Axis units and then plays alone (so to speak: the Axis has no more units to order, but other cards - Bombard, Air Power - might still score medals) so as to to get all three objectives? Of course, the final score would still be 10-to-something, but it would be a weird endgame indeed, since I found no mention of a victory condition like: "If the Allied player holds no objectives at the end of the game, then Axis wins." Or does the errata for The Hedgerow Breach applies: "The Allied player must have 10 medals including one medal token"?
|
I read that this way: if you eliminate all the Axis forces you haven't won until you also take one of the objectives. You can still move around so you can still take one of the objectives. The moment you take one of the objectives you will have met the victory conditions and the game ends, so it is impossible to take the other two.
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 25 August 2014 22:11

|
 |
Jeronimon wrote on Mon, 25 August 2014 21:13 | I read that this way: if you eliminate all the Axis forces you haven't won until you also take one of the objectives. You can still move around so you can still take one of the objectives. The moment you take one of the objectives you will have met the victory conditions and the game ends, so it is impossible to take the other two.
|
Of course, it's obvious now that you pointed it out: movements are made sequentially It makes perfect sense, thank you very much for your answer.
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 01 September 2014 09:08

|
 |
I posted these questions (they cover the same ground) a week ago and since nobody bothered to answer it, I'll "rephrase" it so as to be answered with a simple YES or NO.
In Break Through Normandy, Drop in the Night: 101st scenario, the Allied player paradrops units "before his first turn". So victory event rolls only apply to existing Allied units, yes or no?
Another such instance is The Rescue of Mussolini scenario: in this particular case, Axis player's victory event rolls are useless, as there are no Allied units to be set-up before starting the battle - yes or no?
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 01 September 2014 13:28

|
 |
Rork wrote on Mon, 01 September 2014 03:08 | I posted these questions (they cover the same ground) a week ago and since nobody bothered to answer it, I'll "rephrase" it so as to be answered with a simple YES or NO.
In Break Through Normandy, Drop in the Night: 101st scenario, the Allied player paradrops units "before his first turn". So victory event rolls only apply to existing Allied units, yes or no?
Another such instance is The Rescue of Mussolini scenario: in this particular case, Axis player's victory event rolls are useless, as there are no Allied units to be set-up before starting the battle - yes or no?
|
Victory Event rolls occur after the battle is setup but before any other activity.
The Paradrop occur before the first US turn. This is just a way to have random Allied setups for their starting forces.
I would argue that the battle is not setup until after the para drop and that any VE rolls can be applied to the dropped units.
That is my 2 cents.....
|
|
|
Sgt Storm

Posts: 930
Registered: December 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 01 September 2014 18:28

|
 |
I agree. Generally when a rule is ambiguous, just doing what makes the most sense is the best course of action. In this case, since the VE roll potentially affects Allied troops, they must be in place first.
|
|
|
Clexton27

Posts: 3407
Registered: February 2007
|
|
|
Quit2

Posts: 1387
Registered: July 2007
|
|
|
Clexton27

Posts: 3407
Registered: February 2007
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 01 September 2014 19:35

|
 |
Quit2 wrote on Mon, 01 September 2014 13:29 | I disagree. (Edit: well I agree with Stevens, who posted at the same time)
I believe that is exactly why the allies begin with one unit on the board in Break Through Normandy, Drop in the Night: 101st scenario. To apply the VE rolls.
As for the mussolini scenario: indeed, only the star VE roll has an effect.
|
DITTO!!!
VE rolls are nice to have, but not every scenario benefits from them equally.
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 01 September 2014 21:37

|
 |
Never expected such a storm to break up after such a long silence .
My reading of the rules (and the way we played it) is the same as Stevens': it's the logical consequence of reading the rules ad litteram. However, an official answer would still be most welcome.
tank commander wrote on Mon, 01 September 2014 21:13 | So VE rolls would never affect Reserve Units.
|
They don't: they're applied prior to Reserve Rolls (clearly specified in the rules).
We're about to finish the second Campaign Book and once it's done, I'll post some stats, notes, ideas and possibly other questions about both books. Hopefully, it'll still be of interest, however marginally, to the forum.
[Updated on: Mon, 01 September 2014 21:45]
|
|
|
rasmussen81

Posts: 8173
Registered: July 2007
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Mon, 01 September 2014 23:12

|
 |
Great conversation, guys!
The official answer is in the rules. Read them as they are and play that way! If you miss-read them or come to a different conclusion you can play that way, but the rules are pretty clear in this case with a close reading.
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Tue, 02 September 2014 09:20

|
 |
rasmussen81 wrote on Tue, 02 September 2014 00:12 | Great conversation, guys!
The official answer is in the rules. Read them as they are and play that way! If you miss-read them or come to a different conclusion you can play that way, but the rules are pretty clear in this case with a close reading.
|
Meaning your take on this is... ?
|
|
|
tank commander

Posts: 2628
Registered: October 2004
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Tue, 02 September 2014 11:22

|
 |
Rork wrote on Tue, 02 September 2014 03:20 |
rasmussen81 wrote on Tue, 02 September 2014 00:12 | Great conversation, guys!
The official answer is in the rules. Read them as they are and play that way! If you miss-read them or come to a different conclusion you can play that way, but the rules are pretty clear in this case with a close reading.
|
Meaning your take on this is... ?
|
Yes, and the answer is......?
I am not so sure that the clear answer is in the rules. But if you know otherwise and this would be an official interpretation, I would gladly like to hear it.
Perhaps you could also shed some light on which player rolls and then places his Reserve Units first in a scenario.
|
|
|
Rork

Posts: 80
Registered: November 2006
|
Re:Campaign Book #2 Errata
|
Tue, 02 September 2014 12:27

|
 |
tank commander wrote on Tue, 02 September 2014 12:22 | Yes, and the answer is......?
I am not so sure that the clear answer is in the rules. But if you know otherwise and this would be an official interpretation, I would gladly like to hear it. 
|
As far as I'm concerned, Stevens' message is the answer. However, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out the rules are supposed to have an entirely different meaning (wouldn't be the first time either...). Which is why an official answer would be most welcome.
tank commander wrote on Tue, 02 September 2014 12:22 | Perhaps you could also shed some light on which player rolls and then places his Reserve Units first in a scenario.
|
Nice catch . It isn't specified anywhere, but whoever goes first as per the scenario notes rolls first (victory/reserves/specific pre-battle rules) and takes/places reserves, then the opponent follows. At least that's how we played it throughout both campaign books.
[Updated on: Tue, 02 September 2014 12:28]
|
|
|