Month: August 2010

Battle for Baghdad Rules Questions

Designer Responses to Battle for Baghdad Rules Questions

Responses by MCS Group

Questions by Harvey Mossman and Mark D.


Q: What are the Political Point Values of the Zones used for? They are mentioned in the rules in passing but nowhere in the rules or Example of Play are we told what their use is.

A: This is the number of points you place in a zone when an Arab Street card calls for it.


Q: Can a player play his Collateral Damage card to affect a battle he is not involved in? The card wording just says play “after a battle” but does not specify that you must be a participant in the battle to play it.

A: No.


Q: If I play the “Oil Ministry” card, which requires each player to pay me 2 Political Points, can I immediately play an InfoWar card that doubles income from any “source” to increase my income to 4 Political Points per player?

A: Yes, but the extra PP are drawn from the bank. You get double the points, but your opponents would not pay double the price.


Q: Another question involving InfoWar cards that double income – Can I play two of them back to back and quadruple my income? Here’s a specific example that occurred in our game tonight:

1. U.S. player wins a battle, killing 17 Shiite units for a total of 17 Political Points earned.
2. U.S. player plays an InfoWar card which doubles income; collects another 17 Political Points.
3. U.S. player plays a second InfoWar card which doubles income; collects 34 more Political Points.
Total Political Points Won by U.S. Player: 68

Is this correct? Can you play two of these in a row? If yes, should the second card have netted him 34 additional points or only 17?

A: That sounds like the US crushed the entire Sadr army in an epic battle, and had CNN and Al-Jazeera to sing its praises. Yes, there is a Santa Claus, and you were given Baghdad for Christmas.


Q: If Initiative is won by means of the “Surge/Jihad” card, what is the cost for an Arms Bazaar Card on that turn? Would it be 1 Political Point? Or would it be the highest bid that was made before the “Surge/Jihad” card was played?

A: The relevant rules read: “The player may also purchase the top card from the Arms Bazaar deck at a cost in Political Points equal to the number of Political Points bid by the winning player for Initiative. If no players bid for Initiative, then the cost per card is one Political Point.”
Thus, one Political Point, because the player who won Initiative paid zero (first paragraph), and the cost is one PP when the winner pays zero (second paragraph).


Q: Is the following sequence of events allowable?

a. Player plays InfoWar card to double political points for winning a battle.
b. Player then immediately plays “Back Alley Deal” card to retrieve the InfoWar card just played.
c. Player than immediately plays the InfoWar card again to double points again.

A: “a” and “b” are legal plays. “c” is not.
As soon as the Back Alley Deal card is played, the link between the battle and further card play, like the recovered InfoWar card, is lost. The Back Alley Deal is a new “effect stream”, and only one effect stream can exist at a time. The existence of one effect stream permanently breaks players’ abilities to interact with all previous effect streams.
If a Command Control was played by another player to cancel the Back Alley Deal, then that effect stream would not exist, and players could then interface with the previous effect stream at the end of the battle.


Q: Spawning rules – does “uncontrolled” really mean “non-enemy controlled”? We had a situation where the Jihadi player spawned an Infrastructure unit in the University zone while it was completely empty (and hence, uncontrolled). On the following turn, it was technically no longer “uncontrolled” because Jihadi himself controlled it. Is he still allowed to spawn new units there?

A: A Faction can spawn forces in the following Zones:
* Infrastructure in any Zone the Faction Controls that contains the Faction’s Security forces.
* Security in any Zone the Faction Controls that contains the Faction’s Infrastructure forces.
* Any Zone and conditions explicitly described on the Factions screen.
So, yes, the Jihadi player could Spawn Security forces in the University Zone on the following turn. If some of the Security forces remain, the Jihadi player could spawn additional Infrastructure on subsequent turns.

The Third World War (Series Errata)

Errata for “The Third World War”, as of July 10, 1984

By GDW

Rule Book

Expanded Sequence of Play
1) The NATO regroup pahse was omitted from the NATO first impulse. It is the last phase in the impulse and should read, “NATO Regroup Phase: All NATO units which did not move or attack in the first impulse and are not in an enemy ZOC may regroup (7).”
2) The second echelon/breakthrough sub-impulse of the Pact first impulse should have a movement phase and a combat phase preceeding the regroup phase, and the note in the sub-impulse refers to these two phases.

ZOCs (3B): The following was omitted from the ZOC rule: ZOCs (other than airmobile ZOCs and the ZOCs of mountain units) of units in mountain pass hexes extend across mountain pass hexsides only.

Amphibious Evacuations (11B): The rule on evacuating amphibious units was omitted: An amphibious unit may be evacuated from a partial sea hex that does not contain a port. The hex must be in a naval zone where naval transport/amphibious assault is allowed for the owning player. The amphibious unit may be withdrawn from the hex and transported by sea to a friendly-controlled port. A unit that is evacuated immediately suffers two disruptions.

Surrender (19): The effects of surrender were not mentioned: If a country surrenders, all ground and air units of that country are immediately removed from play.


Counters

The setup information for the British 9th Attack Helicopter Regiment should be B-0113, not A-0113.


Orders of Battle List

Soviet

  • 4 Guards Tank Army: “36 TD” should be “(5-6-3)”.
  • “4GTA AmobB (2-3-7)/PO” should be “4GTA AmobB (2-3-7)/1”
  • 10 Army: “19(C) MRD (7-7-5)/3” should be “(5-6-3)”
  • Western Theater Air Units: There are 2, not 3, Czech MiG-21s.

NATO

  • French: The setup information for the 5th Armored Division should be GE:A1709, not 1706.
  • Canadian: The setup information for the 4th Mechanized Brigade should be GE:A1408, not 1418.
  • Danish: The rating for the LG Mechanized Brigade should be 1-2-6, not 2-3-5.
  • Western Theater Air Units: The Belgian and Netherlands F-16 ratings should be reversed. The Danish F-16 was omitted: 1 Dn F-16 (4*-1-2*-M/5).
  • Turn 2 Air Units: The F-15E is US.

The Third World War: Battle for Germany (Review)

The Third World War: Battle for Germany Board Game

Overview

The Third World War: Battle for Germany is part of a series of GDW games that postulated a world wide war between America and the Soviet Union in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s. I had seen this game over the years in gaming stores, magazine articles, eBay, etc, and it always looked interesting to me. Finally, a friend brought the game to my house and we decided to give it a shot.
Continue reading “The Third World War: Battle for Germany (Review)”

King Philip’s War: Errata as of August 2010

General Errata and Clarifications

By Multiman Publishing

This is a compilation of errata that shipped with the game, as well as some Developer (Adam Starkweather) responses taken from the ConSimWorld Forum.

  • Clarification: The terms “clear”, “open”, and “neutral” are all used in the rules to describe spaces that have neither a red nor a white ring around them.
  • Clarification for Rule 10.0: On the turn a tribe becomes active it does not receive the per-turn reinforcements on that turn – only the initial setup forces. Starting with the turn after activation, the tribe receives its per-turn reinforcements.
  • Map Clarification: The identifying color strips for the Naragansetts and Plymouth colony don’t match the counter color for the tribe/colony. The color stripes on the map for the Naragansetts should be blue, they are the darker purple; the color stripes on the map for the Plymouth spaces should be red, they appear to be more orange-sih than red.
  • Rule 12.2: The last paragraph should begin “War Bands and companies moving by river movement…”
  • Rule 13.3: The last sentence under Ambush, the final word “strength” is missing.
  • Moving Leaders: When moving leaders alone, they move just like infantry and count against your war band/ company limits.
  • Tribal Surrender: Use 13.6 for Tribal Surrender – not 14.0. Only VPs matter for this.
  • Map Correction: You get VPs when a fort is razed (per “13.8”) and not when breached (per the map).

Q: Interception – Can an Indian unit attempt to intercept an English unit that uses “Ocean Movement” and lands at a port adjacent to the Indian unit?

A: No, you can’t intercept Ocean Movement.

Q: Interception – If a War Band/Company is the target of an attack, can it intercept into a hex in another direction?

A: Nope, it can’t intercept.

Q: Evasion – Can a War Band/Company Evade into a space that has been declared the target of an enemy attack (thus becoming part of the defending force)?

A: Nope, it can’t.

Vietnam: 1965-1975 (Review)

Vietnam: 1965-1975 Review

A Long Overdue Review

Vietnam: 1965-1975 is a board game based simulation of the entire American conventional military intervention in Vietnam from 1965, when the first regular ground formations were committed, to the ultimate victory of the North Vietnamese Army at the fall of South Vietnamese capital city of Saigon in 1975.
Continue reading “Vietnam: 1965-1975 (Review)”