Infantry, Motorized Infantry….Artillery...pairing...

The only facility that is buildable on your allies territory is the rail line because it’s the only facility that is built on a territory line instead of the territory itself.

Example: I know a rail line exist but for the sake of argument.

Lets say UK wanted to build a rail line between Jordan and Syria. You would build it on the Jordan-Syrian line however because Syria is French, you need France’s permission to do this.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast
Errata:
“Southern Norway: Coastal Artillery should be in sea zone 13, not 12.”

@delaja said in Rocket Artillery and Shock Attack:

@linkler
The golden bullet often only reveals itself through playtesting.

So very true. :blush:

We also played our first games with artillery support for Motorized Infantry, but also realized that once motorized, they become vehicle class. Heck, we even gave the artillery support to Mechanized Infantry…

However, as you noticed, the +1 bonus if for infantry class units, not all infantry named units.

Since motorized infantry can move 2 and tow the artillery (or AA) and retain the infantry 4 defense roll, it does become a bit OP to have two attacks at 3 (Artillery + Supported), plus 2 movement, plus one artillery first strike for 8 IPP.

By comparison, the self-propelled artillery costs 5 IPP, so you would have to pay 10 IPP for the equivalent range and firepower, althought with an extra first strike and blitz capability, but one less defensive point (as both would defend at 3).

The 25% additional cost would not make S-P Artillery worthwhile, unless you have money to burn.

By losing the artillery support when purchasing or upgrading from regular Infantry to Motorized, you have at least have to choose between overall mobility and attack power.

Motorized purchases and upgrades are mostly for Germany and USSR in our games. The upgrade is meaningless in moutain terrain.

If you play the Spanish Civil War Expansion, the rolled event 3 “Failed Embargo” converts 1 Republican infantry unit to a motorized infantry unit. Considering that Spain is almost all mountains, this is more of a punishment, as you gain almost nothing useful and lose the artillery support.

@GeneralHandGrenade Thanks for the speedy reply!

Hmm must have had them mixed up.

@GeneralHandGrenade Got it, thanks GHG! Sorry if came off as combative, was certainly not the intention if I did. I just wanted to be sure on the rule myself too! I see the logic, will take some getting used to for sure to remember that, as it might not be considered intuitive, but I definitely get the thought process! Thanks for that!

@Munck:

@thenorthman:

So just seems strange then for Elite Marines and SNFL Marines to ALSO have it stated in their specific build notes that only can build two of them per turn. Because it�s redundant if they were only able to have two built per turn in the first place.

Yes, I agree. The manual and reference charts are full of these “written curiosities”, that scream at you after reading a sentence for the 43rd time. It happens to me too  :wink:

I actually emailed them about this. Will seemed glad to have any suggestions, edits, etc. come his way, but maybe that’s just lip service!

The scope of my email was to point out the large amount of continuity errors. By that I mean, have every single reference sheet/set up chart be identical in every way to others where the descriptions should be. One example was for infantry. Some reference sheets mention the 1:1 pairing with artillery, but others do not. Every one should have the exact same information!

Same goes for your issue above. The repetitiveness of some rules in some areas and not others makes to confuse. I agree, reading that for SNLF and Marines would be largely confusing each time.

I love everything they do here, but I wish they’d truly take a small break from all the expansions/units/other games, and really focus and getting the rule set here cleaned up 100%. Then they could just be done with it!