Moving on.......

[cdwalkley]

I can't post to the Consimworld site yet (maybe I typed my email address wrong.....), so here I go starting yet another new topic........

Consider the following from the Demo Scenario #1:
'...enter west edge of Board 1 on turn one...'

In most game this is pretty straight forward (and probably is in LnL too....) but I wonder how it works using the impulse sytem of LnL.

Do you just move all the counters on (or as many as you wish) during your first impulse? Such a move might not be possible (were the counters already on the board) if they were several hexes apart (i.e. one impulse could not be used during a normal game turn to move a stack at the north end of the board *and* a stack at the south end).

When I have played the demo I found it worked fine just allowing the Americans to move on as they wished in the first turn, effectively ignoring the limitations of impulses.

I guess everyone else does this, but just wanted to check http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Thanks very much
Chris (the Brit who asks annoying questions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

[Bamse]

Move them one stack per impulse, starting with your first impulse. So after your first impulse, the bulk of your units will still be off board.

I think you could declare that a leader has activated several adjacent stacks and move them all in one impulse if you like, though. In that case they'd have to have started out adjacent (though off board) like you say.

This isn't an official ruling, of course, it's just my best guess http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ April 30, 2003, 17:36: Message edited by: Bamse ]

[cdwalkley]

That sounds good to me. I have played it a couple of times like that as well.

Best guesses are always good http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[Mark H. Walker]

Yeah, I've always played it like Bamse said... one stack at a time. It's tactically better (at least I think it is). That way, you have units capable of reacting to VC moves.

In fact, the ability to react to the enemy in the middle of a turn is what keeps the scenarios so well balanced. I honestly can't remember how many LnL scenarios I've played that weren't resolved until the final impulse of the final turn... very many, though. Many of them against Bamse.

Best,
Mark

[cdwalkley]

I have only played the two demo scenarios, but if they are any indicator then I agree absolutely about the game being balanced. Kudos to the scenario design team for that!

I haven't played with the 'new and improved' sniper though.......... ouch. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Chris

[Mark H. Walker]

Chris,

The new sniper rules really don't make snipers much toughter. They just make them more fun, and easier to play with.

Best,
Mark

[cdwalkley]

Mark

It just seemed to me that under the old rules, a unshaken squad failing its morale check after being hit by a sniper could only become shaken. Under the new rules, it looks like it could be eliminated!

Thanks
Chris

[Mark H. Walker]

Hi Chris,

IN THEORY it could be. That rarely happens. Even if it does, you need to understand, that a good sniper can do quite a bit of damage in the time a LnL turn represents. Certainly enough damage to render a squad combat ineffective.

Best,
Mark

[cdwalkley]

I agree. But when the demo first came out I spent a while convincing myself that the first Version of the sniper was 'much more realistic'.

Now I have to unconvince myself of that http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Shouldn't take too long...

Thanks
Chris