Welcome to the LnLP Forums and Resource Area

We have updated our forums to the latest version. If you had an account you should be able to log in and use it as before. If not please create an account and we look forward to having you as a member.

jxrey

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
10
Points
1
Location
USA
Now that the game is in early-release, a few questions/comments:
  1. Night scenario (Rebecca can you see me), the target was in a building, and I successfully launched a starshell over the target twice, because the first starshell did not seem improve my chance of spotting the target . The second time I laid the starshell (right over the first one), my chances of spotting actually went down (from 50 to 33 pct i think). Not sure starshells are working properly.
  2. Why only a 33% chance of success on starshells and smoke? Aren’t these just grenades and flares that you throw/launch? Were the real-life chances of lighting up a few bits of battlefield 33%?
  3. I did well in the starter scenarios. However, I was 0-10 in the Normandy pack at one point. Not being the best tactician, I mostly just ran out of time. It would be a good feature for non-grogs to extend scenario lengths more than just a few turns (or, better yet, turn off time limits).
  4. Explain the use of gammon bombs in the rules. Not mentioned in core or Normandy rules.
  5. Playing one of the Nam scenarios (Ap Bac), a Viet Cong mortar unit was shredding me with mortar fire from twenty hexes away, with incredible accuracy (6 for 7) and without any visible spotters or line of sight. Are there invisible spotters in that scenario? One sniper appeared early and i killed him, so he couldn’t have spotted. Also, this single mortar unit self-rallied twice and was impervious to the adjacent unbuttoned M113 firing on it for 3 straight turns without effect (more on that below).
  6. Same scenario as 6 (Ap Bac). Unbuttoned M113 (FP 4), placed inside a light jungle hex, had a 10.9 % chance of effect on a spotted viet cong stack 2 hexes away in clear terrain. Huh? Meanwhile, a regular arvn squad with half the FP, also in a light jungle hex, but 3 hexes away from the same target, had a 62% chance of effect. I’m finding armored units/vehicles to be extremely underpowered in ways that don’t make sense.
 

Stéphane Tanguay

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,269
Points
63
Age
56
1. Starshell don't improve your chance of spotting; they only allow you to spot (or see) units at range father than the regular night range. The chance of spotting stay the same but, at least, you are allowed to try to spot.

2. Can't answer this one. Maybe it is to keep their use in historical frequencies?

3. It's been asked by others. Any extension of the scenario lenght will favor the attacker. I foudn that new players don't take enough risks with their units. Sometime, you have to expossed yourself if you want something done

4. They are explained in one of the SSR that is missing in the mission briefing. These SWs follow the rules for Satchel Charge in every aspect except that they only have a Firepower of 2 (2 FP).

5. From the rules: Mortars can also fire indirectly at spotted hexes to which a Leader (11.1), Scout (11.6) or Advisor (11.9) has a LOS. So looks for a leader that is marked ops complete in this scenario; there is your spotter.

As indicated in the rules, Mortar use the best of two dices for tehir attack; they are thus quite accurate. They can self-rally.

Was the mortar in the open? An unbuttoned, unmoving M-113 adjacent to a enemy unit in the open would fire at 1d6 +4 (FP) +2 (adjacent) so it would automatically shake it every attack. of course, it the mortar self-rally the next turn, everything is to be redone.

Do you have Assault-move as the default for your vehicle? If so, it will always impose a -2 on your vehicle attack, because it believe you are assault firing.

6. See my previous comment on assault move. Plus, I'm not sure that those odds are correctly calculated. A unbuttoned unmoving M113 (does not matter in what type the attackeris standing, except behind bocage) will fire at 1d6+4 (FP) vs 1d6 +0 (TM) against an unmoving VC stack in the open (it does not have to be spotted, because being in the open , it is automatticaly spotted. The regular ARVN squad, say a 2-4-4, will fire at 1d6 +2 (FP) vs 1d6 +0. The M113 is evidently better
 

Tom Proudfoot

Digital Designer
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Messages
674
Points
43
Location
Alameda, CA
Yeah, the vehicle odds are probably wrong, I have not revisited that code since a number of changes to vehicles (to correct rules I had wrong or bugs), and in the meantime I have thought of a better way to display that kind of fire data but haven't gotten to it just yet.
 

jxrey

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
10
Points
1
Location
USA
Stephane, first, thank you for taking the time to answer my questions in detail. Here are my responses:


1. Starshell don't improve your chance of spotting; they only allow you to spot (or see) units at range father than the regular night range. The chance of spotting stay the same but, at least, you are allowed to try to.
  • After reading your explanation of how star shells work, and thank you for that by the way, i still think that more light should result in increased spotting percentages, not just increased range. It’ll be for the designers to decide, but I’m throwing it out there.

2. Can’t answer this one. Maybe it is to keep their use in historical frequencies?


3. It's been asked by others. Any extension of the scenario lenght will favor the attacker. I foudn that new players don't take enough risks with their units. Sometime, you have to expossed yourself if you want something done.
  • That’s true and, as I’ve gotten better, time limits are less of a problem. However, it would still be a good feature i think for the enjoyment of less experienced (or more conservative) players.

4. They are explained in one of the SSR that is missing in the mission briefing. These SWs follow the rules for Satchel Charge in every aspect except that they only have a Firepower of 2 (2 FP).
  • Ok. Thanks for this.

5. From the rules: Mortars can also fire indirectly at spotted hexes to which a Leader (11.1), Scout (11.6) or Advisor (11.9) has a LOS. So looks for a leader that is marked ops complete in this scenario; there is your spotter.
  • That is my understanding also. However, in several instances, I scoured the map for any leader, advisor, etc., with LOS to the target and found none. If i see it again, I will F3 and send a screen shot.
As indicated in the rules, Mortar use the best of two dices for tehir attack; they are thus quite accurate. They can self-rally.
  • Thanks for explaining the algorithm, but I still don’t see that someone essentially tossing nickels into a cup from 100 feet away will be more accurate than someone shooting a gun at it from point blank range. The accuracy of mortars appears to be around 90%. Designers should take a look at the two-dice rule or make other adjustments.
Was the mortar in the open? An unbuttoned, unmoving M-113 adjacent to a enemy unit in the open would fire at 1d6 +4 (FP) +2 (adjacent) so it would automatically shake it every attack. of course, it the mortar self-rally the next turn, everything is to be redone.
  • The mortar was in a rice paddy but, still, even with a negative terrain adjustment, it should not have been unscathed after 3 turns of point-blank fire.
Do you have Assault-move as the default for your vehicle? If so, it will always impose a -2 on your vehicle attack, because it believe you are assault firing.
  • Maybe this was the problem. I’ll look into it.
6. See my previous comment on assault move. Plus, I'm not sure that those odds are correctly calculated. A unbuttoned unmoving M113 (does not matter in what type the attackeris standing, except behind bocage) will fire at 1d6+4 (FP) vs 1d6 +0 (TM) against an unmoving VC stack in the open (it does not have to be spotted, because being in the open , it is automatticaly spotted. The regular ARVN squad, say a 2-4-4, will fire at 1d6 +2 (FP) vs 1d6 +0. The M113 is evidently better.
  • It looks like the designers will change this from what I’m reading above.
Thanks again, sir.
 

Stéphane Tanguay

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,269
Points
63
Age
56
After reading your explanation of how star shells work, and thank you for that by the way, i still think that more light should result in increased spotting percentages, not just increased range. It’ll be for the designers to decide, but I’m throwing it out there.

Two factors against this change:
a) That is not how it is played in the boardgame and LNLT Digital strive to faithfully recreate the boardgame experience
b) Offering an increased spotting percentage under a starshell than under a daylight does not make much sence so you would have to increase the daylight chance to spotting and you can see that this is going down a slippery slope :)

That’s true and, as I’ve gotten better, time limits are less of a problem. However, it would still be a good feature i think for the enjoyment of less experienced (or more conservative) players.

See a) above, The scenarios are supposed to be fairly balanced as is so even offering up to three more turns or more units then designed for one side is already tilting the balance. And I think it is normal for a newbie to find it harder at beginning then, easier and easier as he/she gains experience. You can't win all your games the first tiem :)
That is my understanding also. However, in several instances, I scoured the map for any leader, advisor, etc., with LOS to the target and found none. If i see it again, I will F3 and send a screen shot

IIRC, units marled ops complete are often moved to the bottom of the stack, where it would be harder to notice them. And then, it is quite possible that this is a bug

Thanks for explaining the algorithm, but I still don’t see that someone essentially tossing nickels into a cup from 100 feet away will be more accurate than someone shooting a gun at it from point blank range. The accuracy of mortars appears to be around 90%. Designers should take a look at the two-dice rule or make other adjustments.

See a) about the two-dice rule. It might have been just a string of good luck for the mortar. I'm not a mathematician so I can't really compare how best of 2d6 +2 (FP of most onboard mortar) would compare to 1or 2 IFP (depending on the unit) +2 (for being ajacent) and, thank god, was never at the receiving end of a mortar attack but I,ve read tehy were pretty devastating.

The mortar was in a rice paddy but, still, even with a negative terrain adjustment, it should not have been unscathed after 3 turns of point-blank fire.

Well, if as I guest the problem is that you were considered assault firing, you were attacking at 1d6 +4 (MG) +2 (assault fire) against 1d6 +1 (TM), yielding you a net advantage of +1; not that much
Do you have Assault-move as the default for your vehicle? If so, it will always impose a -2 on your vehicle attack, because it believe you are assault firing.

It looks like the designers will change this from what I’m reading above
Not sure if Tom was just talking just about the odds displayed or the actual calculation.

All that being said, welcome to the world of LNLT!
 
Top