Lock 'n Load Tactical System 1960 - Present Core Rules Living Edition [Deleted]

[David Heath]

David Heath submitted a new resource:

Lock 'n Load Tactical System 1960 - Present Core Rules Living Edition - Lock 'n Load Tactical System 1960 - Present Core Rules Living Edition

Lock 'n Load Tactical System 1960 - Present
Core Rules Living Edition. ​

This is the latest set of guidelines and regulations for the game system. These rules present the core rules for the game system for modules taking place from 1960 to the present. Notable changes from previous versions of the rules (v3.1 and earlier) will be presented in BLUE text. Feel free to use these rules with previously published modules.

If you have any game questions, or if you...

Read more about this resource...

 

[Qwirz]

I haven't (re)read it yet, but it looks really nicely improved!
Thanks!!!

 

[Stefano G.]

Just a little note:

17.2 Small-Arms vs. Armored Vehicles
"...These units can attack unarmored vehicles and
open armored vehicles with their IFP and SWs....
Passengers are considered part of the vehicle
in/on which they are riding."

Well... 1960-Modern APCs (from M113 to BMPs or Bradley and differently from open WW2 APCs as sdkf 251 or M3 ) totally protect mounted infantry from enemy small-arms fire...so the fate of unbottoned crew should be separated from inside-vehicles passengers' one, IMHO.
Small Arms CAN fire against crew of open armoured vehicles BUT CAN NOT fire against inside-vehicles Passengers.

What do you think about?

 

[JKC]

Finally, updated rules for LnL. I am delighted with the publication of v.4 and v.4.1, Heroes of the Pacific and 1960 - Present. Color and additions in blue! And available as downloads, too. Well done Dave and the LnL team.

I am just starting to go through them but as Qwirz wrote, "looks really nicely improved".

Thanks!!

 

[Rekka]

New player here and I've got a few remarks :
- the first time you spoke of OFT we don't have the definition in parenthesis like the others acronyms. Sure, you have a glossary at the end but it could be handy to have it the first time it is used.
- for the maximum TM, on page 14 you say that snipers can have a maximum of +8 but then, on page 25 there is a "no limit" in parenthesis which contradict the page 14

I haven't finished to read the entire manual yet and I think I'll do a reread when I'm finished to better understand the rules and see if I have other remarks.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

- the first time you spoke of OFT we don't have the definition in parenthesis like the others acronyms. Sure, you have a glossary at the end but it could be handy to have it the first time it is used.
- for the maximum TM, on page 14 you say that snipers can have a maximum of +8 but then, on page 25 there is a "no limit" in parenthesis which contradict the page 14

What page on the OFT reference? In section 14.1 it's properly cited, and it's one of those acronyms like FP and DFT that become second nature.
We fixed the TM thing. Must be an earlier version that was posted. It should be "+8 TM" limit for Snipers

 

[Rekka]

There are 3 occurence in page 6, one in page 7, two in page 11 before we know what it is in page 12. I know when you're used to it it becomes a second nature but for a first reader I was like "Huh?".

I finished my first reading of the rules and right now I can't think of anything else but maybe something will arise during my second reading.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

Ok, it will be amended before print.

 

[Stefano G.]

Ok, it will be amended before print.

...and i hope that 17.2 Small-Arms vs. Armored Vehicles for Modern APCs will be reviewed too: inside passenger should not be affected by Small-Arms fire , even when APC's crew is unbuttoned.

It was also debated in: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/7742859#7742859

 

[Jeff Lewis]

The Passengers are protected by the lowest armor factor when open. Serious FP against the vehicle--if you're arguing in the name of realism (which I know you are, Stefano )--would certainly be able to cause a Shaken result when the crew members are dropping down from their hatches KIA, plus ricochet bullets, not to mention the shear terror of a few hundred rounds of 7.62mm against the outside of the vehicle. Shaken results are about state of mind. Perhaps making it so they can only be Shaken, no reduction. Perhaps . . . But the real lesson is to button your vehicles when carrying passengers.

 

[JKC]

What page on the OFT reference? In section 14.1 it's properly cited, and it's one of those acronyms like FP and DFT that become second nature.
We fixed the TM thing. Must be an earlier version that was posted. It should be "+8 TM" limit for Snipers

Re the TM thing: Sorry, I just downloaded the rules and pg. 25 reads "Snipers can be fired on like any other unit, but double their hex’s TM (no limit; this is an exception to 5.5)" Should this read: " ... but double their hexes TM to a maximum of 8 as per 5.5?"

 

[Jeff Lewis]

Re the TM thing: Sorry, I just downloaded the rules and pg. 25 reads "Snipers can be fired on like any other unit, but double their hex’s TM (no limit; this is an exception to 5.5)" Should this read: " ... but double their hexes TM to a maximum of 8 as per 5.5?"

It's already been amended. Amended version has not been posted.

 

[darcone]

Not a big deal, but a minor omission. I have been putting Heroes of the Pacific through its paces lately and had an observance about artillery drift. Normal drift direction is 12-2-4-6-8-10 o'clock on a die roll, when North is facing a hexside. When North is oriented towards a hex-spline, the drift should be 1-3-5-7-9-11 o'clock on the roll. Could not find this in the rules.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

It's not an omission; as written it's more of an inferred guide. North is not always the same direction as the maps are configured (e.g., straight ahead is north). It's more: agree with your playing partner which hexside is 1 and which is 6 and roll, which you did.

 

[JKC]

It's already been amended. Amended version has not been posted.

Thanks, Jeff. I kind of realized this might be the case, amended version not posted yet, after I posted the questions. Thanks for the clarification though.

 

[Dennis Felice]

Going thru the downloaded rulebook now. A very nice job. Thanks for making it avaliable.

 

[The Plodder]

I'm liking the new rulebook (I've only ever read 1.0/1.5), a lot of things are a lot clearer now. However, I've noticed that it still follows the old chapter numbering. I've always felt that the LOS/spotting rules should be before the fire combat rules. Just seems more logical to me, before you fire, you've got to see them. Also, there's no diagram of squad values, but you have them for other counters. Great job though!

 

[David Heath]

Well those were our first attempt at the new rules and I think Jeff did a great Job. It by far is the clearest manual for the game yet. The good news we just today first the updated for of the modern rules and also the WW2 era edition. Those will be released real soon.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

there's no diagram of squad values,

We've added it.

I didn't change the numbering mostly b/c both sections are major sections that are referred to in older modules, in module-specific rules, and in scenarios--10 years of scenarios--and I thought it would cause more confusion and problems than it was worth to throw the old numbering completely out the door and start fresh. That's why the first part of 5.0 Fire Combat refers you to 10.0 LOS and Spotting.

 

[The Plodder]

We've added it.

Nice.

I didn't change the numbering mostly b/c both sections are major sections that are referred to in older modules, in module-specific rules, and in scenarios--10 years of scenarios--and I thought it would cause more confusion and problems than it was worth to throw the old numbering completely out the door and start fresh. That's why the first part of 5.0 Fire Combat refers you to 10.0 LOS and Spotting.

Excellent point, I didn't think of that, esp. the scenarios.