Nations At War Core Rules v3.0 Rev3

Latest Core Rules for the Nations At War Game System

  1. David Heath

    David Heath Administrator
    Staff Member Support Staff

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    934
    David Heath submitted a new resource:

    Nations At War Core Rules v3.0 - Latest Core Rules for the Nations At War Game System

    Read more about this resource...
     
  2. Zac

    Zac Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2015
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Do the module specific rules need any updates?
     
  3. Brettspielkater

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    What's the reason of the high price? Is a rule book production that expensive?
     
  4. David Heath

    David Heath Administrator
    Staff Member Support Staff

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    934
    We don't think the manual has a high price. The old manual was $10.00 less. We are also making the manual spiral bound.

    David
     
  5. Ty Snouffer

    Ty Snouffer Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    77
    WIth the 5.0 LnLT rules there were a handful of actual rule changes. Are there any actual changes in this NaW ruleset or is it simply a accumulation of the rules? From the description page it doesn't see that there are any actual changes but wanted to check to make sure.

    Thanks
     
  6. David Heath

    David Heath Administrator
    Staff Member Support Staff

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    934
    I will say there are not any rule changes, but we have made them clearer.

    David
     
  7. Ty Snouffer

    Ty Snouffer Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    77
    Thanks, David. I have plans to finally get this to the table next week.

    Cheers
     
  8. Tim Foxley

    Tim Foxley Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2018
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gaming Emergency: Line of Sight Rules - don't get the logic and need a decision...!?

    Guys, someone help me please. Bought this a few months ago. Now playing it and very impressed - simple and elegant. But I have come across a logical impasse which has brought my German mechanised recce bn flanking manoeuvre to a standstill. Some visual examples of LOS would have helped. My background with LOS is primarily Squad leader and Panzer Blitz/Leader, which probably hinders me, but I welcomed the Nations at War attempt to simplify this rule aspect down to a handful of paragraphs :)

    Question - can the hill tank shoot at the hill tank in this situation?:

    Hill hex with tank on it---hex---hex---wooded hex---hex---hex---hill hex with tank on it.

    Your rules appear clear that neither tank cannot shoot at the other tank: "...even if both the attacker and target are on a Hill, LOS is blocked if blocking terrain such as a Woods hex is between the attacker and the target's hex". Fine with that - woods are taller than a hill hex.

    Now picture this situation - can the hill tank shoot at the ground tank?

    Hill hex with tank on it---hex---hex---wooded hex---ground hex with tank on it

    Can the hill tank shoot at the ground tank? of course not. Woods being taller than hills, my every instinct says no. Your rules state that "If the attacker is on Hill level, it cannot fire at a Ground-Level enemy unit that is behind and adjacent to a hex that blocks LOS." I get that as well - this is as classic a LOS rule from history (ie Squad Leader etc) that you will find - you are sheltering immediately behind the wood/building. No way anyone can see you.

    So now I work up to the final question - can the hill tank see the ground tank in this next situation?

    Hill hex with tank on it---hex---hex---wooded hex---hex---hex---ground hex with tank on it.

    In writing the rule I have just mentioned "If the attacker is on Hill level, it cannot fire at a Ground-Level enemy unit that is behind and adjacent to a hex that blocks LOS.", you seem to be holding out the possibility that if the ground unit was NOT adjacent to the wood/building hex and was perhaps 2-400 metres away behind it - even a kilometre - 3,4,5,6 hexes or whatever - a unit on a hill could see and fire at such a ground unit. But why does this rule exist if a woods hex blocks every hex (including tanks on hills) behind it?

    If, in this last example, the answer is "no", then what is the military value in this game of having the high ground (other than the bonus defensive die roll from incoming ground fire)?

    I welcome someone's expertise? :)

    Cheers

    Tim
     
  9. ChuckB

    ChuckB Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2015
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    14
    Hi Tim,

    I can offer no "expertise" (meaning specific knowledge or superior understanding of the rules) but I'll try to help (since I'm also playing the game).

    After reading the 5 paragraphs under Rule 6.1.2 several times, I think I understand where the confusion is coming from and here is my interpretation of the rules (which partly comes from knowing and partially applying the LoS rules of the Lock 'N Load Tactical system, which I know):

    I do NOT think that the system assumes that blocking terrain ("BT") is higher than hills but that it is basically the same height, which would explain why there is a "shadow" element of both the ridgelines as well as any BT, meaning anything immediately behind it is outside the LoS, EVEN IF the attacker is on a hill.
    If the target is behind a BT (but not adjacent to it), LoS would be established. What is confusing (or ambiguous) in this case is the second paragraph of Rule 6.1.2, which is your first bolded citation. I read that as a case where everything in this scenario (attacker, target, AND the BT) is on the hill level (but have to admit that this rule would not be strictly necessary, as it would basically irrelevant if it would happen on a hill or not but state the "normal" LoS rules).

    In your examples, it's not clear if the "wooded hex" is actually a "wooded ground hex" or "wooded hill hex" and if the "hexes" in between are "hill hexes" or "ground hexes", which would make a difference.

    If in your first example we speak about a "ground wooded hex", I would think there is LoS between the attacker and target that are each on a hill hex.
    I would agree with you on your second example.
    For the last one, it again makes a difference if the two hexes between the hill attacker and the wooded hex are hill hexes. If so, LoS blocked IMO (last paragraph of 6.1.2), otherwise, if all the hexes (including wooded hex) are ground hexes, I would say LoS established, because the target is NOT adjacent to the wooded hex.

    Again, my reading and understanding, not necessarily the truth ...
     
    #9 ChuckB, May 18, 2019 at 3:53 PM
    Last edited: May 18, 2019 at 4:23 PM
    Tim Foxley likes this.
  10. David Heath

    David Heath Administrator
    Staff Member Support Staff

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    934
    Hi Guys,

    I have asked Sean to jump in and answer this question.

    David
     
    Tim Foxley likes this.
  11. Tim Foxley

    Tim Foxley Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2018
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Chuck - many thanks for this really helpful reply, much appreciated. Apologies for my own slight ambiguity with my examples - every hex is a ground hex unless I specifically note hill hex. Your thinking is in line with mine and I am going to game on that basis. This therefore suggests that paragraph two of the Hill-Level LOS section is the flawed one that confuses our understanding of the subsequent ones. I even wonder now whether the rule writers meant to say "on the same hill" rather than "on a hill". That would then make sense. All my understanding of the logic of this type of tactic-level of boardgaming suggests that a unit on a hill should be able to fire at/see a unit on a different hill with woods and villages in the valley in between playing no part in obstructing LOS. Smoke might be the exception but that is not my concern here.

    My suggested rewrite for paragraph 2 would thus be:

    "If both the attacker and target are on the same hill, LOS is blocked if blocking terrain such as a woods/town hex is between the attacker and the target's hex. If both the attacker and target are on separate hills, LOS is not blocked by intervening woods or towns in the valley between."


    and my clarification for paragraph 3 would be:

    "If the attacker is on a Hill Level, it cannot fire at a Ground-Level enemy unit that is behind and immediately adjacent to a hex that blocks LOS, but it can fire at a unit that is two or more hexes beyond that same blocking terrain (unless other separate LOS factors apply). Cultivated terrain offers no such LOS protection from a unit on a hill."

    Naturally I welcome any thoughts :)
     
  12. Tim Foxley

    Tim Foxley Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2018
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi David, many thanks. I would welcome yours or Sean's thoughts on my reply to Chuck. My sense is that paragraph two of the Hill-Level LOS section may need a slight adjustment.

    Cheers

    Tim
     

Share This Page