Warhorse Simulations

Automated Card Tracking System: Home

Generic Module: H44: A Bridge Too Far III Journal

Number of entries per page:
  Sort order:
Most recent entries first
Oldest entries first

Filter on: (filter will search Player, Title, and Entry)

View elapsed game time

Next 100 entries

Entry # Time Turn Player Title Entry
4 9/17/2019 11:15:00 PM Master ID = 2778 Game Deleted
3 9/17/2019 8:22:00 PM Turn 1 Allied Message There are situations where the players might want to break these up; specifically when the results of Battle A might impact Battle B. (In extreme cases, perhaps the phasing player doesn't even want to conduct Battle B!)
2 9/17/2019 8:21:00 PM Turn 1 Allied Die roll request Request: 6-sided die x 8

5
2
3
2
6
5
5
5


Message from Allied:
Example resolution of multiple battles at once:

A: 2-1 incl 11Arm Art (TK not involved)
B: All adj excl 1/502, 2-1
C: 12 vs 6, 4-1 incl armor, elite
D: 12 vs 3, 5-1 incl armor
E: 16 vs 3, 6-1 incl armor
F: 20 vs 20, 4-1 incl AGRA, Gds Art, elite
G: 9 vs 4, 4-1 incl elite, low quality
H: 4 vs 1, 5-1 incl elite
1 9/17/2019 8:15:00 PM Turn 1 Allied Message Saw you made an ACTS roll so I thought I'd jump in. A few comments:

* Easiest to set up an ACTS log for a game, not do one-off rolls.
* Yes, all die rolls would be done on ACTS.
* Normally, non-phasing player does the rolling after verifying the move. A few H44-centric exceptions:
- If it's clear a bridge demolition attempt would occur, phasing player can do it.
- If it's a movement phase combat against an '?' unit, phasing player rolls. (Such rolls need to reference the defending unit strength/type.)
- Airlanding rolls
The intent is to keep the game moving briskly; once both players demonstrably know the rules, 'rolling their own' is ok but I'd still recommend non-phasing player rolling.

Hope this makes sense...
Tom

Next 100 entries

Copyright 2005 Warhorse Simulations