IHMN new errata etc

[cptkremmen]

Just read errata and POW company.

Not sure what you mean when you say jäger 26 points and tod trupen 39. Do we still pay 26 points per jäger and get the tod trupen free?

In pow I assume cpl Vick and private max are a 2 man team?

Andy

[Craig]

Just read errata and POW company.

Not sure what you mean when you say jäger 26 points and tod trupen 39. Do we still pay 26 points per jäger and get the tod trupen free?

In pow I assume cpl Vick and private max are a 2 man team?

For the Jäger/Tod-truppen combination you pay the higher of the two costs. The Jäger cost is there for completeness should one wish to deploy Jägers without revivifiers.

Yes Vick and Max are a team.

[Skrapwelder]

  Vick and Max. I just got it.

[Craig]

Vick and Max. I just got it.

We knew someone would... 

[cptkremmen]

Yep got vickers and maxim.

So jagers jumped from 26 to 39 points. Fair enough they did seem a bit cheap, though that is a big hike.

Were the upgrades of the Thule to correct mistakes, or as a result of play testing?

I managed to get one of north stars pack of spare zombies, plus a pack of northstar 1866 Prussian skirmishes and a pack of 4 westwind bobbies, an ironclads armoured steam car for the bobbies.    Once painted up these should make great additions to the Thule and Scotland Yard starter packs.

Also ordered a pack of 8 British redcoats from spartan games. Interested to see what they end up like.

Hope my mates actually like this game!

Andy

[Dewbakuk]

Were the upgrades of the Thule to correct mistakes, or as a result of play testing?

Incorrect maths from the looks of it

Of course, someone may have mentioned this in their initial feedback early on  Admittedly I had made a spreadsheet to do the maths for me, which my wife then improved with the printed books details.

[Fuzzywuzzieswiflasers]

Nothing is more annoying than you buy a brand new ruleset and already there is an errata!! 

Lift your game people!

[Dewbakuk]

Nothing is more annoying than you buy a brand new ruleset and already there is an errata!! 

Lift your game people!

I'd rather an errata was made available straight away than in 6 months when the issues have been known from the begining. Or the other way I've seen which is to say 'yeah that's not what was intended but it's in the rules now so that's it'.

[The_Beast]

I'd rather an errata was made available straight away than in 6 months when the issues have been known from the begining. Or the other way I've seen which is to say 'yeah that's not what was intended but it's in the rules now so that's it'.

Those of us still waiting the book will reap the benefits of your pain. 

Doug

[Fuzzywuzzieswiflasers]

Is it too much to expect a proof read to check stats etc. before it goes to the printer???

[cptkremmen]

Sorry fuzzywuzzies can't agree with you.

What you want is ideal but never seems to happen, mistakes sneak in.

Far more important is the fact that Craig is very enthusiastically supporting his creation.  I doubt even Craig realises how important that is.  I find it amazing so many rules sets are neglected by their authors once they are published

My favourite WW2 rules set is bolt action.  Love them, but the direct support from the authors to rules questions on the forums has been very poor.  It has been left for enthusiastic forum members to answer players queries.

Fine when it is a simple query, but when the answer is contentious you. Need the response from the author.

Craig has been great at this, I do not honestly think I have seen such honest commitment to a rules set. As Craig has given.

I want to see errata, rules changes, extra material as fast as he can churn it out.

So to Craig I say don't be disheartened by the occasional whiner, you can never please everyone and I think most of the purchasers of your rules. Are very happy not only. With. The rules but with the excellent support you give us all.

Andy
Ps try and get the costs right in the next book

[Sterling Moose]

Craig has been great at this, I do not honestly think I have seen such honest commitment to a rules set.

+1

[Dewbakuk]

Is it too much to expect a proof read to check stats etc. before it goes to the printer???

It will have been proof read etc several times. Something will always get through. It's rare to read a book of any kind that has absolutely no errors in it's first printing. These issues wouldn't have been picked up by proofreaders anyway as it requires a knowledge of the background mathematics and formulae that only the authors really knew at first.

[myincubliss]

It will have been proof read etc several times. Something will always get through. It's rare to read a book of any kind that has absolutely no errors in it's first printing. These issues wouldn't have been picked up by proofreaders anyway as it requires a knowledge of the background mathematics and formulae that only the authors really knew at first.

IIRC correctly there was a similar issue in A World Aflame (something to do with burning buildings), but it was too late to have it changed as the book was already at the printers...

[steharan]

I'm not too bothered by the odd mis-cost of pts in a rules set considering the amount of playtesting and costing that goes into writing a rules set. The fact that the pts mechanism is clearly explained in the rules to allow a player to construct their own adventuring company makes this game system outstanding and promotes the roleplaying aspect of wargaming incalculably.

Cptkremmen gives a great example with Bolt Action and although I don't necessarily agree with some of his views on that system he's got it spot on in that it feels abandoned by the rules designer and needs some form of clarification from the people that defined the system. I think its great that Craig is doing that (along with Charles) even though the system is lovely and straight forward. Any area of misunderstanding on a printed works can only harm said works and put off prospective gamers.

Keep it up fellas