Does an entrenchment in the jungle (I've been playing Saipan, it could apply to similar terrain elsewhere) give 4 column shifts against or 2? The Direct Fire chart specifically says that an entrenchment in a town is a maximum of -2 shifts, however they are on the same modifier line, while jungles are on a separate one. This becomes an issue when units come adjacent to an entrenchment. The -2 for the entrenchment cancels the -2 for adjacent, and do the defenders still get additional protection from the base terrain?
In 4th edition:
Jungle is limiting terrain and thus Direct Fire against a Jungle hex containing an Entrenchment would be subject to a -1 column modifier for jungle and another -1 column modifier for entrenchment in other limiting terrain. Keep in mind the -2 to +3 limit for the total DF modifiers.
In 3rd edition:
Jungle is limiting terrain and thus Direct Fire against a Jungle hex containing an Entrenchment would be subject to a -1 column modifier for jungle and another column modifier for entrenchment. I would play with the -1 column modifier because I think the (-1 if the entrenchment is in town or woods) is the closest match but I can see why players may argue to use the -2 column modifier for entrenchment. Keep in mind the -2 to +3 limit for the total DF modifier.
About your other question. In either version, the defenders get additional protection from the base terrain unless specified otherwise on TEC.
Right, it was because of the total modifiers that I was having an issue. I was stacking 3 high in jungle entrenchments because if I got -2 for each (jungle/entrenchment...or is jungle -1, I don't have the charts handy), the +1 for having 3 units didn't make a difference because of the -2 limit.
Let me say that 2 Marine HMGs (24 FP) firing at max range against entrenchments can still hurt them. Because of the -2 limit, they are still firing on the 11 column all the time.
(10-03-2015, 05:29 AM)J6A Wrote: [ -> ]Right, it was because of the total modifiers that I was having an issue. I was stacking 3 high in jungle entrenchments because if I got -2 for each (jungle/entrenchment...or is jungle -1, I don't have the charts handy), the +1 for having 3 units didn't make a difference because of the -2 limit.
Let me say that 2 Marine HMGs (24 FP) firing at max range against entrenchments can still hurt them. Because of the -2 limit, they are still firing on the 11 column all the time.
Put 4 of them together with an officer with a combat modifier and you'll be firing on the 22 column!
(10-03-2015, 07:45 AM)Matt W Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2015, 05:29 AM)J6A Wrote: [ -> ]Right, it was because of the total modifiers that I was having an issue. I was stacking 3 high in jungle entrenchments because if I got -2 for each (jungle/entrenchment...or is jungle -1, I don't have the charts handy), the +1 for having 3 units didn't make a difference because of the -2 limit.
Let me say that 2 Marine HMGs (24 FP) firing at max range against entrenchments can still hurt them. Because of the -2 limit, they are still firing on the 11 column all the time.
Put 4 of them together with an officer with a combat modifier and you'll be firing on the 22 column!
This gets tougher in the jungle where guys can only command their own hex. And yeah, I think I would have set up the Japanese in the last scenario I played (23) differently if the Marines had more HMG. I would have put them much farther back to make the HMG waste most of the scenario just getting to them. Yeesh. 22 when entrenched. That's painful!
If there's one thing that Marines bring to the fight, it's firepower!!!