From: hcmeyer@uci.edu (Hank Meyer) Subject: CHANGE: Desert Fox Errata/Addenda (v1.2) Official Desert Fox Errata, Clarifications, and Addenda 21 December 1995 Here's the official (published) errata/addenda as complied from Moves #58, 60, and S&T Special Issue #1 for the Desert Fox game from S&T issue #87. The game is currently (Dec 95) under redevelopment for rerelease as Desert Fox Deluxe by Decision Games in the spring of 1996. The reworked game will contain all the optional addenda listed below, a 1940 Italian Campaign and British Counter- Offensive scenario, a Tunisia scenario (based on the Trail of the Fox game), and a compaign game (including the Torch landings in Algeria, an aditional mapsheet, more units, and rules for ahisitorial events). Questions on the existing Desert Fox (SPI) or information on Desert Fox Deluxe (Decision Games) can be sent to me by e-mail. I'd very much like to hear your comments, ideas, and suggestions on how the existing game system works for you and what you'd like to see reworked or added. Some unofficial errata, clarifications, rules, options, and experimental variants can be found in the Desert Fox file/page. Enjoy! Hank Meyer hcmeyer@uci.edu Executive Producer Chameleon Interactive Media Laguna Beach, California 92651 USA ************************************************************************** Published Addenda to Desert Fox: Doctrine For Desert Fox by Matisse Enzer in Moves #58 (published by SPI), an operational analysis of play which includes three additional rules for the game: Operation Herkules (the invasion of Malta), Detachments (four new unit-counters), and Desert Patrols (five new unit-counters). These didn't make it into the game due to space and counter limitations. Optional Rules for Desert Fox by Richard Berg (the game's designer) in Moves #60 (published by SPI), including Commonwealth Variable Withdrawal and Return (three new tables), Axis Use of Tobruk as a Port, and rules for Rommel (one new unit-counter). These didn't make it into the game due to space and counter limitations. Fox Killed by Steven Copley in S&T Special Issue #1 (published by TSR), a prequel to the Desert Fox game covering the Italian Offensive and O'Connor's Counter-offensive from Sep 40 thru Mar 41 (23 new unit-counters, two new tables). There is also a compiled errata for Desert Fox, which is relatively complete and comprehensive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Published Errata and Clarifications to Desert Fox: Counters: The Italian Artclre Armd Arty unit arrives on Game-Turn 13 (not 18 as shown on the unit counter). The Axis Reinforcement Schedule (5.18) also incorrectly reads turn 18. Commonwealth 6/2 NZ enters on Game Turn 3 (as per the Commonwealth Reinforcement Schedule) instead of on turn 2 (as printed on the counter). The Movement Allowance for Italian 101/Tri Heavy Wpns remains 14 when the unit is depleted (the counter reads 28). Commonwealth 1FF should be 2 stacking Points on both its depleted and non-depleted sides. Commonwealth 2FF should be 1 stacking point on both sides. Charts and Tables: Benghazi should be the equivalent of a Level 1 Fortification, not a Level 2. Shift Benghazi down to the next row on the Combat Results Table. On the Summary of Supply Sources and Capacities, "U/U/-" was mistakenly printed in the bottom right-hand position of the summary. It should read "U/-" instead. [5.17] Commonwealth Reinforcement/Withdrawal Schedule. (Addition): "150/50 Mtrzd" returns on Game-Turn 12 after being withdrawn on turn 6. (Correction): "Delete "5/3 Ind(3)" from Game-Turn 4 withdrawals; "5/4 Ind(2)" is removed instead. (Clarification): "1/2, 4/7 and 7/7 Armd" arrive in the Refit Box on Game-Turn 3, as correctly indicated on the Reinforcement Schedule. It should be noted that these units cannot actually be rebuilt until Game-Turn 4 because of Armor Rating restrictions (see Case 13.3). [7.57] Axis Convoy Arrival Table. (Correction): The note to this table is wrong with regard to the Game-Turns on which rolls on the table are modified. The information in Case 7.55 is correct. [8.29] Terrain Effects Chart and Key ((IMPORTANT!!!) (Important Addition): Roads NEGATE hexside movement costs. Tracks HALVE the cost of hexside terrain. Rules: [5.1] (Addition): Reinforcements may not be placed on the map overstacked. Reinforcements must be delayed if they cannot be placed without violating stacking restrictions. [7.9] (Clarification): This case does apply to dumps captured in the current turn by the phasing player. These dumps trace a line of communications as any other dumps owned by the phasing player. [8.37] (Clarification): A player must roll for disruption immediately following any reaction movement to overruns (see 8.46). [8.43] (Clarification): This rule applies only at the end of each reacting unit's movement. A reacting unit may move by enemy units which are not already in friendly ZOC's (within the restrictions of ZOC's and movement in general) provided that it does not end its movement adjacent to such units. [8.51 and 8.61] (Clarification): When these rules indicate "one unit or Stacking Point (whichever is greater)", they mean that the criteria for permitting movement is either "no more than one unit" or "no more than one Stacking Point." For example, a unit with a Stacking Point Value of "1", another unit with a value of "0", and three MSU's (also with Stacking Point Values of "0") could all be moved by rail or by sea, since all five units together comprise only one Stacking Point. On the other hand, a unit with a Stacking Point Value of "2" and an MSU could NOT use naval and rail transport as they together comprise 2 stacking points AND 2 units. The unit with a value of "2" could be transported by itself, however. [11.4] (Correction): An infantry-type unit worth more than 1 Stacking Point could satisfy the combined arms needs of more than one armored unit stacked with it. Each infantry-type Stacking Point will satisfy the combined arms requirement for 1 Stacking Point of friendly armor. [11.62:3] (Addition): Motorized units may also retreat through sand sea and marsh hexes along a track. [11.9] (Correction): The Commonwealth unit "22(2)" is portrayed in the example at an Armor Rating of 2. The example should have used the "22(3)" counter, indicating an Armor Rating of 3. In the example its combat strength would then be 4 after halving for combined arms effects. [13.2] (Addition): A line is missing. The fourth sentence of this Case should read "Non-motorized units which are eliminated and cannot trace a line of communication go into the Destroyed Units Box." (Combat supply status is irrelevant.) The next sentence should then begin, "If a motorized unit which is out of Combat Supply or cannot trace a line of communication is eliminated, the owning player..."