----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 94 15:01:42 +0200 From: Pedro Faria Subject: Re: Touch ASL > CDFc> In message Thu, 7 Apr 1994 06:17:47 -0400 (EDT), > CDFc> Neal Smith writes: > > > WARNING: I don't agree with this rule, but since I've been > > "challenged", I'll find it. I just read it last week. > > CDFc> Just wondering if the "touch" rule was ever found? > > >Carl- > > I never found it. All I could come up with was one unit's movement is >over when another unit starts to move. It can be found in the old SL rules (19.2). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- : Pedro Faria : : : Lund Institute of Technology (LTH) : mail: Kamnarsvagen 13 D:203 : : email: k89_foc@lthkcu.kc.lth.se : S-226 46 LUND : : Phone: +46 46/394048 : SWEDEN : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 94 09:43:50 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Re: Touch ASL Carl Fago asks: > Just wondering if the "touch" rule was ever found? A4.2 MECHANICS OF MOVEMENT: Whenever a player moves a unit during his MPh he states aloud the MF expended by that unit in entering each hex or in performing any other activity within its current hex. If the unit is going to end its MPh there it must state so before moving another unit. The player is not allowed to take the unit back to a previously occupied hex and begin again (EXC: If a unit's move is illegal, either player may cite the illegal move and demand the move be retraced from the last legally entered hex _unless_ another unit has moved, fired, or performed any other action in the interim.) In short, there is no "touch" rule ASL. The ASLRB is much harsher. I summarized this rule earlier, but was a little too flippant for people to take seriously, I guess. Taken literally, this rule is much more restrictive than the chess "touch" rule. It is a "voice" rule, and once you count off an MF, it is _gone_. If you even edge the piece into a new hex, and delay counting off the MF, you still cannot go back, regard of where your hands are. Note, however, that this rule pertains only to the MPh, so presumably you can take all kinds of "liberties" during the APh and RPh. In this respect, allowing a player the "freedom" of a "touch" rule takeback was most sporting (sarcasm implied). In everyday reality, enforcing either the actual rule or some touch modification, is pretty gamey in non-tournament play. In such cases, though, I would say that once a unit has stopped, or a defensive fire shot has been declared, that the unit can no longer retrace any part of the move. In my opinion, the rule is worded as strictly as possible so that there can be no question in a tournament situtation. It does not mean that you must, or should, apply it this strictly in a friendly game. Matt Brown ----- From: johna@io.org Subject: Red Barricades the Film Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 11:04:05 +0000 (GMT) Wow...Mike... i saw Stalingrad months ago and thought it so bad I refused to bother to review for television... I went another fairly successsful film maker and WW2 fan and the wo of us laughed all the way through at its attempts at portraying the horrors of war. It was cliched and programmed and telegraphed most of the plot twists... I will grant you that some of the battle scenes did attempt to be realistic especially the tank attack... but Boy I thought this was a stinker... I was psyched for it too... Thought maybe we had another Das Boot on our hands but all we got was one dimensional characters and silly aphorisms...Oh well... John Give me Peckingpah any day... ----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 16:13:57 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: PC archives Jeff Shields writes: > I have placed RUSFRONT.ZIP on carlo.phys.uva.nl: > /pub/bas/asl/incoming. It shoudl probably be moved to > /pub/bas/asl/pcprogs. It is a shareware computer game of > PanzerBlitz with 3 Kursk scenarios. You can save game turns and > email those to opponents. Let me know if you like it. Sorry, but I'm only running an ASL archive. This file will simply be removed. Bas. ----- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 94 22:36:50 CDT From: jennifer johnson Subject: Chicago ASL tourney next weekend 1994 Chicago ASL Championships Sponsored By The Windy City Wargamers April 23rd and 24th 1994 At the Best Western Inn of Burr Ridge (About 30 Minutes SW of Chicago) Cost $15 All preregistrants will be sent all rules and scenarios to be used by March 1. I can send them through email for people who would need a copy. Prizes Plaques for first and second place. Top four finishers will receive cash prizes. Hotel Info: Phone # (708) 325)2900 Room Rates: $50 per night if you mention that you are with theWindy City Wargamers. The hotel allows a maximum of four peopleper room. If you want this special rate please mention that youwill be staying in the hotel on your preregistrati on sheet. Transport: Shuttle service is available from Midway ($7.50) orO'Hare ($20). It is suggested that you call ahead to reserveshuttle service. Registration: Send bottom half of flyer to: WCW C/O Louie Tokarz 5724 W. 106 ST Chicago Ridge, IL 60415 Phone# (708) 857)7060 I can also send info through internet(jjohnson@midway.uchicago.edu) _________________________________________________________________ Preregistration Sheet Name: Phone: Address: City: State: Zip: Area Rating: Years Experience: Number of Times Attended Oktoberfest______, AvalonCon______, ASL (above info used for first round seeding) ...... Corey ----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 13:15:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Wayne Young Subject: OVR and CC Greetings all, Having a bit of a disagreement up here where it's still snowing. Here's the sitch: a T-34/85 delcares OVR on a stack in a woods hex. The tank is BU and the potential treadmarks are an 8-1, and three 4-4-7 MMCs. The tank enters the woods hex at half MP and passes its bog check, declares his OVR... so is his attack value a 6 on the IFT? It has a base of 4 for being an AFV with functioning MA that is not MG, FT, IFE, etc, plus the CMG factor is 2 modified by BFF and TPBF comes to 3 on top of the 4 base. Is this right? We (obviously) don't run into this often and there is a bit of contention as to whether or not my fleeing Germans survived. We agreed before the game on the IIFT, so this would seem to be a table 7 IIFT attack with a +1 DRM for the woods. Next stupid (?) question... assuming the attack _is_ on table 7 (or 6 on the IFT) then I have survived (yahoo - I sure hope so!). So apparently I can do a CCV reaction attack (three of them?) with basic kill numbers of 6, 5, and 5 (5 for a squad, +1 to the 1st squad w/ the leader). Is this correct? If so, then he can remain perturbed about that burning wreck result of the "eyes" from the second squad. I may have forgotten some detail, but I don't have my ASLRB, etc, with me. Thanks in advance. Wayne Young youngwr@kirk.northernc.on.ca "Some days you're the windshield and some days you're the fly." ----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 94 12:16:27 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: recipe Hmm, well it looks like a good recipe, and it has many potential ASL uses. Apply the dough to your AFV as a sort of anti-magnetic paste to preclude the use of ATMM. Send Care packages to the troops to raise their ML (except for Marines - no beer in the dough). Replace the flour with gunpowder and the chocolate chips with ball bearings and use them for mini-AP mines. And if you eat the whole batch in one sitting, you'll surely understand DASL bocage. Personally, I'd rather see some good recipes for those worthless Idaho tubers, but I'm glad to see that Brian has maintained his sense of humor despite the late night feedings. Dave ----- From: William G Jelinek Subject: Re: OVR and CC Date: Mon, 18 Apr 94 17:19:20 EDT Wayne Young writes: > > Next stupid (?) question... assuming the attack _is_ on table 7 > (or 6 on the IFT) then I have survived (yahoo - I sure hope so!). So > apparently I can do a CCV reaction attack (three of them?) with basic > kill numbers of 6, 5, and 5 (5 for a squad, +1 to the 1st squad w/ the > leader). Is this correct? If so, then he can remain perturbed about > that burning wreck result of the "eyes" from the second squad. > I may have forgotten some detail, but I don't have my ASLRB, etc, > with me. Thanks in advance. > One detail would be the PAATCs required before the CC Reaction Fire (D7.21, 1989). From the infantry's perspective, I hope they were omitted from the question and not the game :) Adios, Bill =============================================================================== Bill Jelinek jelinek.1@osu.edu --OR-- "Where did I get wjelinek@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu all these socks?" =============================================================================== ----- Subject: OVR and CC From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 94 17:01:00 -0640 Howdy, Wayne Young writes: [T-34/85 OVRs stack in woods. Is the attack 7 up one?] The base is a 4, but the T-34/84 has a BMG and a CMG with a total of 6 FP unless one of the MGs is disabled (the CMG is 4 FP, BTW). All functioning MG are included, tripled and halved (D7.11 '89). The total attack is therefore 4 + 6*3/2 = 13 FP +1 Woods TEM. [What about CC reaction fire?] Before anyone can make a CC Reaction Fire attack, they have to pass a PAATC (D7.21). If the units pass, they can then make their attacks, The base for the squads on the CC table is indeed 5, and the leadership DRM will increase the CC Kill number by one for one attack, but don't forget the +2 for a motion/non-stopped AVF. Also don't forget to roll for ATMM if appropriate. Finally, if you had PFs, you might have called for a DFF shot as the tank entered the hex instead of waiting for the Reaction Fire. This can scare the bejeezus out of a T-34 commander. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 19:17:55 -0400 (EDT) From: DANIEL_T@delphi.com Subject: Questions Answered Hi everyone, I wanted to send these to the list and make sure they got on the Internet Q&A list. Hopefully they clear up some long standing questions! A4.61 What non-movement related activities may be carried out when an infantry unit uses Assault Movement? I.E.: place DC, place SMOKE, enter Foxhole, etc... [Any, as long as the MF limit for Assault Movement isn't exceeded. Remember Assault Movement must be declared before the unit expends any MF.] A4.61 May an infantry unit use Assault Movement even if it doesnUt enter a new location (to carry out one of the non-movement related activities allowed for above)? [Yes.] A10.41 & B25.4 In the 90 annual, there is a Q&A that says, "If caught in a Blaze during the RtPh, a unit that cannot break voluntarily (A10.41) may be moved at that time by its owner into an Accessible Location just as if it were Withdrawing from Melee." In the 93a annual, there is an errata that says, "After 'Units', add 'within both the LOS and Normal Range of an armed and unbroken Known -- and/or ADJACENT to any unbroken -- enemy ground unit'". This would mean that a MMC not in LOS of the enemy but caught in a Blaze Location doesn't break but is simply moved out of the Location... Is this correct? [Yes.] {I wanted to make sure the different Q&A's didn't conflict. DT} A15.24 May a hero use itUs heroic DRM to modify the TH DR of an Ordnance SW that it is firing? [Yes.] May the heroic DRM be used if the hero is merely assisting another SMC in firing any SW? [Yes.] If two heroes are manning any SW, do both of their heroic DRM count toward the attack? [Yes - but only if the SW is non-ordnance.] D2.42 Do the Firing Consequences of this rule apply to non-stopped vehicles as well as motion vehicles? I.E.: When a vehicle fires its MG during its MPh [Bounding First Fire] while non-stopped, is the FP quartered? [Yes.] If yes, would a motion vehicleUs MGs be quartered during the DFPh? [No.] When an ordnance SW is fired from a non-stopped vehicle, what DRM apply? What if the ordnance SW is fired from a Motion vehicle? [+2 in both cases.] D6.1 & 6.22 A previous Q&A that I received showed that the last sentence in D6.1 is in error, and SW usage in 6.22 may also be in error. Exactly what SW may Passengers use? [Desperation attacks by SCW/RCL as per C13.8-.81] What about Riders? [None.] {Note: I would assume that Passengers can also use MG's altho this is not stated. DT} Enjoy! ==Daniel T. ----- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 19:16:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Wayne Young Subject: OVR and CCV Greetings, Many thanks to those who have helped clarify the problem. As it turns out we did make a mistake, but it did not help (with or without the IIFT! =). For those who wondered, a PAATC was done and passed for each squad. The mistake comes from the final attack of 13 as opposed the 7 I figured (could've swore that was "-/2/4" for MGs on the T-34/85, but it was just "2/4") but the increase in FP wasn't enough to make his 11 count for SFA with the TEM. I guess I should start using my reading glasses for those counters or use ye olde "Big Print DASL AFV Data Cards" =). Thanks again, guys. Wayne Young youngwr@kirk.northernc.on.ca "Adolf ties his shoe laces in little Nazis" ----- Date: 19 Apr 94 00:44:25 EDT From: Bruce Probst <100033.3661@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Questions, Questions, Always Questions Daniel T. gives us some Q&A's in relation to the "Internet Q&A" list. 1) Daniel, you didn't identify the source of these answers; are they official from Avalon Hill? 2) What is the Internet Q&A list, and how might someone without access to FTP get hold of it? Bruce (Melbourne, Australia) ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 07:18:43 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: Re: Questions, Questions, Always Questions In message Tue, 19 Apr 1994 11:41:19 +0200, bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) writes: > Bruce Probst <100033.3661@CompuServe.COM> writes: > >> 1) Daniel, you didn't identify the source of these answers; are they >> official from Avalon Hill? > > They looked so to me. Only in so far as they came from Avalon Hill through personal correspondence. There are those who do not take these types of Q&A as "official" until they see print. For me, I like them. *-=Carl=-* ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 11:41:19 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: Questions, Questions, Always Questions Bruce Probst <100033.3661@CompuServe.COM> writes: > 1) Daniel, you didn't identify the source of these answers; are they > official from Avalon Hill? They looked so to me. > 2) What is the Internet Q&A list, and how might someone without > access to FTP get hold of it? Here's the intro of the Q&A list. Bas. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This is a list of rules questions about ASL with official answers from Avalon Hill. It consists of all questions that have appeared in the ASL Annuals and in The General, and of contributions by people who have sent me answers they received from AH. Also included are the official errata that have appeared in the ASL Annuals and chapter H additions. The origin of the items is noted in {}, representing either an Annual or General issue, a rules page or a contributor. The latest version of this list can be retrieved by sending me email which includes in the Subject: field the string 'asl-q&a-request'. The list will then be sent to you automatically. If you don't trust your From: field, include in the header a valid Reply-To: field. The body of the message will fall into the bottomless bit bucket. The last update was on March 8th, 1994. The contributors were: Darrell Kienzle dmk8r@virginia.edu Patrik Manlig m91pma@bellatrix.tdb.uu.se Glenn Elliott gee7759@eeidf002.boeing.com Carl Fago cdf1@psuvm.psu.edu Klas Malmstrom & Robert Maglica roma@pe.chalmers.se Bruce Wehrle wehrlbl@texaco.com Ed Carter ed@a3197pm.ssr.hp.com Daniel T. pendragon@genie.geis.com Franz Schoenbauer system@eimoni.tuwien.ac.at Michael R. m.rodgers@genie.geis.com Jean-Luc Bechennec jlb@lri.fr Dave Ripton ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com Barry Grabow grabowbe@f1groups.fsd.jhuapl.edu Patrick Jonke jonke@brl.mil *) Brian Youse brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov *) *) These answers have not been given by AH, but are the opinion of the person in question. You'll probably not get your opinion in this list unless you make it into an ASL credits section. Please send any errors, suggestions and (especially) new questions with *official* answers to me. Bas de Bakker bas@phys.uva.nl ----- From: tojohnso@fsh.mtu.edu (Johnson) Subject: PBEM Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 09:48:04 -0400 (EDT) I just downloaded the On My Honor rules, and pulled the PBEM section from the FAQ, and am looking for an e-mail opponent. I'd like to try a simple scenario (like the first one from BV). I'm not rated either on the ladder or as an AREA player, so this would be for someone who has a little extra time on their hands. ****************************************************************************** * Tobin M. Johnson * Therefore, the element of chance only is wanting * * tojohnso@mtu.edu * to make of war a game, and in that element it is * * N2MVQ@W8YY * least of all deficient. * * * - Carl von Clausewitz * ****************************************************************************** ----- From: dade_cariaga@rainbow.mentorg.com (Dade Cariaga) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 94 09:25:22 -0700 Subject: Smith and Weston Hi, everyone. Well, it's kind of a slow day, so I'll go ahead and solicit advice from anyone with a little time on their hands and some knowledge about A53: Smith & Weston. I'm going to be the Japanese this Friday. My skills with the Japanese are what you might call deficient, but I did receive some good advice from others on the list when I asked for Japanese tactics. I think I'll go with the following basic plan: Since the Japanese get a total of 18 squads and 4 leaders, I'll split them up fairly evenly as per SSR 4. I'll use the 10-1s and a group of 447s with LMGs to try to get behind the American lines (thanks Brian), and I'll use the weaker Japanese leaders to get the other troops forward with Banzai charges (thanks Grant). Of course, I'll use my little mortars and MMGs to try to soften things up in Prep Fire, but I don't expect much. (The WP will probably be handy.) I'll try to get a squad or half-squad into hand-to-hand with his leader groups and hope to take out those good leaders of his, but this might invite disaster. (The Americans are stealthy, and have good leadership; an ambush could really hurt). Any comments? Dade ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 15:30:30 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Counters I was playing with another person's counters at the last CASL meeting, I had not brought my own, and I noticed that they were all nicely trimmed at the edges -- not unlike hexagonal counters as opposed to squares. In old Generals I had read about this practice, primarily in articles about Third Reich and Russian Front(Campaign or whatever) where the number of counters is much smaller. My question is now what is the best way of trimming these edges -- I neglected to ask at the last meeting how his were doneI have tried some with scissors, and while fast the corners do not come out quite as even as I might like (I know, who cares about such trivial matters, its functionality I should be after!), there must be a better way... Any suggestions about this would be much appreciated!! On another matter, I might have some tips for you all. I noticed that some people on the net have suggested putting plexiglas or plastic over the unmounted map sheets of both KP and RB. I personally don't like this, it's hard to trace line of sight and such with the extra thickness and the refraction inherent in any transparent medium. What we have done, that is myself and two other players, is mount the boards on posterboard that can be found at any art supply store. You can buy this spray adhesive and it is easy to apply. This method is almost identical to dry-mounting pictures and such...the only disadvantage being you can no longer fold the boards, though I'm sure this disadvantage could easily be solved. The boards also look pretty good on the wall of your gameroom as pictures when not in use and otherwise brighten up the otherwise non-descript nature of most rooms used for this purpose. I've gone on long enough -- happy gaming to all and good luck on all those finals (I certainly need it!)... Darren Gour ----- Subject: Marines,again... Date: Tue, 19 Apr 94 18:07:36 -0400 From: strzelin@bnlku9.phy.bnl.gov Sorry to bring up the subject of USMC morale again, but it's been pretty quiet today, anyway. Anyway, I was surprised last night when I actually went to setup a USMC scenario (Gung-Ho has been sitting on my shelf for months waiting for me to slog through the new rules sections) and I realized that USMC units do not have increase morale levels on their broken side! Having played the Americans a lot in ETO and a few PTO scenarios, I naturally expected to see a at least a "9" on the reverse side (and wouldn't have been surprised to see a "10"). Since the lowliest US Army "cook and bottle washer" squads have increased broken-side morale, I certainly expected it of the Marines. Any thought or rationalizations out there about this? The SS has broken "9" morale - and here I thought, with a 7-6-8 Marine squad in my hand - is finally a unit which equals or surpasses an SS squad in _every_ way. -- Bob Strzelinski ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 94 16:11:51 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Marines,again... Bob says: > Sorry to bring up the subject of USMC morale again, but it's been pretty > quiet today, anyway. Anyway, I was surprised last night when I actually > went to setup a USMC scenario (Gung-Ho has been sitting on my shelf for > months waiting for me to slog through the new rules sections) and I realized > that USMC units do not have increase morale levels on their broken side! > Having played the Americans a lot in ETO and a few PTO scenarios, I naturally > expected to see a at least a "9" on the reverse side (and wouldn't have been > surprised to see a "10"). Since the lowliest US Army "cook and bottle > washer" squads have increased broken-side morale, I certainly expected it > of the Marines. Any thought or rationalizations out there about this? > > The SS has broken "9" morale - and here I thought, with a 7-6-8 Marine > squad in my hand - is finally a unit which equals or surpasses an SS squad > in _every_ way. > > -- Bob Strzelinski Obviously just a counter misprint. You must have gotten a bad run. _MY_ USMC squads have a broken ML that is 2 greater than their GO ML. But they have especially superb leadership. :-) Just don't put him on a Horse (right, Tom?) Dave ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 19:18 EDT From: Dan Sullivan Subject: Oh no Marines again > Since the lowliest US Army "cook and bottle washer" squads have increased > broken-side morale, I certainly expected it of the Marines. Any thought or > rationalizations out there about this Well, I got a theory ... Army leaders probably expect their poorly trained cowardly squads to break and snivle at the first sight of enemy fire, and they're trained to encourage there boys to act like men. :) Where as Marine leaders don't even know the word "break" and would cringe at the sight of a routing marines. The broken squads can't very well have a higher morale, when surrouned by their marine companions sneering with open contempt. Hiding in the woods! How dare they wear the uniform! I think we need a rule like the "Commisar" rule for the marines. Any marine that even thinks about breaking within two hexes of a good order marine leader should automatically be drumed out of the corp. :) ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 20:38:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Jeff Shields Subject: Re: Counters Fingernail clippers can be used with relatively good success. Jeff ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 21:09:58 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: More AH musings The past few days have led me to think more on AH and their boardgame standing... Observations: 1) Kingmaker, the computer game is on the store shelves (Electronics Boutique... nice packaging but I wonder about the game inside. I don't recall seeing any place names on the screen shot of the map.) 2) My local game store owner hadn't heard anything about the lack of an Annual. He also hadn't heard about the new AH computer games. He called his distributor who said the lack of an Annual was only a rumor. His distributor hadn't been told about the computer games. Ok, now my conjecture...if AH is intent on keeping the boardgames coming, why aren't they keeping their commercial channels open? My local game store owner (and distributor) was _pissed_ _off_ that they hadn't heard the straight skinny on the annuals nor on the computer game stuff. AH is alienating their normal distribution net for boardgames. One doesn't do this if one wants to stay in business. You don't sell much if you don't distribute. Also, what happens to board game printing if the computer games are being printed? The copy of Kingmaker that I saw had nice color screen shots in the manual. That ain't cheap folks. So, I figure that AH is doing what they have always done, have Monarch Avalon print the stuff. An in-house printing establishment is a handy thing to have. But printing that stuff takes time and effort. Time and effort that would have been spent on boardgame stuff...so no boardgame stuff. (Plus the lateness of the latest General, even with the departure of the editor tells me there is some competition for printing time.) So, at this rate, I am even less convinced of AH keeping any sort of direction in the board game business. Can anyone else corroborate what my local game store owner and distributor are suffering, or is it purely a local thing? BTW, Computer Kingmaker was $49.95. Not too bad, but not great. ----- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 20:32:35 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Scenario Reports If their is anyone out there who wouldn't mind writing a little about the last scenario they played and how it went I would love to here it. I would also enjoy examining set-ups, pre-game strategies and how they went, and any other trivia on any of the AH scenarios or those from the amateur 'zines. Next time you are sending Will your scenario results take a minute and E-mail me an after action report if you have the time...I would like to have a my own little archive of info here on disk and of course would be willing to share it with anyone who might desire the same. Thanx in advance, Darren Gour ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 14:13:00 +0200 From: oleboe@idt.unit.no Subject: Rules questions Hi! Time for some more questions: The Sewer Emergence drm chart on the chapter B divider and in B8.42 are not consistent, so which one is right? Two of the drms differ. The divider reads: -1 Manhole not in enemy LOS or is Hindered by >= +2 +1 Per enemy Good Order MMC in Manhole Location B8.42 reads: -1 Manhole is in a building Location unoccupied by enemy units or is in a Road hex not in LOS of Known enemy or all such LOS is Hindered by >= 2 +1 Per Known enemy Good Order MMC in Manhole Location The drms listed in B8.42 have more details than the ones on the divider, so my guess is that the divider is wrong. My guess is that B8.42 is the right, but I am not sure. Particularly does it bother me if a unit has to be Known to make it easier to discover the Sewer unit. I thought I pointed out an error in the OBA rules last week, but since no-one has answered me, I worry that I have misread the rules. Therefore I try a simple OBA question: What are the options if your observer at the start of your PFPh/DFPh has no LOS to the SR/FFE's base level nor to its blast height, but has a LOS to a Known enemy unit in/adjacent to the SR/FFE hex? And now a question for the Red Barricade players: If a unit is on a rooftop when all paths down is eliminated (i.e., some portion of the building is rubbled), what happens to the unit at the end of the scenario (this is a Campaign Game), may it be repositioned even though it normally couldn't move away from the rooftop, or does it have to be there (encircled) for the rest of the CG or until it's completely eliminated? ------------------------------------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say: Ole Boe Me and my head or oleboe@idt.unit.no Me and my body? ----- From: Neal Smith Subject: Re: More AH musings Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 08:21:48 -0400 (EDT) > > 1) Kingmaker, the computer game is on the store shelves (Electronics > Boutique... nice packaging but I wonder about the game inside. I don't > recall seeing any place names on the screen shot of the map.) Kingmaker was done by a British company and has been released, over there for at least a month now. It is supposedly quite good. It is faithful to the boardgame, IMO that's good. > > > Also, what happens to board game printing if the computer games are being > printed? The copy of Kingmaker that I saw had nice color screen shots in > the manual. That ain't cheap folks. So, I figure that AH is doing what > they have always done, have Monarch Avalon print the stuff. An in-house > printing establishment is a handy thing to have. But printing that stuff > takes time and effort. Time and effort that would have been spent on > boardgame stuff...so no boardgame stuff. (Plus the lateness of the latest > General, even with the departure of the editor tells me there is some > competition for printing time.) > AH basically just took/bought the rights to distribute it in the US. Supposedly, the British company had a hard time, at least initially, of convincing AH that it was a good thing to do. I don't think the work that goes into these boxes is that much of a time thing. It's fairly easy, with the right setup, to knock these things out. I am however disappointed in the pricing scheme. With AH's computer reputation, I'd have lowered the price a bit in order to get into the market and encourage people to by my software and see the benefits of the new commitment to quality in the computer games. I mean, if you're going to do this anyway... Why not do it right so that maybe this can then support the boardgame/ASL aspects of the company. This is no different than the hobby store that is opened by a gamer, who realizes he needs fantasy miniatures and RC cars/planes (cash cows) to keep him in business... Later, Neal Smith ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 08:31:55 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) Assuming that Beyond Squad Leader is out in October (right), assuming that the Hill charges $79.95 for the product, I can't help but wonder if the distribution might also go to catalog stores that charge less than full retail for computer products. I haven't paid retail on a computer program in ages, and see no need to start because AH doesn't want anyone to ever get ASL stuff at a discount. Does anyone know of a place that might carry AH computer products at a closer to reasonable price? Tom Huntington ----- From: Mats Persson Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 16:46:02 +0200 Subject: Re: Marines,again... > I naturally >expected to see a at least a "9" on the reverse side (and wouldn't have been >surprised to see a "10"). Since the lowliest US Army "cook and bottle >washer" squads have increased broken-side morale, I certainly expected it >of the Marines. Any thought or rationalizations out there about this? :-) That was a good one. Almost as good as the jokes from Toumo Repettinen. Please continue with these jokes about marines. The rules discussions on this list get a bit boring sometimes. /Mats Persson ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 10:55:50 EDT From: earle@cmc.ca (Adrian Earle) Subject: ASL tournament in Hamilton Ontario If anyone out there is interested in details about the ASL tournament at Migscon in Hamilton Ontario (last weekend of May) send me email. Hamilton is about 1 hr North of Buffalo. I wouldn't want to bore the entire list with the details (especially since I haven't typed them in yet) Adrian ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 10:57:31 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jimmie M. Raines" Subject: Beyond SL thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) writes: >Assuming that Beyond Squad Leader is out in October (right), assuming that the >Hill charges $79.95 for the product, I can't help but wonder if the distribution Actually, a friend of mine has been corresponding (via email) with the president of Atomic Games, the guys that designed and wrote V for Victory (a great game) and are writing Beyond Squad Leader. This guy claims that 1) Beyond SL will knock our socks off. [Maybe, but as a good computer game or as a good computer version of ASL?] 2) It won't be out until early 1995. Just throwing in my $0.02. Jim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jim Raines, Doctoral Student in Chemistry/Biophysics Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Disclaimer: I'm in graduate school, what do you expect? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 11:06 EDT From: Dan Sullivan Subject: Beserk Question Heres a question about beserk units that will affect a PBeM game I'm playing (hi Mark!). There is a berserk russian 447 in a building. Directly across the street is a broken german 838. The beserk unit declares a dash into the german units posistion. Defensive First fire in the street hex has no effect. Now, if I fire on the unit in the other hex, now containing the 838 and the 447, during Defensive First Fire will the fire affect the broken 838? The rules are a bit ambigous. In the section on Melee there is a reference that says something about fire into a hex containing a melee will effect all units. It even has a paraenthethical remark saying in some cases this can happen during the attackers movement phase. I took that to cover the capability of the beserk unit to enter an enemy hex. But ... This is definatly against the rule concerning firing on moving units, where no other unit in a hex is affected except the moving unit. So does the 838 hunker down and not get hit by friendly fire or do they get blasted out of exsistence? Help ! --------------- djsullivan@bbn.com Dan Sullivan ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 09:19:46 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: Beserk Question > > Now, if I fire on the unit in the other hex, now containing the 838 and the > 447, during Defensive First Fire will the fire affect the broken 838? > Nope, it's not moving. >The rules are a bit ambigous. In the section on Melee there is a reference > that says something about fire into a hex containing a melee will > effect all units. It even has a paraenthethical remark saying in some > cases this can > happen during the attackers movement phase. I took that to cover the > capability of the beserk unit to enter an enemy hex. When the berzerkers enter the 838's hex, it's a CC, not a Melee yet. The parenthetical remark seems to refer to an Attacker attacking a Melee location during his MPh with either Bounding First Fire or Overrun. > > So does the 838 hunker down and not get hit by friendly fire or do they > get blasted out of exsistence? > 838 is safe from friendly first fire, but not friendly final fire. Tom "hoping this is right" ----- Subject: HyperASLRB, or HASLRB Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 11:36:55 -0400 From: strzelin@bnlku9.phy.bnl.gov After spending some time browsing the World Wide Web (WWW, for you ASL acronymphs) via the Mosaic multi-media hypertext widget, the thought struck me (Whack!) - wouldn't it be great to have a hypertext version of the ASLRB!!! I'd buy a PC just for that! "Let's see, what other references are there to SS Panzer Assault Wiener Dogs? Ahh, just point and click on this here Wiener Dog icon..." If the day ever comes that AH passes into the great graveyard hex in the sky and should the RB pass into the public domain, I for one would be willing to begin entering it into html (hypertext markup language) format that it might persist, and yea even flourish, on-line. -- Bob Strzelinski ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 11:36:00 -0400 (EDT) From: HILDEBRANB@iccgcc.cs.hh.ab.com Subject: RE: Beserk Question Dan Sullivan writes: >Heres a question about beserk units that will affect a PBeM game I'm playing >(hi Mark!). > There is a berserk russian 447 in a building. Directly across the street is > a broken german 838. The beserk unit declares a dash into the german units > posistion. Defensive First fire in the street hex has no effect. > Now, if I fire on the unit in the other hex, now containing the 838 and the > 447, during Defensive First Fire will the fire affect the broken 838? Nope. See below. > The rules are a bit ambigous. In the section on Melee there is a reference > that says something about fire into a hex containing a melee will effect all > units. It even has a paraenthethical remark saying in some cases this can > happen during the attackers movement phase. I took that to cover the > capability of the beserk unit to enter an enemy hex. The units aren't in melee yet. They are marked with a CC counter. Therefore you can fire at the berzerk guy without affecting your own unit. And also the moving unit argument would apply...But you could final fire at the berzerk guy and still not affect the b838... Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 08:56:21 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Beserk Question > From tqr@inel.gov Wed Apr 20 08:17:09 1994 > Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 09:19:46 > From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) > To: asl@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov > Subject: Re: Beserk Question > Content-Length: 982 > > > > > > Now, if I fire on the unit in the other hex, now containing the 838 and > the > > 447, during Defensive First Fire will the fire affect the broken 838? > > > > Nope, it's not moving. > > >The rules are a bit ambigous. In the section on Melee there is a reference > > that says something about fire into a hex containing a melee will > > effect all units. It even has a paraenthethical remark saying in some > > cases this can > > happen during the attackers movement phase. I took that to cover the > > capability of the beserk unit to enter an enemy hex. > > > When the berzerkers enter the 838's hex, it's a CC, not a Melee yet. The > parenthetical remark seems to refer to an Attacker attacking a Melee > location during his MPh with either Bounding First Fire or Overrun. > > > > > So does the 838 hunker down and not get hit by friendly fire or do they > > get blasted out of exsistence? > > > > 838 is safe from friendly first fire, but not friendly final fire. As you pointed out above, they are in CC, not Melee, therefore the the 838 is safe during both the MPh and the DFPh. Also since it is CC and not Melee, the 838 will be able to rout away if not killed in the AFPh. Fred > > Tom "hoping this is right" > ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 09:05:19 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Rules questions Ole Boe wrote > Hi! > > Time for some more questions: > The Sewer Emergence drm chart on the chapter B divider and in > B8.42 are not consistent, so which one is right? Two of the > drms differ. The divider reads: > -1 Manhole not in enemy LOS or is Hindered by >= +2 > +1 Per enemy Good Order MMC in Manhole Location > B8.42 reads: > -1 Manhole is in a building Location unoccupied by enemy > units or is in a Road hex not in LOS of Known enemy or > all such LOS is Hindered by >= 2 > +1 Per Known enemy Good Order MMC in Manhole Location > The drms listed in B8.42 have more details than the ones on > the divider, so my guess is that the divider is wrong. > My guess is that B8.42 is the right, but I am not sure. > Particularly does it bother me if a unit has to be Known to > make it easier to discover the Sewer unit. I would agree that the divider is just a shorten version of B8.42. > > I thought I pointed out an error in the OBA rules last week, > but since no-one has answered me, I worry that I have misread > the rules. Therefore I try a simple OBA question: What are the > options if your observer at the start of your PFPh/DFPh has no > LOS to the SR/FFE's base level nor to its blast height, but has > a LOS to a Known enemy unit in/adjacent to the SR/FFE hex? I would treat it the same as anyother time that you can not see the SR/FFE base level nor its blast height. You place a new AR with a 6 hex extend of error and no FFE possible (unless pre-reg'ed) ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 10:14:20 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: During Action Report: AOF's Haven't seen an AAR lately, so howz about a During Action Report. The game is Age Old Foes, which is a great scenario because you can abuse the acronym to OAF's. It's also very nice to read Mark Nixon's advice on the TLH scenarios in the 91 Annual. His Russian defense in particular is pretty solid here; there aren't a lot of other viable options as far as where the Russians want to put their Radio and MMG's. I like it when those hard decisions are pretty much dictated by the terrain and I don't have to think too much :-) Unfortunately, yours truly coughed up a furball when it came to slavishly following Nixon's setup, which I SHOULD HAVE done. Repeat a hundred times: "I will never deviate even a SINGLE HEX from one of Mark Nixon's setups." My particular gaffe here was in not putting a MMG in M5 like Nixon said, but rather in N5. N5 seemed nice because if the Poles attacked through the eastern grainfield, the MMG could be hauled into the building in one MPh without risking too much fire from the sure-to-be-positioned 10-2/MMG in 4P1. In that case, M5 was just one hex too far from where I wanted it to be. Oh, silly me. Despite M5's problem above, it has the very wonderful quality of being able to throw a Fire Lane out to 4EE1, which one can combine with the resid FP from the 447's in A4 and B4 to create a solid wall of resid should the Poles decide to attack through the west. Like Dave did. Seeing the gap in the resid, the Poles had a field day on turn 1. HS's on horses charged up to my defenders and soaked up some vicious fire but cleared the way for the bulk of the Poles to get up to board 33 safely. The 10-2's interdiction stack (458/MMG, 458/atr) landed in 33L0 and started working over my suddenly very busy MMG in N5, which rolled snakes to eradicate a 248/horse, but followed up with boxcars. Moment of panic, but fortunately a little 3-in-1 oil repaired that baby in a jiffy. The Radio? Hah. Lt. Nuryev got a bunch of static and a daytime talk show about cross-dressing Commissars, but no Battalion Mortar. Meanwhile, the heavy Russian presence in the eastern wheatfield did what they could to move toward the battle. Five squads made it to the 33U1 area, with two advancing to positions overlooking the route the 10-2's stack would have to take should they try to advance on the 33R6 building. Interdicting the interdictors - hey, that's all these guys could do. Turn 2 - turn of nastiness. The two 447's on the western board edge are overrun by saber-wielding hordes. I can't seem to knock any Poles off their horses, despite the -2 Cavalry DRM. The 10-2's Prep Fire broke the MMG squad in N5, but fortunately the Polish attack continued down the western corridor instead of veering toward the middle of the board. By lucky forethought, another 447 was in N5 to pick up the MMG for next turn's carnage. But would it be enough? The Polish wagon train appeared around the 33B2 area, and all of the Russians west of hexrow N were either broken or in Melee. This was a job for..... Battalion Mortar! Yes, Lt. Nuryev finally made contact: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DFPh, Polish turn 2 When last we left Lt. Nuryev, he was desperately trying to contact Battalion Mortar. Nothing seems to work. Finally he gives the box a frustrated kick... {Radio Contact DR = 3,2 contact!} The box comes to life. "Battalion Mortar" He looks at the box in amazement. "Battalion Mortar" Grabbing the microphone, Nuryev yells "Battalion Mortar? Come in!" "Yeah Mac, whaddaya want?" "Where the hell have you guys been?" "Look Bub, you want some mortar fire or not? Cuz I got a General and two Colonels on the other line here and I don't get any grief from them." "OK OK, I'm sorry. I need as much mortar fire as you got." "Well, lemme see, I can pencil you in for next Thursday... We got a nice 2-for-1 special going on then." "Goddammit, I need it NOW! This is a Code Red Priority Alert!" {BA chit draw = black, so I get BA and I guess I have 5B/2R left} "OK Bud, no problem. Where you want it?" Being previously occupied with just trying to get the damn radio to work, Nuryev hadn't actually contemplated WHERE he wanted the OBA to land, if indeed he should ever make Radio Contact. He goes over to the window. "Uh, how about 33F4?" "33F4... OK, we can do that. Sending one over now." Nuryev looks out the window and waits for the Spotting Round to fall. {Accuracy dr is not necessary since I need a 1 to be accurate and the Orchard Hindrance from the Observer to the AR is +2. So it's automatically inaccurate, and we have to do a Direction and Extent of Error DR. Error DR = 2,2, so place red Spotting Round in H3} Nuryev sees the SR land in H3. "Hey, that's not F4, that's H3!" "Look pal, that's as F4 as you're gonna GET. Hold the line, I got another call." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In the Russian turn 2, the OBA is redirected to B4, where it starts inflicting Big Badness upon the Polish units cravenly seeking cover in the woods. An 8-0 is blown off his horse in B4, taking a 458 with him. Nearly an entire stack of 457's is broken in B3. An 8-1 is wounded in B5 and another 458 is broken. But the highlight of the OBA was the glorious demise of a single horse in A4. *Sniff* I'm gonna miss Old Pokey. Big brown eyes.*Sniff* More good news - the Bolshevik Guards Armored Truck Division appeared on the eastern board edge and took up positions on the road near O8, with CMG's cocked and pointed at the Very Wide Open corridor the remaining Poles must traverse to get off the board. That's the game up to this point. The Poles need to try to get off the board before the big Russian force (8-1, 8*447, HMG, 2*LMG) appears on the WESTERN board edge on turn 4. To do so, they'll have to cross a line of OBA/resid FP extending from the western edge to the middle of the board. A lot of 1,2, and 4(-2) shots are going to happen real soon now, and don't forget ol' Nuryev and his buddies back at Battalion Mortar. Fun scenario. Tense, action-filled, and close. Tom "never heard of Polish Marines" ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 12:22:09 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: In message Wed, 20 Apr 1994 08:31:55 -0600, thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) writes: > Does anyone know of a place that might carry AH computer products at a > closer to reasonable price? AH seems to have taken up with Electronics Boutique for their computer game distribution. Prices from EB seem to be reasonable and on par with mail order places. So I don't mind buying from there. *-=Carl=-* ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 12:27:33 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: Re: More AH musings In message Wed, 20 Apr 1994 08:21:48 -0400 (EDT), Neal Smith writes: >> 1) Kingmaker, the computer game is on the store shelves (Electronics >> Boutique... nice packaging but I wonder about the game inside. I >> don't recall seeing any place names on the screen shot of the map.) > > Kingmaker was done by a British company and has been released, over > there for at least a month now. A British company? I heard it was made by one guy out of his home in England. > It is supposedly quite good. Hmmm, I heard that the program itself was dog?#%! The CGW review seemed to be so much fluff. It didn't even seem like they played the damned game. > It is faithful to the boardgame, IMO that's good. I agree, it does seem to be relatively faithful. > I don't think the work that goes into these boxes is that much of a > time thing. It's fairly easy, with the right setup, to knock these > things out. I think you underestimate the effort. I'm not just talking of the box but the rules book and guide book. It takes a lot of effort to get the stuff right. Also, the big time thing that affects our boardgames is the printing time. If they are doing printing runs for the computer games then that puts off the General and other board game printings. And I doubt that the Dotts would go out and contract the printing. It just isn't their style. *-=Carl=-* ----- From: Rick White Subject: Re: Beserk Question Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 10:46:53 PDT > > > Now, if I fire on the unit in the other hex, now containing the 838 and > > the > > > 447, during Defensive First Fire will the fire affect the broken 838? > > > > > > > Nope, it's not moving. > > > > >The rules are a bit ambigous. In the section on Melee there is a reference > > > that says something about fire into a hex containing a melee will > > > effect all units. It even has a paraenthethical remark saying in some > > > cases this can > > > happen during the attackers movement phase. I took that to cover the > > > capability of the beserk unit to enter an enemy hex. > > > > > > When the berzerkers enter the 838's hex, it's a CC, not a Melee yet. The > > parenthetical remark seems to refer to an Attacker attacking a Melee > > location during his MPh with either Bounding First Fire or Overrun. > > > > > > > > So does the 838 hunker down and not get hit by friendly fire or do they > > > get blasted out of exsistence? > > > > > > > 838 is safe from friendly first fire, but not friendly final fire. > > As you pointed out above, they are in CC, not Melee, therefore the the 838 is > safe during both the MPh and the DFPh. Also since it is CC and not Melee, the > 838 will be able to rout away if not killed in the AFPh. > > Fred > > > > > Tom "hoping this is right" > > > I believe this is correct however since this is not melee you cannot fire on the CC hex because the rules only allow friendly fire in very specific situation and CC is not one of them. Melee is. Therefore all fire on the Beserker must be done in the movement phase. I think this is correct. Any comments? Rick White Vancouver Canada. ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 11:26:57 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Beserk Question > > > > Now, if I fire on the unit in the other hex, now containing the 838 and > > > the > > > > 447, during Defensive First Fire will the fire affect the broken 838? > > > > > > > > > > Nope, it's not moving. > > > > > > >The rules are a bit ambigous. In the section on Melee there is a reference > > > > that says something about fire into a hex containing a melee will > > > > effect all units. It even has a paraenthethical remark saying in some > > > > cases this can > > > > happen during the attackers movement phase. I took that to cover the > > > > capability of the beserk unit to enter an enemy hex. > > > > > > > > > When the berzerkers enter the 838's hex, it's a CC, not a Melee yet. The > > > parenthetical remark seems to refer to an Attacker attacking a Melee > > > location during his MPh with either Bounding First Fire or Overrun. > > > > > > > > > > > So does the 838 hunker down and not get hit by friendly fire or do they > > > > get blasted out of exsistence? > > > > > > > > > > 838 is safe from friendly first fire, but not friendly final fire. > > > > As you pointed out above, they are in CC, not Melee, therefore the the 838 is > > safe during both the MPh and the DFPh. Also since it is CC and not Melee, the > > 838 will be able to rout away if not killed in the AFPh. > > > > Fred > > > > > > > > Tom "hoping this is right" > > > > > > I believe this is correct however since this is not melee you cannot fire on > the CC hex because the rules only allow friendly fire in very specific > situation and CC is not one of them. Melee is. Therefore all fire on the > Beserker must be done in the movement phase. I think this is correct. > Any comments? > > Rick White > Vancouver Canada. > The situation above is one of the few cases where fire at a location effects only some of the units in the location. When you fire at a location in CC (not in Melee) only the enemy units are effected, not the friendly units in the same location. Therefore this is not friendly fire. I don't have the rules in front of me so I can't quote sections, but it is in section A and if you want I can get it for you tomorrow. Fred ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 11:44:25 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: During Action Report: AOF's > That's the game up to this point. The Poles need to try to get off the board > before the big Russian force (8-1, 8*447, HMG, 2*LMG) appears on the WESTERN > board edge on turn 4. To do so, they'll have to cross a line of OBA/resid FP > extending from the western edge to the middle of the board. A lot of 1,2, > and 4(-2) shots are going to happen real soon now, and don't forget ol' > Nuryev and his buddies back at Battalion Mortar. Of course Tom only rolls well during high DRM attacks, so the Poles are expecting no casualties as they waltz off the board--before the Russian reinforcements arrive. > Fun scenario. Tense, action-filled, and close. You got that right. > Tom "never heard of Polish Marines" Yeah, I bet there are Polish Marines. Or at least Polish Naval Infantry. Just like there was a Swiss Navy. Now, Polish Horse-Marines are something else entirely. Dave ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 14:20:06 CDT From: seningen@ross.com (Mike Seningen) Subject: Re: Beserk Question OK, lets look at this a little further. The 838 survives AFPh, he does not rout away and decides he'd take his chances in CC. Now if the 838 was in a woods or building hex, would there be a roll for ambush? What if more enemy units entered the hex in the AdvPh? Now lets get a bit more esoteric. Assume the 838 is concealed, an enemy 447 squad advances in the AdvPh who is also concealed. If both units decline CC by not revealing the concealment what possibilities exist? No melee -- an attack has not occured? Could the 838 or 447 repair a weapon the next Rally Phase or perform some other in hex concealment loss activity? Remember he is not held in melee. Could he fire w/ TPBF in the Prep Fire phase (halved for concealment) at the 447? He cannot fire outside his hex (same as tank situation)! He could decline Prep Fire and move outside his hex, right? At what point does CC occur? Always? What limitations exist when in CC but not in Melee? Can this be analagous to the a AFVs`situation when he is in an enemy occupied location? Would the ATTACKERS squad have all the benifits that apply to the AFV, only while remaining concealed? Only if the 447 remains concealed? Could the 447 voluntarily drop his concealment -- automatically creating a CC condition to prevent some of the above? cheers, mike ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 13:14:48 -0700 (PDT) From: WHITE@AMU02.SLAC.Stanford.EDU Subject: ASL: AFV combat and tactics questions Hi, We had some questions questions about AFV rules and tactics this weekend and I seem to recall something similar discussed last year. (1) Can an AFV use MG fire against another (BU) AFV to change CA in defensive first fire even though the MG attack can't possibly do anything? (2) If a coaxial or AA MG is used can the hull CA be changed along with the turret CA? Acutally can firing the AA MG be used to change CA at all? (3) What DRM would the AFV's gun suffer if it fires later in the same movement phase? (Would all of the CA changes due to MG fire apply or would none of them apply?) (4) If ROF is maintained or an intensive fire shot taken do the CA drm's reset to 0 again assuming no further CA changes for the additional shot? (5) When is a vehicle considered moving for the purposes of negating the 1-hex and 2-hex range point blank TH DRM's? Is it when the start MP is spent or when the vehicle actually leaves the hex it started in? All of this (if we are doing it correctly) implies that a tank with more machine guns is better able to defend itself against enemy tanks. In fact, with motion attempts thrown in a tank with one MG can pivot a minimum of 4 times! The first is a CA change with the motion attempt (assumes an enemy closing in los from several hexes away), the second is the MG shot, the third is the gun firing, and the fourth is the gun intensive firing. I realize that the gun shots don't have a good chance to hit due to motion but this still leaves 3 CA changes with reasonable to hit rolls on two shots for a tank with only one MG. I know the way to defeat this is to move up from several directions at once but against a good enemy tank you could easily lose a couple of your own first. ASL Trivia: What vehicle or vehicle/passenger combination has the highest OVR firepower and what is that firepower? Joe White ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 13:26:51 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Beserk Question > > OK, lets look at this a little further. > > The 838 survives AFPh, he does not rout away and decides he'd take > his chances in CC. He must rout since the Berserker is KNOWN. If it was a concealed unit that entered it hex (unloading from a vehicle/calvery) he could possibly stay. > > Now if the 838 was in a woods or building hex, would there be > a roll for ambush? What if more enemy units entered the > hex in the AdvPh? If somehow he did stay ambush would only be possible if another unit entered in the APh. > > Now lets get a bit more esoteric. I assume below that the 838 is not broken. > > Assume the 838 is concealed, an enemy 447 squad advances in the AdvPh > who is also concealed. If both units decline CC by not revealing > the concealment what possibilities exist? The 838 is concealed for the ambush dr (possible reguardless of terrain since someone is concealed). If the 447 is also concealed and both decline to attack both remain concealed and in Melee. > > No melee -- an attack has not occured? > Could the 838 or 447 repair a weapon the next Rally Phase > or perform some other in hex concealment loss activity? Remember > he is not held in melee. He could not repair a weapon since he is not Good Order since he is in Melee. He could do some other things in the RPh though. > > Could he fire w/ TPBF in the Prep Fire phase (halved for concealment) > at the 447? He cannot fire outside his hex (same as tank situation)! Yes to TPBF. Correct on not being able to fire out of his hex. > > He could decline Prep Fire and move outside his hex, right? Correct. > > At what point does CC occur? Always? What limitations exist when > in CC but not in Melee? Can this be analagous to the a AFVs`situation > when he is in an enemy occupied location? Would the ATTACKERS > squad have all the benifits that apply to the AFV, only while > remaining concealed? Only if the 447 remains concealed? > CC occurs when enemy units occupy the same location. All CC become Melee during the next CCPh (i.e. in the same player turn.) Melee ends when only one side occupies the location. While in CC units in the location can only fire in the location with TPBF (unless the enemy units are unarmed and broken (I think these are the only exceptions)). While in CC fire into the location be either side will only effect enemy units. Being concealed/unconcealed does not effect the above. > Could the 447 voluntarily drop his concealment -- automatically > creating a CC condition to prevent some of the above? No. > > cheers, > > mike > ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 14:44:09 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: Beserk Question Dangit, gonna get SOMEthing right today. > > > > > Assume the 838 is concealed, an enemy 447 squad advances in the AdvPh > > who is also concealed. If both units decline CC by not revealing > > the concealment what possibilities exist? > > The 838 is concealed for the ambush dr (possible reguardless of terrain since > someone is concealed). If the 447 is also concealed and both decline to attack > both remain concealed and in Melee. > No, A11.15 says "Any unit which retains its concealment is not locked in Melee itself nor can it hold opposing units in Melee. It is free to fire in its next Fire Phase (into the Melee at TPBF)..." > > > > No melee -- an attack has not occured? > > Could the 838 or 447 repair a weapon the next Rally Phase > > or perform some other in hex concealment loss activity? Remember > > he is not held in melee. > > He could not repair a weapon since he is not Good Order since he is in > Melee. He could do some other things in the RPh though. > Since not in Melee, I say he could do pretty much anything normally allowed in the Rally Phase. > > > > Could he fire w/ TPBF in the Prep Fire phase (halved for concealment) > > at the 447? He cannot fire outside his hex (same as tank situation)! > > Yes to TPBF. Correct on not being able to fire out of his hex. > Units in Melee can't do anything other than make CC attacks and Melee withdrawls (A11.15 again). Tom ----- From: joq@austin.ibm.com (Jack O'Quin) Subject: Re: HyperASLRB, or HASLRB Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 16:56:05 -0600 > After spending some time browsing the World Wide Web (WWW, for you ASL > acronymphs) via the Mosaic multi-media hypertext widget, the thought > struck me (Whack!) - wouldn't it be great to have a hypertext version > of the ASLRB!!! I'd buy a PC just for that! "Let's see, what other > references are there to SS Panzer Assault Wiener Dogs? Ahh, just point > and click on this here Wiener Dog icon..." If the day ever comes that > AH passes into the great graveyard hex in the sky and should the RB pass > into the public domain, I for one would be willing to begin entering it > into html (hypertext markup language) format that it might persist, and > yea even flourish, on-line. Yeah! That would be great. Then we could insert Hypertext links to the QA files in the ASL archives at appropriate places in the rule book. ;-) Seriously, the Web is an outstanding networking advance. I think it would be fun to create an ASL home page for the archives. Such a document would explain what's there with imbedded pointers to most of the files. Most of these files could be viewed directly by a WWW browser like Mosiac or the emacs w3 package. I was considering trying to build something like that myself, although I lack both the time and the know-how. Anyone else interested? Does anyone on the list have experience administering a Web server? Jack ----- Subject: ASL: AFV COMBAT AND TACTI From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 18:03:00 -0640 Howdy, WHITE@AMU02.SLAC.Stanford.EDU writes: > (1) Can an AFV use MG fire against another (BU) AFV to > change CA in defensive first fire even though the MG attack > can't possibly do anything? I believe you can. And it can do something. It can break. It can cause a Sniper attack. Think positive :-) > (2) If a coaxial or AA MG is used can the hull CA be changed > along with the turret CA? Acutally can firing the AA MG be > used to change CA at all? D2.11 says "A VCA can also be changed ... as a result of firing outside its CA during any fire phase (other than its own MPh; C5.1)". That a CMG can change the VCA rather than the TCA is at the option of the player: "whenever a vehicle fires a turret-mounted weapon outside its VCA (To Hit Case A), the VCA is not changed (unless the vehicle uses the NT DRM application of Case A)" D3.12. I can read D2.11 as allowing the firer to change VCA as part of an AAMG shot. The problem is that the "it" in "its CA" is ambiguous. Is "it" the vehicle's CA or the weapon's CA? I would think that "it" is the weapon's CA, and since AAMGs don't (usually) have CAs, I would think that you can't change CA with an AAMG shot. Note too that if you change the VCA, you can't change the TCA at the same time (as part of a DFF shot; you can during movement). The TCA stays in the same direction relative to the VCA. > (3) What DRM would the AFV's gun suffer if it fires later in > the same movement phase? (Would all of the CA changes due > to MG fire apply or would none of them apply?) The DRMs from the shot by the MG also apply to the Gun if it fires in the same CA. You can't avoid case A for the Gun by firing the MG first. If it fires outside the current CA, only the change from the current to the new CA is counted [D3.51, see below]. > (4) If ROF is maintained or an intensive fire shot taken do > the CA drm's reset to 0 again assuming no further CA > changes for the additional shot? According to C5.12, if you change CA to fire a weapon, the Case A DRM applies to that shot only. Any subsequent shots by that weapon are treated as if the CA was the way it was after the first shot. According to D3.51, if another weapon (i.e., not the one that fired the first shot) is fired without changing CA, the Case DRM from the first shot applies, but if the CA changes, only the new CA change applies. D3.51 "If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon ... withes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12) but only if the preceding shot(s) were taken at a Known enemy unit; otherwise, no further change in TCA is allowed during that phase." About the only loophole in this rule is that you can use it to move the TCA "close" to the desired one, but it sounds like it will be hard to find a situation where everything falls together. For instance, if your TCA was three spines from the desired target, you could fire the CMG at another target in the CA "next" to the desired one, then fire the MA at the desired target with only a one spine change. But this only works if you have a target in the CA next to the desired one. For DFF this is less likely to be a problem because you can only fire at the moving unit, so it would have to move in one CA (where you fire the CMG at it) then enter another (where you fire the MA with a one-spine Case A DRM rather than a three spine DRM. You should also check out the responses in the Q&A, which mention some of the implications of D3.51. > (5) When is a vehicle considered moving for the purposes of > negating the 1-hex and 2-hex range point blank TH DRM's? Is > it when the start MP is spent or when the vehicle actually > leaves the hex it started in? C.8 ('89) "MOVING VEHICULAR TARGET: A vehicle is considered a moving targe for To Hit/Effects purposes only if during the current Player Turn it has entered a new hex, or used VBM (D2.3), or began its MPh in Motion (D2.4), or is currently in Motion." So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 17:32:02 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Baz 45 Smoke What do you all think about the Baz 45 and its ability to place WP. Does it get the +2 which all other weapons get for firing smoke at a range of 0-12 hexes on the C3 to hit table??? Darren Gour ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 17:36:35 CDT From: seningen@ross.com (Mike Seningen) Subject: Re: ASL: AFV combat and tactics questions Well I would assume it to be that flame thrower HT. Ouch!! Of course that may not be overrun per se -- but still painful. Otherwise I'd chose something exotic like a large truck w/ 3x838and LMGs. That would pack a punch. cheers, mike ----- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 13:53:08 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: ASL: AFV combat and tactics questions > Hi, > > We had some questions questions about AFV rules and tactics this weekend and > I seem to recall something similar discussed last year. > > (1) Can an AFV use MG fire against another (BU) AFV to change CA in defensive > first fire even though the MG attack can't possibly do anything? The MG could be fired into any hex looking for HIP units, even if there are no HIP units in the game. > > (2) If a coaxial or AA MG is used can the hull CA be changed along with the > turret CA? Acutally can firing the AA MG be used to change CA at all? No, a CA can only be changed if required to fire into the hex in question. Note that the VCA can be changed even if only the TCA needs to be changed. IF the VCA is changed the TCA must not change relative to the VCA. > > (3) What DRM would the AFV's gun suffer if it fires later in the same movement > phase? (Would all of the CA changes due to MG fire apply or would none of > them apply?) All of the CA changes that could effect that weapon would apply unless using ROF or IF. (If the TCA changes twice and the VCA changes once all three changes apply to the CMG and only the VCA change apply to the BMG.) > > (4) If ROF is maintained or an intensive fire shot taken do the CA drm's reset > to 0 again assuming no further CA changes for the additional shot? Yes for that weapon only. For other weapons all the CA changes to apply > > (5) When is a vehicle considered moving for the purposes of negating the 1-hex > and 2-hex range point blank TH DRM's? Is it when the start MP is spent or > when the vehicle actually leaves the hex it started in? If it not the MPh and it is in Motion or if it is the MPh and it is not stopped. Usually the moving unit in the MPh is referred to as stopped/non-stopped and Motion only applys to other units or during other phases. > > > All of this (if we are doing it correctly) implies that a tank with more > machine guns is better able to defend itself against enemy tanks. In fact, with > motion attempts thrown in a tank with one MG can pivot a minimum of 4 times! The > first is a CA change with the motion attempt (assumes an enemy closing in los > from several hexes away), the second is the MG shot, the third is the gun > firing, and the fourth is the gun intensive firing. I realize that the gun shots > don't have a good chance to hit due to motion but this still leaves 3 CA changes > with reasonable to hit rolls on two shots for a tank with only one MG. > I know the way to defeat this is to move up from several directions at once > but against a good enemy tank you could easily lose a couple of your own first. > > > > ASL Trivia: What vehicle or vehicle/passenger combination has the highest OVR > firepower and what is that firepower? It is 36. Fred > > > Joe White > ----- Subject: Night Article From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 21:10:00 -0640 Howdy, Since Asad posted this generally, I thought I'd reply publicly since I suspect the answer has broader appeal. Asad Rustum writes: > Oh, there is one rule I am not sure of. Does a unit (cloaked > or concealed) lose its cloaked/concealed status if it > fires? If the unit is within NVR, then the answer is > definitely yes, but how about when it isn't? When you place > a Gunflash, the Location gets within NVR of all other units > barring LOS-obstacles. This implies to me that you lose > your concealment, but I can't seem to find anything about it > in the ALSRB nor in your article. That is why I tend to > believe that the unit does not lose its concealed status. > You mind clearing this up for me? I had hoped I had answered this in the article, but apparently what I wrote was enough to raise the question in your mind but not to answer it. The answer is one of great and annoying subtlety. First, though, a technical point: cloaked units are always uncloaked when they attack unless the attack is a successful ambush. However, these units might end up on board concealed. If units fire within NVR, they lose concealment as you note. However, units firing from beyond NVR are _not_ treated as being within NVR even though there is an LOS to the Gunflash Location (at least this is how I interpret E1.101). This is a Great Subtlety, but even if you interpret E1.101 differently, the clarification of E1.8 [E(C)1.8] says flatly that if a unit fires but is beyond NVR of all suitable viewing units (and is not treated as being within NVR because it is Illuminated) retains its concealment. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Subject: RULE NUMBER? From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 22:17:00 -0640 Howdy, Where is that rule that says an SMC is elite? I know it's in there. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:50:29 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: ASL: AFV combat and tactics questions Fred Timm writes: >> (1) Can an AFV use MG fire against another (BU) AFV to change CA in defensive >> first fire even though the MG attack can't possibly do anything? > The MG could be fired into any hex looking for HIP units, even if > there are no HIP units in the game. Even though I agree you can fire and change CA, this cannot be the reason. This is First Fire and the possible HIP units aren't moving so you could never hit any. Bas. ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Baz 45 Smoke Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 10:59:28 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, > What do you all think about the Baz 45 and its ability to place WP. Does it > get the +2 which all other weapons get for firing smoke at a range of 0-12 > hexes on the C3 to hit table??? Since this is a TH# modification, and the BAZ has its own TH table and does not use the normal TH# table at all, I would say this modifier doesn't apply. -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Trivia Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 11:13:55 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, > Well I would assume it to be that flame thrower HT. Ouch!! > Of course that may not be overrun per se -- but still painful. Perhaps. There is only one FT I can think of that has 36 FP, though - Churchill Crocodile. But that surely is the most impressive OVR that can be made. Not only is it 36 FP - it ignores TEM as well! With the addition of MA FP + MGs I think it could gain another 10 FP for a total of 46 FP. > Otherwise I'd chose something exotic like a large truck w/ > 3x838and LMGs. That would pack a punch. Nowhere near the target, I'm afraid. With the halvings for mounted and bounding fire this would not even be 24 FP. Now, more than 36 FP is obviously impossible since OVR cannot use heavy payload rules. I can think of two vehicles that can get 36 FP OVRs: * Meat Choppers (M16A1 GMC?) 24*1.5 + 2(vehicle)=38FP * Wirbelwinds (FlakPz IV/20?) 20*1.5 + 3*1.5 + 2=36.5FP Last, the question is whether you can make a FG with several FTs. Then you could add the SPW 251/16 to the list (the one with two side FTs). It would then be the meanest thing possible, with 48 FT FP! If it adds AAMG and vehicle FP (in an OG attack) it could attack with another 6.5 FP for a total of 54.5 FP! If you want to be really ridiculous, add a heroic SMC rider carrying a LMG to one of the above to increase FP even further... -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: uucp@husky.bloomu.edu Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 08:24 EDT >From loss Thu Apr 21 08:23:39 1994 remote from husky.bloomu.edu To: asl@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov From: loss@husky.bloomu.edu (Doug Loss) Subject: Re: HyperASLRB, or HASLRB Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:23:39 Message-ID: In article joq@austin.ibm.com (Jack O'Quin) writes: >From: joq@austin.ibm.com (Jack O'Quin) >Subject: Re: HyperASLRB, or HASLRB >Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 16:56:05 -0600 >> After spending some time browsing the World Wide Web (WWW, for you ASL >> acronymphs) via the Mosaic multi-media hypertext widget, the thought >> struck me (Whack!) - wouldn't it be great to have a hypertext version >> of the ASLRB!!! I'd buy a PC just for that! "Let's see, what other [...] >Yeah! That would be great. Then we could insert Hypertext links to >the QA files in the ASL archives at appropriate places in the rule >book. ;-) >Seriously, the Web is an outstanding networking advance. I think it >would be fun to create an ASL home page for the archives. Such a >document would explain what's there with imbedded pointers to most of >the files. Most of these files could be viewed directly by a WWW >browser like Mosiac or the emacs w3 package. >I was considering trying to build something like that myself, although >I lack both the time and the know-how. Anyone else interested? Does >anyone on the list have experience administering a Web server? >Jack Well, I just put up a combination gopher/WWW server here on campus, and I'm trying to bang the drum for getting the university to be serious about the Web. Having said that, I don't really have any available time to do this, or resources I could devote to it. However if I can help with advice or occasional contributions, I'd like to. Doug Loss A touchstone to determine the actual Data Network Coordinator worth of an "intellectual"-- Bloomsburg University find out how he feels about astrology. loss@husky.bloomu.edu Voice (717) 389-4797 ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 9:43:59 -0400 (EDT) From: HILDEBRANB@iccgcc.cs.hh.ab.com Subject: Last Act in Lorraine - Deluxe I played the Deluxe version of Last Act in Lorraine last night which brought up some interesting questions. First off, what victory conditions do you normally play? The VC say the US needs to capture 6 of 7 2-story buildings, and then an SSR takes away all 2nd levels. And there are 14 buildings which could be 2 stories, although only 7 have inherent stairwells. An erratta appears in the 90 Annual indicating there are of course 11 2-story buildings...An article by Mark Nixon in the General reviewing indicated he counted 14 and ignored the 2 row houses and the one ablaze so we did that and said the US needed 6 of the 11 remaining buildings. Any opinions on the VC? The actual scenario turned into a German rout as the US rolled gusts for turn 2 and all the US precious cover disappeared. Shermans started roasting all over the battlefield as Panthers and Panzerfausts had a field day...Even the 20L AA guns claimed 2 Sherman victims... An interesting rules question came up during the roasting of the Shermans. A crew attacks a Sherman in CC and misses so he ends in melee. The Sherman preps at an AT gun and misses. In defensive fire, the AT gun destroys the tank. Should the tank get crew survival since the crew would be exiting into a melee? And if the US crew can exit shouldn't they be at some disadvantage in the melee? or is the German crew now not in melee (since they were going against the tank) and could take TPBF with a -2 modifier? My opponent conceded at this point since his infantry was in disarray and only 2 Shermans remained and neither of them should have survived another turn so we didn't bother looking it up... Thanks... Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ----- Subject: OVR TRIVIA From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 09:52:00 -0640 Howdy, > ASL Trivia: What vehicle or vehicle/passenger combination > has the highest OVR firepower and what is that firepower? Ok, here's my try: Nineteen heros armed with German LMGs as passengers on a LVT(4) with a twentieth hero as rider. FP calculation: 1 x 14 FP AAMGs x 3 / 2 = 21.0 19 x 3 FP LMGs x 3 / 4 = 42.75 1 x 1 FP hero x 3 / 4 = .75 1 x vehicle = 2.0 Total: = 66.5 Load a 10-3 leader too, just in case. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:44:46 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) I was reading an article on how armor works and how one uses armor in ASL Annual '93a last night, and they mentioned a tank "with MT". What does MT stand for? My ASLRB index fails me . . . . Tom Huntington ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 09:10:58 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Interdiction question Can a BU AFV whose MA is a CMG interdict within its TCA? (Think I get some kind of Acronym Density Award for this) Being BU makes it impossible for a weapon which has to make To Hit rolls to interdict, but a CMG doesn't make To Hit rolls. Tom ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 11:11:16 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: MT? B B B id AA04512; Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:44:46 -0600 Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:44:46 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) Message-Id: <9404211444.AA04512@cccc.cc.colorado.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 209 Apparently-To: asl@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov Status: R Tom Huntington sez: >I was reading an article on how armor works and how one uses armor in ASL >Annual '93a last night, and they mentioned a tank "with MT". What does >MT stand for? My ASLRB index fails me . . . . No ammunition (empty). Seriously, it is probably a misprint for 1MT (one man turret), or it could mean Multi-Turret. Don't have 93a with me, but I'll look and try to decipher it. M(at)T Brown ----- From: kinney@sage.cgd.ucar.EDU (Rodney Kinney) Subject: Re: ASL: AFV combat and tactics questions Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 9:12:44 MDT >Otherwise I'd chose something exotic like a large truck w/ >3x838and LMGs. That would pack a punch. Naw. Just pack the thing with 30 heroes. Of course, halved for mounted fire, you've only 15 FP, but the -30 probably makes up for it (-31 in Open Ground). Oops. Don't forget the 1 FP for an overrunning non-armored vehicle with no MA! rk ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:33:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: RULE NUMBER? JR: > Where is that rule that says an SMC is elite? I know it's > in there. It's the first sentence of A1.11. Brent ----- From: Neal Smith Subject: Re: your mail Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 11:54:11 -0400 (EDT) > > I was reading an article on how armor works and how one uses armor in ASL > Annual '93a last night, and they mentioned a tank "with MT". What does > MT stand for? My ASLRB index fails me . . . . I don't have 93a, but could it be "Multiple Turrets"? Later, Neal Smith ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 12:03:01 -0400 (EDT) From: James D Shetler Subject: General Howdy all, Just wondering if anyone has sighted the latest issue of the General? Impatient in Pittsburgh, Jim Shetler ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 09:38:14 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Beserk Question ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se Thu Apr 21 01:54:33 1994 From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Beserk Question To: Frederick.Timm@Eng (Fred Timm) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 10:53:50 +0200 (MET DST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 1058 Hi, [ About berserkers in the same hex as other units. ] Fred writes: > The situation above is one of the few cases where fire at a location effects > only some of the units in the location. When you fire at a location in CC > (not in Melee) only the enemy units are effected, not the friendly units in > the same location. Therefore this is not friendly fire. I don't have the rules > in front of me so I can't quote sections, but it is in section A and if you want > I can get it for you tomorrow. I am very suspicious about this one. When a small arms attack is made, you don't specify (you don't have the option to) a specific target in that location. Instead, _all_ of the units in the location is attacked (unless immune). Hence, since CC isn't excepted you can't attack the 838/447berz in the DFPh at all. For the record, I think this is bogus, and that you should be able to attack both units. That's just not what the rules say, I believe. -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- End Included Message ----- ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 12:41:23 EDT From: ut00894@volvo.com (Doug Maston) Subject: Military Men Who Play ASL Survey Hello, Here are the results of the Military Men Who Play ASL Survey. A total of 24 people responded. Out of a mailing list of 304, that comes out to 8% of the list membership that had some military (or alternative) service. I did not count people with ROTC or Military Academy time (that includes me - Missouri Military Academy, Mexico. MO). This did not change anyone's elligibility to be on the list. It just changed some service dates. If you served in an alternative service program (Peace Corps, U.N., etc), I certainly counted that. They were, and still are, honorable ways to serve one's country. On a personal note, I guess I'm a little sorry I took the survey. I feel like a Civil War Veteran. I think I'm the oldest guy on the list! (47) People who got specific may have noticed that I have grouped you according to Branch of Service. Therefore, if you were in armor, artillery, etc. you were grouped as Army. Below is the table of responses from each person. Note that the vast majority of respondents have infantry experience of some kind (I was USAF, but was an Air Commando so I had some limited infantry training). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Austria Army 88- 89 Reserves Robert Rydlo ryd@dc_szg.ems.co.at Belgium Army ??- ?? Reserves Alain Bogaert TSG70@btmv06.god.bel.alcatel.be Canada Army 89- 92 Veteran Gerry Shaw gshaw@ea.com Canada Army 05/88- Active Wayne Young YOUNGWR@KIRK.NORTHERNC.ON.CA Norway Air Force 06/90-06/91 Veteran Lars Olafsen larso@ifi.uio.no Sweden Army 06/88-01/90 Veteran Asad Rustum f90-ary@nada.kth.se Sweden Army (U.N.) 09/84-03/85 Veteran Mats Persson matsp@ida.liu.se U.S.A. Air Force 05/65/11/67 Veteran Doug Maston d-maston@volvo.com U.S.A. Army 01/83-12/89 Veteran Neal Smith sasrns@unx.sas.com U.S.A. Army 05/81-05/87 Veteran Dave Osborn osborn@cs.umn.edu U.S.A. Army 05/82-05/88 Veteran Neal Ulen nealu@raven.csrv.uidaho.edu U.S.A. Army 06/73-06/78 Veteran John Farris j.farris@genie.geis.com U.S.A. Army 07/89- Active Mark Milem markmilem@aol.com U.S.A. Army 09/70-09/73 Veteran Doug Loss loss@husky.bloomu.edu U.S.A. Army 09/82-07/88 Veteran John Appel jappel@access.digex.com U.S.A. Army 11/85- Reserve Michael Derry mad@guest.apple.com U.S.A. Army 12/81-12/87 Veteran Barry Grabow GARBOWBE@flgroups.fsd.jhaupl.edu U.S.A. Army 72- 79 Veteran Ray Wolsczyn r.woloszyn@genie.geis.com U.S.A. Navy 06/85-06/89 Veteran M. Samuels MSAMUELS@VAXC.STEVENS-TECH.EDU U.S.A. Navy 09/83-09/88 Veteran Carl Fago cdfl@psu.edu U.S.A. Marine Corps 78-Presnet Acvtive Dave Van Kan vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil U.S.A. Marine Corps 00/80-00/84 Veteran Waw Rosch WAWROSCH@delphi.com U.S.A. Marine Corps 06/74-06/76 Veteran Jon Whitworth jwhit@aries.wr.usgs.GOV U.S.A. Peace Corps 00/89-00/92 Veteran Stewart King stumo@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- From: slagblah@acs.bu.edu (Scott de) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: More Armor Questions Since there seems to be a theme, I thought I'd add a question of my own. Reading the rule book, it ssems to say that the J1 and J2 DFF penalties apply to any vehicle that moves that phase, whether it started in your LOS or not. Is this correct? It seems strange that a vehicle which has been sitting there for several turns and to which you have -2 Acquisition is so hard to hit when it first starts to move (beyond the +2 Case J penalty). The second question, is do the above penalties apply to a vehicle expending a start MP. My interpretation is no, as it has not entered a new hex. THis would mean that the best time to fire at a moving vehile is right when it starts up. "Oh no, Fritz, that tank is MOVING! Fire everything you can!" I think I must be doing something wrong because this just doesn't feel right. (The GoodVibes/BadVibes approach to ASL) Scott de Brestian ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 13:56:00 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Re: Beserk Question Fred Timm wrote: >>The situation above is one of the few cases where fire at a location effects >>only some of the units in the location. When you fire at a location in CC >>(not in Melee) only the enemy units are effected, not the friendly units in >>the same location. Therefore this is not friendly fire. I don't have the rules >>in front of me so I can't quote sections, but it is in section A and if you >>want I can get it for you tomorrow. Patrik Manlig writes (I think): > I am very suspicious about this one. When a small arms attack is made, > you don't specify (you don't have the option to) a specific target in that > location. Instead, _all_ of the units in the location is attacked (unless > immune). Hence, since CC isn't excepted you can't attack the 838/447berz > in the DFPh at all. > For the record, I think this is bogus, and that you should be able to > attack both units. That's just not what the rules say, I believe. Depends how you interpret A7.4 (1987). Last sentence says: A unit/weapon may purposefully attack a friendly unit(s) only if specifically allowed to by the rules governing a particular circumstance (e.g., Prisoners, Melee, OBA). Now, Mac knows what "purposefully" is supposed to mean, and there's that damned indistinct distinction between Melee and CC and CC location floating around again, but the fact is that firing on a friendly is explicitly defined for Melee but not for any of the CC situations. So I think Fred is correct here, as much as I dislike the interpretation, and wonder if it is an intentional or accidental distinction. Think of it this way: if a 'zerker or inf overrunner moves into the hex of one of your units, that unit can't fire outside the hex, but should your units be excluded from firing in, especially while the enemy is still moving? It is unfortunate that the phrase "in CC" and variants are used to mean both "in a CC (ie, pre-Melee) location" and "in the act of Close Combat, whether or not they are in Melee". We tend to throw them around here even more loosely than does the ASLRB, further confusing the issue. I wish the distinction did not meed to exist, but ambush and concealed units make that a tough one. I know that, should the opportunity arise, I would OBA the hex simply out of sheer contempt for A7.4 and A15.432. Trivia Phase: Name the situation where units can become locked in Melee prior to the beginning of the Game Turn 1 first player Close Combat Phase. Matt Brown ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 14:00:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Re: your mail How about motorized turret? Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA On Thu, 21 Apr 1994, Tom Huntington wrote: > I was reading an article on how armor works and how one uses armor in ASL > Annual '93a last night, and they mentioned a tank "with MT". What does > MT stand for? My ASLRB index fails me . . . . > > Tom Huntington ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: Beserk Question Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 11:48:23 PDT > Trivia Phase: Name the situation where units can become locked in Melee > prior to the beginning of the Game Turn 1 first player Close Combat Phase. > > Matt Brown Infantry OVR which fails to eliminate the SMC being overrun. -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 13:16:07 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: Beserk Question > >> Trivia Phase: Name the situation where units can become locked in Melee >>prior to the beginning of the Game Turn 1 first player Close Combat Phase. >> > > Infantry OVR which fails to eliminate the SMC being overrun. > Also, if the defender starts the game with unarmed units alone in a hex, the attacker can attempt to capture them in his MPh, and if unsuccessful, the units are placed in Melee. Yeah, sure, never has happened and never will, but it's a correct answer :-) Tom "10% younger than Dave" ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 13:31:33 -0600 (MDT) From: "Tim S. Hundsdorfer" Subject: RE: Beserk Question > > Trivia Phase: Name the situation where units can become locked in Melee > prior to the beginning of the Game Turn 1 first player Close Combat Phase. > > Matt Brown > How about a street-fighting attempt in DF? Generally, my units utterly fail their attack DR and are kept in Melee, free to be pummelled by enemy units. But, hey, at least they passed their PAATC. ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 09:44:10 -1000 From: pjonke@mano.soest.hawaii.edu (Patrick Jonke) Subject: Re: OVR TRIVIA >Nineteen heros armed with German LMGs as passengers on a >LVT(4) with a twentieth hero as rider. > Now this was a truly inspired answer! Brian, do we have some kind of ASL list awards?? +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Patrick Jonke School of Ocean and Earth Science & Technology Department of Marine Geology & Geophysics University of Hawaii at Manoa +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:45:10 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Melee Trivia (was Re: Beserk Question Doug Griffin sez: >> Trivia Phase: Name the situation where units can become locked in Melee >> prior to the beginning of the Game Turn 1 first player Close Combat Phase. >Infantry OVR which fails to eliminate the SMC being overrun. Correctamundo! Now, for extra credit, answer the philosophical question: Why can you Infantry OVR 1 SMC, but not 2 SMC? (Just think, dismount 2 heroes from the 30-hero Overrun Wagon, and it is Infantry OVR-proof!) Trivia 2 - the Sequel: My infantry unit can move into the location of, _and_ out of the location of, your MMC in the same phase. How can this be? Matt Brown ----- From: Ed Carter Subject: GEnie QA (RE: Beserk Q) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:10:44 CDT Guys, Here are some Q&A stuff that was posted on GEnie yesterday. Thought you might like to see it since some of it deals with questions that have come up recently. Ed Carter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here are my latest batch of ASL questions, back from AH (sent 12/13/93, received 4/12/94) with MAC'S ANSWERS . A7.4 -- If there are both friendly and enemy Infantry/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable PRC in a Location which are not yet in melee, may friendly units fire into that Location? YES. Does such fire affect units of both sides, or only enemy units? ONLY ENEMY UNITS. A10.8, D5.1 -- Does Fanaticism affect Inherent crews? NO. A11.4, A21.2 -- When Infantry advance into a woods/building Location containing an Abandoned enemy AFV, is Ambush possible? NO. A11.622 -- Do Armor Leader or Stun DRM apply to a sN attack? Do any other DRM apply to a sN attack? NO TO ALL. All.7 -- Is a Melee considered to exist following an inconclusive CC between Infantry and an AFV in Motion, for purposes of subsequent Ambush, Withdrawal, fire into the Location, etc? NO. If an AFV in Motion is immobilized in a subsequent Player Turn after inconclusive CC with Infantry, while still in the same Location as the Infantry, does it immediately hold the Infantry in Melee? NO. A12.33, A12.34 -- May a Scenario Defender make pre-game LOS checks floolwing all setup to determine which Locations the Scenario Attacker must enter with Good Order units to forceloss of HIP to Fortifications/Guns, rather than waiting until an ensuing Movement Phase to make those secret LOS checks? NO. A26.21 -- Who scores Victory Points for a vehicle/Gun which is captured and then destroyed by the original owning player? THE PLAYER WHO CAPTURED IT. Are victory points doubled in this case? NO. B21.41 -- Is fording considered Hazardous Movement only during Defensive First Fire, or is fording Infantry always subject to the Hazardous Movement DRM? Is fording considered a Concealment-loss ativity only during the movement phase, or at all times? ALWAYS, IN BOTH CASES. B29.2 -- Is LOS to a roadblock hexside Hindered by Hindrances in the adjacent road hex for HIP-loss purposes? YES. Must LOS to a roadblock extension be considered in determining HIP-loss? NO. In determining whether a Narrow Street roadblock (P5.141) loses HIP, must LOS be considered to every point on the line between the center dots of the two hexes? NO -- THE LOS MUST BE DRAWN TO BOTH VERTICES OF THE HEXSIDE STRADDLED. C4.4, C9.2, C12.1, C13.42, C13.46 -- Does the +2 TH# modifier for firing SMOKE apply to a light mortar firing SMOKE, or to a US RCL or BAZ45 firing WP? IN C4.4, CHANGE "A GUN FIRING" TO "ORDNANCE USING THE C3 TH TABLE." C8.4, E1.101 -- If the NVR is < 3, does Canister fire attack/leave Residual FP in Locations which are out of the firer's LOS solely because they are beyond NVR? YES. D2.51 -- May a player make a Mechanical Reliability DR with a Concealed vehicle which is immune to Mechanical Reliability Immobilization/Stalling or a 5/8" Dummy stack, in order to provide misleading information about his OB to his opponent? NO. D5.1, D6.631 -- May a vehicle whose crew Abandons it and Removes all armament retain an inherent driver, or is this only allowed when explicitly permitted by vehicle notes (EX German vehicle note 59). THE LATTER. P84 CG5 -- May an on-map Cloaked non-dm SW be fired on the Player Turn it loses Cloaked status, or is it restricted by E1.42? E1.42 APPLIES. P8.6053 -- Which player initially Controls Strategic Locations which are in nither player's initial setup area? NEITHER PLAYER. DELETE THE SECOND SENTENCE OF P8.6053. P8.6204 -- When an M2 mortar is traded for a 60mm OBA modula may any HS Retained in the same Setup Area be eliminanted, or must a HS of the mortar's original RG be eliminated? ANY HS RETAINED IN THE SAME SETUP AREA. SSR KGP7 -- May a vehicle move off-road in a Single-Lane Road/woods hex? YES. May a vehicle change its VCA to two non-road hexsides in such a hex by making a Bog check? YES, BUT IT MUST ALSO EXPEND THE MP TO ENTER THE WOODS. Is vehicular entry by road of StKK26 from the East prohibited by B6.431, because a vehicle would be unable to enter the hex with a road hexside in its VCA (except by reverse movement)? NO BECAUSE IT COULD ENTER THE HEX WITH STJJ26 IN IT'S VCA (I.E. WITH THE VEHICLE FACING DUE WEST). [Stuff deleted] I hope that some of this stuff is helpful to somebody. Kiri Naiman ------------ ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 16:29:04 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Re: No General (and more trivia) Paul Blankenship wrote: >Thought I got the General today, but my wife now tells me it's >Challange magazine from GDW that I got, don't even subscribe to that >though... Some guys have all the luck. Even my 10-year old son gets the Fredierick's of Hollywood swimsuit catalogs, not me. Back to the trivia. Name two instances where good order units are not subject to Pinning or LLMC. Matt Brown ----- Date: 21 Apr 1994 16:43:08 -0500 From: "William Cirillo" Subject: Night Article? Subject: Time:3:42 PM OFFICE MEMO Night Article? Date:4/21/94 Group, I think I missed something (again). What "Night Article" by Jonathan Vanmechelen is Asad talking about? Bill Cirillo w.m.cirillo@larc.nasa.gov ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: Melee Trivia (was Re: Beserk Question Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 13:49:29 PDT > Trivia 2 - the Sequel: My infantry unit can move into the location of, _and_ > out of the location of, your MMC in the same phase. How can this be? > > Matt Brown Ooh, a toughie! Let's see... I've got a Japanese Stealthy squad hidden in some Jungle and you're routing through. I'm waiting for juicier targets, so I don't give up my hidden status. Somehow I don't think this is what you're looking for, but it works, and I can't imagine what (unless you're counting a situation where the SMC vacates the hex in response to the Infantry OVR). -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 13:54:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Neal Ulen Subject: Re: No General after all On Thu, 21 Apr 1994 pabl@im.se wrote: > Hi All. > > Thought I got the General today, but my wife now tells me it's > Challange magazine from GDW that I got, don't even subscribe to that > though... > > > sorry bout the mixup > Paul Blankenship > pabl@im.se > Man, get my hopes up!! And them dash them! :-( When I read the original mailing, I quickly called home to have the old wifey-pooh check the mail...no General. Damn...those guys on the mailing list are making this crap up!! :-) Neal E. Ulen (nealu@raven.csrv.uidaho.edu) ----- Subject: Interdiction question From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:32:00 -0640 Howdy, tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) writes: >Can a BU AFV whose MA is a CMG interdict within its TCA? >Being BU makes it impossible for a weapon which has to make >To Hit rolls to interdict, but a CMG doesn't make To Hit >rolls. Being BU prevents interdiction by an Ordnance-armed vehicle because of the +1 DRM on the TH chart. By D5.2, this DRM does not apply to non-Ordnance so in general such a vehicle will be able to interdict. A BU vehicle with Ordnance which had an IFE would also be able to interdict because IFE is not penalized for being BU. A BU open-top vehicle couldn't interdict, however, because it couldn't fire a CMG, MA or not (D5.2). So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- From: dade_cariaga@rainbow.mentorg.com (Dade Cariaga) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 13:59:17 -0700 Subject: Re: Melee Trivia (was Re: Beserk Question On Apr 21, 3:45pm, Matthew E. Brown wrote: > > Trivia 2 - the Sequel: My infantry unit can move into the location of, _and_ > out of the location of, your MMC in the same phase. How can this be? My infantry unit is HIP in a dense jungle hex and does not hinder your movement by firing. Dade ----- From: dade_cariaga@rainbow.mentorg.com (Dade Cariaga) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 14:32:04 -0700 Subject: Re: No General (and more trivia) On Apr 21, 4:29pm, Matthew E. Brown wrote: > Back to the trivia. Name two instances where good order units are not > subject to Pinning or LLMC. Human Wave/Banzai and Charging Cavalry. Dade > > Matt Brown > >-- End of excerpt from Matthew E. Brown ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 18:11:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Re: No General after all I haven't gotten mine either -- but I *did* find my old '90 annual that I thought I (a) lost or loaned away, or (b) never had in the first place. Given my propensity to forgetfulness, I got to read it all over again just like it was new. I think I've been eating too many potatos lately. Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:40:29 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Trivia Question With all of the talk of Heros with LMG's: 1. How many Heros can a German HT (15 PP type) carry? 2. How many Heros each with an LMG (1 PP type) can a German HT (15 PP type) carry? Fred ----- Subject: Re: Melee Trivia (was Re: Beserk Question Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 19:15:49 -0400 From: strzelin@bnlku9.phy.bnl.gov > Trivia 2 - the Sequel: My infantry unit can move into the location of, _and_ > out of the location of, your MMC in the same phase. How can this be? My MMC is (as is usually the case) disrupted. -- Bob Strzelinski ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 16:50:15 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: Baz 45 Yo! djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca! I hear ya! d> d> What do you all think about the Baz 45 and its ability to place d> WP. Does it get the +2 which all other weapons get for firing d> smoke at a range of 0-12 hexes on the C3 to hit table??? d> d> Darren Gour I don't know the answer to this, but I have a related question: in order to place WP with the BAZ 45, do you still have to target a building or wall (like BAZ's regular HEAT)? -Grant. ... Blessed are the meek, for they make great scapegoats. -== IceIQle v1.7 ==- ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 19:36:42 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: Re: No General (and more trivia) On Apr 21, 4:29pm, Matthew E. Brown wrote: > Back to the trivia. Name two instances where good order units are not > subject to Pinning or LLMC. Well, a BU AFV is a good order unit and isn't subject to pinning or LLMC. The other could be an already pinned unit that has a higher or equal morale to any leader in its Location. ----- Subject: Re: No General (and more trivia) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 01:49:57 +0200 From: Asad Rustum > On Apr 21, 4:29pm, Matthew E. Brown wrote: > > Back to the trivia. Name two instances where good order units are not > > subject to Pinning or LLMC. > Well, a BU AFV is a good order unit and isn't subject to pinning or LLMC. > The other could be an already pinned unit that has a higher or equal morale > to any leader in its Location. Infantry in boats aren't subject to PIN results nor LLMC/TC. Cavalry, horses and paratroops (while still represented by parachute counters) aren't either subject to PIN or LLMC/TC, and while still on the subject, HoB. +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Asad Rustum 'Oh Lord won't you buy me f90-aru@nada.kth.se a Mercedes Benz...' atomic@astrakan.hgs.se Janis Joplin ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 20:54:28 -0400 (EDT) From: LANCELEU@delphi.com Subject: CMG interdiction =DB=A5-=0Ep=08 Can a BU AFV whose MA is a CMG interdict within its TCA? (Think I get some kind of Acronym Density Award for this) Being BU makes it impossible for a weapon which has to make To Hit ro= lls to=20 interdict, but a CMG doesn't make To Hit rolls.=20 c=FD=C5)PU=19a=FD=C5=0C{=0F=E0{,Mw(=0B=0F=0C{=FAq=14=87=08=14_H8|= =F9@=0B=14=87=B0=08=0F=14V=D1=03=14V,=13=B9 =14X =11z=CE=19=14V(=14V =11z=FAY=14=85=08=14_H8|=F9@=0B=14=85=B0=08=11=14X=CE=03=14X.J=1B =97=0E=B9=10H=B9 H =B8=09`+`0H'=B1=C2=FE=09=DD=8C=D8=90=9A=09=08 Can a BU AFV whose MA is a CMG interdict within its TCA? (Think I get some kind of Acronym Density Award for this) Being=80=01=80=01 ----- From: p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 23:46:00 UTC Subject: berserk question, Tom, Until Melee exists, the defending unit is immune to fire by its own side. It will royut out of the hex as it is broken, and there is only a CC on the stack, not a Melee. Same principle with Banzai and Human wave, you can First fire, and you can Final Fire into the hex where your own units are and only hit the other side (unless you take an Area shot, or use a DC) Phil ----- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 22:20:26 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Funny Rout Question, and 45 BAZ Answer Hi guys, This one just popped up in AGWAV. A wounded, CX 8-0 carrying 2 LMG's is stacked with a DM 458 in a building hex (3T6 for those with a map handy). These units would like to rout to 3R7. This is the closest woods/building hex in MF, ignoring hexes of its own building. It's 3 MF away. The leader would first like to drop his 2 LMG's. This appears to be legal by "_may_ portage it" in A10.711. Then he has either 2 or 3 MF left, depending on whether his CX status can reduce his IPC from 0 to -1. A17.3 says "A wounded man ... has no IPC." (Gee, what happens if Denisova is wounded?) "No" means zero, but can it be reduced to -1, or does it stick to zero? If the leader has a -1 IPC and can thus move only 2 MF, leaving him one hex short, then can he rout with the squad at all without Low Crawling? The squad _must_ go for the nearest woods/building, but the leader can't make it that far, but they have to stay together for the whole RtPh. Confusion reigns. Of course, they can always just Low Crawl or even choose not to rout at all, but I'd like to get some feedback on this one. The rout rules are such a joy. (Why do they say "Known unit in its LOS" when "in its LOS" is part of the definition of "Known," except to confuse me?) Dave Ripton P.S. On the 45a BAZ question: The building/wall/rubble/pillbox restriction applies to HEAT ammo, by C8.31, and a BAZ can fire WP at any target. By C13.42, "Firer (C5) and Target (C6) Hit Determination DRM applicable to LATW apply." By ommission from this rule and of the "L" symbol on the C4 table, I'd say that the C4 DRM, including +2 for SMOKE, do not apply to LATW. ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Funny Rout Question, and 45 BAZ Answer Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 12:50:53 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, I'll just add what I found when looking at the rules last night to Dave's question. > The leader would first like to drop his 2 LMG's. This appears to > be legal by "_may_ portage it" in A10.711. First of all, I think that "may" can mean other things as well. It can mean that a leader can rout _even_ if he has a SW as well. What I was thinking of was when you can drop posession of a SW. I unfortunately don't remember the rule number, but you can't do that in the RtPh unless you're broken. This comes from A4.xx which says you can drop posession in the MPh, APh, RPh (I think) and under certain circumstances in the RtPh. The rule then goes on to refer to when a _broken_ unit must/can/cannot drop posession of a SW. > Then he has either > 2 or 3 MF left, depending on whether his CX status can reduce his > IPC from 0 to -1. A17.3 says "A wounded man ... has no IPC." > (Gee, what happens if Denisova is wounded?) "No" means zero, > but can it be reduced to -1, or does it stick to zero? The IPC has been addressed by a Q&A in the 93b annual. Wounded means IPC=0, and since a negative IPC isn't prohibited I don't see why it would be. > If the leader has a -1 IPC and can thus move only 2 MF, leaving him > one hex short, then can he rout with the squad at all without > Low Crawling? The squad _must_ go for the nearest woods/building, > but the leader can't make it that far, but they have to stay > together for the whole RtPh. Confusion reigns. They could all Low Crawl, of course, but I don't think they can leave the leader after routing only one hex. -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: jd@susq.com (Jim Doughan) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 08:31:33 EDT Subject: TAHGC Does anyone know if TAHGC has an e-mail address? Thanks Jim ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 09:18:19 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Trivia'ed out I won't ask any more trivia questions, at least for a while. Promise. So when is ASL Trivial Pursuit coming out? One last thing: > > Back to the trivia. Name two instances where good order units are not > > subject to Pinning or LLMC. I was amazed by some of the answers, and as usual, by the ability of folks on the list to twist my innocent question to their own diabolical ends. Fanatic Pack Mules Banzai Parachuting, indeed! But so far, no one has come up with 1 of the 4 I was thinking of: Swimmers. This is well and good. I can take my time on my latest scenario design, "Swim the Channel" and not worry about some one coming out with a swimming scenario before me. That Board 25 Ski Jump scenario looked good, but I never could get an answer from the Hill on the MF for skiing off a double crest into a wadi. Matt (FPM-BP) Brown ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 09:59:36 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: TAHGC In message Fri, 22 Apr 94 08:31:33 EDT, jd@susq.com (Jim Doughan) writes: > Does anyone know if TAHGC has an e-mail address? Yes, through GEnie, AOL or Compuserve. The latter two I can send at the end of the day. The latter is... avalon.hill@genie.geis.com (for board games) avalon.hill2@genie.geis.com (for computer games) Hope this helps. *-=Carl=-* ----- Subject: More Armor Questions From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 09:37:00 -0640 Howdy, slagblah@acs.bu.edu (Scott de) writes: > Reading the rule book, it ssems to say that the J1 and J2 > DFF penalties apply to any vehicle that moves that phase, > whether it started in your LOS or not. Is this correct? It > seems strange that a vehicle which has been sitting there > for several turns and to which you have -2 Acquisition is > so hard to hit when it first starts to move (beyond the +2 > Case J penalty). You have missed C6.15: "A target that begins its MPh ... in the firer's LOS is unaffected by these Cases until it is out of that LOS after entering a new Location/vertex." As you note it would be that the first part of the MPh would be penalized. The target has to leave LOS before J1 & J2 can affect the shot. > The second question, is do the above penalties apply to a > vehicle expending a start MP. My interpretation is no, as > it has not entered a new hex. THis would mean that the best > time to fire at a moving vehile is right when it starts up. None of the Case J Motion penalties apply on a DFF shot on a tank expending a Start MP if it began the turn stopped and has not yet moved (see C.8, C6.1 for all the gory details). If the vehicle entered a new hex, stopped, then expended a Start MP, Case J would be applicable at that point. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 10:49 EDT From: Dan Sullivan Subject: Beserk question: follow up Hey guys, Thanks for all the responses to the berserk question, but I have a question about a couple of the replies. A few people flat out said the beserk units can not use dash movement. The rules are kind of fuzzy on that issue. I can't find any rule that states flat out the bersek unit can't dash. The rules imply that the bersek unit has to spend all of it movment to try to reach the closest unit. This usually means that the beserk unit can not use dash movement., but there are rare cases when the nearest unit is directly across the street. In the dash rule it says "unless if becomes pinned, broken or berserk in the road location, in which case Dash benifits immediatly cease." This would mean that the beserk unit is now free to charge the nearst unit with all its movement and is not limited to dash. Can anybody provide any pointers to rules I missed that might clear this up ? -------------- djsullivan@bbn.com dan sullivan ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 11:20 EDT From: Dan Sullivan Subject: Stupid LOS Question that I'm very confused about a the moment. Hey Gang, Here is a stupid LOS question that I should know by now but somehow has me really confused at the momement. Reading throught the legalese about LOS it I found: A6.2 "LOS extend into or out fo obstacles, but not through them into hexes beyond the obstacle except in case where the fire/target is at an elevation >= the height of the obstacle" "Ex. Woods are a level 1 obst. to LOS. .... The target would have to at an eleveation > then the top of the obstacle to posibly establish an LOS to a ground level hex beyond that obstacle" Which is it ">" (in the example) of ">=" in the rule? If a multi-story building was siting next to woods or an orchard in season what level clears the obstacle? Level 1 by the rules? or Level 2 by the example ? -------------- djsullivan@bbn.com dan sullivan ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 17:17:33 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: Beserk question: follow up Dan Sullivan writes: > A few people flat out said the beserk units can not use dash > movement. The rules are kind of fuzzy on that issue. I can't > find any rule that states flat out the bersek unit can't dash. They were wrong: A4.63 & A15.43 Can a Berserk unit use a Dash move to enter an enemy occupied hex? A. Yes - provided it meets all the requirements for both Dash and Berserk movement. {89} Bas. ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 09:34:29 PDT From: will@kafka.saic.com (Will Scarvie x6388) Subject: Factory Hindrance question Hi folks, I was reading the Factory rules last night (setting up to play Tractor Works solo, time permitting) and noticed something odd. The rules mention the reduction of the TEM to +1 for fire between (and within) Factory hexes, but then the example counts another +1 Hindrance apparently for each Factory hex the fire goes through (the German using defensive firing against the moving Russian unit). So is there a +1 Hindrance per Factory hex for these kinds of shots or not? Just thought of something...I bet this is on the Terrain Chart. Duh. I don't have it with me though. Can someone check and let me know? Thanks, Will Scarvie will@kafka.saic.com ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 12:04:03 CDT From: Andrew McCulloh Subject: How many hero's could a half track pack if a half track could... The key thing here is to remember that you get four hero's for free! So a 15 pp ht could carry 19. The other question has a few answers - mostly depending on what ratio of lmgs to heros you want. Assuming 1 lmg / hero (duh!) nine heros to 10 lmgs is probably an optimal fill. The other possiblities to completely fill the ht - given that heros are 'quantized' in groups of 5n + 4 are: 4 heros, 15 lmgs 9 and 10 as above 14 heros and 5 lmgs 19 heros and 0 lmgs The group with the highest fire power - assuming were talking germans here - would be the 9 and 10 w/ 27 fp - then 14 and 5 w/ 24 (but this is -9) so it is actually probably better! Oh what fun it is to ride in an ot psw. Andrew ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 13:34 EDT From: Dan Sullivan Subject: Factory Hindrance question Will Scarvie writes > > So is there a +1 Hindrance per Factory hex for these kinds of shots or not? Its +1 per hex. B23.741 " although each such hex a LOS is traced through ia Hinderence to the LOS." ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 11:38:00 -0400 From: "mark (m.a.) turnbull" Subject: re:Beserk question: follow up Hi Dan! > A few people flat out said the beserk units can not use dash movement. > The rules are kind of fuzzy on that issue. I can't find any rule that > states flat out the bersek unit can't dash. >From the Q&A: A4.63 & A15.43 Can a Berserk unit use a Dash move to enter an enemy occupied hex? A. Yes - provided it meets all the requirements for both Dash and Berserk movement. {89} > The rules imply that the bersek unit has to spend all of it movment to > try to reach the closest unit. This usually means that the beserk unit > can not use dash movement., but there are rare cases when the nearest unit > is directly across the street. A berserk unit has to use the the least expensive route to its target, including the use of bypass. This rule prevents berserk units sneaking up through buildings, trenches etc. I don't believe that DASH is any more expensive than other movement. Mark ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 13:50:00 -0400 From: "mark (m.a.) turnbull" Subject: re:Stupid LOS Question that I'm very confused about a the moment. > Here is a stupid LOS question that I should know by now but somehow has > me really confused at the momement. > > Reading throught the legalese about LOS it I found: > > A6.2 "LOS extend into or out fo obstacles, but not through them into > hexes beyond the obstacle except in case where the fire/target > is at an elevation >= the height of the obstacle" > > "Ex. Woods are a level 1 obst. to LOS. .... The target would > have to at an eleveation > then the top of the obstacle > to posibly establish an LOS to a ground level hex beyond > that obstacle" > > Which is it ">" (in the example) of ">=" in the rule? > > If a multi-story building was siting next to woods or an orchard in season > what level clears the obstacle? Level 1 by the rules? or Level 2 by the > example ? Being at level 1 would allow LOS over the woods to other level 1 or higher locations. To establish LOS to ground level (level 0 normally), you would have to be at level 2 or higher - but watch out for blind hexes. Mark ----- Subject: Re: Factory Hindrance question Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 14:06:08 -0400 From: strzelin@bnlku9.phy.bnl.gov > I was reading the Factory rules last night (setting up to play Tractor > Works solo, time permitting) and noticed something odd. The rules mention > the reduction of the TEM to +1 for fire between (and within) Factory hexes, > but then the example counts another +1 Hindrance apparently for each Factory > hex the fire goes through (the German using defensive firing against the > moving Russian unit). So is there a +1 Hindrance per Factory hex for these > kinds of shots or not? Just played this scenario (solo) - it used to be one of my favorite SL scenarios and I wanted to see how it worked with ASL. Well, it seems to be MUCH harder for the Germans now, due to the new factory TEM/hindrance rules. My interpreta- tion of the factory rules are that TEM is +1 for any LOS traced strictly within the factory and a +1 hindrance for every factory hex between the firer and target. Hmmm, this brings up another question. My strategy was to attempt to _set_ a DC and rubble one of the outer factory hexes to open a LOS into the interior hexes for a German killer MG stack in the 2nd level of a nearby bldg. Didn't work - none of my assault engineers lived long enough to _set_ (as opposed to _place_) a DC once they got into the factory - but if it had worked, what would be the TEM of the interior factory hex for fire from that other building? I guess by the rules it would be +3 since the LOS is not traced entirely inside the factory - even though it is now traced through (over, actually) rubble rather than an exterior factory wall (+1 for each inter- vening non-rubble factory hex). Now that I add up those DRMs, blowing the wall open hardly seems worth the effort. My thinking at the time was that the exterior wall of the factory conveyed the +3 and eliminating it would drop the TEM to +1, letting my MG gunners ream the Russians from their pro- tected positions across the street. I still think that makes more sense, but that's not the way the rules read. Oh well. -- Bob Strzelinski ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 14:11:00 -0400 From: Doug.Williamson@DL-NOTES.SMTRW.LANGATE.sprint.com Subject: RE: Stupid LOS Question that I'm very confused about a... Subject: RE: Stupid LOS Question that I'm very confused about a the mome dan sullivan wrote: >Reading throught the legalese about LOS it I found: >A6.2 "LOS extend into or out fo obstacles, but not through them into >hexes beyond the obstacle except in case where the fire/target >is at an elevation >= the height of the obstacle" >"Ex. Woods are a level 1 obst. to LOS. .... The target would >have to at an eleveation > then the top of the obstacle >to posibly establish an LOS to a ground level hex beyond >that obstacle" >Which is it ">" (in the example) of ">=" in the rule? And the answer is... BOTH! You must be >= to see past the obstacle to a SAME OR HIGHER location and > to see past the obstacle to a LOWER location. >If a multi-story building was siting next to woods or an orchard in season what level clears the >obstacle? Level 1 by the rules? or Level 2 by the example ? Level 1 would allow you to see other Level 1 or higher locations. Level 2 if you every wanted to see Level 0 or lower. Doug Williamson ----- From: dade_cariaga@rainbow.mentorg.com (Dade Cariaga) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 11:29:55 -0700 Subject: Advancing into a CC Location This talk about CC locations got me to thinking (steady there!): For purposes of example, suppose I have a 467 in a building location with a berserk Russian 628. Further, suppose that the location is CC (rather than Melee). Now, if other Russian units ADVANCE into that location before it becomes a Melee: 1) Is there an ambush roll? (I think the answer is "yes" but I'm not sure.) 2) Do the ambush results apply to ALL the Russian units, or just those that ADVANCE into the location? 3) If the results only apply to ADVANCING units, how the HELL do you resolve the close combat attacks? Dade ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 11:40:12 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Advancing into a CC Location > This talk about CC locations got me to thinking (steady there!): > > For purposes of example, suppose I have a 467 in a building location with a > berserk Russian 628. Further, suppose that the location is CC (rather than > Melee). Now, if other Russian units ADVANCE into that location before it > becomes a Melee: > > 1) Is there an ambush roll? > (I think the answer is "yes" but I'm not sure.) Yes since someone is advancing into the hex, reguardless of who is already there. > > 2) Do the ambush results apply to ALL the Russian units, or just those > that ADVANCE into the location? Ambush results apply to all units in the location. > > 3) If the results only apply to ADVANCING units, how the HELL do you > resolve the close combat attacks? N/A. > > Dade > Fred ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 11:42:37 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: How many hero's could a half track pack if a half track could... > > The key thing here is to remember that you get four hero's for free! > > So a 15 pp ht could carry 19. This is not correct. I could carry more. > > The other question has a few answers - mostly depending on what > ratio of lmgs to heros you want. Assuming 1 lmg / hero (duh!) Yes, I mean 1 LMG / Hero. Again 9 is too few. > nine heros to 10 lmgs is probably an optimal fill. The other possiblities > to completely fill the ht - given that heros are 'quantized' in groups > of 5n + 4 are: > 4 heros, 15 lmgs > 9 and 10 as above > 14 heros and 5 lmgs > 19 heros and 0 lmgs > > The group with the highest fire power - assuming were talking germans here - > would be the 9 and 10 w/ 27 fp - then 14 and 5 w/ 24 (but this is -9) so > it is actually probably better! > > Oh what fun it is to ride in an ot psw. > > Andrew > ----- Subject: OBA OBSERVERS From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 10:26:00 -0640 Howdy, On Ole's question on OBA: I think you found a bug in the rules. I would appreciate if people could check what I understand the OBA Observer rules to say and see if it is correct. As a reward to those who make it through, there is a little "observation" of my own at the end: An Observer makes radio contact, gets Battery Access, and calls down a SR. He has an LOS to the Blast Height and likes where the SR is, but doesn't want to convert it to an FFE yet, so next Artillery phase he doesn't roll for Radio Contact (this is slightly advantageous because the Radio won't break). According to C1.22, failing to roll when the SR is in LOS is not "voluntary loss of contact" and so the fire mission is not cancelled. According to the 93a Annual, the SR just sits where it is and remains in place indefinitely. As I understand it, the Leader can now direct attacks, move, and perform nearly every other action (except Voluntary Rout, per C1.6) without voluntarily losing contact, unless he moves out of LOS of the SR. Several turns later the Observer is attacked and breaks. He Routs to a hex that still has an LOS to the SR. According to C1.61, an Observer loses Radio Contact when he breaks if he had it, but the Fire Mission is not cancelled and so the SR remains where it is. The Observer Routs again, but this time to a hex without LOS to the SR. If he does not rally during the RPh, or if he does but fails his radio contact DR, he is now guilty of "voluntary" loss of contact and the fire mission is cancelled. My major difficulty, I think, is that Voluntary Loss of Contact is frequently not very voluntary and that what is colloquially termed "voluntary" loss of contact, not rolling for Radio Contact even if you could, does not result in Voluntary Loss of Contact. There are two situations where I think it is "voluntary", those being failing to roll when the SR is out of LOS and accompanying a broken unit in a Voluntary Rout (C1.6). Trivia: the numbers on the Observer in the picture following C1.62 ('89) are printed upside down. He is a 0-8 leader. Great for attacking but doesn't stay very long! So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 12:57:58 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) Hey! Flying fingers deleted the article with FAQ from GEnie that got posted last night or this morning. Would someone who DID save them please send me a copy? Thanks in advance, Tom Huntington ----- From: kinney@sage.cgd.ucar.EDU (Rodney Kinney) Subject: OBA OBSERVERS: voluntary chaos Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 13:57:17 MDT >From: Jonathan Vanmechelen > >According to C1.22, failing to roll when the >SR is in LOS is not "voluntary loss of contact" and so the >fire mission is not cancelled. According to the 93a >Annual, the SR just sits where it is and remains in place >indefinitely. Hold it! Indefinitely? My paraphrased memory of C1.22 reads: "Involuntary loss of contact does not result in automatic loss of Battery Access, but failure to regain contact at the next opportunity will result in immediate cancellation of the Fire Mission." If the 93a Annual has a "clarification" that contradicts this, I've got to hear it. Of course, if there is such a citation, I'll be only too happy to ignore it and play the way I've always played, complaining all the while about AH's policy of using the Errata as a forum for introducing hastily conceived and ill-tested rules changes. rk ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 16:23:52 -0500 (EST) From: SMITDV@UCBEH.SAN.UC.EDU Subject: KGP1 result and questions Greetings. Here are a few questions which cropped up during the first campaign scenario in our playing of KGP1. We are trying to find ways of speeding up play, and have decided not to research rules when a question arises. There are four of us. We each decide what seems most reasonable to each person, then vote. In the case of a tie, a dr is made to determine which interpretation will be used for the remainder of that scenario. The question is written, and the list of questions researched at a later date. This helps a lot in terms of speeding up the game. There are no extended periods of someone looking up a rule they think they rememnber but cannot find. In our first day, the Germans advanced up to the sanitorium and surrounded the village of Stoumont. Americans took 74 casualty points while the Germans took 35. Unfortunately (can you tell which side I am playing) the Germans were unable to fulfill either victory condition. The German force, however, is pretty much intact. Most losses were in armour (A PzV in armoured assault with an 8-3-8 with DC) was blown away by a suddenly revealed HMG nest and the 90L. Ouch! Two PzIVs were hit and destroyed by guns as well. However, The entire American front in the woods on the hill was obliterated, leaving several small pockets of unorganized Americans in the woods, and about a company stranded in Stoumont. As the Panthers raced for the Sanitorium, little stood in their way. The final assault on the final turn faltered however, as the Americans succeeded in pinning the only units capable of entering the building. Interesting weather accompanied the assault, as more than enough increases in mist density brought the mist level to maximum, and then it began to rain! We do have a couple of questions which we were unable to reconcile afterwards. If anyone could answer or make suggestions about any of these it would be appreciated. 1) An infantry unit DFFs on an enemy vehicle in its hex. It has no SW capable of affecting an AFV, and therefore uses CC reaction fire. Does one put a CC counter on top of that unit? What combat options, if any, remain for that unit? 2) Can one acquire a hex when firing Ordnance smoke at a target? 3) A19.12 states that Crews and non 6+1 leaders disrupt only by Heat of Battle. Rule A15.1 states that crews are not subject to Heat of Battle. Does A19.12 supercede A15.5 because it is a later rule, or does A15.5 carry the day because it is stated so succinctly? Or is this an error in the rules? Enough bandwidth Regards DavidB Smith ----- Subject: Some questions Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 15:31:22 -0700 From: Steven Lin What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location with a hidden friendly unit? Is the friendly unit revealed, placed on the board as concealed, or not revealed? Must the friendly unit engage in CC? If not, can the friendly unit fire at the enemy unit in its turn (PFPh, AFPh) using TPBF? Does TEM apply? The rules for Booby Traps indicate that a trap is triggered whenever a TC exceeds a certain number depending on the Booby Trap level. Is a MC considered a TC for purposes of setting up Booby Traps? Steve ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 19:58:48 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: Re: Funny Rout Question In message Fri, 22 Apr 1994 12:50:53 +0200 (MET DST), Patrik Manlig writes: >> The leader would first like to drop his 2 LMG's. This appears to >> be legal by "_may_ portage it" in A10.711. > > First of all, I think that "may" can mean other things as well. It > can mean that a leader can rout _even_ if he has a SW as well. True, but, while reading A10.5 in research of this, "may" is consistently being used as an option not a requirement. Tough call. But then, dropping the SW isn't listed as an option either. > What I was thinking of was when you can drop posession of a SW. I > unfortunately don't remember the rule number, but you can't do that > in the RtPh unless you're broken. This comes from A4.xx which says > you can drop posession in the MPh, APh, RPh (I think) and under > certain circumstances in the RtPh. The rule then goes on to refer > to when a _broken_ unit must/can/cannot drop posession of a SW. > >> Then he has either >> 2 or 3 MF left, depending on whether his CX status can reduce his >> IPC from 0 to -1. A17.3 says "A wounded man ... has no IPC." >> (Gee, what happens if Denisova is wounded?) "No" means zero, >> but can it be reduced to -1, or does it stick to zero? > > The IPC has been addressed by a Q&A in the 93b annual. Wounded means > IPC=0, and since a negative IPC isn't prohibited I don't see why it > would be. Negative IPC has no bearing when the guy isn't carrying anything. CX wouldn't reduce his MF to 2. This is because, by A4.4 only reduces MF as a result of portaging something, not a reduction in MF based solely on IPC. ----- Subject: KGP1 result and questions From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 19:14:00 -0640 Howdy, SMITDV@UCBEH.SAN.UC.EDU writes: > 1) An infantry unit DFFs on an enemy vehicle in its hex. It > has no SW capable of affecting an AFV, and therefore uses > CC reaction fire. Does one put a CC counter on top of that > unit? What combat options, if any, remain for that unit? D7.21 ('89) "CC REACTION FIRE: After completing its attack, that DEFENDER and all of its possessed SW (including those Inherent) and Guns are marked with with a CC counter, and also with a First or Final Fire counter as apporpriate for that attack." The CC marker indicates that the unit is not in Melee, so it has all its usual DFF options. If the ATTACKER moves out, it can fire at other moving units by SFF, for example. It may also be able to attack other units even if the vehicle remains if, to make up an unusual example, a moving unit turns berserk and enters its hex. > 2) Can one acquire a hex when firing Ordnance smoke at a > target? C6.56 ('89) "SMOKE: A target cannot be acquired (or Acquisition maintained) by firing SMOKE. However, an existing Acquisition DRM can be used to place the initial SMOKE counter in the hex." > 3) A19.12 states that Crews and non 6+1 leaders disrupt only > by Heat of Battle. > > Rule A15.1 states that crews are not subject to Heat of > Battle. Does A19.12 supercede A15.5 because it is a later > rule, or does A15.5 carry the day because >From the Q&A: "A15.1 & A19.12 Rule A15.1 states that crews are never affected by Heat of Battle, while A19.12 states that "Crews and non 6+1 leaders become Disrupted only by Heat of Battle". But crews are never affected by Heat of Battle, right? A. Yes, delete "Crews and" from A19.12. {PM}" So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 18:56:39 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Some questions > What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location with a hidden > friendly unit? The HIP unit(s) is/are placed on the board concealed after the enemy unit proves it is real. > > Is the friendly unit revealed, placed on the board as > concealed, or not revealed? Yes. > > Must the friendly unit engage in CC? As a concealed unit it may decline to attack, but it will may be attacked if the enemy is real. > > If not, can the friendly unit fire at the enemy unit in its turn > (PFPh, AFPh) using TPBF? Does TEM apply? Yes, Yes. > > > > The rules for Booby Traps indicate that a trap is triggered whenever a > TC exceeds a certain number depending on the Booby Trap level. Is a > MC considered a TC for purposes of setting up Booby Traps? No, since the DR required is 11 and/or 12 the units probably has suffered already by braking. Note that entrenching, PAATC, clearance as well as other as other actions are TC and can cause booby traps. > > Steve > > ----- Subject: Re: Some questions Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 22:35:26 -0700 From: Steven Lin "Fred" == Fred Timm writes: >> What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location with a >> hidden friendly unit? > The HIP unit(s) is/are placed on the board concealed after the enemy > unit prove s it is real. Are you sure? A12.15 seems to state rather positively that concealed units are revealed only if enemy units enter the Location during the MPh. Since hidden units are by definition concealed, they would not be revealed. Steve ----- Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 19:12:21 +1000 From: lesk@lna03.lna.oz.au (Les KRAMER) Subject: HIP CC in jungle >"Fred" == Fred Timm writes: > >>> What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location with a >>> hidden friendly unit? > >> The HIP unit(s) is/are placed on the board concealed after the enemy >> unit prove s it is real. > >Are you sure? A12.15 seems to state rather positively that concealed >units are revealed only if enemy units enter the Location during the >MPh. Since hidden units are by definition concealed, they would not >be revealed. > >Steve Yes A12.15 does say this, i.e they maintian concealment until they attack in close-combat. However, A11.19 says that "A hidden unit must be placed on board beneath a "?" counter at the start of any CCPh in which it is in the same Location as an enemy unit." Thus the hidden unit, becomes a concealed unit, which then has the option of remaining concealed or attacking. Note that G.4 allows hidden, stealthy defenders the option to remain hidden during MPh if an attacker enters their jungle, kunia or bamboo location. I only just noticed that it does not bestow the same ability during APh, which I have always assumed was the same until now. Les "lost in the subtlety of rule wording" Kramer ----- Subject: Some questions From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 21:13:00 -0640 Howdy, Steven Lin writes: > What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location > with a hidden friendly unit? Is the friendly unit revealed, > placed on the board as concealed, or not revealed? Must the > friendly unit engage in CC? In most cases, the moving unit bounces back per A12.15 ('87); it does not enter the hex. The exception is that Hidden, Stealthy Infantry in jungle, kunai, or bamboo can allow enemy units to enter and even to pass through the hex (G.4). > If not, can the friendly unit fire at the enemy unit in its turn > (PFPh, AFPh) using TPBF? Does TEM apply? Since the enemy unit does not enter, the attack is PBF, except as above in the jungle where a TPBF attack can take place. > The rules for Booby Traps indicate that a trap is triggered > whenever a TC exceeds a certain number depending on the > Booby Trap level. Is a MC considered a TC for purposes of > setting up Booby Traps? [assuming "setting off Booby Traps" was meant.] No. PTCs will. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Funny Rout Question Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 12:44:50 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, > > First of all, I think that "may" can mean other things as well. It > > can mean that a leader can rout _even_ if he has a SW as well. > > True, but, while reading A10.5 in research of this, "may" is consistently > being used as an option not a requirement. Tough call. But then, dropping > the SW isn't listed as an option either. As a matter of fact, dropping the SW seems to be out of the question since he cannot by the rules. You may drop a SW only in RPh(?), MPh, APh, and in the RtPh only if you're broken. > Negative IPC has no bearing when the guy isn't carrying anything. CX > wouldn't reduce his MF to 2. This is because, by A4.4 only reduces MF as a > result of portaging something, not a reduction in MF based solely on IPC. Thanks. That clears up one stupid objection to that rout. -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: CC/Meelee - friendly fire Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 12:56:51 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, I was looking at the rules the other day, because I was confused by some of the answers to the questions about what happens when you want to DF into a location where there is a berserk unit and one of your own squads. When I looked at A7.4 ['87], I found the following: "Except during Defensive First Fire (8.1) all the Personnel-units/ ^^^ unarmoured-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC in the same Location are considered targets of fire that does not have to specify a perticular target, with the outcome of such fire affecting all those enemy (or Meelee) units in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the target Location..." Now I see how Fred, Phil and Mac answered the way they did. Damn sneaky wording, though! (IMHO) JR - how about that? I seem to remember something about LOS to Location and units in that Location. Suddenly that argument doesn't seem so silly anymore. Hey, if you can be the target of an attack without being affected by it I'm not sure if we can take anything for granted. -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Trivia Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 13:01:34 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, JR writes: > Being BU prevents interdiction by an Ordnance-armed vehicle > because of the +1 DRM on the TH chart. By D5.2, this DRM > does not apply to non-Ordnance so in general such a vehicle > will be able to interdict. A BU vehicle with Ordnance which > had an IFE would also be able to interdict because IFE is > not penalized for being BU. A BU open-top vehicle couldn't > interdict, however, because it couldn't fire a CMG, MA or > not (D5.2). Of course, there are several exceptions to the last sentence. Name one! -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 09:54:14 -0500 From: Bryan Milligan Subject: AFV MG attacks Guys, I have a question on the use of AFV MG. I find it useful to add a MG to an attack even though the MG doesn't change the IFT column solely for the possibility of coming out high on the random selection DR in the event of a malf thereby "saving" the better armament. My question is this: can one add a MG to an attack that can possibly have no effect due to range limitations? Or is one not even allowed to fire in such a case? Bryan ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 11:12:30 -0500 (EST) From: WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu Subject: Simulation I'm a neophyte ASler, and the recent Berserk/CC thread has gotten me to thinking about exactly what's being simulated by many of the game mechanics. I notice that in the rules discussions relatively little appeal is made to "what's supposed to be happening," with much more reliance on the "letter of the law." (I'm not complaining, mind you. I think the game plays fine, such as I understand it. I just get confused when I try to imagine what's being represented.) For example: Ambush. So two squads , blazing away. sit in buildings across the street from each other for, oh, say, ten minutes. Squad A decides it's time to screw their courage to the sticking point and advance into close combat. There they go! Squad B fires First Fire! Still they come! Subsequent First Fire (assuming MP expenditure)! Still they come! Squad A bursts in the door, guns blazing, hand grenades at the ready, to find . . . nothing! They peer around in astonishment. Which way did dey go!? And then: "Sarge, did you hear a rustling noise in the wainscoting?" The cedar closet door flies open and out bursts Squad B, shouting, "AMBUSH!" Squad A dies in a blaze of glory. Later, as the squad relaxes with a cigarette, the grizzled topkick sez, "Wal, boys, if we hadn'ta got 'em in the foyer, we'da just fell back and hid in the potato bin." So how come you can blast away at a unit right up to the time they burst into the hex, yet you can still ambush them? Speaking of time, given that an ASL turn is 2 minutes, can you really do all the groovy things an ASL unit can do in 2 Minutes? Like dis- assemble and reassemble a machine gun AND fire it? And, since 12 turns is fairly long for an ASL scenario, did these historical actions really take less than a half an hour? I thought the _Le Manoir_ action took most of a day, for example. Inquiring minds want to know. Rusty ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 11:34:37 -0500 (EST) From: WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu Subject: General mailing I just (Mon. 11:30 am) got off the phone from making an order to AHGC including a General subscription. The lady on the phone said that the next General mailing should be in about 2 weeks. For what it's worth. Rusty ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 09:59:27 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Surrender question A lousy stinkin' conscript HS is Prep Fired on by a Known Good Order adjacent enemy unit and rolls a Surrender HoB result. In dfire, the enemy unit is broken, and there are no other Known GO Adjacent enemy units. What does the HS do? A15.5 says "A Final HoB DR >= 12 causes the affected unit to become broken if it is not already, and to Surrender by the RtPh method. If no Known enemy unit is ADJACENT, the unit is Disrupted instead [EXC...]," but I don't think this applies since there WAS such an enemy unit present during Prep Fire. Seems weird to have the HS Disrupt retroactively due to my dfire. And since the enemy units have to rout away first, I'm not sure if the HS even has anybody left to Surrender to with the RtPh method. So what happens? Tom "Surrender, surrender, but don't give yourself away..." - Cheap Trick ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 08:54:55 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Some questions > "Fred" == Fred Timm writes: > > >> What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location with a > >> hidden friendly unit? > > > The HIP unit(s) is/are placed on the board concealed after the enemy > > unit prove s it is real. > > Are you sure? A12.15 seems to state rather positively that concealed > units are revealed only if enemy units enter the Location during the > MPh. Since hidden units are by definition concealed, they would not > be revealed. > > Steve > I'm sorry that I wasn't clear, but they are placed on the map at the start of the CCPh, not during the APh. Fred ----- From: jd@susq.com (Jim Doughan) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 11:32:28 EDT Subject: The Forgotten Soldier Thanks to whoever reccomended The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer. It is an excellent book. I can highly reccomend it to anyone interested in the Eastern front. Thanks again, Jim ----- From: Jean-Luc.Bechennec@lri.fr Subject: Re: Surrender question Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 18:39:50 +0200 (MET DST) Tom Repetti writes: > > > A lousy stinkin' conscript HS is Prep Fired on by a Known Good Order > adjacent enemy unit and rolls a Surrender HoB result. In dfire, the enemy > unit is broken, and there are no other Known GO Adjacent enemy units. What > does the HS do? > > A15.5 says "A Final HoB DR >= 12 causes the affected unit to become broken > if it is not already, and to Surrender by the RtPh method. If no Known enemy > unit is ADJACENT, the unit is Disrupted instead [EXC...]," but I don't > think this applies since there WAS such an enemy unit present during Prep > Fire. Seems weird to have the HS Disrupt retroactively due to my dfire. > > And since the enemy units have to rout away first, I'm not sure if the HS > even has anybody left to Surrender to with the RtPh method. So what happens? > > Tom > "Surrender, surrender, but don't give yourself away..." - Cheap Trick > I think the HS become disrupted. the "A Final HoB DR >= 12 causes the affected unit to become broken if it is not already" apply immediatly but the "and to Surrender by the RtPh method. If no Known enemy unit is ADJACENT, the unit is Disrupted instead [EXC...]," can't apply until the RtPh. Because the Attacker routs first, there is nobody to surrender and the HS is disrupted instead. -- ========================================================================== Jean-Luc Bechennec / / Equipe Architecture des Ordinateurs et ( ( Conception des Circuits Integres \ \ LRI, bat 490 \ \ Tel 33 (1) 69-41-70-91 Universite Paris-Sud ) ) Fax 33 (1) 69-41-65-86 F-91405 ORSAY Cedex / / email jlb@lri.lri.fr ========================================================================== ----- Subject: WAR NEWS From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 10:46:00 -0640 Howdy, >From today's Philadelphia Inquirer: "3 dozen WWII paratroops to repeat venture in June "Washington--More than three dozen World War II paratroops who jumped into history over Normandy half a century ago will do so again in June to help mark the 50th anniversary of the D-Day invasion of Europe, the Pentagon announced over the weekend. "Lt. Col. Al Lott, public information officer for the official World War II Commemoration Committee, said the airborne veterans of the San Diego-based Return to Normandy Association, who range from 67 to 83, will jump at the end of the June 5 program at the French town of St. Mere Eglise. Return to Normandy members had been trying since January to win over officials skeptical about having septagenarian skydivers hurtle into the D-Day events. "Airborne troops paid perhaps the highest price for the liberation of Europe. historians say the worst part of the invasion for Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Allied commander, was watching the paratroops take off from England to drop behind German lines near the Normandy beaches when he knew that eight out of 10 would probably never come back." After 50 years, the paratroopers are coming back to do it again? They have 7 ML while the Marines have 8? I haven't read about the Marines returning to Tarawa! God bless 'em. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 13:09:35 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: Surrender question In message Mon, 25 Apr 94 09:59:27, tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) writes: > A lousy stinkin' conscript HS is Prep Fired on by a Known Good Order > adjacent enemy unit and rolls a Surrender HoB result. In dfire, the enemy > unit is broken, and there are no other Known GO Adjacent enemy units. > What does the HS do? I had thought that the half squad surrenders immediately instead of waiting for the rout phase to surrender. I didn't think the RtPh "method" implied that it had to occur _during_ the rout phase. The other method of surrender is via CC. *-=Carl=-* ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: Surrender question Tom: I think that the HoB result was supposed to be applied immediately so it should have been moved to its guard unit during the PFPh. Just because the rule states "...by the RtPh method..." doesn't mean that it has to take place during the RtPh, it just means that it uses the same criteria for guard selection. Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock > > A lousy stinkin' conscript HS is Prep Fired on by a Known Good Order > adjacent enemy unit and rolls a Surrender HoB result. In dfire, the enemy > unit is broken, and there are no other Known GO Adjacent enemy units. What > does the HS do? > > A15.5 says "A Final HoB DR >= 12 causes the affected unit to become broken > if it is not already, and to Surrender by the RtPh method. If no Known enemy > unit is ADJACENT, the unit is Disrupted instead [EXC...]," but I don't > think this applies since there WAS such an enemy unit present during Prep > Fire. Seems weird to have the HS Disrupt retroactively due to my dfire. > > And since the enemy units have to rout away first, I'm not sure if the HS > even has anybody left to Surrender to with the RtPh method. So what happens? > > Tom > "Surrender, surrender, but don't give yourself away..." - Cheap Trick > ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 19:37:56 +0200 From: "hr. Patrik Olsson" Subject: RE: surrender....... Our dear ladderkeeper Tom sez: >A lousy stinkin' conscript HS is Prep Fired on by a Known Good Order >adjacent enemy unit and rolls a Surrender HoB result. In dfire, the enemy >unit is broken, and there are no other Known GO Adjacent enemy units. What >does the HS do? >A15.5 says "A Final HoB DR >= 12 causes the affected unit to become broken >if it is not already, and to Surrender by the RtPh method. If no Known enemy >unit is ADJACENT, the unit is Disrupted instead [EXC...]," but I don't >think this applies since there WAS such an enemy unit present during Prep >Fire. Seems weird to have the HS Disrupt retroactively due to my dfire. >And since the enemy units have to rout away first, I'm not sure if the HS >even has anybody left to Surrender to with the RtPh method. So what happens? >Tom >"Surrender, surrender, but don't give yourself away..." - Cheap Trick I'd say that the unit surrenders instantly by the terms of RtPh-method to ADJACENT GO known enemy unit. Or am I using a to clear sighted vision? Patrik, a swede with to clear vision? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- po@lysator.liu.se "Life is a party and I'm not invited" c93patol@und.ida.liu.se Joakim, a deep loading existensialist. Patrik Olsson Rydsv. 258 B : 26 "Life sucks och }ss} d|r man" 582 51 Linköping Sweden 2nd Lt Bengtsson, swedish army corps. 013-171619 +46-13-171619 for those outside Sweden :) "Diskspace, the final frontier..." Not Captain J.T Kirk of Enterprise IRC alias Darkface "In dblspace, noone can hear u scream!" The microsoftprogrammer of dblspace ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: pabl@im.se Subject: The General Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 13:32:04 EDT Rusty Wrote... I just (Mon. 11:30 am) got off the phone from making an order to AHGC including a General subscription. The lady on the phone said that the next General mailing should be in about 2 weeks. I wouldn't believe em, they told me it would be out in one week 4 weeks ago... Paul Blankenship pabl@im.se ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: Surrender question Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 10:55:34 PDT Jean-Luc Bechennec writes: > I think the HS become disrupted. the "A Final HoB DR >= 12 > causes the affected unit to become broken if it is not already" apply > immediatly but the "and to Surrender by the RtPh method. If no Known > enemy unit is ADJACENT, the unit is Disrupted instead [EXC...]," can't > apply until the RtPh. Because the Attacker routs first, there is nobody > to surrender and the HS is disrupted instead. I don't agree. I think the HS must "surrender by the RtPh method" immediately, even though it isn't the RtPh. If it is really supposed to wait until the RtPh, it would be much simpler to simply Disrupt it automatically. -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- From: Kenneth Crouch Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:10:10 EDT Subject: General mailing Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 11:34:37 -0500 (EST) From: WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu I just (Mon. 11:30 am) got off the phone from making an order to AHGC including a General subscription. The lady on the phone said that the next General mailing should be in about 2 weeks. For what it's worth. Rusty That's what she told me two weeks ago. -- Ken ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 11:03:43 MST From: hancock@ono.geg.mot.com (Don Hancock x2712) Subject: FAQ is back I'm back and will send a FAQ to anyone who needs/wants it :-) Thanks to John Appel for helping while I was out of town. Don ----- From: pabl@im.se Subject: re: SImulation Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:44:09 EDT Rusty Wrote. > For example: Ambush. So two squads , blazing away. sit in buildings across > the street from each other for, oh, say, ten minutes. Squad A decides it's > time to screw their courage to the sticking point and advance into close combat. > There they go! Squad B fires First Fire! Still they come! Subsequent > First Fire (assuming MP expenditure)! Still they come! Squad A bursts in > the door, guns blazing, hand grenades at the ready, to find . . . nothing! > They peer around in astonishment. Which way did dey go!? And then: > "Sarge, did you hear a rustling noise in the wainscoting?" The cedar > closet door flies open and out bursts Squad B, shouting, "AMBUSH!" > Squad A dies in a blaze of glory. > > Later, as the squad relaxes with a cigarette, the grizzled topkick sez, > "Wal, boys, if we hadn'ta got 'em in the foyer, we'da just fell back > and hid in the potato bin." > > So how come you can blast away at a unit right up to the time they > burst into the hex, yet you can still ambush them? Don't think of an ambush as simply getting bushwhacked - it could also just represent that one unit was quicker then the other, and the squad moving towards the CC hex also had a chance to fire in the Advancing Fire Phase (meaning that they were last to shoot while those defenders might have had time to scurry off...) > > Speaking of time, given that an ASL turn is 2 minutes, can you really > do all the groovy things an ASL unit can do in 2 Minutes? Like dis- > assemble and reassemble a machine gun AND fire it? I don't know the ASL specifics but for ASL/SL the NOMINAL time scale is 2 minutes per turn - a turn could represent much more or less depending on the speed at which actions developed, in other words the time scale is arbitrary and only there so people can visualize the scale of the actions from reading the back of the box... > > And, since 12 turns is fairly long for an ASL scenario, did these > historical actions really take less than a half an hour? I thought > the _Le Manoir_ action took most of a day, for example. > In this one for example one turn could very easily be depicting an hour or so of actual time - with our troops for most of that time doing absolutely nothing, but who wants rules that state that a unit can't do anything untill they roll snakeyes in the rally phase or some other obnoxious thing. Just some thoughts Paul Blankenship pabl@im.se ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 15:18:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Wayne Young Subject: RE: Simulation > From: WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu > > I'm a neophyte ASler, and the recent Berserk/CC thread has gotten > me to thinking about exactly what's being simulated by many of the > game mechanics. I notice that in the rules discussions relatively > little appeal is made to "what's supposed to be happening," with much > more reliance on the "letter of the law." (I'm not complaining, mind > you. I think the game plays fine, such as I understand it. I just > get confused when I try to imagine what's being represented.) The understanding I have come to is that explaining the mechanics of the rules _in_ the rules would make them even more cumbersome than they are already percieved to be. I believe this topic is covered a good deal by the General and the Annuals (although I could not say for certain: however, I have found the General explains the mechanics of other AH games I've played/own). > For example: Ambush. So two squads , blazing away. sit in buildings across [Slice!] > and hid in the potato bin." (Good story, though... =) > So how come you can blast away at a unit right up to the time they > burst into the hex, yet you can still ambush them? I'm sure there are dozens of explanations, but I think it's a good generic way to add the ubiquitous "fog of war" to this type of situation. You've been hosing each other down for the last ten minutes but in the din the defender doesn't notice the attacker come in a certain door or hide in a certain terrain feature that is smaller than the scale of the game can cover. Or as in your fine (and humourous) example, the attacking unit gets ambushed by the defender making could use of camouflage and concealment (not to be confused with the ASL terms) at the last moment. > Speaking of time, given that an ASL turn is 2 minutes, can you really > do all the groovy things an ASL unit can do in 2 Minutes? Like dis- > assemble and reassemble a machine gun AND fire it? The example you give, dm'ing an MG, does not represent the field stripping of the weapon's operating components (or am I reading your example all wrong). Rather the MG is removed from its tripod, the tripod folded (where applicable), etc, etc, making the MG easier to carry. A properly trained gun crew can dismantle or setup an MG in a matter of seconds. The reason the German MGs can fire dm is because they're just LMGs with tripods, sustained-fire kits, spare barrels, etc. > And, since 12 turns is fairly long for an ASL scenario, did these > historical actions really take less than a half an hour? I thought > the _Le Manoir_ action took most of a day, for example. And finally, the scenarios seem to represent a small "piece of the action". The closest thing to a whole battle one might get is the CG modules, RB and KGP I. > Inquiring minds want to know. > > Rusty Wayne Young youngwr@kirk.northernc.on.ca "Just putting in my 2 cents, or 1.4 cents U.S. =)" ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 03:53:42 EDT Subject: Re: Last Act in Lorraine - Deluxe >An interesting rules question came up during the roasting of the Shermans. A >crew attacks a Sherman in CC and misses so he ends in melee. The Sherman preps >at an AT gun and misses. In defensive fire, the AT gun destroys the tank. >Should the tank get crew survival since the crew would be exiting into a melee? >And if the US crew can exit shouldn't they be at some disadvantage in the >melee? or is the German crew now not in melee (since they were going against >the tank) and could take TPBF with a -2 modifier? I believe the Sherman's crew bails out as hazardous movement into the hex and can be fired upon as such with TPBF. If it survives it can CC normally. In one of the A rules there is a statement about unloading PRC in OVR hexes that I think would apply in this case. If the German crew destroyed the tank they cannot use their inherent FP to TPBF as they have already fired the gun at the tank. They might be able fire on the tank crew with intensive fire or normal fire ROF is maintained. Too bad about the gusts of wind. This is a hard scenario for the Americans. The weaker player should play the Germans in this one and in its ASL counterpart. Jeffrey Shields ( ) ( ) CBNERRVA (^ ^) (^ ^) VIMS (^) . . (^) Gloucester Point, VA 23062 \\ 0 | | 0 // (804) 642-7128 \\__\\|}{|//__// jeff@back.vims.edu \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Subject: AFV MG attacks From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:28:00 -0640 Howdy, Bryan Milligan writes: > I have a question on the use of AFV MG. I find it useful > to add a MG to an attack even though the MG doesn't change > the IFT column solely for the possibility of coming out > high on the random selection DR in the event of a malf > thereby "saving" the better armament. My question is this: > can one add a MG to an attack that can possibly have no > effect due to range limitations? Or is one not even > allowed to fire in such a case? Give this man an Advanced Sleaze Lawyer award! Note that in general vehicle MGs can't FG with other units or with Ordnance, but with IFE, for example, this will work. I would believe that the weapon is not allowed to participate in the attack. By A1.22 and A7.22 a unit may attack out to twice its normal range. Beyond that it is not allowed to attack. I don't see any explicit statement of this, but it seems so obvious that I would not be surprised if it was omitted. In a similar fashion, I would say that you couldn't link a FG using a weapon that can't attack because of range limitations. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Subject: Simulation From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:28:00 -0640 Howdy, WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu writes: > I notice that in the rules discussions relatively little > appeal is made to "what's supposed to be happening," with > much more reliance on the "letter of the law." That's because it is so easy to make up a reasonable story that will support almost any side of an argument about the rules. When two sides appeal to what is supposed to be simulated using "common sense", the argument is almost never going to be resolved. At least some of this is because very few of us have any combat experience, and those who do generally haven't enough knowledge to generalize this experience. Further I don't know of much from the designers about what they were trying to simulate except the footnotes in the ASLRB. [How can a unit in a building, which has been in a heated fire fight with the unit ADJACENT, suddenly find itself ambushed by that unit?] I think ambush used in the CC sense is not necessarily the movie sense of all the defenders having their throats slit before they realize the enemy are upon them. Instead, it is a mechanism to allow one side or the other to win without being attacked in return. So for instance if the defending squad waw so heavily involved in the fire fight that they don't notice that one brave soul has crept up out of their sight (which is restricted by the windows) and tossed a grenade in the window, this might be what is represented by ambush. I don't know if this is what was on the designer's mind, but it is easy enough to make up stories about it. > Speaking of time, given that an ASL turn is 2 minutes, can > you really do all the groovy things an ASL unit can do in 2 > Minutes? Like dis- assemble and reassemble a machine gun > AND fire it? This has been discussed before. The general conclusion was that a turn often represents more actual time than two minutes. One could even speculate that things that are simultaneous in the game may not have been simultaneous in real life. These are just my thoughts on the matter. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 17:04:28 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: General Surrender > From: WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu > > I just (Mon. 11:30 am) got off the phone from making an order to > AHGC including a General subscription. The lady on the phone > said that the next General mailing should be in about 2 weeks. > > For what it's worth. > > Rusty > >That's what she told me two weeks ago. > >-- Ken Well, at least they are consistent. Back to Tom's question on that surrendering HS. Let's look at a slightly different situation, for clarification. Same HS, nobody adjacent, same DRs. It rolls a Surrender, but there is currently no unit to surrender to. So the unit becomes disrupted instead. Now, the smart opponent moves an MMC adjacent, and if it survives df, the disrupted HS will surrender via that there rout phase method. Seems pretty clear. (I'll probably regret saying that.) Back to the original. there are two conflicting aspects here: 1) The rule literally says "Surrender by the RtPh method." The RtPh method, in A20.21 specifies that this method of Surrender occurs during the Rout Phase. No exceptions are noted. The rule under HOB (A15.5) does not give any counter-verbiage to specify that the Surrender action occurs immediately. 2) But if you think about it, if the rule didn't mean "this happens immediately", the rule could just say "the unit is disrupted now, and will Surrender as specified in A20.21." End of story. So given that a distinction is made, it must mean "surrender now." After all, we've recently discussed other similar out of phase activities, such as "instant cc", right? I, like Jean-Luc, tend toward #1. It follows the rules as written more closely, and if you read the rules that do include out-of-phase activities, they are very specific about when those activities occur (example: A4.151 "engage in immediate CC"). This one tells you to follow a certain method and never tells you to perform it immediately or out of phase. Again, just an opinion. On the rationale, I picture a group of soldiers, pinned down and disheartened or wounded, about to be captured. A friendly unit sees the situation, and to protect their buddies, brings to bear unexpected fire on the enemy squad and suceeds in breaking it. The enemy squad will be in no shape to capture the HS, but neither will the HS be in any shape to take any action. So they end up disrupted. Makes sense to me. Think of it another way. If they perform a "magic rout to captured status" during the PFph (or in other situations, the Rally Phase), they can easily become friendly fire targets. To me, this makes it almost impossible for friendly units to perform the kind of defensive mission I just outlined. Which seems more realistic to you folk? Matt Brown ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 15:21:12 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: General Surrender > > Think of it another way. If they perform a "magic rout to captured status" > during the PFph (or in other situations, the Rally Phase), they can easily > become friendly fire targets. To me, this makes it almost impossible for > friendly units to perform the kind of defensive mission I just outlined. > Which seems more realistic to you folk? > Oh hell Matt, they're just a conscript HS. If anything, they make better targets when they stand around with their arms up. The rest of the Germans probably sneered in disgust at their cowardice and brought even MORE fire to bear on their position. One can imagine the Russian captors waving them off - "Go back! Go back! We don't WANT any prisoners!" The rule seems more workable to say they immediately surrender, if only to avoid the question that I posed. But despite that, I did wonder because of the wording of the RtPh Surrender method, as Matt pointed out. Tom ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: General Surrender Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 15:34:03 PDT Annoying Matt (B^) writes: > On the rationale, I picture a group of soldiers, pinned down and disheartened > or wounded, about to be captured. A friendly unit sees the situation, and > to protect their buddies, brings to bear unexpected fire on the enemy squad > and suceeds in breaking it. The enemy squad will be in no shape to capture > the HS, but neither will the HS be in any shape to take any action. So > they end up disrupted. Makes sense to me. Not to me. What does a "pinned down and disheartened or wounded, about to be captured" group of soldiers look like that another friendly unit can instantly identify them as such? Short of actually standing up and waving the hanky, I just don't see it, and by then it's too late. > Think of it another way. If they perform a "magic rout to captured status" > during the PFph (or in other situations, the Rally Phase), they can easily > become friendly fire targets. To me, this makes it almost impossible for > friendly units to perform the kind of defensive mission I just outlined. > Which seems more realistic to you folk? IMHO, the surrendering unit shouldn't be identifiable as such until the surrender actually occurs, so to keep the side friendly to the surrendering unit from reacting the surrender should take place immediately. When conscripts are disrupted by normal ELR failure, on the other hand, you were probably expecting them to do something like that ANYWAY so it's no big deal to put off their surrender to the RtPh. I think a first line or elite squad's sudden surrender under fire, however, should come as a surprise and not allow such an immediate response. On the other hand, there ARE a lot of things in ASL that you just shouldn't be able to react to but can because of the play sequence; in most cases that is unavoidable, though, while it is NOT unavoidable here. I'm still not absolutely sure that the immediate surrender is what ought to happen, but I'm leaning that way. -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 18:54:22 UTC+0100 From: Andres Riaguas Subject: Questions I'm playing KGPI and I've found this two little problems: - May a burning wreck be removed using D10.42 (i.e. pushing the wreck with an AFV whose weight is...) or using any other method ? - A burning wreck does block a one-lane bridge or KGP's one-lane roads? (like a non burning wreck) By the way, Does anyone know a FTP site or similar with ASL stuff? Thanks, Andres Riaguas. riaguas@cc.unizar.es ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 19:38:21 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: AFV MG attacks In message Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:28:00 -0640, jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) writes: > Bryan Milligan writes: > >> I have a question on the use of AFV MG. I find it useful >> to add a MG to an attack even though the MG doesn't change >> the IFT column solely for the possibility of coming out >> high on the random selection DR in the event of a malf >> thereby "saving" the better armament. My question is this: >> can one add a MG to an attack that can possibly have no >> effect due to range limitations? Or is one not even >> allowed to fire in such a case? > > Give this man an Advanced Sleaze Lawyer award! Note that in > general vehicle MGs can't FG with other units or with > Ordnance, but with IFE, for example, this will work. > > I would believe that the weapon is not allowed to > participate in the attack. I say go ahead and let 'em shoot. That way there will laughter all around when the malfunction roll turns out to be doubles. :-) ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 16:54:12 -0700 (PDT) From: "Glenn E. Elliott" Subject: Impartial LOS Hi guys, I tried to send this from my other account, but it apparently didn't get through. So if you see a similar message oh, say, tomorrow, that will mean that they finally got our mail server back up on wizards.com. Anyway, if someone has board #6 handy I would appreciate an impartial LOS check between 6K1 and 6M3. My opponent and I came up with different results. Thanks! The lives of cardboard soldiers hang in the balance... Glenn Elliott Coordinator, Research & Development Wizards of the Coast, Inc ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 17:20:21 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Impartial LOS One problem with PBeM is that you and your opponent have different boards, and not all boards have the same LOS. > Hi guys, > > I tried to send this from my other account, but it apparently didn't get > through. So if you see a similar message oh, say, tomorrow, that will > mean that they finally got our mail server back up on wizards.com. > > Anyway, if someone has board #6 handy I would appreciate an impartial LOS > check between 6K1 and 6M3. My opponent and I came up with different > results. > > Thanks! The lives of cardboard soldiers hang in the balance... > > Glenn Elliott > Coordinator, Research & Development > Wizards of the Coast, Inc > > ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 20:45:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Re: General Surrender Surrender? What is surrender? Prisoners? What are prisoners? Paul F. Ferraro Off my potato diet in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ----- Subject: Re: Some questions Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 21:38:53 -0700 From: Steven Lin "Fred" == Fred Timm writes: >> "Fred" == Fred Timm writes: >> >> >> What happens when an enemy unit advances into a Location with a >> >> hidden friendly unit? >> >> > The HIP unit(s) is/are placed on the board concealed after the enemy >> > unit prove s it is real. >> >> Are you sure? A12.15 seems to state rather positively that concealed >> units are revealed only if enemy units enter the Location during the >> MPh. Since hidden units are by definition concealed, they would not >> be revealed. >> >> Steve >> > I'm sorry that I wasn't clear, but they are placed on the map at the start > of the CCPh, not during the APh. > Fred Thanks. I finally found the reference. A11.19: ....A hidden unit must be placed on board beneath a "?" counter at the start of any CCPh in which it is in the same Location as an enemy unit.... Steve ----- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 10:19:54 -0700 (PDT) From: "Glenn E. Elliott" Subject: Neutral LOS wanted Hey guys, Anyone have a copy of board 6 handy? If so, is there LOS between K1 and M3? I'd like to have a neutral party look at it for me since my opponent and I came up with different results... Glenn Elliott Coordinator, Research & Development Wizards of the Coast, Inc. ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 09:26:33 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Re: General Surrender I blurted: >> Think of it another way. If they perform a "magic rout to captured status" >> during the PFph (or in other situations, the Rally Phase), they can easily >> become friendly fire targets. To me, this makes it almost impossible for >> friendly units to perform the kind of defensive mission I just outlined. >> Which seems more realistic to you folk? Tom replies: >Oh hell Matt, they're just a conscript HS. If anything, they make better >targets when they stand around with their arms up. The rest of the Germans >probably sneered in disgust at their cowardice and brought even MORE fire to >bear on their position. One can imagine the Russian captors waving them off - >"Go back! Go back! We don't WANT any prisoners!" What a cheap retort! They could just as well be a full squad of Bersiglieri or some other normally brave fellows. My real point is that any out of phase rout to capture ought to be better spelled out in the rules. >The rule seems more workable to say they immediately surrender, if only to >avoid the question that I posed. But despite that, I did wonder because of >the wording of the RtPh Surrender method, as Matt pointed out. If we changed the rules to avoid all your questions, Tom, what fun would be left? I agree that things are simpler if the surrender is immediate. Though simpler still if the rule had said "Disrupted" and let it go at that, instead of going for the dramatic word "Surrender". Doug Gibson made a couple of good points about Heat of Battle occurring fairly suddenly, and the about-to-surrender unit not looking about-to- surrender until they actually do. Makes sense, Still, a defending unit with LOS will see the adjacency, and the change from, potentially, a good order unit to a broken one, and realize that all is not well, and that the position is about to be taken (a unit that was resisting, counterfiring, falls silent, and the enemy looks ready to advance in). But it could just as well go the other way, with arms up suddenly. Anyway, it's a good example of what JR said about being able to rationalize just about anything in ASL in battlefield terms, because so many contradictory things can occur, and did occur, in the real thing. I didn't see any mention of this in the ASOP, and there is no wording in the HOB section like that in the Sniper rules about when events occur and conclude, so I don't know what to think. But I will admit I can't think of too many deferred result situations in ASL, where an event in one phase is not resolved until several phases later (stuff like DCs and OBA don't count here, as there is a clear elapsed time issue). So for simplicity, I guess I'd side with "immediate surrender". And if I had to predict the "Macsez" version, I'd say "immediate" [how's that for a new low: "I predict Mac would agree with me." :-) ] Matt Brown ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 09:07:46 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: General Surrender > > Surrender? What is surrender? Prisoners? What are prisoners? > Kinda reminds me of my early days in school, with various foreign-born teaching assistants whose command of English was tenuous. Never forget Girish, our Indian TA for math, pondering the question, "Who is pi?" At any rate. Prisoners, you say. Play Carl sometime, then you'll learn about prisoners. He won't KILL your units, no no, that would be too easy. Carl has to WOUND them, break them, Disrupt them, so that he can run up and CAPTURE them. Ha ha, there's the real thrill of the game for him. If he had but one unit left on the last turn of the game and had to choose between occupying the VC building or running across the board to capture a disrupted 6+1, I do believe he'd have to think about it. Tom "When in doubt, surrender." ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 09:51:43 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) Hey! Last night, I thought I figured out what I was doing wrong with my ftp software, and downloaded a few files from carlo.phys.uva.nl onto my Mac. I loaded these onto a DOS (ick) disk, took it to a friend's house, and he couldn't unZIP any of the files. One error or another seemed to keep any of them from working. Any suggestions, any similar sad stories, any advice besides buying an IBM? I really wish I could see how the ASL Scenario Generator works. Tom Huntington ----- From: Mats Persson Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 18:25:16 +0200 Subject: ASL ftp archive ======================================================================= Advanced Squad Leader FTP Archive (Use anonymous ftp to ftp.lysator.liu.se (130.236.254.153) in /pub/asl) ======================================================================= Table of files in the archive and description of contents. Scenario discussions ==================== Fighting_Withdrawal .. Compiled tactics/setup tips from discussion list Jungle_Citadel ....... ----- " ----- KGP .................. ----- " ----- (new improved version) Le_Manoir ............ ----- " ----- Red_Barricades ....... ----- " ----- Sunday_of_the_Dead ... ----- " ----- The_Mad_Minute........ ----- " ----- Under_the_Noel_Trees . ----- " ----- Replays ======= AGWAV ................ A Game With A View replay of The Agony of Doom north_bank.replayA ... Replay of ASL scenario A38 North Bank north_bank.replayB ... (part B) PBeM_Replay_T7 ....... Replay of scenario T7 with PBeM (play by email) New scenarios ============= BP_scenarios ......... Brent Pollock's scenarios Debacle_at_Korosten.ps PostScript scenario Defence_of_Luga.ps ... PostScript scenario Digest_Scenarios ..... Compiled ASL digest scenarios KakazuRidge.ps ....... PostScript scenario PanzerMarsch.ps ...... PostScript scenario scenarios.data ....... ASL scenarios in some database format scenarios.info ....... Information file for scenarios.data Sowchos_79.ps ........ PostScript scenario TakeTheChance.ps ..... PostScript scenario Rule Variants ============= ASL_rpg ........... Combine ASL with GURPS! Company_DYO ....... A Company - based DYO system for ASL Double_Blind ...... San Diego ASL Club rules for Double Blind ASL (DB ASL). honor ............. ON MY HONOR play by mail (PBM) rules ift.ps ............ The IFT table in PostScript format ift_anal.arc ...... Analyze of the IFT with Excel iift.ps ........... The Incremental IFT table in PostScript format tht.ps ............ To Hit table in PostScript format Subdirectories ============== boards/* .......... Generators for boards to PostScript format discuss/d-* ....... ASL discussion list reprints digest/* .......... ASL digest reprints Miscellaneous ============= asl.record.YYMMDD . ASL RECORD is a report on pb[e]m ASL games. ASLbibliography ... Recommended books for ASL players asldyo.zip ........ DYO assistant program for MSDOS aslgap.zip ........ GAP for MSDOS Books ............. More recommended books FAQ ............... Frequently Answered Questions about ASL gap_dyo.readme .... How to unzip asldyo.zip and aslgap.zip general.index ..... Index to articles in The General ladder ............ The ASL mailing list ladder survey ............ Readership survey survey-result ..... Survey results Use binary mode when fetching .Z and .zip files. Please capitalize where needed. This is a UNIX system and the case matters. /Mats Persson ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 10:31:12 -0700 From: Steven Lin "Tom" == Tom Huntington writes: > Hey! > Last night, I thought I figured out what I was doing wrong > with my ftp software, and downloaded a few files from > carlo.phys.uva.nl onto my Mac. I loaded these onto a DOS (ick) > disk, took it to a friend's house, and he couldn't unZIP any of the > files. One error or another seemed to keep any of them from > working. > Any suggestions, any similar sad stories, any advice besides > buying an IBM? I really wish I could see how the ASL Scenario > Generator works. > Tom Huntington I can think of a couple of problems. On ftp, did you use binary mode transfer? I'm presuming you used Apple File Exchange to transfer the files from your Mac to the DOS disk. Did you use Default Translation? If you don't do both, then you'll have problems. Steve ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 14:40:20 -0400 From: rlyon@pms157.pms.ford.com (Rob Lyon) Subject: Fire to immobilize friendly AFV I have looked for rules about aimed friendly fire and found nothing. Like the Star Wars rebellion turning to a farmboy on a desert planet for help, I ask the advice of computer literate boardgamers (And yes, I know this action is stupendously ahistorical, but I just gotta know if IT CAN BE DONE) : If you have a german AFV under recall, and a nearby german squad with an ATR, can the german squad fire the ATR to deliberately immobilize the friendly AFV? Let's just call it a dynamically enforced "no retreat" policy. - Ivan "Watching the armor retreat" Lyon P.S. Along these lines, how come there aren't any Armor commissar's? :) ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 13:54:45 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Rout question What are the RtPh options for a DM unit which is a Passenger on an immobilized wagon? Tom "Fire at the wheels, boys!" ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:01:21 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: Fire to immobilize friendly AFV In message Tue, 26 Apr 1994 14:40:20 -0400, rlyon@pms157.pms.ford.com (Rob Lyon) writes: > I have looked for rules about aimed friendly fire and found nothing. In the first part of Chapter A, there is a note on what can and can't be a target. Friendly units can't be a target of fire except for specific exemptions (i.e. firing into a melee.) I can look up the specific paragraph when I get home. Suffice it to say for now that the ATR can't target the fleeing German AFV. *-=Carl=-* ----- From: abillsasl@aol.com Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 16:37:38 EDT Subject: RE: Impartial LOS I checked both of my board 6's and both have blocked LOS between K1 and M3. If I used a thicker thread it would be clear. Sounds like its a call between the two of you. Perhaps use of A6.1 is in order. Alan Bills ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 04:51:43 EDT Subject: A book Have any of you read Kr!tschmer E.-G. 1953. Die Ritterkreuztr!ger der Waffen SS. Plesse Verlag, G!ttingen? I was wondering if the book had factual accounts of the recipients or if it was just a list of names? I have seen several American book on recipients of the Medal of Honor but until now I haven't seen citations for German, British or Russian counterparts. Do any of you know of any? Jeffrey Shields ( ) ( ) CBNERRVA (^ ^) (^ ^) VIMS (^) . . (^) Gloucester Point, VA 23062 \\ 0 | | 0 // (804) 642-7128 \\__\\|}{|//__// jeff@back.vims.edu \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:52:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Re: General Surrender > > > > > Surrender? What is surrender? Prisoners? What are prisoners? > > > > Kinda reminds me of my early days in school, with various foreign-born > teaching assistants whose command of English was tenuous. Never forget > Girish, our Indian TA for math, pondering the question, "Who is pi?" > > At any rate. Prisoners, you say. Play Carl sometime, then you'll learn about > prisoners. He won't KILL your units, no no, that would be too easy. Carl > has to WOUND them, break them, Disrupt them, so that he can run up and > CAPTURE them. Ha ha, there's the real thrill of the game for him. If he had > but one unit left on the last turn of the game and had to choose between > occupying the VC building or running across the board to capture a disrupted > 6+1, I do believe he'd have to think about it. > Corporal Grunt, manning the .50cal: "I think that's it, sir. They are all milling around with their hands in the air." Sgt Ferraro: (Peering through binoculars) "Hell no Corporal, I think da SOBs are doing another of them gad dang waves. Fire again!" Paul Ferraro "The barrel didn't melt, so hell, fire again!" ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 18:29:27 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: Fire to immobilize friendly AFV In message Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:01:21 -0600 (CST), "Carl D. Fago" writes: > In message Tue, 26 Apr 1994 14:40:20 -0400, > rlyon@pms157.pms.ford.com (Rob Lyon) writes: > >> I have looked for rules about aimed friendly fire and found nothing. > > In the first part of Chapter A, there is a note on what can and can't be a > target. Found it. A7.4 last sentence. ----- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 18:33:30 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: Rout question In message Tue, 26 Apr 94 13:54:45, tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) writes: > What are the RtPh options for a DM unit which is a Passenger on an > immobilized wagon? I think it can stay in the vehicle per D6.1 or leave per D5.311 at it's option. ----- Subject: RE: Fire to immobilize fr From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 20:23:00 -0640 Howdy, "Carl D. Fago" writes: >In message Tue, 26 Apr 1994 14:40:20 -0400, > rlyon@pms157.pms.ford.com (Rob Lyon) writes: >> I have looked for rules about aimed friendly fire and >> found nothing. > In the first part of Chapter A, there is a note on what can > and can't be a target. Friendly units can't be a target of > fire except for specific exemptions (i.e. firing into a > melee.) I can look up the specific paragraph when I get > home. Suffice it to say for now that the ATR can't target > the fleeing German AFV. I will steal Carl's thunder: it's A7.4 ('87): "A unit/weapon may purposely attack a friendly unit(s) only if specifically allowed to by the rules governing a particular circumstance (e.g., Prisoners, Melee, OBA)." If you get the "Fearless Leaders: ASL Personalities" module, the Hitler Leader counter will let you put units on "No Move" counters and allow units to fire at friendy units that leave those locations on or after 6/20/44 (I think that's the date). Also, the Stalin Leader counter permits units to purge Leaders. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Subject: Rout question From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 20:23:00 -0640 Howdy, tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) writes: > What are the RtPh options for a DM unit which is a Passenger > on an immobilized wagon? D6.1 "PASSENGERS: Passengers may remain in their vehicle even while broken unless the inherent crew aslo breaks, in which case any broken Passengers must rout beneath the vehicle per D5.311. Otherwist, a broken Passenger may remain in its vehicle free from rout requirements even if enemy units are ADJACENT, in the same hex, or the vehicle is moving toward an enemy unit (even to OVR)." Since a wagon doesn't have an inherent crew, you can remain aboard or leave using all RtPh MF. If you are using the "Wild West" module, you can also roll the wagon on its side and use it for cover from circling Cavalry. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 00:13:18 EDT From: mattb@express.ctron.com (Matthew E. Brown) Subject: Re: Rout Question JR wrote: >tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) writes: > >> What are the RtPh options for a DM unit which is a Passenger >> on an immobilized wagon? > >D6.1 [Quoted] >Since a wagon doesn't have an inherent crew, you can remain >aboard or leave using all RtPh MF. Of course, a real jerk could read D5.311's "(as well as each passenger)" to mean that regardless of Inherent crew or Inherent Driver (ever wonder why they capitalized "Driver" but not "crew"?) that a passenger attacked and broken in an unarmored target has to rout out of the vehicle, and that safe haven is reserved for passengers in armored targets. Note that this phrase was specifically added to D5.311 as part of the 89 errata. It is too bad it wasn't written less ambiguously: "The Inherent crew (and/or all passengers) of a vehicle receiving fire ..." (meaning in all cases of an unarmored target facing/aspect) "The Inherent crew, and each passenger of a vehicle with an Inherent crew, receiving fire..." (limiting the case to those vehicles with an Inherent crew, and exempting those with only an Inherent Driver) I started to write another long rant about this one, but I'll spare y'all, and save my latest joke about Tom's name for another day. (And go ahead, pick apart my wording above. I deserve it for being smug as if writing bulletproof rules for this game is a cinch or something.) >If you are using the "Wild West" module, you can also roll >the wagon on its side and use it for cover from circling >Cavalry. Cavalry? Circling? Revisionist History? Or a decent DYO system at last? Matt (back to annoying, big time) Brown ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 09:01:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: ftp download problems Help! I tried downloading several *.Z files last night and regardless of mode (automatic/binary/text) all I received on my end was something that would have sent an ULTRA decoder into early retirement. I used Fetch through MacSlip. Trying to unzip/unbinhex/unstuffit didn't work either. Are *.Z files for PC clones only? Dazed & Confused! Brent Pollock ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 09:45:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: *.Z file trouble Mucho thanks to all of you who informed me of "uncompress (filename)". Yes, I am on unix and will try this as soon as possible. This was also the suggestion that I received from the computer guru here in the lab. Thanks.Z Brent P.S. If I fail miserably then I'll take someone up on their offer to send me the desired files in uncompressed format. ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 11:49:56 -0500 From: Bryan Milligan Subject: Praise for Avalon Hill Greetings, Since it appears to be a slow day on the list, I thought I'd publicly commend Avalon Hill for the customer service I recently received. I had purchased West of Alamein via mail order, but when it arrived I noticed that the printing on one of the counter sheets was very poor. I'm not sure if it was a printing flaw or damage that occurred during shipping. I was certain that the vendor would want me to return the entire package and force me to wait for a reorder, so I decided to call AH's 800 number (it was the only number I had at the time). The person who answered the phone was very friendly and quickly connected me with the right department. The second person I talked to took my name and address and said they would put a replacement in the mail. No questions, no hassle, no cost to me. Wow. It arrived the other day, and my life is now complete. It's nice to see that some companies still value their customers. Bryan Milligan ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 10:17:28 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: RE: Fire to immobilize fr > From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) > If you get the "Fearless Leaders: ASL Personalities" > module, the Hitler Leader counter will let you put units on > "No Move" counters and allow units to fire at friendy units > that leave those locations on or after 6/20/44 (I think > that's the date). Also, the Stalin Leader counter permits > units to purge Leaders. The correct date is 7/20/44. Tom and I are playtesting this module now. Dave ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 10:20:13 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Rout question > From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) > If you are using the "Wild West" module, you can also roll > the wagon on its side and use it for cover from circling > Cavalry. Tom, I told you I could do that!! But I'm sure that JR meant circling "Indians". Be kind of silly to protect myself from my own cavalry, although that Polish 248 I wasted with FF (Friendly Fire) might not think so. Dave ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 13:30:50 EST From: Tom Kusterer Subject: ftp download problems Brent, The *.Z files are compressed using COMPRESS. It's a utility thats usually found on Unix machines. You'll have to UNCOMPRESS the files. I have an OS/2 version. Don't know about the Mac version though. It not ZIP or BINHEX or UUENCODE or STUFFIT. Thomas Kusterer kustetl1@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu Johns Hopkins University / Applied Physics Laboratory ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 13:35:46 -0400 (EDT) From: James D Shetler Subject: Re: Praise for Avalon Hill Just wanted to second the praise for AH. I always order through their 800 number, and have never encountered any problems. The coupons in the General are cool as well, and have saved me much in shipping costs. They run a tight ship. Now, once again, any sightings on the next issue of the General? I need the distraction. Spring has finally arrived to the University of Pittsburgh, and the young women on campus are surpassing themselves in attracting attention. What's a single, straight librarian to do? Besides, the end result is my realization that I'm getting older and not much wiser. I need some combat to put things back in perspective. A couple of new scenarios would do the nut just fine. Oops, I'm raving again. Until next time... Jim Shetler ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 10:49:15 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Praise for Avalon Hill > From: Bryan Milligan > Greetings, > Since it appears to be a slow day on the list, I thought > I'd publicly commend Avalon Hill for the customer service I > recently received. > It's nice to see that some companies still value their > customers. I have always been impressed by AH's service. They have taken care of all my game-related problems with speed and courtesy, and that is one of the biggest reasons I still buy from them. I'm sure I can get the products I want cheaper from someone else, but I've built up a lot of loyalty to AH over the years. If you really think they've done a fine job, it's appropriate to write them and tell them so. I did, and was surprised at the results. Dave van Kan ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 14:16 EDT From: Dan Sullivan Subject: Re: Praise for Avalon Hill Bryan Milligan writes: > I was certain that the vendor would want me to return the >entire package and force me to wait for a reorder, so I decided to >call AH's 800 number (it was the only number I had at the time). >The person who answered the phone was very friendly and quickly >connected me with the right department. The second person I talked >to took my name and address and said they would put a replacement >in the mail. No questions, no hassle, no cost to me. Wow. It >arrived the other day, and my life is now complete. > It's nice to see that some companies still value their >customers. I'd like to add my praise as satisfied customer. I was a die-hard SL-ite and when I purchased Beyond Valor it sat on my shelf for at least a good three years. When I finally made my "learn-ASL" task check, I found that there were absoultly no german leaders in my box, instead I got three German/Finnish squad counter sheets One call to the Hill detailing my woes of purchasing a game and letting it sit for years and then finding a bad sort of chits, and presto-chango the missing counter sheet arrived in the mail. No questions asked. It made me happy. :) -------------- djsullivan@bbn.com dan sullivan ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 14:33:09 -0500 (EST) From: WITEK@suvax1.stetson.edu Subject: Fearless Leaders So what is this module being playtested anyway? Stalin & Hitler in ASL? So do we get the part where Hitler visits the Western Front once, a stray V-2 almost hits the headquarters, and he leaves never to return again? Rusty ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 11:35:46 -0700 (PDT) From: WHITE@AMU02.SLAC.Stanford.EDU Subject: AFV strangeness in ASL Mike Derry (also on this list) and I were pondering the rules during a game this Sunday and noticed a couple of wierd things that we couldn't resolve with the Q&A. (1) The terrain chart has a R D notation for fully tracked vehicles in woods while all of the other vehicle movement types only have R. This implies that for a tank moving along a woods-road, entering a hex with other vehicles costs 4 MP extra per vehicle, but for any other vehicle it is only 2 MP extra per vehicle. The other places where the D notation shows up on the chart (sunken or elevated roads and bridges) the D applies to all of the vehicle movement types. Is this correct? We don't understand why it should be this way. Why is a tank that much slower that a truck or half-track on a busy woods-road? Even leaving reality out of the discussion, I don't understand the special exception for fully tracked vehicles. That D also implies that entering a woods already containing a vehicle or wreck costs 2 extra MP rather than just 1 extra MP. Again I see no sense in this. (2) Do vehicles entering a hex accross a road hexside really pay 2 MP extra per vehicle already there even if not using the road rate? If this is true, then a tank will often make better time driving into the next hex and then back onto the road. Imagine the situation: Your tank is hauling a** down the road and you spot a truck stalled 40m ahead. You think uh oh I better cut through this field here and head for the curve in the road 100m away because driving next to the road will just be too slow. Boy that truck is just too wide for me to drive within 20m of it without slowing down. Note that for other vehicle movement types it is cheaper to stay on the road (swerving arround the stalled truck). (3) Does the bog DR for a vehicle changing VCA in a building or woods hex suffer the DRM penalty for entering at half MP? If it does, then this is a very dangerous thing to do since most tanks will bog on something like an 8+. This might be reasonable but I can't find out which way it is from the rules and charts. (4) Vehicle stacking vs hex size. The stacking limit of 1 vehicle per hex without penalties seems too low to us especially for a 40 m hex. Although SL was much worse, since overstacking wasn't even allowed. I think a base limit of 2 vehicles would be much better. I must admit that most scenarios don't have a problem since the vehicle density is low but just try a DYO armored infantry company(full strength) combined with a tank company (full strength) in support on a historical attack frontage. Enough for now, Joe White ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 13:42:32 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: LOS Checks After reading through some of the archive files on /pub/asl I have come to the distinct impression that their are people out their playing ftf with free LOS checks. Is this the case or am I reading this wrong...I have never played ftf with this rule but definately see its use in E-mail games. Thanks, Darren Gour ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 13:03:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: re: praise for TAHGC Well...I've mail ordered from them a few times and ONCE I didn't get the ASL ANNUAL I ordered so I phoned them and was told that it would be taken care of. It wasn't. This happened again and again until I eventually gave up and bought it from the store, effectively paying for it twice. Also, last year I was listed as one of the winners of a GENERAL contest and was supposed to receaive a $10 US ($40 000 CDN) gift certificate. It still hasn't arrived, not even after I sent them a SASE (no mean feat to get a US stamp when your in Canada!) inquiring as to what the heck was going on. Share (because paying for it doesn't seem to get you better service) & Enjoy! Brent Pollock ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 14:11:26 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: ASL Music I found it. Finally. I was too wrapped up in my classes to contribute when this was the hot ASL topic, but the best ASL music, especially if you're the Russian Player in a late war scenario such as the Agony of Doom, is "Roads to Moscow" from Al Stewart's Past, Present and Future album. Probably can't find it anywhere these days (released in '74), but check out these lyrics: All summer they drove us back through the Ukraine Smolensk and Viasma soon fell By autumn we stood with our backs to the town of Orel. Closer and closer to Moscow they come Riding the wind like a bell General Guderian stands at the crest of the hill. Winter brought with her the rains, oceans of mud filled the roads Glueing the tracks of their tanks to the ground while the sky filled with snow But, of course, the tide soon turns: The morning roads leads to Stalingrad, and the sky is softly humming. Two broken Tigers on fire in the night Flicker their souls to the wind We wait in the lines for the final approach to begin. It's been almost four years that I carried a gun At home it will almost be spring: The flames of the Tigers are lighting the road to Berlin. Ah, quickly we move through the ruins that bow to the ground The old men and children they send out to face us, they can't slow us down The fate of the protagonist isn't very happy. Gets caught up in the post-war purges, and never makes it home. Dave van Kan ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 17:20:59 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Re: LOS Checks Hi guys, Darren asked about FTF play with free LOS checks. I don't play this way FTF as a regular habit, but I had one opponent who hated the blocked-LOS rule (your unit knows if they can see another unit...) so we played with freebies. No big deal to me either way. PBEM, you have the board sitting there all day, so you might as well be able to play around with it. Plus the LOS sometimes differs between two sets of boards (because of different amounts of backing showing at board edges, usually, though different gauges of string/ floss / rope / bridging cable used by various players also cause even intraboard LOS to vary) so it's nice if both players are always checking everything ahead of time. Finally, I think it speeds up PBEM play for me to be able to check. Otherwise, I spend five minutes doing trig in my head, then decide that I can't tell, and do moves on the other side of the board, and come back later. Iterate three times in a large scenario. Yuck. Without free LOS checks, I never would have been able to take the I-can't-believe-that's-clear shot against Will Scarvie's entrenching Germans in the exit hex in Gavin Take. Which means I probably would have lost. Therefore, free LOS checks are good. I wonder if "Beyond SL" will let you know whether you can actually see something before you can shoot it. I'll bet it will. No way the casual gamer would enjoy some of SL/ASL's idiosyncracies. Dave Ripton Tonight: Ben McDonald pitches the O's, wearing black, to victory. The Caps eliminate the overconfident Penguins. And Dave futilely attempts to catch up on 3 PBEM games while listening to one and watching the other. ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 17:23:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: re: praise for TAHGC I had to wait over a year to get erratta sheets for ASL. Called 'em three times on it. Other than that, no problems. That was 4-5 years ago. They may have cleaned up their act since then. Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 16:13:12 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Ladder Game Well now that I have secured my Internet access for the summer through the school and don't have to worry about leaving people hanging over the summer I would be interested in starting up a ladder game or two. I can play ftf fairly decently but this would be my first PBEM. If anybody out there needs a game I'm ready to go... Darren Gour ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 15:19:02 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Old Age Foes Przemysl, Poland 27 April 1994: With the Soviet Union now in the war against them, those Polish units still in the field had only two alternatives: flight into the neighboring neutrals of Rumania or Hungary, or suffer an endless diet of baked potatoes and a constant wash of Nirvanna music while locked in a chilly Idaho gulag. Just miles north of the Hungarian border, General van Kansky, commanding the battered Grupa Operacyjna Kawalerii Michigansvisky Sucksky, pushed his troops south through the tightening noose of Russians in a brilliant and daring, perhaps even foolhardy, maneuver. As his weary men neared the outskirts of Przemysl (aka Toledo), fire erupted. The Poles recognized their age-old foes, the Wolverines, and without orders charged. With sabres drawn and lances leveled, the cavalrymen commenced their gallop to freedom. Aftermath: With the courage of the desperate (and of those who have seen the Idaho Gulag), the Poles rode on through heavy (albeit typically inaccurate) automatic weapon fire, wagons bearing the wounded and extra Big Macs in their wake. Soon Russian mortar shells began to fall among their ranks. Entering the fray came Russian armor (aka "coffins on wheels") and infantry reinforcements from right and left. Only a few kilometers lay between them and the border, but the Poles were exhausted, low on ammunition and supplies, weary after the Big Sur Marathon and their low cholesterol diet. The "battle" was over. General van Kansky escaped, later to command a makeshift blocking force for the Germans at the Battle of Munchenburg in 1945 (See the Agony of Doom). What small, scattered groups of Poles broke through (well, two wagons and their drivers, actually) made for the border--and from there some would make their way to the Western Allies to carry on the fight. ----- Date: 27 Apr 1994 19:29:27 U From: "Noah Matt" Subject: CC Counters Hi. Besides signifying that same hex units are not yet in melee, does a CC counter mean anything else? I seem to remember reading in a FFE/ASLUG/Rout Report that a CC counter placed on a counter prevented that unit from doing anything (like SFF/FPF) until the CC phase. I can't find the article, and I've found nothing in the ASLRB. Is this true or am I imagining things? Thanks. Matt Noah noah_matt@prc.com ----- Subject: AFV STRANGENESS IN ASL From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 17:57:00 -0640 Howdy, WHITE@AMU02.SLAC.Stanford.EDU writes: > (1) The terrain chart has a R D notation for fully tracked > vehicles in woods while all of the other vehicle movement > types only have R. This implies that for a tank moving > along a woods-road, entering a hex with other vehicles costs > 4 MP extra per vehicle, but for any other vehicle it is > only 2 MP extra per vehicle. The other places where the D > notation shows up on the chart (sunken or elevated roads > and bridges) the D applies to all of the vehicle movement > types. Is this correct? Note D should probably apply to all vehicles, not just fully tracked ones. B13.41 says all vehicles. > (2) Do vehicles entering a hex accross a road hexside really > pay 2 MP extra per vehicle already there even if not using > the road rate? If this is true, then a tank will often make > better time driving into the next hex and then back onto > the road. Yes, per B3.42. I assume the "next hex" is the hex to the left or the right. If the road is straight, I don't think you will make better time because the cost is 3 to go through the wreck (2.5 to enter, .5 to leave) and (assuming open ground) is 4 to go around (1 off to side, 1 straight ahead, 1 to change CA, and 1 to re-enter the road). On a curve you may save something. > (3) Does the bog DR for a vehicle changing VCA in a building > or woods hex suffer the DRM penalty for entering at half > MP? Since it is not entering at all, I don't think it would. Similarly, entering at full MP does not invoke the penalty either. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Subject: LOS Checks From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 17:57:00 -0640 Howdy, djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca writes: > After reading through some of the archive files on /pub/asl > I have come to the distinct impression that their are > people out their playing ftf with free LOS checks. Is this > the case or am I reading this wrong...I have never played > ftf with this rule but definately see its use in E-mail > games. Do you have an example? There are situations where you can get a "free" LOS check, concealment loss for instance (A12.14, A6.11). In any event, I haven't played with anyone who used free LOS checks not allowed in the rules. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: 27 Apr 94 19:58:43 EDT From: Bruce Probst <100033.3661@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Praise for Avalon Hill Jim writes: >> Now, once again, any sightings on the next issue of the General? I >> need the distraction. In a recent (as in the last couple of days) e-mail exchange I had with Bob McNamara, he told me that 29/1 was in the process of being printed (which I assume means it's completed), but he wasn't sure when exactly it would be mailed; the best guess he could hazard was "soon". On a complete change of subject: I used to be a SL "grognard" (of amateur status, at least) - I loved the game, played it as often as I could, knew the rules up to and including G.I. forwards, backwards, and sideways, and loved ASL when it came out even more (although I never got around to memorising the rules in quite the same level of detail ). However, in 1989 I had to move interstate and the resulting personal upheaval meant many things got shelved, including ASL. I tried to stay up to date by buying new modules and the annuals as they came out but I gradually fell behind ... I wasn't even reading them, I would just stick them on the shelf. I kept my General subscription active by sheer inertia alone. Anyway, I'm now finding that I want to play again ... unfortunately, few of the people I know are particularly interested, although I have a couple of likely victims in mind - but they've never played at all, so it will be a slow learning process (which would probably not be so bad an idea for me anyway). To cut to the point: I'm not especially interested in PBeM at this point in time, but if there are any other Melbourne, Australia participants on this mailing list, please drop me an e-mail and maybe we can arrange a FtF game or two? Or ten? Bruce (Melbourne, Australia) ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 18:28:12 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Agony Replay After having printed out 147 pages of the Agony of Doom Series Replay from the archive /pub/asl I was a little miffed to see the last entry as "girlfriend is coming to visit an will attempt to monoplize my time..." Is this game still ongoing or did it finish this way?? Thanks for any responses... Darren Gour (We have tried switching the Jagdpanthers for JgdPz IV/70s but it still favors the German. I think more infantry would/should be added to the Russians. This may have been done here though, I read everything from back to front so I haven't got there yet!) ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 21:12:55 -0400 From: Stewart R King Subject: Re: ASL Music Good choice Capt. Kan! Past, present, and future is out on CD and in Kemp Mill Music the last time I checked. There's lots of Al Stewart that makes good gaming music -- "The Last Day of June, 1934" is another good choice for ASL, or even better for Days of Decision module for World in Flames ...Europe lies sleeping, you feel her heartbeats through the floor On the last day of June, 1934 On the night that Ernst Roehm died, voices rang out in the rolling Bavarian hills, and swept through the cities and danced in the gutters grown strong like the joining of wills And echoed away like a roar in the distance in moonlight carved out of steel ... I know I'm a dreamer, I know I'm out of line with the people I see everywhere The couples pass by, they're looking so good their arms 'round each other, they head for the wood They don't care who Ernst Roehm was, no reason they should Just a shadow that hangs in the air ... Al Stewart is good music for historians (although sometimes the facts suffer from a little poetic license, like when he identified Henry VIII of England as a Plantagenet -- it scanned, but he was a Tudor!) Stewart King ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 23:06:22 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Re: Agony Replay Hi guys, Darren said: >After having printed out 147 pages of the Agony of Doom Series Replay Whoa! I didn't know we were _that_ longwinded. >from the archive /pub/asl I was a little miffed to see the last entry >as "girlfriend is coming to visit and will attempt to monopilize my >time. Is this game still ongoing or did it finish this way? That was several weeks ago. There've been moves since then, but I guess they haven't reached the ftp site yet. The game's still in progress. As a matter of fact, I'm going to send another move up to Patrik and the AGWAV list tonight. We stopped for a couple of days to get input on an interesting (IMO) rout question. Now I'm going to cave in on that point to get things moving. Public service announcement: To get on or off the AGWAV list (or the regular ASL list for that matter) send a polite letter to Brian at asl-request@tpocc.gsfc.nasa. gov. Requests send to the whole ASL list will result in many curses upon your dice. >(We have tried switching the Jagdpanthers for JgdPz IV/70s but it still >Russians. This may have been done here though, I read everything from >back to front so I haven't got there yet!) We're playing this one with Carl's balancing provisions, which involved moving the turn of entry of the 88LL death machines back to turn 5 and the other reinforcements back to turn 2. Patrik's doing well with the Germans, but I wouldn't interpret that as saying the balancing provisions aren't enough. Actually, I like the idea of pulling Patrik's Jagdpanthers off the board and replacing them with something whose armor I can penetrate with an adjacent 85L... I couldn't imagine following this while reading backwards. I have to pull out the boards and pieces to really follow any kind of series replay. Even a well-edited one, not one full of typos and PBEM confusion like this one. Dave ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com Go O's! ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 21:49:23 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Re: Agony Replay Dave, About reading things backwards I'm just an impatient kinda guy and like to know the end before how things got there! I usually scan things once over from back to front, whether a book, a magazine, or whatever. Then I start at the front and go through to the end. You're right about the confusing bit though...the replay is a little hard to get through without actually setting the stuff up and playing along. Fun though. Good luck, Darren Gour ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 20:52 PDT Subject: Trademarks and Copyright From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) Does anyone know what sort of copyright and trademark rules have to be followed if someone puts together scenarios for ASL? This assumes that scanned images of the ASL counters are being used. Is there a difference in the legalities if the scenarios are for sale as opposed to being free of charge? -- J.D. Frazer a481@mindlink.bc.ca Editor "The Harn Tongue Twister: Three Shortsword Sheaths" Columbia Games ----- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 23:43:46 CDT From: seningen@ross.com (Mike Seningen) Subject: Bocage Quickie! How does pinning (if at all) effect wall advantage, expecially considering bocage. You have to be good order, but pin is good order. lets say you have a unit adjacent to you, he is good order, he fires on you and pins you. Do you lose wall advantage? Are you prevented from gaining wall advantage if you want to? thanx, mike ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 13:40:55 +0200 From: oleboe@idt.unit.no Subject: Digest scenario 7 I was planning to play Digest scenario 7: "The Defiance of the Narvik Military Academy", but I don't understand the German OB: Germans forces: Combined Assault Group from the 1st Pioneer Battalion, the 16th Heavy Weapons Battalion, and the 3rd Army Group (ELR 3 SAN 3);Setup on Board 2 Level 3: 2x2-2-8, 1x150* INF Gun, 1x75* INF Gun. Setup South of road 2P1-2I2-2A5: 2x8-3-8 2xDC + Bid from 12x4-6-7 to 5x4-6-7 by HS with the following Ldrs/SWs: n 12x4-6-7 1xMmg 2xLtm 9-1 8-1 8-0 7-0. n 9x4-6-7 remove 1xLmg 1xLtm 1x8-1. n 7x4-6-7 remove 1xMmg. n 5x4-6-7 remove 1x9-1, add 8-1. What is this bid thing actually? Could someone that knows/understands please mail me? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say: Ole Boe Me and my head or oleboe@idt.unit.no Me and my body? ----- Date: 28 Apr 94 09:17:18 EDT From: Paul Bushland <74111.226@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Easy HIP question Hey all you folks out there, This is a pretty basic question, but it's been a while since I've used HIP and wanted to clarify things before I started making big mistakes. I'm playing one of the scenarios from Code of Bushido (Dangerous Occupation) where all my forces start up HIP. The Japanese are marching through the jungle using column movement. My question deals with what happens when I start revealing my units and firing. I think that I get the -2 drm for "hazardous activity," but I'm not sure if his units (which started out concealed) lose concealment when I reveal a unit with a LOS to them (and therefore, before I fire). It would seem that if I qualify for the -2 movement drm, the unit must be expending MF in the LOS of my unit and so would loose concealment. And that if he dosn't have the option to stop movement and avoid a fire drm, he wouldn't have the option to stop movement to avoid ? loss. Does this make sense, or is there something I am missing (very likely ). Thanks for the help Paul Bushland ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 17:10 BST-1 From: Richard Cornwell Subject: Moving G'day All, I've been offered a job back in Sydney and am moving back to the land of Oz. Hopefully I'll be back on the net soon. Apologies to Randy for the Worl Cup game. Brian, you better unsubscribe me. Richard Cornwell rcornwell@cix.compulink.co.uk ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 09:50:34 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Easy HIP question > Hey all you folks out there, > > This is a pretty basic question, but it's been a while since I've used HIP > and wanted to clarify things before I started making big mistakes. > > I'm playing one of the scenarios from Code of Bushido (Dangerous Occupation) > where all my forces start up HIP. The Japanese are marching through the > jungle using column movement. My question deals with what happens when > I start revealing my units and firing. I think that I get the -2 drm for > "hazardous activity," but I'm not sure if his units (which started out > concealed) lose concealment when I reveal a unit with a LOS to them (and > therefore, before I fire). Yes they do lose concealment. All of his units that you can see in the this DFPh will lose concealment since he is not using AM. Fred > > It would seem that if I qualify for the -2 movement drm, the unit must be > expending MF in the LOS of my unit and so would loose concealment. And that > if he dosn't have the option to stop movement and avoid a fire drm, he > wouldn't have the option to stop movement to avoid ? loss. Does this make > sense, or is there something I am missing (very likely ). > > Thanks for the help > > Paul Bushland > > ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 18:58:16 +0200 From: Morten Iversen Subject: ASL - gusts in a no win(d) situation %UNIPLEX %TO asl %MAILBOX asl %FROM miversen %SYSTEM DHLNET %SUBJECT ASL - gusts in a no win(d) situation %VERIFY y %DATE 28/04/94 18:56 %REFERENCE 97207 Hello everyone... Just got connected and I have a question Does anyone have an idea how to resolve a gust if there is no wind...? Should I ignore the gust result or determine a winddirection randomly? Morten %UEND ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 10:06:41 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: ASL - gusts in a no win(d) situation > > %UNIPLEX > %TO asl > %MAILBOX asl > %FROM miversen > %SYSTEM DHLNET > %SUBJECT ASL - gusts in a no win(d) situation > %VERIFY y > %DATE 28/04/94 18:56 > %REFERENCE 97207 > > Hello everyone... > > > Just got connected and I have a question > > Does anyone have an idea how to resolve a gust if there is no > wind...? > > Should I ignore the gust result or determine a winddirection > randomly? > > Morten > %UEND > Randomly roll for wind direction unless you had wind earlier or if is in the SSR (some scenarios say no wind at start, but if it starts it will from the xxx direction). Fred ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 10:19:01 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: May 1994 Internet Ladder Tom, you're setting a bad precedent here. With the General, ASLUG, RR, ATP, etc. all arriving late (or not at all), how can you even think of publishing the May 1994 ladder when we've still got 2 days left in April? Hmm, maybe TAHGC could hire you as the new editor for the General. Dave ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 12:59:13 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: grep on MMG Hi y'all, Ever save all of your moves to a big file and then grep it when the game is done? Dave did that for our recent game, grepping "MMG". Here's what he got, with some slight editing. Interesting and strange snapshot of how the game went. Thanks Dave. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2. 9-1,447/MMG in N5 fire at 33A2 (no 447) 2(+0) DR = 6,6 breaks MMG! MMG repair attempt in N5 dr = 2, yes to his MMG gunner, and it opens up: Your MMG has a R value of 2? Who'd they steal it from? I thought only 1. L)0 Assemble MMG. > c. MMG,447 2MC DR 6,4 = Break, ELR. MMG in Q7 fires dm426 drops MMG and routs from N6 to O7, O8, O9, O10 In my confusion, I forgot that the 447 in N6 will try to grab the MMG that the MMG, and THEN you realized it wasn't possessed. :-) I don't know about this one. That last squad couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with the MMG Sure, take the MMG. Yep. Shit, that's not a great spot for the MMG to wind up in. Boneheads. The other 458 was supposed to drop the MMG and mount a Horse > Boneheads. The other 458 was supposed to drop the MMG and mount a Horse > > Boneheads. The other 458 was supposed to drop the MMG and mount a Horse 4 to kill a truck with the ATR and a 3 with the MMG, and that's assuming I with a probability of (21/36)(10/36) = 0.162, and the MMG (without leader) 1. L1 458/MMG,458 at S1; 4(+1) DR 1,1 = Cower, ROF, 1MC, RSAN c. RS for Cower: MMG dr 4 the MMG squad broke and I needed somebody there to pick it up. Lessee - Typical Repetti game - what I lose in skill (putting the MMG in N5 instead Of course, you probably lose your ROF when you fire an MMG selected situations on defense, but charging into the LOS of a 10-2 with MMG Looks like you've still got ROF for that MMG, pard. What the hell, why assuming that your MMG From Hell hasn't succeeded in kakking any more of my MMG in O8 fires, creates a Fire Lane going E8,F8,... and MMG had been better positioned to take them out on the turn the trucks it was; if you had scored against an MMG or two, things could be different. through the orchard and trucks at my MMG's in cover. hindering your MG fire at my MMG's. Psychologically, they were great. in turn 2. Your prep fire had broken my MMG squad in N5 and pinned the 9-1, eventually capturing my MMG's and Radio and making it hard for the trucks to have any effect on the migration to the west. At the very least, my MMG's getting, and trucks out in the field there would just have hindered my MMG MMG's for more fire lanes, but it turns out you can't scrounge CMG's. ----- From: wuj@moss.att.com Date: 28 Apr 94 19:53:00 GMT Subject: Prisoners and withdraw from CC A quick question from a relative newbie. During "Fighting Withdrawal" a Finnish Half Squad was guarding 3 prisoner squads (captured Russian 4-4-7 dogs). 1. Is there any reason this stack could not become concealed? 2. Assuming the stack could be concealed, what would the modifiers be to its ambush dr? (-1 stealthy, -2 concealed, any others??) 3. Now, assume the HS wins the ambush dr, can the HS withdraw from CC, keep its prisoners, and maintain concealment? In the game, the Finnish HS & prisoners were in OG (road), but managed to win the ambush dr and withdraw to a building. It seemed odd for the HS to be able to herd 30 plus prisoners out of the open road, into an adjacent building, and retain concealment. I was thinking there might be an ambush drm based on the presence of prisoners, similar to the +2 drm for cavalry. Or maybe I missed something in the rules. Was this correct? Walt Ulicki wuj@moss.emsp.att.com ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 04:17:49 EDT Subject: Repeat messages I'm still receiving repeat messages from the asl.newsgroup. What gives? None of my other newsgroups have this problem! On another note: When and where is the AvalonCon? I may live near enough to go to it! Jeffrey Shields ( ) ( ) CBNERRVA (^ ^) (^ ^) VIMS (^) . . (^) Gloucester Point, VA 23062 \\ 0 | | 0 // (804) 642-7128 \\__\\|}{|//__// jeff@back.vims.edu \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 13:17:44 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC > > > A quick question from a relative newbie. During "Fighting Withdrawal" a Finnish > Half Squad was guarding 3 prisoner squads (captured Russian 4-4-7 dogs). > > > 1. Is there any reason this stack could not become concealed? No, it would become concealed anytime the HS alone could. > > > 2. Assuming the stack could be concealed, what would the modifiers > be to its ambush dr? (-1 stealthy, -2 concealed, any others??) There would be no modifiers because it is guarding. All others apply normally. > > > 3. Now, assume the HS wins the ambush dr, can the HS withdraw from > CC, keep its prisoners, and maintain concealment? Yes if it withdraws before any attacks, or if it kills the ambushed units. Fred > > > In the game, the Finnish HS & prisoners were in OG (road), but managed to > win the ambush dr and withdraw to a building. It seemed odd for the HS to > be able to herd 30 plus prisoners out of the open road, into an adjacent > building, and retain concealment. I was thinking there might be an > ambush drm based on the presence of prisoners, similar to the +2 drm for > cavalry. Or maybe I missed something in the rules. Was this correct? It sounds correct to me. Fred > > Walt Ulicki > wuj@moss.emsp.att.com > > ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 17:53:21 BST From: jr_tracy@il.us.swissbank.com (J. R. Tracy) Subject: Chicago Tourney AOR (long) Windy City Wargamers ASL Tourney Well, I haven't seen any after-action reports of the Chicago tournament, so I'll share my humble account. The venue was the Burr Ridge Best Western Inn, offering a good gaming space that was tight, but sufficient for the fifty-ish participants. The format was like the '93 AvalonCon, with five rounds, each round with an 'A' list and a 'B' list of three scenarios each. I didn't see any disputes over scenario selection, so it seems to have worked. The scenarios could fairly be called classics, at least in the A list, with the B list tending toward 'quick-play' scenarios and reputedly unbalanced, but fun, selections. All the B choices had an enforced balance provision. Scoring was ten points for a win, plus an additional point for every game won by a vanquished opponent. Over five rounds the max score is thus seventy points. The tourney was seeded, with subsequent rounds matched by points. I started out 17th seed, a bit high, but the first ten seeds seemed about right. I started out with Italian Brothers, a Dagger scenario that also popped up in At The Point. This one pits the Italian Garibaldi Brigade, fighting for the Republic, against Mussolini's Black Flame Division, fighting for Franco's Nationalists, in the Spanish Civil War. I had the Black Flames and their super-cool L33s against Dave Kleinschmidt's Internationals. Play was fairly even, but at a critical point Dave found himself spread a bit thin, and I managed to survive a cloud of DFF, SFF, and FPF and split his forces in two. He was unable to recover and I emerged 1-0. My second game was Bread Factory #3 against Dave Chrest. This was my first-ever Red Barricades encounter, and I *like* it! Unfortunately, I prepared a good Russian setup beforehand, but ended up with the Germans. My German strategy was formed with my own Russian setup in mind, and Dave, not surprisingly, had something quite different. The terrain is brutal, and all the firepower on the map washed the troops off the board. My berserk leader died very quickly, and after I lost a CC with the 45L crew, the issue wasn't in doubt. Still, I got a taste of Red's Barbecue, and look forward to more. Game three was fought over A Bridge to Nowhere, my Russians against Dan Hendry's Italians. This is a great scenario I'd never played before. We went down to the wire, but Dan knocked off eight of my remaining 22 firepower points in his last shot of the game, pushing me below the sixteen I needed to win. I'd like to try this one again...as the Italians! Game four was an Internet affair with Tom Trumpinski, in Breakout. This is another classic scenario played on Deluxe boards. The German (me) needs to disengage from a strong Russian force on one board edge, and cross three boards to exit. The catch is that the Russian has reinforcements entering behind the initial German start line. The reinforcements include a flame-throwing T34, always the life of the party in an urban environment. I followed Brian Youse's advice and left a strong covering force and skedaddled with the balance of my troops. This one was wild, with Berserk tank riders, lots of street fighting AFV ambushes, and some unfortunate indoor panzerfaust shots. I managed to get about a turn ahead of Tom on my fallback, and pulled this one out. Tom was a real pleasure to play. My last game was against another Internetter, Michael O'Leary. Mike didn't play FtF until this tourney, but that hasn't hurt him much. He had the Germans against my Red Devils in North Bank. Mike tried to talk me out of the scenario, claiming the British had it tough, but I insisted...I was feeling pretty good early on, having greased two SS squads on the first turn with snake-eyes and a three, but Mike's very deliberate approach soon had me spread out...and four squads don't spread very far. I made the fatal error of chasing Tigers when I should have been falling back on my victory hexes, and combined with the loss of my 10-3 in CC (I failed the ambush roll), my fate was sealed. Another enjoyable game, however! Sure, it's not in the victory conditions, but flaming a King Tiger does take the sting out of a loss... The tourney culminated in a last-round showdown between Rich Summers and Phil Spilky (sp?), in Shklov's Labors Lost (sp?). Rich was looking broken and DM'd, having lost his commisar to a sniper on the second to last turn, and losing concealment as well in the mandatory LLMC. His subsequent personal self-rally attempt came up boxcars as he rolled just that for random selection following a CC; that cost him half his remaining squad and his 10-3. However, he was still in the game, as Phil had to nail the last Bolshie HS on the final Russian player-turn to control the contested victory building. Phil failed to fire on the HS as it assault-moved within the building, costing him a couple of shots he needed. He missed a 12+3, and broke his gun on his remaining Stug, leaving Rich the victor with 68 points overall. This game was played in good humor, and was a fitting end to the weekend. Overall, this was a well-managed event, and the numbers attending qualify it as a success. Rounds proceeded smoothly, and Phil's computerized tally system made player match-ups a breeze. My only complaint was the lack of PTO scenarios (only three, and these were optional), but that's a small gripe given the high points. Special thanks to Louie Tokarz, who pulled the whole thing together. I look forward to AvalonCon, and seeing some of these folks again. Until then, take it easy, JR ----- Subject: CC Counters From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 14:06:00 -0640 Howdy, "Noah Matt" writes: > Hi. Besides signifying that same hex units are not yet in > melee, does a CC counter mean anything else? I seem to > remember reading in a FFE/ASLUG/Rout Report that a CC > counter placed on a counter prevented that unit from doing > anything (like SFF/FPF) until the CC phase. I can't find > the article, and I've found nothing in the ASLRB. Is this > true or am I imagining things? Thanks. Well, typically a unit marked with a CC counter would be eligible for TPBF and therefore unable to fire out of the Location. Since A8.312 says "[a]n armed, unbroken _Infantry_ DEFENDER not in Melee _must_ immediately attack any Infantry/Cavalry MMC unit that enters its Location," we can assume that a unit marked with a CC counter could perform at least this (which might happen if a unit were charged by 2 berserk units). I don't know of any rule which specifically limits CC Locations beyond being eligible for TPBF. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 14:06:17 PDT From: erimli@systems.caltech.edu (Bahadir Erimli) Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC > In the game, the Finnish HS & prisoners were in OG (road), but managed to > win the ambush dr and withdraw to a building. Is OG an ambush location ?! take care, bahadir ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 14:17:18 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC > > > In the game, the Finnish HS & prisoners were in OG (road), but managed to > > win the ambush dr and withdraw to a building. > > Is OG an ambush location ?! Ambush is possible in any terrain if one or more units are concealed. Fred > > take care, > bahadir > > ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 14:51:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC Bahadir: OG itself isn't but any non-melee location containing concealed units is. I believe this was the case in the cited example. Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock [stuff deleted] > Is OG an ambush location ?! [stuff deleted] ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 11:41:39 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: Red Army Blues Another good piece of ASL music is RED ARMY BLUES by The Waterboys. A little more on the political side, and from a great album as well. -Grant. ... Why do scots wear Kilts? Because sheep would hear a zipper. -== IceIQle v1.7 ==- ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 11:12:49 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: Carl tTR> At any rate. Prisoners, you say. Play Carl sometime, then tTR> you'll learn about prisoners. He won't KILL your units, no tTR> no, that would be too easy. Carl has to WOUND them, break tTR> them, Disrupt them, so that he can run up and CAPTURE them. Ha tTR> ha, there's the real thrill of the game for him. If he had but tTR> one unit left on the last turn of the game and had to choose tTR> between occupying the VC building or running across the board tTR> to capture a disrupted 6+1, I do believe he'd have to think tTR> about it. tTR> I can vouch for this. OR even better, he likes to sidle up to you in a rusty in of an AFV (AF=1) just to eliminate you for failure to rout. Cruel, baby, too cruel. -Grant. ... 486SX: When only the most recent mediocrity will do... -== IceIQle v1.7 ==- ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 21:34:14 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC In message Thu, 28 Apr 94 14:17:18 PDT, Frederick.Timm@eng.sun.com (Fred Timm) writes: >> > In the game, the Finnish HS & prisoners were in OG (road), but >> managed to > win the ambush dr and withdraw to a building. >> >> Is OG an ambush location ?! > > Ambush is possible in any terrain if one or more units are concealed. Just that it gets tough to figure how someone could advance into an OG location and still retain concealment to justify an ambush. ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 13:44:12 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: Rout Question A rout question has arisen in a current game that echos one that came up at my last club meeting, so I thought I'd post it to see what you all think. There is a GO 467 at 6K8. There is a broken French 437 at J7. The French commander contends that the broken unit can rout from J7 to I8,I9,J9,K10. The German commander contends that the unit must attempt to rout to H10. The German's reasoning is that H10 is the closest building/woods hex in the broken units LOS. The French commander maintains that K10 is actually closer, even though it is out of LOS, and would be routing "forward". In this specific instance, it doesn't bother me which way it goes, but I would like any specific rules references so that I know how to resolve this clearly in future. So say your piece and shed a little light. -Grant. ... Go Flames, GO! -== IceIQle v1.7 ==- ----- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 22:02 PDT Subject: Scenario Playtest From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) A couple of regular gaming buddies and I have come up with (among others) an ASL scenario. It's been tested pretty heavily, but we need a blind playtest or two. Anyone care to try it out? It requires: BV and WoA, and Board 10. It's all infantry, no Guns or AFVs. -- J.D. Frazer, Vancouver, B.C. Editor - Columbia Games a481@mindlink.bc.ca ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 12:10:17 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, [ about a finnish HS guarding three squads of prisoners ] > > 2. Assuming the stack could be concealed, what would the modifiers > > be to its ambush dr? (-1 stealthy, -2 concealed, any others??) > > There would be no modifiers because it is guarding. All others apply > normally. Isn't a guarding units always lax? -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: Patrik Manlig Subject: Re: Easy HIP question Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 12:14:46 +0200 (MET DST) Hi, [ Fred answers to a question about Haz. Movement and ?-loss ] > Yes they do lose concealment. All of his units that you can see in the this > DFPh will lose concealment since he is not using AM. I don't think that AM has any relevance in the _DFPh_. But, if I remember correctly, the column is indeed revealed as soon as any enemy units have a LOS to them. This is becuase Hazardous Movement is a ?-loss activity in all phases, if memory serves. -- m91pma@student.tdb.uu.se /Patrik Manlig "Show me the Devil, and I'll show him HELL!" ----- From: steve.cocks@duesenberg.se Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 12:36:51 Subject: ASL GAP I noticed that the ASL GAP is available by FTP. I take it this is not the official ASL GAP from Avalon Hill but something else. Could someone elaborate on it and let me no if it is worth getting. Is there a mail server for the ASL files. I don't have FTP capability. Cheers Steve Cocks ----- From: wuj@moss.emsp.att.com Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 08:36 EDT Subject: Re: Prisoners and withdraw from CC Thanks for all the replies to my example. -------------------------------------------------------------------- >A unit can only guard 5 times its size in prisoners, so your HS can only >guard 2.5 squads. Rule A20.51, first sentence: A single Guard unit can guard prisoners with a total US# up to five times its own US#, .... A HS has US# of 2 5 * 2 = 10 A Squad has US# of 3 Therefore, 3 Squads can be guarded by a HS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Ambush is possible in any terrain if one or more units are concealed. >Just that it gets tough to figure how someone could advance into an OG >location and still retain concealment to justify an ambush. Let me clarify the situation a little. The Finnish HS was concealed in an OG hex when a Russian squad moved up next to it (it was the Russian player turn). The Russian squad then advanced into the Finns location. The ambush dr was made possible by the presence of the concealed Finns. The Finns never moved or advanced while they were in LOS of enemy units! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Isn't a guarding units always lax? I couldn't find this anywhere. Walt Ulicki wuj@moss.emsp.att.com ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 08:50:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Mustafa Unlu Subject: Night time melee As the bumbling lax boys of the 6th grenadiers attempt to capture a broken German hs in CC, they roll a 12, causing immediate withdrawal of Herr Rommel's suntan parlor specialists. The question is: Are gunflashes still placed? In the spirit of the recent recreationalist thread: I imagine a squad and a half of grenadiers bumbling around in the same hex in the dark, whispering challenges to shadows and inviting each other to surrender, while a few dark shadows slip sliently into the night, unnoticed by anyone. And it isn't even tea time. Speaking of which, does anyone have a house rule addition for A25.4 for scenarios taking place at or around 5 p.m. yet? M. ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 09:36:24 EDT From: brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov (Brian Youse) Subject: Huntsville? Guys, I'll be in Huntsville Alabama from May 8 through May 13. Anyone local want a ftf game to save me from the living hell that is Alabama? 8) Brian ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 10:42:15 EDT From: krv@eng.tridom.com (Kevin Valerien) Subject: Sbeitla Probe question Greetings, I have a question concerning freedom of movement in the scenario Sbeitla Probe. Sbeitla Probe is a night scenario where the Americans are defending. The Americans must start with several on map vehicles in motion. Are these vehicles considered to have freedom of movement? Normally vehicles would be stationary and under a 'No Move' counter. There is no SSR discussing this and I couldn't find any references to on map motion vehicles in the night set-up rules. Thanks, Kevin --- Kevin Valerien krv@eng.tridom.com ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 10:53:18 EDT From: krv@eng.tridom.com (Kevin Valerien) Subject: bog on the beach question Greetings, I started a game the other day as part of the Japanese side of 'Bloody Red Beach'. This is part of our PTO training for Gavutu. :) The marines are heading toward the beach and I've been trying to figure out what bog checks the vehicles need to take when roll up on to the beach hexes with the wire. I'm not that familiar with the desert rules and I was unaware of the special sand Bog rolls until now. It appears to me that the vehicles must take both a sand Bog roll (modified by -1 for hard sand) and a normal Bog roll (modified by +2 for wire). Is this correct? Thanks, Kevin --- Kevin Valerien krv@eng.tridom.com ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 08:35:25 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Counter Storage Ugh. Don't want to discuss this openly on the list, but if anyone who uses the large Plano boxes (4x6 compartments) would send me some ideas about how to arrange my counters in them, I'd be grateful. I've got 8 of the suckers to use. Plano boxes sure beat those hollowed-out potato skins that Tom uses. Dave ----- From: Mats Persson Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 18:44:49 +0200 Subject: Re: Trademarks and Copyright >Does anyone know what sort of copyright and trademark rules have to be >followed if someone puts together scenarios for ASL? This assumes that >scanned images of the ASL counters are being used. I think I should comment this about scenarios with my little knowledge in Swedish and American copyright laws. Correct me if I'm wrong. What are not copyrighted? The historical action in the scenario, names in the historical records, or facts about weapons and equipment, are not copyrighted. This means you can make a module "Peipers adventures in Stoumont", with your own scenarios and campaign games. Ideas are not copyrighted. They maybe can be patented in US, but not in Sweden. This means you can make a system very similar to ASL, without using any material from the ASL rulebook or charts, of course. What is trademarked or copyrighted? The "ASL" logo and "Avalon Hill" and its variations is trademarked or treated as such. Likewise with names of their modules and maybe even names of their scenarios. "Prep fire phase" or "Morale Check" is not trademarked. Everything Avalon Hill sells is copyrighted down to every page or part of a page in the rulebook or a scenario, but ordinary words, sentences and numbers are not. Where to draw this line is up to the judges. How they think is the next paragraph. What is the purpose of the copyright law? To protect the authors artistical and economical interests. If you use ASL in connection with something offending or insulting you are making an artistical infringement. For example, making a scenario called "Fun in the concentration camp" with 20 SS-squads vs 5 Jewish squads and VC "kill all jews". This means its not wise to use the ASL logo on anything you produce. The economical part is the most important and Avalon Hill would defend this harder. Use the question "Would Avalon Hill lose money or income if I copy this?". They would lose income if you copy any of their published scenarios or anything else they produce, because then you wouldn't buy it from them. But would they lose anything if you copy a small counter from a scenario? They did put in some effort in designing the counter, but it is very simple and not very artistic. Anyone can make them with a drawing program. Do they plan to sell scanned counters? Probably not. Is the design of the scenario card copyrighted? No, "look and feel" of a scenario is not copyrighted. Have Avalon Hill said anything about this ever? I haven't heard anything from them. If they want to protect their rights they should protest now, otherwise they lose copyright on the scanned counters. I think you are free to make scenarios and use scanned counters. /Mats Persson ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 12:21:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Re: Counter Storage I was just bagging all of my counters in "ziploc" poly-bags -- a by product of hospital pharmacy these days. I sort the counters by type (eg: 6-5-8ss and attendent half squads in the same bag; all PzII, etc.) and then bag them again by type (eg: all German infantry counter, vehicles, ordnance, etc.). It works pretty well if you have access to 3 or 4 different sizes of poly-bags - I recommend 2x4, 3x5, 4x6, and 6x8 or 6x10. Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ----- Subject: Night time melee From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 11:00:00 -0640 Howdy, Mustafa Unlu writes: > As the bumbling lax boys of the 6th grenadiers attempt to > capture a broken German hs in CC, they roll a 12, causing > immediate withdrawal of Herr Rommel's suntan parlor > specialists. > > The question is: Are gunflashes still placed? The Gunflashes would be due to a Melee counter (E1.82). CC attacks in themselves do not result in a Gunflash. A11.15: "MELEE: If Infantry of both sides remain in the same Location after all initial CC attacks have been resolved at the end of a CCPh, they are considered to be locked in Melee" Since there aren't units locked in Melee, there would be no Gunflash. This does remind me of a question I've been meaning to ask: if units are locked in Melee and one side or the other is removed from the Location (vehicle which moves, Sniper, outside fire), when is the Melee counter removed? Immediately? After the next CCPh? So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Subject: ROUT QUESTION From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 10:48:00 -0640 Howdy, N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) writes: > There is a GO 467 at 6K8. There is a broken French 437 at > J7. The French commander contends that the broken unit can > rout from J7 to I8,I9,J9,K10. The German commander > contends that the unit must attempt to rout to H10. The > German's reasoning is that H10 is the closest building/woods > hex in the broken units LOS. The French commander > maintains that K10 is actually closer, even though it is > out of LOS, and would be routing "forward". I suspect I have missed some subtlety, but I will take a shot at answering. First, I assume the unit in 6K8 is at ground level of the 6K8 building; if not, the French can remain in place and must rout to 6J8 if they choose to rout. Assuming then that the German is at ground level, the closest building/woods is 6K4, at 5 MP distant. I now assume that this solution is also blocked by the presence of Germans, as is J3 at distance 6 MF. Next, the French could Low Crawl to J6, I7, or I8 assuming they did not move closer to enemy units, etc. If the French don't Low Crawl and the K4 solution is ruled out, then the closest building/woods are H10, J10 and K10. The routing unit does _not_ have an LOS to 6H10: it is blocked by the wall, but that doesn't matter. A10.51 says that a unit must rout to "the nearest (in MF) building or woods hex." That rule does not mention LOS to the building at all. Since all the hexes are equidistant, the routing unit can choose from them. The French could not rout to I9 or J9 because these are not buildings/woods and the unit could reach a building/woods this RtPh: >From the Q&A: "A10.51 If a DM broken unit that must rout is within six MF of the nearest woods/building, must it attempt to reach that woods/building in a single RtPh? "A. Yes, unless it uses Low Crawl, but it need not take the shortest route (in hexes/MF) to do so. Even if it uses Low Crawl, however, it must still do so toward that woods/building (i.e., at no time may it increase the hex range between itself and that woods/building, and must end that RtPh closer to it than it was at the start of that phase). {92}" There is no notion of "forward" in routing. In routing to 6K10 the unit would be routing to the nearest building/woods, would not be routing ADJACENT nor toward a Known enemy unit, and so by A10.51 the rout would be legal. Let me know what subtlety I missed :-) So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 10:15:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: Sbeitla Probe question Kevin: The consensus of our wee group is that Freedom of Movement for the MOTION AFVs is the only thing that makes sense. Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock [stuff deleted] > Sbeitla Probe is a night scenario where the Americans are defending. > The Americans must start with several on map vehicles in motion. Are > these vehicles considered to have freedom of movement? Normally vehicles > would be stationary and under a 'No Move' counter. There is no SSR > discussing this and I couldn't find any references to on map motion > vehicles in the night set-up rules. ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 10:19:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: bog on the beach question Kevin: I cannot quote you anything at the moment but I play it that you first take the Sand Bog DR and, if that is passed, you then take the Wire Bog DR. If it were a situation where you have two different Terrain Bog DRs, you'd just make one DR using the worst possible case. Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock [stuff deleted] > The marines are heading toward the beach and I've been trying to > figure out what bog checks the vehicles need to take when roll up > on to the beach hexes with the wire. I'm not that familiar with the > desert rules and I was unaware of the special sand Bog rolls until now. > > It appears to me that the vehicles must take both a sand Bog roll (modified > by -1 for hard sand) and a normal Bog roll (modified by +2 for wire). Is > this correct? ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 17:02:20 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Oops!!! To ASL (double check header) repeat ASL list: Don't you hate it when some dork cc's a message to the wrong mailing list? Why, I think that... Oops. It was me. Sorry. Hey, at least it was only baseball, not alt.fan.llamas or something. At least it was only a couple of pages. At least it was relating to Baltimore, some of TAHGC (thanks to the four of you who kindly made this excuse for me). At least it wasn't a frantic "unsubscribe me or die!!!!!!!" demand to the whole list... Thanks to all x (x >10, x increasing continuously) of you, including 2 O's fans, who pointed out my mistake. No Blue Jays fans flamed me for it. Thanks to the beauty of netlag and the especially slow GEnie -internet gate, I'll be getting "you screwed up" posts until at least next Wednesday. Fitting punishment, I believe. To make things fair, I think I'll send a particularly acronym-laden ASL post to the O's list. Some of the statheads would love anything as complex as ASL. ObASL: As an apology, I'll try to do something useful and ASL-related next week. Maybe I'll finish my holes-in-the-PBEM-rules thesis for the never-to-be-written Chapter Z. Send 'em if you've got any particular pet peeves. (Mine is the fact that you can't relocate your sniper on a 2 when the other guy rolls your SAN without a special note explaining the possibillty...) (... or am I the only one who wishes the PBEM rules were as complex as the actual rules?) Sorry and whatnot, Dave Ripton ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com, or /dev/null for flames ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 17:22:59 -0400 (EDT) From: John Appel Subject: Easy ladder points! Now that the wife, munchkin and I have setttled into our new abode, I can actually unpack my ASL gear and settle down to an e-mail game! Any takers? I have BV, Paratrooper, Yanks, and KGP I. Also, the 89 Annual, and I work three miles from the Armory in Baltimore, so picking up another Annual or General issue isn't much of a problem. MOdules are another story, but not for long.... Side note - JR mentioned the septugenarian paratroopers who are jumping into Normandy for the festivities. Speaking from personal experience, it's probably due to the sharp head blows we receive during landings...scrambles our brains for life. John Appel jappel@access.digex.com ----- Subject: bog on the beach question From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 14:07:00 -0640 Howdy, krv@eng.tridom.com (Kevin Valerien) writes: > The marines are heading toward the beach and I've been > trying to figure out what bog checks the vehicles need to > take when roll up on to the beach hexes with the wire. I'm > not that familiar with the desert rules and I was unaware > of the special sand Bog rolls until now. > > It appears to me that the vehicles must take both a sand Bog > roll (modified by -1 for hard sand) and a normal Bog roll > (modified by +2 for wire). Is this correct? I would think that the tank would only make one Bog DR, modified by -1 for hard sand and +2 for wire. The only support I have from the rules for this, though, is that the DRM for bog check are called "cumulative" [D8.21], which is not the strongest. Note too that there is a Bog check for leaving an Ocean hex [G13.4223] if you wade across a non-beach hexside. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Subject: Re: Trademarks and Copyri From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 14:07:00 -0640 Howdy, Mats Persson writes: > But would they lose anything if you copy a small counter > from a scenario? They did put in some effort in designing > the counter, but it is very simple and not very artistic. > Anyone can make them with a drawing program. Do they plan > to sell scanned counters? Probably not. Is the design of > the scenario card copyrighted? No, "look and feel" of a > scenario is not copyrighted. Have Avalon Hill said anything > about this ever? I haven't heard anything from them. If > they want to protect their rights they should protest now, > otherwise they lose copyright on the scanned counters. This is probably not correct. From what I understand of copyright law it requires a deliberate action (a declaration that the material is not copyright, for instance) to release a copyright if one exists. As I understand the law, even if the holder of the copyright knew of a violation and did nothing to protect their copyright (they felt it wouldn't be worth their time), they still own the copyright and can still protect it at a later time or from another infringement. I don't believe the economic impact has any bearing on the fact of violating copyright (it may affect damages awarded). The fact that the counters are "simple," "not very artistic," and "anyone can make them" probably has no bearing either. If I write an article, you may bet that it will be "simple," "not very artistic," and "anyone can make" it, but I will still hold the copyright. Their future plans for marketing scanned counters also probably holds no weight. My understanding is limited to American law, and derives from the Copyright-FAQ. This article is probably a good place to start understanding copyright law. It is available via anonymous ftp on rtfm.mit.edu in /pub/usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ. I believe that scanned counters may not violate copyright, but for other reasons. I do not want to say why because I only have a vague memory of this and can't find any support for it. Try the copyright FAQ. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 17:13:14 -0600 From: djgour@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Re: Easy ladder points! John, I'm ready to get underway with a ladder game whenever you're ready. I have all the modules that you listed, but would prefer a non-KGP game due to the size of the map and the lack of room I have here to set it up... Darren Gour ----- Subject: Sbeitla Probe question From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 14:07:00 -0640 Howdy, krv@eng.tridom.com (Kevin Valerien) writes: > Sbeitla Probe is a night scenario where the Americans are > defending. The Americans must start with several on map > vehicles in motion. Are these vehicles considered to have > freedom of movement? Normally vehicles would be stationary > and under a 'No Move' counter. There is no SSR discussing > this and I couldn't find any references to on map motion > vehicles in the night set-up rules. We had the same question when we played it, and we also couldn't find any rule, SSR, or erratum. We played it that the reinforcements had FoM because that's the only thing that makes sense. So long, JR --- þ 1st 1.11 #2895 þ Foo ----- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 94 01:38:00 +0200 From: Pedro Faria Subject: Counter question Here is a question for everybody out there. Suppose the scenario card says that you should have 6 AFV's of a certain type. Now, half of the six counters available have a different MG armament than that shown on the scenario card. Should you use them with the different MG armament or should you pretend they all have only the MG armament as shown on the scenario card ? The scenario in question is Ad Hoc at Beaurains. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- : Pedro Faria : : : Lund Institute of Technology (LTH) : mail: Kamnarsvagen 13 D:203 : : email: k89_foc@lthkcu.kc.lth.se : S-226 46 LUND : : Phone: +46 46/394048 : SWEDEN : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 94 20:12 PDT Subject: Re: Trademarks and Copyright From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) Mats Persson writes: > > I think you are free to make scenarios and use scanned counters. Thanks Mats, that's the response I was looking for. -- J.D. Frazer, Vancouver, B.C. Editor - Columbia Games a481@mindlink.bc.ca ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 21:05:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: Easy HIP question Paul [relax, this has nothing to do with our scenario]: I apologise if someone's already pointed this out but shouldn't the entire column lose concealment as soon as you have LOS from an onboard unit: E11.54...all units in a Column lose their "?" when that Column Disbands, regardless of LOS and the presence of and range to enemy units. Also, the second-to-last sentence of E11.53 seems pretty clear (to me) about the Hazardous Movement DRM and DFF, if you remember to treat the Column as a multi-hex stack (i.e. I interpret "instantaneous" loss of Hazardous Movement and Pinning to occur after the MF expenditure). Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock > > I'm playing one of the scenarios from Code of Bushido (Dangerous Occupation) > where all my forces start up HIP. The Japanese are marching through the > jungle using column movement. My question deals with what happens when > I start revealing my units and firing. I think that I get the -2 drm for > "hazardous activity," but I'm not sure if his units (which started out > concealed) lose concealment when I reveal a unit with a LOS to them (and > therefore, before I fire). > > It would seem that if I qualify for the -2 movement drm, the unit must be > expending MF in the LOS of my unit and so would loose concealment. And that > if he dosn't have the option to stop movement and avoid a fire drm, he > wouldn't have the option to stop movement to avoid ? loss. Does this make > sense, or is there something I am missing (very likely ). ----- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 20:54:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: Bocage Quickie! Mike: It looks to me like you already know the answer. I cannot find anything in the rules that differentiates a Pinned re: wall advantage loss/gain. Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock > How does pinning (if at all) effect wall advantage, expecially considering > bocage. You have to be good order, but pin is good order. > lets say you have a unit adjacent to you, he is good order, he fires on > you and pins you. Do you lose wall advantage? Are you prevented from > gaining wall advantage if you want to? ----- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 10:25:09 -0400 (EDT) From: James D Shetler Subject: Marine Corps. book Howdy, I just finished cataloging a book that some of you might find very interesting. The title is "First offensive : the Marine campaign for Guadalcanal". The book is from the series "Marines in World War II Commemorative Series" and is perfect for ASLers. Henry I. Shaw is the author, and the book is well illustrated and very well written. Lots of stuff on equipment, tactics, Gavutu-Tanambogo, etc. Ask for it at a library near you! Toiling, on a Saturday morning, in Pittsburgh, Jim Shetler ----- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 94 13:17:30 CDT From: carrington rhydderch ward Subject: ADJACENTCY of adjacent units Just had a rules revelation that I wanted to confirm. Units are ADJACENT if they are in adjacent hexes, have line of sight, and could conceivably advance into each other's _hex_. (From ASL index) This means that a unit at level one, or in the cellar of a building would be considered ADJACENT to a unit in an adjacent open ground hex, or hex of a different building. Am I right so far? This allows a fire group to be formed between a unit in an upper level building location and an adjacent unit, without necessitating units in the intervening levels. One could even imagine a FG formed between a unit on an upper level and a unit in pillbox or foxhole. So far this all seems fine, I guess. What about the placement of DCs? Does this mean that one could place a DC from the street into the third level location of a building? Into a cellar, etc.? Hmmm. That I don't like so much. Carrington Ward ----- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 17:54:28 -0500 (EST) From: SMITDV@UCBEH.SAN.UC.EDU Subject: KGP Questions Hi! Well my gaming group is preparing to embark on campaign turn 2 of KGP1. The Germans are poised to envelop the Sanatorium, with at least a 4:1 advantage (if the Americans even decide they want to try to hold it this turn). However, we have a few rules questions which we were unable to completely puzle out from the ASLRB. 1) What is the scoop with all these one lane woods roads and vehicle wrecks? KGP7 states that restrictions as stated in B6.43 and B6.431 that apply to one lane bridges also apply to these road hexes. In these we learn that n vehicle may not enter a one-lane bridge if that location already contains a vehicle or wreck. This means that with a wreck, that road becomes impassable. Not a problem, if one expends the neccesary movement to push that vehicle out of the way(D10.4). But wait! Rule KGP10 states that no burnt out wreck may be removed as per D10.4. So, if a burnt out wreck occupies a woods-single lane road, then that road becomes impassable for the duration of that scenario, right? Does anyone have any insights, strategy or otherwise into this situation? I would be happy to hear of anyone perhaps using this to their advantage (or against them also, I guess ). While on the subject of non-moving vehicles, is it possible to push an immobilized vehicle out of the way as per D10.4? The rules make no statement about this, but it seems strange that one would not be able to move such a vehicle out of the way if one needed to. This problem was first evidenced when we were playing "Panthers in the Mist". Anyway, another day of bloodshed and die rolls awaits. Wish me luck! regards David B. Smith -- SMITDV@UCBEH.SAN.UC.EDU