Recent content by Tater

No argument to lose or win...the rules aren't changing...not enough scenarios that include enough foxholes to make it worthwhile. What I have pointed out about foxholes is universally known...it's NOT a "personal idea", it is a known fact, I wasn't even the first person to bring it up in this...

Uuuh, OK...as I stated, for the concept of ASL being the "hot moment" (a universally accepted standard), foxholes are broken...Pete agrees...so, what is you point? Keeping in mind the original question and purpose of the thread...and the themes of the various discussion...this was never about...

I suggest using the woods already present, but that is just me. 🤣

Right, and thanks for finally agreeing that they are broken relative to ASL.

It really is very simple...just allow GO units to move in/out of foxholes the same as brokies do. No need for a lot of extra chrome or verbiage.

OBA...sure, if my opponent can get it...then get it on me...half the scenario could be over by then...maybe longer if I reposition out of LOS of the observer...or skulk to rotate in '?' units. If you are planning your tactics out of fear of the opponents OBA then he doesn't even have to bring it...

There's your problem...an ASL scenario is not a "battle". It is the hot 30-60 minute (real time) fire-fight that would have the handful of squads involved (on both sides) repositioning for any number of short term tactical reasons. Foxhole rules do not fit this idea. So the designers got OBA...

And reduce the use of foxholes even further...not seeing that as a solution. OTOH, it would open up a couple of cells in my storage box when I toss all those foxhole counters.

All I am asking for is that foxholes be usable, which is "something they're not". And it isn't a +2 advantage for foxhole since any other +1 or better terrain is preferable. So the exchange is really higher risk for an additional +1 TEM. To call a foxhole a +2 advantage they would have to make...

And of course the way brokies are able to use foxholes vs GO units is an internally inconsistent rules issue for ASL. It makes no rules sense (historical or not) that brokies (out of control units) are better able to utilize foxholes at a sprint while GO units seem unable to figure out the...

Oh how I love the libtard double standard... Libtard: You can't condemn all muslims because of a few who have misinterpreted the Koran! (correct) Libtard: You can't condemn all illegal aliens because a few are murderers, rapists, drug smugglers, etc! (correct) Libtard: etc... But let one...

Except there is no advantage to using them as intended. One is better off in any +1 terrain rather than a foxhole because of the ability to skulk...and/or make a quick exit to reposition...not talking extensive maneuver (i.e., running half way across the board) but simply changing a hex maybe...

So you are saying that the design/rules for foxholes in ASL intended for players not to use foxholes? Well, they definitely succeeded!!! The only time foxholes don't work out is when you use them.

Yeah, it does...because this is a game. The counter is a game mechanic that abstracts hole(s) in the ground. As such it is a totally generic representation of what that might be from a rules standpoint. Had the rule been written differently from the start you wouldn't know any different. So...

Just reviewed several dozen historical pics of foxholes usage... Looks to me like you could have a hex with 1-2 foxholes or a hex with a dozen or so foxholes. Also looks like you could have deep, almost pit like foxholes as well as relatively shallow (shellhole like) superficial foxholes. As...