Is an AFV good order if in motion and with functioning MA in a hex where a melee counter is above two opposing INF units?

[Ray Woloszyn]

One of the recent Schwerpunkt scenarios requires a good order AFV to be in a crossroads hex at game end for a victory point.

 

[Binchois]

It would be if it was alone in the Location, so it would also be in this case - since the AFV is, itself, not held in melee:

Good Order (a Personnel Unit or vehicular Inherent_Crew which is neither broken, Berserk, captured, stunned, shocked, or held in Melee; or a SW which is fully manned by a Good Order Personnel unit, and is not malfunctioned, or restricted by an Ammunition_Shortage): A.7 [a Panicked unit is never in Good Order: S6.211] [Target of Activated ENEMY: S5.3, S5.31]​

​

An AFV (even an immobile one) can never be held in melee (A11.7).

 

[Justiciar]

I do not think there is a technical definition of a Good Order AFV* in ASL....as opposed to Personnel Unit or vehicular crew, as post 2 shows us.

On might assume it is a AFV which is mobile, has a manned and functioning MA, is not shocked, stunned, Stunned, not suffering Ammo Shortage, or something along these lines....

 

[Binchois]

I do not think there is a technical definition of a Good Order AFV* in ASL....as opposed to Personnel Unit or vehicular crew, as post 2 shows us.

On might assume it is a AFV which is mobile, has a manned and functioning MA, is not shocked, stunned, Stunned, not suffering Ammo Shortage, or something along these lines....

Yes! So strange that the scenario's VC would use this term!

I share your assumptions about how the term "Good Order AFV" might be defined, but given its lack of an official definition, my post reasoned as follows: If the Infantry in that hex were Good Order prior to melee, then being "held in Melee" is the only reason they are currently not Good Order. The same must be true for the AFV: If the AFV was in Good Order before, it must still be in Good Order since it cannot be held in Melee.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Yes! So strange that the scenario's VC would use this term!

It's not uncommon that that expression is used in VC - even in older official scenarios. When I read it I always assume it means the inherent crew is not shocked, stunned, etc. - per the Index definition.

 

[Ray Woloszyn]

We played it as good order but only if in motion. Not sure what to say about the victory conditions which were a bit confusing. A definition of good order for an AFV might be a good idea in the future though it might affect some older scenarios.

 

[Justiciar]

It's not uncommon that that expression is used in VC - even in older official scenarios. When I read it I always assume it means the inherent crew is not shocked, stunned, etc. - per the Index definition.

But if the AFV had no functioning MA....or any weapons at all, and/or was immobilized...this hardly seems like Good Order....one could even make a case that Bog/Mired is not too Good Order either.

Be nice to have an official definition.

I would want it to be more comprehensive (have functioning MA, be mobile, and all the rest that goes with the crew side you note).

 

[jrv]

We played it as good order but only if in motion.

Motion should not affect whether it is good order or not. I assume you are thinking of Melee here, and a vehicle is never held in Melee, Motion or not.

JR

 

[R Hooks]

I agree with all of you that the Tank can't be held in melee. But I have a question about malfunctioned: tanks often have several weapons, if anyone of them is malfunctioned is it not in good order? Or does having one weapon allow it to stay in good order. Or is that reference only about SW, not a tank.

 

[Ray Woloszyn]

Motion should not affect whether it is good order or not. I assume you are thinking of Melee here, and a vehicle is never held in Melee, Motion or not.

JR

Traveling with no rule book and did not realize or checked that an immobile vehicle can't be held in melee which seems to defy logic IMHO. Would not be the first time. Rules "r" rules...RRR.

 

[Robin Reeve]

Traveling with no rule book and did not realize or checked that an immobile vehicle can't be held in melee which seems to defy logic IMHO. Would not be the first time. Rules "r" rules...RRR.

I presume that you were thinking of the end of A11.7, where a Motion/non Stopped vehicle doesn't hold Infantry in Melee :

A11.7 ... Even though a vehicle cannot be held in Melee, a non-Abandoned, "unbroken" (12.1) vehicle holds all Known enemy Infantry occupying the same Location after a CCPh in Melee as long as it remains in the Location (unless in-Motion/Non-Stopped).

But the opposite is not true as

A11.7 VEHICLE WITHDRAWAL FROM CC: A vehicle is never held in Melee...

 

[Vinnie]

There is a definition of good order in the index.

Good Order (a Personnel unit or vehicular inherent crew which is neither broken, berserk, captured, stunned, shocked, or held in Melee; or a SW which is fully manned by a Good Order Personnel unit, and is not malfunctioned, or restricted by an Ammunition Shortage): A.7

The vehicle is never in good order, it is the crew which is. The crew cannot be berserk or held in melee as neither apply to armoured vehicular crews. All other cases coukd apply.
Merely having a malfunctioned weapon does not affect too order status.

 

[Justiciar]

I agree with all of you that the Tank can't be held in melee. But I have a question about malfunctioned: tanks often have several weapons, if anyone of them is malfunctioned is it not in good order? Or does having one weapon allow it to stay in good order. Or is that reference only about SW, not a tank.

There is no technical definition via the Index. Having all weapons malfunctioned but the BMG does not make the AFV out of Good Order. You have to rely on how the scenario card defines the Good Order "status" of AFV...often it says something like "functioning and MA and Mobile" (but not exclusively so, but they do tend to have a definition even if a mixed feast from card to card.) If not, then you need to ask in designer/producer in their subform folder.

 

[Justiciar]

There is a definition of good order in the index.

Good Order (a Personnel unit or vehicular inherent crew which is neither broken, berserk, captured, stunned, shocked, or held in Melee; or a SW which is fully manned by a Good Order Personnel unit, and is not malfunctioned, or restricted by an Ammunition Shortage): A.7

The vehicle is never in good order, it is the crew which is. The crew cannot be berserk or held in melee as neither apply to armoured vehicular crews. All other cases coukd apply.
Merely having a malfunctioned weapon does not affect too order status.

But this is as discussed upstream, not germane to "AFV".

Once Brackin gets wind of this thread I hope he chimes in. He actually had a chat with Perry at a WO a few years gone by now on this very topic...."there is no definition of Good Order AFV"...as I recall...Perry agreed.

 

[jrv]

Once Brackin gets wind of this thread I hope he chimes in.

Brackin has given up on ASL and is playing Axis & Allies: Civil War edition

JR

 

[Eagle4ty]

I presume that you were thinking of the end of A11.7, where a Motion/non Stopped vehicle doesn't hold Infantry in Melee :

But the opposite is not true as

I've always had a hard time swallowing the interpretation of vehicles "not being held in Melee". I would disagree with the current interpretation that "not being held in Melee" means you've never been in Melee in the first place. To me how can one "not be held in Melee" (i.e. released from such a status) if you have never been in that status in the first place? Of course I play it as interpreted currently, but think a more appropriate wording would be something like, "a vehicle is never considered to be in Melee [EXC:...]" if one is to accept wholeheartedly the current concept. {Just thoughts here}

 

[Justiciar]

Hmmm, hair splitting me think your are...

One's "held" and your "considered to be" are on either side of a very fine Tauntaun hair...your verb "to be" is a very powerful one...you are relying on your "considered" as the tempering edge...whilst the ASLRB's "held" is the power verb...but tempered by "not being".

So which to be is it...?

 

[Robin Reeve]

As Melee follows a CC situation, being "held" makes sense as indicating a consequence of a preceding ("in CC") status : the vehicle isn't caught/grasped by other units which would hold it in Melee.

 

[JR Brackin]

Brackin has given up on ASL and is playing Axis & Allies: Civil War edition

JR

Civil War caissons are only in GO if their wheels are not broken and their horses are still GO.

 

[JR Brackin]

But this is as discussed upstream, not germane to "AFV".

Once Brackin gets wind of this thread I hope he chimes in. He actually had a chat with Perry at a WO a few years gone by now on this very topic...."there is no definition of Good Order AFV"...as I recall...Perry agreed.

it has been a while since I talked with Perry - but there is nothing that i am aware of regarding vehicle, but rather the crew. The issue is that it should be specific to state a GO Vehicular crew.