A10.5 and 20.21 - Routing and Surrender Examples

[SlyFrog]

Okay, here is the situation in a current game.

The question concerns the broken, DM German 4-4-7 in G6. We've already played this out, so you can have the pleasure of telling us if we screwed up or not.

As I read the rout and surrender rules combined, you only surrender if you are adjacent to an enemy unit and would either have to low crawl or suffer interdiction in order to rout away.

Meanwhile, you are not permitted to rout toward Known, enemy armed units if they are in the LOS of the routing unit (or were previously in the LOS of the routing unit).

So, as I see it, this unit in G6 could rout into H5, as it does not bring him any closer to any known, enemy, armed units who are in his LOS. Therefore, he has an option other than interdiction/low crawl, and does not surrender.

Now, as he does not have to surrender, he does not have to rout to H5, as he is starting in that building, and does not have to stay there for a rout. Therefore, he could choose to either low crawl to H6 or suffer interdiction (from the unit in F6) and then get to I7 (though possibly at the expense of a morale break to half-squad status).

Right? :shy:

 

[Jazz]

Okay, here is the situation in a current game.

The question concerns the broken, DM German 4-4-7 in G6. We've already played this out, so you can have the pleasure of telling us if we screwed up or not.

As I read the rout and surrender rules combined, you only surrender if you are adjacent to an enemy unit and would either have to low crawl or suffer interdiction in order to rout away.

Meanwhile, you are not permitted to rout toward Known, enemy armed units if they are in the LOS of the routing unit (or were previously in the LOS of the routing unit).

So, as I see it, this unit in G6 could rout into H5, as it does not bring him any closer to any known, enemy, armed units who are in his LOS. Therefore, he has an option other than interdiction/low crawl, and does not surrender.

Now, as he does not have to surrender, he does not have to rout to H5, as he is starting in that building, and does not have to stay there for a rout. Therefore, he could choose to either low crawl to H6 or suffer interdiction (from the unit in F6) and then get to I7 (though possibly at the expense of a morale break to half-squad status).

Right? :shy:

Sounds good to me.... assuming there is no LOS to J2 and your opponent does not reveal one of his concealed units there..both conditions need to exist for your guy to be able to rout to H5. You are correct that he does not have to excercise the option to rout to H5, he only has to have it as an option.

BTW, you have a typo in your 2nd paragraph, although it was evident from your discussion you understood correctly...just mis-typed. I added the required word in red above.

 

[SlyFrog]

Thanks! Corrected the typo. Incidentally, on my boards there did not seem to be line of sight to J2, so the concealment drop was not an issue either way (I added the concealed status in there because there actually is LOS on VASL, but not on our actual map). Forgot about dropping concealment though, so you still learn something every day.

 

[Jon]

Okay, here is the situation in a current game.

The question concerns the broken, DM German 4-4-7 in G6. We've already played this out, so you can have the pleasure of telling us if we screwed up or not.

As I read the rout and surrender rules combined, you only surrender if you are adjacent to an enemy unit and would either have to low crawl or suffer interdiction in order to rout away.

Meanwhile, you are not permitted to rout toward Known, enemy armed units if they are in the LOS of the routing unit (or were previously in the LOS of the routing unit).

So, as I see it, this unit in G6 could rout into H5, as it does not bring him any closer to any known, enemy, armed units who are in his LOS. Therefore, he has an option other than interdiction/low crawl, and does not surrender.

Now, as he does not have to surrender, he does not have to rout to H5, as he is starting in that building, and does not have to stay there for a rout. Therefore, he could choose to either low crawl to H6 or suffer interdiction (from the unit in F6) and then get to I7 (though possibly at the expense of a morale break to half-squad status).

Right? :shy:

Looks like you got it right. Also note that if there is an upper story in building J6, you have the option of routing up stairs to Level 1 or level 2

Cheers
Jon

 

[Jon]

Sounds good to me.... assuming there is no LOS to J2 and your opponent does not reveal one of his concealed units there..both conditions need to exist for your guy to be able to rout to H5. You are correct that he does not have to excercise the option to rout to H5, he only has to have it as an option.

Hi Jazz

just a minor point but but since the broken unit also has the option of a rout upstairs to level 1, the issue of a unit in J2 is irelevant. Since it has that legal rout path upstairs, it then has the option of a Low Crawl to H6 or a rout with Interdiction to H7.

Cheers Jon

 

[Jazz]

Hi Jazz

just a minor point but but since the broken unit also has the option of a rout upstairs to level 1, the issue of a unit in J2 is irelevant. Since it has that legal rout path upstairs, it then has the option of a Low Crawl to H6 or a rout with Interdiction to H7.

Cheers Jon

Yup, I'm disappointed at myself for not seeing that also. Turns out you would not need to have the concealment in J2.

 

[apbills]

Hi Jazz

just a minor point but but since the broken unit also has the option of a rout upstairs to level 1, the issue of a unit in J2 is irelevant. Since it has that legal rout path upstairs, it then has the option of a Low Crawl to H6 or a rout with Interdiction to H7.

Cheers Jon

I am pretty sure that building is a 2 story building with a stairwell in F6. There is no option to rout upstairs in this case. However, if that option was available, it would be a legal rout option and as stated, would allow the unit to rout towards H7 or I7.

 

[SlyFrog]

I am pretty sure that building is a 2 story building with a stairwell in F6. There is no option to rout upstairs in this case. However, if that option was available, it would be a legal rout option and as stated, would allow the unit to rout towards H7 or I7.

That is correct. I did think about routing upstairs, but there is no stairwell in G6 (and there is one in F6).

 

[Jon]

I am pretty sure that building is a 2 story building with a stairwell in F6. There is no option to rout upstairs in this case. However, if that option was available, it would be a legal rout option and as stated, would allow the unit to rout towards H7 or I7.

My Bad. I should have checked where the Stairwell was before posting, but I couldn't be bothered pulling out the actual board

Cheers
Jon

 

[SlyFrog]

Okay, here is another. Am I correct in assuming the broken German units in V5 surrender, assuming that No Quarter is not already in effect (it is an 8-3-8 Assault Engineer Squad, and a 2-4-7 HS in that stack, along with a (now dropped) Demo Charge, a 4-4-7 squad, and a 7-0 leader).

If I understand the rules correctly, they must rout (as they are adjacent to Known, armed enemy units) and they can not rout without low crawl or interdiction, meaning they surrender to those adjacent units.

I think I just learned a big lesson in last nights game session. :laugh:

For bonus points, though this one is a bit more subjective, are my opponent and I correct that the Soviet player should likely declare no quarter and slaughter them, as the MMG toting unit will not be able to fire due to the US# of the prisoners that would be taken exceeding that of the guarding squad?

 

[Psuderman]

Take them prisoner. I think even the Russians can freely deploy when taking prisoners, so take advantage of this. Once No Quarter is in effect, they won't surrender anymore, and you don't get freebies like that. When NQ is in effect, the units stay on the board and there's always chance of Heat of Battle popping them back on their feet at the worst possible time.

Let the other guy be the war criminal

 

[Sparafucil3]

Take them prisoner. I think even the Russians can freely deploy when taking prisoners, so take advantage of this. Once No Quarter is in effect, they won't surrender anymore, and you don't get freebies like that. When NQ is in effect, the units stay on the board and there's always chance of Heat of Battle popping them back on their feet at the worst possible time.

Let the other guy be the war criminal

You can freely deploy as Russians when possessing prisoners, just remember the ratio of Prisoner to Guard must be less than or equal to 5:1. You can combine Prisoner HS into full Prisoner squads to decrease the load should you need. More subtly, declaring NQ does not allow you to Mop Up which can come in quite handy when playing city fighting. -- jim

 

[SlyFrog]

Interesting. Didn't think about that. Soviet player's current though (in response) is that would mean that stack is dropping from 8 to 4 firepower for the next important prep fire phase (as the one HS would not be able to fire due to having US# prisoners higher than it, and the other would not be able to use its inherent FP and man the machinegun).

I did not mean to turn this into a tactics question, but now I'm curious. Do we have the rules right as to the firepower? If so, you would still opt to reduce the firepower of that stack for the next turn instead of going No Quarter?

Either way by the way, we had not considered the free prisoner deploy (I had seen it before, but it did not trigger for either of us in this situtation). So a lot of good has come out of this already in terms of rules knowledge.

 

[Jazz]

Interesting. Didn't think about that. Soviet player's current though (in response) is that would mean that stack is dropping from 8 to 4 firepower for the next important prep fire phase (as the one HS would not be able to fire due to having US# prisoners higher than it, and the other would not be able to use its inherent FP and man the machinegun).

I did not mean to turn this into a tactics question, but now I'm curious. Do we have the rules right as to the firepower? If so, you would still opt to reduce the firepower of that stack for the next turn instead of going No Quarter?

Either way by the way, we had not considered the free prisoner deploy (I had seen it before, but it did not trigger for either of us in this situtation). So a lot of good has come out of this already in terms of rules knowledge.

Why not? Tactics questions are good fun and a rare opportunity to disagree without getting pissed off and emotional about it....:smoke:

The opportunity to deploy Russians ALWAYS (or damn near) trumps any potential loss in firepower. Once you have a prisoner, you make a point of passing that prisoner around to full squads in the advance and rally phases to generate the HS that I always find myself wishing I had with the Russians. I get positively giddy when I can capture a enemy unit as the Russian.

The three things that a lot of players often do/don't do that they shouldn't/should do:

- Don't use SMOKE/smoke enough

- Don't deploy into enough HS (taking your 10% FRU of the at start OOB should be automatic unless you can think of a very specific reason not to)

- Declare No Quarter all the time without thinking about it. (What are the VC? CVP? Prisoners count double. Don't want the defender to low crawl or rout back from defensive position through interdiction to fight another day? Make them surrender).

OK, it's 4 things....

- Shoot too much and don't move enough.... Which is facilitated by HS 'cause you can spread out your troops into more hexes and hopefully flood his defense with targets in more hexes than he can shoot at.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Interesting. Didn't think about that. Soviet player's current though (in response) is that would mean that stack is dropping from 8 to 4 firepower for the next important prep fire phase (as the one HS would not be able to fire due to having US# prisoners higher than it, and the other would not be able to use its inherent FP and man the machinegun).

I did not mean to turn this into a tactics question, but now I'm curious. Do we have the rules right as to the firepower? If so, you would still opt to reduce the firepower of that stack for the next turn instead of going No Quarter?

Either way by the way, we had not considered the free prisoner deploy (I had seen it before, but it did not trigger for either of us in this situtation). So a lot of good has come out of this already in terms of rules knowledge.

Generally speaking, there are far more reasons to take a prisoner than there are to simply declare NQ. I think the reason most people declare NQ is because the rules covering them are so convoluted. If any sections of the rules needs to be relooked at, it is those in particular. On to your questions.

You are right about the firepower. A unit which is guarding more unit size equivalents than its own unit size may not fire at another unit, or use a SW, interdict, or kindle. So without deploying, the squad would not be able to use the MMG anyways.

To declare NQ, or not declare NQ. That is the question. I would have to have a very good reason to declare NQ. Once you do so, this unit here would not surrender but would instead low crawl or risk interdiction. If he can get to a leader, he may be back into the fight soon. Personally, I would take them. An 8 +3 still gets to a NMC on a 5 and ROF ~30% of the time. If I am on the attack and my objective is to secure buildings I never declare NQ. It is so much harder to "tag" every building location. For instance, building X3 in your example has 27 different Locations for a HIP unit to be hidden in. How many turns would it take you to enter each and every one? You can try searching the hexes, but that would take more than one unit and likely take some decent dr's to succeed. Or you could take one armed, unpinned Good Order Infantry MMC (ie, a HS is enough) which begins Prep Fire in X4 and declare Mopping up. Any HIP units in the building are placed on the board under concealment, any broken guys in the building surrender to a friendly unit in the building, dummies are removed, and if no Good Order enemy units remain in the building you gain control. Which one sounds easier to deal with as the attacker: entering all 27 Locations or Mopping up? -- jim

 

[SlyFrog]

Might as well be clear here (since I'm asking for advice without giving full information).

This scenario is Commando Schenke. That building is the fortified building that the Germans have to take. So the Soviets are defending.

Even in my newbie state, I take prisoners, and there are actually some prisoners with that stack of Germans right next to the building. So we're not in the camp that declares No Quarter without thought (though admittedly, we did forget about the free deployment rule, so we don't have our prisoner rules as locked down as I thought).

Hell, I even went through the unnerving "prisoner morale check to assault the guards" when my guarding unit broke a turn back.

Actually, though I get you can't afford to sit around and Prep Fire as the Germans in this scenario, I think I took it to the opposite extreme. The Soviet player did a forward defense, and has skillfully (for newb players anyway ) withdrawn into the fortified building. I pushed forward hard, probably too hard, as a good chunk of my guys got gunned down horribly, in particular by some low rolling MMG fire (rolled a 2 and a 3 on successive attacks against MMCs). It's actually only the beginning of the Soviet turn 3 right now; that position actually represents the end of the last German turn before the Rout Phase (minus some additional Germans that are in the further back buildings that did not seem relevant to the Rout question).

 

[Jazz]

Hell, I even went through the unnerving "prisoner morale check to assault the guards" when my guarding unit broke a turn back.

I've NEVER seen that happen...and I've tried...even if they're my guards....I just wanna see it happen....

I pushed forward hard, probably too hard, as a good chunk of my guys got gunned down horribly, in particular by some low rolling MMG fire (rolled a 2 and a 3 on successive attacks against MMCs).

Huh...low rolling MMGs....you know, one of my first ASL experiences involved a weekend in a hotel suite playing Mark Nixon, among others. He had a way of saying...."Well, if he's gonna roll like that, I'm just gonna lose this scenario..." Or maybe it was "If I'm not gonna make those kind of rolls, I'm gonna lose this scenario"? Can't recall. It was a long weekend.

You got 8 ML engineers so they can survive shots and get up close and not waste time doing it. If they ain't gonna survive the shots (your bad dice or his good)...some scenarios are bound to come up lost. I do think you need to push hard and fast. If the dice say Riga will stay Red for one more day....<shrug>

 

[Barber]

Besides all the previously mentioned reasons, I think you have to take the 838s prisoners. Cripes, it's hard enough to break them the first time. You don't want to have to do it again later. And, if the escape down the road, they come back as conscripts which are a heck of a lot easier to tackle.

Jeff

 

[SlyFrog]

Besides all the previously mentioned reasons, I think you have to take the 838s prisoners. Cripes, it's hard enough to break them the first time. You don't want to have to do it again later. And, if the escape down the road, they come back as conscripts which are a heck of a lot easier to tackle.

Jeff

Heh. That's pretty funny; we have probably been very wrongly influenced in our analysis due to how easily the 8-3-8s have been going down this game.

Another issue I am having is relating to popping smoke. If an 8-3-8 throws it out in front of itself so that it can use it to pass through (and thus hinder shots), it ends up stuck in the smoke as a dead duck (2MF to throw the smoke, and then 2 MF to move into Open Ground containing smoke) for the Defensive Fire Phase (when the smoke is gone).

The one time I moved the 8-3-8 in the open and tried to drop smoke in its current hex, it got gunned down before it could drop the smoke (right after the first move).

I understand that: (i) smoke is a hindrance if LOS passes through it (you do not have to be in it), but it does not help as much if you have firing units on either side of you; and (ii) that you can use bounding to drop smoke that other units can pass through, but then the engineers seem to lose a lot of their mobility.

I think I just need to chuck more around to figure it out. Also, to get to the flanks more so I'm not surrounded by fire. Though I was going to go strong down the east side of the map, I somehow got diverted and funneled into the center.

 

[MLaPanzer]

Heh. That's pretty funny; we have probably been very wrongly influenced in our analysis due to how easily the 8-3-8s have been going down this game.

Another issue I am having is relating to popping smoke. If an 8-3-8 throws it out in front of itself so that it can use it to pass through (and thus hinder shots), it ends up stuck in the smoke as a dead duck (2MF to throw the smoke, and then 2 MF to move into Open Ground containing smoke) for the Defensive Fire Phase (when the smoke is gone).

The one time I moved the 8-3-8 in the open and tried to drop smoke in its current hex, it got gunned down before it could drop the smoke (right after the first move).

I understand that: (i) smoke is a hindrance if LOS passes through it (you do not have to be in it), but it does not help as much if you have firing units on either side of you; and (ii) that you can use bounding to drop smoke that other units can pass through, but then the engineers seem to lose a lot of their mobility.

I think I just need to chuck more around to figure it out. Also, to get to the flanks more so I'm not surrounded by fire. Though I was going to go strong down the east side of the map, I somehow got diverted and funneled into the center.

CX CX CX since just CX is to short.