AFPh leader-direction of Op Fire units

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,594
Reaction score
989
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
I would be interested in the nuances you referred to of AFPh Opportunity Fire if you can recall them.
Once upon a time the now-allowed tactic I describe below was disallowed (under 1eASLRB) -- but 2eASLRB deleted a key line (A7.531, then-last sentence) such that the rules now do allow this:

=-=-=
In the PFPh, mark a ROF-weapon (maybe more than one, if so blessed) for OpFire.

As your game turn unfolds and the battlefield situation develops, use your MPh to maneuver your best still-available fire-direction Leader to stack with your OpFire-marked ROF weapon most likely to inflict greatest hurt on the enemy during your AFPh.

Per desire, fire that weapon with leader direction benefit again and again in your AFPh for as long as ROF (and chaos) allows.
=-=-=

Rule evolution history...

NB: units not marked OpFire may fire only once in the AFPh:
eASLRB said:
A7.25 ...An Opportunity Firer is the only unit that can use a Multiple ROF or Intensive Fire during the AFPh.[fn10]
As rationale ASLRB Chap A Footnote 10 said:
(and says still) A7.25 OPPORTUNITY FIRE: Although Opportunity Fire is executed during the AFPh it is considered a form of Prep Fire and therefore not subject to AFPh penalties, because the units so assigned are assumed to be “firing” or alert for fire opportunities since the PFPh when they were designated as Opportunity Firers. Only the mechanics of that fire have been changed by allowing them to pick their targets during the AFPh so as to be able to fire more effectively at recently discovered enemy units...
Long ago 1eASLRB A7.531 last sentence said:
A SMC directing fire is treated as if he were firing.
Under 1eASLRB, a leader not marked for OpFire could not, in the AFPh, direct more than one shot from a ROF weapon (because fire-directng leaders were then units "treated as ... firing" and prevented by A7.25 from "using" Multiple ROF in the AFPh unless marked for OpFire).

I.e., under 1eASLRB, if the OpFire-marked weapon maintained ROF =it= could fire again but without fire-direction from the (unmarked) leader (since, per rationale in the footnote, that leader counter -- not marked for OpFire in the PFPh -- had not been “firing” or alert for fire opportunities since the PFPh.)

[Conceptually, that late-arriving leader would be directing kinda the last shot, but given we never know whether or not the first shot is also the last, 1eASLRB allowed direction in this case re the first shot (only).]

Come 2eASLRB, that A7.531 last sentence was deleted, thus allowing the practice of maneuvering a non-OpFire leader to link up with and direct all of the AFPh ROF of a weapon in the AFPh as though he'd been there (and marked)
since the PFPh.

[=I= thought that rule change was a poor call, but other opinions prevailed, and today under 2eASLRB the tactic is allowed.]

Use it to advantage if you can.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
14,357
Reaction score
10,206
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llUkraine
Use it to advantage if you can.
This!

I would consider it fine gaming if this tactic were pulled on me. I think 1) understanding the rules well enough, 2) remembering them in the instance when 3) actually recognizing a situation in an ongoing game to apply this tactic, and 4) making it happen is an art rather than a science which I highly respect.

von Marwitz
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
7,466
Reaction score
4,992
Location
Kent, Ohio
First name
Darryl
Country
llUnited States
Once upon a time the now-allowed tactic I describe below was disallowed (under 1eASLRB) -- but 2eASLRB deleted a key line (A7.531, then-last sentence) such that the rules now do allow this:

=-=-=
In the PFPh, mark a ROF-weapon (maybe more than one, if so blessed) for OpFire.

As your game turn unfolds and the battlefield situation develops, use your MPh to maneuver your best still-available fire-direction Leader to stack with your OpFire-marked ROF weapon most likely to inflict greatest hurt on the enemy during your AFPh.

Per desire, fire that weapon with leader direction benefit again and again in your AFPh for as long as ROF (and chaos) allows.
=-=-=

Rule evolution history...

NB: units not marked OpFire may fire only once in the AFPh:


Under 1eASLRB, a leader not marked for OpFire could not, in the AFPh, direct more than one shot from a ROF weapon (because fire-directng leaders were then units "treated as ... firing" and prevented by A7.25 from "using" Multiple ROF in the AFPh unless marked for OpFire).

I.e., under 1eASLRB, if the OpFire-marked weapon maintained ROF =it= could fire again but without fire-direction from the (unmarked) leader (since, per rationale in the footnote, that leader counter -- not marked for OpFire in the PFPh -- had not been “firing” or alert for fire opportunities since the PFPh.)

[Conceptually, that late-arriving leader would be directing kinda the last shot, but given we never know whether or not the first shot is also the last, 1eASLRB allowed direction in this case re the first shot (only).]

Come 2eASLRB, that A7.531 last sentence was deleted, thus allowing the practice of maneuvering a non-OpFire leader to link up with and direct all of the AFPh ROF of a weapon in the AFPh as though he'd been there (and marked)
since the PFPh.

[=I= thought that rule change was a poor call, but other opinions prevailed, and today under 2eASLRB the tactic is allowed.]

Use it to advantage if you can.
Thanks! Greatly appreciated. 🤗
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
7,466
Reaction score
4,992
Location
Kent, Ohio
First name
Darryl
Country
llUnited States
This!

I would consider it fine gaming if this tactic were pulled on me. I think 1) understanding the rules well enough, 2) remembering them in the instance when 3) actually recognizing a situation in an ongoing game to apply this tactic, and 4) making it happen is an art rather than a science which I highly respect.

von Marwitz
Nicely put and an excellent outlook on the tactic. I'm a big fan of OF but have to admit that situation never occurred to me. I also would consider it a fine piece of gaming if it was something my opponent did.
 

Stewart

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
3,382
Reaction score
625
Location
Russia
Country
llRussia
Long ago 1eASLRB A7.531 last sentence said:
A SMC directing fire is treated as if he were firing.


Note: a Hero fires a weapon "as if" he were 2 SMC....yet has limitations...

In our Leader's case, he is still "directing" which is akin to firing.
 

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,594
Reaction score
989
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
Under 2eASLRB, there seem few practical reasons for marking a Leader for OpFire.

Because a 2eASLRB leader is fully capable of directing AFPh ROF w/out an OpFire marker on said leader, it seems it would in =most= cases be almost a blunder to mark a leader in the PFPh for OpFire because, among other things, doing so foregoes freedom of movement in the MPh (and maybe Concealment vs DFF).

Off-hand, aside from "shoot at me" gambits and anti-Sniper reasons, I'm not sure there is any advantage to so-marking a 2eASLRB leader.

So, if dropping Concealment on a ROF weapon to place an OpFire marker, do =not= mark or (un-Conceal) a leader (even if already stacked with that weapon) -- re fire direction, no need to do so under 2eASLRB.
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
Wayne - is it true that an early version of the rules actually had two sets of Movement and Defensive Fire Phases:
  • First Movement
  • First Fire
  • Final Movement
  • Final Fire
But when they were boiled down to the MPh/ DFPh combo that we know today, MMP was too cheap to reprint the First Fire/ Final Fire counters, so they shoehorned all that stuff into the rules just to save money?
 

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,594
Reaction score
989
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
Wayne - is it true that an early version of the rules actually had two sets of Movement and Defensive Fire Phases:
  • First Movement
  • First Fire
  • Final Movement
  • Final Fire
But when they were boiled down to the MPh/ DFPh combo that we know today, MMP was too cheap to reprint the First Fire/ Final Fire counters, so they shoehorned all that stuff into the rules just to save money?
I've never heard that, and steeply doubt it, but IDK. Did SL have such a thing?

[Never played SL. IIRC, it was mid/late 1990s before I found time to really get into ASL. Up til then, I was accumulating all official modules and publications, but 'tween work, night school and family had no time for much more than filing them away.]

Anyway, "too cheap" could have had nothing to do w/MMP, as the 1eASLRB was long-established by time it went over to them.

[There was (¿) maybe (?) some ASLML chatter re Why No Specific OpFire Markers, but that recollection is dim at best.]
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,652
Reaction score
5,537
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
I've never heard that, and steeply doubt it, but IDK. Did SL have such a thing?
Sorry. Just indulging in a bit of farce. You've become such a good Historian of the ASLRB that it seemed you'd inevitably start fielding conspiracy theory questions like the one I posed.

Now, about MGs being able to gain Acquisition...
 
Top