Aircraft, Shock, Concealment

[Howay the Toon]

A Stuka attacked my concealed AFV which had no enemy ground units in its LOS. the stuka achieved a Shock result against the AFV.

The question is does the AFV lose its concealment. I think not but my oponnent thinks it does perhaps due to loss of Good order status.

Who is right?

 

[Chas Argent]

Only a Good Order vehicle could retain Concealment; and being Shocked negates Good Order status...so the "?" marker comes off.

 

[Howay the Toon]

Only a Good Order vehicle could retain Concealment; and being Shocked negates Good Order status...so the "?" marker comes off.

Where does the ASLRB say that?

 

[alanp]

E7.25 says, "...Aircraft cannot cause loss of "?" or prevent the gaining of "?" by "seeing" an enemy unit; aircraft cause the "?"-loss only by attacking concealed units and scoring at least a PTC result on the IFT (provided that attacked unit is within the LOS of a Good Order enemy ground unit.)"

On the Chapter A divider case F is the only one that applies to a vehicle out of LOS of all GO ground units. Is 'shocked' listed on the v.2 A12.121 Table? (I've only got v.1 and I know there are some differences.) Don't think 'shock' is equivalent to 'broken/Reduced/wounded'.

Alan

 

[Chas Argent]

This is the definition of Good Order in the Index:

"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"

LOS to an enemy unit is irrelevant, because the Shocked crew does not fulfill the requirement for Concealment; therefore, it can't retain "?".

 

[alanp]

Thanks for the reply, Chas, but the question remains: where in the rulebook does it say only GO units may be concealed. The RB states when you lose/gain '?', does this shocked, out-of-LOS AFV LOSE its concealment when it becomes shocked? look at the A12.121 table: case F applies for '?' loss.

I really need the v.2 RB, I know! in v.1, A12.1 starts, "Concealment refers to a condition in which units. . ." have they inserted "GO" between 'which' and 'units'. That would clear things up for me, otherwise, enemy LOS is very much relevent, don't you think? Please let me know what I'm missing

Alan

 

[Chas Argent]

I don't have the 1st edition handy, so I'm not sure what the differences between the two may be as far as this particular rule goes. But Concealment can only apply to a unit if it fulfills certain requirements.

Now the flip side is that your opponent may only examine an unconcealed stack if he has a ground unit with a LOS to it. Don't know if that helps in this situation, however.

 

[da priest]

12.121 CONCEALMENT LOSS/GAIN TABLE: The specific situations that allow "?" gain (or cause "?" loss) are given in the Concealment Table [EXC: Night (E1.3)]. To find if a particular non-concealed Good Order unit can gain "?" at the end of its ...

 

[Ole Boe]

I don't have the 1st edition handy, so I'm not sure what the differences between the two may be as far as this particular rule goes. But Concealment can only apply to a unit if it fulfills certain requirements.

But it is generally easier to keep an existing concealment marker than to gain a new. So the fact that it couldn't gain doesn't mean that it will loose the one it has.

The correct answer is "No" - it doesn't loose concealment.

As Alan says, to loose concealment when no ground units are in LOS, case F on the Concealment Loss/Gain table must be fulfilled. It says that the "?" is lost if it becomes broken/reduced/wounded, but says nothing about being Shocked or not being Good Order.

Such a vehicle could not gain concealment though, since to gain, it must fulfill case K, which requires it to be Good Order.

 

[Chas Argent]

Ahh, I see how I am confusing the two; thanks, Ole.

 

[Ole Boe]

Ahh, I see how I am confusing the two; thanks, Ole.

They are easily confused. The first confusion new players have is the difference between the types of enemy units that can force concealment and those that can prevent concealment gain.

Only Good Order enemy units within LOS can force you to loose concealment when you move, fire etc. - thus if the only stacks your opponent have in LOS are concealed, he must momentarily reveal a unit for you to loose concealment.

But any unbroken enemy unit prevents concealment gain though, so at the end of the CCPh even a dummy stack prevents concealment gain.

 

[alanp]

Thanks, Ole, for backing me up.

Ron, in Howay the Toon's example, the AFV was already '?', so I was applying case F on the LOSS part of the table. Am sure we'd all agree that the shocked AFV couldn't GAIN '?'.

This AFV (if not in concealment terrain) will lose it when a GO ground unit gains LOS to it - not too hard a situation if it's really important to HtT's opponent. If you had to be GO to keep '?', ammo shortage would keep you from '?'ing anyone, right?

Good, civil discussion, Gentlemen!

Alan

 

[Chas Argent]

That one of my favorite things about ASL; when I discover I'm wrong about something it helps me be a better player in the long run :clap:

 

[Howay the Toon]

Thanks for the responses guys. After much checking, my oppo and I agreed that the AFV did not lose concealment so its nice that our conclusion matched yours.

Its an odd case though, I can't immediately think of another situation where a unit can lose Good Order status but retain its concealment. Can anyone come up with one?

 

[Robin Reeve]

That one of my favorite things about ASL; when I discover I'm wrong about something it helps me be a better player in the long run :clap:

I my case, I never stop improving! :laugh:
On the reverse "When I discover I am right about sommething, I could tend to believe I am a good player, and thus miss some good questions that would make me become a better one"... :cheeky:

 

[Ole Boe]

Its an odd case though, I can't immediately think of another situation where a unit can lose Good Order status but retain its concealment. Can anyone come up with one?

I can come up with one other, but that one is closely related to the one we've been discussing:

If A CE AFV (out of enemy LOS) is hit by a Sniper and becomes Stunned, it looses its GO status but not its Concealment.

 

[Ole Boe]

To follow myself up with an opposite trivia question: The schocked vehicle could retain concealment even if not Good Order.

I'm sans ASLRB now, but I'm pretty sure there is at least one situation where a Good Order unit will loose concealment, even with absolutely no enemy units in LOS.

Can anyone name this :devious:

 

[Robin Reeve]

I'm sans ASLRB now, but I'm pretty sure there is at least one situation where a Good Order unit will loose concealment, even with absolutely no enemy units in LOS.
Can anyone name this :devious:

Yes, when one of the players sneezes and the concealment counter flies from the stack it is covering. :laugh:

 

[Ole Boe]

Yes, when one of the players sneezes and the concealment counter flies from the stack it is covering. :laugh:

I think this one only counts as momentarily revealing concealment
I was thinking of the more permament kind (and please do not suggest that the concealment counter became too sticky to use after the sneeze) :hush:

 

[alanp]

I was thinking mopping up would reveal dummies, but then I looked and saw that dummies aren't GO because GO is defined as "Personnel" (which dummies aren't, right?)

But, when mopping up you're not necessarily in LOS of the enemy unit.

Looks like a wound unconceals you though, and wounded is still GO.

Alan