? and off-board setup

SonOfTheNorth

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
406
Reaction score
54
Location
Lakeview, Chicago
Country
llUnited States
This is such an elementary question, but we seem to debate this every single game.

Defense has a 18 concealment markers. Attacker sets up off-board for turn 1. In the game setup phase, which scenario is correct?

Scenario A (I'm pretty sure this is wrong, and way too generous to the Defender):
1: Defender sets up units (non-?) and up to hexes of lone ? counters (with two ? apiece)
2: Defender then conceals all other pieces, because Attacker is off board.
3: Defender presents the board to Attacker, and game starts.

Scenario B:
1: Defender sets up units and (non-?) and up to hexes of lone ? counters (with two ? apiece). However, if 9-hexes of ? are used, it's going to be really obvious where the dummies are on Turn-1.
2: Defender Presents the board to Attacker (top unit is visible in all hexes)
3: Defender places ? on all hexes that don't already have ? on top.
4: Game starts.

In Scenario B, for all practical purposes, the Defender is going to have fewer than 9 dummy stacks.

Also, can hexes set up so that a ? is on bottom, and a real unit on top? Since B2 does not allow for inspection, B3 would conceal the stack and on the Defender turn-one, the dummy could move out. This would potentially make all 18x? potential dummies on the board.

For reference, we're playing A17.

Thanks.
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,412
Reaction score
642
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
You set up concealed because he starts off board.
 

ctewks

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
340
Reaction score
164
Location
Massachusetts
Country
llUnited States
Scenario A is correct - when the Attacker is coming from off-board and has no on-board setup, that makes the defender the "Scenario Defender" and affords them some nice advantages. You can setup dummy stacks AND cover real stacks.

You could even make a mix of real units and dummies..... e.g. sq ? ? ? as one stack (just remember you cannot ALSO place a "?" on top of a stack that contains dummies)
 

mgmasl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
4,285
Reaction score
337
Location
Cadiz
First name
Miguel
Country
llSpain
Scenario A is correct - when the Attacker is coming from off-board and has no on-board setup, that makes the defender the "Scenario Defender" and affords them some nice advantages. You can setup dummy stacks AND cover real stacks.

You could even make a mix of real units and dummies..... e.g. sq ? ? ? as one stack (just remember you cannot ALSO place a "?" on top of a stack that contains dummies)

Ie minimum number of given "?" counters per location is TWO.. After normal placement all stacks without a "?"counter atop are covered by a "?" counter, and then enemy sees the map, both players place the sniper counters and game starts according to routine in ASOP.
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,412
Reaction score
642
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
Now per part of his original question, could he place a dummy counter (1) on the bottom of every real stack of units, then conceal them and then during his first MPh split the dummies into 16 different dummy stacks? For the sake of this argument, let's assume he has enough real units to stack all his dummies individually with different real units. Thanks.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Scenario A is closer to correct, but it is not 100% right. The defender sets up all OB-given counters, including OB-given "?" (EXC: OB-given "?" can only be set up in concealment terrain). These "?" may be used as concealment counters (i.e. the top-most "?" in a stack) or as dummy counters (i.e. not the top-most "?" in a stack). The OB-given "?" may be placed on real units too as concealment counters and/or dummies (the dummies need not be placed on top of the real units). After this, since the attacker is entering from off-board, the defender may place free "?" on any stack that does not contain an OB-given "?" counter. The defender may not use a free "?" to convert an OB-given "?" from a concealment counter to a dummy counter. But the defender is free to mix dummy counters and real units if he chooses, then top off the stack with an OB-given "?" for a concealment counter.

JR
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Now per part of his original question, could he place a dummy counter (1) on the bottom of every real stack of units, then conceal them and then during his first MPh split the dummies into 16 different dummy stacks? For the sake of this argument, let's assume he has enough real units to stack all his dummies individually with different real units. Thanks.
No. An OB-given "?" counter may not be converted from a concealment counter (the top-most "?" in a stack) to a dummy counter (not the top-most "?" in a stack) by the placement of the free "?" counters.

JR
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,412
Reaction score
642
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
OK, so the only way you can mix OB given ? and real units is to also top them with an OB given ? as a concealment counter? That makes sense and it's question I've also wondered about.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
OK, so the only way you can mix OB given ? and real units is to also top them with an OB given ? as a concealment counter? That makes sense and it's question I've also wondered about.
Technically you can also place your real units unconcealed above a stack of OB-given "?" (possibly with some other real units mixed in). But you may not then place a free concealment on top. I don't know when you might want to do this, but you are allowed to leave units unconcealed even if they could possibly be concealed either by OB-given "?" or free "?".

Note that if you read A12.11 exactly, it says you may not place a single "?" beneath unconcealed units. I think the intention here is to prevent what you were trying to do, and not to prevent the mix of an unconcealed unit atop a stack of concealed units. If someone insists on playing A12.11 to its letter, then the concealment of the unit you want to expose can be removed as soon as the game starts using your option to remove concealment at any time.

I cannot think of a reason why you would want to have a unit start the game without concealment when you have the option to have it, but it is an option.

JR
 

SonOfTheNorth

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
406
Reaction score
54
Location
Lakeview, Chicago
Country
llUnited States
(1) The OB-given "?" may be placed on real units too as concealment counters and/or dummies (the dummies need not be placed on top of the real units).
[...]
(2) Technically you can also place your real units unconcealed above a stack of OB-given "?" (possibly with some other real units mixed in). But you may not then place a free concealment on top.
[...]
(3) Note that if you read A12.11 exactly, it says you may not place a single "?" beneath unconcealed units.

(4) If someone insists on playing A12.11 to its letter, then the concealment of the unit you want to expose can be removed as soon as the game starts using your option to remove concealment at any time.
JR, as usual, thanks for the comprehensive reply. I would like clarification on the part above, though.

So, in statement (2), you mean to say you can put two (or more) ? under an unconcealed unit. But you cannot then add a free-? on top. I guess the idea would be that you can better "fake" an MMG+Ldr placement or something.

I don't understand (4), because you cannot place the free-?, so how would you "remove" it?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
JR, as usual, thanks for the comprehensive reply. I would like clarification on the part above, though.

So, in statement (2), you mean to say you can put two (or more) ? under an unconcealed unit. But you cannot then add a free-? on top. I guess the idea would be that you can better "fake" an MMG+Ldr placement or something.

I don't understand (4), because you cannot place the free-?, so how would you "remove" it?
You can place two or more OB-given "?" under an unconcealed unit. You cannot add a free "?" on top. I don't know why you would do this. Why would you not just put the OB-given "?" on top of the real unit too? Perhaps it will hide the distribution of OB-given concealment counters from your opponent.

Once the game begins (in most cases, your opponent sits down to set up his first turn reinforcements), you can voluntarily relinquish concealment at (almost) any time per A12.14.

JR
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
The more effective use of Dummies in the above situation would be to place three or more Dummy "?" counters above a real unit(s) perhaps simulating a SW & Ldr or additional units stacked with it, but then one would be unable to place an additional non-Dummy (non-OB given) "?" on that stack. The more important fact is what mgmasl pointed out, that Dummy stacks need not be limited to only two OB given "?" counters but must contain at least two. With that scenario,you'll need a plethora of differing Dummy Stacks to hopefully slow him down or misdirect his attack.
 

SonOfTheNorth

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
406
Reaction score
54
Location
Lakeview, Chicago
Country
llUnited States
Yeah, the "slowing down" part isn't going so well. Neither are my crafty-crafty deceptions. I think I need a remedial course on Defense.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Yeah, the "slowing down" part isn't going so well. Neither are my crafty-crafty deceptions. I think I need a remedial course on Defense.
The very beginner ASL player does two things wrong: his dummies are all forward and all his forward units are dummies, and he puts his HIP units forward. That will never work against a player that has played more than one game. You have to mix real units with dummies. You have to sell your dummies as real units. Occasionally you have to sell your real units as dummies by not taking shots in hopes of a better one. This forces your opponent to treat all concealed units as potentially real. Dummies near the game end can be decisive in soaking up firepower and/or making your opponent cautious.

A17 is going to be a bit harder because the Sovets are restricted to two squads per building, meaning that if you don't make a lot of movement, your opponent can counter-count and determine whether there is likely to be another MMC in a building. In this scenario your best bet may be to put a fair number of real units with a smaller number of dummies in the front line then fall back the real units into a line with more dummies.

Bonus question: the Soviets are restricted to "a maximum of two squads (or equivalents) per building". Since they are Soviets and can't deploy, and since they have only three SMC, how is the "or equivalents" meaningful?

JR
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,412
Reaction score
642
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
Taking prisoners and deploying at that time?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Taking prisoners and deploying at that time?
Sorry, I expressed it poorly. They are restricted during setup to a maximum of two squads or equivalents per building. Once the game starts, anything goes.

JR
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,412
Reaction score
642
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
I have no idea after racking my brain for upwards of 10 minutes but I'm going to guess it has something to do with dummies being squad equivalents for setup purposes.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
I have no idea after racking my brain for upwards of 10 minutes but I'm going to guess it has something to do with dummies being squad equivalents for setup purposes.
Dummies are not equivalent to anything. I think the phrase adds nothing.

JR
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
1,393
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
Are there crews in the original OB? You could have two Crews instead of a squad (depending, maybe, on the type of weapons they man)
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Are there crews in the original OB? You could have two Crews instead of a squad (depending, maybe, on the type of weapons they man)
The scenario is "The Penetration of Rostov." There are ten Soviet squads, three SMC, eight SW and eighteen "?" and that is it.

JR
 
Top