Armed units options in face of enemy unarmed units in same location

[M.Netto]

I have already placed a similar question, but we’re still having a lot of doubts about prisoners while playing, so I'll expose here the points that are inducing some interpretation conflicts among me and my opponent.

A20.5 The captor unit becomes the Guard and may only be relieved of that task during any friendly RPh/APh in which the prisoners – if not involved in Melee with the Guard – are either transferred above another guarding unit in the same manner as a SW or abandoned.

1. May a unit abandon a prisoner in the RPh even if it won’t move or there is another friendly unit in the location, i.e. may armed units remain in the same location with an unarmed enemy unit ignoring it completely?

QA_Total: May Prisoners be abandoned during the MPh? A. No (Guards may transfer/abandon Prisoners Only during RPh/APh)

ASOP: 3.3 DURING ITS MPh: Personnel may attempt SW/Gun Recovery and/or drop possession of SW/Gun(s)/Prisoner(s).

2. A20.5 do not seem to allow abandoning prisoners during the MPh, but ASOP has this possibility listed for MPh. For what I've read about it on this forum, ASOP must be wrong here, I suppose.

A20.54 Unarmed units are not an obstacle to movement, and can be recaptured normally by CC or by any Infantry/Cavalry unit entering their Location and engaging in an immediate CC attack during the MPh. If they fail to eliminate or recapture those unarmed units during the MPh, they are considered in Melee thereafter and may move no farther.

3. A20.54 says that unarmed units are not an obstacle to movement? Can an armed unit just ignore an enemy unarmed unit and keep moving or MUST it try to recapture it by a CC attack? If it can ignore it, may it end its movement in the location with the unarmed enemy unit without trying to capture it?

4. Supposing it can end its movement in a location with an unarmed enemy unit without trying to capture it OR has advanced into a location with an unarmed enemy unit, will a CC be established and resolved in the CCPh?

5. A20.54 states that if they fail to eliminate or recapture, they are considered in Melee thereafter and may move no farther. What about if they succeed? May they use their remaining MF while carrying the recaptured prisoners with no MF cost to the CC attack?

 

[Sparafucil3]

I have already placed a similar question, but we’re still having a lot of doubts about prisoners while playing, so I'll expose here the points that are inducing some interpretation conflicts among me and my opponent.



1. May a unit abandon a prisoner in the RPh even if it won’t move or there is another friendly unit in the location, i.e. may armed units remain in the same location with an unarmed enemy unit ignoring it completely?




2. A20.5 do not seem to allow abandoning prisoners during the MPh, but ASOP has this possibility listed for MPh. For what I've read about it on this forum, ASOP must be wrong here, I suppose.




3. A20.54 says that unarmed units are not an obstacle to movement? Can an armed unit just ignore an enemy unarmed unit and keep moving or MUST it try to recapture it by a CC attack? If it can ignore it, may it end its movement in the location with the unarmed enemy unit without trying to capture it?

4. Supposing it can end its movement in a location with an unarmed enemy unit without trying to capture it OR has advanced into a location with an unarmed enemy unit, will a CC be established and resolved in the CCPh?

5. A20.54 states that if they fail to eliminate or recapture, they are considered in Melee thereafter and may move no farther. What about if they succeed? May they use their remaining MF while carrying the recaptured prisoners with no MF cost to the CC attack?

1: Yes
2: Correct, they may only be Abandoned in the RPh and the APh
3: This one is less clear. The rule further states that failure to capture puts both units in Melee. The word "can" seems to indicate it is an option. I am not honestly sure of the intent. Given the language ("If they fail to eliminate or recapture ...), I think if they don't capture/Eliminate, they would be placed into Melee regardless of whether they opted to attack or not. Look for Q&A to see if there is further guidance.
4: See #3. A Melee is definitely formed if you engage in CC and fail to Capture/Eliminate the unit. It is less clear if the same happens if you opt not to engage in CC. I still think a Melee is formed if you opt not to but the rules are far from clear on this.
5: If they succeed, the continue to move up to their maximum MF allotment.

Like I said though, I would look for Q&A to see if #3 is clarified. -- jim

 

[M.Netto]

4: See #3. A Melee is definitely formed if you engage in CC and fail to Capture/Eliminate the unit. It is less clear if the same happens if you opt not to engage in CC. I still think a Melee is formed if you opt not to but the rules are far from clear on this.

I have already looked and could not find something that would clarify it.

My main doubt is about how much can armed units and unarmed enemy units coexist in the same location. If, for instance, I abandon a prisoner in the RPh and do not move, then what happen when we reach CCPh? If I abandon a prisoner in an empty hex while advancing, and later decide to advance another armed unit into the hex with the abandoned prisoner, will a CC be forcefully established to be resolved in the CCPh? That's why I asked about the MPh obligation to try to capture the unarmed units, since it is still not clear for me if both can coexist in the same location throughout the turn without a fight.

 

[Sparafucil3]

I have already looked and could not find something that would clarify it.

My main doubt is about how much can armed units and unarmed enemy units coexist in the same location. If, for instance, I abandon a prisoner in the RPh and do not move, then what happen when we reach CCPh? If I abandon a prisoner in an empty hex while advancing, and later decide to advance another armed unit into the hex with the abandoned prisoner, will a CC be forcefully established to be resolved in the CCPh? That's why I asked about the MPh obligation to try to capture the unarmed units, since it is still not clear for me if both can coexist in the same location throughout the turn without a fight.

I know for sure you can abandon in the RPh and APh. This is in the rules. So you can certainly co-exist for those spaces of time.

I know they are not obstacles to movement so you can enter into their Location without prohibition.

After take a closer look at the rules, I don't think you are compelled to enter into CC to recapture upon entry. It is an option. If you decide to CC and fail to Eliminate/Capture the Unarmed personnel, you are marked with a Melee counter and resolve that normally going forward. If you opt not to partake in CC, you can move on normally. This sentence in A20.54 does introduce some doubt though: If they fail to eliminate or recapture those unarmed units during the MPh, they are considered in Melee thereafter and may move no farther. This can certainly be read to mean that if a unit opts not to engage in CC, they have failed to Eliminate or Recapture the unarmed unit and are considered in melee thereafter.

I can see this going either way. I lean slightly toward no Melee if you opt against CC but it is 51:49 thing. I am not sure how to answer it correctly. -- jim

 

[M.Netto]

Thank you Jim.

 

[Tuomo]

Slightly similar question, NRBH - if a unit opted to not try to capture an unarmed unit in its location, would it be bound by Target Selection Limits anyway?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Slightly similar question, NRBH - if a unit opted to not try to capture an unarmed unit in its location, would it be bound by Target Selection Limits anyway?

I think so.

 

[Stewart]

Slightly similar question, NRBH - if a unit opted to not try to capture an unarmed unit in its location, would it be bound by Target Selection Limits anyway?

No,
Target selection Limits apply to KNOWN enemy units


Known Enemy Unit (any unconcealed, non-prisoner enemy unit—even one
which is broken or in Melee—which the unit in question currently has a LOS

It would be quite pointless to be restricted by units that have no weapons.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

An abandoned unarmed unit is a non-prisoner?

 

[PresterJohn]

Hold on. Going back to basic principles, the ASOP is the final word right?
And the ASOP says that personnel may drop possession of prisoners in the movement phase.
This should normally end the discussion.
The ASOP refers to A20.53 which specifically mentions abandoning prisoners as per A20.5.
Then A20.5 says that the guard unit may only be relieved of it's task during friendly RPh/APh in the same manner as a SW (4.431) [pause for breath] or abandoned.
Pausing for breath is important because you can say that transferring between guards can only happen in RPh/APh, but then go on to 4.43 which allows the SW or, as I read it, also prisoner to be dropped in MPh, APh, or at start of CC.

I believe the later parts are important, and are consistent with the ASOP being correct, and that at most a comma is needed in A20.5 i.e "(4.431), or abandoned".

What is the gruppebeurteilung?

 

[Larry]

Index:

Known Enemy Unit (any unconcealed, non-prisoner enemy unit

Unarmed units without a guard are not prisoners.

An abandoned unarmed unit is a non-prisoner?

So, yes.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

So an unarmed enemy unit would impose Target Selection Limits.

I think the only exception is an unarmed, unarmored vehicle.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Hold on. Going back to basic principles, the ASOP is the final word right?
And the ASOP says that personnel may drop possession of prisoners in the movement phase.
This should normally end the discussion.
The ASOP refers to A20.53 which specifically mentions abandoning prisoners as per A20.5.
Then A20.5 says that the guard unit may only be relieved of it's task during friendly RPh/APh in the same manner as a SW (4.431) [pause for breath] or abandoned.
Pausing for breath is important because you can say that transferring between guards can only happen in RPh/APh, but then go on to 4.43 which allows the SW or, as I read it, also prisoner to be dropped in MPh, APh, or at start of CC.

I believe the later parts are important, and are consistent with the ASOP being correct, and that at most a comma is needed in A20.5 i.e "(4.431), or abandoned".

What is the gruppebeurteilung?

First, I never noticed this before. And for sure, the ASOP does say that, but I think the ASOP is wrong here, or rather maybe it isn't as clear as it should be. The ASOP refers you to A20.53 (3.31A ... and/or drop possession of SW/Gun(s)/Prisoner(s) (A4.43; A20.53) ...).

A20.53 MOVEMENT: ... Guards abandon their prisoners only by choice per 20.5.

So A20.53 says during the MPh, you can abandon prisoners by choice only by complying with A20.5.

A20.5 GUARDS & UNARMED UNITS: ... The captor unit becomes the Guard and may only be relieved of that task during any friendly RPh/APh in which the prisoners—if not involved in Melee with the Guard—are either transferred above another guarding unit in the same manner as a SW (4.431) or abandoned...

A20.5 says the only time you can transfer/abandon Prisoners is during the RPh and the APh. Altogether, the only way to abandon Prisoners by choice during the MPh is to have first abandoned them in the RPh.

Checking my v1 ASOP, there is no mention of transfer of any kind. Sadly, I don't have a v1 REV 2 ASOP in my collection so I cannot check that.

TL;DR: I think the ASOP is either in error, or misleading. Yes, it points to A20.53 for the mechanics of abandoning during the MPh but A20.53 specifically prohibits abandoning by choice unless first abandoned in the RPh per A20.5. -- jim

 

[PresterJohn]

The ASOP says it is right (until it is changed and then it is still right).
Also I am reading that prisoners being transferred to another guard and being abandoned as two different things. And one of those things can only happen in RPh/APh.
Also A20.5 defines more than just when prisoners can be transferred to another guard, it defines guards and what happens to prisoners with no guard.
I'm just surprised that somebody wanders by and says the ASOP is wrong and nobody looks up from their drinks, as if it happens every day.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

There are several errors/omissions in the ASOP.

 

[PresterJohn]

Errata would seem to be appropriate?

 

[ScottRomanowski]

There are several errors/omissions in the ASOP.

One that was silently fixed (that is, without published errata) from the 2020 updated dividers ASOP to the eASLRB ASOP is

2.12A Change “ordnance, SMOKE (“ to “ordnance-SMOKE-(“, and “MTR, IR (“ to “MTR-IR-(“. [Inspection prompted by Bill Kohler, email, 7 Dec 2002]

And this typo was silently fixed too

3.38D Change “))” to “)”. [Inspection prompted by Bill Kohler, email, 7 Dec 2002]

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I think several errors crept in when the updated, two-pager "(rev.)" version of the ASOP was done for the 1st Edition. Which was probably just migrated into the 2nd Edition later.

 

[PresterJohn]

Is there a list of ASOP errata somewhere? I did not find anything in the current list of errata on the MMP website.
I know that Q&A are intended to explain the rules but really you need an errata to say "that bit is wrong and needs to be changed".
The section of the ASOP 3.32A regarding "drop possession of SW/Gun(s)/Prisoner(s)" is either correct or an error. Perhaps an undiscovered error but still it is disconcerting to think there are ignored errors in the ASOP.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I believe it's an error - that snuck into the updated 1st Edition ASOP. Since it refers to a rule (clarified by a Q&A, IIRC) that does not allow (IMO) abandonment in the MPh...

ote that the original ASOP has no such mention at all.....if the intention with the updated ASOP was to allow it in the MPh, then I don't think such a change would have been intentionally introduced but such a subtle change to the ASOP...

All of this, IMHO of course. YMMV and all that...