ATT at a target out of LOS

[WuWei]

There are enemy units in a foxhole behind a hedge, so out of LOS of my tank that is a few hexes away. Can I fire on the hex using Area Target Type and affect the units in the foxhole? I thought I could, but my opponent didn't think so.

 

[Binchois]

Only a Mortar. A MTR may target any visible level of the hex (since you can see it) but only as ATT. [However, if there are no visible enemy targets, he would have to add +2 TH for a potential, HIP/concealed target (since there is no visible unit in its LOS).

All moot in this case, however, since in accordance with C3.33, even a Mortar can not affect an enemy outside its LOS unless it at least hits one "hardest-to-hit" enemy unit which is in its LOS!]

 

[hongkongwargamer]

[C3.33] ...a mortar also hits all target-hex units that are out of its firer's (Spotter's, if one is being used; 9.3) LOS if that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit (i.e., that received the highest net TH DRM for that shot)].

 

[Binchois]

Also this:

C3.33 Can units out of LOS be hit via Area Target Type?​

A. Only if firing a mortar and it first hits that in-LOS unit that is hardest-to-hit. [Compil5]​

​

Makes enough sense...a direct fire weapon can only hit what lies along its direct LOS.

 

[Vinnie]

Even a Mortar can only affect units it cannot see if there is a unit it can see.
In this instance, if the unit in the foxhole is the only one there, the mortar can not affect it.
If there is another unit in the hex that the Mortar can see then if the Mortar hits that unit, the non-visible one gets affected as well.

 

[WuWei]

Thanks!

 

[Binchois]

Even a Mortar can only affect units it cannot see if there is a unit it can see.
In this instance, if the unit in the foxhole is the only one there, the mortar can not affect it.
If there is another unit in the hex that the Mortar can see then if the Mortar hits that unit, the non-visible one gets affected as well.

Thanks Vinnie. I clarified my response above to reflect this point. Out if curiosity, though, do you know what rule/Errata/Q&A makes this point explicit? Is it just C3.33?

 

[Sparafucil3]

If your mortar WP you could hit them. -- jim

 

[klasmalmstrom]

If your mortar WP you could hit them. -- jim

I think a non-MTR could also attempt to fire WP, albeit with the +2 of Case K.

 

[jrv]

If your mortar WP you could hit them. -- jim

Even with a mortar you can't hit an out-of-LOS unit (without hitting an in-LOS target). The unit is not hit but takes a WP NMC anyway due to the WP counter placement. If you fire WP using a non-mortar at the second level of a building and don't have LOS to the ground level, any unit at the ground level also takes the WP NMC despite not being hit due to the use of WP ammunition.

JR

 

[Sparafucil3]

Even with a mortar you can't hit an out-of-LOS unit (without hitting an in-LOS target). The unit is not hit but takes a WP NMC anyway due to the WP counter placement. If you fire WP using a non-mortar at the second level of a building and don't have LOS to the ground level, any unit at the ground level also takes the WP NMC despite not being hit due to the use of WP ammunition.

JR

Tomaaaatoh -- Tomahhhhto. Do you think it makes a difference to the unit otherwise invulnerable to the NMC? Do you think it matters to the omniscient ASL player who was looking to break the unit? Is there any other time in ASL you can say "Looks like I missed, take your NMC?" -- jim

 

[Sparafucil3]

I think a non-MTR could also attempt to fire WP, albeit with the +2 of Case K.

Yes, Case K would apply. Any hit results in an NMC with the WP. As I understand it, no possibility of a Critical Hit so the NMC would be with a DRM equal to the TEM in favor of the unit "not hit" with the WP. -- jim

 

[Vinnie]

Thanks Vinnie. I clarified my response above to reflect this point. Out if curiosity, though, do you know what rule/Errata/Q&A makes this point explicit? Is it just C3.33?

I think it is a combination of C3.33:
All (including friendly) non-Aerial units in the target hex can be hit (even by WP), except for those immune as per 3.4 [EXC: a mortar also hits all target-hex units that are out of its firer's (Spotter's, if one is being used; 9.3) LOS if that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit (i.e., that received the highest net TH DRM for that shot)].
and C3.4:

 

[Binchois]

I think it is a combination of C3.33:
All (including friendly) non-Aerial units in the target hex can be hit (even by WP), except for those immune as per 3.4 [EXC: a mortar also hits all target-hex units that are out of its firer's (Spotter's, if one is being used; 9.3) LOS if that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit (i.e., that received the highest net TH DRM for that shot)].
and C3.4:

Yeah, that's all I can find too. The confusing thing is that the EXCeption in C3.33 is open to some interpretation:

C3.33...All (including friendly) non-Aerial units in the target hex can be hit (even by WP), except for those immune as per 3.4 [EXC: a mortar also hits all target-hex units that are out of its firer's (Spotter's, if one is being used; 9.3) LOS if that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit (i.e., that received the highest net TH DRM for that shot)].​

In the OP situation, the entrenched unit could be considered "the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit" as the term "non-hidden" isn't precisely defined and the EXCeption does not say "the non-hidden enemy target in its LOS that currently was the hardest for it to hit." Thus, you could say that the entrenched unit can be hit by the MTR if it fires ATT at the ground above the entrenchment...

In practice, I think I have been begrudgingly following JR and Klas (as they've written above) as theirs seem to be the accepted ruling. However, I am still unsure what ruling fully clarifies this point.

 

[jrv]

Tomaaaatoh -- Tomahhhhto. Do you think it makes a difference to the unit otherwise invulnerable to the NMC? Do you think it matters to the omniscient ASL player who was looking to break the unit? Is there any other time in ASL you can say "Looks like I missed, take your NMC?" -- jim

OBA, but no hit/miss with OBA. SAN ("good thing I moved my Sniper last turn because now your 10-3 is dead, dead, dead"). Falling Rubble. Smoke can be a temporarily effective kill.

JR

 

[Sparafucil3]

OBA, but no hit/miss with OBA. SAN ("good thing I moved my Sniper last turn because now your 10-3 is dead, dead, dead"). Falling Rubble. Smoke can be a temporarily effective kill.

JR

All of those things have to "hit" the unit in question. Even a Sniper is moved into the hex in question before attacking and then has to roll for selection. But hey, if you think it good that my 380mm Sturm Morser can't affect your guys in a Gully unless I tape a WP grenade to it, then more power to you. I mean 280lbs of HE has nothing on a pound of WP. Makes as much sense as indestructible walls. -- jim

 

[jrv]

All of those things have to "hit" the unit in question. Even a Sniper is moved into the hex in question before attacking and then has to roll for selection. But hey, if you think it good that my 380mm Sturm Morser can't affect your guys in a Gully unless I tape a WP grenade to it, then more power to you. I mean 280lbs of HE has nothing on a pound of WP. Makes as much sense as indestructible walls. -- jim

Rubble doesn't have to hit. It only has to fall. And the Sturmmörserwagen is perhaps the worlds leading exponent of using falling rubble to kill, including using falling rubble to wipe out units that it can't see. Perhaps we should change the depression rules so you can rubble them.

Smoke doesn't have any direct effect whether it hits or not, but can be a mission kill.

On the matter of indestructible walls it is my opinion that probably part of the wall is destroyed, but it isn't enough of the length to make a difference in game terms.

JR