Basic D9.31 Armored Assault Question

[Pyth]

Reading over the rules just now, it suddenly isn't clear to me how Armored assault works when not in the Mph...

If infantry uses armored assault to move with armor and the armor and infantry end their move together in the same (open ground) hex....does the armor have to expend a stop to continue to provide +1 tem in the subsequent DFPh (and in the opponents player turn prepfire, etc.) or can the armor stay in motion and still provide amored assault +1 tem? I had always thought it could stay in motion until the armored assault was ended... but I don't see that interpretation supported by the rules. The rules say a stopped AFV would continue to provide tem in the DFPh (which isn't normally the case)... which leads me to believe that a motion AFV no longer protects the armored assaulting troops. If this is the case I'm sure I'm not the only player who has been playing this wrong.

 

[hongkongwargamer]

Yeah the AFV will need to have stopped to provide cover in DFPh.

D9.31 ... A Stopped AFV continues to provide the +1 TEM during the DFPh to the units that moved with it.

 

[jrv]

As you say if the AFV remains in Motion it no longer gives TEM during the DFPh to the units that moved with it in the MPh.

JR

 

[buser333]

Along a similar vein, can a unit use armored assault if they are in a woods or building and a vehicle is in bypass in that hex? I would assume the answer is "no" as the unit could not have begun "their MPh beneath that AFV."

 

[buser333]

In response to the OP, I see nothing wrong with those units using their next MPh to continue their armored assault with the moving vehicle and receive the +1 TEM during their MPh.

 

[Pyth]

Ok. I've been playing it wrong and so have opponents... they will need to be informed. Thanks guys. But oddly enough I have the answer handy to buser333's question.

This is an official Q&A I believe.
D2.3 & D9.31

If Infantry that is using Armored Assault enters a woods/building obstacle, may the accompanying AFV use VBM?

A. Yes.

As for the second point... yes in the moving player's next Mph (which is a player turn and a half away)the infantry can return to armored assault. My question was about -- the fire phases immediately after the armored assaulting unit's Mph, which would be the DFph and then in the opponent's turn prep fire and bounding fire and AFPh... all before the amored assaulting infantry gets to move again with the +1 TEM.

*edit. Actually, now I see that the Q&A I cited does not address your question, and it's an interesting question, and I'm inclined to think you guessed it right.

 

[buser333]

That Q&A would indicate to me a unit which started an armored assault with a vehicle in a another hex, not one beginning an armored assault in the situation I mentioned.

 

[Eagle4ty]

That Q&A would indicate to me a unit which started an armored assault with a vehicle in a another hex, not one beginning an armored assault in the situation I mentioned.

As per your initial situation, they begin in the same location (there is no "other location" that they are in) so it would be allowed, a unit exiting a PB in a hex with an AFV could not because they are in a separate location. As a matter of fact you should be allowed to utilize the road bonus if the infantry start in a building hex with a narrow village street and continue to move along the road.

 

[buser333]

The rules do not say they must begin in the "same location" though, they say they must "begin their MPh beneath that AFV..."
Unless somebody is very sloppy with their VBM counters I don't see how the infantry could possibly be beneath the AFV at the start of their MPh.

 

[Eagle4ty]

The rules do not say they must begin in the "same location" though, they say they must "begin their MPh beneath that AFV..."
Unless somebody is very sloppy with their VBM counters I don't see how the infantry could possibly be beneath the AFV at the start of their MPh.

Given the size of the standard Geo-hex and counters involved and owing to the fact the bypassing AFV would necessarily be placed inside the hex of the obstacle it is bypassing, I do not see how you could avoid placing the infantry beneath the AFV counter; they certainly cannot be placed above the AFV counter (passengers/riders, not infantry) or outside the hex. Where else could they be placed if occupying the same location?

 

[buser333]

Regardless of what may be done for practicality purposes, a bypassing vehicle should be properly placed on a hexside. Since infantry cannot end a turn in bypass I still don't see how they can be beneath a vehicle.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Regardless of what may be done for practicality purposes, a bypassing vehicle should be properly placed on a hexside. Since infantry cannot end a turn in bypass I still don't see how they can be beneath a vehicle.

Probably a poorly written portion of the rule open to various interpretations, I've sent a "Q" to Perry to resolve a possible dilemma. Having been infantry most of my career it was just too easy to deploy into a wood-line and wait for our armor support to move past before falling in behind our big brothers. Now I know this is a reality argument, but the game is predicated on what would be practicable in an actual situation for the most part, hence the "Q" to Perry.

 

[buser333]

Probably a poorly written portion of the rule open to various interpretations, I've sent a "Q" to Perry to resolve a possible dilemma. Having been infantry most of my career it was just too easy to deploy into a wood-line and wait for our armor support to move past before falling in behind our big brothers. Now I know this is a reality argument, but the game is predicated on what would be practicable in an actual situation for the most part, hence the "Q" to Perry.

I am not saying I disagree at all, Tom. In a practical sense I completely agree with you. I am just pointing out I think the rule is improperly phrased if that is the intent.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Received the following from Perry:

Q. D9.31 Unit locations for ability to use ARMORED ASSAULT

Given that the ground location of a building/woods hex and any units occupying that location whether in the obstacle or in bypass thereof are in the same location and given the sizes of standard geo-board hexes and unit sizes, are the infantry units considered "beneath" that AFV for the purposes of determining if Armored Assault may be utilized? If the answer is "Yes", is there a difference for DASL?

Thanks for your response to this question.

t.y.​

A. Yes. No.

....Perry
MMP

*NOTE: Posted to Perry says thread as well.