Berserkers and Wall Advantage.

[Tim Niesen]

Can a Beserker unit declare Wall Advantage? It is not in Good Order; therefore, I think not. Tim

 

[buser333]

Can a Beserker unit declare Wall Advantage? It is not in Good Order; therefore, I think not. Tim

A unit does not have to be GO to claim WA, only armed, unbroken, unpinned/TI, and various other odd items.

 

[jrv]

Can a Beserker unit declare Wall Advantage? It is not in Good Order; therefore, I think not.

Per B9.32 the unit need only be armed and unbroken, and if there is anything a berserker is, it is unbroken.

Typically a berserk unit will be charging, and the only time it would be claiming WA usefully would be as part of the charge so as to benefit from hexside TEM. If the enemy unit has WA, the berserk unit can't take it away (for cases the berserk unit would be interested in anyway). If the enemy unit does not have WA (e.g. is using in-hex TEM of a building or similar), the hexside TEM would apply even if the berserk unit does not gain WA. This is not really apropos to the question directly, but indicates that in general the answer isn't so useful.

JR

 

[Tim Niesen]

This incident happened after I left on the bus, during the movement phase. I am not sure if the Rumanian 137 was using assault movement or not. (I have put in a query to Steve. Don would not remember such a detail.) If the unit assault moved, does this action use all of the units movement allowance? If the unit was using regular movement, then it's movement would continue. Likely toward an immobilized Soviet Stuart tank. Tim

 

[jrv]

This incident happened after I left on the bus, during the movement phase. I am not sure if the Rumanian 137 was using assault movement or not. (I have put in a query to Steve. Don would not remember such a detail.) If the unit assault moved, does this action use all of the units movement allowance? If the unit was using regular movement, then it's movement would continue. Likely toward an immobilized Soviet Stuart tank. Tim

I am assuming we are talking about before the unit went berserk. Berserk units can't use assault movement. If the unit went berserk while assault moving, it would no longer be assault moving and could continue its MPh with a charge with its remaining (eight MF minus MF spent) MF.

Assault movement uses the normal MF expenditures, not all of the movement allowance. The unit may not move more than one Location, but if the assault move did not use all the unit's available MF, the unit may use those MF for non-location-changing expenditures, e.g. enter/leave an entrenchment, throw a SMOKE grenade, recover, etc.

JR

 

[Tim Niesen]

JR. This occurred during an assault move. The 137 would have had adequate movement to continue to charge, either toward the tank or an Adjacent Russian stack. We have not yet finished the turn. This happened on a 4MC on the Rumanian 137 as it moved behind a wall. Tim

 

[Tim Niesen]

I am always thinking of possibilities. If the Berserker makes it to the hex with the tank and both survive until the next turn, can the 37LL of the Stuart acquire the Berserk 137? I am aware of the plus 2 penalty of same hex fire. If the Berserker rolls an Immobilization result on the already immobilized Stuart, and it's crew fails the morale check, then a melee results? Tim

 

[Eagle4ty]

Unless the Stuart is adjacent to the 'zerker, the berserk unit must charge the adjacent enemy stack. If the Stuart is also adjacent to it it may choose to charge either location (the fewest in MF) at your discretion as long as the MF limitation is not violated. If it can charge the Stuart, the tank can acquire the charging unit and utilize its acquisition "in hex" [See Case E FIRER BASED HIT DETERMINATION DRMs, see also limitations imposed by C5.5]. If the immobile tank crew fails its NTC on an Immobilization result during CC it will become Infantry and providing the Berserk unit is not eliminated in CC it will Locked in Melee at the end of the CCPh (A11.15). All in all this is a VERY slim probability but may be your best/only option.

 

[Vinnie]

I don't think you take an immobilization TC if immobilized due to a CC attack.

See D5.5. Non CC attack.

I do know you take one when you wander into your own ONE (it's just 70mm, I'll be fine), fail it, take an of a attack as you come out, fail that MC then get shot by the unit you are over running, die leaving them free to use their 50 Cal on the follow up troops!

 

[Tim Niesen]

The Stuart in question had been already immobilized by a now abandoned 20L Gun. I was referring to a possible potential Immobilization result caused by an exact CC result of 4 (half squad). Tim

 

[Tim Niesen]

But I assume that Vinne' rule allusion still applies. Tim

 

[Tim Niesen]

Duh. Last night my mind was dulled by need for sleep and online poker play. The Stuart which the Berserk 137 will charge is Adjacent. There is a 9-1 and a Russian 458 with an ATR there. Not mounted. Two rather elementary questions. Just to make sure. I have had so many assumption shown to be wrong in my thread that I have to ask. 1. Does the direction and path affect the ability of the forward MG on the Stuart to fire at the same hex Berserker? 2. Does the tank TEM affect the fire of the 458 when firing within the hex? Don says no to both questions. Tim

 

[klasmalmstrom]

1. Does the direction and path affect the ability of the forward MG on the Stuart to fire at the same hex Berserker?

Assuming that "forward MG" means BMG and/or CMG - IIRC, they must change CA to included the hexside the Berserker enters across if they are to be used vs the Berserker as Defensive First Fire.

2. Does the tank TEM affect the fire of the 458 when firing within the hex? Don says no to both questions.

No, one never gets TEM from an enemy AFV (unless abandoned) and never when the fire is from within the same Location.

 

[Tim Niesen]

Thanks Klas for your tolerance of my queries. Tim