BFP100 "Tiger Vanguard" Questions

[Will Fleming]

There is an interesting SSR in this one.

SSR3. The Russians may set up l one squad equivalent HIP and any SMC/SW set up with them,
Fortifications containing only HIP units in Concealment Terrain are revealed per E1.16.

A) So if the fortification cannot have any contents, (like wire) this does not apply. Also, an empty trench or a trench with dummies would also not be protected by this rule. One squad equivalent is allowed to setup HIP, so possibly 1 and maybe 2 trench counters plus 2 pillboxes are all that can benefit from this?

Also, they invoke RB SS6, which is interesting due to mines. I believe that buildings and 'connected' trenches would trigger mines in the building location, but possibly not in the trench (should both have 6AP factors for example). A strict reading of the rules would say you have to go from connecting trench to another trench to avoid the mines.

RB6 Trenches (including A-T Ditches) are considered to "connect" (as per B30.8) to (but not through) all ADJACENT building/rubble Locations [EXC: not to a Location that is rubbled during play of that scenario] (see also O6.21; and O6.6, last sentence). Infantry entering such a building/rubble Location need not pay an extra MF to leave the trench in that Location, but must still pay applicable building/rubble COT. Infantry leaving such a building/rubble Location need not pay an extra MF to enter a "connecting" trench; Infantry may not enter such a trench while using Bypass Movement; nor may they use Bypass MOvement while in such a trench; nor may they exit such a trench to directly use Bypass Movement. A unit entering/leaving a building/rubble Location via a "connecting" trench is not subject to Snap Shots as it does so. A vehicle must pay the appropriate MP-costs/penalty to cross such a trench while using VBM; hence those vehicle types not allowed to cross a trench may not do so while using VBM. Infantry may enter a Fortified Building Location as if that Location were not Fortified provided they enter it from a trench/AT-Ditch that is "connected" to that building Location.

B27.54 Trench counters are automatically connected to any adjacent trench counter not seperated by a cliff or Water Obstacle. Infantry already beneath a trench counter may therefore move to a connecting trench without paying the extra MF to enter/exit the trench which would normally apply. Infantry moving from one connecting trench to another are never subject to the FFNAM/FFMO DRM, Snap Shots, Interdiction, or minefield attacks. The cost to enter a connecting trench hex is always one MF (unless doubled for a move to higher elevation) regardless of the other terrain in the hex [EXC: SMOKE]. Even Wire, walls, or hedges have no effect on movement between connecting trenches (see also 30.8). Units may use Non-Assault Movement between connecting trenches without loss of concealment.

B) Say a building has 6AP factors and an MMC advances from a trench into the 'connected' building, does the minefield attack? (in the image, going from IN the trench in AA9 to the building in Z8)

C) Say the reverse and the mines are in the trench hex. Can an infantry advance INTO the 'connected' trench with mines, but not get a minefield attack? (in the image, going from BB7 directly IN the trench in CC8)

 

[Will Fleming]

Just kicking this around in my head, but for question A) an ATG (or SW) is not a 'unit' now is it, so doesn't that SSR become fairly meaningless unless you want to HIP a squad or two HS in them.

My take is that a crew/ATG in a pillbox in concealment terrain should be revealed as per E1.16 for this scenario.

Unit: any game piece or counter with its own MF/MP allotment and normally capable of movement without being portaged, pushed, or towed. Infantry, Cavalry [but not horses], Dummy stacks, and vehicles (even if Immobilized) are all different types of units

 

[Eagle4ty]

A) Seems to be correct unless one would place a Gun with its manning crew in a trench/pillbox also.

B-C) Re: Minefield/Connecting-Trench question, since the unit is moving from/into a building/trench from another trench/building in such a situation there would be no minefield attack because the minefield exits outside the building/trench. Movement trough connecting trenches in Minefield hexes is fairly well lain out as no minefield attack if the unit moves therein. The same could be said for movement within a building, say a multi-hex building with minefields in all of its hexes, since the minefield exits outside of the actual building. Since the trench "connects" directly to the building, one never enters the OG portion of the hex or becomes vulnerable to to the minefield attack when moving into/from such locations (think of it as a quasi-location if you must). At least that's my take on it.

 

[Will Fleming]

B&C) The RB6 SSR specifically mentions not being subjected to snap snots, but leaves off mines. My take is the mines would still come into play. Only moving from one trench to another is the minefield ignored.

A) "Unit" under the HIP rules seems to imply their Guns (and SW?) as well. (my reading anyway, YMMV)

12.3 HIDDEN INITIAL PLACEMENT (HIP): A SSR may allow HIP for one or more units. HIP is a form of concealment wherein a player may secretly record the location of his units in Concealment Terrain (including the TCA/VCA for AFVs and CA for ⅝" ordnance weapons) by written side record rather than placing them on board beneath "?". Hidden Status is considered the equal of concealment except as otherwise specified. Solitaire players should substitute two "?" in a side's OB for each squad-capacity of HIP that a SSR grants that side.

 

[imported_RobO]

B&C) The RB6 SSR specifically mentions not being subjected to snap snots, but leaves off mines. My take is the mines would still come into play. Only moving from one trench to another is the minefield ignored.

A) "Unit" under the HIP rules seems to imply their Guns (and SW?) as well. (my reading anyway, YMMV)

12.3 HIDDEN INITIAL PLACEMENT (HIP): A SSR may allow HIP for one or more units. HIP is a form of concealment wherein a player may secretly record the location of his units in Concealment Terrain (including the TCA/VCA for AFVs and CA for ⅝" ordnance weapons) by written side record rather than placing them on board beneath "?". Hidden Status is considered the equal of concealment except as otherwise specified. Solitaire players should substitute two "?" in a side's OB for each squad-capacity of HIP that a SSR grants that side.

Technically, HIP is allowed only for Units. However, Guns/SW (which you correctly point out are NOT Units) share the same concealment status (HIP = concealment here) as their possessing Units, as per the Concealment Loss/Gain Table (which has lots of things not mentioned in the rules and is often a better place to look than this rules section alone). Unpossessed Guns/SW can never be HIP/concealed (as per the last sentence of A12.11).

As far as the mine attack in connecting building Locations, Eagle4ty is correct. RB Trenches connect to buildings/rubble as per B30.8, which talks about bunkers. Substitute "building/rubble" for Pillbox in that section, which means movement/advance,etc. between a building and a Trench is the same as if it was between two Trenches. Voila, no mine attack.

 

[jrv]

Technically, HIP is allowed only for Units. However, Guns/SW (which you correctly point out are NOT Units) share the same concealment status (HIP = concealment here) as their possessing Units, as per the Concealment Loss/Gain Table (which has lots of things not mentioned in the rules and is often a better place to look than this rules section alone). Unpossessed Guns/SW can never be HIP/concealed (as per the last sentence of A12.11).

The problem is not with the HIP of the SW/Guns. The problem is that the SSR says that fortifications are revealed per E1.16 if they only contain HIP *units*. The argument is that if they contain anything but except HIP *units*, in particular if they also contain HIP SW or HIP Guns, they are not covered by the SSR, and the fortifications lose concealment normally and not per E1.16. On the one hand that is technically how the SSR reads. On the other hand it seems unlikely that that was the intention.

JR

 

[Will Fleming]

As far as the mine attack in connecting building Locations, Eagle4ty is correct. RB Trenches connect to buildings/rubble as per B30.8, which talks about bunkers. Substitute "building/rubble" for Pillbox in that section, which means movement/advance,etc. between a building and a Trench is the same as if it was between two Trenches. Voila, no mine attack.

I think that is being selective. So now the units can move through 'connected' buildings without FFNAM/FFMO and also retain concealment without using assault movement? If your reasoning is mines don't attack, you must agree they can go through the buildings without these 'risks' as well correct?

 

[Eagle4ty]

I don't know how one could extrapolate B28.44 into saying a unit would not be subject to FFNAM/FFMO nor lose concealment using normal (non-assault or advance) movement? In many cases you are correct and this would be so, say the enemy did not have LOS to the location(s) or the LOS was greater than 16 hexes. However, if moving through interior building locations within 16 hexes or less of an enemy unit with a valid LOS concealment would be lost normally and any fire on the unit would incur a FFNAM though no FFMO (yes, I am contending FFMO would not apply in that situation). It's my contention to state exactly what the rule B28.44 implies, that the mines do not exist within the interior of buildings and thus would not attack units moving within the building. Of course one is free to play any rule as they and their opponent agree to.

 

[Will Fleming]

RB6 specifically states that moving between a 'connecting' trench/building does not cause a snap shot.

Trench/trench movement in B28.44 also specifically points out snapshots, but lists other things (FFNAM/FFMO, interdiction, and mines) when moving trench to trench. I think wire is also listed somewhere in there.

Not trying to be a jerk here, but this is how I see the argument:

When doing "A", condition (1) does not apply.
When doing "B", conditions (1), (2), (3) and (4) do not apply.

So when doing "A", conditions (2), (3) and (4) do not apply? I think with COWTRA, you have to assume only (1) applies to "A".

Of course I am the one with the wire/mines, so I have some skin in the game.

 

[Will Fleming]

Found this that supports your argument, but this would say that FFNAM/FFMO and concealment loss would be N/A in the 'connected' building too.

B30.8 - & SSR RB6 B30.8 states "A bunker is treated as a pillbox in all respects except that a unit may move/rout/advance/Withdraw-from-CC between a bunker and such a trench as if the bunker were also a trench". SSR RB6 references B30.8 for trenches connecting to RB buildings and Rubble. Since you are considered to be using trench movement for a bunker and RB building/rubble, does this also mean you can use Non-Assault Movement into RB building-rubble locations without FFNAM or losing concealment if you came from a trench?
A. Yes.