Buchholz Station...

[jrv]

A10.5 During the RtPh a broken unit not in Melee may not remain in the same Open Ground hex in the Normal Range and LOS of a Known non-melee enemy unit/its-SW/Gun, nor-regardless of terrain-may it end a RtPh ADJACENT to or in the same location with a Known enemy unit that is both unbroken and unarmed.

Journal 3 article, pg. 64 Keep on Truckin, Perry Cocke

"Since they are unarmed (A10.5), they cannot force a Unit to Rout. They are considered "broken" for all Concealment purpose (A12.1), neither denying Concealment nor forcing its loss. Trucks are not good order. They cannot claim wall advantage. It used to be that trucks could DM units by moving ADJACENT and prevent units in LOS from Routing towards them and control the Location they solely occupy but that has been eracticized."

remain

[ri-meyn]
verb (used without object)
1.
to continue in the same state; continue to be as specified:
to remain at peace.
2.
to stay behind or in the same place:
to remain at home; I'll remain here when you go to the airport.
3.
to be left after the removal, loss, destruction, etc., of all else:
The front wall is all that remains of the fort.
4.
to be left to be done, told, shown, etc.:
Only the dishwashing remains.
5.
to be reserved or in store.
noun
6.
Usually, remains. something that remains or is left.
7.
remains.

1. miscellaneous, fragmentary, or other writings still unpublished atthe time of an author's death.
2. traces of some quality, condition, etc.
3. a dead body; corpse.
4. parts or substances remaining from animal or plant life that occurin the earth's crust or strata:
   fossil remains; organic remains.

Antonyms for remain

• cease
• die
• discontinue

• go
• leave
• lie

• carry
• depart
• hurry

• move
• forge

Although a broken unit may remain adjacent to an Known, unarmed enemy unit and will not be forced to rout, and although a broken unit may in general rout toward a known, unarmed enemy unit, there is one sentence in A10.51 which does not include the word "unarmed" which will allow some RtPh hanky-panky with trucks. A10.51, "[a] routing unit many never move ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit, unless in doing so it is leaving that enemy unit's Location." This means that trucks can be put in positions where they can prevent rout at least to hexes ADJACENT to themselves. In the following example, the 4-6-7 may not rout because while by moving to, for example, H4 it would be moving toward a known, unarmed enemy unit (which is allowed), it would also be moving ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit (even if unarmed) which is not allowed. If the truck in H3 had been in I3, the broken unit could rout to H4 but not beyond that because again it would be routing ADJACENT to a KEU without leaving its Location.



I am not sure whether not adding "armed" in this sentence too was deliberate or a bobbled ball with the errata that added "armed" to everything else. Personally I would have added armed to that sentence as well. Using trucks to interfere with routs in any way should not be allowed.

JR

 

[clubby]

to·ward
tôrd,t(ə)ˈwôrd/
preposition
preposition: towards; preposition: toward

1. 1.
   in the direction of.

move
mo͞ov/
verb
verb: move; 3rd person present: moves; past tense: moved; past participle: moved; gerund or present participle: moving

1. 1.
   change position

Now that we've gotten the learning portion of our day over with.

 

[Mr Incredible]

So.....

A broken unit ADJACENT to an empty enemy truck is not forced to rout
A routing unit may rout towards an empty enemy truck
A routing unit may never rout ADJACENT to a Known empty enemy truck (unless leaving said truck's Location)

I think we can all agree?

 

[clubby]

I never realized empty trucks were so useful.

 

[Matt Book]

Although a broken unit may remain adjacent to an Known, unarmed enemy unit and will not be forced to rout, and although a broken unit may in general rout toward a known, unarmed enemy unit, there is one sentence in A10.51 which does not include the word "unarmed" which will allow some RtPh hanky-panky with trucks. A10.51, "[a] routing unit many never move ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit, unless in doing so it is leaving that enemy unit's Location." This means that trucks can be put in positions where they can prevent rout at least to hexes ADJACENT to themselves. In the following example, the 4-6-7 may not rout because while by moving to, for example, H4 it would be moving toward a known, unarmed enemy unit (which is allowed), it would also be moving ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit (even if unarmed) which is not allowed. If the truck in H3 had been in I3, the broken unit could rout to H4 but not beyond that because again it would be routing ADJACENT to a KEU without leaving its Location.

View attachment 1296

I am not sure whether not adding "armed" in this sentence too was deliberate or a bobbled ball with the errata that added "armed" to everything else. Personally I would have added armed to that sentence as well. Using trucks to interfere with routs in any way should not be allowed.

JR

This was the same conclusion we came to about a decade ago at ASLOK or Winter War, but we all agreed in consensus regarding your very example that the intent of the Journal 3 article where Perry states: "It used to be that trucks could DM units by moving ADJACENT and prevent units in LOS from Routing towards them and control the Location they solely occupy but that has been eracticized." In essence a routing unit should be able to go through a truck like a enemy unit can move through a disrupted unit. I think someone sent a Q & A in regarding it, don't know if it was ruled on...

 

[Ray Woloszyn]

I never realized empty trucks were so useful.

Just ask Eisenhower. He emptied them all to bring the critical reinforcements for the Battle of the Bulge (from "Band of Brothers" - Ambrose).

 

[Vinnie]

A10.5 During the RtPh a broken unit not in Melee may not remain in the same Open Ground hex in the Normal Range and LOS of a Known non-melee enemy unit/its-SW/Gun, nor-regardless of terrain-may it end a RtPh ADJACENT to or in the same location with a Known enemy unit that is both unbroken and armed.

Journal 3 article, pg. 64 Keep on Truckin, Perry Cocke

"Since they are unarmed (A10.5), they cannot force a Unit to Rout. They are considered "broken" for all Concealment purpose (A12.1), neither denying Concealment nor forcing its loss. Trucks are not good order. They cannot claim wall advantage. It used to be that trucks could DM units by moving ADJACENT and prevent units in LOS from Routing towards them and control the Location they solely occupy but that has been eracticized."

remain

[ri-meyn]
verb (used without object)
1.
to continue in the same state; continue to be as specified:
to remain at peace.
2.
to stay behind or in the same place:
to remain at home; I'll remain here when you go to the airport.
3.
to be left after the removal, loss, destruction, etc., of all else:
The front wall is all that remains of the fort.
4.
to be left to be done, told, shown, etc.:
Only the dishwashing remains.
5.
to be reserved or in store.
noun
6.
Usually, remains. something that remains or is left.
7.
remains.

1. miscellaneous, fragmentary, or other writings still unpublished atthe time of an author's death.
2. traces of some quality, condition, etc.
3. a dead body; corpse.
4. parts or substances remaining from animal or plant life that occurin the earth's crust or strata:
   fossil remains; organic remains.

Antonyms for remain

• cease
• die
• discontinue

• go
• leave
• lie

• carry
• depart
• hurry

• move
• forge

Not sure what point you are trying to make here. A truck cannot force a unit to rout. Not can it DM a unit. However it can still affect a units rout.
You cannot move next to an enemy unit while routing. A truck is an enemy unit. It is not an armed enemy unit but the section I quoted does not require the enemy unit to be armed.
Maybe next time you might be better reading the whole of the rules section rather than copying from a dictionary?

 

[clubby]

Anybody that starts cutting and pasting from the dictionary has already lost the discussion.

 

[Matt Book]

Not sure what point you are trying to make here. A truck cannot force a unit to rout. Not can it DM a unit. However it can still affect a units rout.
You cannot move next to an enemy unit while routing. A truck is an enemy unit. It is not an armed enemy unit but the section I quoted does not require the enemy unit to be armed.
Maybe next time you might be better reading the whole of the rules section rather than copying from a dictionary?

Maybe next time you might consider the content of the entire post before replying.....

Considering that you take your own advice on reading the whole of the rules section I am assuming you noticed the redundancy of lines 8-9 in A10.51 that you quoted........

A10.51A routing unit may never move ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit, unless in doing so it is leaving that enemy unit's Location.

.........in relation to lines 6-7 A10.51 nor, if ADJACENT to a Known armed enemy unit, may it rout into another hex ADJACENT to the same enemy unit.

A Known armed enemy unit IS a Known enemy unit. The function of lines 6-7 IS built into the function of lines 8-9 that you quote. If lines 6-7 were eliminated and replaced with lines 8-9 the same rout functions exist. A unit is ADJACENT to itself and an ADJACENT location is one that could be entered that has LOS barring SMOKE and NVR.

The First Edition Rule Book incorporated these changes by errata issued in the 97 Annual, but the errata is not the same word for word in changes to the Second Edition Rule Book. The errata for First Edition A10.51 placed "armed" in lines 1 and 6, but the Second Edition Rule Book placed "armed" in lines 1, 4, 6. Now, the addition of "armed" in line 4 doesn't change anything function wise, but A10.51 makes reference to the same armed unit by sometimes calling it armed and sometimes not when referencing it specifically. Was the extra "armed" in line 4 suppose to be someplace else in A10.51 like in line 8 which would square the situation of truck rout denial tactics? Like the redundancy of lines 6-7 in relation to 8-9 it simply adds to the question.

Lines 1-4 of A10.50 allows a broken unit to remain in the same location or ADJACENT to a truck during and at the end of the Rout Phase since trucks are unarmed. Oddly, as you mentioned (A10.51 lines 8-9) rout rules prevent units from moving ADJACENT to the same truck. Which begs a question from a standpoint of function: what does being broken in a location/ADJACENT to a truck at the end of the Rout Phase having not routed allow that differs from a broken unit that did rout and moved ADJACENT to or ended ADJACENT to a truck prohibit?

When one goes over the extent of rout rules in A10.50-.51 routing units can do anything regarding trucks except move ADJACENT to an enemy truck if the unit is two hexes away or is already in an ADJACENT hex. So why just that one exception? Was it a miss in the errata? "Armed" not correctly applied in the second edition Rule Book? There may be one interesting example for why the exception was left in and it may have to do with other unarmed units other then trucks. The exception stops routing units from routing to be ADJACENT or in the location with non-prisoner unarmed known enemy units and freezing them up. Now maybe that wasn't the intent, but it does stop escaped unarmed prisoners from being rounded up by broke units using the rout phase as an extra movement phase. Guarded prisoners have no effect on rout, treating trucks as them would eliminate in entirety their rout chaos capabilities while leaving unarmed escaped prisoners free from being rounded up if that was the intent. Interesting to note, the unarmed rules of rout apply the same to non-prisoner unarmed units as they do to trucks since they are treated as Known enemy units. So escaped unarmed prisoners could be used in the same fashion as trucks, but the debate about trucks being used ahistorically tactically for DM/Rout denial purposes has never has been raised equally for escaped unarmed prisoners which is just as applicable. If we add "armed" to line 8 of A10.51 then the same tactics for both are quashed. If the intent of the rout rules was to distinguish between armed units, escaped unarmed prisoners, and trucks then an exception has to be made or whether one, some, or all types are to be treated as Known enemy units at all for rout purposes.

The Journal 3 excerpt from the article by Perry Cocke I mentioned clearly describes the intent of how trucks were to be prevented from being used as rout killers. In the first Journal printed after the release of the Second Edition Rule Book in 2000 not only did Perry write an article titled "First Do No Harm" regarding the preservation of game mechanics, but he penned an entire article in the same Journal focusing solely based on Trucks-the subject warranted an article for itself as a priority. I left out the most condemning commentary he made where he states "The DM and Rout-denial tactics were the worst offenders", referring to them "ahistorical" and "slime tactics". A strict constitutional rule player is going to argue that only rules as stated matter and you can make up intent for anything. Except for there is one issue with that, is there any other rule area where the guru of ASL rule arbitration has laid out an article where intent was so well defined in conflict with rule book textualism? I know of none other then trucks. This will be the difference between a strict rule player and a reasonable player.

 

[Rock SgtDan]

This will be the difference between a strict rule player and a reasonable player.

There is a 3rd category: the players who weren't even born when J3 was published, who are are saying "WTF?"

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Don't play scenarios with trucks - problem solved.

 

[Matt Book]

There is a 3rd category: the players who weren't even born when J3 was published"

I know, that's why I quoted it for verbatim from the article so those players who don't have it could reference it for consideration.

who are are saying "WTF?"

That's been the response to you on this forum ever since you have been here....