Can a unit dismantle a weapon in prep fire and move?

Simon62

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
291
Reaction score
41
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Hi

noticed that A9.8 indicates that dismantling a weapon constitutes use of that support writing and all its ROF.

does this mean that a unit dismantling a weapon in the prep fire phase has as prep fire marker put on it and thus cannot move in the movement phase - we have always played that you can dismantle and then move but I am now questioning this assumption.

could anyone clarify this for me

regards
Simon
 

WuWei

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
682
Location
Germany
First name
Tobias
Country
llGermany
When a unit dismantles a weapon in the PFPh, it can't move in the MPh. We usually put a Prep Fire counter on it, although this might not be 100% correct because dismantling a weapon doesn't create a Gunflash.
 

Robin Reeve

φιλέω ASL אני אוהב
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,562
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Yes. Dismantling/reassembling is the same as using a SW.
If done during the PFPh, the unit is marked with a Prep Fire counter (edit Wu Wei may be right here - it is a concealment loss action though) and it may not move during the MPh.
 

Simon62

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
291
Reaction score
41
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Thanks - another thing we are doing wrong cleared up!!
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,910
Reaction score
1,462
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
One thing you can look at doing once you feel more comfortable with the game is the following:

  • dismantle the weapon in the prep or def fire phase (usually because it is needed elsewhere)
  • as long as the PP cost is 3 or less, voluntarily break the unit in the rout phase
  • rout to a new location closer to where the weapon may be needed (preferably with a leader in that location). This may even be done by routing 'forward' in the direction of the advance if conditions allow.
This tactic requires some care and there are risks (Fate, failing Rally DR, being DM'd again by fire attacks, etc.) but those can be weighed against what might be gained by managing an extra move by the unit (you can scrub off the oily feeling from this bit of sleaze after the victory). :whistle:
 
Last edited:

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
11,227
Reaction score
1,722
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
One thing you can look at doing once you feel more comfortable with the game is the following:

  • dismantle the weapon in the prep or def fire phase (usually because it is needed elsewhere)
  • as long as the PP cost is 3 or less, voluntarily break the unit in the rout phase
  • rout to a new location closer to where the weapon may be needed (preferably with a leader in that location). This may even be done by routing 'forward' in the direction of the advance if conditions allow.
This tactic requires some care and there are risks (Fate, failing multiple rally attempts, etc.) but those can be weighed against what might be gained by managing an extra move by the unit (you can scrub of the oily feeling from this bit of sleaze after the victory). :whistle:
WHERE ARE THE FINNISH COMMISSARS NOW THAT THE WORLD NEEDS THEM!?
 

Bill Kohler

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
399
Reaction score
278
Location
North Carolina
First name
Bill
Country
llUnited States
One thing you can look at doing once you feel more comfortable with the game is the following:
  • dismantle the weapon in the prep or def fire phase (usually because it is needed elsewhere)
  • as long as the PP cost is 3 or less, voluntarily break the unit in the rout phase
  • rout to a new location closer to where the weapon may be needed (preferably with a leader in that location). This may even be done by routing 'forward' in the direction of the advance if conditions allow.
This tactic requires some care and there are risks (Fate, failing Rally DR, being DM'd again by fire attacks, etc.) but those can be weighed against what might be gained by managing an extra move by the unit (you can scrub off the oily feeling from this bit of sleaze after the victory). :whistle:
This kind of play--seizing on tactics that while technically allowed, clearly go against the spirit of the game--IMO cheapens the ASL experience.

What real-world action could possibly be being modeled by such an action? Prepare yourself to go hysterical, then before you do, position yourself so that--when you do go hysterical--you'll see only a carefully chosen spot that is, amazingly, a wonderful vantage point closer to the enemy for when you do become unhysterical, thereby allowing you to run shrieking ahead and get there faster than you could by darting more safely from cover to cover.

For me, I'd rather accept defeat and acknowledge that my opponent has outplayed me.

(I know, I know: people will now bring up the problem with reality arguments, and point out that other happenings can occur in ASL that don't accurately model the real world, and will ask about skulking and freeze-sleaze, etc. But there's a line: and to me, this definitely crosses that line.)

I could use sleaziness, too: I could wait until my opponent sets up 5/8-inch counters under his Trench counters, start the game, and then when he wants to fire them say, "No, no, you can't fire them. B27.1 says that the only 5/8-inch counter that can be fired from under a foxhole is a mortar; and then point out that B27.5 says all rules pertaining to foxholes apply to Trenches unless specifically modified here-in; and then say that while B27.51 allows 5/8-inch counters to begin the game under Trench counters it never says that they can fire from under Trench counters. So ha-ha!"
 
Last edited:

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,981
Reaction score
7,696
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
This kind of play--seizing on tactics that while technically allowed, clearly go against the spirit of the game--IMO cheapens the ASL experience.
I wouldn't go that far.

While the given example is surely one of the more expressive sleazes, I would not look down on an opponent for using it.
I see ASL as a game and not a historical simulation. ASL uses abstractions everywhere.

What I like is 'out of the box' thinking. Finding tactics that no one has thought of before despite the game being in the wild for decades. This is very difficult to pull off and in war (cardboard and real) it is often the unexpected paired with boldness to dare it which wins the day. I respect that.

von Marwitz
 

Bill Kohler

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
399
Reaction score
278
Location
North Carolina
First name
Bill
Country
llUnited States
Evidently not a fan of The Big Black Book of ASL Sleaze....
I play ASL to play a game that in some rough way creates the illusion that I'm replaying WW2 battles. When a player can intentionally break his units after having carefully positioned them so as to rout forward to where, in the nick of time, they can recover their senses and start firing at me from a much better vantage point than they could ever otherwise have reached in time--then the game we're playing no longer in any way resembles WW2. Might as well have mimes parachute in and start digging silent foxholes, or an SMC pass an NTC to sing the other side to sleep during a battle. If the rules could be twisted around to allow it, then why not?

Any game system as complicated as ASL is can't exhaustively disallow every weird rule interaction that might be discovered: to me, rational people should be able to sense when they've entered a space where the function they're using is badly behaved (to use a mathematical reference) and where they are now merely gaming the system to chase a win, at the expense of fairness and good sportsmanship.

People will undoubtedly draw that line at different places, but some things--surely--most players could agree on.
 
Last edited:

Robin Reeve

φιλέω ASL אני אוהב
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,562
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
That sleaze comes with a cost.
Nothing is free.
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,910
Reaction score
1,462
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
I play ASL to play a game that in some rough way creates the illusion that I'm replaying WW2 battles. When a player can intentionally break his units after having carefully positioned them to rout forward to where, in the nick of time, they can recover their senses and start firing at me from a much better vantage point--then the game we're playing no longer in any way resembles WW2. Might as well have mimes parachute in and start digging silent foxholes, or an SMC start singing the opposing side to sleep during a battle.
I don't disagree with you but the game is riven with such examples. I am sure most of the impacts of these sleaze moves were unknown back in '85 so I don't believe it would be fair to blame the original authors/playtesters. However, it is does appear that some rules were adopted because they looked good in a Hollywood/Comic book fashion but never had a basis in reality.

Unfortunately, despite the RB being written more than 35 years ago, there seems little/no appetite to do a comprehensive re-write to get rid of ahistorical options, rule loopholes and things that just do not make sense.

Given my druthers I would like to see v3 of the RB that does just this, even volunteer my time to assist but...

So, we have an unfortunate choice,... use the sleaze,... or hand an advantage to an opponent who will.
 
Last edited:

Robin Reeve

φιλέω ASL אני אוהב
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,562
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
There is better than this sleaze : use a German 3 PP MMG. 😎
 

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
11,227
Reaction score
1,722
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
.....but some things--surely--most players could agree on.
After playing and interacting with ASL players since the early 90's, the only thing I have found general wide-spread agreement on is SMOKE has to get fired before anything else....except maybe OBA...always gotta look that up....

It's a game with cardboard playing pieces. Quit being mystical about it.
 

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
11,227
Reaction score
1,722
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
<shrug> Seemed pretty mystical to me....of course English is my second language so mayhaps I misunderstand?
 

gorkowskij

Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
61
Reaction score
193
Country
llUnited States
One thing you can look at doing once you feel more comfortable with the game is the following:

  • dismantle the weapon in the prep or def fire phase (usually because it is needed elsewhere)
  • as long as the PP cost is 3 or less, voluntarily break the unit in the rout phase
  • rout to a new location closer to where the weapon may be needed (preferably with a leader in that location). This may even be done by routing 'forward' in the direction of the advance if conditions allow.
This tactic requires some care and there are risks (Fate, failing Rally DR, being DM'd again by fire attacks, etc.) but those can be weighed against what might be gained by managing an extra move by the unit (you can scrub off the oily feeling from this bit of sleaze after the victory). :whistle:
Both perpetrator and victim must exercise great caution when sleaze is on the table because it actually takes real skill to implement "legal" sleaze. When it's legal, I respect and use sleaze as often as the next guy. But I've often found alleged "sleaze" was actually a clear rules violation in progress. When someone tries to pull sleaze, any sleaze, pay close attention to the rules to make sure they are doing it "right." If they are doing it right, make 'em pay for it with "counter sleaze."

For example, while the "break to route with MG" sequence above is possible, there are numerous rule complications - especially with routing - that get in the way of a happy ending. To begin, per A10.41 you must be within LOS and normal range of an armed, unbroken, known enemy unit to voluntarily break. Now, if that's the case, why not just fire the MG at those enemy units rather than dismantle it? Anyway, assuming that is the case, once you break, per A10.51, you cannot route toward a known armed enemy unit. So, you cannot route towards the very same enemy that enabled your voluntary break! Where are you going? You must designate the nearest woods or building as your target and go that way, unless of course it's closer to the enemy. You can ignore your own building (but not woods patch) for that, but once you enter woods or building hex you must stop unless you can enter another woods or building hex. That rule (see A10.51) is often overlooked. It means that once you enter woods/building you cannot run around freely - even if out of enemy LOS - unless you are moving from building/woods into another building/woods. All of those hexes cost 2MF, so you're not going very far. Therefore, in the example above, close attention to route rules will foreclose many, many options making it extremely difficult to actually benefit from that scheme.

The same holds for most attempts at sleaze; it often crumbles under scrutiny. Of course, there are cases where sleaze works, but often at a price. I can use my AFV to "sleaze freeze" the other guy with certainty, but there are many things he can do to mitigate such as: fire at the AFV before it enters to lay down residual FP for the infantry he knows will follow, hit me with reaction fire or street fighting, get a better chance at ambush in CC, etc.

Rules knowledge is your best defense against sleaze, real and imagined.
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
2,613
Country
llUnited States
I don't disagree with you but the game is riven with such examples. I am sure most of the impacts of these sleaze moves were unknown back in '85 so I don't believe it would be fair to blame the original authors/playtesters. However, it is does appear that some rules were adopted because they looked good in a Hollywood/Comic book fashion but never had a basis in reality.

Unfortunately, despite the RB being written more than 35 years ago, there seems little/no appetite to do a comprehensive re-write to get rid of ahistorical options, rule loopholes and things that just do not make sense.

Given my druthers I would like to see v3 of the RB that does just this, even volunteer my time to assist but...

So, we have an unfortunate choice,... use the sleaze,... or hand an advantage to an opponent who will.
Another option is to find a way to counter the sleaze without eliminating it.

For friendly or non-tournament play just adopt house rules. The Black Book certainly gives a great start on adopting some house rules.

However if you play in a tournament beware that these sleazes are out there and can be used against you.
 
Top