Can this vehicle change his CA in the AFPh?

[John Fedoriw]

Hi gents<



???????

Thanks,
John

 

[Jazz]

Why not?

Oh, I see,....mayhaps not until he goes CE. Had to go CE during MPh.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Hi gents<

View attachment 28345

???????

Thanks,
John

No. See C3.22 and D3.12. -- jim

 

[Bill Kohler]

Also D5.3 and D5.33.

 

[John Fedoriw]

Thanks everyone.

I thought all vehicles could always change CA in AFPh...its seems this is not the case. They have to be eligible to fire. And BU OT vehicles are not. Got it. I am pretty sure I have other opponents who made the same mistake. More than 1 actually.

I don't why a BU StuG 3B, for example, would have any advantage over a BU Marder when it came to adjusting CA if they are not targeting anything but only pointing the vehicle in a general direction.

Does anyone know why this is the case? Was it the designers intent? An oversight in how the rules were written? What is the real world reason that a NT vehicle being CE / BU would effect that?

 

[Jazz]

Does anyone know why this is the case? Was it the designers intent? An oversight in how the rules were written? What is the real world reason that a NT vehicle being CE / BU would effect that?

Because the rulz we have all agreed to play by say it is so.

It's a game, not reality.

 

[Bill Kohler]

One changes one's CA in this manner because one is fixing to fire elsewhere. If you're BU in an OT machine, by definition you're not fixing to fire anywhere.

(At least that's my rationale for it.)

 

[zgrose]

Does anyone know why this is the case? Was it the designers intent? An oversight in how the rules were written? What is the real world reason that a NT vehicle being CE / BU would effect that?

The best attempt at a reality rationale I've heard to date (this came up for me a couple months ago) is that changing TCA/VCA isn't just the AFV rotating by hitting the left/right pedal but that the AFV is moving from one firing position to another and w/o the Gunner be able to look around, that's kinda hard to do. That is to say, per your statement: " if they are not targeting anything but only pointing the vehicle in a general direction. " they are targeting potential threats coming from a certain direction. All the mini trees and shrubs and boulders and whatnot that would be in your way to shoot "that way" aren't on the map, after all.

You may or may not find that holds water for you.

So a smidge of designer intent and a smidge of possible unintended side-effect, that's my take.

 

[John Fedoriw]

Because the rulz we have all agreed to play by say it is so.

It's a game, not reality.

Sure its a game not reality. That's a valid point and true. But it's supposed to be based at least loosely on reality. If I wanted to play a game based on fantasy I would be playing Dungeons and Dragons.

One changes one's CA in this manner because one is fixing to fire elsewhere. If you're BU in an OT machine, by definition you're not fixing to fire anywhere.

(At least that's my rationale for it.)

I am not sure how I see this is really any different between a CE & a BU vehicle here. Neither is firing right now, just pointing the AFV in a general direction. If you're BU in an OT machine, by definition you're not allowed to fire anywhere. I am not sure that not being allowed to fire anywhere is exactly the same as not fixing to fire somewhere. I think the BU guy IS fixing to fire somewhere and will be ready to fire when he goes CE in the APh.

The best attempt at a reality rationale I've heard to date (this came up for me a couple months ago) is that changing TCA/VCA isn't just the AFV rotating by hitting the left/right pedal but that the AFV is moving from one firing position to another and w/o the Gunner be able to look around, that's kinda hard to do. That is to say, per your statement: " if they are not targeting anything but only pointing the vehicle in a general direction. " they are targeting potential threats coming from a certain direction. All the mini trees and shrubs and boulders and whatnot that would be in your way to shoot "that way" aren't on the map, after all.

You may or may not find that holds water for you.

So a smidge of designer intent and a smidge of possible unintended side-effect, that's my take.

Thanks but it doesn't really hold water, for me anyway. The vehicle is pointing his front in a general direction. One of 6 - 60 degree points around them where they think a threat may be coming from. I doubt that requires a lot of accuracy. I think any fine tuning of the gun to clear these vision hinderances you are speaking about would be done when the gunner was CE and actually looking for a target.

I mean no offence, but all the comments above sound to me like an excuse for a design oversight. That is OK. I guess the conclusion is that I accept that that is the way it is and will play the game by the rules as written. I don't dislike this fact enough to design my own game.

Anyway my apologies if my question upset anyone. I know how much everyone hates reality arguments around here and I wasn't really trying to start one. I was just curious if there was some rationale behind it I hadn't thought of, because it seems odd to me. So of course I wondered if the designers had consciously decided this and if so why? Sometimes it is interesting to hear why rules were decided the way that they were...especially if it is for some reason that had not occurred to you.

Finally I would like to thank everyone who replied. Hopefully we can all just agree to disagree on how we see this, and all stay friends.

 

[zgrose]

Anyway my apologies if my question upset anyone. I know how much everyone hates reality arguments around here and I wasn't really trying to start one. I was just curious ...

Come over to the ASL Discord and ask there next time. We're way more chill.

 

[John Fedoriw]

Come over to the ASL Discord and ask there next time. We're way more chill.

 

[Philippe D.]

Non-reality argument:

When you "use" the option to change [V/T]CA instead of firing, you are at least giving up something in exchange for the CA change - maybe you could have hit something with that shot (and you're not risking malfunction or SAN by taking an artificial dummy shot). If your Marder is BU, it has no shot option to give up.

Another way of seeing it: changing [V/T]CA is supposed to happen during the MPh. But the rules allow you to change them in order to fire, so you basically get that for free. And the "free CA change" rules are just there to remove the threat of malfunction or SAN from the operation, so you can do this CA change with no risk - but you need a weapon capable of fire for that. (This is actually how I saw the rule back when I was learning the game)