CC reaction fire during delay MP

[Pte Parts]

In my last scenario, a squad assaulted a Russian tank but failed to destroy it in CC. The tank attempted to drive away in its MPh, but stalled and suffered 6 delay MP. Can the squad (which had already passed a PAATC when it moved in) attack the AFV with CC reaction fire during the delay MP? I played that it could but it still failed to kill.

 

[Yuri0352]

In my last scenario, a squad assaulted a Russian tank but failed to destroy it in CC. The tank attempted to drive away in its MPh, but stalled and suffered 6 delay MP. Can the squad (which had already passed a PAATC when it moved in) attack the AFV with CC reaction fire during the delay MP? I played that it could but it still failed to kill.

There's an excellent 'Rules and Eratta' sub-forum in the Advanced Squad Leader forum. That would be the best place to post these types of questions. I'm sure you will receive a prompt and useful response.

 

[bendizoid]

In my last scenario, a squad assaulted a Russian tank but failed to destroy it in CC. The tank attempted to drive away in its MPh, but stalled and suffered 6 delay MP. Can the squad (which had already passed a PAATC when it moved in) attack the AFV with CC reaction fire during the delay MP? I played that it could but it still failed to kill.

Yes

 

[Eagle4ty]

The infantry is already in Melee and per A11.15 can only attack in CC but it does not say just during the CCPh. Since CC reaction fire (D7.21) can be declared against any MPs, even delay, and it is by nature CC of course, as Bob has pointed out it may attack without having to pass a PAATC per A11.6 (unlike if the vehicle had become non-stopped & thusly released the infantry from Melee). Note it may make multiple CC Reaction Fire attacks (modified of course) per delay MP spent.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

The Vehicle Notes relating to Stall seems to say that the vehicle actually spends a Start MP (thus becoming Non-Stopped and releasing the Infantry from Melee) - followed by a number of Delay MP.

The Infantry could then attack with using CC Reaction Fire, but a new PAATC is required.

 

[Larry]

Since the vehicle is non-stopped, and in delay for 6 MP, does the +2 for motion apply the the CCRF during the delay points?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Since the vehicle is non-stopped, and in delay for 6 MP, does the +2 for motion apply the the CCRF during the delay points?

I am not sure it is Non-Stopped (excepct for a brief moment when it spend the Start MP - thus breaking the Melee), as Delay MP can only be spent when Stopped.


If we look at e.g., Russian MAVN M it says:
"Therefore, each time a Mechanical Reliability DR (D2.51) is made for a Russian built AFV, an 11 result indicates that the AFV has stalled or suffered transmission difficulties that have prevented it from starting normally. Its owner must then immediately make another DR, which equals the total number of Delay MP (including one MP to stop, but excluding the MP expended to start) that the AFV has used in the unsuccessful attempt to move."

D2.51 says:
"Each time an AFV having a red MP allotment expends a MP to start..."

So it seems like the AFV spends an MP to Start - thus becoming Non-Stopped, and breaking the Melee. Then per MAVN it spends one MP to Stop + a number of Delay MP. So if it's attacked vs the Stop/Delay MP, it's not treated as Non-Stopped so the +2 DRM would not apply.

 

[Pte Parts]

I am not sure it is Non-Stopped (excepct for a brief moment when it spend the Start MP - thus breaking the Melee), as Delay MP can only be spent when Stopped.


If we look at e.g., Russian MAVN M it says:
"Therefore, each time a Mechanical Reliability DR (D2.51) is made for a Russian built AFV, an 11 result indicates that the AFV has stalled or suffered transmission difficulties that have prevented it from starting normally. Its owner must then immediately make another DR, which equals the total number of Delay MP (including one MP to stop, but excluding the MP expended to start) that the AFV has used in the unsuccessful attempt to move."

D2.51 says:
"Each time an AFV having a red MP allotment expends a MP to start..."

So it seems like the AFV spends an MP to Start - thus becoming Non-Stopped, and breaking the Melee. Then per MAVN it spends one MP to Stop + a number of Delay MP. So if it's attacked vs the Stop/Delay MP, it's not treated as Non-Stopped so the +2 DRM would not apply.

So that means the start MP would break melee and the squad would need a new PAATC to attack but then it could attack with CC once per delay MP a stopped AFV (with each attack after the first incurring a +1 DRM as it would then be marked with a First/final fire counter D7.213)

 

[Larry]

The stall is a C.8 another "such as" example of having expended MP but not a moving or motion target ??

The vehicle was stopped and not in motion at the start of the MPh. For one MP, the vehicle was non-stopped and then stopped again for one MP. The vehicle delays stopped for x MP. The vehicle is not in motion for TH or CCRF purposes because it did not enter a new hex and is not currently in motion.

 

[mgmasl]

The Vehicle Notes relating to Stall seems to say that the vehicle actually spends a Start MP (thus becoming Non-Stopped and releasing the Infantry from Melee) - followed by a number of Delay MP.

The Infantry could then attack with using CC Reaction Fire, but a new PAATC is required.

Is the MELEE counter changed to a CC one as a result of the Stall DR?

 

[Eagle4ty]

The stall is a C.8 another "such as" example of having expended MP but not a moving or motion target ??

The vehicle was stopped and not in motion at the start of the MPh. For one MP, the vehicle was non-stopped and then stopped again for one MP. The vehicle delays stopped for x MP. The vehicle is not in motion for TH or CCRF purposes because it did not enter a new hex and is not currently in motion.

I believe I agree with you here Larry as the MAVN does not say the vehicle has been non-stopped, only that it has expended MPs in an attempt to start. As a matter of fact Klas has presented this in his rebuttal to the position I took with "... prevented it from starting normally." which certainly intimates the vehicle has failed to start though the MP was expended. Additionally, simply attempting to spend a MP to start doesn't seem to meet the definition of non-stopped nor does it meet the conditions of Moving/Motion. As there is no MP expenditure spent to Stop and only an attempt to Start in either a failed Mechanical Reliability or Stall MP expenditure the vehicle is considered stopped and therefore would not release the Infantry held in Melee to change its status. In as much as A11.7 states "Even though a vehicle cannot be held in Melee, a non-Abandoned, "unbroken" (12.1) vehicle holds all Known enemy Infantry occupying the same Location after a CCPh in Melee as long as it remains in the Location (unless in-Motion/Non-Stopped)" it seems to me the Infantry is still in Melee and need not take another PAATC to attack the vehicle in CC. (interesting take by Klas nonetheless, but this is my take & I'm sticking with it until further clarified).

 

[klasmalmstrom]

So that means the start MP would break melee and the squad would need a new PAATC to attack but then it could attack with CC once per delay MP a stopped AFV (with each attack after the first incurring a +1 DRM as it would then be marked with a First/final fire counter D7.213)

Yes, that's what I think the rules say.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

The stall is a C.8 another "such as" example of having expended MP but not a moving or motion target ??

The vehicle was stopped and not in motion at the start of the MPh. For one MP, the vehicle was non-stopped and then stopped again for one MP. The vehicle delays stopped for x MP. The vehicle is not in motion for TH or CCRF purposes because it did not enter a new hex and is not currently in motion.

For TH purposes it matters if the vehicle is a "moving target" or not, for CCRF it mattes if the vehicle is "Stopped" or "Non-Stopped".

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I believe I agree with you here Larry as the MAVN does not say the vehicle has been non-stopped, only that it has expended MPs in an attempt to start. As a matter of fact Klas has presented this in his rebuttal to the position I took with "... prevented it from starting normally." which certainly intimates the vehicle has failed to start though the MP was expended. Additionally, simply attempting to spend a MP to start doesn't seem to meet the definition of non-stopped nor does it meet the conditions of Moving/Motion. As there is no MP expenditure spent to Stop and only an attempt to Start in either a failed Mechanical Reliability or Stall MP expenditure the vehicle is considered stopped and therefore would not release the Infantry held in Melee to change its status.

D2.51 says you make the Mech DR when a vehicle "expends a MP to start" - that sure sounds/implies (IMO) that a Start MP has been spent (making the vehicle temporarily Non-Stopped.

In as much as A11.7 states "Even though a vehicle cannot be held in Melee, a non-Abandoned, "unbroken" (12.1) vehicle holds all Known enemy Infantry occupying the same Location after a CCPh in Melee as long as it remains in the Location (unless in-Motion/Non-Stopped)" it seems to me the Infantry is still in Melee and need not take another PAATC to attack the vehicle in CC. (interesting take by Klas nonetheless, but this is my take & I'm sticking with it until further clarified).

If the Infantry is still in Melee it can't make a CC Reaction Fire attack, since that's a form of Defensive First Fire attack.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Is the MELEE counter changed to a CC one as a result of the Stall DR?

You'd just remove the Melee counter, once the Melee is broken.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Actually found some Q&A about this.

A11.6 & D7.21
Assuming a passed PAATC in the previous APh, does a MMC need to pass a (second) PAATC in order to make a Defensive Fire
CCRF attack against an AFV expending start or other MP in the Location in which it started it’s MPh?
A. Yes.

If yes, would it still have to do so if the AFV Stalled? If no, would it have to do so if the AFV left the location and then returned to
the MMC’s Location?
A. Yes. NA.

In the above situation, if the AFV failed a Mechanical Reliability DR and Immobilized (D2.51), or if the vehicle were
Immobilized in the preceding CCPh, would the MMC be able to make a Defensive Fire CCRF attack (despite still being held in
melee (A11.7)) as the AFV expended MP “for non-movement purposes” under the provisions of D8.5?
A. Infantry in Melee cannot attack an already-Immobilized AFV just because it is spending MP in the Melee Location. An AFV
that fails a Mechanical Reliability DR no longer holds Infantry in Melee (just like one that Stalls) and can be attacked after a
PAATC is passed.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Actually found some Q&A about this.

A11.6 & D7.21
Assuming a passed PAATC in the previous APh, does a MMC need to pass a (second) PAATC in order to make a Defensive Fire
CCRF attack against an AFV expending start or other MP in the Location in which it started it’s MPh?
A. Yes.

If yes, would it still have to do so if the AFV Stalled? If no, would it have to do so if the AFV left the location and then returned to
the MMC’s Location?
A. Yes. NA.

In the above situation, if the AFV failed a Mechanical Reliability DR and Immobilized (D2.51), or if the vehicle were
Immobilized in the preceding CCPh, would the MMC be able to make a Defensive Fire CCRF attack (despite still being held in
melee (A11.7)) as the AFV expended MP “for non-movement purposes” under the provisions of D8.5?
A. Infantry in Melee cannot attack an already-Immobilized AFV just because it is spending MP in the Melee Location. An AFV
that fails a Mechanical Reliability DR no longer holds Infantry in Melee (just like one that Stalls) and can be attacked after a
PAATC is passed.

I think the 2nd & 3rd Q&A there probably answered it there best. Well, been wrong before and probably will be again in the future. I am kind of surprised by the answer but also can see how it was arrived at.

Interestingly then since the vehicle is considered non-stopped (it hasn't spent a Stop MP since its last Start MP, though it may be immobilized/stalled-for-its-entire-MPA) if it were to conduct a Gun Duel or fire in any following phase it would seem to have to use Case C4 for its TH DRM and units firing ordnance at it could not get Case Case L Point Blank fire because effectively it is non-stopped.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Interestingly then since the vehicle is considered non-stopped (it hasn't spent a Stop MP since its last Start MP, though it may be immobilized/stalled-for-its-entire-MPA) if it were to conduct a Gun Duel or fire in any following phase it would seem to have to use Case C4 for its TH DRM and units firing ordnance at it could not get Case Case L Point Blank fire because effectively it is non-stopped.

Per the MAVN it spends a Stop MP as part of the Delay MP.

I think C.8 takes of an Immobilized vehicle:
"Thus a Non-Stopped vehicle is a moving, Mobile (D.7) vehicle that has not expended a Stop MP (D2.13) since its last Start MP (D2.12) expenditure."

Since an Immobilized vehicle is not Mobile, it can't be "Non-Stopped".