CC reaction fire with streetfighting rules + VBM and concealment loss -- when does "its" (AFV's) MPh end.

[Pyth]

This came up in a game last night (in the most agonizing way for me.) A whole lot of questions about concealment (loss) and the resolution of CC reaction fire against stationary bypass.

A BU German AFV entered a building hex in bypass and stopped. (The stop the 14th MP expended by a vehicle with 14MP). Inside the building I had a concealed British squad. (Opponent made the move largely to remove concealment from the squad with stationary bypass.) I claimed that the British squad could streetfight vs. the stopped AFV. (This is already error imo, the squad is CC reaction firing using "streetfighting rules" -- not actually streetfighting -- but what exactly is the difference?).... and I claimed the squad retained concealment for this attack. Opponent disagreed.

A12.42 Bypass ....Concealed units in the Location are revealed due to the vehicle's presence only voluntarily, or if the vehicle /its Passengers /Riders end its* MPh in that location.

*fyi, "its" is official errata from ASL Journal 10. Replace "the" with "its"

I think it's clear that the vehicle's Mph hasn't ended until all Defensive Fire (and its own BFF if available, and even SA's) associated with the last MP has been resolved. The RB is clear the vehicle's MPh must end for it to strip concealment just by its presence... and that doesn't occur until AFTER the CC Reaction Fire. My opponent didn't see it that way. I believe he was claiming that the vehicle's movement phase ended with the final MP expended, or perhaps that the concealment strip occurred with the final stop MP. I think either way it's nonsense. Anyone think he was right?

Ironically though I think the question is largely (but perhaps not entirely) moot. Holding on to concealment in streetfighting CC reaction fire isn't very important. When I compromised with my opponent and kept the squad concealment but had them take street fighting attack against the vehicle non-stopped I shot myself in the foot! (It really helps to know the rules and the DRM!) Concealment conveys small advantage during a CC Reaction Fire 'streetfighting rules' because +1/-1 Streetfighting ambush is automatic and the vehicle can't even return CC in the Mph. Meanwhile, CC attack vs a non-stopped vehicle carries a whopping +2 penalty. So, my Squad's CC attack was a 5 up 1 instead of 5 down 1! And, of course, I rolled 5!? Am I correct so far -- The squad can attack with CC Reaction Fire streetfighting keeping concealment for its attack (if it passes the PAATC!)?

Assuming that is correct?. I have several questions about how the CC Reaction Fire should have been correctly resolved. Let's say the concealed squad passes the PAATC and commences the attack:

1. Is there an Ambush roll? (I believe there is, because the infantry is advancing into CC). Does an Ambush roll even matter as the street-fighting bonus is automatic and the bonus is non-cummulative with regular Ambush bonus -- what is the point? I only see one possibilty, and it has to do with concealment. In a regular Ambush during CC, if the vehicle were destroyed, the Concealed unit would keep it's concealment... Is that the case for streetfighting ambush as well, and is it the case for CC reaction fire w/ streetfighting. In short -- what is the concealment status of the CC Reaction-streetfighter after a successful (elim) attack? after a succesful (immob) attack? after an unsuccessful non-12 roll?

2. What return fire is available to the AFV and where is the squad subjected to it? That is: After an unsuccessful CC reaction by the squad, does the AFV have BFF attack vs a concealed or unconcealed squad? Does it attack it in the bypass location with no TEM (or even FFMO?), or is the (concealed/unconcealed) squad returned to the building (assume no wire, mines etc. in the bypass location) and then subjected to BFF modified by building TEM?

I could probably cook up a few more pertinent questions... but uh, this already seems long enough. If you're reading this... sorry for the long post and TIA.

 

[jrv]

Although Street Fighting includes a "Street Fighting Ambush -1/+1 DRM", it is not Ambush. In the v1 rules how much "ambush" rules applied was not so clear and the phrasing made it sound like the two were equivalent, but in v2 the only the DRM applies (so for instance a unit may not withdraw either if attacking a vehicle in bypass of its own hex in the CCPh). The unit loses concealment for making a CC attack other than a successful ambush.

There is no ambush in the enemy MPh, and there will still be none in the CCPh (unless some other unit advances in).

The unit would not be subject to mines in the bypass location, nor would it be attacked in the bypass location (e.g. by OBA) while making its bypass street fighting attack. The vehicle could use BFF by firing at the unit in the building, just the same as if the unit had not made a street-fighting attack.

JR

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Holding on to concealment in streetfighting CC reaction fire isn't very important.

You would lose Concealment for making a CC Reaction Fire attack vs the AFV in bypass anyway.

But per the ASOP a vehicle's MPh hasn't ended until Step 3.4 END of ITS MPh: as those following it. Defensive First Fire takes place earlier.

 

[Pyth]

Thanks JRV. If I understand you correctly -- The unit loses concealment whether the CC reaction succeeds or not (because it is not a 'true' Ambush, which only occurs in the CC phase -- so no opportunity to retain concealment).

I also think I understand the further logic of your response: In Reaction Fire streetfighting vs stationary Bypass the infantry and AFV are already in the same location. So no need to place the streetfighter in the vehicle's location (it's already there). This is why no mines/FFE (in effect the CC reaction streetfighters vs bypass haven't had to leave the building. This is NOT the case when attacking against AFVs in a streetfighting eligible road location (whether as CC reaction fire streetfighting or CCph streetfighting.) -- Yes? You also didn't mention wire ... because there's no way wire could be in the building hex in the first place, which I should have realized.

Klas -- Yes Thanks Klas. I should use that full ASOP more often. I go with the one-pager of 1st edition -- which puts DFF up in the Mph in a way that leaves the question open, or at least, misinterpretable.

 

[Pyth]

So to put a succinct bow on this (that my opponent and anyone else can read)...

I was wrong that CC reaction fire against bypass was allowed to keep concealment. Wrong. WRONG. There. I said it. But not wrong that any concealment loss related to the stop mp/end of Mph would come after DFF (including the reaction fire.)

There was undoubtedly a much more concise way to ask my questions... unfortunately doing that required my knowing the answers first.

 

[Eagle4ty]

So to put a succinct bow on this (that my opponent and anyone else can read)...

I was wrong that CC reaction fire against bypass was allowed to keep concealment. Wrong. WRONG. There. I said it. But not wrong that any concealment loss related to the stop mp/end of Mph would come after DFF (including the reaction fire.)

There was undoubtedly a much more concise way to ask my questions... unfortunately doing that required my knowing the answers first.

All is good. Easily understood. I've found over the years that using the ASOP really answers many rule interpretation debates, now if I could always remember to utilize it during the heat of the moment!