Crazy dummy shenanigans

[Craig Benn]

My opponent pulled some crazy stuff on me yesterday.

First he argued that if he had a stack of 3 dummy ? - the two ? underneath could separate and grow fresh ? on top of them. so from three ? you could have two x two ?.
Secondly dummies could roll for MF to get under wire but were excused mine attacks as no dice roll could be made that would have no effect.

I say he's the dummy....(cough* Ben Jones)

 

[klasmalmstrom]

First he argued that if he had a stack of 3 dummy ? - the two ? underneath could separate and grow fresh ? on top of them. so from three ? you could have two x two ?.

That is correct. One of the "?" beneath the top gets another "?" when they split - just like if it were two real units beneath the top "?".

A12.11:
"...A concealed stack under a single “?” can split into separate stacks; each new stack is topped with its own newly created “?”...."

Secondly dummies could roll for MF to get under wire but were excused mine attacks as no dice roll could be made that would have no effect.

I believe a Dummy stack that enters a minefield is eliminated.

A12.11:
"...Before announcing any mine attacks exposed by the movement of a stack topped by a “?”, the DEFENDER may force the ATTACKER to momentarily reveal a non-Dummy unit in that stack to show that an actual force exists there. If he cannot, or if the stack is friendly to the DEFENDER, the Dummy stack is removed...."

 

[Mister T]

A stack of n dummy counters can be broken up and get up to (n-1) x2 concealement/dummy counters.

 

[Craig Benn]

Guess I'm the dummy if thats the rule but...really?...that's so open to abuse! What happens if you bring 2 stacks of 2? so you have 4x?. Can they then split to 3x 2? Exponential growth.

Even if not and sensibly 2 stacks of 2? could only combine back to 3? ....you still get to effectively double your OB given?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Guess I'm the dummy if thats the rule but...really?...that's so open to abuse! What happens if you bring 2 stacks of 2? so you have 4x?. Can they then split to 3x 2? Exponential growth.

Yes - 4 x "?" - can split into three 2 x "?". - Same as "?" + 3 squads can split into three "?"+squad. Of course one "?" per stacks goes away should the stacks merge again.

Even if not and sensibly 2 stacks of 2? could only combine back to 3? ....you still get to effectively double your OB given?

Personally I don't see it as big problem/issue. If one does it with multiple stacks it starts to be a give away that they are indeed dummies. As always, ymmv.

 

[bendizoid]

I think your confusing the old SL way of multiplying '?' Counters. Now, in ASL, the top '?' is removed from one of the stacks if you recombine them. At least that's how I understand.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I think your confusing the old SL way of multiplying '?' Counters. Now, in ASL, the top '?' is removed from one of the stacks if you recombine them. At least that's how I understand.

Correct, A12.11:
"..Multiple concealed units can combine into a concealed stack but must remove the top “?” counter from all but the original concealed (or Dummy) stack...."

 

[jrv]

The "?" at the top of a (or the concealed part of a) stack is a concealment counter. Any "?" counters below a concealment counter are dummy counters. The number of concealment counters may vary, and may grow. The number of dummy counters may not grow. If a scenario starts with N "?" counters one can place them all in a single stack, giving N-1 dummies and a single concealment counter. One can then split them up into up to N-1 stacks, each with its own concealment counter. If they did then they recombined, the resulting stack would contain N-1 dummies and one concealment counter again. Dummy counters may not become concealment counters, and unless you are very good with your fingers, concealment counters may not become dummy counters.

If I am given dummies in a scenario I look for ways to stack them in large piles so they can split into a large number of dummies. If you are given N "?" counters you can set up from zero (all "?" used as concealment counters) to N-1 dummies. It isn't often possible to create the maximum number of dummies, but with a little care one can often end up with more by splitting up dummy stacks.

JR

 

[Philippe D.]

Well, unless the scenario has SSR to the contrary, you can always end up with your maximum N-1 dummies - just stack them all together at setup. You might want to add some real units to the stack so a counter-counting opponent doesn't immediately know it's just dummies, and also place them somewhere you'll have time to separate them before a single shot clears the whole stack - but you can do it

 

[Capt. Batguano]

... Of course one "?" per stacks goes away should the stacks merge again.

That's the key point imo. There's really only so far a play could abuse this because it works no different than if the dummy stacks were actual units - which your opponent is not supposed to know about. So when they split, they need to split like real concealed units. When they come back together into a stack, same thing.

 

[EagleIV]

When splitting or combining stacks with dummies (whether all dummies or mixed with real units) the stacks should look to you opponent the same as if all the dummies were real units.

 

[jrv]

Mine all look as if the real units are dummies. What am I doing wrong?

JR

 

[EagleIV]

Mine all look as if the real units are dummies. What am I doing wrong?

JR

nothing, but per the OP, if you have 4? and split them into two stacks of 2? it isn't the same as 1? and 3 real units.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Mine all look as if the real units are dummies. What am I doing wrong?

JR

Use Footsteps' counters. They look brighter.

 

[ibncalb]

To expand on the second part of Craig's question.

The dummy stack moved from a trench to take up WA behind bocage in the same hex and then back again. A few times.

As they were not changing location/hex then there would be no mine attack therefore no dice roll therefore the dummies stay.

Any opinions?

 

[jrv]

Sounds good. MF spent in-hex (throw smoke grenades, recovery, etc) do not trigger mines (EXC: search may result in search casualties, but not in a mine attack). Dummies can't do those, of course, but your example is an action they could perform.

JR

 

[Vinnie]

Minefiedls only attack if you enter or leave a minefield location. As the trench and the hex are the same location for these purposes, no attack occurs.

I particularly like the fact you can sit in a fortified building with mines round it and place a DC adjacent without suffering an attack and when he tries to enter and gets rebuffed, he doesn't syffer an attack either but when he eventually advances in, he can get blown away by the mines!