Crest Firegroup

[nekengren2]

Can units in adjacent hexes, both in Crest Status, FireGroup?
I think not but I have seen some forum responses otherwise.

A7.5 FIRE GROUP (FG): A FG may consist of units from more than one Location only if each participating unit occupies a Location ADJACENT to another participating unit of the same FG.
ADJACENT (Locations [and units in them] are considered ADJACENT if any Infantry unit in one Location could conceivably—ignoring any enemy presence—advance into the other during the APh and a LOS exists between the two Locations,
20.93 MPh/APh: Infantry may not move directly from one Crest status to another (even in the APh).

 

[The Purist]

Well, it would be pretty silly if they couldn't. Two squads lying side by side along a crest are only separated by an imaginary line denoting one one hex from the t'uther.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Since the "Crest status" position does not create a separate Location, if one could advance between those two depression Locations then they are ADJCENT.

 

[von Marwitz]

Since the "Crest status" position does not create a separate Location, if one could advance between those two depression Locations then they are ADJCENT.

Thank gawd Klas gave us sound reasoning to explain that it actually is how it should be...

von Marwitz

 

[nekengren2]

klasmalmstrom said:
Since the "Crest status" position does not create a separate Location, if one could advance between those two depression Locations then they are ADJCENT.

the rule says you can't advance from one Crest to another.
20.93 MPh/APh: Infantry may not move directly from one Crest status to another (even in the APh).

Yes, the rules say Crest Status is NOT a new Location. But............immaterial because of 20.93.

I think the reason for 20.93 is..................imagine trying to crawl along the crest of a particularly craggy gully/ravine. kind of can't be done because of all the rocky ins and outs of the eroded terrain. usually you reach the Crest by crawling up a particular erosion feature to reach the top.

 

[The Purist]

Perhaps, but what if it is just a natural grassy gully that drains a farmer's field into a stream or larger coulee? Or a similar gully/depression leading from an orchard or vineyard? What about a Sunken Road or RR (when developed)?

Not all gullies are rocky or even all that steep.

In any case one is in crest 'status' not a Crest Location. The Location is a Gully/Sunken Road.

 

[nekengren2]

ah. now i see what you are saying.
The Location could advance into the other gully location so that makes us qualify for FG.
got it.
Status is immaterial.
thanks.

 

[lightspeed]

Since the "Crest status" position does not create a separate Location, if one could advance between those two depression Locations then they are ADJCENT.

I don't think this is quite correct, as ADJACENT requires LOS. Have a look at the picture accompanying A6.8: 12BB4
and 12AA5 are adjacent but not ADJACENT. (They are adjacent but not connecting gully hexes.)

Having said that, I think they should be allowed to FG. I think it's one of those rules that we have (mostly) agreement
on, and there is a small gap in the rules as this is situation is not covered.

indy

 

[Eagle4ty]

I don't think this is quite correct, as ADJACENT requires LOS. Have a look at the picture accompanying A6.8: 12BB4
and 12AA5 are adjacent but not ADJACENT. (They are adjacent but not connecting gully hexes.)

Having said that, I think they should be allowed to FG. I think it's one of those rules that we have (mostly) agreement
on, and there is a small gap in the rules as this is situation is not covered.

indy

It would certainly depend upon the crest status (direction chosen for front-sides of Crest Status) of each in my estimation.

 

[The Purist]

True but I think Indy's bit:

I think it's one of those rules that we have (mostly) agreement
on, and there is a small gap in the rules as this is situation is not covered.

captures the 'playing' of the rule despite the gap in the rule (reasoning).

More ammunition for a line-by-line review of the rules to close holes/remove silly bits before the next version release.

[Perhaps a parliamentary committee drawn from each party and with regional representation could be convened to compete the review ].

 

[Eagle4ty]

True but I think Indy's bit:



captures the 'playing' of the rule despite the gap in the rule (reasoning).

More ammunition for a line-by-line review of the rules to close holes/remove silly bits before the next version release.

[Perhaps a parliamentary committee drawn from each party and with regional representation could be convened to compete the review ].

Perhaps just a polite social gathering enjoying conversation and a few libations, ASLRB, notebook & loaded .45's on the table.

 

[nekengren2]

ok I'm going with the rule as written....................ADJACENT hexes can Firegroup.
All the permutations of Crest Status direction are immaterial.
Eagles example of gullies without LOS makes the FG not allowed. Not gonna happen often.

 

[Stewart]

It would certainly depend upon the crest status (direction chosen for front-sides of Crest Status) of each in my estimation.

Why would the direction matter, it would only change the FP of the units involved.
IMO the crest rules are bastardized.
Leaving the Crest into the adjacent location getting the FFMO/FFNAM is kinda bullshit.