Critical Hit Question

Discussion in 'ASL Starter Kits' started by TheSQLGuru, Sep 10, 2017.

  1. TheSQLGuru

    TheSQLGuru Member

    98
    Oct 28, 2004
    Decatur, AL
    Two 467's are in a wooden bldg. They are hit with a Critical Hit from a Russian 50 mortar.

    Rule 6.1: the special provisions of a CH are applied only to one randomly selected target

    So one unit takes a 12-2 and the other a 2+2 using the same IFT DR.

    The DR is a 4. So the CH unit gets a 1KIA and a PTC on the non-CH 467.

    3.2.3 KIA states "; all remaining targets are automatically broken and DM,...".

    So does 3.2.3 apply and cause the non-CH 467 to break? It seems logical that an Ordinance hit is a single "unit of action" because it hit a bldg (as opposed to hitting a tank in the same hex as a squad for example), despite in this case having two separate final numbers on two different resolution columns. One unit just got plastered by the shot and the other freaked out and broke because of all the human pieces-parts stuck to the walls and ceiling?

    I did check the official Perry Sez for the full ASL rules and didn't find anything applicable.

    P.S. I am currently playing a game where this happened, and it is a pretty significant event. :)
     
  2. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    All remaining targets that are affected by a #KIA result are broken. The wording is perhaps not the best, but the effects of a result only apply to the units that get that result after figuring FP modifications (e.g. halving due to concealment) and DRM that apply to each unit. Even without a CH it is possible to have different results for different units. For example a hex might have a unit in a foxhole, two units outside each possessing one FT and three units outside that posesses two FTs. The attack on the IFT is at two FP with no cowering and the DR is a two. The units outside the foxhole with two FTs share a result of 2KIA (two are eliminated and one is broken), the two units with one FT share a 1KIA (i.e. one is broken, the other is eliminated), and the unit in the foxhole takes a 1MC.

    JR
     
  3. Eagle4ty

    Eagle4ty Active Member

    Nov 7, 2007
    Eau Claire, Wi
    The short version: One attack (read that TH/IFT action) can be several attacks depending upon the DRMs for each specific unit or by Random Selection of the units attacked.
     
    Mister T likes this.
  4. TheSQLGuru

    TheSQLGuru Member

    98
    Oct 28, 2004
    Decatur, AL
    JR, your reply references both Concealment and Locations, which the starter kit has no notion of, so I don't think it is truly applicable. But your reply and Eagle's, in conjunction with emails with my opponent, have convinced me to switch my view on the subject.
     
  5. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    Sk has concealment for hip guns. For location you can freely substitute hex.

    JR
     
  6. TheSQLGuru

    TheSQLGuru Member

    98
    Oct 28, 2004
    Decatur, AL
    No, it does not. They are just HIP, which is not the same at all. When revealed for any reason they are not put under "?" counter. "?" counters don't even exist in the game, at least not until the PTO module comes out.

    And you cannot freely substitute Hex for Location either, at least for your examples. There is no case that I can think of (which does not mean there isn't one) where there are different modifiers to an IFT DR against a Hex in SK that is due to anything related to what is in the Hex. There are FT and CH modifiers though, which can vary effects.

    The FT actually brings into play the exact situation I described in my OP, because it to can result in a scenario (K/3 IFT DR on squad without FT, meaning 1KIA on squad with FT in same hex due to -1 FT drm for example) exactly like the CH one did.

    I have decided for now that a KIA result due to some drm that does not apply to other units does not cause the auto-KIA-breakage. I will be asking Perry this question when I see him at ASLOK in a few weeks, and will try to remember to post back here when I get word from the rules guru himself.
     
  7. clubby

    clubby Active Member

    Dec 27, 2015
    CA
    So, I've never played SK, but even if you don't get concealment, per se, a shot into that hex can still target the HIP unit. I'm not sure how it's handled in SK, but in ASL they would be subject to an additional +2 TH or 1/2 FP on the IFT. So, that is an in hex modifier which could subject the contents of that hex to different results from the same attack.

    It's not really the exact situation. In your OP, you're talking about CHs. CH only affect one unit (or more subject to random selection ties). The attack affects every unit you're shooting at, but the CH only affects whichever unit(s) is/are randomly selected.

    The "KIA auto breakage" is only applicable to units affected by the KIA result. A shot which yielded a CH and as a result, per your example, a 1KIA versus the CH unit and a K/3 against the non-CH unit, would result in the 1KIA only against the unit(s) subjected to the CH. If more than one unit was randomly selected to take the CH, you'd do RS to determine which one(s) was/were the 1KIA and any other units would break. The unit(s) [again random selection would determine which one(s)] subjected to the K/3, would undergo Casualty Reduction and the rest of the units including the possibly newly created HS would take a 3MC.

    This is not a question subject to a Q&A.
     
  8. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    I am well aware of that there is no concealment other than hip. However, per 6.4, an "attack against a HIP Gun is resolved as Area Fire with half FP on the IFT." Hence when I mention that for some units FP is halved and some units it is not, I meant this.

    You are correct that there are no foxholes in ASLSK, which is what I was thinking of. However what you say about all (or nearly all, excluding FT) modifiers being hex level is incorrect. A gun crew can be emplaced, and the emplacement TEM only applies to the gun (6.3). Also some guns have gunshields, which again only affects the crew. The next I can think of is a CE vehicle crew will get the CE DRM. And the last, an airburst DRM will affect Infantry but not a BU AFV. That may be all; have I missed any?

    Let us know what his answer is. I don't know if you have the time, but I have a list of questions that I have e-mailed him but never gotten a responses on. Perhaps you can slip in one or two.

    JR
     
  9. Perry

    Perry Active Member

    Feb 4, 2003
    Baltimore, MD
    Never hurts to re-submit. I may have forgiven you by then.
     
  10. TheSQLGuru

    TheSQLGuru Member

    98
    Oct 28, 2004
    Decatur, AL
    Yeah, but I'm not going to email them. I'm going to ask him FtF at ASLOK. :cool:
     
  11. Perry

    Perry Active Member

    Feb 4, 2003
    Baltimore, MD
    Where he may well tell you to submit it in writing. ;)

    "The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer.” ;)
     
  12. Eagle4ty

    Eagle4ty Active Member

    Nov 7, 2007
    Eau Claire, Wi
    Think what he's trying to say, if you get a response in person you may resolve your understanding/play of the rule (especially if somehow changed or modified); If you ask it in wrting it becomes official and may help many others. (Hint, Hint to SQLGuru):rolleyes:
     
  13. Tredegar

    Tredegar New Member

    17
    Apr 12, 2006
    Louisiana
    Looking at my ASLSKEP rules, there is one little thing you missed. Since it's a mortar that got the critical hit, it's considered area fire. Under rule 6.1 the effect of the critical hit is to double the firepower, but TEM is not applied. So, per the rules it's a 12FP attack with no modifier. The 2+2 FP on the other unit does apply. The reverse modifier for terrain only applies to Infantry Fire.

    For the 1KIA rule, it does apply but I am not sure in which sequence it occurs, or if the 1KIA rule takes precedence over the normal attack.
     
  14. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    Regrettably that is almost certainly an error in the rules. Either that or it is different than ASL, but I believe the "TEM" being not applicable is meant for vehicles only, despite what is printed in the rule. I will make inquiries and advise as soon as I hear back.

    JR
     
  15. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    The apparent non-reversal of TEM for an Area Target Type CH is not present in ASLSK#2. It looks as though that was introduced in ASLSK#3, and I think it was introduced by mistake.

    JR
     
  16. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    The apparent non-reversal of TEM for an Area Target Type CH is not present in Decision at Elst. I am now almost positive that ASLSK#3 and ASLSK-EP1 are in error.

    JR
     
  17. Tredegar

    Tredegar New Member

    17
    Apr 12, 2006
    Louisiana
    Yeah, I always thought that the TEM modifier does apply. This definitely needs an official ruling.
     
  18. klasmalmstrom

    klasmalmstrom Well-Known Member

    Feb 26, 2003
    Sweden
    From the Elst rulebook - which is later than ASLSK #3.

    6.1:
    "...Furthermore, any positive TEM that the target would normally be entitled to for TH or IFT purposes is reversed and applies as a negative DRM to the IFT DR..."

    And as far as I can tell this sentence is present in the ASLSK #3 rulebook as well.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2017
  19. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    It is, but then in ASLSK#3 the rules go on to say (in salmon, i.e. added since ASLSK#2) , "A CH on the Vehicle Target Type doubles the TK number of that weapon. A CH on the Area Target Type is resolved using double FP of the weapon on the IFT. TEM is not applied." This is repeated in ASLSK-EP1. Although the bolded bit does not specify what it applies to, its appearance in the paragraph suggests strongly that it applies to the previous sentence at least, i.e. to a CH on the Area Target Type. This goes away in the Elst rulebook; I guess that someone noticed but I have no knowledge of why the rule was re-worked in Elst.

    JR
     
  20. klasmalmstrom

    klasmalmstrom Well-Known Member

    Feb 26, 2003
    Sweden
    It was probably re-worked in Elst since this seemingly was a contradiction. I was involved in the editing of the Elst rulebook, but I don't remember any specifics, and I probably don't have the emails/files left either.
     

Share This Page