D9.4 AFV/Wreck LOS Hindrance

[Sparafucil3]

A9.22 "... after resolving the First Fire attack in the normal manner... " [in other words, applying the Wreck Blaze Hindrance to the original attack]
"However, neither NVR (E1.1) nor any SMOKE... affects LOS for Fire Lane placement/attack purposes."
A Wreck Blaze (B25.2) is a type of SMOKE, so the Wreck Blaze does not affect subsequent Fire Lane attacks.

So you would think, for Fire Lane purposes, that would be end of it and a Wreck Blaze does not affect a Fire Lane.
But, D10.3 does say, by EXC, that a Fire Lane does receive a LOS Hindrance for the wreck counter.

It seems to me that SMOKE does not apply to a Fire Lane (except to the initial shot, which is not a Fire Lane attack), but once placed, then the Wreck Blaze Hindrance would not apply, but the wreck counter Hindrance would apply to Fire Lane FP attacks.
[EDIT: I just noticed that apbills and Bill Kohler reached the same conclusion above.]

B25.2 SMOKE: Any Burning Wreck or terrain Blaze is automatically shrouded by smoke up to four levels [EXC: none in Heavy Winds (25.63); two levels in a Mild Breeze (A24.4)] above the level of the Fire in that hex, so no actual smoke counters need be placed on those Fires. However, Wreck Blazes cause a +2 Hindrance DRM rather than the +3 Hindrance DRM of regular smoke. The SMOKE Hindrance DRM replaces the normal Wreck Hindrance DRM (D9.4) except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22), or in Heavy Winds (25.63), where only the Wreck Hindrance DRM would apply. Both Wreck and terrain Blazes can create drifting Dispersed Smoke (A24.61) in a Mild Breeze. Flames do not generate smoke. Fire has no other effect on LOS. See also A24.2 and A24.4-.8.

Emphasis mine. A Burning Wreck replaces a Wreck except for two specific instances, the most common of which will be an already existing Fire Lane. It is an interesting nuance since an MG TH/TK shot that eliminates the target and also places a Fire Lane wouldn't receive a hard Wreck hindrance. The reference to D9.4 is so you know specifically which type of hindrance is being replaced. But for two exceptions, the Wreck effectively no longer exists. -- jim

 

[Bill Kohler]

It is an interesting nuance since an MG TH/TK shot that eliminates the target and also places a Fire Lane wouldn't receive a hard Wreck hindrance.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow the logic to this conclusion. By D10.3, I think the hard Wreck Hindrance would still apply:

D10.3 Cover: . . . A burning wreck does not provide the +1 TEM of 9.3 to Infantry in the same hex, nor does the burning wreck create a LOS Hindrance due to the wreck counter [EXC: Fire Lane (A9.22); Heavy Winds (B25.63)]; however, the attendant smoke of a burning wreck does create a LOS Hindrance (B25.2).

 

[Sparafucil3]

I'm sorry, but I don't follow the logic to this conclusion. By D10.3, I think the hard Wreck Hindrance would still apply:

D10.3 Cover: . . . A burning wreck does not provide the +1 TEM of 9.3 to Infantry in the same hex, nor does the burning wreck create a LOS Hindrance due to the wreck counter [EXC: Fire Lane (A9.22); Heavy Winds (B25.63)]; however, the attendant smoke of a burning wreck does create a LOS Hindrance (B25.2).

B25.2 SMOKE: Any Burning Wreck or terrain Blaze is automatically shrouded by smoke up to four levels [EXC: none in Heavy Winds (25.63); two levels in a Mild Breeze (A24.4)] above the level of the Fire in that hex, so no actual smoke counters need be placed on those Fires. However, Wreck Blazes cause a +2 Hindrance DRM rather than the +3 Hindrance DRM of regular smoke. The SMOKE Hindrance DRM replaces the normal Wreck Hindrance DRM (D9.4) except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22), or in Heavy Winds (25.63), where only the Wreck Hindrance DRM would apply. Both Wreck and terrain Blazes can create drifting Dispersed Smoke (A24.61) in a Mild Breeze. Flames do not generate smoke. Fire has no other effect on LOS. See also A24.2 and A24.4-.8.

Yes, a Burning Wreck has an effect on a FL as noted in the EXCEPTION. But how a Burning Wreck affects the FL is governed elsewhere, specifically in B25.2. The +1 "hard hindrance" is replaced with a +2 SMOKE hindrance unless the Wreck existed BEFORE the FL or if Heavy Winds were in play. The "hard hindrance" effectively fades from existence unless on of the two other conditions exist. -- jim

 

[apbills]

I think the application of the Wreck Hindrance DRM has nothing to do with whether the FL was established prior to the vehicle becoming a burning wreck. It has to do with whether the Wreck Hindrance is NA since most likely the vehicle was considered moving (officially if TH case J applies) when it became a burning wreck, making it NA to any shot taken until after the AFPh. I gave one case I can think of where it would apply (i.e., when a vehicle is in the FL prior to it moving and is turned into a burning wreck before it leaves its hex) and the other one I have come up with would be if a Bounding First Fire shot creates a burning wreck of a non-motion AFV/Wreck. In both of these cases the Wreck Hindrance DRM would be applicable during the MPh. This is completely different for a SMOKE hindrance which is immediate, however, SMOKE hindrance does not apply to an established Fire Lane attack (meaning any FL residual attack).

I will also say that if any Fire Lane Residual attacks, it is due to an "already established Fire Lane". There is no Fire Lane residual present unless a Fire Lane was previously established [EXC: impulse movement, A9.222; and even this attacks after the Fire Lane is established]

 

[Bill Kohler]

Jim, I see your argument, but I think the B25.2 "already" reference is, at most, ambiguous.

B25.2 SMOKE: . . . The SMOKE Hindrance DRM replaces the normal Wreck Hindrance DRM (D9.4) except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22), or in Heavy Winds (25.63), where only the Wreck Hindrance DRM would apply.

"Already established" could mean that the "the Fire Lane was already established when the Wreck Blaze began", or it could simply mean that the "Fire Lane has previously been placed". The latter interpretation leads to greater consistency with how Fire Lanes and Wreck Blazes work together and it's also the easier understanding to arrive at, IMO.

 

[Sparafucil3]

I think the application of the Wreck Hindrance DRM has nothing to do with whether the FL was established prior to the vehicle becoming a burning wreck. It has to do with whether the Wreck Hindrance is NA since most likely the vehicle was considered moving (officially if TH case J applies) when it became a burning wreck, making it NA to any shot taken until after the AFPh. I gave one case I can think of where it would apply (i.e., when a vehicle is in the FL prior to it moving and is turned into a burning wreck before it leaves its hex) and the other one I have come up with would be if a Bounding First Fire shot creates a burning wreck of a non-motion AFV/Wreck. In both of these cases the Wreck Hindrance DRM would be applicable during the MPh. This is completely different for a SMOKE hindrance which is immediate, however, SMOKE hindrance does not apply to an established Fire Lane attack (meaning any FL residual attack).

I will also say that if any Fire Lane Residual attacks, it is due to an "already established Fire Lane". There is no Fire Lane residual present unless a Fire Lane was previously established [EXC: impulse movement, A9.222; and even this attacks after the Fire Lane is established]

That may or may not be. I do not know. All I know is what the rule says: the Wreck hindrance is replaced with a +2 SMOKE hindrance but for two cases. I agree there seem to be limited cases where the Fire Lane were already established but they do exist. And from where I sit, the Wreck ceases to exist in almost every case (see the two exceptions). Since it ceases to exist--being replaced by a +2 SMOKE TEM--the "hard hindrance" also ceases to exist.

Interesting discussion though. I believe we are at the point where we must agree to disagree absent a Q&A. -- jim

 

[apbills]

That may or may not be. I do not know. All I know is what the rule says: the Wreck hindrance is replaced with a +2 SMOKE hindrance but for two cases. I agree there seem to be limited cases where the Fire Lane were already established but they do exist. And from where I sit, the Wreck ceases to exist in almost every case (see the two exceptions). Since it ceases to exist--being replaced by a +2 SMOKE TEM--the "hard hindrance" also ceases to exist.

Interesting discussion though. I believe we are at the point where we must agree to disagree absent a Q&A. -- jim

Given the case we are talking about, i.e., established Fire lanes, is one of the two cases where the Wreck Hindrance DRM is used, it is not clear to me why it would not be used, and given a Wreck hindrance is defined as a hard hindrance (whose definition only applies to Fire Lanes) it is not clear to me why you would not consider it a hard hindrance when used with an established Fire lane.

The Q&A that does exist, which I quoted earlier in this thread and requote here, although not answering as clear as I would like, still answers the question.
"Q: B25.2 states that the wreck hindrance applies to any already established firelane. Does it apply to any firelane, or only a firelane established before the wreck began to burn?
UA: The wreck Hindrance applies normally (e.g., if it is not considered moving). "

So it is stating that the Wreck Hindrance applies normally, giving the example whereby it would not apply if it was considered moving. That answer is what has guided me to my conclusion, i.e., any established Fire lane (i.e., one that is actually in place at the time a unit moves into a Location of that Fire lane) uses a Wreck Hindrance DRM instead of the SMOKE DRM if said wreck is burning, and uses it "normally" (e.g., a wreck hindrance is applicable only if it is not considered moving). If the wreck hindrance is valid (e.g., not considered moving) it is a hard hindrance and applies to an established Fire Lane. A9.22 explains the mechanics of "placing" a Fire lane. The rules use the term "establish" within the A9.22 Fire Lane rules 3 times, once in A9.22, the last sentence "A MG that has established a Fire Lane may not fire again until the DFPh...", once in the example "The existence of any obstacle(s) in Z5/Z6 would not prevent the HMG from establishing a Fire Lane to/past EE6 ..." and once in A9.223 "A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere (/its manning Infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF after establishing the Fire Lane) only if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs.."

I would infer that the term "established" refers to a legally placed Fire Lane, i.e., when a MG places a legal Fire lane, that Fire Lane has been established. The term distinguishes between a Fire lane being declared and placed and one that is now established.

This makes complete sense.
Case 1) An existing burning wreck is between a German 4-6-7/HMG/9-1 ldr stack and a non-assault moving unit. The Defender stack declares a DFF shot, including the placement of a Fire Lane. The attack is resolved using +2 SMOKE, -1 FFNAM, and -1 Ldr mod = net +0. The attack leaves no residual (4 / 2 reduced 2 columns for the Smoke DRM) but places the 4FP Fire Lane through the Location to its target hex. After that moving unit completes its move, another unit non-assault moves through a Location of the Fire Lane which is behind the burning wreck. That 4FP Fire Lane residual attack also gets a net 0 DRM (+1 Wreck Hindrance, -1 FFNAM).

Case 2) An established 4FP Fire Lane is present. An AFV moves through it, and while in a Location of that Fire Lane, it is attacked, killed, and left burning. An infantry unit then moves through that Fire lane, behind the now burning wreck. The Fire Lane residual attack gets a net -1 DRM (-1 FFNAM) as the wreck hindrance is NA due to the wreck being considered moving. Note that the Smoke from the burning wreck does negate FFMO (B24,2) but its DRM does not apply to Fire Lanes residual attacks. If the AFV did not burn, but was just destroyed, the Fire lane residual attack would get a net -2 DRM (-1 FFNAM, -1 FFMO) since the wreck hindrance DRM is NA due to the wreck being considered moving.

For Fire lanes, the Wreck Hindrance DRM is applied normally, regardless of whether the wreck is burning. If it is considered moving, no hindrance, if it is not considered moving, +1 hindrance.

IMO that is what the rules, clarified by the Q&A, say.

 

[apbills]

The +1 "hard hindrance" is replaced with a +2 SMOKE hindrance unless the Wreck existed BEFORE the FL or if Heavy Winds were in play. The "hard hindrance" effectively fades from existence unless on of the two other conditions exist. -- jim

Where is that stated? the actual words are "except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22), or in Heavy Winds (25.63), " which is not the same thing. I am not sure how you get to your red underlined interpretation of the blue underlined rule statement. In practical terms, what you state is mostly true, but is has nothing to do with when the wreck existed relative to when the fire lane was established. It is based on whether or not the wreck is considered moving. I have already stated the two cases I have come up with where if the wreck is created after the FL is established, it still will provide a hindrance DRM. In both of those cases, the AFV already provided a hindrance DRM to the Fire lane, and that AFV becoming a burning wreck doesn't change that.

EDIT: I will say that if you change your statement to "AFV/Wreck" for all practical purposes we get to the same spot. You are basing it on where a vehicle/wreck is to start the MPh and I am basing it on if the AFV/Wreck is considered moving. Effectively, if an AFV/Wreck did not start its MPh in the hex, it will be considered moving to any/all DF and there will be no Hindrance DRM on any shot, regardless of it being a Fire Lane. I just prefer to get there through D9.4.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Where is that stated?

B25.2 SMOKE: Any Burning Wreck or terrain Blaze is automatically shrouded by smoke up to four levels [EXC: none in Heavy Winds (25.63); two levels in a Mild Breeze (A24.4)] above the level of the Fire in that hex, so no actual smoke counters need be placed on those Fires. However, Wreck Blazes cause a +2 Hindrance DRM rather than the +3 Hindrance DRM of regular smoke. The SMOKE Hindrance DRM replaces the normal Wreck Hindrance DRM (D9.4) except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22), or in Heavy Winds (25.63), where only the Wreck Hindrance DRM would apply. Both Wreck and terrain Blazes can create drifting Dispersed Smoke (A24.61) in a Mild Breeze. Flames do not generate smoke. Fire has no other effect on LOS. See also A24.2 and A24.4-.8.

For most instances, the Wreck DRM disappears and is replaced by a SMOKE DRM. A except if B or C. -- jim

 

[Sparafucil3]

IMO that is what the rules, clarified by the Q&A, say.

As I said, we agree to disagree. Absent something clarifying B25.2, we are at an impasse. -- jim

 

[Stewart]

The SMOKE Hindrance DRM replaces the normal Wreck Hindrance DRM (D9.4) except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22),

Seems to read,
Use the SMOKE hindrance on an initial shot...(as most hindrances are ignored after a firelane is laid)
But, AFTER that shot through the burning tank, the Exception comes into play.....It's simply a timing issue.

FL declared Shot - Smoke hindrance
FL is now established after the Smoke modified attack.
Initial and Subsequent FL res fp attack (from this established FL) Wreck applies.


(what's an abnormal Wreck Hindrance DRM?...one might consider a "hard hindrance" to be abnormal)

 

[apbills]

As I said, we agree to disagree. Absent something clarifying B25.2, we are at an impasse. -- jim

Agreed. I am perplexed that the B25.2 Q&A is not enough clarification.

 

[Bill Kohler]

I'm not certain what we're arguing about here.

When you place a Fire Lane, whatever Hindrances are there affect the shot in the standard way: a Wreck Blaze is +2 Hindrance. (A9.22, B25.2)
When you resolve a Fire Lane that has been placed, you treat any Wreck Blaze as a hard Hindrance Wreck. (D10.3, D9.4)

 

[Sparafucil3]

Agreed. I am perplexed that the B25.2 Q&A is not enough clarification.

Because the Q&A and the written rule are not in agreement. The Q&A implies errata should be issued for B25.2 since it changes the written rule. If it said "expect errata" we would be golden. -- jim

 

[Sparafucil3]

I'm not certain what we're arguing about here.

When you place a Fire Lane, whatever Hindrances are there affect the shot in the standard way: a Wreck Blaze is +2 Hindrance. (A9.22, B25.2)
When you resolve a Fire Lane that has been placed, you treat any Wreck Blaze as a hard Hindrance Wreck. (D10.3, D9.4)

B25.2 says the +2 SMOKE hindrance "replaces" the +1 Wreck Hindrance. SMOKE is not a hard hindrance. A Wreck is. If you replace the hard hindrance with a soft one, there is no hard hindrance. The Q&A posted earlier suggests the hard hindrance remains. If that's the case, the SMOKE is not replacing the Wreck or a Blazing Wreck needs to be redefined as being both a soft hindrance and a hard hindrance.

B25.2 SMOKE: ... The SMOKE Hindrance DRM replaces the normal Wreck Hindrance DRM (D9.4) except in the case of an already established Fire Lane (A9.22), or in Heavy Winds (25.63), where only the Wreck Hindrance DRM would apply.

See the above for context. -- jim

 

[Bill Kohler]

B25.2 says the +2 SMOKE hindrance "replaces" the +1 Wreck Hindrance.

I agree. But the underlying wreck is still there. And D10.3 says the underlying wreck no longer provides a TEM to Infantry (presumably because they won't get that close to a hot fire and so can't crowd in behind it), nor a LOS Hindrance . . . except for Fire Lanes!

SMOKE is not a hard hindrance.

I agree.

A Wreck is.

I agree.

If you replace the hard hindrance with a soft one, there is no hard hindrance.

Yes, you are replacing the hard +1 Hindrance of a Wreck with the +2 soft Hindrance of a Wreck Blaze . . . except when D10.3 says that you aren't.

D10.3 Cover: . . . A burning wreck does not provide the +1 TEM of 9.3 to Infantry in the same hex, nor does the burning wreck create a LOS Hindrance due to the wreck counter [EXC: Fire Lane (A9.22); Heavy Winds (B25.63)] . . .

This states that the wreck counter of a burning wreck DOES create a wreck (hard) Hindrance when it comes to Fire Lanes.

Interpretation: when it comes to resolving already placed Fire Lanes, treat any Wreck Blaze as if it's just a Wreck (except for Infantry TEM in the same hex).

 

[Sparafucil3]

I agree. But the underlying wreck is still there. And D10.3 says the underlying wreck no longer provides a TEM to Infantry (presumably because they won't get that close to a hot fire and so can't crowd in behind it), nor a LOS Hindrance . . . except for Fire Lanes!
I agree.
I agree.
Yes, you are replacing the hard +1 Hindrance of a Wreck with the +2 soft Hindrance of a Wreck Blaze . . . except when D10.3 says that you aren't.

D10.3 Cover: . . . A burning wreck does not provide the +1 TEM of 9.3 to Infantry in the same hex, nor does the burning wreck create a LOS Hindrance due to the wreck counter [EXC: Fire Lane (A9.22); Heavy Winds (B25.63)] . . .

This states that the wreck counter of a burning wreck DOES create a wreck (hard) Hindrance when it comes to Fire Lanes.

Interpretation: when it comes to resolving already placed Fire Lanes, treat any Wreck Blaze as if it's just a Wreck (except for Infantry TEM in the same hex).

I disagree the Wreck is still there. A Wreck is replaced with a Blazing Wreck. It is a different animal pedantically. It may still have some of the intrinsic properties of a Wreck but that's not what B25.2 says. B25.2 says you replace the normal Wreck hindrance with a different one.

And as I said earlier, D10.3 does say a Burning Wreck provides a LOS Hindrance but B25.2 says HOW to apply that hindrance.

Again, I see the other side's (including your) argument. I really do. I just don't believe the rules support that position. The Q&A suggests you're right but then if so, the Q&A means their should probably be errata added to B25.2. -- jim

 

[Bill Kohler]

Perry replied:

For simplicity, assume . . .
--The LOS is level and at the same height as the AFVs/Wrecks.
--We are not dealing with Fire Lanes.
--Each AFV/Wreck is in the LOS of both the firer and the target.
--No AFV/Wreck is in bypass.
--No AFV/Wreck would be subject to Case J if fired on by Ordnance.
--No AFV/Wreck is entrenched/Dug-In.

A LOS is traced through a hex that contains both (a) an AFV and (b) a Wreck Blaze. Is the Hindrance for that hex +2 or +3? A: +3
A subsequent shot turns the AFV into a second Wreck Blaze. Is the Hindrance for LOS through the hex now +2 or +3? A: +3

. . . Perry
MMP

 

[apbills]

Perry replied:

For simplicity, assume . . .
--The LOS is level and at the same height as the AFVs/Wrecks.
--We are not dealing with Fire Lanes.
--Each AFV/Wreck is in the LOS of both the firer and the target.
--No AFV/Wreck is in bypass.
--No AFV/Wreck would be subject to Case J if fired on by Ordnance.
--No AFV/Wreck is entrenched/Dug-In.

A LOS is traced through a hex that contains both (a) an AFV and (b) a Wreck Blaze. Is the Hindrance for that hex +2 or +3? A: +3
A subsequent shot turns the AFV into a second Wreck Blaze. Is the Hindrance for LOS through the hex now +2 or +3? A: +3

. . . Perry
MMP

I am more confused then ever. The ONLY thing I have been discussing is Fire Lanes. I appear to be having a different conversation.

As for Perry's answer and stipulations, I fully agree. For the first case you get the AFV Hindrance, and the +2 Smoke Hindrance. For the second case, there are two +2 Smoke hindrances, which hits the max Smoke Hindrance of +3.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Perry replied:

For simplicity, assume . . .
--The LOS is level and at the same height as the AFVs/Wrecks.
--We are not dealing with Fire Lanes.
--Each AFV/Wreck is in the LOS of both the firer and the target.
--No AFV/Wreck is in bypass.
--No AFV/Wreck would be subject to Case J if fired on by Ordnance.
--No AFV/Wreck is entrenched/Dug-In.

A LOS is traced through a hex that contains both (a) an AFV and (b) a Wreck Blaze. Is the Hindrance for that hex +2 or +3? A: +3
A subsequent shot turns the AFV into a second Wreck Blaze. Is the Hindrance for LOS through the hex now +2 or +3? A: +3

. . . Perry
MMP

This isn't what's being discussed, or at least it isn't what I have been discussing. I agree with this. -- jim