E10 - Ammo Dumps

Chris Milne

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
675
Reaction score
3
Location
Letchworth, UK
Country
ll
Playtesting a game involving Ammo Dumps, which to me aren't the best defined features of the game, and a number of questions have arisen. Would be interested in folks' opinions ... this is copied from my opponent's email to the ASLML.

I have an Ammo Dump set up using HIP in a single-hex, single-story
building. It is allowed to set up HIP as if an Emplaced Gun.


Questions:
1. Does an Ammo Dump lose HIP/Concealment for just providing its Ammo
capacity to a Gun? (I would think no. Yes, an Ammo Vehicle is marked
with a Prep Fire counter to show it can't move, not that it has fired.)


2. A GO, armed enemy squad has advanced into the Location of the HIP
Ammo Dump. As the Ammo Dump can not reveal a Strength Factor, does the
Ammo Dump lose Concealment automatically or does it still retail its
concealment? ( I would think loss of concealment would be automatic -- I
think.) Mind you, the Ammo Dump can not attack back so it doesn't have
the option to *drop* its concealment so as to attack.


3. Does an enemy unit have the option to _both_ attempt a capture
attempt in CC as it attacking an unarmed vehicle _and_ attempt to Recover
the Ammo Dump in the RPh/MPh as if a SW/Gun? Or, may (must?) the enemy
unit attempt either a capture attempt in CC *or* a Recovery attempt in
the RPh/MPh? Or is the capture of the Ammo Dump automatic as per A11.52?


4. If the Ammo Dump loses its concealment, does it (can it) hold an
enemy unit in Melee? (I would think no as it's not armed.)


5. If the enemy unit in the same Location as the Ammo Dump has not
captured/recovered the Ammo Dump, may a Gun ADJACENT to the Ammo Dump
_still_ use the benefits of the Ammo Dump? Does this change if the Ammo
Dump is still concealed?
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,338
Reaction score
1,896
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
As an Ammo Dump is not a unit, is it allowed to HIP or concealment at all?
SWs are not, anyway...
 

Chris Milne

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
675
Reaction score
3
Location
Letchworth, UK
Country
ll
SSR allows the Dump to set up as an Emplaced Gun.
If that wasn't the case, the Dump would be treated as a vehicle. In fact, E10.6 pulls the following out of the hat:
'All rules pertaining to Ammo Vehicles apply to the Ammo counter as a stationary Location.'

The SSR adds some problems, but the RB says to treat it as a vehicle, with the curious phrase 'as a stationary Location'.
And the SSR is quite important to the scenario, as this dump is worth VPs to both sides if intact, but counts against you if you destroy it (so attacking in CC is not something you want to try!)

I've got my own answers to the questions, which differ from my opponent in some regards, so we're curious as to the community's thoughts.
 

SamB

Shut up and play!
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
6,792
Reaction score
379
Location
Seattle, Washington,
Country
llUnited States
Chris Milne said:
Playtesting a game involving Ammo Dumps, which to me aren't the best defined features of the game, and a number of questions have arisen. Would be interested in folks' opinions ... this is copied from my opponent's email to the ASLML.

I have an Ammo Dump set up using HIP in a single-hex, single-story
building. It is allowed to set up HIP as if an Emplaced Gun.
I assume this is allowed by SSR?

All of the questions you ask should be defined by SSR... Might want to ask the scenario designer.

Sam
 

Chris Milne

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
675
Reaction score
3
Location
Letchworth, UK
Country
ll
Testing it with the designer :)

Part of our effort is to try to minimise the number of SSR on this scenario - they currently cover about half a regular scenario card. Even if it didn't have the HIP provision, as a 'vehicle' the dump would be allowed to set up concealed per the rulebook and most of the above questions would still apply. For example, is using the dump/vehicle an action by the vehicle for Case C concealment loss purposes? Or is it just an action by the firing Gun?

As it stands, I think the way the scenario uses Ammo Dumps is not something that was ever envisaged by the writer of E10, which causes us a lot of problems. My favoured solution right now is to require the Dump to set up in the same Location as a Gun and to retain the same ? status as that Gun.
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,338
Reaction score
1,896
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
And note that a vehicle without an inherent driver nor Passengers or Riders is considered "broken" for "?" gain/loss purposes (A 12.1 last sentence) : one should be clear if the Dump is considered a "manned" vehicle or not.

Another question : I do think that an unpossessed SW or Gun may not gain concealment nor retain it, but I cannot find a rule saying it. Am I the victim of my imagination or is there a rule reference here?
The consequences of an absence of rules forbidding to conceal non-units (cf. Index definition) could be interesting (e.g. if a concealed unit out of enemy LOS drops a SW or leaves a Gun, one could place a "?" on the weapon so the other player does not know the nature of what was left behind - or one could place a lone LMG (malfunctioned) under a "?" counter, thus creating a "dummy"...).
 

Chris Milne

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
675
Reaction score
3
Location
Letchworth, UK
Country
ll
Last sentence of A12.11 prohibits unpossessed SW and non-units from gaining/retaining concealment.

But I hadn't considered the inherent driver point. Bears thinking about ... E10 doesn't help us on that point.
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,338
Reaction score
1,896
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Chris Milne said:
Last sentence of A12.11 prohibits unpossessed SW and non-units from gaining/retaining concealment.
Thanks! I am not "alzheimerized" yet... ;)
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,338
Reaction score
1,896
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
When one gets old, one loses two things : first, one loses memory and second... mmmh... second... uh... what was I speaking about?
 

UXB

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
Location
California, USA
Country
llUnited States
must use SSR

Sounds like you must use SSR to define the effects.

Related question: in the absence of SSR, would an Ammo Dump be treated like
a Fortification (Foritified Building), or like a Pillbox or Trench?

Since it can be USED one could argue that like a fortified building location,
it is only revealted to the opponent when used.

On the other hand, as soon as a opponent gains LOS to a Pillbox it is revealed.

Any other comments?
 

Chris Milne

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
675
Reaction score
3
Location
Letchworth, UK
Country
ll
I don't think there's anything in the rules to support an Ammo Dump being treated like any form of fortification. It's treated as some sort of 'static location vehicle'.

We're trying to keep away from some big SSR writing exercise and keep to the rules as written if at all possible.
 
Top