Elite, ELR, CR and Possession

CHERDE

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
874
Reaction score
42
Location
The Ruhr
Country
llGermany
Lets have a look at the aforementioned A 10.31 ASLRBv2. It says IMO that the unit which rolled the "12" is CasRed and broken AFTER any unit Replacement required by ELR failure.

So the ELR Replacement is done first. First the squad is replaced by two broken HS (A 19.13). Since SWs must be assigned to an single owner this must be done when the Replacement takes place.

Then there must be the CasRed result applied. I would use RS to determine which of the HS suffers the CasRed, since it would be not logical to apply the CasRed to each HS individually - (effectively eliminating the entire squad) .

Of course if You tie in the RS both HS are elim.


But gladly we have the Q+A (annual 96 A 10.31).
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
1,437
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
CHERDE said:
Lets have a look at the aforementioned A 10.31 ASLRBv2. It says IMO that the unit which rolled the "12" is CasRed and broken AFTER any unit Replacement required by ELR failure.

So the ELR Replacement is done first. First the squad is replaced by two broken HS (A 19.13). Since SWs must be assigned to an single owner this must be done when the Replacement takes place.

Then there must be the CasRed result applied. I would use RS
Why would you use RS? What rule is telling you to do so? Certainly not A10.31, because as you just quoted, the CR is applied to the unit that rolled Fate. That is, the original squad suffers CR. It is not possible for one squad that suffers Fate to lose both of its component HS to that single Fate roll, and it never was possible. The Q&A you cite is affirming the existing rules, not changing or adding to them.

Similarly, you never randomly determine in any CR result whether the HS that lived or the HS that died possessed the SW. It's always the HS that lives that remains in possession.

The underlined ELR rules do not change any of the above in any way -- and never have.
 
Last edited:

CHERDE

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
874
Reaction score
42
Location
The Ruhr
Country
llGermany
You are right

Quote from bprobst
"Why would you use RS? What rule is telling you to do so? Certainly not A10.31, because as you just quoted, the CR is applied to the unit that rolled Fate. That is, the original squad suffers CR. It is not possible for one squad that suffers Fate to lose both of its component HS to that single Fate roll, and it never was possible. The Q&A you cite is affirming the existing rules, not changing or adding to them.

Similarly, you never randomly determine in any CR result whether the HS that lived or the HS that died possessed the SW. It's always the HS that lives that remains in possession.

The underlined ELR rules do not change any of the above in any way -- and never have."


I rethought the whole issue

- AND YOU ARE RIGHT!

It has to be played the way the Q+A in ANNUAL 96 (A10.31 and A19.13) regarding the 658squad says it.

But this Q+A (A10.31 and A19.13) is neccesssary! Because in the same ANNUAL 96 there is a further Q+A regarding also A10.31 and a 467squad which suffers a CasualtyMC and also exceeds its ELR stating

"A. It is first Replaced, then it suffers Casualty Reduction , then it becomes Broken."

This A. is very specific about the order of events.
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
1,437
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
Yes, the Q&A specifies the order of events, which was not previously specified (as best as I can recall); the order of events is now printed in the 2nd ed. rules, however, so the Q&A is no longer necessary.
 
Top