Enemy use of Panzerfaust

MagpieMartin

Recruit
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Country
llFrance
Using C13.311 Optional Usage. My Opponent (German) allocated his PFs to his units ( using HIP on VASL). I eliminated a PF carrying squad, so my opponent left behind the PF as a separate counter. I could advance and attempt to recover the PF. Can I treat the PF as a standard SW, and if so, do I apply the same DRM/B# modifiers for use of an enemy weapon. Because the PF is no longer (SL days) represented as a separate SW counter, should we still represent the weapon as a separate counter when using the Optional rule?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,524
Reaction score
5,602
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Using C13.311 Optional Usage. My Opponent (German) allocated his PFs to his units ( using HIP on VASL). I eliminated a PF carrying squad, so my opponent left behind the PF as a separate counter. I could advance and attempt to recover the PF. Can I treat the PF as a standard SW, and if so, do I apply the same DRM/B# modifiers for use of an enemy weapon. Because the PF is no longer (SL days) represented as a separate SW counter, should we still represent the weapon as a separate counter when using the Optional rule?
I don't think so. The weapon is still inherent, and just like any inherent weapon (regular PF, MOL) it is eliminated with the possessor.

JR
 

MagpieMartin

Recruit
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Country
llFrance
Yes, that makes sense - focussing on the meaning of "inherent" . Thanks for that confirmation. I'll delete the SW counter :)
 

BattleSchool

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
4,388
Reaction score
1,027
Location
Ottawa GMT -5/-4
Country
llCanada
I don't think so. The weapon is still inherent, and just like any inherent weapon (regular PF, MOL) it is eliminated with the possessor.

JR
Don't disagree, but the reference in C13.311 regarding transfers raises a related question.

I wasn't aware that an ATMM, for example, could be transferred. Barring an SSR, under what circumstances might a unit be permitted to transfer any inherent SW?

C*13.311 OPTIONAL USAGE: ...He secretly records which units are carrying PF. Each Personnel unit may carry a number of PF equal to its US#. There is no portage cost. The weapons may be fired or transferred in the same manner as any inherent SW, except that no PF Check is necessary. After use or transfer, the PF possession records are updated accordingly because a PF can fire only once before being removed.
Emphasis added.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,457
Reaction score
616
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
Don't disagree, but the reference in C13.311 regarding transfers raises a related question.

I wasn't aware that an ATMM, for example, could be transferred. Barring an SSR, under what circumstances might a unit be permitted to transfer any inherent SW?

Emphasis added.
None, so that's my interpretation of the circumstances under which inherent PF could be transferred.
 

Jeffrey D Myers

Senior Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Messages
864
Reaction score
270
Location
ABQ, NM, USA
Country
llUnited States
Good point, Chris. Seems like it should say: "The weapons may be fired or transferred, but no PF Check is necessary.". It seems as if the rules writers did intend to allow transfer.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,545
Reaction score
595
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Except that C13.311 specifically allows Personnel units to transfer PF when "Optional Usage" is agreed upon by players (or when C13.311 is in play per SSR). :)
Excellent point. But keep in mind that the Optional Rule (C13.311) still doesn't employ actual counters. PF possession and transfers are noted on paper only. I still think the PFs would be lost if the unit possessing them drops them or is otherwise captured/eliminated.

Personally, I think the ASL switch to treating PFs as "inherent" was a great move. However, if players opt to use counters, they are moving beyond even the optional rule. That's ok with me. And when counters are being used, it seems sensible that those weapons are no longer "inherent" - thus up for grabs when lost or abandoned.
 

BattleSchool

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
4,388
Reaction score
1,027
Location
Ottawa GMT -5/-4
Country
llCanada
Excellent point. But keep in mind that the Optional Rule (C13.311) still doesn't employ actual counters.
Which was the point I was alluding to. Apart from this optional rule, where in ASL are we permitted to transfer inherent SW of any kind? I think the the text below is extraneous, perhaps a holdover from SL.

[These PF] may be fired or transferred in the same manner as any inherent SW...
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,524
Reaction score
5,602
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Which was the point I was alluding to. Apart from this optional rule, where in ASL are we permitted to transfer inherent SW of any kind? I think the the text below is extraneous, perhaps a holdover from SL.
The mention of transferring inherent SW puzzled me a mite. My thought was that the sentence was supposed to say, "non-inherent."

JR
 
Last edited:

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,524
Reaction score
5,602
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
But if "transferred in the same manner as any non-inherent SW" is the intending wording, would such a transfer be a concealment-loss activity, even though a PF never takes counter form?
I suppose so. I can't think of a reason why "taking counter form" would matter. A leader loses concealment for rally a unit even though "rally" doesn't take counter form.

JR
 
Last edited:
Top