Fire vs moving unit on a brush/roads (not path)

mgmasl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
3,903
Reaction score
188
Location
Cadiz
First name
Miguel
Country
llSpain
Anyway, in this case, if the LOS crosses the in-hex brush depiction is still a brush hex.. To use this rule need a clear LOS to the road without crossing the other terrain in the hex and so not applied in this particular case... at least is what I understand checking the example

About the TEM, clearly a TEM of 0 is considered no TEM, ie no modifier to the DR due to terrain effect.. I prefer TEM 0 similar to the TEC definition
 

BattleSchool

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
870
Location
Ottawa GMT -5/-4
Country
llCanada
Anyway, in this case, if the LOS crosses the in-hex brush depiction is still a brush hex.. To use this rule need a clear LOS to the road without crossing the other terrain in the hex.. at least is what I understand checking the example
Not exactly. The hex is always treated as a brush-road hex. However, FFMO may apply if there is a clear LOS to the road depiction on the hexside crossed.

However, as I read it, the brush depiction is only relevant (for the purposes of A4.132) when the LOS is drawn along the same level. A firer at a higher elevation ignores the brush depiction, because the brush is not an "obstruction" for the purposes of A4.132 (only). See also A6.1.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,784
Reaction score
2,324
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Agreed. But I also think that "Vinne" has a point re A4.132.

Given that an LOS traced from M15 to I12 is not hindered, FFMO would apply provided that the firer in M13 can also trace an otherwise unhindered LOS to any point on the road depiction "where the hexside crossed intersects the road used." (FWIW, PBr17.3 mirrors this thinking, stating that A4.132 applies unchanged.)

Since it is not an Open Ground hex I don't think FFMO would apply, regardless of whether brush hinders, if never would, btw, since it never hinders the LOS in its own hex.

I don't think A4.132 was written with brush-roads in mind, ymmv.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,365
Reaction score
504
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
Since it is not an Open Ground hex I don't think FFMO would apply
Well, A4.132 clearly allows FFMO (under conditions) for moving in a woods-road hex, and B13.31 does the same, so just the fact that the hex is not an Open Ground hex is not enough to forbid FFMO.
 

BattleSchool

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
870
Location
Ottawa GMT -5/-4
Country
llCanada
Since it is not an Open Ground hex I don't think FFMO would apply, regardless of whether brush hinders, if never would, btw, since it never hinders the LOS in its own hex.
It was never my contention that FFMO applies to a brush hex, nor that brush hinders LOS within its own hex. I see now that my point about a firer at a higher elevation ignoring the brush depiction within the brush-road hex was unclear. I was referring specifically to the second condition in A4.132. In other words, provided there were no hindrances outside the brush-road hex, FFMO would apply to an LOS traced to the road depiction of the road hexside crossed when entering the brush-road hex at the road movement rate. (Man that's a mouthful.) I think that the ASLRB provides enough guidance as to how to handle the road hexside condition in A4.132.

I am speculating that FFMO would not apply, if LOS--same level or otherwise--were traced to the centre dot of a brush-road hex and in doing so crossed the brush depiction within the target hex. IMO, this is the fussier of the two conditions to interpret in relation to combination terrain that features roads and terrain with no TEM such as brush, grain, and vineyards.

Brush, as we both agree, is never treated as Open Ground, unless converted to Open Ground with a Prepared Fire Zone factor, which brings me to my last point.

I don't think A4.132 was written with brush-roads in mind, ymmv.
Were PFZ vineyard-roads (B36.3) written with A4.132 in mind? ;)
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,784
Reaction score
2,324
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
...In other words, provided there were no hindrances outside the brush-road hex, FFMO would apply to an LOS traced to the road depiction of the road hexside crossed when entering the brush-road hex at the road movement rate.
Agree, and I would even say that FFMO applies if such a LOS is traced to the center dot and never leaves the depiction of the road in the hex - same as in a woods-road hex.


I am speculating that FFMO would not apply, if LOS--same level or otherwise--were traced to the centre dot of a brush-road hex and in doing so crossed the brush depiction within the target hex.
In this situation, I don't think FFMO applies.


Were PFZ vineyard-roads (B36.3) written with A4.132 in mind? ;)
Not sure I see what the issue would be?
 

BattleSchool

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
870
Location
Ottawa GMT -5/-4
Country
llCanada
Were PFZ vineyard-roads (B36.3) written with A4.132 in mind?

[QUOTE="klasmalmstrom, post: 1960363, member: 1861"Not sure I see what the issue would be?[/QUOTE]

The same issue as for a brush-road hex, only with the added complication that a PFZ vineyard-road is inherent terrain.

For the purposes of the first condition in A4.132, would the contours of the former terrain (e.g., woods or bamboo) be used to determine LOS to the centre dot (EX: fire traced from Y5 and Z7 in the illustration below to X7 vs a 6-2-8 moving into the hex from W8)? I wouldn't expect it to, any more than I would expect that fire traced from the vertex of Y6-Z5-Z6 would be eligible for the FFMO DRM. My gut tells me that the inherent nature of the PFZ vineyard means that FFMO can only apply to fire that is traced entirely within the confines of the road depiction.

Granted fire that satisfies the criteria of the second condition in A4.132 may also make the target subject to FFMO. However, in this case, the firer must be able to trace a clear LOS to the road depiction of the road hexside crossed. (EX: Were the 6-2-8 to enter X7 from Y7, then presumably FFMO would apply to fire traced from the foregoing vertex, as well as from Y6-Z5-Z6 and Z7 would be eligible for the FFMO DRM. Correct?

And what of fire from X6 or Y8 vs a unit moving from Y7 to X7? Would the inherent nature of the PFZ vineyard make FFMO NA? I think so. But I didn't see anything in the rules to support this. Imagine instead that X7 is an orchard road. Would fire traced from X6 or Y8 vs a unit moving from Y7 to X7 meet the prerequisites of A4.132; would such fire qualify for FFMO?

Just thinking out loud.

PFZ EX.png
 
Last edited:

Eagle4ty

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,534
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Were PFZ vineyard-roads (B36.3) written with A4.132 in mind?

[QUOTE="klasmalmstrom, post: 1960363, member: 1861"Not sure I see what the issue would be?
The same issue as for a brush-road hex, only with the added complication that a PFZ vineyard-road is inherent terrain.

For the purposes of the first condition in A4.132, would the contours of the former terrain (e.g., woods or bamboo) be used to determine LOS to the centre dot (EX: fire traced from Y5 and Z7 in the illustration below to X7 vs a 6-2-8 moving into the hex from W8)? I wouldn't expect it to, any more than I would expect that fire traced from the vertex of Y6-Z5-Z6 would be eligible for the FFMO DRM. My gut tells me that the inherent nature of the PFZ vineyard means that FFMO can only apply to fire that is traced entirely within the confines of the road depiction.

Granted fire that satisfies the criteria of the second condition in A4.132 may also make the target subject to FFMO. However, in this case, the firer must be able to trace a clear LOS to the road depiction of the road hexside crossed. (EX: Were the 6-2-8 to enter X7 from Y7, then presumably FFMO would apply to fire traced from the foregoing vertex, as well as from Y6-Z5-Z6 and Z7 would be eligible for the FFMO DRM. Correct?

And what of fire from X6 or Y8 vs a unit moving from Y7 to X7? Would the inherent nature of the PFZ vineyard make FFMO NA? I think so. But I didn't see anything in the rules to support this. For example, should PFZ vineyard hexes be treated as orchard roads for the purposes of the FFMO DRM? (This raised another interesting question. Can the second condition of A4.132 ever apply to orchard roads?)

Just thinking out loud.

View attachment 6869[/QUOTE]
Using your depiction and Klas' reasoning, neither the LOS/LOF noted in yellow nor those in green would be able to receive the FFMO if the 628 were sing road movement in X7 because the LOS/LOF is not traced entirely through road hexes and the target hex is a wood/road hex (the hex still being a woods hex). It is for that reason I feel a unit utilizing road bonus fired at from a higher elevation as in the OP situation would receive a FFMO modifier as the type of hex it is moving through is immaterial. There is no hindrance the fire is traced through on the way to the target making the target in OG (to the firer) as per B3.3 and B3.43 indicates the presence of Brush in the hex is not a road negating circumstance based upon the LOS/LOF as the unit is not using the Brush in its movement. YMMV. (Would be an interesting Q&A).
 

BattleSchool

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
870
Location
Ottawa GMT -5/-4
Country
llCanada
Using your depiction and Klas' reasoning, neither the LOS/LOF noted in yellow nor those in green would be able to receive the FFMO if the 628 were sing road movement in X7 because the LOS/LOF is not traced entirely through road hexes and the target hex is a wood/road hex (the hex still being a woods hex).
Not sure I'm following you. I labelled X7 as a PFZ vineyard in the diagram. It is no longer a woods-road hex, but a vineyard-road hex. However, if X7 were still a woods-road hex, I believe that fire traced from the Y6-Z5-Z6 vertex would qualify for FFMO (although fire traced from Z7 would not).

It is for that reason I feel a unit utilizing road bonus fired at from a higher elevation as in the OP situation would receive a FFMO modifier as the type of hex it is moving through is immaterial. There is no hindrance the fire is traced through on the way to the target making the target in OG (to the firer) as per B3.3 and B3.43 indicates the presence of Brush in the hex is not a road negating circumstance based upon the LOS/LOF as the unit is not using the Brush in its movement. YMMV. (Would be an interesting Q&A).
To be clear, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, the unit in the OP's diagram would be subject to FFMO, because the target satisfies the second condition of A4.132, the condition that does not require a clear LOS be traced to the hex centre dot.

As for treating the target as in Open Ground to fire traced from a higher elevation to the centre dot, we are in uncharted territory because brush-road hexes (not to mention grain- and vineyard-road hexes) did not exist when the B3.3 was written.

I think I get what you are driving at regarding B3.3 and B3.43, namely that an Infantry unit using the road movement rate is considered to be in Open Ground regardless of what other terrain exists in the hex. However, I believe that this Open-Ground status is conditional.

With only A4.132 to go by, I'd suggest that the brush depictions within the target hex may still be enough to prevent the application of FFMO. It is clear, for example, that any same-level LOS drawn to the centre dot must clear any in-hex brush depictions in order to qualify for FFMO. Beyond that we can only speculate how A4.132 might be applied in cases where the firer is at a higher elevation. Maybe, a firer also needs to be adjacent, not unlike B9.33, to qualify for the FFMO DRM. (Bear in mind that the road depictions are abstractions, and that the width of roads tend to vary, especially dirt roads.) Interesting discussion, and worthy of a Q&A due to the novel situations created by the "Fort" boards.

However, you got me thinking of another related point.

Imagine a unit at level one in PrBV26. Based on a strict reading of A4.132, a MMC entering S24 (from R24) using the road movement rate may not qualify for FFMO based on the first (centre-dot) condition. However, FFMO still ought to apply because the MMC would satisfy the second condition wherein a clear LOS could be traced to the road depiction of the R24-S24 hexside. Moreover, LOS drawn from level one in V26 ought to satisfy both conditions of A4.132 when targeting the MMC as it enters Q23 and R24. Regrettably, Primasole Bridge sidesteps the issue by having no level-one Locations.

PBr Brush-Road EX.png

PBr17.3 BRUSH-ROAD:
Hex Q23 is an example of a brush-road hex. Footnote R on the Chapter B Terrain Chart applies to all entrance costs, and A4.132 applies unchanged.
 
Last edited:
Top