FL allowed?

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Yes. The hexgrain includes the target hex. Unless this is a trick question, and ammo shortage is in effect.

JR
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Yes, since your first hex of the fire is R3 & and the last hex is V8 (I assume) while the hexspine to determine the FL is R3-S3 even though for LOS/LOF purposes you trace to the T7-T8-U8 hexspine.
A9.221 ALTERNATE HEX GRAIN: A Fire Lane may also be declared along an Alternate Hex Grain, which is a string of connected hexes in which the Fire Lane's LOF (i.e., a line drawn between the first and last center dot) lies along a hexspine of the first hex.
INDEX: Alternate Hex Grain (any string of connected hexes in which a straight line drawn between the first and last center dots lies along the Hexspine of the first hex):...
INDEX: Hexspine (the Hexside of an adjacent Hex which combines with two hexsides of the subject hex as IF forming six spokes of a wheel; hexside E8-E9 is a hexspine of hex F8 and hex D8)...
A6.12 ATYPICAL LOS: Occasionally, the rules will specify that an entire hexside, part of a hexside, or a vertex be used for tracing LOS to/from a firer/target instead of the hex center dot. This occurs during Road use (4.132), Bypass (4.34,...
 

javanabal

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
52
Reaction score
30
Country
llFrance
hello
the situation is: there is no firelane. the cx russian squad comes from u9, bypasses u8 on the t8 side. When bypassing, the squad is fired for the first time by the lmg which places a firelane along the R2/V8 hex grain. is this firelane ok?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
the situation is: there is no firelane. the cx russian squad comes from u9, bypasses u8 on the t8 side. When bypassing, the squad is fired for the first time by the lmg which places a firelane along the R2/V8 hex grain. is this firelane ok?
Yes it is. The target unit is in hex U8, which is part of the Alternate Hex Grain, R2 (R3)-V8. That the Russian unit is bypassing in hex U8 doesn't matter.
 

javanabal

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
52
Reaction score
30
Country
llFrance
OK. That means that you can fire on one side of an obstacle and at the same time lay a FL on the other side. Interesting trick. Thank you.
 

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
OK. That means that you can fire on one side of an obstacle and at the same time lay a FL on the other side. Interesting trick. Thank you.
I'm not sure that qualifies as an independent 'trick' -- it's part of the general trickery of residual FP -- an ordinary MG shot at the bypasser would place residual in U8.

Question 1 -- Suppose there was a wall along T7/T6 hexside blocking the MG's LOS to the Bypasser along U8/T8. My understanding is that the MG cannot initiate a FL, placing FL residual, because it has no valid LOS to the target, but a pre-existing FL would attack the bypasser (with FFMO/NAM). Is that correct?

Question 2 -- Suppose instead there was a wall at U6/U7 -- blocking LOS along the V7/U8 hexspine -- My understanding is that a MG shot against the bypasser along U8/T8 can place FL residual as in the Original Post because: a valid shot can be taken against the bypasser, and the LOS for placing the FL residual is traced to the center of U8. In this case there would be no FL residual placed in V8 as the LOS to the center of V8 would be blocked but nevertheless the FL marker can be placed as if it extended thru V8 (so as to include U8 in the FL residual). -- is this correct?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Question 1 -- Suppose there was a wall along T7/T6 hexside blocking the MG's LOS to the Bypasser along U8/T8. My understanding is that the MG cannot initiate a FL, placing FL residual, because it has no valid LOS to the target, but a pre-existing FL would attack the bypasser (with FFMO/NAM). Is that correct?
Fire Lane Residual FP only exists in hexes where the firer has a LOS to the center dot. So if that wall was there, I don't think a firer in R2 could exert FL Residual FP in U8.

A9.22:
"A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location, and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG, that is within the MG’s Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center dot)."

If there was another Fire Lane RFP in U8 it would attack the bypassing unit, but it receives woods TEM (and thusly not FFMO), just like normal Residual FP, IIRC.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Question 2 -- Suppose instead there was a wall at U6/U7 -- blocking LOS along the V7/U8 hexspine -- My understanding is that a MG shot against the bypasser along U8/T8 can place FL residual as in the Original Post because: a valid shot can be taken against the bypasser, and the LOS for placing the FL residual is traced to the center of U8. In this case there would be no FL residual placed in V8 as the LOS to the center of V8 would be blocked but nevertheless the FL marker can be placed as if it extended thru V8 (so as to include U8 in the FL residual). -- is this correct?
Correct.

Note that the Fire Lane Residual FP counter can be placed beyond normal range, out of LOS (even offboard I think). The rules determine which hexes the Fire Lane exists in anyway. IIRC, there are some Q&A on this.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
14,361
Reaction score
10,214
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llUkraine
Correct.

Note that the Fire Lane Residual FP counter can be placed beyond normal range, out of LOS (even offboard I think). The rules determine which hexes the Fire Lane exists in anyway. IIRC, there are some Q&A on this.
IIRC it is also possible to elect the FL not extending out to the normal range of the MG but you can confine it to be shorter than that. Also correct?

von Marwitz
 
Last edited:

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Fire Lane Residual FP only exists in hexes where the firer has a LOS to the center dot. So if that wall was there, I don't think a firer in R2 could exert FL Residual FP in U8.

A9.22:
"A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location, and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG, that is within the MG’s Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center dot)."

If there was another Fire Lane RFP in U8 it would attack the bypassing unit, but it receives woods TEM (and thusly not FFMO), just like normal Residual FP, IIRC.
In pure geometeric terms I believe the los would string clear of the blocked vertex but I think you mean the string would catch the wall depiction as it extends past the vertex, and I think you're right. When I wrote that question I was assuming it was obvious that the LOS to the center dot was clear... but on second look it isn't obvious at all. At any rate I think we agree that IF the los was clear to the center dot, the residual would exist (and if not, would not.)
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
IIRC it is also possible to elect the FL not extending out to the normal range of the MG but you can confine it to be shorter than that, Also correct?
Yes, I believe you can voluntarily place the FL counter closer to the firer than the MG's Normal Range.

A9.22:
"...must also place a Fire Lane Residual FP counter in one hex along a Hex Grain; that Hex Grain must include the MG’s hex and its First Fire target hex, but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex..."
 

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
IIRC it is also possible to elect the FL not extending out to the normal range of the MG but you can confine it to be shorter than that, Also correct?

von Marwitz
IIRC it is possible to marker the FL as far out as is convenient... but the residual does not exist beyond normal range... I think this is explicitly mentioned in the RB (no RB handy) (*sorry... realize now you were only discussing shortening the FL -- oh and realize Klas had already said what I just said making this comment redundant AND misdirected... neat! )
 
Last edited:

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
In pure geometeric terms I believe the los would string clear of the blocked vertex but I think you mean the string would catch the wall depiction as it extends past the vertex, and I think you're right...
Even if the wall did not extend all the way out the the vertex, it would still block LOS.

A9.1:
"...The thick terrain depiction, as well as the hexside itself (inclusive of vertices), represents the wall/hedge and will affect any LOS through it, except for obvious breaks in the depiction such as 6W9-X9..."
 

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Even if the wall did not extend all the way out the the vertex, it would still block LOS.

A9.1:
"...The thick terrain depiction, as well as the hexside itself (inclusive of vertices), represents the wall/hedge and will affect any LOS through it, except for obvious breaks in the depiction such as 6W9-X9..."
Hmmm... I'm not sure we're understanding each other here. I was most recently saying exactly what I think A9.1 says, which is that wall ART blocks LOS, it's not just a question of looking at the vertex or hexside. I think the LOS we were discussing misses the vertex per se but would probably be blocked by catching the wall art due to the artwork's thickness creating a LOS block beyond the pure vertex. We'd have to string the actual LOS to say if it was blocked for sure.

I do not know how to read "Even if the wall did not extend all the way out the the vertex it would still block LOS." -- What did you mean?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I do not know how to read "Even if the wall did not extend all the way out the the vertex it would still block LOS." -- What did you mean?
What I mean is that if a wall along T6/T7 was drawn like this in the picture below, LOS from U8 to beyond T6 along that hexspine would be blocked, since the wall is actually considered to extend to the T6-T7-U7 vertex, even the art illustration is not drawn all the way out to the vertex.

10478
 

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
What I mean is that if a wall along T6/T7 was drawn like this in the picture below, LOS from U8 to beyond T6 along that hexspine would be blocked, since the wall is actually considered to extend to the T6-T7-U7 vertex, even the art illustration is not drawn all the way out to the vertex."

Oh! Well, that's exactly what you said in the first place, I just didn't think it was what you meant. :unsure::)

I haven't run into wall art that didn't reach the vertex (or I wasn't paying attention)-- I didn't realize that was an issue.

Well anyway, in the case of the LOS we were discussing -- Unless I'm very much mistaken an LOS string from the MG in R2 to target in U8 passes close but distinctly to the right of T7/T6/U7 vertex never touching the T7/T6 hexside. So, if the T7/T6 wall ended short of the vertex as in your illustration, the LOS between R2 and U8 would be definitely clear even considering the caveat you've mentioned about considering the wall as extending to the vertex when the art stops short. There would be a LOS issue if the 'axis' of the FL were passing along the T7/U7 hexside but that is not the case. The axis of the FL is passing along T6/U6.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I haven't run into wall art that didn't reach the vertex (or I wasn't paying attention)-- I didn't realize that was an issue.
I think it was mostly common on older boards - or the rule writes just wanted to cover all the bases.

Well anyway, in the case of the LOS we were discussing -- Unless I'm very much mistaken an LOS string from the MG in R2 to target in U8 passes close but distinctly to the right of T7/T6/U7 vertex never touching the T7/T6 hexside.
Correct, I missed that.
 

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Correct, I missed that.
Well then, take a second look at the FL vs bypasser when adding the wall at the T6/T7 because it's an interesting edge case and I've started second guessing myself regarding my original point there. With that wall there, LOS is blocked to the bypassing unit but NOT to the center dot. So the initial shot to establish a FL cannot be taken against the bypasser -- so far that seems uncontroversial. But if there were a prexisting FL the bypasser is attacked by the residual, since residual effects bypassers. That's what I said earlier... but now I wonder, is that right? Unlike ordinary residual, FL residual is traced back to the source, right? So, I think LOS is strung to the applicable bypass vertices, is blocked, and so there is no attack from the FL residual.

Which is correct? Should this go to Perry? (Is Perry still awol? I have an outstanding unanswered question to him, and I can't tell if the answer is delayed, or if the question was found, 'unworthy' ? )
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,780
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
With that wall there, LOS is blocked to the bypassing unit but NOT to the center dot. So the initial shot to establish a FL cannot be taken against the bypasser -- so far that seems uncontroversial.
Actually, there is an (unofficial) Q/A saying otherwise:

A6.11 & A9.22
A unit is bypassing an obstacle. A shot is taken at that unit and a fire lane is declared. The hex being bypassed is in LOS.
Subsequent LOS check determines the bypass vertices are out of LOS and the attack had no effect. Is the FL still valid and in
effect?
A. Yes.
 
Top