Gun duels and smoke

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Can smoke dispensers of any kind be used by either attacker or defender in gun duel (sD sM sN crew smoke)? Also can a non-motion AFV DFF SMOKE ammo? (and if so it could presumably use SMOKE in a gun duel... I don't think it should be able to but I don't think I've seen a rule prohibiting it.)
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
No reason it could. A smoke dispenser is never used as either Bounding or Defensive fire.

C2.2401 GUN DUELS: Vs a non-concealed, non-Aerial DEFENDER'S declared Defensive First Fire attack on it, a vehicle may attempt to Bounding First Fire (D3.3) its MA (/other-FP, including Passenger FP/SW) at that DEFENDER first...​
As for smoke ammunition, it could be so used, but only if it was WP [and] if it was fired by the DEFENDER (in which case it must be the first shot of any kind fired during that MPh - MPh is considered part of the DFPh for purposes of C8.5 as per A.15).
 
Last edited:

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Can smoke dispensers of any kind be used by either attacker or defender in gun duel (sD sM sN crew smoke)? Also can a non-motion AFV DFF SMOKE ammo? (and if so it could presumably use SMOKE in a gun duel... I don't think it should be able to but I don't think I've seen a rule prohibiting it.)
Ignoring the less common DEFENDER gun duel for the moment, the ATTACKER declares a movement expenditure. The DEFENDER declares defensive first fire. The ATTACKER can declare a Gun Duel to use bounding first fire against the DEFENDER before the DEFENDER can complete his DFF. I think you are suggesting that instead of using BFF, the ATTACKER fires a smoke dispenser. The ATTACKER can only fire a smoke dispenser during his MPh as a movement expenditure. Since the current movement expenditure, the one on which the DEFENDER declared DFF, has not been completely resolved the ATTACKER can't make a second movement expenditure in the middle of the first. The ATTACKER must wait for completion of all DFF (and his BFF) based on the current MP expenditure before he can declare a new expenditure to use a smoke dispenser.

For the less common DEFENDER gun duel, the ATTACKER has announced a BFF attack before expending any MP. The ATTACKER must finish his BFF before he can make his first expenditure. Since smoke dispensers are n/a after the vehicle has fired [D13.1], the ATTACKER can't use a smoke dispenser in this circumstance.

JR
 
Last edited:

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Thank you Jrv, that all makes sense. (@Binchois -- but a smoke dispenser is fired during the Mph. I think it's odd to call sD use "firing" when it has an MP cost. Probably better for the RB to say deployed, used, activated... etc.)

This leaves open the question of Smoke Ammo in defender's gun duel. I don't see a stipulation against either depleteable ammo or ATT in the gun duel rules. (I think they should both disqualify but who cares what I think.) An attacker can't fire SMOKE as BFF because it's ATT and there's no ATT in BFF (right? So no attacker fired ordanance smoke in the Mph -- including as a first shot prior to all movement -- right?) But a non-motion Defender can use ATT, so should be able to use Ordnance smoke, including in a gun duel. This doesn't seem right and I'm hoping someone can find a way to disqualify SMOKE being fired by Defenders in a defensive gun duel situation.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
This leaves open the question of Smoke Ammo in defender's gun duel. I don't see a stipulation against either depleteable ammo or ATT in the gun duel rules. (I think they should both disqualify but who cares what I think.) An attacker can't fire SMOKE as BFF because it's ATT and there's no ATT in BFF (right? So no attacker fired ordanance smoke in the Mph -- including as a first shot prior to all movement -- right?) But a non-motion Defender can use ATT, so should be able to use Ordnance smoke, including in a gun duel. This doesn't seem right and I'm hoping someone can find a way to disqualify SMOKE being fired by Defenders in a defensive gun duel situation.
Smoke can only be used by ordnance in the PFPh and DFPh, which means it cannot be used in a gun duel. WP can be used by ordnance in any fire phase and as DFF. That means it could potentially be used by a DEFENDER in a DEFENDER gun duel. Per a q&a it would have to be used before any non-SMOKE ammunition was used by the DEFENDER.

JR
 

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
Ahhh. Defensive smoke only in the DFPh... Pretty sure my opponents and I have all been playing that wrong. Ok. So WP can fired by a defender in a defender gun duel (or just as plain DFF) if it's the first defender's shot of the round. I don't expect to use that very often, and I don't expect my opponent to appreciate it if I do.

When WP is fired... subsequent units continue to have WP available until some non-WP round is taken I assume.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Ahhh. Defensive smoke only in the DFPh... Pretty sure my opponents and I have all been playing that wrong. Ok. So WP can fired by a defender in a defender gun duel (or just as plain DFF) if it's the first defender's shot of the round. I don't expect to use that very often, and I don't expect my opponent to appreciate it if I do.

When WP is fired... subsequent units continue to have WP available until some non-WP round is taken I assume.
Yes, WP is an option for DFF until non-WP is used.

JR
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
If DEFENDERs could fire Smoke during the enemy MPh they would do it all the time. Tank rolls up, about to BFF. A quick Smoke attack, and the tank is useless. That would make the British & Japanese 50mm MTRs really useful anti-tank weapons, at least until their SMOKE ammo ran out.

One thing that I think is often overlooked is using SMOKE by the defenders (in the strategic sense, not DEFENDER of the player turn) in their PFPh to nullify tanks (and kill stacks) positioned to winkle out other defenders. For instance a German 75mm PaK 40 has a s7. Against a later-war T-34 front it kills with AP on a six. That isn't terrible, but if it gets Smoke the T-34 is momentarily unable to provide useful support with certainty.

JR
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
There's only one instance I can think of where Smoke could be placed in a Gun Duel situation and that would be a DEFENDER initiated Gun Duel where the DEFENDER has a MOL-P (See ASOP 3.36D).
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
(@Binchois -- but a smoke dispenser is fired during the Mph. I think it's odd to call sD use "firing" when it has an MP cost. Probably better for the RB to say deployed, used, activated... etc.)
Technically, a Smoke Dispenser is "dispensed," though the most consistent game term is "used." My point was that these non-weapons (C13.1: A smoke dispenser is not considered a weapon [EXC: sN in CC]) have "usage numbers" and are not fired as a weapon. They could never be considered to be "Bounding Fire" or "Defensive Fire" so could not participate in a Gun Duel. They are simply "used" during some units MP expenditure. Usage doesn't even prohibit further firing from that AFV (though a dispenser cannot be attempted after the AFV has fired any weapon)....

Otherwise, I am glad to have my cluttered thinking about SMOKE and Defensive Fire straightened out by JR (I must remember the difference between Smoke and SMOKE when rereading C8.5!!).

My only remaining doubt is this: If a DEFENDER fires WP (first shot) during the MPh, can he fire other non-SMOKE during the MPh and then return to fire SMOKE (again, first shot(s)) during the DFPh?

I assume no since the only thing allowing WP to fire at all during the MPh is the presumption that A.15 combines the adjacent phases into one DFPh for such purposes (a bit of a stretch given what the rule says, but there's a Q&A for that).
 
Last edited:

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,216
Reaction score
1,024
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
My only remaining doubt is this: If a DEFENDER fires WP (first shot) during the MPh, can he fire other non-SMOKE during the MPh and then return to fire SMOKE (again, first shot(s)) during the DFPh?
They are two separate phases, so I would say yes.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
My only remaining doubt is this: If a DEFENDER fires WP (first shot) during the MPh, can he fire other non-SMOKE during the MPh and then return to fire SMOKE (again, first shot(s)) during the DFPh?

I assume no since the only thing allowing WP to fire at all during the MPh is the presumption that A.15 combines the adjacent phases into one DFPh for such purposes (a bit of a stretch given what the rule says, but there's a Q&A for that).
They are two separate phases, so I would say yes.
You're probably right, but here's what perplexes me:

The RB may not have originally intended WP during the MPh at all. C8.6 only says that WP can be fired "in any friendly fire phase." Arguably, the MPh is not a "fire phase" except that a Q&A allows WP to be used then:

A8.1 & C8.6 May a Gun fire WP during DFF (is DFF considered a friendly fire phase – C8.6?)?​

A. Yes, provided no other non-WP DFF has occurred; C8.6. {1}​

Fair enough, but the reason this is acceptable is because a DEFENDER's units may fire in the MPh and in the DFPh without violating the "only fire in one phase" rule (A.15 and A7.1).

So if the MPh and DFPh are being treated as ONE fire phase, then once non-SMOKE fires in either phase, your SMOKE potential would be voided.

I am not sure if folks play this way, but to do otherwise creates a double standard.
 
Last edited:

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
You're probably right, but here's what perplexes me:

The RB may not have originally intended WP during the MPh at all. C8.6 only says that WP can be fired "in any friendly fire phase." Arguably, the MPh is not a "fire phase" except that a Q&A allows WP to be used then:

A8.1 & C8.6 May a Gun fire WP during DFF (is DFF considered a friendly fire phase – C8.6?)?​

A. Yes, provided no other non-WP DFF has occurred; C8.6. {1}​

Fair enough, but the reason this is acceptable is because a DEFENDER's units may fire in the MPh and in the DFPh without violating the "only fire in one phase" rule (A.15 and A7.1).

So if the MPh and DFPh are being treated as ONE fire phase, then once non-SMOKE fires in either phase, your SMOKE potential would be voided.

I am not sure if folks play this way, but to do otherwise creates a double standard.
The MPh and DFPh are not treated as one fire phase. For many purposes that's a handy way to think of it, but it's not what A.15 says. A.15 says that a unit can fire in both the enemy MPh and the DFPh without violating the prohibition on firing in two different phases. A.15 does not make them one phase for any purpose; it is quite clear that they are two phases.

JR
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
The MPh and DFPh are not treated as one fire phase. For many purposes that's a handy way to think of it, but it's not what A.15 says. A.15 says that a unit can fire in both the enemy MPh and the DFPh without violating the prohibition on firing in two different phases. A.15 does not make them one phase for any purpose; it is quite clear that they are two phases.

JR
Which I agree with - as per the wording of the book. Thereby just keeping me in doubt about the WP in the MPh "rule" (Q&A fiat) and consequences for the DFPh.
 

mgmasl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
4,285
Reaction score
337
Location
Cadiz
First name
Miguel
Country
llSpain
About use of WP by a defender in a Gun Duel.. I think the defender has to declare the shot before the gun duel is declared by the moving unit.. question is if the ammo type and VTT or ATT has to be declared by the defender when announcying the shot before the attacker declares the gun duel or if defender has only to declare a shot and after knowing if the attacker announces a gun duel, decide ammo and VTT or ATT.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
About use of WP by a defender in a Gun Duel.. I think the defender has to declare the shot before the gun duel is declared by the moving unit.. question is if the ammo type and VTT or ATT has to be declared by the defender when announcying the shot before the attacker declares the gun duel or if defender has only to declare a shot and after knowing if the attacker announces a gun duel, decide ammo and VTT or ATT.
I don't think you can declare "I'm about to make an attack; do you want to do anything about it?" I think you have to give the full details of the attack: weapon, target, ammo (if applicable), target type (if applicable), and any other details that are pertinent (I'm not thinking of any right now, but there may be others). I don't think the rules address this explicitly, but it seems to be what it means to "declare an attack."

JR
 
Top