HIP in WO8

[DiceGodHeretic]

I am setting up the Americans in Silent Night, Deadly Night. They receive 6 1S Foxholes. Night rule E1.16 says all Fortifications set up hidden. I assume that includes any personnel/SW/MTR with them. (There is no reference to HIP, just "hidden", which I assume is similar to HIP but with the special discovery rules outlined in 1.16).

Night rule E1.2 says 25% of squad equivalents (FRU) (of Scen Def) may use HIP to set up, including any SW/SMC stacked with them.

My question: Are these two rules exclusive or inclusive? SSR: The only HIP references are #3 "Night Rules are in place." and #5 giving some discretion on placement of "Foxholes and HIP American units".

I assume exclusive, but I saw no EXCs offered in 1.2 to say so and I am not sure what a "H1.6 purchase" is (maybe forts?). If exclusive, most of the units will set up HIP (25% + those in Foxhos) and the rest of the units will be ? (or HIP if SW/SMC with the ? squads/HS, per the rules).

Thanks in advance to all who offer clarifications! Now, lunch.

 

[jrv]

HIP of fortifications does not grant HIP for their contents. Fortifications set up HIP in daytime too but this does not give their contents HIP. HIP Pillboxes explicitly give their contents HIP [B30.7], as do caves [G11.something].

The 25% would be in addition to HIP granted for other reasons.

JR

 

[Eagle4ty]

DGH, I would certainly not assume any personnel & SMC/SWC set up in HIP Foxhole would automatically be granted HIP status as well (you know what assume does) in and above your allotted 25% of HIP units. The rules are certainly exclusive and believe that SSR-5 should have been written more clearly to differentiate the status of Foxholes and American units set up in them. Here I believe the designer/playtestes assumed that some of your 25% HIP units would be set up IN the HIP foxholes, and simply included that thought process within the sentence of SSR-5. I do not see any indication that additional units could be considered HIP above your allotted 25%. By the way, this is a great little scenario, at least I sure had fun with it.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

...believe that SSR-5 should have been written more clearly to differentiate the status of Foxholes and American units set up in them.

Ymmv, but SSR 5 seems clear to me:
"5. Foxholes and HIP American units from either group (and any SMC/SW stacked with them) may also set up anywhere on board 64."

Not sure I see anything that is not clear, am I missing something here?

 

[Eagle4ty]

If one understands the complete operation of the rules, it's clear. However, it could be better stated by breaking it into two sentences, one dealing with the Foxholes and one dealing with the squads. I had no trouble discerning the meaning, but I can envision a potential difficulty in a cusory reading of the SSR or if somewhat unfamiliar with rules applications.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

If one understands the complete operation of the rules, it's clear. However, it could be better stated by breaking it into two sentences, one dealing with the Foxholes and one dealing with the squads. I had no trouble discerning the meaning, but I can envision a potential difficulty in a cusory reading of the SSR or if somewhat unfamiliar with rules applications.

OK. Thanks for the clarificaition.