HIP up to one squad equivalent

Stacks

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
108
Country
llFinland
.......So in my ASL world, setting up 10 SMC in 10 locations(as the Squad Equivalent) would be legal(including ANY SMC/SW stacked with them)
Scenario RB5 The last Bid use squad equivalents.....
The Russians can set up 10 leaders HIP and the reamaining 3 leaders may set up HIP with two crews (or with any of the leaders) and one squad and/or with any of the two squads HIP in the pillboxes.

While the Germans may HIP all his 18 leaders plus the other MMCs quite evenly distrubuted over the mapboard.
 

Stew

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2003
Messages
43
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Country
llUnited States
OK, I -am- a tourney director - not that that means anything.

I would NOT allow this because the SSR says "any SMC stacked with him". It doesn't say you can HIP any SMC except for the ones stacked with the HIP Squad Equivalent.

JMO - Sam
If I were a player, I'd allow him to HIP all of his leaders. It's kinda the way it should be anyway...

And they don't count for building control when they remain HIP and DON'T inflict search casualties either....HIP away!!
 

IYAOYAS

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
1,081
Reaction score
11
Location
Nowhere near here
Country
llUnited States
A5.5 is definitely not airtight, but I think this is clear abuse of the rule/SSR intention. Why else would such SSRs specify (and any SW/SMC stacked with them) if one can use the <= 4 SMC = 0 SE.

Seems the rule needs fixing. Fine. But if one is going to screw with the intent of rules and/or SSRs, one should go all the way. Let's not be shy. Take this typical SSR:

"You may HIP up to one squad equivalent (and any SMC/SW stacked with it)."

I take the original SQ and split it into 2 HS. The HS setup in two separate hexes. Now, because 1SQ =10SMC, and the SSR gives me "(and any SMC/SW stacked with it)", I set up an additional 2.5 squads HIP in each of the two hexes. I'd say 2.5 SQ (=25 SMC) falls within the range of any. So now you get SIX HIP squads out of the single one given by the SSR.

I'm sure this kind of nonsense can be further abused and taken to an even more nauseating level. A5.5 better get fixed quick or I'm gonna figure out how to HIP my entire OOB when I'm only given one squad for HIP. :nuts:

If I were a player, I'd allow him to HIP all of his leaders. It's kinda the way it should be anyway...

And they don't count for building control when they remain HIP and DON'T inflict search casualties either....HIP away!!
SMC do prevent building control (A26.11).
 
Last edited:

Tater

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
9,829
Reaction score
543
Location
Ardmore, TN
Country
llUnited States
Whether this is technically legal or not, and I'm tending towards the side that it is, I hope my opponent decides to HIP all/a bunch of his leaders.

In a normal scenario (whatever normal is) on defense, you'll probably get 3-5 leaders. Go ahead, HIP 4 of them. I'd rather they do that than actually rally troops, direct fire, etc..
???

A HIP leader is not a Sniper target. You have a leader HIP at your rally point. Brokies fall back to get rallied and the leader is NEVER threatened by a sniper. That is huge.

HIP that pitiful 7-0/6+1 with a LATW/DC/FT/etc...

I can thing of some other uses for being able to HIP practically your entire SMC OB...I don't think I will be giving the others away though.
 

Tater

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
9,829
Reaction score
543
Location
Ardmore, TN
Country
llUnited States
For the record, Perry's response in the other thread is here:
http://forums.gamesquad.com/showpost.php?p=943217&postcount=28

The overall thread is "HIP SSR wording":
http://forums.gamesquad.com/showthread.php?t=72309

Perry responds to a Tate post as follows:



I think that's pretty clear that it's illegal to HIP leaders independent of the squads using the equivalency clause...
Which the Perry sez was utter BS...funny...but complete BS.

When there is official errata then Perry would be right...otherwise he is expecting TD's to change the rules on the fly...which is again...BS.
 

Will Fleming

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2003
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
429
Location
Adrift on the Pequod
Country
llUnited States
I'm impressed threads still exist from 5 years ago...

Perry did a drive-by in another thread along these lines indicating that HIP'ing leaders in seperate locations under the "squad equivalent" verbiage is illegal and would have you playing "Advanced Squad" pretty quick as all your leaders would be eliminated for being illegally HIP.

i.e. I don't recommend trying it ASLOK (or WO for that matter) anytime soon as the TD will not look kindly on that if it comes to a TD ruling. :devious:
Why do I think you would rule otherwise if you looked over and saw they were playing me! :freak:
 

Stacks

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
108
Country
llFinland
You are playing the Germans in a scenario that have 12 squads, 3 SMC & 4 SWs.

If a SSR tells you to HIP two squads on board 3 and the other force set up on board 2 then I think its quite obvious that you can

HIP 2 squads
or
1 squad & 2 HS
or
4 HS
on board 3.

If the SSR tells you to HIP two squad equivalents on board 3.

Well, 2 squads and 1 up to 4 leaders = two squad equivalents.

Keep in mind that it was written by D. Greenwood and he never used the term squad equivalents for any of the scenarios released in Beyond Valor that use HIP, instead the term squad is used.

ASL 1 Fighting Withdrawal - Russian may use HIP for 2 squads..
now MMP has changed it to read 2 squad equivalents ??? (the Russians may not deploy).
ASL 3 The Czerniakow Bridgehead - may use HIP for 2 squads and any SMC/SW
ASL 4 The Commissar´s House - may use HIP for 3 squads and any SMC/SW
ASL 5 In Sight of the Volga - may use HIP for 4 squads and any SMC/SW
ASL 8 The Fugitives - etc
ASL 9 To The Square - etc
ASL 10 The Citadel -etc
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Coenedens

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
Location
Italy
Country
llItaly
A5.5 specifically allows substituting half squads for squads in cases like HIP & even explicitly references it in the e.g.: "A squad’s equivalent can be substituted for a squad which has been given special capabilities by a SSR so as to share those special capabilities (e.g., if a SSR specifies that a squad may set up hidden, two hidden HS can be used instead provided that nationality is allowed to Deploy HS)."
Thank you. Very precise answer.
Ale
 

Stacks

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
108
Country
llFinland
I'm impressed threads still exist from 5 years ago...

Perry did a drive-by in another thread along these lines indicating that HIP'ing leaders in seperate locations under the "squad equivalent" verbiage is illegal and would have you playing "Advanced Squad" pretty quick as all your leaders would be eliminated for being illegally HIP.

i.e. I don't recommend trying it ASLOK (or WO for that matter) anytime soon as the TD will not look kindly on that if it comes to a TD ruling. :devious:
Here follows another Perry Sez neither the one above or below is compiled into the Perry Sez collection - don´t ask why? :devious:

Although I agree that the answer to the question is 'no', this answer is incorrect. The player could setup one HS and up to 4 SMC using HIP all in different locations. (which would total one squad-equivalent.) An opponent (Jim Burris) did just that to me at the Open a few years back, and Dave Goldman (the TD) said it was fine. I asked Perry next time I saw him and he verified that the set-up was legal .
 

Bret Hildebran

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
4,884
Reaction score
1,280
Location
NE OH
Country
llUnited States
a) Verbal Perry Sez are worth less than written.

b) The verbal Perry Sez is the same reference that started this thread.

c) The written Perry Sez (or drive-by) is more recent than the verbal which means once Perry considered it in more detail, he changed his mind/ruling.

d) You're correct that neither of these are published.

e) I still wouldn't suggest trying the stunt at ASLOK or WO unless you just love the challenge of playing "Advanced Squad".
 
Top