That's very interesting. Nice.
Heat of Battle Waffen SS II: The Fuhrer's Firemen pack from 1999. Had smc prisoner counters and red beserk counters
Very nice! Thanks for posting the picture! Much better than the ones I imagined. Then again I don't claim to be an artist, just a jick.
I edited this to read " I read " instead of " Read " as I felt it was telling people to read that rules section instead of me saying I had read them. I'm just getting a little lazy with my pronouns and don't want to give the wrong impression.I read A 7.301 KIA, D 8.1 Immobilization and D10.1 Creation of Wrecks for the specific wording of how units that suffered the effects of that rule were treated. Eliminated is the word used.
This was just a follow up from some quick thoughts at lunch. The line of thought was what is the wording used for units that are removed from a board. KIA and vehicles with no Wreck depiction were all that came to mind. There are most likely others but frankly right now I am too tired to search for them. Captain Bacchus and I will see what we can come up with.
I'm only viewing this topic as an interesting rules question. I have no cat in this fight. I dont mean to offend anyone and am only looking at this through the lens of someone who spent a lot of time playtesting the rules.
Although after the pounding I took on the Allied Troops thread you'd think I'd stay out of rules discussions.
I've only been able to give this a little thought but I really think you've uncovered the rule that may close this discussion. Really very well done Sir!
So while I think this is a good rule of thumb (I almost posted something similar) I think it is superseded by an even more important rule of thumb: you should ALMOST never declare NQ--even if it is a surrendering 10-3--if the VC require Building Control and the Buildings in question are multi-story buildings. You will almost always regret it if you do so. Just me .02 -- jim
No argument here. It's always situationally dependent, with multi-level building Control another good example. This is why I encouraged that they be exited pronto.
That was the general plan. The only reason that the 5-4-8 and 2-3-8 were in the same hex was so that the 5-4-8 could transfer the prisoner HS to the 2-3-8 which already had the wounded 8-1 under lock and key, Or so they thought...
You May deploy at any time.
These are nicely done.
The crazy thing about the situation that I described is that the Stug would have been safe if it was the prisoner half squad that survived while the leader was killed. As I understand the rules, the prisoners don't re-arm when their captor HS dies because they didn't take it out in close combat and the presence of the broken squad in the location prevents them from re-arming by "other means":
Thank you Scott! Could Brian or Perry be persuaded to just add 6 white counters with the text "PRISONER" in the nearest upcoming module? There always seem to be a bit of space for extra counters in one of the countersheets.I have those, and some very early (check out the pixels!) ones:
View attachment 18380
And I attached a PDF of some DIY "Prisoner" counters. Put on one top of your captured enemy SMC and there's no need for a side record!
I think I found some history behind the "side note", and why just being stacked above an enemy unit isn't enough: in ASLRBv1, SMC were not automatically rearmed when they escaped -- the first sentence of A20.551 was added in v2, and a similar bit was added to the Index entry for "Unarmed". So in v1 you needed to note that such a SMC unarmed and would not prevent enemy units from routing towards it, etc.
