Illuminating Rounds: Episode 7. Red Factories

daveramsey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,616
Reaction score
481
Location
Hertfordshire
First name
Dave
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Hey guys,

Happy Christmas. Here's our Red Factories overview and scenario. We play Stone Age Caves and chat about the worse 5 things we face during our games.


Stay tuned to the end, for news of our first sponsor (the package literally arrived mid-game).

Enjoy the holidays and see you all in the new year!

Dave & Martin
 

ibncalb

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
425
Reaction score
162
Location
St. Malo
Country
llFrance
Thanks guys. It was great to see Dave cover up those hairy arms.
 

daveramsey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,616
Reaction score
481
Location
Hertfordshire
First name
Dave
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I’m not a fan of sleeves whilst pushing cardboard around. Had a haircut today, they did my eyebrows but I didn’t think to ask about my forearms!

So, what’s the deal about fortified building location’s ‘normal’ tem vs it’s ‘full’ tem? Surely you can’t need better dice than <=5 for breaching the location...
 

ibncalb

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
425
Reaction score
162
Location
St. Malo
Country
llFrance
I read it as an NMC or better will breach. I think the TEM is just for the attack against the defenders if any.
 

daveramsey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,616
Reaction score
481
Location
Hertfordshire
First name
Dave
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Right - It's a HE attack that requires a KIA and just a NMC needed to breach with DC. I assume things like smoke affect the occupants against the area fire attack, but only the tem of the building itself counts against the NMC required to breach on the 30FP column.

I'm still interested to know whether we should count the debris TEM that affects gutted factory hexes for that breach attempt. Anyone have any ideas?
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
1,999
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Smoke is a DRM not a TEM...LOS*** DRM do not effect DC attacks, enough SMOKE could affect placement if the intended target was blinded, eg the placing unit is in +3 Smoke and the target of the DC attack is likewise in +3 Smoke, the unit with the DC cannot see to place/throw the DC in the first place.
 

daveramsey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,616
Reaction score
481
Location
Hertfordshire
First name
Dave
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Ok - thanks. So what's the difference in the definition of full vs normal TEM in B23.711?
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
1,999
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
I think they wanted to make a distinction that although units on the other side of the breach hex side are attacked with Area Fire (and possibly halved again if they are concealed) that they receive full* TEM....and elected to use full as a word to emphasize the fact given all the "having of DC FP" that had just been mentioned (i.e. they are saying Do not halve the TEM) Perhaps they thought if they used normal folks would get confused and take that as a halving b/c of Area Fire. The selection of the word "normal" upstream from there was done since there was just a routine explanation of the attack by the DC vs. the hex side.

That is my take on why they opted to use the two words that way for what is effectively the same TEM.
 

lightspeed

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
256
Reaction score
129
Location
Calgary
Country
llCanada
Dave and Martin,

Thank you for yet another interesting episode. I'm looking forward to your review of Fight for Seoul.

I realy like your scenario AARs. I've seen videos of people playing ASL, and your take is far superior: no dead time.

Keep up the excellent work!

Indy
 

MAS01

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
1,317
Reaction score
455
Location
Joplin, MO
First name
Mark
Country
llUnited States
Hey Dave!

Watched this the other day and was very impressed. You have a new subscriber.

Cheers,


Mark
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,145
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Smoke is a DRM not a TEM...LOS*** DRM do not effect DC attacks, enough SMOKE could affect placement if the intended target was blinded, eg the placing unit is in +3 Smoke and the target of the DC attack is likewise in +3 Smoke, the unit with the DC cannot see to place/throw the DC in the first place.
Although the last sentence of A23.3 says you can't place if the is no LOS, the A23.3 EX shows an example of a DC being placed when both hexes are in +3 Smoke (last sentence of EX). This seems to say that if LOS is blocked purely due to SMOKE the DC can still be placed. Only if the LOS is blocked by obstacles (e.g. both units in depressions without a common depression hexside) is placement prohibited. I have sent for a q&a on the matter, and I will post it when it arrives.

JR
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
1,999
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Although the last sentence of A23.3 says you can't place if the is no LOS, the A23.3 EX shows an example of a DC being placed when both hexes are in +3 Smoke (last sentence of EX). This seems to say that if LOS is blocked purely due to SMOKE the DC can still be placed. Only if the LOS is blocked by obstacles (e.g. both units in depressions without a common depression hexside) is placement prohibited. I have sent for a q&a on the matter, and I will post it when it arrives.

JR
So what you are saying is there is an issue between rule and EX...?

Or are you saying EX trump rules?

Or are you saying "these are not the droids you are looking for?"

Or ....?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,145
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Stone age caves: no mines in rubble [B28.1], unless there is a RF rule I am overlooking.

I was a bit perplexed about a comment on LOS with regard to railroads. RR that run between hexes (e.g. k20/l19) are embankment RRs and are treated as walls. All other RRs (e.g. S20) are ground-level RR [RF2.4] and should have no impact on LOS.

Late in the video you mention using Double Time to move under wire. Units may not use double time in a turn when they (attempt to) move under wire [B26.46].

One thing the Soviets might have considered is some opportunity fire combined with searching. The searching unit is fairly likely to suffer casualties, but, hey, they're Soviets. Suffering is what they were born to do.

Personally I like to use the DCs for clearing the wire. It does mean the DCs can't be used later for breaching fortified buildings, but that's a problem for tomorrow. V18 would be a good place to clear, because then you can get into the V18 trench. It isn't likely that V18 is mined (although search first, just in case). The nice thing about the V18 trench is that it allows access to otherwise fortified buildings [RF6] and across any mines in the building hexes without attack. If you use one or more the DCs to clear wire, you can consider using first line units to place them. The penalty for non-qualified use is a malfunction on a ten (instead of a twelve), and a ten or eleven would not clear the wire anyway. You could use multiple in one hex (e.g. again v18) or you could just try different hexes and run through which ever works. You could also try the east edge wire. You already know that X14 has no mines (above). Perhaps a sneaky move is to start the 8-0 and one or two squads or crews in CC14 each with a DC then move to y15 and place across the wall into x15 using the road bonus (edit: you don't need the road bonus for x15; you could clear x13 instead using the road bonus; on second thought just start in CC13 and never mind the road bonus). That might put the Germans back on their heels. Plus you can use the term, "forlorn hope", for the units. As you move them, shout "Badajoz, Badajoz!" for the full effect.

edit: there's wire in y15, preventing placement on x15 on the first turn. x13 (or even x12) remains viable on the first turn.

JR
 
Last edited:

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,145
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
So what you are saying is there is an issue between rule and EX...?

Or are you saying EX trump rules?

Or are you saying "these are not the droids you are looking for?"

Or ....?
I am saying that I sent for a q&a to answer the question. I think from the EX that the last sentence of A23.3 means that units that are adjacent but not ADJACENT (ADJACENT ignores SMOKE when determining LOS) cannot place/throw DCs without LOS. There is a parenthetical reference to A7.21, which might be referring to the bit in there of units that are adjacent but without LOS. But I don't know. So I sent for a q&a.

JR
 
Last edited:

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
1,999
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Good luck with your Q/A...I have not heard back on 2 of mine...sent some time ago...
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,145
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
One thing you can do with the DCs is place them on wire then have (probably other) units run on top of the wire (you can do that in the reverse order too), hoping that the DC clears the wire underneath the units. Because the DCs don't attack the friendly units the only risk is that the wire is not cleared, in which case the units are stuck. I think if I were going to clear the x12-13 area I would place two on x13 and one on x12, on the odd chance that both hexes are cleared. It would be annoying to place all three in one hex only to have the first DC clear the hex and the other two be "wasted."

JR
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
1,999
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Where is the bit rule-wise that the DC does not attack other troops when Placed for Clearance?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,145
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Where is the bit rule-wise that the DC does not attack other troops when Placed for Clearance?
That's just the standard A7.4. It's not that placing it for clearance restricts the effects; A7.4 says that only enemy units are affected except Melee, Area Target Type, OBA, etc. A placed DC, not being such, would go off without affecting friendly, non-Melee units in the hex.

JR
 
Last edited:
Top