Infantry smoke

[Obi Wan Jacobi]

A unit assault moves and places a smoke in a adjacent hex. If fired upon, is the shot effective before the smoke is rolled for?
If the unit is stationary and tries for smoke, can it be shot at before it rolls for the smoke, since it spends two MF to place smoke adjacent? So, basically shoting at it while it spends the first MF.

 

[jrv]

A unit assault moves and places a smoke in a adjacent hex. If fired upon, is the shot effective before the smoke is rolled for?
If the unit is stationary and tries for smoke, can it be shot at before it rolls for the smoke, since it spends two MF to place smoke adjacent? So, basically shoting at it while it spends the first MF.

DFF takes place after the action resulting from the MP/MF expenditure. The only exception I can think of is DC Placement.

Single MP/MF expenditures can't be broken down into "first MP/MF" for the movement action. The moving player announces the expenditure, the action is completed, and the defender may then fire up to as many times as the MF/MP spent, FRD but minimum of one. If the actions require separate expenditures, e.g. "place Infantry Smoke & place DC", the defender may fire DFF after the first expenditure and before the second. Similarly, if a vehicle is turning VCA, it has to turn one hexspine at a time and wait for DFF. It can't turn two hexspines as one action.

JR

 

[semenza]

The units MFs spent to place the smoke, and MFs spent to move are seperate actions. Using Assault Movement does not make them one action. And, as jrv wrote, they can be fired at for each MF as each seperate action is completed.

EX- As. Mv. to a hex for one, they can be fired at. Then place smoke ADJACENT for two , They can be fired at.

Seth

 

[Robin Reeve]

The fact is that, if firing 'on' the MF spent to place smoke, and if the placement is successfull, the smoke hindrance would apply (if crossed by the LOS).

 

[FrankH.]

The fact is that, if firing 'on' the MF spent to place smoke, and if the placement is successfull, the smoke hindrance would apply (if crossed by the LOS).

That is new to me. Is that really true?

Frank

 

[Robin Reeve]

That is new to me. Is that really true?
Frank

I do think so.
The MF spent corresponds with the smoke placement : the smoke is not placed after the expense.
See the A 8.1 Defensive Fire mechanics :
"...During the ATTACKER's MPh, the DEFENDER should keep careful watch as the ATTACKER counts aloud the MF/MP expended as each unit/stack he moves enters a new Location or performs some task requiring the expenditure of MF/MP in its current Location. Anytime a unit/stack expends MF/MP in the LOS of one of his units, the DEFENDER has the option to temporarily halt its movement while he fires at it in that Location with as many attacks as he can bring to bear..."

So, Def Fire is allowed after the expense has been announced by the ATTACKER (and, logically, any direct effect linked to that expense of MF).
Let us take another MF in-hex example : a squad tries to recover a weapon and announces it. It rolls a dr and then Def Fire occurs (whether the recovery succeeds or not), and not before he tries to recover the weapon.

 

[Mr Incredible]

The fact is that, if firing 'on' the MF spent to place smoke, and if the placement is successfull, the smoke hindrance would apply (if crossed by the LOS).

Oh no, not another chesnut....................:upset:

I guess when firing on a DC placement if the unit is pinned, broken, killed the DC is not placed. I had always used that as an extension of what happens to a unit placing a Smoke Grenade.

But reading A8.1 it would appear that the fire occurs after the MF expenditure to perform a task. Thus you declare to place smoke roll the dr and maybe place it or not and then you receive fire (and maybe twice from the same unit with a 2MF expenditure if into an adjacent hex).

Ole, help!

:ciao:

 

[Robin Reeve]

Ole, help!

Your lack of confidence in me makes me sad... Even if it is earned, it hurts me...:upset: ... just joking :laugh::bite:

 

[Jazz]

Oh no, not another chesnut....................:upset:



Ole, help!

:ciao:

Sorry guy, Ole ain't gonna help you on this one. As you said yerself, its what the rule says.....

After a while you get zen about having played certain things wrong. You also learn that some thiings you've been playing right and some grognard has been doing it wrong.

That is one reason it is important to play players from outside your immediate area as certain mis-readings or mis-interpretations of the rules, once made, take on a life of their own among circles of players. I'm often amazed at what sorts of rules mis-calls pop out at an event like ASLOK.

 

[Larry]

The mechanics of fire during the movement phase are not complex. Shoot at the MF expenditure or suffer the consequences of not shooting.

A unit that assault moves into an adjacent location can be fired upon normally. If it is fired upon, RFP is placed normally. If the unit then places infantry smoke, it undergoes the RFP attack and is subject to other attacks with the smoke if successful. The placement of a DC is the same except the DC placement isn't successful until fire in that location on that MF expenditure is complete.

This really isn't a nuance thing, it is clear. It is amusing when the bad habits bristle a player's style who resists because it rubs his tactics the "wrong" way. My FTF friend that I play sporadically keeps wanting to revert to vaguely remembered rules because he has not read the ASLRB lately. Bad habits die hard ...

 

[FrankH.]

Yes, but...

I do think so.
The MF spent corresponds with the smoke placement : the smoke is not placed after the expense.
See the A 8.1 Defensive Fire mechanics :
"...During the ATTACKER's MPh, the DEFENDER should keep careful watch as the ATTACKER counts aloud the MF/MP expended as each unit/stack he moves enters a new Location or performs some task requiring the expenditure of MF/MP in its current Location. Anytime a unit/stack expends MF/MP in the LOS of one of his units, the DEFENDER has the option to temporarily halt its movement while he fires at it in that Location with as many attacks as he can bring to bear..."

So, Def Fire is allowed after the expense has been announced by the ATTACKER (and, logically, any direct effect linked to that expense of MF).
Let us take another MF in-hex example : a squad tries to recover a weapon and announces it. It rolls a dr and then Def Fire occurs (whether the recovery succeeds or not), and not before he tries to recover the weapon.

Well...A4.44 Recovery states that "In all cases, a Recovery attempt is allowed only by an unpinned, Good Order ...(unit)....." I take that to mean that a unit that becomes Pinned, or ceases to be Good Order, as a result of First Fire or any other means while attempting Recovery cannot in fact recover a SW/Gun.

And... A24.1 Smoke requires that an "Infantry squad.... (be) "still capable of movement during its MPh" in order to be allowed to attempt SMOKE placement. This might seem otherwise redundant to the requirement that the placement attempt costs 2 MF for an attempt in an (ADJACENT) Location, or 1 MF in its own Location. I take all this to mean a squad that becomes Broken or Pinned (i. e. if it is no longer capable of movement) cannot Attempt to place SMOKE.

Now granted that does not say when in all of this the SMOKE is placed, but it IMPLIES to me that the SMOKE is not placed until after the movement costs required are complete.

Most of this leads me to another entirely different question: IS ASL A GAME TO BE PLAYED, OR IS IT MORE A PUZZLE TO BE SOLVED?

Frank

 

[mgmasl]

Well...A4.44 Recovery states that "In all cases, a Recovery attempt is allowed only by an unpinned, Good Order ...(unit)....." I take that to mean that a unit that becomes Pinned, or ceases to be Good Order, as a result of First Fire or any other means while attempting Recovery cannot in fact recover a SW/Gun.

And... A24.1 Smoke requires that an "Infantry squad.... (be) "still capable of movement during its MPh" in order to be allowed to attempt SMOKE placement. This might seem otherwise redundant to the requirement that the placement attempt costs 2 MF for an attempt in an (ADJACENT) Location, or 1 MF in its own Location. I take all this to mean a squad that becomes Broken or Pinned (i. e. if it is no longer capable of movement) cannot Attempt to place SMOKE.

Now granted that does not say when in all of this the SMOKE is placed, but it IMPLIES to me that the SMOKE is not placed until after the movement costs required are complete.

Most of this leads me to another entirely different question: IS ASL A GAME TO BE PLAYED, OR IS IT MORE A PUZZLE TO BE SOLVED?

Frank

But if you need 4Mfs to enter a hex, and you´re pinned in the FF on the 1MF expended, you´re still pinned in the new hex. You´re never returned to old one; and you´re fired in the hex you´re moving in from the first MF expended to move there, with the full TEM of the hex moved in. Is it not the same?

I think the smoke will be placed and then affects your TEM, even if pinned on 1st MFs.

The only exception is DC. Maybe because you need to do anything at the end of your placement to this weapon be effective, or maybe because is a too much potent weapon and the designer need to reflect the difficulty to place it. If you placed 1 DC in an adjacent hex on the first MF expended the DC would always explode. Surely they -designers- wanted to avoid it. Anyway you can always place smoke on your hex at your 1st MF and then place the DC.

Miguel.

 

[Larry]

Most of this leads me to another entirely different question: IS ASL A GAME TO BE PLAYED, OR IS IT MORE A PUZZLE TO BE SOLVED?

Frank

The answer to that question is "yes." What game, whether physical, board, or electronic, does not require the pursuit of a "solution?"

 

[Robin Reeve]

Well...A4.44 Recovery states that "In all cases, a Recovery attempt is allowed only by an unpinned, Good Order ...(unit)....." I take that to mean that a unit that becomes Pinned, or ceases to be Good Order, as a result of First Fire or any other means while attempting Recovery cannot in fact recover a SW/Gun.

And... A24.1 Smoke requires that an "Infantry squad.... (be) "still capable of movement during its MPh" in order to be allowed to attempt SMOKE placement. This might seem otherwise redundant to the requirement that the placement attempt costs 2 MF for an attempt in an (ADJACENT) Location, or 1 MF in its own Location. I take all this to mean a squad that becomes Broken or Pinned (i. e. if it is no longer capable of movement) cannot Attempt to place SMOKE.

Now granted that does not say when in all of this the SMOKE is placed, but it IMPLIES to me that the SMOKE is not placed until after the movement costs required are complete.

Most of this leads me to another entirely different question: IS ASL A GAME TO BE PLAYED, OR IS IT MORE A PUZZLE TO BE SOLVED?

Frank

Recovery or SMOKE grenade placement don't need to be made on the 1st MF spent. So a unit may begin its MPh in a condition that would authorized it to do some actions, but - having been fired upon - could become unable to do them further on.
If a unit attemps recovery (and is in a state that allows it to do it), its owning player states the MF spent and rolls the recovery dr. The Defender can DFF only after the SW was recovered - not before - and thus cannot affect the status of the unit to condition the recovery.

 

[FrankH.]

What do the rules actually say, and how do you interpret them?

I'll stand by my reading of the rules as disallowing a unit that is Pinned or not Good Order from Recovery Attempt (A4.44), and a unit not capable of further movement from SMOKE placement Attempt (A24.1).

Please provide a rule reference stating that a unit which becomes Pinned (or Broken) as it expends MF for Recovery (or Smoke placement) is allowed to make a Recovery (or Smoke placement) Attempt dr.

I do not think a unit that becomes Pinned (or Broken) in the act of MF expenditure for Recovery or Smoke placement is to make an Attempt dr. I think that an Attempt dr in both cases is allowed only to qualifying units AFTER the expenditure of the required MF, based on the unit's status at that time. However, I do agree that these rules are vague and can be read either way. If the text of these rules were more clear these different readings would not occur....

I will add to that list the following actions: Searching (A12.152), Mopping Up (A12.153), Clearance (B24.7), and Attempting to Fire a Starshell - Usage Restrictions (E1.921) which a Pinned unit is not allowed to perform. That is a short list and I am sure there are others.

It is true the a Pinned unit is disallowed from Placing a DC in two different sections of the rules (A7.81 and A23.3). and therefore this case is easier to find, remember, and confirm than the others.

Frank

 

[FrankH.]

If a unit attemps recovery (and is in a state that allows it to do it), its owning player states the MF spent and rolls the recovery dr. The Defender can DFF only after the SW was recovered - not before - and thus cannot affect the status of the unit to condition the recovery.

Rule reference please.

Frank

 

[Reepicheep]

Frank, if your interpretation were correct then a unit spending MF to enter a building that gets broken or pinned in the building would have to return to the hex it was in previously, since it is just as obvious that units that are pinned or broken cannot spend MF to enter buildings.

In short, you spend MF to make an attempt, the rules say you then roll the dice and see if you were succesful. If you were succesful, then you were succesful! You've done whatever you tried to do. The enemy may then fire on the MF that you expended, but there is nothing in the rulebook that says your recovery or smoke placement attempt is annulled by subsequent fire breaking or pinning the moving unit. COWTRA. The very fact that the DC rules state otherwise, clearly show that it is an exception that proves the rule.

 

[FrankH.]

Frank, if your interpretation were correct then a unit spending MF to enter a building that gets broken or pinned in the building would have to return to the hex it was in previously, since it is just as obvious that units that are pinned or broken cannot spend MF to enter buildings.

I guess what I am saying is a bit more subtle than I have implied, or that many are interpreting.

I am not saying that a unit that becomes pinned or broken due to Defensive Fire as a result of its expenditure of MF has not expended those very same MF. Expenditure of MF is of course needed for Defensive Fire to take place, per A8.1.

I am saying that for a Recovery and Smoke Placement ATTEMPT the following is required, in this order:

1. Expenditure of the required amount of, or cost in MF
2. Check the text of the specific rule to determine if the unit is then eligible to make a Recovery, or Smoke Placement Attempt (i. e. the attempt is synonymous with making the dr to see if the attempt is successful). If the unit is not eligible to make a Recovery or Smoke Placement Attempt that is a different matter from its expenditure of MF as PART of its process of qualifying for the attempt.

I believe this to be true since otherwise there are redundant requirements in the text of these rules: that the unit be "unpinned, Good Order", AND expend 1 MF (to Attempt Recovery), or to be "still capable of movement", AND expend 1 or 2 MF (to Attempt Smoke placement).

I realize many people are reading the requirements as #1 and #2 as somehow simultaneous, by some type of analogy or extrapolation of the fact that moving a unit into a new Location does not require a dr following the MF expenditure in entry.

In short, you spend MF to make an attempt, the rules say you then roll the dice and see if you were succesful.

I agree there is more than one way to interpret this word "ATTEMPT".

The very fact that the DC rules state otherwise, clearly show that it is an exception that proves the rule.

My point is that it is not just the DC rules which state otherwise, as an "exception", it is also all those other actions I listed above which state otherwise, if one reads carefully enough.

Frank

 

[FrankH.]

Question to MMP

I have submitted a question to MMP re my interpretation of the Smoke grenade placement rule, A24.1.

Frank

 

[Robin Reeve]

What rule says you may DFF between the declaration of MF spent and the reason these MF were spent for (other than the DC placement exception)?
Placing smoke or redcovering SW cannot be separated from the MF spent to do such actions.
DFF is declared after the MF expense (and, logically, all its direct consequences). Why should there be a difference between MFs expended to change Location and MFs expended to accomplish an action within a Location?
A 8.1 makes no such difference : "... During the ATTACKER's MPh, the DEFENDER should keep careful watch as the ATTACKER counts aloud the MF/MP expended as each unit/stack he moves enters a new Location or performs some task requiring the expenditure of MF/MP in its current Location. Anytime a unit/stack expends MF/MP in the LOS of one of his units, the DEFENDER has the option to temporarily halt its movement while he fires at it in that Location with as many attacks as he can bring to bear."
The smoke grenade explodes as the MF are spent and not after they are spent : you cannot create a special DFF moment between MF declaration and the action corresponding to that expense (the fact that the grenade dr can lead to no smoke being placed does not indicate that there is such a space of time).
A 24.1 is clear that the MF spent are the cost of placement (SMOKE placement may be attempted via inherent SMOKE grenades by any Infantry squad having a SMOKE Placement Exponent and still capable of movement during its MPh, at a cost of two MF if the attempt is to place SMOKE in an ADJACENT Location, or one MF if the attempt is to place SMOKE in its own Location.), and not the cost "before placement".

Of course, a DEFENDER could be frustrated not to have anticipated that the ATTACKER would place smoke, but that is a question of tactics, not of applying the rule.