Leader Direction of a MG Bore sight shot

sfcmikej

US Army Retired
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
880
Reaction score
158
Location
North Carolina
Country
llUnited States
Hey all,

I have always played that a leader can direct a MG shooting as DFF at a bore sighted hex. Recently that was, surprisingly to me, questioned. My opponent pointed out that C6.44 (Below) says that the -2 Bore Sighted DR applies only if all elements of the fire group qualify for it and that the leader becomes part of the fire group by directing the fire and thus the -2 Bore Sighting DRM cannot apply since the leader does not qualify for it. The fire group and the leader direction rules (also below) are not definitive as to whether the leader is part of the fire group, and thus unable to provide the leadership DRM, or is just directing the fire group. I would argue that the "they" (in red below) refers to the "more than one weapon/unit" and if it included the leader as part of the fire group it would be "him" or "the leader". In referencing A7.5 I would argue that a leader directing the attack is not necessarily part of the fire group as they are not not adding any fire power to the fire group and thus not joining together to make a combined attack.

I am surprised that I have never had the ability to direct an attack by a MG by leader questioned in many years of playing if I am wrong, and I was unable to find any Q & A that addresses this issue. Any guidance, reference, and interpretation would be greatly appreciated.

Mike


C6.44 A MG/IFE non-ordnance attack [EXC: all forms of Residual FP; A8.2, A9.22] vs a unit in the firing weapon's Bore Sighted Location may deduct two from its IFT DR unless using Spraying Fire or taking a Snap Shot [EXC: vs Infantry, only such an attack conducted as Defensive First Fire (A8.1) qualifies for this -2 DRM]. The -2 Bore Sighting DRM may be used by a FG making such an attack only if all elements of that FG have Bore Sighted that same Location. See also E1.71.

A7.5 FIRE GROUP (FG): Two or more units/weapons joining together to make a combined fire attack are a FG. Two SMC manning the same SW are not a FG as they are considered one combined firing unit. A FG may consist of units from more than one Location only if each participating unit occupies a Location ADJACENT to another participating unit of the same FG. It is possible to have a FG composed of a virtually unlimited string of ADJACENT Locations; provided each Location in the FG contains a unit that is participating in the attack. A leader alone in a Location cannot be a link in a FG (unless he is Heroic or firing a SW) because each Location of a FG must participate in the attack and a leader normally has no attack capability. Units inside a pillbox may not form a FG with units outside the pillbox.

A7.53 FIRE DIRECTION: A single leader cannot direct more than one weapon/unit per phase unless they are part of the same FG. Hence a squad that elects to use its inherent FP in a different attack than that of the MG it is manning does not get the leadership benefit if given to the MG instead. However, a leader can direct the fire of a MG as many times as the MG can fire, even if he also directed other units as part of a FG in the MG's previous attack. Leader direction used during Defensive First Fire can be used again in Subsequent First Fire, FPF, or Final Fire, but again only for one firing unit/SW or FG—and that unit/SW/FG can only include firers he directed during First Fire; if forming a new FG or using a different SW during that Player Turn, the leader cannot direct its fire (even during FPF). Similarly, a leader may not affect more than one To Hit attempt per fire phase (except for a multiple ROF weapon) regardless of the number of SW the firing unit is eligible to fire. See also 9.4, 10.7, and D6.65.
 

EagleIV

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
531
Location
California
Country
llUnited States
As I play it:
A leader directing a FG is not part of that FG since he is not adding any FP to the attack (A heroic leader adding his 1FP and -1 heroic DRM is not directing the attack).
The word they in A7.53 that you have highlighted refers to the (more than one) units ADDING FP to the attack, not any leader(s) directing the attack.
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,134
Reaction score
4,310
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
So if Leaders can't Direct FGs, then the FG must always be susceptible to Cowering, right? That seems wrong to me; it feels like a leader "Directing" an attack is participating in it. They get marked with a Fire counter, don't they?

But hey. I got surprised by the Snap Shot with Rubble answer, so I could be wrong.
 

DVexile

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2022
Messages
66
Reaction score
129
Location
Baltimore, MD
First name
Ken
Country
llUnited States
it feels like a leader "Directing" an attack is participating in it.
It says in A7.5 quoted in the OP:

A leader alone in a Location cannot be a link in a FG (unless he is Heroic or firing a SW) because each Location of a FG must participate in the attack and a leader normally has no attack capability.

So at least as far as the RB is concerned it appears “directing” is not “participating”.
 

EagleIV

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
531
Location
California
Country
llUnited States
So if Leaders can't Direct FGs, then the FG must always be susceptible to Cowering, right? That seems wrong to me; it feels like a leader "Directing" an attack is participating in it. They get marked with a Fire counter, don't they?

But hey. I got surprised by the Snap Shot with Rubble answer, so I could be wrong.
Leaders can direct a FG, but when they do so, they are NOT part of the FG. Leaders can also be part of a FG if they contribute FP by firing a MG with another SMC, use their heroic FP, etc.
 

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,193
Reaction score
439
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
...Any guidance, reference, and interpretation would be greatly appreciated.
Some ASLRB history...

I agree w/you that the Leader can direct and combine Leadership DRM w/BS DRM under 2eASLRB.

That said, the matter truly merits a Q&A IMO. Here's why:

Late last century in 1eASLRB there was a line at the end of A7.531,
1eASLRB A7.531 last sentence said:
A SMC directing fire is treated as if he were firing.
Because that line was not then understood by rules custodians (see below) it was removed

[I then called that removal a judgement error -- there were sound reasons then to let it stand, but
some of influence disliked a particular AFPh Op Fire nuance of the rule, and
their views prevailed -- sigh and shrug].

Anyway, the "lingering ghost" of that then-killed line suggests your opponent is correct:
=if= the leader were (as once was writ) treated as a firing unit,​
=then= his leadership direction DRM =or= the BS DRM could be used,​
but not both combined, owing to C6.44 penultimate sentence.​
Though it is my opinion that your opponent's understanding ought to be the rule, given the (cough - errant) "fix" made to A7.531 (and absent a curative 2eASLRB Q&A since) I do side w/you, not your opponent.

[With a 10-3, that's a hypothetical -5 DRM, but it's limited to D1F v moving Infantry, so, not overly capital-B broken, right?]

I do wonder if those who struck that "puzzling" line considered that rule's interaction w/bore sighting.
My strong sense is,
No, they missed that too.

an excerpt from now obsolete Q&A said:
A7.531

Does the last A7.351 sentence have any consequences besides marking the leader with a fire counter, and treating it as it has fired, after the attack?
A. None spring to mind.
Not even MG Bore Sighting, I'm guessing

[TBH, that nuance escaped me too, way back then - I knew it was unwise to delete that line simply because it mystified (and annoyed a couple of loud folks) but, hey, so it went -
And now here we all are, two decades later, paying a time-sink cost for that subtle line's deletion

Thankfully, this is a pastime]
 

Stewart

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
2,652
Reaction score
407
Location
California
Country
llMalta
So, the phrase unless ALL elements of the FG have boresighted that location.

We have....
6.42 During setup, the Scenario Defender may choose one Bore Sighted
Location for each allowed weapon. This Location must be outside the
weapon’s own hex, and within both the LOS of the weapon (or its Spotter;

So, the Spotter gets to use the BS DRM but not a leader, when both are actually performing the same action..."directing" the fire of the weapon.

I'd say use the LDR and Give the RB BS loudmouths the Finger.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
13,452
Reaction score
8,557
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llUkraine
So if Leaders can't Direct FGs, then the FG must always be susceptible to Cowering, right? That seems wrong to me; it feels like a leader "Directing" an attack is participating in it. They get marked with a Fire counter, don't they?

But hey. I got surprised by the Snap Shot with Rubble answer, so I could be wrong.
I'll take a position in the middle:

The Snap Shot with Rubble answer did not surprise me.

And I think that a Leader CAN direct a Bore Sighted MG and apply his Leadership DRM to the attack.

I agree that "Directing" an attack can only mean participating in it. This is why the Leader is marked with the appropriate counter and the eliminated line in the rules which Wayne has pointed out also goes into that direction.

I think this is also in line with the fact that a Leader alone cannot be a "link" to form a FG of units in ADJACENT hexes (unless he is firing a SW, of course...). In this case, he is not directing anyone and thus not participating. And if he is firing a SW, then he would be participating. This model of thinking IMHO illumines how the rule is to be understood and handled.

von Marwitz
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
3,735
Country
llUnited States
Some ASLRB history...

I agree w/you that the Leader can direct and combine Leadership DRM w/BS DRM under 2eASLRB.

That said, the matter truly merits a Q&A IMO. Here's why:

Late last century in 1eASLRB there was a line at the end of A7.531,

Because that line was not then understood by rules custodians (see below) it was removed

[I then called that removal a judgement error -- there were sound reasons then to let it stand, but
some of influence disliked a particular AFPh Op Fire nuance of the rule, and
their views prevailed -- sigh and shrug].

Anyway, the "lingering ghost" of that then-killed line suggests your opponent is correct:
=if= the leader were (as once was writ) treated as a firing unit,​
=then= his leadership direction DRM =or= the BS DRM could be used,​
but not both combined, owing to C6.44 penultimate sentence.​
Though it is my opinion that your opponent's understanding ought to be the rule, given the (cough - errant) "fix" made to A7.531 (and absent a curative 2eASLRB Q&A since) I do side w/you, not your opponent.

[With a 10-3, that's a hypothetical -5 DRM, but it's limited to D1F v moving Infantry, so, not overly capital-B broken, right?]

I do wonder if those who struck that "puzzling" line considered that rule's interaction w/bore sighting.
My strong sense is,
No, they missed that too.



Not even MG Bore Sighting, I'm guessing

[TBH, that nuance escaped me too, way back then - I knew it was unwise to delete that line simply because it mystified (and annoyed a couple of loud folks) but, hey, so it went -
And now here we all are, two decades later, paying a time-sink cost for that subtle line's deletion

Thankfully, this is a pastime]
Thanks for the background info, IMO fascinating stuff.

I would be interested in the nuances you referred to of AFPh Opportunity Fire if you can recall them.
 

apbills

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
2,793
Reaction score
342
Location
Pewaukee, WI
Country
llUnited States
I know my hardcopy page (A15vB (c) 2000 Multi-Man Publishing) states "A Leader directing fire is treated as if he were firing." and my current electronic version states "A SMC directing fire is marked with an appropriate Fire counter."

The current hardcopy page I have is from the replacement pages found on the MMP website. The change in that sentence to its current wording is in the ASLRBv2 errata on the MMP website, but there is no indication of when that change was made as it is just a compilation of all errata to ASLRBv2 (thru April 2021) not included in any replacement pages.

I am not privy to any of the discussion that ended up with the change, however, it seems to reinforce the idea that a leader can either direct fire or fire a weapon, but not both. Regardless, it is marked with a fire counter after performing either of those activities. I am sure there is a nuance I do not understand.
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
3,735
Country
llUnited States
LMAO I am either losing it or meshing the two Leader threads together. The dreaded Jickian Mindless Meld.🙄

Most likely both.
 

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
4,566
Reaction score
834
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
What the rule was or implied 20 years ago does not change the rule as written today. The eASLRB ver. 2.01, A7.531 states:

A leader may use his leadership DRM (10.7) to modify the IFT DR of
any one attacking unit or FG per Player Turn, provided all firing units of the
FG are in the same Location.

All elements of the FG making the attack in C6.44 are directed by the leader per A7.531.
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
3,735
Country
llUnited States
HOWWWWWWW do you remember this stuff from 20 years ago? Such obscure infinitely small tiny rules tweaks.
I can't remember the stuff I read at 10am this morning.

Neal
If you start an organization for those with the same memory problem please count me in as a Life Member. 🙄
 

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,193
Reaction score
439
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
I am sure there is a nuance I do not understand.
No nuance to understand -- that (previously) C6.44 Bore Sighting DRMs could not combine w/leader direction DRMs was a 1eASLRB "feature." [Perhaps OP's opponent was a grognard from way back? Or was taught by one?]

Anyway, 2eASLRB implicitly allows it. As you imply, the latter is all one needs to know today.
 
Last edited:

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
4,566
Reaction score
834
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
Q&A from the PS files:

A7.531
Does the last A7.351 sentence have any consequences besides marking the leader with a fire counter, and treating it as it has fired,
after the attack?
A. None spring to mind.
If yes, does it mean that a leader directing fire, is making a fire attack himself, thus participating in the FG he directs? Does it
mean that a leader cannot direct an MG that uses its Bore Sight DRM (since C6.44 requires all elements of a FG to have Bore
Sighted a Location to use the DRM)? Does it mean that a leader is marked with First Fire after having directed one shot (even an
MMG that retains ROF) during the MPh, and thereafter restricts any leader-directed fire to the closest Known enemy unit?
A. No. NA. NA.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
18,766
Reaction score
5,769
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
That looks like the Q&A that lead to the ASL Journal 7 errata..

A7.531: At the end replace “treated as if he were firing” with “marked with an appropriate Fire counter.”.
 

Wayne

Doing Plenty, Kinda Slow
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
1,193
Reaction score
439
Location
Snowiest place in VA
Country
llUnited States
That looks like the Q&A that lead to the ASL Journal 7 errata..

A7.531: At the end replace “treated as if he were firing” with “marked with an appropriate Fire counter.”.
Steeply implying he's =not= firing and kinda begging the Q, Why mark a non-firing unit w/a fire marker?

[Much was simpler and saner when fire direction =was= treated as firing. Just saying.]
 
Top