Little principles to better your setup

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,981
Reaction score
7,696
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
Based on an AAR I have recently posted I have received a PM asking me for the reason why I stacked a squad with a 4PP MMG and a 1PP LMG while leaving a second squad without any SW in my setup. This obviously is not beneficial to movement or optimal with regard to Firepower usage.

The answer might be of some value especially to newer players, so I thought I might post it for the general public. Veterans might even add to it.

Here's the basic situation at the end of the setup before game start (Romanians move first):

FrF089 Red Tears Shed On Gray v633 AAR.jpg

"von Marwitz,
I noticed in the AAR picture you have a 347 carrying a 4PP medium mg and a lmg. Obviously you did this on purpose, what was the reason?
Thanks"




What you see in the screenshot depicts the situation at game-start. This means, concealment is already gained for units elegible but it is not yet the start of the first Rally Phase.

This means that at this point, the Russians may not yet inspect the Romanian stacks. Had the Russians not had LOS to the stack with the 347+MMG+LMG and 347, they would also have become concealed.

But now to your question:

In case no LOS had existed to the squad which the Russians may not inspect before game-start (i.e. the first RPh), then he would only have known that there is one 347 in it for sure but not what is beneath. Had I stacked the LMG with the second 347, he would have known that there is the LMG over there but not which unit holds it. However, a HS will unlikely hold an LMG, so he would have concluded that the two topmost units were a 347+LMG with some certainity.

If the entire stack would have become concealed, because no Russian has LOS, then I could have transferred the LMG to the 347 carrying nothing without losing Concealment during the first Romanian RPh.

So the bottomline is that in case of no LOS, the Romanians could have obscured just a little tidbit more of information to the Russians compared to stacking the LMG with the 2nd 347 from the beginning.

As it turned out there is LOS, the Russians will be able to inspect the stack at game-start - provided his unit in 1C1 is real. So if the Russian asks me to show him the contents of the Romanian squad, I have coerced another tidbit of information from the Russian. Which is quite valuable in this situation as a real unit in 1C1 can slow down the Romanian advance on that flank and will influence the way I move.

Of course, it is highly imporobable that the Russians in 1C1 are dummies as it would be a gross oversight to leave that flank only barely covered from 1F3 (not counting possible HIP units), so I am well advised to treat it as real anyway. BTW, unsurprisingly it was real in our game.

You see that this detail in the setup is just a battle for tidbits of information gained or withheld.

For the same reason, you might notice some more little mindgames:

The leaders in 71A7, 71G7, and 71J7 are not stacked on top. This might help to make it more difficult for the opponent to figure out which stacks of mine might be able to move further (leader bonus) or not. And it might influence his Sniper placement if he knew where exactly my leader were. Still, of course, he might well guess positions where the presence of leaders are likely. But guessing is not knowing.

In 71D7 and 71L7 the HS are not stacked on top. As it is pretty easy to figure out that the Russians will not have LOS to these stacks before game start, I will get concealment before the Russians have a chance to inspect anything. This means, he will know just a little bit less about the strength of the stacks. If there is infantry on top in a stack of 2 units, he can conclude that there is no SW beneath, so it has to be more infantry. It is more beneficial for me if the Russian can only guess if I have two full 347s in those stacks or just a 347 / 137 combo. If I put the 137 on top, he knows that there is a HS in there which is just a little tidbid of additional information for him which I can avoid giving away.

In 71G7 and H7 I did place HS on top. The reason here is that it is less valuable for the Russian to know that I have deployed (at least) one squad rather than to know where my Assault Engineers are - which will also give him some further clues where my DC's and the FT might likely be found as these can be operated without penalty only by Elite personnel. Knowing more details about my most dangerous units might influence the way he conducts or withholds his Defensive First Fire during the first Romanian Movement Phase. Of course, most of the Romanian units will lose their Concealment during their first MPh as they have no time to lose in this scenario. But again, it is a battle for some little tidbit advantages which is behind this.

ASL is a game of chances. It is rarely one tidbit that makes the difference in a scenario. But the number of tidbit advantages in information, DRMs, etc. add up throughout a game and in sum it is more likely that they do make a difference.

This is why I attempt to fight for every little seemingly negligible tidbit whereever I can.

That said, rolling low remains the best tactic, though... ;)


Cheers,
von Marwitz
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
796
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Good tips, vM, and GREAT idea for a thread. I don't know if the Rules & Errata section is the best place, but I would love to hear other tips and comments.

I just began AP61 (Desobry Defiant) and had many frustrations in finding a good setup for the Germans. For one thing, I will emphasize that you MUST read the entire scenario card!! My opponent took one look at my setup and had to remind me: the U.S. sets up AND moves first! Thankfully he was nice enough to let me reset. Otherwise, my positions would have been brutalized quite a bit!

As for your tricks to disguise, I totally agree with your approach. I look for any way possible to confuse the enemy, but the denial of Right of Inspection when there's no LOS is indeed vital when you are not given any free HIP/concealment at start.
 

buser333

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
881
Reaction score
351
Location
central WI
I agree this is a ruse worth doing, but I don't use it myself only because I usually forget to transfer the weapon I'm trying to hide :)
 

vetsurg

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
87
Reaction score
56
Location
Starkville, MS
Country
llUnited States
For a newbie like me, there are a lot of pearls here. Thanks for taking the time to explain this. It’s really helpful, and I would love to read more posts like this.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
1,058
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
I agree this is a ruse worth doing, but I don't use it myself only because I usually forget to transfer the weapon I'm trying to hide :)
Same here :)

Also vM, your ruses are somewhat contradictory - if you hide a HS, then showing one as the top of a stack somehow says there is something else you're trying to hide...
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,981
Reaction score
7,696
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
Also vM, your ruses are somewhat contradictory - if you hide a HS, then showing one as the top of a stack somehow says there is something else you're trying to hide...
True. But what might that be? Or is it only feigning to hide something extrodinary?

Of course, as I mentioned, many of those tricks might not fool an experienced player. But they will add at least a little fog of war for a while.

von Marwitz
 

Roy

Living in Brownbackistan
Joined
Oct 1, 2003
Messages
1,342
Reaction score
629
Location
Wichita
Country
llUnited States
I will 'fess up as the questioner here. And while I'm not a newb, (played for over 20 years) i saw something there that I didn't understand. I have spent my entire ASL career not paying attention and it shows, so I am going to start asking questions and paying attention. I also asked Bob Bendis in another thread if he would explain why he saw a scenario a specific way.

I'm tired of being terrible at a game I love, so I am going to try to remedy it.

Thank you to von Marwitz and Bob. I won't ask my questions in private any more so there will be fewer players like I am.
Roy
 

STAVKA

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
625
Reaction score
335
Location
East Front
Country
llFinland
Think it is little too overanalyzed in an attempt to gain some advantages, better to spend time how the set up units will move and shoot from start.

Btw your setup of the Romanian Sniper is illegal.
Based on an AAR I have recently posted I have received a PM asking me for the reason why I stacked a squad with a 4PP MMG and a 1PP LMG while leaving a second squad without any SW in my setup. This obviously is not beneficial to movement or optimal with regard to Firepower usage.

The answer might be of some value especially to newer players, so I thought I might post it for the general public. Veterans might even add to it.

Here's the basic situation at the end of the setup before game start (Romanians move first):

View attachment 3684

"von Marwitz,
I noticed in the AAR picture you have a 347 carrying a 4PP medium mg and a lmg. Obviously you did this on purpose, what was the reason?
Thanks"




What you see in the screenshot depicts the situation at game-start. This means, concealment is already gained for units elegible but it is not yet the start of the first Rally Phase.

This means that at this point, the Russians may not yet inspect the Romanian stacks. Had the Russians not had LOS to the stack with the 347+MMG+LMG and 347, they would also have become concealed.

But now to your question:

In case no LOS had existed to the squad which the Russians may not inspect before game-start (i.e. the first RPh), then he would only have known that there is one 347 in it for sure but not what is beneath. Had I stacked the LMG with the second 347, he would have known that there is the LMG over there but not which unit holds it. However, a HS will unlikely hold an LMG, so he would have concluded that the two topmost units were a 347+LMG with some certainity.

If the entire stack would have become concealed, because no Russian has LOS, then I could have transferred the LMG to the 347 carrying nothing without losing Concealment during the first Romanian RPh.

So the bottomline is that in case of no LOS, the Romanians could have obscured just a little tidbit more of information to the Russians compared to stacking the LMG with the 2nd 347 from the beginning.

As it turned out there is LOS, the Russians will be able to inspect the stack at game-start - provided his unit in 1C1 is real. So if the Russian asks me to show him the contents of the Romanian squad, I have coerced another tidbit of information from the Russian. Which is quite valuable in this situation as a real unit in 1C1 can slow down the Romanian advance on that flank and will influence the way I move.

Of course, it is highly imporobable that the Russians in 1C1 are dummies as it would be a gross oversight to leave that flank only barely covered from 1F3 (not counting possible HIP units), so I am well advised to treat it as real anyway. BTW, unsurprisingly it was real in our game.

You see that this detail in the setup is just a battle for tidbits of information gained or withheld.

For the same reason, you might notice some more little mindgames:

The leaders in 71A7, 71G7, and 71J7 are not stacked on top. This might help to make it more difficult for the opponent to figure out which stacks of mine might be able to move further (leader bonus) or not. And it might influence his Sniper placement if he knew where exactly my leader were. Still, of course, he might well guess positions where the presence of leaders are likely. But guessing is not knowing.

In 71D7 and 71L7 the HS are not stacked on top. As it is pretty easy to figure out that the Russians will not have LOS to these stacks before game start, I will get concealment before the Russians have a chance to inspect anything. This means, he will know just a little bit less about the strength of the stacks. If there is infantry on top in a stack of 2 units, he can conclude that there is no SW beneath, so it has to be more infantry. It is more beneficial for me if the Russian can only guess if I have two full 347s in those stacks or just a 347 / 137 combo. If I put the 137 on top, he knows that there is a HS in there which is just a little tidbid of additional information for him which I can avoid giving away.

In 71G7 and H7 I did place HS on top. The reason here is that it is less valuable for the Russian to know that I have deployed (at least) one squad rather than to know where my Assault Engineers are - which will also give him some further clues where my DC's and the FT might likely be found as these can be operated without penalty only by Elite personnel. Knowing more details about my most dangerous units might influence the way he conducts or withholds his Defensive First Fire during the first Romanian Movement Phase. Of course, most of the Romanian units will lose their Concealment during their first MPh as they have no time to lose in this scenario. But again, it is a battle for some little tidbit advantages which is behind this.

ASL is a game of chances. It is rarely one tidbit that makes the difference in a scenario. But the number of tidbit advantages in information, DRMs, etc. add up throughout a game and in sum it is more likely that they do make a difference.

This is why I attempt to fight for every little seemingly negligible tidbit whereever I can.

That said, rolling low remains the best tactic, though... ;)


Cheers,
von Marwitz
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,981
Reaction score
7,696
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
As this thread seems to be well received, I'll add an extension. More precisely, I will add my thoughts on the Russian defensive setup and how I believed it would be. This was the basis for my Romanian setup.

I was right in some places and wrong in others (which I will note below). But maybe people can gain some insights on how to analyze the opponent's defensive setup. In this case, I am convinced that some of the grongnards would do better than me.

Below, are pictures of the Russian defensive setup as received followed by the situation at the end of the setup phase with both sides already having received pre-game concealment and with labelled Romanian counters specifying what I believed the Russian setup would be:

FrF089 Red Tears Shed On Gray v633 AAR3.jpg



FrF089 Red Tears Shed On Gray v633 AAR2.jpg

What is a good way to analyze an opponent's setup?

  1. Make a list of unit types with respective numbers of your opponent's on-board OoB to mark off one by one later.
  2. Do some counter counting to determine if he might have deployed and which units of his OoB will unlikely be among the visible counters on-board (for being HIP).
  3. Mark off any units you can definitvely see on your list.
  4. Begin to consider what remaining unaccounted units on the list may be found at which point on the map. Do the "easy" ones first as this will limit down the choices for the more "difficult" ones.
  5. When you have marked off all the units on your list, be aware that you will likely have made some mistakes.
This works reasonably well when playing scenarios that are small to mid-sized and do not include a significant amount of HIP units, scores of dummies or variable OoB's. In other words, it works reasonably well for the majority of scenarios.

So let's go through it in detail taking the scenario as an example and illustration:

First, we have a look at the scenario card. We see the following for the Russian on-board OoB:
  • 11 squads
  • 2 crews
  • 2 leaders
  • 2 MGs
  • 8 Concealment Counters
  • 2 Guns
That is 19 "real" counters and 8 concealment counters.

In this scenario, the SSR tell us that:
  • One Russian MMC (and any SMC/SW stacked with it) may set up HIP.
  • There is an 76* ART piece plus 228 crew.
  • There is a 37L ATG piece plus 228 crew.
  • There is a Fortified Location.
We know that Russians cannot deploy, so without even looking at the opponent's setup, we can be very sure that both Guns plus the two 228 crews and one squad will be HIP (as HIP is forfeited extremely rarely) and we know that there is the Fortified Location somewhere. That is with some certainity 5 units of the Russian OoB which we will not see.

This means, that we will with some certainity at maximum see 19-5= 14 real counters and 8 concealment counters. What we do not know yet is whether a SW and/or a SMC is also set up HIP with the Hidden squad.

Now, the counter-counting reveals that we have
11 stacks, 6 of which are concealed for a total of 21 visible counters.

This gives us some first insights:
Instead of the 14+8=22 counters that we could expect to see at maximum, we see only 21 counters, i.e. 1 less. This could be an indication, that more than the minimum of possible counters is HIP. Or that the opponent might have forfeited a counter (which rarely happens and under certain circumstances has to be announced).
We see 11 stacks of which 6 are concealed. As at this point the Russian has not gained any non-OB given pre-game concealment, we know the whereabouts of 6 of his 8 concealment counters. This indicates that the Russian has either set up one Dummy stack of the remaining 2 concealment counters or used these to "inflate" a stack of real units to look more dangerous than it actually is.

In theory, he could also have used the 2 concealment counters to create a Dummy stack beneath a real unit, but as we do not see an unconcealed unit atop a stack of 3 counters, we can rule it out over here. Furthermore if the real unit atop the Dummy would be out of LOS at before game start, it would NOT gain an extra Concealment counter, giving away something of the "stronger than it is"-ruse. If it is in LOS before game start, then the opponent would of course question the reasoning, why not the entire stack was concealed in the first place and might also come to the conclusion that there is only a Dummy beneath the real unit, which can be true but must not necessarily true - mindgames... It is also important to note that Dummy stacks may only be set up in Concealment terrain.

Next, we make us a little list of the Russian units of the on-board OoB and mark off what we can see or can otherwise account for:
  • 447 (2)
  • 426 (9) 5x accounted for - visible as unconcealed units
  • 228 (2) 2x accounted for - HIP with Guns
  • 10-0 (1)
  • 8-0 (1)
  • MMG (1)
  • LMG (1)
  • "?" (8) 6x accounted for - visible atop 6 stacks
  • ART (1) accounted for - HIP
  • ATG (1) accounted for - HIP
This leaves us with 12 counters unaccounted for of which we almost certainly know that one of these is a HIP squad. We can further safely guess that the Russians will stack his MGs with the 447 squads to avoid the lowering of their Breakage Number from B11 by one to B10 when given to the 426 Concripts which are Inexperienced (A19.32).

Next, we continue to analyze the visible concealed stacks:
  • one stack of 4 counters
  • two stacks of 3 counters
  • three stacks of 2 counters
These concealed squads give us further insights based on which we try to place more of the unaccounted units on the map in our guesswork:

The three stacks of 2 counters won't be unpossessed SW (which cannot be concealed), so they will either be 426 squads or a single leader or a dummy stack.
It is highly unlikely that the Russians will set up both MGs with the HIP squad, so at least one of the stacks of three counters or more will have a 447+MG in them.

Now we have a look at the map. In the 1F3 Factory, we see 3x 426 plus a concealed stack of 4 counters. Besides this, there is nothing visible on that flank except the concealed stack of 2 counters in 1C1.

Pretty easy - will the Russians leave the 3 Concripts in the 1F3 Factory with more concealed units without a leader?
Highly unlikely, as otherwise this flank could be quickly overrun by the Romanian. Does 1F3 look as an inviting spot for an MG? Yes, especially considering a FL along E3-E2 to protect somewhat against a Romanian flanking maneuver.

Is the MG more likely to be the MMG or the LMG?
The MMG will be dropped if the possessing unit is broken and want to rout away (5PP). Locations ADJACENT to 71N10 and 1P1 can be reached by the quite resilient Romanian tanks in the first MPh, whereas 1F3 cannot. So if unlucky, the Russian the former 2 locations might be broken in Romanian Turn 1 and forced to rout, having to leave the MMG behind very early in the game for good. So the MMG is likely to be in 1F3 along with a 447 and leader unless HIP.

Will the 5PP MMG be HIP or not?
As it cannot be moved easily, the Russian will tend to put it into a position where it can survive for a while. If HIP, it would be unlikely to sit somwhere unsupported way up front where it can be quickly reached by the Romanians but rather somewhat back. However, too far back the MMG and its manning 447 will sorely be missed to delay the Romanians. So it is somewhat likely that HIP is not used for the MMG. So 1F3 will likely hold a 447+MMG.

But is it the 8-0 or the 10-0 leader in that stack?
The Rubble placed by the Russians in 1H8 is a strong indication that he wants to enter his reinforcements on that side. It would serve the purpose to allow his entering units to cross into the 1I8 Factory a lot easier and therefore possibly deny 2 of the 10 needed victory locations to the Romanian on that flank. As the reinforcements include a 9-1 leader, maybe he will put the strong Commissar on the eastern flank and hang on with the 8-0 on the western flank until the 9-1 arrives. So my best guess it 8-0 and 447+MMG for 1F3.

What about 1C1?
Easy one. The Russians can't afford an unopposed flanking attack in the west and the position in 1F3 alone it not enough to fend one off. So 1C1 is very likely not a Dummy but a real unit. It won'd be a 447 for these are needed to man the MGs. Thus it will be a 426.

Updated unit count:
  • 447 (2) 1x accounted for
  • 426 (9) 6x accounted for
  • 228 (2) 2x accounted for - HIP with Guns
  • 10-0 (1)
  • 8-0 (1) 1x accounted for
  • MMG (1) 1x accounted for
  • LMG (1)
  • "?" (8) 6x accounted for - visible atop 6 stacks
  • ART (1) accounted for - HIP
  • ATG (1) accounted for - HIP
Now we turn our attention to the Russian eastern flank.

Looking at what is still unaccounted for, we will expect a leader on that flank, the remaining "?" counters, squads and possibly the LMG. At first, let us consider the two stacks of 3 counters. The LOS of 1N10 is somewhat impeded by the adjacent stone rubble, which does not seem to make it too inviting for the LMG. At the same time, it would not make much sense to put the 10-0 commissar closest to the enemy where to Russian will be able to rout to and where the Commissar might be threatened by CC during Romanian turn 1. To place the Commissar alone might be somewhat dangerous with regard to an unlucky Sniper event or a potential CC situation. Thus my best guess would be that 71P1 holds the 10-0 and a 426.

As a consequence, 1N10 will either hold the 447+LMG or it will be a 3 counter Dummy stack or a 426 with 2x "?" on top. Which alternative will it be?

If the 447+LMG were HIP, the eastern flank would only have as "visible" units 5x 436, the 10-0 Commissar, and 2x "?" plus any top-placed concealment-counters. Despite approaches on that flank having considerable open ground, this seems rather weak. Furthermore, the hexes around 71K10 look suspicously empty although from there a lot of difficult open ground can be covered which the Romanians would have a hard time to cross unscathed with the likely cost of losses and delays.

The 71K10 area and 1N10 I found most difficult to figure out in this defensive setup (which even led to a mistake I made as my mind turned...). I figured that something simply must lurk in the 71K10 area. If it were a Gun, it seemed rather badly supported even considering the HIP squad also sitting there with no good means to retreat. If there was no Gun, then the entire Russian eastern flank would appear very weak and the open ground around the 71K10 area just too inviting to cross. But I saw no reasonable way to keep any Gun alive there beyond turn 1, so I dismissed the idea of one being present in the area. Still some of the ground before 71K10 I tought must be covered by a Gun as tanks were not unlikely passing through the area and the Romanian infantry should not have a too easy pass. For that reason, I guessed the HIP ATG+228 being located in 1H2 (CA 1I1). I did not think that the Russian would put his 447+LMG as a sacrificial lamb in the 71K10 area, and thus figured that it must be a 426 which is HIP. The most harm, a sacrificial HIP 426 can do vs. crossing Romanians would be in 71L9 I figured. This meant, that the 447+LMG must be located in 71N10 despite suboptimal LOS. The remaining 426 would make more sense in 1O1 than 1Q2 where the Russian had prudently placed one of his rubble counters to block tank traffic. Thus 1Q2 must be a Dummy. And with this, I had all infantry and SW accounted for. My mistake was, that I had 1x "?" unaccounted for because I forgot that I had already marked off the top counter of 1Q2 before and thus needed only one but not both remaining "?" to make it a Dummy stack. If I had counted properly, I would have figured that it must have been the 447+LMG instead of a single 426 which was HIP.

Updated unit count (inclusive of the 1 erroneous "?" accounted for):
  • 447 (2) 2x accounted for
  • 426 (9) 9x accounted for
  • 228 (2) 2x accounted for - HIP with Guns
  • 10-0 (1) 1x accounted for
  • 8-0 (1) 1x accounted for
  • MMG (1) 1x accounted for
  • LMG (1) 1x acciounted for
  • "?" (8) 8x accounted for (one in error)
  • ART (1) accounted for - HIP
  • ATG (1) accounted for - HIP suspected in 1H2
This left me to figure out the location of the HIP ART+228 and the Fortified Location.

With anything north of the IC4-I1-N1 street to exposed to position a Gun and IH2 "occupied" by the ATG, I figured that the ART piece must be situated somewhere more to the back. 1I7 looked like a reasonable spot but it would leave the Russian eastern flank yet even weaker. So I concluded that I might be in IP7 (CA O6) to deny the street to the 1L6 Factory while the Russian eastern flank would fight a fall back defence with the Russian reinforcements attempting to rush into 1L6 should the Romanians attack down this sector. I was not quite content with this reasoning, though, and it did prove wrong in our game.

I did not spend too much thought on the Fortified Location. 1F3 or somewhere in the 1H7 and 1L6 factories seemed reasonable.

One thing is important to realize:

If you begin to make mistakes in your "guesswork" there is a tendency of your faults adding up. An indication for this is when some of "sensible choices" to assign your remaining opponent's units do not seem sound anymore or don't "feel right".
Analyzing your opponent's setup is an art rather than a science. I would be glad if I were an artist as the true veteran players seem to be in this regard...
That said, if you find out throughout your game that some of your guesswork turns out to be wrong, attempt to correct your assumptions as well as you can while you play along: "Ah, this ain't a 447+LMG but a 10-0+426. Then the reasonable spot for the yet unknown 447+LMG must be over there..."


What were the most important mistakes did I make in my "guesswork" for this scenario with regard to our actual game?

I miscounted one "?" which led me believe the 447+LMG was not HIP but a 426.
I did not expect the HIP 447+LMG in 71J10 because I thought that position would be too vulnerable. Indeed, it turned out to be to vulnerable there.
I did not expect the ART+228 nor the 10-0 in 1F3 along with the 447+MMG. This also turned out to be the Fortified Location. This was tough to overcome.
With the ATG located in 1I7 the Russian eastern flank turned out to be weaker than I had believed my opponent to make it. It might have been a bit of a gamble that worked out for him for which he might have paid dearly if I had elected to attack down the west. Proof, however, that your opponent will always try to play mindgames with you, too.


Cheers,
von Marwitz
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,981
Reaction score
7,696
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
Think it is little too overanalyzed in an attempt to gain some advantages, better to spend time how the set up units will move and shoot from start.
What do you expect? I am German - we are prone to over-engineer things. :D

BTW, did I show you my cup-holder? Never spills a drop of beer on my ASL boards...

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3iZypCMawiE/UsxQbau70DI/AAAAAAAADRM/wib0ipRNNo8/s1600/stabilized+beer.gif

... or the scissors with which I cut a length of LOS thread?

adventure-journal-leatherman-raptor.jpg


Btw your setup of the Romanian Sniper is illegal.
Indeed. I always thought the enemy Sniper would count toward the 6 enemy units that have to be in the radius but upon rereading A14.2 I have to realize that it does not. Hardly a day on which you don't (re-)learn something in ASL.

Thanks for pointing this out.

von Marwitz
 
Last edited:

bendizoid

Official ***** Dickweed
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
3,862
Reaction score
2,038
Location
Viet Nam
Country
llUnited States
All very nice reasoning, but do you have time to do all this? 15-20 minutes seems about right for setup. I play this kind of game a little more 'seat of the pants' style. I would rather be looking for sneaky LOSs and final fallback positions than all that mind game stuff. Still, it's good to have some rules of thumb and I have learned a few things, tanks.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,981
Reaction score
7,696
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
For sure I went into meticulous detail to describe any last thought in this example. This is intended more like an illustration about what sort of things one might think of while looking at an opponent's setup.

With regard to analysis of your opponent's setup, the more important part is the rules of thumb:
  • Do some counter-counting.
  • Eliminate the 'obvious ones' to make educated guesses about the nature of the remaining counters.
  • Be aware that you won't correctly figure out everything.
Once you have figured out your own setup, it is rather easy and quickly done to adjust your stacks to obfuscate their nature a bit.

I absolutely agree that the most important part of the setup is that in the middle: To develop a plan of movement and timing on when to arrive where to meet the VC allowing for that not everything will run according to schedule. Getting a realistic grasp of the timing I find to be the most difficult thing to learn, especially for longer scenarios.

But this was not the focus of my posts yet.

von Marwitz
 

mgmasl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
4,285
Reaction score
334
Location
Cadiz
First name
Miguel
Country
llSpain
Foxholes also hide units at start before Initial LOS reveal units ..
 

Mr Incredible

Rod loves red undies
Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Messages
2,495
Reaction score
386
Location
Perth, Australia
Country
llAustralia
Also a bit risky, but like to stack same units on top of stacks (such as all 447s or 467s just visible) so that all stacks appear the same.

No idea where the SWs are, leaders or if stacks have two squads.

A bit of a risk if SWs can't be recovered, but adds to the FoW.
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
2,241
Reaction score
534
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
I used to have an opponent that would hold his set up for a week and then give it to me an hour before our game. This is, I'm sure, the kind of planning that went into his setup, something I could never dream of accomplishing in a few minutes.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
5,660
Reaction score
3,485
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Foxholes also hide units at start before Initial LOS reveal units ..
Yes, often overlooked when one has the option to entrench his OB or place AFVs in trenches to conceal their actual locations if their movement is of little value and vulnerability is great for the scenario.
 

Mister T

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
1,606
Location
Bruxelles
Country
llFrance
Very nice job Herr Generalfeldmarshall, i'm sure it has been useful to many readers.
Just to mention that the methodology you correctly present is particularly suitable to a VASL game due to the large amount of time players usually enjoy to plan for their attack/defence.
 

aloha_brian

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
143
Reaction score
93
Location
New York
Country
llUnited States
"Foxholes also hide units at start before Initial LOS reveal units .. " What allows this, in non-PTO scenarios?
 
Top