Manila booby trap

[brunger]

Manila question can minefield factors be exchanged for booby traps in relevant scenarios e.g. SF14 the price of postage ??

Or without SSR is it prohibited.
See B 28.9.

 

[Eagle4ty]

I see no SSR prohibiting it and B28.9 requires no SSR to implement it that I see.

 

[ibncalb]

I see no SSR prohibiting it and B28.9 requires no SSR to implement it that I see.

B28.9 specifies 'Board'. As all of the SF scenarios are on the HASL map, I would question if BT exchange would be legal.

I hope it is, as BT mixed with other HIP fortifications is fantastic.

 

[Wayne]

B28.9 specifies 'Board'. As all of the SF scenarios are on the HASL map, I would question if BT exchange would be legal.

I hope it is, as BT mixed with other HIP fortifications is fantastic.

That's an atrractive wish, but I think OP needs (and lacks?) a CG/SSR rule for that.

I see no SSR prohibiting it and B28.9 requires no SSR to implement it that I see.

Problematic is how per-board B28.9 cost converts to costs on a CG mapsheet portion.

Counting its half-hexes as whole, a booby-trapped standard ASL board contains 362 Booby-trap hexes.

OP's SF14 setup area contains 18*25 = 450 (including River hexes). One might claim 27 fewer hexes owing to the River, but B29.9 allows no such discount.

I steeply doubt CG designers would put this calculation demand upon the players. Ergo, I'm best-guessing OP's wish is simply NA.

But search the S&F rules -- I've only skimmed them -- maybe OP will find therein the allowance sought. Good luck.

 

[brunger]

I’m thinking more of the scenario application. Although I believe you can purchase booby traps in the campaign??

 

[brunger]

It could be a reasonable way to play the scenario solitaire too.

Given that the post office was reported to be a potential devils garden of sand bagged locations. Booby traps would appear a likely event? But it’s for the designer to clarify I think.

 

[Eagle4ty]

That's an atrractive wish, but I think OP needs (and lacks?) a CG/SSR rule for that.

Problematic is how per-board B28.9 cost converts to costs on a CG mapsheet portion.

Counting its half-hexes as whole, a booby-trapped standard ASL board contains 362 Booby-trap hexes.

OP's SF14 setup area contains 18*25 = 450 (including River hexes). One might claim 27 fewer hexes owing to the River, but B29.9 allows no such discount.

I steeply doubt CG designers would put this calculation demand upon the players. Ergo, I'm best-guessing OP's wish is simply NA.

But search the S&F rules -- I've only skimmed them -- maybe OP will find therein the allowance sought. Good luck.

A guess is simply not supported by the rules and while one can assume all ASL rules are in effect normally unless prohibited, there is no SF SSR stating B28.9 is not applicable in the scenarios.

 

[Wayne]

A guess is simply not supported by the rules and while one can assume all ASL rules are in effect normally unless prohibited, there is no SF SSR stating B28.9 is not applicable in the scenarios.

If I read you correctly, you seemingly suggest that B28.9 applies to SF14.

B28.9 BOOBY TRAPS: Prior to setup, a player may spend some or all of his minefield factors [EXC: Known; 28.45] for a Booby Trap capability on a particular board(s). ...

To me, absence of "boards" in scenario SF14 kinda necessitates that B28.9 Booby Trap capability bought with Mine Factors is NA (because for what board would one be trading away Mines for BT capability? -- there are no particular boards in this instance).

As writ, B28.9 is a geoboard rule -- not a HASL rule. AFAICS, no general eASLRB rule allows trade of MF for BT capability on HASL map segments.

[The B28.9 verbiage maybe predates RB.]

 

[Eagle4ty]

If I read you correctly, you seemingly suggest that B28.9 applies to SF14.


To me, absence of "boards" in scenario SF14 kinda necessitates that B28.9 Booby Trap capability bought with Mine Factors is NA (because for what board would one be trading away Mines for BT capability? -- there are no particular boards in this instance).

As writ, B28.9 is a geoboard rule -- not a HASL rule. AFAICS, no general eASLRB rule allows trade of MF for BT capability on HASL map segments.

[The B28.9 verbiage maybe predates RB.]

Worth a Q to Perry I would think as the playing area is a board (to me at least-not defined in the INDEX). I feel that in the smaller stand alone scenarios it would seem quite feasible to apply B28.9 as "normally" the playing areas are comparable to a geo-board scenario and booby traps were certainly an element in the Japanese defensive system. However I do feel this should be addressed, especially for the CG purchase, as if one is capable of exchanging minefield factors for a booby trap capability it would be cheaper to spend FPPs on minefield factors and exchange them for a boobytrap capability than to purchase a booby trap capability with FPPs.

 

[Carln0130]

It could be a reasonable way to play the scenario solitaire too.

Given that the post office was reported to be a potential devils garden of sand bagged locations. Booby traps would appear a likely event? But it’s for the designer to clarify I think.

Directly IM ASLSarge on this forum. He was one of, if not THE designer. He could supply a definitive yes or no for you.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Directly IM ASLSarge on this forum. He was one of, if not THE designer. He could supply a definitive yes or no for you.

Well at least his initial design ideas or intent.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

As writ, B28.9 is a geoboard rule -- not a HASL rule. AFAICS, no general eASLRB rule allows trade of MF for BT capability on HASL map segments.

[The B28.9 verbiage maybe predates RB.]

I tend to agree....I looked at some other HASL rules/scenarios and found a couple with the same situation/question....

 

[Larry]

There is a desk in the room. On the desk rests a Manila Envelope. It bears the label, Battle Plans. Don't open it, it is a Manila Booby Trap.