Minimum Move question

Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
277
Reaction score
128
Location
Saint-Brieuc
Country
llFrance
Hi,

Does a Minimum Move prohibit the use of MF (for SW recovery or Smoke placement) prior to that one-hex movement ?

Is "Minimum Move" and "at the cost of a unit's entire MF allotment" exactly the same ?

I don't think so but I cannot find any answer in A4.134 or somewhere else.

Thanks in advance.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Hi,

Does a Minimum Move prohibit the use of MF (for SW recovery or Smoke placement) prior to that one-hex movement ?

Is "Minimum Move" and "at the cost of a unit's entire MF allotment" exactly the same ?

I don't think so but I cannot find any answer in A4.134 or somewhere else.

Thanks in advance.
A4.134 only allows for excess portage penalties that reduce the unit's MF whilst still allowing MM. While it potentially allows MM incurring additional penalties, my reading is that only allows such extras as part of that move into the new location/hex. Eg Smoke in the target hex.

So I would agree with you that no MF can be expended except as required by the 'move' part of the MM.

Strictly speaking MM and "All" are not the same, you can exceed a unit's MF and still make a MM (A4.134). Marsh can be entered at a cost of "All" but only requires a MM when entered from a lower elevation, IE from same level: no CX, from lower level: CX (B16.4). I'm sure others will chime in with more and better examples. So while in many if not most cases that players come across there will be no difference, they are not the same.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Hi,

Does a Minimum Move prohibit the use of MF (for SW recovery or Smoke placement) prior to that one-hex movement ?

Is "Minimum Move" and "at the cost of a unit's entire MF allotment" exactly the same ?

I don't think so but I cannot find any answer in A4.134 or somewhere else.
Although not written explicitly into the rule, I will guess the Minimum Move is the only MF expenditure the unit may make.

I am not sure what "Is "Minimum Move" and "at the cost of a unit's entire MF allotment" exactly the same ?" is asking.

JR
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
277
Reaction score
128
Location
Saint-Brieuc
Country
llFrance
JR,
Sorry for my bad english.
In my mind, it is clear that "at the cost of a unit's entire MF allotment" implies that no MF can be spent before the movement of that unit.

But is it the same for a Minimum Move ? I don't know. Can't a unit recover a SW before a MM for example ?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
JR,
Sorry for my bad english.
In my mind, it is clear that "at the cost of a unit's entire MF allotment" implies that no MF can be spent before the movement of that unit.

But is it the same for a Minimum Move ? I don't know. Can't a unit recover a SW before a MM for example ?
My belief is that a unit making a Minimum Move may only make one expenditure. That would allow things that add MF to the expenditure but did not cause a separate expenditure (like infantry OVR) but would disallow things that require a separate expenditure (e.g. recovery, smoke grenade placement, etc.) But that could be wrong.

JR
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Although not written explicitly into the rule, I will guess the Minimum Move is the only MF expenditure the unit may make.

....

JR
Not entirely so if one refers to a recent reply from Perry:

Q1). Would personnel units [EXC: those immune to HOB] unloading from a vehicle that has spent more than 1/2 but less than or equal to 3/4 of its MP allowance have any additional MF available to conduct a charge if it were to become berserk upon dismounting from the vehicle?

Q2). Is the answer the same for an infantry unit that has spent its entire MF allowance to move into a location using Minimum Move (A4.134) during the current MPh?

A. Yes to both; 8MF minus how many already spent. See the Examples in A4.134 for how to calculate spent MF.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,597
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
I think that the Perry Sez adresses the question of the unit becoming berserk during the MPh, and not the question of usual rules of movement.
A French player has sent the initial question to Perry.
I am interested in reading his answer.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
I think that the Perry Sez adresses the question of the unit becoming berserk during the MPh, and not the question of usual rules of movement.
A French player has sent the initial question to Perry.
I am interested in reading his answer.
I tend to agree with jrv here though that no other activities would be permitted with a minimum move action, however I've been wrong with such "logical" assumptions in the past so I would not be surprised if the opposite were ruled as a possibility. All in all I'm not wedded to either view, but prefer the former.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,597
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Common sense is not always an efficient hermeneutical tool when it comes to solve ASL rules questions.
Blind, mechanical application of the text is usually the way to go - and perhaps helps to avoid collateral effects on other parts of the rulebook.
ASL is WW2 Fantasyland.
 

Ed Caswell

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2004
Messages
260
Reaction score
25
Location
Knob Noster, MO
First name
Ed
Country
llUnited States
My belief is that a unit making a Minimum Move may only make one expenditure. That would allow things that add MF to the expenditure but did not cause a separate expenditure (like infantry OVR) but would disallow things that require a separate expenditure (e.g. recovery, smoke grenade placement, etc.) But that could be wrong.

JR
I believe you are correct here. I have read the rules re this several times and your "analysis" seems to fit perfectly.

Ed
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,597
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
It is a word linked to my job - which is about exegesis and interpretation of the Hebrew Bible.
While exegesis tries to define the meaning of a text in its original setting and for its supposed first readers, hermeneutics try to define what present application of the text can be made.
 
Top