Not using an MA in an overrun

[von Marwitz]

Well, there's always the option not to declare an OVR but to move into the hex, stop, blast away at TBPF, start up again and leave, instead of declaring an OVR.

Of course, it always depends on the situation whether this or an OVR is the better option.

von Marwitz

 

[Houlie]

Would a tanker blaze away with every weapon available when intending to go in harm's way? I think yes.

JR

It's situational. If there is a risk of ammo depletion or malfunction when, as a tank commander, I know my ample MGs, speed, shock and awe will do the trick against say a lone, vulnerable infantry target, why risk breaking your main weapon when it has been reported there are also big nasty tanks lurking in the area? The choice would be a no-brainer for me.

 

[Doug Leslie]

Because I lead a sad life, I have done some digging and I present to you a Q&A answer buried on page 148 of this compilation:-

http://www.klasm.com/ASL/ErrataQA/QA/ASL_QA_Total.pdf

Q "May a vehicle that voluntarily uses its MA only during an OVR and rolls <= its ROF, on the OVR attack, use its MA in a non-OVR attack during the MPh or APh?"

A. "No"

This clearly implies that a vehicle conducting an OVR can opt not to use any of its FP that it chooses. If it can opt to use its MA only, the reverse must surely be true.

 

[Philippe D.]

I think we are not reading the word "only" in the same sense in the question... I understand the question to be "can a vehicle whose MA was used only in an OVR... possibly fire later in non-OVR"; and I think you are reading it as " can a vehicle that, in an OVR, used only its MA..."

I am not reading the Q&A as saying anything about not using some weapon in an OVR.

 

[Doug Leslie]

I think we are not reading the word "only" in the same sense in the question... I understand the question to be "can a vehicle whose MA was used only in an OVR... possibly fire later in non-OVR"; and I think you are reading it as " can a vehicle that, in an OVR, used only its MA..."

I am not reading the Q&A as saying anything about not using some weapon in an OVR.

You are probably right.
It's the word "voluntarily" that confuses matters. That suggested to me doing something with the MA outwith the norm (ie using all available weaponry). I thought that the assumption behind the question was that if the MG were added to the OVR attack, it would go without question that the vehicle could not fire again apart from another OVR, hence "voluntarily" using the MA only. It isn't very clear though.