Ordnance v Concealed in Building

Mgdavey

Recruit
Joined
May 15, 2015
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Country
llUnited States
Couple of questions, one on rules one on tactics:

First, if I'm firing a gun against a known enemy squad in a building that also contains a concealed unit, and I've got acquisition on the known squad, I assume I calculate the to hit against the known enemy using the acquisition and the to-hit against the concealed unit without the acquisition modifier. Is that correct? In other words if I may hit the known unit but not the concealed even though there both in the same location?

On tactics, when firing on concealed units in good cover like a stone building, is it better to use Area Fire if you're firing something like a 70mm gun? That way I'm rolling on the IFT 12 +3, rather than struggling with low ToHit numbers?

Thanks.
 

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
10,692
Reaction score
1,125
Country
llLithuania
If you are shooting Area Target type with a 70mm ordnance, it would be a 6+3 once you have secured a hit of course. Note that the effects are not halved twice due to shooting at a concealed target.

C3.33.......all units hit by HE are attacked on the IFT using a single DR and half the FP of the firing ordnance; ...
 

Mister T

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
3,911
Reaction score
1,299
Location
Bruxelles
Country
llFrance
Couple of questions, one on rules one on tactics:
First, if I'm firing a gun against a known enemy squad in a building that also contains a concealed unit, and I've got acquisition on the known squad, I assume I calculate the to hit against the known enemy using the acquisition and the to-hit against the concealed unit without the acquisition modifier. Is that correct? In other words if I may hit the known unit but not the concealed even though there both in the same location?
You are correct.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,013
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Couple of questions, one on rules one on tactics:

First, if I'm firing a gun against a known enemy squad in a building that also contains a concealed unit, and I've got acquisition on the known squad, I assume I calculate the to hit against the known enemy using the acquisition and the to-hit against the concealed unit without the acquisition modifier. Is that correct? In other words if I may hit the known unit but not the concealed even though there both in the same location?

On tactics, when firing on concealed units in good cover like a stone building, is it better to use Area Fire if you're firing something like a 70mm gun? That way I'm rolling on the IFT 12 +3, rather than struggling with low ToHit numbers?

Thanks.
  1. You are correct in your interpretation for the 1st question as Mr. T has indicated.
  2. Your 2nd query raises quite a few issues that may come into play and considerable thought on your part on exactly what you want to accomplish.
  • As Jazz has indicated using the ATT your FP is halved to 6 [EXC: CH] if firing a 70+ ordnance and the TEM is applied to the IFT DR making a NMC possible only an an IFT effects DR of 4 and stripping concealment with a PTC on a DR 5. Coupled with this fact is the ROF of the ordnance, normally only a one shot chance to get a hit in the first place [EXC: Mortars or using Intensive Fire]. Also you cannot apply Case L (point blank range) to your TH DR when using Area Target Type, though the pretty flat 7 TH# at most ranges and only having to apply a Case K +2 TH DRM (vs concealed target) makes getting a hit relatively easier than firing ITT. There are some other pluses however as a TH DR 2 will almost always result in a CH and you will acquire all visible locations of the hex you shot at regardless of the outcome or the actual location of the target within the hex (a pretty neat tactic if your thought is follow up with a Smoke shot in a following Fire Phase as then even if the base level of the hex is not visible to the firer, the smoke will effect most of the levels found in the hex including the base level).
  • Use of the ITT of course uses the reverse of most of the items noted above. It is indeed relatively more difficult to achieve a hit having to apply both the TEM and concealed status to your TH shot but these can be mitigated somewhat by range factors (higher TH number at <=6 hex range and ability to use Case L, point blank fire, in some cases). Another disadvantage is of course that if you do not obtain a hit or have an effect on the concealed uniut you do not gain acquistion on the target/target-location. However, should a hit be achieved there is a greater chance for IFT effects as no TEM is applied to the resultant effect DR. This is further enhanced by the fact if a PTC or better result you will gain acquisition on the now KEU target. Couple this with a high ROF weapon and the disadvantages of an initial lower TH probability rapidly disappear.
 

Mgdavey

Recruit
Joined
May 15, 2015
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Country
llUnited States
Thanks for the replies. To follow up, how does C3.33 (1/2 FP for IFT resolution) work with C.4:

C.4 Ordnance Area Fire: Ordnance Area Fire never halves the FP effect
of any hit. Instead, any shot affected by any provision of Area Fire caused
by the target's status uses the Case K To Hit DRM (6.2).
Is it the HE?

Then looking at the math. If I'm doing this right, assuming only Case K for Area Fire the chances of getting at least a PTC would be:

ITT: 7.6%
Area: 4.6%, 6.9% (1 Aq), 9.7% (2 Aq)

I was playing against Brits with PIATs and was not even tempted by Case L ;)
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,246
Reaction score
960
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
First, if I'm firing a gun against a known enemy squad in a building that also contains a concealed unit, and I've got acquisition on the known squad, I assume I calculate the to hit against the known enemy using the acquisition and the to-hit against the concealed unit without the acquisition modifier. Is that correct?
Depends. What type of acquisition? If it's Infantry Acq. (1/2") then you're basically correct. If it's Area Acq. (5/8") then the acq. mods will apply to both targets. In either case the concealed target will get an additional +2 (Case K).

In other words if I may hit the known unit but not the concealed even though there both in the same location?
Absolutely.

On tactics, when firing on concealed units in good cover like a stone building, is it better to use Area Fire if you're firing something like a 70mm gun? That way I'm rolling on the IFT 12 +3, rather than struggling with low ToHit numbers?
As mentioned above, it would be a 6+3 if you hit.

As to what's "better" ... it depends. There are several things to consider. Range to the target is one (point-blank mods can do a lot to weaken the toughness of a position). Potential ROF is another (if your 70mm Gun has a normal ROF of 2 or 3, you might not want to give up the potential extra shot(s) -- but at the same time more shots have more chance to trigger the enemy Sniper, or malf the gun). Do you know how tough the targets are -- since you're unlikely to do better than a NMC or PTC, how likely is that to bother them? (Of course even just a PTC will strip concealment.) While we're talking "unlikely", when you have overall positive TH DRM, using the Area Target Type is slightly more likely to get a Critical Hit than the Infantry Target Type (the reverse is true when the overall TH DRM are negative).

The final answer is that if all you have is a single 75mm Gun (that isn't a MTR) then the odds that you will ever do anything significant to concealed enemy units in a stone building are poor. This is even more true if you need to get rid of those guys quickly (i.e., in a turn or two). The real solution to the problem is to either assault the position with more than a single Gun, or (if it's an option) ignore it and go do something useful somewhere else. Or to put it another way -- shooting at the enemy will only accomplish so much. The true path to victory is always manoeuvre.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,013
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Thanks for the replies. To follow up, how does C3.33 (1/2 FP for IFT resolution) work with C.4:



Is it the HE?

Then looking at the math. If I'm doing this right, assuming only Case K for Area Fire the chances of getting at least a PTC would be:

ITT: 7.6%
Area: 4.6%, 6.9% (1 Aq), 9.7% (2 Aq)

I was playing against Brits with PIATs and was not even tempted by Case L ;)
I think what may be causing some confusion here is the use of poor terminology in C.4. It could possibly be cleaned up to intone that use of the Area Target Type does not further halve the FP of the effects of a hit simply because the target is concealed as the Case K imposes the TH penalty. t That is to say, the Base FP [EX: 12 FP for 70+mm] would still be 12 if a hit is obtained using the ITT, or be halved to 6 FP if using the ATT because of the provisions C3.33 and not because of the target's concealed status.

I'm not sure how you arrived at the percentages you give but the final must take into account the ability to hit the target as well as the Final IFT effects.
 

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
10,692
Reaction score
1,125
Country
llLithuania
I think what may be causing some confusion here is the use of poor terminology in C.4. It could possibly be cleaned up to intone that use of the Area Target Type does not further halve the FP of the effects of a hit simply because the target is concealed as the Case K imposes the TH penalty. t That is to say, the Base FP [EX: 12 FP for 70+mm] would still be 12 if a hit is obtained using the ITT, or be halved to 6 FP if using the ATT because of the provisions C3.33 and not because of the target's concealed status.

I'm not sure how you arrived at the percentages you give but the final must take into account the ability to hit the target as well as the Final IFT effects.
Yeah...a difference that many new players are often not aware of.

Area Target Type used by ordnance (C3.33-.332) and Area Fire on the IFT (A7.23) are two very different critters and are rarely (if ever?) at play at the same time.
 

Mgdavey

Recruit
Joined
May 15, 2015
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Country
llUnited States
Ok, that makes sense. Again thanks for all the replies.

Yes, those percentage take into account both the ToHit and the IFT resolution. (e.g. ITT would require a <= 3 ToHit (.083) and a <= 10 to cause a check (.916). .083 * .916 = .076)
 
Top