OtO CG Question

[clubby]

On the Fortification Purchase Table it states:

The Germans may pay double the cost for infantry not possessing ⅝" ordnance to set up HIP in shellholes.

I was under the impression that you could only set up HIP in Concealment Terrain and shellholes, as far as I know in OtO, are not Concealment Terrain. It just seems odd that I can pay double to set up HIP in shellholes but I cannot set up HIP in Trenches or AT Ditches unless they're also set up in Concealment Terrain. Either that or I'm completely botching the rule.

 

[jrv]

On the Fortification Purchase Table it states:

I was under the impression that you could only set up HIP in Concealment Terrain and shellholes, as far as I know in OtO, are not Concealment Terrain. It just seems odd that I can pay double to set up HIP in shellholes but I cannot set up HIP in Trenches or AT Ditches unless they're also set up in Concealment Terrain. Either that or I'm completely botching the rule.

The core rules allow units to set up HIP only in concealment terrain (EXC: fortifications & Guns). A SSR can allow HIP anywhere. So as far as rules are concerned, OtO allows HIP in shellholes but not in trenches or AT-Ditches. As to your design question about it seeming odd, I personally don't have any definite opinion. I suppose a trench/AT Ditch would tend to attract enemy attention and observation, while a shellhole might be natural and common enough that it does not. But that is only a reality argument.

JR

 

[clubby]

Good point.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Further complicating the thought process is that once concealed, a unit IN a trench can move along through the trench in LOS of an enemy unit and maintain his concealed status. My guess is that it was just a design glitch predicated upon poor understanding of the rules.