OVR Flowchart and Reaction Fire

[Rock SgtDan]

It is, you can make an IFT attack vs a vehicle with no vulnerable PRC just e.g., to place Residual FP.

So if you were shooting at a vehicle which has declared an OVR, using the authority of the Q&A to shoot prior to resolving the OVR -- would the Residual Fire marker be placed in the "starting" hex, or in the hex being overrun?

If the latter, would the Residual Fire affect your own units located in the hex being overrun? WHEN would that affect take place: prior to resolving the OVR, or after resolving the OVR? ie would your own units have to take morale checks prior to performing their own pre- and post-OVR fire against the over-running unit?

 

[Fort]

So if you were shooting at a vehicle which has declared an OVR, using the authority of the Q&A to shoot prior to resolving the OVR -- would the Residual Fire marker be placed in the "starting" hex, or in the hex being overrun?

the vehicle has entered the hex where the OVR is going to occur. There is nothing to shoot at in the hex it just left.

If the latter, would the Residual Fire affect your own units located in the hex being overrun? WHEN would that affect take place: prior to resolving the OVR, or after resolving the OVR? ie would your own units have to take morale checks prior to performing their own pre- and post-OVR fire against the over-running unit?

All of the stuff after the red reply is irrelevant and against so many basic principles of the game that I'm just going to say, No.

 

[Rock SgtDan]

All of the stuff after the red reply is irrelevant and against so many basic principles of the game that I'm just going to say, No.

So as soon as you say "I'm performing an OVR and it costs me xxx MP/MF" the unit(s) is instantly placed into the hex being over-run? Fine.

So enemy located outside the hex being over-run would need an LOS into the hex being over-run in order to fire upon that unit?

 

[Rock SgtDan]

A BIG...HUGE EXCEPTION has been left out here, Ken.

instead, the OVR is resolved on the IFT immediately after the MP expenditure [EXC: Bog DR, and defensive First Fire other than Reaction Fire (7.2), prompted by that MP expenditure (or by the MF expenditure of accompanying Infantry using Human Wave {A25.23} and Armored Assault {9.31}) are resolved first].

What rule is that? I don't have one of those handy digital rulebooks where I can type in some text and find it.

The EXC which you explain below seems to be the root of the problem.

IF a reader has been able to diligently read and comprehend the thousands of words upon which the correct understanding of this EXC rests, the rule might be discernable -- by going thru the steps you go through below. But only one in a thousand can do so. The EXC needs to explain itself -- to say exactly which rules sections, which add up to a particular but very complex meaning when read diligently prior to this exception, are being negated.

(yes, the OVR can be difficult to grok. The manner in which they are written is obtuse, yet (Reaction Fire) is needed because of
D3.3 &
D7.1.)
In conjunction with B3.3
...
The reason for the OVR Flowchart is to help explain a defender's options. The chart does a good job if the reader is able to give the chart the respect and rules weight/relevance it deserves. The chart IS correct.
...
None of the above, with the exception of CCRF, is (Reaction Fire) as defined in D7.2 for OVR.
...
In (D7.2 REACTION FIRE)
...because of D3.3 which...
...
Because of D3.3...

An excellent exposition of the points of the law; worthy of Perry Mason.
But I think it proves that the rules have jumped off the complexity cliff into insanity.

If you are still unconvinced, just send a question to MMP. The answer you will get will clear it up for you,.

ROTFLMAO !!!! I love it when a punchline has a nice long setup.

 

[KenYoung]

You missed the point and took what I typed out of context. You're obviously going to remain unconvinced and unyielding in your stance.
Perry is your solution.

Sorry Gary, I was not trying to twist your words. I will read your post again and try to see the point you where making (which I missed the first time).
Your opinion on rules (also Klas, JRV and other in this thread), I respect and usually listen to.

But I have trouble seeing how the Q&A can be correct when it says the target can DFF before the OVR. Yet [A7.211], says the OVR attacks first.
One must be in error. We must wait till Perry tells us the correct order, of who attacks first.
Which would allow me to see the light and happily go on my merry way knowing all is right in the world.

 

[Rock SgtDan]

Finally, look at the first sentence, of A7.221. "Any PRC not BU in a CT AFV which enter an enemy-occupied hex during the MPh are subject to TPBF attacks (both First Fire and Final Fire) from enemy units in that Location". This specifically states that the entering unit is subject to a First Fire attack upon entry.

Point of order: first, a typo, you meant A7.211 TPBF vs PRC:

My page A13 copyright 2000 does not have the parenthetical phrase (in red above). Is this a sticky errata, or were you trying to add an explanatory comment? Curly brackets {} are best for that, I don't think they appear in the RB.

 

[SCK40]

Point of order: first, a typo, you meant A7.211 TPBF vs PRC:

My page A13 copyright 2000 does not have the parenthetical phrase (in red above). Is this a sticky errata, or were you trying to add an explanatory comment? Curly brackets {} are best for that, I don't think they appear in the RB.

You are correct, Dan. That parenthetical is from the 1st Edition. Had both rulebooks open in doing a bit of research and erroneously cross-pollinated the language. Make of it what you will that the parenthetical was dropped in the move to the Second Edition.

Here are the two versions, side by side. Second Edition first.

7.211 TPBF vs. PRC: Any PRC not BU in a CT AFV which are in an enemy-occupied hex are subject to TPBF attacks from enemy units in that Location or any higher Location in that hex, regardless of whether or not the PRC disembark (see also D6.5). Halftrack Passengers and OT AFV crews are subject to such an attack even if not CE, but receive the +2 CE DRM (D5.31). The Moving units [EXC: BU PRC] may attack first as part of an OVR or in turn during their AFPh with both Area and TPBF if they are able to. Any survivors are not considered held in Melee until after the CCPh (PRC of Mobile vehicles are never held in Melee; 11.71) and are marked with a CC counter once the vehicle ends its MPh in that Location and are therefore able to rout away in the RtPh.

7.211 TPBF vs. PRC: Any PRC not BU in a CT AFV which enter an enemy-occupied hex during the MPh are subject to TPBF attacks (both First Fire and Final Fire) from enemy units in that Location or any higher Location in that hex, regardless of whether or not the PRC have disembarked (see also D6.5). Halftrack Passengers and OT AFV crews are subject to such an attack even if not CE, but receive the +2 CE DRM (D5.31). The Moving units [EXC: BU PRC] may attack first as part of an OVR or in turn during their AFPh with both Area and TPBF if they are able to. Any survivors are not considered held in Melee until after the CCPh (PRC of Mobile vehicles are never held in Melee; 11.71) and are marked with a CC counter once the vehicle ends its MPh in that Location and are therefore able to rout away in the RtPh.

 

[Stewart]

So, after 6 pages of discussion, we can eliminate the "immediately" from the OVR rules? or ???

 

[KenYoung]

So, after 6 pages of discussion, we can eliminate the "immediately" from the OVR rules? or ???

The question has been sent to Perry (and the reply will be posted). I believe he is doing his due diligence and reading all the threads/rules/articles on the topic. Whichever way he decides. It is going to involve overturning a 19 year old Q&A or cutting out a few words from (A7.211) so it is not in conflict with the Q&A. My simplistic view, sees only one question. Which carries more weight, the Rule Book or a Q&A.

Originally Posted by Q&A
D7.1 When a vehicle declares an OVR, may the DEFENDER target attack before the OVR is resolved? If yes, would that DEFENDER have to
use Reaction Fire?
A. Yes. No--it would be Reaction Fire only if conducted after the OVR resolution (see the last sentence of D7.2). [An93a; An95w; An96; Mw]

7.211 TPBF vs PRC: Any PRC not BU in a CT AFV which are in an enemy-occupied hex are subject to TPBF attacks from enemy units in that Location or any higher Location in that hex, regardless of whether or not the PRC disembark (see also D6.5). Halftrack Passengers and OT AFV crews are subject to such an attack even if not CE, but receive the +2 CE DRM (D5.31). The Moving units [EXC: BU PRC] may attack first as part of an OVR or in turn during their AFPh with both Area and TPBF if they are able to. Any survivors are not considered held in Melee until after the CCPh (PRC of Mobile vehicles are never held in Melee; 11.71) and are marked with a CC counter once the vehicle ends its MPh in that Location and are therefore able to rout away in the RtPh.

To people who say, to me "You're obviously going to remain unconvinced and unyielding in your stance".
What can be said about them, if after reading A7.211. They still insist that the target can DFF before the OVR.

I was starting to feel like I was the lone voice of contention on this subject. With my beliefs, I was labelled a "Heretic". Going against years of dogma, much like Galileo (yes this is Hyperbole. It was an attempt to bring a smile to everyone's day).

Till I found this DESPERATIONMORALE.COM’s SAME-LOCATION RULE GUIDE
http://www.desperationmorale.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Same-Location-Help-Sheet.pdf

[4.41 DEFENSIVE FIRST FIRE: Defensive First Fire from outside the OVR hex takes place before the OVR; that from within the hex is considered Reaction Fire and takes place after the OVR [EXC: Overrun Prevention (C5.64)]. Defensive Fire that results in the vehicle being Immobilized or destroyed does NOT stop the OVR but does halve its FP value.

This is not an official article. But it gave me hope that my view is shared by others, on this topic.

 

[rcarter]

Ken, I have seen your point from the earliest part of this thread and I think it is actually quite a straightforward question that is admittedly not articulated explicitly in the rules giving at least the impression of a contradiction between D7.2 and D7.1. In other words, the EXC for Def Fire in 7.1 might have been better laid out, at least, could have been explained in an example. Are we talking DF outside the hex or in the hex? That is a question that jumps to mind especially with the language in D7.2.

IMO though the inability of a unit to fire as Defensive fire on a same hex unit just because they declare an OVR make OVR especially powerful. And I have to admit I am on the side of the traditional interpretation of the rules.

Nonetheless, this has been a great discussion (for the most part) on a topic that I have also questioned at least when I was first learning the rule. I just always used the flowchart as my go-to.

Rick

 

[Fort]

The question has been sent to Perry (and the reply will be posted). I believe he is doing his due diligence and reading all the threads/rules/articles on the topic. Whichever way he decides. It is going to involve overturning a 19 year old Q&A or cutting out a few words from (A7.211) so it is not in conflict with the Q&A. My simplistic view, sees only one question. Which carries more weight, the Rule Book or a Q&A.





To people who say, to me "You're obviously going to remain unconvinced and unyielding in your stance".
What can be said about them, if after reading A7.211. They still insist that the target can DFF before the OVR.

I was starting to feel like I was the lone voice of contention on this subject. With my beliefs, I was labelled a "Heretic". Going against years of dogma, much like Galileo (yes this is Hyperbole. It was an attempt to bring a smile to everyone's day).

Till I found this DESPERATIONMORALE.COM’s SAME-LOCATION RULE GUIDE
http://www.desperationmorale.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Same-Location-Help-Sheet.pdf

This is not an official article. But it gave me hope that my view is shared by others, on this topic.

I now see from whence your confusion stems.
The entire reason for the 'Attacks First' of A7.1 is to make note that the OVR attack total includes all PRC regardless of whether or not they remain in Good Order/Unpinned, not Bailed-Out, etc.
Thus the 'attacks first' simply means the OVR, including all PRC Fire, is GOING to occur once the vehicle is in the hex and the OVR has been announced.

Here is a relevant rule to reinforce this point:

D7.11 FP: The FP base for an OVR is one FP for an unarmored vehicle, two FP for an AFV, or four FP for an AFV whose MA is manned and functioning and is not a MG, FT, MTR, ATR or IFE-capable.9 The FP base is modified by adding to it the tripled (TPBF) and halved (Bounding First Fire) FP of all manned and functioning MG/IFE armament on the vehicle [EXC: RMG do not add to OVR FP]. CE armored halftrack (only) Passengers can add one-half (and the Passengers/Riders of other vehicles can add one-fourth) of their printed FP to an OVR, but this too is subject to TPBF. All FT FP is added normally with no TPBF/halving adjustment. The total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR (in addition to any halving vs a concealed target; A12.13), but combat results vs Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP. The halving of FP for Motion/Non-Stopped Fire does not apply to OVR FP.

P.S. Using unvetted play aids masquerading as rules is not good practice.

 

[KenYoung]

IMO though the inability of a unit to fire as Defensive fire on a same hex unit just because they declare an OVR make OVR especially powerful. And I have to admit I am on the side of the traditional interpretation of the rules.

Nonetheless, this has been a great discussion (for the most part) on a topic that I have also questioned at least when I was first learning the rule. I just always used the flowchart as my go-to.

Rick

I believe that's the intent. It's a different situation of have a steel monster rolling up to you, then opening up with all guns. Compared to this same beast coming towards you firing at you, for that last 40 meters as he closes the distance (now you're reacting to an attack that has already begun). But that's a reality argument that carries little weight.

Yes there are two camps about how the rule should be played. I was hoping that a PerrySez would clear things up for everyone (and in the future we all play the same way). As for the OVR Flowchart. It is just a players aid and does not over ride the rule book.

There are only two charts/tables that take precedence over the body of the rules.

A12.121:
"...The Concealment Table always takes precedence over the body of the rules (e.g., an uncommon cause of “?” loss might be mentioned in the Concealment Table even though it is omitted from the rules proper for the sake of brevity)."

ASOP:
"Should the order of actions given in the body of the rules conflict with the ASOP, the latter takes precedence...."

There is no mention in the rules/charts of any other taking precedence. Ideally, of course, there aren't any conflicts.

In the case of the OBA and OVR flowchart, I always go with the rules, since those flowcharts were created after the rules were written.

http://forums.gamesquad.com/showthread.php?123347-FFE-C-Options post#5

 

[KenYoung]

Here is a relevant rule to reinforce this point:

All FT FP is added normally with no TPBF/halving adjustment. The total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR (in addition to any halving vs a concealed target; A12.13), but combat results vs Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP. The halving of FP for Motion/Non-Stopped Fire does not apply to OVR FP.

Yes, good point. But, there are other words that A7.211 could have used, to say the same as D7.11. If that was their sole intention. When they use the words "The Moving units [EXC: BU PRC] may attack first as part of an OVR". I take it to mean just that. The OVR gets to carry out its attack first (including resolution DR). Before the target can fire [EXC: Overrun Prevention (C5.64)].

Like, I said before. If two groups of players, can read the same set of rules. But both come to a different understanding of said rules. Then we must ask for guidance from above.

 

[rcarter]

As for the OVR Flowchart. It is just a players aid and does not over ride the rule book.

Agreed. I meant as a way of clarifying something (ie order/interaction of OVR resolution, DFF, and reaction fire) that is not as clearly spelled out as it could be.

Fort's post is how I understood things as well. The OVR occurs once declared, the question then becomes w/ 1/2 FP or Full FP.

Anyway, I think a clarification from Perry would be helpful especially to those who, like you and me, at first read were not as convinced by the way the Flow chart handled things. (And I do understand that you are not convinced even w/ multiple readings, studying and discussion).

 

[Fort]

Yes, good point. But, there are other words that A7.211 could have used, to say the same as D7.11. If that was their sole intention. When they use the words "The Moving units [EXC: BU PRC] may attack first as part of an OVR". I take it to mean just that. The OVR gets to carry out its attack first (including resolution DR). Before the target can fire [EXC: Overrun Prevention (C5.64)].

Like, I said before. If two groups of players, can read the same set of rules. But both come to a different understanding of said rules. Then we must ask for guidance from above.

You infer that the attack is resolved prior to the defender's ability to shoot from this single sentence.
But that's not exactly what it says, and the later rules spell out how to play it.

The Q&A is the MOST official piece of evidence available and carry the weight of overriding any seemingly contradictory rule.
I don't think the rule is contradictory. I do see there is plenty of room for confusion. It's your bone to chew on and it if takes another Perry sez to satisfy you, then so be it. However, MMP and AH before them are loathe to answer a Q&A twice.

 

[Pyth]

I now see from whence your confusion stems.

It's not merely his confusion, apparently its Mark Pitcavage's confusion too., or was at some point. That "same location guide" is by M. Pitcavage.... I think he qualifies as old guard ASL (A grouchy bunch, you lot). I wonder if he still stands by that guide. I wonder how many players play it in the way that guide gives out. I imagine not that many since the OVR flowchart came out. But the point I still insist matters and which no one seems to want to comment on is -- which rule interpretation is better for the game? Since no one seems to want say anything about that I'll give my noobish perspective. The Pitcavage/Young version of the rule makes infantry in general more vulnerable to OVR and makes infantry very much more vulnerable to OVR by Half Track and makes OVR by unarmored vehicles something other than the car-bomb suicide-mission it is under the conservative version. So, I will be _amazed_ if Perry goes against the OVR flowchart -- I give that about .01% of success -- but IMHO the Pitcavage/Young rule is actually better in game terms, and it makes as much sense with the RB as the conservative interpretation does, arguably, more. I really hope the Pitcavage/Young version can at least attain 'heretical SSR' status and get some players. I would use P/Y rule if possible. Perhaps I'll leverage deals with the IIFT types... I'll use (succumb) to the IIFT if they'll use the P/Y OVR rules!

*edit* Well... *The Pitcavage/Young version of the rule makes infantry in general more vulnerable to OVR* -- that is badly phrased so let me clarify... it's not that the infantry is all that much more vulnerable, it's that the OVR'ing attacker has a _much_ better chance of conducting a successful attack and surviving unharmed. This is particularly true of unarmored or OT vehicles. Because they would have a chance of a successful attack that would not face return fire OVR becomes a greatly more attractive option for those kinds of units. Under the Pitcavage/Young version, it's not that more infantry die, it's that much less CE halftracks with passengers do, and that makes HT OVR a lot more attractive.

 

[Rock SgtDan]

I now see from whence your confusion stems.
The entire reason for the 'Attacks First' of A7.1 is to make note that the OVR attack total includes all PRC regardless of whether or not they remain in Good Order/Unpinned, not Bailed-Out, etc.
Thus the 'attacks first' simply means the OVR, including all PRC Fire, is GOING to occur once the vehicle is in the hex and the OVR has been announced.

Huh? A7.1 ??? Do you mean D-something?

 

[Rock SgtDan]

You infer that the attack is resolved prior to the defender's ability to shoot from this single sentence.
But that's not exactly what it says,
and the later rules spell out how to play it.
I don't think the rule is contradictory.
I do see there is plenty of room for confusion.

No kidding. Just how many widely-separated sentences is the reader expected to be able to chain together to correctly understand?

Its so obvious that this area of the rules needs to be re-written for clarity.
Of course, MMP ain't gonna do it, claiming their license won't allow it.

So its up to knowledgeable players to do so. Then people can read THAT version to understand what the rules manage to confuse. Any two players can agree to refer to that version, simply because ITS UNDERSTANDABLE and then they can just play the fooking game. And don't bleat about "one rulebook to rule them all" because that's only something that tournament Grogs care about. The vast majority of POTENTIAL players just want understandable rules that two people can use.

 

[jrv]

No kidding. Just how many widely-separated sentences is the reader expected to be able to chain together to correctly understand?

The entire rulebook, from front to back.

JR

 

[Stewart]

So the ovr flowchart is an aid and not official? Im not sure how the Ovr chart can be included in RB and not be accepted since the rules has to be dissected to create the chat... Or was it just a single persons play aid that was not subject to quality control standards?

This might be listed in Mark's website comparing it to CH standards...

The standard "old man" interpretation is that the unit OVR only gets Reaction Fire? And only outside units get DFF?
References to "what is widely used" (not necessarily correct), needs to be reiterated in the thread lest you lose your readers... We ARE talking ASL here...

It's almost laughable that this contradiction/issue exists...

Just goes to show you how "we've been playing it" seems to trump new interpretations.