Ozerekya Breakout.

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George we understand that there is an automatic ammo shortage at that point in the campaign game. We are concerned about Soviet ammo shortage caused by outrunning our Tac zones and fortification chains. Tim
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George, Are we misinterpreting that there can be ammo shortages if the Soviets outrun their TAC zones, or if the Axis units are too far from their own TAC zones. The idea of being too far from a source of supply seems a foreign concept to my ASL experience, but I am learning far more about ASL rules than from any simple scenario which I have ever played. Great learning experience. Thanks. Tim
 

George Kelln

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1,595
Location
Victoria, BC, Canada
Country
llCanada
George, Are we misinterpreting that there can be ammo shortages if the Soviets outrun their TAC zones, or if the Axis units are too far from their own TAC zones. The idea of being too far from a source of supply seems a foreign concept to my ASL experience, but I am learning far more about ASL rules than from any simple scenario which I have ever played. Great learning experience. Thanks. Tim

Ahh, different Ammunition Shortage. The Ammo Shortage you are referring to is, if a unit is Isolated can not draw a line back to his map edge. In that case, in ConPh D5.13(a) states the penalty if a unit is Isolated. So if after D5.14(ii, iii) if a unit is Isolated, place a Low Ammo Counter on it.
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George, Thanks, we think we understand the concept of isolation. In this case, Don ruled that the Rumanian forces were not isolated because the Soviet play had not build fortifications (ie., Foxholes) completely across his path to the Northern edge of the map. We were so close. If the session had just lasted another turn! If you send me an email address, I will have Don Deibler sent you a photograph of the end of turn six. We took the two level house on the left side of the map while also taking entire wooded hill. Tim
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George, if a unit is beyond two hexes from a string of fortifications or other of the numerous types of TCAs back to their edge of the map, does this situation also produce ammo shortage? The blaze also happens to cut the only road into the village. Perhaps in the next interphase it will burn itself out. Tim
 

George Kelln

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1,595
Location
Victoria, BC, Canada
Country
llCanada
George, Thanks, we think we understand the concept of isolation. In this case, Don ruled that the Rumanian forces were not isolated because the Soviet play had not build fortifications (ie., Foxholes) completely across his path to the Northern edge of the map. We were so close. If the session had just lasted another turn! If you send me an email address, I will have Don Deibler sent you a photograph of the end of turn six. We took the two level house on the left side of the map while also taking entire wooded hill. Tim
georgekelln@gmail.com
 

George Kelln

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1,595
Location
Victoria, BC, Canada
Country
llCanada
George, if a unit is beyond two hexes from a string of fortifications or other of the numerous types of TCAs back to their edge of the map, does this situation also produce ammo shortage? The blaze also happens to cut the only road into the village. Perhaps in the next interphase it will burn itself out. Tim
a unit must draw a line (of any length) from its location back to a FME through Friendly Controlled/Uncontrolled and enterable hexes. If it cannot then it is cut off and Isolated and under ammo shortage. If cut off, the unit may attempt to redeploy to a hex not cut off during the ConPh D5.14.

Blazes are not handled until after this redeployment (ConPh D5.18), so it will block a path.
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
Once again with two questions: A. May units depot during ConPh to a friendly hex, which is surrounded by uncontrolled territory and not part of its own FEBA? B. Does the end use of a PM turn have two redeployment phases (Behind their friendly FEBA?) These are verbatim questions by Don D. Tim
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
In the prior question depot should be deploy. My own question: when a Gun deploys during the TM break, can it regain its original emplacement and or HIP status? Tim
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George, In my writing of Don question there was an error. The correct question was, "May units deploy during the ConPh to a friendly TAC, that is surrounded by uncontrolled territory and not part of its FEBA?" Sorry, my cell phone lacks the ability to copy texts. I have to write them by hand and then transcribe them.
 

George Kelln

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1,595
Location
Victoria, BC, Canada
Country
llCanada
George, In my writing of Don question there was an error. The correct question was, "May units deploy during the ConPh to a friendly TAC, that is surrounded by uncontrolled territory and not part of its FEBA?" Sorry, my cell phone lacks the ability to copy texts. I have to write them by hand and then transcribe them.

Yes, provided the location is within the allotted redeployment hex range (i.e. Infantry < 6 hexes)
 

George Kelln

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1,595
Location
Victoria, BC, Canada
Country
llCanada
In the prior question depot should be deploy. My own question: when a Gun deploys during the TM break, can it regain its original emplacement and or HIP status? Tim
A redeployed gun can be set up Emplaced and initially it is set up Concealed.

However, the Gun it maybe set up HIP..... "IF" HIP status is Requisitioned as a Fortification (ConPh D5.35) for the Crew (cost 2 DSP) "All SW/Gun set up with its manning unit at no cost."

Just remember, it can be moved from its current/redeployed hex. And it cannot be HIPPED until the set up stage for the next scenario. (meaning your opponent might have a good idea where it is)
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George, I just spoke to Don on the phone. He is rewriting his queries. I will place it here late on Monday. But to summarize his question, he was asking not about re-deploying units already in the campaign game, but rather deploying units purchased and placing them forward. The situation in our game is that a large group of Rumanians were nearly cut off just beyond the wooded area from L27 to P26 and P28. We call it the Cauldron. Please wait until Don rewrites his queries. Thanks for your explanations. Tim
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
"The FEBA is defined as a string of TCAs. Since controlled areas extend two hexes from a TCA-to have continuous FEBA, the maximum number of hexes between TCAs would be four?"
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
"During the ConPH, may TCA's be reinforced with new units and/or DSPs if they are not behind the FEBA but not isolated?"
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
George, It is possible that Don's conception of what the forward edge of battle is erroneous. He links a continuous link of TAC zones with this concept. The Rumanians are nearly surrounded by Soviet force but are not isolated due to a fairly narrow gap (six or seven hexes wide) of clear hexes without any TAC zones (roads, walls, friendly fortifications, etc.) My experience with ASL scenarios only does not make me familiar with such concepts. Does Don have the conception of the forward edge of battle correct or not? Tim
 

George Kelln

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1,595
Location
Victoria, BC, Canada
Country
llCanada
George, It is possible that Don's conception of what the forward edge of battle is erroneous. He links a continuous link of TAC zones with this concept. The Rumanians are nearly surrounded by Soviet force but are not isolated due to a fairly narrow gap (six or seven hexes wide) of clear hexes without any TAC zones (roads, walls, friendly fortifications, etc.) My experience with ASL scenarios only does not make me familiar with such concepts. Does Don have the conception of the forward edge of battle correct or not? Tim
1. TAC are only where units can set up;
2. TAC do not need to be linked together; and
3. TAC do not need to be connected to a FME.

In your example, the Romanians are nearly surrounded, but not surrounded. The 6-7 hexes wide gap is their lifeline for supplies and fortification; just remember the restrictions of having to requisition on map set up for units and only certain fortifications can be set up < 2 hexes from the enemy's FEBA.
 

Tim Niesen

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
146
Country
llUnited States
Don's interpretation is that the stars where our Soviet units advanced into has no impact upon where we can place purchased units. Rather only the fortifications (Also buildings, roads, walls, etc., too. But there are none in this area.) that we captured or created by labor allows us to place units there, or up to two hexes from there, aside from interference from enemy TACs. Is this correct? Thanks for your help. ASL is new to Don, and campaign games are new to both of us. Tim
 
Top