(R9.605) Block Control in ABtF

Legion

Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
9
Location
Picton (NSW)
Country
llAustralia
A recent question by Reepicheep made me think about the way i have been playing the initial scenario (17N) in ABtF-CG...

Do the Germans have automatic Control of the Blocks that are on/east of hexrow N?

Or in other words, if a Brit unit and a German unit ends the 17N game in (say) Block N, is it uncontrolled or does it 'remain' in German control?
 

Reepicheep

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
3,246
Reaction score
22
Location
Toowoomba, QLD
Country
llAustralia
Legion said:
A recent question by Reepicheep made me think about the way i have been playing the initial scenario (17N) in ABtF-CG...

Do the Germans have automatic Control of the Blocks that are on/east of hexrow N?

Or in other words, if a Brit unit and a German unit ends the 17N game in (say) Block N, is it uncontrolled or does it 'remain' in German control?
This is from the Scott Romanowski compiled Q&A collection from various sources... this one, from a letter to AH I believe.

R9.51 & R9.53 CGI/III Initial SSR6
a) The Initial SSR #6 for CG I/III says the Germans control all Strategic Locations on/east of hexrow N at the start of the CG. As Block Control is determined only in step 9.605 of the RePh and that step is not executed before the Initial Scenario this means that the Germans do not have Control of a single Block on the map for the first scenario until Control is determined in the RePh thereafter, right?
A. Correct. This will lead to some (potentially) interesting situations as the first CG scenario nears its end. Both players will need to keep the RePh in mind when they maneuver their forces for the next day.

b) This means that if there are both British and German MMC in e.g. Block K at that point of the RePh after Scenario 1 (CG I/III) this Block will be Uncontrolled territory (whereas if the Germans were to have Block Control at the start of that scenario they would keep Control of that Block and force the British out).
A. Correct. [Letter37]
 

Reepicheep

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
3,246
Reaction score
22
Location
Toowoomba, QLD
Country
llAustralia
Legion said:
Or in other words, if a Brit unit and a German unit ends the 17N game in (say) Block N, is it uncontrolled or does it 'remain' in German control?
Reading your question in the light of the quote I posted above, along with the ABtF rulebook, I think the strict answer is neither of the two options you presented.

Take your block N example. Via the Q&A quote, it begins CG I/III uncontrolled, although all of its strategic locations are in German control initially (being east of hexrow N).

But the mere presence of British MMC wouldn't be enough to keep it uncontrolled if both German and British MMC were present there at the end of 17N provided the Germans still controlled all the strategic locations in the block.

Then, Germans would gain control of the block by R9.605 ("simultaneous control of all strategic locations within that block". The presence of British MMC would only affect block control if the Germans were trying to claim control of the block by R9.6051 ("occupying one or more strategic location in that block while there are no armed, enemy, non-crew MMC within that block."

At least, this is how I'm reading the combination of rules sections and Q&A.
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
28
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
The real question is "Does it really matter?". The British can push the Germans completely off the map and they are still destined to loose. While I like the ABtF scenarios, the campaign is, well dull. The German method of winning is obvious and formulaic and the campaign quickly becomes a lather, rinse, repeat affair. :p
 

Legion

Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
9
Location
Picton (NSW)
Country
llAustralia
WaterRabbit said:
The real question is "Does it really matter?". The British can push the Germans completely off the map and they are still destined to loose. While I like the ABtF scenarios, the campaign is, well dull. The German method of winning is obvious and formulaic and the campaign quickly becomes a lather, rinse, repeat affair. :p
Personally i disagree with this.. it is only that way if the British try to do anything other than their historical tactic in this battle - play cat and mouse deep inside the Blocks - then the AFV and OBA superiority of the Germans is nearly negated and it comes down to well-led dug-in elite troops fighting agains t not so well led but still elite attackers.

While it is not as exciting as KGP, it is still an very good HASL (beats the pants off PB for instance)
 

Legion

Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
9
Location
Picton (NSW)
Country
llAustralia
Reepicheep said:
At least, this is how I'm reading the combination of rules sections and Q&A.
I appreciate your reading of these rules, thank you for (yet again) pointing out an assumption that is not in accord with the strict understanding of the rules
 

Reepicheep

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
3,246
Reaction score
22
Location
Toowoomba, QLD
Country
llAustralia
Just to document the letter I posted earlier regarding no side having block control at the beginning of the scenario...

It's from a "letter by Martin Moser to Russ Bunten and response, posted to the ASLML, 25 December 1999"


And then a further Q&A by letter explains how to initially gain control of an "uncontrolled" block...

R9.6051 How do you initially gain control of an uncontrolled block? 9.6051 only talks about “Control of that Block switching to or remaining with the side occupying the Block.” Strictly speaking this seems not to apply to uncontrolled blocks.
A. It is done using the same mechanism (R9.6051). In this case, the block "switches" from Uncontrolled to German (or British) Controlled. [Letter]
 
Last edited:
Top