RB Trench & Building Connection for a Bunker?

James Taylor

I love women with brains
Joined
Jun 28, 2005
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
374
Location
Michigan
Country
llUnited States
This is the situation. The squad/HMG & 9-1 are IN the PB. They want to move from the PB to the building C42 "in one move", i.e. without first stopping in the Trench in D42.

Because the PB is a bunker, can this be done directly, thereby avoid DFF in D42?

upload_2017-3-12_23-49-38.png

Thanks,

JT
 

Attachments

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,501
Reaction score
4,813
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
A trench connects to a building per RB6 but that doesn't make the building a trench. A pillbox connects to a trench but not to a building. I would say not. Likewise I don't think you could move pillbox-to-pillbox without spending at least a little time outside in the trench.

JR
 

Eagle4ty

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,599
Reaction score
1,268
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
If you were playing me I would allow it in the spirit of the simulation (i.e. the game), however, relying entirely upon the rules, I would bet on jrv's response. It would be an interesting Q&A to Perry though.
 

Gunner Scott

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
12,990
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
I do agree. The RB SSR's say a trench connects to a building, so a Bunker in turn should allow such a move. The way we ended up playing it was I could not pull off such a move and got stuck in the bunker. Thus I ended up firing at my opponents 10-3 stack with no results other than BH one of his guys and a German hero. Than my opponent came back at kept firing AP at my Bunker at a 2 even shot rolling snake eyes and taking out my bunker contents just about (only a wounded 9-1 and a HS survived.) Of course if the rules were more clear this could have been avoided.

Scott

If you were playing me I would allow it in the spirit of the simulation (i.e. the game), however, relying entirely upon the rules, I would bet on jrv's response. It would be an interesting Q&A to Perry though.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
9,581
Reaction score
2,734
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
A trench connects to a building per RB6 but that doesn't make the building a trench. A pillbox connects to a trench but not to a building. I would say not. Likewise I don't think you could move pillbox-to-pillbox without spending at least a little time outside in the trench.

JR
I agree to this.

von Marwitz
 

James Taylor

I love women with brains
Joined
Jun 28, 2005
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
374
Location
Michigan
Country
llUnited States
I'm Scott's opponent. My original inclination was that the move was not allowed--- i.e. in agreement with what JRV and von Marwitz have said.

However, after reading the Q/A below, which I found on Klaus site, I thought it strongly supported allowing Scott's move, even though it does not directly address the situation:

B30.8 & SSR RB6
B30.8 states “A bunker is treated as a pillbox in all respects except that a unit may move/rout/advance/Withdraw-from-CC between a bunker and such a trench as if the bunker were also a trench”. SSR RB6 references B30.8 for trenches connecting to RB buildings and Rubble. Since you are considered to be using trench movement for a bunker and RB building/rubble, does this also mean you can use Non-Assault Movement into RB building-rubble locations without FFNAM or losing concealment if you came from a trench?

A. Yes.​

(BTW, this Q/A was a revelation to me, as I have never played that a unit using NAM and entering a building from a connected RB trench could keep concealment (unless otherwise allowed) and not be subject to FFNAM modifier in the building.)

I'm curious if this Q/A changes JRV's or von Marwitz perspective. Klas opinion would also be appreciated.

Also: I allowed Scott to do the move, but he later retracted it based on JRV's quick response, coupled with an analysis from Carl N. I offered to let it stand, but he chose to take it back based on their information. He then requested that he PREP the units, which I also allowed. That events turned out less than ideal for Scott I can understand his frustration, but I just want to make clear there was no issue of sportsmanship here.

JT
 

Sparafucil3

Elder Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
9,088
Reaction score
1,694
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
My initial reaction was to say he could move without a problem. Then I read the Pillbox rules you quoted and did not post. The Pillbox rules say you may move between a Pillbox and that Adjacent Trench as if the Pillbox were itself a Trench. The Chapter O rules do not say you may enter the Building as if the Building were a Trench. With that in mind, the unit isn't moving into an Adjacent Trench (faux or otherwise). As such, it doesn't qualify for the movement. JMO, YMMV. -- jim

PS: IMO, the Q&A is problematic from a Rules standpoint. Having read it, I would agree the move Scott wanted to make SHOULD be allowed in the same context.
 
Last edited:

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,869
Reaction score
2,406
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
At first glance I don't think the move is allowed - but I haven't looked at the rules in detail. To me that Q&A is more saying that one could treat the building as a Pillbox - not a trench.
 

Gunner Scott

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
12,990
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
No worries, It is a move I have played with several other opponents with no problems because we just assumed that the bunker connected to the building in accordance to the RB SSR's. But I guess we and of course I perhaps were playing it wrong all this time. The technicalities of life I suppose lol. Still a great and fun CG I am having with Jim "Von Poulas" Taylor.

Scott
 

mgmasl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
3,985
Reaction score
199
Location
Cadiz
First name
Miguel
Country
llSpain
I think bunker to bunker is not directly allowed.. Units need to move to a trench.. So building to bunker or viceversa has to be similarly limited.. I think this SSR has to be used considering a building the equivalent of a bunker for movement to/from trench purposes
 
Top