Rubble Clearance And Concealment

volgaG68

Fighting WWII One DR At A Time
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
3,212
Reaction score
1,551
Location
La Crosse, KS
First name
Chris
Country
llUnited States
Nothing to see here, problem solved with a more thorough reading!


 
Last edited:

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,918
Reaction score
5,103
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
I guess I've always taken the route that once marked with a TI counter the unit was engaged in the act of clearing the obstacle (i.e. using Clearance) and would therefore be subject to concealment loss at the end of its MPh because it would be considered a moving unit utilizing all it MF to accomplish the task and would therefore be subject to concealment loss for that reason. However, you do raise a valid point by strict wording of the rules as presented, but believe if a clarification was warranted, it would come down on the side of concealment loss at the time it was declared and thus MF spent. JMHO.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
If it helps, A12.141 puts this case another way:

Any other activity which a concealed unit engages in...causes loss of concealment if that unit is currently in the LOS and within 16 hexes of a Good Order enemy ground unit. [This includes those who] "engage in Clearance attempts..."​

I think the loss occurs upon declaring the action.
 

volgaG68

Fighting WWII One DR At A Time
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
3,212
Reaction score
1,551
Location
La Crosse, KS
First name
Chris
Country
llUnited States
I guess I've always taken the route that once marked with a TI counter the unit was engaged in the act of clearing the obstacle (i.e. using Clearance) and would therefore be subject to concealment loss at the end of its MPh because it would be considered a moving unit utilizing all it MF to accomplish the task and would therefore be subject to concealment loss for that reason. However, you do raise a valid point by strict wording of the rules as presented, but believe if a clarification was warranted, it would come down on the side of concealment loss at the time it was declared and thus MF spent. JMHO.
I deleted the post after a more thorough reading. If it must use ALL its MF to enter the rubble and declare its intent, it therefore could not be using Assault Movement.
 
Top