SASL16 - Friendly Command Control

[cthulhugeek]

Question: Do you make command control for friendly defensive fire on Enemy turn?

 

[bos]

Question: Do you make command control for friendly defensive fire on Enemy turn?

Yes, you do.

 

[Paullus]

Question: Do you make command control for friendly defensive fire on Enemy turn?

Also note that if you friendly units panic they are assumed to be marked with a Final Fire marker and must use Final Protective Fire against ADJACENT or same location moving ENEMY units (S6.212).

 

[FJ_MD]

It is a must but sometimes I dont use it for the enemy, specially when there are very few enemy units onboard or when a very strong enemy leader is present in the area.

I also do other things for helping the enemy, like using skulking tactic.. but this is another story.

 

[cthulhugeek]

Thanks!

Question 2: In reading the enemy defensive fire section (S8.6 - 8.62), it only mentions the enemy making a mandatory Action DR {A2} in the First-Fire section. It does not mention it for the other options including Enemy Final Fire. So the enemy can only panic when first-firing but not final firing? Is that correct?

 

[Paullus]

Thanks!

Question 2: In reading the enemy defensive fire section (S8.6 - 8.62), it only mentions the enemy making a mandatory Action DR {A2} in the First-Fire section. It does not mention it for the other options including Enemy Final Fire. So the enemy can only panic when first-firing but not final firing? Is that correct?

No. You make an Action DR for the first action the ENEMY unit makes in that phase, be it Defensive First Fire in the Friendly Movement Phase or Defensive Fire in the Defensive Fire Phase (see S6.12).

 

[alanp]

Getting back to JG53_Jaguar's idea of making all C&C DRs at the beginning. GraystonW is spot on. If you do it only as needed--per the rules, right before the unit is going to perform an action--this will get you in the proper ASL mind-set: the order of moving/firing and waiting to see what happens makes you choose the most important thing to do first; you learn the "correct" ASL priorities for fire/movement.

I was honestly amazed when I first heard about SASL without C&C. It's simply not SASL. It's solo-ASL (which we all did before SASL came out when there was no real opponent) with Suspect counters. A step up from 'pure' solo with added FoW, but the SASL scenarios were tested with C&C so, in a sense, they 'need' rule 16.

 

[cthulhugeek]

No. You make an Action DR for the first action the ENEMY unit makes in that phase, be it Defensive First Fire in the Friendly Movement Phase or Defensive Fire in the Defensive Fire Phase (see S6.12).

Thanks! I was confused about that.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Cmd DRs really make the game but are D@^# annoying at times...kind of like when your plan starts to fall apart in the face of a live opponent. :angry:

:devious:I have started to use "Personal Leaders" as an additional Leader, this seems to spice things up a bit and gives you more of a Co Cdr feel (especially with the Russians...Leader deficient). This doesn't seem to affect the outcome much as I've played several campaigns with and without personal Leaders and seem to get my butt kicked just as much either way.

 

[Dave Johnson]

I don't like it because it adds more DRs to an already dice-intensive game, but I do use it on occasion.

 

[daniel zucker]

I don't like it because it adds more DRs to an already dice-intensive game, but I do use it on occasion.

Dude:
have you read all of the conversation in this thread before you posted?
DR/dr is how the game is played it is what gives the randomness to the game what frustrates and realizes all your SASL dreams, you don't like it because it adds more DRs; if you go back and read post #17 form this thread you'll see that I asked ....if you don't like making DR/dr then what are you doing playing ASL/SASL its like saying you have too much money or sex. and from some of the others who have weighed in C&C is what combat is about. Good C&C you can bring the right weight of fire power to where its most needed. Bad C&C lot harder to win the fight.

In SASL the ENEMY is disorganized as it is and may have more leaders but there is not the coordination that you face when playing another human.
As it is the player can win SASL (using C&C rules) more often than not. {I'm wondering what the win % really is I know for me its in the 7/8 of 10 missions played}
In this case C&C and the random nature of the dice levels the playing field a bit when I first started to play SASL I did not understand how to control my units and tryd to play like I was playing a live opponent. I also handled the ENEMY bad too. In my first 10 games if I was 50% I think I was doing good. I lured to handle the ENEMY/system better and started to lose even more. From seeing what the C&C for the ENEMY did I finally peaced it together on what and how to control my own units and have gone up to that 70-80 % win rate.

So I say to you and all others who say such things like 'too meny DR' or 'I don't like C&C' you are NOT playing SASL with out the C&C rules you are playing your own hybred version of SASL and will never understand and lurne how to play SASL if you don't start using C&C; it is the glue of the SASL system for the FRIENDLY and ENEMY units

Daniel

 

[Paullus]

Dude:
have you read all of the conversation in this thread before you posted?
DR/dr is how the game is played it is what gives the randomness to the game what frustrates and realizes all your SASL dreams, you don't like it because it adds more DRs; if you go back and read post #17 form this thread you'll see that I asked ....if you don't like making DR/dr then what are you doing playing ASL/SASL its like saying you have too much money or sex. and from some of the others who have weighed in C&C is what combat is about. Good C&C you can bring the right weight of fire power to where its most needed. Bad C&C lot harder to win the fight.

In SASL the ENEMY is disorganized as it is and may have more leaders but there is not the coordination that you face when playing another human.
As it is the player can win SASL (using C&C rules) more often than not. {I'm wondering what the win % really is I know for me its in the 7/8 of 10 missions played}
In this case C&C and the random nature of the dice levels the playing field a bit when I first started to play SASL I did not understand how to control my units and tryd to play like I was playing a live opponent. I also handled the ENEMY bad too. In my first 10 games if I was 50% I think I was doing good. I lured to handle the ENEMY/system better and started to lose even more. From seeing what the C&C for the ENEMY did I finally peaced it together on what and how to control my own units and have gone up to that 70-80 % win rate.

So I say to you and all others who say such things like 'too meny DR' or 'I don't like C&C' you are NOT playing SASL with out the C&C rules you are playing your own hybred version of SASL and will never understand and lurne how to play SASL if you don't start using C&C; it is the glue of the SASL system for the FRIENDLY and ENEMY units

Daniel

Hear hear!:clap:

 

[Dave Johnson]

Most humble apologies for such provocative talk on my part, Daniel. Some of us just don't take it that seriously. For some of us, at least, it's still just a game, and the beauty of SASL is that it's "solitaire" play, so if I want to modify or omit some of the rules when I'm sitting around playing all by my lonesome, who really gives a flip? Maybe someday I'll mature into a true purist, but I hope not.

 

[daniel zucker]

Most humble apologies for such provocative talk on my part, Daniel. Some of us just don't take it that seriously. For some of us, at least, it's still just a game, and the beauty of SASL is that it's "solitaire" play, so if I want to modify or omit some of the rules when I'm sitting around playing all by my lonesome, who really gives a flip? Maybe someday I'll mature into a true purist, but I hope not.

Apologies are unnecessary if you feel that it does not matter what you do or how; when you play ASL, when playing against your self. And understand that doing so is all right and there is nothing bad about that in and of its self. It is your right to play with the game pieces how ever you wish.

But I do insist that if you are rule bending to site you own special idea of how the game should be played, you are not playing SASL. You are playing your own hybrid version of SASL. If you do insist on entering these boards and making a statement for or against a rule then do try to add more to the conversation than 'I do like it', Especially when there is a poll at the start of the thread that shows a majority or responders like the rule.

It is a shame that you think that playing SASL is something below or beneath you, that those of us who like the challenge of trying to play as the rules guide are some sort of misguided purist's, and that is less worthy.

Daniel

 

[Dave Johnson]

If you do insist on entering these boards and making a statement for or against a rule then do try to add more to the conversation than 'I do like it', Especially when there is a poll at the start of the thread that shows a majority or responders like the rule.

The pollster asked a question and I answered it honestly. That, presumably, is the entire point of the poll, regardless of whether I'm in the minority of respondents or whether I conform to your expectations on how or when I should post, or whether I meet your definition of what it means to "really" play SASL. I didn't realize I was accountable to you for such things, or that someone would feel the need to light into me over something so trivial. I say again, it's just a game. The point of a "game" is to have fun. If dropping the C&C rules increases my enjoyment of a game that is by definition and design solitaire, bully for me! If that means I'm no longer playing "true" SASL by your definition, that's fine too. But geez, man, get over it.

 

[bos]

But I do insist that if you are rule bending to site you own special idea of how the game should be played, you are not playing SASL. You are playing your own hybrid version of SASL. If you do insist on entering these boards and making a statement for or against a rule then do try to add more to the conversation than 'I do like it', Especially when there is a poll at the start of the thread that shows a majority or responders like the rule.

By this logic, anyone playing an ASL scenario with "Kindling is n/a" isn't really playing ASL.

 

[Wik]

By this logic, anyone playing an ASL scenario with "Kindling is n/a" isn't really playing ASL.

...unless you stick to missions like JM2: Bloody Omaha which have "Kindling is NA" in the Mission Special Rules

"...within the privacy of their own groups, players are free to design their own House Rules or modifications. However, do not expect others outside your immediate gaming circle to embrace them as willingly, or us to resolve disputes arising from the use of House Rules."

 

[bos]

Just pencil in "MSR 99: Command and Control is N/A" on all your SASL scenario cards. Voila!

Edit: Don't forget to add "Mk II" to the title as well. I recommend photocopying rather than marking up the originals too.

 

[daniel zucker]

By this logic, anyone playing an ASL scenario with "Kindling is n/a" isn't really playing ASL.

I understand that the smilie means that you are just 'funning wit ya'

but.... if a 'Scenario'/'Mission' [in SASL we play Missions] has a SSR/MSR "Kindling is n/a" it is really ASL/SASL. Somewhere in the rule book it says that you can add or delete rules or modifie the rules as you wish [rule bending as I call it]. But don't expect any one else to play by those rules [especally if FTF] and not expect me to think of what you are doing as SASL if you drop the C&C altogather.

As I have said several times before, play with the peaces in any manor you wish but don't call it SASL if you are going to disregard the C&C all togather.

Yes I'm stuck up about it so just deal with it or go away. :rifle:

Daniel

 

[daniel zucker]

...unless you stick to missions like JM2: Bloody Omaha which have "Kindling is NA" in the Mission Special Rules


Quote:
Originally Posted by E.1
"...within the privacy of their own groups, players are free to design their own House Rules or modifications. However, do not expect others outside your immediate gaming circle to embrace them as willingly, or us to resolve disputes arising from the use of House Rules."

Ther we go that's the ticket:smoke:
daniel