Victor
Senior Member
An smc with a disrupted mmc are in a foxhole in otherwise open ground. Is there a clarification somewhere that states an infantry smc ovr can be conducted. Individually it's clear an smc by itself can be infantry ovr'ed and a disrupted mmc can't prevent movement through the location. But the requirements of an smc ovr are that the smc be the only keu in the location being infantry ovr'ed. There is no exception listed for the presence of a disrupted mmc. Here is the biblical quote:
4.15 Infantry OVR: An Infantry MMC may enter in the MPh a Location containing only one Known enemy SMC (unless that SMC occupies an AFV) at double the total MF cost of entry provided it has passed a NTC to enable it to enter the Location [EXC: Berserk (15.432)].
...and later in same ruling:
If other (concealed) units are in the same Location, 12.15 would apply. More than one SMC must be revealed to deny a Location to an enemy MMC capable of OVR. Other MMC could attempt subsequent Infantry OVR attacks but each would require a separate NTC.
If it is clarified somewhere would the ntc be subject to the tem modifier of the foxhole?
Thanks,
Victor
4.15 Infantry OVR: An Infantry MMC may enter in the MPh a Location containing only one Known enemy SMC (unless that SMC occupies an AFV) at double the total MF cost of entry provided it has passed a NTC to enable it to enter the Location [EXC: Berserk (15.432)].
...and later in same ruling:
If other (concealed) units are in the same Location, 12.15 would apply. More than one SMC must be revealed to deny a Location to an enemy MMC capable of OVR. Other MMC could attempt subsequent Infantry OVR attacks but each would require a separate NTC.
If it is clarified somewhere would the ntc be subject to the tem modifier of the foxhole?
Thanks,
Victor