SMCs in Vehicular CC

[Doug Leslie]

I think your interpretation has merit, however, it could still be a stack - there could be multiple MMC attacking.

It would certainly solve the issue with a second leader being created when a MMC+SMC is attacking a vehicle.

If a stack containing multiple MMC is attacking, it wouldn't be too difficult to say that only a MMC that isn't stacked with a leader would be eligible for field promotion. It's possibly a bit esoteric but it seems like a lacuna in the rules that would be easy to rectify.

 

[STAVKA]

I think your interpretation has merit, however, it could still be a stack - there could be multiple MMC attacking.

It would certainly solve the issue with a second leader being created when a MMC+SMC is attacking a vehicle.

No second Ldr is created in this case regardless if vs an AFV or infantry.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

If a stack containing multiple MMC is attacking, it wouldn't be too difficult to say that only a MMC that isn't stacked with a leader would be eligible for field promotion. It's possibly a bit esoteric but it seems like a lacuna in the rules that would be easy to rectify.

The rules already handle what happens when there are multiple MMC making the same attack:

"If more than one type of MMC made the CC attack which created the leader, the MMC with the highest BPV involved is used to determine any Leader Creation drm;..."

 

[Doug Leslie]

The rules already handle what happens when there are multiple MMC making the same attack:

"If more than one type of MMC made the CC attack which created the leader, the MMC with the highest BPV involved is used to determine any Leader Creation drm;..."

Right, but the MMC that the leader is stacked with wouldn't be eligible.

 

[Tuomo]

Or, you could make an EXC to the "one SMC stacks with one MMC in CC" rule when an MMC creates a leader and let both attack/defend with that MMC for that round only. Both SMC add their CCV of 1 to the MMC's, and you use the best leadership modifier.

Because this is an ultra-rare situation and therefore deserving of its own rule. That's The Essence of ASL.

 

[Stewart]

Right, but the MMC that the leader is stacked with wouldn't be eligible.

Why not?
It's the MMC that undergoes the Field Promotion..SMC are not.
Maybe they don't like that prick of a SGT.

 

[SSlunt]

“REPLY TO: Genau. And now it is my Panzer's turn to attack and, yes, I think that I will attack that 10-3 leader who is now on his own since he did not participate in the CC attack. Now let's see...2,1 at odds of 4 to 2...Mr 10-3 is now dead. How sad for him."



Does the rule allow you to restate who the German is now attacking because before the roliiing happens everyone must declare their attack. The German would have declared that we was going after the French MMC and the 10-3 leader so and now he would be forced to go after the MMC and the 10-3 leader and the leader that was generated. I do not believe you get a chance to rejig the plan of attack

 

[Doug Leslie]

“REPLY TO: Genau. And now it is my Panzer's turn to attack and, yes, I think that I will attack that 10-3 leader who is now on his own since he did not participate in the CC attack. Now let's see...2,1 at odds of 4 to 2...Mr 10-3 is now dead. How sad for him."



Does the rule allow you to restate who the German is now attacking because before the roliiing happens everyone must declare their attack. The German would have declared that we was going after the French MMC and the 10-3 leader so and now he would be forced to go after the MMC and the 10-3 leader and the leader that was generated. I do not believe you get a chance to rejig the plan of attack

The German player doesn't designate his attack until after the French attack has been resolved. CC against a vehicle is sequential.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

Does the rule allow you to restate who the German is now attacking because before the roliiing happens everyone must declare their attack.

Because there is a vehicle in that Location it is sequential CC (A11.3). Sequential attacks need not be predesignated.