Sniper activation by IFT after TH

turlusiflu

Member
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
201
Reaction score
46
Location
Catalonia
Country
llSweden
Rule A14.1: "...A player is subject to Sniper attack during any PFPh, MPh, DFPh or AFPh whenever he makes a TH, MC, TC, non-OBA IFT, or Entrenching, Original DR [EXC: those made for Prisoners] equal to the enemy SAN".

Does this non-OBA IFT include IFT resolution after TH against Infantry? If so, what is the difference, in terms of activating a Sniper, in firing a Gun against a tank or against Infantry? In the first case, rolling SAN in TK does not activate the Sniper, but in the second, rolling SAN in IFT does. And it is the same action.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Yes.

The difference is one is an IFT DR and the other is a TK DR.

It isn't the same action. One you use the IFT; the other you use the TK table. It's completely different.

JR
 

asl458

Recruit
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
5
Reaction score
4
Location
Alberta
Country
llCanada
I think turlusiflu is essentially asking why a TH attempt on the VTT should allow only one possible Sniper activation (TH) while the ITT and ATT each allow two (TH + IFT). They are the "same action" in that all are TH attempts by ordnance that can generate subsequent DRs.

It does seem inconsistent and I've wondered the same thing myself but just chalked it up to "that's what the rules say."
 

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,216
Reaction score
1,024
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
It does seem inconsistent and I've wondered the same thing myself but just chalked it up to "that's what the rules say."
You are correct. That's the way they wrote it.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Why doesn't a Bog DR trigger a SAN? It's the same as a TH DR: it's just a DR.

JR
 

turlusiflu

Member
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
201
Reaction score
46
Location
Catalonia
Country
llSweden
Thanks to all your comments; asl458, you're right, what I meant to say is that the single action of firing a Gun results in two different possibilities of triggering the SAN. I think that the IFT DR is a mere resolution of the real attack (TH), as is the TK DR.

Nevertheless, I will apply "that's what the rules say" rule.

But I still think that it's wrong (eppur si muove!)
 
Last edited:

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Why doesn't a Bog DR trigger a SAN? It's the same as a TH DR: it's just a DR.

JR
The same could be said for TK DRs vs an AFV from FT/MOL vs an AFV (Note the ability to optionaly forego an IFT attack by a MOL at the firer's discretion has been established by a Q&A even though A22.611 seems to indicate the 4FP IFT bonus is always applied to an attack).
upload_2018-2-8_3-47-40.png
 

Mister T

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,204
Reaction score
1,680
Location
Bruxelles
Country
llFrance
Small arms attack: one potential SAN
Ordnance vs. Infantry: two potential SAN
Ordnance vs. tanks: one potential SAN

To harmonise SAN consequences per attack, one would have to state that an IFT following a TH would not generate a sniper attack, which admittedly would been a tad more complex. I guess we have to live with it.
 

turlusiflu

Member
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
201
Reaction score
46
Location
Catalonia
Country
llSweden
Small arms attack: one potential SAN
Ordnance vs. Infantry: two potential SAN
Ordnance vs. tanks: one potential SAN

To harmonise SAN consequences per attack, one would have to state that an IFT following a TH would not generate a sniper attack, which admittedly would been a tad more complex. I guess we have to live with it.
Amen to this :D
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,597
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
And what about a Specific Collateral attack, which is resolved on the IFT with the TK DR?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,779
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
And what about a Specific Collateral attack, which is resolved on the IFT with the TK DR?
Q&A:

A14.1 & D.8
Does a specific (or general) collateral attack qualify as a non-OBA IFT roll for the purposes of sniper activation?
A. Neither an OBA-caused general collateral attack nor a specific collateral attack qualifies as a “non-OBA IFT ...Original DR”
for purposes of sniper activation.
 

asl458

Recruit
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
5
Reaction score
4
Location
Alberta
Country
llCanada
Why doesn't a Bog DR trigger a SAN? It's the same as a TH DR: it's just a DR.

JR
Sure, except for the fact that the designer chose to exclude OBA IFT DR from the list, which suggests that those DRs are not just any old DRs and have some significance in this context. I'm not complaining about the rule, just curious about the rationale.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Sure, except for the fact that the designer chose to exclude OBA IFT DR from the list, which suggests that those DRs are not just any old DRs and have some significance in this context. I'm not complaining about the rule, just curious about the rationale.
I guess the reason that OBA IFT are excluded is because it generates too many snipers for too little attack on the enemy, i.e. it was a game-play-based decision. Harassing fire and barrage would be worse. I don't know why the IFT attack generates a SAN but the TK# doesn't but again I doubt it is based on any reality argument. What is it about a TH DR that generates a SAN? I can't come up with any causative chain. It's an arbitrary place in the game to add a game effect. There's no deep thought to find.

JR
 

turlusiflu

Member
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
201
Reaction score
46
Location
Catalonia
Country
llSweden
What I think is that the actions that generate a SAN are actions that a Sniper "may see" who make them and react to them. A Sniper may see who fires small arms (IFT) or Ordnance (TH), who is trying to avoid harm (MC), who is trying to make things (TC), and who is Entrenching. The Sniper reacts to the firing of Ordnance (TH), not to the result (TK). Following this, he wouldn't react to the result of a shot against Infantry (IFT).

Just guessing...
 
Last edited:

buser333

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
940
Reaction score
419
Location
central WI
I have always thought rallies should generate sniper activation. And I still do.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
What I think is that the actions that generate a SAN are actions that a Sniper "may see" who make them and react to them. A Sniper may see who fires small arms (IFT) or Ordnance (TH), who is trying to avoid harm (MC), who is trying to make things (TC), and who is Entrenching. The Sniper reacts to the firing of Ordnance (TH), not to the result (TK). Following this, he wouldn't react to the result of a shot against Infantry (IFT).

Just guessing...
I think you are hoping to make sense of something that was arbitrary. Why entrenching but not clearance? Why a on a PTC/MC from OBA but not on the OBA itself? Why no SAN in the CCPh? Bog is something someone might see and react to, but it isn't a SAN DR. Why an IFT attack as long as it isn't a collateral attack? Why not manhandling? ESB? So many things to explain.

JR
 
Last edited:

turlusiflu

Member
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
201
Reaction score
46
Location
Catalonia
Country
llSweden
I think you are hoping to make sense of something that was arbitrary. Why entrenching but not clearance? Why a on a PTC/MC from OBA but not on the OBA itself? Why no SAN in the CCPh? Bog is something someone might see and react to, but it isn't a SAN DR. Why an IFT attack as long as it isn't a collateral attack? Why not manhandling? ESB? So many things to explain.

JR
Of course you're right, too many exceptions for what seems as you say arbitrary. But you should agree at least (or not :) ) that two shots of the same ordnance shouldn't trigger different kind of results.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,597
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
"Sniper" attacks cover other realities than sniper atracks.
Footnote 9 of chapter E, about mistaken fire, explains why SAN is increased by night.
I would consider that some of that explanation could be used for normal, daytime SAN too.
... Similarly, use of a Sniper attack to reflect Mistaken Fire is also a simple abstraction to reflect the average damage done to one 's own troops during a night action. It does not reflect increased enemy Sniper activity, nor does it necessarily represent fire from a specific friendly unit. The Mistaken Fire DR is just a convenient, artificial mechanism to trigger random errant fire which might be occurring anywhere on the board.
 
Last edited:

Pyth

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
287
Location
Brooklyn NY
Country
llUnited States
What I think is that the actions that generate a SAN are actions that a Sniper "may see" who make them and react to them...
I like Reality-based conceptualizations for the rules, they're great -- but don't get trapped into thinking all the rules lend themselves to that kind of thing. There's a lot of streamlining in the rules where the point is to keep the game playable at the expense of some level of realism. The SAN rules are one of them. The floating UFO-like abstraction known as SAN is probably the most streamlined abstracted-out-of-reality thing in the core gameplay (Honestly, it's too abstract for my taste... one thing I miss from old Squad Leader is the sniper.) Yeah the 2 sniper check vs. 1 sniper check thing is odd... but do two MC checking half squads in a fortified basement really generate twice the sniper activity of a full squad MC checking in the open... and why do any of them trigger a sniper attack on the other side of the board? My personal reality-based conception of the ASL sniper is 50% sniper/50% fickle-finger-of-fate. Especially the low SANs... the 2s, where that side has no business having a sniper at all... those 2's represent people sitting on a bayonet, crippling pollen-allergies, etc.
 
Top