Some pertinent news from MMP

[Michael Dorosh]

We need a counter for that!

And a VBM gauge.

That's what the 1:285 scale vehicles are for....

 

[jrv]

lol: but, that does not quite get my blood pressure up the same way digging through the CC counter tray looking for the HtH ones

It's a bit unfair to blame dasl for your poor counter storage decisions.

JR

 

[hongkongwargamer]

It's a bit unfair to blame dasl for your poor counter storage decisions.

JR

I always have a few HtH CC counters in my pocket, you never know when you will need them ..

 

[BattleSchool]

I always have a few HtH CC counters in my pocket, you never know when you will need them ..

Comes with the (new) territory, I guess.

 

[BattleSchool]

That's what the 1:285 scale vehicles are for....

So as long as my Kübelwagen can squeeze by, we're good, right?

 

[BattleSchool]

lol: but, that does not quite get my blood pressure up the same way digging through the CC counter tray looking for the HtH ones

Don't need no stinkin' H-t-H CC counters when my lackadaisical Italians Ambush CX Rangers at night!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

So as long as my Kübelwagen can squeeze by, we're good, right?

Case by case basis, my friend!

 

[von Marwitz]

the best bit of dasl is that building depictions in the same hex are not necessarily the same height [J2.4].

JR

Good catch!

It is been a while since I have played a DASL scenario. But sure enough I had forgotten about this one.

von Marwitz

 

[von Marwitz]

I always have a few HtH CC counters in my pocket, you never know when you will need them ..

More than a grain of truth in it these days in Hongkong...

von Marwitz

 

[Alan Hume]

We need the RSI units and the Italian Co-belligerent Army units for post-armistice forces. That's a second and a third OB.

JR

Yep, in order to do it properly those guys should get put in there for sure.
I'd love to see it but I'm guessing it's probably just going to be a straight reprint (does anyone know any different?)

 

[Paul M. Weir]

1/285 vehicles are too big even for DASL which works out at about 1/700 (1/715?).

 

[Gordon]

1/285 vehicles are too big even for DASL which works out at about 1/700 (1/715?).

WHAT DO WE WANT?

DELUXE-DELUXE-ASL!

WHEN DO WE WANT IT?

NOW!

 

[BattleSchool]

1/285 vehicles are too big even for DASL which works out at about 1/700 (1/715?).

I was going to mention that earlier. In fact, it was part of the reason that I raised the issue of VBM clearance on DASL boards.

Clearly GHQ's Micro Armour is not to scale where DASL is concerned. That's not an issue as long as you don't treat these miniatures as anything more than decoration. Not only would most hexsides be impassable if the size of the vehicles were taken to be to scale, but all bridges would effectively be one-lane, and restricted to smaller vehicles.

The Pz 38(t) chassis is roughly two metres wide and barely clears the sides of the bridge in the photo below. A Panther is over three metres wide.



So again, what convention, if any, has been agreed with regard to calculating clearance for VBM on a DASL board? Consider the Narrow Street on board i--the first to appear on an "official" DASL board.

1. May a(ny) vehicle Bypass E2 along the D2-E2 hexside? My gut tells me yes.

2. What about C1 along the C1-D0 hexside?

3. How do we measure? Not with the Pleva tool, unless Steve's come up with a Deluxe version in Brazilian cherry.

 

[Gordon]

Scale up a counter-thickness from regular ASL to DASL?

 

[william.stoppel]

COWTRA

 

[bprobst]

If you applied a "scaling rule" to counters on DASL boards, you'd also have to apply the same rule to any HASL board that uses larger-than-normal hexes (or if you recall some early CH efforts, hexes much smaller than normal). Personally I'd rather not take a ruler to each and every HASL map that I might play on to determine what the scale for that particular map should be.

So the simple solution is, as indicated above, COWTRA. The rules don't tell you to worry about scaling, so don't. Yes, that means that most obstacles on DASL boards can be easily bypassed. Since that's always true for everyone, it's utterly unimportant. (Even in regular geo-board scenarios, the question of "can I bypass here?" only comes up occasionally. I don't think it's worth losing any sleep over ....)

 

[BattleSchool]

If you applied a "scaling rule" to counters on DASL boards, you'd also have to apply the same rule to any HASL board that uses larger-than-normal hexes...

Excellent point!

So the simple solution is, as indicated above, COWTRA. The rules don't tell you to worry about scaling, so don't. Yes, that means that most obstacles on DASL boards can be easily bypassed. Since that's always true for everyone, it's utterly unimportant.

Fair enough. I take it then that the counter depth rule per D2.3 still applies to DASL (and HASL).

D2.3 ...Therefore, the interior of each hexside traversed must be clear of any obstacle depiction to the depth of an edge of a unit counter for VBM to be usable. Hold a unit counter vertically so that the entire thickness of the hex-side is just visible along the edge—if the other edge touches any obstacle depiction, VBM is not allowed along that hexside. Walls/hedges are considered extensions of hexsides for this rule.

In the interests of clarity for those suffering through my digression on VBM in DASL, B31.11 is explicit with regard to a Narrow Street. And in keeping with the COWTRA principle, there is no need to test clearance in such cases. (I should have checked. My bad.)

B31.11 MOVEMENT: ...VBM along a Narrow Street is allowed regardless of hexside-to-obstacle clearance (D2.3),...

(Even in regular geo-board scenarios, the question of "can I bypass here?" only comes up occasionally. I don't think it's worth losing any sleep over ....)

Good to know, as I slept poorly.

Granted it probably had something to do with the rich food and wine I indulged in last night.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

1/285 vehicles are too big even for DASL which works out at about 1/700 (1/715?).

The scale is warped from the start (40 metre wide streets) so it seems pointless to apply real world scales to one part of the simulation but not the other.

Just use the 1:285 scale vehicles. It's simple, there's no conversion necessary, and honestly - a typical 1x2 or 1x3 DASL mapboard is so small in area (and has such restricted LOS), that even changing the map scale by a factor of 2 really wouldn't affect the veracity of the simulation vis a vis weapons ranges, etc.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

I'm far, far from saying don't use 1/285 vehicles, just be aware that they are about 2 times too big and allow for that when checking bypass, etc. If it's fun then do it.

 

[bprobst]

I'm far, far from saying don't use 1/285 vehicles, just be aware that they are about 2 times too big and allow for that when checking bypass, etc.

You don't use figures to check bypass, you use counters, exactly as described in D2.3 (quoted above).

On a personal note: I like figures. I like painting figures. I like the ... visual idea ... of using figures on a DASL map. And yet I've never had the faintest desire to ever do so. Partly it's because of the cost ... to amass a suitable collection of figures would be quite expensive (and preparing them all would be very time-consuming). Mostly, though, it's because even if I'm using figures to play a DASL scenario, I still need counters. Lots of counters. As is indeed usual and normal for any ASL scenario. Replacing some counters with figures -- knowing that I can't stack the figures without it (at best) looking dumb, and neither can I stack counters on top of those figures when needed ... for me the entire point of the exercise (playing the scenario!) is ruined.

If, instead of putting all the stuff about miniatures in Chapter J back in 1984, they had just made it an article in the General, with the preface of "hey, here's an alternate way of playing DASL that some of you might like to try out", I suspect a lot more players would have been accepting of DASL back in the day. Putting it in the rules gave it the superficial appearance of being mandatory.