Today in ASL I ... (Day to day ASL doings)

buser333

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
654
Reaction score
168
Location
central WI
Game final. Germans were one VP shy of the 25 need for win.
Final look.
View attachment 6316
So just curious how you had any rain? Conditions are not overcast. Fires are a key aspect of the defender's chances in this one. In our game I think it was safe to say that 1/4 of board 32 was on fire by the end. Very fun scenario.
 
Last edited:

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,269
Reaction score
4,623
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
So just curious how you had any rain in this one? Conditions are not overcast. In our game I think it was safe to say that 1/4 of board 32 was on fire by the end. Very fun scenario.
That was his inside joke because he had rolled the bombardment for all non-spared hexes instead of just for hexes with bombardment targets (units, buildings, bridges, some fortifications). When he realized he had done so, he removed all the flames he had placed by mistake. If you had ¼ of the board on fire, I'm going to guess you did the same thing. I think I figured the expected number of flames placed from the bombardment should be under one.

JR
 

buser333

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
654
Reaction score
168
Location
central WI
That was his inside joke because he had rolled the bombardment for all non-spared hexes instead of just for hexes with bombardment targets (units, buildings, bridges, some fortifications). When he realized he had done so, he removed all the flames he had placed by mistake. If you had ¼ of the board on fire, I'm going to guess you did the same thing. I think I figured the expected number of flames placed from the bombardment should be under one.

JR
Where does it say that only hexes with targets are affected? C1.81 says "Bombardment potentially affects all the hexes of an entire mapboard…" C1.822 says "Each building/bridge hex not in the spared hexes must take a NMC before any of its occupants do." I assume this is mentioned specifically only because if they are rubbled or collapsed their occupants are dead. I don't see anywhere that indicates unoccupied hex effects are not rolled, and it would seem unreasonably omniscient to think that the artillery operators umpteen distance away could shoot with such pinpoint accuracy to exclude unoccupied terrain.
 

Ric of The LBC

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
734
Reaction score
474
Location
Peoples Republic of California
Country
llUnited States
Where does it say that only hexes with targets are affected? C1.81 says "Bombardment potentially affects all the hexes of an entire mapboard…" C1.822 says "Each building/bridge hex not in the spared hexes must take a NMC before any of its occupants do." I assume this is mentioned specifically only because if they are rubbled or collapsed their occupants are dead. I don't see anywhere that indicates unoccupied hex effects are not rolled, and it would seem unreasonably omniscient to think that the artillery operators umpteen distance away could shoot with such pinpoint accuracy to exclude unoccupied terrain.
I was applying this to empty woods hexes. If a fire started in a building then I suppose it could spread to the woods and have the experience you did.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,269
Reaction score
4,623
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Where does it say that only hexes with targets are affected? C1.81 says "Bombardment potentially affects all the hexes of an entire mapboard…" C1.822 says "Each building/bridge hex not in the spared hexes must take a NMC before any of its occupants do." I assume this is mentioned specifically only because if they are rubbled or collapsed their occupants are dead. I don't see anywhere that indicates unoccupied hex effects are not rolled, and it would seem unreasonably omniscient to think that the artillery operators umpteen distance away could shoot with such pinpoint accuracy to exclude unoccupied terrain.
C1.82-.822 list all the times you roll a MC. Woods (the primary candidate for fires in the scenario) are not among the terrain types listed in C1.822, and are given no ML for taking such a MC. Per C1.823 fires start as a side-effect of a MC, not as a primary event.

The reason why is probably playability. Rolling twelve million DRs against empty hexes before starting a game is not necessarily the most fun way to start a scenario. That plus on woods boards it tends to set ¼ of the board on fire, which I don't think was that common.

JR
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,269
Reaction score
4,623
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
There is a Q&A on the matter, which I didn't look up before because I think the rules are relatively clear if you read them carefully.

q&a said:
C1.81 Since "Bombardment potentially affects all the hexes of an entire mapboard, " must all non-spared hexes take a Bombardment MC to resolve effects on terrain? Or does the MC requirement only apply in those hexes occupied by units?
A. No. No, it also applies to hexes with building/-bridge/Fortification. [Compil2]
The "potentially" should be read as "not really."

JR
 

Ric of The LBC

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
734
Reaction score
474
Location
Peoples Republic of California
Country
llUnited States
That was his inside joke because he had rolled the bombardment for all non-spared hexes instead of just for hexes with bombardment targets (units, buildings, bridges, some fortifications). When he realized he had done so, he removed all the flames he had placed by mistake. If you had ¼ of the board on fire, I'm going to guess you did the same thing. I think I figured the expected number of flames placed from the bombardment should be under one.

JR
Since I was playing with myself :)eek:) I played God and wiped all the fires out. :study:
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,269
Reaction score
4,623
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Just got finished playing turns 1-3 of my first Night scenario with Steve Bond. And of course, there are questions. Quickly Robin, to the Rules Forum!
The Night LV hindrance does not apply even though the target is lower than the firer.

JR
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,269
Reaction score
4,623
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
And.... *boom*, there goes my skull.
The night lv hindrance is one of the great sources for confusion in night rules. Applying the rule is very easy, but it is so different from all other hindrance rules that it can be hard get your head around. To see whether the night lv hindrance applies, you compare the height of the *terrain* in the hex with the target to the height of the attacker. The height of the target itself is not important. If the terrain in the target hex is one or more levels higher than the attacker, the night lv hindrance does *not* apply. Otherwise it does.

A unit on a level one hill hex fires at a target at level zero. If the terrain in the hex is at level zero (e.g. open ground), the night lv hindrance applies. If the terrain in the hex starts at level zero and rises to level one (e.g. woods), the terrain is still not one level (or more) higher than the firer, and night lv hindrance still applies. If the terrain with the level zero target rises to level two or higher (e.g. jungle, multi-story building), the terrain (at level two or two-and-a-half) would be at least one level higher than the attacker (at level one on a hill hex), and night lv would not apply (even though the *target* is one level below the attacker).

Note that top level of the terrain need not be occupiable to count when comparing levels. Unlike other hindrances the LOS does not matter nor does one compare the attacker and the target. You compare the height of the attacker and the height of the *terrain* in the target hex.

JR
 
Last edited:

hongkongwargamer

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
5,526
Reaction score
2,563
Location
17 hexes
Country
llGibraltar
There are times when you'd consider whether you should destroy a weapon when a unit's demise seems imminent so that when you rout away (or worse) that weapon won't be taken and used against you.

I was reading the ASOP in the gym just now and realized "destroying" a weapon is not the only option. Another option might be to malfunction that weapon. The opponent can't fix it anyway and unless he picked up and destroy it, you can if you can recapture it.

I keep picking up "new" things from this rulebook ..
Screenshot 2018-12-13 at 17.55.57.png
 

olli

Elder Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
7,229
Reaction score
733
Location
Scotland
Country
llGermany
There are times when you'd consider whether you should destroy a weapon when a unit's demise seems imminent so that when you rout away (or worse) that weapon won't be taken and used against you.

I was reading the ASOP in the gym just now and realized "destroying" a weapon is not the only option. Another option might be to malfunction that weapon. The opponent can't fix it anyway and unless he picked up and destroy it, you can if you can recapture it.

I keep picking up "new" things from this rulebook ..
View attachment 6454
Never knew that one!
 

Jacometti

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
3,512
Reaction score
1,164
Location
Halifax, NS
Country
llCanada
I have suspected many opponents of deliberately malfunctioning their MMG and HMGs just before I planned to capture them.

Mind you, they did roll the dice to do it.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
9,581
Reaction score
2,731
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
I have suspected many opponents of deliberately malfunctioning their MMG and HMGs just before I planned to capture them.

Mind you, they did roll the dice to do it.
Without having checked the rules, I would think that rolling the dice to spike/malf a weapon is not necessary.

von Marwitz
 

Jacometti

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
3,512
Reaction score
1,164
Location
Halifax, NS
Country
llCanada
Today in ASL I did a very daring thing.....based on the fantastic book "Island of Fire" about the fighting around the Barrikady Gun Factory in Stalingrad, I designed a (Death To Fascism) scenario on part of the Red Barricades map......

First playtest in a week or so.....very interested to see if we can make this work......and add something of value to this already epic ASL product.
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,326
Reaction score
1,220
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
Today in ASL I did a very daring thing.....based on the fantastic book "Island of Fire" about the fighting around the Barrikady Gun Factory in Stalingrad, I designed a (Death To Fascism) scenario on part of the Red Barricades map......

First playtest in a week or so.....very interested to see if we can make this work......and add something of value to this already epic ASL product.
The ultimate challenge: Make Stalingrad Interesting to Me. And...go! ;)
 
Top