Today's VASL View From The Cheap Seats

[Tuomo]

JR Tracy playing Danny Stanhagen in Urban Guerrillas. Russian tanks named after LA Lakers.

 

[PresterJohn]

Does anybody else skip the naming and just click on the acq marker to see who owns it?

 

[Michael R]

Does anybody else skip the naming and just click on the acq marker to see who owns it?

Yep.

 

[EJ1]

Does anybody else skip the naming and just click on the acq marker to see who owns it?

Hi Prester,

I label my ordnance and matching acq. counters with simple alphabet lettering at the beginning of the scenario. I avoid the linking feature as I have seen it used as an LOS indicator. Maybe, as an afterthought, our VASL gods could change the link indicator from a line to a circle or similar. Hmm.

Cheers,

 

[Robin Reeve]

At what moment could the link function play the role of an LOS indicator, as you fire before placing an Acq ?
If tracking an acquired unit, you simply can decide not to move the Acq counter until after you declared a shot or abstained from declaring one.

 

[boylermaker]

At what moment could the link function play the role of an LOS indicator, as you fire before placing an Acq ?
If tracking an acquired unit, you simply can decide not to move the Acq counter until after you declared a shot or abstained from declaring one.

Edge case, but some vehicles maintain Acq even when moving, no? Possibly the owner gets a free LOS check anyway in that scenario, though.

I still label my acquisitions because I find that they become unlinked during saving fairly often, and then you can have a big mess.

 

[Robin Reeve]

Edge case, but some vehicles maintain Acq even when moving, no?

With Gyrostabilizers, yes.
Very rare indeed.
Some discipline with the use of counters could prevent unwanted side effects.

 

[apbills]

At what moment could the link function play the role of an LOS indicator, as you fire before placing an Acq ?
If tracking an acquired unit, you simply can decide not to move the Acq counter until after you declared a shot or abstained from declaring one.

Per C6.51 "If an acquired target leaves its present Location and thereby goes out of the firer's LOS (as per 6.15; a free LOS check may be made to ascertain if this occurred), the ½" Acquired counter remains in the last Location that target occupied prior to leaving the acquirer's LOS."

Even if the target moves, if you have it acquired, it appears you get a free LOS check prior to declaring a shot, just to verify if the Acq counter follows the target.

 

[PresterJohn]

Just imagining the hilarity where shots are exchanged with acquisitions acquired, and then later on somebody notices "hey, that line of site is blocked".

 

[Michael R]

Just imagining the hilarity where shots are exchanged with acquisitions acquired, and then later on somebody notices "hey, that line of site is blocked".

Been there, done that.

 

[EJ1]

Hi Robin,

Not too hard to find an instance of using the link feature improperly, maybe even by mistake . . . let he who has not made an ASL mistake cast the first die.

C6.51 "He may choose which of his previously acquired targets will remain acquired, but need not specify which one until he fires at it or that unit has finished its MPh / APh / RtPh / CCPh-Withdrawal (whichever occurs first)."

In the following simplified example:

1. British ATG fires at the German in U2; the shot was clear, but there was no meaningful effect; the British player uses and links the acquisition counter
2. German unit moves from U2 to T1 and ends both its and his MPh. He says, ". . . and moves to T1 and stops. And that's the end of my MPh."
3. It is now the British DFPh, and regardless of orthodox compliance to ASOP, rules, etc. (it happens), the British player clicks his acquisition counter, which shows the link, and moves it to T1; he says, "Okay, that was tough, and my ATG XXX tracks your German now in T1"; in moving the acquisition counter to T1 a look at the link line shows the LOS is blocked; the British player does not fire (which, chuckle, if it were me, would have broken my gun or caused a sniper attack against me which would then kill my 9-2 death stack) or even choose to use his free LOS---not in every situation does one want to reveal the results of a free LOS check

In this scenario, would the acq. counter come off in T1? I think not until a shot is fired or a player chooses to use his free LOS check (C6.51). But, having that link gives valuable information.

Reverse the scenario and have the Germans now drive an AFV with an acquisition counter on the ATG up the U3-Q1 street. As soon as the German clicks and moves his vehicle, the link will follow (track), hex by hex, and tell both sides when he has moved in or out of the ATG's LOS. (Edit: It might be that when I click my linked acquisition counter, the link ALSO appears on my opponent's screen. If not, this could be grounds for more improperly gained information. I'd want to test with a live VASL opponent.)

Bottom-line, one should be careful using this feature as it can be used improperly, maybe by mistake or worse.

Cheers,

 

[hongkongwargamer]

Hi Robin,

Not too hard to find an instance of using the link feature improperly, maybe even by mistake . . . let he who has not made an ASL mistake cast the first die.

C6.51 "He may choose which of his previously acquired targets will remain acquired, but need not specify which one until he fires at it or that unit has finished its MPh / APh / RtPh / CCPh-Withdrawal (whichever occurs first)."

In the following simplified example:

View attachment 25936

1. British ATG fires at the German in U2; the shot was clear, but there was no meaningful effect; the British player uses and links the acquisition counter
2. German unit moves from U2 to T1 and ends both its and his MPh. He says, ". . . and moves to T1 and stops. And that's the end of my MPh."
3. It is now the DFPh, and regardless of orthodox compliance to ASOP, rules, etc. (it happens), the British player clicks his acquisition counter, which shows the link, and moves it to T1; he says, "Okay, that was tough, and my ATG XXX tracks your German now in T1"; in moving the acquisition counter to T1 a look at the link line shows the LOS is blocked; the British player does not fire (which, chuckle, if it were me, would have broken my gun or caused a sniper attack against me which would then kill my 9-2 death stack) or even choose to use his free LOS---not in every situation does one want to reveal the results of a free LOS check

In this scenario, would the acq. counter come off in T1? I think not until a shot is fired or a player chooses to use his free LOS check (C6.51). But, having that link gives valuable information.

Reverse the scenario and have the Germans now drive an AFV with an acquisition counter on the ATG up the U3-Q1 street. As soon as the German clicks his vehicle, the link will follow (track), hex by hex, and tell both sides when he has moved in or out of the ATG's LOS.

Bottom-line, one should be careful using this feature as it can be used improperly, maybe by mistake or worse.

Cheers,

Did you see Post #8?

Today's VASL View From The Cheap Seats

JR Tracy playing Danny Stanhagen in Urban Guerrillas. Russian tanks named after LA Lakers.

www.gamesquad.com

 

[apbills]

Some more thoughts on this...

In the ASLRB most, but not all, rules where you must do something include the word "must". Most, but no all, rules where you have a choice include the word "may".

In C6.5 we have two portions of the rule that work with each other.

1. "... it may place a ½" -1 Acquired counter on its target ..."
2. "The target remains acquired until ..." and a list of actions that cause loss of acquisition.

Note that you have a choice to place an Acq, but if you do place that acq, you can no longer directly choose to remove it, it is lost indirectly due to other actions, some which you obviously can choose to do (like move). I would suggest that the Acq "must" remain on the target (with an exception) until one of the listed actions takes place. the reason I believe it does not actually say "must" is due to C6.51.

1. "He may choose which of his previously acquired targets will remain acquired, but need not specify which one until he fires at it or that unit has finished its MPh/APh/RtPh/CCPh-Withdrawal (whichever occurs first)."
2. "If an acquired target leaves its present Location and thereby goes out of the firer's LOS (as per 6.15; a free LOS check may be made to ascertain if this occurred), the ½" Acquired counter remains in the last Location that target occupied prior to leaving the acquirer's LOS."

The first statement allows the defender a choice, although it is limited. The second statement gives direction regarding where said Acq would be placed given the loss of LOS condition, however, it also does not distinguish between players regarding the free LOS check. I would suggest that LOS check is free for either side. The timing of the final placement of the Acq is controlled by the firer to some extent, and could potentially use this choice to their advantage, i.e., a multi-unit stack splits up, you don't move the Acq with the first unit, and if it clearly goes out of your LOS (no free LOS check if you have not declared you are tracking said unit), the Acq still has the remaining units as potential targets. The risk is that a unit actually does leave your LOS, you did not check it, and you declare a shot further along when it is clearly in LOS, and your opponent challenges the acq placement and it is determined you lost LOS and the acq is no longer in play for you. This is moot if the stack is a single unit. Either you lost LOS (and the Acq is appropriately place, or you don't, and it ends up with the unit, and the Acq "must" follow the target regardless of when the firer actually moves the Acq counter. Either side could potentially use a free LOS check in every Location moved through to determine if LOS was lost.

The mechanics of this are not stipulated in detail and I suspect everyone has a preferred method of manipulating the counters during movement.

In @EJ1 's first example, the stack is a single unit and per C6.5 it must be tracked until loss of Acq conditions are met, so the firer really has no other choice other than move the Acq counter with it, although the timing of that is clearly a choice. I would also suggest that given the tight LOS, it would be prudent for both players to determine the legality of placing the Acq in the new, potentially out of LOS Location prior to any shot being declared/taken, and I have to believe any defender would take the LOS check prior to declaring any shot.

In @EJ1 's second example (with the moving vehicle as the firer) I would suggest the defender could either 1) remove/set-aside the Acq on his unit when the attacker leaves its current Location, or 2) remind the attacker to remove his Acq. And yes, mistakes can occur (how many times do you mistakenly unconceal some of your units) and you may get some intel prior to the Acq getting removed. If that intel (or lack thereof) is important to you I would suggest a reminder regarding loss of Acq prior to MPh if there are any Guns with Acq associated with units that can still move.

When we play, we normally leave the Acq counter behind when we move. At a minimum that marks the starting location of the moving unit (although now with Movement Trails it is not as big a deal). In addition, it makes it easier to deal with moving the unit as it is not encumbered with the additional counter.

Lastly, I am almost positive (99.9%) that the acq line is controlled by each player. You have to select one of the linked counters for it to show, and unit selection is per player.

 

[EJ1]

A few follow-on thoughts:

1. The free LOS check associated with acquisition counters is a deliberate action, often with trade offs for both players, whereas the link feature is automatic—no choice—which sometimes “robs” players of some tactical advantages à la, “Please, be my guest, check the LOS. No, Sir, by all means, you first.”
2. As @apbills suspects, the link feature only appears to the player who clicks the firer or its acquisition counter—this, in a sense, can act like an invisible LOS check to the player who clicks the link
3. I love the feature but would prefer that its linkage be something uncoupled from a LOS and more, maybe, like a temporary circle of some color (e.g., like the red circle we get for broken stuff), have it flash for a moment, etc. True, across large, cluttered boards the line helps, but I have no problem, even in the nastiest Stalingrad brawls, using the show-sniper feature, either.

Cheers,

 

[von Marwitz]

I love the feature but would prefer that its linkage be something uncoupled from a LOS and more, maybe, like a temporary circle of some color (e.g., like the red circle we get for broken stuff), have it flash for a moment, etc. True, across large, cluttered boards the line helps, but I have no problem, even in the nastiest Stalingrad brawls, using the show-sniper feature, either.

How about changing the straight line connecting the unit and its AQ counter with a slightly curved line?

That way, the "secret & free" LOS-checks would be avoided but the visually easy connection of unit and its AQ counter maintained.

von Marwitz

 

[hongkongwargamer]

Or just don't use it. There are a number of VASL features I don't use (linking guns & acq is not one of them). It's just a matter of personal preference.

If there's INDEED a rule issue and we have to change it, I'd rather NOT have a line. Just circle the corresponding ACQ counter when you click on a weapon.

 

[Gordon]

Or highlight the 2 counters without a line at all?

 

[apbills]

I guess I don't see an issue with the feature.

1. When you move and have an Acq on you, leave it behind. Problem solved.
2. Don't use the feature. I always label my Acq counters, even though I link them.
3. I agree with @hongkongwargamer (and @Gordon ) regarding a highlight circle (if a change is made). I would not want curved lines as I would find that a bit confusing, and also probably more complicated to code.

I actually don't believe there is even an issue 95% of the time. With the free LOS check being allowed at any time, if it is a single moving unit the intel is always available per the rules. In the case of a multi-unit stack breaking apart, you have to leave the Acq counter on the non-moving units until you decide to track, so no intel is gathered until that decision is made.

 

[ibncalb]

If you label your vehicles and acqs rather than linking them,

- You're playing for money

- You're playing a small scenario

I can't think of another reason.

 

[Michael R]

The VASL acquisition counter does not follow the unit automatically; I hope people have remembered that in their discussions.