Vehicle concealment loss

buser333

Active Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
586
Likes
126
Points
43
Location
central WI
#1
I imagine this falls under "other activity" but just want to make sure.
Does going CE or BU cause loss of concealment?
 

Eagle4ty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,013
Likes
879
Points
113
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
#2
I imagine this falls under "other activity" but just want to make sure.
Does going CE or BU cause loss of concealment?
Failing to see a Q&A to the contrary, I would venture a reply that yes it falls under any other activity. Note however, failing a Motion attempt or a MR Start attempt is NOT considered an action under this provision.
 

zgrose

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,627
Likes
368
Points
83
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
#3
I see the Motion attempt (D2.401: "There is no penalty (including "?" loss) for failing a Motion attempt dr...") but why would Mechanical Reliability not be concealment loss? You've spent a MP which is Case B for concealment loss (D2.51: "An AFV that suffers a Mechanical Reliability Immobilization is subject to Defensive First Fire (since it has expended a MP to start), but not...").
 

Eagle4ty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,013
Likes
879
Points
113
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
#4
I see the Motion attempt (D2.401: "There is no penalty (including "?" loss) for failing a Motion attempt dr...") but why would Mechanical Reliability not be concealment loss? You've spent a MP which is Case B for concealment loss (D2.51: "An AFV that suffers a Mechanical Reliability Immobilization is subject to Defensive First Fire (since it has expended a MP to start), but not...").
Just per Q&A, a pretty old one at that IIRC, a failed start due to MR will not result in concealment loss.
 

zgrose

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,627
Likes
368
Points
83
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
#5
All I could find was:

D2.51 May a player make a Mechanical Reliability DR with a Concealed vehicle which is immune to Mechanical Reliability Immobilization/Stalling or a 5/8" Dummy stack, in order to provide misleading information about his OB to his opponent?
A. No. [Letter8]

If you've spend a MP (allowing you to fired on for that spent MP), can't see how one wouldn't lose concealment. Maybe someone can dig up the reference.
 

jrv

Vare, legiones redde!
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,589
Likes
3,442
Points
163
Location
Teutoburger Wald
#6
All I could find was:

D2.51 May a player make a Mechanical Reliability DR with a Concealed vehicle which is immune to Mechanical Reliability Immobilization/Stalling or a 5/8" Dummy stack, in order to provide misleading information about his OB to his opponent?
A. No. [Letter8]

If you've spend a MP (allowing you to fired on for that spent MP), can't see how one wouldn't lose concealment. Maybe someone can dig up the reference.
You have to use the combined q&a:

q&a said:
A12.141 & D2.401 Is making a Motion attempt dr a concealment loss action if the vehicle fails? If it passes but fails its subsequent stall/-Mechanical Reliability DR?
A. No. No. [Compil7]
JR
 

klasmalmstrom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,179
Likes
1,867
Points
163
Location
Sweden
#7
That Q&A seems to only be related to making a Mech DR in conjunction with a Motion Attempt though. Since then no MP are actually spent.


If a Mech DR is needed in a vehicle's own MPh, Concealment is lost, since the Mech DR is not made until after a MP has already been expended to (attempt to ) Start.

D2.51:
"Each time an AFV having a red MP allotment expends a MP to start..."
 

Eagle4ty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,013
Likes
879
Points
113
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
#8
That Q&A seems to only be related to making a Mech DR in conjunction with a Motion Attempt though. Since then no MP are actually spent.


If a Mech DR is needed in a vehicle's own MPh, Concealment is lost, since the Mech DR is not made until after a MP has already been expended to (attempt to ) Start.

D2.51:
"Each time an AFV having a red MP allotment expends a MP to start..."
However, using your reasoning somewhat, assume you have made a successful motion attempt (perhaps even a non-platoon movement TC) and succeed but your attempt to start with a MR DR is attempted but fails. All that has gone before that MR attempt is forgotten (data dump), you are now in just the same circumstance as any other vehicle that has to make a MR DR. If the answer for a vehicle attempting to move after a successful motion attempt is "No" for concealment loss, it must stand to reason that it would also be "No" for any other vehicle attempting a MR Start attempt (Note the operative word "attempt").

[Edit] I'm not sure the MP for a MR start has been made, for a Stall yes, but for a MR attempt, not so sure.
 

zgrose

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,627
Likes
368
Points
83
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
#9
MR isn't an attempt, it's a consequence of having spent the Start MP. Same as how that AFV can get fired on for having spent an MP and why concealment is lost for spending a Start MP in your MPh.
 

klasmalmstrom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,179
Likes
1,867
Points
163
Location
Sweden
#10
[Edit] I'm not sure the MP for a MR start has been made, for a Stall yes, but for a MR attempt, not so sure.
I think the quote from D2.51 above is clear that a Start MP has been spent...also, if the vehicle fails the MR and becomes Immobilized it must still spend all its remaining MP - and that, as well, is "?"-loss.
 

Eagle4ty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
3,013
Likes
879
Points
113
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
#11
I think the quote from D2.51 above is clear that a Start MP has been spent...also, if the vehicle fails the MR and becomes Immobilized it must still spend all its remaining MP - and that, as well, is "?"-loss.
It certainly seems to be the case. In that respect I would say the Q&A with regards to a successful Motion Attempt but a failed MR attempt has no credibility and by the current rules at least has been rendered invalid and without merit.
 

klasmalmstrom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,179
Likes
1,867
Points
163
Location
Sweden
#12
It certainly seems to be the case. In that respect I would say the Q&A with regards to a successful Motion Attempt but a failed MR attempt has no credibility and by the current rules at least has been rendered invalid and without merit.
Well, it is an unofficial Q&A. But in the case of an unsuccessful Motion Attempt there is no MP spent. Such a die roll can probably be seen as a sort of a TC to see if the crew is "aware" or not - that that is not a "?"-loss actions is fine with me.

The Stall/Mech DR (I think) could represent multiple things - problems getting into gear, etc. That it should be a "?"-loss action has more merit IMO, ymmv.