APh - Leader SWTransfer and PAATC

[Fort]

"freely' Means freely...YMMV, but that's the way I play it. Always have, always will.

 

[apbills]

"freely' Means freely...YMMV, but that's the way I play it. Always have, always will.

Are you saying you don't count transfers in the RPh and APh as an action? Do you allow units to attempt repair of a SW after they transferred weapons (i.e., the transfer was not an action)? Do you count them as a Case C concealment loss action? Or, do you only treat "freely transfer" as a non-action in the APh?

 

[Richard Summers]

I'm with Fort. Freely means without cost...nothing (no ability) is sacrificed.

 

[Fort]

Are you saying you don't count transfers in the RPh and APh as an action? Do you allow units to attempt repair of a SW after they transferred weapons (i.e., the transfer was not an action)? Do you count them as a Case C concealment loss action? Or, do you only treat "freely transfer" as a non-action in the APh?

I don't count it as an action.

so:

Do you allow units to attempt repair of a SW after they transferred weapons (i.e., the transfer was not an action)?
-Yes

Do you count them as a Case C concealment loss action?
-No

Or, do you only treat "freely transfer" as a non-action in the APh?
-No. RPh too.

 

[apbills]

I don't count it as an action.

so:

Do you allow units to attempt repair of a SW after they transferred weapons (i.e., the transfer was not an action)?
-Yes

Do you count them as a Case C concealment loss action?
-No

Or, do you only treat "freely transfer" as a non-action in the APh?
-No. RPh too.

I guess that is one way to play it. Not consistent with a long-standing (20+ years) Q&A regarding transfers, but still a way to play.

Q: Can units who transfer SW perform other actions (e.g., Recombining, Scrounging, etc.) in the same RPh?
A: No. [Gen22.5; An95w; An96]

 

[ScottRomanowski]

I don't think the question was whether the leader could advance. The OP asked if the leader could transfer a SW and also direct a PAATC.

 

[Doug Leslie]

If the argument that a leader cannot transfer a SW and subsequently assist with a PAATC were correct, would it not also logically follow that any unit that transfers a SW would then be prohibited from advancing? What would be the difference?

In the rally phase, units can perform a variety of actions but can only perform one per RPh. The APh is different. SW transfer takes place at the start of the APh, whereas advancing (including PAATC) occurs during it. Whatever happens at the start of the APh has no bearing on what occurs thereafter.

 

[GeorgeBates]

The APh is different. SW transfer takes place at the start of the APh, whereas advancing (including PAATC) occurs during it. Whatever happens at the start of the APh has no bearing on what occurs thereafter.

Strange. I thought I heard an echo in this thread...?

 

[Sparafucil3]

The APh is different.

That may be. It isn't stated clearly anywhere.

In the rally phase, units can perform a variety of actions but can only perform one per RPh. ... SW transfer takes place at the start of the APh, whereas advancing (including PAATC) occurs during it. Whatever happens at the start of the APh has no bearing on what occurs thereafter.

Recombine takes place at the Start of the RPh (1.13B). You wouldn't then allow that same leader to Rally a unit During the RPh (1.23B). What happens at the Start of the RPh does impact what happens During the RPh. If there's a rule making the APh special in this respect, I am unaware of it.

Having said that, keep in mind, I believe it is allowed.

 

[MichalS]

I don't think the question was whether the leader could advance. The OP asked if the leader could transfer a SW and also direct a PAATC.

Exactly. The concealment table does not treat advancing as an action, but it does taking the PAATC. So the leader could transfer and advance; it just could not transfer and make or direct such an advance that requires a PAATC. Seems to me that a logical consequence of the analysis of available rules leads to such a conclusion*, though admittedly that would be a new one for me.

(* Although the "freely at start" and recombining arguments are strong too.)

BTW I always missed an explicit definition of "action" in the rules.

 

[nekengren2]

10.7 LEADERSHIP.................A leader may attempt only one action per phase,
and may use his leadership modifier (even if 0 or +1) more than once in the same phase only to attempt to rally more than one unit in a RPh, to direct Multiple ROF, Subsequent First Fire, Final Fire, or FPF attacks, and/or to assist units in the same Location or moving stack with a MC/Pin Check.

So these "actions" like Rally and MC can be done multiple times per phase.
What is the list of other "actions" which can only be done once? The only thing I can think of is only one FireGroup.

I think I'm more confused now.

 

[MichalS]

A11.6: "A leader may use his leadership modifier to aid any units in the same Location with their respective PAATC even if he does not advance into the Location himself." Unless it was clear from the "Pin Check" mentioned in A10.7 and the citation above, also using their leadership modifier to pass PAATC can be used multiple times in the same phase and in the same location. (And it clearly is an action.)

The principle is simple: You pick one action per leader per phase - but some actions enable to impart his leadership modifier on actions of several units, taken separately. So if you picked Rally, the leader can lend its leadership in the rally attempt of several units in the same location. If you picked directing a FG, it can lend its leadership to several of its attacks. This is valid for PAATC too. Then there are actions which can only be conducted once per phase; possibly because the leader is not directing but carrying them out himself. So the leader can only try to recover one SW per phase (RPh) irrespective of how many SWs are in his location, and it can only use the radio/field phone also only once and for one OBA "action".

What is an action? It is, for example, not clear whether lending his 1PP to an MMC is an action; though moving in the MPh certainly is. In principle, advancing should also be treated as an action - if a concealed unit advances into open ground in LOS of an enemy unit, it loses its concealment as a result of that action. So units advancing into AFV's location take an action of advancing, and that action requires succeeding at a PAATC check (which for those units taking the PAATC check does not count as a separate action, it is part of advancing). However, for the leader the action is commanding the MMCs taking the PAATC, i.e. imparting his leadeship to their PAATC attempts, and he just "joins in" on their results. This principle of "joining in", when leaders become kind of like attachments to an MMC that carries out an action under their leadership, are also apparent in how a stack is marked with counters in PFPh & MPh/DFPh (i.e. including the leader), joining of broken routing units and participation in close combat, and I guess we could think of more. So the leader does not conduct two actions of directing the PAATC and advancing. His action it to direct the PAATC, and the action of the MMC is advancing (conditional to the PAATC result), on which the leader can participate "for free", as a result of directing. If such a stack advances into open ground, it loses its concealment as a result of that action, and the "joined in" leader does too even though formally his action was directing the PAATC.

The takeaway is that there is a distinction between a unit taking an action and a the action of a leader directing an action of another unit (and partaking on its results "for free", i.e. not as a separate action).

With that out of the way we just need to think through whether the formulation "freely at the start of the phase" implies an action or not, absent any other ruling.

 

[Zajuts149]

This is an interesting thread. My thoughts are that first of all:
A4.431 TRANSFER: Stacks may be freely rearranged(my emphasis) to change possession of SW/Guns.
Then there are the specific conditions and exceptions.
The rules state that it can only be done during(m.e.) the Rally Phase and at the beginning of the Advance Phase.
This means that if a leader is stacked with a Good Order unit and a Broken unit in the Rally Phase, the leader may transfer any possessed SW/Gun to the G.O. unit, and then later in the Rally Phase, according to ASOP, he may then attempt to Rally the Broken unit.
The reason the rules specify at the beginning of the Advance Phase, is to forestall any leapfrogging issues. If the units weren't required to do it at the beginning, you could potentially have the issue of advancing into a location, transfer SW, advance that unit, transfer SW, etc.
Second: A11.6 CC vs AN AFV does not deprive the Leader of its Advance capability if it assists 1(or more) MMCs in their PAATC. The leader may follow into CC, stay put, or even Advance into an entirely different location.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Nobody in this thread can answer the question definitively. I am sure Perry has seen it, he lurks about here quite a bit. We know Klas has seen it and believes the Leader could transfer and apply his leadership to the PAATC. Advancing with the unit and applying his leadership to the CC attack has not been in question.

This means that if a leader is stacked with a Good Order unit and a Broken unit in the Rally Phase, the leader may transfer any possessed SW/Gun to the G.O. unit, and then later in the Rally Phase, according to ASOP, he may then attempt to Rally the Broken unit.

Except this isn't allowed and has been clarified by LONG standing Q&A (see post 12 for example, others exist in @klasmalmstrom's collection). You also can't Recombine (ASOP 1.13B) and then later repair (ASOP 1.22B). A leader can't both direct Recombine (ASOP 1.13B) and then Rally (ASOP 1.23B) a separate unit.

The one action per phase is pretty well established. What isn't nearly as clear is "what is an action"? Action isn't defined anywhere. If the Transfer is the APh isn't an action, then the transfer and directing of the PAATC (which is defined as an action in the Concealment Gain/Loss chart) is OK. If the Transfer is an action, then the transfer and directing of the PAATC might still be OK if the "freely rearranged" (A4.43) allows them to ignore the limitations of 1 action per phase and just rearrange possessions AND do an action. If "freely rearranged" doesn't allow that, then transfer and directing a PAATC wouldn't be allowed. The only person who can definitively answer that won't stick his head into this until he gets the question through proper channels.

For the record, I believe the "freely rearranged" allows for both a transfer and directing of the PAATC. This is how I have seen the game played (and played myself) for decades. Even were this not the original intent, I suspect the answer would still be the same at this point.

Just my .02€.

 

[nekengren2]

thanks for your thoughts guys. Well said. I'll go with the "played this way forever" bent on the rules. Transfer is "free". Yes, Leader can direct stuff after his free transfer.

 

[Bill Kohler]

Since it's your initial question, I think it'd be appropriate for you to send it to MMP for a (semi-)official answer, then we can all be playing it the same way.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I am not even sure the text in A10.7 is needed: "A leader may attempt only one action per phase,..."

The Rally Phase rules already covers that (for all units, not just leader).

I am not seeing in what other Phases it is an issue that the rules do not handle. But I am sure I am missing something.

 

[apbills]

IMO the rule's statement "Stacks may be freely rearranged to change possession of SW/Guns" is being misread. It is defining what the 'transfer' action entails (i.e., the purpose of the paragraph), not telling you it is a free action. The use of the word "freely" is in respect to your ability to rearrange weapons within a stack, at will. You do not need to account for each individual's weapon transfers to/from other units. All units participating in such a rearrangement of weapons have performed an action (transfer). It is clear that in the RPh units involved with weapon transfers can do nothing else, i.e., repair a weapon as well. If the interpretation of "freely rearrange" means the action is free, that would mean you could do something else during the RPh. I don't understand why the A10.7 similar limits on leaders for all phases are in question for the APh.

In my mind it is clear that all units may advance, regardless of other actions taken prior/after that advance (although I don't know what action could be taken after such an advance). A leader helping another unit by use of its leadership modifier is an action (the action in question), not the leaders ability to advance itself. During the MPh such "actions" are treated as part of Movement, costing a unit MF to perform. No such mechanism exists in the APh to combine with the actual step of advancing a unit.

In my own play, I suspect it has been extremely rare that I even encountered a situation where I had a leader that wanted to transfer a weapon prior to units advancing. I can think of situations where I may want to do that, but I rarely, if ever, have been in those situations (most likely a limitation on my own play). I also am not hung up with others playing it as they wish; it is a game and if both opponents want to play that way it is their choice. These situations come up all the time. I am currently playing an RF CG with an opponent I have not played before. We both have been playing ASL for 40+ years, yet we both have played certain rules completely different within our own player groups. An anecdotal experience proving that just because you played it forever one way does not mean that is the correct way per the rules.

 

[nekengren2]

Since it's your initial question, I think it'd be appropriate for you to send it to MMP for a (semi-)official answer, then we can all be playing it the same way.

yep. I sent the question and referenced this thread. This is a question for bigger minds than me.

 

[Tuomo]

This is a question for bigger minds than me.

None available. Best we can do is a bunch of small minds.