From dschofie at bournemouth.ac.uk Fri Apr 1 00:46:50 2005 From: dschofie at bournemouth.ac.uk (David Schofield) Date: Fri Apr 1 00:47:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Online Message-ID: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F2220913D7F4@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> Thanks for those. cheers David ________________________________ From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net on behalf of aslml@aslwebdex.net Sent: Fri 01/04/2005 04:48 To: 'ASL List' Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Online No one objected, so the DR scenarios are now up on the ASLWebDex. You can find the DR Archive at http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/desertrats/rats.html. You can find the WebDex at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/ and all the downloadable scenarios (and links to all the scenarios on the net) at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-scenarios.html. Larry Memmott _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University. Nor can any contract be formed on the University's behalf via e-mail. From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 1 01:05:18 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:03:46 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T1(A) RtPh, AdvPh, CCPh1 In-Reply-To: <00ac01c5365a$2924a0b0$1b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Humming the Prince song, "Around the World in a Day." Comments in "%%%." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 10:29 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T1(A) DFPh, AdvFPh, RtPh Listerz; Back to battle! Two messages in 13 hours! Lightning pace this. :) %%%BATES: Positively scorching. But I've got FtF coming up this Sunday to test my reflexes. > $$$BATES: You are on Central Standard Time, same as my beloved home of > Minnesota, so that means you're 14 hours behind me. I will send this > message at about midnight (24:00 Thu/00:00 Fri) tonight, which should be > 10:00 your time the Thursday. Thanks George. I also read your subsequent post about DST. %%%BATES: This means that as I read your message it is approaching 18:00 on Friday, whereas its about 03:00 in the morning for you. > Advance Fire Phase. Time to flip that smoke. Wow. > Lesse, this makes my best possible assault fire about 5FP+3, pinning and > revealing you on a DR4, which is also your sniper. This isn't likely to > produce any favorable results. That was fast. > > Assuming you will not voluntarily break and rout anyone (there are no > 'fraidy cats in my bunch), 15. ***MCLEOD: STOP! The German 238 will, at the start of the RtPh, declare "Voluntary Break". During the RtPh, the broken 238 w/LMG will rout to P6 (1MF), P7 (2MF), Q8(4MF), R8 (6MF). %%%BATES: He had the LMG, huh? Good luck using that SW if you can't rally him. Taunting aside, this probably is in his, and your, best interest. Not sure I would have added the LMG, as that is an asset you may want to keep in play. Can only guess your were hoping for some error in the pre-reg that might give you a shot at an effective fire lane. > that brings us to the Advance Phase. Here we > have some things to do. However, since it is midnight, I'm going to have > to > save this for a fresh message (and croissant!) with my coffee in the > morning. Cheers! Advance away George! My heroes will consider their options. Mind if we do a review of the action upon the completion of US T1? David, and others if so interested, please feel free to chime in. Not much has happened stick in the eye-wise, but the stage is being set! Take special note of SSR4. %%%BATES: Feel free to make any reviews you want. SSR4 had already slipped my feeble mind, but thinking about it again, it's a very telling restriction on you. Interesting... See you in the morning George. Time here is currently 7:26 Friday evening, your time would then be 9:26 Saturday morning. I hope this reaches you in time to enjoy with your croissant. %%%BATES: More like time for dinner now. By the way, the best croissant I ever had was during one breakfast in Switzerland in the Alps. :) %%%BATES: With coffee or chocolat for breakfast at Chateau d'Agneaux, just outside St. Lo. See the cows strolling out to pasture... =Jim= %%%BATES: Here goes. Advance Phase CX ?+1 in N2 over the bocage to O2 orchard (3MF by my count, so OK even though CX). 337II in N6 to O7. ?+2 in N4 to O5. ?+2 in O5 to P4. Let the festivities commence! Close Combat Phase Moment of truth time. We both need to drop trou and find out who the real men are. I'm holding a 747 & 9-2 in P4. Total ambush mods are -4 (neither of us is stealthy). My ambush dr: 6. Jeez. David can tell you I'm really good at throwing these. I may have to toss the board down the hallway if you have a real unit there and roll a 1... Anyway, let's see what you've got and make your ambush dr if needed. I will jump the gun and tell you that my 9-2 will attack together with the squad so you can go ahead and make your CC DR to speed things along even if its out of sequence. Happy Friday. - G From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 01:05:40 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:05:52 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:22:05 -0600, "Rich Domovic" wrote: >it is unfortunate when one of you just disregards a Perry rules >answer as nonsense. It would be considerably more unfortunate IMO if we parroted answers without thinking about them. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 01:08:09 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:08:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: <8916ba11318d.424bf0e0@broadpark.no> References: <8916ba11318d.424bf0e0@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:45:20 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >What is nonsense about that? You mean, apart from the fact that it's illegal, per the DC rules that Bruce B. has already quoted? Why, nothing at all. I prefer to play my ASL by following the rules, rather than following Q&A that are contrary to the rules. Perry is of course free to issue errata at any time, and when he does so I'll be happy to play by those (new) rules. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 01:11:27 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:11:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: <007601c53657$a15f01e0$1b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <04f701c5364a$06b481e0$a64d8918@klis.com> <007601c53657$a15f01e0$1b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 19:10:42 -0600, "mcleods" wrote: >Without bothering to look it up somewhere, is it known what the actual date >ASL was released on? I have a vague recollection that BV made its sales debut at Origins '85, whenever and wherever that was. But I could be wrong (it's not like I was there). The actual rulebook became available for sale a month or two afterwards. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 01:20:07 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:20:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <154q41hklq8ipun787iq5jaisk8j5f4ai7@4ax.com> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:37:18 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Well, A23.5 says that a DC can affect an AFV only if it is the primary >target of that DC attack. If the AFV is not the target of the Thrown DC >attack, then which target is it that is activating rule A8.1? Which target >is it that is being subjected to an IFT DR? According to the Perry Sez, it's the non-moving Location that the AFV is currently located in. It's my understanding of the rules that non-moving Locations cannot be the subject of a Defensive Fire Attack (EXC: subsequent hexes of an aircraft's Strafing Run). This is the objection I raised in the rules debate that *preceded* the Perry Sez, and the reason why I can't take the Perry Sez seriously. >So much for my opinion of these particular Q&A. I also find it interesting >to note that these have not found there way into any Errata, at least not to >my knowledge. The Q&A is not very old, so that's not all that surprising. Also, unless a Perry Sez specifically says to make some particular change to the rules (i.e., the "unofficial Q&A" becomes "unofficial errata"), it's unlikely to become *actual* errata (generally because Perry thinks that the answer can be derived from the existing rules). Hence, when the answer *can't* be so derived (and, indeed, is directly contradictory), I ignore it. >I find Bruce P.'s arguments about "conditions outside... the target hex" to >be rather weak. My "arguments"? I'm just quoting what the rules *do* say, not (unlike some others) making guesses about what they would say if they said something else. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 01:30:00 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:30:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: <17cd2abf1a94.424d0be2@broadpark.no> References: <17cd2abf1a94.424d0be2@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <7n4q41lau6a6gh5g3cn95tm5q3ioa2n9di@4ax.com> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 08:52:50 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >The bottom line IMHO, is that unlike what you and Tate says, this has been legal (although not clearly so) all the time, even before any of the Q&A in question. I completely agree with this statement. However, it has nothing to do with the actual situation being discussed, which is that the Q&A allows you to make a Defensive First Fire attack at a Location containing a moving unit by specifically *not* attacking that moving unit. Not by attacking that unit knowing that you can't harm it, but by DELIBERATELY NOT TARGETING IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. That's the part that sticks in *my* craw. >This rule does *not* say that the DEFENDER's attack has to be able to affect the moving unit. No it doesn't. However, the reason that it can't be affected is because (and *only* because) no attempt is being made to target it. Are you arguing that A8.1 allows you to *not* select that moving unit as your target? If you are, you're wrong. And the Q&A is similarly wrong. That's all there is to it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 01:51:35 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 01:51:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: <764636a60503310835215c2ae0@mail.gmail.com> References: <5udn415q797g31cag89vc8r64jufd179br@4ax.com> <764636a60503310835215c2ae0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <975q415j21kuioqc3obm0u4625iok2vh4i@4ax.com> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:35:11 -0700, Darren Gour wrote: >On this basis any further thoughts on whether you can fall into a >cellar just from a VCA change in the single story house? Strictly, no. B23.41 says (in part): "Such non-VBM entry of a building hex requires an immediate Bog Check DR .... If the AFV rolls an Original 6 on the colored dr of the Bog Check DR, the AFV has fallen through the floor to the cellar and is removed." "*The* Bog Check DR" being referenced to in the latter sentence is the one caused by entry of the building, not just *any* Bog Check DR that the AFV makes while within the building. I thought I remembered Q&A from somewhere that actually said as much explicitly, but I couldn't find anything. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 02:00:58 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 02:01:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: <20050331090905.1366.qmail@web51001.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050331090905.1366.qmail@web51001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:09:05 +0200 (CEST), Klas Malmstr?m wrote: >So how would you resolve a VCA change in a Woods location ? > >In a woods location you can choose ALL or HALF MP expenditure to enter >and the +3 BOG DRM only applies if you choose HALF. > >What would apply to a VCA change ? That's a very good question. I'm glad that you asked it. It shows great wisdom on your part. Can you tell yet that I don't know the answer? Seriously, I have no idea. Changing VCA within woods costs neither "ALL" nor "HALF" of the AFV's MP allotment. It costs a flat 2 MP, an amount that can be neither increased nor decreased for any reason. If the +3 DRM were phrased as being applicable if the AFV does not spend "ALL", the answer would be straight-forward, but it isn't; it's phrased as being applicable when the AFV spends "HALF". Two conditions, neither of which are true. Sorry, only Perry can straighten this one out. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Apr 1 02:06:32 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri Apr 1 02:09:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower Message-ID: <1ee1d90764ed.424d3948@broadpark.no> Hi, I wrote: > >The bottom line IMHO, is that unlike what you and Tate says, this > has been legal (although not clearly so) all the time, even before > any of the Q&A in question. > and Bruce Probst answered: > I completely agree with this statement. However, it has nothing > to do with the actual situation being discussed, which is that the > Q&A allows you to make > a Defensive First Fire attack at a Location containing a moving > unit by specifically *not* attacking that moving unit. > I agree that specifically *not* attcking the moving unit during D1F is illegal, but I maintain that attacking a moving unit with an attack that cannot affect the moving unit is legal. So you can throw a DC without a position DR vs the BU AFV, just as you can fire a MG as Small Arms without a TH DR vs the same AFV. Those two attacks are of the same type, and nothing in A8.1 says that you need to ve able to affect the target to make an attack against it. > Not by attacking that unit knowing that you can't harm it, but by > DELIBERATELYNOT TARGETING IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. > It's an important difference between *not* attacking it, and to attack it with a type of attack that cannot affect it. The former is illegal per A8.1, while the latter is legal per the same rule. I think (and obviously Perry too) that both firing a MG as small arms and throwing a DC without a positioning DR are of the latter, legal type. > >This rule does *not* say that the DEFENDER's attack has to be > able to affect the moving unit. > > No it doesn't. However, the reason that it can't be affected is > because (and *only* because) no attempt is being made to target it. Are you > arguing that A8.1 allows you to *not* select that moving unit as your target? > A8.1 requires that we "fires at it" - no more, no less. The fact that A23.5 says that the AFV cannot be affected matters just as little as A7.307 and A9.6 matters, when deciding whether the attack is legal in the first place. I'm happy for this simple interpretation of A8.1. You may always attack, regardless of the target's status. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 02:32:35 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 02:32:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: <1ee1d90764ed.424d3948@broadpark.no> References: <1ee1d90764ed.424d3948@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <0i8q411gi3borpn20dahsq1l95cghdg1nv@4ax.com> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:06:32 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >A8.1 requires that we "fires at it" - no more, no less. Absolutely correct. And by deliberately *not* making a Position DR, you are just as deliberately *not* "firing at it". Whatever it is that you're "firing at", the moving AFV is *not* it (since a Position DR is *required* for any Thrown DC attack vs. an AFV). This is clear, which is why you (and the Q&A) are wrong. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bo_siemsen at city.dk Fri Apr 1 02:42:34 2005 From: bo_siemsen at city.dk (Bo Siemsen) Date: Fri Apr 1 02:42:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building References: Message-ID: <424d259a0542e2.22336499@not right> Gentlemen, The rule regarding using "all" MP in woods is D 2.15 and refers to "minimum move". That rule can not be applied to VCA change as far as I can tell. So there should be a modifier of +3 when making VCA change in woods. D 2.11 says "Bog penalties for entry of difficult terrain are also applicable to VCA changes in that terrain if not also o0n a road". Best Regards Bo Siemsen of Copenhagen > Seriously, I have no idea. Changing VCA within woods costs neither "ALL"= > nor > "HALF" of the AFV's MP allotment. It costs a flat 2 MP, an amount that = > can be > neither increased nor decreased for any reason. > > If the +3 DRM were phrased as being applicable if the AFV does not spend > "ALL", the answer would be straight-forward, but it isn't; it's phrased = > as > being applicable when the AFV spends "HALF". Two conditions, neither of = > which > are true. > > Sorry, only Perry can straighten this one out. mind if I try :-) From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Apr 1 02:45:52 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri Apr 1 02:48:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower Message-ID: <203a005455fa.424d4280@broadpark.no> Hi, I wrote: > >A8.1 requires that we "fires at it" - no more, no less. > and Bruce Probst answered: > Absolutely correct. And by deliberately *not* making a Position > DR, you are just as deliberately *not* "firing at it". No, I'm just deliberately not firing at it in a way that can affect it, just as I can do with my MG. > Whatever it is that > you're "firing at", the moving AFV is *not* it (since a Position DR is *required* > for any Thrown DC attack vs. an AFV). No, the Position DR is required if you want to *affect" the AFV. You're also sidestepping why this is illegal with a DC, but legal with a MG, which needs a TH DR to *affect* it, since your arguments could just as well be used against that attack. >This is clear, which is why you (and the Q&A) are wrong. It's obviously not clear. If it was, we wouldn't have discussed it. Someone should send Perry a questions - oh, someone already did ;-) From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Fri Apr 1 03:52:45 2005 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (=?iso-8859-1?q?Klas=20Malmstr=F6m?=) Date: Fri Apr 1 03:52:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050401115245.42160.qmail@web25602.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi, --- Bo Siemsen wrote: > > Gentlemen, > > The rule regarding using "all" MP in woods is D 2.15 and refers to "minimum > move". That rule can not be applied to VCA change as far as I can tell. So > there should be a modifier of +3 when making VCA change in woods. Rule B13.41 mentions a vecicle expending ALL to enter a Woods hex without using Minimum Move. > D2.11 says "Bog penalties for entry of difficult terrain are also applicable > to VCA changes in that terrain if not also on a road". Even though this rule is clear - I don't think that the +3 should apply since the Bog Chart says "entry" - not "entry/VCA". So there is a contradiction between the two rules, IMHO. Perhaps a Q&A to Perry/MMP is in order. Regards, Klas ------------------------------------------------------- Klas Malmstrom Linkoping, Sweden Email: klas_malmstrom@yahoo.se ------------------------------------------------------- From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 1 06:06:33 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 1 06:06:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower References: <20050401042518.91E4984D48@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <000c01c536c4$045de740$2f27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Brian writes, > Jim, > > I once heard a supposedly Scottish saying, perhaps you're familiar? > > When you die, you're going to be upended in a barrel filled with all the > beer (suppose it would count for other spirits as well) you've spilled > during your life. > > If you drown, then to Hell with you! :-) Well, my maker should forgive wet soles of me feet. ;) =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Apr 1 07:11:36 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Apr 1 07:14:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Specifying Targets and Placing Residual (was: Thrown DC residual firepower) In-Reply-To: <203a005455fa.424d4280@broadpark.no> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Ole Boe > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 4:46 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower > > > Yes, it has. A7.307 says: "Small Arms and non-ordnance attacks [EXC: FT, DC, > MOL, ATMM] have no effect vs armored targets but may leave Residual FP". Ole, Sure that is what that rule says. The problem is that other rules don't allow one to target AFV except with ATT: C3.31 "...must be used when firing at an AFV..." This is then followed by a list of exceptions which does not include "...to place residual FP..." Don't know about you Ole but I know what "_must_" means. This rule is clear and unambiguous...if you want to "fire" at an "AFV" you "must" use the VTT. Notice also that ITT and ATT never use the word "must". It is "can" and "may". The only "must" used in any of the three target types is for "firing at an AFV". Also note that it doesn't say "when attempting TH an AFV"...it says "firing". In ITT/VTT it says "from a _hit_ on this table"..."can be hit"..."whenever ordnance"..."All units hit". But in VTT it is "fire". The whole purpose of C3.31 is to say that VTT is the only way to attack/fire (at) AFV (EXC: exposed PRC). Also, there is A7.4: "...Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC in the same Location are considered targets of fire that does not have to specify a particular target..." This specifically leaves AFV out as far as "TARGET DETERMINATION" for IIFT/ift. There is a reference to DFrF as an exception but this refers to the fact that only moving units are viable targets for DFrF. Thus during DFrF only moving "Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC" are legitimate targets for IIFT/ift. So, you can refer to A7.307 all you want...it don't mean a hill of beans because other rules don't even allow IIFT/ift attacks vs BU AFV in the first place. IIFT/ift can not specify a particular target and VTT is the only legal way to target AFV. The mere act of using IIFT/ift to specify an AFV as a target is itself illegal. The only thing that currently allows IIFT/ift attacks vs AFV for sole purpose of placing residual is the Q&A. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 1 07:53:04 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 1 08:02:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T1(A) RtPh, CCPh1 Start T1(G), RPh, PFPh, MPh References: Message-ID: <006d01c536d3$3f0d1af0$2f27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, On with the show! > 15. ***MCLEOD: STOP! The German 238 will, at the start of the RtPh, > declare "Voluntary Break". During the RtPh, the broken 238 w/LMG will > rout > to P6 (1MF), P7 (2MF), Q8(4MF), R8 (6MF). > %%%BATES: He had the LMG, huh? Good luck using that SW if you can't > rally > him. Taunting aside, this probably is in his, and your, best interest. > Not > sure I would have added the LMG, as that is an asset you may want to keep > in > play. Can only guess your were hoping for some error in the pre-reg that > might give you a shot at an effective fire lane. Yes, if the Smoke went astray in a manner beneficial to me it would be nice to have the LMG up front. A bit of a gamble but what the hey. > By the way, the best croissant I ever had was during one > breakfast in > Switzerland in the Alps. :) > %%%BATES: With coffee or chocolat for breakfast at Chateau d'Agneaux, > just > outside St. Lo. See the cows strolling out to pasture... We were in Leysin, up in the mountains. My wife's cousin worked in a bakery there and our goodies were minutes old. The views were tremendous. > %%%BATES: Here goes. > Advance Phase > CX ?+1 in N2 over the bocage to O2 orchard (3MF by my count, so OK even > though CX). > 337II in N6 to O7. > ?+2 in N4 to O5. *** MCLEOD: George, were not the guys in your N4 move in N5? No effect gamewise really but I had you in N5 prior to the Advance, am I correct > ?+2 in O5 to P4. Let the festivities commence! > Close Combat Phase > Moment of truth time. We both need to drop trou and find out who the real > men are. I'm holding a 747 & 9-2 in P4. Total ambush mods are -4 > (neither > of us is stealthy). My ambush dr: 6. Jeez. David can tell you I'm > really > good at throwing these. I may have to toss the board down the hallway if > you have a real unit there and roll a 1... > Anyway, let's see what you've got and make your ambush dr if needed. I > will > jump the gun and tell you that my 9-2 will attack together with the squad > so > you can go ahead and make your CC DR to speed things along even if its out > of sequence. Happy Friday. 16. ***MCLEOD: I can not reveal a strength factor at the Start of the Location's CCPh. I lose 2 x Dummy counters. You retain your "?". Near as I can tell, there are no more CCPh activities other than your 337 inoO7 gaining "?". If this is correct, I will start the Ger. PT1 - RPh If any of this is out of step, please feel free to back things up. [START GERMAN PLAYER TURN 1] RPh: (George, silly me, but is the cdr referenced first in reporting the DR's? That is what I am doing in this case, please correct me if I am not correct. 17. *** MCLEOD: WC DR = 7 (2cdr, 5wdr) I have no other RPh activities other than a Self-Rally for my first broken MMC. Self Rally attempt broken 238 in R8; DR = 9 (5,4). 18. *** MCLEOD: I can't see any RPh activities for you George so I will go to the German PFPh. 19. *** MCLEOD: Ger. PFPh: None. 20. *** MCLEOD: Ger. MPh. Hmmmm ... none. 21. *** MCLEOD: Am. DFPh. You're go George Talk to you soon. =Jim= From morrisgj at mscd.edu Fri Apr 1 08:16:56 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Fri Apr 1 08:26:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Human Wave requirements Message-ID: <2f77992f8e63.2f8e632f7799@mscd.edu> Hello All: A HW requires a average of 2 MMC per hex involved in the wave. A HS is an MMC so if I had 6 half-squads in 3 hexes I would meet the requirements, right? Thanks, Gerry From morrisgj at mscd.edu Fri Apr 1 09:45:23 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Fri Apr 1 09:52:15 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Human Wave requirements Message-ID: <3033dc30534c.30534c3033dc@mscd.edu> Hello David: Thanks for the answer. Russians can deploy via CRing (grin). Strange that I cannot see my posted question but it must be out there in the Ether as you saw it. Take care, Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: David Reenstra Date: Friday, April 1, 2005 10:16 am Subject: RE: [Aslml] Human Wave requirements > Gerry writes: > > > > > Hello All: > > > > A HW requires a average of 2 MMC per hex involved in the wave. A > HS is > > an MMC so if I had 6 half-squads in 3 hexes I would meet the > > requirements, right? > > > > Yep, an HS is an MMC so it meets the requirements. You don't > often see an > HW done this way, since Russians don't usually have the option to > deploy. > HTH, > Dave Reenstra > > > Thanks, > > > > Gerry > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Apr 1 09:07:06 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Fri Apr 1 09:55:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Specifying Targets and Placing Residual (was: Thrown DC residual firepower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Hi, I wrote: > > Yes, it has. A7.307 says: "Small Arms and non-ordnance attacks [EXC: FT, > > DC, > > MOL, ATMM] have no effect vs armored targets but may leave Residual FP". > And Tate answered: > > Sure that is what that rule says. The problem is that other rules don't > allow one to target AFV except with ATT: > > C3.31 "...must be used when firing at an AFV..." > > This is then followed by a list of exceptions which does not > include "...to place residual FP..." > > Don't know about you Ole but I know what "_must_" means. This > rule is clear > and unambiguous...if you want to "fire" at an "AFV" you "must" > use the VTT. > No, with all respect, you've got this *totally* wrong. C3.31 is about TO HIT attempts, and the "must" you see only applies when firing at an AFV using a TO HIT attempt. You can of course fire at an AFV by other means, totally without using the VTT or any other Fire Table. Examples of totally legal attacks not using any To Hit table are when using a FT or a DC. > The whole purpose of C3.31 is to say that VTT is the only way to > attack/fire (at) AFV (EXC: exposed PRC). > ...when using a To Hit Table. You got the rest of your argument wrong. > Also, there is A7.4: > > "...Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC in the > same Location are considered targets of fire that does not have > to specify a particular target..." > I don't know whether it was deliberate or not, but you forgot to quote the start of the sentence. The start is "Except during Defensive First Fire (8.1), all the..." Note that the part you didn't quote says that your quote doesn't apply during DFF, which happens to be what we discuss. So this argument is wrong as well, and that was that ;-) Having said that, I agree with you all that the specific rules that mention AFV as a target seems to be written totally without the thought that the AFV may be attacked by an attack that cannot affect it. So it is far from clear that Don Greenwod's intention was to allow Small Arms etc. attack vs an AFV to place RFP, I'm actually far from sure that he ever thought of the problem. But then we have the new A7.307 and several Q&A stating that such attacks are legal. We then have the choise between saying that A7.307 and those Q&A are nonsense, or accept that A9.6, A23.5 etc. talks about how you need to attack an AFV *if you want to affect it*, but allows for general attacks that leaves residual FP as well. When the latter is the official choise by MMP (which I haven't influenced at all, just to make that clear), I choose to follow that, instead of insisting that one official rule and several Q&A from MMP are nonsense. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From dgour.asl at gmail.com Fri Apr 1 11:35:23 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Fri Apr 1 11:40:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Human Wave requirements In-Reply-To: <3033dc30534c.30534c3033dc@mscd.edu> References: <3033dc30534c.30534c3033dc@mscd.edu> Message-ID: <764636a605040111351fe2155d@mail.gmail.com> On Apr 1, 2005 10:45 AM, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: > Hello David: > > Thanks for the answer. Russians can deploy via CRing (grin). > > Take care, > > Gerry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Reenstra > Date: Friday, April 1, 2005 10:16 am > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Human Wave requirements > > > Gerry writes: > > > > > > > > Hello All: > > > > > > A HW requires a average of 2 MMC per hex involved in the wave. A > > HS is > > > an MMC so if I had 6 half-squads in 3 hexes I would meet the > > > requirements, right? > > > > > > > Yep, an HS is an MMC so it meets the requirements. You don't > > often see an > > HW done this way, since Russians don't usually have the option to > > deploy. > > HTH, > > Dave Reenstra > > Russians just have to plan on capturing somone early and then use the guards freely deply & transferring of prisoners provisions to get a bunch of half-squads. Still, not possible very often what with SS not surrending rule or oft used No Quarter in effect SSR. -- dg From dreenstra at comcast.net Fri Apr 1 09:16:22 2005 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Fri Apr 1 11:59:57 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Human Wave requirements In-Reply-To: <2f77992f8e63.2f8e632f7799@mscd.edu> Message-ID: <20050401171609.59D5E8612E@che.dreamhost.com> Gerry writes: > > Hello All: > > A HW requires a average of 2 MMC per hex involved in the wave. A HS is > an MMC so if I had 6 half-squads in 3 hexes I would meet the > requirements, right? > Yep, an HS is an MMC so it meets the requirements. You don't often see an HW done this way, since Russians don't usually have the option to deploy. HTH, Dave Reenstra > Thanks, > > Gerry > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Apr 1 13:00:36 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Apr 1 13:00:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Specifying Targets and Placing Residual (was: Thrown DC residual firepower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Ole Boe > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:07 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] RE: Specifying Targets and Placing Residual (was: > Thrown DC residual firepower) > > > > Sure that is what that rule says. The problem is that other rules don't > > allow one to target AFV except with ATT: > > > > C3.31 "...must be used when firing at an AFV..." > > > > This is then followed by a list of exceptions which does not > > include "...to place residual FP..." > > > > Don't know about you Ole but I know what "_must_" means. This > > rule is clear > > and unambiguous...if you want to "fire" at an "AFV" you "must" > > use the VTT. > > > No, with all respect, you've got this *totally* wrong. C3.31 is > about TO HIT > attempts, and the "must" you see only applies when firing at an > AFV using a > TO HIT attempt. I disagree...the rule doesn't say "...must be used when attempting a TH...", it says "firing". The rule is telling us that when specifying an AFV as the target of "fire" one "must" use the VTT. > You can of course fire at an AFV by other means, totally without using the > VTT or any other Fire Table. Examples of totally legal attacks > not using any > To Hit table are when using a FT or a DC. There are specific rules for both FT and DC which allow them to designate AFV. There is are no such rules for IIFT/ift. > ...when using a To Hit Table. You got the rest of your argument wrong. C3.31 doesn't say that. > > Also, there is A7.4: > > > > "...Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC in the > > same Location are considered targets of fire that does not have > > to specify a particular target..." > > > I don't know whether it was deliberate or not, but you forgot to quote the > start of the sentence. The start is "Except during Defensive First Fire > (8.1), all the..." I didn't leave it out...I specifically noted the reference. The only thing that referring to A8.1 does is limit the "TARGET DETERMINATION" to those "...Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC..." that are currently expending MP/MF. A8.1 doesn't change A7.4 other than to add the requirement that the targets are also moving. > Note that the part you didn't quote says that your quote doesn't apply > during DFF, which happens to be what we discuss. It doesn't say it doesn't apply. It changes the limits to those "...Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC..." that are moving. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 1 13:20:45 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 1 13:21:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building References: <20050331090905.1366.qmail@web51001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001201c53700$ac396f20$9427c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Klas asks, >So how would you resolve a VCA change in a Woods location ? > >In a woods location you can choose ALL or HALF MP expenditure to enter >and the +3 BOG DRM only applies if you choose HALF. > >What would apply to a VCA change ? Bruce P. replied, "That's a very good question. I'm glad that you asked it. It shows great wisdom on your part. Can you tell yet that I don't know the answer? Seriously, I have no idea. Changing VCA within woods costs neither "ALL" nor "HALF" of the AFV's MP allotment. It costs a flat 2 MP, an amount that can be neither increased nor decreased for any reason. If the +3 DRM were phrased as being applicable if the AFV does not spend "ALL", the answer would be straight-forward, but it isn't; it's phrased as being applicable when the AFV spends "HALF". Two conditions, neither of which are true. Sorry, only Perry can straighten this one out." That _is_ a good question. Can't say I've spent too much time in woods changing VCA. Usually when I'm driving through woods, my AFV's are in a hurry to bet to point B before the enemy does. "pardon me shrubberies ... just passing through, excuse us ..." =Jim= From keith.dalton at gmail.com Fri Apr 1 13:49:10 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Fri Apr 1 13:49:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: 20 years of ASL In-Reply-To: <053301c5365c$a265d140$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <04f701c5364a$06b481e0$a64d8918@klis.com> <007601c53657$a15f01e0$1b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <053301c5365c$a265d140$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <4e2cf5e0050401134914543991@mail.gmail.com> Actually, Origins 1985 was the debut of ASL. We're working on something to commemorate the 20th Anniversary. Keith MMP On Mar 31, 2005 8:36 PM, David Olie wrote: > Jim wrote: > > > Without bothering to look it up somewhere, is it known what the actual > date > > ASL was released on? > > As I mentioned in my following post, this is something we should find out > for sure. I know it was sometime in late 1985. > > David "Doctor Who" Olie > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 14:23:59 2005 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Fri Apr 1 14:24:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050401222359.84996.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I believe the application of DRM for using "All" or "half" MP in a woods hex is worded as only for *entering* the woods hex, which a VCA change is not doing. I have always played it as they do not apply unless the vehicle is actually entering the woods hex. Then again, who am I? Jazz --- mcleods wrote: > Listerz; > > Klas asks, > > >So how would you resolve a VCA change in a Woods location ? > > > >In a woods location you can choose ALL or HALF MP expenditure to enter > >and the +3 BOG DRM only applies if you choose HALF. > > > >What would apply to a VCA change ? > > Bruce P. replied, > > "That's a very good question. I'm glad that you asked it. It shows great > wisdom on your part. > > Can you tell yet that I don't know the answer? > > Seriously, I have no idea. Changing VCA within woods costs neither "ALL" > nor > "HALF" of the AFV's MP allotment. It costs a flat 2 MP, an amount that can > be > neither increased nor decreased for any reason. > > If the +3 DRM were phrased as being applicable if the AFV does not spend > "ALL", the answer would be straight-forward, but it isn't; it's phrased as > being applicable when the AFV spends "HALF". Two conditions, neither of > which > are true. > > Sorry, only Perry can straighten this one out." > > That _is_ a good question. Can't say I've spent too much time in woods > changing VCA. Usually when I'm driving through woods, my AFV's are in a > hurry to bet to point B before the enemy does. > > "pardon me shrubberies ... just passing through, excuse us ..." > > > > > =Jim= > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From morrisgj at mscd.edu Fri Apr 1 22:07:05 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Fri Apr 1 22:07:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Burning Wreck in Bypass Message-ID: <33654733ba79.33ba79336547@mscd.edu> Hello All: I have a burning wreck in bypass. 1. Does the Smoke from this blaze affect LOS? (I ask as D9.4 says you don't get the regular AFV/Wreck Hindrance if in Bypass.) 2. If the Smoke effect applies, I assume it does so when the LOS crosses any part of the hexside that the Burning Wreck is bypassing? Thanks in advance, Gerry From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 22:47:01 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 22:47:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: <203a005455fa.424d4280@broadpark.no> References: <203a005455fa.424d4280@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:45:52 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >It's obviously not clear. If it was, we wouldn't have discussed it. I'm sorry that it's not clear to *you*. Personally, I'm not "discussing" anything; there isn't anything *to* discuss. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From dgour.asl at gmail.com Fri Apr 1 22:50:19 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Fri Apr 1 22:50:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: concealment status of crew of concealed vehicle Message-ID: <764636a60504012250597e6e3d@mail.gmail.com> If a vehicle sets up in concealment terrain and then the crew abandons it while out of LOS of all enemy units does the crew exit the vehicle sharing the concealed status of the vehicle? -- dg From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 22:52:24 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 22:52:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: <20050401222359.84996.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050401222359.84996.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 14:23:59 -0800 (PST), Jazz wrote: >I have always played it as they do not apply unless the vehicle is actually entering the woods >hex. So have I, but that's only because I was ignorant of the D2.11 rule saying that this is actually not the correct way to play it. Now that I am no longer ignorant of that rule, I can hardly pretend that it doesn't exist, can I? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 23:11:17 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 23:11:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Specifying Targets and Placing Residual (was: Thrown DC residual firepower) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 19:07:06 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >When the latter is the official choise by MMP (which I haven't influenced at >all, just to make that clear), I choose to follow that, instead of insisting >that one official rule and several Q&A from MMP are nonsense. I'm sorry, just to be specific, who is that you're claiming as saying that "A7.307 and several Q&A" is "nonsense"? Because I certainly have made no such claim. What I *do* think is nonsense is the *one* Q&A that allows a Thrown DC to attack an AFV by not attacking it (in direct contravention of the Thrown DC rules); your argument that A7.307 supports that Q&A is equally nonsensical, of course. So far as DC are concerned, *all* that A7.307 says is that DC are a form of non-ordnance that can be used to attack AFV, and may leave Residual FP as a consequence of that attack -- and I don't believe that *anyone* has ever attempted to argue otherwise. What A7.307 is specifically *not* saying about DC is what *mechanism* is used for a DC to attack an AFV, which is (quite properly) left to other rules, and it is those *other rules* that the Q&A in question contradicts (and hence, why it is nonsense). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 23:33:01 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 23:33:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Burning Wreck in Bypass In-Reply-To: <33654733ba79.33ba79336547@mscd.edu> References: <33654733ba79.33ba79336547@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 23:07:05 -0700, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >I have a burning wreck in bypass. > >1. Does the Smoke from this blaze affect LOS? (I ask as D9.4 says you >don't get the regular AFV/Wreck Hindrance if in Bypass.) The Smoke fills the Location containing the wreck just as any other smoke source would (B25.2, A24.2). Smoke doesn't care whether it's in bypass or not. >2. If the Smoke effect applies, I assume it does so when the LOS >crosses any part of the hexside that the Burning Wreck is bypassing? See above. SMOKE from *any* source *always* fills the entire Location. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 1 23:39:21 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 1 23:39:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: concealment status of crew of concealed vehicle In-Reply-To: <764636a60504012250597e6e3d@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504012250597e6e3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0mis41tihha7go4f34s3vevh0ak14a6e1e@4ax.com> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 23:50:19 -0700, Darren Gour wrote: >If a vehicle sets up in concealment terrain and then the crew abandons >it while out of LOS of all enemy units does the crew exit the vehicle >sharing the concealed status of the vehicle? PRC *always* share the concealed status of their vehicle (A12.2). So, yes. Note, however, that as soon the crew abandons the vehicle, the vehicle itself is no longer a "unit" and thus cannot remain concealed. Only units (and any SW/Gun they may possess) may be concealed (A12.11, last sentence) (EXC: Fortifications may be HIP). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 2 04:26:56 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 2 04:24:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": end of T1(A) & T1(G) RPh - RtPh In-Reply-To: <006d01c536d3$3f0d1af0$2f27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Sailing toward T2 in "&&&." Should note that tomorrow is an FTF day so don't expect to see me here. Might be able to get another move back to you tonight if you hustle, though. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 12:53 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T1(A) RtPh, CCPh1 Start T1(G), RPh, PFPh, MPh Listerz, On with the show! > 15. ***MCLEOD: STOP! The German 238 will, at the start of the RtPh, > declare "Voluntary Break". During the RtPh, the broken 238 w/LMG will > rout > to P6 (1MF), P7 (2MF), Q8(4MF), R8 (6MF). > %%%BATES: He had the LMG, huh? Good luck using that SW if you can't > rally > him. Taunting aside, this probably is in his, and your, best interest. > Not > sure I would have added the LMG, as that is an asset you may want to keep > in > play. Can only guess your were hoping for some error in the pre-reg that > might give you a shot at an effective fire lane. Yes, if the Smoke went astray in a manner beneficial to me it would be nice to have the LMG up front. A bit of a gamble but what the hey. > By the way, the best croissant I ever had was during one > breakfast in > Switzerland in the Alps. :) > %%%BATES: With coffee or chocolat for breakfast at Chateau d'Agneaux, > just > outside St. Lo. See the cows strolling out to pasture... We were in Leysin, up in the mountains. My wife's cousin worked in a bakery there and our goodies were minutes old. The views were tremendous. &&&BATES: Yeah, people know how to live in the Old Country. There's a lot to be said for 35 hour work weeks and historical preservation. > %%%BATES: Here goes. > Advance Phase > CX ?+1 in N2 over the bocage to O2 orchard (3MF by my count, so OK even > though CX). > 337II in N6 to O7. > ?+2 in N4 to O5. *** MCLEOD: George, were not the guys in your N4 move in N5? No effect gamewise really but I had you in N5 prior to the Advance, am I correct &&&BATES: Another act of dyslexia on my part. They were in N5, but definitely on the road in O5 now, with ideas of goin' places next turn. MOO HWA HA HA HA... > ?+2 in O5 to P4. Let the festivities commence! > Close Combat Phase > Moment of truth time. We both need to drop trou and find out who the real > men are. I'm holding a 747 & 9-2 in P4. Total ambush mods are -4 > (neither > of us is stealthy). My ambush dr: 6. Jeez. David can tell you I'm > really > good at throwing these. I may have to toss the board down the hallway if > you have a real unit there and roll a 1... > Anyway, let's see what you've got and make your ambush dr if needed. I > will > jump the gun and tell you that my 9-2 will attack together with the squad > so > you can go ahead and make your CC DR to speed things along even if its out > of sequence. Happy Friday. 16. ***MCLEOD: I can not reveal a strength factor at the Start of the Location's CCPh. I lose 2 x Dummy counters. You retain your "?". Near as I can tell, there are no more CCPh activities other than your 337 in oO7 gaining "?". If this is correct, I will start the Ger. PT1 - RPh &&&BATES: Aha! Just as I suspected, Watson. He's left a decoy to distract us. And he anticipates our actions. This is a clever Prussian foe, indeed. You are correct, Oberstleutnant, 337II in O7 shall conceal. If any of this is out of step, please feel free to back things up. [START GERMAN PLAYER TURN 1] RPh: (George, silly me, but is the cdr referenced first in reporting the DR's? That is what I am doing in this case, please correct me if I am not correct. &&&BATES: That's the way I always play it. No worries. 17. *** MCLEOD: WC DR = 7 (2cdr, 5wdr) I have no other RPh activities other than a Self-Rally for my first broken MMC. Self Rally attempt broken 238 in R8; DR = 9 (5,4). &&&BATES: Removing his DM. Yessir, nothing like a busted HS with a useless MG in the woods. Expect me to give you plenty more grief about this one. 18. *** MCLEOD: I can't see any RPh activities for you George so I will go to the German PFPh. &&&BATES: How about my "Quartermaster devising secret weapon DR?" 5, 3: NE. Rats. 19. *** MCLEOD: Ger. PFPh: None. 20. *** MCLEOD: Ger. MPh. Hmmmm ... none. &&&BATES: Frozen like a deer in my headlights. Splendid. 21. *** MCLEOD: Am. DFPh. You're go George Talk to you soon. =Jim= &&&BATES: Yeah, like I enjoy making sniper drs. Kind of assume you won't have any AdvF. Let's move on. Rout Phase: Nothing unless you want to voluntarily abandon a position again. Advance Phase: The way I read SSR4, it looks like you are eligible to advance. Why don't I throw this back to you and go have a good wash with the Montgolfier Brothers? Perhaps you'll have something back to me before bedtime. - G From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 2 04:30:38 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Apr 2 04:30:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Thrown DC residual firepower In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >A23.5 says that the DC must designate the AFV as a target to affect it, >while A7.307 says that the Small Arms attack has no effect vs armored >targets. To use Small Arms vs the moving AFV doesn't violate A8.1, and I >don't see what difference in those two rules that means that the Small Arms >attack doesn't violate A8.1 while the DC attack does. > The difference is that A7.307 allows Small Arms, but there is no rule that allows DC to be used this way. If there is, please mention it. IMO, there's been some abuse of A7.307 in order to justify using a Thrown DC versus to place Residual Firepower. Perhaps it would be helpful to review A7.307 again. "Small Arms and non-ordnance attacks ... have no effect vs armored targets but may leave Residual FP." Okay, as far as it goes, it appears you may use Smalls Arms (which have no affect on AFV) to place Residual FP. You may also use those non-ordnance attacks that have no affect on AFV to likewise place Residual FP. But there is an EXC, and it is this: FT, DC, MOL, and ATMM *do* affect armored targets. A7.307 absolutely has nothing to do with FT, DC, MOL and ATMM. A7.307 only deals with non-ordnance attacks that do not affect AFV. It does not support the interpretation that non-ordance attacks that *can* affect an AFV can instead be used in such a way that they *do not* affect AFV, simply in order to place Residual FP. If one uses A7.307 to justify Throwing a DC without specifying the AFV as the target, then you can also use a FT the same way. I'm not buying it. And I'll repeat: A Residual FP counter is placed in the Location the attack was resolved. Note: *"was resolved"*. I.e., *you must resolve the attack*, then place Resiual FP... If there is no attack resolution, there is no placement of Residual FP. Period. So using only the ASLRB 2nd Ed, on what basis may an attack be made and not resolved? Residual FP is only placed (with the Spraying Fire exception) in a Location in which an attack is *resolved*. Using a DC, you can either attack an armored unit (by designating it so), or an unarmored unit (all such units in the Location). Again... if an AFV is moving, and you attack without designating the AFV as the target... what exactly are you attacking? Against which moving targets are you resolving the attack? And don't bring up A7.307 again. It only talks about Small Arms and non-ordnance attacks that *do not* affect an AFV. By exception, FT, DC, MOL and ATMM are not covered by A7.307. The Q&A are not clarifications, they are entirely new rules. If that was not the case, Perry would not have had to elaborate by specifically stating the sequence that must be used (Position DR, etc.). And anyway, aren't Q&A supposed to be answered by "yes" or "no"? That this answer required a lengthy instruction means one thing: it's not found in the rules anywhere, and needed to be described. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 2 07:27:26 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 2 07:27:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T1(G) APh - CCPh -End T1(G) References: Message-ID: <002001c53798$7adf2c10$f827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, A quick one here, > Rout Phase: Nothing unless you want to voluntarily abandon a position > again. ***MCLEOD: > Advance Phase: The way I read SSR4, it looks like you are eligible to > advance. Why don't I throw this back to you and go have a good wash with > the Montgolfier Brothers? Perhaps you'll have something back to me before > bedtime. > > - G > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 2 07:30:52 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 2 07:30:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": end of T1(A) & T1(G) RPh - RtPh References: Message-ID: <002301c53798$f55285f0$f827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, My oops, hit the send button too soon. > &&&BATES: Yeah, like I enjoy making sniper drs. Kind of assume you won't > have any AdvF. Let's move on. 22. ***MCLEOD: You are correct sir, no A'Fire. > Rout Phase: Nothing unless you want to voluntarily abandon a position > again. 23. ***MCLEOD: Nein. > Advance Phase: The way I read SSR4, it looks like you are eligible to > advance. Why don't I throw this back to you and go have a good wash with > the Montgolfier Brothers? Perhaps you'll have something back to me before > bedtime. 24. ***MCLEOD: We will hang tight where we are. I see it as end German Turn 1. Please feel free to start A T2 George. [END MESSAGE] =Jim= From scott.holst at us.army.mil Sat Apr 2 09:44:20 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Sat Apr 2 09:44:27 2005 Subject: [Aslml] World War One ASL (CH! Teufelhunden from HP3) Message-ID: <11186d7111805b.111805b11186d7@us.army.mil> Hi- Just recieved Hero Pax three and it also included a scenario called Teufelhunden (Devil Dog to you non Marine types) on World War One IE The Battle for Belleau Wood, France with 15 Marine 458's vs 10 German 447's. A very intrigueing situation but my question is, will this work? If I recall, most battles of WW1 were very static and squad tactics were not used until the very end of the war. So you would think a form of Platoon movement for squads would be needed for any WW1 scenario. Scott From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Sat Apr 2 09:41:21 2005 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz Martinez) Date: Sat Apr 2 10:41:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] World War One ASL (CH! Teufelhunden from HP3) In-Reply-To: <> References: <> Message-ID: <20050402174121.27748.qmail@r-y-r.com> Hello Scott > Hi- > > Just recieved Hero Pax three and it also included a scenario called Teufelhunden (Devil Dog to you non Marine types) on World War One IE The Battle for Belleau Wood, France with 15 Marine 458's vs 10 German 447's. A very intrigueing situation but my question is, will this work? > > If I recall, most battles of WW1 were very static and squad tactics were not used until the very end of the war. So you would think a form of Platoon movement for squads would be needed for any WW1 scenario. > > > Scott There are rules to simulate the WWI with ASL rules in this address: http://www.cote1664.net/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=14 The main web page is www.cote1664.net Jesus From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Sat Apr 2 09:41:50 2005 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz Martinez) Date: Sat Apr 2 10:41:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] World War One ASL (CH! Teufelhunden from HP3) In-Reply-To: <> References: <> Message-ID: <20050402174150.28200.qmail@r-y-r.com> Hello Scott > Hi- > > Just recieved Hero Pax three and it also included a scenario called Teufelhunden (Devil Dog to you non Marine types) on World War One IE The Battle for Belleau Wood, France with 15 Marine 458's vs 10 German 447's. A very intrigueing situation but my question is, will this work? > > If I recall, most battles of WW1 were very static and squad tactics were not used until the very end of the war. So you would think a form of Platoon movement for squads would be needed for any WW1 scenario. > > > Scott There are rules to simulate the WWI with ASL rules in this address: http://www.cote1664.net/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=14 The main web page is www.cote1664.net Jesus From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Sat Apr 2 11:47:49 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Sat Apr 2 11:47:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on 8.22 Residual FP Message-ID: <2b8228f0050402114771606e74@mail.gmail.com> Listerines, The Journal 6 article on RFP has made me question my interpretation of A8.22; I've always played A8.22 that RFP could attack a unit a second time if it made a second MF expenditure after being attacked by the RFP - OR - if it became more vulnerable. The Journal article seems to say the interpretation is - AND -, not - OR -. A common occurrence with a DC totin' unit in our games has been: * Unit enters RFP location and is attacked by the RFP. * Unit attempts to place DC and is attacked again by the RFP. Zat' wrong? -- Michael ( no residual brain power )Rodgers Montreal From dgour.asl at gmail.com Sat Apr 2 12:14:44 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Sat Apr 2 12:14:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: <20050331090905.1366.qmail@web51001.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050331090905.1366.qmail@web51001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <764636a605040212147a16ca19@mail.gmail.com> On Mar 31, 2005 2:09 AM, Klas Malmstr?m wrote: > Hi, > > --- Bruce Probst wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:12:28 +0200, bo_siemsen@city.dk (Bo Siemsen) wrote: > > > > >Actually, just looking at something new in the rule book now ? > > >I look in D 2.11 (VCA changes). It says ? "VCA can be changed only at the > > cost of one MP per hex-spine change (two MP per hexspine if actually in a > > building/woods/rubble). Bog penalties for entry of difficult terrain are also > > applicable to VCA changes in that terrain if not also on a road". > > > > > >With D 2.11 in mind it seems fairly clear to me that the modifiers should > > have been +1 for normal groundpressure and +3 for 'entry' of wooden building. > > > > > > > >Anybody agree? > > > > How could we disagree? The rule is perfectly clear. > > > > It's also perfectly *hidden*. I had no idea that rule existed! Heaven > > forbid > > that it be mentioned somewhere else like, oh I don't know, THE BOG RULES! > > (It > > would make a useful footnote addition to the "Bog Check DRM" Chart.) > > So how would you resolve a VCA change in a Woods location ? > > In a woods location you can choose ALL or HALF MP expenditure to enter > and the +3 BOG DRM only applies if you choose HALF. > > What would apply to a VCA change ? > > Regards, > Klas Malmstrom > So my follow-up would be when it says all, does that mean you would have to end the previous MPh in motion beside the woods hex and then enter with all MP and stay in motion in the woods hex for the next MPh? What if you were stopped beside the woods hex. Would the start MP preclude now entering the woods using all MP or is there some exception? -- dg From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 2 13:30:58 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Apr 2 13:31:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: <764636a605040212147a16ca19@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > >So my follow-up would be when it says all, does that mean you would >have to end the previous MPh in motion beside the woods hex and then >enter with all MP and stay in motion in the woods hex for the next >MPh? What if you were stopped beside the woods hex. Would the start MP >preclude now entering the woods using all MP or is there some >exception? > D2.7: "Any hex entry listed on the Terrain Chart as requiring *ALL* of a unit's movement capability (other than a Minimum Move which *must* end in Motion) still allows the unit any MP/MF necessary for starting (2.12), stopping (2.13), or towing (C10.1), but further movement is NA even if ESB or Gallop is declared." Regards, Bruce Bakken >-- >dg >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Sat Apr 2 15:09:03 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sat Apr 2 15:09:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] AAR J91 "The Sooner the Better" Message-ID: <004d01c537d8$f673e060$0300a8c0@Father> The usual Saturday game against Dave Stephens. We have not played desert for months and it showed with mistakes all over the place. Rules were played well as this is a simple desert scenario with respect to rules but complex with its strategic/tactical considerations. Lot's of replay value (like you're going to play it again soon!). I had the Desert Rats and realized when I watched the 1953 film "The Desert Rats" DVD with Richard Burton the night before that this is the action depicted at the beginning of this film. It gave me a good feel for what was to come the next day. Dave put all is Germans in Sangars next to each other so as to get HMG/MMG fire groups to take out the Rat's right flank fort. He broke half the infantry there but I dropped an SR right into the middle of his position. His tanks moved on and stayed in motion in order to outrun the advancing Mathilda's coming on in my turn one. My first turn saw an FFE hit most of the Germans in Sangars and it broke a lot of people. His HMG group remained in good order and all game they kept maintaining ROF and low die rolls to restrict my Infantry movement. I should have dropped smoke but the Rats need DVP's. My advancing tanks came on with most stopping to acquire the Germans through rear covered arcs but also through dust. I got three the tanks on his movement phase of turn but he managed to improbably kill one of my A13 smoke tanks whose only smoke of the day would be from its interior. His infantry got to the abandoned guns on turn two and got off an AT shot off with an unqualified crew to kill one of my 2lbr Portees, the most dangerous (and vulnerable) weapon on the board. The game turned into a total melee with no lines, broken units everywhere, tanks immobilized, knocked out or stunned. We did not finish the game but I conceded that I could not out DVP him by the 40 points needed. My artillery stopped shelling after the first mission which hurt. My main problem was that I needed to move all my infantry forward behind tanks but they were too occupied with long range shots on German vehicles heading for the exit area. His infantry had recovered from the initial shelling and with their long range MG's were stopping all my men cold. Great scenario but see the movie to really get into it. "Zadra" From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 15:46:47 2005 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Sat Apr 2 15:46:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bogging in building In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050402234647.16965.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Bruce Probst wrote: > > So have I, but that's only because I was ignorant of the D2.11 rule saying > that this is actually not the correct way to play it. Oh, yes....there is the whole "rules" thing isn't there? Teach me to jump into the middle of a thread I haven't been following.... > > Now that I am no longer ignorant of that rule, I can hardly pretend that it > doesn't exist, can I? Not and be the Bruce we've all come to know and....well, know anyhow. Jazz > From damavs at alltel.net Sat Apr 2 16:39:15 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Sat Apr 2 16:39:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on 8.22 Residual FP In-Reply-To: <2b8228f0050402114771606e74@mail.gmail.com> References: <2b8228f0050402114771606e74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050402193533.01e035e0@mail.alltel.net> M Rodgers wrote: >The Journal 6 article on RFP has made me question my interpretation of >A8.22; I've always played A8.22 that RFP could attack a unit a second >time if it made a second MF expenditure after being attacked by the >RFP - OR - if it became more vulnerable. > >The Journal article seems to say the interpretation is - AND -, not - OR -. > >A common occurrence with a DC totin' unit in our games has been: >* Unit enters RFP location and is attacked by the RFP. >* Unit attempts to place DC and is attacked again by the RFP. > >Zat' wrong? Yes, that's wrong. As noted, a unit may only be attacked once by the residual UNLESS he becomes more vulnerable. So if the DC toter, stopped to pickup a FT instead of place the DC, he gets attacked. Do note that if the DC totin' fellow was shot at placing the residual & then places the DC he IS attacked, as he has not yet been attacked before by that residual before. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sat Apr 2 17:59:42 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sat Apr 2 18:10:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on 8.22 Residual FP References: <2b8228f0050402114771606e74@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.0.14.0.20050402193533.01e035e0@mail.alltel.net> Message-ID: <004b01c537f2$3c89bc00$a64d8918@klis.com> Bret got in on this one before I had a chance. :-) Mike wrote: > >The Journal 6 article on RFP has made me question my interpretation of > >A8.22; As author of said article I feel I should reply. > >I've always played A8.22 that RFP could attack a unit a second > >time if it made a second MF expenditure after being attacked by the > >RFP - OR - if it became more vulnerable. > > > >The Journal article seems to say the interpretation is - AND -, not - OR -. That is, in fact, what it says. Not without a great deal of reading, re-reading, reviewing old threads on the List, hair-pulling, etc., I will grant you. > >A common occurrence with a DC totin' unit in our games has been: > >* Unit enters RFP location and is attacked by the RFP. > >* Unit attempts to place DC and is attacked again by the RFP. > > > >Zat' wrong? Bret replied: > Yes, that's wrong. As noted, a unit may only be attacked once by the > residual UNLESS he becomes more vulnerable. So if the DC toter, stopped to > pickup a FT instead of place the DC, he gets attacked. I concur. > Do note that if the DC totin' fellow was shot at placing the residual & > then places the DC he IS attacked, as he has not yet been attacked before > by that residual before. Also a good point. The way the rule is structured makes it a bit hard to follow, but my understanding is this: - There is a general statement (The Rule): "A unit can be attacked by Residual FP only once per Location". Clear, simple, straightforward. - There is an immediate Exception, the whole business about the Resid. increasing / the unit becoming "more vulnerable". - There follows a list of "Howevers". These are not Exceptions to The Rule, but are "other points to bear in mind". For example, simultaneous expenditures of MF/MP do not cause multiple Resid. attacks, even if the Resid. increases / the unit becomes more vulnerable in the course of expending those MF/MP. Non-simultaneous expenditures of MF/MP (placing SMOKE grenades, placing a DC, recovering a SW, etc.) *do* cause multiple Resid attacks, but *only* if the Resid. increases / the unit becomes more vulnerable in the course of expending those MF/MP. Bret's example of picking up a FT is a good one. Further, the Resid. would not attack again until *after* the FT is picked up (the second "However"), so if the unit breaks or is Pinned by that Resid. attack, it still has possession of the FT. So, bottom line, it *is* an -AND-, not an -OR-. A unit with a DC that enters a Location containing Resid. takes that Resid. attack. If it survives unbroken and unpinned, it can then place the DC in an ADJACENT Location without taking a further attack from that Resid., unless it has somehow become "more vulnerable". However, if its movement into the Location containing the Resid. caused a First Fire/SFF/FPF attack that left *more* Resid. than was there when it entered, it *would* be attacked by that increased Resid. when it spends the non-simultaneous MF necessary to place the DC in the ADJACENT Location. Also, if it moves into a Location containing no Resid., and is then subject to a First Fire/SFF/FPF attack that leaves any Resid., it *would* be attacked by that Resid. when it spends the non-simultaneous MF necessary to place the DC in the ADJACENT Location. This is not being attacked *twice* by the same Resid. in the same Location. Clear as mud, eh? David "making it easier (maybe) for the candy-gram man" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sat Apr 2 18:25:54 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sat Apr 2 18:26:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] World War One ASL (CH! Teufelhunden from HP3) References: <11186d7111805b.111805b11186d7@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <004e01c537f4$7da461c0$a64d8918@klis.com> Scott wrote: > Just recieved Hero Pax three and it also included a scenario called Teufelhunden (Devil Dog to you non Marine types) on World War One IE The Battle for Belleau Wood, France with 15 Marine 458's vs 10 German 447's. A very intrigueing situation but my question is, will this work? Dunno. I've never played it. If you look at it as a kind of generic 4-5-8s vs. 4-4-7s scenario, I don't see why not. > If I recall, most battles of WW1 were very static and squad tactics were not used until the > very end of the war. Well, Belleau Wood took place within 5 months of the end of the war. > So you would think a form of Platoon movement for squads would be needed for any >WW1 scenario. Tactics evolved a lot during the course of WWI. From 1914 - 16 I would tend to agree with you. This was one of the things that defeated Ian Daglish a few years ago when he tried to adapt ASL to WWI. However, the Stosstruppen tactics developed by the Germans in 1917 were not much different from the squad-level tactics of most WWII armies. By 1918 the Germans were even using SMGs on a limited basis. It was a very different war in 1918 from what it had been in 1914. Good thing, too, or it might have gone on forever. I've done some reading about Belleau Wood, and from what I recall the Marines did make an open-order charge through open ground as part of their attack. I don't know if this is what the scenario is portraying. OTOH, we have at least one ASL WWII scenario (J11 "In The Old Tradition") that allows the British (Sikhs) to do a Human Wave. So the system is fairly flexible. I wouldn't rule out a late-WWI scenario using ASL just because it's WWI. OTOH, I don't really see the point, given the number of interesting WWII actions already, or yet-to-be, portrayed. David "where is Ian, anyway?" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 2 19:22:59 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 2 19:23:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] World War One ASL (CH! Teufelhunden from HP3) In-Reply-To: <004e01c537f4$7da461c0$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <11186d7111805b.111805b11186d7@us.army.mil> <004e01c537f4$7da461c0$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <33ou411qijf8d1gi389rveg5bctpn9m3tr@4ax.com> On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 22:25:54 -0400, David Olie wrote: >David "where is Ian, anyway?" Olie In England where he's always been, so far as I know . Being afflicted with an AOL address, Ian decided some time ago that the ASLML was too much trouble to keep up with on any sort of regular basis, to our collective loss. Unless something has changed very recently, he remains active in playing ASL and designing new ASL scenarios for MMP (and writing books for the "Battleground Europe" series like "Operation Bluecoat" and "Operation Goodwood"). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 2 19:33:51 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 2 19:33:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on 8.22 Residual FP In-Reply-To: <004b01c537f2$3c89bc00$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <2b8228f0050402114771606e74@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.0.14.0.20050402193533.01e035e0@mail.alltel.net> <004b01c537f2$3c89bc00$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 21:59:42 -0400, "David Olie" wrote: >Clear as mud, eh? In addition to all of the above, with which I am in complete agreement, another implication of this that is often overlooked is the case of vehicles with vulnerable PRC -- e.g.: CE AFV enters new hex, is attacked by small arms fire, that small arms fire has no effect but leaves some amount of residual FP. If the CE AFV then expends a MP to Stop, or change CA, or do something else that does not involve actually leaving the hex, the Vulnerable PRC will be attacked by the residual FP left from the above -- because that residual has not previously attacked that AFV. This can be *especially* effective if, for example, the residual is placed on a bend or intersection in a road so that an enemy truck must first enter the hex and then change CA to continue using the road! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sat Apr 2 21:25:14 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sat Apr 2 21:27:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] World War One ASL (CH! Teufelhunden from HP3) References: <11186d7111805b.111805b11186d7@us.army.mil> <004e01c537f4$7da461c0$a64d8918@klis.com> <33ou411qijf8d1gi389rveg5bctpn9m3tr@4ax.com> Message-ID: <007501c5380d$d0a60a40$a64d8918@klis.com> Bruce wrote: >In England where he's always been, so far as I know . Being afflicted with >an AOL address, Ian decided some time ago that the ASLML was too much trouble >to keep up with on any sort of regular basis, to our collective loss. And to his. Come on, Ian, get a REAL email address and get with the program! >Unless >something has changed very recently, he remains active in playing ASL and >designing new ASL scenarios for MMP (and writing books for the "Battleground >Europe" series like "Operation Bluecoat" and "Operation Goodwood"). I'm really pleased that an ASL player has "graduated" to writing "serious" military history, since I hope to do the same sometime in the future. Still and all, I'd like to share his wisdom on a regular basis, even if it's just about this silly game we all play. David "as silly as necessary" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sat Apr 2 21:30:50 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sat Apr 2 21:31:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on 8.22 Residual FP References: <2b8228f0050402114771606e74@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.0.14.0.20050402193533.01e035e0@mail.alltel.net> <004b01c537f2$3c89bc00$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <007601c5380e$55572800$a64d8918@klis.com> I wrote: >Clear as mud, eh? and Bruce replied: >In addition to all of the above, with which I am in complete agreement, another implication of this that is often overlooked is the case of vehicles with vulnerable PRC -- e.g.: >CE AFV enters new hex, is attacked by small arms fire, that small arms fire has no effect but leaves some amount of residual FP. >If the CE AFV then expends a MP to Stop, or change CA, or do something else that does not involve actually leaving the hex, the Vulnerable PRC will be attacked by the residual FP left from the above -- because that residual has not previously attacked that AFV. >This can be *especially* effective if, for example, the residual is placed on a bend or intersection in a road so that an enemy truck must first enter the hex and then change CA to continue using the road! Yes, this is also a very good use of Resid. FP. David "the implications are staggering" Olie From janusz.maxe at unf.se Sun Apr 3 03:13:11 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Sun Apr 3 03:13:17 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA Message-ID: Hexes A1 and A2 contain foxholes. Hex A1 contain a squad IN foxhole. There is OBA FFE in both hexes. Q1: Squad wants to move from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in MPh. When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? Q2: Squad wants to advance from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in APh. When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? Q3: Squad wants to rout from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in RtPh. When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? TIA Janusz From hofors at lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 3 06:05:30 2005 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: Sun Apr 3 06:05:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Above and beyond the countermix Message-ID: Hi, if a scenario includes more AFVs of a specific type than are available in the counter mix, what consideration neeeds to be done by the scenario designer? Let's assume a scenario included six Jeeps with 4 FP AAMG. There are only two 4FP AAMG Jeeps in the Yanks OB. The intention is that the player indeed should have six 4FP AAMG Jeeps, and not any of the other kind of Jeeps. Need I as the scenario designer specify that in some way? I don't want any optional armament rules or similar to come into effect, changing the 4 FP AAMGs Jeeps to something else (a non-MG Jeep, a 6 FP AAMG Jeep, a captured Jagdtiger or whatever). Regards, Mattias From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Apr 3 07:06:34 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Apr 3 07:06:41 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:13:11 +0200, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >Hexes A1 and A2 contain foxholes. >Hex A1 contain a squad IN foxhole. >There is OBA FFE in both hexes. > >Q1: Squad wants to move from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in MPh. When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? You don't specify, but I assume A1 and A2 are both Open Ground. Assuming that the squad uses an Assault Move (which is possible if it has > 3 MF available), it's attacked by the OBA when it exits the foxhole in A1 (it has made itself more vulnerable, C1.51) with a -1 DRM (FFMO), and attacked again when it enters A2, again with a -1 DRM (FFMO). It is not attacked when it enters the foxhole in A2 because it has not made itself more vulnerable by doing so. If for some reason an Assault Move is not possible (it's a Green/Conscript squad, or it's carrying 4 PP), everything is the same except the DRM is -2 (FFMO + FFNAM). >Q2: Squad wants to advance from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in APh. When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? It's attacked by the OBA when it exits the foxhole in A1 (it has made itself more vulnerable, C1.51) with a 0 DRM (FFMO/FFNAM is NA during the APh, C1.51), and attacked again when it enters A2, again with a 0 DRM. It is not attacked when it enters the foxhole in A2 because it has not made itself more vulnerable by doing so. >Q3: Squad wants to rout from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in RtPh. When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? It's identical to the answer to Q2, above. The routing squad may combine the exit and entry costs of the foxholes to avoid *interdiction*; the OBA attack is not interdiction and cannot be avoided in this manner. C1.51 still applies as usual. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Apr 3 07:08:48 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Apr 3 07:08:52 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Above and beyond the countermix In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03 Apr 2005 15:05:30 +0200, Mattias R?nnblom wrote: >if a scenario includes more AFVs of a specific type than are available >in the counter mix, what consideration neeeds to be done by the >scenario designer? Let's assume a scenario included six Jeeps with 4 >FP AAMG. There are only two 4FP AAMG Jeeps in the Yanks OB. The >intention is that the player indeed should have six 4FP AAMG Jeeps, >and not any of the other kind of Jeeps. Need I as the scenario >designer specify that in some way? Yes, otherwise D1.84 applies. You need an SSR to indicate that D1.84 does *not* apply. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jbarber at meic.org Sun Apr 3 08:53:18 2005 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jef Barber) Date: Sun Apr 3 08:53:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] PBeM opponent wanted Message-ID: <200504031553.j33FrIJm029994@meic.org> Gang, MWM (married white male) seeks anyone for long term encounter via PBeM on VASL. No smoking (at least at my house) allowed. Must be willing to respond to my rules queries without derision. I will not CC on the first turn. Please reply if interested. Jeff "I really am this pathetic" Barber From dgour.asl at gmail.com Sun Apr 3 09:11:23 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Sun Apr 3 09:11:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Another Ambush Withdrawl Q Message-ID: <764636a605040309112942f52d@mail.gmail.com> Situation came up last night where I wanted to do this but didn't get the ambush role, but, would like to know for sure for next time. Situation is I have a half-squad, leader, and full squad. I ambush opponent. A11.41 says "A force which has qualified..." It later says "Any nonpinned unit...after resolving all CC attacks by and against it..." So, if I ambush, could just the 2-4-8 Ambush Withdraw to ADJ hex or must entire force? That seems to be how it is worded. -- dg From asl at howardhowardfine.com Sun Apr 3 09:23:36 2005 From: asl at howardhowardfine.com (ASL) Date: Sun Apr 3 09:23:46 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Above and beyond the countermix In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20050403112041.0307eaa0@mail.howardhowardfine.com> You simply make an SSR that indicates that another counter(s) be substituted for those not in the counter nix and that they treated as the desired type. there are a few scenarios that do this. In this case, unarmed jeeps are used as if they armed. Much like one could use a Pz IVJ counter to represent a Pz IVH. c At 08:05 AM 03/04/2005, Mattias R?nnblom wrote: >Hi, > >if a scenario includes more AFVs of a specific type than are available >in the counter mix, what consideration neeeds to be done by the >scenario designer? Let's assume a scenario included six Jeeps with 4 >FP AAMG. There are only two 4FP AAMG Jeeps in the Yanks OB. The >intention is that the player indeed should have six 4FP AAMG Jeeps, >and not any of the other kind of Jeeps. Need I as the scenario >designer specify that in some way? I don't want any optional armament >rules or similar to come into effect, changing the 4 FP AAMGs Jeeps to >something else (a non-MG Jeep, a 6 FP AAMG Jeep, a captured Jagdtiger >or whatever). > >Regards, > Mattias > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From scott.holst at us.army.mil Sun Apr 3 10:00:32 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Sun Apr 3 10:00:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Above and beyond the countermix Message-ID: <1433584142fc9d.142fc9d1433584@us.army.mil> Hi- One trick I use is to scan in both sides of the tank, change the ID number, print and glue to an old SL counter. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: ASL Date: Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:23 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] Above and beyond the countermix > > > You simply make an SSR that indicates that another counter(s) be > substituted for those not in the counter nix and that they treated > as the > desired type. there are a few scenarios that do this. In this > case, unarmed > jeeps are used as if they armed. Much like one could use a Pz IVJ > counter > to represent a Pz IVH. > > c > > > > > At 08:05 AM 03/04/2005, Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > >Hi, > > > >if a scenario includes more AFVs of a specific type than are > available>in the counter mix, what consideration neeeds to be done > by the > >scenario designer? Let's assume a scenario included six Jeeps > with 4 > >FP AAMG. There are only two 4FP AAMG Jeeps in the Yanks OB. The > >intention is that the player indeed should have six 4FP AAMG Jeeps, > >and not any of the other kind of Jeeps. Need I as the scenario > >designer specify that in some way? I don't want any optional armament > >rules or similar to come into effect, changing the 4 FP AAMGs > Jeeps to > >something else (a non-MG Jeep, a 6 FP AAMG Jeep, a captured Jagdtiger > >or whatever). > > > >Regards, > > Mattias > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Apr 3 12:22:10 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sun Apr 3 12:20:46 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Above and beyond the countermix In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > >if a scenario includes more AFVs of a specific type than are available > >in the counter mix, what consideration neeeds to be done by the > >scenario designer? Let's assume a scenario included six Jeeps with 4 > >FP AAMG. There are only two 4FP AAMG Jeeps in the Yanks OB. The > >intention is that the player indeed should have six 4FP AAMG Jeeps, > >and not any of the other kind of Jeeps. Need I as the scenario > >designer specify that in some way? > and Bruce Probst answered: > Yes, otherwise D1.84 applies. You need an SSR to indicate that D1.84 does > *not* apply. > I agree. I'd just want to add that I think D1.84 really sucks, and that every scenario designer should make sure that it is *never* invoked, since probably more than half of the players will play it wrong. An example of what I mean (and thereby a bad design, IMO) is J67 The Lawless Roads. The British OB lists 2 A10 Mk IA with -/4/2, but there is only one of the six A10 Mk IA's in the countermix that has this type of MG armament. So when I played this as the British at ASL Scandinavian Open, I chose one with 2/4/2, i.e. an additional BMG. So far so good, but I was far from sure about the designer's intent. Did he really mean 1 with -/4/2 and one with 2/4/2 as D1.84 allows, or did he actually mean 2 with -/4/2? By looking around on the other boards, it looked like more than half of the boards had got it wrong, and played as if there were two -/4/2 vehicles. So instead of this poor OB design, the scenario should either have an SSR specifying that both had -/4/2, *or* the OB should list only one of those, and one with 2/4/2. With one of those fixes, everyone would play it correctly, and there's no good reason for the designer to let this uncertainty slip by. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From scott.holst at us.army.mil Sun Apr 3 13:27:14 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Sun Apr 3 13:27:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Buys The Advanced Tobruk System!!!! Message-ID: <14b621314b288a.14b288a14b6213@us.army.mil> Hi All- Just heard MMP baught CH! ATS system. Well, thats one way of knocking off your rivals. Scott From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Sun Apr 3 13:36:38 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Sun Apr 3 13:36:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Buys The Advanced Tobruk System!!!! In-Reply-To: <14b621314b288a.14b288a14b6213@us.army.mil> References: <14b621314b288a.14b288a14b6213@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <2b8228f0050403133637e684cc@mail.gmail.com> Awfully close to April 1, isn't it? On Apr 3, 2005 4:27 PM, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > Hi All- > > Just heard MMP baught CH! ATS system. Well, thats one way of knocking off your rivals. > > Scott > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From jbarber at meic.org Sun Apr 3 14:11:18 2005 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jef Barber) Date: Sun Apr 3 14:11:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] PBeM opponent wanted Message-ID: <200504032111.j33LBIAM013250@meic.org> I got my game. Thanks. Jeff "spoken for" Barber > Gang, > > MWM (married white male) seeks anyone for long term encounter > via PBeM on VASL. No smoking (at least at my house) allowed. > Must be willing to respond to my rules queries without derision. I > will not CC on the first turn. Please reply if interested. > > Jeff "I really am this pathetic" Barber > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > -- NeoMail - http://neomail.sourceforge.net From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Sun Apr 3 19:22:14 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Sun Apr 3 19:22:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge Message-ID: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> In J96, there are some burnt out wrecks on the Primosole bridge. I have a unit tracing an LOS that crosses a bridge hex, with said wreck on the bridge, but the LOS does not cross the bridge depiction. The bridge is therefore not an LOS hindrance. Logically the wreck might not be either, but I believe the wreck hindrance rules say a wreck is an LOS hindrance when the LOS crosses the hex containing the wreck. Is the wreck a hindrance? Thanks -- Michael ( I wonder if they are German or British wrecks? ) Rodgers Montreal From bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com Sun Apr 3 19:51:24 2005 From: bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Sun Apr 3 19:50:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] PBeM opponent wanted In-Reply-To: <200504032111.j33LBIAM013250@meic.org> Message-ID: <20050404025041.CA22884D2B@che.dreamhost.com> And remember, I got >MY< Spuddy for this type of plea last year. Jeff can't get another one for the same basic email! And Jeff, you owe me the royalty. :-P Good luck with your game, Brian Pickering -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Jef Barber Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 2:11 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] PBeM opponent wanted I got my game. Thanks. Jeff "spoken for" Barber > Gang, > > MWM (married white male) seeks anyone for long term encounter > via PBeM on VASL. No smoking (at least at my house) allowed. > Must be willing to respond to my rules queries without derision. I > will not CC on the first turn. Please reply if interested. > > Jeff "I really am this pathetic" Barber > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > -- NeoMail - http://neomail.sourceforge.net _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From damavs at alltel.net Sun Apr 3 20:20:35 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Sun Apr 3 20:20:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge In-Reply-To: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> References: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050403231611.01da0e18@mail.alltel.net> M Rodgers wrote: >In J96, there are some burnt out wrecks on the Primosole bridge. I >have a unit tracing an LOS that crosses a bridge hex, with said wreck >on the bridge, but the LOS does not cross the bridge depiction. > >The bridge is therefore not an LOS hindrance. Logically the wreck >might not be either, but I believe the wreck hindrance rules say a >wreck is an LOS hindrance when the LOS crosses the hex containing the >wreck. > >Is the wreck a hindrance? Yes - the wreck is a hindrance. There's no exception in D9.4 for bridges, so it follows the "normal" vehicle hindrance rule: same level - both firer & target can see it & it cuts the hex, it counts. Just view it as the awesome presence of the mighty vehicle distracts the shooter just a little - perhaps some over polished chrome gleaming in the sun or maybe the shooter is wondering, is that a 75 or 76 on that tank? - whatever, but it's just enough to cause the hindrance. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From S.Eckhart at cox.net Sun Apr 3 20:48:03 2005 From: S.Eckhart at cox.net (Steve Eckhart) Date: Sun Apr 3 20:48:12 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Concealment Gain Table Message-ID: <00e501c538c9$1aed04d0$0200a8c0@NBN1266> All, My understanding of the Concealment Gain table is that in order to deny ? gain, a unit only has to be unbroken. Therefore, if the only enemy unit in LOS is in Melee, I still could not gain ?. Is this correct? Thanks. Steve Eckhart From scott.holst at us.army.mil Sun Apr 3 23:27:20 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Sun Apr 3 23:27:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Buys The Advanced Tobruk System!!!! Message-ID: <160888016044aa.16044aa1608880@us.army.mil> Hi- Seriously, I was over at WoTC's websight and read the announcement. I should also add, they plan on turning ASL into a d20 RPG. So ASL meets D&D a combo of fun and death with each roll of the d20! Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: M Rodgers Date: Sunday, April 3, 2005 3:36 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Buys The Advanced Tobruk System!!!! > Awfully close to April 1, isn't it? > > On Apr 3, 2005 4:27 PM, scott.holst@us.army.mil > wrote: > > Hi All- > > > > Just heard MMP baught CH! ATS system. Well, thats one way of > knocking off your rivals. > > > > Scott > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net> > > > -- > Michael Rodgers > Montreal > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Apr 3 23:41:18 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sun Apr 3 23:44:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA Message-ID: <59c62f0f7ff.4250fdae@broadpark.no> Hi, Janusz Maxe wrote: > >Hexes A1 and A2 contain foxholes. > >Hex A1 contain a squad IN foxhole. > >There is OBA FFE in both hexes. > > (I fully agreed with Bruce Probst's answers to Q1 and Q2, but I think Q3 need further comment: > >Q3: Squad wants to rout from A1 foxhole to A2 foxhole in RtPh. > When is it attacked by the OBA, and what are the DRMs? > Bruce answered: > It's identical to the answer to Q2, above. The routing squad may > combine the exit and entry costs of the foxholes to avoid *interdiction*; the > OBA attack is not interdiction and cannot be avoided in this manner. C1.51 > still applies as usual. > It is possible that this answer is correct, but the rule doesn't (IMHO) say so - at least not very clearly. B27.4 says: "Note, however, that the cost to enter/exit a foxhole/pillbox during the RtPh may be combined with the entrance cost of the nex hex--thereby escaping Interdiction in the foxhole/pillbox Location (27.41)." The first sentence says that the MF expenditures "may be combined" in the RtPh - not that it "may be combined for Interdiction purposes only". From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Apr 3 23:53:42 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sun Apr 3 23:56:41 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Concealment Gain Table Message-ID: <5a2e1e9f5585.42510096@broadpark.no> Hi, Steve Eckhart wrote: > My understanding of the Concealment Gain table is that in order to > deny ? gain, a unit only has to be unbroken. Therefore, if the only enemy > unit in LOS is in Melee, I still could not gain ?. > > Is this correct? > Fully correct. The same is true for an enemy dummmy stack. It will prevent your concealment gain even if you *know* it's a dummy. From geb3 at inter.net Mon Apr 4 01:52:18 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Apr 4 01:50:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RPh. PFPh, MPh1 In-Reply-To: <002301c53798$f55285f0$f827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Got two rounds in with Malcolm Rutledge yesterday, splitting a successful German defense in T10 "Devil's Hill" with a failed German defense in J98 "Lend-Lease Attack." Feeling refreshed and invigorated. Death shall come swiftly for you in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 12:31 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": end of T1(A) & T1(G) RPh - RtPh Listerz, My oops, hit the send button too soon. > &&&BATES: Yeah, like I enjoy making sniper drs. Kind of assume you won't > have any AdvF. Let's move on. 22. ***MCLEOD: You are correct sir, no A'Fire. > Rout Phase: Nothing unless you want to voluntarily abandon a position > again. 23. ***MCLEOD: Nein. > Advance Phase: The way I read SSR4, it looks like you are eligible to > advance. Why don't I throw this back to you and go have a good wash with > the Montgolfier Brothers? Perhaps you'll have something back to me before > bedtime. 24. ***MCLEOD: We will hang tight where we are. I see it as end German Turn 1. Please feel free to start A T2 George. [END MESSAGE] =Jim= ###BATES: Let the good times roll. _Rally Phase_ Offboard Setup H2: ?+2 H3: ?+2 H5: ?+3 H6: ?+7 H7: ?+2 Wind Change: 4, 4 9-2 in P4 drops concealment to deploy 747a: 2, 5; deployed into 337EE & 337D. _Prep Fire Phase_ Removing dispersed smoke. _Movement Phase_ CX ?+1 in O2 to P2 (2MF). Knock, knock. Anybody home? I'm a real live HS. If not, we'll stroll on to Q3 (3MF), losing concealment as we go... ... brazenly steps up to R3 (4MF). Removing CX. Let's see how you respond to this and then I'll decide what to do next. To borrow from Arsenio Hall, "I wanna tear you apart." - G "And your friend, too." From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 4 07:19:58 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 4 07:20:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA In-Reply-To: <59c62f0f7ff.4250fdae@broadpark.no> References: <59c62f0f7ff.4250fdae@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 08:41:18 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >B27.4 says: "Note, however, that the cost to enter/exit a foxhole/pillbox during the RtPh may be combined with the entrance cost of the nex hex--thereby escaping Interdiction in the foxhole/pillbox Location (27.41)." > >The first sentence says that the MF expenditures "may be combined" in the RtPh - not that it "may be combined for Interdiction purposes only". That's true, and I considered that, but neither A10.531 nor B27.4 negate the very specific description of the procedure in C1.51, which is *not* based on what MF are being expended where, but is solely based on change of position within the Location, and entrance of a new Location. Being allowed to combine the MF costs of exiting a foxhole does not mean that the foxhole is not actually being exited, for instance. The bottom line is that Interdiction resolution and FFE resolution are different procedures, and what may be true for one is not necessarily true for the other. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 4 07:24:28 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 4 07:24:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Another Ambush Withdrawl Q In-Reply-To: <764636a605040309112942f52d@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a605040309112942f52d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6dj251lp0n30a36qeftjlc5jtal9bjolb2@4ax.com> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 09:11:23 -0700, Darren Gour wrote: >Situation is I have a half-squad, leader, and full squad. I ambush >opponent. A11.41 says "A force which has qualified..." It later says >"Any nonpinned unit...after resolving all CC attacks by and against >it..." > >So, if I ambush, could just the 2-4-8 Ambush Withdraw to ADJ hex or >must entire force? That seems to be how it is worded. Some, none, or all qualifying units may Withdraw. As you note, the rule says "any unit", not "all units". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 4 07:29:07 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 4 07:29:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge In-Reply-To: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> References: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9mj2515o6ge4vmumoas56t6g5kstucprp9@4ax.com> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:22:14 -0400, M Rodgers wrote: >In J96, there are some burnt out wrecks on the Primosole bridge. I >have a unit tracing an LOS that crosses a bridge hex, with said wreck >on the bridge, but the LOS does not cross the bridge depiction. > >The bridge is therefore not an LOS hindrance. Logically the wreck >might not be either, but I believe the wreck hindrance rules say a >wreck is an LOS hindrance when the LOS crosses the hex containing the >wreck. > >Is the wreck a hindrance? It sure is, because the EXC for the bridge doesn't extend to units *on* the bridge, just the bridge itself. I won a Spuddy a few years back for being the first to point out this particularly interesting rules effect. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From dgour.asl at gmail.com Mon Apr 4 08:11:28 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Mon Apr 4 08:11:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Another Ambush Withdrawl Q In-Reply-To: <6dj251lp0n30a36qeftjlc5jtal9bjolb2@4ax.com> References: <764636a605040309112942f52d@mail.gmail.com> <6dj251lp0n30a36qeftjlc5jtal9bjolb2@4ax.com> Message-ID: <764636a605040408115a158f94@mail.gmail.com> On Apr 4, 2005 8:24 AM, Bruce Probst wrote: > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 09:11:23 -0700, Darren Gour wrote: > > >Situation is I have a half-squad, leader, and full squad. I ambush > >opponent. A11.41 says "A force which has qualified..." It later says > >"Any nonpinned unit...after resolving all CC attacks by and against > >it..." > > > >So, if I ambush, could just the 2-4-8 Ambush Withdraw to ADJ hex or > >must entire force? That seems to be how it is worded. > > Some, none, or all qualifying units may Withdraw. As you note, the rule says > "any unit", not "all units". > I may not have asked clearly but can only a portion of the force withdraw before any cc takes place? Like you say its pretty clear after the attacks take place but the use of "A force" makes me think that all of my guys must withdraw before combat if any are to take this option. Thanks again. -- dg From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Apr 4 09:13:45 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Apr 4 09:13:49 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA Message-ID: <3rr89m$sktino@mxip15a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Ole B?e > Date: 2005/04/04 Mon AM 01:41:18 CDT > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA > > Bruce answered: > > It's identical to the answer to Q2, above. The routing squad may > > combine the exit and entry costs of the foxholes to avoid *interdiction*; the > > OBA attack is not interdiction and cannot be avoided in this manner. C1.51 > > still applies as usual. > > > It is possible that this answer is correct, but the rule doesn't (IMHO) say so - at least not very clearly. > I don't think Bruce's answer is correct. It is an assumption. The reference to interdiction seems to be more of a pointer than a rule. > B27.4 says: "Note, however, that the cost to enter/exit a foxhole/pillbox during the RtPh may be combined with the entrance cost of the nex hex--thereby escaping Interdiction in the foxhole/pillbox Location (27.41)." > > The first sentence says that the MF expenditures "may be combined" in the RtPh - not that it "may be combined for Interdiction purposes only". > Right...looks more like the designers were giving us a pointer, as in "BTW, one of the benfits of combining is to avoid interdiction"...not, "the only thing that combining does is avoid interdiction". If the actual intent is for combining to apply _ONLY_ to interdiction then the rule needs to be re-written. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From scott.holst at us.army.mil Mon Apr 4 15:16:25 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Mon Apr 4 15:17:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? Message-ID: <1aa975e1aa7228.1aa72281aa975e@us.army.mil> Hi all- Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for dummies. Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as ASL for dummies? Scott From AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com Mon Apr 4 15:20:22 2005 From: AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com (Tuline, Andrew) Date: Mon Apr 4 15:20:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? Message-ID: <6EDD91032BBB004DA86C358BA6D3A3F5046FE097@SCVANEX2.sierrasys.com> I think the starter kit fills that role quite nicely. -----Original Message----- From: scott.holst@us.army.mil [mailto:scott.holst@us.army.mil] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 3:16 PM To: ASL List Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? Hi all- Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for dummies. Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as ASL for dummies? Scott _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Apr 4 15:24:49 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Apr 4 15:25:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge References: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> <9mj2515o6ge4vmumoas56t6g5kstucprp9@4ax.com> Message-ID: <002101c53965$1dd67040$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Spudsters; I had thoughts spuddies were only given out for *funny* comments. Whilst I have all the respect in the world for Mr. Probst, it is difficult for me to imagine him being funny. Grumpy, sure, but funny?? Wynn "Grumpier Old Man" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "M Rodgers" Cc: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 10:29 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:22:14 -0400, M Rodgers wrote: >In J96, there are some burnt out wrecks on the Primosole bridge. I >have a unit tracing an LOS that crosses a bridge hex, with said wreck >on the bridge, but the LOS does not cross the bridge depiction. > >The bridge is therefore not an LOS hindrance. Logically the wreck >might not be either, but I believe the wreck hindrance rules say a >wreck is an LOS hindrance when the LOS crosses the hex containing the >wreck. > >Is the wreck a hindrance? It sure is, because the EXC for the bridge doesn't extend to units *on* the bridge, just the bridge itself. I won a Spuddy a few years back for being the first to point out this particularly interesting rules effect. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From david at stanaway.net Mon Apr 4 15:39:54 2005 From: david at stanaway.net (David Stanaway) Date: Mon Apr 4 15:39:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? In-Reply-To: <6EDD91032BBB004DA86C358BA6D3A3F5046FE097@SCVANEX2.sierrasys.com> References: <6EDD91032BBB004DA86C358BA6D3A3F5046FE097@SCVANEX2.sierrasys.com> Message-ID: <1112654394.13998.15.camel@david.dialmex.net> On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 15:20 -0700, Tuline, Andrew wrote: > I think the starter kit fills that role quite nicely. > Does that make Gung Ho, ASL for Smarties then? (Night beach cave assaults anyone?) -- David Stanaway From aslml at aslwebdex.net Mon Apr 4 16:52:45 2005 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Mon Apr 4 16:53:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050404235258.E3B0E84D48@che.dreamhost.com> Tom Slizewski, the creator of the Desert Rats scenarios has given me permission to keep his scenarios on the ASLWebDex. Those of you who have not downloaded them out of respect for the authors rights and the law can now download without guilt. If you like the desert, you'll love these scenarios. If you don't like the desert, you just haven't played it enough. Thanks to Tom. Enjoy. You can find the DR Archive at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/desertrats/rats.html You can find the WebDex at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/ and all the downloadable scenarios (and links to all the scenarios on the net) at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-scenarios.html Larry Memmott From denis at teachlinux.com Mon Apr 4 17:46:49 2005 From: denis at teachlinux.com (Denis Dimick) Date: Mon Apr 4 17:47:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping Message-ID: <1106.192.168.100.1.1112662009.squirrel@192.168.100.1> I placed an order with MMP last week, via the web site. The web site said it would take up to six weeks to ship. Came home today and waiting for me where my brand new copies of PB, BRT and HH. Was just like Christmas, but not as cold. Funny thing is, I didn't order HH during my order, decided after I had placed the order to add it, Lu Ann Youse e-mailed my my receipt, I just hit replay and asked for it top be included. Nice! I'll try to remember this feeling next time I'm getting up tight waiting for ASLRBv2 to ship. :) Denis From mountainview at westelcom.com Mon Apr 4 17:52:29 2005 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Mon Apr 4 17:53:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! References: <20050404235258.E3B0E84D48@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <006701c53979$c8171870$d78c6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Larry & ASLMLers, Any idea what the last sentence of the VC for DR1 is supposed to really say? Perhaps "Turn 7" should be inserted between "Italian" and "RPh"??? TIA Christopher Fleury Sgt. Meikle's Bunker Mountain View Cottage Lewis, NY USS Iowa; BB-61 Camp Dudley #12557 ASL 6+1 ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 7:52 PM Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! > Tom Slizewski, the creator of the Desert Rats scenarios has given me > permission to keep his scenarios on the ASLWebDex. Those of you who have > not downloaded them out of respect for the authors rights and the law can > now download without guilt. > > If you like the desert, you'll love these scenarios. If you don't like > the > desert, you just haven't played it enough. > > Thanks to Tom. > > Enjoy. > > You can find the DR Archive at: > > http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/desertrats/rats.html > > You can find the WebDex at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/ > > and all the downloadable scenarios (and links to all the scenarios on the > net) at: > > http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-scenarios.html > > Larry Memmott > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 4 17:40:52 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 4 17:53:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge References: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> <9mj2515o6ge4vmumoas56t6g5kstucprp9@4ax.com> <002101c53965$1dd67040$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <016401c53979$b0be1340$a64d8918@klis.com> Wynn wrote: > Spudsters; Acting Spudmeister here. > I had thoughts spuddies were only given out for *funny* comments. > > Whilst I have all the respect in the world for Mr. Probst, it is difficult > for me to imagine him being funny. Grumpy, sure, but funny?? Well, funny is in the eye (ear?) of the beholder, but personally I think Bruce has a dry, and occasionally razor-sharp, wit. There are the other days when he's obviously off his meds, of course. I was pleased to award Bruce four Spuddies in last year's ceremony, and three runners-up to boot. Surely you remember this, Mr. Best Sig.? David "the Spud stops here" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 4 17:43:07 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 4 17:53:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? References: <1aa975e1aa7228.1aa72281aa975e@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <016501c53979$b0cedc20$a64d8918@klis.com> Scott wrote: > Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for dummies. Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as ASL for dummies? Why don't you try it and let us know? David "grenade-fishing in a barrel" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 4 17:59:52 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 4 18:01:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping References: <1106.192.168.100.1.1112662009.squirrel@192.168.100.1> Message-ID: <016b01c5397a$cb031f60$a64d8918@klis.com> Denis wrote: > I placed an order with MMP last week, via the web site. The web site said > it would take up to six weeks to ship. Came home today and waiting for me > where my brand new copies of PB, BRT and HH. Was just like Christmas, but > not as cold. Nice tale, Denis. Have fun with your new toys. > Funny thing is, I didn't order HH during my order, decided after I had > placed the order to add it, Lu Ann Youse e-mailed my my receipt, I just > hit replay and asked for it top be included. Nice! Lu Ann is the best. I wonder if things would go faster if they changed their name to MWP. :-) > I'll try to remember this feeling next time I'm getting up tight waiting > for ASLRBv2 to ship. :) I remain confident that they're really doing their best. David "still waiting for my J#6, though" Olie From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Apr 4 18:06:58 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Apr 4 18:06:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Wrecked on Spuddy Bridge References: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> <9mj2515o6ge4vmumoas56t6g5kstucprp9@4ax.com> <002101c53965$1dd67040$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> <016401c53979$b0be1340$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <005201c5397b$c45395e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Heck, I can't even remember the rules to ASL, let alone who (besides me) wins spuddies. That's why I have to keep asking the ASLML (and Bruce) and thus suffering from the effect of his razor sharp wit. But yes, I will agree at least so far as to say that *if,* in fact, Bruce has a wit, it is a very dry one. Wynn "Witless SMC" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Olie" To: "Wynn" ; ; "M Rodgers" Cc: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 8:40 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge > Wynn wrote: > > >> Spudsters; > Acting Spudmeister here. > >> I had thoughts spuddies were only given out for *funny* comments. >> >> Whilst I have all the respect in the world for Mr. Probst, it is >> difficult >> for me to imagine him being funny. Grumpy, sure, but funny?? > > Well, funny is in the eye (ear?) of the beholder, but personally I think > Bruce has a dry, and occasionally razor-sharp, wit. There are the other > days when he's obviously off his meds, of course. > > I was pleased to award Bruce four Spuddies in last year's ceremony, and > three runners-up to boot. Surely you remember this, Mr. Best Sig.? > > David "the Spud stops here" Olie > > From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Apr 4 18:11:18 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Apr 4 18:11:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping References: <1106.192.168.100.1.1112662009.squirrel@192.168.100.1> <016b01c5397a$cb031f60$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <005701c5397c$5fb088e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> DAvid; See, if you actually *paid* for one, it would have arrived long ago. And you never did tell us what you are doing with all the residual royalty monies from your residual article. Wynn "No Residual Cash" Polnicky From denis at teachlinux.com Mon Apr 4 18:11:41 2005 From: denis at teachlinux.com (Denis Dimick) Date: Mon Apr 4 18:11:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping In-Reply-To: <016b01c5397a$cb031f60$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <1106.192.168.100.1.1112662009.squirrel@192.168.100.1> <016b01c5397a$cb031f60$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <1288.192.168.100.1.1112663501.squirrel@192.168.100.1> > Denis wrote: > > >> I placed an order with MMP last week, via the web site. The web site >> said >> it would take up to six weeks to ship. Came home today and waiting for >> me >> where my brand new copies of PB, BRT and HH. Was just like Christmas, >> but >> not as cold. > Nice tale, Denis. Have fun with your new toys. > >> Funny thing is, I didn't order HH during my order, decided after I had >> placed the order to add it, Lu Ann Youse e-mailed my my receipt, I just >> hit replay and asked for it top be included. Nice! > Lu Ann is the best. I wonder if things would go faster if they changed > their name to MWP. :-) > >> I'll try to remember this feeling next time I'm getting up tight waiting >> for ASLRBv2 to ship. :) > I remain confident that they're really doing their best. > > David "still waiting for my J#6, though" Olie I'm also sure they do the best that they can, I now have a small understanding of the way MMP operates, or at least this is my best guess: Something along the lines of, keep it small, take very little risk, it's better to wait then to rush into something and lose it all. I know that in the day of the internet and on-line shopping we as consomers are used to placing an order and having it show up in a few days. Unless we get a ton of new ASL players I don't think that day will ever come to ASL. Denis From malm at gol.com Mon Apr 4 18:43:57 2005 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon Apr 4 18:44:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? In-Reply-To: <1aa975e1aa7228.1aa72281aa975e@us.army.mil> References: <1aa975e1aa7228.1aa72281aa975e@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050405104310.033d04d0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Isn't A12.11 ASL for Dummies? At 07:16 a.m. 5/04/2005, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: >Hi all- > >Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for dummies. >Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as >ASL for dummies? > > >Scott >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 4 18:58:35 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Mon Apr 4 18:58:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge Message-ID: <148500-2200542515835447@M2W082.mail2web.com> >Whilst I have all the respect in the world for Mr. Probst, it is difficult >for me to imagine him being funny. Grumpy, sure, but funny?? Wounded to the quick! Well, Mr Polnicky, in the unlikely event that is your real name, your mother smells of elderberries. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From malm at gol.com Mon Apr 4 19:36:38 2005 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon Apr 4 19:36:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge In-Reply-To: <148500-2200542515835447@M2W082.mail2web.com> References: <148500-2200542515835447@M2W082.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050405113350.033e0eb8@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 10:58 a.m. 5/04/2005, bprobst@netspace.net.au wrote: > >Whilst I have all the respect in the world for Mr. Probst, it is difficult > >for me to imagine him being funny. Grumpy, sure, but funny?? > >Wounded to the quick! > >Well, Mr Polnicky, in the unlikely event that is your real name, your >mother smells of elderberries. No, no, no. His father smelled of elderberries. His mother was a hamster. Malcolm Rutledge Chief Loon Centre for Pythonic Correctness >Bruce > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >mail2web - Check your email from the web at >http://mail2web.com/ . > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From sidirezegh at charter.net Mon Apr 4 19:49:07 2005 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Mon Apr 4 19:49:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! In-Reply-To: <006701c53979$c8171870$d78c6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <000501c5398a$0a102ef0$9effbe42@ChasHome> What you suggest certainly seems to make the most sense. Regards, -Chas "Not making sense" Argent ^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^ Chas Argent Medford, Oregon, USA > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net- > bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Mountain View Cottage > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 5:52 PM > To: aslml@aslwebdex.net; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! > > Larry & ASLMLers, > > Any idea what the last sentence of the VC > for DR1 is supposed to really say? > > Perhaps "Turn 7" should be inserted between "Italian" > and "RPh"??? > > TIA > > Christopher Fleury > Sgt. Meikle's Bunker > Mountain View Cottage > Lewis, NY > USS Iowa; BB-61 > Camp Dudley #12557 > ASL 6+1 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 7:52 PM > Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! > > > > Tom Slizewski, the creator of the Desert Rats scenarios has given me > > permission to keep his scenarios on the ASLWebDex. Those of you who > have > > not downloaded them out of respect for the authors rights and the law > can > > now download without guilt. > > > > If you like the desert, you'll love these scenarios. If you don't like > > the > > desert, you just haven't played it enough. > > > > Thanks to Tom. > > > > Enjoy. > > > > You can find the DR Archive at: > > > > http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/desertrats/rats.html > > > > You can find the WebDex at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/ > > > > and all the downloadable scenarios (and links to all the scenarios on > the > > net) at: > > > > http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-scenarios.html > > > > Larry Memmott > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 4 19:47:18 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 4 20:01:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping References: <1106.192.168.100.1.1112662009.squirrel@192.168.100.1> <016b01c5397a$cb031f60$a64d8918@klis.com> <1288.192.168.100.1.1112663501.squirrel@192.168.100.1> Message-ID: <019301c5398b$92b68640$a64d8918@klis.com> Denis wrote: > I'm also sure they do the best that they can, I now have a small > understanding of the way MMP operates, or at least this is my best guess: > Something along the lines of, keep it small, take very little risk, it's > better to wait then to rush into something and lose it all. > > I know that in the day of the internet and on-line shopping we as > consomers are used to placing an order and having it show up in a few > days. Unless we get a ton of new ASL players I don't think that day will > ever come to ASL. I believe all of this is quite correct. When you think about it, how many other 20 year-old game systems are actively supported at all? David "will be an even more active suck-up when I get my cheque" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 4 19:55:20 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 4 20:01:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Wrecked on Spuddy Bridge References: <2b8228f005040319225d91a473@mail.gmail.com> <9mj2515o6ge4vmumoas56t6g5kstucprp9@4ax.com> <002101c53965$1dd67040$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> <016401c53979$b0be1340$a64d8918@klis.com> <005201c5397b$c45395e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <019501c5398b$92e13fc0$a64d8918@klis.com> Wynn wrote: > Heck, I can't even remember the rules to ASL, let alone who (besides me) > wins spuddies. *GASP* You mean, you didn't print them out and post them over your computer as an ongoing reminder of the Greatness of Spuddyship! Ungrateful swine! > That's why I have to keep asking the ASLML (and Bruce) and thus suffering > from the effect of his razor sharp wit. > > But yes, I will agree at least so far as to say that *if,* in fact, Bruce > has a wit, it is a very dry one. I like: dry wit, dry white wine, and Canada Dry. I guess we just get too much rain around here. David "never saw a drought in my life" Olie From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 4 20:30:58 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 4 20:31:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RPh. PFPh, MPh1 References: Message-ID: <003001c5398f$e35285f0$4b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Ripping into Turn 2 ... > Got two rounds in with Malcolm Rutledge yesterday, splitting a successful > German defense in T10 "Devil's Hill" with a failed German defense in J98 > "Lend-Lease Attack." Most excellent George, too bad about your German defence. I hope you kept the receipt, maybe you can return it to the German High Command and get your Reiche(sp?) Marks back. :) > Feeling refreshed and invigorated. Death shall come swiftly for you in > "###." Oh, blah-da, blah-da blah-da ... my guys know their mission. The letters to next of kin are already in the mail. German bureaucratic efficiency at it's finest! :) > ###BATES: Let the good times roll. > > _Rally Phase_ > Offboard Setup > H2: ?+2 > H3: ?+2 > H5: ?+3 > H6: ?+7 > H7: ?+2 > > Wind Change: 4, 4 > > 9-2 in P4 drops concealment to deploy 747a: 2, 5; deployed into 337EE & > 337D. > > _Prep Fire Phase_ > > Removing dispersed smoke. > > _Movement Phase_ > > CX ?+1 in O2 to P2 (2MF). Knock, knock. Anybody home? I'm a real live > HS. 25. ***MCLEOD: Bounce you back with a 238. No D'fire. > If not, we'll stroll on to Q3 (3MF), losing concealment as we go... 26. ***MCLEOD: Your above unit's MPh is over so I will continue to the next moving unit. > Let's see how you respond to this and then I'll decide what to do next. > To > borrow from Arsenio Hall, "I wanna tear you apart." > > - G > > > "And your friend, too." _That_ was a funny movie, can't recall the title at the moment but I see Eddie Murphy I believe. Summary: Your HS bounced into my HS and that is all for now. George, I will be going to the Southern Ontario ASL Tournament this coming weekend and will therefore not be answering your messages until Tuesday of next week. We will get in as much killin' as we can until then. =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Mon Apr 4 20:35:03 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Apr 4 20:33:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050405113350.033e0eb8@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: -----Original Message----- Malcolm Rutledge Chief Loon Centre for Pythonic Correctness ... AND Minister of Silly Walks. From scott.holst at us.army.mil Mon Apr 4 21:56:28 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Mon Apr 4 21:56:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping Message-ID: <1bb86ae1bb5d54.1bb5d541bb86ae@us.army.mil> Hi- My only concern is that its april, and still no ASLRB/ BV3/ Or AoO. But I'll start getting a little worried if nothing comes out by october. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: David Olie Date: Monday, April 4, 2005 9:47 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Shipping > Denis wrote: > > > I'm also sure they do the best that they can, I now have a small > > understanding of the way MMP operates, or at least this is my > best guess: > > Something along the lines of, keep it small, take very little > risk, it's > > better to wait then to rush into something and lose it all. > > > > I know that in the day of the internet and on-line shopping we as > > consomers are used to placing an order and having it show up in > a few > > days. Unless we get a ton of new ASL players I don't think that > day will > > ever come to ASL. > > I believe all of this is quite correct. When you think about it, > how many > other 20 year-old game systems are actively supported at all? > > David "will be an even more active suck-up when I get my cheque" Olie > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Apr 5 00:43:49 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Apr 5 00:46:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA Message-ID: <84752b851b9d.42525dd5@broadpark.no> Hi, > > Bruce answered: > > > It's identical to the answer to Q2, above. The routing squad > > >may > > > combine the exit and entry costs of the foxholes to avoid > > > *Interdiction*; the > > > OBA attack is not interdiction and cannot be avoided in this > > >manner. C1.51 still applies as usual. > > > and Tate Rogers wrote: > > I don't think Bruce's answer is correct. It is an assumption. The > reference to interdiction seems to be more of a pointer than a rule. > Yes, in the B27.4 it does.... > > B27.4 says: "Note, however, that the cost to enter/exit a > foxhole/pillbox during the RtPh may be combined with the entrance > cost of the nex hex--thereby escaping Interdiction in the > foxhole/pillbox Location (27.41)." > > > > The first sentence says that the MF expenditures "may be > combined" in the RtPh - not that it "may be combined for > Interdiction purposes only". > > Right...looks more like the designers were giving us a pointer, as > in "BTW, one of the benfits of combining is to avoid > interdiction"...not, "the only thing that combining does is avoid > interdiction". > If the actual intent is for combining to apply _ONLY_ to > interdiction then the rule needs to be re-written. > After taking a second analysis, I kind of agree with you both! I agree with Tate that the rule actually says that MF expenditures are combined - not only for Interdiction purposes. But I also agree with Bruce, that the unit will be attacked when exiting the foxhole. C1.51 says "It also attacks each unit/stack that is changing position (or becoming vulnerable) within a Blast Area hex if the unit/stack is becoming more vulnerable to the FFE than it was in its immediately-previous position (e.g., a unit exiting a sewer or foxhole..." Note that for this rule, it doesn't matter if the MF are combined or not. The exit of the foxhole may be combined with exit of the hex for all purposes (which would mean that a DEFENDER couldn't use DFF if this had happened in the MPh), but for the OBA this doesn't matter - it attacks immediately as it exits the foxhole - since there's no rule saying that the OBA can only attack *after* each such combined move. Finally, I agree with Tate that B27.41 should be slightly rewritten to remove this confusion. From aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Apr 5 02:56:15 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Apr 5 02:56:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge References: <148500-2200542515835447@M2W082.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <001601c539c5$b54585a0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> > Wounded to the quick! But it seems that the Wound roll was a 1 to 4. Wynn "Nuthin' Wrong with Fermented Elderberries" Polnicky From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 5 06:37:09 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 5 06:37:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Another Ambush Withdrawl Q In-Reply-To: <764636a605040408115a158f94@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a605040309112942f52d@mail.gmail.com> <6dj251lp0n30a36qeftjlc5jtal9bjolb2@4ax.com> <764636a605040408115a158f94@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 09:11:28 -0600, Darren Gour wrote: >I may not have asked clearly but can only a portion of the force >withdraw before any cc takes place? Like you say its pretty clear >after the attacks take place but the use of "A force" makes me think >that all of my guys must withdraw before combat if any are to take >this option. Yes. It's still "any Infantry part of a force", not "*all* Infantry part of a force", no matter when the decision to withdraw occurs. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From s.deller at charter.net Tue Apr 5 07:20:02 2005 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Tue Apr 5 07:20:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Flame TK Case A DRM? Message-ID: <003601c539ea$8efb6de0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Gentlemen, Will the Case A DRM apply to a BF changing VCA to fire at an enemy AFV? The Flame TK table specifically limits the applicable DRM to the few listed on the chart (which do not include any VCA change DRMs) and D3.6 only applies Case A to IFT DR. As such, it seems clear that the answer is "no," which is a little odd as you rarely get a free lunch in this game. Have I missed an applicable rule? Cheers, Sean Deller From denis at teachlinux.com Tue Apr 5 10:56:53 2005 From: denis at teachlinux.com (Denis Dimick) Date: Tue Apr 5 10:56:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping In-Reply-To: <1bb86ae1bb5d54.1bb5d541bb86ae@us.army.mil> References: <1bb86ae1bb5d54.1bb5d541bb86ae@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <51847.128.165.148.15.1112723813.squirrel@128.165.148.15> I got an e-mail from a friend that dropped them a note asking about the RB, they said it was at the printers.. If we don't see the RB by the end of May, I'm going to really worry. It is kind of hard to wait for everything, but like David said, how many 20 year old games do you see out today and still have some support? Denis > Hi- > > My only concern is that its april, and still no ASLRB/ BV3/ Or AoO. But > I'll start getting a little worried if nothing comes out by october. > > > Scott > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Olie > Date: Monday, April 4, 2005 9:47 pm > Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Shipping > >> Denis wrote: >> >> > I'm also sure they do the best that they can, I now have a small >> > understanding of the way MMP operates, or at least this is my >> best guess: >> > Something along the lines of, keep it small, take very little >> risk, it's >> > better to wait then to rush into something and lose it all. >> > >> > I know that in the day of the internet and on-line shopping we as >> > consomers are used to placing an order and having it show up in >> a few >> > days. Unless we get a ton of new ASL players I don't think that >> day will >> > ever come to ASL. >> >> I believe all of this is quite correct. When you think about it, >> how many >> other 20 year-old game systems are actively supported at all? >> >> David "will be an even more active suck-up when I get my cheque" Olie >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net >> > From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Apr 5 11:53:02 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Apr 5 11:53:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping In-Reply-To: <51847.128.165.148.15.1112723813.squirrel@128.165.148.15> References: <1bb86ae1bb5d54.1bb5d541bb86ae@us.army.mil> <51847.128.165.148.15.1112723813.squirrel@128.165.148.15> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050405135201.01eb4ba0@pop3.direcway.com> At 12:56 PM 4/5/2005, Denis Dimick wrote: >I got an e-mail from a friend that dropped them a note asking about the >RB, they said it was at the printers. :) "they" have been saying that since Aug/Sept of last year. :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From asl at thuring.com Tue Apr 5 12:29:20 2005 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Tue Apr 5 12:29:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4252E710.1080404@thuring.com> George Bates wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > Malcolm Rutledge > Chief Loon > Centre for Pythonic Correctness > > ... AND Minister of Silly Walks. Guess that would be a wounded commissar trying to to lead a Human Wave in ASL terms. /Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 21:28:00 up 33 days, 2:07, 4 users, load average: 0.17, 0.15, 0.11 From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Apr 5 13:12:53 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Apr 5 13:13:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge Message-ID: <3rra4i$t9pcmo@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> OK! Stop this now or it is off to the "Comfy Chair" for the lot of you!!! Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > From: "Wynn" > Date: 2005/04/05 Tue AM 04:56:15 CDT > To: , > Subject: Re: [Aslml] wreck on Primosole bridge > > > > Wounded to the quick! > > But it seems that the Wound roll was a 1 to 4. > > Wynn "Nuthin' Wrong with Fermented Elderberries" Polnicky > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From kevinkenneally at isot.com Tue Apr 5 13:02:11 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Tue Apr 5 13:36:53 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? In-Reply-To: <1aa975e1aa7228.1aa72281aa975e@us.army.mil> References: <1aa975e1aa7228.1aa72281aa975e@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6005.65.161.6.20.1112731331.squirrel@65.161.6.20> Scott, Why should MMP do this? They would already have most of the MMP crowd saying my favorite quote from the 3 Stooges "I resemble that remark"...... > Hi all- > > Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for dummies. > Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as > ASL for dummies? > > > Scott > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From geb3 at inter.net Tue Apr 5 16:44:05 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Apr 5 16:42:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Shipping In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050405135201.01eb4ba0@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: Yeah, its Gutenberg Printing. That's the ticket. - G Pathological liar since 1969. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of ron mosher Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 3:53 AM To: denis@teachlinux.com; scott.holst@us.army.mil Cc: ASL List Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Shipping At 12:56 PM 4/5/2005, Denis Dimick wrote: >I got an e-mail from a friend that dropped them a note asking about the >RB, they said it was at the printers. :) "they" have been saying that since Aug/Sept of last year. :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From geb3 at inter.net Tue Apr 5 17:52:12 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Apr 5 17:50:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh2 In-Reply-To: <003001c5398f$e35285f0$4b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Hand signals. The thud and scuffle of combat boots. Safeties being snapped off, bolts pulled back. Comments in "$$$." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 12:31 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RPh. PFPh, MPh1 Listerz, Ripping into Turn 2 ... > Got two rounds in with Malcolm Rutledge yesterday, splitting a successful > German defense in T10 "Devil's Hill" with a failed German defense in J98 > "Lend-Lease Attack." Most excellent George, too bad about your German defence. I hope you kept the receipt, maybe you can return it to the German High Command and get your Reiche(sp?) Marks back. :) $$$BATES: How about I just wail, "Christ, it's another MMP dog! Would never happen if Fort were still runnin' the show. I want a refund, and I'll only buy TPP stuff from now on, too! Selling this Journal on e-Bay next week for 50 bucks." Then would you send me to the funny farm, please? Stop me before I rant again. Seriously, Lend-Lease deserves multiple playings. Short, sharp, shocked. A compact challenge for booth players holding very disparate resources. > Feeling refreshed and invigorated. Death shall come swiftly for you in > "###." Oh, blah-da, blah-da blah-da ... my guys know their mission. The letters to next of kin are already in the mail. German bureaucratic efficiency at it's finest! :) > ###BATES: Let the good times roll. > > _Rally Phase_ > Offboard Setup > H2: ?+2 > H3: ?+2 > H5: ?+3 > H6: ?+7 > H7: ?+2 > > Wind Change: 4, 4 > > 9-2 in P4 drops concealment to deploy 747a: 2, 5; deployed into 337EE & > 337D. > > _Prep Fire Phase_ > > Removing dispersed smoke. > > _Movement Phase_ > > CX ?+1 in O2 to P2 (2MF). Knock, knock. Anybody home? I'm a real live > HS. 25. ***MCLEOD: Bounce you back with a 238. No D'fire. $$$BATES: Aha! More prey! His days are numbered. > If not, we'll stroll on to Q3 (3MF), losing concealment as we go... 26. ***MCLEOD: Your above unit's MPh is over so I will continue to the next moving unit. > Let's see how you respond to this and then I'll decide what to do next. > To > borrow from Arsenio Hall, "I wanna tear you apart." > > - G > > > "And your friend, too." _That_ was a funny movie, can't recall the title at the moment but I see Eddie Murphy I believe. $$$BATES: "Living of America." A gut buster that carried Eddie off the SNL stage to Hollywood. Summary: Your HS bounced into my HS and that is all for now. $$$BATES: For now. MOO HWA HA HA HA HA! George, I will be going to the Southern Ontario ASL Tournament this coming weekend and will therefore not be answering your messages until Tuesday of next week. We will get in as much killin' as we can until then. $$$BATES: Thanks for the heads up. ASL road trip! Drive safely and roll low. =Jim= $$$BATES: The pursuit continues... 337D in P4L0 double-times to L1 (1MF)... ... to Q4L1 (3MF)... ... to Q4L0 (4MF)... ... to R4 (5MF)... ... to S5 (6MF). Let's see how you like them apples. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Apr 5 20:12:49 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue Apr 5 20:15:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh2 References: Message-ID: <003601c53a56$ec9d2fd0$1f27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, The hunt is on! > $$$BATES: The pursuit continues... > 337D in P4L0 double-times to L1 (1MF)... > ... to Q4L1 (3MF)... > ... to Q4L0 (4MF)... 27. ***MCLEOD: Hello Boris! My formerly HIP 238 in Q4LO bounces you back up stairs. His MPh is done. > Let's see how you like them apples. Mmmmm, quite tasty. I'm sure they'll make excellent Calvados. :) Bring it on George! =Jim= From morrisgj at mscd.edu Tue Apr 5 20:16:58 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Tue Apr 5 20:17:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Factory MPs and firing Message-ID: <135aa91371c4.1371c4135aa9@mscd.edu> Hello All: I know a unit firing from 20G3 @ 20H2 uses the +3 tem for H2 as the fire is not traced entirely inside the factory depiction. My question relates to movement from 20H2 to 20G3. Is the 20G3/H2 hexside consider a factory hexside? I ask as less than half of the hexside is inside the Factory, and like I mentioned above the LOF between teh 2 hexes leaves the factory depiction for a bit. So will this move cost 2MF or 1 MF? Thanks very much, Gerry From chris at jib.co.za Wed Apr 6 00:37:07 2005 From: chris at jib.co.za (Chris van Wyk) Date: Wed Apr 6 00:39:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? In-Reply-To: <6005.65.161.6.20.1112731331.squirrel@65.161.6.20> Message-ID: <200504060744.j367h7PH003713@shphoenix.jib.co.za> Hi, The starter kit I would say is very close to an ASL for dummies compared to the rule book. I've bought the rule book 2 years ago and only got myself the Starter Kit now. The kit contains everything to get started in an easy and not "bloody hell look at all the rules" way. As I found BV is nearly impossible to get unless reprinted, the starter kit is the way to go. Chris > Scott, > > Why should MMP do this? > > They would already have most of the MMP crowd saying my favorite quote > from the 3 Stooges "I resemble that remark"...... > > > Hi all- > > > > Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for > dummies. > > Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as > > ASL for dummies? > > > > > > Scott > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > ************************************** > Computer problems? ................... > ..............http://www.multibyte.net > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 6 02:55:01 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 6 02:55:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Flame TK Case A DRM? In-Reply-To: <003601c539ea$8efb6de0$2083b018@DHT8S631> References: <003601c539ea$8efb6de0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <5bb751h0obkdmdej389l09h0pif02tn5cm@4ax.com> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:20:02 -0400, "Sean Deller" wrote: >Will the Case A DRM apply to a BF changing VCA to fire at an enemy AFV? I hope you mean "bow-mounted FT" by "BF". Otherwise I don't understand your question. Assuming that this is what you mean: no. >The Flame TK table specifically limits the applicable DRM to the few listed on >the chart (which do not include any VCA change DRMs) and D3.6 only applies >Case A to IFT DR. Right. >As such, it seems clear that the answer is "no," which is >a little odd as you rarely get a free lunch in this game. Have I missed an >applicable rule? Note the last sentence of C7.344: "Other factors ... do not modify the Basic TK#." A long list of example "other factors" is provided, and it's only an *example* list, not an exhaustive one. So yeah, you get a free (toasted) lunch in this case. Interestingly, if I'm reading D.8A correctly, if a vehicle armed with a bow-mounted FT turned one hexspine and attacked an armoured ht with Vulnerable PRC, not only would the Case A DRM not apply to the TK DR, but it *also* would not apply to the Collateral Attack on the PRC ... but the CE DRM would. If there was Infantry accompanying the ht, and the FT was used to attack *them*, and not the ht, the Case A DRM *would* apply (D3.6) and the ht PRC would be immune (because they are only attacked collaterally if the vehicle is designated the target of the attack; A22.34 and D.8). If the ht was *not* armoured, all of them -- vehicle, PRC and Infantry -- would be attacked on the IFT and thus the Case A DRM would apply vs. all! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 6 03:07:34 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 6 03:07:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Factory MPs and firing In-Reply-To: <135aa91371c4.1371c4135aa9@mscd.edu> References: <135aa91371c4.1371c4135aa9@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:16:58 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >My question relates to movement from 20H2 to 20G3. Is the 20G3/H2 >hexside consider a factory hexside? Only if the scenario you're playing has an SSR specifying that building G3 is a factory. >I ask as less than half of the hexside is inside the Factory 20G3/H2?? "Less than half"? You have some seriously misprinted boards, there .... >and like I mentioned above the LOF between teh 2 hexes leaves the factory depiction for a bit. Not on my board 20 it doesn't. >So will this move cost 2MF or 1 MF? 1 (if the building is indeed a factory). Even the tiniest smidgen of building artwork over the hexside between two building locations is sufficient for movement from one to the other to be considered "within the building". E.G., consider building 8K2. If that building were designated a factory, you could move from 8K2 to K3 at a cost of 1 MF. So long as some portion of building artwork connects the two, you never have to "step outside" to move from one adjacent hex to the other, *unless* there's a Rowhouse hexside or Factory Wall preventing normal access. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From cryo at xs4all.nl Wed Apr 6 03:23:31 2005 From: cryo at xs4all.nl (Albert van Poppel) Date: Wed Apr 6 03:23:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Operations "47" shipping - new scenario for ASLSK References: <200504060744.j367h7PH003713@shphoenix.jib.co.za> Message-ID: <001901c53a92$aeb9de20$9700000a@Skye650> MMP has been shipping Operations #47 the last two days. It contains new scenario S8. More details on my website. If anyone gets the magazine I'd love to hear some details about the ASLSK content!? Regards, Albert van Poppel ------------- http://www.cardboardwarriors.com/ Post ASL news to news@cardboardwarriors.com ! From blueistheonlycolour at hotmail.com Wed Apr 6 04:23:12 2005 From: blueistheonlycolour at hotmail.com (blue istheonlycolour) Date: Wed Apr 6 04:23:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Fire-lane question Message-ID: It is the MPh. A squad and LMG have fired and set up a fire lane without cowering or malf the SW. They are in open ground and marked "first fire." A motorcycle (m/c) with HS moves into their open ground hex without using OVR. Questions 1. Is the squad required to SFF vs the m/c and HS? Probably yes - A8.312 2. Does the squad have the option to NOT fire the LMG in this mandatory SFF? Probably yes. 3. If the squad does not use the LMG in the mandatory SFF does the firelane still exist? Probably yes, but the wording in A9.223 is slightly ambiguous. "A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere (ignore brackets) only if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs (A8.312/D7.21) - in which case the firelane must be cancelled." Does this mean if a TPBF situation occurs the firelane must be cancelled? Or may be cancelled? If it may be cancelled then the wording should be " - in which case the firelane would be cancelled." Thanks for any help. _________________________________________________________________ Want to block unwanted pop-ups? Download the free MSN Toolbar now! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From s.deller at charter.net Wed Apr 6 05:55:50 2005 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Wed Apr 6 05:57:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Flame TK Case A DRM? References: <003601c539ea$8efb6de0$2083b018@DHT8S631> <5bb751h0obkdmdej389l09h0pif02tn5cm@4ax.com> Message-ID: <000e01c53aa8$1b8895e0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Bruce/Randy, Thanks for confirming this. Interesting point with the Collateral Attack, Bruce. Cheers, Sean "mmmmm....free lunch" Deller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "Sean Deller" Cc: "ASLML" Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 5:55 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Flame TK Case A DRM? On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:20:02 -0400, "Sean Deller" wrote: >Will the Case A DRM apply to a BF changing VCA to fire at an enemy AFV? I hope you mean "bow-mounted FT" by "BF". Otherwise I don't understand your question. Assuming that this is what you mean: no. >The Flame TK table specifically limits the applicable DRM to the few listed >on >the chart (which do not include any VCA change DRMs) and D3.6 only applies >Case A to IFT DR. Right. >As such, it seems clear that the answer is "no," which is >a little odd as you rarely get a free lunch in this game. Have I missed an >applicable rule? Note the last sentence of C7.344: "Other factors ... do not modify the Basic TK#." A long list of example "other factors" is provided, and it's only an *example* list, not an exhaustive one. So yeah, you get a free (toasted) lunch in this case. Interestingly, if I'm reading D.8A correctly, if a vehicle armed with a bow-mounted FT turned one hexspine and attacked an armoured ht with Vulnerable PRC, not only would the Case A DRM not apply to the TK DR, but it *also* would not apply to the Collateral Attack on the PRC ... but the CE DRM would. If there was Infantry accompanying the ht, and the FT was used to attack *them*, and not the ht, the Case A DRM *would* apply (D3.6) and the ht PRC would be immune (because they are only attacked collaterally if the vehicle is designated the target of the attack; A22.34 and D.8). If the ht was *not* armoured, all of them -- vehicle, PRC and Infantry -- would be attacked on the IFT and thus the Case A DRM would apply vs. all! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.3 - Release Date: 4/5/2005 From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 6 06:08:05 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 6 06:06:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] FW: Primosole Bridge notes? Message-ID: Dudes, The sublime Randy Yeates has graciously acquiesced to my request for the missing aftermath to J96 "Another Bloody Attack." As a public service I share it with you, my brothers. Tip o' the cap to Mr. Yeates. Enjoy! l // l// l/ l l "All we have to do is decide what to do with the time we are given." -----Original Message----- From: Yeates, Randhall R Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:37 PM To: George Bates Subject: RE: Primosole Bridge notes? George, ... Here is the aftermath for Another Bloody Attack. Feel free to share with the list if you like. Aftermath: The 9th Durham Light Infantry charged forward bravely across the open ground approach to the German Pioneers. As they neared the German positions the covering smoke screen began to lift and German fire began taking its toll. During the fighting a company of the German Pioneers withdrew to the north of the Simeto when it thought it was about to be cut off. Most of two platoons of British Infantry managed to cross the river, but were pinned down on the bank and the attack stalled. By noon it was all over with the British forced to withdraw to their starting positions, leaving behind several smoking tanks and many of their badly wounded. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 6 06:21:29 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 6 06:21:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez Re: D2.11 & D8.21 VCA change in woods and Bog Message-ID: On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:34:35 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: > D2.11 says (in part) "Bog penalties for entry of difficult terrain are also > applicable to VCA changes in that terrain if not also on a road ...." > > D8.21 indicates that there is a +3 DRM for entry of woods at "half MP > allotment", but +0 DRM for entry of woods for "ALL MP" (B13.41-.42). > > Which of these two possible "entry DRM" are applicable to the Bog DR when a > vehicle changes VCA while in a woods hex (which is expending neither "half" > nor "all" MP)? +0 DRM for changing VCA in woods or building or graveyard or rubble. The +3/+4 DRM are strictly upon entry. ....Perry MMP ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 6 06:22:23 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 6 06:22:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez Re: A23.6 Thrown DC residual FP Message-ID: On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:35:47 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: > Does a Thrown DC leave Residual FP in both the target and thrower's Locations > (assuming that the thrower's Location can be so attacked)? Yes. > Is the amount of Residual FP left by the Thrown DC reduced for the +2/+3/+4 > DRM (as applicable) per A8.26 (i.e., does this DRM count as a "condition > outside the target Location")? Yes (yes). ....Perry MMP ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 6 06:54:45 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 6 06:55:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Fire-lane question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 11:23:12 +0000, "blue istheonlycolour" wrote: >It is the MPh. A squad and LMG have fired and set up a fire lane without cowering or malf >the SW. They are in open ground and marked "first fire." > >A motorcycle (m/c) with HS moves into their open ground hex without using OVR. > >Questions > >1. Is the squad required to SFF vs the m/c and HS? > >Probably yes - A8.312 No. The m/c Rider is not "Infantry/Cavalry MMC". Hence the squad is not *required* to attack. It may *choose* to do so. >2. Does the squad have the option to NOT fire the LMG in this mandatory SFF? > >Probably yes. As above, it's *not* mandatory, but yes, the squad doesn't have to use the MG in SFF if it doesn't want to. However, whether it does or not, both squad and MG will be marked "Final Fire", and the Fire Lane will be cancelled (A8.3, A9.223). >3. If the squad does not use the LMG in the mandatory SFF does the firelane >still exist? > >Probably yes, but the wording in A9.223 is slightly ambiguous. Actually, the answer is no, and I fail to see how "... if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs ... the Fire Lane must be cancelled ...." is even slightly ambiguous. Note that since the SFF is not mandatory, if the squad holds its fire, the FL is still cancelled any way, and if the m/c ends up moving out of the hex the squad+MG is now free to conduct "normal" SFF/FPF. It's sort of the ASL equivalent of playing "chicken". >Does this mean if a TPBF situation occurs the firelane must be cancelled? Since that's exactly what it says, I would assume that this is indeed what it means. The rule does use a roundabout way of saying it, I'll grant you. I *hate* rules that begin by saying "X will only happen if a, b or c is true" and then follow it up almost immediately by saying "If d or e happens, X happens." Someone somewhere misunderstood the meaning of the word "only". I suspect that the intent was to differentiate between "voluntary" and "involuntary" cancellation of a FL, but since the only way of "voluntarily" canceling it is in fact also "involuntary", the whole thing ends up being rather more convoluted than necessary. The *important* part of A9.223 is actually the restriction it places on the MMC (it cannot use SFF/FPF while the FL is in place, and once you place a FL you can't *choose* to "unplace" it, although it can be *forced* to by a TPBF situation). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 08:20:41 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Apr 6 08:21:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Can't find anything that bars Russians from yelling at the top of their lungs while pushing down on skipoles. May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? Rob __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball. http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/ From damavs at alltel.net Wed Apr 6 08:40:20 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Wed Apr 6 08:40:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave Message-ID: <20050406154020.YXJT1218.ispmxmta05-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Robert Nelson writes: > Can't find anything that bars Russians from yelling at > the top of their lungs while pushing down on skipoles. > > May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? I don't see why not. Although not getting off the skis for CC will make life problematic and perhaps quite short for the Russkies. While I think you CAN do it, I can't think of too many situations where it would be good game play to try it. If you can do it either not under fire, or via cover, and you won't have to worry about CC on skis, then it's a great move, but if that's all true, what's your opponent doing? Admittedly I'm not a human wave proponent as it just takes too many squads, forces stacking & ties your hands too much in limiting how they can move. Banzai is so much more elegant a tool than the clumsy, random wave... Regardless of the genius of the game merits of a ski wave, it will score very highly on the "Buzz Lightyear ASL" style points meter, and often that can be more important than winning... Good luck to your cardboard ski heroes... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 09:07:49 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Apr 6 09:08:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050406160750.39107.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> it's all about style points, isn't it? actually, makes a lot of sense too. In the Ring, I used two giant waves to devastating effect against my opponent. If you have to get a lot of troops across a lot of land fast, and the pickets are limited against you, I LOVE them. Additionally, you almost have a 1.5 morale increase, with the pin being n/a. I won a game of DASL Little Stalingrad with one recently. And you want style points? throw in the 3 armoured assaulting, platoon moving T34s...that is one fun scen. In any case, we're now playing TAC70. 12 8 morale ski troops have to cross a lot of land, and the pickets against them are spare. My opponent wants to return my waving favour, and hopes to outstyle me at the same time. Rob --- Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: > Robert Nelson writes: > > Can't find anything that bars Russians from > yelling at > > the top of their lungs while pushing down on > skipoles. > > > > May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? > > I don't see why not. Although not getting off the > skis > for CC will make life problematic and perhaps quite > short > for the Russkies. While I think you CAN do it, I > can't > think of too many situations where it would be good > game > play to try it. If you can do it either not under > fire, > or via cover, and you won't have to worry about CC > on skis, > then it's a great move, but if that's all true, > what's > your opponent doing? > > Admittedly I'm not a human wave proponent as it just > takes > too many squads, forces stacking & ties your hands > too > much in limiting how they can move. Banzai is so > much > more elegant a tool than the clumsy, random wave... > > Regardless of the genius of the game merits of a ski > wave, > it will score very highly on the "Buzz Lightyear > ASL" > style points meter, and often that can be more > important > than winning... > > Good luck to your cardboard ski heroes... > > Bret Hildebran > damavs@alltel.net > www.aslok.org > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From afantozzi at tiscali.it Tue Apr 5 15:41:20 2005 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Wed Apr 6 13:03:52 2005 Subject: R: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! In-Reply-To: <006701c53979$c8171870$d78c6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <005e01c53ae2$97b245f0$a5100a3e@andrea> Agree. BTW the last sentence is unnecessary. The British player may win only by forcing the Italian force to surrender; this may happen at the end of any RPh. If this does not happen it is obvious that the Italian wins. Andrea > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]Per conto di Mountain > View Cottage > Inviato: marted? 5 aprile 2005 2.52 > A: aslml@aslwebdex.net; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! > > > Larry & ASLMLers, > > Any idea what the last sentence of the VC > for DR1 is supposed to really say? > > Perhaps "Turn 7" should be inserted between "Italian" > and "RPh"??? > > TIA > > Christopher Fleury > Sgt. Meikle's Bunker > Mountain View Cottage > Lewis, NY > USS Iowa; BB-61 > Camp Dudley #12557 > ASL 6+1 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 7:52 PM > Subject: [Aslml] Desert Rats Scenarios Legal! > > > > Tom Slizewski, the creator of the Desert Rats scenarios has given me > > permission to keep his scenarios on the ASLWebDex. Those > of you who have > > not downloaded them out of respect for the authors rights > and the law can > > now download without guilt. > > > > If you like the desert, you'll love these scenarios. If > you don't like > > the > > desert, you just haven't played it enough. > > > > Thanks to Tom. > > > > Enjoy. > > > > You can find the DR Archive at: > > > > http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/desertrats/rats.html > > > > You can find the WebDex at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/ > > > > and all the downloadable scenarios (and links to all the > scenarios on the > > net) at: > > > > http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-scenarios.html > > > > Larry Memmott > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 01/04/2005 > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 01/04/2005 From jbarber at meic.org Wed Apr 6 14:39:37 2005 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Wed Apr 6 14:39:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Wall, hills and COT In-Reply-To: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dudes, Surely this has been asked and answered before. Are walls, hedges and other hexside terrain included in COT? B9.4 would indicate that crossing walls and hedges are not a part of COT because it says it costs 1 + COT to go over a wall/hedge. If I've just answered my question, I apologize for belaboring the point below. Examples: What is the MF cost for an infantry unit to cross a hillside wall/hedge and enter an open ground higher elevation hex? Does it cost 3MF (1 (open ground COT) x 2 (higher elevation) + 1 (hedge)) or 4MF (1 (open ground) + 1 hedge = 2 x 2 (higher elevation)). And to complicate things, what's the cost in MF for an infantry unit to move upslope, over a hedge and enter a higher elevation open ground hex. I got 3.5. Is that right? -- Jeff "COT for me means 'confused on terrain'" Barber From trainman at dmbroadband.com Wed Apr 6 18:59:46 2005 From: trainman at dmbroadband.com (Kevin Thurnau) Date: Wed Apr 6 19:00:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? References: <200504060744.j367h7PH003713@shphoenix.jib.co.za> Message-ID: <004c01c53b15$7bda8e40$6501a8c0@thurnau> Hey- I resemble that remark. Some of us have to start (or restart) somewhere. If not for us Dummies you experts wouldn't have any new cannon fodder! A retread. ----- Original Message ----- From: Chris van Wyk To: 'ASL List' Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 2:37 AM Subject: RE: [Aslml] ASL for Dummies? > Hi, > > The starter kit I would say is very close to an ASL for dummies compared to > the rule book. > > I've bought the rule book 2 years ago and only got myself the Starter Kit > now. The kit contains everything to get started in an easy and not "bloody > hell look at all the rules" way. > > As I found BV is nearly impossible to get unless reprinted, the starter kit > is the way to go. > > Chris > > > Scott, > > > > Why should MMP do this? > > > > They would already have most of the MMP crowd saying my favorite quote > > from the 3 Stooges "I resemble that remark"...... > > > > > Hi all- > > > > > > Wizards of the coast is putting out a book for D&D called D&D for > > dummies. > > > Maybe MMP should do the same for ASL or does the starter kits qualify as > > > ASL for dummies? > > > > > > > > > Scott > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > > > > > ************************************** > > Computer problems? ................... > > ..............http://www.multibyte.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 6 22:31:46 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 6 22:29:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <003601c53a56$ec9d2fd0$1f27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Jim trundles out that tired old HIP routine again, like we haven't seen this all before. My response in "%%%" shall be swift and merciless. But do me a quick favor first, Jim. Please confirm that I have removed 4 of your OB-given "?" from play and your remaining concealed units are ?+2 in R5 and ?+2 in S4. If not, read no further and get back to me with correct info. If so, this would leave you with 3 "?", a 548, 8-0 and MMG, which suggests that you gacked your setup somehow, you deliberately left out a "?", or you have a very unorthodox setup. I look forward to discovering which. Play on. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 12:13 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh2 Listerz, The hunt is on! > $$$BATES: The pursuit continues... > 337D in P4L0 double-times to L1 (1MF)... > ... to Q4L1 (3MF)... > ... to Q4L0 (4MF)... 27. ***MCLEOD: Hello Boris! My formerly HIP 238 in Q4LO bounces you back up stairs. His MPh is done. %%%BATES: Two down, two to go. "Shirley chooses door number two and, oh! it's a half squad. Sorry Shirley, but you lose your $175,000 and half to take these 5 hungry German soldiers. I'm sure they'll make themselves handy around the house and you'll never have to worry about being burgled again. Johnny, do we have a consolation prize for Shirley to take home to Winnetka with her?" "You bet we do, Monty! Shirley, you'll also receive this fine naugahyde divan, perfect for your family or living room. And, you'll be able to choose from the finest in National Socialist couture with a copy of the latest Spiegel catalog." No DFF once again, it appears. Going once, going twice... > Let's see how you like them apples. Mmmmm, quite tasty. I'm sure they'll make excellent Calvados. :) Bring it on George! =Jim= %%%BATES: Here it is, sweetness. 337EE in P4L0 steps out into the road on Q5 (1MF)... ... bypasses R5 on R4 & S5 (2MF)... ... sneaks into S6 (4MF). Curious what will show up here. Keep going. ?+1 in O7 to O8 (1MF)... ... bypass P8 on O9 & P9 (2MF)... ... to Q9 (4MF). As I understand it, I can't lose "?" because you're not GO, and you don't gain DM because I'm concealed. "He tasks me, and I shall have him." Enough for now. Let's see what pops into view. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 7 04:16:23 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 7 04:16:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh3 References: Message-ID: <000e01c53b63$3c833500$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > Jim trundles out that tired old HIP routine again, like we haven't seen > this > all before. He was HIP ... :) > My response in "%%%" shall be swift and merciless. > But do me a quick favor first, Jim. Please confirm that I have removed 4 > of > your OB-given "?" from play and your remaining concealed units are ?+2 in > R5 > and ?+2 in S4. If not, read no further and get back to me with correct > info. > If so, this would leave you with 3 "?", a 548, 8-0 and MMG, which suggests > that you gacked your setup somehow, you deliberately left out a "?", or > you > have a very unorthodox setup. I look forward to discovering which. Play > on. All good. >> $$$BATES: The pursuit continues... > >> 337D in P4L0 double-times to L1 (1MF)... > >> ... to Q4L1 (3MF)... > >> ... to Q4L0 (4MF)... > > 27. ***MCLEOD: Hello Boris! My formerly HIP 238 in Q4LO bounces you back > up > stairs. His MPh is done. > %%%BATES: Two down, two to go. > "Shirley chooses door number two and, oh! it's a half squad. Sorry > Shirley, > but you lose your $175,000 and half to take these 5 hungry German > soldiers. > I'm sure they'll make themselves handy around the house and you'll never > have to worry about being burgled again. Johnny, do we have a consolation > prize for Shirley to take home to Winnetka with her?" > "You bet we do, Monty! Shirley, you'll also receive this fine naugahyde > divan, perfect for your family or living room. And, you'll be able to > choose from the finest in National Socialist couture with a copy of the > latest Spiegel catalog." > No DFF once again, it appears. Going once, going twice... Sold! >> Let's see how you like them apples. > > Mmmmm, quite tasty. I'm sure they'll make excellent Calvados. > > :) > > Bring it on George! > %%%BATES: Here it is, sweetness. > > 337EE in P4L0 steps out into the road on Q5 (1MF)... > ... bypasses R5 on R4 & S5 (2MF)... 28. ***MCLEOD: Stop, my 548 w/MMG drops "?" and it is back to Q5 for you good sir. I believe his MPh is done. No D'fire at this time. I did not read the remainder of the the message George in case you wish to rethink your moves. =Jim= From dschofie at bournemouth.ac.uk Thu Apr 7 04:34:07 2005 From: dschofie at bournemouth.ac.uk (David Schofield) Date: Thu Apr 7 04:34:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] test Message-ID: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0355@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> cheers David This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University. Nor can any contract be formed on the University's behalf via e-mail. From frango1000 at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 7 05:47:02 2005 From: frango1000 at sbcglobal.net (David Goldman) Date: Thu Apr 7 05:47:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL OPEN 42 pre-Paid 21 additional reservations! Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050407074225.00b264e0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Three weeks from tomorrow the ASL OPEN starts. I already have reservations and pre-paids that make it clear we should exceed last year's attendance. Total attendance is going to be around 70. If you haven't let me know you're coming then you probably don't have the scenario list. Let me know and I'll get it out to you right away. David Goldman From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 7 07:03:32 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:02:15 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <000e01c53b63$3c833500$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Another blown cover, another message. I proceed in "&&&." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 8:16 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh3 Listerz, > Jim trundles out that tired old HIP routine again, like we haven't seen > this > all before. He was HIP ... :) > My response in "%%%" shall be swift and merciless. > But do me a quick favor first, Jim. Please confirm that I have removed 4 > of > your OB-given "?" from play and your remaining concealed units are ?+2 in > R5 > and ?+2 in S4. If not, read no further and get back to me with correct > info. > If so, this would leave you with 3 "?", a 548, 8-0 and MMG, which suggests > that you gacked your setup somehow, you deliberately left out a "?", or > you > have a very unorthodox setup. I look forward to discovering which. Play > on. All good. >> $$$BATES: The pursuit continues... > >> 337D in P4L0 double-times to L1 (1MF)... > >> ... to Q4L1 (3MF)... > >> ... to Q4L0 (4MF)... > > 27. ***MCLEOD: Hello Boris! My formerly HIP 238 in Q4LO bounces you back > up > stairs. His MPh is done. > %%%BATES: Two down, two to go. > "Shirley chooses door number two and, oh! it's a half squad. Sorry > Shirley, > but you lose your $175,000 and half to take these 5 hungry German > soldiers. > I'm sure they'll make themselves handy around the house and you'll never > have to worry about being burgled again. Johnny, do we have a consolation > prize for Shirley to take home to Winnetka with her?" > "You bet we do, Monty! Shirley, you'll also receive this fine naugahyde > divan, perfect for your family or living room. And, you'll be able to > choose from the finest in National Socialist couture with a copy of the > latest Spiegel catalog." > No DFF once again, it appears. Going once, going twice... Sold! >> Let's see how you like them apples. > > Mmmmm, quite tasty. I'm sure they'll make excellent Calvados. > > :) > > Bring it on George! > %%%BATES: Here it is, sweetness. > > 337EE in P4L0 steps out into the road on Q5 (1MF)... > ... bypasses R5 on R4 & S5 (2MF)... 28. ***MCLEOD: Stop, my 548 w/MMG drops "?" and it is back to Q5 for you good sir. I believe his MPh is done. No D'fire at this time. &&&BATES: Most excellent. That just about accounts for everybody, and no casualties or resid yet, either. I did not read the remainder of the the message George in case you wish to rethink your moves. =Jim= &&&BATES: Speeding things up a little now. ?+1 in O7 to P7, does _not_ claim WA (1MF)... ... to P8 (3MF)... ... late double-time to Q9 (5MF). As I understand it, I can't lose "?" because you're not GO, and you don't gain DM because I'm concealed. "He tasks me, and I shall have him." ?+2 in H2 will conduct all his movement out of your LOS, so here goes: Double-time to I3, bypass J2 on J3, K3, L3, M3, N3 (7.5MF). Takes WA and keeps "?." Same for ?+2 in H3. Double-times to I4, J4, K4, L4, M4, N4 (6MF). Takes WA and keeps "?." One concealed unit in H7 to I7, J7 (3MF). Other concealed unit in H7 to I7, J6, K6, L6 (4MF). No looky, no shooty. ?+3 in H5 double-times to I6, J6, K7, L7, M8, bypass N8 on N7 (6MF). Here your HS in Q4 strips his concealment (damn gusts) and you see 747SS/radio & 8-0. Care to shoot? ... to O7 (7MF)... ... to P7 (8MF) and takes WA. I have more to move but it's bedtime. Lessee what you do with this. - G From cjsloki at comcast.net Thu Apr 7 07:29:00 2005 From: cjsloki at comcast.net (cjsloki@comcast.net) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:29:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question Message-ID: <68880-2200544714290606@M2W082.mail2web.com> Entrenchments Came across this when playing a scenario from Journal 6. In the special scenario rules it says that the germans may set up entrenched. Does this mean any entrenchment ( foxhole or trench or AT-Ditch. Or does just mean foxholes. I think it was J97. Thanks. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 07:30:35 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:30:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave In-Reply-To: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >Can't find anything that bars Russians from yelling at >the top of their lungs while pushing down on skipoles. > >May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? It appears to be perfectly legal. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From john.slotwinski at nist.gov Thu Apr 7 07:38:20 2005 From: john.slotwinski at nist.gov (John Slotwinski) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:37:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave In-Reply-To: References: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20050407103557.00a73990@mailserver.nist.gov> At 12:30 AM 4/8/2005 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote: > >May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? >It appears to be perfectly legal. It would also be very cool. Maybe not the smartest move, but high style points nonetheless. John "stylish trumps smart every time" Slotwinski From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 07:37:27 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:37:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Wall, hills and COT In-Reply-To: References: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 15:39:37 -0600, Jeff Barber wrote: >Surely this has been asked and answered before. Are walls, hedges and other hexside terrain included in COT? No. (B.2 contains the answers you seek.) >Examples: What is the MF cost for an infantry unit to cross a hillside wall/hedge and enter an open ground higher elevation hex? Does it cost 3MF (1 (open ground COT) x 2 (higher elevation) + 1 (hedge)) or 4MF (1 (open ground) + 1 hedge = 2 x 2 (higher elevation)). And to complicate things, what's the cost in MF for an infantry unit to move upslope, over a hedge and enter a higher elevation open ground hex. I got 3.5. Is that right? 3 MF [1 (COT) x 2, +1]. 3.5 MF [1 (COT) x 2, +1, +0.5]. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From morrisgj at mscd.edu Thu Apr 7 07:42:43 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:42:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Wall, hills and COT Message-ID: <1d5bd01d6b08.1d6b081d5bd0@mscd.edu> Hello Jeff: "What is the MF cost for an infantry unit to cross a hillside wall/hedge and enter an open ground higher elevation hex? Does it cost 3MF (1 (open ground COT) x 2 (higher elevation) + 1 (hedge))" 3MF I believe as hedge/wall cost is not COT and is just added to COT. "And to complicate things, what's the cost in MF for an infantry unit to move upslope, over a hedge and enter a higher elevation open ground hex. I got 3.5. Is that right?" 3.5 seems right as I look at my OVHS Slope rules - says they "must expend 1/2 MF + COT". Take care, Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Barber Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2005 3:39 pm Subject: [Aslml] Wall, hills and COT > Dudes, > > Surely this has been asked and answered before. Are walls, hedges > and other hexside terrain included in COT? > > B9.4 would indicate that crossing walls and hedges are not a part > of COT because it says it costs 1 + COT to go over a wall/hedge. > If I've just answered my question, I apologize for belaboring the > point below. > > > Examples: What is the MF cost for an infantry unit to cross a > hillside wall/hedge and enter an open ground higher elevation hex? > Does it cost 3MF (1 (open ground COT) x 2 (higher elevation) + 1 > (hedge)) or 4MF (1 (open ground) + 1 hedge = 2 x 2 (higher > elevation)). And to complicate things, what's the cost in MF for > an infantry unit to move upslope, over a hedge and enter a higher > elevation open ground hex. I got 3.5. Is that right? > > > -- > Jeff "COT for me means 'confused on terrain'" Barber > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 07:46:34 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 7 07:46:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave Message-ID: <20050407144634.86620.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> again a comment on possible 'foolishness', this time from Slotwinski. Am I just incredibly lucky with waves or what? I find them to be a spectacular coup-weapon of the Russians. Can't remember the last time I had more than 12 Russian mmcs and didn't use one! I take it they crumple up and die painfully for many of you. I've yet to learn my lesson. (even beyond 'physical' results, the manner with which they utterly panic and demoralize my opponents is in many ways the most powerful) Rob --- John Slotwinski wrote: > At 12:30 AM 4/8/2005 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote: > > >May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? > >It appears to be perfectly legal. > > It would also be very cool. Maybe not the smartest > move, but high style > points nonetheless. > > John "stylish trumps smart every time" Slotwinski > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From blueistheonlycolour at hotmail.com Thu Apr 7 08:01:24 2005 From: blueistheonlycolour at hotmail.com (blue istheonlycolour) Date: Thu Apr 7 08:01:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Rubble LOS question Message-ID: A humble question for anyone who might provide an answer. Rubble is a half-level LOS obstacle though the entire hex (including hexsides) B 24.2. Imagine a row of hexes ... hexes 1, 2 and 4 each have a ground-level rubble counter. All other hexes are open ground. In other words: rubble, rubble, OG, rubble, OG Question 1: German squad in hex 2 rubble. Russian squad enters hex 5 OG in MPh Is there LOS? Does the rubble act as a wall on both hexsides and block LOS or can LOS be traced through the entire hex into OG hex 5? Question 2: German squad in hex 1 rubble. Russian squad enters hex 3 OG in MPh Is there LOS? Thanks _________________________________________________________________ It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger From damavs at alltel.net Thu Apr 7 08:26:12 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Thu Apr 7 08:26:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Rubble LOS question Message-ID: <20050407152612.PPCP4937.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> "blue istheonlycolour" writes: > Rubble is a half-level LOS obstacle though the entire hex (including > hexsides) B 24.2. > > Imagine a row of hexes ... hexes 1, 2 and 4 each have a ground-level rubble > counter. All other hexes are open ground. In other words: rubble, rubble, > OG, rubble, OG > > Question 1: > German squad in hex 2 rubble. Russian squad enters hex 5 OG in MPh > > Is there LOS? Does the rubble act as a wall on both hexsides and block LOS > or can LOS be traced through the entire hex into OG hex 5? No LOS. The German can see into the rubble of hex 4 but no further. Rubble is even more restrictive than a wall as a unit in OG hex 3, can't see OG hex 5 over the rubble, but with a walled enclosure they could. > Question 2: > German squad in hex 1 rubble. Russian squad enters hex 3 OG in MPh > > Is there LOS? Nope - again no LOS. Units at same level can't see "over" rubble at all. This is the same as my "wall example" above - if rubble were like a wall, there would be LOS, but w/rubble there isn't. It's a whole hex half level obstacle to LOS. Hope that helps, Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 08:27:42 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 08:27:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez RE: A11.11 CC Mods Q Message-ID: Not what I expected. It seems that Perry interprets A.5 slightly differently than I would; when it says "a modifier" he must be reading it only in terms of its "value" as a number -- i.e., all -1 modifiers are the same; whereas I would expect it to be treated as separated according to cause -- i.e., a -1 DRM for reason A is not the same as a -1 DRM for reason B. Either interpretation fits; the only practical difference is that Perry's results in slightly less bloodier CC. Not a big issue, I guess, and probably not all that likely to come up in actual play. *** On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:03:38 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: >A hex contains a wire counter, a friendly squad under the wire, an enemy >squad above the wire, and an enemy squad below the wire but who is CX. The >friendly squad attacks both enemy squads together. Each enemy squad has a -1 DRM >applicable to it, but for a different reason. The odds are 1:2 and it is >normal CC, not HtH. > >If the Original DR is "5", the Final DR vs. the unit on the wire is a "4". >The Final DR vs. the CX unit would also be a "4". Does the different >reason for the DRM mean that *each* enemy unit separately suffers a Casualty >Reduction result? Or is the "collective" DRM a single -1, so that Random >Selection would apply? No. Yes. >If both enemy units were above the wire, and neither were CX, if the >Original DR is "5" is the result calculated any differently? No. ....Perry MMP *** ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 08:30:12 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 08:30:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] (fwd) RE: B23.32 & C3.71 Indirect Fire CH DRM vs lower building levels Message-ID: On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:15:30 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: >Subject: B23.32 & C3.71 Indirect Fire CH DRM vs lower building levels >An EXC in C3.71 makes it clear that the additional TEM for indirect fire vs. >lower building levels is *not reversed* on a CH. Does that TEM therefore >still apply as a positive DRM? No. ....Perry MMP >[The rule does not say that the conditions listed in the TEM are ignored (or >treated as "0"), only that they are not reversed. There are *other* rules >that say the TEM is ignored for the other conditions listed (e.g., B30.113 for >Pillbox TEM), but there is no equivalent "other rule" for the >higher-building-level TEM. I'm guessing that B23.32 *ought* to have an EXC >in it stating that the additional TEM is NA for a CH ... but it doesn't.] [ B23.32 or C3.71 would be a good place to clarify this.] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 08:50:06 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 08:50:12 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave In-Reply-To: <20050407144634.86620.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050407144634.86620.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 07:46:34 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >again a comment on possible 'foolishness', this time >from Slotwinski. > >Am I just incredibly lucky with waves or what? I don't think anyone is suggesting that HW are "foolish", only that a ski-equipped HW may be. Although since generally it costs no MF to switch from ski to foot, there's no special reason why this should be true. You just have to be careful of the timing of the switch. (In other words, make the switch *before* the skier's MPh is finished!) >I take it they crumple up and die painfully for many >of you. In my experience, unless the opposition is pathetic, a HW is either going to be terrific (good luck) or awful (bad luck). If you pull it off in the face of serious opposition, the crowds will cheer. If it fails, you're probably left in a terrible position. The "secret", if there is one, is to maximise the HW's chance of success *before* you kick it off. Choose puny targets with limited firing opportunities. (Isolated broken targets are best!) If you don't need to go very far, get most of the wave moving through cover rather than be in the open. If you *have* to move through the open, see if Smoke can be laid down first (not always easy for the Russians, of course, but it's usually the best use for OBA when on the attack, and if AFV are available they can at least attempt to place vehicular smoke grenades). For the Japanese, try not to charge Marines armed with .50 cals and directed by 10-3 leaders. By and large it's all pretty obvious stuff. There's no requirement that you be in a suicidal frame of mind . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 09:05:49 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 09:09:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question In-Reply-To: <68880-2200544714290606@M2W082.mail2web.com> References: <68880-2200544714290606@M2W082.mail2web.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 10:29:00 -0400, "cjsloki@comcast.net" wrote: >Entrenchments > >Came across this when playing a scenario from Journal 6. In the special >scenario rules it says that the germans may set up entrenched. Does this >mean any entrenchment ( foxhole or trench or AT-Ditch. Or does just mean >foxholes. I think it was J97. I don't have J6 to confirm, but it's highly likely that by "entrenched" the SSR means "in foxholes". The last time I raised this issue with Perry his response was that since so many scenarios use "entrenched" when they mean "in foxholes", if MMP were to stop using the word "entrenched" everyone would think that all those old scenarios actually mean "put them in trenches or even A-T Ditches if you like". Personally I find that highly unlikely, and it bugs me when a clear rulebook definition is being subverted in meaning by "tradition", and a very poor tradition at that. The other problem with SSRs like this is that even a statement that says "units may begin in foxholes" is still a little vague. Can I use this rule to place 3S foxholes to cover a single HS, for instance? We assume the answer to be "no" but in fact it's not actually forbidden. The SSR *should* read something like "units may begin in foxholes of minimum capacity required to hold them" or something like that, but that's incredibly clumsy compared to a simple "may begin entrenched" command, no matter how imprecise the latter is .... The "ideal" solution would be an additional rule in B27 -- an extension of the introductory paragraph, perhaps -- that reads something like "If a scenario SSR states that 'units may begin the scenario entrenched if in suitable terrain', this should be interpreted to mean that the units may set up under a foxhole counter of the minimum capacity required to cover those units; any such SSR-specified foxholes are in addition to any Entrenchments that may be listed in the scenario OB for that side." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 09:13:24 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 7 09:13:52 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Rubble LOS question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:01:24 +0000, "blue istheonlycolour" wrote: >Imagine a row of hexes ... hexes 1, 2 and 4 each have a ground-level rubble >counter. All other hexes are open ground. In other words: rubble, rubble, >OG, rubble, OG > >Question 1: >German squad in hex 2 rubble. Russian squad enters hex 5 OG in MPh > >Is there LOS? Does the rubble act as a wall on both hexsides and block LOS >or can LOS be traced through the entire hex into OG hex 5? No. The intervening rubble hex (4) blocks same-level LOS through that hex. >Question 2: >German squad in hex 1 rubble. Russian squad enters hex 3 OG in MPh > >Is there LOS? No. The intervening rubble hex (2) blocks same-level LOS through that hex. The only way in which rubble and walls are similar is that they are both half-level LOS obstacles. You cannot "see over" a rubble hex by being adjacent to it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Why do you hate my groin so much?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Apr 7 10:18:26 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Apr 7 10:18:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question Message-ID: <3rb42s$rkhk2l@mxip20a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2005/04/07 Thu AM 11:05:49 CDT > To: cjsloki@comcast.net > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 10:29:00 -0400, "cjsloki@comcast.net" > wrote: > > I don't have J6 to confirm, but it's highly likely that by "entrenched" the > SSR means "in foxholes". The last time I raised this issue with Perry his > response was that since so many scenarios use "entrenched" when they mean "in > foxholes", if MMP were to stop using the word "entrenched" everyone would > think that all those old scenarios actually mean "put them in trenches or even > A-T Ditches if you like". Personally I find that highly unlikely, and it bugs > me when a clear rulebook definition is being subverted in meaning by > "tradition", and a very poor tradition at that. I think an errata note ought ot be added to the foxholes to the effect: "[Note: Any SSR that refers to units setting up 'entrenched' is referring to the use of foxholes only.]" > The other problem with SSRs like this is that even a statement that says > "units may begin in foxholes" is still a little vague. Can I use this rule to > place 3S foxholes to cover a single HS, for instance? We assume the answer to > be "no" but in fact it's not actually forbidden. The SSR *should* read > something like "units may begin in foxholes of minimum capacity required to > hold them" or something like that, but that's incredibly clumsy compared to a > simple "may begin entrenched" command, no matter how imprecise the latter is > .... I disagree...the SSR for setting up entrenched is to reflect a position which has time to prepare defenses. Even in the course of a 5-6 turn scenario a HS has the potential to dig a 3sq-foxhole. Thus, if the same HS has 1-2 days to prepare then a 3sq-foxhole is highly feasible. > The "ideal" solution would be an additional rule in B27 -- an extension of the > introductory paragraph, perhaps -- that reads something like "If a scenario > SSR states that 'units may begin the scenario entrenched if in suitable > terrain', this should be interpreted to mean that the units may set up under a > foxhole counter of the minimum capacity required to cover those units; any > such SSR-specified foxholes are in addition to any Entrenchments that may be > listed in the scenario OB for that side." Yep... Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From weflemi at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 15:54:10 2005 From: weflemi at yahoo.com (William Fleming) Date: Thu Apr 7 15:54:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050407225410.97431.qmail@web30305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > > >Entrenchments > > > >Came across this when playing a scenario from > Journal 6. In the special > >scenario rules it says that the germans may set up > entrenched. Does this > >mean any entrenchment ( foxhole or trench or > AT-Ditch. Or does just mean > >foxholes. I think it was J97. > > I don't have J6 to confirm, but it's highly likely > that by "entrenched" the > SSR means "in foxholes". The last time I raised > this issue with Perry his > response was that since so many scenarios use > "entrenched" when they mean "in > foxholes", if MMP were to stop using the word > "entrenched" everyone would > think that all those old scenarios actually mean > "put them in trenches or even > A-T Ditches if you like". Personally I find that > highly unlikely, and it bugs > me when a clear rulebook definition is being > subverted in meaning by > "tradition", and a very poor tradition at that. > This actually is one of the PrBr scenarios by Randy Yeates. In this scenario, the German units may setup entrenched. In the other two scenarios, Randy Yeates specifically statest that units may setup in 'foxholes'. In this scenario, there are a few onboard trenches/foxholes already onboard. Since trenches (and AT trenches) are entrenchments and units in them are entrenched, I think it is legal to use trenches. If Randy or any other scenario designers mean foxholes they should just say foxholes instead of entrenchments--Like Randy did in the other two PrBr scenarios. The Phum Ga map scenarios also state 'entrenched' but there is errata on it saying that it means foxholes. I agree they should also specify the capacity of any foxholes used. I also agree that this should be clarified better by MMP/designers. Will __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Apr 7 15:45:28 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Apr 7 16:04:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave References: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> <5.0.0.25.2.20050407103557.00a73990@mailserver.nist.gov> Message-ID: <003901c53bc6$2531a0e0$a64d8918@klis.com> Several wrote: > > >May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? > >It appears to be perfectly legal. > > It would also be very cool. Maybe not the smartest move, but high style > points nonetheless. I wanna see this at the next Winter Olympics. Hell, I'll be a judge if they want. David "biathlon with attitude" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Apr 7 16:17:15 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Apr 7 16:18:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh4 References: Message-ID: <004101c53bc7$f7a45580$a64d8918@klis.com> Moderator here. George wrote: > ... late double-time to Q9 (5MF). As I understand it, I can't lose "?" > because you're not GO, and you don't gain DM because I'm concealed. You understand correctly. A brokie can neither cause concealment loss nor deny concealment gain because he is not Good Order and he is not unbroken. A12.121 Concealment Loss/Gain Table. Also, a brokie becomes DM whenever a Known armed enemy unit becomes ADJACENT. (A10.62) The concealed unit is not Known, therefore no DM. > "He tasks me, and I shall have him." George says this because he Khan. David "if the Klingon in ST: TNG started an airline, it would be called WorfAir" Olie From neil at pegacat.com Thu Apr 7 16:17:33 2005 From: neil at pegacat.com (Neil Andrews) Date: Thu Apr 7 16:27:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Info On Scenarios Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20050408091724.02d1ca10@popa.melbpc.org.au> G'day Does any one out there know the providence of the scenario "False Facade", A US Vs German affair. It has the title ASL Scenario WM 01. And while you are at it, does any one know where the scenario "Semper Paratus" comes from. This one does not have any indication of a scenario number Neither of them are on ROAR So if anyone can tell me where they come from I would appreciate it Stay Safe Yours in ASL =============================== Neil Andrews Secretary - Army Group South ASL Group Boronia, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia neil@pegacat.com http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/asl-victoria/ http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/asl-au-ags/ =============================== From neil at pegacat.com Thu Apr 7 16:17:49 2005 From: neil at pegacat.com (Neil Andrews) Date: Thu Apr 7 16:27:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] On All Fronts/Rout Report Scenarios Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20050408091743.02ccc9e0@popa.melbpc.org.au> G'day I have a small collection of scenarios from the now defunct magazines On All Fronts and The Rout Report. I am wondering if anyone out there could expand this collection A photocopy or the like is more than enough Contact me ex list if you have any, and would be willing to make a copy or two Thanks Stay Safe Yours in ASL =============================== Neil Andrews Secretary - Army Group South ASL Group Boronia, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia neil@pegacat.com http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/asl-victoria/ http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/asl-au-ags/ =============================== From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Apr 7 17:09:06 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Apr 7 17:09:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Info On Scenarios References: <5.2.0.9.0.20050408091724.02d1ca10@popa.melbpc.org.au> Message-ID: <007d01c53bcf$32b94980$a64d8918@klis.com> Neil wrote: > Does any one out there know the providence of the scenario "False Facade", > A US Vs German affair. It has the title ASL Scenario WM 01. I have a copy of this as well, sent to me by a PBeM buddy. I have no idea what it "provenance" is. (This is the word you're looking for, yes?) > And while you are at it, does any one know where the scenario "Semper > Paratus" comes from. This one does not have any indication of a scenario > number "Semper Paratus" began as a CoD-level scenario published in The General in association with a SL Clinic article on pillboxes. For some reason I no longer have the original. What I do have is a copy of an ASL translation from the same source as above. The scenario is intended to be instructional in the setup and use of pillboxes, rather than a scenario for competition. If the German sets up correctly, it's almost impossible for the Canadian to win. The secret is to set up the 1+3+5 and 2+3+5 pillboxes in OG with their backs to the Canadians, and to set up the 1+5+7 pillbox with the 8-1; HMG/4-6-7 facing forward to cover the rest. Barring an HMG malf. or a CH from the captured PaK 40 on the 1+5+7 pillbox, the Germans should win every time. I suppose this is why this scenario has never been "officially" translated into ASL. David "this scenario is history" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Apr 7 17:28:21 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Apr 7 17:29:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Info On Scenarios ERRATUM References: <5.2.0.9.0.20050408091724.02d1ca10@popa.melbpc.org.au> Message-ID: <009501c53bd1$e1787a20$a64d8918@klis.com> Hey, all. And while I'm pulling Neil up on his use of English, I should also say I should have written "its "provenance"" rather than "it "provenance"". David "I have the editor gene" Olie From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 7 19:22:25 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 7 19:20:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Info On Scenarios ERRATUM In-Reply-To: <009501c53bd1$e1787a20$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: ... less a couple of base-pairs. 8-) - G -----Original Message----- Hey, all. And while I'm pulling Neil up on his use of English, I should also say I should have written "its "provenance"" rather than "it "provenance"". David "I have the editor gene" Olie From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 7 19:15:22 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 7 19:28:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh4 References: Message-ID: <001a01c53be2$b471ed20$cb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> > > 28. ***MCLEOD: Stop, my 548 w/MMG drops "?" and it is back to Q5 for you > good sir. I believe his MPh is done. No D'fire at this time. > &&&BATES: Most excellent. That just about accounts for everybody, and no > casualties or resid yet, either. > &&&BATES: Speeding things up a little now. > > ?+1 in O7 to P7, does _not_ claim WA (1MF)... > ... to P8 (3MF)... > ... late double-time to Q9 (5MF). As I understand it, I can't lose "?" > because you're not GO, and you don't gain DM because I'm concealed. > "He tasks me, and I shall have him." That is correct Moneypenny. > ?+2 in H2 will conduct all his movement out of your LOS, so here goes: > Double-time to I3, bypass J2 on J3, K3, L3, M3, N3 (7.5MF). Takes WA and > keeps "?." Very Good. > Same for ?+2 in H3. Double-times to I4, J4, K4, L4, M4, N4 (6MF). Takes > WA > and keeps "?." 29. *** MCLEOD: Stop in I4! I believe that my 548 in R6 has a clear LOS to you. Drop that "?" and what do you have. I do not look at the rest comrade until I see what is there. =Jim= From robertthepastor at juno.com Thu Apr 7 21:40:06 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Thu Apr 7 22:54:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question Message-ID: <20050407.225105.2068.3.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Bruce offered and Tate agreed with: "> > The "ideal" solution would be an additional rule in B27 -- an extension of the > > introductory paragraph, perhaps -- that reads something like "If a scenario > > SSR states that 'units may begin the scenario entrenched if in suitable > > terrain', this should be interpreted to mean that the units may set up under a > > foxhole counter of the minimum capacity required to cover those units; any > > such SSR-specified foxholes are in addition to any Entrenchments that may be > > listed in the scenario OB for that side." > > Yep..." I agree but with a slight change. Please, in the fourth line, change "should be interpreted to mean" to "means". Otherwise, it is not mandatory for only Foxhole placement but permissive for any type of Entrenchment. Just attempting to close any loopholes. Respectfully, Robert "always preaching a simpler rule" Hammond From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 7 23:28:51 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Thu Apr 7 23:29:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 Death at Carentan: T2(A) MPh4 Message-ID: <46450-2200545862851187@M2W074.mail2web.com> >> "He tasks me, and I shall have him." >George says this because he Khan. Really? I thought it was because he clearly knows Dick. Bruce "... but call me Ishmael." -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 8 05:53:17 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 8 05:51:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Sneaking around Carentan In-Reply-To: <004101c53bc7$f7a45580$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: David gives his stamp of approval to my stalking activities... -----Original Message----- From: David Olie [mailto:daveolie@eastlink.ca] Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 8:17 AM To: George Bates; mcleods; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh4 Moderator here. George wrote: > ... late double-time to Q9 (5MF). As I understand it, I can't lose "?" > because you're not GO, and you don't gain DM because I'm concealed. You understand correctly. A brokie can neither cause concealment loss nor deny concealment gain because he is not Good Order and he is not unbroken. A12.121 Concealment Loss/Gain Table. Also, a brokie becomes DM whenever a Known armed enemy unit becomes ADJACENT. (A10.62) The concealed unit is not Known, therefore no DM. BATES: Can you say "ambush?" I knew you could. > "He tasks me, and I shall have him." George says this because he Khan. BATES: He who would pun would pick a pocket. David "if the Klingon in ST: TNG started an airline, it would be called WorfAir" Olie BATES: McCleod, I told you we should spend some money and get ourselves a _real_ moderator... From janusz.maxe at unf.se Fri Apr 8 06:29:11 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Fri Apr 8 06:30:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA Message-ID: But do Ole agree with Bruce about Q3, entering a hex and foxhole under FFE? I don't think so, and therefore submitted a Q to Perry. Janusz ________________________________ From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net on behalf of Ole B?e Sent: Tue 2005-04-05 09:43 To: Tate Rogers Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] entrenchment and OBA Hi, > > Bruce answered: > > > It's identical to the answer to Q2, above. The routing squad > > >may > > > combine the exit and entry costs of the foxholes to avoid > > > *Interdiction*; the > > > OBA attack is not interdiction and cannot be avoided in this > > >manner. C1.51 still applies as usual. > > > and Tate Rogers wrote: > > I don't think Bruce's answer is correct. It is an assumption. The > reference to interdiction seems to be more of a pointer than a rule. > Yes, in the B27.4 it does.... > > B27.4 says: "Note, however, that the cost to enter/exit a > foxhole/pillbox during the RtPh may be combined with the entrance > cost of the nex hex--thereby escaping Interdiction in the > foxhole/pillbox Location (27.41)." > > > > The first sentence says that the MF expenditures "may be > combined" in the RtPh - not that it "may be combined for > Interdiction purposes only". > > Right...looks more like the designers were giving us a pointer, as > in "BTW, one of the benfits of combining is to avoid > interdiction"...not, "the only thing that combining does is avoid > interdiction". > If the actual intent is for combining to apply _ONLY_ to > interdiction then the rule needs to be re-written. > After taking a second analysis, I kind of agree with you both! I agree with Tate that the rule actually says that MF expenditures are combined - not only for Interdiction purposes. But I also agree with Bruce, that the unit will be attacked when exiting the foxhole. C1.51 says "It also attacks each unit/stack that is changing position (or becoming vulnerable) within a Blast Area hex if the unit/stack is becoming more vulnerable to the FFE than it was in its immediately-previous position (e.g., a unit exiting a sewer or foxhole..." Note that for this rule, it doesn't matter if the MF are combined or not. The exit of the foxhole may be combined with exit of the hex for all purposes (which would mean that a DEFENDER couldn't use DFF if this had happened in the MPh), but for the OBA this doesn't matter - it attacks immediately as it exits the foxhole - since there's no rule saying that the OBA can only attack *after* each such combined move. Finally, I agree with Tate that B27.41 should be slightly rewritten to remove this confusion. _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From ethan.strauss at promega.com Fri Apr 8 07:01:47 2005 From: ethan.strauss at promega.com (Ethan Strauss) Date: Fri Apr 8 07:42:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Open Roommate? Message-ID: <84A048E51A0101448AF43BF3DDAB716807F541B5@madmsg001.promega.com> Hi, Anyone want to share a room at the ASL open? I want to try to get a single roommate to cut expenses some. Anyone interested? Please reply to me directly so I don't miss it in the deluge from the list. Thanks! Ethan Strauss Madison Wisconsin. ethan.strauss@promega.com From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 8 08:00:58 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 8 07:59:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh5 In-Reply-To: <001a01c53be2$b471ed20$cb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: OK, Jim, let's see what we can squeeze in before you hit the road. I won't expect a reply before Monday. This round in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 11:15 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh4 > 28. ***MCLEOD: Stop, my 548 w/MMG drops "?" and it is back to Q5 for you > good sir. I believe his MPh is done. No D'fire at this time. > &&&BATES: Most excellent. That just about accounts for everybody, and no > casualties or resid yet, either. > &&&BATES: Speeding things up a little now. > > ?+1 in O7 to P7, does _not_ claim WA (1MF)... > ... to P8 (3MF)... > ... late double-time to Q9 (5MF). As I understand it, I can't lose "?" > because you're not GO, and you don't gain DM because I'm concealed. > "He tasks me, and I shall have him." That is correct Moneypenny. ###BATES: I intend to make you pay for that error in setup > ?+2 in H2 will conduct all his movement out of your LOS, so here goes: > Double-time to I3, bypass J2 on J3, K3, L3, M3, N3 (7.5MF). Takes WA and > keeps "?." Very Good. > Same for ?+2 in H3. Double-times to I4, J4, K4, L4, M4, N4 (6MF). Takes > WA > and keeps "?." 29. *** MCLEOD: Stop in I4! I believe that my 548 in R6 has a clear LOS to you. Drop that "?" and what do you have. ###BATES: Well, bust my buttons, so you do (damn gusts). Yer lookin' at 337CC & 747LL. Do you wanna shot? If not, read on. I do not look at the rest comrade until I see what is there. =Jim= ###BATES: Now that you've called attention to that narrow LoS, I'll be making some adjustments Moose and squirrel continue to J3 (2MF)... ... to K4 (3MF). Another opportunity for a shot... ... to L4 (4MF)... ... to M4 (5MF)... ... to N4 (6MF) and grab WA. One concealed unit in H7 to I7, J7 (3MF). Other concealed unit in H7 to I7, J6, K6, L6 (4MF). No looky, no shooty. ?+3 in H5 double-times to I6, J6, K7, L7, M8, bypass N8 on N7 (6MF). Here your HS in Q4 strips his concealment and you see 747SS/radio & 8-0. Care to shoot? ... to O7 (7MF)... ... to P7 (8MF) and takes WA. Time for another invigorating wash. Wonder if we'll make it through to the end of this message. - G From pyoung at cwhealth.net Fri Apr 8 08:27:33 2005 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Fri Apr 8 08:27:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave In-Reply-To: <003901c53bc6$2531a0e0$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> <20050406152041.67936.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> <5.0.0.25.2.20050407103557.00a73990@mailserver.nist.gov> <003901c53bc6$2531a0e0$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <4256A2E5.5010900@cwhealth.net> Style points, oh yeah. A few years ago, Tom Repetti (IIRC) started a thread on "Buzz Lightyear" moments, those times when you do something purely for style points rather than doing it the most straightforward or tactically sensible way. While the thread didn't really pan out (posters didn't seem to understand what he was driving at), I think a Ski Wave would've won easily. Pete David Olie wrote: > Several wrote: > > >>>>May a Russian ski-wearing mmc be part of a HW? >>> >>>It appears to be perfectly legal. >> >>It would also be very cool. Maybe not the smartest move, but high style >>points nonetheless. > > > I wanna see this at the next Winter Olympics. Hell, I'll be a judge if they > want. > > David "biathlon with attitude" Olie From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 8 08:36:40 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 8 08:36:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh5 References: Message-ID: <004901c53c50$c35624a0$9627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > OK, Jim, let's see what we can squeeze in before you hit the road. I > won't > expect a reply before Monday. This round in "###." We'll have more time than you think. :) > 29. *** MCLEOD: Stop in I4! I believe that my 548 in R6 has a clear LOS > to > you. Drop that "?" and what do you have. > ###BATES: Well, bust my buttons, so you do (damn gusts). Yer lookin' at > 337CC & 747LL. Do you wanna shot? If not, read on. Narrow!!! A Berlin bus can rip sideways through that LOS! :) No D'fire. > ###BATES: Now that you've called attention to that narrow LoS, I'll be > making some adjustments > Moose and squirrel continue to J3 (2MF)... > ... to K4 (3MF). Another opportunity for a shot... None. > ... to L4 (4MF)... No shot. > ... to M4 (5MF)... > ... to N4 (6MF) and grab WA. No D'fire. > One concealed unit in H7 to I7, J7 (3MF). > Other concealed unit in H7 to I7, J6, K6, L6 (4MF). > No looky, no shooty. 30. *** MCLEOD: Yes Looky. My 8-0, momentarily reveals in S4, and will try to strip your "?" in J6. Tell me what you got. No more looky at the rest until I hear back comrade. =Jim= From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Fri Apr 8 14:48:34 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Fri Apr 8 14:48:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] March Madness '99 Kintetic Enegry Scenarios Message-ID: <001001c53c84$b6c34f90$0200a8c0@Father> I missed these reworkings of classic TOT and KE scenarios when I was in Europe. Have all the other stuff. Is there someplace I can go to get the changes in OB and victory conditions that these scenarios attempted to correct? I have seen a review of the pack on VFTT but in order to skirt possible copyright issues the author did not quote verbatim the changes, he only hinted at them. I do not want to violate anybody's copyright but I know there is no way to buy the originals these days. "Zadra" From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Fri Apr 8 21:04:03 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Fri Apr 8 22:44:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Info on Scenarios - Reply Message-ID: <000701c53cb9$2aea9480$0200a8c0@Father> I have "Semper Paratus" in a set of scenarios done by Jim Stahler back in 1987. I believe that is who did the translation into ASL from SL-GI. I am sure I have "False Facade" around but need to know the date of the action as that is how I have my ASL scenarios organized. "Zadra" From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 8 21:29:52 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 8 22:47:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Whale watching in Carentan? In-Reply-To: References: <46450-2200545862851187@M2W074.mail2web.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 11:33:21 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Actually, I wasn't sure whether this line had been borrowed from Melville or >not (surely not Milton!). I have a collection of his short stories, but not >_Moby Dick_, I can't recall Gregory Peck delivering that line, and >Bartlett's wasn't any help, either (in fact, Bartlett also leaves out, "from >Hell's heart I stab at thee"). Still, Ricardo "Quy es mus macho?" >Montalblan's delivery is such high camp it stays with you. Even my wife >liked that film. The original quote is from Chapter 36 of "Moby Dick" (thank God for Google, it would have taken me forever to find it in my printed copy): "To me, the white whale is that wall, shoved near to me. Sometimes I think there's naught beyond. But 'tis enough. He tasks me; he heaps me; I see in him outrageous strength, with an inscrutable malice sinewing it. That inscrutable thing is chiefly what I hate; and be the white whale agent, or be the white whale principal, I will wreak that hate upon him. Talk not to me of blasphemy, man; I'd strike the sun if it insulted me." Chapter 135: "Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering whale; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee. Sink all coffins and all hearses to one common pool! and since neither can be mine, let me then tow to pieces, while still chasing thee, though tied to thee, thou damned whale!" ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "I love the girl ... but I want the hand!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 8 19:33:23 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 8 22:49:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh6 In-Reply-To: <004901c53c50$c35624a0$9627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: All now present and accounted for in the 'ville, as Jim slyly leaves one of his OB "?" off the board. Continuing in "$$$." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 12:37 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh5 Listerz, > OK, Jim, let's see what we can squeeze in before you hit the road. I > won't > expect a reply before Monday. This round in "###." We'll have more time than you think. :) $$$BATES: What happened, Jim? Spring blizzard? Chariot breakdown? > 29. *** MCLEOD: Stop in I4! I believe that my 548 in R6 has a clear LOS > to > you. Drop that "?" and what do you have. > ###BATES: Well, bust my buttons, so you do (damn gusts). Yer lookin' at > 337CC & 747LL. Do you wanna shot? If not, read on. Narrow!!! A Berlin bus can rip sideways through that LOS! :) No D'fire. > ###BATES: Now that you've called attention to that narrow LoS, I'll be > making some adjustments > Moose and squirrel continue to J3 (2MF)... > ... to K4 (3MF). Another opportunity for a shot... None. > ... to L4 (4MF)... No shot. > ... to M4 (5MF)... > ... to N4 (6MF) and grab WA. No D'fire. > One concealed unit in H7 to I7, J7 (3MF). > Other concealed unit in H7 to I7, J6, K6, L6 (4MF). > No looky, no shooty. 30. *** MCLEOD: Yes Looky. My 8-0, momentarily reveals in S4, and will try to strip your "?" in J6. Tell me what you got. No more looky at the rest until I hear back comrade. $$$BATES: There he is, the architect of this mayhem himself, Boris Badenov. This is 747b. I don't think you can hit him with anything, so let's just assume he made it to L6 in one piece. Trivia question: Somebody help me remember Natascha's last name. =Jim= $$$BATES: Let's see if we can keep the movement messages in the single digits. ?+3 in H5 double-times to I6, then J6, where Boris ("give to me large kiss!") notes they are 747SS/radio & 8-0, but is powerless to act. Stack proceeds to K7, L7, M8, bypass N8 on N7 (6MF). Here your HS in Q4 can shoot. Whaddaya say? If not, pray proceed... ... to O7 (7MF)... ... to P7 (8MF) and takes WA. Keep going... ?+2 in O5 to P4 (2MF). This is 747W/BAZ... ... tosses smoke into Q5 (4MF), dr: 4; not happening. Wasted AM opportunity. Oh, well... Why don't we see your reactions here and we'll get to the piece de la resistance? - G From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 9 01:07:50 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 9 01:05:57 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE2: Whale watching in Carentan? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: You're a steel trap, Mr. Probst. An what squalor and ignorance did we all live in before Google came along, anyway? Can anyone remember? I'd forgotten the "I'd strike the sun" line. What a marvelous character in such a gargantuan ripping yarn! Tom Clancy & John Grisham, my ass. They pale and whither by comparison... - G -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 1:30 PM To: George Bates Cc: daveolie@eastlink.ca; jmmcleod@mts.net; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: Whale watching in Carentan? On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 11:33:21 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Actually, I wasn't sure whether this line had been borrowed from Melville or >not (surely not Milton!). I have a collection of his short stories, but not >_Moby Dick_, I can't recall Gregory Peck delivering that line, and >Bartlett's wasn't any help, either (in fact, Bartlett also leaves out, "from >Hell's heart I stab at thee"). Still, Ricardo "Quy es mus macho?" >Montalblan's delivery is such high camp it stays with you. Even my wife >liked that film. The original quote is from Chapter 36 of "Moby Dick" (thank God for Google, it would have taken me forever to find it in my printed copy): "To me, the white whale is that wall, shoved near to me. Sometimes I think there's naught beyond. But 'tis enough. He tasks me; he heaps me; I see in him outrageous strength, with an inscrutable malice sinewing it. That inscrutable thing is chiefly what I hate; and be the white whale agent, or be the white whale principal, I will wreak that hate upon him. Talk not to me of blasphemy, man; I'd strike the sun if it insulted me." Chapter 135: "Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering whale; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee. Sink all coffins and all hearses to one common pool! and since neither can be mine, let me then tow to pieces, while still chasing thee, though tied to thee, thou damned whale!" ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "I love the girl ... but I want the hand!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From janusz.maxe at unf.se Sat Apr 9 02:43:28 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Sat Apr 9 02:43:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK scenarios 7 and 8 Message-ID: Anyone tried these? Are they any good? Janusz From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 9 06:34:01 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 9 06:34:01 2005 Subject: (fwd) Re: [Aslml] Primasole Bridge question Message-ID: On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:54:38 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: Bruce (and whomever Bruce wants to share this with), The standard SSR says "set up entrenched (B27.1)". That subtle rules reference to foxholes helps mightily, IMO. Unfortunately, the J97 SSR does not have that rules reference. Just to complicate matters, J96 allows the Germans to "set up in foxholes" when it means the same as the J97 SSR. We actually noticed these at the very last minute and decided to live with this very small consistency in order to get J6 to Winter Offensive. Blame me. ....Perry ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "I love the girl ... but I want the hand!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 9 06:37:08 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 9 06:37:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh6 References: Message-ID: <003201c53d09$3b129240$2d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Back to the mix ... > We'll have more time than you think. :) > $$$BATES: What happened, Jim? Spring blizzard? Chariot breakdown? No, just had to bow out at the last minute, happens sometimes. :( >> One concealed unit in H7 to I7, J7 (3MF). > > >> Other concealed unit in H7 to I7, J6, K6, L6 (4MF). >> No looky, no shooty. > > 30. *** MCLEOD: Yes Looky. My 8-0, momentarily reveals in S4, and will > try > to strip your "?" in J6. Tell me what you got. No more looky at the rest > until I hear back comrade. > $$$BATES: There he is, the architect of this mayhem himself, Boris > Badenov. > This is 747b. I don't think you can hit him with anything, so let's just > assume he made it to L6 in one piece. Trivia question: Somebody help me > remember Natascha's last name. She had a last name? I always thought she was one of those one-name East European types. > $$$BATES: Let's see if we can keep the movement messages in the single > digits. > ?+3 in H5 double-times to I6, then J6, where Boris ("give to me large > kiss!") notes they are 747SS/radio & 8-0, but is powerless to act. Stack > proceeds to K7, L7, M8, bypass N8 on N7 (6MF). Here your HS in Q4 can > shoot. Whaddaya say? If not, pray proceed... 31. ### MCLEOD: No D'fire. A 1 flat shot is not to my liking at this time. :) > ... to O7 (7MF)... You mean O8 perchance? > ... to P7 (8MF) and takes WA. Keep going... > ?+2 in O5 to P4 (2MF). This is 747W/BAZ... > ... tosses smoke into Q5 (4MF), dr: 4; not happening. Wasted AM > opportunity. Oh, well... 32. ### MCLEOD:George, near as I can tell, all you have left to move is your mondo stack in H6. Time to pop off a few rounds before we go any further. Target, 747 w/Baz in P4. Firer is the HS in Q4L0. You expended 2 MF for that smoke grenade placement attempt so I may, provided I do not cower, get two pokes at you. Here goes ... 4 +1, D'First Fire at 747, DR=11 (5,6), NE, 2 RFP in P4. No more D'fire from this or other units at this time. > Why don't we see your reactions here and we'll get to the piece de la > resistance? That was it mate. A big build up and then ... pop! :) I hope we can get some good action in this weekend George. I have a lot of pent up cardboard carnage ready to loose on someone. I was saving it for Burlington but since that is a no-go, it will be directed at you. :) I like the Moby Dick back and forth between you and Bruce BTW. Why study literature in university? All one need do is post something to the ASLML and see where it takes you. How about Dickens? I watched a very good biography series on him that used actors to play the characters in the series. If Victorian times were as bleak as they were depicted in the series, the times before that must have been sheer misery. A peasant must have prayed to be pillaged by a foreign horde of invaders to end it all. Bring out the big stack! =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 9 08:17:45 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 9 08:15:49 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh7 In-Reply-To: <003201c53d09$3b129240$2d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: A light appears at the end of my MPh tunnel in "%%%." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 10:37 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh6 Listerz, Back to the mix ... > We'll have more time than you think. :) > $$$BATES: What happened, Jim? Spring blizzard? Chariot breakdown? No, just had to bow out at the last minute, happens sometimes. :( %%%BATES: Bummer. The guys in Burlington tell me they had your hemorrhoid donut/whoopee cushion all ready for you. >> One concealed unit in H7 to I7, J7 (3MF). > > >> Other concealed unit in H7 to I7, J6, K6, L6 (4MF). >> No looky, no shooty. > > 30. *** MCLEOD: Yes Looky. My 8-0, momentarily reveals in S4, and will > try > to strip your "?" in J6. Tell me what you got. No more looky at the rest > until I hear back comrade. > $$$BATES: There he is, the architect of this mayhem himself, Boris > Badenov. > This is 747b. I don't think you can hit him with anything, so let's just > assume he made it to L6 in one piece. Trivia question: Somebody help me > remember Natascha's last name. She had a last name? I always thought she was one of those one-name East European types. %%%BATES: I can only recall it was a real groaner. Worse than Olie. Somebody set their Wayback Machine to the late '60s/early '70s and get me this answer. > $$$BATES: Let's see if we can keep the movement messages in the single > digits. > ?+3 in H5 double-times to I6, then J6, where Boris ("give to me large > kiss!") notes they are 747SS/radio & 8-0, but is powerless to act. Stack > proceeds to K7, L7, M8, bypass N8 on N7 (6MF). Here your HS in Q4 can > shoot. Whaddaya say? If not, pray proceed... 31. ### MCLEOD: No D'fire. A 1 flat shot is not to my liking at this time. :) > ... to O7 (7MF)... You mean O8 perchance? %%%BATES: Nice catch on the typo. Apologies. His final location is correct. > ... to P7 (8MF) and takes WA. Keep going... > ?+2 in O5 to P4 (2MF). This is 747W/BAZ... > ... tosses smoke into Q5 (4MF), dr: 4; not happening. Wasted AM > opportunity. Oh, well... 32. ### MCLEOD:George, near as I can tell, all you have left to move is your mondo stack in H6. Time to pop off a few rounds before we go any further. Target, 747 w/Baz in P4. Firer is the HS in Q4L0. You expended 2 MF for that smoke grenade placement attempt so I may, provided I do not cower, get two pokes at you. Here goes ... 4 +1, D'First Fire at 747, DR=11 (5,6), NE, 2 RFP in P4. No more D'fire from this or other units at this time. %%%BATES: Why wasn't I worried? Actually, I'm overjoyed you did this. > Why don't we see your reactions here and we'll get to the piece de la > resistance? That was it mate. A big build up and then ... pop! :) I hope we can get some good action in this weekend George. I have a lot of pent up cardboard carnage ready to loose on someone. I was saving it for Burlington but since that is a no-go, it will be directed at you. :) %%%BATES: All work and no FtF makes Jimbo grumpy, eh? I like the Moby Dick back and forth between you and Bruce BTW. Why study literature in university? All one need do is post something to the ASLML and see where it takes you. %%%BATES: Usually straight to the gutter, rarely to the heights. But I like it that way. ;-) How about Dickens? I watched a very good biography series on him that used actors to play the characters in the series. If Victorian times were as bleak as they were depicted in the series, the times before that must have been sheer misery. A peasant must have prayed to be pillaged by a foreign horde of invaders to end it all. %%%BATES: If it be Dickens you're a wanting, I'll have you ask, "Please Sir, may I have some more?" 8-) Oh, and what do you call a guy with no arms and no legs and a big white dot in the middle of his back? . . . Pip . . . ... sorry ... Bring out the big stack! =Jim= %%%BATES: As you wish... ?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and double-times out of your LoS to I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm to them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like snipers, keep going... ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... ... to P5 (8MF). That should do it. So glad the HS in Q4L0 DFFd. Why don't you see what you can do in your DFPh? Your doom awaits. - G From willette at gmpexpress.net Sat Apr 9 08:37:54 2005 From: willette at gmpexpress.net (joe willette) Date: Sat Apr 9 08:37:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] March Madness '99 Kintetic Enegry Scenarios In-Reply-To: <001001c53c84$b6c34f90$0200a8c0@Father> Message-ID: I second the request for this info. I have the first two KE TOT packs and would love to see any corrections. (of course I'd be quite happy to purchase the packs too). Joe Willette -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Raymond Woloszyn Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 5:49 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] March Madness '99 Kintetic Enegry Scenarios I missed these reworkings of classic TOT and KE scenarios when I was in Europe. Have all the other stuff. Is there someplace I can go to get the changes in OB and victory conditions that these scenarios attempted to correct? I have seen a review of the pack on VFTT but in order to skirt possible copyright issues the author did not quote verbatim the changes, he only hinted at them. I do not want to violate anybody's copyright but I know there is no way to buy the originals these days. "Zadra" _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 9 15:55:30 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 9 15:55:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh7 References: Message-ID: <001401c53d57$3be52810$2827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, More runnin' and gunnin' ... :) > 32. ### MCLEOD:George, near as I can tell, all you have left to move is > your > mondo stack in H6. Time to pop off a few rounds before we go any further. > Target, 747 w/Baz in P4. Firer is the HS in Q4L0. You expended 2 MF for > that smoke grenade placement attempt so I may, provided I do not cower, > get > two pokes at you. Here goes ... 4 +1, D'First Fire at 747, DR=11 (5,6), > NE, > 2 RFP in P4. No more D'fire from this or other units at this time. > %%%BATES: Why wasn't I worried? Actually, I'm overjoyed you did this. We're happy, you're happy. ;) >> Why don't we see your reactions here and we'll get to the piece de la >> resistance? > > That was it mate. A big build up and then ... pop! :) > > I hope we can get some good action in this weekend George. I have a lot > of > pent up cardboard carnage ready to loose on someone. I was saving it for > Burlington but since that is a no-go, it will be directed at you. :) > %%%BATES: All work and no FtF makes Jimbo grumpy, eh? .... growl, growl ... > I like the Moby Dick back and forth between you and Bruce BTW. Why study > literature in university? All one need do is post something to the ASLML > and see where it takes you. > %%%BATES: Usually straight to the gutter, rarely to the heights. But I > like it that way. ;-) > > How about Dickens? I watched a very good biography series on him that > used > actors to play the characters in the series. If Victorian times were as > bleak as they were depicted in the series, the times before that must have > been sheer misery. A peasant must have prayed to be pillaged by a foreign > horde of invaders to end it all. > %%%BATES: If it be Dickens you're a wanting, I'll have you ask, "Please > Sir, may I have some more?" 8-) > Oh, and what do you call a guy with no arms and no legs and a big white > dot > in the middle of his back? > . > . > . > Pip > . > . > . > ... sorry ... > > Bring out the big stack! > > > =Jim= > > > %%%BATES: As you wish... > > ?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and double-times out of your LoS to > I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be > 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm to > them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your > 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like > snipers, keep going... ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. > ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= 6 (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, please feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ DR for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them listed earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks. I like it. You are correct about that HS shot, don't know what I was thinking, too early in the morning perhaps. However, this shot makes up for it. :) BTW, I had my daughter witness the DR ... she though the results good. > ... to P5 (8MF). That should do it. So glad the HS in Q4L0 DFFd. Why > don't you see what you can do in your DFPh? Your doom awaits. 34***MCLEOD: We'll skip the P5 move ... for obvious reasons. Again, the HS shot was _stupid_. Boys and girls, don't try that at home. Fortunately the dice-gods reckoned I needed some help after that faux pas. On to the DFPh. 35***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in P2 Final fires at 337 in oO2, 2FP flat, DR = 5 (3,2), NMC. 337 DR = 7 (6,1) = Pin. 36***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in O4 Final fires at 337 in Q5, 2FP flat, DR = 2 (1,1), Cowers to 1FP, 1MC. 337 DR = 6 (2,4) +1 = 7FDR = Pin. 37***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 fires at 9-2, 747 w/Baz in P4L0, 9FP flat, DR = 3 (2,1) [US SAN] maintain ROF= 2MC. 9-2 DR = 5(4,1) +2 = FDR 7, Passes; 747 w/Baz, DR = 11(6,5) +2 and -2 = FDR 11(6,5) = Breaks. 38***MCLEOD: SAN dr = 4 = NE. 39***MCLEOD: MMG in R5 ROF shot at 337 in Q5, 10FP (PB) flat, DR = 8 (6,2) =NMC. 337 DR = 10(6,4) = Breaks. End of DFPh. My gawd! _That_ was interesting George. Your AFPh I believe. =Jim= From asl1 at bellsouth.net Sat Apr 9 17:16:46 2005 From: asl1 at bellsouth.net (asl1@bellsouth.net) Date: Sat Apr 9 17:16:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bocage Message-ID: <20050410001646.RAVG1995.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Evening Listers, Played Russ Curry today in a FTF match of BtB 8 "Steel Inferno." Great little scenario (I lost as the Brits today). Driving back to Savannah from St. Simons I thought about the game and I'm still bothered about how we may have played the bocage. We may have played it correctly but I want to make sure. Ok .. I'm using board HOB III for my examples. EX: 1. German squad is in X4. British squad is in Y2 but not beneath a Wall Advantage counter. Russ and I concluded that the British squad is out of the LOS of the German squad. However, my question is can the German squad fire into Y2 and if so, would it be as Area Fire? Ex 2. Assume that X4 has a Level 1. German squad is on Level 1 with the British squad in Y2 and not beneath a Wall Advantage counter. Again if allowed, can the German squad fire into Y2 and as Area Fire? Ex 3. Assume that X4 has a Level 1. German observer (w/radio) is on Level 1. British squad in Y2 and again not beneath a Wall Advantage counter. German observer wants to correct an SR and convert to an FFE1. Ok now 2 parts here: (a). German corrects SR to Y2 and is accurate. If the observer has a LOS to the base level of the SR would an extra chit draw be required? (b). German corrects SR to X2 and is accurate. Would an extra chit draw be required? Thanks in advance. Pierce Mason From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 9 20:05:44 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 9 20:04:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) AdvFPh & RtPh1 In-Reply-To: <001401c53d57$3be52810$2827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Jim starts beating me like a rented mule. All this before my second cup of coffee. I'll pick up the pieces in "&&&." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 7:56 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh7 Listerz, More runnin' and gunnin' ... :) > 32. ### MCLEOD:George, near as I can tell, all you have left to move is > your > mondo stack in H6. Time to pop off a few rounds before we go any further. > Target, 747 w/Baz in P4. Firer is the HS in Q4L0. You expended 2 MF for > that smoke grenade placement attempt so I may, provided I do not cower, > get > two pokes at you. Here goes ... 4 +1, D'First Fire at 747, DR=11 (5,6), > NE, > 2 RFP in P4. No more D'fire from this or other units at this time. > %%%BATES: Why wasn't I worried? Actually, I'm overjoyed you did this. We're happy, you're happy. ;) >> Why don't we see your reactions here and we'll get to the piece de la >> resistance? > > That was it mate. A big build up and then ... pop! :) > > I hope we can get some good action in this weekend George. I have a lot > of > pent up cardboard carnage ready to loose on someone. I was saving it for > Burlington but since that is a no-go, it will be directed at you. :) > %%%BATES: All work and no FtF makes Jimbo grumpy, eh? .... growl, growl ... > I like the Moby Dick back and forth between you and Bruce BTW. Why study > literature in university? All one need do is post something to the ASLML > and see where it takes you. > %%%BATES: Usually straight to the gutter, rarely to the heights. But I > like it that way. ;-) > > How about Dickens? I watched a very good biography series on him that > used > actors to play the characters in the series. If Victorian times were as > bleak as they were depicted in the series, the times before that must have > been sheer misery. A peasant must have prayed to be pillaged by a foreign > horde of invaders to end it all. > %%%BATES: If it be Dickens you're a wanting, I'll have you ask, "Please > Sir, may I have some more?" 8-) > Oh, and what do you call a guy with no arms and no legs and a big white > dot > in the middle of his back? > . > . > . > Pip > . > . > . > ... sorry ... > > Bring out the big stack! > > > =Jim= > > > %%%BATES: As you wish... > > ?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and double-times out of your LoS to > I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be > 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm to > them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your > 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like > snipers, keep going... ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. &&&BATES: Between S4 & K6? Take another look. This doesn't come near the overlay and there's no bocage anywhere to speak of save the NW sides of K6. > ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= 6 (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, please feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ DR for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them listed earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks. I like it. You are correct about that HS shot, don't know what I was thinking, too early in the morning perhaps. However, this shot makes up for it. :) BTW, I had my daughter witness the DR ... she though the results good. &&&BATES: I thought there was an outside chance you'd overlook that shot, and compared with O5, 1FP-2 was certainly the lesser of two evils (weevils to you, David). Nevertheless, IT REMAINS EVIL. OK, that lump of quivering jelly is in O6. Best things to be said for that is that they don't have far to rout and I have now grabbed the building. > ... to P5 (8MF). That should do it. So glad the HS in Q4L0 DFFd. Why > don't you see what you can do in your DFPh? Your doom awaits. 34***MCLEOD: We'll skip the P5 move ... for obvious reasons. Again, the HS shot was _stupid_. Boys and girls, don't try that at home. Fortunately the dice-gods reckoned I needed some help after that faux pas. On to the DFPh. 35***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in P2 Final fires at 337 in oO2, 2FP flat, DR = 5 (3,2), NMC. 337 DR = 7 (6,1) = Pin. 36***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in O4 Final fires at 337 in Q5, 2FP flat, DR = 2 (1,1), Cowers to 1FP, 1MC. 337 DR = 6 (2,4) +1 = 7FDR = Pin. &&&BATES: You mean your guy in _Q_4, correct? 37***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 fires at 9-2, 747 w/Baz in P4L0, 9FP flat, DR = 3 (2,1) [US SAN] maintain ROF= 2MC. 9-2 DR = 5(4,1) +2 = FDR 7, Passes; 747 w/Baz, DR = 11(6,5) +2 and -2 = FDR 11(6,5) = Breaks. 38***MCLEOD: SAN dr = 4 = NE. 39***MCLEOD: MMG in R5 ROF shot at 337 in Q5, 10FP (PB) flat, DR = 8 (6,2) =NMC. 337 DR = 10(6,4) = Breaks. End of DFPh. My gawd! _That_ was interesting George. Your AFPh I believe. =Jim= &&&BATES: Moderator, I want someone on the next flight to Winnipeg to audit McLeod's dicebot. This was too ugly. Time to get up off the mat and hit back. BTW, Jim, I am comfortable with a "xFP+y" shorthand for your FP+final mods. If I can't figure out how you got that number I'll ask. Likewise, go ahead and just give the DRs as x, y; I can total them and add the mods just fine. Don't want you getting carpal tunnel or anything- though you appear to be very close to getting dice roller's cramp... _Advance Fire Phase_ 337 in Q4L1 @L0, 3FP+2: 6, 4; NE. CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 @R5. 5FP+3: 2, 4; NE. CX 337CC & 747LL in N4 @P2, 6FP+4: 4, 6; NE. CX ?+2 in N3 drops "?" to show 747YY & 7-0 @P2, 5FP+4: 4, 3; NE. Well, ain't that all just perfectly peachy. _Rout Phase_ Here we have a problem. DM337EE is in Q5 with two units adjacent and no rout path save through P5 where he can be interdicted. Who do you want him to surrender to? Or will you invoke no quarter? I'd like you to make this call before I do my other routs and go on to advances. Thx. - G From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 9 20:48:13 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 9 20:48:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh6 In-Reply-To: References: <004901c53c50$c35624a0$9627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 11:33:23 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Trivia question: Somebody help me remember Natascha's last name. Fatale (and her first name was spelt "Natasha"). http://bullwinkle.toonzone.net/natasha.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 9 21:02:09 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 9 21:02:15 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh6 In-Reply-To: <003201c53d09$3b129240$2d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <003201c53d09$3b129240$2d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 08:37:08 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >How about Dickens? I watched a very good biography series on him that used >actors to play the characters in the series. If Victorian times were as >bleak as they were depicted in the series, the times before that must have >been sheer misery. A peasant must have prayed to be pillaged by a foreign >horde of invaders to end it all. Well, Victorian urban life *was* a pit of despair if you were poor, because the recent outbreak of industrialisation had drawn people into the cities in unprecedented numbers, and there was no way to accommodate them in anything like minimal acceptable living standards. Dickens barely scratched the surface of what life for the poor was *really* like in that era. As for peasant life in prior times ... it generally wasn't *too* awful, unless there was a war on (not infrequent), in which case they were probably being taxed out of what little they had. Worse still if they lived anywhere *near* the war, and just as bad in peacetime (all those soldiers didn't go home during peace; they hung around and pillaged, pillaged, pillaged, until somebody found them a new war somewhere else). If you get a chance read Barbara Tuchman's "A Distant Mirror", concerning life in the 14th Century (for people in all social strata). Very eye-opening stuff. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 9 21:34:36 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 9 21:34:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bocage In-Reply-To: <20050410001646.RAVG1995.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> References: <20050410001646.RAVG1995.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <9u9h511f79h3vdd1bolec4sougpq9jun58@4ax.com> On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 20:16:46 -0400, wrote: >I'm using board HOB III for my examples. > >EX: 1. German squad is in X4. British squad is in Y2 but not beneath a Wall Advantage counter. Russ and I concluded that the British squad is out of the LOS of the German squad. However, my question is can the German squad fire into Y2 and if so, would it be as Area Fire? Whoa, you're getting it all wrong from the get-go. The British squad in Y2 is subject to Mandatory Wall Advantage (B9.323). You don't *need* to place a WA counter but you can if it will help you to remember this stuff. Thus the German can see the British squad just fine (and vice-versa). (*If* for some reason the Germans did *not* have LOS to the British squad they could indeed attack Y2 as Area Fire, but it would have absolutely no effect on the British squad, or anyone else who was out of LOS.) >Ex 2. Assume that X4 has a Level 1. German squad is on Level 1 with the British squad in Y2 and not beneath a Wall Advantage counter. Again if allowed, can the German squad fire into Y2 and as Area Fire? Again, the British squad *is* beneath a WA counter in effect if not in actuality, and they don't get a choice about it (that's why it's called "Mandatory"). Again, the Germans can see them with no problem at all. Again, units that *are* out of LOS are (usually) immune to attacks no matter how much FP you hit them with. You seem to be operating under the belief that units not in LOS can still be attacked, just at half strength. It doesn't work that way. Units out of LOS can't be attacked *at all*, except in very specific circumstances (none of which apply here). >Ex 3. Assume that X4 has a Level 1. German observer (w/radio) is on Level 1. British squad in Y2 and again not beneath a Wall Advantage counter. German observer wants to correct an SR and convert to an FFE1. Ok now 2 parts here: (a). German corrects SR to Y2 and is accurate. If the observer has a LOS to the base level of the SR would an extra chit draw be required? (b). German corrects SR to X2 and is accurate. Would an extra chit draw be required? Once again, those British are perfectly visible to those Germans, so any part of your question that assumes that they're not is making a false assumption and is irrelevant. *** Let's rework your example. Suppose the British unit is in V5, and that the V5/W5 hexside is bocage. Now Mandatory WA no longer applies, and if the British unit is not currently claiming WA then there is *no* LOS from the Germans in X4 to the British in V5. EX 1: There's no LOS. The Germans can't see 'em, so they can't attack 'em. They can attack the hex at half FP if they like, but it will have no effect on the British squad. EX 2: Ditto. (I don't know why you think that the extra level of elevation would have any effect regardless.) EX 3: (a) (Assuming that the hex that you're correcting the SR to is V5.) Yes. You, the player can see something that the observer cannot see. Hence, an extra chit draw is required. (The chit draw takes place *before* the roll for accuracy.) (b) (Assuming that the hex that you're correcting the SR to is U5.) Yes, for exactly the same reasons (and again, the extra chit draw takes place *before* the accuracy dr). Hope this helps. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 9 22:20:31 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 9 22:22:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) AdvFPh & RtPh1 References: Message-ID: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, The smoke clears ... > Jim starts beating me like a rented mule. All this before my second cup > of > coffee. I'll pick up the pieces in "&&&." Corpsman! >> ?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and double-times out of your LoS >> to >> I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be >> 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm >> to >> them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your >> 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like >> snipers, keep going... > > ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage > that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. > &&&BATES: Between S4 & K6? Take another look. This doesn't come near > the > overlay and there's no bocage anywhere to speak of save the NW sides of > K6. I'm looking at P2 to N5, no LOS there due to Bocage blockage. I am not considering the S4 to K6 LOS. >> ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... > > 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you > Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= > 6 > (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, > please > feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ > DR > for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them > listed > earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down > George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 > w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks. I > like it. You are correct about that HS shot, don't know what I was > thinking, too early in the morning perhaps. However, this shot makes up > for > it. :) BTW, I had my daughter witness the DR ... she though the results > good. > &&&BATES: I thought there was an outside chance you'd overlook that shot, > and compared with O5, 1FP-2 was certainly the lesser of two evils (weevils > to you, David). Nevertheless, IT REMAINS EVIL. OK, that lump of > quivering > jelly is in O6. Best things to be said for that is that they don't have > far > to rout and I have now grabbed the building. Without checking the rules, in order to Control the building (if that is what you are referring to whenyou say "grabbed the building") your MMC would have to be Good Order would they not? Therefore no building control at this time. A RPh out to fix that. >> ... to P5 (8MF). That should do it. So glad the HS in Q4L0 DFFd. Why >> don't you see what you can do in your DFPh? Your doom awaits. > > 34***MCLEOD: We'll skip the P5 move ... for obvious reasons. Again, the > HS > shot was _stupid_. Boys and girls, don't try that at home. Fortunately > the > dice-gods reckoned I needed some help after that faux pas. On to the > DFPh. > > 35***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in P2 Final fires at 337 in oO2, 2FP flat, DR > = > 5 (3,2), NMC. 337 DR = 7 (6,1) = Pin. > > 36***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in O4 Final fires at 337 in Q5, 2FP flat, DR = > 2 > (1,1), Cowers to 1FP, 1MC. 337 DR = 6 (2,4) +1 = 7FDR = Pin. > &&&BATES: You mean your guy in _Q_4, correct? Good catch George, Q4 indeed. > 37***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 fires at 9-2, 747 w/Baz in P4L0, 9FP flat, DR > = > 3 (2,1) [US SAN] maintain ROF= 2MC. 9-2 DR = 5(4,1) +2 = FDR 7, Passes; > 747 w/Baz, DR = 11(6,5) +2 and -2 = FDR 11(6,5) = Breaks. > > 38***MCLEOD: SAN dr = 4 = NE. > > 39***MCLEOD: MMG in R5 ROF shot at 337 in Q5, 10FP (PB) flat, DR = 8 (6,2) > =NMC. 337 DR = 10(6,4) = Breaks. End of DFPh. > > My gawd! _That_ was interesting George. Your AFPh I believe. > &&&BATES: Moderator, I want someone on the next flight to Winnipeg to > audit > McLeod's dicebot. This was too ugly. No kidding! My daughter was the unbiased observer, she particularly liked the snake-eyes. For the record, I am using my T-34 MKIII Dice Tower c/w Wide-Track Tray, all stealthed with blue foam. The dice are 1/2" precision flat surface dice. If David cares to come out to Winnipeg to observe the preceedings that would be fine. He is terrific company and we will likely get some FtF action in between emails. :) > Time to get up off the mat and hit > back. BTW, Jim, I am comfortable with a "xFP+y" shorthand for your > FP+final > mods. If I can't figure out how you got that number I'll ask. Likewise, > go > ahead and just give the DRs as x, y; I can total them and add the mods > just > fine. Don't want you getting carpal tunnel or anything- though you appear > to be very close to getting dice roller's cramp... I was wondering about that myself George. I am OK with the typing and want to get a standard patter for the responses. > _Advance Fire Phase_ > 337 in Q4L1 @L0, 3FP+2: 6, 4; NE. > CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 @R5. 5FP+3: 2, 4; NE. > CX 337CC & 747LL in N4 @P2, 6FP+4: 4, 6; NE. > CX ?+2 in N3 drops "?" to show 747YY & 7-0 @P2, 5FP+4: 4, 3; NE. > Well, ain't that all just perfectly peachy. > _Rout Phase_ > Here we have a problem. DM337EE is in Q5 with two units adjacent and no > rout path save through P5 where he can be interdicted. Who do you want > him > to surrender to? Or will you invoke no quarter? I'd like you to make > this > call before I do my other routs and go on to advances. Thx. Well, I showed that broken HS to my daughter and she asked me what I was going to do; take them prisoner or shoot them. I asked her for her opinion ... she said shoot 'em, it will be a lesson for the others. BTW, when my lovely little one plays Medieval Total War, she always kills the hostages/prisoners for the reason. She likes it when here Kings are renowned for their "swift justice". :) Therefore, I refuse their surrender, NQ is now in effect for the Americans. Please continue to Rout. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 9 22:25:11 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 9 22:25:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) MPh6 References: <003201c53d09$3b129240$2d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001b01c53d8d$abb18c70$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Bruce wrote, "Well, Victorian urban life *was* a pit of despair if you were poor, because the recent outbreak of industrialisation had drawn people into the cities in unprecedented numbers, and there was no way to accommodate them in anything like minimal acceptable living standards. Dickens barely scratched the surface of what life for the poor was *really* like in that era. As for peasant life in prior times ... it generally wasn't *too* awful, unless there was a war on (not infrequent), in which case they were probably being taxed out of what little they had. Worse still if they lived anywhere *near* the war, and just as bad in peacetime (all those soldiers didn't go home during peace; they hung around and pillaged, pillaged, pillaged, until somebody found them a new war somewhere else). If you get a chance read Barbara Tuchman's "A Distant Mirror", concerning life in the 14th Century (for people in all social strata). Very eye-opening stuff." That does sound very interesting Bruce and I will look for it, if the book is available, at Chapters next time I am there. =Jim= From ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 10 00:10:16 2005 From: ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk (Binyamin Jones) Date: Sun Apr 10 00:10:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenched/hedge/ATT In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050410071016.73287.qmail@web25701.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> squad entrenched behind hedge, another same level firer, not adjacent, therefore no LOS. can this firer hit the foxhole guys with ATT/mortar/OBA etc? b e n Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From gray at ulery.net Sun Apr 10 00:14:34 2005 From: gray at ulery.net (Gray Ulery) Date: Sun Apr 10 00:14:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Natasha References: <20050409190531.987C984D47@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <001201c53d9c$f39a5ee0$6601a8c0@domain.invalid> >>Trivia question: Somebody help me > > remember Natascha's last name. > > She had a last name? I always thought she was one of those one-name East > European types. > %%%BATES: I can only recall it was a real groaner. Worse than Olie. > Somebody set their Wayback Machine to the late '60s/early '70s and get me > this answer. Natasha's last name was Fatale, dollink (read the last word with her bad accent). -Gray gray@ulery.net From geb3 at inter.net Sun Apr 10 01:17:29 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Apr 10 01:15:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: The battalion sees 337EE crumple in the road. Visages grow grim. Steel is sharpened. Low curses are uttered in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 2:21 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) AdvFPh & RtPh1 Listerz, The smoke clears ... > Jim starts beating me like a rented mule. All this before my second cup > of > coffee. I'll pick up the pieces in "&&&." Corpsman! >> ?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and double-times out of your LoS >> to >> I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be >> 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm >> to >> them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your >> 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like >> snipers, keep going... > > ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage > that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. > &&&BATES: Between S4 & K6? Take another look. This doesn't come near > the > overlay and there's no bocage anywhere to speak of save the NW sides of > K6. I'm looking at P2 to N5, no LOS there due to Bocage blockage. I am not considering the S4 to K6 LOS. ###BATES: You're certainly right about that, but S4 did have 'em in sight. Small matter now... >> ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... > > 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you > Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= > 6 > (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, > please > feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ > DR > for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them > listed > earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down > George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 > w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks. I > like it. You are correct about that HS shot, don't know what I was > thinking, too early in the morning perhaps. However, this shot makes up > for > it. :) BTW, I had my daughter witness the DR ... she though the results > good. > &&&BATES: I thought there was an outside chance you'd overlook that shot, > and compared with O5, 1FP-2 was certainly the lesser of two evils (weevils > to you, David). Nevertheless, IT REMAINS EVIL. OK, that lump of > quivering > jelly is in O6. Best things to be said for that is that they don't have > far > to rout and I have now grabbed the building. Without checking the rules, in order to Control the building (if that is what you are referring to whenyou say "grabbed the building") your MMC would have to be Good Order would they not? Therefore no building control at this time. A RPh out to fix that. ###BATES: Bless me, you're right. The leader is not sufficient for building control. Promises to be a mad, mad, mad, mad RPh. >> ... to P5 (8MF). That should do it. So glad the HS in Q4L0 DFFd. Why >> don't you see what you can do in your DFPh? Your doom awaits. > > 34***MCLEOD: We'll skip the P5 move ... for obvious reasons. Again, the > HS > shot was _stupid_. Boys and girls, don't try that at home. Fortunately > the > dice-gods reckoned I needed some help after that faux pas. On to the > DFPh. > > 35***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in P2 Final fires at 337 in oO2, 2FP flat, DR > = > 5 (3,2), NMC. 337 DR = 7 (6,1) = Pin. > > 36***MCLEOD: First F'd 238 in O4 Final fires at 337 in Q5, 2FP flat, DR = > 2 > (1,1), Cowers to 1FP, 1MC. 337 DR = 6 (2,4) +1 = 7FDR = Pin. > &&&BATES: You mean your guy in _Q_4, correct? Good catch George, Q4 indeed. > 37***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 fires at 9-2, 747 w/Baz in P4L0, 9FP flat, DR > = > 3 (2,1) [US SAN] maintain ROF= 2MC. 9-2 DR = 5(4,1) +2 = FDR 7, Passes; > 747 w/Baz, DR = 11(6,5) +2 and -2 = FDR 11(6,5) = Breaks. > > 38***MCLEOD: SAN dr = 4 = NE. > > 39***MCLEOD: MMG in R5 ROF shot at 337 in Q5, 10FP (PB) flat, DR = 8 (6,2) > =NMC. 337 DR = 10(6,4) = Breaks. End of DFPh. > > My gawd! _That_ was interesting George. Your AFPh I believe. > &&&BATES: Moderator, I want someone on the next flight to Winnipeg to > audit > McLeod's dicebot. This was too ugly. No kidding! My daughter was the unbiased observer, she particularly liked the snake-eyes. For the record, I am using my T-34 MKIII Dice Tower c/w Wide-Track Tray, all stealthed with blue foam. The dice are 1/2" precision flat surface dice. If David cares to come out to Winnipeg to observe the preceedings that would be fine. He is terrific company and we will likely get some FtF action in between emails. :) ###BATES: I believe Olie is housebroken, doesn't jump on the furniture and is excellent company for small children. Never hitched him to a sled, though. Just don't fall for his sad eyes routine when he asks for the balance. Damn, I just fell of somebody's Christmas list. 8-) > Time to get up off the mat and hit > back. BTW, Jim, I am comfortable with a "xFP+y" shorthand for your > FP+final > mods. If I can't figure out how you got that number I'll ask. Likewise, > go > ahead and just give the DRs as x, y; I can total them and add the mods > just > fine. Don't want you getting carpal tunnel or anything- though you appear > to be very close to getting dice roller's cramp... I was wondering about that myself George. I am OK with the typing and want to get a standard patter for the responses. > _Advance Fire Phase_ > 337 in Q4L1 @L0, 3FP+2: 6, 4; NE. > CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 @R5. 5FP+3: 2, 4; NE. > CX 337CC & 747LL in N4 @P2, 6FP+4: 4, 6; NE. > CX ?+2 in N3 drops "?" to show 747YY & 7-0 @P2, 5FP+4: 4, 3; NE. > Well, ain't that all just perfectly peachy. > _Rout Phase_ > Here we have a problem. DM337EE is in Q5 with two units adjacent and no > rout path save through P5 where he can be interdicted. Who do you want > him > to surrender to? Or will you invoke no quarter? I'd like you to make > this > call before I do my other routs and go on to advances. Thx. Well, I showed that broken HS to my daughter and she asked me what I was going to do; take them prisoner or shoot them. I asked her for her opinion ... she said shoot 'em, it will be a lesson for the others. BTW, when my lovely little one plays Medieval Total War, she always kills the hostages/prisoners for the reason. She likes it when here Kings are renowned for their "swift justice". :) Therefore, I refuse their surrender, NQ is now in effect for the Americans. Please continue to Rout. =Jim= ###BATES: Can your daughter also barf on priests at will and make her head spin around on her shoulders? Or, are you raising her to be another Catherine de Medici? DM747W/BAZ in P4 must also rout and does so by running upstairs to L1. 9-2 does _not_ accompany him. Read on even if you voluntarily rout somebody. But perhaps you're learning your lesson there. Q4L0 would have to rout to S4. I don't think P2 has a rout target since he can't see over the bocage to T0, right? _Advance Phase_ 337D in Q4L1 to L0, regardless of whether you occupy it or not. 9-2 in P4L0 to Q4L0. Somebody's got to pay. In the event you routed your 238 to S4, 9-2 would go to P4L1. CX 747YY & 7-0 in N3 over the hedge to O3. CX 747LL & 337CC in N4 likewise to O4. 747b in L6 to L5. CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 to Q8. CX ?+1 in Q9 to R8. Don't struggle, it will be less painful that way. _Close Combat Phase_ Unless the guy in Q4L0 routed to S4, we have two possibilities for ambush. Neither of us are stealthy/lax. Q4L0: My 337D & 9-2 (dr-2: 6) vs your 238 (dr: 4); no ambush. Jeez. The only possible combinations are 2:1-2 for me (DR: 4, 5; CR) & 1:2 (4, 5) for you. Scratch your 238. Even if he fled I now control P4. R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); I ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce the integers 1, 2 or 3... Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, 1; elim) that scratches you before you can roll. There's a rare 1. CX 337D keeps his "?" hat. The LMG is unprocessed (unlike your lovely child, it would appear). 8-) Removing Pin counters. 747b in L5 attempts concealment, dr: 3; concealed. Nobody else unless your 238 in P2 somehow found a way to bug out. This ends T2(A). See below for my rally activities in your half of the turn. _T2(G) US Rally Activities_ CX 337II in R8 drops "?" to attempt to recover the LMG, dr: 5; failed. No Bruce Willises in this bunch. Ground cover seems rather thick here. Remove DM on 747W/BAZ in P4L1. 9-1 in O6 rallies his little lambs: DM 747GG/dm MMG: 2, 4; rallies. _Now_ I've got building O6. DM 747O/dm MMG: 3, 2; rallies. DM 747K/BAZ: 6, 6; CR. Crikey. Remove DM. Becomes broken 337EE/BAZ. I sure as hell hope I've just about used up my quota of 6s for the game. It's been one thing after another since those damn gusts. Let's see what you can come with over pancakes on your Sunday morning, big fella. - G From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Apr 10 01:55:42 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sun Apr 10 01:53:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] entrenched/hedge/ATT In-Reply-To: <20050410071016.73287.qmail@web25701.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, Binyamin Jones wrote: > squad entrenched behind hedge, another same level > firer, not adjacent, therefore no LOS. can this firer > hit the foxhole guys with ATT/mortar/OBA etc? > Its different for those three attack types. OBA: Yes, the OBA attacks all units in its hex (with full effect) regardless of LOS. However, if all units within the blast area is out of LOS (or concealed) to the observer, then an *additional* chit must be drawn when placing the AR, or converting the SR/FFE:C to a FFE:1 (per C1.21). Non-mortar ordnance: The unit is immune (per C3.4) Mortar: The unit *can* be hit *if* "... that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit" (C3.33) This means that for the mortar to hit the unit out of LOS, there *must* be at least one unit in LOS in that hex, and all those units in LOS must be hit. See the C3.33 ex for an example. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Apr 10 02:01:43 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sun Apr 10 01:59:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Bocage In-Reply-To: <9u9h511f79h3vdd1bolec4sougpq9jun58@4ax.com> Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst answers are correct, I just wanted to add a couple of details. > Let's rework your example. Suppose the British unit is in V5, > and that the > V5/W5 hexside is bocage. Now Mandatory WA no longer applies, and if the > British unit is not currently claiming WA then there is *no* LOS from the > Germans in X4 to the British in V5. > > EX 1: There's no LOS. The Germans can't see 'em, so they can't > attack 'em. > They can attack the hex at half FP if they like, but it will have > no effect on the British squad. > Just wanted to add that if there also was a squad *with* WA in the same Location (thus in LOS) and the Germans attacked the hex with a Mortar, then hitting the in-LOS unit would also give a hit (with no additional halving) vs the out-of-LOS unit (C3.33). > EX 3: (a) (Assuming that the hex that you're correcting the SR to is V5.) > Yes. You, the player can see something that the observer cannot > see. Hence, an extra chit draw is required. (The chit draw takes place > *before* the roll for accuracy.) > Correct, but there would also be one more extra chit draw *after* the roll for accuracy if the SR was to be converted to a FFE:1 (both are found in C1.21). --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From leonardus at mymail.ro Sun Apr 10 03:01:01 2005 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Sun Apr 10 03:02:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RB3 Bread Factory #2 References: Message-ID: <004901c53db4$a152e860$b9c5fea9@LocalHost> Hi, What's happened with ASLML list? For some days no messages at all .... What's up folks? L. > > Hi, Seth wrote: > > > Alright - I've had enough. Tired of having people patronize me because I > > actually happen to understand why someone might have some confusion on > > this. I am glad that this rule is at least clear to all of you. It will > > at least be one section of the rules that is not revised ad nauseam. > > > I agree with Jim when he says: Oh come on Seth. I can easily understand why > someone might have some confusion, but the answer can still be clear when > *all* the relevant rules have been read. The fact that a rule is unclear > when you don't read it, doesn't make it unclear. > In this case, O5.1 says without *any* restictions that all such buildings on > the RB map are factories, and E.2 makes sure to tell us that O5 takes > precedence over B23, so the rule is clear when you actually read it. > > > > Ron still has an opponent who is not buying this argument. Maybe > > _someone_ > > could actually try to help him out instead of simply saying > > "lalalalalalalala I am not listening to you - higher number rule > > and shame on you if you don't interpret this the way I do." > But fortunately, noone has said this. Real help is to show him the relevant > rule, not to agree that the question is unclear, just because he may not > have read the rules. > > It would be very unclear what you do with a Japanese squad that fails a MC > if you don't read G1 - but you don't help a player that dive into a PTO > scenario by agreeing that A7 tells you to break him. You help him by > pointing out the correct rule. G1 in the case of the Japanese, and O5 in the > case of RB factories. > > I don't understand why you're upset. Is it really so bad that many different > people tell you that a clear rule (O5.1) exists, that answers this question? > --------------------------------------- > If you cut off my head, what do I say? > Me and my body, or me and my head? > > Ole Boe > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > Publicitate: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Posteaza gratuit anunturi de orice dimensiune si ai audienta de sute de mii, lunar. > Publicitate: --------------------------------------------------------------- Posteaza gratuit anunturi de orice dimensiune si ai audienta de sute de mii, lunar. From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Sun Apr 10 04:51:02 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sun Apr 10 04:51:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More Primosole Bridge and Questions Message-ID: <001901c53dc3$91cbd960$0200a8c0@Father> Finished the last part of the scenario trilogy yesterday winning two of the three journal scenarios as the Brits. This game should be played on large hexes like on the deluxe boards due to the counter morass around the bridge. Between wrecks, stacks of infantry and sw, tanks with various markers it got really unwieldy. Like the previous two scenarios, the match went down to the last close combats. Actually, with the hindrances and terrain , CC is the preferred method of attack. With all the wrecks on the bridge, we ran into the following situations that were not clear to us: 1) A moving AFV is in the same hex as a static AFV. If a near miss occurs in the moving phase, does it hit the non-moving AFV (given the proper die roll)? Is this a case of non-moving units being affected by defensive fire? 2) What is the cost of an AFV on the Primosole Bridge going through a bridge hex with one wreck and one AFV while buttoned up? While unbuttoned? I just can't seem to figure this out. Would more wrecks or AFV's add to the cost? From smcbee at midtnn.net Sun Apr 10 09:15:45 2005 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Sun Apr 10 09:16:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] NashCon ASL Tournament Update Message-ID: <000001c53de8$934fe180$9ef29904@steves> Hey all, The tournament is now only 7 weeks away, but if you are planning on coming, you need to get your reservations in for the convention hotel in by May 5 (last year all rooms were gone by that date). If you need more information about the tournament, drop me a line at smcbee@midtnn.net. Here is the information about the convention site. Hope to see you there. ABOUT THE LOCATION The Franklin Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, located immediately off Exit 68 on I-65, features elegant rooms, Lorraine's Bistro, the Stirrup Cup Lounge and a patio for relaxing Special room rate of just $89.00 per night. To get this special deal, call (615) 261-6100 and tell the hotel you are with NashCon (Do NOT call Marriott's 800 # or you will be charged the usual rate.) DON'T DELAY! Because of other conventions at the same time plus holiday travelers, the hotel was booked up before convention time last year. MAKE YOUR RESERVATION BEFORE MAY 5! TICKET PRICE Just $18 for HMGS members ($20 after May 15th) Non Members add $5, Under 12 free with paying adult REGISTER NOW FOR NASHCON 2005 Make checks payable to "HMGS Mid-South" Name_______________________________________ Mailing Address_______________________________ ____________________________________________ E-mail:______________________________________ Phone:______________________________________ ____ NashCon 2005 Passes @ $18 or $23 (nonmembers) = $ ________ ____ HMGS MidSouth memberships (July-Dec) @ $10 = $ ________ Total Amount Enclosed:________ Check#__________ Mail To: HMGS MidSouth - NashCon 2819 Columbine Place Nashville, TN 37204 From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Apr 10 07:58:34 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun Apr 10 10:09:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RPh, PFPh and MPh References: Message-ID: <000201c53df0$10c1aa20$5127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > The battalion sees 337EE crumple in the road. Visages grow grim. Steel > is > sharpened. Low curses are uttered in "###." Remember in "BoB" the Germans running across the marshy area aftert he fight for Carentan? Pretty much the thing here. C'est la guere. :) > No kidding! My daughter was the unbiased observer, she particularly liked > the snake-eyes. For the record, I am using my T-34 MKIII Dice Tower c/w > Wide-Track Tray, all stealthed with blue foam. The dice are 1/2" > precision > flat surface dice. If David cares to come out to Winnipeg to observe the > preceedings that would be fine. He is terrific company and we will likely > get some FtF action in between emails. :) > ###BATES: I believe Olie is housebroken, doesn't jump on the furniture > and > is excellent company for small children. Never hitched him to a sled, > though. Do try him in the harness next time you're out and about, and don't spare the whip ... I think he likes it. > Just don't fall for his sad eyes routine when he asks for the balance. He knows better than to ask. :) > Damn, I just fell of somebody's Christmas list. 8-) > ###BATES: Can your daughter also barf on priests at will and make her > head > spin around on her shoulders? Or, are you raising her to be another > Catherine de Medici? My opinion is that her style and tastes will run more in line with the latter. As long as she gets things here way, no one gets hurt. :) > DM747W/BAZ in P4 must also rout and does so by running upstairs to L1. > 9-2 > does _not_ accompany him. > Read on even if you voluntarily rout somebody. But perhaps you're > learning > your lesson there. Q4L0 would have to rout to S4. I don't think P2 has a > rout target since he can't see over the bocage to T0, right? 40.***MCLEOD: 238 in Q4L.0 does Voluntarily Break. Routs to R4 (1MF) then to S4 (3MF) > _Advance Phase_ > 337D in Q4L1 to L0, regardless of whether you occupy it or not. It's all yours. Keep it clean, we're coming back soon. > 9-2 in P4L0 to Q4L0. Somebody's got to pay. > In the event you routed your 238 to S4, 9-2 would go to P4L1. > CX 747YY & 7-0 in N3 over the hedge to O3. > > CX 747LL & 337CC in N4 likewise to O4. > > 747b in L6 to L5. > > CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 to Q8. ***MCLEOD: Are you sure the squad possesses the Radio George? That is how I see it as written. > CX ?+1 in Q9 to R8. Don't struggle, it will be less painful that way. > _Close Combat Phase_ > > Unless the guy in Q4L0 routed to S4, we have two possibilities for ambush. > Neither of us are stealthy/lax. > > Q4L0: My 337D & 9-2 (dr-2: 6) vs your 238 (dr: 4); no ambush. Jeez. > The only possible combinations are 2:1-2 for me (DR: 4, 5; CR) & 1:2 (4, > 5) > for you. Scratch your 238. Even if he fled I now control P4. ***MCLEOD: We be gonzo dude! :) > R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); I > ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce > the > integers 1, 2 or 3... > Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, > 1; > elim) that scratches you before you can roll. There's a rare 1. CX 337D > keeps his "?" hat. The LMG is unprocessed (unlike your lovely child, it > would appear). 8-) The fuhrer weeps ... NOT! Plenty more where they come from. > Removing Pin counters. > > 747b in L5 attempts concealment, dr: 3; concealed. ***MCLEOD: Does he have any -drm? Near as I can tell, he is in OG with a +3drm, that makes a Fdr of 6 does it not? Therefore no "?". > Nobody else unless your 238 in P2 somehow found a way to bug out. > This ends T2(A). See below for my rally activities in your half of the > turn. ***MCLEOD: No, these guys are gunnning for Iron Crosses. > _T2(G) US Rally Activities_ > > CX 337II in R8 drops "?" to attempt to recover the LMG, dr: 5; failed. > No > Bruce Willises in this bunch. Ground cover seems rather thick here. Look for the blood covered thing. :) > Remove DM on 747W/BAZ in P4L1. > 9-1 in O6 rallies his little lambs: > DM 747GG/dm MMG: 2, 4; rallies. _Now_ I've got building O6. > DM 747O/dm MMG: 3, 2; rallies. > DM 747K/BAZ: 6, 6; CR. Crikey. Remove DM. Becomes broken 337EE/BAZ. > I sure as hell hope I've just about used up my quota of 6s for the game. > It's been one thing after another since those damn gusts. > Let's see what you can come with over pancakes on your Sunday morning, big > fella. 41.***MCLEOD: German T2, RPh, WC DR = 5 (2,3) 42.***MCLEOD: Attempt to Rally 238 in S4, 8-0 loses "?", DR = 7(2,5) = NE. PFPh. 43.***MCLEOD: 238 in P2 fires at 747 and 7-0 in O3, 4FP(PB) flat. DR = 3 (1,2) [US SAN] = 2MC. 7-0 DR = 9 (4,5) +2 = FDR of 11 = Breaks; 747 DR = 7 (4,3) +2 = FDR 9 = Breaks. 44.***MCLEOD: US SAN DR = 1. Direction and Extent DR = 8 (5,3), Sniper goes from R4 to O6, moves to N5, affects German Sniper, German SAN reduced to 3. ***MCLEOD: Crappage ... 45.***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 Spray Fire at R8 and Q8, w/5FP +1 TEM. DR = 11 (5,6) = NE. MPh. 46.***MCLEOD: 2 x "?" Assault Move from S4 to S3. [end MPh] ***MCLEOD: Your go George. I thought I would try the SF thing for yucks. It was either that or AM back in skulkish mode. :) Have at er' in your DFPh! =Jim= From damavs at alltel.net Sun Apr 10 11:58:38 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Sun Apr 10 11:58:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More Primosole Bridge and Questions In-Reply-To: <001901c53dc3$91cbd960$0200a8c0@Father> References: <001901c53dc3$91cbd960$0200a8c0@Father> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050410143209.01e61270@mail.alltel.net> Raymond Woloszyn wrote: >With all the wrecks on the bridge, we ran into the following situations >that were not clear to us: > >1) A moving AFV is in the same hex as a static AFV. If a near miss >occurs in the moving phase, does it hit the non-moving AFV (given the >proper die roll)? Is this a case of non-moving units being affected by >defensive fire? I guess not - A5.13 says "Overstacking penalties apply only to moving units..." Which would mean moving tanks don't really suffer from overstacking while moving. A5.132 doesn't offer anything to change that. >2) What is the cost of an AFV on the Primosole Bridge going through a >bridge hex with one wreck and one AFV while buttoned up? While >unbuttoned? I just can't seem to figure this out. Would more wrecks >or AFV's add to the cost? D2.14 says 1 additional & doubled to 2 if entered via a road hexside along the road, which is unavoidable for a bridge. So just the wreck is 3 if BU & 2.5 if CE. Further B6.43 doubles the costs while on the bridge. So that makes it: BU: 6 MP = (2 + 1) * 2 = (road wreck + COT) * doubled for bridge CE: 5 MP = (2 + .5) * 2 Add another vehicle/wreck and it does get worse BU: 10 MP = (2 + 2 + 1) * 2 = (road wreck + road wreck + COT) * doubled for bridge CE: 9 MP = (2 + 2 + .5) * 2 Which basically makes crossing the bridges w/those wrecks quite difficult, especially when your tanks start getting whacked on the bridge, adding to the clutter. Add some smoke or 3 wrecks & you can start looking at some minimum tank moves quite quickly. FWIW, I was playing this wrong until the Primosole Bridge scenarios opened my eyes on how tough wreck-riddled bridges can be to cross & just how the road penalties are defined... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From Derek.Tocher at btinternet.com Sun Apr 10 12:13:56 2005 From: Derek.Tocher at btinternet.com (Derek Tocher) Date: Sun Apr 10 12:17:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] UK Crusader ASL Ladder Updated with HEROES 2005 Results Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.1.20050410201247.00ac0de0@mail.btinternet.com> Guys, The ladder has been updated with HEROES 2005 results. Full ladder and 'active players' ladder are available at:- http://www.btinternet.com/~derek.tocher/ladder.htm Cheers Derek Visit ASL UK at http://www.btinternet.com/~derek.tocher Home of the Crusaders ASL Open Tournament Ladder From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Apr 10 17:50:59 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun Apr 10 17:51:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OAFS Day - April 16 References: <002001c4eec2$03416520$2101a8c0@gateway.2wire.net><20041230235741.654.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00b701c53e30$873e3340$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Gentlemen; Only six days and counting to the next meeting of OAFS, the greatest ASL club in the known world. Time to start getting your dice warmed up and let me know if you intend to come. If you already have, confirmations would still be appreciated so we can match up opponents and so I don't run out of beer. Reg and I plan to play the revamped-for-ASL classic Climax at Nijmegen Bridge (which was also a scenario in the original Squad Leader). It promises to be a ton of fun. If we have an odd number of players the odd man out an either play the US paratroopers who come on in Turn 4 or one of the mixed nationalities in Nijmegen itself (Brit or US). As always, beer and munchies will be on me, if anyone needs directions e-mail me or phone me at (613) 253-8196. Wynn "OAFS Orchestrator" Polnicky Ottawa Advanced squad leader FanaticS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wynn" To: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; Cc: "Mike Balis" ; ; ; "Robert M Hammond" ; ; ; ; ; "Alex Key" ; "stefano cuccurullo" ; "Ryan Schultz" Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 8:49 PM Subject: [Canadian ASL Association] April OAFS - J6 Day > > Fellow OAFS; > > As Cory and I battle for possession of Edson's Ridge on Guadalcanal, with > the Marines hanging on by their fingernails and the Japanese dying in > droves > on the Wire, and four of us prepare to start the fight for Blood Reef on > Tarawa, it seems appropriate that Wynns ASL Fortified Cellar host > something > other than a Pacific theatre CG. To that end, I propose that the April > OAFS > club day be Saturday, 16 April, and focus on play of scenarios from the > new > Journal (which I have, of course). J6 has a wide variety of scenarios, and > includes a map for Primosole Bridge (Brit para assault in Sicily) with > several scenarios and a CG. > > Pse let me know if that date of 16 April is suitable or not and if you > intend to make it! As always, coffee/pop/beers/munchies will be provided. > > As well, I propose 30 April as the date for the Marines to begin their > attempt to conquer Tarawa. That should give us plenty of time to digest > the > often Byzantine rules for BR: T and for those who have the module on order > to receive it. > > Looking forward to rolling dice with all of you on the 16th. > > Wynn :Number of the OAF: (613) 253-8196" Polnicky > > PS. E-mail me if you need directions. > From geb3 at inter.net Sun Apr 10 17:54:01 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Apr 10 17:52:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh & DFPh In-Reply-To: <000201c53df0$10c1aa20$5127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: "It was a large, corduroy monster with wide lapels, long dangling participles and a pronounced gazetteer. "Maim," roared the monster, "Mutilate, Mangle Crush. See HARM." "Aieeee!" shrieked Legolam (in $$$), "A Thesaurus!" -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:59 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RPh, PFPh and MPh Listerz, > The battalion sees 337EE crumple in the road. Visages grow grim. Steel > is > sharpened. Low curses are uttered in "###." Remember in "BoB" the Germans running across the marshy area aftert he fight for Carentan? Pretty much the thing here. C'est la guere. :) $$$BATES: "Thwackum was for doing justice, and leaving mercy to Heaven." > No kidding! My daughter was the unbiased observer, she particularly liked > the snake-eyes. For the record, I am using my T-34 MKIII Dice Tower c/w > Wide-Track Tray, all stealthed with blue foam. The dice are 1/2" > precision > flat surface dice. If David cares to come out to Winnipeg to observe the > preceedings that would be fine. He is terrific company and we will likely > get some FtF action in between emails. :) > ###BATES: I believe Olie is housebroken, doesn't jump on the furniture > and > is excellent company for small children. Never hitched him to a sled, > though. Do try him in the harness next time you're out and about, and don't spare the whip ... I think he likes it. > Just don't fall for his sad eyes routine when he asks for the balance. He knows better than to ask. :) > Damn, I just fell of somebody's Christmas list. 8-) > ###BATES: Can your daughter also barf on priests at will and make her > head > spin around on her shoulders? Or, are you raising her to be another > Catherine de Medici? My opinion is that her style and tastes will run more in line with the latter. As long as she gets things here way, no one gets hurt. :) $$$BATES: So she likes to gambol about the house in long silk brocades plotting intrigue, hm? My kinda gal! > DM747W/BAZ in P4 must also rout and does so by running upstairs to L1. > 9-2 > does _not_ accompany him. > Read on even if you voluntarily rout somebody. But perhaps you're > learning > your lesson there. Q4L0 would have to rout to S4. I don't think P2 has a > rout target since he can't see over the bocage to T0, right? 40.***MCLEOD: 238 in Q4L.0 does Voluntarily Break. Routs to R4 (1MF) then to S4 (3MF) $$$BATES: No stomach for the knocks, eh? > _Advance Phase_ > 337D in Q4L1 to L0, regardless of whether you occupy it or not. It's all yours. Keep it clean, we're coming back soon. $$$BATES: Don't come back, or I shall have to taunt you a second time. This does mean Mr. 9-2 is in P4L1. > 9-2 in P4L0 to Q4L0. Somebody's got to pay. > In the event you routed your 238 to S4, 9-2 would go to P4L1. > CX 747YY & 7-0 in N3 over the hedge to O3. > > CX 747LL & 337CC in N4 likewise to O4. > > 747b in L6 to L5. > > CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 to Q8. ***MCLEOD: Are you sure the squad possesses the Radio George? That is how I see it as written. $$$BATES: That's right. This allows the 8-0 to double-time for full 8MF, whereas he could only do 7 with the radio. Little trick I learned from Olie. > CX ?+1 in Q9 to R8. Don't struggle, it will be less painful that way. > _Close Combat Phase_ > > Unless the guy in Q4L0 routed to S4, we have two possibilities for ambush. > Neither of us are stealthy/lax. > > Q4L0: My 337D & 9-2 (dr-2: 6) vs your 238 (dr: 4); no ambush. Jeez. > The only possible combinations are 2:1-2 for me (DR: 4, 5; CR) & 1:2 (4, > 5) > for you. Scratch your 238. Even if he fled I now control P4. ***MCLEOD: We be gonzo dude! :) $$$BATES: And he won't rally, either. You have my word on it. > R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); I > ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce > the > integers 1, 2 or 3... > Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, > 1; > elim) that scratches you before you can roll. There's a rare 1. CX 337D > keeps his "?" hat. The LMG is unprocessed (unlike your lovely child, it > would appear). 8-) The fuhrer weeps ... NOT! Plenty more where they come from. $$$BATES: We'll see about that. Notice how my spell checker converted "unpossessed" to "unprocessed." Grrr... > Removing Pin counters. > > 747b in L5 attempts concealment, dr: 3; concealed. ***MCLEOD: Does he have any -drm? Near as I can tell, he is in OG with a +3drm, that makes a Fdr of 6 does it not? Therefore no "?". $$$BATES: My bad, I didn't check to make sure. I was just happy to get less than 4 pips. He's not concealed. > Nobody else unless your 238 in P2 somehow found a way to bug out. > This ends T2(A). See below for my rally activities in your half of the > turn. ***MCLEOD: No, these guys are gunnning for Iron Crosses. > _T2(G) US Rally Activities_ > > CX 337II in R8 drops "?" to attempt to recover the LMG, dr: 5; failed. > No > Bruce Willises in this bunch. Ground cover seems rather thick here. Look for the blood covered thing. :) > Remove DM on 747W/BAZ in P4L1. $$$BATES: Since 9-2 went upstairs, he will rally these guys: 1, 2; rallies. A little more than I needed, but... > 9-1 in O6 rallies his little lambs: > DM 747GG/dm MMG: 2, 4; rallies. _Now_ I've got building O6. > DM 747O/dm MMG: 3, 2; rallies. > DM 747K/BAZ: 6, 6; CR. Crikey. Remove DM. Becomes broken 337EE/BAZ. > I sure as hell hope I've just about used up my quota of 6s for the game. > It's been one thing after another since those damn gusts. > Let's see what you can come with over pancakes on your Sunday morning, big > fella. 41.***MCLEOD: German T2, RPh, WC DR = 5 (2,3) 42.***MCLEOD: Attempt to Rally 238 in S4, 8-0 loses "?", DR = 7(2,5) = NE. $$$BATES: Outstanding. PFPh. 43.***MCLEOD: 238 in P2 fires at 747 and 7-0 in O3, 4FP(PB) flat. DR = 3 (1,2) [US SAN] = 2MC. 7-0 DR = 9 (4,5) +2 = FDR of 11 = Breaks; 747 DR = 7 (4,3) +2 = FDR 9 = Breaks. $$$BATES: What is it with you and your low DR followed by two high DRs on low FP shots? 44.***MCLEOD: US SAN DR = 1. Direction and Extent DR = 8 (5,3), Sniper goes from R4 to O6, moves to N5, affects German Sniper, German SAN reduced to 3. ***MCLEOD: Crappage ... $$$BATES: Serves you right. These dice are being too good to you. 45.***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 Spray Fire at R8 and Q8, w/5FP +1 TEM. DR = 11 (5,6) = NE. $$$BATES: Much better. MPh. 46.***MCLEOD: 2 x "?" Assault Move from S4 to S3. [end MPh] ***MCLEOD: Your go George. I thought I would try the SF thing for yucks. It was either that or AM back in skulkish mode. :) Have at er' in your DFPh! =Jim= $$$BATES: You asked for it, so here you go. Personally, I'd have skulked to S6, nevermind any lost boresighting. 337P in O2 @ P2, 6FP+3: 2, 6; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 3: passed. This fellow is truly a pain. CX 337CC & 747LL in O4 @P2, 10FP+4: 5, 6, NE. 747s O & GG in O6 assemble their MMGs, constituting use of SW. Now they form FG w/9-1 @S4, 14FP+1: 2, 5; 1MC. 8-0 1MC: 2, 1; passed, but my sniper again. Broken 238 1MC: 5, 2; passed but DM. Sniper dr: 1; not your lucky day. Direction & distance: 5, 5; to I8, which means your sniper in N5 is once again the target. Your SAN is now 2. I like that, but frankly would have preferred R5. CX 747ISS/Radio & 8-0 in Q8 @R5, 7FP+3: 3, 6; NE. No help. 337D in Q4L0 @R5, 3FP+2: 2, 1; NMC. At last. 548 NMC: 5, 4; DM. There we go. 747W/BAZ & 9-2 add insult to injury with IFP only @R5, 7FP: 2, 4; 1MC. DM548 1MC: 2, 1; passed, but my sniper again. Sniper dr: 4; he must be tuckered out now. Here are my routs after you do yours. If your DM238 & 8-0 in S4 decide to vacate for U5, then my DM 747YY & DM7-0 can use P4 as their rout target and go to P4L1 through O4 and P4L0 (4MF). If you choose to leave those poor bums in S4, you'll force me to rout through O5 to O6 and overstack the hex (4MF). Yessir, nothing like a hearty DFPh to go with my oatmeal in the morning. I'm feeling much better about clearing out the 'ville now, P2 notwithstanding. Ready for a rockin' Monday. You have one, too. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Apr 10 21:26:24 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun Apr 10 21:29:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh & DFPh References: Message-ID: <006b01c53e4e$ff7f6f40$6127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, When the going gets tough, the tough VB! :) > 40.***MCLEOD: 238 in Q4L.0 does Voluntarily Break. Routs to R4 (1MF) > then > to S4 (3MF) > $$$BATES: No stomach for the knocks, eh? The 9-2 is scary. Even with the CX on the 337, my lad does not have a fair chance in that CC. >> _Advance Phase_ > >> 337D in Q4L1 to L0, regardless of whether you occupy it or not. > > It's all yours. Keep it clean, we're coming back soon. > $$$BATES: Don't come back, or I shall have to taunt you a second time. > This does mean Mr. 9-2 is in P4L1. ***MCLEOD: Roger that. >> CX 747YY & 7-0 in N3 over the hedge to O3. >> >> CX 747LL & 337CC in N4 likewise to O4. >> >> 747b in L6 to L5. >> >> CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 to Q8. > > ***MCLEOD: Are you sure the squad possesses the Radio George? That is how > I > see it as written. > $$$BATES: That's right. This allows the 8-0 to double-time for full 8MF, > whereas he could only do 7 with the radio. Little trick I learned from > Olie. ***MCLEOD: Clever man that David. Does he say what you do when the Leader Pins and the S w/Radio breaks and runs away? :) Having said that, it is a good idea. > ***MCLEOD: We be gonzo dude! :) > $$$BATES: And he won't rally, either. You have my word on it. >> R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); >> I >> ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce >> the >> integers 1, 2 or 3... >> Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, >> 1; >> elim) that scratches you before you can roll. There's a rare 1. CX 337D >> keeps his "?" hat. The LMG is unprocessed (unlike your lovely child, it >> would appear). 8-) > The fuhrer weeps ... NOT! Plenty more where they come from. > $$$BATES: We'll see about that. Notice how my spell checker converted > "unpossessed" to "unprocessed." Grrr... ***MCLEOD: Not on the first read. >> Removing Pin counters. >> >> 747b in L5 attempts concealment, dr: 3; concealed. > > ***MCLEOD: Does he have any -drm? Near as I can tell, he is in OG with a > +3drm, that makes a Fdr of 6 does it not? Therefore no "?". > $$$BATES: My bad, I didn't check to make sure. I was just happy to get > less than 4 pips. He's not concealed. >> Nobody else unless your 238 in P2 somehow found a way to bug out. >> This ends T2(A). See below for my rally activities in your half of the >> turn. > > ***MCLEOD: No, these guys are gunnning for Iron Crosses. > >> _T2(G) US Rally Activities_ >> >> CX 337II in R8 drops "?" to attempt to recover the LMG, dr: 5; failed. >> No >> Bruce Willises in this bunch. Ground cover seems rather thick here. > > Look for the blood covered thing. :) > >> Remove DM on 747W/BAZ in P4L1. > $$$BATES: Since 9-2 went upstairs, he will rally these guys: 1, 2; > rallies. A little more than I needed, but... > 41.***MCLEOD: German T2, RPh, WC DR = 5 (2,3) > > 42.***MCLEOD: Attempt to Rally 238 in S4, 8-0 loses "?", DR = 7(2,5) = NE. > $$$BATES: Outstanding. ***MCLEOD: The expected result. Hopefully a second chance will come. > > PFPh. > > 43.***MCLEOD: 238 in P2 fires at 747 and 7-0 in O3, 4FP(PB) flat. DR = 3 > (1,2) [US SAN] = 2MC. 7-0 DR = 9 (4,5) +2 = FDR of 11 = Breaks; 747 DR = > 7 > (4,3) +2 = FDR 9 = Breaks. > $$$BATES: What is it with you and your low DR followed by two high DRs on > low FP shots? ***MCLEOD: Thst is fairly standard Jim dice, George. However, being that I roll both your and my DR/dr in this PBEM when there is an effects, it seems that there are negative results soon to be had. Not too often does a string of good DR come by. > 44.***MCLEOD: US SAN DR = 1. Direction and Extent DR = 8 (5,3), Sniper > goes > from R4 to O6, moves to N5, affects German Sniper, German SAN reduced to > 3. > > ***MCLEOD: Crappage ... > $$$BATES: Serves you right. These dice are being too good to you. ***MCLEOD: Ohhh, that'll change. :) > 45.***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 Spray Fire at R8 and Q8, w/5FP +1 TEM. DR > = > 11 (5,6) = NE. > $$$BATES: Much better. ***MCLEOD: See. > MPh. > > 46.***MCLEOD: 2 x "?" Assault Move from S4 to S3. > > [end MPh] > > ***MCLEOD: Your go George. I thought I would try the SF thing for yucks. > It was either that or AM back in skulkish mode. :) Have at er' in your > DFPh! > > > =Jim= > > > $$$BATES: You asked for it, so here you go. Personally, I'd have skulked > to S6, nevermind any lost boresighting. ***MCLEOD: Thought about it but what the heck. Could of rolled a 4 and the move would have been genius. ;) > 337P in O2 @ P2, 6FP+3: 2, 6; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 3: passed. This fellow > is > truly a pain. ***MCLEOD: George, was not the 337 in O2 CX? His DRM should be +4, and NE, if that was the case. And the DR you are showing are the FDR, correct? > CX 337CC & 747LL in O4 @P2, 10FP+4: 5, 6, NE. > 747s O & GG in O6 assemble their MMGs, constituting use of SW. > Now they form FG w/9-1 @S4, 14FP+1: 2, 5; 1MC. 8-0 1MC: 2, 1; passed, > but > my sniper again. Broken 238 1MC: 5, 2; passed but DM. ***MCLEOD: Quick, the blue badge of courage! > Sniper dr: 1; not your lucky day. Direction & distance: 5, 5; to I8, > which means your sniper in N5 is once again the target. Your SAN is now > 2. > I like that, but frankly would have preferred R5. ***MCLEOD: Next time, I smell another 3 coming up. :) > CX 747ISS/Radio & 8-0 in Q8 @R5, 7FP+3: 3, 6; NE. No help. > 337D in Q4L0 @R5, 3FP+2: 2, 1; NMC. At last. 548 NMC: 5, 4; DM. There > we go. ***MCLEOD: Ahhh yes, there is that 3! ;) > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 add insult to injury with IFP only @R5, 7FP: 2, 4; 1MC. > DM548 1MC: 2, 1; passed, but my sniper again. ***MCLEOD: I suddenly feel like one of those ducks at the fair ... > Sniper dr: 4; he must be tuckered out now. ***MCLEOD: Out of ammo, pop another clip in the weapon. > Here are my routs after you do yours. 47***MCLEOD: DM 548 wMMG in R5 routs to S5 takes interdiction from 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 7 (4,3) = NE. DM 238 in S4 routs to T4, takes Interdiction from 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 6 (4,2) = NE. > If your DM238 & 8-0 in S4 decide to vacate for U5, then my DM 747YY & > DM7-0 > can use P4 as their rout target and go to P4L1 through O4 and P4L0 (4MF). > If you choose to leave those poor bums in S4, you'll force me to rout > through O5 to O6 and overstack the hex (4MF). ***MCLEOD: Won't the CX 747YY & 7-0 be taking Interdiction from the 238 in P2 in hexes O4 and O5 if he is going to O6? Also, could he not Rout to P4 if he chooses to? If he wishes, he could LC to O4 since NQ is in effect. Who says a person has no control over broken units! :) > Yessir, nothing like a hearty DFPh to go with my oatmeal in the morning. > I'm feeling much better about clearing out the 'ville now, P2 > notwithstanding. Ready for a rockin' Monday. You have one, too. ***MCLEOD: It is always a good thing to put plenty of FP downrange early in the day. :) See you tomorrow. =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Mon Apr 11 02:12:27 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Apr 11 02:10:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RtPh In-Reply-To: <006b01c53e4e$ff7f6f40$6127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: See how they run in "%%%." Got some questions on your routs to clear up, Jim. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 1:26 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh & DFPh Listerz, When the going gets tough, the tough VB! :) > 40.***MCLEOD: 238 in Q4L.0 does Voluntarily Break. Routs to R4 (1MF) > then > to S4 (3MF) > $$$BATES: No stomach for the knocks, eh? The 9-2 is scary. Even with the CX on the 337, my lad does not have a fair chance in that CC. >> _Advance Phase_ > >> 337D in Q4L1 to L0, regardless of whether you occupy it or not. > > It's all yours. Keep it clean, we're coming back soon. > $$$BATES: Don't come back, or I shall have to taunt you a second time. > This does mean Mr. 9-2 is in P4L1. ***MCLEOD: Roger that. >> CX 747YY & 7-0 in N3 over the hedge to O3. >> >> CX 747LL & 337CC in N4 likewise to O4. >> >> 747b in L6 to L5. >> >> CX 747SS/Radio & 8-0 in P7 to Q8. > > ***MCLEOD: Are you sure the squad possesses the Radio George? That is how > I > see it as written. > $$$BATES: That's right. This allows the 8-0 to double-time for full 8MF, > whereas he could only do 7 with the radio. Little trick I learned from > Olie. ***MCLEOD: Clever man that David. Does he say what you do when the Leader Pins and the S w/Radio breaks and runs away? :) Having said that, it is a good idea. %%%BATES: Yeah, make sure you catch up to him by Turn 4. 8-) > ***MCLEOD: We be gonzo dude! :) > $$$BATES: And he won't rally, either. You have my word on it. >> R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); >> I >> ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce >> the >> integers 1, 2 or 3... >> Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, >> 1; >> elim) that scratches you before you can roll. There's a rare 1. CX 337D >> keeps his "?" hat. The LMG is unprocessed (unlike your lovely child, it >> would appear). 8-) > The fuhrer weeps ... NOT! Plenty more where they come from. > $$$BATES: We'll see about that. Notice how my spell checker converted > "unpossessed" to "unprocessed." Grrr... ***MCLEOD: Not on the first read. >> Removing Pin counters. >> >> 747b in L5 attempts concealment, dr: 3; concealed. > > ***MCLEOD: Does he have any -drm? Near as I can tell, he is in OG with a > +3drm, that makes a Fdr of 6 does it not? Therefore no "?". > $$$BATES: My bad, I didn't check to make sure. I was just happy to get > less than 4 pips. He's not concealed. >> Nobody else unless your 238 in P2 somehow found a way to bug out. >> This ends T2(A). See below for my rally activities in your half of the >> turn. > > ***MCLEOD: No, these guys are gunnning for Iron Crosses. > >> _T2(G) US Rally Activities_ >> >> CX 337II in R8 drops "?" to attempt to recover the LMG, dr: 5; failed. >> No >> Bruce Willises in this bunch. Ground cover seems rather thick here. > > Look for the blood covered thing. :) > >> Remove DM on 747W/BAZ in P4L1. > $$$BATES: Since 9-2 went upstairs, he will rally these guys: 1, 2; > rallies. A little more than I needed, but... > 41.***MCLEOD: German T2, RPh, WC DR = 5 (2,3) > > 42.***MCLEOD: Attempt to Rally 238 in S4, 8-0 loses "?", DR = 7(2,5) = NE. > $$$BATES: Outstanding. ***MCLEOD: The expected result. Hopefully a second chance will come. > > PFPh. > > 43.***MCLEOD: 238 in P2 fires at 747 and 7-0 in O3, 4FP(PB) flat. DR = 3 > (1,2) [US SAN] = 2MC. 7-0 DR = 9 (4,5) +2 = FDR of 11 = Breaks; 747 DR = > 7 > (4,3) +2 = FDR 9 = Breaks. > $$$BATES: What is it with you and your low DR followed by two high DRs on > low FP shots? ***MCLEOD: Thst is fairly standard Jim dice, George. However, being that I roll both your and my DR/dr in this PBEM when there is an effects, it seems that there are negative results soon to be had. Not too often does a string of good DR come by. > 44.***MCLEOD: US SAN DR = 1. Direction and Extent DR = 8 (5,3), Sniper > goes > from R4 to O6, moves to N5, affects German Sniper, German SAN reduced to > 3. > > ***MCLEOD: Crappage ... > $$$BATES: Serves you right. These dice are being too good to you. ***MCLEOD: Ohhh, that'll change. :) > 45.***MCLEOD: 548 w/MMG in R5 Spray Fire at R8 and Q8, w/5FP +1 TEM. DR > = > 11 (5,6) = NE. > $$$BATES: Much better. ***MCLEOD: See. > MPh. > > 46.***MCLEOD: 2 x "?" Assault Move from S4 to S3. > > [end MPh] > > ***MCLEOD: Your go George. I thought I would try the SF thing for yucks. > It was either that or AM back in skulkish mode. :) Have at er' in your > DFPh! > > > =Jim= > > > $$$BATES: You asked for it, so here you go. Personally, I'd have skulked > to S6, nevermind any lost boresighting. ***MCLEOD: Thought about it but what the heck. Could of rolled a 4 and the move would have been genius. ;) > 337P in O2 @ P2, 6FP+3: 2, 6; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 3: passed. This fellow > is > truly a pain. ***MCLEOD: George, was not the 337 in O2 CX? His DRM should be +4, and NE, if that was the case. And the DR you are showing are the FDR, correct? %%%BATES: Oops, there is an error here, but not the CX status. His CX was removed in the American 1/2 of the turn as I had double-timed him in T1. You may be confused because I always keep my units labeled CX until the end of the MPh the following turn so it's clear they're not eligible to double-time again. Nevertheless, this was still a miss as I overlooked the +3 (even though I had just typed it!). Just my eagerness to hit something. You should add the mod to the two dice I show for the final DR, which was 11, and a clear miss. > CX 337CC & 747LL in O4 @P2, 10FP+4: 5, 6, NE. > 747s O & GG in O6 assemble their MMGs, constituting use of SW. > Now they form FG w/9-1 @S4, 14FP+1: 2, 5; 1MC. 8-0 1MC: 2, 1; passed, > but > my sniper again. Broken 238 1MC: 5, 2; passed but DM. ***MCLEOD: Quick, the blue badge of courage! %%%BATES: I'd call it the blue badge of discretion, personally... > Sniper dr: 1; not your lucky day. Direction & distance: 5, 5; to I8, > which means your sniper in N5 is once again the target. Your SAN is now > 2. > I like that, but frankly would have preferred R5. ***MCLEOD: Next time, I smell another 3 coming up. :) > CX 747ISS/Radio & 8-0 in Q8 @R5, 7FP+3: 3, 6; NE. No help. > 337D in Q4L0 @R5, 3FP+2: 2, 1; NMC. At last. 548 NMC: 5, 4; DM. There > we go. ***MCLEOD: Ahhh yes, there is that 3! ;) %%%BATES: 'Bout freakin time it was, too. Almost as late as Olie's copy of J6. > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 add insult to injury with IFP only @R5, 7FP: 2, 4; 1MC. > DM548 1MC: 2, 1; passed, but my sniper again. ***MCLEOD: I suddenly feel like one of those ducks at the fair ... > Sniper dr: 4; he must be tuckered out now. ***MCLEOD: Out of ammo, pop another clip in the weapon. > Here are my routs after you do yours. 47***MCLEOD: DM 548 wMMG in R5 routs to S5 takes interdiction from 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 7 (4,3) = NE. DM 238 in S4 routs to T4, takes Interdiction from 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 6 (4,2) = NE. %%%BATES: Hang on. First, what are the rout target hexes for these units? I'd say that DM548/MMG in R5 should be heading for S6. The S4 unit should be headed to U5, but they can rout through the T3 & U4 grain to avoid interdiction. Also, is your 8-0 accompanying the HS? Sure would recommend it if either of them want to stay in the game. Anyway, please give me rout target, path, last hex entered if the routing unit can't reach the target and MF spent. > If your DM238 & 8-0 in S4 decide to vacate for U5, then my DM 747YY & > DM7-0 > can use P4 as their rout target and go to P4L1 through O4 and P4L0 (4MF). > If you choose to leave those poor bums in S4, you'll force me to rout > through O5 to O6 and overstack the hex (4MF). ***MCLEOD: Won't the CX 747YY & 7-0 be taking Interdiction from the 238 in P2 in hexes O4 and O5 if he is going to O6? Also, could he not Rout to P4 if he chooses to? If he wishes, he could LC to O4 since NQ is in effect. Who says a person has no control over broken units! :) %%%BATES: If you left the 8-0 in S4, then he's a KEU and I can't close the distance to him by entering P4. But you're right, if the 8-0 is in S4 then they should rout toward O6 using low crawl to enter O4 and avoid interdiction. If the guy in S4 is not there, I'll still have to risk interdiction from P2 in O4 on my way to P4. What'll it be? You running and living to see another turn? > Yessir, nothing like a hearty DFPh to go with my oatmeal in the morning. > I'm feeling much better about clearing out the 'ville now, P2 > notwithstanding. Ready for a rockin' Monday. You have one, too. ***MCLEOD: It is always a good thing to put plenty of FP downrange early in the day. :) See you tomorrow. =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 11 02:18:38 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 11 02:18:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 17:17:29 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); I >ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce the >integers 1, 2 or 3... >Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal No, it's not. He has *no* options. Broken units may only attempt withdrawal from *melee*. When it's the first round of CC (not yet Melee), the broken units just have to sit there and take what comes. Of course, this means that they don't get the extra -2 DRM for withdrawing .... > so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, 1; elim) ... not that it mattered. Your total DRM was -2 (-2 broken units, -1 ambush, +1 CX), but a final DR of "5" is still an elim on 3:2. I have no idea who's where on the mapboard, but remember that units behind bocage may *automatically* claim concealment, and for RPh activities are considered out of LOS (and thus won't lose concealment) (B9.55). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 11 02:33:28 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 11 02:33:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More Primosole Bridge and Questions In-Reply-To: <001901c53dc3$91cbd960$0200a8c0@Father> References: <001901c53dc3$91cbd960$0200a8c0@Father> Message-ID: <1lgk51ps2nr3tkurjoh4lc1q9aoq3sescq@4ax.com> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 07:51:02 -0400, "Raymond Woloszyn" wrote: >1) A moving AFV is in the same hex as a static AFV. If a near miss >occurs in the moving phase, does it hit the non-moving AFV (given the proper >die roll)? Is this a case of non-moving units being affected by defensive >fire? Yes. Yes. *** A5.132 1) Can non-moving vehicle(s) be hit by an "overstack hit" during DFF -- i.e., do the overstack rules negate the Defensive First Fire rules on eligible targets? A. Yes. 2) Can the intended target be hit by an "overstack hit" (in any fire phase)? A. No. 3) If yes, how do you determine the target if there are only two vehicles in the hex (this rule says to use Random Selection only if there are three or more vehicles)? A. The non-target vehicle is hit if only 2 vehicles are in Location. {Answer to second part in Letter 252.}[Letters4 & 252] 4) Bruce Probst to AH & Bob McNamara, & replies, 12 September 1995 252) Bruce Probst to Perry Cocke, multiple emails and replies, posted to ASLML 16-18 June 2003 *** >2) What is the cost of an AFV on the Primosole Bridge going through a >bridge hex with one wreck and one AFV while buttoned up? While >unbuttoned? I just can't seem to figure this out. Would more wrecks or >AFV's add to the cost? Assuming that the bridge is a normal (multi-lane) bridge, it's 0.5 MP for a CE vehicle on a road, or 1 MP if BU; plus 1 MP per vehicle/wreck, doubled because road rate is being used: thus a total of 4.5 MP if CE, or 5 MP if BU. Yes, each additional vehicle/wreck will add 2 MP to the cost. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 11 02:37:25 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 11 02:37:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More Primosole Bridge and Questions In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.0.20050410143209.01e61270@mail.alltel.net> References: <001901c53dc3$91cbd960$0200a8c0@Father> <6.2.0.14.0.20050410143209.01e61270@mail.alltel.net> Message-ID: <06hk51d1vnh5cuh0sjgqt5ht5ahbct6hte@4ax.com> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:58:38 -0400, Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: >FWIW, I was playing this wrong until the Primosole Bridge scenarios opened >my eyes on how tough wreck-riddled bridges can be to cross & just how the >road penalties are defined... I'm afraid that you're still playing it wrong: the COT for the road is not doubled, it remains either a flat 0.5 or 1 MP, depending on whether the vehicle is CE or BU. It's the penalties for extra vehicles/wrecks that gets doubled, normally 1, so it's a flat 2 MP for each. SMOKE would add an additional 1 MP to the cost (again, it's not doubled). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Mon Apr 11 02:49:40 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Apr 11 02:47:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Death by ambush in Carentan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: FYI Bruce, this one occurred in a woods hex in full view of Jim's 548/MMG 3 hexes away. That's why I cared about the success of the ambush. However, you are right that the ASLRB does indeed say "melee," not close wombat. It's a new one every day. So Jim's HS was entirely at my mercy and still handily dispatched by a DR of 7 on a 3:2-2 shot. - G -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 6:19 PM To: George Bates Cc: mcleods; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 17:17:29 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >R8: My CX concealed 337II (dr-1: 5) vs your broken 238/LMG (dr+1: 6); I >ambush you. It appears my dicebot has been reprogrammed not to produce the >integers 1, 2 or 3... >Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal No, it's not. He has *no* options. Broken units may only attempt withdrawal from *melee*. When it's the first round of CC (not yet Melee), the broken units just have to sit there and take what comes. Of course, this means that they don't get the extra -2 DRM for withdrawing .... > so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, 1; elim) ... not that it mattered. Your total DRM was -2 (-2 broken units, -1 ambush, +1 CX), but a final DR of "5" is still an elim on 3:2. I have no idea who's where on the mapboard, but remember that units behind bocage may *automatically* claim concealment, and for RPh activities are considered out of LOS (and thus won't lose concealment) (B9.55). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From chris at shphoenix.jib.co.za Mon Apr 11 01:36:14 2005 From: chris at shphoenix.jib.co.za (chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za) Date: Mon Apr 11 03:29:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer Message-ID: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> Hi all, I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? Regards Chris From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Mon Apr 11 03:41:09 2005 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (Kenn) Date: Mon Apr 11 03:43:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer In-Reply-To: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> Message-ID: <425A5445.4020908@wideopenwest.com> chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za wrote: >Hi all, > >I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. >It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any >subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? > >Regards >Chris > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > There is a second issue. I am not sure where you can find it. A large portion of the Coastal Fortress stuff moved to the SoCal site when they called it quits. I would try there first. Kenn From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 03:57:53 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 03:58:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> Message-ID: <000a01c53e85$50d2ec60$6e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Chris wrote, > Hi all, > > I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. > It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any > subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? FO was a "one off" as far as I know. A shame, have the issue and it is a real gem. =Jim= From rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 07:56:00 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Apr 11 07:56:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050411145600.82046.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Most learned fellows, More from Breakwater: (btw, he's doing it, the human ski wave! will tell what happens when it's over) Situation elsewhere on mammoth battlefield: Concealed Russian stack of Commissar, and 3 447s AM's in OG deep snow, for 1.5mf. 8-1 led German MMG, opens up. Area fire, -1 ffmo, and -1ldr. Rof, and causes an MC which strips concealment, and breaks one sqd. On second MF (really .5), MMG fires again, now 4-2. Rolls 1,2. rof. 1KIA. But, is it the case that against the brokie, it was a 4-3 shot, due to the fact that it is no longer assault moving? Thus, against that one mmc, a 2KIA result? We thought simply 1KIA, rs'ed, eliminated one GO russian sqd, broke the rest, and thus CR-ed the already broken sqd. But, I'm now thinking that 2 russian sqds should have been eliminated, leaving only one broken commisar and sqd? yours, Rob __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Mon Apr 11 08:11:15 2005 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (=?iso-8859-1?q?Klas=20Malmstr=F6m?=) Date: Mon Apr 11 08:11:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050411151115.66262.qmail@web25604.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi, --- Robert Nelson wrote: > Most learned fellows, > > More from Breakwater: (btw, he's doing it, the human > ski wave! will tell what happens when it's over) > > Situation elsewhere on mammoth battlefield: > Concealed Russian stack of Commissar, and 3 447s AM's > in OG deep snow, for 1.5mf. > > 8-1 led German MMG, opens up. Area fire, -1 ffmo, and > -1ldr. Rof, and causes an MC which strips concealment, > and breaks one sqd. > > On second MF (really .5), MMG fires again, now 4-2. Not an answer to your question but I'm not sure that the second attack is allowed. A8.14 says: "A unit that survives a Defensive First Fire attack with no effect can be fired on again in that same Location during its MPh before expending additional MF/MP, but only by different attackers or if it expended at least two MF/MP in that Location (see 9.2)." And A9.2 says: "However, during the MPh a DEFENDER MG cannot fire at the same unit in the same Location more times than the number of MF/MP expended by the target in that Location (FRD, but a minimum of once per hex)." Regards, Klas Malmstrom ------------------------------------------------------- Klas Malmstrom Linkoping, Sweden Email: klas_malmstrom@yahoo.se ------------------------------------------------------- From rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 08:23:07 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Apr 11 08:23:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050411152307.51832.qmail@web52601.mail.yahoo.com> holy sunni batman, I have ALWAYS fired twice at, for instance, the 1.5mf for moving into grain. argh. and now I see quite clearly under AM that the brokie was ffnam, for the phantom second shot... Alas, if the second shot had been allowed, two dead sqds? Rob --- Klas Malmström wrote: > Hi, > > --- Robert Nelson wrote: > > Most learned fellows, > > > > More from Breakwater: (btw, he's doing it, the > human > > ski wave! will tell what happens when it's over) > > > > Situation elsewhere on mammoth battlefield: > > Concealed Russian stack of Commissar, and 3 447s > AM's > > in OG deep snow, for 1.5mf. > > > > 8-1 led German MMG, opens up. Area fire, -1 ffmo, > and > > -1ldr. Rof, and causes an MC which strips > concealment, > > and breaks one sqd. > > > > On second MF (really .5), MMG fires again, now > 4-2. > > Not an answer to your question but I'm not sure that > the second attack is > allowed. > > A8.14 says: > "A unit that survives a Defensive First Fire attack > with no effect can be fired > on again in that same Location during its MPh before > expending additional > MF/MP, but only by different attackers or if it > expended at least two MF/MP in > that Location (see 9.2)." > > And A9.2 says: > "However, during the MPh a DEFENDER MG cannot fire > at the same unit in the same > Location more times than the number of MF/MP > expended by the target in that > Location (FRD, but a minimum of once per hex)." > > Regards, > Klas Malmstrom > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Klas Malmstrom > Linkoping, Sweden > Email: klas_malmstrom@yahoo.se > ------------------------------------------------------- > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From damavs at alltel.net Mon Apr 11 08:27:37 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Mon Apr 11 08:28:11 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... Message-ID: <20050411152737.VZTS4937.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Robert Nelson writes: > Situation elsewhere on mammoth battlefield: > Concealed Russian stack of Commissar, and 3 447s AM's > in OG deep snow, for 1.5mf. > > 8-1 led German MMG, opens up. Area fire, -1 ffmo, and > -1ldr. Rof, and causes an MC which strips concealment, > and breaks one sqd. > > On second MF (really .5), MMG fires again, now 4-2. > Rolls 1,2. rof. 1KIA. But, is it the case that against > the brokie, it was a 4-3 shot, due to the fact that it > is no longer assault moving? Thus, against that one > mmc, a 2KIA result? We thought simply 1KIA, rs'ed, > eliminated one GO russian sqd, broke the rest, and > thus CR-ed the already broken sqd. As Klas already pointed out, the 2nd shot is not allowed, because you can't fire a 2nd time on the .5 part of the 1.5 MF expended. But if the shot was legal, then yes the brokie is no longer AM'ing and would have been subject to a -3 shot & thus eaten a KIA all his own. So it all depends on which alternate universe you want to allow - the one where the illegal shot also killed the brokie, or the one where the illegal shot wasn't taken, or just invoke A.4 and move on... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 09:25:06 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Apr 11 12:36:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave Underway! Message-ID: <20050411162507.92014.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> ok folks, the buzz lightyear moment is underway (thanks to the suspended universe of PBEM!) First problem: two 458s and 7-0, on skis, waving. Opponent wants 7-0 to click off skis and enter the wooden building in the next forward hex (the only one free of resid!), for 2mf, AND wants the sqds to zip by the building in bypass....keeping their skis on... A25.232:...All HW Units must move to a new Location as a multihex stack before any may make a new MF expenditure. He can't do it can he? either 7-0 keeps skiing round the house, screaming at the top of his lungs, or they all click off the telemarks, and order hot cocoa? Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From malm at gol.com Mon Apr 11 09:46:10 2005 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon Apr 11 12:41:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: <20050411152737.VZTS4937.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102 .165.30]> References: <20050411152737.VZTS4937.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050412014040.03b85bb0@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 12:27 a.m. 12/04/2005, Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: >So it all depends on which alternate universe you want >to allow - the one where the illegal shot also killed the >brokie, or the one where the illegal shot wasn't taken, or >just invoke A.4 and move on... A.4? Just which optional rules did you have in mind? I suggest E.11 Player taking illegal shot must skull a beer while singing the "I'm sorry" song from Calvin and Hobbes >Bret Hildebran >damavs@alltel.net >www.aslok.org > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 09:52:14 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Apr 11 12:44:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave, additional point Message-ID: <20050411165214.3391.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> With regard to the last question, wavers in and out of buildings, regardless of whether or not the 7-0 goes in or out of the building, from yet a different hex, another 628 entered the building. thus, no matter what happens, at the end of the impulse, there will be units inside the building, and outside skiing in bypass. If I first fire a sqd at that hex, is it 4fp -2/+1 at all units in the hex? or must I target one stack? Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Mon Apr 11 10:56:29 2005 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (kmonte@wideopenwest.com) Date: Mon Apr 11 12:45:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer In-Reply-To: <000a01c53e85$50d2ec60$6e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> <000a01c53e85$50d2ec60$6e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <20050411165416.M93139@wideopenwest.com> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 05:57:53 -0500, mcleods wrote > Listerz, > > Chris wrote, > > > Hi all, > > > > I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. > > It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any > > subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? > > FO was a "one off" as far as I know. A shame, have the issue and > it is a real gem. > > =Jim= I say again, there are two issues. Summer 2001 16 pages Fall 2001 19 pages I seem to recall that when they went offline they asked to respect their copyrights, so if SoCal does not have them, we would need one of those two to say OK to distributing the second issue. Kenn From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Mon Apr 11 10:53:24 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Mon Apr 11 13:09:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] S.O. ASL tournament - brief AAR Message-ID: <2b8228f00504111053567962b0@mail.gmail.com> I managed to come in second place this year. Here's what and who I played. In the Commonwealth round, I played SP40 Stand At Festubert against Kurt Berger. This was Kurt's very first tournament and I was his very first tournament opponent. It brought back memories of my first tournament (Avaloncon 1990) and my first opponent (Mike McGrath), but the relative skill levels in this case were much closer. Anyway, I won as the British, with the balance. In the Russians round, I played OB9 Oriola Force against John McDairmid. I had the Russians, with the balance. I hope I can take some credit for a competent Russian defense, but John had atrocious dice rolls on his MC's. After three turns, many of his units were behind the start line trying to rally, and John conceded. In the French round, I played A108 Sudden Death against Rob MacKenzie. I had the Germans with the balance. This scenario lived up to its title. I defended the French entry road with one 447 and hero. In French turn 1 CC, they killed a HS, but stayed in melee with a squad. The German sniper killed the French 7-0 in the bottom of Turn 1. In French Turn 2 DFPh, my 9-2 directed MMG opened up on a French squad, got rate, and broke it into oblivion to give me the 5 CVP difference to win the scenario. In the Partisan round, I played a Paddington Bears scenario printed by CH. This was only my second Paddington Bears scenario, and I was pleased that I enjoyed it as much as my previous experience. The scenario was PB-CH(C) Balkan Dawn. I had the Partisans and the Croats (David Butterworth) had the balance. This was a fun, calculating scenario that I eventually won. The final round had American scenarios. Since I had to leave around 2:30pm to drive home, my first choice was the shortish SP51 Stryker's Charge, which Wai Wong and I ended up playing. I made perhaps my only big mistake all weekend, when I bid to play the attacking Americans. I momentarily forgot that Shwerepunkt scenarios are hard on the attacker. I should have bid German defender to make sure that I at least had the balance. The American entry area is almost completely covered by German fire, so everybody must enter in one or two hexes, or else run a gauntlet of fire. And if Wai had set up his guns a little differently, it would have been even worse. My mortar got no smoke. My bazooka got no smoke. Even my squads had trouble getting their smoke. Wai's guns got some decent rate, although two guns malfunctioned, one repaired. I managed to make a game of it, but in the last turn, I was unable to affect the remaining two German guns and crews. Thanks to Nick Hoekstra and Harvey Schoals for organizing and running the tournament. -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From damavs at alltel.net Mon Apr 11 13:19:07 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Mon Apr 11 13:48:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... Message-ID: <20050411201907.LOQF11805.ispmxmta06-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Malcolm Rutledge > A.4? > Just which optional rules did you have in mind? I was going for the "Mistakes happen - sins of the past are in the past & happened - you can't go back & replay them from the point of error as many players would never finish a scenario" rule. Isn't that A.4? > I suggest E.11 Player taking illegal shot must skull a beer while singing > the "I'm sorry" song from Calvin and Hobbes That's probably a more entertaining optional rule. Heck, they may be playing it that way already since this is the same game w/the ski troops waving :-) Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From damavs at alltel.net Mon Apr 11 13:25:34 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Mon Apr 11 13:55:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave, additional point Message-ID: <20050411202534.YUOY1218.ispmxmta05-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Robert Nelson queries > With regard to the last question, wavers in and out of > buildings, I can't think of any reason that your opponent could not have 2 squads bypass the building while the 7-0 goes in. It is still the same location after all. > regardless of whether or not the 7-0 goes in or out of > the building, from yet a different hex, another 628 > entered the building. thus, no matter what happens, at > the end of the impulse, there will be units inside the > building, and outside skiing in bypass. If I first > fire a sqd at that hex, is it 4fp -2/+1 at all units > in the hex? or must I target one stack? Human wave you get to target the end of the impulse & could thus shoot everyone in that location at the end of said impulse. So YES - you'd have a 4(-2/+1) shot on that hex, presuming you have LOS to both the building and the bypassed hex. Taking the skis out of the equation, it'd be foolish to not just enter everyone into the building since the impulse is 2 MF anyway, but w/skiing, it may actually make sense to take the extra -2 perhaps. Just roll low on the 4(-2) shot and all will be good... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Apr 11 13:30:22 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Mon Apr 11 13:56:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Ski Wave Underway! In-Reply-To: <20050411162507.92014.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, Robert Nelson wrote: > First problem: two 458s and 7-0, on skis, waving. > Opponent wants 7-0 to click off skis and enter the > wooden building in the next forward hex (the only one > free of resid!), for 2mf, AND wants the sqds to zip by > the building in bypass....keeping their skis on... > > A25.232:...All HW Units must move to a new Location as > a multihex stack before any may make a new MF > expenditure. > > He can't do it can he? either 7-0 keeps skiing round > the house, screaming at the top of his lungs, or they > all click off the telemarks, and order hot cocoa? > Yes he can. The "multihex stack" part is to be taken lightly, and in no way implies that all units of the HW need to use bypass or not at the same time. So as long as each individual HW unit meets the requirements of entering a new Location, they are free to individually do so through bypass or not. The "multihex stack" part only means that they all move at the same time without violating A4.2. > regardless of whether or not the 7-0 goes in or out of > the building, from yet a different hex, another 628 > entered the building. thus, no matter what happens, at > the end of the impulse, there will be units inside the > building, and outside skiing in bypass. If I first > fire a sqd at that hex, is it 4fp -2/+1 at all units > in the hex? or must I target one stack? Small Arms DFF targets all moving units in the Location, so some are attacked with -2 DRM and some by +1 DRM. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From janusz.maxe at unf.se Mon Apr 11 14:25:36 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Mon Apr 11 14:25:41 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... Message-ID: Klas Malmstr?m quoted: "A8.14 says: "A unit that survives a Defensive First Fire attack with no effect can be fired on again in that same Location during its MPh before expending additional MF/MP, but only by different attackers or if it expended at least two MF/MP in that Location (see 9.2)." Does that mean that I cannot fire again at an enemy unit that just broke? I checked the rule, and found this: "A unit broken or pinned Defensive first fire can be fired on again in its current Location by other samephase Defensive first fire attacks, but is attacked in its broken or pinned state." So, enemy unit moves, costing 2 MFs. I fire my unit and breaks him. Can't my unit SFF at him? Must it be a First fire? Confused Janusz From damavs at alltel.net Mon Apr 11 15:07:02 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Mon Apr 11 15:38:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050411180253.01dfcab0@mail.alltel.net> Janusz Maxe wrote: >Klas Malmstr?m quoted: >"A8.14 says: >"A unit that survives a Defensive First Fire attack with no effect can be >fired >on again in that same Location during its MPh before expending additional >MF/MP, but only by different attackers or if it expended at least two MF/MP in >that Location (see 9.2)." > >Does that mean that I cannot fire again at an enemy unit that just broke? Yes unless he spent 2 MF/MP in that location (which is covered by the last OR clause to end the quote above. > I checked the rule, and found this: >"A unit broken or pinned Defensive first fire can be fired on again in its >current Location by other samephase Defensive first fire attacks, but is >attacked in its broken or pinned state." > >So, enemy unit moves, costing 2 MFs. I fire my unit and breaks him. Can't >my unit SFF at him? Must it be a First fire? Yes, you can SFF in this case since he spent 2MFs in the location. If he spent < 2 MF, then you could not SFF and only first fire from other units would be allowed. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 11 15:48:55 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 11 15:51:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> Hey, all. Moderator here. George wrote: >Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal and Bruce replied: >No, it's not. He has *no* options. Broken units may only attempt withdrawal from *melee*. When it's the first round of CC (not yet Melee), the broken units just have to sit there and take what comes. The Moderator concurs. I was intending to point this out if it had come to a dispute, but I figured someone (well Bruce, actually) would pick up on it. Bruce also wrote: >Of course, this means that they don't get the extra -2 DRM for withdrawing .... The Moderator concurs again. George wrote: > so I have a 3:2-4 (DR: 6, 1; elim) and Bruce replied: >... not that it mattered. Your total DRM was -2 (-2 broken units, -1 ambush, +1 CX), but a final DR of "5" is still an elim on 3:2. This is the reason the Moderator didn't butt in. But it's a good reminder of the actual rules, which seem to have been missed by both players. Thanks, Bruce. Bruce wrote further: >I have no idea who's where on the mapboard, but remember that units behind bocage may *automatically* claim concealment, and for RPh activities are considered out of LOS (and thus won't lose concealment) (B9.55). Another good reminder to our players. Thanks again. David "sub-contracting the Moderator's duties" Olie From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Apr 11 16:53:50 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Apr 11 16:54:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.0.20050411180253.01dfcab0@mail.alltel.net> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Bret & > Julie Hildebran > Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 5:07 PM > To: Janusz Maxe; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... > > Yes, you can SFF in this case since he spent 2MFs in the location. If he > spent < 2 MF, then you could not SFF and only first fire from other units > would be allowed. Not entirely true. Other units already marked FrF could SFF at the brokie _IF_ they had not already fired at him on the first MF expended. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Apr 11 17:17:39 2005 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:18:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: WP questions Message-ID: Greetings Situation 1: A Two story house has an unconcealed unit at ground level and no units in the upper level. A Light Mtr (with WP) has LOS to the Level 1 building Location but does not have LOS to the Ground level Loc due to an intervening wall. The Mtr fires WP at the building hex, applying Case K on the TH DR as per C6.2 and scores a hit. As per C8.52, the WP is placed in the ground level location and rises from there. Does the enemy unit at ground level take the WP NMC even though it was out of the Mtr's LOS? Situation 2: Multi story building hex with unit at Level 2 Location. WP is fired at it and placed at Level 0. Does the unit on Level 2 take the WP NMC? TIA Cheers Jon This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not dissemminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 16:06:08 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:21:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> <000a01c53e85$50d2ec60$6e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <20050411165416.M93139@wideopenwest.com> Message-ID: <007f01c53ef5$8aa02d70$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, I wrote, >> FO was a "one off" as far as I know. A shame, have the issue and >> it is a real gem. Kenn replied, > I say again, there are two issues. > Summer 2001 16 pages > Fall 2001 19 pages I sit corrected, my apologies. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 16:24:53 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:22:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, David wrote, > Hey, all. Moderator here. > > George wrote: >>Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal > > and Bruce replied: >>No, it's not. He has *no* options. Broken units may only attempt > withdrawal > from *melee*. When it's the first round of CC (not yet Melee), the broken > units just have to sit there and take what comes. > > The Moderator concurs. I was intending to point this out if it had come > to > a dispute, but I figured someone (well Bruce, actually) would pick up on > it. > > Bruce also wrote: >>Of course, this means that they don't get the extra -2 DRM for withdrawing > .... > > The Moderator concurs again. It may be worse than that. Check out A11.16, the bit regarding the EFTR at the end of the CCPh for units in Melee. Once the CC attacks are resolved for a Location, a Melee counter is placed on the stack. Once all CC attacks are done and all the other CCPh activities are done, the brokies, under a Melee counter going into the end of the CCPh, are eliminated. So the way I saw it, those brokies were done on any DR other than a 12. > Bruce wrote further: >>I have no idea who's where on the mapboard, but remember that units behind > bocage may *automatically* claim concealment, and for RPh activities are > considered out of LOS (and thus won't lose concealment) (B9.55). > > Another good reminder to our players. Thanks again. Duly noted Bruce, I will post the Locations of all the units following the G-PT2. That way George and I can confirm who is where. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 17:13:51 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:23:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RtPh, APh, CCPh References: Message-ID: <008301c53ef5$8d8a7c20$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, We continue ... > See how they run in "%%%." Got some questions on your routs to clear up, > Jim. > >> 337P in O2 @ P2, 6FP+3: 2, 6; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 3: passed. This fellow >> is >> truly a pain. > > ***MCLEOD: George, was not the 337 in O2 CX? His DRM should be +4, and > NE, > if that was the case. And the DR you are showing are the FDR, correct? > %%%BATES: Oops, there is an error here, but not the CX status. His CX > was > removed in the American 1/2 of the turn as I had double-timed him in T1. > You may be confused because I always keep my units labeled CX until the > end > of the MPh the following turn so it's clear they're not eligible to > double-time again. Nevertheless, this was still a miss as I overlooked > the > +3 (even though I had just typed it!). Just my eagerness to hit > something. > You should add the mod to the two dice I show for the final DR, which was > 11, and a clear miss. > >> CX 337CC & 747LL in O4 @P2, 10FP+4: 5, 6, NE. > >> 747s O & GG in O6 assemble their MMGs, constituting use of SW. >> Now they form FG w/9-1 @S4, 14FP+1: 2, 5; 1MC. 8-0 1MC: 2, 1; passed, >> but >> my sniper again. Broken 238 1MC: 5, 2; passed but DM. > > ***MCLEOD: Quick, the blue badge of courage! > %%%BATES: I'd call it the blue badge of discretion, personally... > >> Sniper dr: 1; not your lucky day. Direction & distance: 5, 5; to I8, >> which means your sniper in N5 is once again the target. Your SAN is now >> 2. >> I like that, but frankly would have preferred R5. > > ***MCLEOD: Next time, I smell another 3 coming up. :) > >> CX 747ISS/Radio & 8-0 in Q8 @R5, 7FP+3: 3, 6; NE. No help. > >> 337D in Q4L0 @R5, 3FP+2: 2, 1; NMC. At last. 548 NMC: 5, 4; DM. >> There >> we go. > > ***MCLEOD: Ahhh yes, there is that 3! ;) > %%%BATES: 'Bout freakin time it was, too. Almost as late as Olie's copy > of > J6. > >> 747W/BAZ & 9-2 add insult to injury with IFP only @R5, 7FP: 2, 4; 1MC. >> DM548 1MC: 2, 1; passed, but my sniper again. > > ***MCLEOD: I suddenly feel like one of those ducks at the fair ... > >> Sniper dr: 4; he must be tuckered out now. > > ***MCLEOD: Out of ammo, pop another clip in the weapon. > >> Here are my routs after you do yours. > > 47***MCLEOD: DM 548 wMMG in R5 routs to S5 takes interdiction from > 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 7 (4,3) = NE. DM 238 in S4 routs to T4, takes > Interdiction from 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 6 (4,2) = NE. > %%%BATES: Hang on. First, what are the rout target hexes for these > units? ***MCLEOD: The DM 548 can rout to S4 even though he may ignore it. The DM 238's target hex is U5. If he routed through the Grain, he could not have routed there (moving closer to the guys in Q8 and R8 if the LOS is good, therefore I decided to take the interdiction in T4 to reach U5. A gamble but hey, its only cardboard. :) > I'd say that DM548/MMG in R5 should be heading for S6. ***MCLEOD: I can ignore S6 as it is equidistant to the Q/R8 dudes from the R5 Location. > The S4 unit should be headed to U5, but they can rout through the T3 & U4 > grain to avoid > interdiction. ***MCLEOD: I don't believe I have to George. I'll check the rules but it may be the routing player's call whether or not to risk Interdiction... besides, they're in a hurry. :) > Also, is your 8-0 accompanying the HS? Sure would recommend it if either > of them want to stay in the game. ***MCLEOD: No, I believe that the 548 guys rout path is good and he, the 548, stands a better chance of bouncing back than the 238. So, 8-0 stays put. > Anyway, please give me rout target, path, last hex entered if the routing > unit can't reach the target and MF spent. ***MCLEOD: No problem George, I dashed the last message off in a hurry. It was late last night when I wrote it and I wanted you to have some fresh stuff to chew on today. >> If your DM238 & 8-0 in S4 decide to vacate for U5, then my DM 747YY & >> DM7-0 >> can use P4 as their rout target and go to P4L1 through O4 and P4L0 (4MF). >> If you choose to leave those poor bums in S4, you'll force me to rout >> through O5 to O6 and overstack the hex (4MF). > ***MCLEOD: Won't the CX 747YY & 7-0 be taking Interdiction from the 238 > in > P2 in hexes O4 and O5 if he is going to O6? Also, could he not Rout to P4 > if he chooses to? If he wishes, he could LC to O4 since NQ is in effect. > Who says a person has no control over broken units! :) > %%%BATES: If you left the 8-0 in S4, then he's a KEU and I can't close > the > distance to him by entering P4. ***MCLEOD: DOH! ... never mind. A refreshed eye sees the blazingly obvious, sorry about that George. > But you're right, if the 8-0 is in S4 then > they should rout toward O6 using low crawl to enter O4 and avoid > interdiction. If the guy in S4 is not there, I'll still have to risk > interdiction from P2 in O4 on my way to P4. What'll it be? You running > and > living to see another turn? ***MCLEOD: Well, I'm pretty sure I can leave my 8-0 in S4. Therefore, I believe that your guys will LC to O4. "Rules Mavens" please feel free to correct or confirm my opinions. >> Yessir, nothing like a hearty DFPh to go with my oatmeal in the morning. >> I'm feeling much better about clearing out the 'ville now, P2 >> notwithstanding. Ready for a rockin' Monday. You have one, too. > ***MCLEOD: It is always a good thing to put plenty of FP downrange early > in > the day. :) See you tomorrow. ***MCLEOD: So, if the routs are good, I will go to the APh. 48***MCLEOD: Hmmmmm, not much to do here, "?" +1 counter adv. from S3 to R2. 49***MCLEOD: My last remaining GO MMC in P2 will hang tight and weather the upcoming storm to whatever conclusion the gods decide. [German PT2 is over] ***MCLEOD: George, I shall hold my US3 RPh activities until I hear back from you on my routs. "Let the good dice roll! Let them fall where they may!" Apologies to the Cars ... =Jim= From chris at shphoenix.jib.co.za Mon Apr 11 05:46:51 2005 From: chris at shphoenix.jib.co.za (chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:40:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer In-Reply-To: <425A5445.4020908@wideopenwest.com> References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> <425A5445.4020908@wideopenwest.com> Message-ID: <1819.155.239.118.94.1113223611.squirrel@155.239.118.94> Thanks Will have a look. Chris > chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za wrote: > >>Hi all, >> >>I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve >> Svare. >>It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any >>subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? >> >>Regards >>Chris >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >>Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net >> >> >> >> > There is a second issue. > I am not sure where you can find it. A large portion of the Coastal > Fortress stuff moved to the SoCal site when they called it quits. > I would try there first. > > Kenn > From seh at panix.com Mon Apr 11 12:03:35 2005 From: seh at panix.com (Steven E. Harris) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:41:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASLRBv2 available on eBay Message-ID: Greetings, After months of deliberation, I finally decided to part with my pristine ASLRBv2 for lack of the time and attention it deserves. It's up for auction on eBay as item number 5184977646?, entitled ,---- | Adv. Squad Leader Rule Book 2nd Ed. (ASLRB2) - Perfect `---- Per the listing description, the binder is unwrapped but otherwise unused. It only ever enjoyed casual browsing through Chapter A, all of which was sealed within page protectors. Various pictures of the binder are available.? Someone else will be able to make better use of it than I can for now. In the meantime, I have an unopened Starter Kit that will suffice for study should the opportunity arise. Take a look if you're interested, and feel free to follow up with any questions. Footnotes: ? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5184977646 ? Front Cover http://www.panix.com/~seh/temp/aslrb/1.jpg Back Cover http://www.panix.com/~seh/temp/aslrb/2.jpg Open View 1 http://www.panix.com/~seh/temp/aslrb/3.jpg Open View 2 http://www.panix.com/~seh/temp/aslrb/4.jpg Open View 3 http://www.panix.com/~seh/temp/aslrb/5.jpg Corner (Dinged) http://www.panix.com/~seh/temp/aslrb/6.jpg -- Steven E. Harris From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Apr 11 17:50:00 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Apr 11 17:50:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <011301c53ef9$8ee888b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Jim; My rulebook says that any boken unti failing to withdraw from **melee** is eliminated for FtR. Failure to withdraw from CC is irrelevant! Or are you trying to pull an ASOP on us, arguing that *placement* of the Melee counter at the end of the CCPh means they failed to withdraw from Melee! > > It may be worse than that. Check out A11.16, the bit regarding the EFTR > at the end of the CCPh for units in Melee. Once the CC attacks are > resolved for a Location, a Melee counter is placed on the stack. Once all > CC attacks are done and all the other CCPh activities are done, the > brokies, under a Melee counter going into the end of the CCPh, are > eliminated. > > So the way I saw it, those brokies were done on any DR other than a 12. Wynn "My Brokies Never Live to See Melee" Polnicky From aaron.cleavin at gmail.com Mon Apr 11 18:18:45 2005 From: aaron.cleavin at gmail.com (Aaron Cleavin) Date: Mon Apr 11 18:18:53 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> Clearly there _was_ no Melee at the start of the CCph so in no way did the brokies fail to withdraw from Melee. To claim otherwise is sophistry at best. On Apr 12, 2005 9:24 AM, mcleods wrote: > Listerz, > > David wrote, > > > Hey, all. Moderator here. > > > > George wrote: > >>Here your only option is to attempt withdrawal > > > > and Bruce replied: > >>No, it's not. He has *no* options. Broken units may only attempt > > withdrawal > > from *melee*. When it's the first round of CC (not yet Melee), the broken > > units just have to sit there and take what comes. > > > > The Moderator concurs. I was intending to point this out if it had come > > to > > a dispute, but I figured someone (well Bruce, actually) would pick up on > > it. > > > > Bruce also wrote: > >>Of course, this means that they don't get the extra -2 DRM for withdrawing > > .... > > > > The Moderator concurs again. > > It may be worse than that. Check out A11.16, the bit regarding the EFTR at > the end of the CCPh for units in Melee. Once the CC attacks are resolved > for a Location, a Melee counter is placed on the stack. Once all CC attacks > are done and all the other CCPh activities are done, the brokies, under a > Melee counter going into the end of the CCPh, are eliminated. > > So the way I saw it, those brokies were done on any DR other than a 12. > > > > Bruce wrote further: > > >>I have no idea who's where on the mapboard, but remember that units behind > > bocage may *automatically* claim concealment, and for RPh activities are > > considered out of LOS (and thus won't lose concealment) (B9.55). > > > > Another good reminder to our players. Thanks again. > > Duly noted > > Bruce, I will post the Locations of all the units following the G-PT2. That > way George and I can confirm who is where. > > =Jim= > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 18:19:56 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 18:20:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com><008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <011301c53ef9$8ee888b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <00b801c53efd$be7a9600$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Wynn wrote, > Jim; > > My rulebook says that any boken unti failing to withdraw from **melee** is > eliminated for FtR. Failure to withdraw from CC is irrelevant! Read lines 6 and 7 of A11.16, "Any non-guard ...". > Or are you trying to pull an ASOP on us, arguing that *placement* of the > Melee counter at the end of the CCPh means they failed to withdraw from > Melee! Wynn bay-bee, I did not write the rules, inclusive of the ASOP. I am simply trying to follow the word as closely as it is written. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 18:31:01 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 18:31:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Aaron wrote, > Clearly there _was_ no Melee at the start of the CCph so in no way did > the brokies fail to withdraw from Melee. To claim otherwise is > sophistry at best. Hold the sophistries Aaron. A11.16, sentence in lines 6 and 7 says, "Any non-guard broken unit unable to withdraw from Melee is eliminated at the end of that CCPh for Failure to Rout." If it is the end of the CCPh and the brokie is sitting under a Melee counter, it is in Melee. Doesn't seem to matter when the counter is placed near as I can tell. Each Location fights its own battle during the CCPh during the CCPh. When that Location's CC attacks are done and the requirements for Melee are present, a Melee counter is placed during the CCPh. The EFtR ocurrs at the end of THE CCPh, at which time, the brokie is under a Melee counter and therefore must be considered in Melee. Where do you find basis in your original statement of, "Clearly there _was_ no Melee at the start of the CCph so in no way did the brokies fail to withdraw from Melee." I may very well be wrong, (ie: I've overlooked the pertinent rule) but there is more in the ASLRB that supports what I claim, than what you claim. Paging Bruce Probst ... Bruce Probst ... =Jim= From aaron.cleavin at gmail.com Mon Apr 11 18:43:15 2005 From: aaron.cleavin at gmail.com (Aaron Cleavin) Date: Mon Apr 11 18:43:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com> Before one can fail to do something one must have the opportunity to do so otherwise the rule has no meaning, and might just as well read "Broken units in a melee are hex are eliminating at the end of the Ccph". NRBH but does the ASOP clearly state when Melee Counters are placed? On Apr 12, 2005 11:31 AM, mcleods wrote: > Listerz, > > Aaron wrote, > > > > Clearly there _was_ no Melee at the start of the CCph so in no way did > > the brokies fail to withdraw from Melee. To claim otherwise is > > sophistry at best. > > Hold the sophistries Aaron. > > A11.16, sentence in lines 6 and 7 says, "Any non-guard broken unit unable to > withdraw from Melee is eliminated at the end of that CCPh for Failure to > Rout." > > If it is the end of the CCPh and the brokie is sitting under a Melee > counter, it is in Melee. Doesn't seem to matter when the counter is placed > near as I can tell. Each Location fights its own battle during the CCPh > during the CCPh. When that Location's CC attacks are done and the > requirements for Melee are present, a Melee counter is placed during the > CCPh. The EFtR ocurrs at the end of THE CCPh, at which time, the brokie is > under a Melee counter and therefore must be considered in Melee. > > Where do you find basis in your original statement of, "Clearly there _was_ > no Melee at the start of the CCph so in no way did the brokies fail to > withdraw from Melee." > > I may very well be wrong, (ie: I've overlooked the pertinent rule) but there > is more in the ASLRB that supports what I claim, than what you claim. > > Paging Bruce Probst ... Bruce Probst ... > > =Jim= > > From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 19:15:53 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 19:15:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Aaron wrote, > Before one can fail to do something one must have the opportunity to > do so otherwise the rule has no meaning, and might just as well read > "Broken units in a melee are hex are eliminating at the end of the > Ccph". > NRBH but does the ASOP clearly state when Melee Counters are placed? ASOP step 8.31B (END if LOCATIONS CCPh), says that CC counters Flip/remove CC, or retain/remove Melee, counter as appropriate. ASOP step 8.4 (END of CCPh) doesn't even say that broken units in Melee are EfFtR although A11.16 says that (End of the CCPh) is when such elimination ocurrs. So, going into ASOP step 8.4, a brokie who managed to survive an initial CC attack is already under a Melee counter. If it is under a Melee counter, it must be in Melee. If it, the brokie, is in Melee at the end of the CCPh, then it is eliminated per A11.16. That is what the rule says. =Jim= From aaron.cleavin at gmail.com Mon Apr 11 19:25:07 2005 From: aaron.cleavin at gmail.com (Aaron Cleavin) Date: Mon Apr 11 19:25:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com> <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <1bec6aa050411192552acfc88@mail.gmail.com> Hmmmm Maybe this isn't as bad as it seems. As If a Beserk/Banzai Unit comes inot a brokie (or soon to be brokies) hex it has the chance to Rout away during the Rtph. If a broken unit remians adjacent to a GO unit at the End of the RTph it is eliminated. So the only case where this becomes relevent is if a concealed unit advances into a broken units hex and fails to kill then it gets an Auto-Kill via this mechanism. Units in Melee Which are subsequently broken (By outside Fire or Sniper attack) will always get a least one chance to withdraw. On Apr 12, 2005 12:15 PM, mcleods wrote: > Listerz, > > Aaron wrote, > > > Before one can fail to do something one must have the opportunity to > > do so otherwise the rule has no meaning, and might just as well read > > "Broken units in a melee are hex are eliminating at the end of the > > Ccph". > > NRBH but does the ASOP clearly state when Melee Counters are placed? > > ASOP step 8.31B (END if LOCATIONS CCPh), says that CC counters Flip/remove > CC, or retain/remove Melee, counter as appropriate. > > ASOP step 8.4 (END of CCPh) doesn't even say that broken units in Melee are > EfFtR although A11.16 says that (End of the CCPh) is when such elimination > ocurrs. > > So, going into ASOP step 8.4, a brokie who managed to survive an initial CC > attack is already under a Melee counter. If it is under a Melee counter, it > must be in Melee. If it, the brokie, is in Melee at the end of the CCPh, > then it is eliminated per A11.16. > > That is what the rule says. > > =Jim= > > From malm at gol.com Mon Apr 11 19:51:13 2005 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon Apr 11 19:51:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com> <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050412114640.03a00958@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 11:15 a.m. 12/04/2005, mcleods wrote: >Listerz, > >Aaron wrote, > >>Before one can fail to do something one must have the opportunity to >>do so otherwise the rule has no meaning, and might just as well read >>"Broken units in a melee are hex are eliminating at the end of the >>Ccph". >>NRBH but does the ASOP clearly state when Melee Counters are placed? > >ASOP step 8.31B (END if LOCATIONS CCPh), says that CC counters Flip/remove >CC, or retain/remove Melee, counter as appropriate. > >ASOP step 8.4 (END of CCPh) doesn't even say that broken units in Melee >are EfFtR although A11.16 says that (End of the CCPh) is when such >elimination ocurrs. > >So, going into ASOP step 8.4, a brokie who managed to survive an initial >CC attack is already under a Melee counter. If it is under a Melee >counter, it must be in Melee. If it, the brokie, is in Melee at the end >of the CCPh, then it is eliminated per A11.16. > >That is what the rule says. No it isn't. The rule does not say that a brokie in melee at the end of the phase is eliminated. It says that a brokie that failed to withdraw is eliminated. In this case the brokie has not attempted withdrawal, and therefore has not failed to withdraw. > > =Jim= > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 19:59:36 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 19:59:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPhand beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com><008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc><1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com><00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc><1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com><00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <6.2.1.2.0.20050412114640.03a00958@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <011c01c53f0b$aa3b2480$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Malcolm wrote, > No it isn't. > The rule does not say that a brokie in melee at the end of the phase is > eliminated. It says that a brokie that failed to withdraw is eliminated. > In this case the brokie has not attempted withdrawal, and therefore has > not failed to withdraw. No, the rule says, "unable to withdraw", which is the situation since the brokie was "unable" to withdraw during it's Location's CCPh. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Apr 11 20:01:16 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Apr 11 20:01:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com> <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa050411192552acfc88@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <011f01c53f0b$e613e1e0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Aaron wrote, > Hmmmm > Maybe this isn't as bad as it seems. > As > If a Beserk/Banzai Unit comes inot a brokie (or soon to be brokies) > hex it has the chance to Rout away during the Rtph. Yes. > If a broken unit remians adjacent to a GO unit at the End of the RTph > it is eliminated. Only if the GO unit is known to the brokie. > So the only case where this becomes relevent is if a concealed unit > advances into a broken units hex and fails to kill then it gets an > Auto-Kill via this mechanism. Only if the "?" is loses its "?" and becomes known to the brokie before the end of the CCPh. > Units in Melee Which are subsequently broken (By outside Fire or > Sniper attack) will always get a least one chance to withdraw. Yes. JMO to all the above. =Jim= From malm at gol.com Mon Apr 11 21:00:32 2005 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon Apr 11 21:00:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPhand beyond... In-Reply-To: <011c01c53f0b$aa3b2480$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118436cdb328f@mail.gmail.com> <00d501c53f05$8f3d1ae0$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <6.2.1.2.0.20050412114640.03a00958@pop3.norton.antivirus> <011c01c53f0b$aa3b2480$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050412125652.03a003b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 11:59 a.m. 12/04/2005, mcleods wrote: >Listerz, > >Malcolm wrote, > >>No it isn't. >>The rule does not say that a brokie in melee at the end of the phase is >>eliminated. It says that a brokie that failed to withdraw is eliminated. >>In this case the brokie has not attempted withdrawal, and therefore has >>not failed to withdraw. > >No, the rule says, "unable to withdraw", which is the situation since the >brokie was "unable" to withdraw during it's Location's CCPh. "unable to withdraw from melee" This still has not been attempted According to your reading of this rule, the first sentence of the rule is unnecessary, since the brokie will automatically be eliminated. > > =Jim= > From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Apr 11 21:34:26 2005 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Apr 11 21:35:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Platoon Movement questions Message-ID: Greetings Had the following situation in a recent game. French Turn 1: A platoon of 3 French tanks (A, B & C), with red MPs, enters from off board using platoon movement. The platoon halts with tank A in hex X6, tank B in X5 and tank C in X4. In the Advancing Fire Phase, tank B malfunctions its MA with a 6,6 TH DR. German Turn 1: In the Rally Phase, tank B disables its MA trying to repair it. French Turn 2: Tanks A and C Prep Fire. Tank B passes its Mechanical Reliability DR, starts up and exits the board. It doesn't need to take a non-platoon movement TC as it is under Recall. French Turn 3: At the start of the MPh, tank A is in hex X6 and tank C is in hex X4. Both tanks wish to move. Tank A takes a non-platoon movement TC and passes. It then passes its Mechanical Reliability DR, starts up and moves to hex X5 and is now at to tank C. Does tank C need to pass a non-platoon movement TC or is it now considered to be in Platoon? If in platoon I assume that because a platoon must start/stop as one, tank A would first have to expend a Stop MP, and then the platoon of tanks A & C must expend a Start MP with a Mechanical Reliability DR (due to the Red MPs) before moving off in platoon. Did I play this correctly? TIA Cheers Jon This e-mail and files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressee. The confidentiality and/or privilege in this e-mail is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not dissemminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From e4spm at hotmail.com Mon Apr 11 22:20:04 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Mon Apr 11 22:20:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Disagree with 'Tater' SFF is a form of FF so the same unit that broke the enemy using FF on the first MF can SFF the enemy on the second MF. >From: "Tate Rogers" >Reply-To: gr27134@charter.net >To: "Bret & Julie Hildebran" ,"Janusz Maxe" >, >Subject: RE: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... >Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:53:50 -0500 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Bret & > > Julie Hildebran > > Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 5:07 PM > > To: Janusz Maxe; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: RE: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... > > > > Yes, you can SFF in this case since he spent 2MFs in the location. If >he > > spent < 2 MF, then you could not SFF and only first fire from other >units > > would be allowed. > >Not entirely true. > >Other units already marked FrF could SFF at the brokie _IF_ they had not >already fired at him on the first MF expended. > >Later- > >Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 From aaron.cleavin at gmail.com Mon Apr 11 22:43:51 2005 From: aaron.cleavin at gmail.com (Aaron Cleavin) Date: Mon Apr 11 22:43:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1bec6aa050411224352ab5d2a@mail.gmail.com> Xept there is no 2nd MF! On Apr 12, 2005 3:20 PM, David Marvanek wrote: > Disagree with 'Tater' > > SFF is a form of FF so the same unit that broke the enemy using FF on the > first MF can SFF the enemy on the second MF. > > >From: "Tate Rogers" > >Reply-To: gr27134@charter.net > >To: "Bret & Julie Hildebran" ,"Janusz Maxe" > >, > >Subject: RE: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... > >Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:53:50 -0500 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > > > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Bret & > > > Julie Hildebran > > > Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 5:07 PM > > > To: Janusz Maxe; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > Subject: RE: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... > > > > > > Yes, you can SFF in this case since he spent 2MFs in the location. If > >he > > > spent < 2 MF, then you could not SFF and only first fire from other > >units > > > would be allowed. > > > >Not entirely true. > > > >Other units already marked FrF could SFF at the brokie _IF_ they had not > >already fired at him on the first MF expended. > > > >Later- > > > >Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: > http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Apr 11 23:37:36 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Apr 11 23:40:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Platoon Movement questions Message-ID: <6a83deaa7531.425b88d0@broadpark.no> Hi, Jonathan Cole wrote: > French Turn 1: A platoon of 3 French tanks (A, B & C), with red > MPs, enters from off board using platoon movement. The platoon halts > with tank A in hex X6, tank B in X5 and tank C in X4. In the Advancing > Fire Phase, tank B malfunctions its MA with a 6,6 TH DR. > > German Turn 1: In the Rally Phase, tank B disables its MA trying > to repair it. > > French Turn 2: Tanks A and C Prep Fire. Tank B passes its Mechanical > Reliability DR, starts up and exits the board. It doesn't need to > take a non-platoon movement TC as it is under Recall. > > French Turn 3: At the start of the MPh, tank A is in hex X6 and > tank C is in hex X4. Both tanks wish to move. > Tank A takes a non-platoon movement TC and passes. It then passes its > Mechanical Reliability DR, starts up and moves to hex X5 and is > now at to tank C. > Does tank C need to pass a non-platoon movement TC or is it now > consideredto be in Platoon? If in platoon I assume that because a > platoon must start/stop as one, tank A would first have to expend a Stop MP, > and then the platoon of tanks A & C must expend a Start MP with a Mechanical > ReliabilityDR (due to the Red MPs) before moving off in platoon. > > Did I play this correctly? Your reasoning is sound, but I don't think the two AFV could form a platoon during the French turn 3 at all, since they didn't *start* their MPh in adjacent hexes. One one hand, D14.23 says: "Lone radioless AFV may form/join platoons with other radioless AFV (up to a maximum of three per platoon) once they are in the necessary adjacent hexes" This may be interpreted as allowing them to form a platoon *during* their MPh, and not only at the start, but it doesn't say so explicitely, and allowing this breaks with the general movement mechanics defined in A4.2, so my view is that the two AFV must move individually during that MPh since they didn't start their MPh as a platoon. For what its worth, the new Platoon Movement rules, which are now at MMP's hands, states clearly that the AFV can only form a platoon at the start of their MPh. From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Apr 11 23:41:13 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Apr 11 23:44:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... Message-ID: <6aabb62c4d63.425b89a9@broadpark.no> Hi, Regarding the CC and broken unit debate. There's an unofficial Q&A on the subject: A11.16 Must an un-Disrupted non-guarding broken Infantry unit attempt to Withdraw from Melee or face elimination in the first CCPh in which there is an enemy unit in its Location, or is it only after it is in Melee that it must attempt to Withdraw? A. Only after it is in Melee. [Letter8] From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Apr 11 23:55:58 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Apr 11 23:59:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: WP questions Message-ID: <6b20a0307dbf.425b8d1e@broadpark.no> Hi, Jonathan Cole wrote: > Situation 1: A Two story house has an unconcealed unit at ground > level and no units in the upper level. > > A Light Mtr (with WP) has LOS to the Level 1 building Location but > does not have LOS to the Ground level Loc due to an intervening wall. > > The Mtr fires WP at the building hex, applying Case K on the TH DR > as per C6.2 and scores a hit. > As per C8.52, the WP is placed in the ground level location and > rises from there. > > Does the enemy unit at ground level take the WP NMC even though it > was out of the Mtr's LOS? > Yes. The Case K +2 is there to penalize you from your added knowledge, and when you hit, C8.52 tells to place it in the ground level, and A24.31 says: "All units (including friendly ones) ... in a Location with a WP counter must take a NMC when the WP is placed ... in that Location " > Situation 2: Multi story building hex with unit at Level 2 > Location. WP is fired at it and placed at Level 0. Does the > unit on Level 2 take the WP NMC? > Propably. He doesn't have to take it per the above quote form A24.31, but A24.31 also says: "All units ... must take a NMC ... when hit by WP on the Area Target Type". So the question is if the unit was "hit". Normally, he would be hit by the shot since the shot hit the hex, but there are (at least) two prossible reasons that he may not have been hit: 1) He could be out of LOS (i.e. your firer did only see the rooftop or another level). In this case, he is hit only if there was >= one other unit in the hex, and all the other were hit (per C3.33). 2) He could be concealed while there were other Known units in the same hex. In this case, the firer doesn't add the Case K +2 DRM vs the hex (since there are >= one Known unit), but does so vs those that are concealed. So the WP is placed, and attacks all at ground level, + all units that are hit. From Vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Apr 12 00:42:57 2005 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Tue Apr 12 00:44:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] VASL OBA Message-ID: <001101c53f33$4418b8c0$152ca8c0@loungedining> Okay Chaps, I need help with using OBA on VASL. When I click on the OBA button in the toolbar nothing happens (well the screen flickers but that's it). Do I ned to set the module up and if so how do I do this?. Also it keeps terying to update and failing. The vasl.mod file cannot be backed up. Any ideas? Yours Aye Martin From geb3 at inter.net Tue Apr 12 02:39:17 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Apr 12 02:37:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) RPh In-Reply-To: <008301c53ef5$8d8a7c20$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: OK, this is the cleanup inning. Taking big swings in"&&&." - G -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 9:14 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(G) RtPh, APh, CCPh Listerz, We continue ... > See how they run in "%%%." Got some questions on your routs to clear up, > Jim. > >> 337P in O2 @ P2, 6FP+3: 2, 6; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 3: passed. This fellow >> is >> truly a pain. > > ***MCLEOD: George, was not the 337 in O2 CX? His DRM should be +4, and > NE, > if that was the case. And the DR you are showing are the FDR, correct? > %%%BATES: Oops, there is an error here, but not the CX status. His CX > was > removed in the American 1/2 of the turn as I had double-timed him in T1. > You may be confused because I always keep my units labeled CX until the > end > of the MPh the following turn so it's clear they're not eligible to > double-time again. Nevertheless, this was still a miss as I overlooked > the > +3 (even though I had just typed it!). Just my eagerness to hit > something. > You should add the mod to the two dice I show for the final DR, which was > 11, and a clear miss. > >> CX 337CC & 747LL in O4 @P2, 10FP+4: 5, 6, NE. > >> 747s O & GG in O6 assemble their MMGs, constituting use of SW. >> Now they form FG w/9-1 @S4, 14FP+1: 2, 5; 1MC. 8-0 1MC: 2, 1; passed, >> but >> my sniper again. Broken 238 1MC: 5, 2; passed but DM. > > ***MCLEOD: Quick, the blue badge of courage! > %%%BATES: I'd call it the blue badge of discretion, personally... > >> Sniper dr: 1; not your lucky day. Direction & distance: 5, 5; to I8, >> which means your sniper in N5 is once again the target. Your SAN is now >> 2. >> I like that, but frankly would have preferred R5. > > ***MCLEOD: Next time, I smell another 3 coming up. :) > >> CX 747ISS/Radio & 8-0 in Q8 @R5, 7FP+3: 3, 6; NE. No help. > >> 337D in Q4L0 @R5, 3FP+2: 2, 1; NMC. At last. 548 NMC: 5, 4; DM. >> There >> we go. > > ***MCLEOD: Ahhh yes, there is that 3! ;) > %%%BATES: 'Bout freakin time it was, too. Almost as late as Olie's copy > of > J6. > >> 747W/BAZ & 9-2 add insult to injury with IFP only @R5, 7FP: 2, 4; 1MC. >> DM548 1MC: 2, 1; passed, but my sniper again. > > ***MCLEOD: I suddenly feel like one of those ducks at the fair ... > >> Sniper dr: 4; he must be tuckered out now. > > ***MCLEOD: Out of ammo, pop another clip in the weapon. > >> Here are my routs after you do yours. > > 47***MCLEOD: DM 548 wMMG in R5 routs to S5 takes interdiction from > 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 7 (4,3) = NE. DM 238 in S4 routs to T4, takes > Interdiction from 9-2/747w/Baz in P4L.1, DR = 6 (4,2) = NE. > %%%BATES: Hang on. First, what are the rout target hexes for these > units? ***MCLEOD: The DM 548 can rout to S4 even though he may ignore it. The DM 238's target hex is U5. If he routed through the Grain, he could not have routed there (moving closer to the guys in Q8 and R8 if the LOS is good, therefore I decided to take the interdiction in T4 to reach U5. A gamble but hey, its only cardboard. :) > I'd say that DM548/MMG in R5 should be heading for S6. ***MCLEOD: I can ignore S6 as it is equidistant to the Q/R8 dudes from the R5 Location. > The S4 unit should be headed to U5, but they can rout through the T3 & U4 > grain to avoid > interdiction. ***MCLEOD: I don't believe I have to George. I'll check the rules but it may be the routing player's call whether or not to risk Interdiction... besides, they're in a hurry. :) > Also, is your 8-0 accompanying the HS? Sure would recommend it if either > of them want to stay in the game. ***MCLEOD: No, I believe that the 548 guys rout path is good and he, the 548, stands a better chance of bouncing back than the 238. So, 8-0 stays put. > Anyway, please give me rout target, path, last hex entered if the routing > unit can't reach the target and MF spent. ***MCLEOD: No problem George, I dashed the last message off in a hurry. It was late last night when I wrote it and I wanted you to have some fresh stuff to chew on today. &&&BATES: So here's what I have for your routs: DM 548/MMG in R5 to S4 thru S5, where he passes his interdiction check (3MF). DM 238 in S4 to U5 thru T4, where _he_ passes _his_ interdiction check (3MF). I'm not sure about whether routing in a semicircle thru T3 & U4 is invalid because it first carries them away from, then back to a point equidistant from the KEUs at the point they started their rout. More patient diggers through the RB than me will have to hunt that one down. Couldn't you have routed both to U5 where together with the leader, where both might be rallied and they'd stand a greater chance of surviving? >> If your DM238 & 8-0 in S4 decide to vacate for U5, then my DM 747YY & >> DM7-0 >> can use P4 as their rout target and go to P4L1 through O4 and P4L0 (4MF). >> If you choose to leave those poor bums in S4, you'll force me to rout >> through O5 to O6 and overstack the hex (4MF). > ***MCLEOD: Won't the CX 747YY & 7-0 be taking Interdiction from the 238 > in > P2 in hexes O4 and O5 if he is going to O6? Also, could he not Rout to P4 > if he chooses to? If he wishes, he could LC to O4 since NQ is in effect. > Who says a person has no control over broken units! :) > %%%BATES: If you left the 8-0 in S4, then he's a KEU and I can't close > the > distance to him by entering P4. ***MCLEOD: DOH! ... never mind. A refreshed eye sees the blazingly obvious, sorry about that George. > But you're right, if the 8-0 is in S4 then > they should rout toward O6 using low crawl to enter O4 and avoid > interdiction. If the guy in S4 is not there, I'll still have to risk > interdiction from P2 in O4 on my way to P4. What'll it be? You running > and > living to see another turn? ***MCLEOD: Well, I'm pretty sure I can leave my 8-0 in S4. Therefore, I believe that your guys will LC to O4. "Rules Mavens" please feel free to correct or confirm my opinions. &&&BATES: Since you didn't send the 8-0 with the 238, but chose to have him stay in S4 and coddle the DM 548/MMG there, then my DM 747YY & 7-0 are in O4. >> Yessir, nothing like a hearty DFPh to go with my oatmeal in the morning. >> I'm feeling much better about clearing out the 'ville now, P2 >> notwithstanding. Ready for a rockin' Monday. You have one, too. > ***MCLEOD: It is always a good thing to put plenty of FP downrange early > in > the day. :) See you tomorrow. ***MCLEOD: So, if the routs are good, I will go to the APh. 48***MCLEOD: Hmmmmm, not much to do here, "?" +1 counter adv. from S3 to R2. &&&BATES: Ooooh! Veddy sceddy! 49***MCLEOD: My last remaining GO MMC in P2 will hang tight and weather the upcoming storm to whatever conclusion the gods decide. [German PT2 is over] ***MCLEOD: George, I shall hold my US3 RPh activities until I hear back from you on my routs. "Let the good dice roll! Let them fall where they may!" Apologies to the Cars ... =Jim= &&&BATES: OK, just rallies then. Wind change: 6, 4; NA. DM 7-0 in O4 self-rally: 6, 3; keeps DM. DM 747YY in O4 self-rally: 3, 4; keeps DM. 9-1 in O6 rallies 337EE/BAZ: 4, 4; rallied. CX 8-0 in Q8 takes radio from CX 747SS. CX337II attempts LMG recovery in R8: 3; got it. Can't....stop...must...mmrrrmmph.....SAY IT! "Now I have a machine gun." That should do it. Let's check the intestinal fortitude of your squealing FJs. - G From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 04:12:37 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 04:12:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer In-Reply-To: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> Message-ID: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:36:14 +0200 (SAST), chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za wrote: >I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. >It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any >subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? I have copies of both issues. I don't believe that they're available for public download any more, sadly. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 04:17:27 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 04:17:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] rof, breaking, and nam... In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.0.20050411180253.01dfcab0@mail.alltel.net> References: <6.2.0.14.0.20050411180253.01dfcab0@mail.alltel.net> Message-ID: <6fbn51119fj21vedpj4qqkh4rvecbs1odk@4ax.com> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:07:02 -0400, Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: >Yes, you can SFF in this case since he spent 2MFs in the location. If he >spent < 2 MF, then you could not SFF and only first fire from other units >would be allowed. Delete "first" from the second sentence above. Bottom line is that no unit or FG could fire more than once on a movement expenditure of < 2 MF/MP. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 04:27:54 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 04:27:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:24:53 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >It may be worse than that. Check out A11.16, the bit regarding the EFTR at >the end of the CCPh for units in Melee. Once the CC attacks are resolved >for a Location, a Melee counter is placed on the stack. Once all CC attacks >are done and all the other CCPh activities are done, the brokies, under a >Melee counter going into the end of the CCPh, are eliminated. No. A11.16: "... unable to withdraw from *Melee* ..." (my emphasis). There was no Melee to withdraw from, so no penalty for failing to do it. >So the way I saw it, those brokies were done on any DR other than a 12. No. >Bruce, I will post the Locations of all the units following the G-PT2. That >way George and I can confirm who is where. It's a good thing to post this info (although IMO it's a *better* thing to use VASL so you don't have to bother with that kind of nonsense), but don't do it on *my* account, because I'm not paying *any* attention to who's where on the mapboard . I just cast an eye over your chatter. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 04:28:52 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 04:28:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <00b801c53efd$be7a9600$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com><008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <011301c53ef9$8ee888b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> <00b801c53efd$be7a9600$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:19:56 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >Wynn bay-bee, I did not write the rules, inclusive of the ASOP. I am simply >trying to follow the word as closely as it is written. So why are you ignoring the word "Melee"? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 04:36:03 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 04:36:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... In-Reply-To: <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <1bec6aa05041118183aee7dd6@mail.gmail.com> <00ca01c53eff$4a6e4390$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:31:01 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >If it is the end of the CCPh and the brokie is sitting under a Melee >counter, it is in Melee. Doesn't seem to matter when the counter is placed >near as I can tell. *Of course* it matters. Withdrawal attempts take place *before* any markers are placed. There was no Melee to Withdraw from, so they are not eliminated for failing to Withdraw from it. This is not rocket science! >Paging Bruce Probst ... Bruce Probst ... You've had several people already tell you the bleeding obvious; nothing for me to add, just repetition of what you've been told. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 06:02:25 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 06:02:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: WP questions In-Reply-To: <6b20a0307dbf.425b8d1e@broadpark.no> References: <6b20a0307dbf.425b8d1e@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 08:55:58 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >> Does the enemy unit at ground level take the WP NMC even though it >> was out of the Mtr's LOS? >> >Yes. The Case K +2 is there to penalize you from your added knowledge, and when you hit, C8.52 tells to place it in the ground level, and A24.31 says: "All units (including friendly ones) ... in a Location with a WP counter must take a NMC when the WP is placed ... in that Location " I'm not sure that I agree. C3.33 tells us that the unit is immune to attack unless there was a "non-hidden enemy target" that could be hit by that shot. It's not clear to me that hitting the hex is the same as hitting a "target" for this purpose. If not, then the WP is successfully placed, but that's all that happens. >> Situation 2: Multi story building hex with unit at Level 2 >> Location. WP is fired at it and placed at Level 0. Does the >> unit on Level 2 take the WP NMC? >> >Propably. Not probably, definitely: A24.31 & C3.33 Does a unit in an upper level building Location that is hit by WP take the A24.31 MC even though the WP counter is placed in the ground level Location of that hex? Would a unit out of the firer's LOS? A. Yes. Only if hit by a mortar. [An97; Mw] [I imagine that this Q&A is why the 2nd ed. text of C3.33 emphasises "hex" and adds "(even by WP)".] (Note that the second answer confirms that the out-of-LOS unit must be "hit" by the MTR; it still leaves open the question of whether successfully hitting the hex counts as a hit on the *unit*.) Although, logically, if hitting the *hex* is enough to "hit" the units in the upper levels, it ought to be enough to "hit" the out-of-LOS unit as well ... so I suppose I don't really disagree after all. I wish the rules were a tad more specific about it, however. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 12 06:19:25 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 12 06:21:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Platoon Movement questions In-Reply-To: <6a83deaa7531.425b88d0@broadpark.no> References: <6a83deaa7531.425b88d0@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 08:37:36 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >This may be interpreted as allowing them to form a platoon *during* their MPh, and not only at the start, but it doesn't say so explicitely Actually, strictly speaking, it is allowed. D14.23 says "... if at the start of its MPh ...." One of the two vehicles must commence *its* MPh in non-Platoon movement, which also means that it must *end* its MPh before any additional units may be moved. When it comes time for the second vehicle to move, the first vehicle has finished movement, so there's no opportunity for the two vehicles to move off together during *that* MPh. However, it *would* be possible for the second vehicle to declare that it's now forming a Platoon with the first (if the first is adjacent to it), so it could adopt the same Motion status etc. if necessary, or even move a short distance so long as it *remained* adjacent to the first vehicle, all without risking a NTC. >For what its worth, the new Platoon Movement rules, which are now at MMP's hands, states clearly that the AFV can only form a platoon at the start of their MPh. Indeed. This helps to emphasise that tanks moving in platoon sacrifice a little flexibility (as well as simplifying the rule somewhat). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Apr 12 06:17:52 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Apr 12 06:21:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: WP questions Message-ID: <7b3c030e620.425be6a0@broadpark.no> Hi, > >> Does the enemy unit at ground level take the WP NMC even though > >>it was out of the Mtr's LOS? > >> I wrote: > >Yes. The Case K +2 is there to penalize you from your added > knowledge, and when you hit, C8.52 tells to place it in the ground > level, and A24.31 says: "All units (including friendly ones) ... > in a Location with a WP counter must take a NMC when the WP is > placed ... in that Location " > and bruce Probst answered: > I'm not sure that I agree. C3.33 tells us that the unit is immune > to attack unless there was a "non-hidden enemy target" that could be hit by > that shot. It's not clear to me that hitting the hex is the same as hitting a > "target"for this purpose. If not, then the WP is successfully > placed, but that's all that happens. > C3.33 says: "All (including friendly) non-Aerial units in the target hex can be hit (even by WP), except for those immune as per 3.4 " So I agree with you that the unit is not "hit". But then A24.31 says to take the NMC if one of two possible requirements are fulfilled. One is if the unit is "hit" by WP (which is not fulfilled here), the other is that a WP counter is placed in its Location, which is fulfilled in this situation. Therefore the unit must take the NMC. If the unit had been on level 1 and the firer only seen level 2, then the unit would not have to take the NMC, because none of the A24.31 requirements were fulfilled. A24.31 says: "All units ... in a Location with a WP counter must take a NMC when the WP is placed ... in that Location ... or when hit by WP on the Area Target Type" > >> Situation 2: Multi story building hex with unit at Level 2 > >> Location. WP is fired at it and placed at Level 0. Does the > >> unit on Level 2 take the WP NMC? > >> > >Propably. > > Not probably, definitely: > > A24.31 & C3.33 Does a unit in an upper level building Location > that is hit by WP take the A24.31 MC even though the WP counter is placed in the > ground level Location of that hex? Would a unit out of the firer's LOS? > > A. Yes. Only if hit by a mortar. [An97; Mw] > > [I imagine that this Q&A is why the 2nd ed. text of C3.33 > emphasises "hex" and adds "(even by WP)".] > If you had read my answer better (which is cut off), you would see that I said exactly the same as the Q&A: "Yes, but only if it was actually hit". > (Note that the second answer confirms that the out-of-LOS unit > must be "hit" by the MTR; it still leaves open the question of whether > successfully hitting the hex counts as a hit on the *unit*.) > I see no open question here. C3.33 defines exactly when an out-of-LOS unit is hit. Hitting the hex is not enough, you must also hit an in-LOS unit. That's one of the two reasons that I answered "probably" and not definately. The other is that it is possible to *not* hit a unit in LOS, and still hit the hex. > Although, logically, if hitting the *hex* is enough to "hit" the > units in the upper levels, it ought to be enough to "hit" the out-of-LOS unit > as well ... > so I suppose I don't really disagree after all. I wish the rules > were a tad more specific about it, however. > Good, then you agree to my "probably" answer after all. I think the rule is clear when both A24.31 and C3.33 are considered. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 06:59:34 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Apr 12 06:59:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Platoon Movement questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >Actually, strictly speaking, it is allowed. I totally disagree. It's not even remotely hinted at being allowed. >D14.23 says "... if at the start >of its MPh ...." One of the two vehicles must commence *its* MPh in >non-Platoon movement, which also means that it must *end* its MPh before >any >additional units may be moved. Exactly. When an AFV conducts non-Platoon movement, it is not considered a part of any platoon for that entire MPh. >When it comes time for the second vehicle to >move, the first vehicle has finished movement, so there's no opportunity >for >the two vehicles to move off together during *that* MPh. Which is exactly why you are wrong. >However, it *would* >be possible for the second vehicle to declare that it's now forming a >Platoon >with the first (if the first is adjacent to it), No, this is incorrect. Not because of the rule of adjacency, though. Simply being adjacent is not enough to form a Platoon. AFV in Platoon must also expend MP *together*. First, the "two or three AFV platoon ... must move... as a 'multihex stack'..." [D14.2] Second, "a platoon is a single entity" [EX, page D22] Third, members of a Platoon "must Start/Stop/remain-in-Motion as a single entity." [D14.21] The first AFV has finished its MPh, by your own admission. The second AFV could not then form a platoon with the first AFV because they can not "move as a multihex stack". I.e., the first AFV may no longer expend MP, so the second AFV cannot expend MP as part of a Platoon consisting also of that first AFV. >so it could adopt the same >Motion status etc. if necessary, or even move a short distance so long as >it >*remained* adjacent to the first vehicle, all without risking a NTC. > No it could not. The members of a Platoon must expend MP together. Since the first AFV may no longer expend MP, it may not form Platoon Movement with another AFV later in the same MPh. Your reasoning is flawed because it must violate the very essence of Platoon Movement: moving together as a single entity. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 07:07:10 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Apr 12 07:07:57 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Platoon Movement questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >French Turn 3: At the start of the MPh, tank A is in hex X6 and tank C is >in >hex X4. Both tanks wish to move. >Tank A takes a non-platoon movement TC and passes. It then passes its >Mechanical Reliability DR, starts up and moves to hex X5 and is now at to >tank C. Once Tank A has started its MPh, it must complete its MPh before any other unit may move. >Does tank C need to pass a non-platoon movement TC or is it now considered >to be in Platoon? It may strictly speaking be considered to be in Platoon because of the wording in D14.23, but Tank C would not be able to use Platoon Movement with Tank A. Units in Platoon must move as a "multi-hex stack". Once Tank A started non-Platoon movement, it is no longer considered a part of any Platoon for that MPh and must finish its MPh before another unit may move. Even if Tank A ended its MPh adjacent to Tank C, Tank C could not use Platoon Movement with Tank A, because Tank A has completed its MPh and may no longer expend MP. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Tue Apr 12 07:43:28 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue Apr 12 07:52:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com> <008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <01c301c53f6e$089a2780$a64d8918@klis.com> Moderator here. Jim wrote: > It may be worse than that. Check out A11.16, the bit regarding the EFTR at > the end of the CCPh for units in Melee. Once the CC attacks are resolved > for a Location, a Melee counter is placed on the stack. Once all CC attacks > are done and all the other CCPh activities are done, the brokies, under a > Melee counter going into the end of the CCPh, are eliminated. As others have pointed out, your interpretation of the rule is incorrect, Jim. > So the way I saw it, those brokies were done on any DR other than a 12. Look at it this way: Under your interpretation, there would never be any point in attacking brokies in CC after advancing into their Location, since they're going to be eliminated anyway. David "when you put it that way..." Olie From david at stanaway.net Tue Apr 12 08:32:12 2005 From: david at stanaway.net (David Stanaway) Date: Tue Apr 12 08:36:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer In-Reply-To: References: <1492.155.239.118.178.1113208574.squirrel@155.239.118.178> Message-ID: <1113319932.14125.3.camel@david.dialmex.net> There is an archive of the coastal fortress site on the way back machine http://web.archive.org/web/20021209035926/http://www.coastalfortress.com/index.html Unfortunately, the pdf files were not archived, but you can get the filenames, and try and search for them elsewhere. You can access all the AARs though, and the other HTML content. On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 21:12 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:36:14 +0200 (SAST), chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za wrote: > > >I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. > >It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any > >subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? > > I have copies of both issues. I don't believe that they're available for > public download any more, sadly. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > -- David Stanaway From dgour.asl at gmail.com Tue Apr 12 08:46:32 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Tue Apr 12 08:48:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: FL counter placement Message-ID: <764636a605041208462bed3b93@mail.gmail.com> How does one go about placing the firelane counter when there are many soft hinderances? As soft hinderances don't count but to cancel FFMO can the firelane essentially extend beyond 6 hinderances that would normally block LOS ? NRBH but seem to remember something along the line of place the FL counter in LOS. If this is the case then when doing a FL into a FFE1 SMOKE concentration you can only put the counter in the first smoke hex? Placing it in the second would be illegal as there is no LOS (6 hinderances) ? Or, do the bullets just keep on going... Same situation in a recent game where there was a lot of Kunai. Can only place to the sixth Kunai despite the fact that the Kunai will now not be a DRM? Thanks. -- dg From gd891 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 10:12:38 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd) Date: Tue Apr 12 10:17:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Beta In-Reply-To: <764636a605041208462bed3b93@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Anyone know how to setup a shortcut on a XP desktop that will launch my VASL5 beta just like the one the VASL4 install creates? Or do I always have to go through the VAASSAL module first and load the VASL5.mod file? Greg gd891@hotmail.com From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Apr 12 16:11:08 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue Apr 12 16:26:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] CC in Carentan References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com><008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <005201c53fb6$ff38afb0$b127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, I wrote, No. A11.16: "... unable to withdraw from *Melee* ..." (my emphasis). There was no Melee to withdraw from, so no penalty for failing to do it. >So the way I saw it, those brokies were done on any DR other than a 12. Bruce P. replied, "No." Indeed, I saw Ole's post re: the Q&A. Also, in re-reading and chewing the rule over, I see the actual meaning of the rule. Aaron and Malcolm, I sit corrected. :) >Bruce, I will post the Locations of all the units following the G-PT2. >That >way George and I can confirm who is where. It's a good thing to post this info (although IMO it's a *better* thing to use VASL so you don't have to bother with that kind of nonsense), but don't do it on *my* account, because I'm not paying *any* attention to who's where on the mapboard . I just cast an eye over your chatter. Ah yes, VASL. Some day I shall install it. Getting it to run may be a different matter. :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Apr 12 16:23:52 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue Apr 12 16:26:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) RPh References: Message-ID: <005301c53fb7$000a7ea0$b127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Time for Turn 3! > &&&BATES: OK, just rallies then. > > Wind change: 6, 4; NA. > DM 7-0 in O4 self-rally: 6, 3; keeps DM. > DM 747YY in O4 self-rally: 3, 4; keeps DM. > 9-1 in O6 rallies 337EE/BAZ: 4, 4; rallied. > CX 8-0 in Q8 takes radio from CX 747SS. > CX337II attempts LMG recovery in R8: 3; got it. > Can't....stop...must...mmrrrmmph.....SAY IT! > "Now I have a machine gun." > That should do it. Let's check the intestinal fortitude of your squealing > FJs. 50***MCLEOD: Egads ... I hope this turns out well ... the only RPh activity I have is the DM 548 in S4, DR = 6 (2,4) ... ack! This is going to suck. Remove DM counters from the 548 in S4 and the 238 in U5. End of German RPh. ***MCLEOD: You're go George. =Jim= From aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Apr 12 16:46:42 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Apr 12 16:46:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com><008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc><011301c53ef9$8ee888b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31><00b801c53efd$be7a9600$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <006101c53fb9$e154fc30$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Like the Bruce said, Jim. How do I spell loud, obnoxious, RASPBERRY, anyway? Wynn "Prefers Strawberries, Actually" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "mcleods" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 7:28 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh,CCPh and beyond... On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:19:56 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >Wynn bay-bee, I did not write the rules, inclusive of the ASOP. I am >simply >trying to follow the word as closely as it is written. So why are you ignoring the word "Melee"? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Apr 12 16:49:33 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Apr 12 16:49:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T2(A) RtPh2, AdvPh, CCPh and beyond... References: <000e01c53d8d$36920730$a927c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><00cc01c53ee8$b2801380$a64d8918@klis.com><008001c53ef5$8b936710$ee0ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> <01c301c53f6e$089a2780$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <006a01c53fba$4729b5f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> David; Just because you are the moderator doesn't mean you have to be so ... darn ... MODERATE! Remember, you are trying to explain English to Jim McLeod. Wynn "Oh for an Italian ASLRB" Polnicky > > As others have pointed out, your interpretation of the rule is incorrect, > Jim. > From aslml at aslwebdex.net Tue Apr 12 19:44:19 2005 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Tue Apr 12 19:44:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050413024425.4364C84D0B@che.dreamhost.com> Any idea whether Scott and Steve have allowed these to be freely distributed? If they had no objection, I would be interested in putting them on the ASLWebDex, if they are both in .pdf form, and if someone provided me with copies. Larry -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Probst Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 6:13 AM To: chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] More of: The Forward Observer On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:36:14 +0200 (SAST), chris@shphoenix.jib.co.za wrote: >I found a pdf copy of The Forward Observer by Scott Faulk and Steve Svare. >It is the 1st copy released in summer 2001. What I'd like know is if any >subsequent issue exist and where to look for them? I have copies of both issues. I don't believe that they're available for public download any more, sadly. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From morrisgj at mscd.edu Tue Apr 12 21:01:37 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Tue Apr 12 21:01:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Very Heavy Mist in OVHS Message-ID: <41fe49419cdf.419cdf41fe49@mscd.edu> Hello All: Playing 20AM of OVHS CG - Very Heavy Mist in play. Footnote of Weather chart mentions SSR KGP3. Questions: 1. Should we be using the KGP3 SSR to figure changes in Mist level via: a) Rain starting/stopping; and b) Mist Change DR? We have been doing this. Now I am wondering if we should just leave the Mist as VHM throughout the 20AM Date? 2. Assume we should be using KGP3. VHM in play. Rain starts and this would raise it to X.Heavy Mist? 3. Assume we should be using KGP3. VHM in play. Rain stops. Is the Mist reduced one or 2 levels (Note: RR1 doesn't specifically mention Heavy Rain - which would cause a drop of 2 in the Mist iif it stopped. Hope this is intelligible. Thanks for your help. Gerry From dgour.asl at gmail.com Tue Apr 12 22:07:42 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Tue Apr 12 22:07:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] CH3: Nixon's 10 Year ASLOK Re-cap Message-ID: <764636a60504122207455d3b32@mail.gmail.com> Just got some of my mags from Ebay. Nixon's 10 Year ASLOK Re-cap article in Critical Hit number 3 is the bomb. Amazing that the most recent ASLOK he speaks of was 10 years ago - takes me back to '85 when I took up this game for the first time. Hmm, by '93 Nixon had played his 100th game just at ASLOK not to metion what sounded like 100 games pre-tournament week. Wow. -- dg From dgour.asl at gmail.com Tue Apr 12 22:10:38 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Tue Apr 12 22:10:41 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? Message-ID: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Maybe you haven't seen my latest post about Nixon having played his 100th ASLOK game by '93. Wonder how many he has played total.. So, having just retaken up the game last September I now have 16 games recorded in ROAR. So, time for an informal survey: How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? How many total have you played (estimate) ? How long have you played? -- dg From bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com Tue Apr 12 22:16:29 2005 From: bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Tue Apr 12 22:15:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20050413051535.A731684D22@che.dreamhost.com> 12 recorded 50 or so all-told Playing since 1990, or thereabouts. Compared to 100 by '93, pretty lame, huh? Brian Pickering -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Darren Gour Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 10:11 PM To: ASLML Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? Maybe you haven't seen my latest post about Nixon having played his 100th ASLOK game by '93. Wonder how many he has played total.. So, having just retaken up the game last September I now have 16 games recorded in ROAR. So, time for an informal survey: How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? How many total have you played (estimate) ? How long have you played? -- dg _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From dgour.asl at gmail.com Tue Apr 12 22:50:03 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Tue Apr 12 22:50:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Beta Message-ID: <764636a605041222506a599fa6@mail.gmail.com> New VASL beta with all new counters at: http://www.vasl.org/beta/ Lots of easter eggs like the Borg chick partisan leader and DC dog counters. -- dg From janusz.maxe at unf.se Wed Apr 13 01:31:36 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Wed Apr 13 01:31:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Operation magazine scenarios Message-ID: So, has noone played the starter kit scenarios from the magazine? Interesting... Janusz From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 13 03:05:56 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 13 03:06:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Platoon Movement questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:59:34 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Third, members of a Platoon "must Start/Stop/remain-in-Motion as a single >entity." [D14.21] True, true. My brain is currently in a sort of limbo-land between what the PM rules say now, what I wish they said, what the new rules will say, what I wish the new rules will say (but won't) ... you see the problem, I trust. Six months of reading the same rules over and over will do that to you .... I recant my prior statement. No soup for me! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Apr 13 03:04:06 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed Apr 13 03:06:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: WP questions Message-ID: <9aecbdca7985.425d0ab6@broadpark.no> Hi, After some thinking, I need to correct one of my answers here: > > Situation 2: Multi story building hex with unit at Level 2 > > Location. WP is fired at it and placed at Level 0. Does the > > unit on Level 2 take the WP NMC? > > > Propably. He doesn't have to take it per the above quote form > A24.31, but A24.31 also says: "All units ... must take a NMC ... > when hit by WP on the Area Target Type". So the question is if the > unit was "hit". Normally, he would be hit by the shot since the > shot hit the hex, but there are (at least) two prossible reasons > that he may not have been hit: > 1) He could be out of LOS (i.e. your firer did only see the > rooftop or another level). In this case, he is hit only if there > was >= one other unit in the hex, and all the other were hit (per > C3.33). >2) He could be concealed while there were other Known units > in the same hex. In this case, the firer doesn't add the Case K +2 > DRM vs the hex (since there are >= one Known unit), but does so vs > those that are concealed. So the WP is placed, and attacks all at > ground level, + all units that are hit. > The second is not correct. On a closer reading of C6.2 I see that case K is not even added against the concealed unit, if there are unconcealed units in the hex, so the concealed unit will always be hit by WP if the hex is hit. The first case is still correct though. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 13 03:32:11 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 13 03:32:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 23:10:38 -0600, Darren Gour wrote: >How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? 159 since Sep '97. That does not include numerous playtest games since that time, or tournament scenarios that were one-offs and not recorded in ROAR. It would thus work out somewhere around 200 since that time. >How many total have you played (estimate) ? Probably somewhere around 250. >How long have you played? I first bought the game when it was released in '85, and played a handful of scenarios at that time. However, I developed interests elsewhere and although I kept buying new modules etc. as they were released I didn't get back into playing it until 1994 or thereabouts. Have been playing regularly since then. So that averages about one game a fortnight for the last 10 years. Not *too* shabby, but not stellar .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 13 03:32:12 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 13 03:32:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: FL counter placement In-Reply-To: <764636a605041208462bed3b93@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a605041208462bed3b93@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:46:32 -0600, Darren Gour wrote: >How does one go about placing the firelane counter when there are many >soft hinderances? As soft hinderances don't count but to cancel FFMO >can the firelane essentially extend beyond 6 hinderances that would >normally block LOS ? No, you can't place a FL outside of your LOS, because the initial placement of the FL requires an attack on a target. [EXC: bore-sighted FL at night]. >NRBH but seem to remember something along the line of place the FL >counter in LOS. If this is the case then when doing a FL into a FFE1 >SMOKE concentration you can only put the counter in the first smoke >hex? Placing it in the second would be illegal as there is no LOS (6 >hinderances) ? Or, do the bullets just keep on going... You can't shoot further than you can see. >Same situation in a recent game where there was a lot of Kunai. Can >only place to the sixth Kunai despite the fact that the Kunai will now >not be a DRM? Makes no difference. No LOS, no shot, no FL. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 13 03:32:44 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 13 03:33:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Very Heavy Mist in OVHS In-Reply-To: <41fe49419cdf.419cdf41fe49@mscd.edu> References: <41fe49419cdf.419cdf41fe49@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:01:37 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >Playing 20AM of OVHS CG - Very Heavy Mist in play. Footnote of Weather >chart mentions SSR KGP3. Actually, it consists of *errata* for KGP SSR 3. Odd placement, but it's nothing new, that errata was printed in J4. >Questions: >1. Should we be using the KGP3 SSR to figure changes in Mist level >via: a) Rain starting/stopping; and b) Mist Change DR? No. Why would you apply an SSR from a completely different CG to this one? >We have been doing this. Now I am wondering if we should just leave >the Mist as VHM throughout the 20AM Date? You should definitely not import rules from other games unless *explicitly* told to do so ... which you are not. That's like playing "The Commissar's House" (the original BV version) and assuming that all RB SSR apply, because after all they're both set in the same part of the same city, right? Well, yes, but the fact remains that the only SSR that apply to "The Commissar's House" are the ones printed on the scenario card. >2. Assume we should be using KGP3. VHM in play. Rain starts and this >would raise it to X.Heavy Mist? You're not using *any* CG rule or SSR from KGP, you're only using the CG rules printed on pp.Z21-Z38. Pretend you don't own KGP. Pretend you've never even *heard* of KGP. Use only the rules that you've been given. >3. Assume we should be using KGP3. VHM in play. Rain stops. Is the >Mist reduced one or 2 levels (Note: RR1 doesn't specifically mention >Heavy Rain - which would cause a drop of 2 in the Mist iif it stopped. See above. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Apr 13 04:04:52 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed Apr 13 04:07:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: FL counter placement Message-ID: <9d47e4017c5b.425d18f4@broadpark.no> Hi, Darren Gour wrote: > > >How does one go about placing the firelane counter when there are > >many soft hinderances? As soft hinderances don't count but to > >cancel FFMO > >can the firelane essentially extend beyond 6 hinderances that would > >normally block LOS ? > and Bruce Probst answered: > No, you can't place a FL outside of your LOS, because the initial > placement of the FL requires an attack on a target. > [EXC: bore-sighted FL at night]. This is wrong. The initial attack must be on a target within LOS as normal, but the FL counter need not be placed in that hex, it can be placed on any hex along the (alternate) hex grain that includes the firer and the target. The FL counter can thus be placed even out of LOS and/or outside the MG's range. A9.22 says: "If he does declare a Fire Lane, he ... must also place a Fire Lane Residual FP counter in one hex along a Hex Grain; that Hex Grain must include the MG's hex and its First Fire target hex, but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex" Note that there are no LOS or range requirements here. > >NRBH but seem to remember something along the line of place the FL > >counter in LOS. You remember incorrectly. > >If this is the case then when doing a FL into a FFE1 > >SMOKE concentration you can only put the counter in the first smoke > >hex? Placing it in the second would be illegal as there is no LOS (6 > >hinderances) ? Or, do the bullets just keep on going... > > You can't shoot further than you can see. > The FL can be placed outside LOS and Normal Range, but A9.22 goes on to tell that it only *attacks* units within Normal range and in LOS, but that "SMOKE/brush/grain/marsh/FFE/LV-(E3.1)/DLV-(F11.6)/Dust-(F11.794)/hut-(G5.21) Hindrance " does not "affects LOS for Fire Lane placement/attack purposes". So the FL will attack those units out of LOS, if the reason for the blocked LOS are among the above. So yes, the FL will attack with no positve DRM beyond the FFE SMOKE. > >Same situation in a recent game where there was a lot of Kunai. Can > >only place to the sixth Kunai despite the fact that the Kunai > >will now not be a DRM? > > Makes no difference. No LOS, no shot, no FL. > Kunai is treated as Brush for most purposes (including FL), so Yes, the FL will attack beyond the sixth Kunai witout any positive DRM (only cancellation of FFMO). From thunderchief at ozemail.com.au Wed Apr 13 04:38:12 2005 From: thunderchief at ozemail.com.au (Adam Lunney) Date: Wed Apr 13 04:38:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <003501c5401d$4caecac0$a03354d2@yourfulkl1oh2q> 132 on ROAR - commencing Dec 1997 243 played + app 10 playtest Playing since Jan 1993. I keep an excel spreadsheet with the details of all my games :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Gour" To: "ASLML" Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 3:10 PM Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? Maybe you haven't seen my latest post about Nixon having played his 100th ASLOK game by '93. Wonder how many he has played total.. So, having just retaken up the game last September I now have 16 games recorded in ROAR. So, time for an informal survey: How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? How many total have you played (estimate) ? How long have you played? -- dg _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Apr 13 05:37:48 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed Apr 13 05:40:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. Message-ID: Hi, a local player has found what I think must be an error in the first part of the Comprehensive Rout Example from ASLRBv2. The error is the text about the unit in L8. It says: "The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in the same hex as an unbroken KEU and not in Melee. It can ignore every building/woods Location on the map as being equidistant from the KEU in its own hex [10.51]. " I'm pretty sure that this is incorrect, because this one doesn't compare the correct distances. A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that hex is no farther from a Known enemy unit than its starting hex" I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this to mean that a hex can be ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance from the broken unit to the KEU. However, this part of the example seems to say that a hex can be ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance from the broken unit to the target hex. Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes from a KEU, and there is a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes from the KEU, can you ignore it or not? Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can be ignored, but this is wrong IMHO, which is evident from examples both in the A10.531 ex and in the Comprehensive Rout Example. Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 05:40:45 2005 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Wed Apr 13 05:41:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050413124045.26228.qmail@web60903.mail.yahoo.com> Number of games recorded in ROAR -> entered by me 0. Total games played -> about 700 Playing since 1987, number of games played in the past few years has pulled down the yearly average. Once averaged high 90s for 4 years in a row, the golden age of ASL. Attended every ASLOK, but 1 since 1988. Kevin "have seen a lot of cardboard heroes die" Meyer --- Darren Gour wrote: > Maybe you haven't seen my latest post about Nixon > having played his > 100th ASLOK game by '93. Wonder how many he has > played total.. > > So, having just retaken up the game last September I > now have 16 games > recorded in ROAR. So, time for an informal survey: > > How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? > How many total have you played (estimate) ? > How long have you played? > > -- > dg > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From gd891 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 06:02:30 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd) Date: Wed Apr 13 06:02:46 2005 Subject: [Aslml] PBr VASL map - Don't make me come over there... In-Reply-To: <7f110d99372c.42316079@broadpark.no> Message-ID: OK. My only ASL these days is via VASL. I'd love to start a game with my regular FtF partner but it is apparent that the PBr VASL map is only available to a select few. Evidently, there are worries about copyright issues since a GIF image was used. This is a sad day indeed. I finally got my Journal 6 and now it just collects dust. (Well, I have had my @$$ kicked in J100, but we don't need to bring that up, its just too painful). Does MMP have any policy about the VASL Maps regarding copyrights? Should they? Greg From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Apr 13 06:52:59 2005 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Apr 13 06:53:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] The SoCal ASL Club Presents...The 3rd Annual Cinco de Gringo! Message-ID: <000901c54030$1b36c7f0$9effbe42@ChasHome> Our 3rd Annual Cinco de Gringo Mexican Barbecue and game day will be held on May 7th at Bryan Earll's house in Monrovia. Our tournament theme this year will be "Pimp My Tank". All the scenarios will feature tanks that have been adapted and upgraded from some other combatant. This is generally our best-attended one day event each year, and with good reason. First, you're going to get a great day of playing ASL. Second, you can't beat the Mexican Barbecue that our hosts, Bryan Earll and Matt Cicero put on, not to mention the stuff our members bring, like Matt Romey's "Romey Rice". It's all you can eat and drink, and best of all; it's free for our members! (And only $5 for non-members.) And if all that gaming, food and booze isn't enough to get you to come out... Our Club Officers have approved an additional incentive for members to show up: If you are a member in good standing for 2005 (IOW: your dues are paid) and you attend two of our three one day events this year and play at least one game, and you attend West Coast Melee IX next February (full admission, not the one-day price) you will get the next available ASL Journal for FREE. We want to make a serious effort to boost attendance to our events, and we've decided to make it worth your while. No, the Officers have not gone insane (though that may be short walk for most of them). We looked at the Club treasury, and we did the math. The Club can afford to do this, at least for this year. This is an experiment for this year only. Now be sure to mark that date on your calendar! Regards, Jim Aikens, President, SoCal ASL Club www.socalasl.com From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 09:05:39 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Apr 13 09:05:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: [snip] >A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that >hex is no farther from a >Known enemy unit than its starting hex" > >I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this to mean that a hex can be >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance >from the broken unit to the KEU. Agreed. Routing there would not take the broken unit any farther from a Known enemy unit. That's how I've interpreted it. (It has also been argued that the phrase "a Known enemy unit" does not necessarily refer to the same Known enemy unit in each distance consideration.) >However, this part of the example [L8] seems to say that a hex can be >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance >from the broken unit to the target hex. > Agreed. It does seem to say that, though it could be referring only to the unique situation where both the Known enemy unit's hex and the starting hex are the same ("in its own hex"). >Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes from a KEU, and there is >a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes from the KEU, can you ignore >it or not? > No, the broken unit may not ignore it. The target hex is farther from a Known enemy unit than [is] its starting hex. [insert] > >"The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in the same hex as an >unbroken KEU and not in >Melee. It can ignore every building/woods Location >on the map as being equidistant from the KEU >in its own hex [10.51]. " > >Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can be ignored, but this is >wrong IMHO, which is >evident from examples both in the A10.531 ex and in >the Comprehensive Rout Example. > I have to agree that I have been unable to reconcile the L8 EX with the wording of A10.51. I therefore also conclude that the L8 EX is an incorrect interpretation of A10.51. >Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? > No, I tend to avoid reading EX... Though I will say, that sentence in A10.51 is not grammatically tight. It lends itself to twisted eyeballs and confused brains. I'm speaking only for myself, of course... Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From trweniger at gmail.com Wed Apr 13 09:39:45 2005 From: trweniger at gmail.com (Tom Weniger) Date: Wed Apr 13 09:39:49 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7ec9371e0504130939651a1005@mail.gmail.com> On 4/12/05, Darren Gour wrote: > > How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? > How many total have you played (estimate) ? > How long have you played? > 328 500+ 1985 -- Virtually, Tom W From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Apr 13 10:38:56 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Apr 13 10:39:17 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050413123819.01cf7670@pop3.direcway.com> At 12:10 AM 4/13/2005, Darren Gour wrote: >How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? >How many total have you played (estimate) ? >How long have you played? 100 250+ 1986 ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 10:44:35 2005 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Apr 13 10:44:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Fanatic Enterprises SALE!!!!!!!! In-Reply-To: <7ec9371e0504130939651a1005@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Fanatic Enterprises is please to announce a sale. Buy any two (2) items at full price and receive a third item of equal or lesser value for free! S&H is free for the free item as well! Limit of 2 free items per order. This sale is good for all sales received by midnight on May 10th, 2005. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ From asl1 at bellsouth.net Wed Apr 13 12:37:57 2005 From: asl1 at bellsouth.net (asl1@bellsouth.net) Date: Wed Apr 13 12:38:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? Message-ID: <20050413193757.RATN2549.imf25aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Hi Folks, a) I have 185 games Recorded in ROAR b) estimate I have played 400 games (still play like a newbie at times) c) have been playing ASL since 1993 (first FTF match - SP10 and lost) d) this year have played 11 FTF -(won 5/ lost 6); 21 VASL PBeM - (a few carried over from 2004 won 9/lost 12) and 1 Live VASL game that I won. Enjoy playing ASL regardless if I win or lose. Cheers! Pierce Mason > > From: Darren Gour > Date: 2005/04/13 Wed AM 01:10:38 EDT > To: ASLML > Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? > > Maybe you haven't seen my latest post about Nixon having played his > 100th ASLOK game by '93. Wonder how many he has played total.. > > So, having just retaken up the game last September I now have 16 games > recorded in ROAR. So, time for an informal survey: > > How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? > How many total have you played (estimate) ? > How long have you played? > > -- > dg > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From asl1 at bellsouth.net Wed Apr 13 12:39:35 2005 From: asl1 at bellsouth.net (asl1@bellsouth.net) Date: Wed Apr 13 12:39:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey Message-ID: <20050413193935.RCBG2549.imf25aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Hi Folks, Correction on my total games .. meant to type 140 not 400. Cheers! Pierce Mason From scott.holst at us.army.mil Wed Apr 13 14:18:32 2005 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Apr 13 14:19:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? Message-ID: <4b78a774b7767c.4b7767c4b78a77@us.army.mil> Hey Ron, playing yourself and your rug rats dont count. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: ron mosher Date: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 12:38 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? > At 12:10 AM 4/13/2005, Darren Gour wrote: > >How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? > >How many total have you played (estimate) ? > >How long have you played? > > 100 > 250+ > 1986 > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From asl_scottj at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 15:58:38 2005 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Wed Apr 13 15:58:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: FL counter placement In-Reply-To: <9d47e4017c5b.425d18f4@broadpark.no> Message-ID: Ole is right. Scott Jackson aka Stonewall >From: Ole Bøe > >Darren Gour wrote: > > > > >How does one go about placing the firelane counter when there are > > >many soft hinderances? As soft hinderances don't count but to > > >cancel FFMO > > >can the firelane essentially extend beyond 6 hinderances that would > > >normally block LOS ? > > >and Bruce Probst answered: > > > No, you can't place a FL outside of your LOS, because the initial > > placement of the FL requires an attack on a target. > > [EXC: bore-sighted FL at night]. >This is wrong. The initial attack must be on a target within LOS as normal, >but the FL counter need not be placed in that hex, it can be placed on any >hex along the (alternate) hex grain that includes the firer and the target. >The FL counter can thus be placed even out of LOS and/or outside the MG's >range. > >A9.22 says: "If he does declare a Fire Lane, he ... must also place a Fire >Lane Residual FP counter in one hex along a Hex Grain; that Hex Grain must >include the MG's hex and its First Fire target hex, but he may place the >Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex" > >Note that there are no LOS or range requirements here. > > > > >NRBH but seem to remember something along the line of place the FL > > >counter in LOS. >You remember incorrectly. > > > >If this is the case then when doing a FL into a FFE1 > > >SMOKE concentration you can only put the counter in the first smoke > > >hex? Placing it in the second would be illegal as there is no LOS (6 > > >hinderances) ? Or, do the bullets just keep on going... > > > > You can't shoot further than you can see. > > >The FL can be placed outside LOS and Normal Range, but A9.22 goes on to >tell that it only *attacks* units within Normal range and in LOS, but that >"SMOKE/brush/grain/marsh/FFE/LV-(E3.1)/DLV-(F11.6)/Dust-(F11.794)/hut-(G5.21) >Hindrance " does not "affects LOS for Fire Lane placement/attack purposes". > >So the FL will attack those units out of LOS, if the reason for the blocked >LOS are among the above. So yes, the FL will attack with no positve DRM >beyond the FFE SMOKE. > > > > >Same situation in a recent game where there was a lot of Kunai. Can > > >only place to the sixth Kunai despite the fact that the Kunai > > >will now not be a DRM? > > > > Makes no difference. No LOS, no shot, no FL. > > >Kunai is treated as Brush for most purposes (including FL), so Yes, the FL >will attack beyond the sixth Kunai witout any positive DRM (only >cancellation of FFMO). > From asl_scottj at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 16:00:20 2005 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Wed Apr 13 16:00:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Very Heavy Mist in OVHS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I agree with Bruce. My, don't I add sooooo much to these rules commentaries??? :-) ;-) Scott Jackson aka Stonewall >From: Bruce Probst >Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au >To: morrisgj@mscd.edu >CC: ASLML >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Very Heavy Mist in OVHS >Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:32:44 +1000 > >On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:01:37 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: > > >Playing 20AM of OVHS CG - Very Heavy Mist in play. Footnote of Weather > >chart mentions SSR KGP3. > >Actually, it consists of *errata* for KGP SSR 3. Odd placement, but it's >nothing new, that errata was printed in J4. > > >Questions: > >1. Should we be using the KGP3 SSR to figure changes in Mist level > >via: a) Rain starting/stopping; and b) Mist Change DR? > >No. Why would you apply an SSR from a completely different CG to this one? > > >We have been doing this. Now I am wondering if we should just leave > >the Mist as VHM throughout the 20AM Date? > >You should definitely not import rules from other games unless *explicitly* >told to do so ... which you are not. > >That's like playing "The Commissar's House" (the original BV version) and >assuming that all RB SSR apply, because after all they're both set in the >same >part of the same city, right? Well, yes, but the fact remains that the >only >SSR that apply to "The Commissar's House" are the ones printed on the >scenario >card. > > >2. Assume we should be using KGP3. VHM in play. Rain starts and this > >would raise it to X.Heavy Mist? > >You're not using *any* CG rule or SSR from KGP, you're only using the CG >rules >printed on pp.Z21-Z38. Pretend you don't own KGP. Pretend you've never >even >*heard* of KGP. Use only the rules that you've been given. > > >3. Assume we should be using KGP3. VHM in play. Rain stops. Is the > >Mist reduced one or 2 levels (Note: RR1 doesn't specifically mention > >Heavy Rain - which would cause a drop of 2 in the Mist iif it stopped. > >See above. > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"You know, his work is uncluttered by talent." >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From swfancher at mindspring.com Wed Apr 13 16:18:50 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Wed Apr 13 16:19:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050413191353.02302b80@mindspring.com> At 01:10 AM 4/13/2005, Darren Gour wrote: >How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? 12 >How many total have you played (estimate) ? 60 scenarios. Most of my play is CGs. Have played the following CGs (always the BIG version): RB ABTF BRT (started, not complete) OtO (twice) >How long have you played? Started in 1996... From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Wed Apr 13 19:35:51 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Wed Apr 13 19:35:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2b8228f005041319352ae1c445@mail.gmail.com> On 4/13/05, Darren Gour wrote: > Maybe you haven't seen my latest post about Nixon having played his > 100th ASLOK game by '93. Wonder how many he has played total.. > > So, having just retaken up the game last September I now have 16 games > recorded in ROAR. So, time for an informal survey: > > How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? probably between 50 and 100. Someone entered a second Michael Rodgers, who I believe is me, and who has some of my games. > How many total have you played (estimate) ? My game log says 309, but I know I'm missing a few, and I don't include playtests. > How long have you played? Since 1989. > > -- > dg > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From damavs at alltel.net Wed Apr 13 20:32:28 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Wed Apr 13 20:32:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050413232358.01df28a0@mail.alltel.net> Darren Gour wrote: >How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? 74 >How many total have you played (estimate) ? 767 w/nearly 100 of those being playtests. ~half of the non-playtest games are tourney matches (319). >How long have you played? Started playing some ASL in '87 although I didn't start playing a lot until '92 after moving to Cleveland and answering Pete Shelling's ad in the General "Opponents Wanted" section... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 13 23:12:07 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 13 23:10:15 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) RPh2, PFPh, MPh1 In-Reply-To: <005301c53fb7$000a7ea0$b127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Now's my chance. Time to terminate Germans with extreme prejudice. See my moves below Jim's sig. BTW, Jim, I am embarking on a new project next Monday and may not be able to send moves quite so frequently for a while. Let's make some hay this weekend. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 8:24 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) RPh Listerz, Time for Turn 3! > &&&BATES: OK, just rallies then. > > Wind change: 6, 4; NA. > DM 7-0 in O4 self-rally: 6, 3; keeps DM. > DM 747YY in O4 self-rally: 3, 4; keeps DM. > 9-1 in O6 rallies 337EE/BAZ: 4, 4; rallied. > CX 8-0 in Q8 takes radio from CX 747SS. > CX337II attempts LMG recovery in R8: 3; got it. > Can't....stop...must...mmrrrmmph.....SAY IT! > "Now I have a machine gun." > That should do it. Let's check the intestinal fortitude of your squealing > FJs. 50***MCLEOD: Egads ... I hope this turns out well ... the only RPh activity I have is the DM 548 in S4, DR = 6 (2,4) ... ack! This is going to suck. Remove DM counters from the 548 in S4 and the 238 in U5. End of German RPh. ***MCLEOD: You're go George. =Jim= _Rally Phase_ If it's all the same to you, I've decided not to leave the DM counters on the broken 7-0 and 747YY in O4. _Prep Fire Phase_ No prep fire. We are going to establish conclusively that ASL is a game of maneuver. _Movement Phase_ 337D in Q4 to R4, causing your broken 548/MMG in S4 to go DM (1MF)... ... to S5 (2MF)... ... to T4 (3MF). Broken 238 in U5 goes DM... ... End of 337D's movement. 747GG in O6 to P5 (1MF). Since there's nothing you can do to prevent his movement, have him continue to Q5, R5 (4MF). CX 337II/GerLMG in R8 bypass S8 on R7 (1MF)... ... to S7 (2MF)... ... bypass S6 on T6 (3MF)... ... to T5 (4MF). Remove CX. Let's see what your last able-bodied guys in P2 can make of this. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 14 04:22:04 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 14 04:22:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) RPh2, PFPh, MPh1 References: Message-ID: <001801c540e4$312fe230$9627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, T3 shenanigans begin > Now's my chance. Time to terminate Germans with extreme prejudice. See > my > moves below Jim's sig. > BTW, Jim, I am embarking on a new project next Monday and may not be able > to > send moves quite so frequently for a while. Let's make some hay this > weekend. ***MCLEOD: If its hay you want, its hay you'll get!!! > Listerz, > > Time for Turn 3! > > >> &&&BATES: OK, just rallies then. >> >> Wind change: 6, 4; NA. >> DM 7-0 in O4 self-rally: 6, 3; keeps DM. >> DM 747YY in O4 self-rally: 3, 4; keeps DM. >> 9-1 in O6 rallies 337EE/BAZ: 4, 4; rallied. >> CX 8-0 in Q8 takes radio from CX 747SS. >> CX337II attempts LMG recovery in R8: 3; got it. >> Can't....stop...must...mmrrrmmph.....SAY IT! >> "Now I have a machine gun." > >> That should do it. Let's check the intestinal fortitude of your >> squealing >> FJs. > > 50***MCLEOD: Egads ... I hope this turns out well ... the only RPh > activity I have is the DM 548 in S4, DR = 6 (2,4) ... ack! This is going > to > suck. Remove DM counters from the 548 in S4 and the 238 in U5. End of > German RPh. > > ***MCLEOD: You're go George. > If it's all the same to you, I've decided not to leave the DM counters on > the broken 7-0 and 747YY in O4. I believe they stay on due to your friend, the 238, in P2. > _Prep Fire Phase_ > > No prep fire. We are going to establish conclusively that ASL is a game > of > maneuver. Too true. > _Movement Phase_ > > 337D in Q4 to R4, causing your broken 548/MMG in S4 to go DM (1MF)... > ... to S5 (2MF)... > ... to T4 (3MF). Broken 238 in U5 goes DM... > ... End of 337D's movement. 747GG in O6 to P5 (1MF). > Since there's nothing you can do to prevent his movement, have him > continue > to Q5, R5 (4MF). ***MCLEOD: No SW's with this guy? > CX 337II/GerLMG in R8 bypass S8 on R7 (1MF)... > ... to S7 (2MF)... > ... bypass S6 on T6 (3MF)... > ... to T5 (4MF). Remove CX. > > Let's see what your last able-bodied guys in P2 can make of this. ***MCLEOD: No D'fire dude. More hay please. :) =Jim= From weflemi at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 07:00:10 2005 From: weflemi at yahoo.com (William Fleming) Date: Thu Apr 14 07:00:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050414140010.807.qmail@web30305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: > >How long have you played? > > Started playing some ASL in '87 although I didn't > start playing a lot until > '92 after moving to Cleveland and answering Pete > Shelling's ad in the > General "Opponents Wanted" section... > That is one thing that is way cool about ASL. You can pretty much go anywhere in the world, ask to have a game and have a good chance of finding one. No way I would have a complete stranger in the house--unless he brings a copy of the ASLRB. :) I myself have found games in Australia, Japan, Groton (CT), Sacramento and Montreal that same way. Will Talk to me not of bargains. Lions and men make no truce, wolves and lambs have no friendship--they hate each other forever. So there can be no love between you and me; and there shall be no truce for us, until one of the two shall fall and glut Ares with his blood. ---Homer, The Iliad __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From gd891 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 07:01:47 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (G D) Date: Thu Apr 14 07:02:11 2005 Subject: [Aslml] J95 - Help? In-Reply-To: <7f110d99372c.42316079@broadpark.no> Message-ID: Anyone have any tips for the British defenders in J95? I'm not sure what to do with these pillboxes vs the German onslaught. What about good setup postions for the guns? Greg From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 14 07:32:48 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 14 07:31:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 In-Reply-To: <001801c540e4$312fe230$9627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Jim watches helplessly as his positions are infiltrated. "Oh, the humanity!" Reports from the scene continue in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 8:22 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) RPh2, PFPh, MPh1 Listerz, T3 shenanigans begin > Now's my chance. Time to terminate Germans with extreme prejudice. See > my > moves below Jim's sig. > BTW, Jim, I am embarking on a new project next Monday and may not be able > to > send moves quite so frequently for a while. Let's make some hay this > weekend. ***MCLEOD: If its hay you want, its hay you'll get!!! > Listerz, > > Time for Turn 3! > > >> &&&BATES: OK, just rallies then. >> >> Wind change: 6, 4; NA. >> DM 7-0 in O4 self-rally: 6, 3; keeps DM. >> DM 747YY in O4 self-rally: 3, 4; keeps DM. >> 9-1 in O6 rallies 337EE/BAZ: 4, 4; rallied. >> CX 8-0 in Q8 takes radio from CX 747SS. >> CX337II attempts LMG recovery in R8: 3; got it. >> Can't....stop...must...mmrrrmmph.....SAY IT! >> "Now I have a machine gun." > >> That should do it. Let's check the intestinal fortitude of your >> squealing >> FJs. > > 50***MCLEOD: Egads ... I hope this turns out well ... the only RPh > activity I have is the DM 548 in S4, DR = 6 (2,4) ... ack! This is going > to > suck. Remove DM counters from the 548 in S4 and the 238 in U5. End of > German RPh. > > ***MCLEOD: You're go George. > If it's all the same to you, I've decided not to leave the DM counters on > the broken 7-0 and 747YY in O4. I believe they stay on due to your friend, the 238, in P2. ###BATES: Take a look at A10.62. I can opt to keep or remove it in OG. However, if I take it off, and the RtPh rolls around and your guys in P2 are still with us, then it goes right back on again. I'm counting on your boys to be gone by then. > _Prep Fire Phase_ > > No prep fire. We are going to establish conclusively that ASL is a game > of > maneuver. Too true. > _Movement Phase_ > > 337D in Q4 to R4, causing your broken 548/MMG in S4 to go DM (1MF)... > ... to S5 (2MF)... > ... to T4 (3MF). Broken 238 in U5 goes DM... > ... End of 337D's movement. 747GG in O6 to P5 (1MF). > Since there's nothing you can do to prevent his movement, have him > continue > to Q5, R5 (4MF). ***MCLEOD: No SW's with this guy? ###BATES: No, he didn't drop his MMG. Forgot to type it 747GG/MMG in R5. Also, notch another building for the good guys. > CX 337II/GerLMG in R8 bypass S8 on R7 (1MF)... > ... to S7 (2MF)... > ... bypass S6 on T6 (3MF)... > ... to T5 (4MF). Remove CX. > > Let's see what your last able-bodied guys in P2 can make of this. ***MCLEOD: No D'fire dude. More hay please. :) =Jim= ###BATES: Continuing to gain position. CX 8-0/Radio in Q8 to R7 (1MF)... ... to S7 (2MF) ... ... to T6 (3.5MF)... ... to U6 (4.5MF) ... ... to V5 (5.5MF). Remove CX. 337EE/BAZ in O6 drops BAZ, moves to O7, O8, O9 (4MF). 747O/MMG in O6 drops MMG, to P5 (1MF)... ... to Q5 (2MF)... ... to R4 (3MF) ... ... late double-time to toss smoke into R3: 1; smoke placed (5MF). Going according to plan so far... 9-2 & 747 in P4L1 toss smoke into P3: 3; smoke placed (2MF)... ... to P4L0 (3MF)... ... bypass Q4 on Q5 & R4 (4MF)... ... to R3 (6MF). CX 747LL in O4 AM to P3 (2MF). Remove CX. CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. Time for bed. Let's see what you do with this bunch and perhaps we can get the MPh done tomorrow. - G From pshelling at comcast.net Thu Apr 14 14:09:31 2005 From: pshelling at comcast.net (pshelling@comcast.net) Date: Thu Apr 14 14:09:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ROAR games Message-ID: <041420052109.25702.425EDC0B00069DDE00006466220073407609020704040A089C9F@comcast.net> >How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? I have never submitted any; some of my opponents have. >How many total have you played (estimate) ? 1200-1300. Between around '94-'98 I played 2-3 times a week plus 4-5 tourneys. Now I still do tourneys. >How long have you played? Actually, a National Guard buddy (Keith Evans) and I discussed other wargames over an Axis and Allies battle one drill weekend. We both had ASL sitting on the shelf, never played. Then Bret and a few other guys answered my Opponents Wanted ad back in '92. Best 50 cents I ever spent. Pete "I picked up all of their bad habits and now I suck at this game" Shelling From garciagd at velocity.net Thu Apr 14 17:25:25 2005 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Thu Apr 14 17:25:57 2005 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Questions Message-ID: Hi! Hope all is well! I am playing J97 A Nice morning for a Ride this weekend. I am playing the Germans. I seem to be a little confused about the VC/Set up. Bear with me, its been a long week:>) The card states the Brits set up in hexrows J through O >/= 18. The Germans set up (first) North of the bridge, >/= 3 hexes from Brit set up area. All Germans can set up entrenched. The Germans also get HIP. The VC states that The British win if they Control all hexes on/between K though O numbers >/= 19 as long as the Germans do not inflict 40CVP. The way I see it, the Brits already set up IN their VC area. So, it seems to me (I may be missing something) that according to the VC, the Germans must attack into the Brit area, even though their force is a Defensive one (and sets up entrenched). Is there Errata? Where am I being real dumb? Also, does Entrenched mean in a Trench or Foxhole? Thanks! Peace Roger __________________ "once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right" -j.garcia/r.hunter, "Scarlet Begonias" From asl_scottj at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 18:25:19 2005 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Thu Apr 14 18:25:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >I am playing J97 A Nice morning for a Ride this weekend. > >I am playing the Germans. > >I seem to be a little confused about the VC/Set up. > >The card states the Brits set up in hexrows J through O >/= 18. > >The Germans set up (first) North of the bridge, >/= 3 hexes from Brit set >up >area. All Germans can set up entrenched. The Germans also get HIP. > >The VC states that The British win if they Control all hexes on/between K >though O numbers >/= 19 as long as the Germans do not inflict 40CVP. > >The way I see it, the Brits already set up IN their VC area. You are correct. >So, it seems to me (I may be missing something) that according to the VC, >the Germans must attack into the Brit area, even though their force is a >Defensive one (and sets up entrenched). Yes, but notice that they get 16 squads plus supporting Guns. And to win, they only need one HS/crew running around in the British area. I think this one'll be tough for the Brits. Reading the Forward and Afterwards this looks about right. The Brits have a bridgehead that the Germans are trying to reduce before British reinforcements arrive...and the reinforcements have to secure the brideghead and drive all Germans out. >Is there Errata? I don't have any for this scenario. >Where am I being real dumb? You're not...it's a *very* different situation. >Also, does Entrenched mean in a Trench or Foxhole? FH only. Q&A (different scenario...same principle): >Is the American player allowed to set-up 17 Squad-capacities of Foxholes in ASL 22 as long as they are set up together >with a American MMC, for example a 3S Foxhole with a hs ? No. >If No, is it correct that only American MMC in entrenchable terrain can have a Foxhole and then only of the size needed to >harbor the MMC(s) in the hex ? Yes. ....Perry plus another Q&A: Off the top of my head I don't know of any scenario where the phrase "may set up entrenched" is intended to include Trenches. Since at least 1997 we have been trying to consistently include with that phrase a rules citation to B27.1, making it clear that foxholes are intended, not trenches. I don't think I have seen anyone seriously suggest that a lone squad can use this rule to create a 3-squad foxhole, but I have blacked out some of my Fortenberry and Ostrander memories. ....Perry Scott Jackson aka Stonewall From asl_scottj at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 18:36:10 2005 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Thu Apr 14 18:36:12 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >Hi, a local player has found what I think must be an error in the first >part of the Comprehensive Rout Example from ASLRBv2. > >The error is the text about the unit in L8. It says: > >"The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in the same hex as an >unbroken KEU and not in Melee. It can ignore every building/woods Location >on the map as being equidistant from the KEU in its own hex [10.51]. " > >I'm pretty sure that this is incorrect, because this one doesn't compare >the correct distances. A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a >building/woods hex if that hex is no farther from a Known enemy unit than >its starting hex" > >I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this to mean that a hex can be >ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance >from the broken unit to the KEU. However, this part of the example seems to >say that a hex can be ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target >hex is <= the distance from the broken unit to the target hex. > >Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes from a KEU, and there is >a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes from the KEU, can you ignore >it or not? > >Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can be ignored, but this is >wrong IMHO, which is evident from examples both in the A10.531 ex and in >the Comprehensive Rout Example. > >Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? Yes, though Perry says it's not a mistake (hey, it's mind-numbing for me too...I often get it wrong!). Q&A: >1) A10.51 (on page 25, column 1, first paragraph, last sentence) says "A >routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that hex is no farther >from a Known enemy unit than its starting hex..." > >Should this be read as > a) The routing unit may ignore a building/wood hex if the distance >from the building/wood to a Known enemy unit is no further then the >distance >from the Known enemy unit to the Routing unit's starting hex ie the routing >unit may ignore a building/wood as a rout destination if by going there the >range to a Known enemy unit will not be greater then the range from its >starting Location to that KEU > or > b) The routing unit may ignore a building/wood hex if the distance >from the building/wood to a Known enemy unit is no further then the >distance >from the buliding/wood to the Routing unit's starting hex. b) >2) If the answer to the above is a), the Comprehensive Rout example must be >wrong in the fourth paragraph of the Russian Routs ("The broken squad in >L8.."). The sentence "It can ignore every building/woods Location on the >map >as being equidistant from the KEU in its own hex[A10.51]" can not possibly >be correct as any rout target outside its starting location will be further >from the KEU in it's hex (range of zero to this KEU). >As I see the EX, the broken unit would have to select either M7, L4 or M5 >as >its rout target. These hexes are within 6MF and all of them are further >from >the KEUs (in L8, J9 and M9) then where the broken unit starts in L8. >Is the Comprehensive Rout EX incorrect as outlined above? No. >3) Comprehensive Rout Example: 2nd paragraph beginning "The broken 4-4-7 on >Level 2 of M2" >Would the 4-4-7 be eliminated for Failure to Rout if it entered the ground >level of N1? Would it not Surrender to to the 4-6-7 in O1, instead as per >A20.21 Only if NQ were in effect. Yes. Scott Jackson aka Stonewall From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Thu Apr 14 18:44:59 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Thu Apr 14 18:45:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you Message-ID: <002601c5415c$bbed60a0$0200a8c0@Father> I have seventy-six games recorded in ROAR but have to add some more from recent (well, maybe a couple of years old) tournament PIS sheets. Being an accountant the last thing I like to do is my own personal scorekeeping. I record enough minutia at work as it is. I figure I have played in total about 660 games using an estimated two a month and about four tournaments a year going back to 1986 (ASLOK I). I think I, Aaron Cleavin, Randy Rossi and a few others like us can claim to have played the most "foreign" opponents by virtue of our expatriate work experience. With this confession above I can only speculate what I could have accomplished had I used that time for productive or social redeeming pursuits! It's all too depressing. Well, one good thing, unlike Michael Rogers, I usually do not have any problem with ROAR identity theft :) "Zadra" From garciagd at velocity.net Thu Apr 14 18:46:33 2005 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Thu Apr 14 18:47:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Thanks for the input Scott. Though the way I read the Before and After reports the Brits should be attacking. After all, the Brits even get to "go" first:>) And its not like the Germans can move those guys around very well:>) I guess HIPing the 2 squads and then making a rush on the last turn may be the answer. Not certain I like this one as the Germans. The Brits see where everything is coming from. Get a LV hindrance, so the guns are less effective, then the Brits get 5 tanks:>( Peace Rog From garciagd at velocity.net Thu Apr 14 18:48:09 2005 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Thu Apr 14 18:48:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: And its not like the Germans can move those guys around very well:>) this should have been GUNS:>) not guys:>) Peace Rog From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 14 18:53:13 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 14 18:54:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 References: Message-ID: <004d01c5415e$139377d0$4727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> > Jim watches helplessly as his positions are infiltrated. "Oh, the > humanity!" Reports from the scene continue in "###." >> ***MCLEOD: You're go George. > >> If it's all the same to you, I've decided not to leave the DM counters on >> the broken 7-0 and 747YY in O4. > > I believe they stay on due to your friend, the 238, in P2. > ###BATES: Take a look at A10.62. I can opt to keep or remove it in OG. > However, if I take it off, and the RtPh rolls around and your guys in P2 > are > still with us, then it goes right back on again. ***MCLEOD: Well bugger, I did not know that! Thanks George. :) > I'm counting on your boys to be gone by then. ***MCLEOD: A fairly safe bet my friend. >> Since there's nothing you can do to prevent his movement, have him >> continue >> to Q5, R5 (4MF). > > ***MCLEOD: No SW's with this guy? > ###BATES: No, he didn't drop his MMG. Forgot to type it 747GG/MMG in > R5. > Also, notch another building for the good guys. > ###BATES: Continuing to gain position. > > CX 8-0/Radio in Q8 to R7 (1MF)... > ... to S7 (2MF) ... > ... to T6 (3.5MF)... > ... to U6 (4.5MF) ... > ... to V5 (5.5MF). Remove CX. ***MCLEOD: All good. > 337EE/BAZ in O6 drops BAZ, moves to O7, O8, O9 (4MF). > 747O/MMG in O6 drops MMG, to P5 (1MF)... > ... to Q5 (2MF)... > ... to R4 (3MF) ... > ... late double-time to toss smoke into R3: 1; smoke placed (5MF). Going > according to plan so far... > 9-2 & 747 in P4L1 toss smoke into P3: 3; smoke placed (2MF)... ***MCLEOD: George, can you do this? I just looked at the rule and tossing the smoke from an upper building level to an adjacent lower Open Ground hex may not be allowed. It says you can place smoke into the ground level of a non-interior building hex from an upper building level, as well as down a stairwell. I will stop reading and send this to you pending your review off the rule (A24.1). You may wish to redo you next moves. =Jim= From johnpeplow at yahoo.ca Thu Apr 14 20:45:17 2005 From: johnpeplow at yahoo.ca (John Peplow) Date: Thu Apr 14 20:45:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] snakes in CC Message-ID: <20050415034517.49813.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all: I have a question on CC mechanics when snakes are rolled. It's the German CCPh and a German 468 has advanced into CC with a Russian CX447 in a building. Ambush is rolled for but neither side gets it. The German attacker rolls for CC and gets snakes. This results in Leader Creation and a 7-0 is generated for the Germans. The Germans would eliminate the Russian squad and could advance/infiltrate into an eligible unoccupied hex if they want to, without being attacked by the Russians. If they elect to remain in the CC hex, the eliminated Russians can then attack in CC at the adjusted odds of 1:2 (for the generated leader) with a +1DRM for CX. Is this correct? John ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 14 20:56:24 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 14 20:54:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 In-Reply-To: <004d01c5415e$139377d0$4727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: It's lunchtime! Time to answer Jim's question about my defenestration (Ooh, you wicked man, you"). Please go to the bottom of this message for my response. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 10:53 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 > Jim watches helplessly as his positions are infiltrated. "Oh, the > humanity!" Reports from the scene continue in "###." >> ***MCLEOD: You're go George. > >> If it's all the same to you, I've decided not to leave the DM counters on >> the broken 7-0 and 747YY in O4. > > I believe they stay on due to your friend, the 238, in P2. > ###BATES: Take a look at A10.62. I can opt to keep or remove it in OG. > However, if I take it off, and the RtPh rolls around and your guys in P2 > are > still with us, then it goes right back on again. ***MCLEOD: Well bugger, I did not know that! Thanks George. :) > I'm counting on your boys to be gone by then. ***MCLEOD: A fairly safe bet my friend. >> Since there's nothing you can do to prevent his movement, have him >> continue >> to Q5, R5 (4MF). > > ***MCLEOD: No SW's with this guy? > ###BATES: No, he didn't drop his MMG. Forgot to type it 747GG/MMG in > R5. > Also, notch another building for the good guys. > ###BATES: Continuing to gain position. > > CX 8-0/Radio in Q8 to R7 (1MF)... > ... to S7 (2MF) ... > ... to T6 (3.5MF)... > ... to U6 (4.5MF) ... > ... to V5 (5.5MF). Remove CX. ***MCLEOD: All good. > 337EE/BAZ in O6 drops BAZ, moves to O7, O8, O9 (4MF). > 747O/MMG in O6 drops MMG, to P5 (1MF)... > ... to Q5 (2MF)... > ... to R4 (3MF) ... > ... late double-time to toss smoke into R3: 1; smoke placed (5MF). Going > according to plan so far... > 9-2 & 747 in P4L1 toss smoke into P3: 3; smoke placed (2MF)... ***MCLEOD: George, can you do this? I just looked at the rule and tossing the smoke from an upper building level to an adjacent lower Open Ground hex may not be allowed. It says you can place smoke into the ground level of a non-interior building hex from an upper building level, as well as down a stairwell. I will stop reading and send this to you pending your review off the rule (A24.1). You may wish to redo you next moves. =Jim= BATES: Although this specific activity is neither explicitly allowed or prohibited, I believe A24.1 gives substantial support to what I'm doing. Please refer to the following: Line 18: Placement in an ADJACENT hex is permissible if there is no wind. There are no stated exceptions. Line 26: SMOKE grenades can be placed down to the next lower level of the unit's building hex via a stairwell... The ability to do this does not exclude the ability to throw the grenades out of the upper level of a building into an adjacent OG hex. Line 28: SMOKE grenades can also be placed across a cliff or Double-Crest Line into an adjacent lower hex. This is the clincher for me. The only difference between doing this or placing them from the upper level of an adjacent building is the assumed presence of a window or other aperture from which to wind up & throw. Also, consider this. I could easily spend 1MF to go down to L0, then two more MF to toss the grenades into P3 from there. The only difference is that you would get a 2FP+1 shot at me in P4L0 before the smoke was thrown. But if a unit can toss grenades from the ground level of a building into an adjacent OG hex, why not from upper floors? If this is sufficiently convincing, please continue with my MPh2 message as written. If you tossed the rest of it away, please advise and I'll send a new one. More dessert! - G From smcbee at midtnn.net Thu Apr 14 21:26:56 2005 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Thu Apr 14 21:27:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] snakes in CC In-Reply-To: <20050415034517.49813.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c54173$64f094e0$45f49904@steves> Yes. That is correct. Take care Steve John asked: I have a question on CC mechanics when snakes are rolled. It's the German CCPh and a German 468 has advanced into CC with a Russian CX447 in a building. Ambush is rolled for but neither side gets it. The German attacker rolls for CC and gets snakes. This results in Leader Creation and a 7-0 is generated for the Germans. The Germans would eliminate the Russian squad and could advance/infiltrate into an eligible unoccupied hex if they want to, without being attacked by the Russians. If they elect to remain in the CC hex, the eliminated Russians can then attack in CC at the adjusted odds of 1:2 (for the generated leader) with a +1DRM for CX. Is this correct? From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 21:32:40 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 14 21:33:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] PB mortar and spotted fire. In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050415043240.83395.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> In Pegasus Bridge, is there any reason I (as the German) can't buy the mtr/halftrack french conversion, have it drive in behind the maternity ward, and 'spot' fire it with a halfsquad on the rooftop? Rob __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From morrisgj at mscd.edu Thu Apr 14 22:51:28 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Thu Apr 14 22:51:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] BFF FP and DRMs in Factory Message-ID: <536926531f29.531f29536926@mscd.edu> Hello All: T34/85 drives into a Factory - and not just any factory! It's the Slaughterhouse. Enters from non-Factory hex. Bogs - there are German units in this hex by the way. 1. Is the T34 considered Stopped as it Bogged? 2. I think I can BFF the MGs @ (6*3)/2 (if it is considered Stopped) or (6*3)/4 if non-stopped. But what is the TEM, +1 or +3? 3. If I fire the MA the TH DRMs are: +4 (B + C) and +4 for fire in own hex within Building (and Motion penalty if I am considered non- Stopped). Thanks as always. Gerry From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Apr 15 00:05:32 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri Apr 15 00:08:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. Message-ID: Hi, Scott Jackson answered my rout question: > > Yes, though Perry says it's not a mistake (hey, it's mind-numbing > for me too...I often get it wrong!). > Then Perry must have been smoking something he shouldn't... >>1) A10.51 (on page 25, column 1, first paragraph, last sentence) says "A >>routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that hex is no farther >>from a Known enemy unit than its starting hex..." >> >>Should this be read as >> a) The routing unit may ignore a building/wood hex if the distance >>from the building/wood to a Known enemy unit is no further then the >>distance >>from the Known enemy unit to the Routing unit's starting hex ie the routing >>unit may ignore a building/wood as a rout destination if by going there the >>range to a Known enemy unit will not be greater then the range from its >>starting Location to that KEU >> or >> b) The routing unit may ignore a building/wood hex if the distance >>from the building/wood to a Known enemy unit is no further then the >>distance >>from the buliding/wood to the Routing unit's starting hex. > >b) This Q&A essentially says that the L8 example is correct. That is well and dandy, EXCEPT for the fact that: 1) a) makes more sense (IMHO and all I've discussed it with), but more important: 2) This Q&A says that the following examples are INCORRECT: ** A10.531 example says that the J2 unit can ignore adjacent hex K2, since both J2 and K2 are two hexes away from enemy in K4. The reason for ignoring it is a) -- if b) had been correct, K2 could *not* be ignored. ** Comprehensive rout example says that the J4 unit cannot ignore M5 as a rout destination, although M5 is three hexes from both the J4 unit and the KEU in K3, so if b) had been correct, it could be ignored. ** Comprehensive rout example says that the S3 unit can ignore R3 due to the KEU in R1. The reason for ignoring it is a) -- if b) had been correct, R3 could not be ignored. So when choosing between one incorrect example in the Comprehensive rout example, or two there and one elsewhere, I will continue to believe that the L8 one is incorrect, not the other three - at least until Perry submits errata for those other three examples. > >2) If the answer to the above is a), the Comprehensive Rout > >example must be wrong in the fourth paragraph of the Russian > >Routs... > > No. YES. From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Fri Apr 15 00:52:15 2005 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Fri Apr 15 00:53:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. Message-ID: My comments inter-dispersed below, preceded by ## > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Jackson [mailto:asl_scottj@hotmail.com] > Sent: Friday, 15 April 2005 9:36 AM > To: oleboe@broadpark.no; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. > > >Hi, a local player has found what I think must be an error in the first > >part of the Comprehensive Rout Example from ASLRBv2. > > > >The error is the text about the unit in L8. It says: > > > >"The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in the same hex as an > >unbroken KEU and not in Melee. It can ignore every building/woods > Location > >on the map as being equidistant from the KEU in its own hex [10.51]. " > > > >I'm pretty sure that this is incorrect, because this one doesn't compare > >the correct distances. A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a > >building/woods hex if that hex is no farther from a Known enemy unit than > >its starting hex" > > > >I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this to mean that a hex can > be > >ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance > >from the broken unit to the KEU. However, this part of the example seems > to > >say that a hex can be ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target > >hex is <= the distance from the broken unit to the target hex. > > ## I also without a doubt have interpreted this to mean that a hex can be ignored if the distance from the KEU to the target hex is <= the distance from the broken unit to the KEU. After all, this is what the rule says. I have yet to come across any one who understands it otherwise. > >Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes from a KEU, and there > is > >a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes from the KEU, can you > ignore > >it or not? > > > >Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can be ignored, but this is > >wrong IMHO, which is evident from examples both in the A10.531 ex and in > >the Comprehensive Rout Example. > > > >Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? ## A few years back I raised this on the ASLML. I don't recall Perry answering but I do recall Tom Repetti (I think it was), who wrote this article that appeared in ASL Journal 2 (?) before it was transposed to ASLRBv2. My recollection is that Tom admitted he was in error with regard to the unit in L8. I no longer have the emails from that time but I will have a look for a hard copy (I seem to recall that I printed it) > > > Yes, though Perry says it's not a mistake (hey, it's mind-numbing for me > too...I often get it wrong!). > > Q&A: > > >1) A10.51 (on page 25, column 1, first paragraph, last sentence) says "A > >routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that hex is no > farther > >from a Known enemy unit than its starting hex..." > > > >Should this be read as > > a) The routing unit may ignore a building/wood hex if the distance > >from the building/wood to a Known enemy unit is no further then the > >distance > >from the Known enemy unit to the Routing unit's starting hex ie the > routing > >unit may ignore a building/wood as a rout destination if by going there > the > >range to a Known enemy unit will not be greater then the range from its > >starting Location to that KEU > > or > > b) The routing unit may ignore a building/wood hex if the distance > >from the building/wood to a Known enemy unit is no further then the > >distance > >from the buliding/wood to the Routing unit's starting hex. > > > b) ## This answer is plainly at odds with what the rule says A10.51 "A routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that hex is no farther from a Known enemy unit than its starting hex..." Analysing the sentence gives us "A routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that hex [*that "hex" being the building/woods hex that is a potential rout target*]is no farther from a Known enemy unit than its starting hex..." [*"it's starting hex" being the current hex occupied by the broken unit prior to it routing*] > >2) If the answer to the above is a), the Comprehensive Rout example must > be > >wrong in the fourth paragraph of the Russian Routs ("The broken squad in > >L8.."). The sentence "It can ignore every building/woods Location on the > >map > >as being equidistant from the KEU in its own hex[A10.51]" can not > possibly > >be correct as any rout target outside its starting location will be > further > >from the KEU in it's hex (range of zero to this KEU). > >As I see the EX, the broken unit would have to select either M7, L4 or M5 > >as > >its rout target. These hexes are within 6MF and all of them are further > >from > >the KEUs (in L8, J9 and M9) then where the broken unit starts in L8. > >Is the Comprehensive Rout EX incorrect as outlined above? > > No. > > Scott Jackson > aka Stonewall ## How Perry came up with these answers, I have no idea. This Q&A also conflicts with other examples in the Comprehensive Rout example, as well as conflicting with what A10.51 actually says. Normally I am quite happy to play by unofficial Q&A/"Perry Sez" but this one defies reason and logic :) Given that it appears neither in any printed product, eg ASL Journal, or on MMP's website, it will be one I will have no problem disregarding until errata is forthcoming :) Cheers Jon This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not dissemminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From dschofie at bournemouth.ac.uk Fri Apr 15 04:14:07 2005 From: dschofie at bournemouth.ac.uk (David Schofield) Date: Fri Apr 15 04:14:17 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification Message-ID: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0371@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> Just posted this on the forum but would like your opinions as well. 'I am a very experienced player but have come across differing interpretations of armoured assault. Where can the tank go once it leaves the infantry [if it does]? Imagine a tank accompanies a squad across open ground and the squad moves 4 hexes? Can the tank; a) move any further? b) move only one more hex [the infantry could declare cx though it hasn't]? c) two further hexes [as the infantry could have declared cx at the start of it's move though it didn't]? d) go anywhere the infantry could have got from its starting hex e.g. go back 8+ hexes [the 4 the infantry went forward plus the 4 it could have gone in the other direction? I have seen all of these interpretations in games recently at tournaments - and the example and text in the rule book can support them all perhaps? Any thoughts?' cheers David This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University. Nor can any contract be formed on the University's behalf via e-mail. From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 15 06:09:44 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 15 06:10:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Rout Rule Renovations References: Message-ID: <002f01c541bc$659f6850$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, ... Good gawd ... After 20 years, one would think that the Rout Rules were pretty much a lock. However, this one rule section seems to generate the most Q's when compared to other rule sections. This rule section makes my head hurt and there is weirdness within that should be made less weird. Having said that, I just learned something new from George Bates regarding placement/removal of the DM counter, not that that in itself is weird. :) Ole, while you are moving walls around within A10., change the part concerning Surrender and the RtPh. I despise that rule! I will always declare that a broken unit must be both ADJACENT and be subject to Interdiction in the next hex it enters along its' Rout path in order for the broken unit to Surrender. The rule as it currently stands is just plain wrong from many angles. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 15 06:23:09 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 15 06:23:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 References: Message-ID: <004201c541be$454f3e20$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, A Smokey Q for all, > It's lunchtime! Time to answer Jim's question about my defenestration > (Ooh, > you wicked man, you"). Please go to the bottom of this message for my > response. > BATES: Although this specific activity is neither explicitly allowed or > prohibited, I believe A24.1 gives substantial support to what I'm doing. > Please refer to the following: That first part to your reply is enough to say "no", George. :) > Line 18: Placement in an ADJACENT hex is permissible if there is no wind. > There are no stated exceptions. You are not ADJ. to P3 from L.1 of P4. > Line 26: SMOKE grenades can be placed down to the next lower level of the > unit's building hex via a stairwell... No problemo. > The ability to do this does not exclude the ability to throw the grenades > out of the upper level of a building into an adjacent OG hex. Yes it does, you are not "ADJACENT" to that hex, you are "adjacent" to it. UPPER vs. lower case. > Line 28: SMOKE grenades can also be placed across a cliff or Double-Crest > Line into an adjacent lower hex. Yes, the rule is clear here. > This is the clincher for me. The only difference between doing this or > placing them from the upper level of an adjacent building is the assumed > presence of a window or other aperture from which to wind up & throw. How about the apparant absence of a Cliff or a Double Crest line? :) Those two are prerequisites for such smoke placement IMHO. > Also, consider this. I could easily spend 1MF to go down to L0, then two > more MF to toss the grenades into P3 from there. The only difference is > that you would get a 2FP+1 shot at me in P4L0 before the smoke was thrown. > But if a unit can toss grenades from the ground level of a building into > an > adjacent OG hex, why not from upper floors? I understand what you are saying but that is not what the rule says. Again, I may be wrong, but based on the requirements set out for smoke placement, tossing smoke into an hex requires you to be ADJACENT except in a few specific cases. > If this is sufficiently convincing, please continue with my MPh2 message > as > written. If you tossed the rest of it away, please advise and I'll send a > new one. You have not convinced me of the legality of the Upper Level Smoke Toss, George. If our band of onlookers care to chime in, that would be fine with me. > More dessert! Bon appetite! I am home all day today. If the time difference permits, please post away with reckless abandon. I hear the stomp of massed jumpboots in the distance. The accent clearly says, "MADE IN GERMANY". =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Apr 15 07:09:29 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Apr 15 07:10:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 Message-ID: <3rr7ej$uj124j@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "mcleods" > Date: 2005/04/15 Fri AM 08:23:09 CDT > To: "George Bates" , > "ASL Mailing List" > Subject: [Aslml] Re: Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": > T3(A) MPh2 > > > You have not convinced me of the legality of the Upper Level Smoke Toss, > George. If our band of onlookers care to chime in, that would be fine with > me. I have to agee with Jim on this. The smoke placement from level 1 building location into an adjacent lower elevation location doesn't appear to be allowed. Although, the fact that a unit can place smoke grenades across a cliff hex side to an adjacent lower elevation location but not from an upper level building to an adjacent lower elevation location seems inconsistant within the rules...not talking reality merely consistancy of the rules. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 15 07:09:40 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Apr 15 07:10:12 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A)MPh2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >BATES: Although this specific activity is neither explicitly allowed or >prohibited, I believe A24.1 gives substantial support to what I'm doing. >Please refer to the following: > Normally, the litmus test for an activity in ASL is whether or not it is explicitly allowed, not whether it is specifically prohibited. That's the spirit of COWTRA, IMO. >Line 18: Placement in an ADJACENT hex is permissible if there is no wind. >There are no stated exceptions. > The ground level of P3 in not ADJACENT to the first level of P4. >Line 26: SMOKE grenades can be placed down to the next lower level of the >unit's building hex via a stairwell... Irrelevant to this example. >The ability to do this does not exclude the ability to throw the grenades >out of the upper level of a building into an adjacent OG hex. > Irrelevant. There is no statement allowing Smoke Grenade placement out of the upper level of a building into an adjacent Open Ground hex. Therefore, it is not allowed. >Line 28: SMOKE grenades can also be placed across a cliff or Double-Crest >Line into an adjacent lower hex. Irrelevant to this example. >This is the clincher for me. The only difference between doing this or >placing them from the upper level of an adjacent building is the assumed >presence of a window or other aperture from which to wind up & throw. > Reality Argument disregarded. >Also, consider this. I could easily spend 1MF to go down to L0, then two >more MF to toss the grenades into P3 from there. That's allowed. >The only difference is >that you would get a 2FP+1 shot at me in P4L0 before the smoke was thrown. Well, that may be true... However, there is more than just this "only difference". Simply stated... >But if a unit can toss grenades from the ground level of a building into an >adjacent OG hex, why not from upper floors? > ... because the rules do not allow it. >If this is sufficiently convincing, please continue with my MPh2 message as >written. If you tossed the rest of it away, please advise and I'll send a >new one. > I think you better send a new one, because what you have done with your Smoke Grenades in this instance is illegal. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 15 07:34:31 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 15 07:32:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh3 (lawyers wanted) In-Reply-To: <004201c541be$454f3e20$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Strawberry shortcake and a message from Jim. Schweet! Of course Jim replied, Something here inside, Cannot be denied... The use of "ADJACENT hex" does complicate the issue, doesn't it? The capitalized form is defined by the ability to advance from one hex to another, which is not possible in this case as gravity desires that we move parallel with or at right angles to the earth. Still, the ability to cast grenades to some adjacent lower elevations but not others seems rather counterintuitive. One can almost visualize the nice arcs they would make. Thank heavens this isn't a game about defending castle walls. We'll see how the rules lawyers weigh in, and perhaps fire off a Perry Sez request if the House seems divided. Meanwhile, I have a solution to get things going again. I'll give you the alternate move from my last message, which we both agree is workable. 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in P4L1 to L0 (1MF), toss smoke into P3: 2; placed (3MF). Take your shots, if any, and look for more from me below. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 10:23 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 Listerz, A Smokey Q for all, > It's lunchtime! Time to answer Jim's question about my defenestration > (Ooh, > you wicked man, you"). Please go to the bottom of this message for my > response. > BATES: Although this specific activity is neither explicitly allowed or > prohibited, I believe A24.1 gives substantial support to what I'm doing. > Please refer to the following: That first part to your reply is enough to say "no", George. :) > Line 18: Placement in an ADJACENT hex is permissible if there is no wind. > There are no stated exceptions. You are not ADJ. to P3 from L.1 of P4. > Line 26: SMOKE grenades can be placed down to the next lower level of the > unit's building hex via a stairwell... No problemo. > The ability to do this does not exclude the ability to throw the grenades > out of the upper level of a building into an adjacent OG hex. Yes it does, you are not "ADJACENT" to that hex, you are "adjacent" to it. UPPER vs. lower case. > Line 28: SMOKE grenades can also be placed across a cliff or Double-Crest > Line into an adjacent lower hex. Yes, the rule is clear here. > This is the clincher for me. The only difference between doing this or > placing them from the upper level of an adjacent building is the assumed > presence of a window or other aperture from which to wind up & throw. How about the apparant absence of a Cliff or a Double Crest line? :) Those two are prerequisites for such smoke placement IMHO. > Also, consider this. I could easily spend 1MF to go down to L0, then two > more MF to toss the grenades into P3 from there. The only difference is > that you would get a 2FP+1 shot at me in P4L0 before the smoke was thrown. > But if a unit can toss grenades from the ground level of a building into > an > adjacent OG hex, why not from upper floors? I understand what you are saying but that is not what the rule says. Again, I may be wrong, but based on the requirements set out for smoke placement, tossing smoke into an hex requires you to be ADJACENT except in a few specific cases. > If this is sufficiently convincing, please continue with my MPh2 message > as > written. If you tossed the rest of it away, please advise and I'll send a > new one. You have not convinced me of the legality of the Upper Level Smoke Toss, George. If our band of onlookers care to chime in, that would be fine with me. > More dessert! Bon appetite! I am home all day today. If the time difference permits, please post away with reckless abandon. I hear the stomp of massed jumpboots in the distance. The accent clearly says, "MADE IN GERMANY". =Jim= BATES: Too bad there won't be anyone left to greet them when they arrive. No garlands, just hot lead. 8-) What's going on at the homestead today, Jim? Holiday? 747W/BAZ & 9-2 continue by bypassing Q4 on Q5 & R4 (4MF)... ... to R3 (6MF). CX 747LL in O4 AM to P3 (2MF). Remove CX. 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). Landshark. 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. Things are still shaping up nicely. Can't promise anything, but might be able to answer another move from you before bed. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 15 08:26:19 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 15 08:26:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh3 (lawyers wanted) References: Message-ID: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, PBEM grinds away, > Strawberry shortcake and a message from Jim. Schweet! > > Of course Jim replied, > Something here inside, > Cannot be denied... The Poet Bates writes, > The use of "ADJACENT hex" does complicate the issue, doesn't it? A wee bit. > The capitalized form is defined by the ability to advance from one hex to > another, which is not possible in this case as gravity desires that we > move > parallel with or at right angles to the earth. > Still, the ability to cast grenades to some adjacent lower elevations but > not others seems rather counterintuitive. One can almost visualize the > nice > arcs they would make. Thank heavens this isn't a game about defending > castle walls. We'll see how the rules lawyers weigh in, and perhaps fire > off a Perry Sez request if the House seems divided. Well, we two authourities are chiming in with support for my argument. We'll have to see what the Norwegian judge says on the matter. :) > Meanwhile, I have a solution to get things going again. I'll give you the > alternate move from my last message, which we both agree is workable. > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in P4L1 to L0 (1MF), toss smoke into P3: 2; placed (3MF). > Take your shots, if any, and look for more from me below. ***MCLEOD: None. >***MCLEOD: I hear the stomp of massed jumpboots in the distance. The >accent clearly > says, "MADE IN GERMANY". > BATES: Too bad there won't be anyone left to greet them when they arrive. > No garlands, just hot lead. 8-) > What's going on at the homestead today, Jim? Holiday? > > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 continue by bypassing Q4 on Q5 & R4 (4MF)... > ... to R3 (6MF). > CX 747LL in O4 AM to P3 (2MF). Remove CX. > 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). > Landshark. > 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the MPh or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. Back to you. =Jim= From aaron.cleavin at gmail.com Fri Apr 15 08:34:26 2005 From: aaron.cleavin at gmail.com (Aaron Cleavin) Date: Fri Apr 15 08:35:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh3 (lawyers wanted) In-Reply-To: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <1bec6aa050415083425e4e7d7@mail.gmail.com> Hmmm "Giving up assault move" If this is anything Mr Rutledge has been teaching George over in Japan, I Offer an apology and words will be had. If OTOH it's oneGeorge as made up himself he should be ashamed at giving Mr Mcleod such a wide opening for ROF with sustained sarcasm AAron > 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). > Landshark. > 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the MPh or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. Back to you. =J From dave.connell at cougarcorp.com Fri Apr 15 09:09:35 2005 From: dave.connell at cougarcorp.com (Dave Connell) Date: Fri Apr 15 09:05:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) Message-ID: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8AC6@trinity.cougarcorp.com> Hi all, I am having one of those NRBH moments: This probably is somewhere in A12...OB designated "?" is provided for one side setting up first. Must the units be in concealment terrain to receive the OB given concealment counters? How about getting them in non-concealment terrain, but the units are beyond that magical 17 hexes? Thanks in advance, Dave "back under concealment" Connell From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 09:37:40 2005 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Fri Apr 15 09:37:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050415163740.88130.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> "A12.12 PLACEMENT: The player setting up first in a scenario does so out of vision of his opponent, and after setting up his regular units may place only scenario OB-designated "?" at first¡ªbut only in Terrain listed in red in the Terrain Chart/Desert Terrain Chart/PTO Terrain Chart. After his opponent sets up in the same manner, each unconcealed unit (of both sides) which is either out of the LOS of all unbroken enemy ground units within 16 hexes of it, or at ¡Ý 17 hexes from all of them, may have a "?" not designated by the OB placed on it..." Gotta be in ? terrain for placement of OB given ? counters before your opponent gets to see the top counter....note that he cannot inspect the stack. Only what he can see without picking through the stack. Jazz --- Dave Connell wrote: > > > Hi all, > > I am having one of those NRBH moments: This probably is somewhere in > A12...OB designated "?" is provided for one side setting up first. Must > the units be in concealment terrain to receive the OB given concealment > counters? How about getting them in non-concealment terrain, but the > units are beyond that magical 17 hexes? > > Thanks in advance, > > Dave "back under concealment" Connell > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From dreenstra at comcast.net Fri Apr 15 10:54:16 2005 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Fri Apr 15 10:53:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050415175352.F03B484D22@che.dreamhost.com> Hello all, Playing A106 "Debacle at Korosten" with Rob "Sabre" Nelson and had a question come up. A German Armored Car has fallen into the clutches of Rob's cavalry. Naturally, they have little idea what to do with a beast that doesn't eat hay and spew manure, so the first shot with the MA (firing as IFE) and CMG results in breakdown (and a tie on the RS). The question is, can Rob's Temporary Crew attempt repair? A9.72 talks about captured SW/Guns not being able to be repaired unless recaptured, but this wouldn't seem to apply to the vehicle's CMG/MA. And D3.7 only says, "any inherent crew that is not Shocked or Stunned", no restriction on the vehicle not being captured. Any help appreciated. Dave Reenstra > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net- > bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Bakken > Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 12:06 PM > To: oleboe@broadpark.no; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. > > [snip] > > >A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a building/woods hex if that > >hex is no farther from a >Known enemy unit than its starting hex" > > > >I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this to mean that a hex can > be > >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the target hex is <= the > distance > >from the broken unit to the KEU. > > Agreed. Routing there would not take the broken unit any farther from a > Known enemy unit. That's how I've interpreted it. > > (It has also been argued that the phrase "a Known enemy unit" does not > necessarily refer to the same Known enemy unit in each distance > consideration.) > > >However, this part of the example [L8] seems to say that a hex can be > >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the target hex is <= the > distance > >from the broken unit to the target hex. > > > > Agreed. It does seem to say that, though it could be referring only to > the > unique situation where both the Known enemy unit's hex and the starting > hex > are the same ("in its own hex"). > > >Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes from a KEU, and there > is > >a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes from the KEU, can you > ignore > >it or not? > > > > No, the broken unit may not ignore it. The target hex is farther from a > Known enemy unit than [is] its starting hex. > > [insert] > > > >"The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in the same hex as an > >unbroken KEU and not in >Melee. It can ignore every building/woods > Location > >on the map as being equidistant from the KEU >in its own hex [10.51]. " > > > >Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can be ignored, but this is > >wrong IMHO, which is >evident from examples both in the A10.531 ex and in > >the Comprehensive Rout Example. > > > > I have to agree that I have been unable to reconcile the L8 EX with the > wording of A10.51. > > I therefore also conclude that the L8 EX is an incorrect interpretation of > A10.51. > > >Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? > > > > No, I tend to avoid reading EX... > > Though I will say, that sentence in A10.51 is not grammatically tight. It > lends itself to twisted eyeballs and confused brains. I'm speaking only > for > myself, of course... > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From dgour.asl at gmail.com Fri Apr 15 11:04:21 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Fri Apr 15 11:04:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) In-Reply-To: <20050415163740.88130.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050415163740.88130.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <764636a605041511045312ee2a@mail.gmail.com> ..and then there is a bit about if the opponents forces all enter from off board you can place concealment counters on everybody (but not ones that already have an OB given counter) prior to your opponent seeing the board. OB given ones still have to be in concealment terrain. -- dg On 4/15/05, Jazz wrote: > "A12.12 PLACEMENT: The player setting up first in a scenario does so out of vision of his > opponent, and after setting up his regular units may place only scenario OB-designated "?" at > first??but only in Terrain listed in red in the Terrain Chart/Desert Terrain Chart/PTO Terrain > Chart. After his opponent sets up in the same manner, each unconcealed unit (of both sides) which > is either out of the LOS of all unbroken enemy ground units within 16 hexes of it, or at ?? 17 > hexes from all of them, may have a "?" not designated by the OB placed on it..." > > Gotta be in ? terrain for placement of OB given ? counters before your opponent gets to see the > top counter....note that he cannot inspect the stack. Only what he can see without picking > through the stack. > > Jazz > > --- Dave Connell wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am having one of those NRBH moments: This probably is somewhere in > > A12...OB designated "?" is provided for one side setting up first. Must > > the units be in concealment terrain to receive the OB given concealment > > counters? How about getting them in non-concealment terrain, but the > > units are beyond that magical 17 hexes? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Dave "back under concealment" Connell > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From Vicca at v21.me.uk Fri Apr 15 11:12:09 2005 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Fri Apr 15 11:12:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification References: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0371@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> Message-ID: <000901c541e6$a46dccf0$152ca8c0@loungedining> I recall haveing this arguement with you last year at heroes. My take is that the tank can move as far as the infantry could if they accompanied it. In your situatiuon the tank can move no futher since the infantry can move no further. If the Inf declare themselves cx but do not move then the tank can move a further hex. The infantry would not have to move any further despite declaring cx. Please note that the vehicle can continue to spend mps doing other things but not in moveing. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Schofield" To: Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 12:14 PM Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification Just posted this on the forum but would like your opinions as well. 'I am a very experienced player but have come across differing interpretations of armoured assault. Where can the tank go once it leaves the infantry [if it does]? Imagine a tank accompanies a squad across open ground and the squad moves 4 hexes? Can the tank; a) move any further? b) move only one more hex [the infantry could declare cx though it hasn't]? c) two further hexes [as the infantry could have declared cx at the start of it's move though it didn't]? d) go anywhere the infantry could have got from its starting hex e.g. go back 8+ hexes [the 4 the infantry went forward plus the 4 it could have gone in the other direction? I have seen all of these interpretations in games recently at tournaments - and the example and text in the rule book can support them all perhaps? Any thoughts?' cheers David This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University. Nor can any contract be formed on the University's behalf via e-mail. _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From dreenstra at comcast.net Fri Apr 15 11:20:46 2005 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Fri Apr 15 11:20:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Informal Survey: How many ROAR games have you recorded? In-Reply-To: <764636a60504122210781a461f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20050415182025.99C2A84D23@che.dreamhost.com> Darren writes: > > How many games do you have recorded in ROAR? > How many total have you played (estimate) ? > How long have you played? > 209 as of today, reported my first game in Oct 1997. 350+ being conservative. The difference comes from playtests and games with players not registered on ROAR. ASL since 1993. Started with PBEM, then met some local players in '95 or so. Now I mix in VASL (Live and PBEM) with FtF. Dave Reenstra From dave.connell at cougarcorp.com Fri Apr 15 11:42:37 2005 From: dave.connell at cougarcorp.com (Dave Connell) Date: Fri Apr 15 11:38:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) Message-ID: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8AC9@trinity.cougarcorp.com> Thanks Jazz and Darren, Let me refine this question: Scenario given "?" can also be Dummies. Does the Dummy counter have to setup in the concealment terrain as you referenced? Dave"ASLRBv2 hurts the eyes as bad as v1 did"Connell -----Original Message----- From: Darren Gour [mailto:dgour.asl@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 11:04 AM To: Jazz Cc: Dave Connell; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) ..and then there is a bit about if the opponents forces all enter from off board you can place concealment counters on everybody (but not ones that already have an OB given counter) prior to your opponent seeing the board. OB given ones still have to be in concealment terrain. -- dg On 4/15/05, Jazz wrote: > "A12.12 PLACEMENT: The player setting up first in a scenario does so out of vision of his > opponent, and after setting up his regular units may place only scenario OB-designated "?" at > first??but only in Terrain listed in red in the Terrain Chart/Desert Terrain Chart/PTO Terrain > Chart. After his opponent sets up in the same manner, each unconcealed unit (of both sides) which > is either out of the LOS of all unbroken enemy ground units within 16 hexes of it, or at ?? 17 > hexes from all of them, may have a "?" not designated by the OB placed on it..." > > Gotta be in ? terrain for placement of OB given ? counters before your opponent gets to see the > top counter....note that he cannot inspect the stack. Only what he can see without picking > through the stack. > > Jazz > > --- Dave Connell wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am having one of those NRBH moments: This probably is somewhere in > > A12...OB designated "?" is provided for one side setting up first. Must > > the units be in concealment terrain to receive the OB given concealment > > counters? How about getting them in non-concealment terrain, but the > > units are beyond that magical 17 hexes? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Dave "back under concealment" Connell > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From damavs at alltel.net Fri Apr 15 11:47:00 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Fri Apr 15 11:47:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) Message-ID: <20050415184700.QSCX14321.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> "Dave Connell" writes: > Let me refine this question: Scenario given "?" can also be Dummies. Does the Dummy counter have to setup in the concealment terrain as you referenced? Yes. All dummy stacks MUST be setup in concealment terrain, at least if you want to setup legally. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From dave.connell at cougarcorp.com Fri Apr 15 12:56:27 2005 From: dave.connell at cougarcorp.com (Dave Connell) Date: Fri Apr 15 12:52:27 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) Message-ID: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8ACA@trinity.cougarcorp.com> How about if my unit is beyond 17 hexes, behind a building out of sight, but standing in the middle of a road or other open ground? Dave"haven't played in a while; can you tell?"Connell -----Original Message----- From: Bret & Julie Hildebran [mailto:damavs@alltel.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 11:47 AM To: Dave Connell; Darren Gour; Jazz Cc: ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) "Dave Connell" writes: > Let me refine this question: Scenario given "?" can also be Dummies. Does the Dummy counter have to setup in the concealment terrain as you referenced? Yes. All dummy stacks MUST be setup in concealment terrain, at least if you want to setup legally. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From daveolie at eastlink.ca Fri Apr 15 13:19:33 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Fri Apr 15 13:20:29 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) References: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8ACA@trinity.cougarcorp.com> Message-ID: <006701c541f8$72c783a0$a64d8918@klis.com> Dave reiterated: >How about if my unit is beyond 17 hexes, behind a building out of sight, >but standing in the middle of a road or other open ground? No. OB-designated concealment counters can only be set up in concealment terrain. Range makes no difference. LOS makes no difference. It's one of the few nice, simple, absolute rules in the ASLRB. >Dave"haven't played in a while; can you tell?"Connell Umm... yes. But hey, I had to write an article to finally get this one right. David "getting educated in public" Olie From damavs at alltel.net Fri Apr 15 13:35:53 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Fri Apr 15 13:36:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OB Given Concealment Counters (lawyers wanted) Message-ID: <20050415203553.XNNJ15030.ispmxmta05-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> "Dave Connell" writes: > How about if my unit is beyond 17 hexes, behind a building out of sight, > but standing in the middle of a road or other open ground? Only if it's night, thus turning OG hexes into concealment terrain, otherwise no. OG is not concealment terrain otherwise, hence no dummies may be setup therein. Bret From rln22 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 15:17:29 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Fri Apr 15 15:17:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More on the Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050415175352.F03B484D22@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <20050415221729.37358.qmail@web52605.mail.yahoo.com> Gentlemen, we went as far as the rally phase with the russian captured German AC. on the CMG a 1, so can he shoot it now? on the MA...a 6! Recalled? (it sure looks like it...) If not, Dave did advance into my hex with a German Sqd. May one abandon (and destroy) a captured vehicle while jumping into an enemy occupied location? Rule says PRC may 'dismount'. If he is recalled, this will be the longest, and funniest, start and stop recall in ASL history.. Rob --- David Reenstra wrote: > Hello all, > > Playing A106 "Debacle at Korosten" with Rob "Sabre" > Nelson and had a > question come up. > > A German Armored Car has fallen into the clutches of > Rob's cavalry. > Naturally, they have little idea what to do with a > beast that doesn't eat > hay and spew manure, so the first shot with the MA > (firing as IFE) and CMG > results in breakdown (and a tie on the RS). The > question is, can Rob's > Temporary Crew attempt repair? A9.72 talks about > captured SW/Guns not being > able to be repaired unless recaptured, but this > wouldn't seem to apply to > the vehicle's CMG/MA. And D3.7 only says, "any > inherent crew that is not > Shocked or Stunned", no restriction on the vehicle > not being captured. > > Any help appreciated. > > Dave Reenstra > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net- > > bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Bakken > > Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 12:06 PM > > To: oleboe@broadpark.no; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout > Example. > > > > [snip] > > > > >A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a > building/woods hex if that > > >hex is no farther from a >Known enemy unit than > its starting hex" > > > > > >I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this > to mean that a hex can > > be > > >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the > target hex is <= the > > distance > > >from the broken unit to the KEU. > > > > Agreed. Routing there would not take the broken > unit any farther from a > > Known enemy unit. That's how I've interpreted it. > > > > (It has also been argued that the phrase "a Known > enemy unit" does not > > necessarily refer to the same Known enemy unit in > each distance > > consideration.) > > > > >However, this part of the example [L8] seems to > say that a hex can be > > >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the > target hex is <= the > > distance > > >from the broken unit to the target hex. > > > > > > > Agreed. It does seem to say that, though it could > be referring only to > > the > > unique situation where both the Known enemy unit's > hex and the starting > > hex > > are the same ("in its own hex"). > > > > >Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes > from a KEU, and there > > is > > >a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes > from the KEU, can you > > ignore > > >it or not? > > > > > > > No, the broken unit may not ignore it. The target > hex is farther from a > > Known enemy unit than [is] its starting hex. > > > > [insert] > > > > > >"The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in > the same hex as an > > >unbroken KEU and not in >Melee. It can ignore > every building/woods > > Location > > >on the map as being equidistant from the KEU >in > its own hex [10.51]. " > > > > > >Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can > be ignored, but this is > > >wrong IMHO, which is >evident from examples both > in the A10.531 ex and in > > >the Comprehensive Rout Example. > > > > > > > I have to agree that I have been unable to > reconcile the L8 EX with the > > wording of A10.51. > > > > I therefore also conclude that the L8 EX is an > incorrect interpretation of > > A10.51. > > > > >Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? > > > > > > > No, I tend to avoid reading EX... > > > > Though I will say, that sentence in A10.51 is not > grammatically tight. It > > lends itself to twisted eyeballs and confused > brains. I'm speaking only > > for > > myself, of course... > > > > Regards, > > Bruce Bakken > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN > Search! > > > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From sidirezegh at charter.net Fri Apr 15 15:36:31 2005 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Fri Apr 15 15:36:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More on the Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair Message-ID: <3spdi8$6nah5p@mxip14a.cluster1.charter.net> You should never have allowed yourself to get into this situation; now you have all these damn complicated questions! Sheesh... ;-) Regards, Chas "Ally of Evil" Argent > > From: Robert Nelson > Date: 2005/04/15 Fri PM 10:17:29 GMT > To: dreenstra@comcast.net, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] More on the Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair > > > Gentlemen, > > we went as far as the rally phase with the russian > captured German AC. > > on the CMG a 1, so can he shoot it now? > > on the MA...a 6! Recalled? (it sure looks like it...) > If not, Dave did advance into my hex with a German > Sqd. May one abandon (and destroy) a captured vehicle > while jumping into an enemy occupied location? Rule > says PRC may 'dismount'. > > If he is recalled, this will be the longest, and > funniest, start and stop recall in ASL history.. > > Rob > > > --- David Reenstra wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > Playing A106 "Debacle at Korosten" with Rob "Sabre" > > Nelson and had a > > question come up. > > > > A German Armored Car has fallen into the clutches of > > Rob's cavalry. > > Naturally, they have little idea what to do with a > > beast that doesn't eat > > hay and spew manure, so the first shot with the MA > > (firing as IFE) and CMG > > results in breakdown (and a tie on the RS). The > > question is, can Rob's > > Temporary Crew attempt repair? A9.72 talks about > > captured SW/Guns not being > > able to be repaired unless recaptured, but this > > wouldn't seem to apply to > > the vehicle's CMG/MA. And D3.7 only says, "any > > inherent crew that is not > > Shocked or Stunned", no restriction on the vehicle > > not being captured. > > > > Any help appreciated. > > > > Dave Reenstra > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net- > > > bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Bakken > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 12:06 PM > > > To: oleboe@broadpark.no; > > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout > > Example. > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > >A10.51 says "A routing unit may also ignore a > > building/woods hex if that > > > >hex is no farther from a >Known enemy unit than > > its starting hex" > > > > > > > >I've always (without any doubt) interpreted this > > to mean that a hex can > > > be > > > >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the > > target hex is <= the > > > distance > > > >from the broken unit to the KEU. > > > > > > Agreed. Routing there would not take the broken > > unit any farther from a > > > Known enemy unit. That's how I've interpreted it. > > > > > > (It has also been argued that the phrase "a Known > > enemy unit" does not > > > necessarily refer to the same Known enemy unit in > > each distance > > > consideration.) > > > > > > >However, this part of the example [L8] seems to > > say that a hex can be > > > >ignored if the distance >from the KEU to the > > target hex is <= the > > > distance > > > >from the broken unit to the target hex. > > > > > > > > > > Agreed. It does seem to say that, though it could > > be referring only to > > > the > > > unique situation where both the Known enemy unit's > > hex and the starting > > > hex > > > are the same ("in its own hex"). > > > > > > >Or in other words, if your broken unit is 2 hexes > > from a KEU, and there > > > is > > > >a building hex 3 hexes from you *and* 3 hexes > > from the KEU, can you > > > ignore > > > >it or not? > > > > > > > > > > No, the broken unit may not ignore it. The target > > hex is farther from a > > > Known enemy unit than [is] its starting hex. > > > > > > [insert] > > > > > > > >"The broken squad in L8 must rout since it is in > > the same hex as an > > > >unbroken KEU and not in >Melee. It can ignore > > every building/woods > > > Location > > > >on the map as being equidistant from the KEU >in > > its own hex [10.51]. " > > > > > > > >Well, the L8 example tells us that this hex can > > be ignored, but this is > > > >wrong IMHO, which is >evident from examples both > > in the A10.531 ex and in > > > >the Comprehensive Rout Example. > > > > > > > > > > I have to agree that I have been unable to > > reconcile the L8 EX with the > > > wording of A10.51. > > > > > > I therefore also conclude that the L8 EX is an > > incorrect interpretation of > > > A10.51. > > > > > > >Have anyone else stumbled onto this before? > > > > > > > > > > No, I tend to avoid reading EX... > > > > > > Though I will say, that sentence in A10.51 is not > > grammatically tight. It > > > lends itself to twisted eyeballs and confused > > brains. I'm speaking only > > > for > > > myself, of course... > > > > > > Regards, > > > Bruce Bakken > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN > > Search! > > > > > > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! > http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 15 18:30:25 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 15 18:28:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: I have been spanked--and quite rightly so--by Jim and Aaron. Making amends in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 12:26 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh3 (lawyers wanted) Listerz, PBEM grinds away, > Strawberry shortcake and a message from Jim. Schweet! > > Of course Jim replied, > Something here inside, > Cannot be denied... The Poet Bates writes, > The use of "ADJACENT hex" does complicate the issue, doesn't it? A wee bit. > The capitalized form is defined by the ability to advance from one hex to > another, which is not possible in this case as gravity desires that we > move > parallel with or at right angles to the earth. > Still, the ability to cast grenades to some adjacent lower elevations but > not others seems rather counterintuitive. One can almost visualize the > nice > arcs they would make. Thank heavens this isn't a game about defending > castle walls. We'll see how the rules lawyers weigh in, and perhaps fire > off a Perry Sez request if the House seems divided. Well, we two authourities are chiming in with support for my argument. We'll have to see what the Norwegian judge says on the matter. :) ###BATES: The Australian judge appears to be sitting this one out, too. And the French & Russian guys are in a cafe across the street. What are we paying them for? Hope you gave The Platters credit for the lines above. Actually, I have one more thought on this matter. It occurs to me that fire from P4L1 to P3 is Point Blank Fire and A7.21 very explicitly allows PBF between ADJACENT hexes. Apparently, concussion grenades sail though the windows just fine. Why would not the same apply to smoke? Put _that_ in your pipe & smoke it! > Meanwhile, I have a solution to get things going again. I'll give you the > alternate move from my last message, which we both agree is workable. > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in P4L1 to L0 (1MF), toss smoke into P3: 2; placed (3MF). > Take your shots, if any, and look for more from me below. ***MCLEOD: None. >***MCLEOD: I hear the stomp of massed jumpboots in the distance. The >accent clearly > says, "MADE IN GERMANY". > BATES: Too bad there won't be anyone left to greet them when they arrive. > No garlands, just hot lead. 8-) > What's going on at the homestead today, Jim? Holiday? > > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 continue by bypassing Q4 on Q5 & R4 (4MF)... > ... to R3 (6MF). > CX 747LL in O4 AM to P3 (2MF). Remove CX. > 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). > Landshark. > 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the MPh or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. Back to you. =Jim = ###BATES: A clear foul, pro consul! This is a confusion/memory access problem I have yet to overcome. Profuse apologies. AM puts a cap on MF so that an AMing unit can't use it's full allowance (which I mistakenly did). If there had been an SW in P3, I could spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place a DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject to DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things the same way? I tend to learn better by doing (and failing). Perhaps this incident will finally straighten me out. Anyway, the WP toss is wiped. Did not happen. We have 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in R3 and 747LL safely in P3 with no DFF, correct? If so, pray proceed to the below. CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. CX 337CC in O4 to O5 (1MF)... ... to N5 (2MF). Will continue since you're unlikely to shoot. N6, M7 (4MF). Remove CX. 747b in L5 to M4, N4 (2MF). Here's where the rules question we just had comes back to get me again. 8-1 in O6 assault moves, recovers BAZ: 3, got it (1MF). AM to O5 (2MF). Nice target. Care to shoot? If you have no DFF, then 337P in O2 will sit tight and stare at you. However, depending on DFF results I still may elect to move him. If your DFF activities are all "NE," consider the MPh over and go ahead with your DFPh. Are we having fun yet? - G From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Fri Apr 15 18:38:34 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Fri Apr 15 18:38:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] BFF FP and DRMs in Factory Message-ID: <002301c54225$00f708e0$0200a8c0@Father> Dave Reenstra convinced me a while ago that once a tank during the movement phase bogs or is immobilized due to an ESB roll or hit, it can no longer bounding fire as it's movement phase is over. It would have to wait for advancing fire. If the above is the general consensus then any actions by our T34 in the factory would have to wait. What say ye all? "Zadra" From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 20:52:49 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 20:52:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: FL counter placement In-Reply-To: <9d47e4017c5b.425d18f4@broadpark.no> References: <9d47e4017c5b.425d18f4@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:04:52 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >This is wrong. The initial attack must be on a target within LOS as normal, but the FL counter need not be placed in that hex, it can be placed on any hex along the (alternate) hex grain that includes the firer and the target. The FL counter can thus be placed even out of LOS Yes. I wasn't thinking clearly when I posted my reply, and concentrated on the "initial attack" part and not the "after the FL is placed" part. However: >and/or outside the MG's range. While I agree that *technically* this seems legal, it is, of course, simply wrong, since the FL only exerts Residual FP in hexes that are within the MG's Normal Range. Placing the FL counter in hexes beyond Normal Range is thus both pointless *and* potentially confusing. >Note that there are no LOS or range requirements here. But there *are* range requirements stated elsewhere, so using this sentence as an excuse is just sophistry. Worse, it serves no actual purpose. >The FL can be placed outside LOS and Normal Range Outside LOS yes, outside Normal Range no. Remember, the *purpose* of the FL counter is to mark those hexes affected by the FL Residual FP. Thus, to mark hexes which are *not* so affected (because they are outside the MG's Normal Range) serves no useful purpose whatsoever. A player has better things to do with his time than mark hexes that are *not* affected by a FL! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:09:59 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:10:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A10.51 and Comprehensive Rout Example. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:05:32 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >So when choosing between one incorrect example in the Comprehensive rout example, or two there and one elsewhere, I will continue to believe that the L8 one is incorrect, not the other three - at least until Perry submits errata for those other three examples. No disputes from me. However, it should be pointed out that the "can ignore every building/woods hex" part of the EX concerning L8 is the only part in error; the rest of the paragraph is correct, including the conclusion that the broken squad must surrender to the squad in M9. So the correct answer for the L8 EX is that the broken unit must declare M7 as its rout destination, as it is the nearest legal building/woods hex that it can rout to (and it is indeed further from every KEU than the hex that it starts in, so it can't be ignored). The M9 unit's ability to interdict both K8 and L7 do indeed result in the broken unit's surrender, however. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:18:20 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:18:29 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Infantry smoke question on A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh2 In-Reply-To: References: <004d01c5415e$139377d0$4727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <4c4161tcj2i5ltj7ab8h5pvjje6363urda@4ax.com> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:56:24 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >BATES: Although this specific activity is neither explicitly allowed or >prohibited, I believe A24.1 gives substantial support to what I'm doing. >Please refer to the following: I have to agree with the other replies you've received. It's illegal because it's not specifically allowed. What *is* specifically allowed is: ADJACENT hex -- NA here. Lower level of building hex -- NA here. Across cliff or double-crest line into adjacent lower-level hex -- NA here. Since none of the allowed options are applicable, the answer is "it's Not Allowed". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:25:29 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:25:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh3 (lawyers wanted) In-Reply-To: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:26:19 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >> 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). >> Landshark. >> 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. > >***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn >something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault >Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the MPh >or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. You are correct. Like diamonds, Assault Move is forever. Until they break . On a related note, there's no such thing as a "conditional" Assault Move either; e.g., "I'll attempt to toss SMOKE, if it succeeds I'll move normally, if it fails I'll do an Assault Move." is Striktly Verboten and punishable by Extreme Derision directed at your opponent's sexual potency. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:33:30 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:33:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh4 In-Reply-To: References: <006b01c541cf$79de88b0$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 10:30:25 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >###BATES: The Australian judge appears to be sitting this one out, too. Well, I contemplated either replying promptly to your concerns, or going to work and earning enough money to eat, and reluctantly concluded that the latter was more appropriate. Bite me. >Actually, I have one more thought on this matter. It occurs to me that fire >from P4L1 to P3 is Point Blank Fire and A7.21 very explicitly allows PBF >between ADJACENT hexes. Apparently, concussion grenades sail though the >windows just fine. Why would not the same apply to smoke? Choose one: * Because the SMOKE grenades are too heavy for the grenade pixies to carry them as far. "Fly, my pretties, fly!" or * Because the rules don't allow it. >If there had been an SW in P3, I could >spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place a >DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject to >DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things the >same way? Correct. You can do anything in Assault Move that you can do in a regular move, *except* use all of your available MF or change more than one Location. Because it's an AM the FFNAM DRM cannot apply. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:38:27 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:38:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] snakes in CC In-Reply-To: <20050415034517.49813.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050415034517.49813.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:45:17 -0400 (EDT), John Peplow wrote: >It's the German CCPh and a German 468 has advanced >into CC with a Russian CX447 in a building. Ambush is >rolled for but neither side gets it. The German >attacker rolls for CC and gets snakes. This results in >Leader Creation and a 7-0 is generated for the >Germans. >The Germans would eliminate the Russian squad and >could advance/infiltrate into an eligible unoccupied >hex if they want to, without being attacked by the >Russians. If they elect to remain in the CC hex, the >eliminated Russians can then attack in CC at the >adjusted odds of 1:2 (for the generated leader) with a >+1DRM for CX. Is this correct? Correct on all counts. Note that, unlike an Ambush, the Germans can't stay in the CC hex, wait to see what the Russian attack is like, and *then* do the Withdrawal. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:40:21 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:40:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] PB mortar and spotted fire. In-Reply-To: <20050415043240.83395.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050415043240.83395.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:32:40 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >In Pegasus Bridge, > >is there any reason I (as the German) can't buy the >mtr/halftrack french conversion, have it drive in >behind the maternity ward, and 'spot' fire it with a >halfsquad on the rooftop? None that I can think of. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 21:57:10 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 21:57:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] BFF FP and DRMs in Factory In-Reply-To: <536926531f29.531f29536926@mscd.edu> References: <536926531f29.531f29536926@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:51:28 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >T34/85 drives into a Factory - and not just any factory! It's the >Slaughterhouse. Enters from non-Factory hex. Bogs - there are German >units in this hex by the way. > >1. Is the T34 considered Stopped as it Bogged? Well, somewhat oddly the Bog rules don't actually use the word "Stopped" anywhere, but they do say that a Bogged vehicle is "Immobile". D.7 tells us that an Immobile vehicle is one that is currently incapable of movement during the MPh for various reasons (as listed). We seem to be left to "common sense" to understand that Immobile vehicles are, in fact, Stopped. In a sense it *has* to be Stopped because otherwise it would be possible to leave the Bogged vehicle in Motion at the end of the MPh (D2.13), and only Mobile vehicles may remain in Motion (D2.4). >2. I think I can BFF the MGs @ (6*3)/2 (if it is considered Stopped) >or (6*3)/4 if non-stopped. But what is the TEM, +1 or +3? Well, you can't BFF at all, actually. D8.21 "... the vehicle bogs, is marked with a Bog counter, and must end its MPh immediately." "Immediately" does not mean "in a minute, after I finish resolving my BFF", it means *now*. No MPh, no BFF. >3. If I fire the MA the TH DRMs are: +4 (B + C) and +4 for fire in own >hex within Building (and Motion penalty if I am considered non- >Stopped). Again, no BFF allowed. You can of course perform normal Bounding Fire during the AFPh. You are certainly Stopped, so Motion fire penalties don't apply, but all the other usual AFPh penalties do. The relevant TEM is +1 (the fire is originating from within the factory). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 22:20:28 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 22:20:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0371@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> References: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0371@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> Message-ID: On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:14:07 +0100, "David Schofield" wrote: >Where can the tank go once it leaves the infantry [if it does]? Anywhere it likes, provided that (a) it has sufficient MP to get there and (b) the Infantry that was accompanying it could also have reached there, given all the conditions applicable to the Infantry's movement in that MPh. (I.E., if the Infantry declared CX at the start of their MPh, then you can include the +2 MF in the determination of "how far they could have reached"; if they didn't declare CX at the start of the MPh, but were otherwise eligible to declare it, then you can include the +1 MF; if they were not eligible to declare CX at all, then you can only use their inherent MF; in all cases, taking into account any MF penalties otherwise applicable for wounding, PP carried, etc.) >Imagine a tank accompanies a squad across open ground and the squad >moves 4 hexes? Can the tank; > >a) move any further? Depends. Was the squad capable of declaring CX at any point during its MPh? Did it actually make a CX declaration at the start of its MPh? How many MF did the squad expend in traveling those 4 hexes? Without additional information, the only answer I can give you is "possibly". >b) move only one more hex [the infantry could declare cx though it >hasn't]? Yes, if it's a hex that the infantry could have reached by making that CX declaration (and if it's a hex that the vehicle also has sufficient remaining MP to reach). >c) two further hexes [as the infantry could have declared cx at the >start of it's move though it didn't]? No. The infantry must *actually* have declared CX at the beginning of its MPh for the Armoured Assault stack (which includes the vehicle) to benefit from the extra 2 MF. >d) go anywhere the infantry could have got from its starting hex e.g. go >back 8+ hexes [the 4 the infantry went forward plus the 4 it could have >gone in the other direction? Definitely not. The basis of how far the vehicle can go is based on the assumption that the accompanying Infantry also travels that *same* distance *in that MPh*. >I have seen all of these interpretations in games recently at >tournaments - and the example and text in the rule book can support them >all perhaps? I strongly doubt it. Just because different people can interpret the same rule different ways does not mean that they are all correct. You have to factor in that some "interpretations" are just plain wrong. The wording of D9.31 could perhaps be improved to be more rigorous in its application, but I don't think that there's anything in its current wording that would lead anyone to a completely inaccurate interpretation of how it's meant to work. The important phrase is "cannot move farther than if it were accompanied by that same Infantry throughout the move" -- which means you look at where the Infantry (accompanied by the vehicle) *did* go, *then* decide where it *could* have gone (taking all current conditions into account) -- *then* move the vehicle accordingly. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From dgour.asl at gmail.com Fri Apr 15 22:30:56 2005 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Fri Apr 15 22:30:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: References: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0371@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> Message-ID: <764636a6050415223042ac6f06@mail.gmail.com> On 4/15/05, Bruce Probst wrote: > On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:14:07 +0100, "David Schofield" > wrote: > > > > >b) move only one more hex [the infantry could declare cx though it > >hasn't]? > > Yes, if it's a hex that the infantry could have reached by making that CX > declaration (and if it's a hex that the vehicle also has sufficient remaining > MP to reach). So are you saying Bruce that the vehicle can go one extra hex even if the infantry doesn't declare cx because the infantry conceivably could and thus satisfies the "cannot move farther than if it were accompanied by that same Infantry throughout the move" phrase? -- dg From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 22:58:03 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 22:58:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050415175352.F03B484D22@che.dreamhost.com> References: <20050415175352.F03B484D22@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:54:16 -0400, "David Reenstra" wrote: >A German Armored Car has fallen into the clutches of Rob's cavalry. >Naturally, they have little idea what to do with a beast that doesn't eat >hay and spew manure, so the first shot with the MA (firing as IFE) and CMG >results in breakdown (and a tie on the RS). The question is, can Rob's >Temporary Crew attempt repair? A9.72 talks about captured SW/Guns not being >able to be repaired unless recaptured, but this wouldn't seem to apply to >the vehicle's CMG/MA. And D3.7 only says, "any inherent crew that is not >Shocked or Stunned", no restriction on the vehicle not being captured. A9.72 "A captured SW/Gun may never be repaired .... Only a crew (not a Temporary Crew) can attempt to repair a Gun ...." The 10-cent answer to "what is a Temporary Crew?" is "anything that isn't the normal Inherent crew of the vehicle in question": A21.22 "TEMPORARY CREW: An armed vehicle which is captured takes in a new inherent crew .... Should the vehicle be manned by a now-removed HS or Infantry crew counter, its MP allotment is halved, (etc.) .... Should it be manned by a HS rather than a vehicle crew, both the above movement and doubled captured weapon penalties (21.13) apply." So: No repair of the MA -- the vehicle (and all its weapons) is captured, and captured Guns may not be repaired (even by "real" crews). The question of vehicular-mounted MG, which are neither SW nor Guns, is not addressed. Although D3.7 does indeed say "any inherent crew", which does not (in itself) rule out Temporary Crews, A9.72 *does* rule out Temporary Crews performing repairs on Guns (which is what the MA of the AC is). You could argue that D3.7 is a "higher-numbered rule", but in that case A9.72 is specifically in error and would require errata. I would argue that the specific language of A9.72 overrules the general language of D3.7 (hence no errata required). Either way, as noted, A9.72 doesn't comment on non-SW MG, and D3.7 thus seems to allow repair of such by even Temporary Crews, but common sense would suggest that they too may not be repaired (given the general rule that *nothing else* that is captured may ever be repaired). Ample room for a Perry Sez, though. The wider question of what happens to a captured vehicle whose MA is not merely malfunctioned but actually disabled is pretty straight-forward. The language of D3.7 is plain: immediate Recall. This is supported by D5.1, which tells us that all the rules applicable to Inherent crews also apply to Temporary Crews, except where specified otherwise. The only reference to Temporary Crews in the Recall rules is for SMC (D5.343), which is NA here. So, if the Temporary Crew is able to drive the vehicle anywhere at all, they must attempt to exit the map. If the temporary crew cannot move the vehicle, they must Abandon it. Here is the question I would ask Perry: A21.22 and D3.7: May a Temporary Crew attempt repair of any malfunctioned weapons of the vehicle it is manning? I would *expect* the answer to be "no". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 23:25:09 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 23:25:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] More on the Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050415221729.37358.qmail@web52605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050415175352.F03B484D22@che.dreamhost.com> <20050415221729.37358.qmail@web52605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3ca161h7u2mjq00jg5ur2kucbf45ormev4@4ax.com> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:17:29 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >we went as far as the rally phase with the russian >captured German AC. > >on the CMG a 1, so can he shoot it now? Per my other reply, I don't believe that he should be permitted any repair attempts on the captured vehicle. >on the MA...a 6! Recalled? (it sure looks like it...) See above. However, if the MA is disabled *for any reason*, then yes, the vehicle will be subject to Recall (again, see my other post). > If not, Dave did advance into my hex with a German >Sqd. May one abandon (and destroy) a captured vehicle >while jumping into an enemy occupied location? Rule >says PRC may 'dismount'. Abandoning a vehicle voluntarily may only occur during the MPh, and consumes all of the crew's (and vehicle's) movement. I don't know what relevant rule you're thinking of that says "PRC may dismount"; you may perhaps be thinking of D6.5, which says that "PRC may unload or Bail Out in an enemy-occupied hex ...." However, Abandonment is neither "unloading" nor "Bailing Out". Unloading again only occurs in the MPh (or RtPh, if the unit is broken), and Bailing Out only occurs when the vehicle is eliminated by non-CC attacks (or at other occasions for an AFV Rider) -- none of which is applicable to the CCPh. I have not been able to locate any rule or Q&A that addresses whether it's legal for a crew to abandon a vehicle into a hex currently occupied by enemy units. I suspect that it is. However, it certainly can't happen in the middle of CC! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 23:45:29 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 23:45:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: <764636a6050415223042ac6f06@mail.gmail.com> References: <5DA146E1E559B341A0C85AB49E01F222094D0371@tamar.bournemouth.ac.uk> <764636a6050415223042ac6f06@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0tc1615nicvlrka9qgnfd3ggth3bl3segi@4ax.com> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 23:30:56 -0600, Darren Gour wrote: >So are you saying Bruce that the vehicle can go one extra hex even if >the infantry doesn't declare cx because the infantry conceivably could >and thus satisfies the "cannot move farther than if it were >accompanied by that same Infantry throughout the move" phrase? That's exactly what I'm saying -- but be careful when you use phrases like "an extra hex" though -- the (hypothetical) declaration of CX gives the infantry an extra MF, but that extra MF might not be sufficient for the infantry to have actually reached an additional hex. It depends on the terrain type of the hex in question, how many MF the infantry had already expended, etc. For the vehicle to go "that extra hex", it must have been theoretically possible for the infantry to have reached that particular hex. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 15 23:49:29 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 15 23:49:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: References: <20050415175352.F03B484D22@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:58:03 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote: >Here is the question I would ask Perry: > >A21.22 and D3.7: May a Temporary Crew attempt repair of any malfunctioned >weapons of the vehicle it is manning? > >I would *expect* the answer to be "no". Errata: insert "captured" before "vehicle". I would expect that the Temporary Crew of a *non*-captured vehicle to be able to repair the weapons (keeping in mind that only a crew may repair a Gun). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 16 00:40:50 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 16 00:39:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Don't Antipodeans _always_ get up from the wrong side of the bed? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: His Eminence appears rather cross today. -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] . . . >>###BATES: The Australian judge appears to be sitting this one out, too. >Well, I contemplated either replying promptly to your concerns, or going to >work and earning enough money to eat, and reluctantly concluded that the >latter was more appropriate. Bite me. Sigh. Another one abandons his principles and dreams for the mundane, base purposes of scratching out a living. >>Actually, I have one more thought on this matter. It occurs to me that fire >>from P4L1 to P3 is Point Blank Fire and A7.21 very explicitly allows PBF >>between ADJACENT hexes. Apparently, concussion grenades sail though the >>windows just fine. Why would not the same apply to smoke? >Choose one: > >* Because the SMOKE grenades are too heavy for the grenade pixies to carry >them as far. "Fly, my pretties, fly!" >or >* Because the rules don't allow it. I like the pixies myself. Consistent with the special ammo gremlins and platoon movement fairies. 8-) Given the cliff and point blank incongruities, I believe I'll ask Perry if he wants to issue a clarification or errata. Whether he does or not, I still love this game. >>If there had been an SW in P3, I could >>spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place a >>DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject to >>DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things the >>same way? >Correct. You can do anything in Assault Move that you can do in a regular >move, *except* use all of your available MF or change more than one Location. >Because it's an AM the FFNAM DRM cannot apply. Bear with me now as I make certain that this one is firmly wedged in my skull and that all the boys & girls watching at home get it, too. Other activities (like SW recovery) during the assault move do _not_ receive the -1 FFNAM mod? From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 16 01:38:24 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 16 01:38:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Don't Antipodeans _always_ get up from the wrong side of the bed? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fj1611b3vufkp92kkkprbtnq3b827mu84@4ax.com> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:40:50 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >His Eminence appears rather cross today. Yoo talkin' to me?! >Bear with me now as I make certain that this one is firmly wedged in my >skull and that all the boys & girls watching at home get it, too. Other >activities (like SW recovery) during the assault move do _not_ receive >the -1 FFNAM mod? Did you declare an Assault Move with that unit? * Yes -- FFNAM doesn't apply, no matter what the unit does (unless the unit breaks or Pins). * No -- FFNAM does apply, no matter what the unit does (unless the unit Pins). That's all there is to it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From willette at gmpexpress.net Sat Apr 16 05:38:55 2005 From: willette at gmpexpress.net (joe willette) Date: Sat Apr 16 05:38:49 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B question on Shellholes In-Reply-To: <002f01c541bc$659f6850$3d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: After finishing Chapter A, I'm now embarked on Chapter B. I got stuck in the first new terrain type. Shellholes: B2.3 says that the conditional TEM apllies only to infantry. The Chapter B divider note (corresponding to TEM) says "Treat as Open Ground if entered at 1MF unless BU". What does the "unless BU" refer to (i.e. I thought BU applies only to vehicles)? Joe From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 16 05:43:44 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Apr 16 05:43:46 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I agree with everything you've said here. I said essentially the same thing on the WFHQ Forums, where this question was cross-posted. An interesting point was raised there, however. The D9.31 EX seems to indicate that the Infantry must actually declare CX in order for the AFV to gain that extra hex. I.e., the argument runs that the EX *requires* CX, and not just the potential of CX. My opinion is that the EX is not all-inclusive, and gives an example of Infantry splitting off (and thus completing) its move first. I also humbly submit that the EX may be incorrect. (That seems to be going around lately...) However... Well, the EX is either correct (and I am wrong and the rule should be clarified), or the EX is incorrect and should be changed. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Apr 16 05:46:57 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Apr 16 05:45:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B question on Shellholes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Joe Willette wrote: > Shellholes: B2.3 says that the conditional TEM apllies only to infantry. > The Chapter B divider note (corresponding to TEM) says "Treat as > Open Ground > if entered at 1MF unless BU". What does the "unless BU" refer to (i.e. I > thought BU applies only to vehicles)? > Good catch. The "unless BU" phrase means nothing, and is an error. There is an official errata telling to simply remove it. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 16 05:46:51 2005 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Apr 16 05:46:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: <764636a6050415223042ac6f06@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > >So are you saying Bruce that the vehicle can go one extra hex even if >the infantry doesn't declare cx because the infantry conceivably could >and thus satisfies the "cannot move farther than if it were >accompanied by that same Infantry throughout the move" phrase? > Not to speak for Bruce... Yes, that is exactly what he is saying, and also what I believe. However, the D9.31 EX seems to imply otherwise. I don't believe the EX, however. I mostly dislike how EX are used in the ASLRB. Regards, (also) Bruce (not Probst but) Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Apr 16 05:52:59 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Apr 16 05:51:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Bakken wrote: > An interesting point was raised there, however. The D9.31 EX seems to > indicate that the Infantry must actually declare CX in order for > the AFV to > gain that extra hex. I.e., the argument runs that the EX > *requires* CX, and not just the potential of CX. > > My opinion is that the EX is not all-inclusive, and gives an example of > Infantry splitting off (and thus completing) its move first. I > also humbly submit that the EX may be incorrect. (That seems to be > going around lately...) > > However... Well, the EX is either correct (and I am wrong and the rule > should be clarified), or the EX is incorrect and should be changed. > I planned to give a response saying the same. I don't like the example, and think it should be clarified. I guess I will here from Perry soon if he agrees that the *potential* of CX is enough for the AFV, because in an Armored Assault example in the new Platoon Movement rules, I do exactly this - move the AFV based on the MF from a potential CX. So if Perry accepts this example, then we got a clarification. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From smcbee at midtnn.net Sat Apr 16 05:51:46 2005 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Sat Apr 16 05:52:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B question on Shellholes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54283$133274f0$79f19904@steves> Joe, There is errata for this on MMP's Website. Here it is from Scott R.'s compilation: Chapter B Terrain Chart In the Notes section for 'Shellholes' delete "unless BU". [Mw] Hope that helps, Steve Joe asked: Shellholes: B2.3 says that the conditional TEM apllies only to infantry. The Chapter B divider note (corresponding to TEM) says "Treat as Open Ground if entered at 1MF unless BU". What does the "unless BU" refer to (i.e. I thought BU applies only to vehicles)? From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 16 07:08:52 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 16 07:09:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh4 References: Message-ID: <006801c5428d$d30a80b0$6627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, More T3, >I have been spanked--and quite rightly so--by Jim and Aaron. Making amends > in "###." ***MCLEOD: Indeed George, but could you please stop smiling. ;) > The Poet Bates writes, > >> The use of "ADJACENT hex" does complicate the issue, doesn't it? > > A wee bit. > >> The capitalized form is defined by the ability to advance from one hex to >> another, which is not possible in this case as gravity desires that we >> move >> parallel with or at right angles to the earth. >> Still, the ability to cast grenades to some adjacent lower elevations but >> not others seems rather counterintuitive. One can almost visualize the >> nice >> arcs they would make. Thank heavens this isn't a game about defending >> castle walls. We'll see how the rules lawyers weigh in, and perhaps fire >> off a Perry Sez request if the House seems divided. > > Well, we two authourities are chiming in with support for my argument. > We'll have to see what the Norwegian judge says on the matter. :) > ###BATES: The Australian judge appears to be sitting this one out, too. > And the French & Russian guys are in a cafe across the street. What are > we > paying them for? > Hope you gave The Platters credit for the lines above. > Actually, I have one more thought on this matter. It occurs to me that > fire > from P4L1 to P3 is Point Blank Fire and A7.21 very explicitly allows PBF > between ADJACENT hexes. Apparently, concussion grenades sail though the > windows just fine. Why would not the same apply to smoke? > Put _that_ in your pipe & smoke it! ***MCLEOD: "puff, puff ... mmmm, the rains must have been just right in Panama this year ... still a no-go. >> 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). >> Landshark. >> 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. > > ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn > something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault > Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the MPh > or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. > > Back to you. > ###BATES: A clear foul, pro consul! > This is a confusion/memory access problem I have yet to overcome. Profuse > apologies. AM puts a cap on MF so that an AMing unit can't use it's full > allowance (which I mistakenly did). If there had been an SW in P3, I > could > spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place a > DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject > to > DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things the > same way? > I tend to learn better by doing (and failing). Perhaps this incident will > finally straighten me out. > Anyway, the WP toss is wiped. Did not happen. We have 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in > R3 > and 747LL safely in P3 with no DFF, correct? If so, pray proceed to the > below. ***MCLEOD: Seems good. Both have smoke in their hexes as well. > CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. > CX 337CC in O4 to O5 (1MF)... > ... to N5 (2MF). Will continue since you're unlikely to shoot. N6, M7 > (4MF). Remove CX. > 747b in L5 to M4, N4 (2MF). ***MCLEOD: "M4"? You mean oM5? > Here's where the rules question we just had comes back to get me again. > 8-1 in O6 assault moves, recovers BAZ: 3, got it (1MF). AM to O5 (2MF). > Nice target. Care to shoot? ***MCLEOD: Do you mena the "9-1" in O6? No shot. > If you have no DFF, then 337P in O2 will sit tight and stare at you. > However, depending on DFF results I still may elect to move him. > If your DFF activities are all "NE," consider the MPh over and go ahead > with > your DFPh. That wasn't too bad George. :) > Are we having fun yet? Abso-freaking-lutey! [GERMAN DFPh] ***MCLEOD: Not much will happen here, just my heroes in O2. Your smoke grenades will have been removed at the end of your MPh George, revealing that juicy 747 next to my 238. The 238 in P2 will fire at the 747 in P3 with 4FP (PBF), DR = 6 (1,5) = NMC. 747 MC DR = 4 (1,3) ... Oh, oh. That is about it for my D'fire. :) Your AFPh George. =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 16 07:24:08 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 16 07:22:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] FW: Clarification on smoke grenade use from buildings (A24.1) Message-ID: Here it is in black & white, kiddies. And don't forget to use that official Q&A address--though I suspect that Perry's personal answer would not differ from his official answer... - G -----Original Message----- From: perrycocke@comcast.net [mailto:perrycocke@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 10:47 PM To: George Bates Subject: Re: Clarification on smoke grenade use from buildings (A24.1) > Can smoke grenades be placed in adjacent (no caps) hexes from the upper > levels of buildings? No. For official answers write to asl_qa@multimanpublishing.com ....Perry From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Sat Apr 16 08:31:06 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sat Apr 16 08:31:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Open Roommate Needed Message-ID: <002701c54299$4ec9e190$0200a8c0@Father> Would like to share room expenses for Friday and Saturday night at the ASL Open in Chicago. Anyone looking for a roommate? This partisan does not not snore (that's why he is still around) but keeps late hours in the gaming room (a bitter ender!). "Zadra" From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 16 08:58:31 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 16 08:56:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) AdvFPh, RtPh, AdvPh, CCPh & T3(G) RPh In-Reply-To: <006801c5428d$d30a80b0$6627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: If this were billiards, it would be time to clear the table. Jim may yet have his day, but mine comes now in "$$$." My, but the Bushmill's is particularly savory this evening... -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 11:09 PM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) MPh4 Listerz, More T3, >I have been spanked--and quite rightly so--by Jim and Aaron. Making amends > in "###." ***MCLEOD: Indeed George, but could you please stop smiling. ;) $$$BATES: You prefer your mares to enjoy an occasional taste of crop, Jim, my boy? > The Poet Bates writes, > >> The use of "ADJACENT hex" does complicate the issue, doesn't it? > > A wee bit. > >> The capitalized form is defined by the ability to advance from one hex to >> another, which is not possible in this case as gravity desires that we >> move >> parallel with or at right angles to the earth. >> Still, the ability to cast grenades to some adjacent lower elevations but >> not others seems rather counterintuitive. One can almost visualize the >> nice >> arcs they would make. Thank heavens this isn't a game about defending >> castle walls. We'll see how the rules lawyers weigh in, and perhaps fire >> off a Perry Sez request if the House seems divided. > > Well, we two authourities are chiming in with support for my argument. > We'll have to see what the Norwegian judge says on the matter. :) > ###BATES: The Australian judge appears to be sitting this one out, too. > And the French & Russian guys are in a cafe across the street. What are > we > paying them for? > Hope you gave The Platters credit for the lines above. > Actually, I have one more thought on this matter. It occurs to me that > fire > from P4L1 to P3 is Point Blank Fire and A7.21 very explicitly allows PBF > between ADJACENT hexes. Apparently, concussion grenades sail though the > windows just fine. Why would not the same apply to smoke? > Put _that_ in your pipe & smoke it! ***MCLEOD: "puff, puff ... mmmm, the rains must have been just right in Panama this year ... still a no-go. $$$BATES: Well, Perry just told me I'm smoking oregano, so we'll can that idea from now on. >> 747LL gives up AM to try to give you a WP-gram in P2: 1; placed (4MF). >> Landshark. >> 238 NMC: 4, 3; passed. > > ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn > something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault > Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the MPh > or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. > > Back to you. > ###BATES: A clear foul, pro consul! > This is a confusion/memory access problem I have yet to overcome. Profuse > apologies. AM puts a cap on MF so that an AMing unit can't use it's full > allowance (which I mistakenly did). If there had been an SW in P3, I > could > spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place a > DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject > to > DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things the > same way? > I tend to learn better by doing (and failing). Perhaps this incident will > finally straighten me out. > Anyway, the WP toss is wiped. Did not happen. We have 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in > R3 > and 747LL safely in P3 with no DFF, correct? If so, pray proceed to the > below. ***MCLEOD: Seems good. Both have smoke in their hexes as well. > CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. > CX 337CC in O4 to O5 (1MF)... > ... to N5 (2MF). Will continue since you're unlikely to shoot. N6, M7 > (4MF). Remove CX. > 747b in L5 to M4, N4 (2MF). ***MCLEOD: "M4"? You mean oM5? $$$BATES: Ack, not enough coffee this morning. This should be L5-L4-M4. Holding down the northeast flank. > Here's where the rules question we just had comes back to get me again. > 8-1 in O6 assault moves, recovers BAZ: 3, got it (1MF). AM to O5 (2MF). > Nice target. Care to shoot? ***MCLEOD: Do you mena the "9-1" in O6? No shot. $$$BATES: I think I called him a 9-1 last turn, didn't I? OB says he's an 8-1, though. Really don't know _what_ is wrong with me lately. Maybe I put together a bad batch of brownies? The Missus is planning one of her scrumptious *carrot* cakes for tomorrow, maybe that'll straighten me out. Countermedication, mmm... > If you have no DFF, then 337P in O2 will sit tight and stare at you. > However, depending on DFF results I still may elect to move him. > If your DFF activities are all "NE," consider the MPh over and go ahead > with > your DFPh. That wasn't too bad George. :) > Are we having fun yet? Abso-freaking-lutey! [GERMAN DFPh] ***MCLEOD: Not much will happen here, just my heroes in O2. Your smoke grenades will have been removed at the end of your MPh George, revealing that juicy 747 next to my 238. The 238 in P2 will fire at the 747 in P3 with 4FP (PBF), DR = 6 (1,5) = NMC. 747 MC DR = 4 (1,3) ... Oh, oh. $$$BATES: You mean I actually _passed_ an MC? I'm practically speechless. That is about it for my D'fire. :) Your AFPh George. =Jim= $$$BATES: Here we are, about to give a whole new meaning to the term "sudden death." _Advance Fire Phase_ Let's take care of the most serious business first. 337D in T4 @S4, 3FP+2: 4, 2; NE. 747W IFP & 9-2 in R3 @S4, 8FP (ain't assault fire just the neatest thing?): 5, 6; NE. S4 is encircled. Would be even neater if I could _hit_ you with the assault fire... CX 747O in R4 @S4, 8FP+3: 5, 3; NE. 747GG in R5 @S4, 5FP+2: 1, 2; 1MC. That's more like it. Encircled 8-0 1MC: 3, 4; DM. Encircled DM 548: 1, 5; passed. No more point in shooting here, don't want any HoBs. 337P in O2 @P2, 3FP+3: 3, 1; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 6; pinned. I'm going to forgo further fire and try to ambush this irritating little jerk-off. _Rout Phase_ Since 747YY & 7-0 still have LoS to a KEU they have to put on their DM hat again. Now they choose P4 at their rout target and enter it for 2MF. Forgive me for doing your rout phase, but since both U5 & S4 have to try to surrender, I will declare "no quarter" (Lizzie Borden to your Catherine de Medici) on whichever does so first, and the other will be eliminated for FTR. Agreed? If so, we move to the... _Advance Phase_ 8-0/Radio in V5, 337D in T4, 337II/GerLMG in T5 all into U5. 747GG/MMG in R5 to S6. CX 747O in R4 to S4. "Where _is_ it, Precioussss?" 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in R3 to R4. 747LL in P3 to P2. Place CC counter. 8-1/BAZ in O5 to P4. 337EE in Q9 to P9. Looks like everybody's on station. Wish I could replace that squad's worth of casualties... _Close Combat Phase_ Ambush drs, good guys: 5. Bad guys, 6. No ambush. My 3-1: 2, 6; CR. Your 1-4: 3-1; near miss. That was almost a bummer. Please conceal U5, S4, S6, O2, P2, 8-1/BAZ in P4, P9, O6, M4. 9-2 in R4: 3; concealed. 747W/BAZ in R4: 2; concealed. 337CC in M7: 3; concealed. At this point, I control all 8 points worth of buildings. Well, here I am, King of the 'Ville. Come kick me out. My rally activities are below, just for kicks. US rally activities: Since R2 appears to be a dummy and the rest of your forces are offboard, I will retain concealment. Ldr in U5 orders two HS to recombine. Just in case you want to protest, check this one first. Deploying is only in your own player turn. Recombining is in either. CX squad in S6 tries to recover Ger MMG: 6; still lost, the Precious is lost! Thief! Baggins! Ldr in P4 rallies DM7-0: 4, 6; remove DM. Ldr in P4 rallies DM747: 5, 5; remove DM. Most unsavory. Squad in O6 tries to recover MMG: 2; recovered. OK, big fella, it's your moment to shine now. - G From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Sat Apr 16 09:08:14 2005 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Sat Apr 16 09:08:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASLRB reprint Message-ID: <332a4d0305041609086c187219@mail.gmail.com> what is the status of the reprint? -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury@gmail.com From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Apr 16 09:37:55 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Apr 16 09:35:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASLRB reprint In-Reply-To: <332a4d0305041609086c187219@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, Chuck T wrote: > what is the status of the reprint? > Perry wrote the following on Consimworld yesterday: > I expect it before July. > I am hoping for well before July. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From asl1 at bellsouth.net Sat Apr 16 11:06:28 2005 From: asl1 at bellsouth.net (asl1@bellsouth.net) Date: Sat Apr 16 11:06:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] E-mail Address Message-ID: <20050416180628.FYRQ1995.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Afternoon, This is for Kimmo (a.ka. Sgt. Steiner). Kimmo, my e-mails are being returned .. you have a new e-mail address? Thanks, Pierce From robertthepastor at juno.com Sat Apr 16 17:46:35 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sat Apr 16 18:09:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair Message-ID: <20050416.180827.3392.1.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Howdy! Bruce wrote, "The wider question of what happens to a captured vehicle whose MA is not merely malfunctioned but actually disabled is pretty straight-forward. The language of D3.7 is plain: immediate Recall. This is supported by D5.1, which tells us that all the rules applicable to Inherent crews also apply to Temporary Crews, except where specified otherwise. The only reference to Temporary Crews in the Recall rules is for SMC (D5.343), which is NA here. So, if the Temporary Crew is able to drive the vehicle anywhere at all, they must attempt to exit the map. If the temporary crew cannot move the vehicle, they must Abandon it." I disagree _only_ with a captured vehicle whose MA is disabled and being manned by a Temporary / Inherent crew is subject to immediate Recall. Yes, Bruce *is* correct that rule D3.7 is clear and plain, and so states the vehicle is subject to immediate Recall. However, *I* feel the _intent_ of this rule is for a *non-captured* vehicle whose MA is disabled and manned by an Inherent crew is subject to immediate Recall. I also feel the intent for a non-captured vehicle whose MA is disabled and manned by a _Temporary_ crew should receive *one* attempt to get the beast moving towards a FBE so as to exit; failure to start the thing or it becomes Stopped for any reason (e.g., Immobilization, Bog), the Temporary crew must Bail-Out. As for a captured vehicle, it should be treated the same way as a non-captured vehicle manned by a Temporary crew. Mind you, the crew of this vehicle should not be allowed to expend a Stop MP with my example. The rules are clear that a Stop MP may not used while under Recall. Now, with all of that said, I really have NO rules leg to stand on. My opponent would be most correct in demanding the Recall of the vehicle (unless it I *was* playing Bruce, then I would ignore him). :-) IOW, *I feel* the _intent_ was only for an Inherent crew in their non-captured vehicle to be so mandated to be under Recall. All others should receive one voluntary attempt to exit the vehicle; failure to do so and they must Abandon it with NO other enemy Personnel allowed to man the vehicle. Mind you, as the rules currently are -- if the captured vehicle and its crew are under Recall, and they become Stopped, for what ever reason (barring a burning Wreck ), they must Abandon it but another friendly to the crew Personnel could man the vehicle! I don't think that should be allowed. Take care, Robert From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 16 18:19:31 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 16 18:19:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ANZACon 2005 Message-ID: <2va361t5s832ltieedfhm63jqbjjcmdviq@4ax.com> Once again Army Group South, Victoria's ASL club is proud to present ANZACon, our annual ASL tournament. This is the 10th consecutive year the tournament has been run! The format for this year's tournament is "scenarios you haven't seen before". Designers from around the world have volunteered several designs that have not yet seen official publication any where, so they're sure to be "new" to all tournament participants and represent a variety of settings and ideas. There will be five rounds in total. As always, the tournament is held at the Ashburton Public Library (address below) in Melbourne over the ANZAC Day long weekend. That means 23 April - 25 April. In addition, Friday night (22 April) there will be "open gaming" for you to play whatever against whoever. Some excellent prizes donated by our sponsors will be on offer, so bring your best dice along! Not to mention the usual "ANZACon trophy" for the tournament victor, this year being constructed by Dave Bardi. Tournament entry fee is $25. *** HERE IS WHAT YOU NEED TO BRING AND/OR KNOW FOR THIS YEAR'S TOURNAMENT: Five rounds in total: 2 on Saturday, 2 on Sunday, 1 on Monday. Don't forget "open gaming night" on Friday night! NATIONALITIES INVOLVED: American; British; Finnish; Germans (including SS); Partisan; Russian. BOARDS REQUIRED: 5, 9, 20, 24, 32, 40, 44, 46 OVERLAYS REQUIRED: G2, G3, G4, G5, O2, Oc1, Oc2, Oc3, Oc4, Wd4, X15, X18 (All local Melbourne players are encouraged to bring their boards, overlays, etc. so that we can be sure to have enough to go around.) Per ANZACON tradition, a dinner will be organised for the Saturday night for all those interested. Partners welcome. *** Proudly sponsored by: MMP www.multimanpublishing.com Military Simulations www.milsims.com.au Games 4 Gamers www.games4gamers.net Read all about Army Group South at our web page at http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/asl-victoria/ or call Neil Andrews (Club Secretary) on (03) 9801 1412. Our Club meetings are held at the Copeland Committee Room at the Ashburton Public Library, 154 High Street, Ashburton. (Melways Reference 60-C9) Please direct all queries to the tournament organiser: Bruce Probst at bprobst@netspace.net.au or telephone (03) 9563 3873. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 16 19:06:45 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 16 19:06:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Don't Antipodeans _always_ get up from the wrong side of the bed? In-Reply-To: <0fj1611b3vufkp92kkkprbtnq3b827mu84@4ax.com> References: <0fj1611b3vufkp92kkkprbtnq3b827mu84@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 18:38:24 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote: >* Yes -- FFNAM doesn't apply, no matter what the unit does (unless the unit >breaks or Pins). Actually even if the unit Pins FFNAM still won't apply. D'oh. That'll teach me for trying to be comprehensively accurate! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 16 19:11:18 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 16 19:11:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] armoured assault clarification In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 08:43:44 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >An interesting point was raised there, however. The D9.31 EX seems to >indicate that the Infantry must actually declare CX in order for the AFV to >gain that extra hex. I.e., the argument runs that the EX *requires* CX, and >not just the potential of CX. Hmm. Hadn't noticed that. >However... Well, the EX is either correct (and I am wrong and the rule >should be clarified), or the EX is incorrect and should be changed. Right. And I agree that the EX is incorrect in asserting that an *actual* declaration of CX is required. At least, that's how I'd like the rule to work. If Perry wants the rule to work the way the EX describes it, the text of the rule needs further work. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 16 19:29:24 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 16 19:29:29 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050416.180827.3392.1.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20050416.180827.3392.1.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: <0ph36198q3muct1iv6tkjbu83am22rabe9@4ax.com> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 17:46:35 -0700, Robert M Hammond wrote: >However, *I* feel the _intent_ of this rule is for a *non-captured* >vehicle whose MA is disabled and manned by an Inherent crew is subject to >immediate Recall. Uh, Robert, you should not confuse "answering rules questions" with "discussions of what we wish the rules would say". It's easy and tempting to confuse the two, I know, but it only ends up hindering clarity. As you yourself note, your "rules" here are invented out of thin air, and bear no relationship to what is actually printed. FWIW, the only thing I would change about the current rules is: (a) make it crystal clear that no-one can attempt repair of anything that's captured, no matter who they are or what it is; and (b) a Temporary Crew (of either side) in a Recall situation should be forced to Abandon the vehicle instead of driving away with it. (Generally speaking, Recall represents the vehicle crew deciding to bug out with their valuable hides and valuable vehicle rather than stick around like regular grunts. When the crew *are* regular grunts, however, that motivation becomes suspect.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From robertthepastor at juno.com Sat Apr 16 20:55:17 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sat Apr 16 20:59:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair Message-ID: <20050416.205736.2328.2.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Bruce, I was not confuse, it was quite deliberate on my part. :) I do completely agree with you on your point "(a)". I agree with your point "(b)" but two things: 1. What a captured vehicle manned by an Inherent (i.e., vehicle) crew? Should they be forced to Recall? Truthfully, I don't know. I can see either way. 2. I am not sure I follow you on your point inside the parenthesis. Are you saying the vehicle crew, in *counter* form, should be under some sort of Recall? Again, I could see it either way. Robert On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 12:29:24 +1000 Bruce Probst writes: > On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 17:46:35 -0700, Robert M Hammond > wrote: > > >However, *I* feel the _intent_ of this rule is for a *non-captured* > >vehicle whose MA is disabled and manned by an Inherent crew is subject to > >immediate Recall. > > Uh, Robert, you should not confuse "answering rules questions" with > "discussions of what we wish the rules would say". It's easy and tempting to > confuse the two, I know, but it only ends up hindering clarity. > > As you yourself note, your "rules" here are invented out of thin air, and bear > no relationship to what is actually printed. > > FWIW, the only thing I would change about the current rules is: > > (a) make it crystal clear that no-one can attempt repair of anything that's > captured, no matter who they are or what it is; > > and > > (b) a Temporary Crew (of either side) in a Recall situation should be forced > to Abandon the vehicle instead of driving away with it. (Generally speaking, > Recall represents the vehicle crew deciding to bug out with their valuable > hides and valuable vehicle rather than stick around like regular grunts. When > the crew *are* regular grunts, however, that motivation becomes suspect.) From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Apr 17 07:22:37 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Apr 17 07:22:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050416.205736.2328.2.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20050416.205736.2328.2.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: <66r46111oio9at97upr0hrlgorb057q9l4@4ax.com> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 20:55:17 -0700, Robert M Hammond wrote: >1. What a captured vehicle manned by an Inherent (i.e., vehicle) crew? Vehicle, shmiecle. They're a "Temporary Crew" by the definition of the rule. Thus any rule (actual or speculative) that applies to a Temporary Crew applies to them. I don't want to see "conditional" rules more complicated than the ones that already exist. >2. I am not sure I follow you on your point inside the parenthesis. Are >you saying the vehicle crew, in *counter* form, should be under some sort >of Recall? Again, I could see it either way. No, not at all. Once they're in counter form they're not under any sort of restrictions whatsoever (with the exception that a *particular* crew counter may not be allowed to recrew a *particular* Immobile vehicle, if they were forced to Abandon that Immobile vehicle due to Recall). All I was trying to say that infantry that man a vehicle "just because they can" should not be classed as if they were a "real" vehicular crew (i.e., the crew that trained with that vehicle), and I think only "real" vehicular crews are the ones that should be forced to adhere to Recall. Everyone else ought to just bug out of the thing if it's not working properly any more. But this is all just hypothetical gas-bagging, and really has nothing to do with what the rules *actually* say, which is that any type of crew (inherent or Temporary) will abide by all the Recall restrictions as per usual. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From robertthepastor at juno.com Sun Apr 17 15:13:13 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sun Apr 17 15:15:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair Message-ID: <20050417.151331.3396.6.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Bruce wrote, ". . . and I think only "real" vehicular crews are the ones that should be forced to adhere to Recall. Everyone else ought to just bug out of the thing if it's not working properly any more." Well, it sounds like you agree with me! :-) Great. So, how do we ask Perry about this?????? Robert From frango1000 at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 17 18:51:19 2005 From: frango1000 at sbcglobal.net (David Goldman) Date: Sun Apr 17 18:51:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Set Nearly Complete (NO Red Barricades or DB) Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050417203535.00b26cb0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> For sale: Nearly complete set of ASL Modules. The only missing Modules are Red Barricades and Doomed Battalions. But everything else is here and in great condition. 99% of counters are clipped. All counters neatly sorted in clearly marked coin envelopes. All overlays are cut affixed with double sided tape and on page protectors in the appropriate module. All components including boxes are brand new except counters and overlays. Since the set is nearly complete the somewhat worn German and British counters are overwhelming duplicated with unworn counters, I can safely say that if you want a complete set, this is the one. Modules are: Beyond Valor Paratroopers Yanks Partisan West of Alamein The Last Hurrah Hollow Legions Croix De Guerre Code of Bushido Gung Ho! Kampfgruppe Pieper I Kampfgruppe Pieper II A Bridge Too Far Blood Reef Tarawa Operation Watchtower Operation Veritable Pegasus Bridge Streets of Fire Hedgerow Hell Contact me off line if you're interested. David Goldman No I'm not getting out of ASL, I just replaced my counters and I'm selling my extra set. From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Apr 17 19:30:38 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun Apr 17 19:30:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) AdvFPh, RtPh, AdvPh, CCPh & T3(G) RPh References: Message-ID: <002701c543be$9c5c9e90$450ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Greetings Listerz, Rounding out the top of the 3rd, > If this were billiards, it would be time to clear the table. Jim may yet > have his day, but mine comes now in "$$$." My, but the Bushmill's is > particularly savory this evening... Cheers George, I'll make mine Dalwhinnie. :) >> ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn >> something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault >> Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the >> MPh >> or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. >> >> Back to you. > >> ###BATES: A clear foul, pro consul! >> This is a confusion/memory access problem I have yet to overcome. >> Profuse >> apologies. AM puts a cap on MF so that an AMing unit can't use it's full >> allowance (which I mistakenly did). If there had been an SW in P3, I >> could >> spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place >> a >> DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject >> to >> DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things >> the >> same way? >> I tend to learn better by doing (and failing). Perhaps this incident >> will >> finally straighten me out. ***MCLEOD: No problem at all George. ASL being ASL, rule farts come with the scenery. >> Anyway, the WP toss is wiped. Did not happen. We have 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in >> R3 >> and 747LL safely in P3 with no DFF, correct? If so, pray proceed to the >> below. > > ***MCLEOD: Seems good. Both have smoke in their hexes as well. > >> CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. > >> CX 337CC in O4 to O5 (1MF)... > >> ... to N5 (2MF). Will continue since you're unlikely to shoot. N6, M7 >> (4MF). Remove CX. > >> 747b in L5 to M4, N4 (2MF). > > ***MCLEOD: "M4"? You mean oM5? > $$$BATES: Ack, not enough coffee this morning. This should be L5-L4-M4. > Holding down the northeast flank. >> Here's where the rules question we just had comes back to get me again. >> 8-1 in O6 assault moves, recovers BAZ: 3, got it (1MF). AM to O5 (2MF). >> Nice target. Care to shoot? > > ***MCLEOD: Do you mena the "9-1" in O6? No shot. > $$$BATES: I think I called him a 9-1 last turn, didn't I? OB says he's > an > 8-1, though. Really don't know _what_ is wrong with me lately. Maybe I > put > together a bad batch of brownies? The Missus is planning one of her > scrumptious *carrot* cakes for tomorrow, maybe that'll straighten me out. > Countermedication, mmm... ***MCLEOD: Better off with the Bushmills. ;) However, this does bring up an interesting situation. That "9-1" just passed his MC from my DFF shot a little while ago. Here is the sequence, >(Geroge Bate's move) "?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and >double-times out of your LoS to > I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be > 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm to > them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your > 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like > snipers, keep going... ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. > ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= 6 (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, please feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ DR for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them listed earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks." ***MCLEOD: Your 9-1 actually being an 8-1 would have broken instead of Pinned. A bunch of different results/actions could have occured had he not rallied. I will assume that A.2 applies here. >> If you have no DFF, then 337P in O2 will sit tight and stare at you. >> However, depending on DFF results I still may elect to move him. >> If your DFF activities are all "NE," consider the MPh over and go ahead >> with >> your DFPh. > > That wasn't too bad George. :) > >> Are we having fun yet? > > Abso-freaking-lutey! > > [GERMAN DFPh] > > ***MCLEOD: Not much will happen here, just my heroes in O2. Your smoke > grenades will have been removed at the end of your MPh George, revealing > that juicy 747 next to my 238. The 238 in P2 will fire at the 747 in P3 > with 4FP (PBF), DR = 6 (1,5) = NMC. 747 MC DR = 4 (1,3) ... Oh, oh. > $$$BATES: You mean I actually _passed_ an MC? I'm practically > speechless. > > That is about it for my D'fire. :) Your AFPh George. > $$$BATES: Here we are, about to give a whole new meaning to the term > "sudden death." > _Advance Fire Phase_ > Let's take care of the most serious business first. > 337D in T4 @S4, 3FP+2: 4, 2; NE. > 747W IFP & 9-2 in R3 @S4, 8FP (ain't assault fire just the neatest > thing?): > 5, 6; NE. S4 is encircled. Would be even neater if I could _hit_ you > with > the assault fire... > CX 747O in R4 @S4, 8FP+3: 5, 3; NE. > 747GG in R5 @S4, 5FP+2: 1, 2; 1MC. That's more like it. Encircled 8-0 > 1MC: 3, 4; DM. Encircled DM 548: 1, 5; passed. > No more point in shooting here, don't want any HoBs. > > 337P in O2 @P2, 3FP+3: 3, 1; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 6; pinned. > I'm going to forgo further fire and try to ambush this irritating little > jerk-off. > _Rout Phase_ > Since 747YY & 7-0 still have LoS to a KEU they have to put on their DM hat > again. Now they choose P4 at their rout target and enter it for 2MF. > Forgive me for doing your rout phase, but since both U5 & S4 have to try > to > surrender, I will declare "no quarter" (Lizzie Borden to your Catherine de > Medici) on whichever does so first, and the other will be eliminated for > FTR. Agreed? If so, we move to the... ***MCLEOD: All sounds to sadly true George. > _Advance Phase_ > 8-0/Radio in V5, 337D in T4, 337II/GerLMG in T5 all into U5. > 747GG/MMG in R5 to S6. > CX 747O in R4 to S4. "Where _is_ it, Precioussss?" > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in R3 to R4. > 747LL in P3 to P2. Place CC counter. > 8-1/BAZ in O5 to P4. > 337EE in Q9 to P9. > Looks like everybody's on station. Wish I could replace that squad's > worth > of casualties... ***MCLEOD: Oh waaaah! Trading 1 S. for 2.5 S. is a pretty good deal, and look at the hardware you picked up, cheap fun. > _Close Combat Phase_ > Ambush drs, good guys: 5. Bad guys, 6. No ambush. My 3-1: 2, 6; CR. > Your 1-4: 3-1; near miss. That was almost a bummer. ***MCLEOD: More waaah, for you good sir! > Please conceal U5, S4, S6, O2, P2, 8-1/BAZ in P4, P9, O6, M4. > 9-2 in R4: 3; concealed. > 747W/BAZ in R4: 2; concealed. > 337CC in M7: 3; concealed. ***MCLEOD: Got it all. > At this point, I control all 8 points worth of buildings. > Well, here I am, King of the 'Ville. Come kick me out. > My rally activities are below, just for kicks. ***MCLEOD: Oh, we're comming buddy ... > US rally activities: > Since R2 appears to be a dummy and the rest of your forces are offboard, I > will retain concealment. > > Ldr in U5 orders two HS to recombine. Just in case you want to protest, > check this one first. Deploying is only in your own player turn. > Recombining is in either. ***MCLEOD: That one I remember. :) > CX squad in S6 tries to recover Ger MMG: 6; still lost, the Precious is > lost! Thief! Baggins! > > Ldr in P4 rallies DM7-0: 4, 6; remove DM. > Ldr in P4 rallies DM747: 5, 5; remove DM. Most unsavory. ***MCLEOD: Yet more waaaah ... :) > Squad in O6 tries to recover MMG: 2; recovered. > OK, big fella, it's your moment to shine now. ***MCLEOD: We'll try. BTW, is there a "?" and a counter in J7? I will send you my off-board setup on the next steamer. Enjoy your whisky. =Jim= From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sun Apr 17 20:00:17 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sun Apr 17 20:23:11 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) AdvFPh, RtPh, AdvPh, CCPh & T3(G) RPh References: <002701c543be$9c5c9e90$450ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <01d001c543c5$b18c2fe0$a64d8918@klis.com> Moderator here. Jim wrote: > ***MCLEOD: Better off with the Bushmills. ;) However, this does bring up > an interesting situation. That "9-1" just passed his MC from my DFF shot a > little while ago. Here is the sequence, > > >(Geroge Bate's move) "?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and > >double-times out of your LoS to > > I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be > > 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm to > > them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your > > 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like > > snipers, keep going... > > ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage > that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. > > > ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... > > 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you > Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= 6 > (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, please > feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ DR > for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them listed > earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down > George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 > w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks." > > ***MCLEOD: Your 9-1 actually being an 8-1 would have broken instead of > Pinned. A bunch of different results/actions could have occured had he not > rallied. I will assume that A.2 applies here. Unfortunately, yes, this one will have to be governed by A.2. Sorry, Jim. This points up again how important it is to verify your oppo's logs for typos, etc. David "they're playing fast and loose" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 18 02:30:13 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 18 02:30:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050417.151331.3396.6.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20050417.151331.3396.6.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: <96v6615rf1lfnadvjo50cuhmh2o7trl26f@4ax.com> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:13:13 -0700, Robert M Hammond wrote: >Well, it sounds like you agree with me! :-) Great. So, how do we ask >Perry about this?????? Ask him about what? The rule isn't broken in its current form. See, here you go again, confusing general rules chatter with discussion about actual rules issues. Perry has plenty to keep himself busy already in fixing actual rules loopholes, without asking him (and everyone else) to adopt our "wannabe rules" as well. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From daveotway at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 03:41:35 2005 From: daveotway at yahoo.com (David Otway) Date: Mon Apr 18 03:41:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? Message-ID: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello all! Been outta loop for about 12 months - is AOO anywehere near ready yet? Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise but IS good) Cheers Dave Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From cryo at xs4all.nl Mon Apr 18 03:53:03 2005 From: cryo at xs4all.nl (cryo@xs4all.nl) Date: Mon Apr 18 03:53:11 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20822.145.72.98.1.1113821583.squirrel@145.72.98.1> This is the latest I heard: April 9 2005 - Status update on "Armies of Oblivion" Read a comment from MMP today on the yet to be released core module for ASL "Armies of Oblivion"; It's supposed to be done (yes... again...) except for "proofing the countersheets" 'cause some pieces of artwork are still missing. it was hinted though that the other components (scenarios, rules, boards) were indeed finished. Greets, Albert Follow the latest ASl news on http://www.cardboardwarriors.com > Hello all! > > Been outta loop for about 12 months - is AOO anywehere > near ready yet? > > Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth > spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise > but IS good) > > Cheers > > Dave From hofors at lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 18 04:39:07 2005 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: Mon Apr 18 04:39:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Many of the Schwerpunkt scenarios are really good, and their magazines are definitely worth buying. Regards, Mattias David Otway writes: > Hello all! > > Been outta loop for about 12 months - is AOO anywehere > near ready yet? > > Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth > spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise > but IS good) > > Cheers > > Dave > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From geb3 at inter.net Mon Apr 18 06:56:31 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Apr 18 06:54:52 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) Hairshirt in the RPh In-Reply-To: <002701c543be$9c5c9e90$450ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000701c5441e$6d1cf890$3200170a@DF6TP71X> I hang my head in shame and obediently answer all Jim's questions in "%%%." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 11:31 AM To: George Bates; ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(A) AdvFPh, RtPh, AdvPh, CCPh & T3(G) RPh Greetings Listerz, Rounding out the top of the 3rd, > If this were billiards, it would be time to clear the table. Jim may yet > have his day, but mine comes now in "$$$." My, but the Bushmill's is > particularly savory this evening... Cheers George, I'll make mine Dalwhinnie. :) >> ***MCLEOD: What! You can't "give up" AM George, or am I going to learn >> something new again. :) Near as I can tell, once you declare Assault >> Movement, that is it, you've declared and it lasts for the rest of the >> MPh >> or until buddy gets broken. So, unless I am incorrect, no WP placement. >> >> Back to you. > >> ###BATES: A clear foul, pro consul! >> This is a confusion/memory access problem I have yet to overcome. >> Profuse >> apologies. AM puts a cap on MF so that an AMing unit can't use it's full >> allowance (which I mistakenly did). If there had been an SW in P3, I >> could >> spend 1MF to stoop and pick it up without violating the AM cap (or place >> a >> DC in O3 for 1 MF, etc..). However, the SW recovery MF would be subject >> to >> DFF w/the -1 FFNAM modifier, as I understand it. Do you reckon things >> the >> same way? >> I tend to learn better by doing (and failing). Perhaps this incident >> will >> finally straighten me out. ***MCLEOD: No problem at all George. ASL being ASL, rule farts come with the scenery. >> Anyway, the WP toss is wiped. Did not happen. We have 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in >> R3 >> and 747LL safely in P3 with no DFF, correct? If so, pray proceed to the >> below. > > ***MCLEOD: Seems good. Both have smoke in their hexes as well. > >> CX 747SS in Q8 to P7, O7, O6 (4MF). Remove CX. > >> CX 337CC in O4 to O5 (1MF)... > >> ... to N5 (2MF). Will continue since you're unlikely to shoot. N6, M7 >> (4MF). Remove CX. > >> 747b in L5 to M4, N4 (2MF). > > ***MCLEOD: "M4"? You mean oM5? > $$$BATES: Ack, not enough coffee this morning. This should be L5-L4-M4. > Holding down the northeast flank. >> Here's where the rules question we just had comes back to get me again. >> 8-1 in O6 assault moves, recovers BAZ: 3, got it (1MF). AM to O5 (2MF). >> Nice target. Care to shoot? > > ***MCLEOD: Do you mena the "9-1" in O6? No shot. > $$$BATES: I think I called him a 9-1 last turn, didn't I? OB says he's > an > 8-1, though. Really don't know _what_ is wrong with me lately. Maybe I > put > together a bad batch of brownies? The Missus is planning one of her > scrumptious *carrot* cakes for tomorrow, maybe that'll straighten me out. > Countermedication, mmm... ***MCLEOD: Better off with the Bushmills. ;) However, this does bring up an interesting situation. That "9-1" just passed his MC from my DFF shot a little while ago. Here is the sequence, >(Geroge Bate's move) "?+7 in H6 drops all its extraneous kit and >double-times out of your LoS to > I6, J6, K6 (3MF), where you're lonely 8-0 in S4 makes them out to be > 747K/BAZ, 747O/dmMMG, 747GG/dmMMG, 9-1. Since there's no possible harm to > them now they continue to L5 & M6 (5MF), but when they hit N5 (6MF), your > 238 in P2 is eligible for a shot. Your call? Assuming you don't like > snipers, keep going... ***MCLEOD: Actually, I believe that there is no LOS George. That Bocage that is covered by the Overlay blocks the LOS. > ... bypass O6 on O5 (7MF)... 33***MCLEOD: Whoa there big guy! My HS in P2 will fire at you as you Bypass O6 at the first vertice you reach. 1FP (LR) -2 at your stack, DR= 6 (1,5) = NMC. Since this is my first result on a fire attack George, please feel free to roll back to wherever I make an error. _I_ now make _your_ DR for the MC, correct? If so, here goes, to to bottom as you have them listed earlier in your message. Here goes the results ... are you sitting down George? 9-1 DR = 9 (3,6) = Pins; 747w/Baz DR = 11 (5,6) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 8 (3,5) = Breaks; 747 w/MMG(dm) DR = 10 (4,6) = Breaks." ***MCLEOD: Your 9-1 actually being an 8-1 would have broken instead of Pinned. A bunch of different results/actions could have occured had he not rallied. I will assume that A.2 applies here. %%%BATES: All I can do is apologize, and that's not enough when my carelessness costs you. This is not the way things should work. Hopefully, there'll be a similar error in your favor or one of us will win by such a wide margin that this mistake won't matter. If we have a situation later that seems too close to call, feel free to call this chit in. >> If you have no DFF, then 337P in O2 will sit tight and stare at you. >> However, depending on DFF results I still may elect to move him. >> If your DFF activities are all "NE," consider the MPh over and go ahead >> with >> your DFPh. > > That wasn't too bad George. :) > >> Are we having fun yet? > > Abso-freaking-lutey! > > [GERMAN DFPh] > > ***MCLEOD: Not much will happen here, just my heroes in O2. Your smoke > grenades will have been removed at the end of your MPh George, revealing > that juicy 747 next to my 238. The 238 in P2 will fire at the 747 in P3 > with 4FP (PBF), DR = 6 (1,5) = NMC. 747 MC DR = 4 (1,3) ... Oh, oh. > $$$BATES: You mean I actually _passed_ an MC? I'm practically > speechless. > > That is about it for my D'fire. :) Your AFPh George. > $$$BATES: Here we are, about to give a whole new meaning to the term > "sudden death." > _Advance Fire Phase_ > Let's take care of the most serious business first. > 337D in T4 @S4, 3FP+2: 4, 2; NE. > 747W IFP & 9-2 in R3 @S4, 8FP (ain't assault fire just the neatest > thing?): > 5, 6; NE. S4 is encircled. Would be even neater if I could _hit_ you > with > the assault fire... > CX 747O in R4 @S4, 8FP+3: 5, 3; NE. > 747GG in R5 @S4, 5FP+2: 1, 2; 1MC. That's more like it. Encircled 8-0 > 1MC: 3, 4; DM. Encircled DM 548: 1, 5; passed. > No more point in shooting here, don't want any HoBs. > > 337P in O2 @P2, 3FP+3: 3, 1; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 6; pinned. > I'm going to forgo further fire and try to ambush this irritating little > jerk-off. > _Rout Phase_ > Since 747YY & 7-0 still have LoS to a KEU they have to put on their DM hat > again. Now they choose P4 at their rout target and enter it for 2MF. > Forgive me for doing your rout phase, but since both U5 & S4 have to try > to > surrender, I will declare "no quarter" (Lizzie Borden to your Catherine de > Medici) on whichever does so first, and the other will be eliminated for > FTR. Agreed? If so, we move to the... ***MCLEOD: All sounds to sadly true George. > _Advance Phase_ > 8-0/Radio in V5, 337D in T4, 337II/GerLMG in T5 all into U5. > 747GG/MMG in R5 to S6. > CX 747O in R4 to S4. "Where _is_ it, Precioussss?" > 747W/BAZ & 9-2 in R3 to R4. > 747LL in P3 to P2. Place CC counter. > 8-1/BAZ in O5 to P4. > 337EE in Q9 to P9. > Looks like everybody's on station. Wish I could replace that squad's > worth > of casualties... ***MCLEOD: Oh waaaah! Trading 1 S. for 2.5 S. is a pretty good deal, and look at the hardware you picked up, cheap fun. > _Close Combat Phase_ > Ambush drs, good guys: 5. Bad guys, 6. No ambush. My 3-1: 2, 6; CR. > Your 1-4: 3-1; near miss. That was almost a bummer. ***MCLEOD: More waaah, for you good sir! %%%BATES: Are you gonna call me a waahmbulance? 8-) > Please conceal U5, S4, S6, O2, P2, 8-1/BAZ in P4, P9, O6, M4. > 9-2 in R4: 3; concealed. > 747W/BAZ in R4: 2; concealed. > 337CC in M7: 3; concealed. ***MCLEOD: Got it all. > At this point, I control all 8 points worth of buildings. > Well, here I am, King of the 'Ville. Come kick me out. > My rally activities are below, just for kicks. ***MCLEOD: Oh, we're comming buddy ... > US rally activities: > Since R2 appears to be a dummy and the rest of your forces are offboard, I > will retain concealment. > > Ldr in U5 orders two HS to recombine. Just in case you want to protest, > check this one first. Deploying is only in your own player turn. > Recombining is in either. ***MCLEOD: That one I remember. :) %%%BATES: You'd be surprised how many don't... > CX squad in S6 tries to recover Ger MMG: 6; still lost, the Precious is > lost! Thief! Baggins! > > Ldr in P4 rallies DM7-0: 4, 6; remove DM. > Ldr in P4 rallies DM747: 5, 5; remove DM. Most unsavory. ***MCLEOD: Yet more waaaah ... :) %%%BATES: We could break into a Doug & Wendy Whiner routine. But seriously, if you get inside my screen early it's quite possible those guys'll remain belly-up all game... > Squad in O6 tries to recover MMG: 2; recovered. > OK, big fella, it's your moment to shine now. ***MCLEOD: We'll try. BTW, is there a "?" and a counter in J7? I will send you my off-board setup on the next steamer. Enjoy your whisky. =Jim= %%%BATES: Yes, J7 is occupied by a ?+1 that moved onboard in T2(A) and never showed himself. Trying to cover all likely avenues of approach. Hey, along with your setup, would you put some Triscuits in a care package on that steamer for me, too? Can't get 'em here, and sometimes I crave. The whisky was gooooooood. Your setup, sweetpants. - G From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Apr 18 07:13:44 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon Apr 18 07:14:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050418104135.12080.qmail@web31002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050418091145.01cc5fb8@pop3.direcway.com> At 05:41 AM 4/18/2005, David Otway wrote: >Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth >spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise >but IS good) Heat of Battle's: Beyond the Beachhead Battle Pack Fighting the Bocage by Chas Smith Beyond the Beachhead offers players the opportunity to do cardboard battle on more "Normandy-like" terrain. The scenarios range from 6 June to 25 July, 1944 with a variety of forces including U.S., British, Canadian, German, and SS. BtB contains two brand-new geomorphic mapboards, two geomorphic half-board overlays, and eight action-packed scenarios. Best TTP out there now, then SP's package, then...well not much... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From homercles11 at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 07:28:19 2005 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Mon Apr 18 07:28:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050418091145.01cc5fb8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: yeah but .... bocage Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: ron mosher To: David Otway ,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:13:44 -0500 At 05:41 AM 4/18/2005, David Otway wrote: >Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth >spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise >but IS good) Heat of Battle's: Beyond the Beachhead Battle Pack Fighting the Bocage by Chas Smith Beyond the Beachhead offers players the opportunity to do cardboard battle on more "Normandy-like" terrain. The scenarios range from 6 June to 25 July, 1944 with a variety of forces including U.S., British, Canadian, German, and SS. BtB contains two brand-new geomorphic mapboards, two geomorphic half-board overlays, and eight action-packed scenarios. Best TTP out there now, then SP's package, then...well not much... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From sidirezegh at charter.net Mon Apr 18 07:58:25 2005 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Mon Apr 18 07:58:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? Message-ID: <3rr7ar$us0veq@mxip11a.cluster1.charter.net> Bocage is cool and easy now that v2 has cleared it up. Don't let the mere thought of it deter you. -Chas "Bustle in my hedgerow" Argent > > From: "Paul Kenny" > Date: 2005/04/18 Mon PM 02:28:19 GMT > To: rjmosher@direcway.com, daveotway@yahoo.com, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? > > > > yeah but .... bocage > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: ron mosher > To: David Otway ,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? > Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:13:44 -0500 > > At 05:41 AM 4/18/2005, David Otway wrote: > >Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth > >spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise > >but IS good) > > Heat of Battle's: > > > Beyond the Beachhead > > > > Battle Pack Fighting the Bocage by Chas Smith > > Beyond the Beachhead offers players the opportunity to do cardboard battle > on more "Normandy-like" terrain. The scenarios range from 6 June to 25 July, > 1944 with a variety of forces including U.S., British, Canadian, German, and > SS. > BtB contains two brand-new geomorphic mapboards, two geomorphic half-board > overlays, and eight action-packed scenarios. > > Best TTP out there now, then SP's package, then...well not much... > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From homercles11 at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 08:00:31 2005 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Mon Apr 18 08:00:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <3rr7ar$us0veq@mxip11a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: I get nauseaus at the mere thought. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: Chas Argent To: "Paul Kenny" , , , Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:58:25 +0000 Bocage is cool and easy now that v2 has cleared it up. Don't let the mere thought of it deter you. -Chas "Bustle in my hedgerow" Argent > > From: "Paul Kenny" > Date: 2005/04/18 Mon PM 02:28:19 GMT > To: rjmosher@direcway.com, daveotway@yahoo.com, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? > > > > yeah but .... bocage > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: ron mosher > To: David Otway ,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? > Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:13:44 -0500 > > At 05:41 AM 4/18/2005, David Otway wrote: > >Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth > >spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise > >but IS good) > > Heat of Battle's: > > > Beyond the Beachhead > > > > Battle Pack Fighting the Bocage by Chas Smith > > Beyond the Beachhead offers players the opportunity to do cardboard battle > on more "Normandy-like" terrain. The scenarios range from 6 June to 25 July, > 1944 with a variety of forces including U.S., British, Canadian, German, and > SS. > BtB contains two brand-new geomorphic mapboards, two geomorphic half-board > overlays, and eight action-packed scenarios. > > Best TTP out there now, then SP's package, then...well not much... > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From btdtall at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 12:20:22 2005 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Mon Apr 18 12:20:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050418192022.92006.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Heat of Battle's "Onslaught to Orsha" is great too, probably the best next to RB. --- David Otway wrote: > Hello all! > > Been outta loop for about 12 months - is AOO > anywehere > near ready yet? > > Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth > spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise > but IS good) > > Cheers > > Dave > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From robertthepastor at juno.com Mon Apr 18 11:55:12 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Mon Apr 18 12:48:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair Message-ID: <20050418.124718.3480.4.RobertThePastor@juno.com> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:30:13 +1000 Bruce Probst writes: > On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:13:13 -0700, Robert M Hammond > wrote: > > >Well, it sounds like you agree with me! :-) Great. So, how do we ask > >Perry about this?????? > > Ask him about what? The rule isn't broken in its current form. See, here you > go again, confusing general rules chatter with discussion about actual rules > issues. Perry has plenty to keep himself busy already in fixing actual rules > loopholes, without asking him (and everyone else) to adopt our "wannabe rules" > as well. Ask if the *intent* was only for inherent (i.e., "real") crews to be subject to Recall. I never said the rule was broken. No, I'm NOT confusing "general rules chatter with ... actual rules issues"! It should have been plain for all to see that we were only discussing "general rules chatter". I thought I made that quite evident that we both are in agreement that the rule, as it currently is now, requires *any* crew to be subject to Recall. What is so confusing about that?? Nothing, obviously. But, again, if the *intent* of the rule was only for the vehicle crew, then it should be so specified. That was _all_ I was inquiring about, and it makes since for that (especially as you found yourself agreeing with me). Robert From aslbunker at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 16:35:29 2005 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Mon Apr 18 16:35:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker April Update Message-ID: <20050418233529.52752.qmail@web51709.mail.yahoo.com> Greetings from the Bunker and hello to all at the ASL Mailing List. The Bunker Crew has taken a well earned respite from Newsletter work this past month, but will begin cranking up Issue #21 next month for a September publishing date at the annual Bunker Bash. Issue # 20 of our amateur ASL Newsletter Dispatches from the Bunker made its publishing debut last month at the Nor'Easter Tournament to very positive reviews. As usual we have the three action-packed scenarios, with our analysis for each, including another Tourney style action from Steve Johns: Hill 731, this one portraying the Italian offensive into Greece during the Axis invasion of the Balkans in '41. An Italian Combined Arms Force is attacking a Greek border defense unit on Board 11. Quick playing and action packed with these Minor forces. Also seen in this Issue will be the Backhand Blow, a Kharkov '43 slug-fest, with the 1st SS juggernaut trying to smash their way into the Factory District of the city through a mixed Russian defense. Last but not least, the first in our 45th 'Thunderbirds' Infantry Division series, this one in southern France in 1944 with the Americans defending key buildings with the help of the French Resistance against a nasty counterattack by the famed 11th Panzer, the 'Ghost' Division. We've had a ball testing these, and hope they will be fun for all. We'll also have another fine article co-authored by Jim Torkelson and Vince O'Connell, looking at the game from a novice perspective. Also on tap will be Carl Nogueira's tactical Tips, a look back at both the 2004 Bunker Bash and the New York State ASL Championship held last December in Albany, and a look at the Nor'Easter Tournament. This 12 page Amateur Newsletter comes to the greater ASL Community twice a year, sometime in March and September courtesy of the New England ASL Community, including the Bunker Crew and our yasl Brothers in Southern New England. IF this sounds like a successful clearance attempt on that minefield blocking your exit, 4 Issue Subscriptions and ALL Back-Issues are still available, and here is how to get yours (all prices include S & H make all checks/money orders out to Vic Provost, Please, NOT Dispatches from the Bunker): 4 Issue Subscription (Starting with current Issue #20): In the USA: $13.00 (Check/Money Order/Cash) Outside the States: $15.00 (International Postal Money Order or USA Currency Only, Sorry, NO Credit Cards, Personal Checks not drawn on a USA Bank, NO Western Union, Nor Pay-Pal, this is an Old School Amateur Effort and our Hobby, not a Full Time 'Business' :-) Back-Issues: Issue #01 is our FREE Preview Issue available with any New Subscription or upon request with a #10 SASE. All other Back-Issues (#02 - #19) are $3.50 Each in the USA or $4.00 Each outside the States. All 20 Issues in print (No subscription): $45.00 in the USA, $50.00 outside the states. The Works: All 20 Issues plus a 4 Issue Subscription, starting with current Issue #20 (23 Issues in total) $55.00 in the USA, $60.00 outside the states Make your remittance out to Vic Provost and send to: Vic Provost Dispatches from the Bunker P.O. Box 2024 Hinsdale MA 01235 USA Any other questions just reply to my e-mail at: aslbunker@aol.com and I'll do my best to answer your query. Thanks again to all my Contributors, Playtesters, and Subscribers, without whom the Newsletter would not be possible. Thanks for your time and consideration, your ASL Comrade, Vic Provost. 'SSR: All Occupants of the Bunker Location are considered Fanatic [A10.8]' __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From swfancher at mindspring.com Mon Apr 18 18:57:38 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Mon Apr 18 18:57:46 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <20050418192022.92006.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050418192022.92006.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050418215653.02301770@mindspring.com> I'll second this - if you can only get one ASL product, OtO is the way to go IMO. When you factor in the price as well...can't beat it hands down! Seth At 03:20 PM 4/18/2005, btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: >Heat of Battle's "Onslaught to Orsha" is great too, >probably the best next to RB. >--- David Otway wrote: > > Hello all! > > > > Been outta loop for about 12 months - is AOO > > anywehere > > near ready yet? > > > > Is there anything TP thats really good (i.e. worth > > spending hard cash on that should be spent otherwise > > but IS good) > > > > Cheers > > > > Dave > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From garciagd at velocity.net Mon Apr 18 18:59:33 2005 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Mon Apr 18 18:59:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion release date ? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050418215653.02301770@mindspring.com> Message-ID: "I'll second this - if you can only get one ASL product, OtO is the way to go IMO. When you factor in the price as well...can't beat it hands down!" Agreed a truly wonderful product. One of the best for ASL in years. Peace Roger From e4spm at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 21:25:09 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Mon Apr 18 21:25:12 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW Message-ID: This came up in play last night. Side 1 is under Ammo Shortage. Side 2 capture MG from side 1. Is side 2 subject to any of the effects of the ammo shortage when firing the captured MG? David _________________________________________________________________ Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 From scottgreenman at comcast.net Mon Apr 18 22:02:26 2005 From: scottgreenman at comcast.net (Scott Greenman) Date: Mon Apr 18 22:01:53 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW References: Message-ID: <003601c5449c$fc5b8390$6601a8c0@PARENTS> I happened to stumble across this rule just today. No, captured weapons are not subject to ammo shortage. Says so in the captured weapons rules in chapter A. Scott "too tired for a specific rule #" Greenman ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Marvanek" To: Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 10:25 PM Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW > This came up in play last night. > > Side 1 is under Ammo Shortage. > Side 2 capture MG from side 1. > > Is side 2 subject to any of the effects of the ammo shortage when firing > the captured MG? > > David > > _________________________________________________________________ > Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: > http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From e4spm at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 23:19:19 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Mon Apr 18 23:19:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW In-Reply-To: <003601c5449c$fc5b8390$6601a8c0@PARENTS> Message-ID: Another question Can a PF create rubble? David >From: "Scott Greenman" >To: "David Marvanek" , >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW >Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 23:02:26 -0600 > >I happened to stumble across this rule just today. No, captured weapons are >not subject to ammo shortage. Says so in the captured weapons rules in >chapter A. > >Scott "too tired for a specific rule #" Greenman > >----- Original Message ----- From: "David Marvanek" >To: >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 10:25 PM >Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW > > >>This came up in play last night. >> >>Side 1 is under Ammo Shortage. >>Side 2 capture MG from side 1. >> >>Is side 2 subject to any of the effects of the ammo shortage when firing >>the captured MG? >> >>David >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: >>http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >>Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net >> > > _________________________________________________________________ Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 From mountainview at westelcom.com Tue Apr 19 04:19:40 2005 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Tue Apr 19 04:20:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ATR DI? References: Message-ID: <003a01c544d1$b7177a70$218e6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Listers, Can an ATR attempt Deliberate Immobilization? TIA, Christopher Fleury Sgt. Meikle's Bunker Mountain View Cottage Lewis, NY USS Iowa; BB-61 Camp Dudley #12557 ASL 6+1 From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Apr 19 04:27:14 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Apr 19 04:30:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ATR DI? Message-ID: <6702ecdce3f.42650732@broadpark.no> Hi, Mountain View Cottage wrote: > Can an ATR attempt Deliberate Immobilization? > Sure - provided the normal requirements are met (especially note that the ATR's Basic TK# must be > the targets lowest hull AF). The rule says that DI can be attempted by ordnance (which includes ATR), but not with Indirect Fire or MG/IFE, or when using the Area Target Type. ATR is not mentioned as NA, so it is allowed together with all other ordnance. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 19 06:05:09 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 19 06:05:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q on Captured vehicular weapon repair In-Reply-To: <20050418.124718.3480.4.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20050418.124718.3480.4.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: <9b0a619r51f6t5nvkavrsa16jrqph9q335@4ax.com> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 11:55:12 -0700, Robert M Hammond wrote: >No, I'm NOT confusing "general rules chatter with ... actual rules issues"! It >should have been plain for all to see that we were only discussing >"general rules chatter". Then why do you feel the urgent need to bring it to Perry's attention? I'm sure he can chatter as well as any of us but I'm not entirely sure I see the point. >But, again, if the *intent* of the rule was only for the vehicle crew, >then it should be so specified. That was _all_ I was inquiring about, >and it makes since for that (especially as you found yourself agreeing >with me). I'm pretty sure that Perry will have no better idea as to the "intent" of the rule than either of us. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 19 06:08:32 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 19 06:08:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW In-Reply-To: References: <003601c5449c$fc5b8390$6601a8c0@PARENTS> Message-ID: On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:49:19 +0930, "David Marvanek" wrote: >Can a PF create rubble? Sure. If you hit an infantry target in a building and roll very well you have a chance of rubbling the building. It's all in B24.11. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 20 07:20:36 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 20 07:20:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] ANZACon updated info Message-ID: I knew I'd manage to leave out something .... Start time for each day of the tournament is 9.00am. Start time for Friday night open gaming is any time after 7pm. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From spotlink at maine.rr.com Wed Apr 20 17:05:26 2005 From: spotlink at maine.rr.com (Ernie Bartis) Date: Wed Apr 20 17:05:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] From The Cellar Overlays Question Message-ID: <000a01c54605$d2896e50$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> Hello, This pack came with two overlays (FT5 and FT4). FT4 is used in one of the scenarios in the pack, but I cannot find any use for overlay FT5. Am I missing something? Thanks From swfancher at mindspring.com Wed Apr 20 17:23:40 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Wed Apr 20 18:06:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] From The Cellar Overlays Question In-Reply-To: <000a01c54605$d2896e50$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> References: <000a01c54605$d2896e50$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050420202128.0230e7a0@mindspring.com> Hi Ernie, It is not clear from a quick review of the scenarios, but the blockhouse (FT5) is also used in scenario FT50. Check out SSR3...a 2-hex building is replaced by a blockhouse that this overlay represents. Looks like a great scenario...it is high up on my list "To Play." HTH. Be well. Seth At 08:05 PM 4/20/2005, Ernie Bartis wrote: >Hello, > >This pack came with two overlays (FT5 and FT4). > >FT4 is used in one of the scenarios in the pack, but I cannot find any use >for overlay FT5. Am I missing something? > >Thanks > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From spotlink at maine.rr.com Wed Apr 20 18:45:03 2005 From: spotlink at maine.rr.com (Ernie Bartis) Date: Wed Apr 20 18:44:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] From The Cellar Overlays Question References: <000a01c54605$d2896e50$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> <6.2.1.2.2.20050420202128.0230e7a0@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <000501c54613$bcca3aa0$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> Hello, The blockhouse overlay mentioned in scenario FT50 sr3 is the same one mentioned in sr1. Its overlay FT4. The other overlay (FT5) is just a two hex dark patch and not the blockhouse. I cannot seem to find what it is supposed to be used for. Ernie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Seth W Fancher" To: "Ernie Bartis" ; "ASL List" Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 8:23 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] From The Cellar Overlays Question > Hi Ernie, > > It is not clear from a quick review of the scenarios, but the blockhouse > (FT5) is also used in scenario FT50. Check out SSR3...a 2-hex building is > replaced by a blockhouse that this overlay represents. > > Looks like a great scenario...it is high up on my list "To Play." > > HTH. Be well. > > Seth > > > > At 08:05 PM 4/20/2005, Ernie Bartis wrote: > >Hello, > > > >This pack came with two overlays (FT5 and FT4). > > > >FT4 is used in one of the scenarios in the pack, but I cannot find any use > >for overlay FT5. Am I missing something? > > > >Thanks > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > From e4spm at hotmail.com Wed Apr 20 18:57:56 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Wed Apr 20 18:57:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The reason I asked is that (NRBH) rubble can only be created by HE attacks of >= 70mm (or something like that) does a PF qualify? It is a HEAT weapon and nowhere could I find a clear definition of its calliber equivalent. David >From: Bruce Probst >Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au >To: "David Marvanek" >CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW >Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 23:08:32 +1000 > >On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:49:19 +0930, "David Marvanek" >wrote: > > >Can a PF create rubble? > >Sure. If you hit an infantry target in a building and roll very well you >have >a chance of rubbling the building. It's all in B24.11. > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > _________________________________________________________________ Buy want you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 From morrisgj at mscd.edu Wed Apr 20 19:43:42 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Wed Apr 20 19:43:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned Leader in CC Message-ID: <777c2d778ea7.778ea7777c2d@mscd.edu> Hello All: Can a Pinned Leader use his DRM in CC? (I know he cannot use it to direct fire.) Thanks, Gerry From e4spm at hotmail.com Wed Apr 20 19:58:29 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Wed Apr 20 19:58:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Wall TEM & wall advantage Message-ID: The situation: ___ ___ / A1 \___/ C1 \ \___/ B1 \___/ / A2 \___/ C2 \ \___/ B2 \___/ \___/ (hope my ascii graphics hold up :-) A unit is in A1 A wall exists on the B1 hex side that connects A1 to C1 A unit moves into C1. The Questions: Does the unit moving into C1 get wall protection vs the unit in A1? Does wall advantage play any part in this? Is the answer different in 1st ed vs 2nd ed rulebooks. David _________________________________________________________________ SEEK: Now with over 80,000 dream jobs! Click here: http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail From e4spm at hotmail.com Wed Apr 20 20:06:55 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Wed Apr 20 20:06:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Loss of cloaking/concealment Message-ID: The situation: Night scenario. A cloaked unit non-assault moves into a location that is ALREADY illuminated by a star shell. The location is NOT in LOS to any enemy units The questions: Does the moving unit lose cloaking status? Does the moving unit lose concealment status? (NRBH) the rules say something like 'unit (non assault?) moving into an illuminated location lose Cloaking/"?" The rules don't mention LOS to enemy units. Does Cloaking/"?" mean Cloaking AND concealment? David _________________________________________________________________ SEEK: Now with over 80,000 dream jobs! Click here: http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Apr 20 19:53:19 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Apr 20 20:29:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(GER) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 References: <000701c5441e$6d1cf890$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <002801c54622$4f258ae0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, 51. ***MCLEOD: Sorry for the delay. Here is the German Off-board setup (German units are off-board opposite the hex coordinate): "?" + 3 counters, N0 "?" + 4 counters, N10 "?" + 1 counter, O1 "?" + 1 counter, O10 "?" + 1 counter, Q10 "?" + 1 counter, R10 "?" + 3 counters, S10 "?" + 2 counters, U10 "?" + 4 counters, W1 "?" + 1 counter, X0 52. ***MCLEOD: WC DR = 3 (2,1) 53. ***MCLEOD: Deploy S. offboard of W1; DR = 7 (1,6), Deploys. [German RPh Over] [German PFPh] - None [German MPh] 54. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter in R2 AM to S3 (1.5 MF). 55. ***MCLEOD: ? + 1 counter off-board from Q10, AM to Q10 (1 MF), you see a 238 as I know that your "?" guy is real. Any D' fire "Kapitan"? =Jim= From damavs at alltel.net Wed Apr 20 20:57:09 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Wed Apr 20 20:57:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Wall TEM & wall advantage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050420235406.01e925c8@mail.alltel.net> David Marvanek wrote: >The situation: >___ ___ >/ A1 \___/ C1 \ >\___/ B1 \___/ >/ A2 \___/ C2 \ >\___/ B2 \___/ > \___/ >(hope my ascii graphics hold up :-) > >A unit is in A1 >A wall exists on the B1 hex side that connects A1 to C1 >A unit moves into C1. > >The Questions: > >Does the unit moving into C1 get wall protection vs the unit in A1? Yes. >Does wall advantage play any part in this? No, not at all if C1 is a non-TEM hex. If it's a building offering a +3 TEM the moving unit would have a choice & could/should choose the higher TEM - in pretty much any other case the unit in C1 would take the Wall TEM. >Is the answer different in 1st ed vs 2nd ed rulebooks. No. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From damavs at alltel.net Wed Apr 20 21:32:23 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Wed Apr 20 21:32:27 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Loss of cloaking/concealment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050420235723.01e86cd8@mail.alltel.net> David Marvanek wrote: >The situation: >Night scenario. >A cloaked unit non-assault moves into a location that is ALREADY >illuminated by a star shell. >The location is NOT in LOS to any enemy units > >The questions: >Does the moving unit lose cloaking status? No. LOS is a requirement for concealment/cloaking loss. >Does the moving unit lose concealment status? No - cloaking and concealment loss during the movement phase are essentially identical. There are some things a unit can do and stay concealed that require being de-cloaked for (successfully firing a starshell, shooting while outside enemy LOS etc.) >(NRBH) the rules say something like 'unit (non assault?) moving into an >illuminated location lose Cloaking/"?" >The rules don't mention LOS to enemy units. Quite odd that. I think E1.31 is phrased very poorly. I'd argue that the clause of E1.3 Concealment indicating "Night '?' varies from daylight '?' in only three ways & then mentions "...loses Cloaking/'?' at night if it uses Non-Assault Movement in a Location that is already illuminated WHEN that unit expends MF in it..." in E1.31, presumes LOS given these are the only differences listed & LOS is an essential presumption for nearly all concealment loss. Frankly I can't fathom the literal meaning is that No LOS to the unit is required & since they're only listing exceptions I presume that LOS being required is implied due to that exception. I play a fair amount of night and have never run across anyone interpreting that LOS is not required for ? loss at night. J.R. Van Mechlen's excellent article "Bring on the Night" also explicitly claims LOS must exist as well as using non-assault in an illuminated location (at least in the BackBlast version I consulted - not sure where it was reprinted). Bottom line, I'll agree it's stated poorly & perhaps a candidate for errata, but I'm essentially positive the intent is LOS is required to force concealment loss. Further backing this up is the Concealment Loss/Gain Table (A12.121) where "None in LOS" is only Case F which is broken/reduced/wounded, search and dummy that's mopped up. >Does Cloaking/"?" mean Cloaking AND concealment? They are different, but when losing cloaking involuntarily while moving, you lose both. Cloaking loss is specifically covered in E1.43 & the essence of the rule is "...for any situation that would cause one or more of its units to lose concealment at night, and for making any attack other than a successful ambush." Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 20 22:50:40 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 20 22:48:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 In-Reply-To: <002801c54622$4f258ae0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000501c54636$0f40cb10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Jim, I've got a few notes on your setup and activities in "###." Also, I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 have WA or not. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 11:53 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(GER) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 Listerz, 51. ***MCLEOD: Sorry for the delay. Here is the German Off-board setup (German units are off-board opposite the hex coordinate): "?" + 3 counters, N0 ###BATES: By my nomenclature, N-1. We on the same wavelength? "?" + 4 counters, N10 "?" + 1 counter, O1 "?" + 1 counter, O10 "?" + 1 counter, Q10 "?" + 1 counter, R10 "?" + 3 counters, S10 "?" + 2 counters, U10 "?" + 4 counters, W1 "?" + 1 counter, X0 ###BATES: "MP40s to the right of them, MG42s to the left of them..." 52. ***MCLEOD: WC DR = 3 (2,1) 53. ***MCLEOD: Deploy S. offboard of W1; DR = 7 (1,6), Deploys. [German RPh Over] [German PFPh] - None [German MPh] 54. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter in R2 AM to S3 (1.5 MF). ###BATES: Oh, him? I suppose he could give me grief using the SFF rules, but he's not worth dropping concealment and wasting bullets on. 55. ***MCLEOD: ? + 1 counter off-board from Q10, AM to Q10 (1 MF), you see a 238 as I know that your "?" guy is real. Any D' fire "Kapitan"? ###BATES: I was about to hit "send" when I realized you had more here. Nah, we'll see about some TLC for him in a little while. =Jim= ###BATES: Keep 'em coming, big fella. - G From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 21 01:45:27 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 21 01:48:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned Leader in CC Message-ID: Hi, > Can a Pinned Leader use his DRM in CC? (I know he cannot use it to > direct fire.) > > Gerry > No. A11.141 says "One leader may direct the CC attack..." A7.831 says: "A pinned leader can neither direct an attack..." So since A7.831 prevents the Pinned leader from directing attacks, and A11.141 tells us that using the leadership DRM in CC is to direct an attack, this is illegal. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 21 01:58:48 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 21 02:01:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Wall TEM & wall advantage Message-ID: Hi, > David Marvanek wrote: > >The situation: > >___ ___ > >/ A1 \___/ C1 \ > >\___/ B1 \___/ > >/ A2 \___/ C2 \ > >\___/ B2 \___/ > > \___/ > >(hope my ascii graphics hold up :-) > > > >A unit is in A1 > >A wall exists on the B1 hex side that connects A1 to C1 > >A unit moves into C1. > > > >The Questions: > > > >Does the unit moving into C1 get wall protection vs the unit in A1? > and Bret Hildebran answered: > Yes. > That's right. See the B9.2 example where enemy units in Y8 and Z9 both gain wall TEM vs each other. > >Does wall advantage play any part in this? > > No, not at all if C1 is a non-TEM hex. If it's a building offering a +3 > TEM the moving unit would have a choice & could/should choose the > higher TEM - in pretty much any other case the unit in C1 would take the > Wall TEM. > Correct, but note that a unit can always gain Wall TEM unless fired on by an adjacent unit that has Wall Advantage. So since no enemy can be adjacent and fire directly along a wall hexspine, WA doesn't play much part in this situation. > >Is the answer different in 1st ed vs 2nd ed rulebooks. > > No. > Correct. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 21 02:33:29 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 21 02:33:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned Leader in CC In-Reply-To: <777c2d778ea7.778ea7777c2d@mscd.edu> References: <777c2d778ea7.778ea7777c2d@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:43:42 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >Can a Pinned Leader use his DRM in CC? (I know he cannot use it to >direct fire.) A7.831. "A pinned leader can neither direct an attack ...." CC is a form of attack. So, no. More generally, a pinned leader cannot use his DRM for *anything* that I can think of. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Apr 21 05:30:57 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Apr 21 05:31:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Loss of cloaking/concealment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of David > Marvanek > Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 10:07 PM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Cc: toga@chariot.net.au > Subject: [Aslml] Q: Loss of cloaking/concealment > > (NRBH) the rules say something like 'unit (non assault?) moving into an > illuminated location lose Cloaking/"?" > The rules don't mention LOS to enemy units. It doesn't have to mention enemy LOS by virtue of the statement: "otherwise identical to daylight concealment" All concealment loss relative to movement/actions is predicated on the presence of enemy LOS. This can be found in section A12. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 08:29:48 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 21 08:29:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] VC question In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050421152948.94882.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Fellows, currently on scenario 5 of the 7 scen 1991 annual Arnhem CG. Loads of fun, and will report on the whole thing when finished. VC question, that I believe is clear, but is not dealt with in the Rulebook. for both Guards Attack (A35, now updated in FKaC), and A36 Oy Veghel, the VC function the same. for A35: British player wins by sole occupation of 17q6/q7 or 17P4/q4 at the conclusion of any player turn. the problem arises from the non-RB term, 'occupation'. We usually speak of control... To win A35, I happen to have had a hs on one hex, and a tank eliminated a German during an OVR in the other hex. thus, by any definition of occupation I won at the end of that player turn. However, in Oy Veghel, my opponent has 'thunder-ran' a Stug into Veghel, is now planning on abadoning the AFV, and running through the two victory hexes that constitue a single building, with his crew. He's arguing that in ASL that gives him 'control', and, with no allied counter in the building, he's the sole 'occupant'. Yes, really pushing it there, but I hate it when I have to rely on non-asl common sense to argue my position: that he has to physically have units on both hexes at the end of a player turn. so, a) am I right, and is there a 'rule' to back me up, or only language? b) does the FKaC version of this scen change the VC wording into ASL-ese? yours, Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 11:33:20 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 21 11:33:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... Message-ID: <20050421183320.8241.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Sirs, Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal sized artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought it was an AT gun. What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and there is no more AT capability on the map? Or simply 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my mind, and keep him guessing where it is to the end? Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From homercles11 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 11:47:26 2005 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Thu Apr 21 11:47:28 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: <20050421183320.8241.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I would replace it in a location adjacent to and pointing at my opponents most powerful tank. I think that is the way to go. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: Robert Nelson To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:33:20 -0700 (PDT) Sirs, Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal sized artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought it was an AT gun. What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and there is no more AT capability on the map? Or simply 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my mind, and keep him guessing where it is to the end? Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From damavs at alltel.net Thu Apr 21 11:55:43 2005 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Thu Apr 21 11:57:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... Message-ID: <20050421185543.KQNK14321.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Robert Nelson writes: > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal sized > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought it > was an AT gun. > > What is the etiquette here? Much depends on the tenor of the game - is it for fun? a tourney game where you're both in the running? a loser leaves town grudge match? > Tell him I goofed, and > there is no more AT capability on the map? That's certainly an option, although I don't think there's any need/obligation to inform your opponent that your HIP piece is no more. > Or simply > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my mind, > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? That's the most chivalrous answer, but also the most extreme and likely to unbalance the scenario. It's likely the magnanimous thing to offer. What I'd suggest - especially in a "for fun" game is to tell your opponent: "hey, I screwed up and illegally setup my gun here. Are you OK with me moving him here? (while pointing to some legal setup space that's in the vicinity, but likely behind your initial setup that isn't offering key shots at the moment of the move)" And if he agrees, put him onboard concealed & play on. You shouldn't gain an advantage from your error, but totally deleting the piece is extreme IMO. I've seldom seen an opponent demand the gun be totally deleted in such a situation, even in tournament play, although it is certainly w/i your opponent's rights to demand so. Typically a compromise can be reached that preserves the piece though w/o breaking the scenario. In a for fun game I'd expect that compromise to be reached & even in a tourney game it would be my first suggestion recognizing that the aggrieved party would have the right to demand a setup elimination if they so desired. The one silver lining w/having it eliminated is you'll remember it & be unlikely to make the same mistake again... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net www.aslok.org From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 12:13:03 2005 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu Apr 21 12:13:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050421191303.39033.qmail@web30702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > Sirs, > > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal sized > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought it > was an AT gun. > > What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and > there is no more AT capability on the map? Or simply > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my mind, > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? As Bret mentioned, what is the tenor of the game? If it was a friendly game I'd probably say words to the effect "Oh shit, my HIP gun is illegal" and negotiate from there, probably the closest legal set up location or some-such. Of course, another, almost viable, option is just keeping mum and eliminating the gun in your mind...and keep him guessing where it is as long as possible. How well this works depends on the scenario and possible set up locations for the gun. If its a tourny setting and both are in the running....well, I guess you just got out of the running. Winning Tourny play is all about not making mistakes, and that would be a big time mistake. Jazz > > Rob > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 12:25:13 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 21 12:25:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> It's PBEM, and its BIG, so the game will not be destroyed with the loss of this gun. tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing is not an option. Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. Rob --- Jazz wrote: > > > > Sirs, > > > > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal > sized > > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought > it > > was an AT gun. > > > > What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and > > there is no more AT capability on the map? Or > simply > > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my > mind, > > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? > > As Bret mentioned, what is the tenor of the game? > If it was a friendly game I'd probably say > words to the effect "Oh shit, my HIP gun is illegal" > and negotiate from there, probably the > closest legal set up location or some-such. > > Of course, another, almost viable, option is just > keeping mum and eliminating the gun in your > mind...and keep him guessing where it is as long as > possible. How well this works depends on the > scenario and possible set up locations for the gun. > > If its a tourny setting and both are in the > running....well, I guess you just got out of the > running. Winning Tourny play is all about not > making mistakes, and that would be a big time > mistake. > > Jazz > > > > Rob > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dave.connell at cougarcorp.com Thu Apr 21 12:48:51 2005 From: dave.connell at cougarcorp.com (Dave Connell) Date: Thu Apr 21 12:44:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... Message-ID: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8ADE@trinity.cougarcorp.com> Well, in that case, IMHO, I would eliminate it from your OB right now, but not tell him. You goofed and learn from your mistake and with sportsmanship, eliminate it. But he still must consider that a gun is present and the fact that it is not on the board, instead of HIP shouldn't matter much, except he never finds it. It's friendly and complies with a.2 and the "HIP" gun still makes it fun. It's all good. Dave"Take this with a grain of salt, hell salt to taste"Connell -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Robert Nelson Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 12:25 PM To: Jazz; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... It's PBEM, and its BIG, so the game will not be destroyed with the loss of this gun. tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing is not an option. Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. Rob --- Jazz wrote: > > > > Sirs, > > > > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal > sized > > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought > it > > was an AT gun. > > > > What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and > > there is no more AT capability on the map? Or > simply > > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my > mind, > > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? > > As Bret mentioned, what is the tenor of the game? > If it was a friendly game I'd probably say > words to the effect "Oh shit, my HIP gun is illegal" > and negotiate from there, probably the > closest legal set up location or some-such. > > Of course, another, almost viable, option is just > keeping mum and eliminating the gun in your > mind...and keep him guessing where it is as long as > possible. How well this works depends on the > scenario and possible set up locations for the gun. > > If its a tourny setting and both are in the > running....well, I guess you just got out of the > running. Winning Tourny play is all about not > making mistakes, and that would be a big time > mistake. > > Jazz > > > > Rob > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From s.deller at charter.net Thu Apr 21 13:11:53 2005 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Thu Apr 21 13:12:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8ADE@trinity.cougarcorp.com> Message-ID: <001101c546ae$5c623140$2083b018@DHT8S631> Ronb, I agree with Dave, et al. With the circumstances as you described you should eliminate the Gun, but don't tell him. If I was your opponent I wouldn't have any beef with you doing this (although I'd be OK with some negotiated alternative as well). Cheers, Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Connell" To: "Robert Nelson" ; "Jazz" ; Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:48 PM Subject: RE: [Aslml] Etiquette... Well, in that case, IMHO, I would eliminate it from your OB right now, but not tell him. You goofed and learn from your mistake and with sportsmanship, eliminate it. But he still must consider that a gun is present and the fact that it is not on the board, instead of HIP shouldn't matter much, except he never finds it. It's friendly and complies with a.2 and the "HIP" gun still makes it fun. It's all good. Dave"Take this with a grain of salt, hell salt to taste"Connell -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Robert Nelson Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 12:25 PM To: Jazz; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... It's PBEM, and its BIG, so the game will not be destroyed with the loss of this gun. tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing is not an option. Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. Rob --- Jazz wrote: > > > > Sirs, > > > > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal > sized > > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought > it > > was an AT gun. > > > > What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and > > there is no more AT capability on the map? Or > simply > > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my > mind, > > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? > > As Bret mentioned, what is the tenor of the game? > If it was a friendly game I'd probably say > words to the effect "Oh shit, my HIP gun is illegal" > and negotiate from there, probably the > closest legal set up location or some-such. > > Of course, another, almost viable, option is just > keeping mum and eliminating the gun in your > mind...and keep him guessing where it is as long as > possible. How well this works depends on the > scenario and possible set up locations for the gun. > > If its a tourny setting and both are in the > running....well, I guess you just got out of the > running. Winning Tourny play is all about not > making mistakes, and that would be a big time > mistake. > > Jazz > > > > Rob > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 From s.deller at charter.net Thu Apr 21 13:17:59 2005 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Thu Apr 21 13:18:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8ADE@trinity.cougarcorp.com> <001101c546ae$5c623140$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <001501c546af$38c0d5b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Rob, It's quite possible that you would get more mileage out of a "secret elimination" than any probable negotiated alternative anyway. Just a thought. Cheers, Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Deller" To: "Dave Connell" ; "Robert Nelson" ; "Jazz" ; Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:11 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > Ronb, > > I agree with Dave, et al. With the circumstances as you described you > should eliminate the Gun, but don't tell him. If I was your opponent I > wouldn't have any beef with you doing this (although I'd be OK with some > negotiated alternative as well). > > Cheers, > Sean > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave Connell" > To: "Robert Nelson" ; "Jazz" ; > > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:48 PM > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > Well, in that case, IMHO, I would eliminate it from your OB right > now, but not tell him. You goofed and learn from your mistake and with > sportsmanship, eliminate it. But he still must consider that a gun is > present and the fact that it is not on the board, instead of HIP > shouldn't matter much, except he never finds it. It's friendly and > complies with a.2 and the "HIP" gun still makes it fun. It's all good. > > Dave"Take this with a grain of salt, hell salt to taste"Connell > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Robert > Nelson > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 12:25 PM > To: Jazz; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > It's PBEM, and its BIG, so the game will not be > destroyed with the loss of this gun. > > tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing > is not an option. > > Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I > get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. > > Rob > > > --- Jazz wrote: >> >> >> > Sirs, >> > >> > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal >> sized >> > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought >> it >> > was an AT gun. >> > >> > What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and >> > there is no more AT capability on the map? Or >> simply >> > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my >> mind, >> > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? >> >> As Bret mentioned, what is the tenor of the game? >> If it was a friendly game I'd probably say >> words to the effect "Oh shit, my HIP gun is illegal" >> and negotiate from there, probably the >> closest legal set up location or some-such. >> >> Of course, another, almost viable, option is just >> keeping mum and eliminating the gun in your >> mind...and keep him guessing where it is as long as >> possible. How well this works depends on the >> scenario and possible set up locations for the gun. >> >> If its a tourny setting and both are in the >> running....well, I guess you just got out of the >> running. Winning Tourny play is all about not >> making mistakes, and that would be a big time >> mistake. >> >> Jazz >> > >> > Rob >> > >> > __________________________________________________ >> > Do You Yahoo!? >> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam >> protection around >> > http://mail.yahoo.com >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> > >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email >> webmaster@aslml.net >> > >> > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 > > From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Thu Apr 21 13:27:48 2005 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Thu Apr 21 13:27:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: > tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing > is not an option. ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) > > Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I > get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal to omit part of your OB during setup. If you don't tell him, that's what it amounts to, as far as I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, your cover is blown. Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From s.deller at charter.net Thu Apr 21 13:42:02 2005 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Thu Apr 21 13:42:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> Marty, There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal to do so. It does not say, however, whether such elimination must be announced. Rob will have to make a judgement call based on his relationship with his opponent. Cheers, Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Snow" To: "Robert Nelson" Cc: Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: > >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing >> is not an option. > > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) > >> >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. >> > > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal to omit part of your OB > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's what it amounts to, as far as > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, your cover is blown. > > Marty > > Martin Snow <*> > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 > > From tompygo at comcast.net Thu Apr 21 13:51:15 2005 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Thu Apr 21 13:51:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> <001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <001001c546b3$dd796d20$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> I don't believe you can eliminate it and not tell your opponent. I believe the best thing to do is to leave it in the location HIP. When the opponent would normally recognize find it, then it is revealed and eliminated for an illegal setup. If you eliminate it without telling him then you are manipulating the board behind his back. It's kinda like SAN. There's no way to prove that your opponent saw the SAN and failed to point it out. So, should you point out opponent's SAN when you roll them? There's no way to prove that your opponent knows his setup is illegal. So you can't prove that he ever thought it was. Therefore if it stays HIP for the entire scenario and then found to be illegal and thusly removed, is that ok? I suppose in a tournament situation, even after the game, the opponent could claim an illegal setup and take the victory. I mean, one of the potent things about a HIP Gun is the fact that the opponent can't see it. So putting it somewhere he won't look (because it is illegal) may give an advantage, albeit a slight one. So, the next question goes, do you have to set up all components of your OB? If not, then which components are elligible for not setting up? Later, Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Deller" To: "Martin Snow" ; "Robert Nelson" Cc: Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:42 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > Marty, > > There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal to do so. It does not > say, however, whether such elimination must be announced. Rob will have to > make a judgement call based on his relationship with his opponent. > > Cheers, > Sean > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Snow" > To: "Robert Nelson" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: > > > >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing > >> is not an option. > > > > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) > > > >> > >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I > >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. > >> > > > > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal to omit part of your OB > > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's what it amounts to, as far as > > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, your cover is blown. > > > > Marty > > > > Martin Snow <*> > > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu > > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 14:01:28 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:01:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050421210128.29017.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Jeff does bring up a good point. I now believe that if he moves through the hex, or gets a result on the hex with area fire (say while firing at other units of mine that are in there), I must then reveal and eliminate. A final question here, would the crew have to be eliminated....? Rob --- Jeff Thompson wrote: > I don't believe you can eliminate it and not tell > your opponent. I believe > the best thing to do is to leave it in the location > HIP. When the opponent > would normally recognize find it, then it is > revealed and eliminated for an > illegal setup. If you eliminate it without telling > him then you are > manipulating the board behind his back. > > It's kinda like SAN. There's no way to prove that > your opponent saw the SAN > and failed to point it out. So, should you point > out opponent's SAN when > you roll them? > > There's no way to prove that your opponent knows his > setup is illegal. So > you can't prove that he ever thought it was. > Therefore if it stays HIP for > the entire scenario and then found to be illegal and > thusly removed, is that > ok? > > I suppose in a tournament situation, even after the > game, the opponent could > claim an illegal setup and take the victory. I > mean, one of the potent > things about a HIP Gun is the fact that the opponent > can't see it. So > putting it somewhere he won't look (because it is > illegal) may give an > advantage, albeit a slight one. > > So, the next question goes, do you have to set up > all components of your > OB? If not, then which components are elligible for > not setting up? > > Later, > Jeff > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Deller" > To: "Martin Snow" ; "Robert > Nelson" > > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:42 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > > Marty, > > > > There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal > to do so. It does not > > say, however, whether such elimination must be > announced. Rob will have > to > > make a judgement call based on his relationship > with his opponent. > > > > Cheers, > > Sean > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Martin Snow" > > To: "Robert Nelson" > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: > > > > > >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so > replacing > > >> is not an option. > > > > > > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) > > > > > >> > > >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the > feeling I > > >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. > Cool. > > >> > > > > > > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal > to omit part of your OB > > > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's > what it amounts to, as far > as > > > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, > your cover is blown. > > > > > > Marty > > > > > > Martin Snow <*> > > > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu > > > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or > email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > > > -- > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - > Release Date: 4/20/2005 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Thu Apr 21 14:05:46 2005 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:06:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: <001001c546b3$dd796d20$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> <001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> <001001c546b3$dd796d20$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Jeff Thompson wrote: > There's no way to prove that your opponent knows his setup is illegal. So > you can't prove that he ever thought it was. Therefore if it stays HIP for > the entire scenario and then found to be illegal and thusly removed, is that > ok? This brings up an interesting point. What if you think it's illegal and you're wrong? Follow the twisted logic: 1) I set up my unit in hex X. 2) Midway through the game, I mis-read the scenario card and decide that my unit is set up illegally. 3) If I silently remove it from the game, I'm removing a legal unit! That's why I'd always talk to my opponent. Just to make sure. :-) Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From dave.connell at cougarcorp.com Thu Apr 21 14:24:59 2005 From: dave.connell at cougarcorp.com (Dave Connell) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:20:49 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... Message-ID: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A28D8AE2@trinity.cougarcorp.com> I think that leaving the gun where it is and having him find it is scary: 1) First, his blood pressure goes up discovering a HIP gun!, then 2) it goes up further when he determines this setup is illegal, prompting a temporary delay in the game while apologies/corrections and the cardiac-migraine DR is made. I would have to agree with Martin; go ahead and say you have a mistake and what would he like to do? If he is really an a.2 stickler, then it will be eliminated anyway, I would think. Dave"flip-flopping in a blue state"Connell -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Martin Snow Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 2:06 PM To: Jeff Thompson Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Jeff Thompson wrote: > There's no way to prove that your opponent knows his setup is illegal. So > you can't prove that he ever thought it was. Therefore if it stays HIP for > the entire scenario and then found to be illegal and thusly removed, is that > ok? This brings up an interesting point. What if you think it's illegal and you're wrong? Follow the twisted logic: 1) I set up my unit in hex X. 2) Midway through the game, I mis-read the scenario card and decide that my unit is set up illegally. 3) If I silently remove it from the game, I'm removing a legal unit! That's why I'd always talk to my opponent. Just to make sure. :-) Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From Vicca at v21.me.uk Thu Apr 21 14:22:40 2005 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:22:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <20050421210128.29017.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006601c546b8$417f3670$152ca8c0@loungedining> No I don't believe so. The crew is set-up legally. Wait one. The crew is not set-up legally. They enjoy HIP status which they gain from being set-up wiht the gun which is illegally set-up. The gun cannot be HIP there. You are aware of the error. You must take steps to amend this. I believe that since the gun would be eliminated when you see the error this would result in the crew no longer being entitled to be HIP in that et-up location (there is no legal gun) thus you would have to atr this point place the crew on board. Unless the crew would be HIP anyway I feel that you have to place them on board. Otherwise consider the situation where you havbe to have a MMC in a victory building and you have no HIP units - you place your gun in an illegal building hex and enjoy the HIP benefits of the crew. Obviously a horrible sleazy move but not what has happened here (you're hardly likely to advertise that on the list). But the effect here must be to deny yourself any advantage from your error. The crew being HIP in a hex they could not be HIP in is an advantage so this must be reconcilled at the earliest opportunity. I feel you are duty bound to place the crew on board (? status is subject to current conditions) If you are asked why then you will have to come clean about the error. Simply eliminating the crew still accrues you an advantage. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: "Jeff Thompson" ; Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 10:01 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > Jeff does bring up a good point. > > I now believe that if he moves through the hex, or > gets a result on the hex with area fire (say while > firing at other units of mine that are in there), I > must then reveal and eliminate. > > A final question here, would the crew have to be > eliminated....? > > Rob > > > --- Jeff Thompson wrote: >> I don't believe you can eliminate it and not tell >> your opponent. I believe >> the best thing to do is to leave it in the location >> HIP. When the opponent >> would normally recognize find it, then it is >> revealed and eliminated for an >> illegal setup. If you eliminate it without telling >> him then you are >> manipulating the board behind his back. >> >> It's kinda like SAN. There's no way to prove that >> your opponent saw the SAN >> and failed to point it out. So, should you point >> out opponent's SAN when >> you roll them? >> >> There's no way to prove that your opponent knows his >> setup is illegal. So >> you can't prove that he ever thought it was. >> Therefore if it stays HIP for >> the entire scenario and then found to be illegal and >> thusly removed, is that >> ok? >> >> I suppose in a tournament situation, even after the >> game, the opponent could >> claim an illegal setup and take the victory. I >> mean, one of the potent >> things about a HIP Gun is the fact that the opponent >> can't see it. So >> putting it somewhere he won't look (because it is >> illegal) may give an >> advantage, albeit a slight one. >> >> So, the next question goes, do you have to set up >> all components of your >> OB? If not, then which components are elligible for >> not setting up? >> >> Later, >> Jeff >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sean Deller" >> To: "Martin Snow" ; "Robert >> Nelson" >> >> Cc: >> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:42 PM >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... >> >> >> > Marty, >> > >> > There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal >> to do so. It does not >> > say, however, whether such elimination must be >> announced. Rob will have >> to >> > make a judgement call based on his relationship >> with his opponent. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Sean >> > >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Martin Snow" >> > To: "Robert Nelson" >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM >> > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... >> > >> > >> > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: >> > > >> > >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so >> replacing >> > >> is not an option. >> > > >> > > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) >> > > >> > >> >> > >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the >> feeling I >> > >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. >> Cool. >> > >> >> > > >> > > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal >> to omit part of your OB >> > > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's >> what it amounts to, as far >> as >> > > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, >> your cover is blown. >> > > >> > > Marty >> > > >> > > Martin Snow <*> >> > > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu >> > > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> > > >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or >> email webmaster@aslml.net >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > No virus found in this incoming message. >> > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - >> Release Date: 4/20/2005 >> > > >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> > >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email >> webmaster@aslml.net >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email >> webmaster@aslml.net >> > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From ted at cabeen.org Thu Apr 21 14:21:55 2005 From: ted at cabeen.org (Ted Cabeen) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:45:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Real World AARs from Iraq Message-ID: <877jivg70s.fsf@gray.impulse.net> These AARs from the house-to-house fighting in Iraq are pretty interesting, particularly when read from a ASL perspective: For the Record: Infantry Squad Tactics in Fallujah http://www.sftt.us/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Defensewatch%20Special%2010.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=1&rnd=881.5041188530178 For the Record: MPs Outgunned but Win http://www.sftt.us/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch%202005%2edb&command=viewone&id=150 -- Ted Cabeen http://www.cabeen.org ted@cabeen.org Check Website or Keyserver for PGP/GPG Key BA0349D2 ted@impulse.net "I have taken all knowledge to be my province." -F. Bacon secabeen@pobox.com "Human kind cannot bear very much reality."-T.S.Eliot secabeen@gmail.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 21 14:53:22 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:53:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 In-Reply-To: <000501c54636$0f40cb10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> References: <002801c54622$4f258ae0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <000501c54636$0f40cb10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:50:40 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Also, I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 have WA >or not. If the issue hasn't been decided previously (and isn't decided automatically, e.g., mandatory WA), eligible units may claim WA at the end of the RPh (ATTACKER first). If you don't claim it (and it isn't mandatory), then you don't have it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Apr 21 14:56:16 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Apr 21 14:56:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Ammo shortage and captured SW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:27:56 +0930, "David Marvanek" wrote: >The reason I asked is that (NRBH) rubble can only be created by HE attacks >of >= 70mm (or something like that) does a PF qualify? It is a HEAT weapon >and nowhere could I find a clear definition of its calliber equivalent. PF don't have a "caliber" equivalent, but they do have a FP equivalent: 16. See C8.31 (which specifically mentions rubble creation as a consequence of this FP). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 21 15:14:02 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 21 15:12:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000801c546bf$6ec32db0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> That's right, it is RPh. In which case, I'd like to do it. Jim? - G -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 6:53 AM To: George Bates Cc: 'mcleods'; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:50:40 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Also, I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 >have WA or not. If the issue hasn't been decided previously (and isn't decided automatically, e.g., mandatory WA), eligible units may claim WA at the end of the RPh (ATTACKER first). If you don't claim it (and it isn't mandatory), then you don't have it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 21 15:57:10 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 21 15:57:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <20050421183320.8241.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001f01c546c5$7404cb20$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Robert wrote, > Sirs, > > Playing a game, i realize I've set up my normal sized > artillery piece, HIP, in a stone building. THought it > was an AT gun. > > What is the etiquette here? Tell him I goofed, and > there is no more AT capability on the map? Or simply > 'eliminate' gun and crew from the game, in my mind, > and keep him guessing where it is to the end? Take it like a man. Eliminate the Gun, don't tell the other guy what happened until after the match and keep him guessing as to where it may be. That alone is worth something. Bet you won't do that again. :) =Jim= From swfancher at mindspring.com Thu Apr 21 16:02:01 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Thu Apr 21 16:03:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: <001001c546b3$dd796d20$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> <001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> <001001c546b3$dd796d20$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050421185751.02306bf0@mindspring.com> There was a Perry sez about this and the answer was "No, you do not have to set up all of your OB." But, units not set up are counted towards your opponents VC is applicable. So, if the VC are "eliminate these two AFVs" the player cannot ensure victory by not setting them up on board. As far as the more general question, I would say to my opponent "I set up my HIP Gun illegally, how do you think it should be handled?" and go from there. Agree that if the HIP Gun was what allowed the crew to be HIP then the crew setup was also illegal and they would be eliminated also if that is the opponent's wish. Of course, possibly the game will be over at that point so may as well start again from the get go! Be well! Seth At 04:51 PM 4/21/2005, Jeff Thompson wrote: >So, the next question goes, do you have to set up all components of your >OB? If not, then which components are elligible for not setting up? > >Later, >Jeff > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sean Deller" >To: "Martin Snow" ; "Robert Nelson" > >Cc: >Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:42 PM >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > > Marty, > > > > There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal to do so. It does not > > say, however, whether such elimination must be announced. Rob will have >to > > make a judgement call based on his relationship with his opponent. > > > > Cheers, > > Sean > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Martin Snow" > > To: "Robert Nelson" > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: > > > > > >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing > > >> is not an option. > > > > > > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) > > > > > >> > > >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I > > >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. > > >> > > > > > > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal to omit part of your OB > > > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's what it amounts to, as far >as > > > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, your cover is blown. > > > > > > Marty > > > > > > Martin Snow <*> > > > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu > > > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > > > -- > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From swfancher at mindspring.com Thu Apr 21 16:04:48 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Thu Apr 21 16:04:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] VC question In-Reply-To: <20050421152948.94882.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050421152948.94882.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050421190244.023193b0@mindspring.com> Hi Rob, Occupied is not related to control in my book. You need a unit in that Location to occupy it. Don't think "occupied" needs an ASL definition because it is pretty clear from common English usage and ASL usage is no different (as opposed to, say, "Location" which in common English is not terribly specific, nor clear enough for a game). HTH. Be well. Seth At 11:29 AM 4/21/2005, Robert Nelson wrote: >Fellows, > >currently on scenario 5 of the 7 scen 1991 annual >Arnhem CG. Loads of fun, and will report on the whole >thing when finished. > >VC question, that I believe is clear, but is not dealt >with in the Rulebook. > >for both Guards Attack (A35, now updated in FKaC), and >A36 Oy Veghel, the VC function the same. for A35: >British player wins by sole occupation of 17q6/q7 or >17P4/q4 at the conclusion of any player turn. > >the problem arises from the non-RB term, 'occupation'. >We usually speak of control... > >To win A35, I happen to have had a hs on one hex, and >a tank eliminated a German during an OVR in the other >hex. thus, by any definition of occupation I won at >the end of that player turn. > >However, in Oy Veghel, my opponent has 'thunder-ran' a >Stug into Veghel, is now planning on abadoning the >AFV, and running through the two victory hexes that >constitue a single building, with his crew. He's >arguing that in ASL that gives him 'control', and, >with no allied counter in the building, he's the sole >'occupant'. > >Yes, really pushing it there, but I hate it when I >have to rely on non-asl common sense to argue my >position: that he has to physically have units on both >hexes at the end of a player turn. > >so, a) am I right, and is there a 'rule' to back me >up, or only language? >b) does the FKaC version of this scen change the VC >wording into ASL-ese? > >yours, >Rob > > > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 21 16:12:10 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 21 16:12:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com><001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> <001001c546b3$dd796d20$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: <004a01c546c7$8ccbcd50$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Jeff wrote, >I don't believe you can eliminate it and not tell your opponent. Why not? > I believe the best thing to do is to leave it in the location HIP. When > the opponent > would normally recognize find it, then it is revealed and eliminated for > an > illegal setup. If you eliminate it without telling him then you are > manipulating the board behind his back. I disagree. If the Gun is illegally setup, it is eliminated. Since the opponent played no part in said elimination and no actual game result caused the elimination, unless there is something official stating to the contrary, why tell your opponent during play? And being eliminated, I believe that the Guns loss counts as CVP for the other guy. I would even say that the crew is gone to so there is another 2 CVP. > It's kinda like SAN. There's no way to prove that your opponent saw the > SAN > and failed to point it out. So, should you point out opponent's SAN when > you roll them? Absolutely. SAN is an automatic game mechanic. If it is rolled, it is resolved to see if there is an effect. > There's no way to prove that your opponent knows his setup is illegal. So > you can't prove that he ever thought it was. Therefore if it stays HIP > for > the entire scenario and then found to be illegal and thusly removed, is > that > ok? > > I suppose in a tournament situation, even after the game, the opponent > could > claim an illegal setup and take the victory. I mean, one of the potent > things about a HIP Gun is the fact that the opponent can't see it. So > putting it somewhere he won't look (because it is illegal) may give an > advantage, albeit a slight one. > So, the next question goes, do you have to set up all components of your > OB? If not, then which components are elligible for not setting up? I beleive that units not setup are considered eliminated and count as CVP. Whether or not the CVP will result in losing the game depends on the scenario VC. Playing without a chunk of your OB will likely result in your losing as well. =Jim= > Later, > Jeff > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Deller" > To: "Martin Snow" ; "Robert Nelson" > > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 3:42 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > >> Marty, >> >> There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal to do so. It does not >> say, however, whether such elimination must be announced. Rob will have > to >> make a judgement call based on his relationship with his opponent. >> >> Cheers, >> Sean >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Martin Snow" >> To: "Robert Nelson" >> Cc: >> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... >> >> >> > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: >> > >> >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing >> >> is not an option. >> > >> > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) >> > >> >> >> >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I >> >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. >> >> >> > >> > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal to omit part of your >> > OB >> > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's what it amounts to, as far > as >> > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, your cover is blown. >> > >> > Marty >> > >> > Martin Snow <*> >> > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu >> > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net >> > >> > >> > -- >> > No virus found in this incoming message. >> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.1 - Release Date: 4/20/2005 >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >> Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 21 16:13:49 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 21 16:13:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... References: <20050421210128.29017.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005101c546c7$c8025740$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Robert wrote > > Jeff does bring up a good point. > > I now believe that if he moves through the hex, or > gets a result on the hex with area fire (say while > firing at other units of mine that are in there), I > must then reveal and eliminate. If the Gun is illegally setup, it was never there in the first place. How can you hit something that is not there? > A final question here, would the crew have to be > eliminated....? An illegally setup Gun takes its illegally setup crew with it IMHO. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 21 16:16:55 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 21 16:16:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) RPh, PFPh, MPh1 References: <000801c546bf$6ec32db0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <007201c546c8$36936500$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > That's right, it is RPh. In which case, I'd like to do it. Jim? > > - G You grab that WA George. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 21 17:52:06 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 21 17:58:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh2 References: <000501c54636$0f40cb10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <00b801c546d6$5363eb10$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; > Jim, I've got a few notes on your setup and activities in "###." Also, > I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 have WA > or not. The WA is yours and would have been taken in the RPh. > 51. ***MCLEOD: Sorry for the delay. Here is the German Off-board > setup > (German units are off-board opposite the hex coordinate): > > "?" + 3 counters, N0 > ###BATES: By my nomenclature, N-1. We on the same wavelength? ***MCLEOD: The woods half hex would be N0, would it not? > "?" + 4 counters, N10 > "?" + 1 counter, O1 > "?" + 1 counter, O10 > "?" + 1 counter, Q10 > "?" + 1 counter, R10 > "?" + 3 counters, S10 > "?" + 2 counters, U10 > "?" + 4 counters, W1 > "?" + 1 counter, X0 > ###BATES: "MP40s to the right of them, MG42s to the left of them..." > > 52. ***MCLEOD: WC DR = 3 (2,1) > > 53. ***MCLEOD: Deploy S. offboard of W1; DR = 7 (1,6), Deploys. > > [German RPh Over] > > [German PFPh] - None > > [German MPh] > > 54. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter in R2 AM to S3 (1.5 MF). > ###BATES: Oh, him? I suppose he could give me grief using the SFF > rules, but he's not worth dropping concealment and wasting bullets on. > 55. ***MCLEOD: ? + 1 counter off-board from Q10, AM to Q10 (1 MF), you > see > a 238 as I know that your "?" guy is real. Any D' fire "Kapitan"? > ###BATES: I was about to hit "send" when I realized you had more here. > Nah, we'll see about some TLC for him in a little while. 56. ***MCLEOD: "?" +1 counter declare AM and move into O10 (1 MF). You see a 238. D'fire? If not, please proceed. 57. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter declare AM into O1 (1 MF). D'fire? If not, please proceed. 58. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter move into W1 (1 MF), lose "?" and you see a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. ... W2 (3MF) ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. ... oV2 (4 MF). Any D'fire? There are three pokes to pick from George. Let me know what you wish to do before I send out any more heroes. =Jim= From e4spm at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 18:54:19 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Thu Apr 21 18:54:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Walls, buildings and wall advantage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Thanks to those who responsed. That reminds me of another situation regarding wall advantage A unit is in a ground level building location surrounded by a wall. Under what circumstances is the unit not eligible for the building TEM? Is the following sequence legal? 1. A unit (unit D) defending in a ground level building location is fired upon in the prep fire phase by a non adjacent enemy unit and claims the building TEM. 2. In the movement phase an enemy unit (unit M) moves adjacent to unit D and unit D claims wall advantage and fires on unit M who does not get the wall TEM. 3 In the advance fire phase unit D is fired upon by enemy units and relinquishes any wall advantage to again cliam the building TEM Are there any circumsances where the wall surrounding the building location blocks LOS from the defending unit (at ground level) to other ground level locations? Again is the rule application different between 1st ed and 2nd. >From: Ole Bøe >To: Bret & Julie Hildebran >CC: David Marvanek , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net, >toga@chariot.net.au >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Q: Wall TEM & wall advantage >Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:58:48 +0200 > >Hi, > > > David Marvanek wrote: > > >The situation: > > >___ ___ > > >/ A1 \___/ C1 \ > > >\___/ B1 \___/ > > >/ A2 \___/ C2 \ > > >\___/ B2 \___/ > > > \___/ > > >(hope my ascii graphics hold up :-) > > > > > >A unit is in A1 > > >A wall exists on the B1 hex side that connects A1 to C1 > > >A unit moves into C1. > > > > > >The Questions: > > > > > >Does the unit moving into C1 get wall protection vs the unit in A1? > > >and Bret Hildebran answered: > > > Yes. > > >That's right. See the B9.2 example where enemy units in Y8 and Z9 both gain >wall TEM vs each other. > > > >Does wall advantage play any part in this? > > > > No, not at all if C1 is a non-TEM hex. If it's a building offering a >+3 > > TEM the moving unit would have a choice & could/should choose the > > higher TEM - in pretty much any other case the unit in C1 would take >the > > Wall TEM. > > >Correct, but note that a unit can always gain Wall TEM unless fired on by >an adjacent unit that has Wall Advantage. So since no enemy can be adjacent >and fire directly along a wall hexspine, WA doesn't play much part in this >situation. > > > >Is the answer different in 1st ed vs 2nd ed rulebooks. > > > > No. > > >Correct. > _________________________________________________________________ SEEK: Now with over 80,000 dream jobs! Click here: http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail From david at stanaway.net Thu Apr 21 21:58:19 2005 From: david at stanaway.net (David Stanaway) Date: Thu Apr 21 21:58:33 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Etiquette... In-Reply-To: <001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> References: <20050421192514.55403.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> <001b01c546b2$94882300$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <1114145899.4847.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> How does this sound for a way to play around this in such a way that the effect of the HIP gun has on your opponents movement is preserved as close to as if you had placed the gun legally? Wait until the kind of target that is appropriate for the gun comes within range/los of when you would probably have poped a shot, and then reveal the illegal setup, and eliminate the gun. That way your opponent then has freedom of movement, but not before he has done some maneuvering to avoid getting his tail plates intruded upon. Also, if infantry moves through or fires at the nearest valid hip setup position to where you illegally set up, then that would be a fair time to reveal your illegal setup, and declare its elimination. On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 16:42 -0400, Sean Deller wrote: > Marty, > > There is a Perry Sez which states that it is legal to do so. It does not > say, however, whether such elimination must be announced. Rob will have to > make a judgement call based on his relationship with his opponent. > > Cheers, > Sean > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Snow" > To: "Robert Nelson" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:27 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Etiquette... > > > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Robert Nelson wrote: > > > >> tenor is friendly, but he is big on a.2, so replacing > >> is not an option. > > > > ok, you should have mentioned this earlier. :-) > > > >> > >> Question is simply tell him or mum, and the feeling I > >> get from you guys is that mum is just fine. Cool. > >> > > > > That assumes that you both agree that it's legal to omit part of your OB > > during setup. If you don't tell him, that's what it amounts to, as far as > > I can tell. Of course, if he reads the ASLML, your cover is blown. > > From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 22 03:54:17 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 22 03:54:32 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh2 References: <000501c54636$0f40cb10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <00b801c546d6$5363eb10$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000801c54729$a2c83c30$0327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> George, I wrote, > 57. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter declare AM into O1 (1 MF). D'fire? If > not, please proceed. This unit is in OG, and you have a real unit in O2, mu guy is a 548. Forgot to put that in my last message ... doh! =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 22 05:16:37 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 22 05:15:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh2 In-Reply-To: <00b801c546d6$5363eb10$3e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000001c54735$24b3a940$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Infiltration begins in earnest. I respond in "$$$." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 9:52 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh2 Listerz; > Jim, I've got a few notes on your setup and activities in "###." > Also, I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 > have WA or not. The WA is yours and would have been taken in the RPh. $$$BATES: Your lordship's magnanimity streams out like the warm rays of the sun. > 51. ***MCLEOD: Sorry for the delay. Here is the German Off-board > setup (German units are off-board opposite the hex coordinate): > > "?" + 3 counters, N0 > ###BATES: By my nomenclature, N-1. We on the same wavelength? ***MCLEOD: The woods half hex would be N0, would it not? $$$BATES: Correcto mundo. > "?" + 4 counters, N10 > "?" + 1 counter, O1 > "?" + 1 counter, O10 > "?" + 1 counter, Q10 > "?" + 1 counter, R10 > "?" + 3 counters, S10 > "?" + 2 counters, U10 > "?" + 4 counters, W1 > "?" + 1 counter, X0 > ###BATES: "MP40s to the right of them, MG42s to the left of them..." > > 52. ***MCLEOD: WC DR = 3 (2,1) > > 53. ***MCLEOD: Deploy S. offboard of W1; DR = 7 (1,6), Deploys. > > [German RPh Over] > > [German PFPh] - None > > [German MPh] > > 54. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter in R2 AM to S3 (1.5 MF). > ###BATES: Oh, him? I suppose he could give me grief using the SFF > rules, but he's not worth dropping concealment and wasting bullets on. > 55. ***MCLEOD: ? + 1 counter off-board from Q10, AM to Q10 (1 MF), > you see a 238 as I know that your "?" guy is real. Any D' fire > "Kapitan"? > ###BATES: I was about to hit "send" when I realized you had more > here. Nah, we'll see about some TLC for him in a little while. 56. ***MCLEOD: "?" +1 counter declare AM and move into O10 (1 MF). You see a 238. D'fire? If not, please proceed. $$$BATES: C'mon, give me a rich target. His life is short, he wants to live it to the fullest. 57. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter declare AM into O1 (1 MF). D'fire? If not, please proceed. $$$BATES: I was about to ask about this one, when Jim wrote in a second message, "This unit is in OG, and you have a real unit in O2, mu guy is a 548. Forgot to put that in my last message ... doh!" Folks, this is what those of us in my profession call a "gift horse." When you are give a 6 down 2 shot at an elite squad, do not waste time thinking. Pull the trigger. Now. 337P in O2 drops "?", 6FP-2 @O1: 4, 1; 2MC, 2RFP. Yes, the very satisfying sound of bullets thudding home. 548 2MC: 4, 2; pinned. I'll take that result. Even though, this was just a pin, I'm going to delete everything below and let you make any adjustments you see fit. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 22 17:38:47 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 22 17:39:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 References: <000001c54735$24b3a940$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <001d01c5479c$d153fda0$8b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, >> Jim, I've got a few notes on your setup and activities in "###." >> Also, I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 >> have WA or not. > The WA is yours and would have been taken in the RPh. > $$$BATES: Your lordship's magnanimity streams out like the warm rays of > the sun. The ring George, you kiss the ring ... :) > 56. ***MCLEOD: "?" +1 counter declare AM and move into O10 (1 MF). You > see > a 238. D'fire? If not, please proceed. > $$$BATES: C'mon, give me a rich target. His life is short, he wants to > live it to the fullest. ***MCLEOD: Big talk from a short timer, we'll be getting the bayonets ready for you comrade! > 57. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter declare AM into O1 (1 MF). D'fire? If > not, > please proceed. > $$$BATES: I was about to ask about this one, when Jim wrote in a second > message, "This unit is in OG, and you have a real unit in O2, mu guy is > a 548. Forgot > to put that in my last message ... doh!" > Folks, this is what those of us in my profession call a "gift horse." > When you are give a 6 down 2 shot at an elite squad, do not waste time > thinking. Pull the trigger. Now. > 337P in O2 drops "?", 6FP-2 @O1: 4, 1; 2MC, 2RFP. Yes, the very > satisfying sound of bullets thudding home. 548 2MC: 4, 2; pinned. > I'll take that result. > Even though, this was just a pin, I'm going to delete everything below > and let you make any adjustments you see fit. ***MCLEOD: I was expecting worse than that, we'll be happy with a Pin. :) 58. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter move into W1 (1 MF), lose "?" and you see a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. ... W2 (3MF) ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. ... oV2 (4 MF). Ends Movement. Any D'fire? If not, please continue. 59. ***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves onto U10 (2 MF), you see a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... U9 (4 MF) ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... declares Double Time, and goes to U8 (5 MF). Ends Movement. D'fire? If not, please continue ... 60.***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves in bypass of N10 (O10 hexside) (1MF), you see a 548. There is some fat for you George! :) D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... bypass N9 (O10 hexside) (2 MF). D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... on into O9 (4 MF). D'fire? If not, please continue ... 61.***MCLEOD: A 8-0/548 w/LMG bypass N0 (on M1 hexside) (1 MF). D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory awaits! That will do for now George. Can't wait to see how things turn out. =Jim= From rjmosher at direcway.com Sat Apr 23 05:42:52 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sat Apr 23 05:45:33 2005 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Aslml] Q: Walls, buildings and wall advantage Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050423074159.01d0b2d8@pop3.direcway.com> Hmmm..did da list have a hiccup? >Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:13:11 -0500 >To: David Marvanek , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >From: ron mosher >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Q: Walls, buildings and wall advantage >Cc: toga@chariot.net.au > >At 08:54 PM 4/21/2005, David Marvanek wrote: >>1. A unit (unit D) defending in a ground level building location is fired >>upon in the prep fire phase by a non adjacent enemy unit and claims the >>building TEM. > >If he isn't claiming WA from a previous phase(like the RPh). He is stuck >with the building..cannot "claim" WA now. > >>2. In the movement phase an enemy unit (unit M) moves adjacent to unit D >>and unit D claims wall advantage and fires on unit M who does not get the >>wall TEM. > >D cannot claim WA now..part of new WA rules. > >>3 In the advance fire phase unit D is fired upon by enemy units and >>relinquishes any wall advantage to again cliam the building TEM > >No can do. > >Pertinent rules, ASLRBv2, for all the above: > >"Claiming WA ....can be done by a unit at five times: during its setup; at >the end of any RPh ...; during its MPh/APh ...; when losing HIP status; >whenever all enemy units lose/forfeit WA over shared wall/hedge hexsides." > >"Claiming/forfeiting WA can never be done between an enemy action being >declared and that action being completed, e.g., fire vs the unit claiming WA." > > >For the nonce, >ron >acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From jim.white at dol.net Sat Apr 23 05:58:08 2005 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sat Apr 23 06:00:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] BRT map question Message-ID: <021701c54804$28a777a0$6401a8c0@workstation1> Can an LVT or tank move from U32 or V32 into the water portion of U33? From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 23 06:44:16 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 23 06:45:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3: A.2? References: <000001c547e7$c4df8e90$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <001c01c5480a$a18862f0$a427c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Hello gents, > Jim, Aaron's right, I forgot to apply the DRM again. Is senility > automatic when you turn 41? Hey, I'm 43. My excuse is the constant roar produced by three children. :) I read your post quickly and did not examine the numbers too closely George. My bad as well. > You are due for a mistake in your favor, so we can let the 548 stay > pinned. Otherwise, if we apply the 2MC DR I made earlier there's a > pinned 238 in O1. Or, you can re-roll the 2MC. > Since it's my bad, I'll let you choose how you'd like to play it. Have > not looked at your move yet and will not do so until you tell me what > you'd like to do. Leave the 238 Pinned, the K/ stands. > Thanks, Aaron. Sorry, Jim. Good catch Aaron, you can be our auditor. :) =Jim= From weflemi at yahoo.com Sat Apr 23 07:04:36 2005 From: weflemi at yahoo.com (William Fleming) Date: Sat Apr 23 07:04:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RB Reserve RG Question Message-ID: <20050423140436.11549.qmail@web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> All, This is from Scott Romanowski's compilation 22. O11.6194b Does a Reserve RG receive one Cloaking counter per squad-equivalent (E1.411), plus up to five Dummy Cloaking counters, or one Cloaking counter per Location occupied by Reserve units, plus up to five Dummy Cloaking counters? A. One per squad-equivalent. [Letter8] This looks fine, but a Russian MOL-P platoon gets 3 crews when full strength, which is 1.5 squad equivalents. FRD in ASL normally, so that means he gets one 1/2 cloaking counter to put all 3 units in!!! That doesn't seem right. The HW platoon is similarly restricted to 6 crews and thus 3 cloaking counters because the MTR must setup dm and thus don't count towards squad-equivalents. Depleted RG make it even worse. The dummy allotment is just that--dummies. You can't use those to setup real units, but there just aren't enough _real_ cloaking counters for reserver platoons. This just isn't right. I assume that the Russian/Germans should get as many cloaking counters as they want provided they put a MMC in them--plus 5 dummies on top of that if they desire. Will __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 23 07:11:27 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 23 07:11:07 2005 Subject: [Aslml] TEST Message-ID: <000201c5480e$585a1d90$3200170a@DF6TP71X> TEST - G From jim.white at dol.net Sat Apr 23 07:54:58 2005 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sat Apr 23 07:55:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armored Assault question Message-ID: <025601c54814$6d7b7380$6401a8c0@workstation1> In case this got lost during the List hiccup.......I am sending again. Concerns my BRT CG...but applies everywhere.... Anyway...the rules are killing me today...serious vapor lock of the brain. But...a tank moves into a shallow ocean hex at the cost of 4MP. Infantry are stacked with it and wish to use armored assault. It costs them 3MF to enter the same shallow ocean hex as the tank. Provided they declared CX at the beginning of the move...they could then move into another ocean hex for a total of 6MF expended. The tank must expend another 4MP to move with them. I think this is allowed (i.e., infantry use 6MF and AFV uses 8MP to armor assault a total of two hexes)...but for some reason I'm questioning myself. What say the List? From pzchala at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 08:06:08 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sat Apr 23 08:06:13 2005 Subject: [Aslml] BRT map question In-Reply-To: <021701c54804$28a777a0$6401a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: Yes, because the pier is a seperate Location in the hex. T9.2 refers us to G13.7, which states that. See G13.731 for more info no spending MP in a water Location adjacent to a pier. Mike Pierzchala >From: "James S. White Jr." >To: "ASL Mailing List" >Subject: [Aslml] BRT map question >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 08:58:08 -0400 > >Can an LVT or tank move from U32 or V32 into the water portion of U33? > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From pzchala at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 08:31:55 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sat Apr 23 08:32:26 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Armored Assault question In-Reply-To: <025601c54814$6d7b7380$6401a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: I think you got it right, as far as how the armored assault MF/MP is spent, anyway. Mike Pierzchala >From: "James S. White Jr." >To: "ASL Mailing List" >Subject: [Aslml] Armored Assault question >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:54:58 -0400 > >In case this got lost during the List hiccup.......I am sending again. > >Concerns my BRT CG...but applies everywhere.... > >Anyway...the rules are killing me today...serious vapor lock of the brain. >But...a tank moves into a shallow ocean hex at the cost of 4MP. Infantry >are stacked with it and wish to use armored assault. It costs them 3MF to >enter the same shallow ocean hex as the tank. Provided they declared CX at >the beginning of the move...they could then move into another ocean hex for >a total of 6MF expended. The tank must expend another 4MP to move with >them. I think this is allowed (i.e., infantry use 6MF and AFV uses 8MP to >armor assault a total of two hexes)...but for some reason I'm questioning >myself. What say the List? > > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sat Apr 23 09:07:10 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sat Apr 23 09:07:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS Message-ID: <873c248788f9.8788f9873c24@mscd.edu> Hello All: About to play J52 Dress Rehearsal. Is the LOS from 18DD9 to 48Q5 blocked by the Orchard in 48K8? B14.6 only mentions the Hindrance issue. Thanks in advance, Gerry From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sat Apr 23 09:14:24 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sat Apr 23 09:14:29 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OP Tank and Motion Message-ID: <87618087644b.87644b876180@mscd.edu> Hello All: Possibility of having a Pz IIIJ OP tank. Seems it can observe while in Motion w/o any penalty? Worried about the poor guy getting dizzy. Take care, Gerry From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Sat Apr 23 09:55:19 2005 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Sat Apr 23 09:55:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OP Tank and Motion In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050423165519.29334.qmail@web30701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> NRBH but spotting for OBA is a Prep fire activity. A motion vehicle cannot prep fire as it must expend MP in the MPH.....so I'd say no. D2.4 MOTION STATUS: . . . . .... A vehicle (and its PRC) which starts its Player Turn in Motion may not Prep Fire and must expend at least one MP (even if just to stop) during its Mph A vehicle may not start a scenario set up onboard in Motion. Jazz --- morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: > Hello All: > > Possibility of having a Pz IIIJ OP tank. > > Seems it can observe while in Motion w/o any penalty? Worried about > the poor guy getting dizzy. > > Take care, > > Gerry > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From pzchala at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 14:09:28 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sat Apr 23 14:09:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] OP Tank and Motion In-Reply-To: <87618087644b.87644b876180@mscd.edu> Message-ID: >From version 21 (Oct 2002) of Scott Romanowski's compilation: H1.461 Can an OP tank (eg., a U.S. OP Sherman) attempt radio contact (C1.2) and other OBA actions while in motion (C1.6)? While it is stunned/schocked? If it is Recalled? A. Not during PFPh. No. No. [Compil 4] Compli 4 is a compilation of questions sent to asl_qa@anodyne.com from Aug 16, 1996. Mike Pierzchala >From: morrisgj@mscd.edu >To: ASLML Distribution >Subject: [Aslml] OP Tank and Motion >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:14:24 -0600 > >Hello All: > >Possibility of having a Pz IIIJ OP tank. > >Seems it can observe while in Motion w/o any penalty? Worried about >the poor guy getting dizzy. > >Take care, > >Gerry >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From pzchala at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 14:16:21 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sat Apr 23 14:16:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS In-Reply-To: <873c248788f9.8788f9873c24@mscd.edu> Message-ID: The orchard is in season, so blocks LOS from level 1 hill 18DD9 to ground level hex 48Q5. Mike Pierzchala >From: morrisgj@mscd.edu >To: ASLML Distribution >Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:07:10 -0600 > >Hello All: > >About to play J52 Dress Rehearsal. Is the LOS from 18DD9 to 48Q5 >blocked by the Orchard in 48K8? B14.6 only mentions the Hindrance >issue. > >Thanks in advance, > >Gerry >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sat Apr 23 15:24:21 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sat Apr 23 15:24:29 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS Message-ID: <880b4d8830e5.8830e5880b4d@mscd.edu> Hello Mike: Thanks for the answers. Here is what I don't understand. The thread goes thru the Road part of the Orchard-Roads hex. If this was a same-level LOS issue, there would be no +1 Hindrance due to teh LOS going thru the Road part (B14.6). But with the LOS obstacle issue it doesn't matter that the thread only goes thru the Road depiction. Thanks, Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Pierzchala Date: Saturday, April 23, 2005 3:16 pm Subject: RE: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS > The orchard is in season, so blocks LOS from level 1 hill 18DD9 to > ground > level hex 48Q5. > > Mike Pierzchala > > >From: morrisgj@mscd.edu > >To: ASLML Distribution > >Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS > >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:07:10 -0600 > > > >Hello All: > > > >About to play J52 Dress Rehearsal. Is the LOS from 18DD9 to 48Q5 > >blocked by the Orchard in 48K8? B14.6 only mentions the Hindrance > >issue. > > > >Thanks in advance, > > > >Gerry > >_______________________________________________ > >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from > McAfee? > Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > > From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sat Apr 23 15:29:21 2005 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sat Apr 23 15:29:27 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Broadway to Prokhorovka mini-CG design question Message-ID: <881fb88848fe.8848fe881fb8@mscd.edu> Hello All: Wondering about the CG1SSR 1 (German Fatigue) used in the Broadway to Prokhorovka mini-CG. 1. Curious why the number of leaders is used to determine Fatigue. 2. Giving the criteria in CG1SSR 1, the Germans should choose the Leader/SW group that has the 9-1 and 8-1 (4 cvp) as opposed to the 9-2 group (3 cvp). Right? As ye can see I am years behind the times as usual. Thanks, Gerry From pzchala at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 20:53:56 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sat Apr 23 20:53:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I need to correct my answer. I answered without cracking the RB, but a subsequent look at B14.6 has proven that answer to be wrong. The correct answer is that there is LOS through the orchard hex in question from level 1 hill hex 18DD9 to the ground level hex of 48Q5. That is true regardless of wether the orchard is in-season, because B14.6 tells us that, as long as the LOS doesn't leave the road depiction when going through the orchard road hex, the hindrance rules do not apply and that FFMO could apply. There is also this, from Romanowski's compilation: B14.2 & B14.6 Do in-season orchard hexes block LOS from differing elevations when sighting down an orchard-road. EX: 23S7 to 23AA3 Level 1. A. No. That LOS is clear. [Letter 197] Letter 197 is credited as "Sam Tyson to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 19 September 2002. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused by my earlier reply. Mike Pierzchala >From: "Michael Pierzchala" >To: morrisgj@mscd.edu, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: RE: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 17:16:21 -0400 > >The orchard is in season, so blocks LOS from level 1 hill 18DD9 to ground >level hex 48Q5. > >Mike Pierzchala > >>From: morrisgj@mscd.edu >>To: ASLML Distribution >>Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS >>Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:07:10 -0600 >> >>Hello All: >> >>About to play J52 Dress Rehearsal. Is the LOS from 18DD9 to 48Q5 >>blocked by the Orchard in 48K8? B14.6 only mentions the Hindrance >>issue. >> >>Thanks in advance, >> >>Gerry >>_______________________________________________ >>Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >>Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > >_________________________________________________________________ >Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® >Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From geb3 at inter.net Sun Apr 24 00:17:35 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Apr 24 00:15:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <001d01c5479c$d153fda0$8b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> They keep coming. I keep taunting in "%%%." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 9:39 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 Listerz, >> Jim, I've got a few notes on your setup and activities in "###." >> Also, I'm not sure when we need to confirm that my units in O2 and M7 >> have WA or not. > The WA is yours and would have been taken in the RPh. > $$$BATES: Your lordship's magnanimity streams out like the warm rays > of the sun. The ring George, you kiss the ring ... :) %%%BATES: Cardinal McLeod? " 'Ay, there's a dead bishop on the landing..." > 56. ***MCLEOD: "?" +1 counter declare AM and move into O10 (1 MF). > You see a 238. D'fire? If not, please proceed. > $$$BATES: C'mon, give me a rich target. His life is short, he wants > to live it to the fullest. ***MCLEOD: Big talk from a short timer, we'll be getting the bayonets ready for you comrade! %%%BATES: Comrade? Sounds like you have some impressed Soviet prisoners in your ranks who are bewildered as to which side their on.... > 57. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter declare AM into O1 (1 MF). D'fire? > If not, please proceed. > $$$BATES: I was about to ask about this one, when Jim wrote in a > second message, "This unit is in OG, and you have a real unit in O2, > mu guy is a 548. Forgot to put that in my last message ... doh!" > Folks, this is what those of us in my profession call a "gift horse." > When you are give a 6 down 2 shot at an elite squad, do not waste time > thinking. Pull the trigger. Now. > 337P in O2 drops "?", 6FP-2 @O1: 4, 1; 2MC, 2RFP. Yes, the very > satisfying sound of bullets thudding home. 548 2MC: 4, 2; pinned. > I'll take that result. > Even though, this was just a pin, I'm going to delete everything below > and let you make any adjustments you see fit. ***MCLEOD: I was expecting worse than that, we'll be happy with a Pin. :) %%%BATES: As we have determined with a little boost from Aaron, a DR5 on a 6FP-2 shot yields a K/2. EXCEPT that he _assault moved_ in OG, so this was a 6FP-1 shot. I typed the mod wrong but got the IIFT result right. This _IS_ a pinned _548_. Whew, have we made enough mistakes from a single DR? I'm tired. We'll see if there is an Episode 2 of "The Death of Mary, Queen of Scots." 58. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter move into W1 (1 MF), lose "?" and you see a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. ... W2 (3MF) ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. ... oV2 (4 MF). Ends Movement. Any D'fire? If not, please continue. 59. ***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves onto U10 (2 MF), you see a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... U9 (4 MF) ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... declares Double Time, and goes to U8 (5 MF). Ends Movement. D'fire? If not, please continue ... 60.***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves in bypass of N10 (O10 hexside) (1MF), you see a 548. There is some fat for you George! :) D'fire? If not, please continue ... %%%BATES: Yes, as a general policy, squads that move with impunity through spaces with down 2 mods get shot. 337EE in P9 will drop concealment and give him 3FP-2 right there on the N10/O10/O11 vertex: 1, 3; K/2. 1 RFP in N10. 238 2MC: 4, 6; DM. We'll see how many times that has to happen before you start to slow down. Better see what changes you'd care to make before we continue. - G From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Sun Apr 24 05:25:01 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sun Apr 24 05:25:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Red Finn's from Canada Message-ID: <001c01c548c8$a339cb20$0200a8c0@Father> Went to an international film festival here in Winston-Salem this weekend. One of the films was "Letters from Karelia". It is a documentary with dramatic footage a la the history channel from Canada's National Film Board. It was up for awards which was obvious from the splendid quality. Had unseen footage of the fighting in Karelia and good depictions of the Finnish military prison system. If you get a chance to see it, do. It deals with the Red Finns that left Finland during the civil war that followed independence after WWI and moved to Canada. Later, during the Great Depression, many young Canadian Finns who parents brought them up being communists moved to the Soviet Union at the invitation of the Karelian soviet to build the new socialist dream. The film centered on one young Canadian (Aate Pitkanen, BTW - no relation to Mark Pitcavage :) ) who became a sports legend in Russian (cross country skiing, of course) and in WWII was a spy for the SU against Finland, was caught and then executed. It dealt with his history coming to light in the early nineties, his long lost son and the remains of his Canadian family. The city of his death was Petrozavodsk (see "Karelian Dream" from the CH Finland at War pack). Seems he was to be awarded the Order of Lenin recommended by Yuri Andropov but Stalin did not allow it due to his Canadian-Finnish origins. More info can be had by searching the film's title on Google. Raymond "Zadra" Woloszyn From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Apr 24 05:52:10 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun Apr 24 05:52:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS References: Message-ID: <002701c548cc$6faf39d0$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Michael wrote, >I need to correct my answer. I answered without cracking the RB, but a >subsequent look at B14.6 has proven that answer to be wrong. > > The correct answer is that there is LOS through the orchard hex in > question from level 1 hill hex 18DD9 to the ground level hex of 48Q5. > That is true regardless of wether the orchard is in-season, because B14.6 > tells us that, as long as the LOS doesn't leave the road depiction when > going through the orchard road hex, the hindrance rules do not apply and > that FFMO could apply. > > There is also this, from Romanowski's compilation: > > B14.2 & B14.6 Do in-season orchard hexes block LOS from differing > elevations when sighting down an orchard-road. EX: 23S7 to 23AA3 Level 1. > A. No. That LOS is clear. [Letter 197] > > Letter 197 is credited as "Sam Tyson to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to > ASLML 19 September 2002. What if the moving unit elects to not use the Road during its movement? Rather, it is moving in the Orchard portion of the hex. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Apr 24 06:42:55 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun Apr 24 06:44:53 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; The nuttiness unfolds ... > %%%BATES: As we have determined with a little boost from Aaron, a DR5 > on a 6FP-2 shot yields a K/2. EXCEPT that he _assault moved_ in OG, so > this was a 6FP-1 shot. I typed the mod wrong but got the IIFT result > right. This _IS_ a pinned _548_. > Whew, have we made enough mistakes from a single DR? I'm tired. > We'll see if there is an Episode 2 of "The Death of Mary, Queen of > Scots." ***MCLEOD: Well, now that the ASLML knows how much we suck at playing, what worse can happen? Hmmmm, on the other hand, we can slap Aaron with a "Yellow Kibitzer Card". One more infraction and he gets a red along with a stick in the eye. :) Again, the thing I am finding with PBEM is how quickly one forgets where one has left off. Reviewing prior posts to confirm actions/results seems to be a must ... at least for someone with my memory. > 58. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter move into W1 (1 MF), lose "?" and you > see a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. > > > ... W2 (3MF) ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. > > > ... oV2 (4 MF). Ends Movement. Any D'fire? If not, please continue. > > > 59. ***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves onto U10 (2 MF), you see a 238 > ... > D'fire? If not, please continue ... > > > ... U9 (4 MF) ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... > > > ... declares Double Time, and goes to U8 (5 MF). Ends Movement. D'fire? > If > not, please continue ... > > > 60.***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves in bypass of N10 (O10 hexside) > (1MF), > you see a 548. There is some fat for you George! :) D'fire? If not, > > please continue ... > %%%BATES: Yes, as a general policy, squads that move with impunity > through spaces with down 2 mods get shot. 337EE in P9 will drop > concealment and give him 3FP-2 right there on the N10/O10/O11 vertex: > 1, 3; K/2. 1 RFP in N10. 238 2MC: 4, 6; DM. We'll see how many times > that has to happen before you start to slow down. > Better see what changes you'd care to make before we continue. ***MCLEOD: He did his job. George, you can resolve all the following moves. They will be made regardless of the outcome of the other moves in this message. 61.***MCLEOD: A 8-0/548 w/LMG bypass N0 (on M1 hexside) (1 MF). D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory awaits! 62. ***MCLEOD: No guts, no glory I say. A 548 w/LMG moves in bypass of N10 (O10 hexside) [1 MF] and gets whacked by the 1 RFP in N10. George Do I roll for the RFP? I will proceed as if I do as that seems to make sense to keeps thing rolling. And now for a Q. Without looking through Q&A and only a cursory glance at the ASLRB, I will say that the RFP attack on my guy receives the following DRM; -1 for FFNAM and +1 for the woods TEM for a net 0 DRM. I am not quite sure if the -1 for FFMO applies since the RFP is in the hex (woods) which is not OG, my moving in bypass notwithstanding. So here goes, if I am wrong we will correct accordingly. RFP attack, 1 FP +0 DRM, DR = 8 (2,6) = NE. ... Bypass N9 (O10 hexside) [2 MF] and into O9 [4 MF]. Any D'fire? (snicker, snicker ... I wonder if he will shoot? :) ) 63. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter moves in bypass of V0 (W1 hexside) [1 MF], you see a 238. Any D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... into V1 ([2 MF] ... ... into U2 [3.5 MF] and ends movement. 64. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter move in bypass of X0 (Y1 hexside) [1 MF] ... ... bypass X1 (Y1/Y2 hexside) [2 MF] ... ... and into X2 and ends movement [4 MF]. 65. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter enters R10 [1 MF], you see a 548, bypasses R9 (Q10 hexside) [2 MF], and on into Q9 [4 MF]. That should do for now George. I will go dig out some more HS's and see what happens in your next message. =Jim= From pzchala at hotmail.com Sun Apr 24 09:36:34 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sun Apr 24 09:36:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS In-Reply-To: <002701c548cc$6faf39d0$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Comment below... >From: "mcleods" >To: "Michael Pierzchala" >,, >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Woods Orchard and LOS >Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 07:52:10 -0500 > > >Listerz, > >Michael wrote, > >>I need to correct my answer. I answered without cracking the RB, but a >>subsequent look at B14.6 has proven that answer to be wrong. >> >>The correct answer is that there is LOS through the orchard hex in >>question from level 1 hill hex 18DD9 to the ground level hex of 48Q5. That >>is true regardless of wether the orchard is in-season, because B14.6 tells >>us that, as long as the LOS doesn't leave the road depiction when going >>through the orchard road hex, the hindrance rules do not apply and that >>FFMO could apply. >> >>There is also this, from Romanowski's compilation: >> >>B14.2 & B14.6 Do in-season orchard hexes block LOS from differing >>elevations when sighting down an orchard-road. EX: 23S7 to 23AA3 Level 1. >>A. No. That LOS is clear. [Letter 197] >> >>Letter 197 is credited as "Sam Tyson to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to >>ASLML 19 September 2002. > >What if the moving unit elects to not use the Road during its movement? >Rather, it is moving in the Orchard portion of the hex. > =Jim= B14.6 says "Entrance of such a hex through a road hexside is identical to movement along any road." A4.132 says that if infantry pays the cost of other terrain in the hex, then it is considered in that terrain, and avoid FFMO DRM. It seems that moving in the Orchard portion of the road is the smart move. It cost the same MF, and offers more protection from enemy fire. A no-brainer for the ATTACKER, unless he needs to stay on the road for the Road Bonus extra MF. It's a non-no-brainer if I'll remember this in future play! Mike Pierzchala _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From pzchala at hotmail.com Sun Apr 24 09:52:56 2005 From: pzchala at hotmail.com (Michael Pierzchala) Date: Sun Apr 24 09:53:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Broadway to Prokhorovka mini-CG design question In-Reply-To: <881fb88848fe.8848fe881fb8@mscd.edu> Message-ID: Comment inserted... >From: morrisgj@mscd.edu >To: ASLML Distribution >Subject: [Aslml] Broadway to Prokhorovka mini-CG design question >Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 16:29:21 -0600 > >Hello All: > >Wondering about the CG1SSR 1 (German Fatigue) used in the Broadway to >Prokhorovka mini-CG. > >1. Curious why the number of leaders is used to determine Fatigue. > >2. Giving the criteria in CG1SSR 1, the Germans should choose the >Leader/SW group that has the 9-1 and 8-1 (4 cvp) as opposed to the 9-2 >group (3 cvp). Right? I assume this is regarding J52. Both groups are the same in CVP. 9-1 & 8-1 = 4, but so do the 9-2, 8-0. 9-2 = 3 CVP, 8-0 = 1. 9-1 and 8-1 = 2 each. See A26.211. >As ye can see I am years behind the times as usual. I know the feeling. :-) Mike Pierzchala _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sun Apr 24 11:41:44 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sun Apr 24 12:12:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <002701c54901$6b5ed860$a64d8918@klis.com> Moderator here. Jim wrote: > 62. ***MCLEOD: No guts, no glory I say. A 548 w/LMG moves in bypass of N10 > (O10 hexside) [1 MF] and gets whacked by the 1 RFP in N10. George Do I roll > for the RFP? Yes, the usual thing in PBeM is that the moving player makes the DRs for any Resid./Fire Lane attacks. > I will proceed as if I do as that seems to make sense to keeps > thing rolling. And that's the reason. > And now for a Q. Without looking through Q&A and only a > cursory glance at the ASLRB, I will say that the RFP attack on my guy > receives the following DRM; -1 for FFNAM and +1 for the woods TEM for a net > 0 DRM. I am not quite sure if the -1 for FFMO applies since the RFP is in > the hex (woods) which is not OG, my moving in bypass notwithstanding. Not correct, Jim. The bypassing unit is moving in the *OG* portion of the hex, so FFMO *does* apply, just as if he was being fired on at a vertex by direct fire. The difference with Resid. is that the woods TEM also applies. So you have +1 Woods, -1 FFNAM, -1 FFMO. There's an interesting new article (*ahem*) in the latest Journal which addresses this issue, among others. > So > here goes, if I am wrong we will correct accordingly. RFP attack, 1 FP +0 > DRM, DR = 8 (2,6) = NE. The net DRM is -1, but with that DR it makes no difference. David "Readers Wanted" Olie From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Apr 24 13:29:39 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun Apr 24 13:29:40 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Qs wrt Defence of the Chrysanthemum Throne References: <20050421152948.94882.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001801c5490c$56faf650$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Listers; Preparing to defend the emperor on Tarawa (for the first time) in CG III: 1. I have found some old e-mails from 1999 (one from Perry, one from Steve Dethlefsen) which contradict each other as to whether the 8 inch cannons are 'free', that is, do no have to be purchased with GPPs. If the GPPs for them are not spent, do these Guns exist at all? On a related note, since the T15.6141 GPP table lists a CG maximum of two 8 inch gun turrets, are those two *in addition* to the two already there? If so, can they be placed anywhere? 2. T15.6142 explains the meaning of the exponent which may exist in the CAPP allotment. OK, but is this a 'freebie', ie there is no penalty to the Japanese to take advantage (or not) of this extra capacity? I can draw what I believe are reasonable conclusions with respect to both of these questions, but this being ASL, don't like to do that in the absence of clear rules. Wynn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 11:29 AM Subject: [Aslml] VC question > Fellows, > > currently on scenario 5 of the 7 scen 1991 annual > Arnhem CG. Loads of fun, and will report on the whole > thing when finished. > > VC question, that I believe is clear, but is not dealt > with in the Rulebook. > > for both Guards Attack (A35, now updated in FKaC), and > A36 Oy Veghel, the VC function the same. for A35: > British player wins by sole occupation of 17q6/q7 or > 17P4/q4 at the conclusion of any player turn. > > the problem arises from the non-RB term, 'occupation'. > We usually speak of control... > > To win A35, I happen to have had a hs on one hex, and > a tank eliminated a German during an OVR in the other > hex. thus, by any definition of occupation I won at > the end of that player turn. > > However, in Oy Veghel, my opponent has 'thunder-ran' a > Stug into Veghel, is now planning on abadoning the > AFV, and running through the two victory hexes that > constitue a single building, with his crew. He's > arguing that in ASL that gives him 'control', and, > with no allied counter in the building, he's the sole > 'occupant'. > > Yes, really pushing it there, but I hate it when I > have to rely on non-asl common sense to argue my > position: that he has to physically have units on both > hexes at the end of a player turn. > > so, a) am I right, and is there a 'rule' to back me > up, or only language? > b) does the FKaC version of this scen change the VC > wording into ASL-ese? > > yours, > Rob > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 25 03:03:31 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 25 03:03:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Very quick ANZACon 2005 results Message-ID: <8afp61h799h7vbkmtmcve912uhc66ifjkb@4ax.com> 12 players participated in this year's tournament; three were from interstate and one from overseas (Darryl Lundy, of course!). There were five rounds, but some of the scenarios played longer than expected, and various time pressures forced the last couple of rounds to be somewhat truncated. I sincerely apologise to all the players for this annoying inconvenience. Still, people seemed to have fun. (At least that's what they told me ... I hope I'm not burning in effigy somewhere.) Tournament winner was Steve Banham, whose 4 victories narrowly edged out Darryl Lundy's 4 victories when bonus points were accounted for. Dave Bardi was an equally-close 3rd-place. Two bonus prizes were awarded: one for most snake-eyes rolled during the tournament, and one for most boxcars. Neil Andrews won the first by a handy margin and through an *incredible* effort in the last round (11 boxcars in one scenario before he conceded!) came within one pip of winning the boxcars result also -- but sterling consistent effort by the tag-team of Andrew Nugteren and Brent Sword (Andrew played in rounds 1, 2 & 5, and Brent covered him for rounds 3 & 4) yielded them the, er, coveted prize. Thanks to all who attended, and thanks also to the sponsors -- MMP, Games 4 Gamers, and Military Simulations (aka Jedko). Full tournament write-up etc. to follow soon. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Apr 25 03:45:59 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Apr 25 03:46:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <002701c54901$6b5ed860$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <002701c54901$6b5ed860$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <4mhp6119ujek0jr6cd3v49trgm7bv7eas0@4ax.com> On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 15:41:44 -0300, "David Olie" wrote: >> 0 DRM. I am not quite sure if the -1 for FFMO applies since the RFP is in >> the hex (woods) which is not OG, my moving in bypass notwithstanding. >Not correct, Jim. The bypassing unit is moving in the *OG* portion of the >hex, so FFMO *does* apply, just as if he was being fired on at a vertex by >direct fire. The difference with Resid. is that the woods TEM also applies. >So you have +1 Woods, -1 FFNAM, -1 FFMO. >There's an interesting new article (*ahem*) in the latest Journal which >addresses this issue, among others. Oh dear. Does the article really say that? If it does, I'm afraid it's in error. A8.2 "RESIDUAL FIREPOWER: ... Thereafter, any unit entering (or expending MF/MP in) that same Location in the same MPh is attacked on the IFT with the FP represented by that Residual FP counter, a new IFT DR, and any applicable FFMO/FFNAM DRM. ... All non-hexside TEM ... of the target Location apply to a Residual FP attack (even vs. Bypassing units). ...." Well, that seems OK, so far as it goes. Until we remember the following: A4.6 "MOVEMENT MODIFIERS (FFMO/FFNAM): ... Infantry that has moved during the MPh without using Assault (or Hazardous) Movement is subject to a -1 FFNAM DRM to all Defensive First Fire attacks against it in addition to the applicable TEM of its Location .... A further -1 First Fire DRM applies to units moving in the open (FFMO), but whenever such movement is combined with another effective protective TEM ... in the target Location itself, the -1 FFMO DRM does not apply." A8.2 tells us that FFNAM/FFMO modifies the DR *if applicable*. A4.6 tells us that while FFNAM *is* cumulative with other TEM, FFMO is *not*. There are no relevant EXC given, thus, FFMO is *not* applicable. Thus, in Jim's move above, the total DRM is 0: +1 TEM, -1 FFNAM. FFMO is NA because it is not usually cumulative with TEM (except in unusual circumstances, like runways -- B7.3). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Apr 25 08:10:06 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Apr 25 08:12:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <002701c54901$6b5ed860$a64d8918@klis.com> <4mhp6119ujek0jr6cd3v49trgm7bv7eas0@4ax.com> Message-ID: <00a601c549a8$e1843b00$a64d8918@klis.com> Bruce wrote: > Oh dear. Does the article really say that? If it does, I'm afraid it's in > error. Actually, no, it doesn't. Brain fart on my part. I began writing that article nearly 5 years ago and it's not exactly fresh in my mind. >Thus, in Jim's move above, the total DRM is 0: +1 TEM, -1 FFNAM. FFMO is NA >because it is not usually cumulative with TEM (except in unusual >circumstances, like runways -- B7.3). Agreed. Sorry for the disinformation. David "clearly not an expert" Olie ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From pshelling at comcast.net Mon Apr 25 15:20:41 2005 From: pshelling at comcast.net (pshelling@comcast.net) Date: Mon Apr 25 15:21:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE:Broadway to Prokhorovka design question Message-ID: <042520052220.25052.426D6D390003DEEA000061DC220700095309020704040A089C9F@comcast.net> Gerry jawed: >Hello All: >Wondering about the CG1SSR 1 (German Fatigue) used in the Broadway to >Prokhorovka mini-CG. >1. Curious why the number of leaders is used to determine Fatigue. It's been a while, but I think it was an easier method than anything else I could think up. Design principle #2: Keep it simple. >2. Giving the criteria in CG1SSR 1, the Germans should choose the >Leader/SW group that has the 9-1 and 8-1 (4 cvp) as opposed to the 9-2 >group (3 cvp). Right? It certainly has it's plusses, but I think the other choice has advantages as well. If not, then my playtesters weren't very honest with me. As a designer, I put OB choices in for one reason: to torture the player. Not only to agonize over which group to chose, but to see them cringe when they reach the point in the game that they wish they would've chosen the other one. Only then, can they feel the same pain and self-loathing caused by ASL play that I feel when I play. Pete 'As an artist, it is important that my work emotes' Shelling. From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Mon Apr 25 20:01:59 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Mon Apr 25 20:03:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Qs wrt Defence of the Chrysanthemum Throne In-Reply-To: <001801c5490c$56faf650$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <20050421152948.94882.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> <001801c5490c$56faf650$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <2b8228f005042520015c9418c6@mail.gmail.com> Wynn, Perry told me, in person, that two 8-inch guns are free, and two more can be purchased, depending on the CG. I believe their possible setup locations are painted on the map, and maybe mentioned in the BRT terrain rules, or in the ordnance note. I'm too lazy to look up T15.6141 just now, but my memory tells me that the exponent must be fully "used". This can be a pain, because every pillbox must be manned to capacity, if I remember correctly. On 4/24/05, Wynn wrote: > Listers; > > Preparing to defend the emperor on Tarawa (for the first time) in CG III: > > 1. I have found some old e-mails from 1999 (one from Perry, one from Steve > Dethlefsen) which contradict each other as to whether the 8 inch cannons are > 'free', that is, do no have to be purchased with GPPs. If the GPPs for them > are not spent, do these Guns exist at all? > > On a related note, since the T15.6141 GPP table lists a CG maximum of two 8 > inch gun turrets, are those two *in addition* to the two already there? If > so, can they be placed anywhere? > > 2. T15.6142 explains the meaning of the exponent which may exist in the CAPP > allotment. OK, but is this a 'freebie', ie there is no penalty to the > Japanese to take advantage (or not) of this extra capacity? > > I can draw what I believe are reasonable conclusions with respect to both of > these questions, but this being ASL, don't like to do that in the absence of > clear rules. > > Wynn > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Nelson" > To: > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 11:29 AM > Subject: [Aslml] VC question > > > Fellows, > > > > currently on scenario 5 of the 7 scen 1991 annual > > Arnhem CG. Loads of fun, and will report on the whole > > thing when finished. > > > > VC question, that I believe is clear, but is not dealt > > with in the Rulebook. > > > > for both Guards Attack (A35, now updated in FKaC), and > > A36 Oy Veghel, the VC function the same. for A35: > > British player wins by sole occupation of 17q6/q7 or > > 17P4/q4 at the conclusion of any player turn. > > > > the problem arises from the non-RB term, 'occupation'. > > We usually speak of control... > > > > To win A35, I happen to have had a hs on one hex, and > > a tank eliminated a German during an OVR in the other > > hex. thus, by any definition of occupation I won at > > the end of that player turn. > > > > However, in Oy Veghel, my opponent has 'thunder-ran' a > > Stug into Veghel, is now planning on abadoning the > > AFV, and running through the two victory hexes that > > constitue a single building, with his crew. He's > > arguing that in ASL that gives him 'control', and, > > with no allied counter in the building, he's the sole > > 'occupant'. > > > > Yes, really pushing it there, but I hate it when I > > have to rely on non-asl common sense to argue my > > position: that he has to physically have units on both > > hexes at the end of a player turn. > > > > so, a) am I right, and is there a 'rule' to back me > > up, or only language? > > b) does the FKaC version of this scen change the VC > > wording into ASL-ese? > > > > yours, > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 21:51:32 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Apr 25 21:51:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A bypass LOS I've just never had to deal with... Message-ID: <20050426045132.10707.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> List, for some reason, I've never had this situation come up, and I'm stumped. What happens when you fire into an ADJ hex, at a bypassing unit, and your LOS to the vertex travels along an orchard hexside? Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in bypass in 12 o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6. To get to the vertex, the LOS is traced along the inherent orchard of P6. So, is this a -2 shot, ffnam and ffmo, or merely a ffnam shot? (for of course the orchard cannot act as a 'hindrance', as there are no hexes between firer and target. The question is really, does the inherent nature of the orchard hexside eliminate ffmo) please advise, Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Apr 26 02:32:54 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Apr 26 02:33:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <00a601c549a8$e1843b00$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <002701c54901$6b5ed860$a64d8918@klis.com> <4mhp6119ujek0jr6cd3v49trgm7bv7eas0@4ax.com> <00a601c549a8$e1843b00$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:10:06 -0300, "David Olie" wrote: >Actually, no, it doesn't. Brain fart on my part. I began writing that >article nearly 5 years ago and it's not exactly fresh in my mind. Oh good. I was feeling too tired for a no-holds-barred rules disagreement, and I was deathly afraid that one was coming . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From Vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Apr 26 12:15:30 2005 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Tue Apr 26 12:18:57 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A bypass LOS I've just never had to deal with... References: <20050426045132.10707.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002c01c54a94$553159c0$152ca8c0@loungedining> stick my head out here. Orchard is inherant terrain so would hinder the shot if the unit did not "occupy" the orchard hex (ie if it were between). Here the orchard hex is not between so will not hinder. However the unit is not in open ground thus no FFMO will aopply. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 5:51 AM Subject: [Aslml] A bypass LOS I've just never had to deal with... > List, > > for some reason, I've never had this situation come > up, and I'm stumped. > > What happens when you fire into an ADJ hex, at a > bypassing unit, and your LOS to the vertex travels > along an orchard hexside? > > Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in bypass in > 12 o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6. To get to the vertex, > the LOS is traced along the inherent orchard of P6. > > So, is this a -2 shot, ffnam and ffmo, or merely a > ffnam shot? (for of course the orchard cannot act as a > 'hindrance', as there are no hexes between firer and > target. The question is really, does the inherent > nature of the orchard hexside eliminate ffmo) > > please advise, > > Rob > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From Vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Apr 26 12:17:50 2005 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Tue Apr 26 12:20:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper TEM Message-ID: <003401c54a94$a7917470$152ca8c0@loungedining> My sniper has just gone off he has 3 possible tagerts 2 are infantry in woods one is an emplaced gun in grain. I have to go for the least TEM. Is this one of the inf or the gun I E does the +2 emplaced bonus act as tem for the purposes of sniper selection. Yours Aye Martin From rln22 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 12:40:22 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Tue Apr 26 12:41:02 2005 Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050426194023.11368.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Where is the rule that specifically states that one may use AP when using the ITT? I see all these rules for HEAT, and how the target has to be 'hard' (in building etc), but I don't see the same for AP. Yet, the "pillbox attack special" makes it clear that AP can be used on the ITT vs infantry in a hard target. Rob __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From tompygo at comcast.net Tue Apr 26 13:14:37 2005 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Tue Apr 26 13:14:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT References: <20050426194023.11368.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000701c54a9c$92d2cf90$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> Try... C3.32 INFANTRY TARGET TYPE: The Infantry Target Type can be selected only when firing HE [EXC: AP or HEAT vs an unarmored target (8.31, 11.52)] That pretty much says it all. Later, Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 2:40 PM Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT > Where is the rule that specifically states that one > may use AP when using the ITT? I see all these rules > for HEAT, and how the target has to be 'hard' (in > building etc), but I don't see the same for AP. Yet, > the "pillbox attack special" makes it clear that AP > can be used on the ITT vs infantry in a hard target. > > Rob > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From daveolie at eastlink.ca Tue Apr 26 15:55:36 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue Apr 26 16:08:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh3 References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <002701c54901$6b5ed860$a64d8918@klis.com> <4mhp6119ujek0jr6cd3v49trgm7bv7eas0@4ax.com> <00a601c549a8$e1843b00$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <003001c54ab4$96914a40$a64d8918@klis.com> Bruce wrote: >Oh good. I was feeling too tired for a no-holds-barred rules disagreement, >and I was deathly afraid that one was coming . In a world torn by strife and bitterness, I've always found a fast "mea culpa" can do wonders for the cosmic balance, dude. David "like, wow" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Tue Apr 26 16:02:10 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue Apr 26 16:09:22 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper TEM References: <003401c54a94$a7917470$152ca8c0@loungedining> Message-ID: <003101c54ab4$96a9b440$a64d8918@klis.com> Martin asked: > I have to go for the least TEM. Is this one of the inf or the gun I E does > the +2 emplaced bonus act as tem for the purposes of sniper selection. The Sniper goes for the Infantry. Emplacement is described as "TEM" throughout C11.2, and in the Index, so I don't see any reason why it would not apply where A14.21 is concerned, assuming the Gun is being operated by a crew and not a squad. David "emplacements are the pits" Olie From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Apr 26 16:42:10 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue Apr 26 16:42:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, George Bates wrote, > The evil minions keep coming. Shots ring out from the perimeter in > "&&&." Thats "Freedom Fighters" to you green men! ;) >> 58. ***MCLEOD: "?" + 1 counter move into W1 (1 MF), lose "?" and you see >> a 238 ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. >> >> >> ... W2 (3MF) ... D'fire? If not, please proceed. >> >> >> ... oV2 (4 MF). Ends Movement. Any D'fire? If not, please > continue. >> >> >> 59. ***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves onto U10 (2 MF), you see a 238 > >> ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... >> >> >> ... U9 (4 MF) ... D'fire? If not, please continue ... >> >> >> ... declares Double Time, and goes to U8 (5 MF). Ends Movement. D'fire? >> If not, please continue ... >> >> >> 60.***MCLEOD: A "?" + 1 counter moves in bypass of N10 (O10 hexside) >> (1MF), >> you see a 548. There is some fat for you George! :) D'fire? If > not, >> >> please continue ... >> %%%BATES: Yes, as a general policy, squads that move with impunity >> through spaces with down 2 mods get shot. 337EE in P9 will drop >> concealment and give him 3FP-2 right there on the N10/O10/O11 vertex: 1, >> 3; K/2. 1 RFP in N10. 238 2MC: 4, 6; DM. We'll see how many times >> that has to happen before you start to slow down. Better see what changes >> you'd care to make before we continue. > > ***MCLEOD: He did his job. George, you can resolve all the following > moves. They will be made regardless of the outcome of the other moves in > this message. > > 61.***MCLEOD: A 8-0/548 w/LMG bypass N0 (on M1 hexside) (1 MF). > D'fire? If not, please continue ... > &&&BATES: 747b in M4 likes that action, drops concealment 7FP+1 @ > N0/N1/M1 vertex: 1, 5; NMC. Because there are 3 hindrance hexes I > don't think there's any resid. 8-0 NMC: 5, 6; DM. 548/LMG NMC: 2, 6; > pin. Nothin' like stopping these fellows in their tracks. ***MCLEOD: "+1"!? There are three grain hexes as hindrances, correct? There is a -1 DRM plus +3 DRM for the LOS hindrances which gives us a net +2, unless I am missing something here George. That means that the 8-0 is Pinned and the 548 w/LMG is good to go. > ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. > D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... > 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory awaits! > &&&BATES: Not so fast, caped crusader! These guys are parked in N0 for > a spell. ***MCLEOD: Apparently not. You may wish to take another poke at the squad. The 8-0 is Pinned in N0, the S. is in N1. > 62. ***MCLEOD: No guts, no glory I say. A 548 w/LMG moves in bypass of > N10 (O10 hexside) [1 MF] and gets whacked by the 1 RFP in N10. George Do > I > roll for the RFP? I will proceed as if I do as that seems to make sense > to > keeps thing rolling. And now for a Q. Without looking through Q&A and > only a > > cursory glance at the ASLRB, I will say that the RFP attack on my guy > receives the following DRM; -1 for FFNAM and +1 for the woods TEM for a > net 0 DRM. I am not quite sure if the -1 for FFMO applies since the RFP > is > in the hex (woods) which is not OG, my moving in bypass notwithstanding. > So here goes, if I am wrong we will correct accordingly. RFP attack, 1 FP > +0 DRM, DR = 8 (2,6) = NE. > &&&BATES: Looks like Probst & Olie have kept you on the straight and > narrow with all this, so we continue. BTW, still one more concealed > unit in N11, right? ***MCLEOD: I knew this rule to be so, just do not ask me where to find it. :) Yes, there is still a unit off map in "N11". > ... Bypass N9 (O10 hexside) [2 MF] and into O9 [4 MF]. Any D'fire? > &&&BATES: Definitely. 337EE in P9 will FF at O9, 3FP: 2, 6. 1RFP in > O9. Lucky you. > However, 747SS/MMG uncloaks in O6, IFP + FL to O9, 11FP+1: 6, 1; 1MC. > Now 4RFP in O9 and a 2FL. 548/LMG 1MC: 1, 5; passed. ***MCLEOD: Where does the 4 RFP come from? The MMG laid down a 2 FP FL, the squads IFP is 7 which becomes 2 RFP which is then knocked down to 1 RFP due to the Orchard hex in O7. > IFP SFF on the 2nd MF, 3.5FP+1: 3, 1; NMC. 548/LMG NMC: 4, 4; pin. I > love pins. ***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and is manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No Pin. Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) > (snicker, snicker ... I wonder if he will shoot? :) ) > &&&BATES: Guess we've answered that question. But don't feel too smug. > 337EE is giving it up for the cause to strip your concealment and throw > a few tacks under your tires. He even had an anvil for that squad in > N10. I'd say he's doing a fine job. ***MCLEOD: We will think highly of him as we pick through his pockets ... either dead or as a prisoner ... :) > 63. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter moves in bypass of V0 (W1 hexside) > [1 MF], you see a 238. Any D'fire? If not, please continue ... > &&&BATES: 747GG/MMG drops "?" in S6, lays left side alternate hexgrain > FL to V0, 4FP+1: 6, 4; NE. He gets a pass. ***MCLEOD: George, aren't we missing a few DRM here? There is at least +3 LOS hindrance DRM fo that shot. The final DRM should be +2 shouldn't it? > ... into V1 ([2 MF] ... > &&&BATES: That'll be a 2FP+1 FL shot: 3, 4; NE. Not happening. ***MCLEOD: Suppose I wanted to get off the bullet beaten track? :) Oh well, away we go! > ... into U2 [3.5 MF] and ends movement. > &&&BATES: Another 2FP+1 shot: 5, 5; NE. Scot free [so to speak 8-)]. ***MCLEOD: WRT FL's, is it protocol to advise the other player if he wishes to not run up the FL once one has been declared? My guy is now where he is, but in future I may not wish to take my chances. > 64. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter move in bypass of X0 (Y1 hexside) [1 > MF] ... > ... bypass X1 (Y1/Y2 hexside) [2 MF] ... > > > ... and into X2 and ends movement [4 MF]. > &&&BATES: Since he didn't AM, the guys in U5 wanna know what he is. > Reserve the right to blow him away if I want. ***MCLEOD: He is a 548. Hmmm, thought I sent that information in the last mailing. Sorry George. > 65. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter enters R10 [1 MF], you see a 548, > bypasses R9 (Q10 hexside) [2 MF], and on into Q9 [4 MF]. That should do > for now George. I will go dig out some more HS's and see what happens in > your next message. > &&&BATES: That will entitle him to a 3FP FPF shot from 337EE in P9: 4, > 3; PTC. 548 PTC: 3, 1; passed. 1RFP in O9, but I pinned, didn't I? ***MCLEOD: Good shot. If the 337 does not die in the upcoming RtPh, I will wager that a CC of un-ending duration will commence. :) George, you had better go back and check the Q's I have up above. I will not move anyone else until I hear back from you. BTW, you left the ASLML out of our last communication. =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Tue Apr 26 18:29:30 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Apr 26 18:28:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Lest we forget... Message-ID: <000001c54ac8$93994fe0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> War is hell. See the book review below. Am also in the middle of Rising '44, which in spite of the anglicized nicknames (barf!) is still an eye-opener. George "avowed civilian" Bates Yokohama, Japan Gaming by the Bay the 1st Sunday of every month (except May!). C'mon over. Now in progress: J81 "They Fired on Odessa...", Rumanian vs. David Olie A59 "Death at Carentan", US vs. Jim McLeod BOOKS OF THE TIMES | 'LONDON 1945' Amid the Rubble, After London Took It By WILLIAM GRIMES Published: April 27, 2005 In 1940, at the height of the blitz, Britain adopted a defiant slogan: "London can take it." By 1945, the mood had changed. Germany's V-2 rockets were wreaking horrific damage on the city and its suburbs. Years of rationing, scarcity and endless queues had taken a toll. In Croydon, a 57-year-old woman turned on the gas and left a note that read, "This war lasted too long for me; I can't go on." Despite the brave face, London could not take much more. In her thoroughly engrossing "London 1945," Maureen Waller describes a city on its last legs, hanging on desperately in the waning months of the war and looking forward, with a forlorn sort of hope, to a newer, better peacetime Britain. Mingling statistical data with eyewitness accounts, she builds up a detailed picture of daily life in London that moves easily from the horrific (mangled flesh hanging from trees) to the mundane (the annoyance of having to wear short socks). Food, fashion and bombs all get equal treatment, for the very good reason that Londoners spent at least as much time worrying about how to get a lamb chop as they did about dodging the next rocket. Ms. Waller, the author of "1700: Scenes From London Life" and "Ungrateful Daughters," a study of the Glorious Revolution, begins with the bombs. The V-1, or doodlebug, had already claimed thousands of lives by late 1944, when it was supplanted by the even more frightening V-2, which approached its targets silently, prompting one London woman to call them "bombs with slippers on." Somehow, the idea of a pilotless bomb made the "second blitz" worse than the one at the beginning of the war. "You accepted a plane with a man in it," one Londoner said. "You couldn't accept something that was automatic. It was this that struck psychologically at us in such a way that it destroyed our nerves." It was not only the bombs that wore on nerves. Londoners also made do on food rations that Americans could not even begin to imagine. No American ever had to eat the infamous Woolton pie. Named after the minister of food, it was a vegetable pie thickened with oatmeal and commonly topped with potato. The average town dweller could expect to eat three eggs a month. Many women, who did without so that their children could eat more, took up smoking to cut their hunger pangs. Onions were so precious they were offered as raffle prizes. It came as a severe blow that after the war the food situation only grew worse. Clothing allowances were just as severe. Trouser cuffs were banned, and young boys had to go on wearing shorts until age 12. Women could only dream of stockings, at least until the Americans began turning up in large numbers. As a makeshift, they painted their legs with gravy browning or cocoa. In February 1945, a small ray of fashion sunshine peeked through the clouds. The ban on heels higher than two inches was lifted. But shoes remained so scarce that they created a new phenomenon, the meta-queue, as women stood in line hoping to get the right to join a queue for shoes. By and large, Ms. Waller writes, Londoners perceived the rationing system as fair and put up with it. That does not mean that the wartime economy was entirely on the up and up. With the police ranks thinned by war, and illegal guns proliferating (some sold by American G.I.'s), opportunity beckoned for a new breed of London criminal, the spiv, "distinct in his loud, garish clothing, his gait an imitation of the Chicago gangsters in Hollywood films." In one of her more colorful chapters, Ms. Waller describes the exploits of the Elephant Boys of Bermondsey and the criminal gangs that flourished along the docks. Sometimes the heist would be jewelry, a smash and grab on Bond Street. But it might just as easily be a consignment of frozen turkeys. There was a white-hot market for anything and everything. "Sleek in their Savile Row suits, their molls dripping with furs and jewels, London's underworld kings were having the time of their lives," Ms. Waller writes. It was not only the criminals who benefited from the war. Ms. Waller also finds a silver lining in the social changes brought about by it. Concern for civilian morale forced the government to pay attention to its citizens, and to listen to their fears and hopes in a way it never had before. Like the New Deal in the United States, wartime social-welfare programs in Britain laid the foundation for a different kind of postwar state, one in which government took a much more active role in such areas as health care and housing. Under pressure, class distinctions began to erode. "The war had been a democratizing process," Ms. Waller writes. "Rationing had succeeded in instilling in people's minds the idea of fair shares for all: as Churchill's daughter Sarah pointed out to him, the socialist policies that had been introduced in wartime had proved to be a force for good, not harm." After getting a taste of Churchill-sponsored socialism during the war, the British electorate responded by throwing their wartime leader out of office just months after V-E Day and handing the Labor Party a landslide victory. It was a vote for houses, food and jobs, for a new, more equitable Britain. But London in 1945 looked like a defeated city. Cool Britannia was a long way off. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 27 01:49:09 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 27 01:49:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] (fwd) My ANZACon 2005 results Message-ID: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com> Forwarded with permission of Rob Morieson: On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 16:27:56 +1000, "Robert Morieson" wrote: Firstly, let me thank Bruce for all his work. It mightn't have all gone to plan, but it wouldn't have gone at all without his efforts. Bruce picked a bunch of unknown/unpublished scenarios that all looked to be fun/interesting and sometimes a little different. Unfortunately, this lack of playing can lead to problems with balance and time as proved to be the case. That said, almost everybody thought the first sceanrio would be close before they started, so Bruce can hardly be blamed there. Scenario 1 : Island Hopping on Lake Ladoga. Me : Finns, David : Russians It looked good, and I was moderately pleased when rolled high and got the Finns, but having a bunch of boats crossing lots of open water into the teeth of Russian small arms fire and the 82mm mortar proved to be almost impossible. The first wave took enough losses as to limit their effectiveness in drawing fire away from the second wave. Of the 6 games played, I think all of them proved to be easy Russian wins. 0-1 Scenario 2: Prelude to Disaster Me: Germans, Murray: Canadians We both wanted the Germans, and I again rolled high to get them, he got the balance. I think I would have had to have played a good game here to beat Murray who seems a very good player, but I put in a shocker, both tactically and with the dice and got swamped. My plan was to hide the guns at the back and use my infantry to slow his inf down giving him little time to find them, but my defence in depth crumbled and made life easy for him. 0-2 My day was probably best summed up by the rally phases. Over the course of 2 scenarios, I managed to rally 1 squad and a 9-1 leader while killing 1.5 of my own squads. I was equal leader in the boxcars race by the end of the day. Scenario 3: To Have and to Hold. Me: US, Neil M: Germans. A 'take the bridge and hold it' type scenario. I swept in on the first turn with my armoured cars intent on finding the few Germans and putting them into VBM so my jeep mounted inf could take the bridge and support them. First AC was shot at and the resulting MC kicked off a sniper, '2', hits the AC so he stuns, stops and buttons up in the hex. Not exactly what I had in mind, and the start of a good day for his sniper. Another AC finds and VBMs the rest of the Germans , half squads with leaders close in for both CC's and I lose an AC in one, while killing him and a half squad in the other ( casualty reduction, so the leader and stunned AC was left there ). In defensive fire, my 'spare' AC fires into the melee, kills the Germans ( 12 on MC ) and ELRs the US officer...fun. Neil brings on his reinforcements but seems to bring them forward a little too slow for mine, leading to a mad dash for the bridge on the last turn from some distance. 3 squads made it into the adjacent hex, but all failed to stand up the the 1 pt residual and 2*2pt firelanes going through that hex so I never had to use my 'reserve' 7(-4) attack I was saving for any who didn't pin/break. I started with 3 ACs, the first fell to CC while in motion...sad, a little unlucky, but fair enough, the second was recalled by a sniper( it was the second time that AC was his by a sniper ), the third was charging down a road, was shot at by a BU StuG which had seen it for 1/2 an MP and killed ( 3 TH, 11TK ). 1-2 Scenario 4: Grasping for the wind. Me: US, Brent: Bolshevik Partisans Set in 1919 in Siberia! This is big for a tournament scenario..about 20 squads per side, but despite my trepidations, it played out fairly quick once started. The idea for the US is to take large chunks of the board 24 village without taking more than 15 CVP. Brent set up a little light front and center for mine, so my prep fire concentrated there and was rather effective, so I pushed up the middle and the trees either side of the middle and just swept him back. Brent was rolling pretty badly, which encouraged this aggressiveness, but the firepower I was bringing to bare, particular with advancing/assault fire proved overwhelming. One amusing point was my left flank...He had 1 squad in a buildng out on it's own, I put 5 squads there, planning to quickly sweep it aside and sprint around the flank...it held..and held, even generating a hero. I eventually took it out by advancing adjacent to it and hitting it with a 35+2 attack followed by a 10+2, eventually taking the surviving HS prisoner, but my fast flanking force didn't get moving until turn 3. If the rest of the battle hadn't been going so well it would have been very frustrating. 2-2 Scenario 4: ( I forgot the name, sorry ) [Bruce's edit: It's actually #5, and the scenario title was "Loser Takes All"] Me: Russian, Neil A: German. German attacks from both sides to take a village in '45. This is probably a fun, balanced scenario, but when Neil rolls 11 12's, even more 11's, gets his JagdPather immobilised by a 1 pt AT mine, and the Russian Sniper stuns 2 of his vehicles (on the same impulse), it proves impossible for the Germans. He pressed on bravely, until time forced his hand and he faced what was by then almost inevitable and resigned. 3-2 ( equal 5th ) What can I say, Saturday sucked, but Sunday and Monday I came through. Coincidentally my luck turned at the same time as this turnaround...I didn't roll all that well, but the bad guys rolled awfully. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From cryo at xs4all.nl Wed Apr 27 02:23:44 2005 From: cryo at xs4all.nl (Albert van Poppel) Date: Wed Apr 27 02:23:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule References: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com> Message-ID: <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> MMP announced some release dates about AOO, ASLSK2, Valour of the guards and other games on ConsimWorld. I made a small recap on my website for easy of use; Http://www.cardboardwarriors.com Enjoy, Albert van Poppel From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 27 02:31:48 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 27 02:30:15 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": Questions in T3(G) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000301c54b0b$f161f760$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Looks like there's lots of issues here, I'll truncate the message and go straight to the trouble spots in "%%%." Think I cover everything, but I'm not sure why you think the free hands in a squad who are not manning an MG placing an FL cannot SFF. You invoked the Norse god. Let's see if he has a comment. Probably some guy on the Labrador coast who thinks he's entitled to an opinion, too, just because he had an article published. Lord knows Probst won't be able to resist. -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:42 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 Listerz, George Bates wrote, > The evil minions keep coming. Shots ring out from the perimeter in > "&&&." Thats "Freedom Fighters" to you green men! ;) . . . ***MCLEOD: He did his job. George, you can resolve all the following moves. They will be made regardless of the outcome of the other moves in this message. > 61.***MCLEOD: A 8-0/548 w/LMG bypass N0 (on M1 hexside) (1 MF). > D'fire? If not, please continue ... > &&&BATES: 747b in M4 likes that action, drops concealment 7FP+1 @ > N0/N1/M1 vertex: 1, 5; NMC. Because there are 3 hindrance hexes I > don't think there's any resid. 8-0 NMC: 5, 6; DM. 548/LMG NMC: 2, > 6; pin. Nothin' like stopping these fellows in their tracks. ***MCLEOD: "+1"!? There are three grain hexes as hindrances, correct? There is a -1 DRM plus +3 DRM for the LOS hindrances which gives us a net +2, unless I am missing something here George. That means that the 8-0 is Pinned and the 548 w/LMG is good to go. %%%BATES: I think I gave him a -1FFMO DRM, which does not apply even though he's in OG due to the hindrance. Good catch. I think I made this mistake again later. We'll need to check for it. > ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. > D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... > 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory awaits! > &&&BATES: Not so fast, caped crusader! These guys are parked in N0 > for a spell. ***MCLEOD: Apparently not. You may wish to take another poke at the squad. The 8-0 is Pinned in N0, the S. is in N1. %%%BATES: That is where things stand. Yeah, we'll shoot him again, Kim. First, 337P in O2 SFF @N1, 3FP-1: 3, 3; cowers to 1FP, PTC. No resid (not that it matters). 548/LMG PTC: 6, 3; pinned. Outstanding. 747b in N4 SFF @N1, 3.5FP+1: 5, 5; cowers to 1FP, NE. No resid. Yes, it is true the 101st weren't hardened veterans. > 62. ***MCLEOD: No guts, no glory I say. A 548 w/LMG moves in bypass > of N10 (O10 hexside) [1 MF] and gets whacked by the 1 RFP in N10. > George Do I roll for the RFP? I will proceed as if I do as that seems > to make sense to > keeps thing rolling. And now for a Q. Without looking through Q&A and > only a > > cursory glance at the ASLRB, I will say that the RFP attack on my guy > receives the following DRM; -1 for FFNAM and +1 for the woods TEM for a > net 0 DRM. I am not quite sure if the -1 for FFMO applies since the RFP > is > in the hex (woods) which is not OG, my moving in bypass notwithstanding. > So here goes, if I am wrong we will correct accordingly. RFP attack, 1 FP > +0 DRM, DR = 8 (2,6) = NE. > &&&BATES: Looks like Probst & Olie have kept you on the straight and > narrow with all this, so we continue. BTW, still one more concealed > unit in N11, right? ***MCLEOD: I knew this rule to be so, just do not ask me where to find it. :) Yes, there is still a unit off map in "N11". > ... Bypass N9 (O10 hexside) [2 MF] and into O9 [4 MF]. Any D'fire? > &&&BATES: Definitely. 337EE in P9 will FF at O9, 3FP: 2, 6; NE. 1RFP in > O9. Lucky you. > However, 747SS/MMG uncloaks in O6, IFP + FL to O9, 11FP+1: 6, 1; 1MC. > Now 4RFP in O9 and a 2FL. 548/LMG 1MC: 1, 5; passed. ***MCLEOD: Where does the 4 RFP come from? The MMG laid down a 2 FP FL, the squads IFP is 7 which becomes 2 RFP which is then knocked down to 1 RFP due to the Orchard hex in O7. %%%BATES: I see I mixed up a variety of things here. The IFP resid should remain 1RFP. The 2FL will pay a +1 hard hindrance for fire passing through the orchard. > IFP SFF on the 2nd MF, 3.5FP+1: 3, 1; NMC. 548/LMG NMC: 4, 4; pin. I > love pins. ***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and is manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No Pin. Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) %%%BATES: I'm not sure what you mean by not a TBPF situation. Sure there's an FL, but squad is entitled to use 2 SW or 1 SW and its IFP. Why no SFF? > (snicker, snicker ... I wonder if he will shoot? :) ) > &&&BATES: Guess we've answered that question. But don't feel too smug. > 337EE is giving it up for the cause to strip your concealment and throw > a few tacks under your tires. He even had an anvil for that squad in > N10. I'd say he's doing a fine job. ***MCLEOD: We will think highly of him as we pick through his pockets ... either dead or as a prisoner ... :) > 63. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter moves in bypass of V0 (W1 hexside) > [1 MF], you see a 238. Any D'fire? If not, please continue ... > &&&BATES: 747GG/MMG drops "?" in S6, lays left side alternate hexgrain > FL to V0, 4FP+1: 6, 4; NE. He gets a pass. ***MCLEOD: George, aren't we missing a few DRM here? There is at least +3 LOS hindrance DRM fo that shot. The final DRM should be +2 shouldn't it? %%%BATES: Same mistake I made above applying the -1 FFMO DRM when the hindrance cancels it. Sue me for malpractice. > ... into V1 ([2 MF] ... > &&&BATES: That'll be a 2FP+1 FL shot: 3, 4; NE. Not happening. ***MCLEOD: Suppose I wanted to get off the bullet beaten track? :) Oh well, away we go! %%%BATES: Actually, this shot is deadlier, because the grain is a soft hindrance, meaning this was a final DR of 6, and therefore a PTC. For the fun of it I click the dicebot and you pass on a 2, 3. > ... into U2 [3.5 MF] and ends movement. > &&&BATES: Another 2FP+1 shot: 5, 5; NE. Scot free [so to speak 8-)]. ***MCLEOD: WRT FL's, is it protocol to advise the other player if he wishes to not run up the FL once one has been declared? My guy is now where he is, but in future I may not wish to take my chances. %%%BATES: Usually I would, but I took you at your word: "George, you can resolve all the following moves. They will be made regardless of the outcome of the other moves in this message." Fortunately, no harm has been done so there's nothing you'd care to change, right? Let's assume that new developments are always worth a pause and a check from now on. > 64. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter move in bypass of X0 (Y1 hexside) [1 > MF] ... > ... bypass X1 (Y1/Y2 hexside) [2 MF] ... > > > ... and into X2 and ends movement [4 MF]. > &&&BATES: Since he didn't AM, the guys in U5 wanna know what he is. > Reserve the right to blow him away if I want. ***MCLEOD: He is a 548. Hmmm, thought I sent that information in the last mailing. Sorry George. %%%BATES: No worries. The balance of errors is still in your favor. 548, huh? A tempting morsel, even with the +2 hindrance. However, I will see what other threats await. > 65. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter enters R10 [1 MF], you see a 548, > bypasses R9 (Q10 hexside) [2 MF], and on into Q9 [4 MF]. That should do > for now George. I will go dig out some more HS's and see what happens in > your next message. > &&&BATES: That will entitle him to a 3FP FPF shot from 337EE in P9: 4, > 3; PTC. 548 PTC: 3, 1; passed. 1RFP in O9, but I pinned, didn't I? ***MCLEOD: Good shot. If the 337 does not die in the upcoming RtPh, I will wager that a CC of un-ending duration will commence. :) George, you had better go back and check the Q's I have up above. I will not move anyone else until I hear back from you. BTW, you left the ASLML out of our last communication. %%%BATES: A wise decision, eminence. Have tried to sort things out so you can proceed, with one outstanding question. Blame the engineer in the van for not opening my broadcast mike to the List. Not that anybody missed us, right? =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 27 02:37:05 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 27 02:37:57 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:42:10 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and is >manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF >situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No Pin. >Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) I'm no Ole Boe, but you are correct. Placing a FL is tantamount to the manning MMC saying "I ain't gonna fire no more, no more, I ain't gonna fire no more. At least not until the DFPh, when the FL goes away." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From aaron.cleavin at gmail.com Wed Apr 27 02:37:48 2005 From: aaron.cleavin at gmail.com (Aaron Cleavin) Date: Wed Apr 27 02:39:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": Questions in T3(G) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <000301c54b0b$f161f760$3200170a@DF6TP71X> References: <002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <000301c54b0b$f161f760$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <1bec6aa0504270237900f113@mail.gmail.com> Sorry George much as though it pains me to agree with Jim he is right on this occasion. Delve into the intracies of FL in the RB and there you will se enlightenment! Aaron On 4/27/05, George Bates wrote: > Looks like there's lots of issues here, I'll truncate the message and go > straight to the trouble spots in "%%%." Think I cover everything, but > I'm not sure why you think the free hands in a squad who are not manning > an MG placing an FL cannot SFF. You invoked the Norse god. Let's see > if he has a comment. Probably some guy on the Labrador coast who thinks > he's entitled to an opinion, too, just because he had an article > published. Lord knows Probst won't be able to resist. > > -----Original Message----- > From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:42 AM > To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' > Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 > > Listerz, > > George Bates wrote, > > > The evil minions keep coming. Shots ring out from the perimeter in > > "&&&." > > Thats "Freedom Fighters" to you green men! ;) > > . > . > . > ***MCLEOD: He did his job. George, you can resolve all the following > moves. > They will be made regardless of the outcome of the other moves in this > message. > > > 61.***MCLEOD: A 8-0/548 w/LMG bypass N0 (on M1 hexside) (1 MF). > > D'fire? If not, please continue ... > > > &&&BATES: 747b in M4 likes that action, drops concealment 7FP+1 @ > > N0/N1/M1 vertex: 1, 5; NMC. Because there are 3 hindrance hexes I > > don't think there's any resid. 8-0 NMC: 5, 6; DM. 548/LMG NMC: 2, > > 6; pin. Nothin' like stopping these fellows in their tracks. > > ***MCLEOD: "+1"!? There are three grain hexes as hindrances, correct? > There is a -1 DRM plus +3 DRM for the LOS hindrances which gives us a > net > +2, unless I am missing something here George. That means that the 8-0 > is > Pinned and the 548 w/LMG is good to go. > %%%BATES: I think I gave him a -1FFMO DRM, which does not apply even > though he's in OG due to the hindrance. Good catch. > I think I made this mistake again later. We'll need to check for it. > > > ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. > > D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... > > 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory awaits! > > &&&BATES: Not so fast, caped crusader! These guys are parked in N0 > > for a spell. > > ***MCLEOD: Apparently not. You may wish to take another poke at the > squad. > The 8-0 is Pinned in N0, the S. is in N1. > %%%BATES: That is where things stand. Yeah, we'll shoot him again, > Kim. > First, 337P in O2 SFF @N1, 3FP-1: 3, 3; cowers to 1FP, PTC. No resid > (not that it matters). 548/LMG PTC: 6, 3; pinned. Outstanding. > 747b in N4 SFF @N1, 3.5FP+1: 5, 5; cowers to 1FP, NE. No resid. > Yes, it is true the 101st weren't hardened veterans. > > > 62. ***MCLEOD: No guts, no glory I say. A 548 w/LMG moves in bypass > > of N10 (O10 hexside) [1 MF] and gets whacked by the 1 RFP in N10. > > George Do I roll for the RFP? I will proceed as if I do as that seems > > > to make sense to > > keeps thing rolling. And now for a Q. Without looking through Q&A > and > > only a > > > > cursory glance at the ASLRB, I will say that the RFP attack on my guy > > receives the following DRM; -1 for FFNAM and +1 for the woods TEM for > a > > net 0 DRM. I am not quite sure if the -1 for FFMO applies since the > RFP > > is > > in the hex (woods) which is not OG, my moving in bypass > notwithstanding. > > So here goes, if I am wrong we will correct accordingly. RFP attack, > 1 FP > > +0 DRM, DR = 8 (2,6) = NE. > > > &&&BATES: Looks like Probst & Olie have kept you on the straight and > > narrow with all this, so we continue. BTW, still one more concealed > > unit in N11, right? > > ***MCLEOD: I knew this rule to be so, just do not ask me where to find > it. > :) Yes, there is still a unit off map in "N11". > > > ... Bypass N9 (O10 hexside) [2 MF] and into O9 [4 MF]. Any D'fire? > > > &&&BATES: Definitely. 337EE in P9 will FF at O9, 3FP: 2, 6; NE. > 1RFP in > > O9. Lucky you. > > > However, 747SS/MMG uncloaks in O6, IFP + FL to O9, 11FP+1: 6, 1; 1MC. > > > Now 4RFP in O9 and a 2FL. 548/LMG 1MC: 1, 5; passed. > > ***MCLEOD: Where does the 4 RFP come from? The MMG laid down a 2 FP > FL, > the squads IFP is 7 which becomes 2 RFP which is then knocked down to 1 > RFP > due to the Orchard hex in O7. > %%%BATES: I see I mixed up a variety of things here. The IFP resid > should remain 1RFP. The 2FL will pay a +1 hard hindrance for fire > passing through the orchard. > > > IFP SFF on the 2nd MF, 3.5FP+1: 3, 1; NMC. 548/LMG NMC: 4, 4; pin. > I > > love pins. > > ***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and > is > manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF > situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No > Pin. > Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) > %%%BATES: I'm not sure what you mean by not a TBPF situation. Sure > there's an FL, but squad is entitled to use 2 SW or 1 SW and its IFP. > Why no SFF? > > > (snicker, snicker ... I wonder if he will shoot? :) ) > > > &&&BATES: Guess we've answered that question. But don't feel too > smug. > > 337EE is giving it up for the cause to strip your concealment and > throw > > a few tacks under your tires. He even had an anvil for that squad in > > N10. I'd say he's doing a fine job. > > ***MCLEOD: We will think highly of him as we pick through his pockets > ... > either dead or as a prisoner ... :) > > > 63. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter moves in bypass of V0 (W1 hexside) > > [1 MF], you see a 238. Any D'fire? If not, please continue ... > > > &&&BATES: 747GG/MMG drops "?" in S6, lays left side alternate > hexgrain > > FL to V0, 4FP+1: 6, 4; NE. He gets a pass. > > ***MCLEOD: George, aren't we missing a few DRM here? There is at least > +3 > LOS hindrance DRM fo that shot. The final DRM should be +2 shouldn't > it? > %%%BATES: Same mistake I made above applying the -1 FFMO DRM when the > hindrance cancels it. Sue me for malpractice. > > > ... into V1 ([2 MF] ... > > &&&BATES: That'll be a 2FP+1 FL shot: 3, 4; NE. Not happening. > > ***MCLEOD: Suppose I wanted to get off the bullet beaten track? :) Oh > > well, away we go! > %%%BATES: Actually, this shot is deadlier, because the grain is a soft > hindrance, meaning this was a final DR of 6, and therefore a PTC. For > the fun of it I click the dicebot and you pass on a 2, 3. > > > ... into U2 [3.5 MF] and ends movement. > > > &&&BATES: Another 2FP+1 shot: 5, 5; NE. Scot free [so to speak > 8-)]. > > ***MCLEOD: WRT FL's, is it protocol to advise the other player if he > wishes > to not run up the FL once one has been declared? My guy is now where he > is, > but in future I may not wish to take my chances. > %%%BATES: Usually I would, but I took you at your word: "George, you > can resolve all the following moves. They will be made regardless of > the outcome of the other moves in this message." Fortunately, no harm > has been done so there's nothing you'd care to change, right? Let's > assume that new developments are always worth a pause and a check from > now on. > > > 64. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter move in bypass of X0 (Y1 hexside) > [1 > > MF] ... > > > ... bypass X1 (Y1/Y2 hexside) [2 MF] ... > > > > > > ... and into X2 and ends movement [4 MF]. > > > &&&BATES: Since he didn't AM, the guys in U5 wanna know what he is. > > Reserve the right to blow him away if I want. > > ***MCLEOD: He is a 548. Hmmm, thought I sent that information in the > last > mailing. Sorry George. > %%%BATES: No worries. The balance of errors is still in your favor. > 548, huh? A tempting morsel, even with the +2 hindrance. > However, I will see what other threats await. > > > 65. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter enters R10 [1 MF], you see a 548, > > bypasses R9 (Q10 hexside) [2 MF], and on into Q9 [4 MF]. That should > do > > for now George. I will go dig out some more HS's and see what happens > in > > your next message. > > > &&&BATES: That will entitle him to a 3FP FPF shot from 337EE in P9: > 4, > > 3; PTC. 548 PTC: 3, 1; passed. 1RFP in O9, but I pinned, didn't I? > > ***MCLEOD: Good shot. If the 337 does not die in the upcoming RtPh, I > > will wager that a CC of un-ending duration will commence. :) > > George, you had better go back and check the Q's I have up above. I > will > not move anyone else until I hear back from you. BTW, you left the > ASLML > out of our last communication. > %%%BATES: A wise decision, eminence. Have tried to sort things out so > you can proceed, with one outstanding question. Blame the engineer in > the van for not opening my broadcast mike to the List. Not that anybody > missed us, right? > > =Jim= > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 27 03:02:45 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 27 03:02:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c54b10$476f3ec0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Fellas, I give. Where in this paragraph does it say the squad is not permitted to SFF with its IFP whilst a FL is in play? A9.11 is pretty specific; "A squad may fire any one SW MG at no cost to its own Inherent FP..." There are no exceptions. Work with me here, people. - G -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:37 PM To: mcleods Cc: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:42:10 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and is >manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF >situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No >Pin. >Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) I'm no Ole Boe, but you are correct. Placing a FL is tantamount to the manning MMC saying "I ain't gonna fire no more, no more, I ain't gonna fire no more. At least not until the DFPh, when the FL goes away." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Apr 27 04:34:14 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Apr 27 04:34:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: <000401c54b10$476f3ec0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> References: <000401c54b10$476f3ec0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:02:45 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Fellas, I give. Where in this paragraph does it say the squad is not >permitted to SFF with its IFP whilst a FL is in play? A9.11 is pretty >specific; "A squad may fire any one SW MG at no cost to its own Inherent >FP..." There are no exceptions. Work with me here, people. A9.223. "A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere (/its manning infantry may use Subsequent First Fire/FPF after establishing the Fire Lane) only if a TBPF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs ...." Translation: MANNING INFANTRY MAY USE SFF/FPF ONLY IF A TPBF SITUATION OCCURS. OK? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Apr 27 04:35:33 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed Apr 27 04:38:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? Message-ID: <7382f5e061cf.426f9525@broadpark.no> Hi=2C George Bates wrote=3A =3E Fellas=2C I give=2E Where in this paragraph does it say the squad i= s not =3E permitted to SFF with its IFP whilst a FL is in play=3F = Here=3A A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere= (/its manning Infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF after establis= hing the Fire Lane) only if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs (8=2E= 312/D7=2E21)=97in which case the Fire Lane must be cancelled = =3E A9=2E11 is pretty =3E specific=3B =22A squad may fire any one SW MG at no cost to its own = =3E InherentFP=2E=2E=2E=22 There are no exceptions=2E Work with me her= e=2C people=2E =3E = Yes=2C but a FL is a special case=2E Also note that A8=2E3 requires the = Squad to use all its MG in the SFF attack - something which is impossibl= e without cancelling the FL=2C so even without the paranthesis in A9=2E2= 23=2C the Squad=27s SFF attack would be illegal while having a FL=2E Bruce probst wrote=3A =3E I=27m no Ole Boe=2C but you are correct=2E Placing a FL is tantamou= nt = =3E to the =3E manning MMC saying =22I ain=27t gonna fire no more=2C no more=2C I a= in=27t gonna =3E fire no more=2E At least not until the DFPh=2C when the FL goes awa= y=2E=22 =3E = I am a Ole Boe=2C and I mostly agree=2E It is often smart to place a FL = with a squad without using its IFP=2E That way you at least get one shot= with the Squad during the MPh=2E That may be enough to keep the attacke= rs from bypassing you=2E From geb3 at inter.net Wed Apr 27 07:45:58 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Apr 27 08:17:15 2005 Subject: [Aslml] I hear Strunk & White screaming... (WAS: A9.223? What about A9.11?) In-Reply-To: <7382f5e061cf.426f9525@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <000001c54b37$d543ec10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Why, there's the word "only", not half a league away from the word "may!" Of course, that's as the crow flies, you have to work your way around the parentheses to get there... I see it at last. But saints preserve us, what awful prose. Sack the writers. Sack the proofers. Sack the editors. Sack the people responsible for sacking the writers, proofers & editors. May I recommend the following substitution for a future edition? >ahem< "Players may only choose to cancel an MG's fire lane in order for that MG to fire elsewhere in a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation (8.312/D7.21), or so that the MG's manning infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF (8.3)." Actually, Ole's reference to A8.3 really rounds off the jagged edges and seals the issue. Thanks to you. And to Bruce. You look so cute with smoke curling out of your ears! - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Ole B? Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:36 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? Hi, George Bates wrote: > Fellas, I give. Where in this paragraph does it say the squad is not > permitted to SFF with its IFP whilst a FL is in play? Here: A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere (/its manning Infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF after establishing the Fire Lane) only if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs (8.312/D7.21)?in which case the Fire Lane must be cancelled > A9.11 is pretty > specific; "A squad may fire any one SW MG at no cost to its own > InherentFP..." There are no exceptions. Work with me here, people. > Yes, but a FL is a special case. Also note that A8.3 requires the Squad to use all its MG in the SFF attack - something which is impossible without cancelling the FL, so even without the paranthesis in A9.223, the Squad's SFF attack would be illegal while having a FL. Bruce probst wrote: > I'm no Ole Boe, but you are correct. Placing a FL is tantamount > to the > manning MMC saying "I ain't gonna fire no more, no more, I ain't gonna > fire no more. At least not until the DFPh, when the FL goes away." > I am a Ole Boe, and I mostly agree. It is often smart to place a FL with a squad without using its IFP. That way you at least get one shot with the Squad during the MPh. That may be enough to keep the attackers from bypassing you. _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 07:47:10 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Apr 27 08:22:20 2005 Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427144710.94792.qmail@web52601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeff Thompson wrote: > Try... > > C3.32 INFANTRY TARGET TYPE: The Infantry Target Type > can be selected only > when firing HE [EXC: AP or HEAT vs an unarmored > target (8.31, 11.52)] > > That pretty much says it all. > > Later, > Jeff I wish it did. this rule sends one to C8.31 where it states that HEAT has to be used against 'hardened' type targets. There is no statement there that AP has to do so as well. Thus, it would seem that firing AP on the ITT is identical to firing HE, with no differences other than no resid, and an HE equivalency? (in other words, may I shoot AP at a unit standing in open ground?) Rob > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Nelson" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 2:40 PM > Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT > > > > Where is the rule that specifically states that > one > > may use AP when using the ITT? I see all these > rules > > for HEAT, and how the target has to be 'hard' (in > > building etc), but I don't see the same for AP. > Yet, > > the "pillbox attack special" makes it clear that > AP > > can be used on the ITT vs infantry in a hard > target. > > > > Rob > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Apr 27 07:42:32 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Apr 27 08:25:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": Questions in T3(G) MPh4 References: <002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><000301c54b0b$f161f760$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <1bec6aa0504270237900f113@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002d01c54b38$5561c610$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Aaron wrote, "Sorry George much as though it pains me to agree with Jim he is right on this occasion. Delve into the intracies of FL in the RB and there you will se enlightenment!" Aaron, sorry for putting you in such agony. I shall try to cock-up the next few Q's to alleviate your suffering. :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Apr 27 07:40:52 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Apr 27 08:29:01 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X><002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <002a01c54b38$54605ba0$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; I wrote, >***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and is >manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF >situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No Pin. >Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) Bruce P. replied, "I'm no Ole Boe, but you are correct. Placing a FL is tantamount to the manning MMC saying "I ain't gonna fire no more, no more, I ain't gonna fire no more. At least not until the DFPh, when the FL goes away."" No offence intended Bruce. I read your reply to David Olie regarding your CX nature, post 2005 ANZACON. I figured that you were still prostrate and twitching after three days of ASL. Many thanks for rallying sufficiently to respond. :) =Jim= ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Apr 27 07:49:33 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Apr 27 08:31:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? References: <7382f5e061cf.426f9525@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <003001c54b38$562eda10$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Ole "Blood Axe" Boe ... (sorry Ole, am reading a very interesting book on Vikings at the moment. The various Viking Kings all had cool names and "Blood Axe" seems like a decent fit for you ... "Blood Axe Boe ... I like it. It was either that or "Forkbeard" :) ) ... wrote, Hi, George Bates wrote: > Fellas, I give. Where in this paragraph does it say the squad is not > permitted to SFF with its IFP whilst a FL is in play? Here: A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere (/its manning Infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF after establishing the Fire Lane) only if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs (8.312/D7.21)?in which case the Fire Lane must be cancelled > A9.11 is pretty > specific; "A squad may fire any one SW MG at no cost to its own > InherentFP..." There are no exceptions. Work with me here, people. > Yes, but a FL is a special case. Also note that A8.3 requires the Squad to use all its MG in the SFF attack - something which is impossible without cancelling the FL, so even without the paranthesis in A9.223, the Squad's SFF attack would be illegal while having a FL. Bruce probst wrote: > I'm no Ole Boe, but you are correct. Placing a FL is tantamount > to the > manning MMC saying "I ain't gonna fire no more, no more, I ain't gonna > fire no more. At least not until the DFPh, when the FL goes away." > I am a Ole Boe, and I mostly agree. It is often smart to place a FL with a squad without using its IFP. That way you at least get one shot with the Squad during the MPh. That may be enough to keep the attackers from bypassing you. IMHO, A7., A8. and A9. are the most frequently used yet most misunderstood rule sections in the game. I even heard that some fool couldn't even get A7.353 straight! Idiot!! ;) =Jim= From tompygo at comcast.net Wed Apr 27 08:14:56 2005 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Wed Apr 27 08:54:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT References: <20050427144710.94792.qmail@web52601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000901c54b3b$df539e40$8150020a@JZTHOMPS> Rob, Firing AP with the ITT is allowed against unarmored targets. That's it. C8.31 does refer to AP in its anti-personnel usage and in the HE equivalency table. And C11.52 only refers to AP, not HEAT. To answer your question: Yes, you can fire at personnel standing in open ground. It leaves no Residual FP (C8.31) and you use the table from rule C8.31 to determine the HE equivalency. So your own conclusion is correct, firing AP is exactly like firing HE except for how it is modified in C8.31. In the movie "Stalingrad" an AP round does quite job on pesonnel standing in the open. Later, Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: "Jeff Thompson" ; Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] AP on the ITT > > --- Jeff Thompson wrote: > > Try... > > > > C3.32 INFANTRY TARGET TYPE: The Infantry Target Type > > can be selected only > > when firing HE [EXC: AP or HEAT vs an unarmored > > target (8.31, 11.52)] > > > > That pretty much says it all. > > > > Later, > > Jeff > > > I wish it did. this rule sends one to C8.31 where it > states that HEAT has to be used against 'hardened' > type targets. There is no statement there that AP has > to do so as well. Thus, it would seem that firing AP > on the ITT is identical to firing HE, with no > differences other than no resid, and an HE > equivalency? (in other words, may I shoot AP at a > unit standing in open ground?) > > Rob > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Robert Nelson" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 2:40 PM > > Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT > > > > > > > Where is the rule that specifically states that > > one > > > may use AP when using the ITT? I see all these > > rules > > > for HEAT, and how the target has to be 'hard' (in > > > building etc), but I don't see the same for AP. > > Yet, > > > the "pillbox attack special" makes it clear that > > AP > > > can be used on the ITT vs infantry in a hard > > target. > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Apr 27 09:15:21 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Apr 27 09:32:21 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": Questions in T3(G) MPh5 References: <000301c54b0b$f161f760$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <006f01c54b44$50782e80$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > Looks like there's lots of issues here, I'll truncate the message and go > straight to the trouble spots in "%%%." Think I cover everything, but > I'm not sure why you think the free hands in a squad who are not manning > an MG placing an FL cannot SFF. You invoked the Norse god. Let's see > if he has a comment. Probably some guy on the Labrador coast who thinks > he's entitled to an opinion, too, just because he had an article > published. Lord knows Probst won't be able to resist. Jay-zus, don't tell Olie he's from La-braa-door! He'll pop a vessel and spill 'is beer. Our David is from Nova Scotia > ***MCLEOD: "+1"!? There are three grain hexes as hindrances, correct? > There is a -1 DRM plus +3 DRM for the LOS hindrances which gives us a > net > +2, unless I am missing something here George. That means that the 8-0 > is > Pinned and the 548 w/LMG is good to go. > %%%BATES: I think I gave him a -1FFMO DRM, which does not apply even > though he's in OG due to the hindrance. Good catch. > I think I made this mistake again later. We'll need to check for it. ***MCLEOD: SO, we are good here. >> ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. >> D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... >> 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory awaits! >> &&&BATES: Not so fast, caped crusader! These guys are parked in N0 >> for a spell. > > ***MCLEOD: Apparently not. You may wish to take another poke at the > squad. > The 8-0 is Pinned in N0, the S. is in N1. > %%%BATES: That is where things stand. Yeah, we'll shoot him again, > Kim. > First, 337P in O2 SFF @N1, 3FP-1: 3, 3; cowers to 1FP, PTC. No resid > (not that it matters). 548/LMG PTC: 6, 3; pinned. Outstanding. > 747b in N4 SFF @N1, 3.5FP+1: 5, 5; cowers to 1FP, NE. No resid. > Yes, it is true the 101st weren't hardened veterans. ***MCLEOD: So my guys are Pinned in N1, better than broke I say. > ***MCLEOD: Where does the 4 RFP come from? The MMG laid down a 2 FP > FL, > the squads IFP is 7 which becomes 2 RFP which is then knocked down to 1 > RFP > due to the Orchard hex in O7. > %%%BATES: I see I mixed up a variety of things here. The IFP resid > should remain 1RFP. The 2FL will pay a +1 hard hindrance for fire > passing through the orchard. ***MCLEOD: OK, good here. >> IFP SFF on the 2nd MF, 3.5FP+1: 3, 1; NMC. 548/LMG NMC: 4, 4; pin. > I >> love pins. > > ***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and > is > manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF > situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No > Pin. > Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) > %%%BATES: I'm not sure what you mean by not a TBPF situation. Sure > there's an FL, but squad is entitled to use 2 SW or 1 SW and its IFP. > Why no SFF? ***MCLEOD: I believe that we are good here and the SFF Q has been resolved. >> 63. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter moves in bypass of V0 (W1 hexside) >> [1 MF], you see a 238. Any D'fire? If not, please continue ... > >> &&&BATES: 747GG/MMG drops "?" in S6, lays left side alternate > hexgrain >> FL to V0, 4FP+1: 6, 4; NE. He gets a pass. > > ***MCLEOD: George, aren't we missing a few DRM here? There is at least > +3 > LOS hindrance DRM fo that shot. The final DRM should be +2 shouldn't > it? > %%%BATES: Same mistake I made above applying the -1 FFMO DRM when the > hindrance cancels it. Sue me for malpractice. ***MCLEOD: Why bring those bottom feeding legal types into this. We shall resolve matters like gentlemen. :) >> ... into V1 ([2 MF] ... >> &&&BATES: That'll be a 2FP+1 FL shot: 3, 4; NE. Not happening. > > ***MCLEOD: Suppose I wanted to get off the bullet beaten track? :) Oh > > well, away we go! > %%%BATES: Actually, this shot is deadlier, because the grain is a soft > hindrance, meaning this was a final DR of 6, and therefore a PTC. For > the fun of it I click the dicebot and you pass on a 2, 3. > >> ... into U2 [3.5 MF] and ends movement. > >> &&&BATES: Another 2FP+1 shot: 5, 5; NE. Scot free [so to speak > 8-)]. > > ***MCLEOD: WRT FL's, is it protocol to advise the other player if he > wishes > to not run up the FL once one has been declared? My guy is now where he > is, > but in future I may not wish to take my chances. > %%%BATES: Usually I would, but I took you at your word: "George, you > can resolve all the following moves. They will be made regardless of > the outcome of the other moves in this message." Fortunately, no harm > has been done so there's nothing you'd care to change, right? Let's > assume that new developments are always worth a pause and a check from > now on. ***MCLEOD: I will add a note regarding FL in the future as I may wish to reconsider running down that bullet beaten path. >> 64. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter move in bypass of X0 (Y1 hexside) > [1 >> MF] ... > >> ... bypass X1 (Y1/Y2 hexside) [2 MF] ... >> >> >> ... and into X2 and ends movement [4 MF]. > >> &&&BATES: Since he didn't AM, the guys in U5 wanna know what he is. >> Reserve the right to blow him away if I want. > > ***MCLEOD: He is a 548. Hmmm, thought I sent that information in the > last > mailing. Sorry George. > %%%BATES: No worries. The balance of errors is still in your favor. > 548, huh? A tempting morsel, even with the +2 hindrance. > However, I will see what other threats await. ***MCLEOD: Fair enough, the 548 rests in X2. >> 65. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter enters R10 [1 MF], you see a 548, >> bypasses R9 (Q10 hexside) [2 MF], and on into Q9 [4 MF]. That should > do >> for now George. I will go dig out some more HS's and see what happens > in >> your next message. > >> &&&BATES: That will entitle him to a 3FP FPF shot from 337EE in P9: > 4, >> 3; PTC. 548 PTC: 3, 1; passed. 1RFP in O9, but I pinned, didn't I? > > ***MCLEOD: Good shot. If the 337 does not die in the upcoming RtPh, I > > will wager that a CC of un-ending duration will commence. :) > > George, you had better go back and check the Q's I have up above. I > will > not move anyone else until I hear back from you. BTW, you left the > ASLML > out of our last communication. > %%%BATES: A wise decision, eminence. Have tried to sort things out so > you can proceed, with one outstanding question. Blame the engineer in > the van for not opening my broadcast mike to the List. Not that anybody > missed us, right? ***MCLEOD: Are you kidding, they don't even know where we are! :) It seems we have ironed out all the rule stuff and there are no more firing quandries for you, therefore, I shall continue to move. 66.***MCLEOD: "?" and 1 counter move onto N10 [2 MF] ... ... into N9 [4 MF] and you see a 238 ... ... the 238 declares DT and enters T8 [5 MF] D'fire anyone? Next ... 67. ***MCLEOD: The stack opposite of W1 moves into X0 [2 MF] and you can probably see that it is an 8-1, 548 w/LMG ... ... into X1 [4 MF] ... and into W2 [6 MF] where they end their movement. There remains one unit off map, opposite N10 and a stack of 3 counters opposite S10. I await your actions in this message before I commit the remaining forces to battle. =Jim= From Kyle.Curle at aia.com Wed Apr 27 09:31:24 2005 From: Kyle.Curle at aia.com (Kyle Curle) Date: Wed Apr 27 09:41:14 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Onslaught on Orsha VASL counters Message-ID: My birthday is here and I am thinking of getting this module. Almost all of my ASL play these days is via VASL. I notice they have a nice map for VASL, but has anyone made the new vehicle counters the website talks about? It looks like there are several that might be important to have on the map. Thanks, Kyle From hofors at lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 27 09:49:04 2005 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: Wed Apr 27 09:55:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Wargaming shops in NYC Message-ID: Hi all, I'm going to New York City this weekend, and I wonder if anyone knows if there are any good wargaming shops in NYC? ASL and other wargames. Thanks, Mattias From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 10:20:34 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Apr 27 10:21:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Still working on this LOS... In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427172034.78927.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Folks, > thus far, I'm getting even responses as to whether > ffmo applies or not. > > But no one is offering a clear rules or example > reference. > > thus, so far I'm no closer to knowing if the shot is > -2, or -1. Rob > > --- bearlyonthehill@optonline.net wrote: > > Rob - > > > > No it does not effect the -2 shot if your > opponent's > > unit is moving from 12o8 to 12p6 or 12n7 to 12p6. > > The reason is you are not firing along the hexside > > is due to the fact, you are firing to the vertex > of > > a orchard hex not INTO it. > > I take from your discription that the unit you are > > firing at is bypassing a rowhouse building that > you > > are attached to. > > > > If the unit moving from 12n7 to 12p7 through 12o7 > > then your vertex is 12p6/12p7/12o7 and your fire > > would be modified to a -1 FFNAM +1Orchard = 0. > > Otherwise you cannot see the unit, it is blocked > due > > to the rowhouse. > > > > Hope this helps > > > > Gus > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Robert Nelson > > Date: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 0:51 am > > Subject: [Aslml] A bypass LOS I've just never had > to > > deal with... > > > > > List, > > > > > > for some reason, I've never had this situation > > come > > > up, and I'm stumped. > > > > > > What happens when you fire into an ADJ hex, at a > > > bypassing unit, and your LOS to the vertex > travels > > > along an orchard hexside? > > > > > > Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in > > bypass in > > > 12 o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6. To get to the > > vertex, > > > the LOS is traced along the inherent orchard of > > P6. > > > > > > So, is this a -2 shot, ffnam and ffmo, or merely > a > > > ffnam shot? (for of course the orchard cannot > act > > as a > > > 'hindrance', as there are no hexes between firer > > and > > > target. The question is really, does the > inherent > > > nature of the orchard hexside eliminate ffmo) > > > > > > please advise, > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or > email > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Kyle.Curle at aia.com Wed Apr 27 11:02:15 2005 From: Kyle.Curle at aia.com (Kyle Curle) Date: Wed Apr 27 11:46:29 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Placing VASL extentions (Apple users please help) Message-ID: I am using an Apple powerbook and can't seem to find where it is the extensions for VASL go. Any idea where these go? On my hard drive in the applications I have a vasl.mod document but no folder. VASL works for me like this. I can unstuff that document and get a VASL. mod folder, but when I open VASL I don't think it looks at that one because if I throw away the unstuffed document it won't open even if the VASL. mod folder is there. Thanks for the help, Kyle From brianbor at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 12:17:57 2005 From: brianbor at yahoo.com (Brian Borawski) Date: Wed Apr 27 12:19:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Valour of the Guards Message-ID: <20050427191757.37755.qmail@web54607.mail.yahoo.com> I'm pretty new to the list, and I keep seeing references to VotG, which I've now figured out is Valour of the Guards. What is this module going to be? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kevinkenneally at isot.com Wed Apr 27 12:14:24 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Wed Apr 27 12:52:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Valour of the Guards In-Reply-To: <20050427191757.37755.qmail@web54607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050427191757.37755.qmail@web54607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <61441.65.161.6.20.1114629264.squirrel@65.161.6.20> This module is gonna "Rock your Jox"............. Central Railway Station fighting in STALINGRAD................ Will make Red Barricades look like a side show.......... > I'm pretty new to the list, and I keep seeing > references to VotG, which I've now figured out is > Valour of the Guards. What is this module going to > be? > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From gr27134 at charter.net Wed Apr 27 13:45:53 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Wed Apr 27 13:46:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Valour of the Guards Message-ID: <41dmh6$snmbv2@mxip05a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: kevinkenneally@isot.com > Date: 2005/04/27 Wed PM 02:14:24 CDT > To: "Brian Borawski" > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Valour of the Guards > > This module is gonna "Rock your Jox"............. > > Central Railway Station fighting in STALINGRAD................ > > Will make Red Barricades look like a side show.......... Maybe...if it isn't still born due to excesive historical accuracy! Later- tater (One Mean Spud!) From Vicca at v21.me.uk Wed Apr 27 14:36:11 2005 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Wed Apr 27 14:36:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] that pesky 2 dr in CC Message-ID: <002101c54b71$26216e80$152ca8c0@loungedining> Okay chaps not sure how to deal with this one: my 3-3-8 got jumped by 2 big nasty 4-4-7s. There is no ambush. His roll was exactly equal to the result needed (a 7?) My roll was a 2. I generate a ldr (8-1) My unit cannot withdraw since the result has already been applied and my jhs is dead. Now the ldr did not alter the odds (now 4 to 8 was 3 to 8; still 2:1) Does the ldr share the same fatre as the HS? Is there RS used to determine who suffers casualty reduction? Yours Aye Martin From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 15:11:33 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Apr 27 15:11:45 2005 Subject: [Aslml] that pesky 2 dr in CC In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427221133.23178.qmail@web52605.mail.yahoo.com> and I add yet ANOTHER infiltration question. this rule just seems to come up ALL THE TIME. My 337 just got jumped by a 468 and 436. he declared 2:1. I declared 1:2 vs the 468. he rolls snakes, kills me, and withdraws ONLY the 468. May the DEFENDER re-declare and attack the 436, or is my only declared target safely gone, and me now dead...? Rob --- Martin Vicca wrote: > Okay chaps not sure how to deal with this one: > my 3-3-8 got jumped by 2 big nasty 4-4-7s. > There is no ambush. > His roll was exactly equal to the result needed (a > 7?) > My roll was a 2. > I generate a ldr (8-1) > My unit cannot withdraw since the result has already > been applied and my jhs > is dead. > Now the ldr did not alter the odds (now 4 to 8 was 3 > to 8; still 2:1) > Does the ldr share the same fatre as the HS? > Is there RS used to determine who suffers casualty > reduction? > Yours Aye > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 16:22:20 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Apr 27 16:22:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] that pesky 2 dr in CC In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427232220.14679.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Dave, I'm SURE something to do with infiltration came up a week or two ago, as it just seems to come up all the time, and rarely do two people seem to be comfortable in agreement about it. the one thing I thought I 'knew' about infiltration is that, unlike an ambush, you MUST withdraw if you want to avoid the previously 'declared' return attack. But i wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if I was proven wrong. this is a rule CRYING out for re-writing, as it just gets asked about all the time. Rob --- dreenstra@comcast.net wrote: > Rob, > > NRBH > > I'm pretty sure you can't re-direct your attack, > once stated, that's the one that has to be carried > out (or not in this case). > > Didn't this just come up a week or two ago and the > consensus then seemed to be that the 468 wasn't even > required to withdraw in such a situation, it was > just an option and not required to do so even to > avoid the return attack? > > HtH > Dave Reenstra > > -------------- Original message -------------- > > > and I add yet ANOTHER infiltration question. > > > > this rule just seems to come up ALL THE TIME. > > > > My 337 just got jumped by a 468 and 436. he > declared > > 2:1. I declared 1:2 vs the 468. he rolls snakes, > kills > > me, and withdraws ONLY the 468. > > > > May the DEFENDER re-declare and attack the 436, or > is > > my only declared target safely gone, and me now > > dead...? > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > --- Martin Vicca wrote: > > > Okay chaps not sure how to deal with this one: > > > my 3-3-8 got jumped by 2 big nasty 4-4-7s. > > > There is no ambush. > > > His roll was exactly equal to the result needed > (a > > > 7?) > > > My roll was a 2. > > > I generate a ldr (8-1) > > > My unit cannot withdraw since the result has > already > > > been applied and my jhs > > > is dead. > > > Now the ldr did not alter the odds (now 4 to 8 > was 3 > > > to 8; still 2:1) > > > Does the ldr share the same fatre as the HS? > > > Is there RS used to determine who suffers > casualty > > > reduction? > > > Yours Aye > > > Martin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or > email > > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From willette at gmpexpress.net Wed Apr 27 16:39:27 2005 From: willette at gmpexpress.net (joe willette) Date: Wed Apr 27 16:39:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] WA questions In-Reply-To: <20050427232220.14679.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Surprisingly to me, I managed to get confused by walls and hedges, in particular the wall advantege rules. -Is Wall advantage only relevant when units are adjacent to each other with a wall/hedge between them (I believe the answer is yes, but why not come out and say it in the rules?)? -9.321 says "a unit always has WA over all possible (as per 9.32) wall/hedge hexsides of its hex". 9.322 says "a unit claiming WA must always be marked with a WA counter" and further lists times that WA can be claimed that do not include during your opponent's Mph.. The logical implication is that all units next to hedges/walls should be marked with a WA counter. Yet, I have never seen this in practice and the only examples showing units with WA counters occur when they are adjacent to an enemy unit with a shared wall/hedge between them. My interpretation is that a WA counter does not get placed until an enemy unit moves adjacent and that by default, the non-moving unit has the WA until he gives it up/loses it for the reasons listed in 9.32. Is this correct? If this is the case, the rules seem very unnecessarily obscure. Joe From swfancher at mindspring.com Wed Apr 27 18:15:53 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Wed Apr 27 18:58:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Onslaught on Orsha VASL counters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050427211357.023144c0@mindspring.com> Hi Kyle, There is a VASL extension for OtO available with the new AFVs and all that good stuff. Might be on the VASL site, the HoB site or Warfare HQ.... Alternately, if/when you need it, let me know and I will email the zip file to you. Buy OtO! Best module/scenario pack in terms of value for money IMO. Be well. Seth At 12:31 PM 4/27/2005, Kyle Curle wrote: >My birthday is here and I am thinking of getting this module. Almost all >of my ASL play these days is via VASL. I notice they have a nice map for >VASL, but has anyone made the new vehicle counters the website talks >about? It looks like there are several that might be important to have on >the map. > >Thanks, >Kyle > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From arobin at scccinternet.com Wed Apr 27 23:12:59 2005 From: arobin at scccinternet.com (Andrew Robin) Date: Wed Apr 27 23:19:59 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Pillboxs and a Bombardment Message-ID: When a bombardment is done at pregame (no enemy units onboard), after a pillbox passes its MC, do the occupants then take a 2MC as per C1.82? If so, when the occupants of the Pillbox use its TEM (In this case I believe the NCA) to modify their 2MC, does the Pillbox in concealment terrain lose its HIP status due to Case L on the Concealment Gain Chart (use of its protective TEM) and are thus placed on board? Many thanks ANDREW ROBIN From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Apr 27 23:46:44 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed Apr 27 23:49:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] WA questions Message-ID: <8dd60ddd74b7.4270a2f4@broadpark.no> Hi, > Surprisingly to me, I managed to get confused by walls and > hedges, in particular the wall advantege rules. > You're not alone, and not even as confused as many others have been. > -Is Wall advantage only relevant when units are adjacent to each > other with a wall/hedge between them (I believe the answer is yes, but why > not come out and say it in the rules?)? > It is *most* relevant then, but has other implications as well. Most importantly, behind Bocage where you're out of enemy LOS unless you have WA. But also note that a unit claiming WA never receives in-hex TEM (B9.31). So a unit in a Stone building Location that claims WA will never get building TEM, thus if it is fired on from behind, the TEM will be zero. > -9.321 says "a unit always has WA over all possible (as per 9.32) > wall/hedgehexsides of its hex". 9.322 says "a unit claiming WA > must always be marked > with a WA counter" and further lists times that WA can be claimed > that do not include during your opponent's Mph.. ...although you may claim it during your opponent's MPh if an enemy unit drops WA. > The logical implication > is that all units next to hedges/walls should be marked with a WA counter. If they want to have WA, yes (unless there is no in-hex TEM, in which it is not necessary to place WA until an enemy comes adjacent - Mandatory WA: B9.323. The most important reason for *not* doing so is that you'll not receive in-hex TEM if attacked. So it is a choise between being safe from enemy Prep Fire, or making sure that moving enemy units cannot claim it from you. Thus a tactical choise - which is a good thing. > Yet, I have never seen this in practice and the only examples showing > units with WA counters occur when they are adjacent to an enemy unit with > a shared wall/hedge between them. > The B9.321 example has errata. The German in T3 should be marked with WA. That's an example of a situation where having placed WA in the RtPh is necessary if you want to deny your moving opponent from gaining it. As for what you've seen in practice - the equality between having a WA counter and being able to claim WA was not clear until ASLRBv2, so many players are probably hampered by old habits. > My interpretation is that a WA counter does not get placed until > an enemy unit moves adjacent and that by default, the non-moving unit has > the WA until he gives it up/loses it for the reasons listed in 9.32. Is this > correct? No. This is only correct if B9.323 apply (i.e. if the unit has no in-hex TEM). Otherwise, B9.322 applies, saying: "A unit claiming WA must always be marked with a WA counter", and then later in the rules tell you when you may claim it, and enemy movement is not one of the cases (unless the enemy unit drops WA from a shared hexside). So, assuming in-hex TEM exists, your units must choose (normally during the RtPh) whether to take WA and thereby not be able to claim in-hex TEM at all (not even from Inherent Terrain like Rubble), or not to take WA and thereby risk that an enemy unit moves adjacent and claims WA - resulting in your attack against it being modified by +1 (+2 Wall TEM -1 FFNAM) instead of -2 (FFMO/FFNAM). The flip side is that you as an atttacker knows that if the enemy unit is not marked with WA, then you may move adjacent and claim it. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 28 00:30:44 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 28 00:34:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] that pesky 2 dr in CC Message-ID: <8f60585b7d32.4270ad44@broadpark.no> Hi, Martin Vicca wrote: > Okay chaps not sure how to deal with this one: > my 3-3-8 got jumped by 2 big nasty 4-4-7s. > There is no ambush. > His roll was exactly equal to the result needed (a 7?) > My roll was a 2. > I generate a ldr (8-1) > My unit cannot withdraw since the result has already been applied > and my hs is dead. ...but he won't lay down? > Now the ldr did not alter the odds (now 4 to 8 was 3 to 8; still 2:1) > Does the ldr share the same fatre as the HS? Yes, the attack is reapplied vs the HS and leader. In this case, it's still a 2:1 thus a CR result. > Is there RS used to determine who suffers casualty reduction? Yes, as always when there is a CR result vs two units, so the HS may be alive after all... A18.12 says: "Unless one or both sides Withdraw due to Infiltration (11.22), both attacks are re-figured using both of the originally-rolled Original DRs and the new leader's FP/Leadership just as if he had been there all along." In your case it doesn't matter whether you withdraw due to Infiltration, since the enemy attacked first, so both attacks will be re-figured as if the leader was there all along. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 28 00:35:45 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 28 00:38:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] that pesky 2 dr in CC Message-ID: <8f8d58ff2607.4270ae71@broadpark.no> Hi, Robert Nelson wrote: > and I add yet ANOTHER infiltration question. > > this rule just seems to come up ALL THE TIME. > Yes, they could have been simpler... > My 337 just got jumped by a 468 and 436. he declared > 2:1. I declared 1:2 vs the 468. he rolls snakes, kills > me, and withdraws ONLY the 468. > > May the DEFENDER re-declare and attack the 436, or is > my only declared target safely gone, and me now > dead...? The latter. If you look at the ASOP, you'll find that both sides declare target before the first attack roll, and there's no ASOP step for later changing target. The exception is of course when the CC is truely sequential as after an Ambush, where one side performs all its attack before the other side declares its attacks. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 28 01:35:44 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 28 01:38:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Still working on this LOS... Message-ID: <91b2a9b1329d.4270bc80@broadpark.no> Hi, Robert Nelson wrote: > > What happens when you fire into an ADJ hex, at a > > bypassing unit, and your LOS to the vertex > > travels along an orchard hexside? > > > > Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in bypass in > > 12 o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6. To get to the vertex, > > the LOS is traced along the inherent orchard of P6. I assume you mean the O7/P6/P7 vertex, as that means the LOS being traced along one orchard hexside, but I'll answer both cases. First, look at B.6, which defines exactly when Inherent Terrain affects LOS: "It is not necessary that a LOS actually cross such a symbol to be affected - mere entrance of the hex (even if only to trace a LOS to or through a vertex of such a hex) or a LOS exactly along one of its hexsides (A6.1) suffices. " This one says that the LOS is affected by the Orchard hex in three situations: 1) by crossing the hex (NA here). 2) by ENTRANCE OF THE HEX (including a vertex of the hex). Note the caps - it is important. 3) by going along a hexside of the hex. Now that this is settled, it is time for looking at your example. First assume that you meant along the Orchard hexside, to the O7/P6/P7 vertex, i.e. along the O7/P6 hexside. In this case, the LOS is going along a hexside of the Orchard hex (3), so the Orchard *does* cancel FFMO, even if the LOS never entered or crossed the Orchard hex. But assume that you really meant a shot vs. the O6/O7/P6 vertex, i.e. only to a vertex of the Orchard hex, and not along a hexside. In this case it matters which hex the target is in. In your example it is in O7 - which doesn't contain the Orchard. Now (1) and (3) clearly isn't fulfilled, but what about (2)?. The LOS goes to a vertex of the Orchard hex, but it does not enter the orchard hex (it enters O7 - not O6), so (2) isn't fulfilled either - thus FFMO applies. If the target instead had bypassed IN the orchard hex (assuming a building/orchard hex existed), then fire vs the exact same vertex would been affected by the Orchard since the LOS now entered its hex - thus cancelling FFMO. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 28 01:44:06 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 28 01:46:50 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Still working on this LOS... Message-ID: <923027ba555c.4270be76@broadpark.no> Hi, Gus wrote: > No it does not effect the -2 shot if your > opponent's > unit is moving from 12o8 to 12p6 or 12n7 to 12p6. > The reason is you are not firing along the hexside > is due to the fact, you are firing to the vertex > of a orchard hex not INTO it. But the LOS goes along an orchard hexside from O6 to the O7/P6/P7 vertex. In this case, B.6 tells us that it affects the LOS (see my previous post). > If the unit moving from 12n7 to 12p7 through 12o7 > then your vertex is 12p6/12p7/12o7 and your fire > would be modified to a -1 FFNAM +1Orchard = 0. Whether the unit plans to enter P6 or P7 when fired on at the O7/P6/P7 vertex doesn't matter. In both cases it bypassed O7 and is therefore considered in O7 for all purposes (the hex it bypassed) - not the hex it is going to enter after the bypass. From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 28 02:06:01 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 28 02:04:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh6 In-Reply-To: <006f01c54b44$50782e80$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000001c54bd1$81de1330$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Pretty ineffective shooting in "&&&." Minor mysteries at the end of the message. - G -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 1:15 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: A59 "Death at Carentan": Questions in T3(G) MPh5 Listerz, > Looks like there's lots of issues here, I'll truncate the message and go > straight to the trouble spots in "%%%." Think I cover everything, but > I'm not sure why you think the free hands in a squad who are not > manning an MG placing an FL cannot SFF. You invoked the Norse god. > Let's see if he has a comment. Probably some guy on the Labrador > coast who thinks he's entitled to an opinion, too, just because he had > an article published. Lord knows Probst won't be able to resist. Jay-zus, don't tell Olie he's from La-braa-door! He'll pop a vessel and spill 'is beer. Our David is from Nova Scotia. &&&BATES: Those Maritimers all look (and smell) the same to me. What's the difference between and Old Scot and a New Scot, anyway? > ***MCLEOD: "+1"!? There are three grain hexes as hindrances, > correct? There is a -1 DRM plus +3 DRM for the LOS hindrances which > gives us a net > +2, unless I am missing something here George. That means that the > +8-0 > is > Pinned and the 548 w/LMG is good to go. > %%%BATES: I think I gave him a -1FFMO DRM, which does not apply even > though he's in OG due to the hindrance. Good catch. I think I made > this mistake again later. We'll need to check for it. ***MCLEOD: SO, we are good here. &&&BATES: "Good" is a relative term... >> ... S. attempts to place smoke grenades in N1 (3 MF), dr = 4. NE. >> D'fire? If not, please continue ... ... No smoke, too bad lads ... >> 8-0/548w/LMG enter N1 (4.5 MF), ends Movement. Death or glory >> awaits! >> &&&BATES: Not so fast, caped crusader! These guys are parked in N0 >> for a spell. > > ***MCLEOD: Apparently not. You may wish to take another poke at the > squad. The 8-0 is Pinned in N0, the S. is in N1. > %%%BATES: That is where things stand. Yeah, we'll shoot him again, > Kim. First, 337P in O2 SFF @N1, 3FP-1: 3, 3; cowers to 1FP, PTC. No > resid (not that it matters). 548/LMG PTC: 6, 3; pinned. > Outstanding. 747b in N4 SFF @N1, 3.5FP+1: 5, 5; cowers to 1FP, NE. > No resid. Yes, it is true the 101st weren't hardened veterans. ***MCLEOD: So my guys are Pinned in N1, better than broke I say. &&&BATES: Stopped enemy units are always nice. > ***MCLEOD: Where does the 4 RFP come from? The MMG laid down a 2 FP > FL, the squads IFP is 7 which becomes 2 RFP which is then knocked down > to 1 RFP > due to the Orchard hex in O7. > %%%BATES: I see I mixed up a variety of things here. The IFP resid > should remain 1RFP. The 2FL will pay a +1 hard hindrance for fire > passing through the orchard. ***MCLEOD: OK, good here. >> IFP SFF on the 2nd MF, 3.5FP+1: 3, 1; NMC. 548/LMG NMC: 4, 4; pin. > I >> love pins. > > ***MCLEOD: Hey there dude, that S. is marked with a 1stF. counter and > is > manning an MG that is laying down a FL is it not? There is no TPBF > situation etc. (A9.223), therefore, AFAIK, he can't SFF at my guy. No > Pin. Ole Boe! Are you reading this! :) > %%%BATES: I'm not sure what you mean by not a TBPF situation. Sure > there's an FL, but squad is entitled to use 2 SW or 1 SW and its IFP. > Why no SFF? ***MCLEOD: I believe that we are good here and the SFF Q has been resolved. &&&BATES: Not quite the way I would have wished, but resolved, yes. >> 63. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter moves in bypass of V0 (W1 >> hexside) [1 MF], you see a 238. Any D'fire? If not, please continue >> ... > >> &&&BATES: 747GG/MMG drops "?" in S6, lays left side alternate > hexgrain >> FL to V0, 4FP+1: 6, 4; NE. He gets a pass. > > ***MCLEOD: George, aren't we missing a few DRM here? There is at > least > +3 > LOS hindrance DRM for that shot. The final DRM should be +2 shouldn't > it? > %%%BATES: Same mistake I made above applying the -1 FFMO DRM when the > hindrance cancels it. Sue me for malpractice. ***MCLEOD: Why bring those bottom feeding legal types into this. We shall resolve matters like gentlemen. :) >> ... into V1 ([2 MF] ... >> &&&BATES: That'll be a 2FP+1 FL shot: 3, 4; NE. Not happening. > > ***MCLEOD: Suppose I wanted to get off the bullet beaten track? :) > Oh > > well, away we go! > %%%BATES: Actually, this shot is deadlier, because the grain is a > soft hindrance, meaning this was a final DR of 6, and therefore a PTC. > For the fun of it I click the dicebot and you pass on a 2, 3. > >> ... into U2 [3.5 MF] and ends movement. > >> &&&BATES: Another 2FP+1 shot: 5, 5; NE. Scot free [so to speak > 8-)]. > > ***MCLEOD: WRT FL's, is it protocol to advise the other player if he > wishes to not run up the FL once one has been declared? My guy is now > where he is, > but in future I may not wish to take my chances. > %%%BATES: Usually I would, but I took you at your word: "George, you > can resolve all the following moves. They will be made regardless of > the outcome of the other moves in this message." Fortunately, no harm > has been done so there's nothing you'd care to change, right? Let's > assume that new developments are always worth a pause and a check from > now on. ***MCLEOD: I will add a note regarding FL in the future as I may wish to reconsider running down that bullet beaten path. >> 64. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter move in bypass of X0 (Y1 hexside) > [1 >> MF] ... > >> ... bypass X1 (Y1/Y2 hexside) [2 MF] ... >> >> >> ... and into X2 and ends movement [4 MF]. > >> &&&BATES: Since he didn't AM, the guys in U5 wanna know what he is. >> Reserve the right to blow him away if I want. > > ***MCLEOD: He is a 548. Hmmm, thought I sent that information in the > last mailing. Sorry George. > %%%BATES: No worries. The balance of errors is still in your favor. > 548, huh? A tempting morsel, even with the +2 hindrance. However, I > will see what other threats await. ***MCLEOD: Fair enough, the 548 rests in X2. >> 65. ***MCLEOD: A "?" and 1 counter enters R10 [1 MF], you see a 548, >> bypasses R9 (Q10 hexside) [2 MF], and on into Q9 [4 MF]. That should > do >> for now George. I will go dig out some more HS's and see what >> happens > in >> your next message. > >> &&&BATES: That will entitle him to a 3FP FPF shot from 337EE in P9: > 4, >> 3; PTC. 548 PTC: 3, 1; passed. 1RFP in O9, but I pinned, didn't I? > > ***MCLEOD: Good shot. If the 337 does not die in the upcoming RtPh, > I > > will wager that a CC of un-ending duration will commence. :) > > George, you had better go back and check the Q's I have up above. I > will not move anyone else until I hear back from you. BTW, you left > the ASLML > out of our last communication. > %%%BATES: A wise decision, eminence. Have tried to sort things out > so you can proceed, with one outstanding question. Blame the engineer > in the van for not opening my broadcast mike to the List. Not that > anybody missed us, right? ***MCLEOD: Are you kidding, they don't even know where we are! :) It seems we have ironed out all the rule stuff and there are no more firing quandaries for you, therefore, I shall continue to move. 66.***MCLEOD: "?" and 1 counter move onto N10 [2 MF] ... &&&BATES: Whoops! He loses concealment to 337EE in P9 and also has to take the 1RFP shot in N10. For the sake of speed I'll scroll down and see... Ah, yes, he's a 238. 1RFP: 1, 5; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 2; passed. ... into N9 [4 MF] and you see a 238 ... ... the 238 declares DT and enters T8 [5 MF] D'fire anyone? Next ... &&&BATES: This is passing strange, m'lord. Mayhap this unit began his movement in U11 and moved onboard to U10, which _is_ out of my LoS? Will work on that assumption and leave him be... 67. ***MCLEOD: The stack opposite of W1 moves into X0 [2 MF] and you can probably see that it is an 8-1, 548 w/LMG ... ... into X1 [4 MF] ... and into W2 [6 MF] where they end their movement. &&&BATES: This is another +2 shot, but the LMG & 8-1 make it worth it. 8-0/radio drops concealment to direct 747a/Ger LMG @ W2, 10FP+2: 5, 1; NMC. 4 resid. 8-1 NCM: 1, 2; passed. 548 NMC: 3, 2; passed. Well, maybe I made them move away from the fire lane? There remains one unit off map, opposite N10 and a stack of 3 counters opposite S10. I await your actions in this message before I commit the remaining forces to battle. &&&BATES: Well Jim, here I have to confess that I'm confused. Did you deliberately leave a counter out of your setup? I have 5 units left for you, not 4: 548, 9-1, 7-0, dm MMG & PSK. Have I miscounted? Are any of these already on board and I somehow missed them? Please advise. =Jim= From smcbee at midtnn.net Thu Apr 28 05:13:17 2005 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Thu Apr 28 05:13:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] NashCon 2005 Message-ID: <000001c54beb$af56db70$a1f39904@steves> Hello all, Less than one month to go before the tournament starts and I'm sending out this reminder notice. The ASL tournament is being run during the same time as the HMGS-MidSouth convention in Nashville. The exact tournament format is still up in the air as I don't know exactly how many people will be there. It's either a single elimination or a round robin. The scenario list is being worked on and should be available before the convention within the next week or so. There is a flyer available for any who drops me a line asking for it (smcbee@midtnn.net). Hope to see you there. Steve From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 28 05:55:17 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 28 05:56:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Follow-up: Hollow Legions (2nd ed.) Counter Errata In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000701c54bf1$8c1bc980$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Listermints, About half a year ago The Bruce posted the notice below regarding some pretty heavy in Hollow Legions 2nd Edition errata. I haven't verified them all, but the spot checks I did are just as Bruce says. AFAI can see on the MMP site, they have not acknowledged any errata for the module. Anybody hear any scuttlebutt about this issue and whether replacement counters are in fact in the offing for AoO or not? - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Probst Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 4:06 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Hollow Legions (2nd ed.) Counter Errata As far as I'm aware the following errata has not been published or summarised anywhere. It applies *only* to the MMP edition of HL ("2nd ed.") -- 1st ed. counters are fine. *** The prisoner counters have no ID (applies to 1st ed. as well). *** [The MG mistakes were noted on the "updated comprehensive Ch.N" file as recently made available on the WebDex. However, that file does not note that "no dm" should not apply to the MMG either.] LMG -- Image on reverse of counter is wrong (has no effect on game play). MMG -- Image on reverse of counter is wrong; should NOT say "no dm". HMG -- Image on reverse of counter is wrong; should NOT say "no dm". The backs of all the DC, FT and Phone counters are white instead of grey (has no effect on game play). (Actually this applies to 1st ed. as well.) *** [The following Ordnance counter mistakes are already known at MMP; these counters are to be replaced in AoO.] Italian Ordnance Note 4: AT 37/45 -- The front of the counter is wrong -- it's labeled "PaK 35/36" and should not have any HEAT information. The back of the counter is correct. (4 counters: "A", "B", "C", "D".) Italian Ordnance Note 11: ART 75/32 -- The front of the counter is wrong -- it's labeled "leFK 16nA" and should not be B11. The back of the counter is correct. (4 counters: "A", "B", "C", "D".) Italian Ordnance Note 16: ART 149/40 -- The front of the counter is wrong -- it's labeled "K 18" and should be overscored as HE only. The back of the counter is correct. (2 counters: "E", "F".) *** Italian Vehicle Note 26: Autocarretta -- Counter "D" should have "CS 5" on the back, not "cs 5". Italian Vehicle Note 27: Fiat 508 MC -- Counters "C" and "D" should have "cs 2" on the back, not "CS 2". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From mseningen at austin.rr.com Thu Apr 28 08:42:57 2005 From: mseningen at austin.rr.com (michael seningen) Date: Thu Apr 28 08:51:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] 13th ASL Team Tournament AUSTIN TEXAS Jun 23-26! Message-ID: Come join the fun in Texas! jump to here for details! http://www.angelfire.com/tx2/seningen/ Hope you can make it! cheers, Mike From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 28 09:03:06 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 28 09:03:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh7 References: <000001c54bd1$81de1330$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <004d01c54c0b$c59ba3f0$b427c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, George writes regarding the esteemed David Olie, > &&&BATES: Those Maritimers all look (and smell) the same to me. What's > the difference between and Old Scot and a New Scot, anyway? ***MCLEOD: About a quarter inch of grime. > ***MCLEOD: So my guys are Pinned in N1, better than broke I say. > &&&BATES: Stopped enemy units are always nice. > 66.***MCLEOD: "?" and 1 counter move onto N10 [2 MF] ... > &&&BATES: Whoops! He loses concealment to 337EE in P9 and also has to > take the 1RFP shot in N10. For the sake of speed I'll scroll down and > see... Ah, yes, he's a 238. > 1RFP: 1, 5; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 2; passed. > > > ... into N9 [4 MF] and you see a 238 ... > > > ... the 238 declares DT and enters T8 [5 MF] D'fire anyone? Next ... > &&&BATES: This is passing strange, m'lord. Mayhap this unit began his > movement in U11 and moved onboard to U10, which _is_ out of my LoS? > Will work on that assumption and leave him be... ***MCLEOD: (Jim quietly dons the loser cap) er, yes ... U10 to U9 to, um, T8 ... (whistles quietly ...). George, aren't _we_ the poster boys for PBEM ... :) > 67. ***MCLEOD: The stack opposite of W1 moves into X0 [2 MF] and you > can > probably see that it is an 8-1, 548 w/LMG ... > > > ... into X1 [4 MF] ... > > > and into W2 [6 MF] where they end their movement. > &&&BATES: This is another +2 shot, but the LMG & 8-1 make it worth it. > 8-0/radio drops concealment to direct 747a/Ger LMG @ W2, 10FP+2: 5, 1; > NMC. 4 resid. 8-1 NCM: 1, 2; passed. 548 NMC: 3, 2; passed. Well, > maybe I made them move away from the fire lane? > There remains one unit > off map, opposite N10 and a stack of 3 counters opposite S10. I await > your > actions in this message before I commit the remaining forces to battle. > &&&BATES: Well Jim, here I have to confess that I'm confused. Did you > deliberately leave a counter out of your setup? I have 5 units left for > you, not 4: 548, 9-1, 7-0, dm MMG & PSK. Have I miscounted? Are any > of these already on board and I somehow missed them? Please advise. ***MCLEOD: I will advise that I have lost the PsK! It must have gone MIA when the map setup went from upstairs to downstairs and back upstairs again. Oh well, we'll take our lumps. A.2. 68. ***MCLEOD: Now, the 9-1, 548 w/dm MMG moves into S10 [1 MF] ... ... S9 [3 MF] ... ... and end their movement there. No sense in getting _really_ silly at this point, plenty of time for that. That concludes the German Movement Phase for turn 3. I await your DFPh. =Jim= From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 09:56:16 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Apr 28 09:56:38 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Important Perry sez. Message-ID: <20050428165617.26997.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Listers, For at least answers A and C, the RB provided no definitive answer, so store this perry sez in a safe place... Rob --- perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: > From: perrycocke@comcast.net > To: Robert Nelson > Subject: Re: Q and A Request for ASL > Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:49:53 +0000 > > > > > Rules sections: A21.22, D6.5. > > > > a) Can a temporary crew repair the armaments (both > MA > > and Mgs) of a captured vehicle? > No. > > > b) If a temporary crew finds itself in a captured > > vehicle > > with a disabled MA, is it immediately under > recall? > Yes. > > > c) May a crew abandon a vehicle into an enemy > occupied > > hex? > > > Yes. > For official answers write to > asl_qa@multimanpublishing.com > ....Perry __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From afantozzi at tiscali.it Wed Apr 27 15:21:01 2005 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Thu Apr 28 13:05:19 2005 Subject: R: [Aslml] Still working on this LOS... In-Reply-To: <20050427172034.78927.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002a01c54c2c$56a0d4e0$260d0a3e@andrea> Hi Robert, First of all your example is not very clear. You should state which hex and which hexside(s) unit is bypassing. You only say: "Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in bypass in 12o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6". To be able to trace LOS to the O7/O6/P6 hexside it means that the bypassing unit is bypassing along the O7/P6 hexside... but is it going to enter your hex? Where esle is this unit going? Anyway, let's assume I am correct. A bypassing unit is always be considered in a specific hex (O7 in this case, i.e. the hex that contains the obstacle it is bypassing). This is spelled out in C.5 (and its subcases). So, the first thing that is sure is that the target unit is in O7 (even if you trace los to the vertex). Range from O7 to O6 is 1 hex and your FP would be doubled for PBF. Then we know for sure that Orchard is a LOS Hindrance and is Inherent Terrain (B14 and terrain chart) Another thing that is clear (as stated in B.6) is that inherent terrain affect LOS even when such LOS is traced *to* or through a vertex/hexside of such a hex. Therefore, since the vertex you are tracing LOS *to* is also part of an inherent-terrain-Orchard-Hindrance such LOS is indeed "affected" by the Orchard (again, as per B.6). In addition, since the hindrance is *between* the firer and target hex (firer is in O6 and target is in O7, as per C.5) not only FFMO is negated by the Orchard at the vertex, but also the usual +1 for a Hindrance between firer and target applies (for a net DRM of zero). This is, however, a curious situation since a unit in P6 would not benefit from the hindrance and would see only FFMO negate (because in this case the Hindrance is in the target hex (and not between firer and target). Hope this helps Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]Per conto di > Robert Nelson > Inviato: mercoledi 27 aprile 2005 19.21 > A: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: [Aslml] Still working on this LOS... > > > Folks, > > > thus far, I'm getting even responses as to whether > > ffmo applies or not. > > > > But no one is offering a clear rules or example > > reference. > > > > thus, so far I'm no closer to knowing if the shot is > > -2, or -1. > > Rob > > > > > > > > > --- bearlyonthehill@optonline.net wrote: > > > Rob - > > > > > > No it does not effect the -2 shot if your > > opponent's > > > unit is moving from 12o8 to 12p6 or 12n7 to 12p6. > > > The reason is you are not firing along the hexside > > > is due to the fact, you are firing to the vertex > > of > > > a orchard hex not INTO it. > > > I take from your discription that the unit you are > > > firing at is bypassing a rowhouse building that > > you > > > are attached to. > > > > > > If the unit moving from 12n7 to 12p7 through 12o7 > > > then your vertex is 12p6/12p7/12o7 and your fire > > > would be modified to a -1 FFNAM +1Orchard = 0. > > > Otherwise you cannot see the unit, it is blocked > > due > > > to the rowhouse. > > > > > > Hope this helps > > > > > > Gus > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Robert Nelson > > > Date: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 0:51 am > > > Subject: [Aslml] A bypass LOS I've just never had > > to > > > deal with... > > > > > > > List, > > > > > > > > for some reason, I've never had this situation > > > come > > > > up, and I'm stumped. > > > > > > > > What happens when you fire into an ADJ hex, at a > > > > bypassing unit, and your LOS to the vertex > > travels > > > > along an orchard hexside? > > > > > > > > Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in > > > bypass in > > > > 12 o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6. To get to the > > > vertex, > > > > the LOS is traced along the inherent orchard of > > > P6. > > > > > > > > So, is this a -2 shot, ffnam and ffmo, or merely > > a > > > > ffnam shot? (for of course the orchard cannot > > act > > > as a > > > > 'hindrance', as there are no hexes between firer > > > and > > > > target. The question is really, does the > > inherent > > > > nature of the orchard hexside eliminate ffmo) > > > > > > > > please advise, > > > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > > protection around > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > > > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or > > email > > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.2 - Release Date: 21/04/2005 > -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.2 - Release Date: 21/04/2005 From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Apr 28 14:08:59 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Apr 28 14:32:56 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh6 References: <000001c54bd1$81de1330$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <002001c54c39$62395ae0$a64d8918@klis.com> George wrote: > &&&BATES: Those Maritimers all look (and smell) the same to me. What's > the difference between and Old Scot and a New Scot, anyway? Mostly the quantity of preservative. David "make mine Glenmorangie" Olie From S.Eckhart at cox.net Thu Apr 28 15:11:08 2005 From: S.Eckhart at cox.net (Steve Eckhart) Date: Thu Apr 28 15:11:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule In-Reply-To: <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> Message-ID: <014201c54c3f$2e563760$0200a8c0@NBN1266> Albert, Thank you for posting this. I am still befuddled why MMP can't/won't make these announcements on the ASLML. It just isn't that hard to CC another email address. Not only that, but this information is nowhere to be found on their own web page! I don't have the time or the desire to read Consimworld. Steve Eckhart > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > Albert van Poppel > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 4:24 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule > > > > MMP announced some release dates about AOO, ASLSK2, Valour of > the guards and > other games on ConsimWorld. > > I made a small recap on my website for easy of use; > Http://www.cardboardwarriors.com > > Enjoy, > Albert van Poppel > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Thu Apr 28 20:05:58 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Thu Apr 28 20:06:04 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule In-Reply-To: <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> References: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com> <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> Message-ID: <2b8228f0050428200527be0ef2@mail.gmail.com> Anyone, What are: Bloody Ridge - June 2005 30th on Origins Fire in the sky - June 2005 30th on Origins Target Arnhem Freebee - June 2005 30th on Origins Michael (and I thought I knew what was in the pipeline) Rodgers On 4/27/05, Albert van Poppel wrote: > > MMP announced some release dates about AOO, ASLSK2, Valour of the guards and > other games on ConsimWorld. > > I made a small recap on my website for easy of use; > Http://www.cardboardwarriors.com > > Enjoy, > Albert van Poppel > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Thu Apr 28 20:17:28 2005 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (Kenn) Date: Thu Apr 28 20:19:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule In-Reply-To: <2b8228f0050428200527be0ef2@mail.gmail.com> References: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com> <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> <2b8228f0050428200527be0ef2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4271A748.2080106@wideopenwest.com> M Rodgers wrote: >Anyone, > >What are: > >Bloody Ridge - June 2005 30th on Origins > > TCS Game, PTO >Fire in the sky - June 2005 30th on Origins > > First in their International Line. A Japanese Reprint >Target Arnhem Freebee - June 2005 30th on Origins > > Another Japanese reprint, but free. Kenn From geb3 at inter.net Thu Apr 28 20:29:56 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Apr 28 20:28:24 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh7 & DFPh In-Reply-To: <004d01c54c0b$c59ba3f0$b427c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000001c54c6b$b8de1160$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Got the shooting wrapped up in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:03 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh7 Listerz, George writes regarding the esteemed David Olie, > &&&BATES: Those Maritimers all look (and smell) the same to me. > What's the difference between and Old Scot and a New Scot, anyway? ***MCLEOD: About a quarter inch of grime. > ***MCLEOD: So my guys are Pinned in N1, better than broke I say. > &&&BATES: Stopped enemy units are always nice. > 66.***MCLEOD: "?" and 1 counter move onto N10 [2 MF] ... > &&&BATES: Whoops! He loses concealment to 337EE in P9 and also has > to take the 1RFP shot in N10. For the sake of speed I'll scroll down > and see... Ah, yes, he's a 238. > 1RFP: 1, 5; PTC. 238 PTC: 4, 2; passed. > > > ... into N9 [4 MF] and you see a 238 ... > > > ... the 238 declares DT and enters T8 [5 MF] D'fire anyone? Next ... > &&&BATES: This is passing strange, m'lord. Mayhap this unit began > his movement in U11 and moved onboard to U10, which _is_ out of my > LoS? Will work on that assumption and leave him be... ***MCLEOD: (Jim quietly dons the loser cap) er, yes ... U10 to U9 to, um, T8 ... (whistles quietly ...). George, aren't _we_ the poster boys for PBEM ... :) ###BATES: OK, we're clear here. > 67. ***MCLEOD: The stack opposite of W1 moves into X0 [2 MF] and you > can probably see that it is an 8-1, 548 w/LMG ... > > > ... into X1 [4 MF] ... > > > and into W2 [6 MF] where they end their movement. > &&&BATES: This is another +2 shot, but the LMG & 8-1 make it worth > it. 8-0/radio drops concealment to direct 747a/Ger LMG @ W2, 10FP+2: > 5, 1; NMC. 4 resid. 8-1 NMC: 1, 2; passed. 548 NMC: 3, 2; passed. > Well, maybe I made them move away from the fire lane? > There remains one unit > off map, opposite N10 and a stack of 3 counters opposite S10. I await > your actions in this message before I commit the remaining forces to > battle. > &&&BATES: Well Jim, here I have to confess that I'm confused. Did > you deliberately leave a counter out of your setup? I have 5 units > left for you, not 4: 548, 9-1, 7-0, dm MMG & PSK. Have I miscounted? > Are any of these already on board and I somehow missed them? Please > advise. ***MCLEOD: I will advise that I have lost the PsK! It must have gone MIA when the map setup went from upstairs to downstairs and back upstairs again. Oh well, we'll take our lumps. A.2. ###BATES: Well, there's one less thing to worry about. But don't be too embarrassed. Olie left one of his MMGs under a tree in J28 "Inhumaine" a while back. Still wiped me out, though. Couldn't whack his Croc when I had the shot... However, for the benefit of all the boys & girls watching at home, we should note that you are not obligated to admit that anything is missing. All you have to do is confirm what is and is not on board. For example, it is enough to say that there are 10 squad equivalents on board now, and the two leaders, dm MMG and PSK are not on the board yet. You can keep me guessing on the rest. 68. ***MCLEOD: Now, the 9-1, 548 w/dm MMG moves into S10 [1 MF] ... ... S9 [3 MF] ... ###BATES: That's 7 flat from 747GG in S6, who has laid the FL but not DFF's with his IFP yet. 7FP @S9: 6, 2; PTC. 2RFP, not that it really matters now. 9-1 PTC: 2, 1; passed but my sniper (I missed a sniper last message, BTW. A.2). 548/dmMMG PTC: 2, 2; passed. Sniper is dr2; warm. Dir, Dist: 1, 2; to N3. Since the squad in N1 is already pinned, they're equidistant and TEM is the same, I'm going back to N5 and pin your sniper. ... and end their movement there. No sense in getting _really_ silly at this point, plenty of time for that. That concludes the German Movement Phase for turn 3. I await your DFPh. ###BATES: So ?+1 in N11 waits for the AdvPh? I see. Silliness is refreshing and always welcome. Just don't be pathetic. =Jim= ###BATES: OK, Defensive Fire Phase. Just this: Pinned 337EE in P9 FPF @ Q10, 1.5FP: 5, 3; NE and 337E is DM. Believe he will be elimnated for failure to rout. That's enough. At this point concealment is the better part of valor. Got any AdvF, Pin Boy? - G From e4spm at hotmail.com Thu Apr 28 20:51:40 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Thu Apr 28 20:51:54 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: <003001c54b38$562eda10$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Just wanted to point out that 8.3 does NOT require a squad to use all it's MG in a SFF attack. A squad may choose NOT to use it's MG in a SFF attack but in doing so forfiets the option to use the MG for the rest of the MPh. NRBH but I'm pretty sure 8.3 reads something like that. Not sure what the consequence is for the discussion below. David >From: "mcleods" >To: Ole Bøe , >Subject: Re: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? >Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:49:33 -0500 > >Listerz, > >Ole "Blood Axe" Boe ... > >(sorry Ole, am reading a very interesting book on Vikings at the moment. >The various Viking Kings all had cool names and "Blood Axe" seems like a >decent fit for you ... "Blood Axe Boe ... I like it. It was either that or >"Forkbeard" :) ) > >... wrote, > >Hi, > >George Bates wrote: >>Fellas, I give. Where in this paragraph does it say the squad is not >>permitted to SFF with its IFP whilst a FL is in play? >Here: > >A MG may cancel its Fire Lane in order to gain freedom to fire elsewhere >(/its manning Infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF after establishing >the Fire Lane) only if a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation occurs >(8.312/D7.21)—in which case the Fire Lane must be cancelled > >>A9.11 is pretty >>specific; "A squad may fire any one SW MG at no cost to its own >>InherentFP..." There are no exceptions. Work with me here, people. >> >Yes, but a FL is a special case. Also note that A8.3 requires the Squad to >use all its MG in the SFF attack - something which is impossible without >cancelling the FL, so even without the paranthesis in A9.223, the Squad's >SFF attack would be illegal while having a FL. > >Bruce probst wrote: >>I'm no Ole Boe, but you are correct. Placing a FL is tantamount >>to the >>manning MMC saying "I ain't gonna fire no more, no more, I ain't gonna >>fire no more. At least not until the DFPh, when the FL goes away." >> >I am a Ole Boe, and I mostly agree. It is often smart to place a FL with a >squad without using its IFP. That way you at least get one shot with the >Squad during the MPh. That may be enough to keep the attackers from >bypassing you. > >IMHO, A7., A8. and A9. are the most frequently used yet most misunderstood >rule sections in the game. > >I even heard that some fool couldn't even get A7.353 straight! > >Idiot!! ;) > > > > > >=Jim= > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Buy what you really want - sell what you don't on eBay: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/705-10129-5668-323?ID=2 From WITCHBOTTLES at peoplepc.com Thu Apr 28 20:57:03 2005 From: WITCHBOTTLES at peoplepc.com (jon halfin) Date: Thu Apr 28 20:57:19 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Seeking Pierce Mason Message-ID: <006e01c54c6f$82901a50$0d179341@mariotm2z2bi0b> Hello and sorry for TWBW here, I've really no idea if my first attempt to post got through or not, it appears not. Paging Pierce Mason, formerly at asl1@frontier.net my CoW pbem campaign opponent. I've returned and this is my new e-addy. E-mail me off list plz. Also anyone else I was entangled with via PBEM before Iraqi Freedom. Regards, Jon H. From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Apr 28 22:39:41 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Apr 28 22:39:39 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh7 & DFPh & AFPh & RtPh & APh & CCPh & T4(US) RPh References: <000001c54c6b$b8de1160$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <00c601c54c7d$d8348230$b427c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; The Keystone Kops kontinue ... > 68. ***MCLEOD: Now, the 9-1, 548 w/dm MMG moves into S10 [1 MF] ... > > > ... S9 [3 MF] ... > ###BATES: That's 7 flat from 747GG in S6, who has laid the FL but not > DFF's with his IFP yet. > 7FP @S9: 6, 2; PTC. 2RFP, not that it really matters now. 9-1 PTC: > 2, 1; passed but my sniper (I missed a sniper last message, BTW. A.2). > 548/dmMMG PTC: 2, 2; passed. > Sniper is dr2; warm. Dir, Dist: 1, 2; to N3. Since the squad in N1 is > already pinned, they're equidistant and TEM is the same, I'm going back > to N5 and pin your sniper. ***MCLEOD: LMAOAROTF!!! I'm, sorry George but ... a shot from S6 to S9!!!! Are we using our selective vision here and _not_ seeing the trees in S8? :) Unless of course I miss-read your shot or am missing something else. > ... and end their movement there. No sense in getting _really_ silly at > > this point, plenty of time for that. > > That concludes the German Movement Phase for turn 3. I await your DFPh. > ###BATES: So ?+1 in N11 waits for the AdvPh? I see. Silliness is > refreshing and always welcome. Just don't be pathetic. ***MCLEOD: "Pathetic" is my new PBEM middle nom de guere. > ###BATES: OK, Defensive Fire Phase. > Just this: Pinned 337EE in P9 FPF @ Q10, 1.5FP: 5, 3; NE and 337E is > DM. Believe he will be elimnated for failure to rout. > That's enough. At this point concealment is the better part of valor. ***MCLEOD: George lad, have you been in the Sake again? As far as I know, FPF is MF dependent and happens only in the opponents MPh. No FPF in the DFPh so you are not broken. I'm telling you, wait for the CCPh for the real weirdness to begin. > Got any AdvF, Pin Boy? ***MCLEOD: Yup, we got a few kicks to get in ... 69. ***MCLEOD: The 238 in O10 fires at the Pinned 337 in P9, 2 FP +2, DR = 7 (4,3) = FDR 9 = NE. 70. ***MCLEOD: 548 in Q9 and 238 in Q10 fire at the same target in P9, 8 FP +2, DR = 6 (5,1) = FDR 8 = NMC. Your guy is encircled from this shot. 337 MC DR = 8 (6,2), Breaks and DM. 71 ***MCLEOD: Pinned 548 in O1 fires at 337 in O2, 4 FP +0, DR = 4 (3,1) = 1MC. Yee-haa!! Jimmy doin' the jiggy bum dance! Oops! Better wait to see what the outcome is ... 337 MC DR = 6 (4,2) = Pin. I jiggy'd too soon. :( 72. ***MCLEOD: Fire group formed by 238 in U2, 238 in V2, 548 w/LMG in W2 and 548 in X2 fires at U5. 11 FP + 4, DR = 2 (1,1)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FDR = 6. Jimmy jivin! Jimmy jivin! RS to see who cowers U2 to X2, 1,1,3,2; 548 w MG Cowers. FG FP = 6 with FDR of 6 = 1MC. 8-0 MC DR = 2 (1,1) ... I can't believe this ... = HOB. HOB DR = 10 (6,4) -1 DRM for Elite = HOB FDR 9 = Berserk ... Crappage ... I believe that the 747 must take his 1MC before the Berserk TC. 747 MC DR = 11 (6,5) +1 = FDR 12. 747 is broken and DM. Berserk TC = 6 (3,3). Now isn't this sweet. Your 8-0 and 747 are now Berserk. Thats it, from now on, no more Jimmy jivin'. ***MCLEOD: Well George, I hope you're happy now ... No more Adv Fire. Rout Phase 73. ***MCLEOD: If you have any Voluntary Breaks George, just stop the message here and send that information along. No German routs, the 337 in P9 is eliminated for failure to rout. Advance Phase 74. ***MCLEOD: Note to HS, stay away from the crazy guys ... - "?" and one counter Adv. into N10 - 548 w/LMG from O9 to N8 - 238 from O10 to O9 - 548 from Q9 to R8 - 238 from Q10 to Q9 - 9-1, 548 w/dm MMG from S9 to S8 - CX 238 from T8 to T7 - CX 238 from U8 to T7 - 238 in U2 to T2 - 238 in oV2 to oW3 ... sorry boys ... - 548 from X2 to W2 End of APh. Close Combat Phase "?" 238 in Q9. End CCPh. Start Turn 4(US) Rally Phase ***MCLEOD: George, to keep things moving I will take the liberty of making the US WC DR, is that protocol? If not, please re-roll it. WC DR = 3 (1,2) 75. ***MCLEOD: I only have one RPh activity. Rally attempt in N10, DR = 8 (4,4) = unit remains broken, DM removed. ***MCLEOD: That was all very entertaining. Can't wait to see what the 'morrow brings. :) =Jim= From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Apr 28 23:50:39 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Apr 28 23:53:22 2005 Subject: R: [Aslml] Still working on this LOS... Message-ID: Hi, Andrea wrote: > You only say: "Firing unit is in 12o6, firing at a unit in bypass > in 12o7, at the vertex o7/o6/p6". > To be able to trace LOS to the O7/O6/P6 hexside it means that the > bypassingunit is bypassing along the O7/P6 hexside... but is it > going to enter your hex? Where esle is this unit going? > Anyway, let's assume I am correct. Below is a drawing to make it clearer. If it looks distorted, change the font of your email reader to a monospace font (Courier etc.), or copy it to Word and do the same there. ___ /O6 \ / \___ \ /P6 \ \___/O O \ /O7 \ O O / / BB \___/ \ BB / \___/ > A bypassing unit is always be considered in a specific hex (O7 in > this case, > i.e. the hex that contains the obstacle it is bypassing). This is > spelledout in C.5 (and its subcases). So, the first thing that is > sure is that the > target unit is in O7 (even if you trace los to the vertex). Range > from O7 to O6 is 1 hex and your FP would be doubled for PBF. Correct. > Then we know for sure that Orchard is a LOS Hindrance and is Inherent > Terrain (B14 and terrain chart) > Another thing that is clear (as stated in B.6) is that inherent > terrainaffect LOS even when such LOS is traced *to* or through a > vertex/hexside of such a hex. Not so fast. The actual sentence of B.6 says: "mere entrance of the hex (even if only to trace a LOS to or through a vertex of such a hex) ... suffices." It says "mere entrance ... (even...". In our case there is no entrance of the hex at all, since the LOS enters O7, not P6. It is not enough to trace LOS to the vertex, the LOS must enter the hex, and as established in C.5, the LOS didn't enter P6, but O7. So according to B.6, the Orchard does *not* affect the LOS. It may seem absurd to say that it matters that O7 is the target hex and not P6 when the LOS id drawn to a common vertex, but that's what C.5 and B.6 in combination tells us. For an ASLRB example to show that this really matters, look at the B9.21 example. > Therefore, since the vertex you are tracing LOS *to* is also part of an > inherent-terrain-Orchard-Hindrance such LOS is indeed "affected" > by the Orchard (again, as per B.6). No, since you overlookd the "entrance" part of B.6. The rest of your conclution is therefore also incorrect. You were on the right track by looking upo B.6 and C.5 though. From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Apr 29 00:06:06 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri Apr 29 00:08:42 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? Message-ID: Hi, David Marvanek wrote: > Just wanted to point out that 8.3 does NOT require a squad to use > all it's MG in a SFF attack. A squad may choose NOT to use it's MG in a SFF > attack but in doing so forfiets the option to use the MG for the rest of > the MPh. NRBH but I'm pretty sure 8.3 reads something like that. > You're correct of course (except that it may use the SW in FPF)... I short-quoted A8.3 a bit. > Not sure what the consequence is for the discussion below. > Nothing. We were discussing whether a Squad could SFF while having a FL. A8.3 doesn't directly disallow this, but by doing so it cannot use the SW anymore (until FPF) - which would mean a cancellation of the FL - which A9.223 says it cannot do until a FPF situation occurs. So A8.3 is still useful as an additional argument to A9.233 for not allowing a Squad to SFF while having a FL. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 00:55:43 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 00:56:18 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: I hear Strunk & White screaming... (WAS: A9.223? What about A9.11?) In-Reply-To: <000001c54b37$d543ec10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> References: <7382f5e061cf.426f9525@broadpark.no> <000001c54b37$d543ec10$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:45:58 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >May I recommend the following substitution for a future edition? >ahem< > "Players may only choose to cancel an MG's fire lane in order for that MG to fire elsewhere in a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation (8.312/D7.21), or so that the MG's manning infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF (8.3)." That would be a complete change of the current rule. I don't see any reason why the FL rules need revision (again). Players should be aware that laying down a FL is a commitment, and if you aren't prepared for that, it may turn around and bite you on the bum. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 01:11:31 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 01:11:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Follow-up: Hollow Legions (2nd ed.) Counter Errata In-Reply-To: <000701c54bf1$8c1bc980$3200170a@DF6TP71X> References: <000701c54bf1$8c1bc980$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:55:17 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >About half a year ago The Bruce posted the notice below regarding some >pretty heavy in Hollow Legions 2nd Edition errata. I haven't verified >them all, but the spot checks I did are just as Bruce says. AFAI can >see on the MMP site, they have not acknowledged any errata for the >module. Anybody hear any scuttlebutt about this issue and whether >replacement counters are in fact in the offing for AoO or not? There are no current plans that I am aware of to make this errata "official". That doesn't mean it won't happen, of course. (Like a guilty conscience, I poke and prod at Perry at regular intervals, not letting him forget his past sins ....) It certainly *should* happen. However, I'm pretty confident that Perry has bigger issues on his plate right now . The last plans I saw for the AoO countersheets (which, admittedly, was some time ago now), there were definitely going to be replacements for the faulty ordnance 5/8" counters (as I previously indicated). That's all *I* know about the subject .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 01:30:19 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 01:30:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez Re: A19.3 Inexperienced Personnel and Leaders Message-ID: The following overturns an earlier Perry Sez of mine from a couple of years ago that covered some of the same territory. I'm not complaining, this one is easier to remember. The last question is because the ASLSK rules specify that the leader must be "Good Order", whereas the ASL rules specify merely "unbroken". Perry seems to be implying that the ASLSK wording is in error (albeit, for ASLSK purposes, a harmless one). On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:40:29 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: > For Green personnel, does being "stacked with" an unbroken leader cancel out > the following penalties *even if* the leader does not participate in the > attack subject to those penalties: > > (a) A19.32 SW B# penalty. > > EX: A leader and a Green squad armed with a LMG are stacked together in a hex. > The squad uses the MG to make an attack, but the attack is *not* directed by > the leader. Is the B# of the MG worsened by 1? > > (b) A19.33 Cowering penalty. > > EX: A leader and a Green squad are stacked together in a hex. The squad makes > a small-arms attack *not* directed by the leader and rolls "doubles". Is the > FP column used in the attack shifted by 2 columns? > > (c) A19.34 PAATC penalty and CCV penalty. > > EX: A leader, a 1st-line and a Green squad are stacked together in a hex. The > two squads must each roll a PAATC to advance into CC with an enemy AFV. Is > the Green squad subject to the 1PAATC penalty? > > Both squads pass the PAATC and attack the AFV. The leader assists the > 1st-line squad's attack. Is the Green squad's CCV reduced by 1? > > (d) A19.35 Capture penalty. > > EX: A leader, a 1st-line squad and a Green squad are stacked together in a > hex, and all are subject to attacks in CC. The leader defends with the > 1st-line squad vs. one attack, and the Green squad is the sole defender vs. > another attack. Is the Green squad subject to the -1 DRM for a capture > attempt? > > (e) A19.36 Lax penalties. > > EX: A leader and a Green squad are stacked together in a hex during a Night > scenario. The units are subject to straying, but will not be moving together > in a stack. Is the Green squad considered Lax for the Straying DR? The leader exempts the squad in each (a)-(e) situation, so the answer to each EX is "No." > Finally, is a leader who is unbroken but not Good Order still eligible to > cancel any Inexperienced Personnel penalties? Yes. [I don't think there are any instances in ASLSK where this distinction in this rule is meaningful.] Apologies for any previous answers that may conflict with this one. ....Perry MMP ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 01:35:56 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 01:36:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] (fwd) Re: A23.7 Set DC Message-ID: This is all pretty straightforward, I was just somewhat surprised that (a) it isn't already in the rules and (b) no-one's ever asked these questions before. (Remember, however, that attempting a Set DC NTC is *not* a concealment-loss activity, so of course a HIP/concealed "detonator" should not be marked with a fire counter if it isn't doing anything else ....) On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:42:28 +0000, perrycocke@comcast.net wrote: > Does A23.2 apply if the DC is Set by a non-Elite unit, and/or the DC being Set > is captured? If the DC is Set prior to play by SSR, can a non-Elite unit be > designated as the "detonator"? If so does A23.2 apply? Yes to all. >Does a Set DC detonation attempt count as a SW usage by the detonating unit? Yes. > Is there any penalty for failing a Set DC detonation NTC, other than being > unable to detonate the DC? It is use of a SW. >Is a unit that attempts a Set DC detonation NTC > marked with any sort of fire counter if it (a) succeeds; (b) fails? It is use of a SW so it might as well be marked (although it does not cause a gunflash at night). ....Perry MMP ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 01:54:14 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 01:54:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T3(G) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <002a01c54b38$54605ba0$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000301c5489d$b1b6cde0$3200170a@DF6TP71X><002e01c548d3$85c7a480$ea27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc><002801c54ab9$92502be0$5527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <002a01c54b38$54605ba0$dd27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <6ft371d5msfppeuju602mahmjqhd8rh96c@4ax.com> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:40:52 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >No offence intended Bruce. Oh, none taken, I assure you. I was just half-afraid that in my sleep-deprived state I was going to end up quoting the Fire Lane rules from "Monopoly". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 01:55:49 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 01:56:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] AP on the ITT In-Reply-To: <20050427144710.94792.qmail@web52601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050427144710.94792.qmail@web52601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:47:10 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >I wish it did. this rule sends one to C8.31 where it >states that HEAT has to be used against 'hardened' >type targets. There is no statement there that AP has >to do so as well. Thus, it would seem that firing AP >on the ITT is identical to firing HE, with no >differences other than no resid, and an HE >equivalency? (in other words, may I shoot AP at a >unit standing in open ground?) Correct, grasshopper, you are learning how the ASL rules work! (Yes.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Apr 29 01:57:31 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Apr 29 01:57:41 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4mt3715pioo6p79f8q2o1fs63j0list1ru@4ax.com> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:06:06 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >> Just wanted to point out that 8.3 does NOT require a squad to use >> all it's MG in a SFF attack. A squad may choose NOT to use it's MG in a SFF >> attack but in doing so forfiets the option to use the MG for the rest of >> the MPh. NRBH but I'm pretty sure 8.3 reads something like that. >> >You're correct of course (except that it may use the SW in FPF)... I short-quoted A8.3 a bit. MUST use the MG in FPF, if at all able to. But, yes, it was not a relevant point to the actual discussion. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 29 02:25:37 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 29 02:24:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: I hear Strunk & White screaming... (WAS: A9.223? What about A9.11?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000901c54c9d$6afd9fb0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Bruce, I think you misunderstand my intent. The purpose of the suggested re-write was to make the wording intelligible and the rule clear and easy to understand. Having "may" and only separated by more than a dozen words does not lead to speedy comprehension. Now that I have been able to parse it, I agree with you about what the rule is supposed to do and have no desire to change that. Play on. - G -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 4:56 PM To: George Bates Cc: 'Ole B?'; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net; 'mcleods'; aaron.cleavin@gmail.com Subject: Re: I hear Strunk & White screaming... (WAS: A9.223? What about A9.11?) On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:45:58 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >May I recommend the following substitution for a future edition? >>ahem< > "Players may only choose to cancel an MG's fire lane in order for that MG to fire elsewhere in a TPBF/CC-Reaction-Fire situation (8.312/D7.21), or so that the MG's manning infantry may use Subsequent-First-Fire/FPF (8.3)." That would be a complete change of the current rule. I don't see any reason why the FL rules need revision (again). Players should be aware that laying down a FL is a commitment, and if you aren't prepared for that, it may turn around and bite you on the bum. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 29 10:21:21 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 29 10:23:48 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) RPh, PFPh, and MPh1 References: <000001c54c6b$b8de1160$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <00c601c54c7d$d8348230$b427c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <008001c54ce0$2d53a950$cb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, ***MCLEOD: George, thanks for the Sniper catch on that 2 MC DR, I missed that completely. > 73. ***MCLEOD: If you have any Voluntary Breaks George, just stop the > message here and send that information along. No German routs, the 337 > in P9 is eliminated for failure to rout. > $$$BATES: Thought that would happen one way or the other. Nobody is > abandoning their posts. ***MCLEOD: Good men those para's. > Advance Phase > > 74. ***MCLEOD: Note to HS, stay away from the crazy guys ... > > - "?" and one counter Adv. into N10 > - 548 w/LMG from O9 to N8 > - 238 from O10 to O9 > - 548 from Q9 to R8 > - 238 from Q10 to Q9 > - 9-1, 548 w/dm MMG from S9 to S8 > - CX 238 from T8 to T7 > $$$BATES: I don't think this guy went CX. Certainly didn't need to > double-time to get to T8. Why don't you double-check that? ***MCLEOD: I am certain I DT'd those guys. They had to trudge through 2 woods hexes and then on into OG for 5 MF. > - CX 238 from U8 to T7 > - 238 in U2 to T2 > - 238 in oV2 to oW3 ... sorry boys ... > $$$BATES: Baaaah. Baaaah. I hear the sound of sacrificial lambs... ***MCLEOD: It should be fun for someone. :) > - 548 from X2 to W2 > $$$BATES: So 8-1 & 548/LMG in W2 stay put? If you move them, read > everything up through my rally phase below, then delete the rest and get > back to me. ***MCLEOD: They stay. > End of APh. > > Close Combat Phase > > "?" 238 in Q9. > > End CCPh. > > Start Turn 4(US) > > Rally Phase > > ***MCLEOD: George, to keep things moving I will take the liberty of > making the US WC DR, is that protocol? If not, please re-roll it. WC DR > = 3 (1,2) > $$$BATES: Oh, why the hell not? Either of us is liable to get it > wrong, anyway... 8-) ***MCLEOD: At least we are consistent! :) > 75. ***MCLEOD: I only have one RPh activity. Rally attempt in N10, DR = > 8 (4,4) = unit remains broken, DM removed. > ***MCLEOD: That was all very entertaining. Can't wait to see what the > 'morrow brings. :) > $$$BATES: Well, I have lots of rally activities. > CX 747O in S4 drops concealment to continue his quest for the German > MMG, dr 6. Christ. Amazing they found their ripcords earlier in the > week. > 8-1/BAZ in P4 uncloaks, rallies broken 7-0: 5, 1; rallied. > Rallies broken 747YY: 6, 1; rallies. > Well, there's some good news. ***MCLEOD: I so wanted to fire at those guys last turn but I could not muster the FP to do the trick. :( > _Prep_Fire_Phase_ > Since berserk 8-0/Radio in U5 is not good order, radio contact is NA. > Here comes perhaps my biggest roll of the game. 9-2 & 747W in R4 lose > "?" and attempt to entrench: 3, 5; NA. TI, under -1 labor counter. > Damn, that was probably their only chance. ***MCLEOD: We will top them with a TI and a Prep Fire counter too. > Time for some covering fire. > 747GG/MMG in S6 @S9, CA 5th point clockwise from N, 11FP+1: 1, 4; 1MC & > RoF. 9-1 1MC: 2, 5; passed. 548/dmMMG 1MC: 4, 1; passed. Rats. > 4FP @T7: 4, 6; NE. ***MCLEOD: Rounds rip through the branches and leaves ... I'm having Band Of Brothers flashbacks! :) > 747SS/MMG in O6 @N8, 11FP+2: 5, 1; 1MC. 548/LMG 1MC: 1, 1; HOB. HOB > DR-1: 1, 3; hero. Very lame. ***MCLEOD: Jeez George, I feel guilty now. All I got for you was Berserk and here you go and give me a Hero. Many thanks good sir. He has a Snipers mark upon him already. > As I've noted before, Prep Fire is overrated. Time to maneuver. > > _Movement_Phase_ > You know who is required to go first. T2, W3 & T7 are equidistant in > hexes from U5, so I choose T2 to charge. Off we go into U4 (1.5MF)! > These are the best moves I can make so whatever lives through the hail > of bullets, just proceed on... ***MCLEOD: You know, I really should read the Berserk charge rules before I advance ... ;) 76. ***MCLEOD: 238 HS in oW3 fires at the B'boys, 2 FP +0, DR = 2 (1,1) ... jeeeeeeeeeez ... Cowers, and is marked with Final Fire counter, to 1 FP = 1MC. 8-0 MC DR = 6 (5,1) = NE , 747 MC DR = 7 (6,1) = NE, no RFP. > ... to T3 (3MF)... 77. ***MCLEOD: George, after reading the rule, your guys must take the shortest rout in MF during their charge, check A15.431 about halfway down. They must enter the Orchard in oU3. I will put them there and will fire away. The 8-1 (directing fire), 2 x 548 and LMGin W3 will fire at oU3 with 13 FP -1 DRM. DR = 5 (4,1) = FDR 4 = 3MC. 8-0 MC DR = 6 (5,1) = FDR 9 = Pass; 747 MC DR = 11 (6,5) = FDR 14 = Breaks and CR'd to 337. Some joy. :) My guys are 1st Fired and there are 4 RFP in oU3. > ... and enter T2 for 4.5MF. 78. ***MCLEOD: 4 MF due to the course correction. My 238 in T2 will fire at the intruders. TPBF, 6 FP -1, DR = 8 (3,5) = FDR 7 = NMC. 8-0 MC DR = 11 (5,6) ... must resist urge to Jimmy jive! Wound DR = 6. Leader eliminated, radio falls to the ground. 337 MC DR = 3 (2,1) = NE. There is 2 RFP in T2. > Let see what's left when the smoke clears and then I'll give you further > moves. ***MCLEOD: There it is George. For the record, Icompletely blew my plan for directing your charge. I should have read the bloody rule in question as I wanted you to charge my bait 238 in the Orchard. I had a nice 26 -2 waiting for you. Although it was interesting the way things turned out anyway. I just made 9 DR's and the DR average is 6.5. Weird game this ASL. I just started a thread on ASL and luck on the Forums inspired in part by the events of last night. The nuttiness contiues to day with the Hero creation and other fun stuff. George, you left our List mates out again. Are we taking this private to preserve what little ASL credibilty we still have left? :) I've been telling people for years that I suck at this game, this only underscores that fact. ;) =Jim= From aslwynn at rogers.com Fri Apr 29 16:59:06 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Fri Apr 29 16:59:10 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? References: Message-ID: <004801c54d17$6e239760$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Ole; Something related to this that I've wondered about but never got around to asking before: You say (below) that an MG that has already fired and lost ROF can fire again as FPF. Right. But what if its CA has been fixed (for firing out of woods/bldg) and the enemy unit now creating the FPF opportunity is not within that CA? Can the MG fire at all? IIRC the MG is obligated to fire in FPF if the MMC possessing it does. Wynn "Usually Fires MGs that have 0 ROF" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ole B?e" To: "David Marvanek" Cc: Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 3:06 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? > Hi, > > David Marvanek wrote: > >> Just wanted to point out that 8.3 does NOT require a squad to use >> all it's MG in a SFF attack. A squad may choose NOT to use it's MG in a >> SFF >> attack but in doing so forfiets the option to use the MG for the rest of >> the MPh. NRBH but I'm pretty sure 8.3 reads something like that. >> > You're correct of course (except that it may use the SW in FPF)... I > short-quoted A8.3 a bit. > >> Not sure what the consequence is for the discussion below. >> > Nothing. We were discussing whether a Squad could SFF while having a FL. > A8.3 doesn't directly disallow this, but by doing so it cannot use the SW > anymore (until FPF) - which would mean a cancellation of the FL - which > A9.223 says it cannot do until a FPF situation occurs. So A8.3 is still > useful as an additional argument to A9.233 for not allowing a Squad to SFF > while having a FL. > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Apr 29 17:06:13 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri Apr 29 17:06:11 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: <004801c54d17$6e239760$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: Hi, Wynn wrote: > You say (below) that an MG that has already fired and lost ROF can fire > again as FPF. Right. But what if its CA has been fixed (for firing out of > woods/bldg) and the enemy unit now creating the FPF opportunity is not > within that CA? Can the MG fire at all? No. A9.21 says: "...it may continue to fire during that phase only inside the CA of the prior shot..." with no exceptions. > IIRC the MG is obligated to fire in > FPF if the MMC possessing it does. > A8.31 says: "All usable MG/IFE possessed by that unit ... must be fired" "useable" is not a defined ASL term, so I take it to mean "any MG/IFE that can legally be used in this shot" - which *excludes* a MG with fixed CA. A9.21 is also the higher numbered rule and therefore takes precedence even if you don't agree with my understanding of A8.31. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From geb3 at inter.net Fri Apr 29 17:35:05 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Apr 29 17:33:41 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) Bugler, sound the charge! In-Reply-To: <008001c54ce0$2d53a950$cb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000701c54d1c$797941a0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Problems getting the men on their feet and out the door. Go to the bottom in "%%%." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 2:21 AM To: mcleods; George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) RPh, PFPh, and MPh1 Listerz, ***MCLEOD: George, thanks for the Sniper catch on that 2 MC DR, I missed that completely. > 73. ***MCLEOD: If you have any Voluntary Breaks George, just stop the > message here and send that information along. No German routs, the 337 > in P9 is eliminated for failure to rout. > $$$BATES: Thought that would happen one way or the other. Nobody is > abandoning their posts. ***MCLEOD: Good men those para's. > Advance Phase > > 74. ***MCLEOD: Note to HS, stay away from the crazy guys ... > > - "?" and one counter Adv. into N10 > - 548 w/LMG from O9 to N8 > - 238 from O10 to O9 > - 548 from Q9 to R8 > - 238 from Q10 to Q9 > - 9-1, 548 w/dm MMG from S9 to S8 > - CX 238 from T8 to T7 > $$$BATES: I don't think this guy went CX. Certainly didn't need to > double-time to get to T8. Why don't you double-check that? ***MCLEOD: I am certain I DT'd those guys. They had to trudge through 2 woods hexes and then on into OG for 5 MF. %%%BATES: If you insist, but S10-T9-T8 only requires 4MF. > - CX 238 from U8 to T7 > - 238 in U2 to T2 > - 238 in oV2 to oW3 ... sorry boys ... > $$$BATES: Baaaah. Baaaah. I hear the sound of sacrificial lambs... ***MCLEOD: It should be fun for someone. :) > - 548 from X2 to W2 > $$$BATES: So 8-1 & 548/LMG in W2 stay put? If you move them, read > everything up through my rally phase below, then delete the rest and > get back to me. ***MCLEOD: They stay. > End of APh. > > Close Combat Phase > > "?" 238 in Q9. > > End CCPh. > > Start Turn 4(US) > > Rally Phase > > ***MCLEOD: George, to keep things moving I will take the liberty of > making the US WC DR, is that protocol? If not, please re-roll it. WC > DR = 3 (1,2) > $$$BATES: Oh, why the hell not? Either of us is liable to get it > wrong, anyway... 8-) ***MCLEOD: At least we are consistent! :) > 75. ***MCLEOD: I only have one RPh activity. Rally attempt in N10, DR > = 8 (4,4) = unit remains broken, DM removed. > ***MCLEOD: That was all very entertaining. Can't wait to see what the > 'morrow brings. :) > $$$BATES: Well, I have lots of rally activities. > CX 747O in S4 drops concealment to continue his quest for the German > MMG, dr 6. Christ. Amazing they found their ripcords earlier in the > week. 8-1/BAZ in P4 uncloaks, rallies broken 7-0: 5, 1; rallied. > Rallies broken 747YY: 6, 1; rallies. > Well, there's some good news. ***MCLEOD: I so wanted to fire at those guys last turn but I could not muster the FP to do the trick. :( > _Prep_Fire_Phase_ > Since berserk 8-0/Radio in U5 is not good order, radio contact is NA. > Here comes perhaps my biggest roll of the game. 9-2 & 747W in R4 lose > "?" and attempt to entrench: 3, 5; NA. TI, under -1 labor counter. > Damn, that was probably their only chance. ***MCLEOD: We will top them with a TI and a Prep Fire counter too. > Time for some covering fire. > 747GG/MMG in S6 @S9, CA 5th point clockwise from N, 11FP+1: 1, 4; 1MC > & RoF. 9-1 1MC: 2, 5; passed. 548/dmMMG 1MC: 4, 1; passed. Rats. > 4FP @T7: 4, 6; NE. ***MCLEOD: Rounds rip through the branches and leaves ... I'm having Band Of Brothers flashbacks! :) > 747SS/MMG in O6 @N8, 11FP+2: 5, 1; 1MC. 548/LMG 1MC: 1, 1; HOB. > HOB > DR-1: 1, 3; hero. Very lame. ***MCLEOD: Jeez George, I feel guilty now. All I got for you was Berserk and here you go and give me a Hero. Many thanks good sir. He has a Snipers mark upon him already. > As I've noted before, Prep Fire is overrated. Time to maneuver. > > _Movement_Phase_ > You know who is required to go first. T2, W3 & T7 are equidistant in > hexes from U5, so I choose T2 to charge. Off we go into U4 (1.5MF)! > These are the best moves I can make so whatever lives through the hail > of bullets, just proceed on... ***MCLEOD: You know, I really should read the Berserk charge rules before I advance ... ;) %%%BATES: I knew it! I can just see you reading this, going "Wait a minute!" and flipping madly through the RB to HoB, then shaking your head sadly... 76. ***MCLEOD: 238 HS in oW3 fires at the B'boys, 2 FP +0, DR = 2 (1,1) ... jeeeeeeeeeez ... Cowers, and is marked with Final Fire counter, to 1 FP = 1MC. 8-0 MC DR = 6 (5,1) = NE , 747 MC DR = 7 (6,1) = NE, no RFP. > ... to T3 (3MF)... 77. ***MCLEOD: George, after reading the rule, your guys must take the shortest rout in MF during their charge, check A15.431 about halfway down... %%%BATES: Deleting the rest of your message here so we can fix this, because you're half wrong and I'm half wrong. Your mistake is that you're forgetting that the berserk unit first chooses it's target to charge, that being the closest KEU in hexes, not MF (A15.43, first two lines). Therefore T2 is a legitimate choice for me. My error is that I cannot choose to run him through the grain, but have to send him to T2 on the shortest route in MF (your citation of A15.431), which is T4 (1MF), T3 (2.5MF), then T2 (4MF). You and I don't have any choice in the matter. Let's do this one more time. Take all the shots you want on this charge path. This is going to be ugly no matter what happens. - G From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Fri Apr 29 18:57:43 2005 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Fri Apr 29 17:57:35 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54d27$ffcf82e0$6401a8c0@NewDell> > A8.31 says: "All usable MG/IFE possessed by that unit ... > must be fired" It is interesting to note that prior to the 97 annual there was official q&a that was not had some strange interpretations of what A8.3 and 9.21 were saying. I do not remember what the rescinded q&a effect was now. In 97 MMP reversed the q&a with this one: A8.3 & A9.21 If a MG's restricted CA prevents it from participating in its squad's SFF attack, must its use be forfeited as per A8.3? A. Yes. (This supersedes the prior answer to this question in the '95w and '96 Annuals.) [An97; Mw] From rk0123msp at mindspring.com Fri Apr 29 19:57:23 2005 From: rk0123msp at mindspring.com (Richard Kindel) Date: Fri Apr 29 19:46:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Etiquette Message-ID: <002001c54d30$56c5cde0$348656d1@oemcomputer> First time trying out the ASLML here. I don't understand why the listers believe the illegaly placed Gun needs to be eliminated. There is no rule governing the elimination of weapons setup in Locations, other than unpossessed weapons in water obstacles (marsh, swamp, fordable river Locations, wading...). I would argue that the Gun is *not* eliminated, and in fact, the applicable rule that covers this situation should be observerd. The applicable rule being A.2 which says (in part) "... the game cannot be backed up to correct the error , *even if such an error is in violation of a rule*." I say that the error *cannot* be corrected *even if such an error is in violation of the rule.* Now, obviously, to me anyway, the crew would remain HIP (unless performing some concealment loss activity), since the unit was HIP at the point of setup *and the error cannot be corrected.* The only gray area that I see is whether or not the Gun can shoot from its (illegally positioned) Location, which I would argue cannot (for similar reasoning that non aa type weapons cannot shoot at a target on a cliff at < elevation, or motor fire from buildings...). I would say that in order for the Gun-player to get some play from his ART piece he would have to manhandle the gun from the building Location to a legally accessible ADJACENT Location, obvioulsy it's SOL if placed in an interior building hex (but I would guess that's not the case). Anyway, that's my two cents worth based on the rules' wording covering this situation. From rk0123msp at mindspring.com Fri Apr 29 19:58:10 2005 From: rk0123msp at mindspring.com (Richard Kindel) Date: Fri Apr 29 19:47:47 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Broadway to Prokhorovka Message-ID: <002301c54d30$72c354e0$348656d1@oemcomputer> I'm curious as to what the rationale was behind the German's getting +1 cgvp (I think it was) for prisoners, and nothing for KIAing Russian tanks. Played this cg a year or so ago, and my opponent specifically tied his attacks into capture attempts (i.e. tried to flank with tanks, and run Adjacent to infantry defenders with the intent of breaking & capturing for ftr) more than attempting to win scenario VCs. I thought this tactic was very 'gamey' but certainly the cg ssr's allowed that option on the part of the German player, so it's certainly a good option. IMO though, it would've been better to have both the Germans & Russians get the same # of cgvp's for destroying AFVs/vehicles instead of one side getting vehicle points and the other side prisoner points, JMO though. From rk0123msp at mindspring.com Fri Apr 29 19:58:45 2005 From: rk0123msp at mindspring.com (Richard Kindel) Date: Fri Apr 29 19:48:00 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: FFMO in orchard hex Message-ID: <002601c54d30$87521680$348656d1@oemcomputer> Hello Robert, trying out the ASLML here so hopefully my messages will appear in the next ASLML batch. To answer this question, I'd first look in the index under FFMO where it says (in part) "... a -1 DRM vs moving Infantry in *Open Ground*..." Next I'd go the index under Open Ground it says (again in part) "...[for FFMO: any hex in which no positive TEM or LOS hindrance *applies*: A4.6]. In the case of an orchard hex a LOS hindrance *applies* (though not necessarily to the shot vs you .. in the case of no orchard, or other, hindrance being between firer & fired-upon .. this negates Open Ground since a hindrance *applies*). Note also the first sentence of the A10.531 Example: "A Grain, Brush, or Orchard hex is not Open Ground because the -1 FFMO DRM does not apply." From rk0123msp at mindspring.com Fri Apr 29 19:59:29 2005 From: rk0123msp at mindspring.com (Richard Kindel) Date: Fri Apr 29 19:48:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: AP HE-equivalency Message-ID: <002901c54d30$a10d4ea0$348656d1@oemcomputer> Hello Robert, this came up in a game of ASL16 No Better Spot to Die that I played a year or so ago. The U.S has a 57L ATG and my opponent certainly got his money's worth wailing on me with 57L AP rounds after his HE7 (I think it was) ran out. It's perfectly legal, C8.31 says (in part), "...AP is also given HE equivalecy for *normal AP use* as well as collateral attacks. Note that AP is a totally seperate thing from HEAT and is not limited by it's target options (as indicated by separating HEAT from AP by two sentences, starting one with HEAT and the other HE). One can certainly shoot AP at infantry in the open, as my wily opponent did, and a 3ROF 57L Gun shooting 2 even hits (57L HE equivalency = 2) quickly becomes deadly & scary, not to mention the tacking on of ITT acquisition. Firing AP equivalency is certainly *normal AP use*, I see no reasons contrary to this, and as AP is not HEAT it's also not subject to HEAT' targetting limitations. From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 29 19:56:00 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 29 19:56:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) Bugler, sound the charge! References: <000701c54d1c$797941a0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <000601c54d30$257068e0$c127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; > Problems getting the men on their feet and out the door. Go to the > bottom in "%%%." > ***MCLEOD: You know, I really should read the Berserk charge rules > before I > advance ... ;) > %%%BATES: I knew it! I can just see you reading this, going "Wait a > minute!" and flipping madly through the RB to HoB, then shaking your > head sadly... ***MCLEOD: Pretty much. I'm starting to pay closer attention to what is happening, not that I will catch everything from here in. This is turning into a train wreck of a scenario game play wise. Missed snipers, mistaken leaders, forgotten DRM, SW left in the kit box, units with x-ray vision ... I could go on but I'm becoming embarassed. :) At least I can plea "PBEM newbie-itis". ;) However, I can say in all honesty that is is great fun. Having a little ASL fix every day or so is a nice tonic. > 76. ***MCLEOD: 238 HS in oW3 fires at the B'boys, 2 FP +0, DR = 2 (1,1) > ... > jeeeeeeeeeez ... Cowers, and is marked with Final Fire counter, to 1 FP > = > 1MC. 8-0 MC DR = 6 (5,1) = NE , 747 MC DR = 7 (6,1) = NE, no RFP. > >> ... to T3 (3MF)... > > > 77. ***MCLEOD: George, after reading the rule, your guys must take the > shortest rout in MF during their charge, check A15.431 about halfway > down... > > %%%BATES: Deleting the rest of your message here so we can fix this, > because you're half wrong and I'm half wrong. Your mistake is that > you're forgetting that the berserk unit first chooses it's target to > charge, that being the closest KEU in hexes, not MF (A15.43, first two > lines). ***MCLEOD: Got it. > Therefore T2 is a legitimate choice for me. My error is that I > cannot choose to run him through the grain, but have to send him to T2 > on the shortest route in MF (your citation of A15.431), which is T4 > (1MF), T3 (2.5MF), then T2 (4MF). You and I don't have any choice in > the matter. Let's do this one more time. Take all the shots you want > on this charge path. This is going to be ugly no matter what happens. ***MCLEOD: Fair enough George, I see what you mean. 9-1 (directing fire), 548 w/dm MMG in S8 fires at the Berserkers in T4 with 8 FP w/-3 DRM. DR = 4 (1,3) -3 = FDR 1 = 2KIA, 8-0 and 747 are eliminated, 548 will leave 2 RFP in T4, dm/MMG retains ROF, 548 marked 1st Fire. Yuck .. that'll leave a stain ... Random SW destruction dr for Radio = 6, remains in T4, RSWD dr for LMG = 2 LMG eliminated. Due to the change in play, the German units in T2, W2 and W3 are not marked as fired, correct? =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Apr 29 20:02:58 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Apr 29 20:03:06 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Etiquette References: <002001c54d30$56c5cde0$348656d1@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <001901c54d31$1e3b0d90$c127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Richard writes, > First time trying out the ASLML here. I don't understand why the listers > believe the illegaly placed Gun needs to be eliminated. There is no rule > governing the elimination of weapons setup in Locations, other than > unpossessed weapons in water obstacles (marsh, swamp, fordable river > Locations, wading...). I would argue that the Gun is *not* eliminated, > and > in fact, the applicable rule that covers this situation should be > observerd. > The applicable rule being A.2 which says (in part) "... the game cannot > be > backed up to correct the error , *even if such an error is in violation of > a > rule*." I say that the error *cannot* be corrected *even if such an error > is in violation of the rule.* Now, obviously, to me anyway, the crew > would > remain HIP (unless performing some concealment loss activity), since the > unit was HIP at the point of setup *and the error cannot be corrected.* > The > only gray area that I see is whether or not the Gun can shoot from its > (illegally positioned) Location, which I would argue cannot (for similar > reasoning that non aa type weapons cannot shoot at a target on a cliff at > < > elevation, or motor fire from buildings...). I would say that in order > for > the Gun-player to get some play from his ART piece he would have to > manhandle the gun from the building Location to a legally accessible > ADJACENT Location, obvioulsy it's SOL if placed in an interior building > hex > (but I would guess that's not the case). Anyway, that's my two cents > worth > based on the rules' wording covering this situation. Richard, as you've already noticed, there are many POV's on this matter. Personally, I do not like the idea of the offending player putting the other guy on the spot by saying, "well, what do you want me to do with my illegally setup Gun?" That is not a fair question. In our tournaments, we have a tournament rule that says any illegally setup units are eliminated ... period end of story. In a tournament, if you illegally setup a unit, you've just failed a game skill test and should suffer accordingly. If it costs you the game, so be it. I also believe that if the illegal setup becomes known by the offending player during play, he need not tell his opponent that fact. The loss of the weapon is bad enough, retaining the Fog-of-War of your opponent still thinking your Gun out there is minor consolation and makes up a tiny bit for the error. JMHO on the matter. =Jim= From daveolie at eastlink.ca Fri Apr 29 20:50:31 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Fri Apr 29 20:52:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Etiquette References: <002001c54d30$56c5cde0$348656d1@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <00e201c54d37$d9cc1da0$a64d8918@klis.com> Richard wrote: > First time trying out the ASLML here. Welcome to the List, Richard. My, you've been productive for your first day. :-) > I don't understand why the listers > believe the illegaly placed Gun needs to be eliminated. There is no rule > governing the elimination of weapons setup in Locations, other than > unpossessed weapons in water obstacles (marsh, swamp, fordable river > Locations, wading...). It so happens that I've recently written an article on this very subject. Let's take B23.423 as an example. "No weapon depicted on a 5/8" counter may occupy an upper level of a building" [EXC: Mortars and Fortified Building Locations]. The usual understanding of this, and similar, rules, is that if such a weapon ever does occupy such a Location, usually by being set up there illegally, it effectively "disappears" because it's in violation of the rules. Anything that is in violation of the rules cannot happen. Therefore, in this example, the 5/8" counter can no longer exist. It's effectively gone over the event horizon of a black hole. > I would argue that the Gun is *not* eliminated, and > in fact, the applicable rule that covers this situation should be observerd. > The applicable rule being A.2 which says (in part) "... the game cannot be > backed up to correct the error , *even if such an error is in violation of a > rule*." I say that the error *cannot* be corrected *even if such an error > is in violation of the rule.* However, A.2 as written only covers errors that occur *during play*. It's silent on those errors that occur *prior to play*. This is a point that I bring up in my article. > Now, obviously, to me anyway, the crew would > remain HIP (unless performing some concealment loss activity), since the > unit was HIP at the point of setup *and the error cannot be corrected.* The > only gray area that I see is whether or not the Gun can shoot from its > (illegally positioned) Location, which I would argue cannot (for similar > reasoning that non aa type weapons cannot shoot at a target on a cliff at < > elevation, or motor fire from buildings...). I would say that in order for > the Gun-player to get some play from his ART piece he would have to > manhandle the gun from the building Location to a legally accessible > ADJACENT Location, obvioulsy it's SOL if placed in an interior building hex > (but I would guess that's not the case). Anyway, that's my two cents worth > based on the rules' wording covering this situation. If you opponent was agreeable, this would be an alternate way of resolving such a situation. However, I'd make a point of agreeing to this prior to play, since that's not the usual way it's done. You're correct that the rules are not entirely clear that an illegal setup = elimination in some cases. However, that is the convention that has been followed during the past 20 years by most players. One of the reasons I wrote my article was to try to resolve some of these issues. Perhaps it may see publication in a future issue of the Journal. David "I live my life by A.2" Olie From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Apr 29 22:22:27 2005 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Apr 29 22:22:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Etiquette In-Reply-To: <002001c54d30$56c5cde0$348656d1@oemcomputer> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Richard > Kindel > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 9:57 PM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] RE: Etiquette > > The applicable rule being A.2 which says (in part) "... the game > cannot be > backed up to correct the error , *even if such an error is in > violation of a > rule*." I say that the error *cannot* be corrected *even if such an error > is in violation of the rule.* The problem with applying A.2 is that the other guy (i.e., the opponent) has no chance to call the set-up error due to the HIP. Also, one must be careful how one applies A.2. For example, using your reasoning, one could literally set-up HIP units anywhere on the board (including one's opponents set-up area) and simply site A.2 when revealing them. IOW, applying A.2 to HIP set-up creates far to much opportunity for abuse/mis-use. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 30 01:20:21 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 30 01:19:09 2005 Subject: [Aslml] FW: A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh2 Message-ID: <000001c54d5d$76a41810$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Oops, left out the little people again. - G -----Original Message----- From: George Bates [mailto:geb3@inter.net] Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 4:58 PM To: 'mcleods' Subject: A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh2 A moment of silence, then on with the business at hand in "&&&." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 11:56 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) Bugler, sound the charge! Listerz; > Problems getting the men on their feet and out the door. Go to the > bottom in "%%%." > ***MCLEOD: You know, I really should read the Berserk charge rules > before I advance ... ;) > %%%BATES: I knew it! I can just see you reading this, going "Wait a > minute!" and flipping madly through the RB to HoB, then shaking your > head sadly... ***MCLEOD: Pretty much. I'm starting to pay closer attention to what is happening, not that I will catch everything from here in. This is turning into a train wreck of a scenario game play wise. Missed snipers, mistaken leaders, forgotten DRM, SW left in the kit box, units with x-ray vision ... I could go on but I'm becoming embarassed. :) At least I can plea "PBEM newbie-itis". ;) &&&BATES: I think David said this earlier, but a lot of these things don't get a chance to happen FtF because both pairs of eyes are on the board (usually no pretty girls around) at the same time and people can immediately question things they don't understand. Let it ride. However, I can say in all honesty that is is great fun. Having a little ASL fix every day or so is a nice tonic. &&&BATES: Roger that. I look forward to my daily doses from you and Olie. Besides, you should be having fun, you louse. You're passing all your MCs and that lucky HoB has just remarkably improved your chances of winning. Enjoy it while you can. Paybacks are a bitch. > 76. ***MCLEOD: 238 HS in oW3 fires at the B'boys, 2 FP +0, DR = 2 > (1,1) ... jeeeeeeeeeez ... Cowers, and is marked with Final Fire > counter, to 1 FP = > 1MC. 8-0 MC DR = 6 (5,1) = NE , 747 MC DR = 7 (6,1) = NE, no RFP. > >> ... to T3 (3MF)... > > > 77. ***MCLEOD: George, after reading the rule, your guys must take > the shortest rout in MF during their charge, check A15.431 about > halfway down... > > %%%BATES: Deleting the rest of your message here so we can fix this, > because you're half wrong and I'm half wrong. Your mistake is that > you're forgetting that the berserk unit first chooses it's target to > charge, that being the closest KEU in hexes, not MF (A15.43, first two > lines). ***MCLEOD: Got it. > Therefore T2 is a legitimate choice for me. My error is that I cannot > choose to run him through the grain, but have to send him to T2 on the > shortest route in MF (your citation of A15.431), which is T4 (1MF), T3 > (2.5MF), then T2 (4MF). You and I don't have any choice in the > matter. Let's do this one more time. Take all the shots you want on > this charge path. This is going to be ugly no matter what happens. ***MCLEOD: Fair enough George, I see what you mean. 9-1 (directing fire), 548 w/dm MMG in S8 fires at the Berserkers in T4 with 8 FP w/-3 DRM. DR = 4 (1,3) -3 = FDR 1 = 2KIA, 8-0 and 747 are eliminated, 548 will leave 2 RFP in T4, dm/MMG retains ROF, 548 marked 1st Fire. Yuck .. that'll leave a stain ... Random SW destruction dr for Radio = 6, remains in T4, RSWD dr for LMG = 2 LMG eliminated. Due to the change in play, the German units in T2, W2 and W3 are not marked as fired, correct? =Jim= &&&BATES: This aggression will not stand, man! Really thought they stood a chance of surviving if they could get past that first 8 down 3 shot. Well, thems the breaks. Lessee, I think you'll like this one. 337J in J7 drops "?" and double-times in bypass of I8 on the J8 hexside (1MF)... ... to I9 (2MF)... ... to J9 (3MF)... ... to K10 (4MF)... ... to L9 (6MF). Let's see if keeping you at arms length allowed him to survive and infiltrate. Brave 337P in O2 assault moves to O3 and claims WA over both hexsides there. You want your guys in N1 to grab the hedge there now? Just in case there was any doubt, the ?+1 in M7 has been holding WA over the L7 & M8 hexsides. Let's see what you make of these before we give you more. - G From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Apr 30 06:03:44 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Apr 30 06:03:55 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A9.223? What about A9.11? In-Reply-To: <000001c54d27$ffcf82e0$6401a8c0@NewDell> Message-ID: Hi, Brian W wrote > > A8.31 says: "All usable MG/IFE possessed by that unit ... > > must be fired" > > It is interesting to note that prior to the 97 annual there was official > q&a that was not had some strange interpretations of what A8.3 and 9.21 > were saying. If I'm not too mistaken ,then the strange 95w Annual Q&A is from the relatively short time when Gary Fortenberry controlled the Q&A. We may (have reason to) complain about some of the current Perry sez., but it seemed that Gary issued more than one *official* Q&A that was very strange - and that was later fixed by MMP. >I do not remember what the rescinded q&a effect was now. In > 97 MMP reversed the q&a with this one: > > A8.3 & A9.21 If a MG's restricted CA prevents it from participating in > its squad's SFF attack, must its use be forfeited as per A8.3? > A. Yes. (This supersedes the prior answer to this question in the '95w > and '96 Annuals.) [An97; Mw] Good. That's how I read the current rules - even without this Q&A. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 07:02:17 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 07:02:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] FW: A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh2 References: <000001c54d5d$76a41810$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <001401c54d8d$392990c0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > Oops, left out the little people again. ***MCLEOD: Can't do that George, the audience is warming up to the slaughter. We two cardboard gladiators are providing the masses with a bloody spectacle worthy of Rome and the Colosium. :) > A moment of silence, then on with the business at hand in "&&&." ... taps please ... > ***MCLEOD: Pretty much. I'm starting to pay closer attention to what > is > happening, not that I will catch everything from here in. This is > turning > into a train wreck of a scenario game play wise. Missed snipers, > mistaken > leaders, forgotten DRM, SW left in the kit box, units with x-ray vision > ... > I could go on but I'm becoming embarassed. :) > > At least I can plea "PBEM newbie-itis". ;) > &&&BATES: I think David said this earlier, but a lot of these things > don't get a chance to happen FtF because both pairs of eyes are on the > board (usually no pretty girls around) at the same time and people can > immediately question things they don't understand. Let it ride. ***MCLEOD: True enough. And again, I find the lapses between plays causes major loss of focus on what is going on. A new skill to learn. > However, I can say in all honesty that is is great fun. Having a little > ASL > fix every day or so is a nice tonic. > &&&BATES: Roger that. I look forward to my daily doses from you and > Olie. Besides, you should be having fun, you louse. You're passing all > your MCs and that lucky HoB has just remarkably improved your chances of > winning. Enjoy it while you can. Paybacks are a bitch. ***MCLEOD: This is the thing. The ax swings both ways. I much prefer the nice dice later on than early. Oh, I can see it coming comrade. :) >From a "who's in front?" POV, I had you nicely in the lead. Your 9-2 is well situated and the all round defence position looks sound. However, the recent events have leveled the field a bit. That Entrenchment move was fairly gutsy. I can see the reasoning for it but having 9-2 and Co. stuck in their present hex for a player turn may not be a good thing. We will see how it plays out. > &&&BATES: This aggression will not stand, man! Really thought they > stood a chance of surviving if they could get past that first 8 down 3 > shot. Well, thems the breaks. > Lessee, I think you'll like this one. 337J in J7 drops "?" and > double-times in bypass of I8 on the J8 hexside (1MF)... > ... to I9 (2MF)... > ... to J9 (3MF)... > ... to K10 (4MF)... > ... to L9 (6MF). Let's see if keeping you at arms length allowed him > to survive and infiltrate. ***MCLEOD: Keeners eh? A little back field action is always fun. > Brave 337P in O2 assault moves to O3 and claims WA over both hexsides > there. You want your guys in N1 to grab the hedge there now? Just in > case there was any doubt, the ?+1 in M7 has been holding WA over the L7 > & M8 hexsides. ***MCLEOD: We have taken up position behind the Bocage in N1 gruppe fuhrer! There is no doubt regarding the M& guys, Mandatory WA would take care of that. > Let's see what you make of these before we give you more. ***MCLEOD: I make of it well. Your infiltration team will create a nice sub-action which will lead to a trgic end for someone. Bring it on George! The crowd screams out for more! =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 30 08:58:58 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 30 08:57:30 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <001401c54d8d$392990c0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000001c54d9d$866705b0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> We'll see how Jim's dice hold up after this series in "###." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 11:02 PM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] FW: A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh2 Listerz, > Oops, left out the little people again. ***MCLEOD: Can't do that George, the audience is warming up to the slaughter. We two cardboard gladiators are providing the masses with a bloody spectacle worthy of Rome and the Colosium. :) ###BATES: Colosium? That condition's treatable now, Jim, no need for you to suffer in silence any longer. ;-) > A moment of silence, then on with the business at hand in "&&&." ... taps please ... > ***MCLEOD: Pretty much. I'm starting to pay closer attention to what > is happening, not that I will catch everything from here in. This is > turning > into a train wreck of a scenario game play wise. Missed snipers, > mistaken > leaders, forgotten DRM, SW left in the kit box, units with x-ray vision > ... > I could go on but I'm becoming embarassed. :) > > At least I can plea "PBEM newbie-itis". ;) > &&&BATES: I think David said this earlier, but a lot of these things > don't get a chance to happen FtF because both pairs of eyes are on the > board (usually no pretty girls around) at the same time and people can > immediately question things they don't understand. Let it ride. ***MCLEOD: True enough. And again, I find the lapses between plays causes major loss of focus on what is going on. A new skill to learn. ###BATES: Strange, I have no trouble remembering that I'm supposed to hide in the buildings and kill yer guys... > However, I can say in all honesty that is is great fun. Having a > little ASL fix every day or so is a nice tonic. > &&&BATES: Roger that. I look forward to my daily doses from you and > Olie. Besides, you should be having fun, you louse. You're passing > all your MCs and that lucky HoB has just remarkably improved your > chances of winning. Enjoy it while you can. Paybacks are a bitch. ***MCLEOD: This is the thing. The ax swings both ways. I much prefer the nice dice later on than early. Oh, I can see it coming comrade. :) >From a "who's in front?" POV, I had you nicely in the lead. Your 9-2 is well situated and the all round defence position looks sound. However, the recent events have leveled the field a bit. That Entrenchment move was fairly gutsy. I can see the reasoning for it but having 9-2 and Co. stuck in their present hex for a player turn may not be a good thing. We will see how it plays out. ###BATES: I should've happened by T3, but your shot that broke the 8-1 & 3 squads forced a change of schedule. > &&&BATES: This aggression will not stand, man! Really thought they > stood a chance of surviving if they could get past that first 8 down 3 > shot. Well, thems the breaks. > Lessee, I think you'll like this one. 337J in J7 drops "?" and > double-times in bypass of I8 on the J8 hexside (1MF)... > ... to I9 (2MF)... > ... to J9 (3MF)... > ... to K10 (4MF)... > ... to L9 (6MF). Let's see if keeping you at arms length allowed him > to survive and infiltrate. ***MCLEOD: Keeners eh? A little back field action is always fun. > Brave 337P in O2 assault moves to O3 and claims WA over both hexsides > there. You want your guys in N1 to grab the hedge there now? Just in > case there was any doubt, the ?+1 in M7 has been holding WA over the > L7 & M8 hexsides. ***MCLEOD: We have taken up position behind the Bocage in N1 gruppe fuhrer! There is no doubt regarding the M& guys, Mandatory WA would take care of that. > Let's see what you make of these before we give you more. ***MCLEOD: I make of it well. Your infiltration team will create a nice sub-action which will lead to a trgic end for someone. Bring it on George! The crowd screams out for more! =Jim= ###BATES: The recently returned to their senses 747YY & 7-0 in P4 to Q4 (2MF)... ... to R4 (3MF)... ... to S4 (5MF)... ... squad attempts Ger MMG recovery: 6; where _is_ that goddam thing (6MF)? 7-0 attempts Ger MMG recovery: 1; recovered (6MF). Formerly CX 747O in S4 to R5 (1MF)... ... to R6 (3MF). It's bedtime, so that's enough for now. We'll see what you shot at in the morning. - G ... and sits tight. From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 09:50:17 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 09:52:12 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 References: <000001c54d9d$866705b0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > We'll see how Jim's dice hold up after this series in "###." ***MCLEOD: Creaking under the strain, something has to give soon. > ***MCLEOD: Can't do that George, the audience is warming up to the > slaughter. We two cardboard gladiators are providing the masses with a > bloody spectacle worthy of Rome and the Colosium. :) > ###BATES: Colosium? That condition's treatable now, Jim, no need for > you to suffer in silence any longer. ;-) ***MCLEOD: Bloody hell, should have hit spellcheck. How about "coliseum"? > ###BATES: The recently returned to their senses 747YY & 7-0 in P4 to Q4 > (2MF)... 79. (I missed 78.) ***MCLEOD: I see where they are off to. My 548 w/LMG and newly gained WA in N1 will fire at your guys in Q4 with 8 FP with a net +2 DRM (+1 Hindrance, + 2 Building TEM and -1 FFNAM). DR = 5 (3,2) = FDR 7. 7-0 MC DR = 7 (4,3)= FDR 8, Breaks and DM; 747 MC DR = 10 (4,6) = FDR 11, Breaks and DM. [delete reminder of move] > Formerly CX 747O in S4 to R5 (1MF)... 80. ***MCLEOD: George, do you mean S4 to S5? If no, please disregard the following. If yes, read on ... ... I will take a poke at them with the 8-1, 2 x 548 and LMG in W2 with 8 FP +1 (+3 for LOS hindrances, -1 Leader DRM and -1 FFNAM), DR = 6 (4,2) = FDR 7 = 1MC. 747 MC DR = 3 (2,1) = FDR 4 = Pass. No RFP, my guys are 1st Fired. > ... to R6 (3MF). ***MCLEOD: Can I assume S6? > It's bedtime, so that's enough for now. We'll see what you shot at in > the morning. ***MCLEOD: See you tomorrow George. =Jim= From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Sat Apr 30 14:23:11 2005 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Sat Apr 30 14:23:16 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule In-Reply-To: <4271A748.2080106@wideopenwest.com> References: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com> <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> <2b8228f0050428200527be0ef2@mail.gmail.com> <4271A748.2080106@wideopenwest.com> Message-ID: <2b8228f005043014237ee3754f@mail.gmail.com> So, in other words, not ASL stuff. On 4/28/05, Kenn wrote: > M Rodgers wrote: > > >Anyone, > > > >What are: > > > >Bloody Ridge - June 2005 30th on Origins > > > > > > TCS Game, PTO > > >Fire in the sky - June 2005 30th on Origins > > > > > First in their International Line. A Japanese Reprint > > >Target Arnhem Freebee - June 2005 30th on Origins > > > > > > Another Japanese reprint, but free. > > > Kenn > -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 30 17:55:31 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 30 17:55:43 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Full ANZACon 2005 results (long) Message-ID: A total of 13 players gathered over the ANZAC Day long weekend here in Melbourne, in unseasonably dry and warm weather, to fight for the traditional ANZACon trophy -- this year a terrific diorama featuring a Pz38(t) constructed by Dave Bardi. Other prizes were also on offer, donated by the sponsors MMP, Military Simulations and Games 4 Gamers. This year was something of an experiment. I wanted to offer the players scenarios they had never seen before, but I knew I was in no position to design and playtest any scenarios myself (let alone 5 of them), so I appealed to the international ASL community for designs that had been well-tested but not published. I got several positive responses and ended up with more than I needed (although, curiously, none of them were PTO), so then it became a matter of choosing for the greatest interest and variety. Of course the potential flaw in this process is that one man's "balanced" scenario is another man's hairy woofer ... but I consider myself an experienced player and casting my eye over the offerings available they all looked OK to me. Which just goes to show, I suppose .... Round 1: "Island-Hopping on Lake Ladoga" by Eric Henyey. A Finnish amphibious invasion of a Russian-held island in 1941, supported by gunboats! This looked too cool for words, with the high firepower & morale of the Finns countered by their vulnerability while in the water. Many of the players agreed, with most players preferring to take the Finns. The 4TC required to set-up the map (using unusual placement of the Oc overlays) passed, and after a quick refresher course on boat rules, they were off! And started quickly sinking. It turns out that boats really are *incredibly* vulnerable in the water, the Finnish gunboats were only able to lay a very limited amount of suppressing FP, and the two high-ROF Russian guns were simply murder. Those few Finns able to reach land found themselves facing a very steep CVP mountain to climb in a very short space of time. Basically a disaster, in six games there were no Finnish wins. There's a good idea here, but it needs some work yet (particularly revised VC) to turn it into a worthwhile game. Round 2: "Prelude To Disaster" by Jim McLeod. It's the day after D-Day and the Canadians are about to discover that the Germans aren't going to give ground easily. The Canadians make a powerful assault force against mostly indifferent opposition, but two PaK 40 AT Guns and convoluted VC make it a tough job. Several of the players spotted the flaw in this design: the combination of somewhat-weird VC and HIP guns (which factored into the VC) made this scenario a "bug-hunt", with the Canadians having only a short space of time available to essentially sweep the board of opposition. There were four German victories and a strong perception that the Germans were advantaged. Subsequent work with the designer has led to a revision of the design (including more reasonable VC) that's more likely to be a better game, but that's being wise after the fact; not much comfort to the players on the day. Still, balance problems aside, the game played well enough and this will, I think, one day make a popular tournament-sized scenario. Round 3: "To Have And To Hold" by Mattias R?nnblom. How many scenarios feature an assault to capture a bridge? Or an assault to *re*-capture one? Well, this scenario features both -- an American recon patrol has to quickly capture a very lightly-defended bridge and then hold it in the face of a determined German effort to recapture it. This scenario was the undoubted pick of the weekend, with no apparent flaws in balance and great fun for both sides. The Americans have a lot of FP but not many warm bodies, while the Germans are largely the reverse. Interesting VC (if the Americans don't have control of both hexes of the bridge at the end of *every* player turn, they lose) made the game tense for the duration -- which was its sole flaw; the game took a *lot* longer to finish than it looked like it would. (Except for one game, where the American player lost sight of the VC and forgot he was there to take the bridge -- thus losing at the end of the first player turn!) This overlong play was going to have unfortunate consequences for the remainder of the weekend. There were five American victories, but there was no perception that this was due to imbalance; rather, it just happened that the Americans won five times. The results could easily have gone the other way. Look for this one when it makes it public appearance. Round 4: "Grasping For The Wind" by Robert Hammond. One of many scenarios that Robert has been slaving away over for the last few years, this is part of his "Russian Civil War" pack, this one being set in Siberia in 1919. Robert has devised a number of rules to retrofit ASL into this period and by and large they seem to work well. This scenario features a strong American assault onto a village held by Bolshevik Partisans. Although it features a large number of units on each side, the numerous SSRs are pretty easily assimilated and the actual play was very straight-forward. Unfortunately the spectre of the previous scenario's long playing time was hanging over this one making it difficult for people to finish the game in the time allotted to it. Instead of just truncating this one game I allowed play to continue on the next day ... but still faced severe time problems even then. My personal opinion was that players were taking longer over this scenario than they needed to, but the fact remains that my organisational skills failed me. Regardless, those who did play this scenario to completion were pretty happy with it. There were some OB-related issues (each side gets to make several choices in their setup, and not all the choices were of equal value) but the actual play was fine. The Americans have tremendous FP but have to be very careful of their casualties. There were four American victories, and I think Robert's scenario pack, if and when it ever gets published, will be popular with those looking for ASL with a "twist". Round 5: "Loser Takes All" by Richard Weiley. This was the second of two scenarios that Richard had sent me. I was going to go with the first one due to its ANZAC theme but MMP spoiled everything by publishing it! ("On To Florence") So I brought out this one instead, which had previously been seen at a SAGA tournament a few years back and had been quite popular. Only one of the players at this tournament had also been at that one and thus the scenario just qualified as being "*mostly* unknown". It's Hungary in 1945 and the SS are on the attack against a strongly-defended Russian village. The Germans are attacking from two sides with a very powerful force but only have a short space of time available to achieve their objective of flushing the Russians out of the village. The only real problem here was time, players just really didn't have the time available to give play of this scenario justice. With many of the final results being adjudicated it was definitely an unsatisfactory conclusion to the weekend. Be that as it may, no-one had any complaints with the scenario itself. There were three German victories to two Russian ones; the sixth game was not actually played due to board-failure (an insufficient number of local players had brought their gear to the tournament), so those two players (neither of whom were in the running for the top three places) played an alternate scenario that they did have boards for, in this case "Silesian Interlude" which at least kept the "1945 East Front" theme going. The Russians won that scenario, which according to ROAR is not that surprising; give the Germans the balance is my advice. And so the weekend came to an end. Here are the final placement results: 1: Steve Banham (49) 2: Darryl Lundy (47) 3: Dave Bardi (46) 4: Jamie Westlake (38) 5: Robert Morieson (33) 5: Murray McCloskey (33) 7: Neil Andrews (27) 8: Joe Moro (24) 9: Gordon Stokes (23) 10: Andrew Nugteren/ Brent Sword* (22) 11: David Wallace (16) 12: Neil Macpherson (3) * Andrew played on Saturday and Monday, Brent played on Sunday. Winner of "snake-eyes" award, for most number of 2s rolled over the course of the weekend: Neil Andrews, with 15. Winner of "boxcars" award, for most number of 12s rolled over the course of the weekend: Andrew/Brent, with 22. Thanks once again to the sponsors, to all the players who attended, and apologies once again for my poor organisation skills. I'll try harder next time ... although frankly I'd rather be playing than organising any way. See you next year! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ziggy had Garfield neutered? Now that's funny!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From spotlink at maine.rr.com Sat Apr 30 18:22:05 2005 From: spotlink at maine.rr.com (Ernie Bartis) Date: Sat Apr 30 18:21:37 2005 Subject: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule References: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com> <000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650> <2b8228f0050428200527be0ef2@mail.gmail.com> <4271A748.2080106@wideopenwest.com> <2b8228f005043014237ee3754f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002b01c54dec$301e4d40$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> LOL, Just tell us if its ASL stuff or not. Don't list the other junk especially when it sounds like WW2 ASL stuff. K Thx Bye ----- Original Message ----- From: "M Rodgers" To: "Kenn" Cc: Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 5:23 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP gives release schedule So, in other words, not ASL stuff. On 4/28/05, Kenn wrote: > M Rodgers wrote: > > >Anyone, > > > >What are: > > > >Bloody Ridge - June 2005 30th on Origins > > > > > > TCS Game, PTO > > >Fire in the sky - June 2005 30th on Origins > > > > > First in their International Line. A Japanese Reprint > > >Target Arnhem Freebee - June 2005 30th on Origins > > > > > > Another Japanese reprint, but free. > > > Kenn > -- Michael Rodgers Montreal _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 30 19:23:54 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 30 19:23:58 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000001c54d9d$866705b0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:50:17 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >***MCLEOD: Bloody hell, should have hit spellcheck. How about "coliseum"? Getting closer . Just one little "s" short now .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ziggy had Garfield neutered? Now that's funny!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Apr 30 19:29:01 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Apr 30 19:29:03 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 In-Reply-To: <003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <000001c54d9d$866705b0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> <003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: I wrote: >>***MCLEOD: Bloody hell, should have hit spellcheck. How about "coliseum"? >Getting closer . Just one little "s" short now .... Bloody hell, hoist by my own petard. "Coliseum" is perfectly acceptable Queen's English spelling. The Americans, however, apparently spell it "colosseum". I shall never live the shame down. (Although, given the Latin derivation, the American spelling actually makes more sense -- for once!) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ziggy had Garfield neutered? Now that's funny!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 19:31:40 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 19:31:51 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 References: <000001c54d9d$866705b0$3200170a@DF6TP71X><003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001801c54df5$e9924250$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, I wrote, >***MCLEOD: Bloody hell, should have hit spellcheck. How about "coliseum"? Bruce replied, Getting closer . Just one little "s" short now .... *** Ahem, Mr. Probst, my copy of the OED carries both the "s" and the "SS" spelling of colis(s)eum. :) =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 30 19:52:51 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 30 19:51:23 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh4 In-Reply-To: <003d01c54da4$f0e211d0$eb27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000201c54df8$df28d330$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Guess we found the answer. I am not amused in "$$$." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 1:50 AM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 Listerz, > We'll see how Jim's dice hold up after this series in "###." ***MCLEOD: Creaking under the strain, something has to give soon. > ***MCLEOD: Can't do that George, the audience is warming up to the > slaughter. We two cardboard gladiators are providing the masses with > a bloody spectacle worthy of Rome and the Colosium. :) > ###BATES: Colosium? That condition's treatable now, Jim, no need for > you to suffer in silence any longer. ;-) ***MCLEOD: Bloody hell, should have hit spellcheck. How about "coliseum"? $$$BATES: That would be in New Jersey. The original is Colosseum (after "colossus"). I have a fweind in Wome, you know... > ###BATES: The recently returned to their senses 747YY & 7-0 in P4 to > Q4 (2MF)... 79. (I missed 78.) ***MCLEOD: I see where they are off to. My 548 w/LMG and newly gained WA in N1 will fire at your guys in Q4 with 8 FP with a net +2 DRM (+1 Hindrance, + 2 Building TEM and -1 FFNAM). DR = 5 (3,2) = FDR 7. 7-0 MC DR = 7 (4,3)= FDR 8, Breaks and DM; 747 MC DR = 10 (4,6) = FDR 11, Breaks and DM. $$$BATES: That just sucks, but my stupidity for retreating the have squad too soon to enable you to take the shot. I think you are also the beneficiary of board 17's famous off-center hex dots. Plus those two units are big babies. Never send boys to do a man's job. Resid in Q4 is 2, right? [delete reminder of move] =Jim= $$$BATES: Jim, once you break somebody it's best to stop and see what the other guy wants to do. We cannot commit each other to future activities when we don't know about events happening that may affect that activity. This is why we won't repeat the "go ahead, I won't change a thing" thing again, right? You can rest assured now that we are not abandoning S4. Formerly CX 7470 there declares assault movement and pops smoke into T4: 3; placed (2MF). Well done... ... recovers Ger MMG: 5; found (barely) (3MF). Fine piece of craftsmanship, this is. ... 8-1/BAZ in P4 double times to Q4 and drops BAZ there (2MF). 2RFP+1: 3, 5; NE... ... to R4 (3MF)... ... to S5 (4MF)... ... and, you guessed it, into T4 (6MF). 2RFP+1: 5, 2; NE. Safe so far... ... attempts to recover radio: 6; not (7MF)... ... second attempt: 4; recovered (8MF). _IF_ I made it through your DFF. Gimme the hail of bullets and we'll move on. - G From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 30 20:02:04 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 30 20:00:36 2005 Subject: [Aslml] we slept through in Latin class In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c54dfa$28f5fe60$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Just like you to catch your own faux pas, BP. 8^) "He has a wife, you know..." -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 11:29 AM To: mcleods Cc: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh3 I wrote: >>***MCLEOD: Bloody hell, should have hit spellcheck. How about >>"coliseum"? >Getting closer . Just one little "s" short now .... Bloody hell, hoist by my own petard. "Coliseum" is perfectly acceptable Queen's English spelling. The Americans, however, apparently spell it "colosseum". I shall never live the shame down. (Although, given the Latin derivation, the American spelling actually makes more sense -- for once!) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ziggy had Garfield neutered? Now that's funny!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From danielzucker at comcast.net Sat Apr 30 20:03:43 2005 From: danielzucker at comcast.net (daniel zucker) Date: Sat Apr 30 20:29:34 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Mike E References: <8bku6156kj3ctlp2mkgqtohht4fprrqvht@4ax.com><000601c54b0a$cf5dbbf0$9700000a@Skye650><2b8228f0050428200527be0ef2@mail.gmail.com><4271A748.2080106@wideopenwest.com><2b8228f005043014237ee3754f@mail.gmail.com> <002b01c54dec$301e4d40$d72cc618@ernie94r4upt6t> Message-ID: <004501c54dfd$f9289c20$29e18e45@danielmpnlmqxq> Mike My computer died last week. The hard drive froze and I had to get a new one. Daniel From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 20:49:10 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 20:50:17 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh4 References: <000201c54df8$df28d330$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <002d01c54e00$dfcdf330$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, > Guess we found the answer. I am not amused in "$$$." George ... for a moment there, you sounded just like Her Majesty. ;) > 79. (I missed 78.) ***MCLEOD: I see where they are off to. My 548 w/LMG > and > newly gained WA in N1 will fire at your guys in Q4 with 8 FP with a net > +2 > DRM (+1 Hindrance, + 2 Building TEM and -1 FFNAM). DR = 5 (3,2) = FDR > 7. > 7-0 MC DR = 7 (4,3)= FDR 8, Breaks and DM; 747 MC DR = 10 (4,6) = FDR > 11, > Breaks and DM. > $$$BATES: That just sucks, but my stupidity for retreating the have > squad too soon to enable you to take the shot. I think you are also the > beneficiary of board 17's famous off-center hex dots. Plus those two > units are big babies. Never send boys to do a man's job. Resid in Q4 > is 2, right? ***MCLEOD: Well, one shouldn't judge their cardboard masculinity too harshly, they should blame the HS for pulling back too soon. I was pleased when you did that. RFP value is correct and yes, I have the "Fun House" Bd.17. > $$$BATES: Jim, once you break somebody it's best to stop and see what > the other guy wants to do. We cannot commit each other to future > activities when we don't know about events happening that may affect > that activity. This is why we won't repeat the "go ahead, I won't > change a thing" thing again, right? ***MCLEOD: You know, I thought of that a few minutes after I hit send and was looking at the map. It looked awfully lonely over there as far as US units were concerned. Apologies George. I shall return the message when there are men down after the bullets whistle. > You can rest assured now that we are not abandoning S4. ***MCLEOD: No doubt. > Formerly CX 7470 there declares assault movement and pops smoke into T4: > 3; placed > (2MF). Well done... > ... recovers Ger MMG: 5; found (barely) (3MF). Fine piece of > craftsmanship, this is. > ... 8-1/BAZ in P4 double times to Q4 and drops BAZ there (2MF). > 2RFP+1: 3, 5; NE... > ... to R4 (3MF)... > ... to S5 (4MF)... > ... and, you guessed it, into T4 (6MF). 2RFP+1: 5, 2; NE. Safe so > far... > ... attempts to recover radio: 6; not (7MF)... > ... second attempt: 4; recovered (8MF). _IF_ I made it through your > DFF. > Gimme the hail of bullets and we'll move on. ***MCLEOD: No go George, read A4.44. A unit only has one chance to recover a SW/Gun per MPh. Radio is still on the ground. Resisting the urge to fire ... Better chances await. Bring on some more. Near as I can see, you have three more units to move. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 21:05:03 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 21:05:08 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Foxholes and Walls Message-ID: <005601c54e02$f4b79420$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, My 10 year old son is learning ASL as and when he wishes to play, usually a half turn at a time. Last night we were setting up a scenario and I gave him some FH's A brief explanation was given as to how a unit is either in or out of a FH. He placed one FH behind a hedge and then setup a HS w/MMG on top of the FH. I was interested as to why he did this and when asked, my son said that his HS could go in the FH to stay out sight in his turn and then pop back up to shoot me in mine. This is quite correct but I asked how he knew that and he explained that the hole was deeper than the hedge was high so my guys would not be able see him when he was in the FH and behind a hedge. Smart lad! Very intuitive interpretation of the rule in question. Too bad all of the ASLRB wasn't so easy to grok. He likes Spray Fire as well ... especially when his 9-1 is directing fire and I am in the open. :) =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 30 21:36:02 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 30 21:34:44 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Foxholes and Walls In-Reply-To: <005601c54e02$f4b79420$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000501c54e07$49f88ad0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Quite a brood you're raising there, Jim. If they start referring to their home as "The Compound" I'll get a bit worried... Don't forget to teach them to refrain from reality arguments. - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of mcleods Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 1:05 PM To: ASL Mailing List Current May 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Foxholes and Walls Listerz, My 10 year old son is learning ASL as and when he wishes to play, usually a half turn at a time. Last night we were setting up a scenario and I gave him some FH's A brief explanation was given as to how a unit is either in or out of a FH. He placed one FH behind a hedge and then setup a HS w/MMG on top of the FH. I was interested as to why he did this and when asked, my son said that his HS could go in the FH to stay out sight in his turn and then pop back up to shoot me in mine. This is quite correct but I asked how he knew that and he explained that the hole was deeper than the hedge was high so my guys would not be able see him when he was in the FH and behind a hedge. Smart lad! Very intuitive interpretation of the rule in question. Too bad all of the ASLRB wasn't so easy to grok. He likes Spray Fire as well ... especially when his 9-1 is directing fire and I am in the open. :) =Jim= _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 21:39:20 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 21:39:25 2005 Subject: [Aslml] Foxholes and Walls References: <000501c54e07$49f88ad0$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <007d01c54e07$bea9bde0$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; George wrote, > Quite a brood you're raising there, Jim. If they start referring to > their home as "The Compound" I'll get a bit worried... > Don't forget to teach them to refrain from reality arguments. No worries there, the home is the "casa". However, if you move about on four legs and are not invited, I would steer clear. ... you _don't_ want to hear what happened to the ground hog ... =Jim= From geb3 at inter.net Sat Apr 30 21:51:01 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sat Apr 30 21:49:31 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh5 In-Reply-To: <002d01c54e00$dfcdf330$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000601c54e09$60c78d90$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Jim's up past his usual bedtime. Gotta feed the machine in "%%%." -----Original Message----- From: mcleods [mailto:jmmcleod@mts.net] Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 12:49 PM To: George Bates; 'ASL Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh4 Listerz, > Guess we found the answer. I am not amused in "$$$." George ... for a moment there, you sounded just like Her Majesty. ;) %%%BATES: You have our leave to withdraw. 8^) > 79. (I missed 78.) ***MCLEOD: I see where they are off to. My 548 > w/LMG and newly gained WA in N1 will fire at your guys in Q4 with 8 FP > with a net > +2 > DRM (+1 Hindrance, + 2 Building TEM and -1 FFNAM). DR = 5 (3,2) = FDR > 7. 7-0 MC DR = 7 (4,3)= FDR 8, Breaks and DM; 747 MC DR = 10 (4,6) = > FDR 11, > Breaks and DM. > $$$BATES: That just sucks, but my stupidity for retreating the have > squad too soon to enable you to take the shot. I think you are also > the beneficiary of board 17's famous off-center hex dots. Plus those > two units are big babies. Never send boys to do a man's job. Resid > in Q4 is 2, right? ***MCLEOD: Well, one shouldn't judge their cardboard masculinity too harshly, they should blame the HS for pulling back too soon. I was pleased when you did that. RFP value is correct and yes, I have the "Fun House" Bd.17. %%%BATES: I am equipped with same. Fills every move with suspense, doesn't it? Those two have to accept some responsibility for their own actions. Oh, BTW, don't be so damn quick to agree with your opponents dumb moves. 8^) > $$$BATES: Jim, once you break somebody it's best to stop and see what > the other guy wants to do. We cannot commit each other to future > activities when we don't know about events happening that may affect > that activity. This is why we won't repeat the "go ahead, I won't > change a thing" thing again, right? ***MCLEOD: You know, I thought of that a few minutes after I hit send and was looking at the map. It looked awfully lonely over there as far as US units were concerned. Apologies George. I shall return the message when there are men down after the bullets whistle. > You can rest assured now that we are not abandoning S4. ***MCLEOD: No doubt. > Formerly CX 7470 there declares assault movement and pops smoke into > T4: > 3; placed > (2MF). Well done... > ... recovers Ger MMG: 5; found (barely) (3MF). Fine piece of > craftsmanship, this is. > ... 8-1/BAZ in P4 double times to Q4 and drops BAZ there (2MF). > 2RFP+1: 3, 5; NE... > ... to R4 (3MF)... > ... to S5 (4MF)... > ... and, you guessed it, into T4 (6MF). 2RFP+1: 5, 2; NE. Safe so > far... > ... attempts to recover radio: 6; not (7MF)... > ... second attempt: 4; recovered (8MF). _IF_ I made it through your > DFF. Gimme the hail of bullets and we'll move on. ***MCLEOD: No go George, read A4.44. A unit only has one chance to recover a SW/Gun per MPh. Radio is still on the ground. Resisting the urge to fire ... Better chances await. Bring on some more. Near as I can see, you have three more units to move. =Jim= %%%BATES: Right you are on A4.44. Sorry. 747b in M4 AM to M3 (1.5MF). Let's see how you handle that before I do anything else. The +DRMs have got to start working for me sometime. - G From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Apr 30 22:23:57 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Apr 30 22:24:05 2005 Subject: [Aslml] A59 "Death at Carentan": T4(US) MPh5 References: <000601c54e09$60c78d90$3200170a@DF6TP71X> Message-ID: <009001c54e0d$fa5f7b30$fc27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, George offers, > Jim's up past his usual bedtime. Gotta feed the machine in "%%%." Hey, I just finished watching a very cool special on the Canadian liberation of Holland. Anyone else know the cease fire was signed on 30 April 1945? Some very good film footage was shown as well. Stuff I had never seen before. Anyway, it is just a shade past midnight and my Port glass is on the better side of full. ;) >> Guess we found the answer. I am not amused in "$$$." > > George ... for a moment there, you sounded just like Her Majesty. ;) > %%%BATES: You have our leave to withdraw. ***MCLEOD: Isn't that what HRM asks of Philip after he ... uh, ... he ... never mind ... >> $$$BATES: That just sucks, but my stupidity for retreating the have >> squad too soon to enable you to take the shot. I think you are also >> the beneficiary of board 17's famous off-center hex dots. Plus those >> two units are big babies. Never send boys to do a man's job. Resid >> in Q4 is 2, right? > > ***MCLEOD: Well, one shouldn't judge their cardboard masculinity too > harshly, they should blame the HS for pulling back too soon. I was > pleased > when you did that. RFP value is correct and yes, I have the "Fun House" > > Bd.17. > %%%BATES: I am equipped with same. Fills every move with suspense, > doesn't it? > Those two have to accept some responsibility for their own actions. > Oh, BTW, don't be so damn quick to agree with your opponents dumb moves. > > 8^) :) >> $$$BATES: Jim, once you break somebody it's best to stop and see what > >> the other guy wants to do. We cannot commit each other to future >> activities when we don't know about events happening that may affect >> that activity. This is why we won't repeat the "go ahead, I won't >> change a thing" thing again, right? > > ***MCLEOD: You know, I thought of that a few minutes after I hit send > and > was looking at the map. It looked awfully lonely over there as far as > US > units were concerned. Apologies George. I shall return the message > when > there are men down after the bullets whistle. > >> You can rest assured now that we are not abandoning S4. > > ***MCLEOD: No doubt. > >> Formerly CX 7470 there declares assault movement and pops smoke into >> T4: >> 3; placed >> (2MF). Well done... > >> ... recovers Ger MMG: 5; found (barely) (3MF). Fine piece of >> craftsmanship, this is. > >> ... 8-1/BAZ in P4 double times to Q4 and drops BAZ there (2MF). >> 2RFP+1: 3, 5; NE... > >> ... to R4 (3MF)... > >> ... to S5 (4MF)... > >> ... and, you guessed it, into T4 (6MF). 2RFP+1: 5, 2; NE. Safe so >> far... > >> ... attempts to recover radio: 6; not (7MF)... > >> ... second attempt: 4; recovered (8MF). _IF_ I made it through your >> DFF. Gimme the hail of bullets and we'll move on. > > ***MCLEOD: No go George, read A4.44. A unit only has one chance to > recover > a SW/Gun per MPh. Radio is still on the ground. Resisting the urge to > fire > ... Better chances await. Bring on some more. Near as I can see, you > have > three more units to move. > %%%BATES: Right you are on A4.44. Sorry. ***MCLEOD: No problem, we were gaff free for a spell and were due. My turn next. :) > 747b in M4 AM to M3 (1.5MF). > Let's see how you handle that before I do anything else. The +DRMs have > got to start working for me sometime. ***MCLEOD: Wankers. The 548 w/LMG (sustain fire) in N1 fire at M3, 4 FP +1 DRM, DR = 6 (4,2) = FDR 7 = PTC; 747 PTC DR = 4 (2,2) = Pass. The N1 548 is now Final Fired, 1 RFP in M3. =Jim=