From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 1 00:23:08 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 1 00:23:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] New ASL Goodies at the ASLWebDex In-Reply-To: <001201c48fc8$49996f80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> References: <122791da1227ae9c.1227ae9c122791da@us.army.mil> <6.1.2.0.0.20040831204232.01c0fec0@pop3.direcway.com> <001201c48fc8$49996f80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: <63uaj0dddtn92tkt8p0od1nf4q5bbekggd@4ax.com> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 21:06:19 -0500, wrote: >One of those rare AH unkept promises has always been Chapter N of the ASLRB. >A lovely idea, but as far as I know only one installment was every >officially released. Sorry? There was an installment for every module that was released until Doomed Battalions! TAHGC had no problem keeping that particular promise -- it was MMP who decided to let it slide. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 1 00:29:49 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 1 00:29:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive First Fire...alas, more clarification. In-Reply-To: <20040831215247.17517.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040831215247.17517.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:52:47 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >Situation: Defending 467 has a LMG. A 447 moves 4 hexes away. >LMG (only) is fired. No rate, and 447 breaks. > >1) When placing the first fire counter, how does one >stack? In other words, does this counter go on top of both >the 467 and LMG? (And if so, does this mean that, whether >the 467 used its inherent firepower or not, it becomes >'marked'?) The LMG (only) is marked. Most people I know angle the First Fire counter with the LMG so that it no longer sits square on the squad counter to indicate this, if memory seems likely to fail. The 4-6-7 has not used its inherent FP. (EXC: If the LMG cowers, the 4-6-7 *also* cowers and both are marked "Final Fire".) >2) If another 447 then moves 5 hexes away, is the >inherent firepower of the 467 then subject to SFF restrictions? No. It has not yet been used. >3) Likewise, if in the original situation, only the >467 had fired and broken the 447, is the 'unmarked' LMG in any way >subject to SFF restrictions when the next 447 moves, at a >distance of 5 hexes? No, for the same reasons. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 1 00:33:51 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 1 00:33:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive First Fire...alas, more clarification. In-Reply-To: <41356380.79C0@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <20040831215247.17517.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20040831185511.01cb1d20@mail.alltel.net> <41356380.79C0@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:52:00 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >I believe that the FF shot could only be made versus adjacent units. No, because if I understood his comments correctly, Bret is describing a situation where the MG is not yet marked at all (only the squad is marked First Fire). Hence, it is not restricted by Final Fire limitations. (The squad certainly is.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From ctewks at yahoo.com Wed Sep 1 04:05:47 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed Sep 1 04:05:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] New ASL Goodies at the ASLWebDex In-Reply-To: <001201c48fc8$49996f80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: <20040901110547.19139.qmail@web42101.mail.yahoo.com> This is simply AMAZING! THANKS and keep up the fantastic work! -Chuck --- aslml@aslwebdex.net wrote: > One of those rare AH unkept promises has always been Chapter N of the ASLRB. > A lovely idea, but as far as I know only one installment was every > officially released. Reid Hutchinson (aka jackbear) has now made up for > AH's failure. > > The full ASL Armory, probably better than Chapter N would have been anyway, > is now on the ASLWebDex in two forms, a zipped Excell file and an HTML > version. Both provide not only a full inventory of the counters in the > various official releases, but all the counter errata, an explanation of the > sources of updated/corrected counters, and even the names of the leaders > released in each module. It is truly a spectacular piece of work and you > should check it out. As far as that goes, you should probably send Reid > money (what's your address, Reid?). > > The ASL Armory is linked from the Chapter N page of the ASLWebDex > (www.aslwebdex.net - chapter N page: > www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-chn.html. > > While we're at it, I might as well note that the WebDex now also covers all > (or almost all - some have apparently been lost forever) of the AAR's > originally included on the much-mourned ASL Crossroads. Other Crossroads > documents and detrius is going up daily. These are integrated throughout > the WebDex, but the AAR's are linked through the Scenario Analysis and AAR > page (probably the largest collection of AAR's and links to AAR's anywhere) > at http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-aars.html. > > Have fun. > > Larry Memmott > ASLWebDexer > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From aslwynn at rogers.com Wed Sep 1 06:08:17 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Wed Sep 1 06:08:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AH2 Commissar's House References: Message-ID: <001401c49024$bf83e110$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Dissenting opinion: I've played this as both the Russian and German, and think that it is well-balanced, perhaps even a little pro-Russian, with the Russians Fanatic in the Commissar's House. Germans has to grab BOTH the widely separated Chemist's Shop and Commissar's House, so he needs to have a very fine sense of how to allocate his forces right from the start. Too much to the Chemist's Shop and he won't have his schwerpunkt together in time for the Commissar's House, too little and he either won't take it or will spend too much time in doing so. Wynn "Was it the Commissar's House Where Zaitsev Gave It to Tania Chernova (aka Rachel Weisz)?" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janusz Maxe" To: "Ole B?e" ; "ASLML" Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 5:42 PM Subject: SV: [Aslml] AH2 Commissar's House I played vs two newbies, and got my handed to me with a turn to spare. I didn't play very well, but I believe the Germans need to do some fundamental misstakes to lose this one. Fanatism might be enough, but I'm not sure > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r Ole B?e > Skickat: den 31 augusti 2004 21:17 > Till: ASLML > ?mne: [Aslml] AH2 Commissar's House > > > Hi, > > I'm planning to play Commissar's House on the RB map, for the > next gaming > session in our local tournament. IIRC the scenario is > considered pro-German > (unlike the BV version), and ROAR supports this by listing it > as 38-19 in > German favour. > > Now, the Russian balance makes the Russian units Fanatic in > the Commisar's > House (the building - not the scenario :-) > > So I wondered if this balance is ok. I don't want a > pro-Russian scenario, > but a balanced or slightly pro-German one (I'm playing the > Russian against a > less experienced player). So do anyone have any insights as > to whether this > balance makes it about right? > > --------------------------------------- > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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 mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 09:53:37 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Wed Sep 1 07:21:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WFHQ References: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4135FE91.74C7@mb.sympatico.ca> Keith Todd wrote: > > Jim, > > Nat last said that he had the OARS stuff but I cannot > find his address. Nat was kind of enough to take care of my questions off-list. > I too find the WFHQ very klunky, so I am changing > back from ASLML digest to individual. vive la' ASLML! > And thanks for the help with the Canadian ASLers. No problem, I hope everything works out. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 10:28:29 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Wed Sep 1 07:21:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive First Fire...alas, more clarification. References: <20040831215247.17517.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20040831185511.01cb1d20@mail.alltel.net> <41356380.79C0@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <413606BD.6709@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; I wrote, > >I believe that the FF shot could only be made versus adjacent units. Bruce replied, > No, because if I understood his comments correctly, Bret is describing a > situation where the MG is not yet marked at all (only the squad is marked > First Fire). Hence, it is not restricted by Final Fire limitations. (The > squad certainly is.) Thanks Bruce, I mis-interpreted the exchange in the original reponse. If, assuming a German 4-6-7 squad firing a 3-8 LMG, the German fires in the enemie's movement phase: - at a non-adjacent target with the S FF'd but not the LMG, the attack is 3.5 FP - at an adjacent target the shot is 7 FP. If the German waits to use Final Fire; - The S. can still fire at adjacent units with 4 FP but the LMG can fire normally (range wise) with 3 FP at non-adjacent units or 6 FP versus adjacent - The S. can fire both it's IFP and the LMG at an adjacent target with a whoppin' great 10 FP!! In both of the Final Fire cases, there is the added bonus of not having to worry about sustained Fire penalties. Bret does in fact point out a subtle nuance in the rules, a nuance that almost seems non-sensical. But then again, A7.353 and A9.11 fall into the same category non-sensical wise. ;) Anyway, nice fielding Bruce. Anyway, nice fielding Bruce ... for an Aussie wanker ... :) =Jim= From jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 07:23:20 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 07:23:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > Of course John Kerry never lied us into a War in Iraq to benefit his Vice > President's business interest and to please his father. Oh, poor, poor Paul. Did the black helicopters come and take your baby away, too? Would you like to share with us how you fit your tinfoil hat? Are you still at home pouting that that mean, mean, John McCain called your hero, Michael Moore what he is? > Think what 130,000 troops could be achieving in Afghanistan or is Osama Bin > Laden not responsible for 9/11 If more troops could be useful in Afghanistan, they would be there -- it's not like we have a shortage! :-) More generally, Afghanistan now has liberty, equality, the rule of law, and almost the entire eligible voting population has _already_ registered to vote in the upcoming elections. Just what are you suggesting that we could be accomplishing there with `more troops' that is not already being accomplished? Or are you parroting the John Kerry line that ``Arabic-speaking intelligence assets were taken out of Afghanistan to work in Iraq'' -- a line which is really quite amusing when one considers that _no one in Afghanistan speaks Arabic_. (The native language of Afghanistan is Pashto, with minority populations speaking Urdu and other indic tongues). - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNdtcRxzMSZ/9vAMRAknQAKC5dTjUX2z/mKdQBMI/Ch2nDquoAACgtosq MDK6LWAZ78HHErnHu1bFZKg= =nZIs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From s.deller at charter.net Wed Sep 1 08:00:53 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Wed Sep 1 08:01:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG AFV crews Message-ID: <002901c49034$7a418570$2083b018@DHT8S631> Gentlemen, I couldn't find any guidance on the handling of AFV crews during the RePh. Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even if there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used in "infantry" mode)? Are they Withdrawn if their platoon is Withdrawn? Would you make a Withdrawal dr solely for a surviving crew? Thanks, Sean Deller From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Sep 1 08:13:50 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 1 08:13:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Improving your ASL game In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040831095612.00ae83b0@mailserver.nist.gov> References: <5.0.0.25.2.20040831095612.00ae83b0@mailserver.nist.gov> Message-ID: <4135E72E.7000407@charter.net> John Slotwinski wrote: > (1) Play fast and play often. Note that these two are synergistic and > the faster you play the more you'll be able to play. I got this from > Nixon and I think it's one of the best tips out there. For me, this is the area requiring the most improvement. I'm still a slow player in FTF situations (meaning that a great deal of my playing is via email), and I'm trying to go faster...Dade Cariaga told me last weekend at Wild West Fest ..."DAMN you're slow!!!" LOL > (6) Above all, have fun. Your game won't improve if you take it so > seriously that you're not having a good time. Crucial, and a point I need to remind myself of frequently, so my competitve side doesn't become a tyrant & overwhelm the fun side. -Chas "Workin' on it" Argent > > js > > At 05:11 PM 8/30/2004 -0400, pete shelling wrote: > >> Roger wrote: >> >> "What did some of you guys do to get better?" >> >> I agree with those who say 'go to tournaments'. In fact, my won-lost >> record >> over the past few years has gotten a lot better since I stopped most >> local >> play, and now get 80-90% of my ASL from the four or so tournaments I >> get to >> during the year. >> >> Now I've dropped all the bad habits I was getting from the NE Ohio >> locals >> such as Mark Nixon, Bret Hildebran and 'Wild Bill' Hayward. >> >> Pete 'now I pick up JR Tracy's bad habits' Shelling >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 12:15:03 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Wed Sep 1 09:15:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WFHQ References: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> <4135FE91.74C7@mb.sympatico.ca> <4135DD45.20407@charter.net> Message-ID: <41361FB7.71A@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Chas Argent wrote: > Why not use & enjoy both resources? I much prefer the one-stop-shop aspect of the List. Just a personal preference given the spare time I have to dedicate to List/Forum reading. > You old farts :-) Old! Who you callin' old! I'm still on the sweet side of 43 pal. I may have a little less cover on top but all the good stuff still works fine. However, the "fart" lable is certainly warranted. ;) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 12:22:27 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Wed Sep 1 09:15:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Improving your ASL game References: <5.0.0.25.2.20040831095612.00ae83b0@mailserver.nist.gov> <4135E72E.7000407@charter.net> Message-ID: <41362173.2A89@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Chas Argent wrote: > For me, this is the area requiring the most improvement. I'm still a > slow player in FTF situations (meaning that a great deal of my playing > is via email), and I'm trying to go faster...Dade Cariaga told me last > weekend at Wild West Fest ..."DAMN you're slow!!!" LOL Playing ASL slowly kills the fun of the game IMHO. Although, I will never begrudge the person who takes a period of time to ponder a tough decision at a critical point. But b all means, make an effort to keep the game flow gowing. John wrote, > > (6) Above all, have fun. Your game won't improve if you take it so > > seriously that you're not having a good time. Chas replied, > Crucial, and a point I need to remind myself of frequently, so my > competitve side doesn't become a tyrant & overwhelm the fun side. Chas, playing slow and being overly competitive seem to go hand in hand. Put the two together and one kills the fun factor in ASL, again JMHO. Remember, lives are not at risk here. :) I'm quite competitive in ASL but I always try to keep things rolling along. =Jim= From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Sep 1 09:24:10 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 1 09:24:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Improving your ASL game Message-ID: <3948se$766oar@mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Jim McLeod > Chas, playing slow and being overly competitive seem to go hand in > hand. Put the two together and one kills the fun factor in ASL, again > JMHO. Remember, lives are not at risk here. :) > In my case, I don't think the two are related. I think I'm slower right now simply because I don't have enough experience yet to see movement and fire combinations readily. Obvioulsly the MPh is the challenge. That's why I'm tryin' to be a better player :-) -Chas From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 09:06:36 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 09:28:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: Sorry Jim, what I am refering to is Dumbya's intentional lies and deceptions to the American people that drug us into a war in Iraq. Preemptive attack to stop an immenent threat when a) there were NO WMD, let me repeat NO WMD. and b) NO LINK to Al Queda repeat NO LINK to Al Queda. So why are we there? This is making America more secure? How by creating an unstable country in the middle of hte middle east? By opening the door to Islamic Extremists? Mark my words we will either be in Iraq for 10+ years still losing men OR we will abandon the country to a civil war. BTW draftdodging Bush and his draft dodging lackies invaded a country based on, at best, faulty intelligence, with far too insufficient forces to secure the country and with NO basic understanding of Iraq culture. They invaded Iraq because Dumbya talks and listens to God instead of his advisors (who weren't parroting his position) or those who actually have an understanding of history in the Middle East. SCARY!!! Oh yeah and he can't even think of a mistake or something he wouldnt do differently. BTW with regards to Afghanistan perhaps with 100,000 +American troops on the ground we would be able to mount effective search missions for the actual leader behind the 9/11 attack, not some no account dictator who we had under control. Lies, Lies, Lies The Compassionate Republican party, unless you happen to be gay or believe in science or a minority or believe we shouldnt have invaded Iraq or happen to be a decorated Viet Nam war hero. It just blows my mind how Dumbya and Dickie Cheny have the cajones to degrade Kerry's service in Viet Nam. He actually served as oppossed to ducking, hiding and getting drunk. Cant wait to see Dumbya voted out!! :O) Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: Jim Wise To: Paul Kenny CC: jbarber@meic.org, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 10:23:20 -0400 (EDT) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > Of course John Kerry never lied us into a War in Iraq to benefit his Vice > President's business interest and to please his father. Oh, poor, poor Paul. Did the black helicopters come and take your baby away, too? Would you like to share with us how you fit your tinfoil hat? Are you still at home pouting that that mean, mean, John McCain called your hero, Michael Moore what he is? > Think what 130,000 troops could be achieving in Afghanistan or is Osama Bin > Laden not responsible for 9/11 If more troops could be useful in Afghanistan, they would be there -- it's not like we have a shortage! :-) More generally, Afghanistan now has liberty, equality, the rule of law, and almost the entire eligible voting population has _already_ registered to vote in the upcoming elections. Just what are you suggesting that we could be accomplishing there with `more troops' that is not already being accomplished? Or are you parroting the John Kerry line that ``Arabic-speaking intelligence assets were taken out of Afghanistan to work in Iraq'' -- a line which is really quite amusing when one considers that _no one in Afghanistan speaks Arabic_. (The native language of Afghanistan is Pashto, with minority populations speaking Urdu and other indic tongues). - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNdtcRxzMSZ/9vAMRAknQAKC5dTjUX2z/mKdQBMI/Ch2nDquoAACgtosq MDK6LWAZ78HHErnHu1bFZKg= =nZIs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From jtracy at bankofny.com Wed Sep 1 09:28:01 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 09:29:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Improving your ASL game Message-ID: > Chas, playing slow and being overly competitive seem to > go hand in hand. Put the two together and one kills the > fun factor in ASL, again JMHO. Remember, lives are not > at risk here. :) I think Chas is exaggerating his state of play - he's neither slow nor over-competitive! Totally mellow and a pleasure to play, and the pace was appropriate to the situation. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Sep 1 09:34:23 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 1 09:34:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Improving your ASL game Message-ID: <3948se$767j6t@mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net> JR you ROCK!!! LOL The check is in the mail. -Chas > > From: jtracy@bankofny.com > Date: 2004/09/01 Wed PM 04:28:01 GMT > To: ASL List > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: Improving your ASL game > > > Chas, playing slow and being overly competitive seem to > > go hand in hand. Put the two together and one kills the > > fun factor in ASL, again JMHO. Remember, lives are not > > at risk here. :) > > I think Chas is exaggerating his state of play - he's neither slow nor > over-competitive! Totally mellow and a pleasure to play, and the pace was > appropriate to the situation. > > JR > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. > _______________________________________________ > 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 denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 10:44:00 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 10:44:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Um.. Please name one other company that could do what your claiming can be done.. Halaburton is like the Microsoft of what they do.. Name one other company that can say that they have had to lay people off due to H getting the job? Do you really think that the DNC would not have told us these facts if they where true? Until you can come up with some facts please STFU! Denis On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > > Of course John Kerry never lied us into a War in Iraq to benefit his Vice > President's business interest and to please his father. > > Think what 130,000 troops could be achieving in Afghanistan or is Osama Bin > Laden not responsible for 9/11 > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: Jim Wise > To: Jeff Barber > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:10:04 -0400 (EDT) > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Jeff Barber wrote: > > >I know better but I just can't help myself. > > > >>Besides, on the night that _John McCain_ speaks, > > > >Ah, John McCain. The same McCain that disagrees with the position of > >his party on gays, abortion, the environmen and budget deficits. > > This may come as a bit of a shock to you, if you've just come from > seeing the over-edited conformity-fest in Boston, where candidates were > required to submit their speeches in advance, so that they could be > re-written by the Democratic party to match party line, but there are a > wide range of views on a wide range of issues within the Republican > party, and _no one_ is pressed to conform to some imaginary party line. > > As it happens, I disagree with Mr. McCain on several issues, some of > them among the list you've given above. But you know what? I agree > with him strongly on one position which he's been stating for years now > - -- that this election is crucial to the future of our nation, and that > the best candidate in this election is George W. Bush. > > How do you like them apples? :-) > > > >>even as Kerry's Vietnam > >>record looks more and more dubious, > > > >Really? To whom? The "Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth", whatever > >their truth may be, have been thoroughly and completely discredited. > >Not only are they wrong, but they have been shown to be nothing more > >than a front group for ultra-conservative money (in fact, the same > >people that tried to smear John McCain's war record in 2000), if not > >just a front for King George II's campaign. Read all about it here: > > Yes, yes. Like Kerry's talking heads on TV, keep repeating to yourself > that the SwiftVets have been `discredited'. But don't expect it to > stick as long as claim after claim which Kerry has made falls apart. > Let's look at the record: > > * Kerry has repeatedly claimed that he was in Cambodia ``ordered there > by President Nixon'' on Christmas Eve, 1968. The Wall Street > Journal, for instance, has pointed out no fewer than _four_ times, > all on the official congressional record, when he told this story. > > Yet his official biography says he was not in Cambodia on this date, > President Nixon was still four weeks away from taking office on this > date, and not a _single_ person other than Kerry who served on a > swift boat in Vietnam -- not even those who are fervently supporting > him -- agrees that _any_ swift boat was in Cambodia anywhere near > that time. > > Pressed on the matter, Kerry has since suggested that he was _not_ > in Cambodia on this date, but ``often went their later'', yet none > of his crew members, not even those supporting him, remember any > later trips either. > > > * Kerry has now published no fewer than three contradictory accounts > of the action in which he received his first Bronze star. There are > similar problems with his Silver Star -- the form he has provided > for the press describes it as a `Silver Star with Combat V', yet as > the Navy confirmed last week, _no_ branch of the US military has > _ever_ awarded a Combat V on a silver star -- there is no such medal. > > Yet Kerry persists in refusing to sign a Form 180 to allow release > of the original of this document to the press > > > * Upon returning from Vietnam, Kerry traveled the country slandering > his fellow vets, saying before congress that: > > ``I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say > that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at > which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly > decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in > Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a > day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all > levels of command.... > > They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut > off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to > human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up > bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion > reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, > poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of > South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the > normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied > bombing power of this country.'' > > John McCain has testified that when he was a POW in North Vietnam, > this testimony of Kerry's was repeatedly played back for him and > other POWs in an attempt to demoralize them, and has also repeatedly > criticized Kerry for this, saying just yesterday that this > testimony, which Kerry has never disowned, should be a part of the > current debate. > > > * of the men who served with Kerry in Vietnam (and yes, I do mean > `served with' -- all of these men had the same job as Kerry in the > same region at the same time, and the LA Times has corrected their > original claim otherwise, 264 oppose Kerry, and less than a > dozen support him. > > Indeed, of the 20 men in the picture of Kerry in Vietnam which he > shopped around at the convention, 13 oppose him, and only one > supports him. One. > > This may or may not tell us how clean Kerry's record is, but it sure > tells us a lot about the effect he had on the men around him. > > > Even while running from each of these statements of his which turned out > to be false, Kerry has tried throwing every accusation he can think of > at the SwiftVets, only to find that none of them stand up: > > * That they are simply Republicans -- The SwiftVets include many > members of each major political party, as well as a number of > independents. John O'Neill, one of the two leaders of the group, > voted for Al Gore in 2000, dislikes Bush (he calls him an `empty > suit'), and has a long record of supporting candidates from both > parties. But he _also_ has known Kerry since his time in Vietnam > (where he served for _years_, not the 100 days which Kerry spent > there before getting himself shipped home on a technicality), and > he believes that Kerry is completely unfit to be commander in chief. > > * That they are controlled by the Republican party -- Kerry keeps > claiming this, but has yet to show a single instance of such a link > -- and his raising this issue has rebounded on him, as links between > his campaign and 527 groups such as MoveOn.org which has spent 65 > _million_ dollars on ads (compared to $200,000 spent by the > SwiftVets). > > * That they did not serve with Kerry directly -- the LA Times tried > this one out, and ended up printing an embarrassed retraction when > they realized that _all_ of the SwiftVets served in the same branch > of the service as Kerry in the same place at the same time. Indeed, > two of Kerry's four crew members have come out against him, as well > as 13 of the twenty vets in the photo which Kerry made the > centerpiece of his convention (just one of the 20 in the > photo supports Kerry, four are deceased). > > > >>suggesting that it's _this_ party > >>which has a Vietnam problem is... amusing. > > > >You may find it amusing but I don't. It's not a problem if you didn't > >serve but being a chickenhawk like, King George, Dick Cheney, Tom > >Delay, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz and Bill O'Reilly is. For more on the > >Chickenhawks, look here (courtesy of the New Hampshire Gazette): > > Fascinating. George Bush spent the entire war flying air patrol > missions over our nation's Southeast, but this service is somehow > discounted in your worldview. Does this disrespect for the National > Guard extend to the millions of others who have served there honorably, > or just Mr. Bush? > > Likewise, when you fault Cheney, thirty years old and a father at the > time, for not being drafted, why do you not fault John Edwards, just > eighteen at the time, who got the same deferment? Or Howard Dean, who > got a deferment for a `bad spine' and then spent the war as a _Skiing > instructor_ in Colorado? > > And if service in Vietnam is some sort of prerequisite for political > credibility in your book, why do you advise us to ignore McCain's > endorsement? In what branch did you serve? In what war? > > > >>And slavery? I may be a bit confused, but can you tell me the political > >>party of any of the following: > > > > > > > >Well thank God for the Republicans, > > I do. Often. :-) > > > >the champions of civil rights and minorities worldwide. Come on, this > >doesn't even make it to the giggle test, much less pass it. > > Hey, if you want to hold the party which ran a segregationist candidate > for President, which fought (literally and violently) to prevent > integration of schools, and which filibustered the Civil Rights Act > _and_ the Voting Rights Act, before doing a 180 degree turn and calling > for racial quotas to enforce a whole new type of discrimination up as > some sort of paragons of civil rights, you're free to do so. > > You'll have to forgive me if I'm not too impressed, though. :-) > > - -- > Jim Wise > jwise@draga.com > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) > > iD8DBQFBNM0QRxzMSZ/9vAMRAmiHAJ90EFSLQDGIYAXBeaLTP001HSr3LwCgm01n > gTsL8tZQg722hLIGF2zc9zY= > =LTIJ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and > more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 11:06:53 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 11:08:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > Sorry Jim, what I am refering to is Dumbya's intentional lies and deceptions to > the American people that drug us into a war in Iraq. Preemptive attack to stop Yes, yes. Keep up the conspiracy theories. Go on, tell us how Bush planned 9/11. Tell us about all of the `liars': * Tell us how the UN Security Council are liars, when they voted UNANIMOUSLY, in November 2002, that Iraq was still in violation of dozens of UNSC resolutions, and must face `serious consequences' * Tell us how the US Senate and House were all liars when, with access to the same intelligence Bush had, they voted _overwhelmingly_ to support the war -- including your boys Kerry and Edwards (perhaps Kerry has an excuse -- he has since admitted he was `too busy' to attend _any_ of the intelligence briefings in that period!) * Tell us how the intelligence services both of nations which supported the war (the UK, Poland, dozens of others), and those which opposed the war (France, Germany, Russia, a few others) were `liars' when they reported (correctly) that Saddam still had the _capacity to produce_ WMD * Tell us how the bipartisan 9/11 commission were `liars' when they confirmed both that Saddam _had_ made repeated efforts to buy yellow-cake uranium in Africa, and his extensive `working relationship' with al Qaeda. (What's the matter? Haven't read the report yet? I _really_ suggest you go do so before your next post. > an immenent threat when `Imminent threat' here is _your_ phrase. Bush, in his 2003 State of the Union address, said something _very_ different: Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. > a) there were NO WMD, let me repeat NO WMD. You can repeat it as many times as you want. I advise you to keep doing so if it makes you feel good. :-) What there _were_ were dozens of precursor materials, millions of pages of documentation, hundreds of dual-use facilities, and all the other material needed to produce WMDs, should Saddam decide again to use them. This is a man who had _repeatedly_ used chemical and biological weapons in the past, including against his own people in huge areas of Iraq, and you're still arguing that he couldn't make them if he wanted them, and wouldn't use them if he had them? Really? > and b) NO LINK to Al Queda repeat NO LINK to Al Queda. Sorry, you're still reading from last seasons `loony left anti-war' script. Now that the links between Saddam and al Qaeda have been extensively documented, both by the 9/11 Commission, and in a number of excellent books such as Stephen Hayes' excellent _The Connection_, you're supposed to say ``so what if he was helping al Qaeda, there were other countries doing the same thing?''. Get with the program, man! > So why are we there? This is making America more secure? How by > creating an unstable country in the middle of hte middle east? By I'm fascinated that you describe Saddam Hussein's Iraq, a nation of daily murder, torture, and atrocity with strong ties to terrorism, and the capacity to produce WMD to arm these groups as `stable' and `making America more secure'. As it happens, between Iraq and Afghanistan, _50 million_ people now live in free and equal societies where before they lived under repression and torture. Millions of people who have lived their whole lives without voting are registered to vote, and have already elected local leaders in preparation for national elections. Millions of people need no longer worry that if they say the wrong phrase, they will be whisked off to be torn apart by dogs, beheaded in public squares, stoned to death, or fed into industrial plastic shredders. There _used_ to be a time when such a victory for human rights would have exhilarated the left, would have been seen for what it is. That the left now cheers the thugs who would prevent elections in these nations, and sees such liberations as a `tragedy' and a `setback' is as good a capsule definition as I'll ever be able to provide of why they have lost so much respect in this nation. > opening the door to Islamic Extremists? Perhaps it is your belief that those who attacked us on September 11 would no longer be attacking us if we were not in Iraq? If you are wrong in this belief, of course, surely you can not argue that we would be better off fighting them here in the downtown areas of our major cities than in Iraq, right? > Mark my words we will either be in Iraq for 10+ years still losing men > OR we will abandon the country to a civil war. Only one candidate in this election is calling for the abandonment of the Iraqi people to the thugs who oppose freedom there, and that candidate is John Kerry. > BTW draftdodging Bush and his draft dodging lackies Now _there's_ a reasoned and coherent argument. Let's be honest, Mr. Kenny. You on the left have always held the American military man in the highest of contempt. You can see an example of the type of disinformation John Kerry himself was spreading about our military in 1971 right here: http://www.perryonpolitics.com/archives/002143.html Do not _now_ try to claim that only those whose military service was in a branch of the service of which _you_ approve (Bush's service in the National Guard being equivalent to `draft dodging in your book, a true insult to the millions serving honorably therein to this day) is some sort of prerequisite for intelligent thought. But, if you really believe this, how about a challenge? Will you agree to vote on November 2 in the same way that polls at that time show that the majority of our soldiers and veterans are voting? Will you? Well? > invaded a country based on, at best, faulty intelligence, with far too > insufficient forces to secure the country and with NO basic > understanding of Iraq culture. And this is why you will lose this election. While other Americans see millions and millions of Iraqis enjoy their new-found freedoms and rejoice, you see their liberation as a mistake. While other Americans understand that _whatever_ the reason for the Iraqi war, abandoning the Iraqi people now would be a tragedy, you seek cheap political points. In the end, you can only look back, never forward, and you have talked yourself into a corner where the only good news for your position is bad news for the country you claim to love, and the only chance you have of election is that the country you claim to love falters, or fails. > They invaded Iraq because Dumbya talks and listens to God instead of his > advisors (who weren't parroting his position) or those who actually have an > understanding of history in the Middle East. What would an `understanding' of history in the Middle East teach us, pray tell? The reasons why it would be acceptable for Saddam's murder and tyranny to continue? The reason `those people' over there don't deserve democracy and freedom? Isn't telling us that if we only understood Arabs we would not seek to liberate them the most obscene form of bigotry and ethnocentrism? > SCARY!!! > > Oh yeah and he can't even think of a mistake or something he wouldnt do > differently. Hey, John Kerry said a week ago that if he had it all to do over again, knowing then what he knows now, he would still have voted to go to war in Iraq. Presumably, having voted to send our troops there, he would still have voted _against_ the $87 billion needed to provide food, shelter, ammunition, and body armor to the troops once they were in harms way, too. What sense does _that_ make? > BTW with regards to Afghanistan perhaps with 100,000 +American troops on the > ground we would be able to mount effective search missions for the actual > leader behind the 9/11 attack, not some no account dictator who we had under > control. Mmm-hmm. Our commanders on the ground have been given every soldier they have ever asked for. If we needed more soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan, there are still divisions upon divisions we could send there. In actual fact, Afghanistan is doing quite well, with reconstruction way ahead of schedule, the rule of law spreading to the farthest ends of the nation, and national elections coming soon. Meanwhile, most experts agree that many senior al Qaeda are now in the Waziristan province of Pakistan, where we have avoided a major presence by working with Pakistani forces. Since you're so gung-ho about sending troops to where bin Laden may be (showing an obsession with revenge instead of prevention), would you support an invasion there? Would you? > Lies, Lies, Lies More rational and coherent debate, I see. > The Compassionate Republican party, unless you happen to be gay or believe in > science or a minority or believe we shouldnt have invaded Iraq Keep on talking like that -- I'll bet that will _really_ help get Republicans and independents voting for Kerry this time, right? > or happen to be a decorated Viet Nam war hero. Like the 264 Swift Boat Vets who Kerry has spent the last weeks slandering and attempting to silence through legal threats? Or do you mean that only veterans who agree with Kerry should be allowed to speak? > It just blows my mind how Dumbya and Dickie Cheny have the cajones to degrade > Kerry's service in Viet Nam. He actually served as oppossed to ducking, hiding > and getting drunk. Another fine compliment to the millions who, like Bush, are serving their nation in the National Guard. Way to get out those swing voters, man! And since we're on the subject, why is Cheney a `draft dodger' in your book for getting a deferment when he was 33 and a father, when Edwards, who got the same exact deferment when he as 18 and unmarried, is not? > Cant wait to see Dumbya voted out!! Yup. Let's touch base November 3, eh, and see how you're feeling! :-) - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNg/BRxzMSZ/9vAMRAke0AKCZdxkUwFffme6x9C9GEouWmt8lqgCgi+QX wTU+vaoxYQLz03k8hZg2oAg= =IPjl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From garymei at optonline.net Wed Sep 1 11:20:37 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Wed Sep 1 11:20:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: That's easy. DynCorp, Raytheon, and Bechtel. >Um.. Please name one other company that could do what your claiming can be >done.. Halaburton is like the Microsoft of what they do.. >Name one other company that can say that they have had to lay people off >due to H getting the job? >Do you really think that the DNC would not have told us these facts if >they where true? >Until you can come up with some facts please STFU! >Denis From jital at charter.net Wed Sep 1 11:29:27 2004 From: jital at charter.net (Jeff Ital) Date: Wed Sep 1 11:24:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke References: Message-ID: <000f01c49051$9d200a90$6401a8c0@screamin> Preach on!! Jeff Ital ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Wise" To: "Paul Kenny" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 1:06 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > > > Sorry Jim, what I am refering to is Dumbya's intentional lies and deceptions to > > the American people that drug us into a war in Iraq. Preemptive attack to stop > > Yes, yes. Keep up the conspiracy theories. Go on, tell us how Bush > planned 9/11. Tell us about all of the `liars': > > * Tell us how the UN Security Council are liars, when they voted > UNANIMOUSLY, in November 2002, that Iraq was still in violation of > dozens of UNSC resolutions, and must face `serious consequences' > > * Tell us how the US Senate and House were all liars when, with access > to the same intelligence Bush had, they voted _overwhelmingly_ to > support the war -- including your boys Kerry and Edwards (perhaps > Kerry has an excuse -- he has since admitted he was `too busy' to > attend _any_ of the intelligence briefings in that period!) > > * Tell us how the intelligence services both of nations which > supported the war (the UK, Poland, dozens of others), and those > which opposed the war (France, Germany, Russia, a few others) were > `liars' when they reported (correctly) that Saddam still had the > _capacity to produce_ WMD > > * Tell us how the bipartisan 9/11 commission were `liars' when they > confirmed both that Saddam _had_ made repeated efforts to buy > yellow-cake uranium in Africa, and his extensive `working > relationship' with al Qaeda. (What's the matter? Haven't read the > report yet? I _really_ suggest you go do so before your next post. > > > > an immenent threat when > > `Imminent threat' here is _your_ phrase. Bush, in his 2003 State of the > Union address, said something _very_ different: > > Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. > Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, > politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat > is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all > words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in > the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, > and it is not an option. > > > > a) there were NO WMD, let me repeat NO WMD. > > You can repeat it as many times as you want. I advise you to keep doing > so if it makes you feel good. :-) > > What there _were_ were dozens of precursor materials, millions of pages > of documentation, hundreds of dual-use facilities, and all the other > material needed to produce WMDs, should Saddam decide again to use them. > > This is a man who had _repeatedly_ used chemical and biological weapons > in the past, including against his own people in huge areas of Iraq, and > you're still arguing that he couldn't make them if he wanted them, and > wouldn't use them if he had them? Really? > > > > and b) NO LINK to Al Queda repeat NO LINK to Al Queda. > > Sorry, you're still reading from last seasons `loony left anti-war' > script. Now that the links between Saddam and al Qaeda have been > extensively documented, both by the 9/11 Commission, and in a number of > excellent books such as Stephen Hayes' excellent _The Connection_, > you're supposed to say ``so what if he was helping al Qaeda, there were > other countries doing the same thing?''. > > Get with the program, man! > > > > So why are we there? This is making America more secure? How by > > creating an unstable country in the middle of hte middle east? By > > I'm fascinated that you describe Saddam Hussein's Iraq, a nation of > daily murder, torture, and atrocity with strong ties to terrorism, and > the capacity to produce WMD to arm these groups as `stable' and `making > America more secure'. > > As it happens, between Iraq and Afghanistan, _50 million_ people now > live in free and equal societies where before they lived under > repression and torture. Millions of people who have lived their whole > lives without voting are registered to vote, and have already elected > local leaders in preparation for national elections. Millions of > people need no longer worry that if they say the wrong phrase, they will > be whisked off to be torn apart by dogs, beheaded in public squares, > stoned to death, or fed into industrial plastic shredders. > > There _used_ to be a time when such a victory for human rights would > have exhilarated the left, would have been seen for what it is. > > That the left now cheers the thugs who would prevent elections in these > nations, and sees such liberations as a `tragedy' and a `setback' is as > good a capsule definition as I'll ever be able to provide of why they > have lost so much respect in this nation. > > > > opening the door to Islamic Extremists? > > Perhaps it is your belief that those who attacked us on September 11 > would no longer be attacking us if we were not in Iraq? If you are > wrong in this belief, of course, surely you can not argue that we would > be better off fighting them here in the downtown areas of our major > cities than in Iraq, right? > > > > Mark my words we will either be in Iraq for 10+ years still losing men > > OR we will abandon the country to a civil war. > > Only one candidate in this election is calling for the abandonment of > the Iraqi people to the thugs who oppose freedom there, and that > candidate is John Kerry. > > > > BTW draftdodging Bush and his draft dodging lackies > > Now _there's_ a reasoned and coherent argument. Let's be honest, Mr. > Kenny. You on the left have always held the American military man in > the highest of contempt. You can see an example of the type of > disinformation John Kerry himself was spreading about our military in > 1971 right here: > > http://www.perryonpolitics.com/archives/002143.html > > Do not _now_ try to claim that only those whose military service was in > a branch of the service of which _you_ approve (Bush's service in the > National Guard being equivalent to `draft dodging in your book, a true > insult to the millions serving honorably therein to this day) is some > sort of prerequisite for intelligent thought. > > But, if you really believe this, how about a challenge? Will you agree > to vote on November 2 in the same way that polls at that time show that > the majority of our soldiers and veterans are voting? Will you? > > Well? > > > > invaded a country based on, at best, faulty intelligence, with far too > > insufficient forces to secure the country and with NO basic > > understanding of Iraq culture. > > And this is why you will lose this election. While other Americans see > millions and millions of Iraqis enjoy their new-found freedoms and > rejoice, you see their liberation as a mistake. While other Americans > understand that _whatever_ the reason for the Iraqi war, abandoning the > Iraqi people now would be a tragedy, you seek cheap political points. > In the end, you can only look back, never forward, and you have talked > yourself into a corner where the only good news for your position is bad > news for the country you claim to love, and the only chance you have of > election is that the country you claim to love falters, or fails. > > > > They invaded Iraq because Dumbya talks and listens to God instead of his > > advisors (who weren't parroting his position) or those who actually have an > > understanding of history in the Middle East. > > What would an `understanding' of history in the Middle East teach us, > pray tell? The reasons why it would be acceptable for Saddam's murder > and tyranny to continue? The reason `those people' over there don't > deserve democracy and freedom? Isn't telling us that if we only > understood Arabs we would not seek to liberate them the most obscene > form of bigotry and ethnocentrism? > > > > SCARY!!! > > > > Oh yeah and he can't even think of a mistake or something he wouldnt do > > differently. > > Hey, John Kerry said a week ago that if he had it all to do over again, > knowing then what he knows now, he would still have voted to go to war > in Iraq. Presumably, having voted to send our troops there, he would > still have voted _against_ the $87 billion needed to provide food, > shelter, ammunition, and body armor to the troops once they were in > harms way, too. What sense does _that_ make? > > > > BTW with regards to Afghanistan perhaps with 100,000 +American troops on the > > ground we would be able to mount effective search missions for the actual > > leader behind the 9/11 attack, not some no account dictator who we had under > > control. > > Mmm-hmm. Our commanders on the ground have been given every soldier > they have ever asked for. If we needed more soldiers on the ground in > Afghanistan, there are still divisions upon divisions we could send > there. In actual fact, Afghanistan is doing quite well, with > reconstruction way ahead of schedule, the rule of law spreading to the > farthest ends of the nation, and national elections coming soon. > > Meanwhile, most experts agree that many senior al Qaeda are now in the > Waziristan province of Pakistan, where we have avoided a major presence > by working with Pakistani forces. Since you're so gung-ho about sending > troops to where bin Laden may be (showing an obsession with revenge > instead of prevention), would you support an invasion there? > > Would you? > > > > Lies, Lies, Lies > > More rational and coherent debate, I see. > > > > The Compassionate Republican party, unless you happen to be gay or believe in > > science or a minority or believe we shouldnt have invaded Iraq > > Keep on talking like that -- I'll bet that will _really_ help get > Republicans and independents voting for Kerry this time, right? > > > > or happen to be a decorated Viet Nam war hero. > > Like the 264 Swift Boat Vets who Kerry has spent the last weeks > slandering and attempting to silence through legal threats? Or do you > mean that only veterans who agree with Kerry should be allowed to speak? > > > > It just blows my mind how Dumbya and Dickie Cheny have the cajones to degrade > > Kerry's service in Viet Nam. He actually served as oppossed to ducking, hiding > > and getting drunk. > > Another fine compliment to the millions who, like Bush, are serving > their nation in the National Guard. Way to get out those swing voters, > man! > > And since we're on the subject, why is Cheney a `draft dodger' in your > book for getting a deferment when he was 33 and a father, when Edwards, > who got the same exact deferment when he as 18 and unmarried, is not? > > > > Cant wait to see Dumbya voted out!! > > Yup. Let's touch base November 3, eh, and see how you're feeling! :-) > > - -- > Jim Wise > jwise@draga.com > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) > > iD8DBQFBNg/BRxzMSZ/9vAMRAke0AKCZdxkUwFffme6x9C9GEouWmt8lqgCgi+QX > wTU+vaoxYQLz03k8hZg2oAg= > =IPjl > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > 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 jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 11:30:27 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 11:30:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Gary Mei wrote: >That's easy. DynCorp, Raytheon, and Bechtel. Methinks you have misunderstood Denis' question: are you claiming that any of these companies could do the job of feeding, housing, and providing mail service and other communications infrastructure which keeps our troops healthy, comfortable, and safe? This job is now being done by Haliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown, and Root (KBR), under contracts first negotiated in the mid nineties. (Who was president then? I seem to have forgotten...) This alone is one of the largest chunks of money being paid to Haliburton, in an area in which none of the companies you name are competitive. Another big chunk of money being paid to Haliburton is to transport oil _into_ Iraq, so that our soldiers won't use a _drop_ of locally produced POL products. Why is this necessary? So that boobs like Michael Moore and several of the posters on this list can't claim that we're ``stealing'' _any_ of Iraq's oil! That's right. You, me, and all other Americans on this list are paying extra to shut the likes of Michael Moore up, while not a _drop_ of Iraqi oil is going to support the liberation of their own country, or to otherwise help Americans in any way. Still sure you're being robbed by those of us on the _right_? - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNhVHRxzMSZ/9vAMRAqPxAKCmc1OJAFPKw7VbJKzJID3mT1x3igCfRSjd guiUQg0bPWJJaqzNazv/YHg= =B6Bi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From garymei at optonline.net Wed Sep 1 11:40:42 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Wed Sep 1 11:41:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: >Methinks you have misunderstood Denis' question: are you claiming that >any of these companies could do the job of feeding, housing, and >providing mail service and other communications infrastructure which >keeps our troops healthy, comfortable, and safe? >This job is now being done by Haliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown, and >Root (KBR), under contracts first negotiated in the mid nineties. (Who >was president then? I seem to have forgotten...) >This alone is one of the largest chunks of money being paid to >Haliburton, in an area in which none of the companies you name are >competitive. Where are you getting that one from??? Bechtel is doing the bulk of the work in Iraq that Halliburton isn't doing. And in the last round of bidding for this type of work which was actually open, both DynCorp and Raytheon made bids. I'm sure those 3 companies would be shocked at your assertions. And I doubt very much that these companies would charge the government for millions of meals that were never served to our troops. >Another big chunk of money being paid to Haliburton is to transport oil >_into_ Iraq, so that our soldiers won't use a _drop_ of locally produced >POL products. >Why is this necessary? So that boobs like Michael Moore and several of >the posters on this list can't claim that we're ``stealing'' _any_ of >Iraq's oil! >That's right. You, me, and all other Americans on this list are paying >extra to shut the likes of Michael Moore up, while not a _drop_ of Iraqi >oil is going to support the liberation of their own country, or to >otherwise help Americans in any way. >Still sure you're being robbed by those of us on the _right_? That's some gall there. Halliburton was caught with its fingers in the cookie jar, paying millions of dollars more than necessary to import the oil, and now you're using that as their defense? *giggle* I'm sure there are *plenty* of companies that can handle importing oil. From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 11:51:37 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:00:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: so where are the WMD that Dumbya KNEW were there? Where is the smoking gun connecting Saddam to Osama Bin Laden? LIES LIES LIES. That is what the compassionate Republicans are all about. Great case for war Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: denis@teachlinux.com To: Paul Kenny CC: jwise@draga.com, , Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 11:44:00 -0600 (MDT) Um.. Please name one other company that could do what your claiming can be done.. Halaburton is like the Microsoft of what they do.. Name one other company that can say that they have had to lay people off due to H getting the job? Do you really think that the DNC would not have told us these facts if they where true? Until you can come up with some facts please STFU! Denis On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > > Of course John Kerry never lied us into a War in Iraq to benefit his Vice > President's business interest and to please his father. > > Think what 130,000 troops could be achieving in Afghanistan or is Osama Bin > Laden not responsible for 9/11 > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: Jim Wise > To: Jeff Barber > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:10:04 -0400 (EDT) > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Jeff Barber wrote: > > >I know better but I just can't help myself. > > > >>Besides, on the night that _John McCain_ speaks, > > > >Ah, John McCain. The same McCain that disagrees with the position of > >his party on gays, abortion, the environmen and budget deficits. > > This may come as a bit of a shock to you, if you've just come from > seeing the over-edited conformity-fest in Boston, where candidates were > required to submit their speeches in advance, so that they could be > re-written by the Democratic party to match party line, but there are a > wide range of views on a wide range of issues within the Republican > party, and _no one_ is pressed to conform to some imaginary party line. > > As it happens, I disagree with Mr. McCain on several issues, some of > them among the list you've given above. But you know what? I agree > with him strongly on one position which he's been stating for years now > - -- that this election is crucial to the future of our nation, and that > the best candidate in this election is George W. Bush. > > How do you like them apples? :-) > > > >>even as Kerry's Vietnam > >>record looks more and more dubious, > > > >Really? To whom? The "Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth", whatever > >their truth may be, have been thoroughly and completely discredited. > >Not only are they wrong, but they have been shown to be nothing more > >than a front group for ultra-conservative money (in fact, the same > >people that tried to smear John McCain's war record in 2000), if not > >just a front for King George II's campaign. Read all about it here: > > Yes, yes. Like Kerry's talking heads on TV, keep repeating to yourself > that the SwiftVets have been `discredited'. But don't expect it to > stick as long as claim after claim which Kerry has made falls apart. > Let's look at the record: > > * Kerry has repeatedly claimed that he was in Cambodia ``ordered there > by President Nixon'' on Christmas Eve, 1968. The Wall Street > Journal, for instance, has pointed out no fewer than _four_ times, > all on the official congressional record, when he told this story. > > Yet his official biography says he was not in Cambodia on this date, > President Nixon was still four weeks away from taking office on this > date, and not a _single_ person other than Kerry who served on a > swift boat in Vietnam -- not even those who are fervently supporting > him -- agrees that _any_ swift boat was in Cambodia anywhere near > that time. > > Pressed on the matter, Kerry has since suggested that he was _not_ > in Cambodia on this date, but ``often went their later'', yet none > of his crew members, not even those supporting him, remember any > later trips either. > > > * Kerry has now published no fewer than three contradictory accounts > of the action in which he received his first Bronze star. There are > similar problems with his Silver Star -- the form he has provided > for the press describes it as a `Silver Star with Combat V', yet as > the Navy confirmed last week, _no_ branch of the US military has > _ever_ awarded a Combat V on a silver star -- there is no such medal. > > Yet Kerry persists in refusing to sign a Form 180 to allow release > of the original of this document to the press > > > * Upon returning from Vietnam, Kerry traveled the country slandering > his fellow vets, saying before congress that: > > ``I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say > that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at > which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly > decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in > Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a > day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all > levels of command.... > > They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut > off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to > human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up > bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion > reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, > poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of > South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the > normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied > bombing power of this country.'' > > John McCain has testified that when he was a POW in North Vietnam, > this testimony of Kerry's was repeatedly played back for him and > other POWs in an attempt to demoralize them, and has also repeatedly > criticized Kerry for this, saying just yesterday that this > testimony, which Kerry has never disowned, should be a part of the > current debate. > > > * of the men who served with Kerry in Vietnam (and yes, I do mean > `served with' -- all of these men had the same job as Kerry in the > same region at the same time, and the LA Times has corrected their > original claim otherwise, 264 oppose Kerry, and less than a > dozen support him. > > Indeed, of the 20 men in the picture of Kerry in Vietnam which he > shopped around at the convention, 13 oppose him, and only one > supports him. One. > > This may or may not tell us how clean Kerry's record is, but it sure > tells us a lot about the effect he had on the men around him. > > > Even while running from each of these statements of his which turned out > to be false, Kerry has tried throwing every accusation he can think of > at the SwiftVets, only to find that none of them stand up: > > * That they are simply Republicans -- The SwiftVets include many > members of each major political party, as well as a number of > independents. John O'Neill, one of the two leaders of the group, > voted for Al Gore in 2000, dislikes Bush (he calls him an `empty > suit'), and has a long record of supporting candidates from both > parties. But he _also_ has known Kerry since his time in Vietnam > (where he served for _years_, not the 100 days which Kerry spent > there before getting himself shipped home on a technicality), and > he believes that Kerry is completely unfit to be commander in chief. > > * That they are controlled by the Republican party -- Kerry keeps > claiming this, but has yet to show a single instance of such a link > -- and his raising this issue has rebounded on him, as links between > his campaign and 527 groups such as MoveOn.org which has spent 65 > _million_ dollars on ads (compared to $200,000 spent by the > SwiftVets). > > * That they did not serve with Kerry directly -- the LA Times tried > this one out, and ended up printing an embarrassed retraction when > they realized that _all_ of the SwiftVets served in the same branch > of the service as Kerry in the same place at the same time. Indeed, > two of Kerry's four crew members have come out against him, as well > as 13 of the twenty vets in the photo which Kerry made the > centerpiece of his convention (just one of the 20 in the > photo supports Kerry, four are deceased). > > > >>suggesting that it's _this_ party > >>which has a Vietnam problem is... amusing. > > > >You may find it amusing but I don't. It's not a problem if you didn't > >serve but being a chickenhawk like, King George, Dick Cheney, Tom > >Delay, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz and Bill O'Reilly is. For more on the > >Chickenhawks, look here (courtesy of the New Hampshire Gazette): > > Fascinating. George Bush spent the entire war flying air patrol > missions over our nation's Southeast, but this service is somehow > discounted in your worldview. Does this disrespect for the National > Guard extend to the millions of others who have served there honorably, > or just Mr. Bush? > > Likewise, when you fault Cheney, thirty years old and a father at the > time, for not being drafted, why do you not fault John Edwards, just > eighteen at the time, who got the same deferment? Or Howard Dean, who > got a deferment for a `bad spine' and then spent the war as a _Skiing > instructor_ in Colorado? > > And if service in Vietnam is some sort of prerequisite for political > credibility in your book, why do you advise us to ignore McCain's > endorsement? In what branch did you serve? In what war? > > > >>And slavery? I may be a bit confused, but can you tell me the political > >>party of any of the following: > > > > > > > >Well thank God for the Republicans, > > I do. Often. :-) > > > >the champions of civil rights and minorities worldwide. Come on, this > >doesn't even make it to the giggle test, much less pass it. > > Hey, if you want to hold the party which ran a segregationist candidate > for President, which fought (literally and violently) to prevent > integration of schools, and which filibustered the Civil Rights Act > _and_ the Voting Rights Act, before doing a 180 degree turn and calling > for racial quotas to enforce a whole new type of discrimination up as > some sort of paragons of civil rights, you're free to do so. > > You'll have to forgive me if I'm not too impressed, though. :-) > > - -- > Jim Wise > jwise@draga.com > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) > > iD8DBQFBNM0QRxzMSZ/9vAMRAmiHAJ90EFSLQDGIYAXBeaLTP001HSr3LwCgm01n > gTsL8tZQg722hLIGF2zc9zY= > =LTIJ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and > more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 12:12:08 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:21:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Gary Mei wrote: >Where are you getting that one from??? Bechtel is doing the bulk of the >work in Iraq that Halliburton isn't doing. And in the last round of bidding >for this type of work which was actually open, both DynCorp and Raytheon >made bids. I'm sure those 3 companies would be shocked at your assertions. >And I doubt very much that these companies would charge the government for >millions of meals that were never served to our troops. Again, you're confusing the _type_ of work being discussed. Dyncorp, for instance, is _already_ the largest PMC (Private Military Contractor) active in Iraq, with a $2 billion contract which dwarfs KBR's contract - -- but it is not active in the same area. While Dyncorp mainly provides security services, KBR provides trucking, mail delivery, shelter construction, and meal service. Likewise, Bechtel has been _very_ successful in contracts to provide POL-related production support and rebuilding, but is similarly not competing with KBR. Meanwhile, KBR, the largest Haliburton group in Iraq, is providing these services -- trucking, base construction, meal service -- under contracts first signed in the mid nineties, when Dick Cheney was a private citizen, and ... someone else... was in the White House. But we mustn't let silly things like _facts_ ruin a good conspiracy theory, right? >That's some gall there. Halliburton was caught with its fingers in the >cookie jar, paying millions of dollars more than necessary to import the >oil, and now you're using that as their defense? *giggle* > >I'm sure there are *plenty* of companies that can handle importing oil. Actually, you've got your facts a little wrong here -- Haliburton was caught _paying_ too much for oil in the early months of the war, and passing on the costs at no additional profit to themselves. Although a bipartisan congressional probe found no wrongdoing in the matter, Haliburton still soaked the cost of this when they agreed to pay back the difference between the price _they_ had been paying for the oil and the going price. Incidentally, you know why they got ripped off, right? Because they were encouraged to quickly find Kuwaiti sources of oil, as a way to reward the Kuwaitis for their support and withdraw contracts from Saudi sources. But perhaps you would be happier if the Saudis were getting _more_ of our money? So again, what are you arguing here? That Dyncorp, already the largest single PMC in Iraq by providing services which they are experts at should have _also_ gotten the contract to provides services that they aren't as good at? That Raytheon should be cooking meals and driving trucks too, in addition to the billions of dollars of work they're already doing just to make sure that no Haliburton company gets _any_ contract, even where they can save the government money? That Haliburton entered into a conspiracy to get ripped off on Kuwaiti oil? Please keep your black-helicopter stories coherent at least! - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNh8LRxzMSZ/9vAMRApVIAJ9KGSIBrxy0eOxTbaAyrnfma60DxgCcD4d7 psVsIsRyyFGob6AvVDyTJzI= =WFem -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mastadon61 at cox.net Wed Sep 1 12:15:58 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:21:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A4.15 & A12.15 vs concealed SMC Message-ID: <20040901191558.NOZC4228.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> > The Task Check has to be passed in the location since the SMC was > concealed, but the 238 must add the TEM of the building to its TC DR. > The 238 could only actually enter the location and perform the OVR if it > passes its TC; if it fails, it is done for the MPh. > > Assuming the SMC is not capable of attacking with PBF/TPBF, what you > stae in 2b below is correct. > > -Chas > Thanks Chas, But, what if I don't want to be in that hex? Can I forgo the NTC and remain in the original hex? Is #1 a valid option or is the HS required to take the NTC? Don Hancock > mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > > >A 238 HS attempts to enter a building hex containing a single concealed unit, expending 2 MF. The concealed unit is revealed as per A12.15 Detection as a 6+1 SMC. What are the HS's options? > > > >1) Expend 0 MF, and return to the previous hex > >2) Expend 2 additional MF, declare an infantry overrun. > >2a) Fails the NTC and is returned to the previous hex > >2b) Passes the NTC and lets the SMC choose between immediate CC or entering an adjacent Accessible Location of the ATTACKERS choice. > > > >Thanks for your help. > > > >Don Hancock > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 Wed Sep 1 12:19:52 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:22:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A4.15 & A12.15 vs concealed SMC Message-ID: <391r9h$7u88p0@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> Yes, you don't have to perform the OVR if you don't want to; but your 238 would have to end its move in the hex it was returned to. -Chas > > From: > Date: 2004/09/01 Wed PM 07:15:58 GMT > To: Chas Argent > CC: > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] A4.15 & A12.15 vs concealed SMC > > > > The Task Check has to be passed in the location since the SMC was > > concealed, but the 238 must add the TEM of the building to its TC DR. > > The 238 could only actually enter the location and perform the OVR if it > > passes its TC; if it fails, it is done for the MPh. > > > > Assuming the SMC is not capable of attacking with PBF/TPBF, what you > > stae in 2b below is correct. > > > > -Chas > > > Thanks Chas, > > But, what if I don't want to be in that hex? Can I forgo the NTC and remain in the original hex? Is #1 a valid option or is the HS required to take the NTC? > > Don Hancock > > > mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > > > > >A 238 HS attempts to enter a building hex containing a single concealed unit, expending 2 MF. The concealed unit is revealed as per A12.15 Detection as a 6+1 SMC. What are the HS's options? > > > > > >1) Expend 0 MF, and return to the previous hex > > >2) Expend 2 additional MF, declare an infantry overrun. > > >2a) Fails the NTC and is returned to the previous hex > > >2b) Passes the NTC and lets the SMC choose between immediate CC or entering an adjacent Accessible Location of the ATTACKERS choice. > > > > > >Thanks for your help. > > > > > >Don Hancock > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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 jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 12:22:30 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:22:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > so where are the WMD that Dumbya KNEW were there? Facilities capable of their production have been found all over Iraq. Signs that Saddam was seeking their raw materials, including yellow-cake uranium, once dismissed as `lies' by your party have since been confirmed by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission report. You cannot still with a straight face argue that Saddam, who had used chemical and biological weapons repeatedly in the past, and who we now know had _never_ dismantled the facilities capable of their production could not have produced them at any time. You can, I suppose, argue that we should somehow have been compelled to wait until he had already produced them and handed them off to some of the many terrorist groups with which he had ties before doing something about this threat, but you would be rather silly to do so. No, I agree with Bush -- with such a threat, if one waits until the danger is `imminent', one has already waited _far_ too long. > Where is the smoking gun Mr. Kenny, you seem to forget here that a gun only smokes _after_ it has been fired. Surely you are not arguing that we should have waited to be _attacked_ with these weapons before doing something about the threat? > connecting Saddam to Osama Bin Laden? Again, you're reading from an old script. With the 9/11 Commission report and dozens of recent books extensively documenting Saddam's `working relationship' with al Qaeda, this question just doesn't hold up any more. > LIES LIES LIES. That is what the compassionate Republicans are all > about. Again, is this what passes for rational debate with you? Is this how you are in your home life? I can just imagine: SO: ``Paul, you forgot to buy butter on the way home.'' Paul: ``LIES LIES LIES!!! That is what buying butter is all about!'' > Great case for war Yup. - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNiF5RxzMSZ/9vAMRAuZHAKC3gKdh2PVFO69lgjjW0sENlyDRAwCeKbHU owKDHEQ96zi7GQGqHvSvEbQ= =rG02 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From swfancher at mindspring.com Wed Sep 1 12:29:08 2004 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:30:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040901152437.01dc6628@mindspring.com> Must have been a "black helicopter" that came through the ASLML this morning and said this was going to be taken off-list. I keep hoping.... At 10:23 AM 9/1/2004, Jim Wise wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > > > Of course John Kerry never lied us into a War in Iraq to benefit his Vice > > President's business interest and to please his father. > >Oh, poor, poor Paul. Did the black helicopters come and take your baby >away, too? Would you like to share with us how you fit your tinfoil >hat? Are you still at home pouting that that mean, mean, John McCain >called your hero, Michael Moore what he is? > > > > Think what 130,000 troops could be achieving in Afghanistan or is Osama Bin > > Laden not responsible for 9/11 > >If more troops could be useful in Afghanistan, they would be there -- >it's not like we have a shortage! :-) > >More generally, Afghanistan now has liberty, equality, the rule of law, >and almost the entire eligible voting population has _already_ >registered to vote in the upcoming elections. Just what are you >suggesting that we could be accomplishing there with `more troops' that >is not already being accomplished? > >Or are you parroting the John Kerry line that ``Arabic-speaking >intelligence assets were taken out of Afghanistan to work in Iraq'' -- >a line which is really quite amusing when one considers that _no one in >Afghanistan speaks Arabic_. (The native language of Afghanistan is >Pashto, with minority populations speaking Urdu and other indic >tongues). > >- -- > Jim Wise > jwise@draga.com >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) > >iD8DBQFBNdtcRxzMSZ/9vAMRAknQAKC5dTjUX2z/mKdQBMI/Ch2nDquoAACgtosq >MDK6LWAZ78HHErnHu1bFZKg= >=nZIs >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >_______________________________________________ >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 pete at rockdata.com Wed Sep 1 12:33:47 2004 From: pete at rockdata.com (pete@rockdata.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:32:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry Message-ID: <51169.143.127.131.4.1094067227.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> Sorry about this to all who are disinterested. I bought and read the first couple of chapters of _Unfit for Command_ (by the swift boat vets). One fact presented in this book, that I find shocking, is not being talked about by either side. In Ho Chi Min city there is a museum dedicated to those who help the North win their war. John Kerry has his picture on the wall, along with Jane Fonda, as those who influenced Washington to withdraw troops. Although it has been a while since my Code of Conduct classes this is a fine example of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy", the definition of being a traitor. Why in the world would one vote for such a traitor regardless of politics? Besides even the DNC doesn't want Kerry to win. If he does Hilliary cannot run in 2008. My money is on Gulliani -vs- Clinton. Pete "you don't need a crystal ball for that one" Belford From asl at thuring.com Wed Sep 1 12:36:20 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:34:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <41362173.2A89@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <5.0.0.25.2.20040831095612.00ae83b0@mailserver.nist.gov> <4135E72E.7000407@charter.net> <41362173.2A89@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <413624B4.1060205@thuring.com> Hi listers, SSR 3 for this scenario states "If this hex *or* any unit in it is hit by the MA of a Sturmtiger, the ammunition depot explodes ...". So it seems the hex can be hit even if empty. Which Target Type would be used as the ATT is NA for the Sturmtiger? cheers, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 21:32:00 up 2 days, 6:23, 1 user, load average: 0.16, 0.10, 0.03 From garymei at optonline.net Wed Sep 1 12:34:38 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:36:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >Again, you're confusing the _type_ of work being discussed. Dyncorp, >for instance, is _already_ the largest PMC (Private Military Contractor) >active in Iraq, with a $2 billion contract which dwarfs KBR's contract >- -- but it is not active in the same area. While Dyncorp mainly provides >security services, KBR provides trucking, mail delivery, shelter >construction, and meal service. >Likewise, Bechtel has been _very_ successful in contracts to provide >POL-related production support and rebuilding, but is similarly not >competing with KBR. >Meanwhile, KBR, the largest Haliburton group in Iraq, is providing these >services -- trucking, base construction, meal service -- under contracts >first signed in the mid nineties, when Dick Cheney was a private >citizen, and ... someone else... was in the White House. >But we mustn't let silly things like _facts_ ruin a good conspiracy >theory, right? Yeah, like the fact that there have been 3 previous LOGCAP contracts bid and awarded. One from 1992 awarded to Halliburton, one from 1997 awarded to DynCorp, and one in 2001 awarded to Halliburton after beating out Raytheon and DynCorp. IOW, DynCorp has *already* won a contract and done this sort of work for the government before. Methinks you should actually check your own facts before making silly phony accusations. >Actually, you've got your facts a little wrong here -- Haliburton was >caught _paying_ too much for oil in the early months of the war, and >passing on the costs at no additional profit to themselves. Although a >bipartisan congressional probe found no wrongdoing in the matter, >Haliburton still soaked the cost of this when they agreed to pay back >the difference between the price _they_ had been paying for the oil and >the going price. Yeah, after_they_were_caught_with_their_fingers_in_the_cookie_jar. If they didn't refund the money, they would've been heavily fined, and the government would've terminated their contracts. And you're dead wrong about "no additional profit to themselves". They are operating on a "cost plus" contract. IOW, the higher their expenses, the more money they make. It was in their own direct best interest to find the costliest supplier possible. Various whistleblowers have already detailed how management encouraged them to not worry about costs or finding the best prices for subcontracts. >Incidentally, you know why they got ripped off, right? Because they >were encouraged to quickly find Kuwaiti sources of oil, as a way to >reward the Kuwaitis for their support and withdraw contracts from Saudi >sources. But perhaps you would be happier if the Saudis were getting >_more_ of our money? What baloney! They actively sought high prices, even though they could get much lower prices from Turkey, because cost plus means that profits rise with expenses. >So again, what are you arguing here? That Dyncorp, already the largest >single PMC in Iraq by providing services which they are experts at >should have _also_ gotten the contract to provides services that they >aren't as good at? That Raytheon should be cooking meals and driving >trucks too, in addition to the billions of dollars of work they're >already doing just to make sure that no Haliburton company gets _any_ >contract, even where they can save the government money? That >Haliburton entered into a conspiracy to get ripped off on Kuwaiti oil? How about competitive bidding and better oversight on all bidding in Iraq? No bid Cost Plus contracts are a direct invitation to rip off the taxpayer. >Please keep your black-helicopter stories coherent at least! I find it hilarious that the far Right is the first to rip on waste and fraud in the government, except when it comes from one of their pet darlings. ROFL. From MPitcavage at adl.org Wed Sep 1 12:36:56 2004 From: MPitcavage at adl.org (Pitcavage, Mark) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:37:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95176@nymail.adl.org> I do not have any urge to discuss my political opinions with ASLers and I definitely have no wish to have those of others forced on me--whether I might agree with them or not. This list is already subject to the worst sorts of flamewars and namecallings. Why add fuel to the fire by bringing in politics? Let's just leave it at ASL. From jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 12:46:03 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:46:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry In-Reply-To: <51169.143.127.131.4.1094067227.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> References: <51169.143.127.131.4.1094067227.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 pete@rockdata.com wrote: >Sorry about this to all who are disinterested. > >I bought and read the first couple of chapters of _Unfit for Command_ (by >the swift boat vets). > >One fact presented in this book, that I find shocking, is not being talked >about by either side. In Ho Chi Min city there is a museum dedicated to >those who help the North win their war. John Kerry has his picture on the >wall, along with Jane Fonda, as those who influenced Washington to >withdraw troops. > >Although it has been a while since my Code of Conduct classes this is a >fine example of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy", the definition of >being a traitor. Why in the world would one vote for such a traitor >regardless of politics? Indeed. If this is not enough of an example, consider two more: * in 1971, Kerry traveled to Paris at the time of the peace negotiations with North Vietnam, and with a delegation of his group, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, _met privately with representatives of the North Vietnamese government_. You can read more about this trip here: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/03/25/kerry_spoke_of_meeting_negotiators_on_vietnam/ (and that's the Boston Globe, which is _hardly_ a `conservative' paper by _any_ definition). * as mentioned before, in 1971, John Kerry went before the US Congress, and gave testimony in which he asserted that all manner of atrocities and mass murders were being carried out by US Soldiers in Vietnam as a matter of policy. This testimony is reproduced in _Unfit for Command_, and can also be seen here: http://www.pbs.org/greatspeeches/timeline/j_kerry_s.html (again, PBS chosen as a source for this story as no one can argue that they have a _conservative_ bias). John McCain and other former POWs have reported that this testimony was repeatedly played back to them in between torture sessions in North Vietnamese prisons in an attempt to destroy their morale. As one former POW and friend of the SwiftVets has put it ``John Kerry gave the North Vietnamese for free what we underwent torture to avoid giving up''. And yet, thirty years later, in his bizarre self-obsession, Kerry _doesn't understand_ why so many veterans are angry at him! >Besides even the DNC doesn't want Kerry to win. If he does Hilliary >cannot run in 2008. My money is on Gulliani -vs- Clinton. Heh, mmmm. Another possibility is Giuliani vs. Clinton when she's up for re-election to the Senate in two years, with an eye toward a senate defeat which would make it hard for her to turn around and run for President two years later. Believe me, as a New Yorker, I'm waiting. :-) - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD4DBQFBNib+RxzMSZ/9vAMRAl76AJd0n2pJY5c4toVj4uQoZG+HTQscAKCI8SBs 98AJ3KN6wETpA0KuZM124A== =4EOL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 12:46:09 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:46:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: If this is true then why do we not hear them crying about it? Your wrong, and need to look for a bit more, or any facts, noot just something someone told you. You have to be a smart person, you figured out ASL.. Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Gary Mei wrote: > That's easy. DynCorp, Raytheon, and Bechtel. > > > > > >Um.. Please name one other company that could do what your claiming can be > >done.. Halaburton is like the Microsoft of what they do.. > > >Name one other company that can say that they have had to lay people off > >due to H getting the job? > > >Do you really think that the DNC would not have told us these facts if > >they where true? > > >Until you can come up with some facts please STFU! > > >Denis > > _______________________________________________ > 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 johnprovan4 at yahoo.com Wed Sep 1 12:47:24 2004 From: johnprovan4 at yahoo.com (John Provan) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:47:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry In-Reply-To: <51169.143.127.131.4.1094067227.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> Message-ID: <20040901194724.97353.qmail@web81206.mail.yahoo.com> I am sure John Kerry can control what the Viet-cong do with thier museums. I don't consider someone who won three purple hearts and a silver star to be a traitor. It is only when he runs for President that they want to dispute these awards - no one wanted to debate them prior to that. I am glad Kerry, Fonda and whoever else got us out of Vietnam - it was a war we were going to lose even if we were still there today. BTW, Kerry did it the way of the United States democracy through talking to Congress and protests. Protest should not be a evil world or idea - it is what we stand for being able to speak our hearts and minds. Bush likes to say " you are with us or against us" - in other words if you don't like the way I see things you are the enemy not just someone with a different point of view. And he was suppose to be a uniter - so much for that. It really irks me having served in the military for anyone's awards to be questioned. If they should be questioned then they shouldn't have gotten them to begin with. You don't debate them 30+ something years later. Now we will be in Iraq for years and years to come - wonderful. We still haven't removed our troops from Germany, Italy, Guam, Japan, Korea and everywhere else we went into - so we should be in Iraq for at least 40 more years. I can't wait to spend my tax dollars on that. I just love throwing my money away. I hope Kerry wins before Bush makes many more world enemies. He has more than half the world against us now - 4 more years he will have the other half against us. John > > One fact presented in this book, that I find > shocking, is not being talked > about by either side. In Ho Chi Min city there is a > museum dedicated to > those who help the North win their war. John Kerry > has his picture on the > wall, along with Jane Fonda, as those who influenced > Washington to > withdraw troops. > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 12:44:18 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:49:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: Ahhh Jim it is amazing how quickly Bushies flip flop from one of being leaders to followers, either Dumbya took the lead in invading Iraq or he followed the UN (of course we dont need the UN) or the Congress or other countries intelligence agencies. I do recall there being something of a fuss from the actaul WMD inspectors about our aggressive stance towards Iraq who were finding no evidence of WMD in Iraq but that is a fact easily overlooked by Dumbya. Gee the people actually in the country finding NO evidence were certainly wrong in their findings, that Saddam was just too cagy for them to find any evidence. Hmmm who was right there? So invading Iraq when engaged in Afghanistan was the only and best option to the threat of terrorism? I wish the Bushies could consider the fact that there are other ways to influence the world than a show of shock and awe. Most of the sympathy and good will recieved by the US after 9/11 has been lost because of Dumbya's hubristic and arrogant approach to his war on terror from Abu Graid to calling the invasion of Afghanistan a crusade to constant redefinition of the reasons for a war on Iraq. The fact of the matter there were a 1000 ways that we could have fought terrorism that did not involve an invasion of Iraq that were squandered and as a result terrorism grows. So the reason we went to war with Iraq was because of a few reams of paper? Good cause! And for that matter how come we arent invading N. Korea or Iran? Or what about teh genocide in Africa, we ignore that, or the systematic subjegation of an entire gender in Saudi Arabia (oops Saudi Arabia is where the majority of 9/11 high jackers and Osama bin Laden come from ), of course Saudi Arabia is our friend, (a very democratic society) Yes keep dreaming about hte link between Iraq and Al Queda perhaps enough people will be fooled. Thing is though that Iraq is NOW a hotbed for Islamic Extremists. hmmmm Afghanistan I dont argue with Bushies decision to attack, I think it was the right thing to do, I think it wasnt handled as well as it could have been, using untrained Afghan fighters in Boquba to go after the Taliban and Osama when American troops would have been better used is a great example. But that is only a failure (to some extent of execution). Here is an example of what could have been achieved. Used the 100+billion being spent in Iraq to rebuild Afghanistan, moderates in the Islamic world see this and respect America, Extremists influence is lessened. In stead we have Iraq, 100+billion spent not on reconstruction but security (mostly for Americans) and most voices in the Islamic world critisize our efforts. Just not smart actions. Point is Saddam was contained and now there is chaos in Iraq. BTW this wonderful democracy in Iraq, do you know what is happening in Fallujah? Another Taliban situation is the way I hear, of course AMericans cant even go into the city but that is another thing. Sadr City, another example of American neoconservative democracy. Najaf is under a ceasfire due to the efforts of a Shiite cleric and if you think that peace willl last, well>>> I am not disagreeing that the spread of democracy is not a great thing but the way it is being achieved is hypocritical, hubristic and arrogant. Why should the poor people under Saddam be liberated but not poor people living under despotic regimes elsewhere? Sudan, N. Korea. Iran, perhaps it is because Bush had something for Iraq from day 1. Another agenda. Kerry is not proposing abandoning Iraq but to internationalize the situation, something Bushie did as he went hat in hand to the UN. BTW teh Republicans love to paint the insurgents as thugs. Point of fact is that there are people in Iraq who dont like us, for religioius, cultural and other reasons. From what I understand it is a large percentage of the population, many of them have supported the insurgency (pictures of people dancing on burnt out humvees comes to mind) does that make them thugs? Or perhaps they want their country liberated from what they perceive as an invader. It gets back to my point of the neo-cons not understanding the culture they were invading, at least Colin Powell recognized that we would be taking responsibility for the entire nation. Shame Bush didnt understand what that means. They will be welcoming us with roses thown at our feet was what Cheney said (or something close to that). Seems that was a mistake, of course the Republicans would never characterize it that way. History tells us that there has NEVER been a working democracy in the middle east that came as a result of force of arms. That the people of Iraq are a splintered group with vastly different goals, beliefs, cultures. It is arrogant to have believed that by invading the country that it could somehow become a working democracy. Life aint that simple, unless you are a Bushie. Bottom line is that Bush and crew have CONSISTENTLY made mistakes in their handling of Iraq including case for war over WMD certainly not the immediate threat posed by Bush and Powell Links with Al Queda certainly not a close ties as Saudi Arabia Not Enough troops, the looting of Iraq after the Iraq army collapsed is a wonderful example of what went wrong Debaathification of even school teachers, big threat they posed, of course that ripped apart the fabric of Iraq society Abu Graib-Responsibility for this goes right to Rumsfeld desk and that memo detailling how the Geneva Convention does not apply Arrogant handling of the rest of the world-burning bridges and so many more You need to listen a little less to Rush Limbaugh and read more objective reporting of Kerry. BTW was it a flip flop by Bush that the war on terrorism couldnt be won? And your second to last point is hilarious. we have enough troops in Iraq? That the commanders have all the troops they want? That would be hilarious if it werent so sad. We have plenty of troops to guard the green zone but god forbid we had to leave that area. Of course we can just keep nondrafting people back into the service to fulfill our need for troops. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: Jim Wise To: Paul Kenny CC: jbarber@meic.org, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 14:06:53 -0400 (EDT) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > Sorry Jim, what I am refering to is Dumbya's intentional lies and deceptions to > the American people that drug us into a war in Iraq. Preemptive attack to stop Yes, yes. Keep up the conspiracy theories. Go on, tell us how Bush planned 9/11. Tell us about all of the `liars': * Tell us how the UN Security Council are liars, when they voted UNANIMOUSLY, in November 2002, that Iraq was still in violation of dozens of UNSC resolutions, and must face `serious consequences' * Tell us how the US Senate and House were all liars when, with access to the same intelligence Bush had, they voted _overwhelmingly_ to support the war -- including your boys Kerry and Edwards (perhaps Kerry has an excuse -- he has since admitted he was `too busy' to attend _any_ of the intelligence briefings in that period!) * Tell us how the intelligence services both of nations which supported the war (the UK, Poland, dozens of others), and those which opposed the war (France, Germany, Russia, a few others) were `liars' when they reported (correctly) that Saddam still had the _capacity to produce_ WMD * Tell us how the bipartisan 9/11 commission were `liars' when they confirmed both that Saddam _had_ made repeated efforts to buy yellow-cake uranium in Africa, and his extensive `working relationship' with al Qaeda. (What's the matter? Haven't read the report yet? I _really_ suggest you go do so before your next post. > an immenent threat when `Imminent threat' here is _your_ phrase. Bush, in his 2003 State of the Union address, said something _very_ different: Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. > a) there were NO WMD, let me repeat NO WMD. You can repeat it as many times as you want. I advise you to keep doing so if it makes you feel good. :-) What there _were_ were dozens of precursor materials, millions of pages of documentation, hundreds of dual-use facilities, and all the other material needed to produce WMDs, should Saddam decide again to use them. This is a man who had _repeatedly_ used chemical and biological weapons in the past, including against his own people in huge areas of Iraq, and you're still arguing that he couldn't make them if he wanted them, and wouldn't use them if he had them? Really? > and b) NO LINK to Al Queda repeat NO LINK to Al Queda. Sorry, you're still reading from last seasons `loony left anti-war' script. Now that the links between Saddam and al Qaeda have been extensively documented, both by the 9/11 Commission, and in a number of excellent books such as Stephen Hayes' excellent _The Connection_, you're supposed to say ``so what if he was helping al Qaeda, there were other countries doing the same thing?''. Get with the program, man! > So why are we there? This is making America more secure? How by > creating an unstable country in the middle of hte middle east? By I'm fascinated that you describe Saddam Hussein's Iraq, a nation of daily murder, torture, and atrocity with strong ties to terrorism, and the capacity to produce WMD to arm these groups as `stable' and `making America more secure'. As it happens, between Iraq and Afghanistan, _50 million_ people now live in free and equal societies where before they lived under repression and torture. Millions of people who have lived their whole lives without voting are registered to vote, and have already elected local leaders in preparation for national elections. Millions of people need no longer worry that if they say the wrong phrase, they will be whisked off to be torn apart by dogs, beheaded in public squares, stoned to death, or fed into industrial plastic shredders. There _used_ to be a time when such a victory for human rights would have exhilarated the left, would have been seen for what it is. That the left now cheers the thugs who would prevent elections in these nations, and sees such liberations as a `tragedy' and a `setback' is as good a capsule definition as I'll ever be able to provide of why they have lost so much respect in this nation. > opening the door to Islamic Extremists? Perhaps it is your belief that those who attacked us on September 11 would no longer be attacking us if we were not in Iraq? If you are wrong in this belief, of course, surely you can not argue that we would be better off fighting them here in the downtown areas of our major cities than in Iraq, right? > Mark my words we will either be in Iraq for 10+ years still losing men > OR we will abandon the country to a civil war. Only one candidate in this election is calling for the abandonment of the Iraqi people to the thugs who oppose freedom there, and that candidate is John Kerry. > BTW draftdodging Bush and his draft dodging lackies Now _there's_ a reasoned and coherent argument. Let's be honest, Mr. Kenny. You on the left have always held the American military man in the highest of contempt. You can see an example of the type of disinformation John Kerry himself was spreading about our military in 1971 right here: http://www.perryonpolitics.com/archives/002143.html Do not _now_ try to claim that only those whose military service was in a branch of the service of which _you_ approve (Bush's service in the National Guard being equivalent to `draft dodging in your book, a true insult to the millions serving honorably therein to this day) is some sort of prerequisite for intelligent thought. But, if you really believe this, how about a challenge? Will you agree to vote on November 2 in the same way that polls at that time show that the majority of our soldiers and veterans are voting? Will you? Well? > invaded a country based on, at best, faulty intelligence, with far too > insufficient forces to secure the country and with NO basic > understanding of Iraq culture. And this is why you will lose this election. While other Americans see millions and millions of Iraqis enjoy their new-found freedoms and rejoice, you see their liberation as a mistake. While other Americans understand that _whatever_ the reason for the Iraqi war, abandoning the Iraqi people now would be a tragedy, you seek cheap political points. In the end, you can only look back, never forward, and you have talked yourself into a corner where the only good news for your position is bad news for the country you claim to love, and the only chance you have of election is that the country you claim to love falters, or fails. > They invaded Iraq because Dumbya talks and listens to God instead of his > advisors (who weren't parroting his position) or those who actually have an > understanding of history in the Middle East. What would an `understanding' of history in the Middle East teach us, pray tell? The reasons why it would be acceptable for Saddam's murder and tyranny to continue? The reason `those people' over there don't deserve democracy and freedom? Isn't telling us that if we only understood Arabs we would not seek to liberate them the most obscene form of bigotry and ethnocentrism? > SCARY!!! > > Oh yeah and he can't even think of a mistake or something he wouldnt do > differently. Hey, John Kerry said a week ago that if he had it all to do over again, knowing then what he knows now, he would still have voted to go to war in Iraq. Presumably, having voted to send our troops there, he would still have voted _against_ the $87 billion needed to provide food, shelter, ammunition, and body armor to the troops once they were in harms way, too. What sense does _that_ make? > BTW with regards to Afghanistan perhaps with 100,000 +American troops on the > ground we would be able to mount effective search missions for the actual > leader behind the 9/11 attack, not some no account dictator who we had under > control. Mmm-hmm. Our commanders on the ground have been given every soldier they have ever asked for. If we needed more soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan, there are still divisions upon divisions we could send there. In actual fact, Afghanistan is doing quite well, with reconstruction way ahead of schedule, the rule of law spreading to the farthest ends of the nation, and national elections coming soon. Meanwhile, most experts agree that many senior al Qaeda are now in the Waziristan province of Pakistan, where we have avoided a major presence by working with Pakistani forces. Since you're so gung-ho about sending troops to where bin Laden may be (showing an obsession with revenge instead of prevention), would you support an invasion there? Would you? > Lies, Lies, Lies More rational and coherent debate, I see. > The Compassionate Republican party, unless you happen to be gay or believe in > science or a minority or believe we shouldnt have invaded Iraq Keep on talking like that -- I'll bet that will _really_ help get Republicans and independents voting for Kerry this time, right? > or happen to be a decorated Viet Nam war hero. Like the 264 Swift Boat Vets who Kerry has spent the last weeks slandering and attempting to silence through legal threats? Or do you mean that only veterans who agree with Kerry should be allowed to speak? > It just blows my mind how Dumbya and Dickie Cheny have the cajones to degrade > Kerry's service in Viet Nam. He actually served as oppossed to ducking, hiding > and getting drunk. Another fine compliment to the millions who, like Bush, are serving their nation in the National Guard. Way to get out those swing voters, man! And since we're on the subject, why is Cheney a `draft dodger' in your book for getting a deferment when he was 33 and a father, when Edwards, who got the same exact deferment when he as 18 and unmarried, is not? > Cant wait to see Dumbya voted out!! Yup. Let's touch base November 3, eh, and see how you're feeling! :-) - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNg/BRxzMSZ/9vAMRAke0AKCZdxkUwFffme6x9C9GEouWmt8lqgCgi+QX wTU+vaoxYQLz03k8hZg2oAg= =IPjl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 12:54:26 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:54:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nothing like a good debate to get the list going again!.. Most people in the Intel world will tell you that we need to look to the North to find the WMD.. Everything I have seen has pointed to this. And since I don't work for the CIA, or FBI and have a brain I think I'm correct here. Also, so it's OK to allow the people of Iraq to live under a mad man and suffer? So since we didn't find WMD we should turn the clock back and put the cray guy back? Paul, as a note, I'd drop the add for you product when you post off topic stuff. If you happen to piss someone off they may not buy from you. Hollywood is crying about the same thing.. Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > so where are the WMD that Dumbya KNEW were there? Where is the smoking gun > connecting Saddam to Osama Bin Laden? LIES LIES LIES. That is what the > compassionate Republicans are all about. > Great case for war > > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs > > Including: > > Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of > Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: denis@teachlinux.com > To: Paul Kenny > CC: jwise@draga.com, , > Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 11:44:00 -0600 (MDT) > > > Um.. Please name one other company that could do what your claiming can be > done.. Halaburton is like the Microsoft of what they do.. > > Name one other company that can say that they have had to lay people off > due to H getting the job? > > Do you really think that the DNC would not have told us these facts if > they where true? > > Until you can come up with some facts please STFU! > > Denis > > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > > > > > Of course John Kerry never lied us into a War in Iraq to benefit his Vice > > President's business interest and to please his father. > > > > Think what 130,000 troops could be achieving in Afghanistan or is Osama > Bin > > Laden not responsible for 9/11 > > > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > > From: Jim Wise > > To: Jeff Barber > > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > > Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:10:04 -0400 (EDT) > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Jeff Barber wrote: > > > > >I know better but I just can't help myself. > > > > > >>Besides, on the night that _John McCain_ speaks, > > > > > >Ah, John McCain. The same McCain that disagrees with the position of > > >his party on gays, abortion, the environmen and budget deficits. > > > > This may come as a bit of a shock to you, if you've just come from > > seeing the over-edited conformity-fest in Boston, where candidates were > > required to submit their speeches in advance, so that they could be > > re-written by the Democratic party to match party line, but there are a > > wide range of views on a wide range of issues within the Republican > > party, and _no one_ is pressed to conform to some imaginary party line. > > > > As it happens, I disagree with Mr. McCain on several issues, some of > > them among the list you've given above. But you know what? I agree > > with him strongly on one position which he's been stating for years now > > - -- that this election is crucial to the future of our nation, and that > > the best candidate in this election is George W. Bush. > > > > How do you like them apples? :-) > > > > > > >>even as Kerry's Vietnam > > >>record looks more and more dubious, > > > > > >Really? To whom? The "Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth", whatever > > >their truth may be, have been thoroughly and completely discredited. > > >Not only are they wrong, but they have been shown to be nothing more > > >than a front group for ultra-conservative money (in fact, the same > > >people that tried to smear John McCain's war record in 2000), if not > > >just a front for King George II's campaign. Read all about it here: > > > > Yes, yes. Like Kerry's talking heads on TV, keep repeating to yourself > > that the SwiftVets have been `discredited'. But don't expect it to > > stick as long as claim after claim which Kerry has made falls apart. > > Let's look at the record: > > > > * Kerry has repeatedly claimed that he was in Cambodia ``ordered there > > by President Nixon'' on Christmas Eve, 1968. The Wall Street > > Journal, for instance, has pointed out no fewer than _four_ times, > > all on the official congressional record, when he told this story. > > > > Yet his official biography says he was not in Cambodia on this date, > > President Nixon was still four weeks away from taking office on this > > date, and not a _single_ person other than Kerry who served on a > > swift boat in Vietnam -- not even those who are fervently supporting > > him -- agrees that _any_ swift boat was in Cambodia anywhere near > > that time. > > > > Pressed on the matter, Kerry has since suggested that he was _not_ > > in Cambodia on this date, but ``often went their later'', yet none > > of his crew members, not even those supporting him, remember any > > later trips either. > > > > > > * Kerry has now published no fewer than three contradictory accounts > > of the action in which he received his first Bronze star. There are > > similar problems with his Silver Star -- the form he has provided > > for the press describes it as a `Silver Star with Combat V', yet as > > the Navy confirmed last week, _no_ branch of the US military has > > _ever_ awarded a Combat V on a silver star -- there is no such > medal. > > > > Yet Kerry persists in refusing to sign a Form 180 to allow release > > of the original of this document to the press > > > > > > * Upon returning from Vietnam, Kerry traveled the country slandering > > his fellow vets, saying before congress that: > > > > ``I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say > > that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at > > which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly > > decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in > > Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a > > day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all > > levels of command.... > > > > They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut > > off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to > > human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up > > bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion > > reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, > > poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of > > South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the > > normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied > > bombing power of this country.'' > > > > John McCain has testified that when he was a POW in North Vietnam, > > this testimony of Kerry's was repeatedly played back for him and > > other POWs in an attempt to demoralize them, and has also repeatedly > > criticized Kerry for this, saying just yesterday that this > > testimony, which Kerry has never disowned, should be a part of the > > current debate. > > > > > > * of the men who served with Kerry in Vietnam (and yes, I do mean > > `served with' -- all of these men had the same job as Kerry in the > > same region at the same time, and the LA Times has corrected their > > original claim otherwise, 264 oppose Kerry, and less than a > > dozen support him. > > > > Indeed, of the 20 men in the picture of Kerry in Vietnam which he > > shopped around at the convention, 13 oppose him, and only one > > supports him. One. > > > > This may or may not tell us how clean Kerry's record is, but it sure > > tells us a lot about the effect he had on the men around him. > > > > > > Even while running from each of these statements of his which turned out > > to be false, Kerry has tried throwing every accusation he can think of > > at the SwiftVets, only to find that none of them stand up: > > > > * That they are simply Republicans -- The SwiftVets include many > > members of each major political party, as well as a number of > > independents. John O'Neill, one of the two leaders of the group, > > voted for Al Gore in 2000, dislikes Bush (he calls him an `empty > > suit'), and has a long record of supporting candidates from both > > parties. But he _also_ has known Kerry since his time in Vietnam > > (where he served for _years_, not the 100 days which Kerry spent > > there before getting himself shipped home on a technicality), and > > he believes that Kerry is completely unfit to be commander in chief. > > > > * That they are controlled by the Republican party -- Kerry keeps > > claiming this, but has yet to show a single instance of such a link > > -- and his raising this issue has rebounded on him, as links between > > his campaign and 527 groups such as MoveOn.org which has spent 65 > > _million_ dollars on ads (compared to $200,000 spent by the > > SwiftVets). > > > > * That they did not serve with Kerry directly -- the LA Times tried > > this one out, and ended up printing an embarrassed retraction when > > they realized that _all_ of the SwiftVets served in the same branch > > of the service as Kerry in the same place at the same time. Indeed, > > two of Kerry's four crew members have come out against him, as well > > as 13 of the twenty vets in the photo which Kerry made the > > centerpiece of his convention (just one of the 20 in the > > photo supports Kerry, four are deceased). > > > > > > >>suggesting that it's _this_ party > > >>which has a Vietnam problem is... amusing. > > > > > >You may find it amusing but I don't. It's not a problem if you didn't > > >serve but being a chickenhawk like, King George, Dick Cheney, Tom > > >Delay, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz and Bill O'Reilly is. For more on the > > >Chickenhawks, look here (courtesy of the New Hampshire Gazette): > > > > Fascinating. George Bush spent the entire war flying air patrol > > missions over our nation's Southeast, but this service is somehow > > discounted in your worldview. Does this disrespect for the National > > Guard extend to the millions of others who have served there honorably, > > or just Mr. Bush? > > > > Likewise, when you fault Cheney, thirty years old and a father at the > > time, for not being drafted, why do you not fault John Edwards, just > > eighteen at the time, who got the same deferment? Or Howard Dean, who > > got a deferment for a `bad spine' and then spent the war as a _Skiing > > instructor_ in Colorado? > > > > And if service in Vietnam is some sort of prerequisite for political > > credibility in your book, why do you advise us to ignore McCain's > > endorsement? In what branch did you serve? In what war? > > > > > > >>And slavery? I may be a bit confused, but can you tell me the > political > > >>party of any of the following: > > > > > > > > > > > >Well thank God for the Republicans, > > > > I do. Often. :-) > > > > > > >the champions of civil rights and minorities worldwide. Come on, this > > >doesn't even make it to the giggle test, much less pass it. > > > > Hey, if you want to hold the party which ran a segregationist candidate > > for President, which fought (literally and violently) to prevent > > integration of schools, and which filibustered the Civil Rights Act > > _and_ the Voting Rights Act, before doing a 180 degree turn and calling > > for racial quotas to enforce a whole new type of discrimination up as > > some sort of paragons of civil rights, you're free to do so. > > > > You'll have to forgive me if I'm not too impressed, though. :-) > > > > - -- > > Jim Wise > > jwise@draga.com > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) > > > > iD8DBQFBNM0QRxzMSZ/9vAMRAmiHAJ90EFSLQDGIYAXBeaLTP001HSr3LwCgm01n > > gTsL8tZQg722hLIGF2zc9zY= > > =LTIJ > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools > and > > more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 12:57:44 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:57:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20040901152437.01dc6628@mindspring.com> Message-ID: At least it keeps traffic up ;) On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Seth W Fancher wrote: > Must have been a "black helicopter" that came through the ASLML this > morning and said this was going to be taken off-list. I keep hoping.... > > > > From pferraro at greenepa.net Wed Sep 1 12:59:04 2004 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Wed Sep 1 12:59:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread Message-ID: The moderators are licking their chops. I'd hoped I wouldn't have to feed them again, but if need be the list will become moderated for a while...maybe until early Novemeber? Another alternative is to ban (for a while) certain posters. So please, flail away in private, CCing all who wish to join the fray. Paul "Vote for the (other) JR for President" Ferraro From jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 13:01:39 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:01:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Gary Mei wrote: >Yeah, like the fact that there have been 3 previous LOGCAP contracts bid and >awarded. One from 1992 awarded to Halliburton, one from 1997 awarded to >DynCorp, and one in 2001 awarded to Halliburton after beating out Raytheon >and DynCorp. IOW, DynCorp has *already* won a contract and done this sort >of work for the government before. Funny how you leave out two key facts: * Dyncorp was nixed for the 2001 contract after repeatedly being faulted for suspicious allocation and other wastage of government money in the period of their 1997 contract, and after a number of their employees were _arrested_ for using their positions providing services to US troops in Bosnia to take part in the sex trade of Bosnian girls to brothels in Western Europe * Haliburton's 2001 contract was awarded under terms essentially identical to those negotiated both in 1992 and in their rejected 1997 bid -- showing that contrary to your pet conspiracy theory, they got no better terms in 2001 when Cheney was Vice President than they had gotten in 1997 when Cheney worked for them, or in 1992 before Cheney had any connection to them. Yet, even not getting LOGCAP, Dyncorp has the single largest PMC contract in Iraq, dwarfing the funds put into LOGCAP. In other words, the company you claim got cheated actually got _more_ than Haliburton, yet you persist in claiming that they should have gotten another shot at LOGCAP -- in addition to this! -- even after how badly they had screwed up their last try. Is your definition of being `cheated' _really_ `getting more than anyone else, but not getting everything'? Really? >Yeah, after_they_were_caught_with_their_fingers_in_the_cookie_jar. If they >didn't refund the money, they would've been heavily fined, and the >government would've terminated their contracts. Exactly -- yet _you_ persist in claiming that they are getting a sweetheart deal from this government. >What baloney! They actively sought high prices, even though they could get >much lower prices from Turkey, because cost plus means that profits rise >with expenses. Have you forgotten that Turkey prohibited the supply of our troops in Iraq from their soil? >How about competitive bidding and better oversight on all bidding in Iraq? >No bid Cost Plus contracts are a direct invitation to rip off the taxpayer. Dyncorp has already shown what they can't do well (LOGCAP), and what they can (the billions of dollars of contracts which they got in other areas). Are you really complaining because they were passed up for LOGCAP in favor of a company with a much longer history of filling LOGCAP contracts (remember, KBR was a leading contractor in the various contracting systems from 1969 through 1992 which preceded LOGCAP), even though they got billions in other deals? Really? - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNiqmRxzMSZ/9vAMRArMXAJ435YoiDDGBdLbFu+ggZAFmuDekyQCgwxpx 6205ubVqi/x5GLFfFHap0oQ= =s52u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 13:03:30 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:03:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry In-Reply-To: <51169.143.127.131.4.1094067227.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> Message-ID: Pete, I think your correct about 2008 Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 pete@rockdata.com wrote: > Sorry about this to all who are disinterested. > > I bought and read the first couple of chapters of _Unfit for Command_ (by > the swift boat vets). > > One fact presented in this book, that I find shocking, is not being talked > about by either side. In Ho Chi Min city there is a museum dedicated to > those who help the North win their war. John Kerry has his picture on the > wall, along with Jane Fonda, as those who influenced Washington to > withdraw troops. > > Although it has been a while since my Code of Conduct classes this is a > fine example of "giving aid and comfort to the enemy", the definition of > being a traitor. Why in the world would one vote for such a traitor > regardless of politics? > > Besides even the DNC doesn't want Kerry to win. If he does Hilliary > cannot run in 2008. My money is on Gulliani -vs- Clinton. > > Pete "you don't need a crystal ball for that one" Belford > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Sep 1 12:59:28 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:03:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread References: Message-ID: <007f01c4905e$31645100$f301010a@gecac.org> MANY THANKS! this is why I do not mind a moderated list:>) Peace Roger From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 13:05:23 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:05:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95176@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: Maybe we need to have these post have a subject line starting with "NASL" for not ASL.. Then you guys that don't care can filter them. What does the list think? Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Pitcavage, Mark wrote: > > I do not have any urge to discuss my political opinions with ASLers and I > definitely have no wish to have those of others forced on me--whether I > might agree with them or not. > > This list is already subject to the worst sorts of flamewars and > namecallings. Why add fuel to the fire by bringing in politics? > > Let's just leave it at 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 johnprovan4 at yahoo.com Wed Sep 1 13:08:25 2004 From: johnprovan4 at yahoo.com (John Provan) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:08:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread In-Reply-To: <007f01c4905e$31645100$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <20040901200825.65278.qmail@web81204.mail.yahoo.com> I think this is why I like unmoderated - I think debates like this should be allowed for a short period of time - at least it woke up the list. Debates that go on for ever though should be stopped. Pete just caught me on a bad day at work or otherwise I would have let that fastball keep on cruising and not respond. It was too tempting though. John --- rwhelan wrote: > MANY THANKS! > > this is why I do not mind a moderated list:>) > > Peace > > Roger > _______________________________________________ > 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!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 13:08:25 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:08:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry In-Reply-To: <20040901194724.97353.qmail@web81206.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040901194724.97353.qmail@web81206.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, John Provan wrote: >I am sure John Kerry can control what the Viet-cong do >with thier museums. I don't consider someone who won >three purple hearts and a silver star to be a traitor. Kind of beside the point -- do you consider someone who meets secretly with officials of enemy governments to help them in cease-fire negotiations a traitor? Do you consider someone who returns home early to travel the country slandering those he served with a traitor? > It is only when he runs for President that they want >to dispute these awards - no one wanted to debate them >prior to that. I am glad Kerry, Fonda and whoever >else got us out of Vietnam - it was a war we were >going to lose even if we were still there today. BTW, That's really enough to end the debate. Shall we agree that everyone who approves of Jane Fonda's actions in Vietnam should vote for Kerry, and no one else should? That would be plenty good enough for my purposes... :-) >Kerry did it the way of the United States democracy >through talking to Congress and protests. Protest >should not be a evil world or idea - it is what we >stand for being able to speak our hearts and minds. The act of `protesting' is morally neutral. It is what protestors _stand for_ that's relevant. Civil Rights marchers protested against segregation, and are rightly remembered as heroes. But for Kerry and his friends at VVAW, `protesting' meant handing out flyers such as this one: http://www.perryonpolitics.com/archives/002143.html Do you think he was right in doing so? >Now we will be in Iraq for years and years to come - >wonderful. We still haven't removed our troops from >Germany, Italy, Guam, Japan, Korea and everywhere else >we went into - so we should be in Iraq for at least 40 >more years. I can't wait to spend my tax dollars on >that. I just love throwing my money away. I could point out _why_ we stayed in these places through the cold war (perhaps you feel we should have abandoned Europe to the Soviets?), but I don't really need to. As it happens, it is _Bush_ who has proposed bringing tens of thousands of US troops home from Germany, East Asia, and elsewhere, and it was _Kerry_ who objected. Or did you forget this? It's only been a week or so... - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNiw9RxzMSZ/9vAMRAh7rAJ9dY53z/ZJVDVfhPq6vI1hF52f9PwCghak8 wT1rVqddsnxisZdN6CchO/U= =Xf1u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From pyoung at cwhealth.net Wed Sep 1 13:10:06 2004 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:10:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41362C9E.6040907@cwhealth.net> Paul Kenny wrote: > so where are the WMD that Dumbya KNEW were there? Where is the > smoking gun connecting Saddam to Osama Bin Laden? LIES LIES LIES. > That is what the compassionate Republicans are all about. > Great case for war > > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs > > Including: > > Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' > Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ You know, Paul's new advertising campaign really needs some polishing. :-) Pete From MPitcavage at adl.org Wed Sep 1 13:15:25 2004 From: MPitcavage at adl.org (Pitcavage, Mark) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:15:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B9517C@nymail.adl.org> Maybe we should just stay on topic. -----Original Message----- From: denis@teachlinux.com [mailto:denis@teachlinux.com] Maybe we need to have these post have a subject line starting with "NASL" for not ASL.. Then you guys that don't care can filter them. What does the list think? From gd891 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 13:15:53 2004 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:16:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: You guys are a bunch of amateurs. If this were the old list, someone would have compared someone else to Hitler by now. And someone else would have chimed in how this off-topic debate is going to delay AOO even more! Greg I miss the old days. From jwise at draga.com Wed Sep 1 13:15:52 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:16:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Ferraro wrote: > >The moderators are licking their chops. I'd hoped I wouldn't have to feed >them again, but if need be the list will become moderated for a >while...maybe until early Novemeber? Another alternative is to ban (for a >while) certain posters. > >So please, flail away in private, CCing all who wish to join the fray. > > >Paul "Vote for the (other) JR for President" Ferraro Sounds good to me. You all know my email address if you want to continue! :-) Also, any who want to be CC'ed if the thread does continue, feel free to let me know... I hereby promise I will post no original political content to this list. I'll try my darndest to restrain my itchy `respond key' finger if others do, but I make no firm promises. ;-) - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNi37RxzMSZ/9vAMRAvS5AJ44lnyqyhHLnHuslAKInO4BJmcswACdEZph OwMIDjQjU9AukE4yUSlowf0= =GQsV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From smcbee at midtnn.net Wed Sep 1 13:17:06 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:17:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG AFV crews In-Reply-To: <002901c49034$7a418570$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <000001c49060$ab970d80$e6f59904@steves> Hmm, good question here. Yes, if one of the AFV crews has an AL, the AL would still be available. Maybe the crews remaining without a vehicle are there in case the man with the tank dies, then they will pick up the vehicle. I didn't see anything either as far as withdrawing goes. But I would hazard a guess that it does apply. However, the rule could be read either way. Maybe Perry can give some guidance on this? Take care, Steve Sean asked for help and got me instead: Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even if there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used in "infantry" mode)? Are they Withdrawn if their platoon is Withdrawn? Would you make a Withdrawal dr solely for a surviving crew? From garymei at optonline.net Wed Sep 1 13:20:22 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:21:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: I've taken this off list. From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 13:23:05 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:23:09 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B9517C@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: Mark, It would be a pretty dull world without other people thinking differently. Maybe I'm wrong but I see everyone here as part of my ASL family and enjoy debating things other then ASL with them. If the list was busy with ASL stuff you would not see us go OT, However I do understand there are some people on the list that really don't want to see OT posts, this is why I suggested the NASL lag. See I did it in my reply. When you go to play ASL in a large group do you only talk ASL? Having never played FTF, this is a "real" question, not just a slam on you.. Thanks Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Pitcavage, Mark wrote: > > Maybe we should just stay on topic. > > -----Original Message----- > From: denis@teachlinux.com [mailto:denis@teachlinux.com] > Maybe we need to have these post have a subject line starting with "NASL" > for not ASL.. > > Then you guys that don't care can filter them. > > What does the list think? > > > From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 13:24:04 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:24:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Blame it on the OZ that tossed the first stone..:) On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, gd wrote: > You guys are a bunch of amateurs. If this were the old list, someone > would have compared someone else to Hitler by now. And someone else > would have chimed in how this off-topic debate is going to delay AOO > even more! > > Greg > > I miss the old days. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Sep 1 13:19:12 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:24:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry Message-ID: John Kerry was winning purple hearts, bronze stars,silver stars, Dumbya was getting drunk and going AWOL, so whose record should be challenged? BTWI think Kerry earned the right question what was going on in Viet Nam by actuallyhaving been there. BTBTW I am not a liberal i voted for Gore but before that I voted for Dole, Bush, Bush, Reage and Reagen. You lost me somewhere along the line Republicans Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: John Provan To: pete@rockdata.com, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT: John Kerry Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 12:47:24 -0700 (PDT) I am sure John Kerry can control what the Viet-cong do with thier museums. I don't consider someone who won three purple hearts and a silver star to be a traitor. It is only when he runs for President that they want to dispute these awards - no one wanted to debate them prior to that. I am glad Kerry, Fonda and whoever else got us out of Vietnam - it was a war we were going to lose even if we were still there today. BTW, Kerry did it the way of the United States democracy through talking to Congress and protests. Protest should not be a evil world or idea - it is what we stand for being able to speak our hearts and minds. Bush likes to say " you are with us or against us" - in other words if you don't like the way I see things you are the enemy not just someone with a different point of view. And he was suppose to be a uniter - so much for that. It really irks me having served in the military for anyone's awards to be questioned. If they should be questioned then they shouldn't have gotten them to begin with. You don't debate them 30+ something years later. Now we will be in Iraq for years and years to come - wonderful. We still haven't removed our troops from Germany, Italy, Guam, Japan, Korea and everywhere else we went into - so we should be in Iraq for at least 40 more years. I can't wait to spend my tax dollars on that. I just love throwing my money away. I hope Kerry wins before Bush makes many more world enemies. He has more than half the world against us now - 4 more years he will have the other half against us. John > > One fact presented in this book, that I find > shocking, is not being talked > about by either side. In Ho Chi Min city there is a > museum dedicated to > those who help the North win their war. John Kerry > has his picture on the > wall, along with Jane Fonda, as those who influenced > Washington to > withdraw troops. > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 _________________________________________________________________ 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 MPitcavage at adl.org Wed Sep 1 13:27:37 2004 From: MPitcavage at adl.org (Pitcavage, Mark) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:27:48 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B9517E@nymail.adl.org> Denis, the one thing that subscribers to this list share is an interest in ASL. It was because of this interest that the mailing list was created in the first place. When you post something to the list that is unrelated to ASL, you send it to everybody, regardless or whether or not that non-ASL subject interests them. This is different from FtF, where you are inflicting your opinion on only one person, and that person has presumably given you signals that he is interested in the topic. Of all the offtopic posts that one could make, partisan political posts are among the worst, because they are guaranteed to alienate a certain number of list members and are very likely to start a partisan flamewar (which is exactly what happened here). There are countless forums available to discuss and argue politics online. Why not have those discussions in such forums, rather than in a forum created for Advanced Squad Leader? -----Original Message----- From: denis@teachlinux.com [mailto:denis@teachlinux.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 4:23 PM To: Pitcavage, Mark Cc: 'aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net' Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Mark, It would be a pretty dull world without other people thinking differently. Maybe I'm wrong but I see everyone here as part of my ASL family and enjoy debating things other then ASL with them. If the list was busy with ASL stuff you would not see us go OT, However I do understand there are some people on the list that really don't want to see OT posts, this is why I suggested the NASL lag. See I did it in my reply. When you go to play ASL in a large group do you only talk ASL? Having never played FTF, this is a "real" question, not just a slam on you.. Thanks Denis From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 13:28:20 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:28:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901152755.01b94370@pop3.direcway.com> At 02:59 PM 9/1/2004, Paul Ferraro wrote: >Another alternative is to ban (for a >while) certain posters. > >So please, flail away in private, CCing all who wish to join the fray. > > >Paul "Vote for the (other) JR for President" Ferraro Daddy you're home!!!! For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 13:25:41 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:29:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap Message-ID: Hey that is why I got started in this argument toliven up the ASLML a bit. BTW none of the aforeargued points necessarily represent the management or ownership of Fanatic Enterprises! :O) Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: "gd" To: Subject: [Aslml] OT crap Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:15:53 -0500 You guys are a bunch of amateurs. If this were the old list, someone would have compared someone else to Hitler by now. And someone else would have chimed in how this off-topic debate is going to delay AOO even more! Greg I miss the old days. _______________________________________________ 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 _________________________________________________________________ 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 homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 13:20:17 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:32:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: Coming soon the Battlin Bastards of Boston pack Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: Peter Young To: Paul Kenny CC: denis@teachlinux.com, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:10:06 -0700 Paul Kenny wrote: >so where are the WMD that Dumbya KNEW were there? Where is the smoking gun >connecting Saddam to Osama Bin Laden? LIES LIES LIES. That is what the >compassionate Republicans are all about. >Great case for war > > >Paul Kenny > >Owner of Fanatic Enterprises >makers of quality ASL scenario packs > >Including: > >Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of >Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > >Check out my website at > >http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ You know, Paul's new advertising campaign really needs some polishing. :-) Pete _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 13:22:38 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:35:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread Message-ID: And FWIW I would gladly sit down with Jim and play a game or two if he were interested. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: Jim Wise To: Paul Ferraro CC: ASL List Subject: Re: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 16:15:52 -0400 (EDT) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Ferraro wrote: > >The moderators are licking their chops. I'd hoped I wouldn't have to feed >them again, but if need be the list will become moderated for a >while...maybe until early Novemeber? Another alternative is to ban (for a >while) certain posters. > >So please, flail away in private, CCing all who wish to join the fray. > > >Paul "Vote for the (other) JR for President" Ferraro Sounds good to me. You all know my email address if you want to continue! :-) Also, any who want to be CC'ed if the thread does continue, feel free to let me know... I hereby promise I will post no original political content to this list. I'll try my darndest to restrain my itchy `respond key' finger if others do, but I make no firm promises. ;-) - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNi37RxzMSZ/9vAMRAvS5AJ44lnyqyhHLnHuslAKInO4BJmcswACdEZph OwMIDjQjU9AukE4yUSlowf0= =GQsV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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 McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 13:51:08 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:51:11 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B9517E@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: Mark, Call me dumb, and others feel free to also, But I see this as a debate not a flame war.. On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Pitcavage, Mark wrote: > Denis, the one thing that subscribers to this list share is an interest in > ASL. It was because of this interest that the mailing list was created in > the first place. When you post something to the list that is unrelated to > ASL, you send it to everybody, regardless or whether or not that non-ASL > subject interests them. Yes, but no one is forced to read it.. Put NASL in the subject and people can hit the delete key and move on. > > This is different from FtF, where you are inflicting your opinion on only > one person, and that person has presumably given you signals that he is > interested in the topic. >From the number of posts posted by others I'd say there is some intrest in the subject. > > Of all the offtopic posts that one could make, partisan political posts are > among the worst, because they are guaranteed to alienate a certain number of > list members and are very likely to start a partisan flamewar (which is > exactly what happened here). You can call it a flame war, I don't see it as one, maybe I'm used to some of the old flame wars on Usenet. I see it as a way to get to know others and learn something. Did you know that Kerry has his Pic up in Vietnam? That he went to Paris during the pease talks? I didn't I'm better informed today then I was yesterday. > > There are countless forums available to discuss and argue politics online. > Why not have those discussions in such forums, rather than in a forum > created for Advanced Squad Leader? So we can only talk about ASL and thats it? Now for a question to really show how little I know, Are you running the fourm or in charge of it in some way? If you are and tell me to STFU, I will since it's "your house" Denis From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 13:52:27 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:52:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Now go back and check your web stats and see if you have more hits... Lord knows we have all seen your add by now.. Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > Hey that is why I got started in this argument toliven up the ASLML a bit. > > BTW none of the aforeargued points necessarily represent the management or > ownership of Fanatic Enterprises! > > :O) > > > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs > > Including: > > Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of > Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: "gd" > To: > Subject: [Aslml] OT crap > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:15:53 -0500 > > You guys are a bunch of amateurs. If this were the old list, someone > would have compared someone else to Hitler by now. And someone else > would have chimed in how this off-topic debate is going to delay AOO > even more! > > Greg > > I miss the old days. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 MPitcavage at adl.org Wed Sep 1 13:54:09 2004 From: MPitcavage at adl.org (Pitcavage, Mark) Date: Wed Sep 1 13:54:13 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95180@nymail.adl.org> From: denis@teachlinux.com [mailto:denis@teachlinux.com] >Yes, but no one is forced to read it.. Put NASL in the subject and people >can hit the delete key and move on. How is that possible for people who are getting a digest version? It is not. >From the number of posts posted by others I'd say there is some intrest in >the subject. I have already gotten several "THANK YOU!!!"s in my e-mail for asking people to not make political posts. > Did you know that Kerry has his Pic up in Vietnam? >That he went to Paris during the pease talks? I didn't I'm better informed >today then I was yesterday. This mailing list is not designed to educate you on current events. >So we can only talk about ASL and thats it? This is the ASL Mailing List. From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 13:56:49 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:05:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap Message-ID: 5 hits today, 9 yesterday so, who knows :O) Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: denis@teachlinux.com To: Paul Kenny CC: gd891@hotmail.com, Subject: RE: [Aslml] OT crap Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 14:52:27 -0600 (MDT) Now go back and check your web stats and see if you have more hits... Lord knows we have all seen your add by now.. Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > Hey that is why I got started in this argument toliven up the ASLML a bit. > > BTW none of the aforeargued points necessarily represent the management or > ownership of Fanatic Enterprises! > > :O) > > > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs > > Including: > > Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of > Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: "gd" > To: > Subject: [Aslml] OT crap > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:15:53 -0500 > > You guys are a bunch of amateurs. If this were the old list, someone > would have compared someone else to Hitler by now. And someone else > would have chimed in how this off-topic debate is going to delay AOO > even more! > > Greg > > I miss the old days. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _________________________________________________________________ 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 graydo_mn at sbcglobal.net Wed Sep 1 14:06:08 2004 From: graydo_mn at sbcglobal.net (graydo_mn@sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:06:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040901210607.7CB8B985BF@che.dreamhost.com> This is stupid beyond words (almost). The worst you can sanely say is Bush erred in relying on intelligence which was confirmed by pretty much every western intelligence agency and some non-western ones. Now ultimately he's still responsible for the decision, right or wrong, but saying it is a matter of "LIES" is remarkably puerile. dave -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Kenny Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 1:52 PM To: denis@teachlinux.com Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke so where are the WMD that Dumbya KNEW were there? Where is the smoking gun connecting Saddam to Osama Bin Laden? LIES LIES LIES. That is what the compassionate Republicans are all about. Great case for war Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ From pyoung at cwhealth.net Wed Sep 1 14:17:41 2004 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:18:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41363C75.5080206@cwhealth.net> Paul Kenny wrote: > Hey that is why I got started in this argument toliven up the ASLML a > bit. > > BTW none of the aforeargued points necessarily represent the > management or ownership of Fanatic Enterprises! > > :O) Too late! I've already decided to boycott your products! Anything with your name on it goes on the shelf, right next to my Dixie Chicks CDs! At least, until I need something to play. :-) -- Peter Young pyoung@cwhealth.net http://firstfire.blogspot.com From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 14:22:11 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:22:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL directory In-Reply-To: <20040831113631.56098.qmail@web42102.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040831113631.56098.qmail@web42102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901161518.01934488@pop3.direcway.com> At 06:36 AM 8/31/2004, Chuck T wrote: >I loaded VASL on a new PC and mistakenly indicated a folder to install the >vasl.mod file. Now I cannot seem to "uninstall" VASL to put it back in the >right place. How can I do this? Seemingly lost in the flames, a cry for help. Don't really know myself, but I think that VASL doesn't screw with the Windows stuff, so just deleting the complete file should work. And then try reloading that sucker. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 14:25:22 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:25:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Please retire the Kery/Bush/etc thread Message-ID: > >I think this is why I like unmoderated - I think >debates like this should be allowed for a short period >of time - at least it woke up the list. > Wrong. This is the Advanced Squad Leader Mailing List. I shouldn't have to wade through this tripe when I have not signed up for it. Take it elsewhere. >Debates that >go on for ever though should be stopped. > Advanced Squad Leader debates can go on as long as they want. This crap has no place on the ASLML. Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 14:26:15 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:26:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: > >Maybe we need to have these post have a subject line starting with "NASL" >for not ASL.. > >Then you guys that don't care can filter them. > >What does the list think? > This member of the list thinks that this crap does not belong on the ASLML. I'll join a political discussion list if I want to wade through this garbage. I also resent being forced to filter out something that I did not sign up for. Rather than inconvenience the members who signed up for ASL, you people should take it elsewhere. That's what I think. Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 14:27:24 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:27:27 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: > >Mark, > >It would be a pretty dull world without other people thinking differently. >Maybe I'm wrong but I see everyone here as part of my ASL family and enjoy >debating things other then ASL with them. > Then do it off-list. Don't subject the rest of us to it. >However I do understand there are some people on the list that really >don't want to see OT posts, this is why I suggested the NASL lag. See I >did it in my reply. > This is the Advanced Squad Leader Mailing List. The list has been hijacked by this crap, and I for one don't appreciate it. >When you go to play ASL in a large group do you only talk ASL? No, but I can walk away from conversations that don't interest me. Forcing me to delete a message is causing an inconvenience, and is slamming it down my throat. Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Sep 1 14:32:53 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:31:18 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Denis answered Mark Pitcavage... > Call me dumb, and others feel free to also, But I see this as a > debate not a flame war.. > but a debate that's *not* appropriate on this mailing list. > Yes, but no one is forced to read it.. Put NASL in the subject and people > can hit the delete key and move on. > The fact that you feel the need to put NASL in the subject line should tell most people that the post should not be on the list in the first place. This is an ASL list - not a "Not ASL" maling list. > So we can only talk about ASL and thats it? > You can talk about topics that one should expect to be of special interest to ASL players. > Now for a question to really show how little I know, Are you running the > fourm or in charge of it in some way? > > If you are and tell me to STFU, I will since it's "your house" > Denis, when you (and others) behave as rudely as you've done on the list now, you should expect to be told to shut up. From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Sep 1 14:45:59 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:44:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <413624B4.1060205@thuring.com> Message-ID: Hi, Lars Thuring wrote: > SSR 3 for this scenario states "If this hex *or* any unit in it is hit > by the MA of a Sturmtiger, the ammunition depot explodes ...". So it > seems the hex can be hit even if empty. Which Target Type would be used > as the ATT is NA for the Sturmtiger? > Well, C3.41 says "The Infantry, as well as the Area, Target Type may be used to attack a(n) unarmored-target/unmanned-Gun/building/bridge/vehicle, and may also attack a hex devoid of such. [EXC: The Infantry Target Type (3.32) attacks a specific Location rather than an entire hex, and cannot be used to attack an AFV]." So the Infantry Target Type can be used to attack empty Locations to hit whatever terrain therein. The rule masters disagree as to what DRM to apply though, so apply whatever DRM that still gives you a hit :-) From asl at thuring.com Wed Sep 1 14:51:34 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:49:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41364466.8000203@thuring.com> Ole Boe wrote: > Hi, > Lars Thuring wrote: > > >>SSR 3 for this scenario states "If this hex *or* any unit in it is hit >>by the MA of a Sturmtiger, the ammunition depot explodes ...". So it >>seems the hex can be hit even if empty. Which Target Type would be used >>as the ATT is NA for the Sturmtiger? >> > > Well, C3.41 says "The Infantry, as well as the Area, Target Type may be used > to attack a(n) unarmored-target/unmanned-Gun/building/bridge/vehicle, and > may also attack a hex devoid of such. [EXC: The Infantry Target Type (3.32) > attacks a specific Location rather than an entire hex, and cannot be used to > attack an AFV]." There it is in black on white - thanks! > So the Infantry Target Type can be used to attack empty Locations to hit > whatever terrain therein. The rule masters disagree as to what DRM to apply > though, so apply whatever DRM that still gives you a hit :-) I rolled a 10 and couldn't find any good ones... ;-) cheers, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 23:48:00 up 2 days, 8:39, 1 user, load average: 0.04, 0.11, 0.08 From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 14:54:52 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:54:58 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95180@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: So, your not the owner of the list? Mark I'll make this simple for you: Mark owns or manages the list: ____ Yes ____ No Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Pitcavage, Mark wrote: > From: denis@teachlinux.com [mailto:denis@teachlinux.com] > >Yes, but no one is forced to read it.. Put NASL in the subject and people > >can hit the delete key and move on. > > How is that possible for people who are getting a digest version? It is > not. > > >>From the number of posts posted by others I'd say there is some intrest in > >the subject. > > I have already gotten several "THANK YOU!!!"s in my e-mail for asking people > to not make political posts. > > > Did you know that Kerry has his Pic up in Vietnam? > >That he went to Paris during the pease talks? I didn't I'm better informed > >today then I was yesterday. > > This mailing list is not designed to educate you on current events. > > > >So we can only talk about ASL and thats it? > > This is the ASL Mailing List. > > > From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 14:55:58 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 14:56:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Would have at least thought that the hits would have gone up.. Denis On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > 5 hits today, 9 yesterday so, who knows > > :O) > > > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs > > Including: > > Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of > Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: denis@teachlinux.com > To: Paul Kenny > CC: gd891@hotmail.com, > Subject: RE: [Aslml] OT crap > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 14:52:27 -0600 (MDT) > > > Now go back and check your web stats and see if you have more hits... > > Lord knows we have all seen your add by now.. > > Denis > > > On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Paul Kenny wrote: > > > Hey that is why I got started in this argument toliven up the ASLML a > bit. > > > > BTW none of the aforeargued points necessarily represent the management > or > > ownership of Fanatic Enterprises! > > > > :O) > > > > > > > > Paul Kenny > > > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > > makers of quality ASL scenario packs > > > > Including: > > > > Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards > of > > Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. > > > > Check out my website at > > > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > > From: "gd" > > To: > > Subject: [Aslml] OT crap > > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:15:53 -0500 > > > > You guys are a bunch of amateurs. If this were the old list, someone > > would have compared someone else to Hitler by now. And someone else > > would have chimed in how this off-topic debate is going to delay AOO > > even more! > > > > Greg > > > > I miss the old days. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 15:23:15 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 15:23:22 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Ole, Is this your way of saying STFU? > Denis, when you (and others) behave as rudely as you've done on the list > now, you should expect to be told to shut up. As I see it, A few people what to talk about somethings that are not ASL releated, using the ASL list since most of the people they talk to and respect are on the same list. A small number, I have to say small since I have no way of giving numbers other then from people that have posted and said to take it off line, don't like it. If I remember, since it's been almost 2 hours or so, the topic has been taken off list, yet a few people are still posting due to what I see as just getting around to reading e-mail and responding. However I think the rudeness is from the lack of people even willing to descuss posting OT. I suggested that OT be headed with NASL and a few List Nazi's, (OK I said it, did it take long enough?) don't even want to entertain the idea. Anyone keeping track of the niumber of post from NASL vers B/K? Denis From denis at teachlinux.com Wed Sep 1 15:24:01 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Wed Sep 1 15:24:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well Bruce I think your wrong.. On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: > > > > >Maybe we need to have these post have a subject line starting with "NASL" > >for not ASL.. > > > >Then you guys that don't care can filter them. > > > >What does the list think? > > > > This member of the list thinks that this crap does not belong on the ASLML. > I'll join a political discussion list if I want to wade through this > garbage. > > I also resent being forced to filter out something that I did not sign up > for. > > Rather than inconvenience the members who signed up for ASL, you people > should take it elsewhere. > > That's what I think. > > Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 15:24:41 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 15:27:31 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B9517E@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901172417.01d0c768@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:51 PM 9/1/2004, denis@teachlinux.com wrote: >Call me dumb, and others feel free to also, But I see this as a debate not >a flame war.. Book'im Paulo.... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 15:25:33 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 15:28:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <20040901210607.7CB8B985BF@che.dreamhost.com> References: <20040901210607.7CB8B985BF@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901172515.01c14cc8@pop3.direcway.com> At 04:06 PM 9/1/2004, graydo_mn@sbcglobal.net wrote: >This is stupid beyond words (almost). Yes you are.. Book'im too... ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 15:32:28 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 15:32:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901173042.01d2f1a8@pop3.direcway.com> At 05:24 PM 9/1/2004, denis@teachlinux.com wrote: >Well Bruce I think your wrong.. Well I count nine real OT posts from this "gentleman" since the List meister's "Cease and Desist" order. One per week sounds good...how about it, Paul, a nine week suspension? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 1 16:05:51 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:05:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: Let me get this straight... You offer your opinion, then ask "the list" what it thinks... As a card-carrying member of the ASLML, I gave you my opinion... And then you counter by stating that you think I am wrong, which implies that you believe you are right to force members of the ASLML to wade through your political ramblings, when they have nothing to do with ASL... No, Denis. *You* are wrong. Technically speaking, anyone who posts off-topic can reasonably expect to be put down. Usually there is no uproar, since it typicallys ends quickly. But this topic has gone way beyond merely "off topic", and we are being forced to filter out a *long* string of emails exchanging political barbs that I quite frankly have no interest in, and did not bargain for when I signed up to the ASLML. And if you claim that there are "a few" that are interested in such things, certainly you can put those "few" on a distribution list and have this conversation with them. As long as you persist in bombarding a mailing list that I belong to with inappropriate content for that mailing list... I am going to voice my opinion that you take that crap elsewhere. I'm being as polite as I can within the bounds of email decency... Now, kindly take it somewhere else. Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From graydo_mn at sbcglobal.net Wed Sep 1 16:06:29 2004 From: graydo_mn at sbcglobal.net (graydo_mn@sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:06:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901173042.01d2f1a8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <20040901230626.63ED5985BF@che.dreamhost.com> >acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL So what do you have to do to get excommunicated? dave From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 1 16:27:52 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:23:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List References: Message-ID: <001101c4907b$4d8a4160$09c7d342@whelan> come on guys enough, please please please take it private. Hello, moderators">) Peace Roger From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 16:26:39 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:26:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20040901230626.63ED5985BF@che.dreamhost.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901173042.01d2f1a8@pop3.direcway.com> <20040901230626.63ED5985BF@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901182558.01b923c8@pop3.direcway.com> At 06:06 PM 9/1/2004, graydo_mn@sbcglobal.net wrote: >So what do you have to do to get excommunicated? Sigh, newbies...stop playing ASL? Does that work for you? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From swfancher at mindspring.com Wed Sep 1 16:27:48 2004 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:28:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95176@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040901191611.01e12f68@mindspring.com> Denis, I missed this the first time around because I have been deleting all your posts and 95% of the rest of them today. I only happened across it because I saw a post by Bruce B and I did not delete sight unseen. Hopefully you'll appreciate the fact that at least a dozen people by my count have asked that this be taken off-list...nicely at first, and now, it appears, with increasing vehemence since you seem intent on continuing in spite of the fact that based on a quick straw poll, you have about 10 people "voting" that you take this somewhere else, and you are the _only_ one who thinks that it should stay on the ASLML. And maybe you'll not appreciate the subtle fact that since probably 95% of the list are already deleting everything you write that you are not going to get very many responses to your question. In case there is any doubt about my _opinion_: everyone interested in this should feel free to do so...somewhere else. FWIW, this is only a quasi-public forum. You do not have an unqualified right to free speech here, just as you do not have an unqualified right to free speech in my living room, or at work. If you want to exercise that right, you need to go somewhere else. If you want an ASLML where this kind of discussion can be had, feel free to start your own ASLML, pay for the systems resources required to maintain it, administrate it, and then the four of your can have at it. This list does actually "belong" to someone. And Paul Ferraro is good enough to "oversee" it for them. And he has asked you to take this elsewhere. Your arguing with him about it just makes you look ignorant and unappreciative of the efforts made by other people to keep this list going. At 04:05 PM 9/1/2004, denis@teachlinux.com wrote: >Maybe we need to have these post have a subject line starting with "NASL" >for not ASL.. > >Then you guys that don't care can filter them. > >What does the list think? > >Denis > >On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Pitcavage, Mark wrote: > > > > > I do not have any urge to discuss my political opinions with ASLers and I > > definitely have no wish to have those of others forced on me--whether I > > might agree with them or not. > > > > This list is already subject to the worst sorts of flamewars and > > namecallings. Why add fuel to the fire by bringing in politics? > > > > Let's just leave it at 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 pferraro at greenepa.net Wed Sep 1 16:30:52 2004 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:30:19 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > So, your not the owner of the list? > > Mark I'll make this simple for you: > > Mark owns or manages the list: > > ____ Yes > > ____ No Mark, before you answer, make Nat an offer. ;-) From pferraro at greenepa.net Wed Sep 1 16:59:55 2004 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Wed Sep 1 16:59:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20040901230626.63ED5985BF@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: > So what do you have to do to get excommunicated? >From the List? It's only ever happened twice. In both those cases the posters were very much over the top. I suppose over the course of so many years (eight?) having only two is a good thing... Paul Ferraro www.greenepa.net/~pferraro From ctewks at yahoo.com Wed Sep 1 17:29:57 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed Sep 1 17:29:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL directory In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901161518.01934488@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <20040902002957.42599.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com> you're right -- it worked thanks Chuck --- ron mosher wrote: > At 06:36 AM 8/31/2004, Chuck T wrote: > >I loaded VASL on a new PC and mistakenly indicated a folder to install the > >vasl.mod file. Now I cannot seem to "uninstall" VASL to put it back in the > >right place. How can I do this? > > Seemingly lost in the flames, a cry for help. > > Don't really know myself, but I think that VASL doesn't screw with the > Windows stuff, so just deleting the complete file should work. And then try > reloading that sucker. > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 21:28:57 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Wed Sep 1 18:34:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap References: <41363C75.5080206@cwhealth.net> Message-ID: <4136A189.6660@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Peter Young wrote: > Too late! I've already decided to boycott your products! Anything with > your name on it goes on the shelf, right next to my Dixie Chicks CDs! > > At least, until I need something to play. :-) I can see it now, public burnings of of Paul's scenarios! Bring your weenies and beers, there's gonna' be a cookout tonight! =Jim= From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 1 18:50:05 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 1 18:50:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap In-Reply-To: <4136A189.6660@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <41363C75.5080206@cwhealth.net> <4136A189.6660@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040901204900.01c70828@pop3.direcway.com> At 11:28 PM 9/1/2004, Jim McLeod wrote: >I can see it now, public burnings of of Paul's scenarios! Da*n, wish I had thought of that. Ya know, sometimes these Canucks can be OK, eh? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 1 19:11:44 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 1 19:11:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG AFV crews In-Reply-To: <002901c49034$7a418570$2083b018@DHT8S631> References: <002901c49034$7a418570$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <610dj0l67scbh642c8a50ulc5j63od2rq3@4ax.com> On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 11:00:53 -0400, "Sean Deller" wrote: >I couldn't find any guidance on the handling of AFV crews during the RePh. > >Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even if >there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used in >"infantry" mode)? Are they Withdrawn if their platoon is Withdrawn? Would >you make a Withdrawal dr solely for a surviving crew? The AFV Withdrawal rules only talk about AFVs ... I think surviving crews are simply treated as infantry and are under no particular restrictions. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 1 19:21:04 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 1 19:21:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive First Fire...alas, more clarification. In-Reply-To: <413606BD.6709@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <20040831215247.17517.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20040831185511.01cb1d20@mail.alltel.net> <41356380.79C0@mb.sympatico.ca> <413606BD.6709@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 10:28:29 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >Anyway, nice fielding Bruce ... for an Aussie wanker ... But we wank the *best*. Just look at our medal tally . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 1 19:28:57 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 1 19:29:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: <413624B4.1060205@thuring.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:45:59 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >So the Infantry Target Type can be used to attack empty Locations to hit >whatever terrain therein. The rule masters disagree as to what DRM to apply >though, so apply whatever DRM that still gives you a hit :-) If you're using ITT, you'd apply Cases K and Q, primarily (and any others that might also be applicable, e.g., Case L), I would think. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From aslml at aslwebdex.net Wed Sep 1 21:21:51 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Wed Sep 1 21:21:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] New ASL Goodies at the ASLWebDex References: <122791da1227ae9c.1227ae9c122791da@us.army.mil> <6.1.2.0.0.20040831204232.01c0fec0@pop3.direcway.com> <001201c48fc8$49996f80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> <63uaj0dddtn92tkt8p0od1nf4q5bbekggd@4ax.com> Message-ID: <004d01c490a4$6055ab80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> My humble appologies to all the offended AH-boosters out there. No intent to insult, just to misinform. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: ; Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 2:23 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] New ASL Goodies at the ASLWebDex On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 21:06:19 -0500, wrote: >One of those rare AH unkept promises has always been Chapter N of the ASLRB. >A lovely idea, but as far as I know only one installment was every >officially released. Sorry? There was an installment for every module that was released until Doomed Battalions! TAHGC had no problem keeping that particular promise -- it was MMP who decided to let it slide. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bryanb at bnm.co.za Wed Sep 1 23:32:12 2004 From: bryanb at bnm.co.za (Bryan Brinkman) Date: Wed Sep 1 23:29:50 2004 Subject: NASL RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c490b6$9621c660$23000060@brinkman.local> Denis Call it what you want ... the subject matter is not even remotely ASL, and please remember that this list has many members who are not American citizens and consequently the matter under discussion is very off-topic. Also please spare a thought for those of us on a regular dial-up who have to PAY more for downloading all this stuff. Off-list please. As Bruce Bakken said "Kindly take it elsewhere". Bryan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The problem with designing something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of a complete fool. - Douglas Adams, In Literature/Douglas Adams From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 00:03:42 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 00:01:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > >So the Infantry Target Type can be used to attack empty Locations to hit > >whatever terrain therein. The rule masters disagree as to what > DRM to apply > >though, so apply whatever DRM that still gives you a hit :-) > and Bruce Probst answered: > If you're using ITT, you'd apply Cases K and Q, primarily (and > any others that might also be applicable, e.g., Case L), I would think. > I agree that the rules specify case Q (TEM) and case L (PBF), but the ASLRB says nothing about applying case K (concealed target) in this case. Case K says: "Ordnance firing at a hidden/concealed target ... must add the +2 DRM of Case K to its TH DR vs that target." With COWTRA firmly in mind, I'm quite sure you willll *not* find that 1) Buildings (or other terrain) is hidden/concealed, or 2) Case K is told to apply against terrain (EXC: SMOKE). I know there is a Perry sez efefctively telling us to apply case K, but unfortunately there's nothing in the ASLRB (that I know of) indicating this... From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 01:10:15 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 01:08:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] New ASL Goodies at the ASLWebDex In-Reply-To: <004d01c490a4$6055ab80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: Hi, Larry wrote: > My humble appologies to all the offended AH-boosters out there. No intent > to insult, just to misinform. As one who have visited his ch. N page, I can tell that the page outclasses the old armory pages in the AH modules by far. It lacks the pictures, but it containg all information, *including* all errata, and where replacement counters are issued. That's very valuable info for people like me who have DB v1 and v2 counters, ABTF counters and J2 counters, and need to sort out which counters belong where. From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Sep 2 06:34:50 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Sep 2 06:34:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List Message-ID: <391l71$7lg5im@mxip19a.cluster1.charter.net> > > From: Paul Ferraro > Date: 2004/09/01 Wed PM 06:59:55 CDT > To: graydo_mn@sbcglobal.net > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List > > > > So what do you have to do to get excommunicated? > > >From the List? It's only ever happened twice. In both those cases the > posters were very much over the top. I suppose over the course of so many > years (eight?) having only two is a good thing... ...and Pitcavage and I were not among the two. Imagine how _BAD_ they must of been if he and I are still here! ;-) Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From garciagd at velocity.net Thu Sep 2 06:39:09 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Thu Sep 2 06:43:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] This is the ASL Mailing List References: <391l71$7lg5im@mxip19a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <003401c490f2$3a0e0820$f301010a@gecac.org> > Imagine how _BAD_ they must of been if he and I are still here! now THIS was funny! Thanks! Peace Roger (though I do notknow why I keep reading this topic) From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 21:28:57 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Sep 2 07:17:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap References: <41363C75.5080206@cwhealth.net> Message-ID: <4136A189.6660@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Peter Young wrote: > Too late! I've already decided to boycott your products! Anything with > your name on it goes on the shelf, right next to my Dixie Chicks CDs! > > At least, until I need something to play. :-) I can see it now, public burnings of of Paul's scenarios! Bring your weenies and beers, there's gonna' be a cookout tonight! =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 07:18:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 07:18:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:03:42 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >I agree that the rules specify case Q (TEM) and case L (PBF), but the ASLRB >says nothing about applying case K (concealed target) in this case. Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, there are no Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are (equivalent to) Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. >With COWTRA firmly in mind, I'm quite sure you willll *not* find that >1) Buildings (or other terrain) is hidden/concealed, or >2) Case K is told to apply against terrain (EXC: SMOKE). I agree, but the SSR says *nothing* about hitting the building, or indeed any other type of terrain ... it says only that the *hex* (or any units in it) must be hit. The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a Location) that is empty of Known enemy units requires application of Case K. The rules *are* quite clear about that. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Wed Sep 1 21:28:57 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Sep 2 07:19:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT crap References: <41363C75.5080206@cwhealth.net> Message-ID: <4136A189.6660@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Peter Young wrote: > Too late! I've already decided to boycott your products! Anything with > your name on it goes on the shelf, right next to my Dixie Chicks CDs! > > At least, until I need something to play. :-) I can see it now, public burnings of of Paul's scenarios! Bring your weenies and beers, there's gonna' be a cookout tonight! =Jim= From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 2 07:30:14 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 2 07:30:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> Message-ID: <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> Bruce Probst wrote: >Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, there are no >Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are (equivalent to) >Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. > Where does any rule say "equivalent to"? I must have missed that. > The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a > Location) that is empty of Known enemy units requires application of > Case K. The rules *are*quite clear about that. This is not what C6.2 says, however; shooting at an *empty* hex is different from shooting at a hex with only hidden/concealed units. Case K applies to the latter, but not the former. I have never seen amyone apply Case K to hit an otherwise empty hex, (when gaining acquisition, for example...) -Chas From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 08:57:29 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 08:57:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 07:30:14 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >>Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, there are no >>Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are (equivalent to) >>Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. >> >Where does any rule say "equivalent to"? I must have missed that. Well, I'll grant you that the rules don't go so far as to say "an actually empty hex is equivalent to an apparently empty hex that has HIP units in it, if you want to take shots at it", but do you really need that spelled out before you believe it to be true? An empty hex devoid of Known Enemy Units can only contain HIP enemy units (which may not actually exist) -- unless you've otherwise verified that this is not the case (by occupying it, searching it, or whatever). That's simple logic. (It doesn't matter if you, the player, know that the enemy has *no* HIP units -- the units you control don't "know" it.) >> The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a >> Location) that is empty of Known enemy units requires application of >> Case K. The rules *are*quite clear about that. > >This is not what C6.2 says, however; shooting at an *empty* hex is >different from shooting at a hex with only hidden/concealed units. No, it's not; indeed it *cannot* be so (noting the EXC for SMOKE in C6.2). How do you distinguish between HIP targets and genuinely empty hexes? Do you tell your opponent which hexes are actually empty and which ones contain units, so he knows whether to apply Case K or not? Of course not -- Case K applies to *all* non-SMOKE shots vs. (apparently) empty hexes -- it's called Area Fire. To put it another way, when using IFT FP to attack an apparently empty hex, you don't wait to see if there's actually an enemy unit there before you find out whether to halve your FP or not -- Area Fire applies automatically in such situations (A12.13). Case K is the Ordnance equivalent (C.4) and applies in the same situations. The only time that Case K does *not* apply is when using the Area Target Type to fire SMOKE at an (apparently) empty hex (C6.2); since the rules require an EXC to grant that allowance, it follows that applying Case K is the "usual" procedure for Area Fire -- which of course is what we expect. >Case K applies to the latter, but not the former. I have never seen amyone >apply Case K to hit an otherwise empty hex, (when gaining acquisition, >for example...) Then I'm afraid that you've been playing it wrong. It's hardly necessary, given the rules as quoted above, but there is supporting evidence (if you need it) in the form of the following old Q&A: C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? A. Yes. [Compil9] [Compilations of ASL questions 9) 27 February 1999] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From styson at fchoice.com Thu Sep 2 09:09:01 2004 From: styson at fchoice.com (Sam Tyson) Date: Thu Sep 2 09:09:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: What if you know there are no HIP units that could be there, either through lack of HIP capability or prior discoveries in the scenario? -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Probst Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 10:57 AM To: Chas Argent; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 07:30:14 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >>Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, there >>are no Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are >>(equivalent to) Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. >> >Where does any rule say "equivalent to"? I must have missed that. Well, I'll grant you that the rules don't go so far as to say "an actually empty hex is equivalent to an apparently empty hex that has HIP units in it, if you want to take shots at it", but do you really need that spelled out before you believe it to be true? An empty hex devoid of Known Enemy Units can only contain HIP enemy units (which may not actually exist) -- unless you've otherwise verified that this is not the case (by occupying it, searching it, or whatever). That's simple logic. (It doesn't matter if you, the player, know that the enemy has *no* HIP units -- the units you control don't "know" it.) >> The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a >> Location) that is empty of Known enemy units requires application of >> Case K. The rules *are*quite clear about that. > >This is not what C6.2 says, however; shooting at an *empty* hex is >different from shooting at a hex with only hidden/concealed units. No, it's not; indeed it *cannot* be so (noting the EXC for SMOKE in C6.2). How do you distinguish between HIP targets and genuinely empty hexes? Do you tell your opponent which hexes are actually empty and which ones contain units, so he knows whether to apply Case K or not? Of course not -- Case K applies to *all* non-SMOKE shots vs. (apparently) empty hexes -- it's called Area Fire. To put it another way, when using IFT FP to attack an apparently empty hex, you don't wait to see if there's actually an enemy unit there before you find out whether to halve your FP or not -- Area Fire applies automatically in such situations (A12.13). Case K is the Ordnance equivalent (C.4) and applies in the same situations. The only time that Case K does *not* apply is when using the Area Target Type to fire SMOKE at an (apparently) empty hex (C6.2); since the rules require an EXC to grant that allowance, it follows that applying Case K is the "usual" procedure for Area Fire -- which of course is what we expect. >Case K applies to the latter, but not the former. I have never seen >amyone apply Case K to hit an otherwise empty hex, (when gaining >acquisition, for example...) Then I'm afraid that you've been playing it wrong. It's hardly necessary, given the rules as quoted above, but there is supporting evidence (if you need it) in the form of the following old Q&A: C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? A. Yes. [Compil9] [Compilations of ASL questions 9) 27 February 1999] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." 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 oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 09:12:41 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 09:10:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > >I agree that the rules specify case Q (TEM) and case L (PBF), > >but the ASLRB > >says nothing about applying case K (concealed target) in this case. > and Bruce Probst answered: > Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, > there are no > Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are (equivalent to) > Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. > I disagree. 1) C3.41 says that I can attack a building, a bridge or an empty Location using the Infantry Target Type. So in those cases, the building etc. is the target. 2) Case K applies if the target is concealed/hidden. It doesn't say to apply if there are no know units. It is applied if the target is concealed/hidden. 3) In this case, the building is the target, and the building is not concealed/hidden. > The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a > Location) that > is empty of Known enemy units requires application of Case K. > The rules *are* > quite clear about that. > That must be a different versiion of the rules that the one I own. The ASLRB says two things about case K: 1) Apply it if the target is concealed/hidden. Note, that this doesn't tell us to apply it if there is not target *unit* there. 2) When firing SMOKE, apply it vs. the hex only if there are un-known units there. So the only place that mentions target Locations without known enemy units is the SMOKE *exception* which tells us to apply Case K when there are units there that are not known, but not when the hex is empty. Far from clear in my book. From asl at thuring.com Thu Sep 2 09:26:59 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Thu Sep 2 09:30:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> Message-ID: <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> Bruce Probst wrote: > On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 07:30:14 -0700, Chas Argent > wrote: > > >>>Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, there are no >>>Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are (equivalent to) >>>Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. >>> >> >>Where does any rule say "equivalent to"? I must have missed that. > > > Well, I'll grant you that the rules don't go so far as to say "an actually > empty hex is equivalent to an apparently empty hex that has HIP units in it, > if you want to take shots at it", but do you really need that spelled out > before you believe it to be true? An empty hex devoid of Known Enemy Units > can only contain HIP enemy units (which may not actually exist) -- unless > you've otherwise verified that this is not the case (by occupying it, > searching it, or whatever). So it if it is an Open Ground hex which *can't* contain HIP units how do you that? > That's simple logic. (It doesn't matter if you, > the player, know that the enemy has *no* HIP units -- the units you control > don't "know" it.) > > >>>The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a >>>Location) that is empty of Known enemy units requires application of >>>Case K. The rules *are*quite clear about that. >> >>This is not what C6.2 says, however; shooting at an *empty* hex is >>different from shooting at a hex with only hidden/concealed units. > > > No, it's not; indeed it *cannot* be so (noting the EXC for SMOKE in C6.2). > How do you distinguish between HIP targets and genuinely empty hexes? See above; some hexes can not contain HIP units when in direct LOS. > It's hardly necessary, given the rules as quoted above, but there is > supporting evidence (if you need it) in the form of the following old Q&A: > > C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it > pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? > A. Yes. [Compil9] > [Compilations of ASL questions 9) 27 February 1999] The situation did not involve firing at a vacant location searching for HIP units. There was an ammo dump which was not concealed in any way. regards, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 18:23:00 up 3 days, 3:14, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 09:44:49 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 09:42:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst wrote: > Well, I'll grant you that the rules don't go so far as to say "an actually > empty hex is equivalent to an apparently empty hex that has HIP > units in it, > if you want to take shots at it", but do you really need that spelled out > before you believe it to be true? An empty hex devoid of Known > Enemy Units > can only contain HIP enemy units (which may not actually exist) -- unless > you've otherwise verified that this is not the case (by occupying it, > searching it, or whatever). That's simple logic. (It doesn't > matter if you, > the player, know that the enemy has *no* HIP units -- the units > you control > don't "know" it.) > I agree to all this, but I don't know of any rule where this matters. Case K applies vs hidden/concealed targets, including possible hidden targets, but not against other targets. Any hidden unit in a Location may be HIP and get case K, while the building or bridge in the same Location is certainly not HIP, and thus does not get case K according to the rules. > >This is not what C6.2 says, however; shooting at an *empty* hex is > >different from shooting at a hex with only hidden/concealed units. > > No, it's not; indeed it *cannot* be so (noting the EXC for SMOKE in C6.2). > How do you distinguish between HIP targets and genuinely empty > hexes? Do you > tell your opponent which hexes are actually empty and which ones contain > units, so he knows whether to apply Case K or not? Of course not I agree, shooting at any empty *hex* or *Location* is no different from shooting at the same containing hidden units. In both cases, case K is applied vs. those potential hidden units, but not against the building/bridge etc. If you think so, please cite a rule. > -- Case K > applies to *all* non-SMOKE shots vs. (apparently) empty hexes -- > it's called Area Fire. > Again, it would be nice with a rule reference. I don't know of any. > To put it another way, when using IFT FP to attack an apparently > empty hex, > you don't wait to see if there's actually an enemy unit there > before you find > out whether to halve your FP or not -- Area Fire applies > automatically in such > situations (A12.13). Agreed, since the small arms attack only can target units (A7.1) > Case K is the Ordnance equivalent (C.4) and > applies in the same situations. > No, since ordnance attacks can target buildings, bridges and empty Locations/hexes as well. C3.41 specifically says that the building or bridge or an empty hex/Location can be a target for ITT and ATT attacks. Nowhere does it says that those buildings/bridges/hexes/Locations are considered concealed, or that they share the same concealed/hidden status as the (potential) units in the Location. You imply that, but you're not correct unless you can quote a rule. > The only time that Case K does *not* apply is when using the Area > Target Type to fire SMOKE at an (apparently) empty hex (C6.2); since the > rules require an EXC to grant that allowance, it follows that applying Case K is > the "usual" procedure for Area Fire -- which of course is what we expect. > Well, the EXC doesn't tell what it is an exception from. You think it is an exception from applying case K against an empty hex. But it is just as likely that the standard procedure is not to apply case K against an empty hex since the hex is not concealed, and then the EXC tells us to apply it if there are non-hip unknown units there. > It's hardly necessary, given the rules as quoted above, but there is > supporting evidence (if you need it) in the form of the following old Q&A: > > C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP > units, does it > pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? > A. Yes. [Compil9] > [Compilations of ASL questions 9) 27 February 1999] > This tells us to apply case K vs the unit, which I of course agree to. It says nothing about the terrain in the same hex though, which can be hit even if you miss the hidden units therein. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 10:07:42 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 10:07:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 11:09:01 -0500, "Sam Tyson" wrote: >What if you know there are no HIP units that could be there, either >through lack of HIP capability or prior discoveries in the scenario? What of it? It doesn't alter the rules in any way. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 10:12:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 10:12:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:12:41 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >1) C3.41 says that I can attack a building, a bridge or an empty Location >using the Infantry Target Type. So in those cases, the building etc. is the >target. It also says that you can attack a hex devoid of all of those things, which, after all, is the point of the SSR in question, which only requires that you hit *the hex*, not *the building*. >2) Case K applies if the target is concealed/hidden. It doesn't say to apply >if there are no know units. It is applied if the target is concealed/hidden. Please, don't *you* start with this ridiculous argument. No units == HIP units. To argue otherwise not only contradicts the rules on Area Fire, it's also logically nonsensical. >3) In this case, the building is the target, and the building is not >concealed/hidden. No, the building is *not* the target, the hex is -- per the SSR in question. >Far from clear in my book. Then you're not reading it correctly, I'm afraid. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 10:27:18 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 10:27:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> Message-ID: <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 18:26:59 +0200, lars thuring wrote: >So it if it is an Open Ground hex which *can't* contain HIP units how do >you that? Who says HIP units can't exist in Open Ground? There are several rules that permit it -- Night being the most obvious, but there are others. In any case, it doesn't matter -- the rules are clear. Case K applies when firing at an empty hex. Why? Because it's Area Fire. For you to argue otherwise, you have to demonstrate that firing at an empty hex (not at a specific terrain feature in the hex, but at "the hex") does *not* invoke Area Fire. Good luck. >See above; some hexes can not contain HIP units when in direct LOS. Well, I'll grant you that I don't think there's any way of placing HIP units in water obstacles. Aside from that, your statement is not true, as I indicate above. >The situation did not involve firing at a vacant location searching for >HIP units. There was an ammo dump which was not concealed in any way. I know. The SSR requires that you hit "the hex", or a unit in the hex. If there are no units to shoot at, then you can only shoot at -- an empty hex, and all relevant rules must apply *because the SSR doesn't say any different*. (By the way, you know nothing about the "concealment status" of the ammo dump, because the SSR does not address it. All you *know* about the ammo dump is that it exists.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 10:58:23 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 10:58:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:44:49 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >I agree to all this, but I don't know of any rule where this matters. Case K >applies vs hidden/concealed targets, including possible hidden targets, but >not against other targets. Any hidden unit in a Location may be HIP and get >case K, while the building or bridge in the same Location is certainly not >HIP, and thus does not get case K according to the rules. I agree with this, but since we're not shooting at a bridge or a building, it's hardly relevant, is it? I don't understand why you think that shooting at a bridge or building has anything to do with the original question. >> -- Case K applies to *all* non-SMOKE shots vs. (apparently) empty hexes -- >> it's called Area Fire. >> >Again, it would be nice with a rule reference. I don't know of any. That would be A12.13, spelt out in black and white. >> The only time that Case K does *not* apply is when using the Area >> Target Type to fire SMOKE at an (apparently) empty hex (C6.2); since the >> rules require an EXC to grant that allowance, it follows that applying >> Case K is the "usual" procedure for Area Fire -- which of course is what we expect. > >Well, the EXC doesn't tell what it is an exception from. Of course it does -- it's an EXC to the normal rule that concealed/HIP targets have Case K applied to them. The EXC specifies in detail what's required for it to apply -- in short, the hex has to be either actually empty or contain at least one Known Enemy Unit (and, of course, you must be firing SMOKE). Now, if the EXC can apply if the hex is actually empty, and that *without* the EXC Case K is applicable, then it follows that, indeed, Case K being applied to non-SMOKE fire at an empty hex *is* the usual state of affairs. This is very straight-forward, and should not confuse anyone familiar with ASL-speak. You seem to be arguing that "the terrain" -- i.e., the non-specific, not-a-building-or-bridge contents of a Location are somehow a valid target quite separate to the HIP contents (if any) of that Location. I don't see any support for that in the rules. I understand why you think C3.41 says that, but I don't agree that it says what you think it says . Even if I *did* agree that this was the case, there are only a couple of occasions where this would be at all useful: (i) I'm trying to "hit" a hex with 150+mm Ordnance so that I can create shellholes. (ii) I'm trying to "hit" flammable terrain with HE so as to place a flame. (iii) This particular SSR. Since I think we can all agree that C3.41 was not written with this particular SSR in mind, it falls to the likelihood of it being written solely with (i) and (ii) in mind. I'm happy to argue that I consider this quite unlikely, and in turn argue that it was *actually* written so that empty Locations could be attacked in order to flush out HIP units, in which case Area Fire must apply (which latter point you seem to agree with). To put it another way, if the author of the SSR wanted the empty hex to be "hittable" without Area Fire being a consideration, I'd want to see that stated explicitly in the SSR -- because the normal rules clearly indicate otherwise. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 11:24:46 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 11:22:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I wrote > >1) C3.41 says that I can attack a building, a bridge or an empty Location > >using the Infantry Target Type. So in those cases, the building > etc. is the > >target. > and Bruce Probst answered: > It also says that you can attack a hex devoid of all of those > things, which, > after all, is the point of the SSR in question, which only > requires that you > hit *the hex*, not *the building*. > I was discussing the general rules, but OK, it doesn't change anything... > >2) Case K applies if the target is concealed/hidden. It doesn't > say to apply > >if there are no know units. It is applied if the target is > concealed/hidden. > > Please, don't *you* start with this ridiculous argument. No units == HIP > units. To argue otherwise not only contradicts the rules on Area > Fire, it's also logically nonsensical. > Bruce, I want to discuss what the ASLRB says, not what you think is ridiculous. So I'll quote case K again: "Ordnance firing at a hidden/concealed target ... must add the +2 DRM of Case K to its TH DR vs that target" Now please tell me where it says to apply case K against anything else but hidden/concealed targets. You may think its ridiculous, but you'll not find such a rule. Normally, when firing against an empty hex, you're firing in the hope of hitting a potential hidden unit there. And against this potential hidden unit, case K is applied, but its not exactly a new thing in ASL that different targets (the potential hidden unit and the hex) has different DRM. From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 2 11:27:32 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 2 11:27:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <391q2v$7pb7oj@mxip18a.cluster1.charter.net> > >2) Case K applies if the target is concealed/hidden. It doesn't say to apply > >if there are no know units. It is applied if the target is concealed/hidden. > > Please, don't *you* start with this ridiculous argument. No units == HIP > units. Where do you get this? Rules reference, please... >To argue otherwise not only contradicts the rules on Area Fire, it's > also logically nonsensical. No, it's not; a player must apply Case K to hit a target with "?" units as a reward for his omniscience. It serves as an equalizer to compensate for his knowledge of what his eyes *see* on the board that is theoretically invisible to him. That's why an *empty* hex is easier To Hit. > >Far from clear in my book. > > Then you're not reading it correctly, I'm afraid. No, it's being read correctly, just not the way you would have it read. That doesn't make it wrong. -Chas From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 11:34:58 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 11:33:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> Message-ID: Hi, continuing the debate... Bruce wrote: > In any case, it doesn't matter -- the rules are clear. Case K > applies when firing at an empty hex. Why? Because it's Area Fire. > Rule quote please. For the record: C3.41 says that such an empty hex can be a target. A12 does not say that an empty hex is hidden/concealed, and C6.2 tells us that case K is added vs concealed/hidden targets. Where was it you found the rule that fire against an empty hex uses case K? > For you to argue otherwise, you have to demonstrate that firing > at an empty > hex (not at a specific terrain feature in the hex, but at "the hex") does > *not* invoke Area Fire. Good luck. > But this is nonsense. C6.2 is clear that it is applied vs. concealed/hidden targets only, and the rulebook doesn't say that an empty hex is a concealed/hidden target. C6.2 is specific about when Case K is added. A known hex is not one of them. > I know. The SSR requires that you hit "the hex", or a unit in > the hex. If > there are no units to shoot at, then you can only shoot at -- an > empty hex, Agreed, and the empty hex can be a target as per C3.41. > and all relevant rules must apply *because the SSR doesn't say > any different*. > Agreed, so please show a rule that specifies empty hexes as either concealed or hidden. > (By the way, you know nothing about the "concealment status" of > the ammo dump, > because the SSR does not address it. All you *know* about the > ammo dump is that it exists.) > Since the SSR doesn't address it, we'll have to stick to A12 which defines concealment/HIP. Can you see in those rules that an ammo dump is concealed/hidden? I guessed not. From jtracy at bankofny.com Thu Sep 2 11:38:19 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Thu Sep 2 11:39:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG AFV crews Message-ID: Bruce writes: > The AFV Withdrawal rules only talk about AFVs ... > I think surviving crews are simply treated as > infantry and are under no particular restrictions. Pity the poor StuG gunner who asked himself, "Is there anything worse than being a tank crewman in Stalingrad?" only to wake up the next day as an infantryman.... JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 12:24:33 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 12:22:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: One more: Bruce again: > >> -- Case K applies to *all* non-SMOKE shots vs. (apparently) > empty hexes -- > >> it's called Area Fire. > >> > >Again, it would be nice with a rule reference. I don't know of any. > > That would be A12.13, spelt out in black and white. > Oh please, now you're starting to behave like Tate did during the exit from pillbx debate. Citing a rule number without giving any clue to what in the rule supports you. But I can analyze A12.13 bit for bit to see if it tells us to apply case K vs an empty hex: * All fire and CC vs a concealed unit are halved as Area Fire Doesn't apply, since the hex is neither concealed nore a unit. * Ordnance attacks apply the Case K To Hit DRM instead of halving the FP of any resulting hit. OK, this specifies how the above applies to ordnance. Still nothing about empty hexes. *The effects of Area Fire for concealment are cumulative with other causes of Area Fire. Still more about how the above works, and nothing about empty hexes. *If a target Location contains both concealed and unconcealed units, any attack capable of affecting both types must be resolved once for each type, using a different FP column (or To Hit Numbers for ordnance) but the same DR. Still nothing about an empty hex, and that is essentially the end of A12.13. Where did it mention an empty hex? > >> The only time that Case K does *not* apply is when using the Area > >> Target Type to fire SMOKE at an (apparently) empty hex (C6.2); > since the > >> rules require an EXC to grant that allowance, it follows that applying > >> Case K is the "usual" procedure for Area Fire -- which of > course is what we expect. > > > >Well, the EXC doesn't tell what it is an exception from. > > Of course it does -- it's an EXC to the normal rule that > concealed/HIP targets have Case K applied to them. *You* interpret it that way. I interpret it to be an EXC to the normal rule that a hex is never considered concealed. The EXC doesn't tell us which one is correct. > The EXC specifies in detail what's required for > it to apply -- in short, the hex has to be either actually empty > or contain at least one Known Enemy Unit (and, of course, you must be firing > SMOKE). Wrong. The EXC says "if the target hex contains = one non-hidden enemy ground unit but none of those units are Known to the firer/Spotter" In short, the hex can *not* be empty, and must contain *no* known units. That's the direct opposite of what you say. > Now, if the EXC can apply if the hex is actually empty, and that > *without* the EXC Case K is applicable, then it follows that, indeed, Case K being > applied to non-SMOKE fire at an empty hex *is* the usual state of affairs. > This is very straight-forward, and should not confuse anyone familiar with ASL-speak. > Since the EXC actually says to apply in the exact opposite situation of what you wrote, you either argue against yourself, or the argument makes little sense. I believe the latter. > You seem to be arguing that "the terrain" -- i.e., the non-specific, > not-a-building-or-bridge contents of a Location are somehow a valid target > quite separate to the HIP contents (if any) of that Location. I > don't see any > support for that in the rules. I understand why you think C3.41 > says that, > but I don't agree that it says what you think it says . > C3.41 says: "The Infantry, as well as the Area, Target Type may be used to attack [some thing] and may also attack a hex devoid of such" Since the ITT and ATT can be used to attack a hex devoid of units, its obvious to me that the hex is a valid target. What else does this part of C3.41 mean? > Even if I *did* agree that this was the case, there are only a couple of > occasions where this would be at all useful: > > (i) I'm trying to "hit" a hex with 150+mm Ordnance so that I can create > shellholes. > > (ii) I'm trying to "hit" flammable terrain with HE so as to place a flame. > > (iii) This particular SSR. > > (iv) I try to hit a building to create rubble. (v) I try to hit a bridge to destroy it. ...and possibly a few others. You are right, this doesn't matter in most cases. > Since I think we can all agree that C3.41 was not written with > this particular SSR in mind, it falls to the likelihood of it being written > solely with (i) and (ii) in mind. I'm happy to argue that I consider this > quite unlikely, and in turn argue that it was *actually* written so that > empty Locations could be attacked in order to flush out HIP units, in which > case Area Fire must apply > (which latter point you seem to agree with). > To me, its a sign of you having a bad case, when you must fall back to your view of the intention of the rules, and not to the rule text (but I of course agree that case K applies vs. hidden units) > To put it another way, if the author of the SSR wanted the empty hex to be > "hittable" without Area Fire being a consideration, I'd want to see that > stated explicitly in the SSR -- because the normal rules clearly indicate > otherwise. I think you have failed to show that the normal rules indicate otherwise. From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Sep 2 12:33:52 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Sep 2 12:33:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <3a57rt$7mn7t1@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Ole Boe > Date: 2004/09/02 Thu PM 02:24:33 CDT > To: > Subject: RE: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > Oh please, now you're starting to behave like Tate did > during the exit from pillbx debate. I guess you didn't get my copyright letter. There is a licensing fee for using my name unless I am directly envolved in the thread. You owe me $0.25/USF. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) Citing a rule number without giving any clue to what in the > rule supports you. > > But I can analyze A12.13 bit for bit to see if it tells us to apply case K > vs an empty hex: > > * All fire and CC vs a concealed unit are halved as Area Fire > Doesn't apply, since the hex is neither concealed nore a unit. > > * Ordnance attacks apply the Case K To Hit DRM instead of halving the FP of > any resulting hit. > OK, this specifies how the above applies to ordnance. Still nothing about > empty hexes. > > *The effects of Area Fire for concealment are cumulative with other causes > of Area Fire. > Still more about how the above works, and nothing about empty hexes. > > *If a target Location contains both concealed and unconcealed units, any > attack capable of affecting both types must be resolved once for each type, > using a different FP column (or To Hit Numbers for ordnance) but the same > DR. > Still nothing about an empty hex, and that is essentially the end of A12.13. > > Where did it mention an empty hex? > > > > >> The only time that Case K does *not* apply is when using the Area > > >> Target Type to fire SMOKE at an (apparently) empty hex (C6.2); > > since the > > >> rules require an EXC to grant that allowance, it follows that applying > > >> Case K is the "usual" procedure for Area Fire -- which of > > course is what we expect. > > > > > >Well, the EXC doesn't tell what it is an exception from. > > > > Of course it does -- it's an EXC to the normal rule that > > concealed/HIP targets have Case K applied to them. > *You* interpret it that way. I interpret it to be an EXC to the normal rule > that a hex is never considered concealed. The EXC doesn't tell us which one > is correct. > > > The EXC specifies in detail what's required for > > it to apply -- in short, the hex has to be either actually empty > > or contain at least one Known Enemy Unit (and, of course, you must be > firing > > SMOKE). > Wrong. The EXC says "if the target hex contains = one non-hidden enemy > ground unit but none of those units are Known to the firer/Spotter" > > In short, the hex can *not* be empty, and must contain *no* known units. > That's the direct opposite of what you say. > > > Now, if the EXC can apply if the hex is actually empty, and that > > *without* the EXC Case K is applicable, then it follows that, indeed, Case > K being > > applied to non-SMOKE fire at an empty hex *is* the usual state of affairs. > > This is very straight-forward, and should not confuse anyone familiar with > ASL-speak. > > > Since the EXC actually says to apply in the exact opposite situation of what > you wrote, you either argue against yourself, or the argument makes little > sense. I believe the latter. > > > You seem to be arguing that "the terrain" -- i.e., the non-specific, > > not-a-building-or-bridge contents of a Location are somehow a valid target > > quite separate to the HIP contents (if any) of that Location. I > > don't see any > > support for that in the rules. I understand why you think C3.41 > > says that, > > but I don't agree that it says what you think it says . > > > C3.41 says: "The Infantry, as well as the Area, Target Type may be used to > attack [some thing] and may also attack a hex devoid of such" > > Since the ITT and ATT can be used to attack a hex devoid of units, its > obvious to me that the hex is a valid target. What else does this part of > C3.41 mean? > > > Even if I *did* agree that this was the case, there are only a couple of > > occasions where this would be at all useful: > > > > (i) I'm trying to "hit" a hex with 150+mm Ordnance so that I can create > > shellholes. > > > > (ii) I'm trying to "hit" flammable terrain with HE so as to place a flame. > > > > (iii) This particular SSR. > > > > > (iv) I try to hit a building to create rubble. > (v) I try to hit a bridge to destroy it. > > ...and possibly a few others. > > You are right, this doesn't matter in most cases. > > > Since I think we can all agree that C3.41 was not written with > > this particular SSR in mind, it falls to the likelihood of it being > written > > solely with (i) and (ii) in mind. I'm happy to argue that I consider this > > quite unlikely, and in turn argue that it was *actually* written so that > > empty Locations could be attacked in order to flush out HIP units, in > which > > case Area Fire must apply > > (which latter point you seem to agree with). > > > To me, its a sign of you having a bad case, when you must fall back to your > view of the intention of the rules, and not to the rule text (but I of > course agree that case K applies vs. hidden units) > > > To put it another way, if the author of the SSR wanted the empty hex to be > > "hittable" without Area Fire being a consideration, I'd want to see that > > stated explicitly in the SSR -- because the normal rules clearly indicate > > otherwise. > I think you have failed to show that the normal rules indicate otherwise. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Sep 2 13:19:25 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 13:17:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <3a57rt$7mn7t1@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > > Oh please, now you're starting to behave like Tate did > > during the exit from pillbx debate. > and Tate answered: > I guess you didn't get my copyright letter. There is a licensing > fee for using my name unless I am directly envolved in the thread. > > You owe me $0.25/USF. > No, you're wrong, its Bruce that owes you the fee. It was he that used the technique you pioneered so excellently. Maybe I'll subscribe to it though. Its so much easier to win every rules debate using this technique. BTW, did you know that you always apply FFNAM/FFMO *and* Hazardous Movement against empty hexes? Rule Q35.112 clearly says this green on red. Don't you agree? Then show me where Q35.112 says that this isn't true. :-) From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Thu Sep 2 13:22:26 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Thu Sep 2 13:22:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <3a57rt$7mn7t1@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <3a57rt$7mn7t1@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Tate Rogers wrote: > I guess you didn't get my copyright letter. There is a licensing fee for > using my name unless I am directly envolved in the thread. > > You owe me $0.25/USF. > Uh oh, Tate has become a Belgian or maybe he's secretly French. Now he wants to be paid in Francs. Or does USF stand for Un-Specified Funds? He may be planning on storing them in his garage, so you'd better pay up. Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Sep 2 13:52:26 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu Sep 2 13:52:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Oy Vehgel! (A36) Message-ID: <20040902205226.84416.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Listers, About to play the mini-market garden campaign from Annual '91. While the four British scens have been updated in FKaC, the Americans have not. Of course, Zon is perfectly balanced. Lash out, at 70/90 seems fine. Oy Vehgel, A36, however, sits at 38 to 10 on the ROAR. Has there been any tinkering with this scen for balance? I imagine giving the printed balance will go a certain way, but it does seem a bit off (to those of us in the "45+ playings merits some statistical relevance school"). A) any ideas for balance? B) any comments on this campaign game in general? yours, Rob _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From caise at juno.com Thu Sep 2 13:57:32 2004 From: caise at juno.com (caise@juno.com) Date: Thu Sep 2 14:00:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <20040902.135832.23797.516203@webmail24.nyc.untd.com> I have no desire to get into the political aspects of this argument, but as a long time Contracting Officer for the Air Force (and knowing some of the Contracting Personnel who work on Iraqi recontsruction), Gary's description of how a "Cost-Plus" contract works is DEAD WRONG. Gary is confusing a "cost plus" contract with a "cost plus percentage of cost" contract. The former has many safe guards against what Gary is afraid of here and the latter is AN ILLEGAL FORM OF CONTRACT for the government. I would be very surprised if any of the Iraqi Recontruction contracts are "cost plus percentage of cost" contracts as they are illegal. Contracts are my life! I wish ASL were a bigger part of it! Caise Message: 8 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 15:34:38 -0400 From: Gary Mei Gary writes: And you're dead wrong about "no additional profit to themselves". They are operating on a "cost plus" contract. IOW, the higher their expenses, the more money they make. It was in their own direct best interest to find the costliest supplier possible. AND************** What baloney! They actively sought high prices, even though they could get much lower prices from Turkey, because cost plus means that profits rise with expenses. ________________________________________________________________ Get your name as your email address. Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today! From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 2 14:06:03 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 2 14:06:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <3ds8t6$5t2v71@mxip20a.cluster1.charter.net> STOP. STOP NOW. > > From: "caise@juno.com" > Date: 2004/09/02 Thu PM 08:57:32 GMT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] OT joke > > > I have no desire to get into the political aspects of this argument, but as a long time Contracting Officer for the Air Force (and knowing some of the Contracting Personnel who work on Iraqi recontsruction), Gary's description of how a "Cost-Plus" contract works is DEAD WRONG. Gary is confusing a "cost plus" contract with a "cost plus percentage of cost" contract. The former has many safe guards against what Gary is afraid of here and the latter is AN ILLEGAL FORM OF CONTRACT for the government. I would be very surprised if any of the Iraqi Recontruction contracts are "cost plus percentage of cost" contracts as they are illegal. > > Contracts are my life! I wish ASL were a bigger part of it! > > Caise > > > > Message: 8 > Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 15:34:38 -0400 > From: Gary Mei > > Gary writes: > > And you're dead wrong about "no additional profit to themselves". They are > operating on a "cost plus" contract. IOW, the higher their expenses, the > more money they make. It was in their own direct best interest to find the > costliest supplier possible. > > AND************** > > What baloney! They actively sought high prices, even though they could get > much lower prices from Turkey, because cost plus means that profits rise > with expenses. > > > ________________________________________________________________ > Get your name as your email address. > Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more > Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today! > _______________________________________________ > 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 at thuring.com Thu Sep 2 14:26:05 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Thu Sep 2 14:23:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> Message-ID: <41378FED.9070202@thuring.com> Bruce Probst wrote: > On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 18:26:59 +0200, lars thuring wrote: > > >>So it if it is an Open Ground hex which *can't* contain HIP units how do >>you that? > > > Who says HIP units can't exist in Open Ground? There are several rules that > permit it -- Night being the most obvious, but there are others. I'll give you that; I was thinking about the scenario situation where it is an OG hex with no walls / hedges. No units in and no HIP uits per setup except for the Gun which would have been revealed. > In any case, it doesn't matter -- the rules are clear. Case K applies when > firing at an empty hex. Why? Because it's Area Fire. > > For you to argue otherwise, you have to demonstrate that firing at an empty > hex (not at a specific terrain feature in the hex, but at "the hex") does > *not* invoke Area Fire. Good luck. I don't need luck with it in my particular case; the Sturmtiger can't use the ATT. > I know. The SSR requires that you hit "the hex", or a unit in the hex. If > there are no units to shoot at, then you can only shoot at -- an empty hex, > and all relevant rules must apply *because the SSR doesn't say any different*. > > (By the way, you know nothing about the "concealment status" of the ammo dump, > because the SSR does not address it. All you *know* about the ammo dump is > that it exists.) Granted. However, assuming the simplest case is that when a special feature mentioned by a SSR it is that it is *not* HIP or concealed unless so specified. It would otherwise make lots of scenarios much intresting, e.g. "SSR 4: there is a bridge in hex XY", "SSR 3: these units must setup within 2 hexes of the building XZ", and so on. regards, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 23:18:00 up 3 days, 8:09, 2 users, load average: 0.05, 0.04, 0.09 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 2 15:30:24 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 2 15:30:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: > >The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a Location) >that >is empty of Known enemy units requires application of Case K. The rules >*are* >quite clear about that. > Sorry, but you are wrong. Case K applies only the hidden/concealed units, but not to the Location itself. Thus, it is possible to hit the Location, but still miss the hidden units. NRBH, but I would demonstrate it this way. Assume a wooden building that may or may not contain hidden units. Basic TH# is 8. Case K is +2. Case Q is +2. You roll an Original DR of "6". That would result in a hit versus the building (Original DR + Case Q = 8), but would result in a miss versus the Hidden units (Original DR + Case K + Case Q = 10). I've read all your arguments, and nothing you've said has convinced me that you are correct. Not least of which, you have not shown any rule that states that Case K applies to an Infantry Target Type hit versus a Location. 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 Thu Sep 2 15:34:37 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 2 15:34:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: >and Bruce Probst answered: > > If you're using ITT, you'd apply Cases K and Q, primarily (and > > any others that might also be applicable, e.g., Case L), I would think. > > >I agree that the rules specify case Q (TEM) and case L (PBF), but the ASLRB >says nothing about applying case K (concealed target) in this case. Case K >says: "Ordnance firing at a hidden/concealed target ... must add the +2 DRM >of Case K to its TH DR vs that target." > I agree with you. >With COWTRA firmly in mind, I'm quite sure you willll *not* find that >1) Buildings (or other terrain) is hidden/concealed, or >2) Case K is told to apply against terrain (EXC: SMOKE). > Case K only applies to any potential hidden/concealed units in the Location, not to the Location itself, because a Location can be neither hidden nor concealed. It is possible to hit a Location, but not the units in it. It probably happens very frequently. C3.4: "A hit obtained on *any* TH Table affects only the target hex and, depending on the Target-Type/applicable-DRM, not necessarily all the occupants of that hex." This is a clear indication that you could fire at an empty hex, hit the Location, but miss the hidden units due to applicable DRM (Case K in this instance). >I know there is a Perry sez efefctively telling us to apply case K, but >unfortunately there's nothing in the ASLRB (that I know of) indicating >this... > I would suggest that Perry is mistaken. :-) 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 2 15:38:16 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 2 15:38:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: > > >I agree that the rules specify case Q (TEM) and case L (PBF), but the >ASLRB > >says nothing about applying case K (concealed target) in this case. > >Certainly it does. You're firing on the Infantry Target Type, there are no >Known Infantry targets in the Location, therefore they are (equivalent to) >Hidden/Concealed targets, and therefore Case K applies. > Exactly *what* are "equivalent to" Hidden/Concealed targets? The Location? You are talking nonsense. Case K applies to any potential hidden units, but not to the Location itself. Thus, you could hit the Location, but subsequently not hit the units due to the application of Case K. > >The normal procedure for hitting a hex (or more accurately, a Location) >that >is empty of Known enemy units requires application of Case K. The rules >*are* >quite clear about that. > All the rules say is that Case K applies to hidden/concealed targets. It says nothing about the Location itself. You can fire at the Location, hit the Location, but miss the units because Case K turns the Final DR into a Miss. No problem. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 2 15:47:19 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 2 15:47:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: > >but do you really need that spelled out >before you believe it to be true? When it comes to ASL, yes. >An empty hex devoid of Known Enemy Units >can only contain HIP enemy units (which may not actually exist) -- unless >you've otherwise verified that this is not the case (by occupying it, >searching it, or whatever). That's simple logic. Your logic is flawed. >(It doesn't matter if you, >the player, know that the enemy has *no* HIP units -- the units you control >don't "know" it.) > When firing at a hex, you apply all appropriate DRM, including Case Q and Case K. If it results in a hit after applying all DRM, then the hidden units are revealed and the attack is resolved against it. If it results it a hit versus only some of the unconcealed units, but Case K causes a miss versus concealed units, the unconcealed units are hit and the concealed units are not hit. > >How do you distinguish between HIP targets and genuinely empty hexes? Simple. You fire at the hex. If, after applying Case K, there is a hit, the hidden units are hit and revealed. If, after applying Case K, there is no hit, then the hidden units are not touched. However, applicable DRM may result in a hit versus other nonconcealed units in the Location, or in a hit versus the Location itself. >Do you >tell your opponent which hexes are actually empty and which ones contain >units, so he knows whether to apply Case K or not? > No. You apply Case K automatically versus any potential hidden units. Case K never applies to nonconcealed units, nor to the Location itself. Of course not -- Case K >applies to *all* non-SMOKE shots vs. (apparently) empty hexes -- it's >called >Area Fire. > >To put it another way, when using IFT FP to attack an apparently empty hex, >you don't wait to see if there's actually an enemy unit there before you >find >out whether to halve your FP or not -- Area Fire applies automatically in >such >situations (A12.13). Case K is the Ordnance equivalent (C.4) and applies >in >the same situations. > Interesting argument, your best yet in this thread. So I ask you: what, exactly, *is* a "target"? > >Then I'm afraid that you've been playing it wrong. > Not so fast. It appears you have been playing it wrong. >It's hardly necessary, given the rules as quoted above, but there is >supporting evidence (if you need it) in the form of the following old Q&A: > >C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it >pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? >A. Yes. [Compil9] >[Compilations of ASL questions 9) 27 February 1999] > Give me a break with the hopelessly outdated unofficial Q&A. You should know better. Since this didn't make it into ASLRB 2nd Ed, we can kiss it goodbye. Buh-bye. 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 2 15:49:31 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 2 15:49:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: >I agree, shooting at any empty *hex* or *Location* is no different from >shooting at the same containing hidden units. In both cases, case K is >applied vs. those potential hidden units, but not against the >building/bridge etc. I agree with this. > >If you think so, please cite a rule. > He can't. But he'll *say* "it's clear", and "it's logical". 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 jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Thu Sep 2 20:41:20 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Sep 2 17:39:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: Message-ID: <4137E7E0.744C@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Ole B?e wrote: > Maybe I'll subscribe to it though. Its so much easier to win every rules > debate using this technique. Ole, I like the lione you used a few weeks back when we were discussing something. The gist of it was, "Perry sent me a Perry sez on this off-list so I would not worry too much about it". I like that one. :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Thu Sep 2 20:45:15 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Sep 2 17:39:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: <3a57rt$7mn7t1@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <4137E8CB.609F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Martin Snow wrote: > Uh oh, Tate has become a Belgian or maybe he's secretly French. Now he > wants to be paid in Francs. Martin, I'm pretty sure "USF" stands for "Union of the South Francs". Remember that a large number of French refugees fled Quebec to Louisiana, they be the Cajuns. As a matter of fact, Tate likely has a fair bit of French blood given he's from down South that way. :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Thu Sep 2 21:01:25 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Sep 2 17:56:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: Message-ID: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; For the record, I agree with Bruce and Ole on this. Bruce Bakken wrote: > You can fire at the Location, hit the Location, but miss the units because > Case K turns the Final DR into a Miss. I will dig into the ASLRB later about this but, what happens when a 150mm HE shot fired on the IFT hits the building and rubbles it whilst, unbeknownst to the firer at the time of firing, there is in fact a HIP unit in the building? Without checking, and I will later, I would say that the guy with the HIP unit will say, after the Rubble creation DR, "hey, I have HIP'sters in the building!" At that point, the shot could very well become a miss once case K, which is now applicable, is applied. I believe that that is how it should work. Good discussion BTW although I found the OT one on Bush v. Kerry very informative as well. =Jim= From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 2 18:01:17 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 2 18:01:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <4137C25D.5080609@charter.net> Jim McLeod wrote: > I will dig into the ASLRB later about this but, what happens when a > >150mm HE shot fired on the IFT hits the building and rubbles it whilst, >unbeknownst to the firer at the time of firing, there is in fact a HIP >unit in the building? > >Without checking, and I will later, I would say that the guy with the >HIP unit will say, after the Rubble creation DR, "hey, I have HIP'sters >in the building!" At that point, the shot could very well become a miss >once case K, which is now applicable, is applied. > >I believe that that is how it should work. > > I think this is right; it's up to the player owning the HIP unit to remember this, though I think the presence of the HIPster would have to be be announced after the TH roll and before any effects roll, since its presence may affect whether the location actually *gets* hit. -Chas From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Thu Sep 2 19:26:34 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Thu Sep 2 19:25:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night questions Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C6D2B@agalsrv03> Greetings all I'm having some trouble digesting this whole Majority Squad Type and stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night thing. E.4 says an OB or stack containing more then one type of Personnel unit has a Majority squad type equal to the most numerous in that stack, determined by US# E1.6 says units are classified as Lax, Normal or Stealthy ay night. Cloaking counters are considered equal to the Majority Squad type at scenario start. An SSR is the ultimate definition. E1.61 Stealthy are generally Commando, Ranger, ANZAC etc plus Good Order SMC Suppose the SSR says a side's Majority Squad Type is Normal 1) If a Good Order SMC is alone in a Loc and wants to move in the MPh, is it Stealthy or Normal for Straying purposes? 2) If a squad and Hero are stacked together at the start of the MPh and want to move as a stack, I presume the stack is considered Normal (as per E.4) for Straying purposes. 3) If a squad and Hero are stacked together and advance in for CC, does the hero still apply a -1 drm to the Ambush dr, even though that stack has a Majority Squad Type of Normal? Would a Good Order leader be Stealthy for Ambush purposes? 4) Scenario H "Escape from Velikiye Luki" SSR1 says the Majority Squad Type of both sides is Normal but that all German units are Stealthy while all Russian units are Lax. This makes no sense to me at all. Cheers Jon From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 19:49:59 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 19:50:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <41378FED.9070202@thuring.com> References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> <41378FED.9070202@thuring.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 23:26:05 +0200, lars thuring wrote: >> For you to argue otherwise, you have to demonstrate that firing at an empty >> hex (not at a specific terrain feature in the hex, but at "the hex") does >> *not* invoke Area Fire. Good luck. > >I don't need luck with it in my particular case; the Sturmtiger can't >use the ATT. I said "Area Fire", not "Area Target Type". As all players know, they're not the same thing. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 19:53:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 19:53:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <391q2v$7pb7oj@mxip18a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <391q2v$7pb7oj@mxip18a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <30nfj0djp3s9ngad3c1upfaq0mbb2qu6vp@4ax.com> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:27:32 +0000, Chas Argent wrote: >No, it's not; a player must apply Case K to hit a target with "?" units as a reward for his omniscience. No, Chas, that's not how it works. *All* concealed/hidden *units* -- even theoretical ones -- must have Case K applied to them. I think you'll find that even Ole and Bruce B. agree with that. If you do not use Case K when firing at a hidden *unit*, you are playing incorrectly. The argument in this thread is about whether you can fire at an empty Location, without attempting to hit any units that may or may not be there. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 19:58:01 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 19:58:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 21:24:33 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >(iv) I try to hit a building to create rubble. >(v) I try to hit a bridge to destroy it. AAARRRGHHHH!!! For the umpteenth time, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT BUILDINGS AND BRIDGES ARE NOT CONCEALED TARGETS. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THEM. THEY HAVE NO PART IN THIS DISCUSSION. Hitting a terrain feature *in* a Location is *different* to hitting "the Location" (generically). We are discussing the "hex devoid of such" part of C3.41, not the "hex not devoid of such" part. >I think you have failed to show that the normal rules indicate otherwise. I think you have demonstrated that your original point was correct after all -- the experts disagree . I'm quite comfortable with the arguments I've presented, actually, and as far as *I'm* concerned the matter is closed, especially since you can't seem to make your point *without* bringing in buildings and bridges. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 2 20:24:07 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 2 20:24:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night questions In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C6D2B@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C6D2B@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <0rnfj01ead7u67cpguipm5edvvor0at4j4@4ax.com> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:26:34 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >I'm having some trouble digesting this whole Majority Squad Type and >stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night thing. Remember, "Majority Squad Type" is only important for *Cloaking Counters* (E1.6) and *moving units/stacks* (E1.53). >E.4 says an OB or stack containing more then one type of Personnel unit has >a Majority squad type equal to the most numerous in that stack, determined >by US# Right. E.4 is only telling you how to calculate MST if an SSR doesn't already specify what it is. >E1.6 says units are classified as Lax, Normal or Stealthy ay night. Cloaking >counters are considered equal to the Majority Squad type at scenario start. >An SSR is the ultimate definition. Actually E1.6 is a little misleading in this, in that units are *always* classified as Lax, Normal or Stealthy at *any* time, not just at night. However, at Night there are specific additional ramifications for these conditions. >E1.61 Stealthy are generally Commando, Ranger, ANZAC etc plus Good Order SMC Right -- generally. >Suppose the SSR says a side's Majority Squad Type is Normal Then all Cloaking Counters and moving stacks have a MST of "Normal". >1) If a Good Order SMC is alone in a Loc and wants to move in the MPh, is it >Stealthy or Normal for Straying purposes? SSR wins. It's Normal, for movement purposes. >2) If a squad and Hero are stacked together at the start of the MPh and want >to move as a stack, I presume the stack is considered Normal (as per E.4) >for Straying purposes. Again, the SSR wins -- Normal for movement purposes. >3) If a squad and Hero are stacked together and advance in for CC, does the >hero still apply a -1 drm to the Ambush dr, even though that stack has a >Majority Squad Type of Normal? Would a Good Order leader be Stealthy for >Ambush purposes? In this case I think the specific Ambush modifiers apply, since they are generally determined "per participating unit", not "per Stack". I.E., I don't think Majority Squad Type is relevant to Ambush, even if it's a Cloaking Counter that advances in. >4) Scenario H "Escape from Velikiye Luki" SSR1 says the Majority Squad Type >of both sides is Normal but that all German units are Stealthy while all >Russian units are Lax. This makes no sense to me at all. The SSR is talking about two things -- the status of the MST, and the status of each unit. The MST is normal, which affects movement. The various individual units are either Stealthy or Lax, which affects Ambush, concealment growth, etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Thu Sep 2 20:35:28 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Thu Sep 2 20:33:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night questions Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C6D45@agalsrv03> > >4) Scenario H "Escape from Velikiye Luki" SSR1 says the Majority Squad > Type > >of both sides is Normal but that all German units are Stealthy while all > >Russian units are Lax. This makes no sense to me at all. > > The SSR is talking about two things -- the status of the MST, and the > status > of each unit. The MST is normal, which affects movement. The various > individual units are either Stealthy or Lax, which affects Ambush, > concealment > growth, etc. This is what I find strange. If all the German units are Stealthy, then surely their MST should be stealthy Cheers Jon From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 2 21:27:24 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 2 21:27:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Oy Vehgel! (A36) In-Reply-To: <20040902205226.84416.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040902205226.84416.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4137F2AC.8070107@charter.net> The American balance seems pretty benign-no Schuerzen for the Germans? Pshaw, whatever... How about one more 747 for the Yanks? Or reduce the German 9-2 to a 9-1 instead. -Chas Robert Nelson wrote: >Listers, > >About to play the mini-market garden campaign from >Annual '91. > >While the four British scens have been updated in >FKaC, the Americans have not. Of course, Zon is >perfectly balanced. Lash out, at 70/90 seems fine. Oy >Vehgel, A36, however, sits at 38 to 10 on the ROAR. > >Has there been any tinkering with this scen for >balance? I imagine giving the printed balance will go >a certain way, but it does seem a bit off (to those of >us in the "45+ playings merits some statistical >relevance school"). > >A) any ideas for balance? >B) any comments on this campaign game in general? > >yours, >Rob > > > >_______________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. >http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush >_______________________________________________ >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 Thu Sep 2 23:27:47 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Sep 2 23:27:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Schuerzen Message-ID: <20040903062747.22816.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> I just read that the Germans deveoloped Schuerzen for ATR's, not shaped charge weapon protection. The Germans actually said that Schuerzen helped helped shape charge weapon rounds penetrate their armor by setting off the round in front of the armor. This allowed the "blow torch" effect of HEAT to melt the armor easier. The Germans actually said they tried to keep Schuerzen off their tanks when dealing with the Western allied forces because of Baz and Piat's. Interesting, huh ? _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 2 23:50:28 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Thu Sep 2 23:51:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1094194228.413814348654c@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, I'm not giving up very easily when I get started, so: I wrote: > >(iv) I try to hit a building to create rubble. > >(v) I try to hit a bridge to destroy it. > and Bruce Porobst answered: > AAARRRGHHHH!!! For the umpteenth time, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT BUILDINGS AND > BRIDGES ARE NOT CONCEALED TARGETS. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THEM. THEY > HAVE NO PART IN THIS DISCUSSION. > > Hitting a terrain feature *in* a Location is *different* to hitting "the > Location" (generically). We are discussing the "hex devoid of such" part of > C3.41, not the "hex not devoid of such" part. > ??? C3.41 says that a building can be a target, and also that a "hex devoid of such", so it establishes that units can be a target, that buidlings can be a target and that empty hexes can be a target (good, if not, we couldn't even fire SMOKE at an empty hex). So C3.41 establishes that a building and an empty hex are both legal targets for ATT and ITT. And you agree to not add case K against the building, but want to apply it against the empty hex. Could you then point me to the rule that tells us to treat those two differently with regard to concealment/Case K? You want to treat them differently, so surely you must have a rule to quote that tells us to do so? > I think you have demonstrated that your original point was correct after all > -- the experts disagree . > :-) From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Sep 3 00:10:01 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Fri Sep 3 00:11:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <1094195401.413818c9d4724@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, Quoting Jim McLeod : > For the record, I agree with Bruce and Ole on this. > Bruce Probst or Bruce Bakken? Since Bruce Bakken agrees with me and Bruce Probst disagrees, I guess its the former. Thatnks for agreeing with me anyway. It's unfortuante that I don't agree with you though :-) > I will dig into the ASLRB later about this but, what happens when a > 150mm HE shot fired on the IFT hits the building and rubbles it whilst, > unbeknownst to the firer at the time of firing, there is in fact a HIP > unit in the building? > The building still becomes rubble. Reasoning: 1) C3.41 again establishes that the targeted Location contains two targets: The building and the hidden unit. 2) A12.13 and C6.2 establishes that Case K applies to the concealed/hidden targets only, and that some targets in a Location may be concealed/hidden and receive case K, while other targets is not. In this case, the building is not concealed/hidden, and is therefore hit, while the hidden unit is not hit. (If you want realism argument, consider this a hit against the building structure - which is no harder to hit just because an enemy squad was hiding inside - but not a hit against the room that the squad was hiding in). 3) For added argumentation, B24.11 says: "The level affected in an Area-Target-Type/OBA attack vs a multi-level building is determined via Random Selection among those levels hit." Note that it says "levels hit", not "levels with units hit". > Without checking, and I will later, I would say that the guy with the > HIP unit will say, after the Rubble creation DR, "hey, I have HIP'sters > in the building!" At that point, the shot could very well become a miss > once case K, which is now applicable, is applied. > The shot would be a miss against all concealed/hidden targets, but still not a misss against the *not* concealed building. To give some more to think about: You seem to think that the building Location should share the same Case K DRM as the units in the building Location (if any). Would you also add other DRM, so that a building Location with a concealed, very small gun is almost impossible to hit (+7 DRM), while a building Location with a very large AFV in bypass is very easy to hit (-2 DRM). IMO, in both cases, the *building* is an individual target with individual DRM (+2/+3 for TEM, case L if point blank, etc), but never concealed, moving, small or large etc. > Good discussion BTW although I found the OT one on Bush v. Kerry very > informative as well. :-) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Sep 3 00:39:00 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Sep 3 00:39:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: > >Now please tell me where it says to apply case K against anything else but >hidden/concealed targets. You may think its ridiculous, but you'll not find >such a rule. > >Normally, when firing against an empty hex, you're firing in the hope of >hitting a potential hidden unit there. And against this potential hidden >unit, case K is applied, but its not exactly a new thing in ASL that >different targets (the potential hidden unit and the hex) has different >DRM. > Ah, late at night when trying to get my young son to sleep, ASL thoughts dance through my head... I'm beginning to waver a bit on this, not because of Bruce P.'s arguments, but rather because of this situation: Consider a wood building containing a Known MMC and a concealed MMC. Assume a Basic TH# of "8". Assume further that the only DRM that apply to my shot are Case K and Case Q. I roll an Original "5". In this case, I would resolve a hit versus the Known MMC (Final DR = "7"), but it would be a miss versus a concealed MMC (Final DR = "9"). No problems so far. But now consider the same situation, except that there is only a concealed MMC in the building and no other units. This time, what I would normally do is consider the shot to have been a miss -- as it would be versus the concealed unit -- and not resolve it any further. I.e., I normally would not consider myself to have missed the concealed unit, but still hit the building Location itself. I don't think it has ever occurred to me to resolve it that way. And yet I have argued earlier that it is possible to hit the building Location, but not the concealed/hidden units in them. I have not actually resolved it that way -- that I can remember -- if the building contains a concealed unit and no Known units. I would just consider it a miss and move on. So now, for me to argue that an apparently empty building can be hit even if any hypothetical hidden units would not be, seems contradictory to how I would normally play it if the building contained a concealed MMC. In other words, in the first case I would consider it a miss versus a concealed unit and not resolve the attack versus the building, and in the second case I would consider it a miss versus a potential hidden unit but still resolve the attack versus the building. Not consistent, I must say. I have become impressed with the weakness of my own argument, rather than by the strength of Bruce P.'s argument. I do not believe that Bruce P. has sufficiently demonstrated that Case K must apply in order to hit a hex (= Location in most cases) apparently devoid of any units. Nor do I believe that Ole nor I nor anybody else have sufficiently demonstrated exactly *how* it should be handled. I now find myself dissatisfied with either solution, because I don't think the ASLRB can be shown to really support either position. (Perhaps the ASLRB can be shown to actually support both positions, but that's not satisfactory either...) Ah, the ASLRB. Some days, I just hate it. I really, really do. Maybe I'm just tired. Literally, because of the lateness of the hour... and figuratively, because I grow weary of debating ASL rules using a rulebook that is as messed up as the one we have. I'm considering just crawling back into my hole and remaining in my own little ASL world, where I play it the way I play it, no one argues with me, problems are resolved effortlessly because we don't really care, and I don't find myself typing rules arguments at 3:30 AM because my son can't sleep. Go back to bed. Me, not you. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Sep 3 01:10:28 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Fri Sep 3 01:11:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1094199028.413826f409d0b@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, Quoting Bruce Bakken : > I'm beginning to waver a bit on this, not because of Bruce P.'s arguments, > but rather because of this situation: > Its always good to take a step back... > Consider a wood building containing a Known MMC and a concealed MMC. Assume > > a Basic TH# of "8". Assume further that the only DRM that apply to my shot > are Case K and Case Q. I roll an Original "5". > > In this case, I would resolve a hit versus the Known MMC (Final DR = "7"), > but it would be a miss versus a concealed MMC (Final DR = "9"). No problems > so far. > Agreed. > But now consider the same situation, except that there is only a concealed > MMC in the building and no other units. This time, what I would normally do > is consider the shot to have been a miss -- as it would be versus the > concealed unit -- and not resolve it any further. I.e., I normally would > not consider myself to have missed the concealed unit, but still hit the > building Location itself. I don't think it has ever occurred to me to > resolve it that way. > I can say exactly the same. It never occurred to me either, until I joined a discussion about this on the Swedish ASL forum (I'm Norwegian, but Norwegians and Swedes can easily understand each other). I guess most players have played this way, but IMHO, that's not the point. The point is what the rules actually says. And the rules says nothing about applying the best, or the worst DRM for real or hyptothetical units when resokving an attack vs. the terrain. > And yet I have argued earlier that it is possible to hit the building > Location, but not the concealed/hidden units in them. I have not actually > resolved it that way -- that I can remember -- if the building contains a > concealed unit and no Known units. I would just consider it a miss and move > on. > That's how I have played for 10 years too. Fortunately, it very seldom matters - you must have a big Gun to get rubble/flame effects. > So now, for me to argue that an apparently empty building can be hit even if > any hypothetical hidden units would not be, seems contradictory to how I > would normally play it if the building contained a concealed MMC. In other > words, in the first case I would consider it a miss versus a concealed unit > and not resolve the attack versus the building, and in the second case I > would consider it a miss versus a potential hidden unit but still resolve > the attack versus the building. > > Not consistent, I must say. > Agreed, and also nothing in the ASLRB that indicates such a difference. > I have become impressed with the weakness of my own argument, rather than by > the strength of Bruce P.'s argument. I do not believe that Bruce P. has > sufficiently demonstrated that Case K must apply in order to hit a hex (= > Location in most cases) apparently devoid of any units. Nor do I believe > that Ole nor I nor anybody else have sufficiently demonstrated exactly *how* > it should be handled. > The ASLRB *is* a bit weak here. All examples with terrain effects has unconcealed, non-moving infantry there, so the hit chances vs the terrain is equal to the hit chances vs. the unit, so there's not much help there. I'm actually quite unsure of old Don Greenwood's intentions, but I still believe that the combination of C3.41, C6.2 and A12.13 says that the case K DRM only affects the concealed targets, and that the building is an unconcealed target in its own right. Look at it this way. You clearly agree that when firing against one concealed and one unconcealed target *unit*, only the concealed receives case K. C3.41 equals units and buildings (and empty hexes) as targets, so there's no reason to apply the rules differently when one of the targets is the terrain. > Ah, the ASLRB. Some days, I just hate it. I really, really do. > > Maybe I'm just tired. Literally, because of the lateness of the hour... and > figuratively, because I grow weary of debating ASL rules using a rulebook > that is as messed up as the one we have. I'm considering just crawling back > into my hole and remaining in my own little ASL world, where I play it the > way I play it, no one argues with me, problems are resolved effortlessly > because we don't really care, and I don't find myself typing rules arguments > ..personally I think *discussing* the rules are fun, but when playing, the game and not the rules receives the focus. > at 3:30 AM because my son can't sleep. > Go back to bed. Me, not you. > Good night. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Sep 3 06:48:06 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Sep 3 06:50:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night questions Message-ID: > > > >4) Scenario H "Escape from Velikiye Luki" SSR1 says the Majority Squad > > Type > > >of both sides is Normal but that all German units are Stealthy while >all > > >Russian units are Lax. This makes no sense to me at all. > > > > The SSR is talking about two things -- the status of the MST, and the > > status > > of each unit. The MST is normal, which affects movement. The various > > individual units are either Stealthy or Lax, which affects Ambush, > > concealment > > growth, etc. > >This is what I find strange. If all the German units are Stealthy, then >surely their MST should be stealthy > You're right, Jon. How it's written is messed up. How it is currently written is a self-contradiction. I'm sure Bruce P. is correct about it. It appears the intention was for all units to be considered Normal for Straying purposes, but Stealthy/Lax for all other purposes. But no, it couldn't just be stated simply that way. Let's pull out some ASL-speak and fumbly-jumbly with it. The players can sort it out. It's small wonder you find it strange, Jon. And I agree with you. If the Germans are Stealthy and attempting to be sneaky; and if the Russians are Lax and "boisterous"... then surely those benefits should apply to Straying. Somebody was trying way too hard to write that SSR. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Sep 3 07:09:38 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Sep 3 07:09:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Concealed Target (Was HS32 ... ) Message-ID: I'll be brief. C6.2: "Ordnance firing at a hidden/concealed target ..." A12: Paraphrasing big time. Only units may be hidden or concealed (EXC: Fortifications). Thus, only units may be "hidden/concealed target[s]". C3.41: Locations can be targets, and the Infantry Target Type attacks a specific Location. Questions -- Q: When achieving a Hit on the Infantry Target Type, am I hitting a specific Location? [My answer is Yes] Q: Can I declare a hex's Location to be the target of my attack, whether the hex or Location contains units or not? [My answer is Yes] Q: Can I hit a Location, but still not hit the units in the Location due to DRM? [My answer is Yes] Q: Does Case K ever apply to a Location designated as the target? [My answer is No] That's all I got for now. 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 steven.dennis at autodesk.com Fri Sep 3 07:15:36 2004 From: steven.dennis at autodesk.com (Steven Dennis) Date: Fri Sep 3 07:15:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: Guys, Randy Rossi and I played this back when it came out. We had the same type of discussion, only in about 5 minutes. Then just because it was cool we rolled the dice and figured why not that seems like a hit! And he was pissed when it didn't level the entire koresh compound!!! Who used to have the tagline "Shut up and play!!"?? Steve Dennis PS: McLeod actually had the best example with the rubble and HIP guy. That I think is the question for Perry, for Rubble purposes does Case K apply whether a HIP/Concealed guy is there are not? I think it does not since doesn't rubble say ORIGINAL IFT DR? From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 10:53:35 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 07:46:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> <1094195401.413818c9d4724@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <4138AF9F.764F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Ole B?e wrote: > Bruce Probst or Bruce Bakken? Since Bruce Bakken agrees with me and Bruce Probst > disagrees, I guess its the former. Bruce B. > Thatnks for agreeing with me anyway. It's > unfortuante that I don't agree with you though :-) No worries Ole. :) I wrote, > > I will dig into the ASLRB later about this but, what happens when a > > 150mm HE shot fired on the IFT hits the building and rubbles it whilst, > > unbeknownst to the firer at the time of firing, there is in fact a HIP > > unit in the building? Ole replied, > The building still becomes rubble. > > Reasoning: > > 1) C3.41 again establishes that the targeted Location contains two targets: The > building and the hidden unit. Agreed. > 2) A12.13 and C6.2 establishes that Case K applies to the concealed/hidden > targets only, and that some targets in a Location may be concealed/hidden and > receive case K, while other targets is not. > In this case, the building is not concealed/hidden, and is therefore hit, while > the hidden unit is not hit. Agreed, I believe that Bruce P. is incorrect in his interpretation of the above rule references. > (If you want realism argument, Whoa! Hold on there Ole, this Jim "king of the reality argument" McLeod you're talking to here. > consider this a hit against the building > structure - which is no harder to hit just because an enemy squad was hiding > inside - but not a hit against the room that the squad was hiding in). Agree 100%. > 3) For added argumentation, B24.11 says: "The level affected in an > Area-Target-Type/OBA attack vs a multi-level building is determined via Random > Selection among those levels hit." > Note that it says "levels hit", not "levels with units hit". Funny you should mention B24.11 Ole, I was reading that this morning over coffee. BTW, I love getting up early when I am on vacation. Everyone is still asleep and pa'pa can read his email and rulebook in the bliss of the morning calm. :) Anyway, B24.11 got me to thinking about OBA and this argument. What if there are HIPsters within the FFE blast area? The OBA still comes down, correct? There is no pulling an extra chit if the other guy says, "what I have a HIP unit there!" I wrote, > > Without checking, and I will later, I would say that the guy with the > > HIP unit will say, after the Rubble creation DR, "hey, I have HIP'sters > > in the building!" At that point, the shot could very well become a miss > > once case K, which is now applicable, is applied. Ole replied, > The shot would be a miss against all concealed/hidden targets, but still not a > misss against the *not* concealed building. > > To give some more to think about: You seem to think that the building Location > should share the same Case K DRM as the units in the building Location (if > any). No, my above example is incorrect IMO. The building takes the hit and if it rubbles, too bad for the HIP guys, same thing would have happened if they were attacked by an FFE attack capable of rubbling that building. > Would you also add other DRM, so that a building Location with a > concealed, very small gun is almost impossible to hit (+7 DRM), while a > building Location with a very large AFV in bypass is very easy to hit (-2 > DRM). No. > IMO, in both cases, the *building* is an individual target with individual DRM > (+2/+3 for TEM, case L if point blank, etc), but never concealed, moving, small > or large etc. Agreed, however, it can be argued from reality argument POV that most buildings should qualify as a large or very large target. :) Now, and I will dig about for the pertinent rule later, suppose the following. There is a building hex with an AFV in bypass a known infantry unit on the ground level and a "?" unit on the first level. Can the building itself be targeted seperately to avoid case K for the "?" units in the hope that (given a Gun with sufficient FP) the shot will possibly rubble the building? =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Sep 3 08:00:41 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Sep 3 08:00:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <3948se$7h2jk2@mxip08a.cluster1.charter.net> USF = United States Funds Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > From: Martin Snow > Date: 2004/09/02 Thu PM 03:22:26 CDT > To: Tate Rogers > CC: Ole Boe , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Tate Rogers wrote: > > > I guess you didn't get my copyright letter. There is a licensing fee for > > using my name unless I am directly envolved in the thread. > > > > You owe me $0.25/USF. > > > > Uh oh, Tate has become a Belgian or maybe he's secretly French. Now he > wants to be paid in Francs. > > Or does USF stand for Un-Specified Funds? > > He may be planning on storing them in his garage, so you'd better pay up. > > Marty > > Martin Snow <*> > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html > From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 11:11:04 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 08:03:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: Message-ID: <4138B3B8.718D@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Steven Dennis wrote: > Who used to have the tagline "Shut up and play!!"?? It is being replaced with, "Shut up while I read the damn book!" :) > Steve Dennis > PS: McLeod actually had the best example with the rubble and HIP guy. > That I think is the question for Perry, for Rubble purposes does Case K > apply whether a HIP/Concealed guy is there are not? I think it does not > since doesn't rubble say ORIGINAL IFT DR? Based on Ole's argument, I have changed my position on this whole "what is the target" thing. Bruce. B wrote, > Q: Can I hit a Location, but still not hit the units in the Location due to > DRM? [My answer is Yes] Interesting proposition. I miss the "?" dudes with my 150mm round but hit the building. In the subsequent effects DR, I roll a KIA of sufficient severity to ultimately rubble the building, eliminating the "?" unit that I originally missed. Interesting indeed and realistic ... I like it, I like it, its good. =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Sep 3 08:27:12 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Sep 3 08:28:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <3a5bqj$7hh23i@mxip04a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/02 Thu PM 05:47:19 CDT > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, sidirezegh@charter.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > >To put it another way, when using IFT FP to attack an apparently empty hex, > >you don't wait to see if there's actually an enemy unit there before you > >find > >out whether to halve your FP or not -- Area Fire applies automatically in > >such > >situations (A12.13). Case K is the Ordnance equivalent (C.4) and applies > >in > >the same situations. > > > > Interesting argument, your best yet in this thread. Not really since IFT FP never effects terrain (EXC: HE C.6). Unlike ordnance, small arms can not specifically target terrain. The target is always the potential HIP units. > So I ask you: what, exactly, *is* a "target"? Look at A7.4, IFT (and ATT) firing into a location never specifies a target so all vulnerable units are the target. ITT and VTT do have to specify a target. > >C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it > >pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? > >A. Yes. [Compil9] > >[Compilations of ASL questions 9) 27 February 1999] > > > > Give me a break with the hopelessly outdated unofficial Q&A. You should > know better. Since this didn't make it into ASLRB 2nd Ed, we can kiss it > goodbye. Buh-bye. Agreed...I mean we have already had reversals of the v2 reprint (i.e., the AM bump). Not to mention that Perry has reversed his own pre v2 answers. As I have said before, if one waits long enough to ask the question again one can eventually get the desired answer. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Sep 3 08:32:12 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Sep 3 08:32:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <391ogq$7ahr8b@mxip03a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Jim McLeod > Date: 2004/09/02 Thu PM 10:45:15 CDT > To: Martin Snow > CC: Tate Rogers , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > Listerz; > > Martin Snow wrote: > > > Uh oh, Tate has become a Belgian or maybe he's secretly French. Now he > > wants to be paid in Francs. > > Martin, I'm pretty sure "USF" stands for "Union of the South Francs". > Remember that a large number of French refugees fled Quebec to > Louisiana, they be the Cajuns. As a matter of fact, Tate likely has a > fair bit of French blood given he's from down South that way. > Grrrrrr! Them's fighten words pard! I am good 'ol English stock with a touch of Cherokee & Norwegian thrown into the mix. If I thought I had even a hint of "Fraidy Frog" in me I would commit HariKiri on the spot. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Fri Sep 3 08:52:53 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Fri Sep 3 08:52:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Worn dice- funny Message-ID: <1094226773.d6544e9cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Not to point fingers at our favorite company's product, since dice-wise they're at least acceptable, but anyone else have any dice as worn as this? :-) http://www.dndorks.com/Default.aspx Brian "Rollin' Rollin' Rollin'" Pickering From sambelcher at cablespeed.com Fri Sep 3 09:07:08 2004 From: sambelcher at cablespeed.com (Sam Belcher) Date: Fri Sep 3 09:07:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:15:36 -0400 "Steven Dennis" wrote: > > >Guys, > > Randy Rossi and I played this back when it came out. We >had the same >type of discussion, only in about 5 minutes. > >Then just because it was cool we rolled the dice and >figured why not >that seems like a hit! > >And he was pissed when it didn't level the entire koresh >compound!!! > >Who used to have the tagline "Shut up and play!!"?? > Steve, That would be me. I was Lars' opponent when we played last weekend. We also settled the issue in 2 minutes. It never came up in the game because EVERY FREAKING TIME Lars fired those 380mm monsters he hit. And every hit was a KIA. I learned two things. 1. Shut up and Play is a good thing. 2. Don't stay in LOS once those monsters stop moving. Sam "Shut up and Play" Yes, it is ammusing how much discussion this question has raised. IMO it is NOT clear, and the SSR for the scenario makes it an issue. Playtesters? MMP? Any authoritative comments? From asl at thuring.com Fri Sep 3 09:16:19 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Fri Sep 3 09:13:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <413898D3.7030207@thuring.com> Sam Belcher wrote: > On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:15:36 -0400 > "Steven Dennis" wrote: > >> >> >> Guys, >> >> Randy Rossi and I played this back when it came out. We had the same >> type of discussion, only in about 5 minutes. >> >> Then just because it was cool we rolled the dice and figured why not >> that seems like a hit! >> >> And he was pissed when it didn't level the entire koresh compound!!! >> >> Who used to have the tagline "Shut up and play!!"?? >> > > Steve, > That would be me. I was Lars' opponent when we played last weekend. We > also settled the issue in 2 minutes. It never came up in the game > because EVERY FREAKING TIME Lars fired those 380mm monsters he hit. And > every hit was a KIA. Sam, Sam, you exagerate! Not *every* time, it was *only* five subsequent KIA2 or worse in a row; this the sixth TH DR was a 10 (followed by the boxcars) ... ;-) Weird wasn't it? > I learned two things. 1. Shut up and Play is a good thing. > 2. Don't stay in LOS once those monsters stop moving. I admit it was a nice feeling there. > Sam "Shut up and Play" > > Yes, it is ammusing how much discussion this question has raised. IMO it > is NOT clear, and the SSR for the scenario makes it an issue. > Playtesters? MMP? Any authoritative comments? Yes, that would be intresting to hear. cheers, Lars "Boom, boom" -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 18:10:00 up 4 days, 3:01, 2 users, load average: 0.19, 0.15, 0.09 From aslwynn at rogers.com Fri Sep 3 09:13:56 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Fri Sep 3 09:13:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca><1094195401.413818c9d4724@webmail.broadpark.no> <4138AF9F.764F@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <003001c491d1$03ce2350$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> My first "contribution" to this thread. Jim offfers the following q for discussion: > Now, and I will dig about for the pertinent rule later, suppose the > following. > > There is a building hex with an AFV in bypass a known infantry unit on > the ground level and a "?" unit on the first level. > > Can the building itself be targeted seperately to avoid case K for the > "?" units in the hope that (given a Gun with sufficient FP) the shot > will possibly rubble the building? > My (first) answer: Absolutely. I have played ABTF firing at buildings with the express purpose of rubbling them, with no intent to even try to hit a unit, concealed/HIP or otherwise. I have always played it the way that Ole has, even though as Bruce B. recently pointed out, often I have forgotten to check for results vs other terrain in a hex if I miss the targetted unit. Why? Well, two reasons: 1. Often the 'To Hit' numbers are the same or very close. 2. Normally the calibre of the ordnacnce has no possibility of rubble/flame creation or other damages to the terrain. I do believe it is a bit of a red herring to discuss the 'To Hit" modifiers vs a 'building' or 'bridge' et cetera if/when discussing ATT. ALL terrain will be hit if the Hex is hit (with ATT) but there are no Case Q To Hit mods for ATT. It does become potentially interesting for ITT/VTT; though.. Say one is fiiring at 'stuff' in a hex with a building in it, and has the option of selecting a vehicle, or infantry. C 3.31 points out that "The Vehicle Target Type can be selected only when firing at a specific vehicle (even if HIP/concealed ... A hit on the target vehicle cannot itself cause damage to any other .. terrain in the same hex." (As an aside, what if the shot is a miss? Is this rule implying that a miss might damage other units/terrain?) C3.41 states that "The Infantry, as well as the Area, Target Type may be used to attack a ... /building/bridge/vehicle ..., and may also attack a hex devoid of such. [EXC: The Infantry Target Type (3.32) attacks a specific Location ... " OK, seems clear to me then that the VTT can't be used vs terrain, but the ITT can. So, let me run through an example at 6 hexes vs a wooden building: Choose ATT: Basic To Hit of 7 ITT: To Hit of 6 after Case Q. Normally an ITT shot would provide greater probability of inflicting a result since the calibre will not be halved, so ITT would most often be selected. So the question remains: can the building be hit with ITT and the unit not? If so, how? C3.41 implies that it could, depending on how the language is parsed; especially the 'of such' bit. Is that phrase telling us that ONLY a hex without any of the specified things are in it can be targetted via the ITT? Seems to me that that IS, indeed, what it is saying. Now I'm even more confused than before I started to write this! It still makes 'common sense' to me that Ordnance should be able to shoot at a 'mythical' unconcealed Infantry target in any Location, but I have yet to find a definitive answer in the ASLRB. So perhaps an actual infantry target must be hit in order to use ITT vs a Location, making it more difficult to hit a building with a concealed unit in it or a potential HIPster than one with an unconcealed unit. I don't like this result of my thinking, though! Help, somebody. Wynn "Needs to Read the ASLRB More Often" Polnicky From asl at thuring.com Fri Sep 3 09:28:14 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Fri Sep 3 09:25:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> <41378FED.9070202@thuring.com> Message-ID: <41389B9E.1040605@thuring.com> Bruce Probst wrote: > On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 23:26:05 +0200, lars thuring wrote: > > >>>For you to argue otherwise, you have to demonstrate that firing at an empty >>>hex (not at a specific terrain feature in the hex, but at "the hex") does >>>*not* invoke Area Fire. Good luck. >> >>I don't need luck with it in my particular case; the Sturmtiger can't >>use the ATT. > > > I said "Area Fire", not "Area Target Type". As all players know, they're not > the same thing. > Ok, my missread. I would still try to wiggle my way out of this by stating that only Units / Fortifications can be concealed / HIP, and certainly an ammo dump doesn't qualify for either, but there seems to be a Perry Says on this (Patrik Manlig supplied it on the aslx @ yahoo ML): ------------------8<----------------------------------- >Subject: Ordnance attacks. vs. empty hexes/concealed unit ? > >Assume the following situation: > >A Mortar is 6 hexes away from a building hex that contains a concealed >enemy unit. No To Hit DRM apply, so the Basic To Hit Number for the Area >Target Type is 7 and vs. the concealed unit Case K (+2) applies. >So I need a 5 or less to hit the concealed unit. If I roll a 6 or 7 I miss >the concealed unit but do I still "hit" the building so I can roll an >effects DR vs. it to possibly rubble it ? No. >The same situation but the building hex is empty and I want to try and >rubbleit. Do I have to add Case K in this case as well (hitting a potential HIP >unit)before I can make an effects DR ?, or do I "hit" building in this case with >a TH DR <= 7 ? You have to add Case K. ....Perry MMP ------------------8<----------------------------------- (last on http://forum.aslsweden.com//index.php?showtopic=122&st=60) I don't know if it should make a difference that ammo depot isn't defined as a Building in the SSR. regards, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 18:00:00 up 4 days, 2:51, 2 users, load average: 0.03, 0.08, 0.07 From daveolie at eastlink.ca Fri Sep 3 11:20:52 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Fri Sep 3 11:25:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: <391ogq$7ahr8b@mxip03a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <040101c491e2$f49ec9e0$a64d8918@klis.com> Tater wrote: > If I thought I had even a hint of "Fraidy Frog" in me I would commit HariKiri on the spot. This could be our big chance, gentlemen. Can anyone recommend a good genealogist for hire? David "and this is your great-great-great grandpere Rog?rs" Olie From janusz.maxe at unf.se Fri Sep 3 14:05:33 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Fri Sep 3 14:05:37 2004 Subject: VB: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: Janusz Maxe Skickat: den 3 september 2004 23:05 Till: 'lars thuring' ?mne: SV: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > I said "Area Fire", not "Area Target Type". As all players > know, they're not > > the same thing. No, not all players. I've found some terms that make it harder for newbies to learn ASL: * That the term "area fire" is used in a huge number of situations is really confusing. One tend to thing that "area fire" can only be applied once to a shot. * "Area fire" and "Area target type". Hand up everyone who thought that mortars could fire at concealed guys becouse they use ATT! * "NMC" should of course be "0MC". Much more logical. * "Open ground"! Not the terrain, but the FFMO. Sometimes it's used, it's the terrain in ch.B, and sometimes it's "no positive DRM" and sometimes it's FFMO. Open ground (FFMO) should have been named differently, like "clear shot" or "unobstructed LOS" or something other than the terrain type. OG can also be in an orchard road, a bridge and so on, which is clearly not "open ground" according to ch B. Janusz From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 18:34:00 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 15:26:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <41391B88.3547@mb.sympatico.ca> Patrik, Thanks for the reply. Upon re-reading my question afterwards (I had quickly rattled it off before we left to buy the kids their school supplies) I believe that the question was a poor example. How about this. Assume that there are HIP/"?" units in the scenario. A Gun fires at an unoccupied building Location 3 hexes away using the ITT. Case K does not apply (case Q would presumably), correct? Assuming a hit, we roll the effects DR to check for any possible Flame/Rubble creation. Correct? If there happens to be a HIP unit in the building, and the building is rubbled due to the attack, too bad for the HIP guys, correct? Now, assuming there is a "?" unit in this building hex that is not known to the firer, case K would apply if the firer elected to fire on the ATT. Correct? Using the ITT, if the firer elected to fire at an unoccupied building Location of the building hex that is in it's LOS (but the "?" unit is currently out of the firer's LOS), case K would not apply. Correct? Assuming the answer is correct, if the attack subsequently rubbles the building Location targeted and the entire building is ultimately rubbled per B24.11, the rubble crushes the beggars out of the firer's LOS amd again its too bad for them, correct? Now, ... uh, ... assuming that, uh ... You'll have to excuse for a bit Patrik, I think my "bwain 'erts". :) =Jim= From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Fri Sep 3 15:36:31 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Fri Sep 3 15:36:35 2004 Subject: VB: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4138F1EF.5000406@mbj.nifty.com> Janusz Maxe wrote: > > * "NMC" should of course be "0MC". Much more logical. True. The Normal Moral Check is hardly the normal result either. 1MCs are much more common. There really is nothing 'normal' about it. ;) From aslwynn at rogers.com Fri Sep 3 16:24:12 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Fri Sep 3 16:24:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: Message-ID: <007a01c4920d$1f5bda40$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Hear, hear Janusz! Open Ground has always been one uf my pet peeves. Just another example: are gully hexes (which are otherwise 'open') considered Open Ground? Depends! Orchards are orchards, woods are woods but Open Ground is far too complicatd! But I still love ASL, even with all of its warts. Janusz wrote: * "Open ground"! Not the terrain, but the FFMO. Sometimes it's used, it's the terrain in ch.B, and sometimes it's "no positive DRM" and sometimes it's FFMO. Open ground (FFMO) should have been named differently, like "clear shot" or "unobstructed LOS" or something other than the terrain type. OG can also be in an orchard road, a bridge and so on, which is clearly not "open ground" according to ch B. From tweniger at telusplanet.net Fri Sep 3 16:52:47 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Fri Sep 3 16:52:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cowering halftracks Message-ID: <1094255566.5868.10.camel@basement> Greetings All, Pay attention Purist, this is how it's done. Two halftracks w/1 squad passengers fire their IFP and the AAMG of each halftrack at an adjacent target. The DR is doubles. Does the attack cower? According to pg. A16vB, A7.9, "Cowering affects all fire except ...any form of vehicular fire." Would this include PRC? Or just the vehicular weapons? -- Virtually, Tom W From neil at pegacat.com Fri Sep 3 16:04:39 2004 From: neil at pegacat.com (Neil Andrews) Date: Fri Sep 3 17:13:30 2004 Subject: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040904090157.03437230@popa.melbpc.org.au> At 00:45 4/09/04, you wrote: > >Without checking, and I will later, I would say that the guy with the > >HIP unit will say, after the Rubble creation DR, "hey, I have HIP'sters > >in the building!" At that point, the shot could very well become a miss > >once case K, which is now applicable, is applied. > > > >I believe that that is how it should work. Well I don't. HIP/Concealed is revealed by getting a pin or better. Not by saying oh well you missed because the HIP unit you didn't know is actually there. Good one !!!! > > > > >I think this is right; it's up to the player owning the HIP unit to >remember this, though I think the presence of the HIPster would have to >be be announced after the TH roll and before any effects roll, since its >presence may affect whether the location actually *gets* hit. So whats the bloody point of being HIP then. !!!!! >-Chas Stay Safe Yours ============================ Neil Andrews Boronia, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia neil@pegacat.com ============================ From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 20:42:36 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 17:35:11 2004 Subject: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) References: <4138919E.9060507@landfocus.se> <4139198D.3949@mb.sympatico.ca> <4138FACD.7090106@landfocus.se> Message-ID: <413939AC.1F83@mb.sympatico.ca> Patrik, thankyou for taking the time to field these questions and I agree with you opinions. By extension, this argument (building being hit but the "?" target in the hex/Location not being hit by the same TH attempt) applies to "?" units in many types of terrain; woods, grain orchard. Example: A "?" squad is in a woods hex. A Gun fires at the "?" S. and must apply case K to it's TH attempt. The TH attempt fails to hit the "?" S. but hits the grain hex. A DR is made to resolve the attack against the grain field which could possibly result in a Flame being created or, if we are firing a 150mm Gun at the target S., shellholes could be created and the S. would remain unaffected. A little shaken perhaps by the near miss but otherwise unharmed. I must admit that I have never played the rule this way but it is a very interesting take on the topic. I shall be reading over this stuff this evening as I enjoy a Guinness. =Jim= From aslwynn at rogers.com Fri Sep 3 18:01:34 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:01:33 2004 Subject: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) References: <4138919E.9060507@landfocus.se> <4139198D.3949@mb.sympatico.ca><4138FACD.7090106@landfocus.se> <413939AC.1F83@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <008801c4921a$b99a03e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Jim; You need to play more. :) This is the way I had always udnerstood it was to work, but this thread has made me doubt that I was playing it right, particularly in light of the Q&A that was quoted by Patrik (I think). Oh well, let us all know what the Guinness tells you. Wynn "Suddenly Thirsty" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim McLeod" To: ; "Patrik Manlig" Cc: "Ole Boe" Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 11:42 PM Subject: Re: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) > Patrik, thankyou for taking the time to field these questions and I > agree with you opinions. > > By extension, this argument (building being hit but the "?" target in > the hex/Location not being hit by the same TH attempt) applies to "?" > units in many types of terrain; woods, grain orchard. > > Example: A "?" squad is in a woods hex. A Gun fires at the "?" S. and > must apply case K to it's TH attempt. The TH attempt fails to hit the > "?" S. but hits the grain hex. A DR is made to resolve the attack > against the grain field which could possibly result in a Flame being > created or, if we are firing a 150mm Gun at the target S., shellholes > could be created and the S. would remain unaffected. A little shaken > perhaps by the near miss but otherwise unharmed. > > I must admit that I have never played the rule this way but it is a very > interesting take on the topic. > > I shall be reading over this stuff this evening as I enjoy a Guinness. > > > > =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 mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 21:12:46 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:05:21 2004 Subject: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040904090157.03437230@popa.melbpc.org.au> Message-ID: <413940BE.135A@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; I wrote, > > >Without checking, and I will later, I would say that the guy with the > > >HIP unit will say, after the Rubble creation DR, "hey, I have HIP'sters > > >in the building!" At that point, the shot could very well become a miss > > >once case K, which is now applicable, is applied. > > > > > >I believe that that is how it should work. Neil replied, > Well I don't. HIP/Concealed is revealed by getting a pin or better. Not > by saying oh well you missed because the HIP unit you didn't know is > actually there. Good one !!!! I have changed my position on this Neil. There is no case K applied in the above case. If my tank decides to fire at a building containing , unknown to the firer at this time, a HIP squad, the firer only adds the building TEM to the TH DR. If the TH DR is sufficiently low enough to theoretically hit the HIP unit the player owning the HIP unit must place the HIP unit on map if the effects DR is sufficient to cause a PTC or better. If the shot is a miss on the HIP unit but a hit on the building, an effects DR is still made to see if a flame is created or if the building is possibly rubbled. =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:06:33 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:07:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Stealthy/Normal/Lax at Night questions In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C6D45@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C6D45@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <5n4ij098nrjsjnvabahmiss072ovl95qj9@4ax.com> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 11:35:28 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >This is what I find strange. If all the German units are Stealthy, then >surely their MST should be stealthy This is pure guesswork on my part, but I assume that the scenario "designer" (or "adapter", I guess, to be more accurate) didn't want the Russians' ability to "chase" the Germans to be compromised, but wanted the Germans to have the upper hand if/when the Russians actually catch them. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From geb3 at inter.net Fri Sep 3 18:17:03 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:13:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Soggy Example: RE: HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) Message-ID: Jim, I think you've had more than one Guinness, as your example "?" squad has mysteriously slipped from woods terrain into grain. But what the heck, we get it, so go ahead and have another. Thanks to Patrik, as well. George "just finished my bacon & eggs with 3 cups of coffee, now ready for a Guinness" Bates -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Jim McLeod Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 12:43 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net; Patrik Manlig Cc: Ole Boe Subject: Re: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) Patrik, thankyou for taking the time to field these questions and I agree with you opinions. By extension, this argument (building being hit but the "?" target in the hex/Location not being hit by the same TH attempt) applies to "?" units in many types of terrain; woods, grain orchard. Example: A "?" squad is in a woods hex. A Gun fires at the "?" S. and must apply case K to it's TH attempt. The TH attempt fails to hit the "?" S. but hits the grain hex. A DR is made to resolve the attack against the grain field which could possibly result in a Flame being created or, if we are firing a 150mm Gun at the target S., shellholes could be created and the S. would remain unaffected. A little shaken perhaps by the near miss but otherwise unharmed. I must admit that I have never played the rule this way but it is a very interesting take on the topic. I shall be reading over this stuff this evening as I enjoy a Guinness. =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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:17:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:18:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Schuerzen In-Reply-To: <20040903062747.22816.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040903062747.22816.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 23:27:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote: > I just read that the Germans deveoloped Schuerzen >for ATR's, not shaped charge weapon protection. The >Germans actually said that Schuerzen helped helped >shape charge weapon rounds penetrate their armor by >setting off the round in front of the armor. This >allowed the "blow torch" effect of HEAT to melt the >armor easier. The Germans actually said they tried to >keep Schuerzen off their tanks when dealing with the >Western allied forces because of Baz and Piat's. >Interesting, huh ? Read where? Interesting, but not very well informed IMO. Adding a layer of air between the HEAT round and the target armour -- and possibly distorting the angle of attack by forcing a premature detonation -- can only *reduce* the likelihood of penetration, not enhance it, no matter what the tank crews might have thought. Of course, I'm neither an engineer nor a physics expert, so maybe I'm completely wrong, but I'd be interested to hear the argument if I am. I think the reality in any case is probably that most of the time sch?rzen didn't make a damned bit of difference either way. Half the time the tank lost it just by driving around any way. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:19:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:21:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <4138AF9F.764F@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> <1094195401.413818c9d4724@webmail.broadpark.no> <4138AF9F.764F@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <006ij0phipt6oqi6l0lb3ocia7hqtdr266@4ax.com> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 10:53:35 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >> In this case, the building is not concealed/hidden, and is therefore hit, while >> the hidden unit is not hit. > >Agreed, I believe that Bruce P. is incorrect in his interpretation of >the above rule references. For the record, Bruce P. has *never* claimed that buildings can be concealed. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 21:28:42 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:21:43 2004 Subject: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) References: <4138919E.9060507@landfocus.se> <4139198D.3949@mb.sympatico.ca><4138FACD.7090106@landfocus.se> <413939AC.1F83@mb.sympatico.ca> <008801c4921a$b99a03e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <4139447A.C84@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Wynn wrote: > > Jim; > > You need to play more. :) Tell me about it ... :) > This is the way I had always udnerstood it was to work, but this thread has > made me doubt that I was playing it right, particularly in light of the Q&A > that was quoted by Patrik (I think). If you still have it, the Q&A, handy please post it again Wynn as I can't recall which one you refer to. Anyway, this business about missing the target but affecting the terrain in the hex is intriguing. However, it may in fact answer that age old question, "If a 150mm round explodes and nobody is around to hear it, does it still make a sound?" Wynn adds, > Oh well, let us all know what the Guinness tells you. It is whispering, "there's another in the fridge." ;) BTW, as another lister has pointed out, in my example, the squad in the example teleported from a woods hex on into a grain hex. Good catch! That must have been due to the concusion of the blast that did not kill the squad. :) Now, where is that frosted mug, it is almost "beer o'clock" in these parts. =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:24:28 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:25:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <1094194228.413814348654c@webmail.broadpark.no> References: <1094194228.413814348654c@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <236ij0hgilhk93q1jdbojdgptka43glm18@4ax.com> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 08:50:28 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >??? C3.41 says that a building can be a target, and also that a "hex devoid of >such", so it establishes that units can be a target, that buidlings can be a >target and that empty hexes can be a target (good, if not, we couldn't even >fire SMOKE at an empty hex). Agreed. >So C3.41 establishes that a building and an empty hex are both legal targets for >ATT and ITT. Agreed. >And you agree to not add case K against the building, but want to apply it >against the empty hex. Could you then point me to the rule that tells us to >treat those two differently with regard to concealment/Case K? You want to >treat them differently, so surely you must have a rule to quote that tells us >to do so? I want to treat them differently because normally there's no sensible reason to attack an empty hex, unless you're trying to attack the HIP units that the hex may contain. It's not a matter of rules, it's a matter of logic. You know what? Since this is the *only* scenario in the entire history of ASL where this might actually be important, I don't think I really care either way. It's an MMP Sturmtiger, so it will never hit a target any way . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Sep 3 21:40:02 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:33:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q References: <4137EC95.6C2F@mb.sympatico.ca> <1094195401.413818c9d4724@webmail.broadpark.no> <4138AF9F.764F@mb.sympatico.ca> <006ij0phipt6oqi6l0lb3ocia7hqtdr266@4ax.com> Message-ID: <41394722.5869@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bruce Probst wrote: > For the record, Bruce P. has *never* claimed that buildings can be concealed. I stand corrected Bruce, my apologies. =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:33:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:34:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Scandinavian Conspiracies In-Reply-To: <1094199028.413826f409d0b@webmail.broadpark.no> References: <1094199028.413826f409d0b@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: Needing a distraction, I observed that on Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:10:28 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >I joined a discussion about this on the Swedish ASL forum (I'm Norwegian, but Norwegians >and Swedes can easily understand each other). They talk about us, you know, behind our backs, knowing that we free-thinking people of the West can't understand their primitive nattering. They're plotting! Plotting, I tell you! Never trust an entire race of people who choose to live north of the Arctic Circle! Do you think it was a coincidence that Vikings plagued the civilised lands of Europe -- and Ireland -- for hundreds of years?! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:56:59 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 18:58:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <1094199028.413826f409d0b@webmail.broadpark.no> References: <1094199028.413826f409d0b@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:10:28 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >I guess most players have played this way, but IMHO, that's not the point. The >point is what the rules actually says. And the rules says nothing about >applying the best, or the worst DRM for real or hyptothetical units when >resokving an attack vs. the terrain. I would have thought that C3.41 was, in effect, requiring that you have to declare the terrain feature as your intended target for it to be hit. However, that's not what B6.33, B24.11 and B25.13 say. So I guess you're right. One *does* need to pay attention if you use ITT (or ATT, if you're using a very large caliber) to attack concealed infantry with HE. Miss by only one or two (Case K) and you hit the terrain around them, and that hit needs to be resolved on the off-chance that you'll start a fire under them, rubble their location or whatever. (It doesn't need to be super-large caliber: 50+mm can place a flame!) Interesting. (And on a separate topic, I just realised something very minor that I'd being doing wrong: I thought *any* 150+ mm HE attack could cause shellholes in appropriate terrain, but on re-reading B2.1 I see that it *must* be an FFE or "aerial bomb/rocket". Which latter point makes me wonder what the rules think an "aerial rocket" is? It can't be referring to rocket FFE, since that's already covered by the previous clause .... Looks like an artifact left over from "G.I.", when Typhoons could attack with rockets on the 150mm HE column! Chapter E would not yet have been written at the time Chapter B was finalised.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 18:58:47 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 19:00:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <288ij055t9l6vtabricjt49d1ugtp6h1qk@4ax.com> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:15:36 -0400, "Steven Dennis" wrote: >That I think is the question for Perry, for Rubble purposes does Case K >apply whether a HIP/Concealed guy is there are not? I think it does not >since doesn't rubble say ORIGINAL IFT DR? I don't understand your question. Case K affects the TH DR, Rubble is resolved only if you get a hit. Case K can't affect the Rubble DR. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 19:07:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 19:08:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <41389B9E.1040605@thuring.com> References: <5iaej0hi1s2sqgm0atlvb4qf9d74m8pptn@4ax.com> <41372E76.7000302@charter.net> <413749D3.9050200@thuring.com> <04lej0dsntnf6345tbti85ea74gqqtes49@4ax.com> <41378FED.9070202@thuring.com> <41389B9E.1040605@thuring.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 18:28:14 +0200, lars thuring wrote: > >Subject: Ordnance attacks. vs. empty hexes/concealed unit ? > > > >Assume the following situation: > > > >A Mortar is 6 hexes away from a building hex that contains a concealed > >enemy unit. No To Hit DRM apply, so the Basic To Hit Number for the Area > >Target Type is 7 and vs. the concealed unit Case K (+2) applies. > >So I need a 5 or less to hit the concealed unit. If I roll a 6 or 7 I miss > >the concealed unit but do I still "hit" the building so I can roll an > >effects DR vs. it to possibly rubble it ? > >No. > > >The same situation but the building hex is empty and I want to try and > >rubbleit. Do I have to add Case K in this case as well (hitting a >potential HIP > >unit)before I can make an effects DR ?, or do I "hit" building in this >case with > >a TH DR <= 7 ? > >You have to add Case K. > > >....Perry >MMP Well bugger me. Perry agrees with me (sorta). Just when Ole's arguments were beginning to sway me! Or does he? The question was asking about the Area Target Type, whereas we've been discussing the ITT ... although C3.41 covers both. And I don't see why Case K should apply vs. an attack against a *building* (as opposed to just attacking "the hex"). It's you and me against the world, Perry! Stand by to repel boarders! Arh, mateys! Beware Vikings! (Then, once there's just the two of us left, we can fight mano-a-mano over the SS ELR question.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 19:14:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 19:16:01 2004 Subject: VB: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 23:05:33 +0200, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >> > I said "Area Fire", not "Area Target Type". As all players >> know, they're not the same thing. > >No, not all players. I'm sorry, I should have written "All players who read the ASL FAQ", but of course I can't comprehend the concept of an ASL player who hasn't read the FAQ! But you are right, the apparent similarity between the terms "area fire" and "area target type" is unfortunate, and unnecessarily confusing. Maybe something like "dispersed fire" instead of "area fire", and/or "Hex Target Type" instead of "Area Target Type"? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 19:37:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 19:38:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Concealed Target (Was HS32 ... ) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 10:09:38 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Q: When achieving a Hit on the Infantry Target Type, am I hitting a >specific Location? [My answer is Yes] Conditionally I'd say "yes", but it sort of depends on what you mean by "hitting", since you can "hit a Location" with ITT and yet not affect targets in that Location (e.g., vehicles). >Q: Can I declare a hex's Location to be the target of my attack, whether >the hex or Location contains units or not? [My answer is Yes] Yes, C3.41 makes that clear. >Q: Can I hit a Location, but still not hit the units in the Location due to >DRM? [My answer is Yes] I would have said yes, because it seemed logical (after the fact), but the recent Perry Sez (I assume it's recent) supplied by Patrik indicates otherwise. >Q: Does Case K ever apply to a Location designated as the target? [My >answer is No] As you know, I would have said "no" if attacking a particular terrain feature *in* the hex, but "yes" if just attacking the Location "generally". The Perry Sez, however, indicates "yes" at all times. What Perry is saying, if I can read between the lines, is that you can only ever *damage* a Location (or a terrain feature *in* that Location) if you actually hit an infantry unit in that Location/feature. If there isn't any Known infantry currently located there, you have to hit a (theoretical) HIP unit. (Extrapolating further, presumably that HIP unit would have to be of "normal" target size; an *actual* HIP target that is either Small or Large may or may not be hit according to its individual modifiers ....) This is pure guesswork on my part, but I suspect that Perry has ruled this way in order to avoid the whole issue of missing the target in the building but rubbling the building any way -- which as you've just pointed out, is not a consideration that 99% of us (except for those sneaky Scandinavians) have ever thought about. (To put it another way, Perry is making "by rule" what most of us were doing "by habit" any way -- not an unprecedented manoeuvre in ASL rules history.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 19:47:54 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 19:47:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cowering halftracks In-Reply-To: <1094255566.5868.10.camel@basement> References: <1094255566.5868.10.camel@basement> Message-ID: <2kaij0pc25isn7ak1qv9o7sqre8ot96c1s@4ax.com> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:52:47 -0600, Tom Weniger wrote: >Two halftracks w/1 squad passengers fire their IFP and the AAMG of each >halftrack at an adjacent target. The DR is doubles. Does the attack >cower? Yes. >According to pg. A16vB, A7.9, "Cowering affects all fire except ...any >form of vehicular fire." Would this include PRC? Or just the vehicular >weapons? Just the vehicular weapons. What you are doing here is forming a FG, and the normal rules for FG that are composed of units that can cower and units that can't cower apply (A7.9, last sentence). The squads can cower (and you would use Random Selection to determine which of them actually does, if it's important), the ht can't cower -- but their combined attack suffers the cowering penalty. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 3 19:56:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 3 19:56:16 2004 Subject: [aslx] Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q (fwd) In-Reply-To: <413939AC.1F83@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4138919E.9060507@landfocus.se> <4139198D.3949@mb.sympatico.ca> <4138FACD.7090106@landfocus.se> <413939AC.1F83@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 20:42:36 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >if we are firing a 150mm Gun at the target S., shellholes >could be created No they couldn't. Please re-read B2.1. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Sep 3 20:26:53 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Sep 3 20:27:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <3a57rt$7t6ocf@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/03 Fri PM 08:24:28 CDT > To: Ole B?e , > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > > I want to treat them differently because normally there's no sensible reason > to attack an empty hex, unless you're trying to attack the HIP units that the > hex may contain. It's not a matter of rules, it's a matter of logic. > Ironically, it was Bruce P. that pointed out that, at night, it is not out of the ordinary to have units HIP in OG (empty) locations. > You know what? Since this is the *only* scenario in the entire history of ASL > where this might actually be important, I don't think I really care either > way. It's an MMP Sturmtiger, so it will never hit a target any way . > You got that right. The d*mn BMG is more useful than that stinking 380mm MA. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Sep 3 20:37:33 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Sep 3 20:37:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <3a6eho$7esoen@mxip07a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/03 Fri PM 09:07:14 CDT > To: lars thuring , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 18:28:14 +0200, lars thuring wrote: > > > >The same situation but the building hex is empty and I want to try and > > >rubbleit. Do I have to add Case K in this case as well (hitting a > >potential HIP > > >unit)before I can make an effects DR ?, or do I "hit" building in this > >case with > > >a TH DR <= 7 ? > > > >You have to add Case K. > > > > > >....Perry > >MMP Wow...I am shocked...a Perry Sez that is completely at odds with what the rules actually say. As usual, no rules references...no rational...nothing to hang a hat on...just "You have to add Case K". Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bryanb at bnm.co.za Sat Sep 4 00:50:22 2004 From: bryanb at bnm.co.za (Bryan Brinkman) Date: Sat Sep 4 00:47:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Worn dice- funny In-Reply-To: <1094226773.d6544e9cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Message-ID: <000301c49253$d54f9580$23000060@brinkman.local> No, but a friend of mine does have a nasty D10 in his collection which he offers unsuspecting newcomers to use. He found it in this garden after it had passed through the digestive track of his dog! Bryan From asl at thuring.com Sat Sep 4 02:37:36 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Sat Sep 4 02:35:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: <3a57rt$7t6ocf@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <3a57rt$7t6ocf@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <41398CE0.7010704@thuring.com> Tate Rogers wrote: >>From: Bruce Probst >>Date: 2004/09/03 Fri PM 08:24:28 CDT >>To: Ole B?e , >> aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >>Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q >> >> >>I want to treat them differently because normally there's no sensible reason >>to attack an empty hex, unless you're trying to attack the HIP units that the >>hex may contain. It's not a matter of rules, it's a matter of logic. >> > > > Ironically, it was Bruce P. that pointed out that, at night, it is not out of the ordinary to have units HIP in OG (empty) locations. > > >>You know what? Since this is the *only* scenario in the entire history of ASL >>where this might actually be important, I don't think I really care either >>way. It's an MMP Sturmtiger, so it will never hit a target any way . >> > > > You got that right. The d*mn BMG is more useful than that stinking 380mm MA. I beg to differ! :-) The seven shots in my game with Sam the results were five subsequent hits, each taking out a full squad (of the eight) and two leaders and some SW's. Of course the last two DR's were 10 and 6,6 ... regards, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 11:34:00 up 4 days, 20:25, 3 users, load average: 0.04, 0.08, 0.03 From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Sep 4 11:08:00 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Sep 4 08:00:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Case K Q&A References: <4138919E.9060507@landfocus.se> <4139198D.3949@mb.sympatico.ca><4138FACD.7090106@landfocus.se> <413939AC.1F83@mb.sympatico.ca> <008801c4921a$b99a03e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> <4139447A.C84@mb.sympatico.ca> <001401c49278$6d6123b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <413A0480.6E3D@mb.sympatico.ca> Thanks to all who sent me the Q&A. =Jim= From tweniger at telusplanet.net Sat Sep 4 08:21:00 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Sat Sep 4 08:21:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cowering halftracks In-Reply-To: <2kaij0pc25isn7ak1qv9o7sqre8ot96c1s@4ax.com> References: <1094255566.5868.10.camel@basement> <2kaij0pc25isn7ak1qv9o7sqre8ot96c1s@4ax.com> Message-ID: <1094311260.7721.11.camel@basement> On Fri, 2004-09-03 at 20:47, Bruce Probst wrote: > On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:52:47 -0600, Tom Weniger > wrote: > > >Two halftracks w/1 squad passengers fire their IFP and the AAMG of each > >halftrack at an adjacent target. The DR is doubles. Does the attack > >cower? > > Yes. > > >According to pg. A16vB, A7.9, "Cowering affects all fire except ...any > >form of vehicular fire." Would this include PRC? Or just the vehicular > >weapons? > > Just the vehicular weapons. What you are doing here is forming a FG, and the > normal rules for FG that are composed of units that can cower and units that > can't cower apply (A7.9, last sentence). > > The squads can cower (and you would use Random Selection to determine which of > them actually does, if it's important), the ht can't cower -- but their > combined attack suffers the cowering penalty. > Greetings Bruce, Thanks for the clarification. I was interested in the wording of the rule since it did not implicitly mention PRC. Of course, "vehicular fire" is not defined either. -- Virtually, Tom W From tweniger at telusplanet.net Sat Sep 4 08:30:15 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Sat Sep 4 08:30:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck In-Reply-To: <4134CA2A.480C@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4133F713.478F@mb.sympatico.ca> <1093919105.3343.19.camel@basement> <4134CA2A.480C@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <1094311815.7721.22.camel@basement> On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 12:57, Jim McLeod wrote: > Listerz; > > Tom Weniger wrote: > > > Greetings All, > > I agree with this line. I can sum it up best by saying that luck has > > everything to do with winning in ASL. If your cardboard can't pass that > > MC/Rally you are losing. Oddly enough, I have found that most of the > > wins I have experienced are due to passing the MCs and my opponent > > missing his MCs. > > Part of the trick is avoiding the MC altogether. :) > > > So, in the end, one can blame their dice for their fortune/misfortune. > > Tom, if you are saying that winning in ASL is all dependent on good > luck, that I disagree with. Luck plays a factor, no doubt, but skill > can and does take up the slack caused by poor luck are crucial times. > > Greetings Jim, It is not all dependent on good luck. I am just saying that the dice do play their role in determining which side will win. No matter what you may say about skill, if one player keeps pinning/breaking more than the other player he is losing the match. You are concentrating on the exceptional circumstances instead of the overall flow of the match. -- Virtually, Tom W From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Sep 4 11:59:10 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sat Sep 4 11:57:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, just a post to add to the confusion... Bruce Probst wrote (after having read the Perry sez) > Well bugger me. Perry agrees with me (sorta). Just when Ole's > arguments were beginning to sway me! > ...but you don't trust Perry over me, do you :-) > Or does he? The question was asking about the Area Target Type, > whereas we've been discussing the ITT ... although C3.41 covers both. And I > don't see why Case K should apply vs. an attack against a *building* (as > opposed to just attacking "the hex"). > > It's you and me against the world, Perry! Stand by to repel > boarders! Arh, > mateys! Beware Vikings! > After having received this Perry sez on the Swedish ASL forum, I contacted Perry and argued against it and asked for any rule references. What I got in return was forwarded arguments, not from Perry, but from Scott Jackson who helps Perry with Q&A. I guess it comes as no big surprise that I didn't think Scott's arguments was very good, and neither did Patrik. So Patrik contacted Scott, and after a few posts, Scott changed his mind, and now agreed to my interpretation (I'm sure Scott will inform the list if I'm wrong). I have no idea whether Scott's initial analysis was the basis of the Perry sez, or if Perry had made up his mind before Scott sent him his arguments. If its the former, it could possibly mean that the Perry sez had been different if only Patrik had been able to talk some sense into Scott a little earlier... ;-) From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sat Sep 4 08:35:25 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sat Sep 4 15:46:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OBA and DUST questions Message-ID: <00fb01c492d0$b93f6910$c3090a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, I have two questions on two topics for you... First one: This is the situation: a unit with a DC places the DC in an adjacent hex during the MPh. The target hex (only) is part of the Blast Area of an FFE:C. Is the placing unit affected by the OBA? I would say no because the unit is expending MF in a hex that is outside the blast area... however the target hex is in the blast area... how can it place it without being affected? Second one: is Light/Moderate Dust DRM applied to an OBA accuracy dr? I would say yes since there is no exception for this type of LV hindrance. Thank you Andrea Fantozzi --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004 From cwillmer1 at earthlink.net Sat Sep 4 17:47:05 2004 From: cwillmer1 at earthlink.net (Charlie Willmer) Date: Sat Sep 4 17:47:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT CG Setup Question Message-ID: <00bb01c492e1$dde44cc0$0500a8c0@Neodad> Listers, Jim and I are starting BRT CGIII. Yes, we are ambitious lurkers. Can the Japanese setup infantry on/under the Betio Piers? The last sentence of T9.2 says yes, if it is within the stated Japanese setup area, and the pier is in the setup area for Red Beach 2. However, CG OB says "setup in Hinterland hexes <= 3 hexes from any hex of a specified beach ...". Is this a contradiction or do the CG OB instructions override T9.2? Thanks, Charlie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 4 17:50:44 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 4 17:50:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 20:59:10 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >I guess it comes as no big surprise that I didn't think Scott's arguments >was very good, and neither did Patrik. So Patrik contacted Scott, and after >a few posts, Scott changed his mind, and now agreed to my interpretation >(I'm sure Scott will inform the list if I'm wrong). "After a few posts ...". You mean "after a few threats". More Scandinavian thuggery! I'll bet Doc Martins sell very well in that part of the world. More seriously .... In the larger viewpoint -- the actual play of the game -- what would changing the Q&A actually achieve? I'm *very* comfortable with the Q&A as it was presented because it means that I (and, it would seem, the vast majority of other ASL players) can continue not doing what I had already been not doing for the last 20 years: i.e., worrying about what my fire will be doing to buildings that I wasn't aiming at in the first place. If your proposed solution is implemented instead, that's an extra mental step added to the process that no-one has ever found necessary or desirable, just for the sake of proving Scandinavian Superiority In Rules Arguments. I mean, really, what's the point? The consequence of your argument is that when shooting at concealed targets in buildings (or other flammable terrain) an extra DR of resolution is required (which might be multiplied by many occurrences, e.g., a 50mm AT Gun or 80+mm MTR firing at a concealed target in a building could "miss" the target but "hit" the terrain a *lot* in a single fire phase), and I will happily argue that it was unintended in the original design, that it adds very little to the fundamental play of the game, and 99% of the time will only serve to slow play down. Yay. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sat Sep 4 17:57:22 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 4 17:57:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OBA and DUST questions In-Reply-To: <00fb01c492d0$b93f6910$c3090a3e@andrea> References: <00fb01c492d0$b93f6910$c3090a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 17:35:25 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >This is the situation: a unit with a DC places the DC in an adjacent hex >during the MPh. The target hex (only) is part of the Blast Area of an FFE:C. >Is the placing unit affected by the OBA? I would say no because the unit is >expending MF in a hex that is outside the blast area... however the target >hex is in the blast area... how can it place it without being affected? Because C1.51 says that the FFE only attacks units that *enter* the Blast Area (or are already within it and make themselves more vulnerable). The MF used to place the DC are expended in the unit's hex -- A23.3 makes this *extremely* clear -- and at no point does the placing unit actually enter the FFE's hex. Therefore it is not attacked. >is Light/Moderate Dust DRM applied to an OBA accuracy dr? I would say yes >since there is no exception for this type of LV hindrance. Correct. See F11.791. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Elf tastes just like chicken." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 4 18:30:35 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 4 18:30:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT CG Setup Question In-Reply-To: <00bb01c492e1$dde44cc0$0500a8c0@Neodad> References: <00bb01c492e1$dde44cc0$0500a8c0@Neodad> Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 20:47:05 -0400, "Charlie Willmer" wrote: >Can the Japanese setup infantry on/under the Betio Piers? The last sentence >of T9.2 says yes, if it is within the stated Japanese setup area, and the >pier is in the setup area for Red Beach 2. However, CG OB says "setup in >Hinterland hexes <= 3 hexes from any hex of a specified beach ...". > >Is this a contradiction or do the CG OB instructions override T9.2? T9.2 says "if allowed". The CG OB says it's *not* allowed (because under the Pier is Beach, not Hinterland). Where would the contradiction be? ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 gr27134 at charter.net Sat Sep 4 19:48:02 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat Sep 4 19:48:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q Message-ID: <3a6eho$7gcjfl@mxip07a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/04 Sat PM 07:50:44 CDT > To: Ole Boe , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] HS32 A Few Rounds Q > > On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 20:59:10 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: > > In the larger viewpoint -- the actual play of the game -- what would changing > the Q&A actually achieve? > > I'm *very* comfortable with the Q&A as it was presented because it means that > I (and, it would seem, the vast majority of other ASL players) can continue > not doing what I had already been not doing for the last 20 years: i.e., > worrying about what my fire will be doing to buildings that I wasn't aiming at > in the first place. If your proposed solution is implemented instead, that's > an extra mental step added to the process that no-one has ever found necessary > or desirable, just for the sake of proving Scandinavian Superiority In Rules > Arguments. I mean, really, what's the point? The consequence of your > argument is that when shooting at concealed targets in buildings (or other > flammable terrain) an extra DR of resolution is required (which might be > multiplied by many occurrences, e.g., a 50mm AT Gun or 80+mm MTR firing at a > concealed target in a building could "miss" the target but "hit" the terrain a > *lot* in a single fire phase), and I will happily argue that it was unintended > in the original design, that it adds very little to the fundamental play of > the game, and 99% of the time will only serve to slow play down. Yay. > Wouldn't argue against any of that...except, it doesn't agree with the rule as written. So, either errata the rule or play it as written. A clarification "add case K" ain't good enough because there is absolutely no rules support for that answer. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From s.deller at charter.net Sun Sep 5 09:28:41 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Sun Sep 5 09:28:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG Commissars question Message-ID: <001d01c49365$682dd2b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Gentlemen, May the Russians obtain Commissars by exchanging leaders from the OB-given companies in CG III's Initial Scenario? I don't believe so as the Commissar-exchange process descibed in O11.6206 specifically refers to "purchased" RG. What I find confusing is that O11.6206 does not prohibit the normal exchange for Commissars described in A25.22, it merely says the "normal limit...does not apply." Therefore, the OB-given Russian companies could conceivably start with six Commissars (if the leadership DR's yield the right results). I doubt this is the intent. What do you say? Cheers, Sean Deller From smcbee at midtnn.net Sun Sep 5 11:38:04 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Sun Sep 5 11:38:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG Commissars question In-Reply-To: <001d01c49365$682dd2b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <000001c49377$8395f250$60f79904@steves> Yes they can. I asked Perry that (lost the response) a while back and the initial OB given companies count as purchased. Note though that 11.6206 does limit the number of Commissars to 1 per 12 squads (last sentence). Sean asked: May the Russians obtain Commissars by exchanging leaders from the OB-given companies in CG III's Initial Scenario? I don't believe so as the Commissar-exchange process descibed in O11.6206 specifically refers to "purchased" RG. What I find confusing is that O11.6206 does not prohibit the normal exchange for Commissars described in A25.22, it merely says the "normal limit...does not apply." Therefore, the OB-given Russian companies could conceivably start with six Commissars (if the leadership DR's yield the right results). I doubt this is the intent. What do you say? From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Sep 5 12:08:42 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sun Sep 5 12:07:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Q&A rant (was: HS32 A Few Rounds Q) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst wrote: > In the larger viewpoint -- the actual play of the game -- what > would changing the Q&A actually achieve? > If we disregard that changing the Q&A would make the Q&A in line with the rules (which IMHO is a good thing), not extremely much. We would achieve rules that would make slightly more sense: Its not harder to hit an empty building than one containg known enemy units, but for 99%+ of the gameplay, it wouldn't matter. > I'm *very* comfortable with the Q&A as it was presented because... I snipped the argument, because it makes sense, except that it seems that Bruce totally ignores one point: The Q&A as presented is *not* official (MMP's pages make that clear), and does *not* say the same as the ASLRB. I would be perfectly happy if this Q&A was in a Journal, in the form of an errata that actually explained the process. What we have now is an unofficial Q&A that goes against the rules, and leaves several questions, like: The Q&A says that case K against the terreain is dependant on other units in the terrain, but only mentions ATT and case K, so its not very general. Is this true only for case K, or for all To Hit DRM and the ITT as well? I can see no place in the rules that is special for case K in this regard, so maybe its true for all other DRM as well? Does it mean that we can check for rubble in an empty building after having rolled a TH roll of 11, if the building Location contained a Stopped, very large AFV in bypass with a -1 acquisition, but not if I roll 2 vs the another building that contains a very small, concealed gun? Maybe its only case K that is inherited from the unit, and not target size, movement modifiers etc -- I cannot say from this Q&A alone. The bottom line is that IMHO, *all* Q&A should contain rule references. If that is impossible (like the current Q&A), the Q&A should be held off until the next Journal, when it could be published in the form of a clear errata. I'm certainly not comfortable with unofficial Q&A that's not in accordance with the rules, and not general enough to know exactly what's it supposed to cover. From btdtall at yahoo.com Sun Sep 5 15:06:43 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Sun Sep 5 15:06:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duel Question Message-ID: <20040905220643.79442.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Listers- When assessing a Gun Duel you add up all the Firer Based DRM. The rules state that all support weapon/Bow Based/ non-ordinance is treated as NCA ordinance for Gun Duel Purposes. My question is that if you turn to use your Bow Mounted MG or even a FT and the AFV is BU, do you then apply the BU TH MOD even if it isn't going to apply to the actual shot ? Thanks in advance __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Sep 5 18:30:57 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Sep 5 18:31:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: List Magnates... Ah, this little conundrum about attacking empty buildings; it just won't seem to leave me alone. Have a seat gents, I'm presenting a case. We can all agree that it is possible to attack an empty building by making a TH DR using the Infantry Target Type. What's troubling me is what happens next; or rather, to what end would one attack an empty building or bridge if not to flush out any hidden units? It would seem that the purpose for doing so -- if not to attack potential hidden units -- is to cause Rubble (for a building) or Flame creation (for burnable terrain), or to destroy (and Rubble) a bridge. So just how does one go about doing that, anyway? Well, for Rubbling a building we turn to B24.11: "Any HE (only) attack >= 70mm (or HEAT attack) against a building hex with an Original IFT DR which causes a KIA on the appropriate IFT column ... causes structural damage which may possibly cause the affected building level in that hex to collapse... Before normally resolving the HE attack against any affected occupants..." The important point to notice is that an Original IFT DR is required. We'll come back to that. How about creating a Flame in burnable terrain? That's found in B25.13: "Any form of HE or HEAT attack ... may possibly cause a Flame in a Burnable Terrain Target Location if it rolls an Original KIA on the IFT. After normally resolving the attack on all occupants of that Location, make a subsequent DR [etc.] ..." Hey, there's that Original DR on the IFT thing again. Hmm, this is getting interesting... Okay, how do I destroy a bridge? Ah, B6.33: "Only HE attacks can destroy a bridge... The same Original DR used on the IFT to resolve attacks against units on the bridge is used against the bridge itself by adding a +3 TEM for a stone bridge [etc.] ... Only a Final KIA result will destroy the bridge in the target hex." What?!? An Original DR on the IFT *again*? There seems to be a trend developing here. You see, to have any effect on terrain, one must make a DR on the IFT. That is clear enough, but... I wonder when I am allowed to make a DR on the IFT with ordnance? When firing ordnance, we turn to C3.3: "A Final DR <= this Modified TH# results in a hit vs the target, which is then resolved on the IFT vs Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycle targets or on the appropriate To Kill Table vs non-motorcycle vehicular targets." Oh, I see. In order to make a DR on the IFT, I must attack Infantry, Cavalry or motorcycle targets. Hey. Pay attention now, this is important: You must attack an Infantry, Cavalry, or Motorcyle target in order to make an Original DR on the IFT. This fact can not be minimized. There is no other provision that I can find that allows an ordnance shot using the Infantry Target Type to make a DR on the IFT. Go ahead, check it out. I'll wait. Satisfied? That's right. Even though we are told by C3.41 that we can attack a building, bridge, or any other Location, the only way we can even have any effect on a terrain feature is by -- everyone say it with me now -- making a DR on the IFT. Which is only possible when -- class, are you paying attention? -- attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. So if a Location is apparently empty, the *only* way you can "hit" it with hope of damaging the terrain is by *attacking the Infantry* (et al) in the Location. And if the Location is apparently empty, the only way to *attack the Infantry* is by treating them as Hidden, which means... You got it. You must apply Case K. And we've gone full circle. According to the rules as I have been able to uncover them, the only way to rubble a building, cause flame, or destroy a bridge is by attacking the Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles in them. And if those Locations are empty, then you must treat the Location as if occupied by Hidden units. Ah, yes. Kinda sucks, doesn't it? And you know what? According to the rules, it appears that you must apply Case K against an empty Location in order to "hit" any possible hidden units, *before* you can even *hope* to affect the terrain. It doesn't strike me as particularly realistic, but from a rules standpoint... Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. Let fly, gentlemen. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Sep 5 18:44:35 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Sep 5 18:44:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duel Question Message-ID: Hello, > >Listers- > When assessing a Gun Duel you add up all the >Firer Based DRM. The rules state that all support >weapon/Bow Based/ non-ordinance is treated as NCA >ordinance for Gun Duel Purposes. My question is that >if you turn to use your Bow Mounted MG or even a FT >and the AFV is BU, do you then apply the BU TH MOD >even if it isn't going to apply to the actual shot ? >Thanks in advance > Well... first I was sure not... now I'm not so sure, because it C2.2401 *does* say that the "order of fire for non-ordnance/SW is determined as if it were ordnance", and the EXC does not include Case I. Since ordnance *would* have to use Case I, it appears that yes, you do have to include Case I in the Gun Duel calculation. That stinks. Any other thoughts out there? 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 Vicca at v21.me.uk Mon Sep 6 00:47:03 2004 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Peter Vicca) Date: Mon Sep 6 00:47:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: Message-ID: <028901c493e5$b63ad7c0$0b00000a@home> I'm afraid I must agree with you on your conclusions but disagree on the realistic point. If you have a target in your sights (I can see inf over there) then your mind is going to be concentrated on the target. if you are merely firing at a building to rubble it then the urgency is missing. i know ythis is a rlity arguement but the effect is to reduce the overall knowlege a player has. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Bakken" To: Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 2:30 AM Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > List Magnates... > > Ah, this little conundrum about attacking empty buildings; it just won't > seem to leave me alone. Have a seat gents, I'm presenting a case. > > We can all agree that it is possible to attack an empty building by making a > TH DR using the Infantry Target Type. What's troubling me is what happens > next; or rather, to what end would one attack an empty building or bridge if > not to flush out any hidden units? > > It would seem that the purpose for doing so -- if not to attack potential > hidden units -- is to cause Rubble (for a building) or Flame creation (for > burnable terrain), or to destroy (and Rubble) a bridge. So just how does > one go about doing that, anyway? > > Well, for Rubbling a building we turn to B24.11: "Any HE (only) attack >= > 70mm (or HEAT attack) against a building hex with an Original IFT DR which > causes a KIA on the appropriate IFT column ... causes structural damage > which may possibly cause the affected building level in that hex to > collapse... Before normally resolving the HE attack against any affected > occupants..." > > The important point to notice is that an Original IFT DR is required. We'll > come back to that. > > How about creating a Flame in burnable terrain? That's found in B25.13: > "Any form of HE or HEAT attack ... may possibly cause a Flame in a Burnable > Terrain Target Location if it rolls an Original KIA on the IFT. After > normally resolving the attack on all occupants of that Location, make a > subsequent DR [etc.] ..." > > Hey, there's that Original DR on the IFT thing again. Hmm, this is getting > interesting... > > Okay, how do I destroy a bridge? Ah, B6.33: "Only HE attacks can destroy a > bridge... The same Original DR used on the IFT to resolve attacks against > units on the bridge is used against the bridge itself by adding a +3 TEM for > a stone bridge [etc.] ... Only a Final KIA result will destroy the bridge in > the target hex." > > What?!? An Original DR on the IFT *again*? There seems to be a trend > developing here. > > You see, to have any effect on terrain, one must make a DR on the IFT. That > is clear enough, but... I wonder when I am allowed to make a DR on the IFT > with ordnance? > > When firing ordnance, we turn to C3.3: "A Final DR <= this Modified TH# > results in a hit vs the target, which is then resolved on the IFT vs > Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycle targets or on the appropriate To Kill Table vs > non-motorcycle vehicular targets." > > Oh, I see. In order to make a DR on the IFT, I must attack Infantry, > Cavalry or motorcycle targets. Hey. > > Pay attention now, this is important: You must attack an Infantry, Cavalry, > or Motorcyle target in order to make an Original DR on the IFT. > > This fact can not be minimized. There is no other provision that I can find > that allows an ordnance shot using the Infantry Target Type to make a DR on > the IFT. Go ahead, check it out. I'll wait. > > Satisfied? > > That's right. Even though we are told by C3.41 that we can attack a > building, bridge, or any other Location, the only way we can even have any > effect on a terrain feature is by -- everyone say it with me now -- making a > DR on the IFT. Which is only possible when -- class, are you paying > attention? -- attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. > > So if a Location is apparently empty, the *only* way you can "hit" it with > hope of damaging the terrain is by *attacking the Infantry* (et al) in the > Location. And if the Location is apparently empty, the only way to *attack > the Infantry* is by treating them as Hidden, which means... > > You got it. You must apply Case K. > > And we've gone full circle. > > According to the rules as I have been able to uncover them, the only way to > rubble a building, cause flame, or destroy a bridge is by attacking the > Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles in them. And if those Locations are empty, > then you must treat the Location as if occupied by Hidden units. > > Ah, yes. Kinda sucks, doesn't it? > > And you know what? According to the rules, it appears that you must apply > Case K against an empty Location in order to "hit" any possible hidden > units, *before* you can even *hope* to affect the terrain. > > It doesn't strike me as particularly realistic, but from a rules > standpoint... > > Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. > > Let fly, gentlemen. > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to > School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sep 6 01:40:08 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 01:40:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG Commissars question In-Reply-To: <001d01c49365$682dd2b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> References: <001d01c49365$682dd2b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 12:28:41 -0400, "Sean Deller" wrote: >May the Russians obtain Commissars by exchanging leaders from the OB-given >companies in CG III's Initial Scenario? Yes, per Perry Sez: Rule:O11.6206 Question:It is the first day of a Red Barricades CG. When deciding how many commisars the Russian player can get, do the at start forces count toward Purchased Infantry RGs or only the actual purchased Infantry RGs? In other words, can I trade in 3 leaders (two at start infantry RGs and one purchased) for commisars or only one? Three leaders (in your fictional example); consider the OB-given RG to have been "purchased" for this purpose. ....Perry ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Sep 6 01:47:32 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 01:47:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duel Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5o8oj0pi9pa365ip6habd721fadjitktdj@4ax.com> On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:44:35 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >> When assessing a Gun Duel you add up all the >>Firer Based DRM. The rules state that all support >>weapon/Bow Based/ non-ordinance is treated as NCA >>ordinance for Gun Duel Purposes. My question is that >>if you turn to use your Bow Mounted MG or even a FT >>and the AFV is BU, do you then apply the BU TH MOD >>even if it isn't going to apply to the actual shot ? > >Well... first I was sure not... now I'm not so sure, because it C2.2401 >*does* say that the "order of fire for non-ordnance/SW is determined as if >it were ordnance", and the EXC does not include Case I. > >Since ordnance *would* have to use Case I, it appears that yes, you do have >to include Case I in the Gun Duel calculation. I agree. "As if it were ordnance" is equivalent to saying "as if it had to make a TH DR", and BU would certainly be one of the applicable modifiers in that case. The point is, I believe, that a BU vehicle is going to unable to "react" as quickly in a Gun Duel situation -- no matter what weapon it's attempting to "react" with. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Sep 6 02:06:32 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 02:06:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <459oj01bu9g90gu49ejd8jjrs6glb4f6m4@4ax.com> On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:30:57 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >According to the rules as I have been able to uncover them, the only way to >rubble a building, cause flame, or destroy a bridge is by attacking the >Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles in them. And if those Locations are empty, >then you must treat the Location as if occupied by Hidden units. Didn't I just make that argument a couple of days ago? (Although admittedly I thought that the rules permitted you to attack buildings and bridges as targets directly, irrespective of their contents.) I don't normally trust the "tortuous" route of rules argument, which is what you've used here, because frankly it tends to assume that the rules were written to be "obviously" interpreted in such a subtle fashion ... when more usually a clear and straight-forward statement would be the actually useful approach to take. Nevertheless, it *is* an argument, and it casts some doubt on Ole's approach that the Perry Sez "obviously" contradicts the rules as written. What it *really* proves is that the rules are not really all that clear on the issue -- there's more than a little of "but of course you knew that, didn't you?" involved .... >Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. Why? I've already provided the argument for why we *want* this to be the correct interpretation of the rule. I have absolutely no argument with Ole's desire that clarifying errata be published (although in this case I think it's more "clarifying" and less "errata"). In the meantime, though, I'd like to thank you for "proving" that the Perry Sez makes as much sense (within the context of the rules) as my gut feeling told me it did. It ain't pretty, but it will do until something better comes along. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 aslbrad at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 04:22:47 2004 From: aslbrad at hotmail.com (Brad Knoll) Date: Mon Sep 6 04:29:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CASLA Open Roommate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c49403$d6302a30$7b57fea9@diesel2> Hey, I am looking for a room mate in the hotel for the CASLA Open in Winnepeg coming up. Any takers? Brad From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 04:40:25 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 6 04:40:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > > >According to the rules as I have been able to uncover them, the only way >to > >rubble a building, cause flame, or destroy a bridge is by attacking the > >Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles in them. And if those Locations are >empty, > >then you must treat the Location as if occupied by Hidden units. > >Didn't I just make that argument a couple of days ago? > You sure did. I haven't reviewed it recently... It didn't seem to as logically "connect the dots" at the time. At least, not to me. >(Although admittedly I >thought that the rules permitted you to attack buildings and bridges as >targets directly, irrespective of their contents.) > That's what I thought as the basis for my arguments earlier as well. >I don't normally trust the "tortuous" route of rules argument > "Tortuous"?!? Whaddaya mean, "tortuous"? >when more >usually a clear and straight-forward statement would be the actually useful Yep, I wish the rules were very direct about attacking buildings, bridges, et al. >Nevertheless, it *is* an argument, and it casts some doubt >on Ole's approach that the Perry Sez "obviously" contradicts the rules as >written. > I've come to believe that Perry's response -- in this case -- is actually more in line with the rules than my original argument was. >What it *really* proves is that the rules are not really all that clear on >the >issue -- there's more than a little of "but of course you knew that, didn't >you?" involved .... > I think it shows that some interpretations have to be extrapolated. And they can be, usually, if one if very patient. And "tortuous". Extrapolation has been touted as a valid ASLRB exercise in the past. Tate can vouch for that... anybody remember those teletransporting passengers? > >Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. > >Why? I've already provided the argument for why we *want* this to be the >correct interpretation of the rule. > But I disagree that we should necessarily *want* this to be the correct interpretation. I would much prefer that buildings be able to be targeted independently of any units inside. > In the meantime, though, I'd like to thank you for "proving" that >the Perry Sez makes as much sense (within the context of the rules) as my >gut >feeling told me it did. It ain't pretty, but it will do until something >better comes along. > Well, it *was* a "proof". It's a lot like geometry, this ASL business. One proof builds on another. Sometimes. That's only because the stupid thing is written so obscurely at times. It couldn't be straightforward, no... Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Sep 6 08:23:43 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Sep 6 08:23:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: Message-ID: <001801c49425$7f9357c0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Bruce Bakken finally adopts an appropriate form of address: > List Magnates... then cogently makes the case that an original IFT DR is needed in order to check for Rubble/Flame et cetera. > > You see, to have any effect on terrain, one must make a DR on the IFT. > That is clear enough, but... I wonder when I am allowed to make a DR on > the IFT with ordnance? > > When firing ordnance, we turn to C3.3: "A Final DR <= this Modified TH# > results in a hit vs the target, which is then resolved on the IFT vs > Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycle targets or on the appropriate To Kill Table vs > non-motorcycle vehicular targets." > > Oh, I see. In order to make a DR on the IFT, I must attack Infantry, > Cavalry or motorcycle targets. Hey. > > Pay attention now, this is important: You must attack an Infantry, > Cavalry, or Motorcyle target in order to make an Original DR on the IFT. > > This fact can not be minimized. Well, Bruce, facts are facts. Unfortunately, this is not a *fact,* rather this is an interpretation, which you have dressed up as a fact. And I asy shame on you! I would not have been surprised to see that form of "it's self-evident" argument from other but not from you. The rule (C3.3) does NOT say that one must attack an Infantry Cavalry or Motorcycle target. The primary point of the referenced sentence is to finish the description of the To Hit process, the primary clause saying that "A Final DR <= this Modified TH# results in a hit vs the target, which is then resolved on the IFT vs .. or ... To Kill ..." Your interpretation/assumption is that the list in the subordinate clause is an all-inclusive one. OK, maybe so, but that is certainly not a definitive argument, let alone any kind of unassailable, logical proof. There is no other provision that I can find > that allows an ordnance shot using the Infantry Target Type to make a DR > on the IFT. Go ahead, check it out. I'll wait. > > Satisfied? > NO!! Becasue C3.41 clearly states that "The Infantry ... Target Type may be used to attack ... /building/bridge/ ... and may also attack a hex devoid of such." > That's right. Even though we are told by C3.41 that we can attack a > building, bridge, or any other Location, the only way we can even have any > effect on a terrain feature is by -- everyone say it with me now -- making > a DR on the IFT. Which is only possible when -- class, are you paying > attention? -- attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. > And you acknowldege my previous point here. > So if a Location is apparently empty, the *only* way you can "hit" it with > hope of damaging the terrain is by *attacking the Infantry* (et al) in the > Location. And if the Location is apparently empty, the only way to > *attack the Infantry* is by treating them as Hidden, which means... > This is where I have difficulty. If the ONLY way one can attack a building/bridge is by hitting a mythical HIPster, WHY the reference in C 3.41 to using ITT vs a bridge/building??? Why refer to these terrain types as an ITT target in C3.41 if the "actual" target is a (mythical) HIP infantry unit? That makes no sense at all to me, and I am more inclined to subscribe to the C3.41 implication than the C3.3 implication. > You got it. No, I do not. > > Ah, yes. Kinda sucks, doesn't it? > Here I am in absolute agreement! > And you know what? According to the rules, it appears that you must apply > Case K against an empty Location in order to "hit" any possible hidden > units, *before* you can even *hope* to affect the terrain. > > It doesn't strike me as particularly realistic, but from a rules > standpoint... > > Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. > > Let fly, gentlemen. > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 10:19:44 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 6 10:19:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > >Bruce Bakken finally adopts an appropriate form of address: > Hello, Wynn. >>List Magnates... > >then cogently makes the case that an original IFT DR is needed in order to >check for Rubble/Flame et cetera. > Here you acknowledge that an Original IFT DR is required. >> >>You see, to have any effect on terrain, one must make a DR on the IFT. >>That is clear enough, but... I wonder when I am allowed to make a DR on >>the IFT with ordnance? >> But you did not attempt to answer that question. This is the key, IMO. Just *when* are we allowed to make an IFT DR when using the Infantry Target Type? >> >>This fact can not be minimized. > >Well, Bruce, facts are facts. Unfortunately, this is not a *fact,* rather >this is an interpretation, which you have dressed up as a fact. And I asy >shame on you! Ouch. But, I see your point. >I would not have been surprised to see that form of "it's self-evident" >argument from other but not from you. > Well, thank you. However, I didn't believe myself to be making a "self-evident" type of argument. Maybe I did without realizing it. What I thought I was doing is showing that there appears to be no other way to be allowed an Original IFT DR when using the Infantry Target Type, *unless* you are attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. I will amend it to say, you have to *hit* a *unit* in order to make an IFT DR. See my last comments below... >The rule (C3.3) does NOT say that one must attack an Infantry Cavalry or >Motorcycle target. > You're right. >The primary point of the referenced sentence is to finish the description >of the To Hit process, the primary clause saying that "A Final DR <= this >Modified TH# results in a hit vs the target, which is then resolved on the >IFT vs .. or ... To Kill ..." > >Your interpretation/assumption is that the list in the subordinate clause >is an all-inclusive one. OK, maybe so, but that is certainly not a >definitive argument, let alone any kind of unassailable, logical proof. > I'll concede the point on this: all it says is that you must resolve an attack versus Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycles by making a DR on the IFT. >> >>Satisfied? >> > >NO!! Becasue C3.41 clearly states that "The Infantry ... Target Type may >be used to attack ... /building/bridge/ ... and may also attack a hex >devoid of such." > But ... and help me out here ... if an Original IFT DR is required to have *any effect at all* against terrain... where oh where is it stated that one can make an IFT DR while attacking terrain for the sole purpose of damaging that terrain? How can I be allowed to make an IFT DR if I haven't hit any units? I can't find any such reference. The only way I know of to be allowed to make an IFT DR -- while using ordnance and the Infantry Target Type -- is by hitting a unit. Nowhere else is it allowed or stated. At least, not to my knowledge. >>So if a Location is apparently empty, the *only* way you can "hit" it with >>hope of damaging the terrain is by *attacking the Infantry* (et al) in the >>Location. And if the Location is apparently empty, the only way to >>*attack the Infantry* is by treating them as Hidden, which means... >> > >This is where I have difficulty. If the ONLY way one can attack a >building/bridge is by hitting a mythical HIPster, WHY the reference in C >3.41 to using ITT vs a bridge/building??? > Why, indeed? I think that's what we've all been wondering. >Why refer to these terrain types as an ITT target in C3.41 if the "actual" >target is a (mythical) HIP infantry unit? > Again, why indeed? I can't argue with you there. >That makes no sense at all to me, and I am more inclined to subscribe to >the C3.41 implication than the C3.3 implication. > Yes, I know. And you're not alone. Listen, I'm not trying to be difficult. But I simply cannot understand how it is possible to make an IFT DR (using the Infantry Target Type) if you are not in fact attacking Infantry (etc.). > >> >>Ah, yes. Kinda sucks, doesn't it? >> > >Here I am in absolute agreement! > Well, this post was my attempt at using the rules to reach a conclusion. I was just trying to "connect the dots". Like you, I don't like the situation one bit. And while I respect that you disagree, I would point out that you have not been able to tell me how it is possible to make an IFT DR *without* attacking Infantry. Yep. It's far from clear. I'm doing my part to find clarity. YMMV. >> >>Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. >> I understand that you disagree. I noticed that you have not proven me wrong, however. ;-) All you gotta do is show me where it says I can make an IFT DR when using the Infantry Target Type, if I am *not* attacking Infantry, Cavalry, or Motorcycles. Here's more fuel, C3.32 (Infantry Target Type): "All other in-LOS enemy units in that Location can be hit ... and all that are hit are then attacked on the IFT with a single Effects DR..." That tells *me* that *units* must be hit before a DR is made on the IFT. If the Location appears empty, that "unit" would be treated as Hidden; i.e. you must be able to hit a Hidden *unit*. Petrol added to the fire, C3.33 (Area Target Type): "All units hit by HE are attacked on the IFT using a single DR ..." Again, this tells me that a *unit* must be hit in order to make an IFT DR. I'm sorry to say, but it appears that if no *units* are hit (including potentially hidden ones), then an IFT DR is *not* made. Any exceptions to that anywhere in the ASLRB? 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 rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Sep 6 10:37:19 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Sep 6 10:37:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can an Leader lay a firelane? In-Reply-To: <20040905220643.79442.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040906173719.74062.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Listers, Two questions, from a game of Zon: A) SMC (8-1 ldr) with an LMG. May he lay a 1FP FL? (rule states FL is one column below what is 'normally' used for the MG. But of course, in this case, the LMG would 'normally' use the 1FP column, while used by a lone leader.) B) IF this 1FP lane is allowed: The enemy dashed across the street. May the leader with the LMG make a .5FP attack (Area Fire for lone leader, Area Fire for dash) vs the unit, in order to lay a FL? In other words, may one make a fire attack, ever, of less than 1 FP? Thanks, RN __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 11:50:50 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 11:51:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <3ds8t6$6apj9k@mxip20a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/05 Sun PM 08:30:57 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > > Satisfied? No... > That's right. Even though we are told by C3.41 that we can attack a > building, bridge, or any other Location, the only way we can even have any > effect on a terrain feature is by -- everyone say it with me now -- making a > DR on the IFT. Which is only possible when -- class, are you paying > attention? -- attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. > Wrong...what C3.41 is telling us is that we can attack terrain even if we absolutely, possitivily know that no "infantry" are present. If your logic is correct then one can never attack terrain if one knows that there is absolutely no chance of any "infantry" present. Why? Because there is nothing to hit and get an IFT roll against. The rules you used don't say anything about attacking _theoretically_ present infantry. > So if a Location is apparently empty, the *only* way you can "hit" it with > hope of damaging the terrain is by *attacking the Infantry* (et al) in the > Location. And if the Location is apparently empty, the only way to *attack > the Infantry* is by treating them as Hidden, which means... > > You got it. You must apply Case K. Wrong...your logic is flawed. Your argument would mean that one can never attack a building/bridge/etc which one knows conclusively are empty because there is no "infantry" to hit. Also, what you are creating is a case where '?' units impart their '?' status to the terrain they occupy. This is totally unsupported by the rules. So you have a unconcealed 467 in a building...the building is easier to hit...put a concealment on the 467 and suddenly the building is now more obscured to the gunner? I find that inconsistant with the rules. The building isn't concealed...the unit is. Look, what we need is a simple errata for C3.41 which requires case K. Otherwise, as it stands, it doesn't apply. > And we've gone full circle. More like a dog chasing his tail... > And if those Locations are empty, then you must treat > the Location as if occupied by Hidden units. There is no rules that says the above. You have errouneously extrapolated this. Your logic is flawed. Based on your argument one can not attack any terrain which one knows conclusively is empty because none of the rules you sighted allows for attacking "theoretically" present infantry. According to your argument there are only three conditions for attacking terrain: 1) KEU in location 2) '?' Enemy Unit Present 3) Potential HIP Enemy Unit Present > Ah, yes. Kinda sucks, doesn't it? Only if one assumes your are right...which I do not. > And you know what? According to the rules, it appears that you must apply > Case K against an empty Location in order to "hit" any possible hidden > units, *before* you can even *hope* to affect the terrain. > Wrong... > It doesn't strike me as particularly realistic, but from a rules > standpoint... It is neither realistic or supported by the rules. It is in fact inconsistent with the rules. It is in fact directly in conflict with C3.41 because your "theory" would require the presence or _potential_ presence of infantry. C3.41 is specifically intended to allow attacks vs terrain even when we know there is absolutely no chance of infantry being present in the location. In fact I would go so far as to say that C3.41 is specifically included in the rules because of your circular logic. Because without C3.41 you would be entirely correct...terrain could only be targeted if there was an actually unit present _OR_ there was a real potential for an actual unit being present. > Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. See above. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 11:56:09 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 11:56:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <3a57qo$7c9shh@mxip06a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Wynn" > Date: 2004/09/06 Mon AM 10:23:43 CDT > To: "Bruce Bakken" , > Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > This is where I have difficulty. If the ONLY way one can attack a > building/bridge is by hitting a mythical HIPster, WHY the reference in C > 3.41 to using ITT vs a bridge/building??? Why refer to these terrain types > as an ITT target in C3.41 if the "actual" target is a (mythical) HIP > infantry unit? That makes no sense at all to me, and I am more inclined to > subscribe to the C3.41 implication than the C3.3 implication. > Not to mention that if Bruce B. is correct then one can not attack a location that one is positive does not contain any enemy infantry. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Sep 6 12:10:22 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:08:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Bakken wrote: >We can all agree that it is possible to attack an empty building by making a >TH DR using the Infantry Target Type. What's troubling me is what happens >next; or rather, to what end would one attack an empty building or bridge if >not to flush out any hidden units? > >It would seem that the purpose for doing so -- if not to attack potential >hidden units -- is to cause Rubble (for a building) or Flame creation (for >burnable terrain), or to destroy (and Rubble) a bridge. So just how does >one go about doing that, anyway? > >Well, for Rubbling a building we turn to B24.11 [snip] >The important point to notice is that an Original IFT DR is required. We'll >come back to that. Ok. >How about creating a Flame in burnable terrain? [snip] >Hey, there's that Original DR on the IFT thing again. Hmm, this is getting >interesting... OK >Okay, how do I destroy a bridge? [snip] >What?!? An Original DR on the IFT *again*? There seems to be a trend >developing here. Fortunately, they're treated mostly the same yes. >You see, to have any effect on terrain, one must make a DR on the IFT. That >is clear enough, but... I wonder when I am allowed to make a DR on the IFT >with ordnance? > >When firing ordnance, we turn to C3.3: "A Final DR <= this Modified TH# >results in a hit vs the target, which is then resolved on the IFT vs >Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycle targets or on the appropriate To Kill Table vs >non-motorcycle vehicular targets." > >Oh, I see. In order to make a DR on the IFT, I must attack Infantry, >Cavalry or motorcycle targets. Hey. You're actually forgetting that other rules can add to or modify this rule (as is often the case with the ASLRB), I'll come back to that later... >Pay attention now, this is important: You must attack an Infantry, Cavalry, >or Motorcyle target in order to make an Original DR on the IFT. No, it doesn't say that. It says that if you hit Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycles, you roll on the IFT against them, but it doesn't say what you do when hitting terrain targets (which is explained in B24.11 etc.). In other words: If a rule says when "A", do "B", it doesn't mean that "A" is the only situation where you do "B". >This fact can not be minimized. There is no other provision that I can find >that allows an ordnance shot using the Infantry Target Type to make a DR on >the IFT. Go ahead, check it out. I'll wait. OK. C3.41 says that a building/bridge/empty hex can be the target of the ITT, and B24.11, B25.13 and B6.33 adds to C3.3 by saying how this is handled. All those three rules tell to make one IFT roll for the terrain itself, in some cases a spearate roll, and in the case of the bridge, the same roll as vs. any other units. >Satisfied? Not really :-) >That's right. Even though we are told by C3.41 that we can attack a >building, bridge, or any other Location, the only way we can even have any >effect on a terrain feature is by -- everyone say it with me now -- making a >DR on the IFT. Agreed. > Which is only possible when -- class, are you paying > attention? -- attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. No. Where does it say that those are the *only* instances you can roll on the IFT? This rule (IMHO) merely provide the *general* way of handling ordnance. Specific additions (like the effect vs. terrain,or the collateral attack effect vs. vulnerable PRC is found elsewhere). >So if a Location is apparently empty, the *only* way you can "hit" it with >hope of damaging the terrain is by *attacking the Infantry* (et al) in the >Location. And if the Location is apparently empty, the only way to *attack >the Infantry* is by treating them as Hidden, which means... > >You got it. You must apply Case K. No, don't agree with this conclusion, from the reasons above. If I've understood you correctly, you mean that you must either hit a real, or roll low enough to hit a non-existant, HIP Infantry, to be able to roll on the IFT against all other types of targets. If this was universally true, then assume a building with a large, highly armored *CE* AFV. A normal way of attacking this AFV is by declaring an attack on the VTT with HE. In my book, I hit the AFV on a 11 or less (due to the -1 DRM for size), and gets to roll on the IFT with a +2 for CE. If making a DR on the IFT is only possible if having rolled low enough to hit Infantry, then the attack vs the CE crew is NA unless you roll 2, which would be needed to hit a hypothetical HIP infantry in the building. Now, an attack vs a CE AFV is not the same as an attack vs the terrain, but I guess it is still enough to prove that C3.3 only lists the most normal ways to achieve a roll on the IFT. Now for another example of why your argument cannot be true: Consider a bridge. If you want to destroy an empty bridge, you say you to add case K because you need to roll low enough to hit a hypothetical Infantry. So lets assume we must add case K. A hypothetical HIP Infantry on the bridge would be hit on a roll of 5 or less (+2 Case K, +1 TEM). Assume the roll is 6. If your understanding of C3.3 is correct, then this is not a hit against the Bridge. But B6.31 says: "Direct Fire against targets on a non-pontoon bridge (not against the bridge itself) ... has a TEM of +1". Note that the TEM against the bridge itself is zero, thus you will always hit the bridge on a roll of one higher than any units there, but by your understanding of C3.3, you must hit the infantry before allowed to roll for effect against the terrain. So B6.31 has an exception to allow the bridge to be hit more easily than the infantry on it, but according to you, it cannot be hit more easily that the infantry. This must mean that either the exception about bridge TEM makes no sense, or your understanding of C3.3 is incorrect. I believe the latter. Now, don't get me wrong: I don't say that this is a crystal clear rule - not even almost clear, and from the reading of the rules, I tend to think that Don Greenwod didn't even consider the question at all when writing the rules. I wouldn't have any problem with an official Q&A/errata either way, but this Q&A/errata must be official and general enough to cover all cases. From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 12:13:29 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:13:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <391q2v$84b67a@mxip18a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/06 Mon PM 12:19:44 CDT > To: aslwynn@rogers.com, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > But ... and help me out here ... if an Original IFT DR is required to have > *any effect at all* against terrain... where oh where is it stated that one > can make an IFT DR while attacking terrain for the sole purpose of damaging > that terrain? Sigh...uhm, C3.41..."may be used to attack"...how does one "attack" with ITT/ATT...uhm, you get a hit and then roll on the IFT. D'uh!!! BTW, does one add case 'K' to attack an "unmanned-Gun"? > How can I be allowed to make an IFT DR if I haven't hit > any units? What if you know...absolutely without a doubt...that no units are present in the hex? None of the rules you noted earlier mentioned anything about rolling vs "theoretical" units. So, if you are right then one can only attack empty location if there is the potential for HIP enemy units in the scenario. > I can't find any such reference. C3.41..."may be used to attack". Just follow the standard sequence for how one uses ATT/ITT attacks. Your just using it vs terrain instead of infantry. > The only way I know of to be allowed to > make an IFT DR -- while using ordnance and the Infantry Target Type -- is by > hitting a unit. Nowhere else is it allowed or stated. At least, not to my > knowledge. > C3.41..."may be used to attack". Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 12:22:02 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:22:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: >Wrong...what C3.41 is telling us is that we can attack terrain even if we >absolutely, possitivily know that no "infantry" are present. Ah, the omniscient player syndrome. First of all, C3.41 says no such thing about player knowledge of units. >If your logic is correct then one can never attack terrain if one knows >that there is absolutely no chance of any "infantry" present. The Omniscient Player again. Your cardboard soldiers don't know one thing about the presence or absence of potentially hidden enemy cardboard soldiers. > >Wrong...your logic is flawed. No, it's not. It's pretty solid, because I don't base it on the omniscience of the player. >Your argument would mean that one can never attack a building/bridge/etc >which one knows conclusively are empty because there is no "infantry" to >hit. Mr. Omniscience. He knows conclusively when no enemy are present. I'll bet a real soldier would love to have a skill like that. > >Also, what you are creating is a case where '?' units impart their '?' >status to the terrain they occupy. This is totally unsupported by the >rules. So you have a unconcealed 467 in a building...the building is easier >to hit...put a concealment on the 467 and suddenly the building is now more >obscured to the gunner? I find that inconsistant with the rules. What rule would that be? Actually, what I'm saying is that you must behave as if there is a hidden *unit* in the Location. My conclusion sucks. I don't deny that. But according to a logical connection of rules, that is what we are left with. >The building isn't concealed...the unit is. > Right. But in order to affect terrain, you must make an IFT DR... and in order to make an IFT DR, you must hit a unit. The concealed unit. Or the hidden unit, if no enemy is apparently present. >Look, what we need is a simple errata for C3.41 which requires case K. >Otherwise, as it stands, it doesn't apply. > Nope. What you need to realize is that you are not allowed an IFT DR unless you hit a unit. Have a look at C3.32 and C3.33. No IFT DR, no Rubble or Flame. > > > And if those Locations are empty, then you must treat > > the Location as if occupied by Hidden units. > >There is no rules that says the above. You have errouneously extrapolated >this. > Prove it with something other than opinion. >Your logic is flawed. Based on your argument one can not attack any terrain >which one knows conclusively is empty because none of the rules you sighted >allows for attacking "theoretically" present infantry. Would you please stop it, Mr Omniscience? ... "which one knows conclusively" ... Give me a friggin' break. According to your argument there are only three conditions for attacking terrain: >1) KEU in location >2) '?' Enemy Unit Present >3) Potential HIP Enemy Unit Present > That's absolutely correct. It's not only my argument. It's what the rules lead us to conclude. I'll spell it out for you very slowly. Please feel free to refute any one of these points. 1. In order to make an *IFT DR* with ordnance, the ordnance must first hit a *unit*. 2. In order to hit a hidden unit, the TH DR must add Case K. 3. In order to know -- in game terms, not through Omniscience -- whether a hidden unit is present, that unit must suffer an attack on the IFT of "PTC" or better. 4. If you hit a hidden unit, but fail to make a Final IFT DR of "PTC" or better, the hidden unit is not revealed and you do not gain the knowledge -- in game terms -- of whether of not the Location is devoid of units. 5. In order to cause Rubble, you must make an IFT DR. 6. In order to make an IFT DR, you must hit a unit (Point 1). 7. If a building is apparently empty, you must hit a hidden unit by adding Case K (Point 2). 8. If you do not hit a hidden unit in an apparently empty building, you may not make an IFT DR. 9. If you may not make an IFT DR, you may not possibly rubble a building. Go ahead. Refute any one of the above points. I don't believe you can. > > Ah, yes. Kinda sucks, doesn't it? > >Only if one assumes your are right...which I do not. > Your call. > > And you know what? According to the rules, it appears that you must >apply > > Case K against an empty Location in order to "hit" any possible hidden > > units, *before* you can even *hope* to affect the terrain. > > > >Wrong... > Um... right. You must make an IFT DR in order to affect terrain... and in order to make an IFT DR, you must hit a *unit*. > >It is neither realistic or supported by the rules. It is in fact >inconsistent with the rules. It is in fact directly in conflict with C3.41 >because your "theory" would require the presence or _potential_ presence of >infantry. It's not my theory. It's what the rules demonstrably require. >C3.41 is specifically intended to allow attacks vs terrain even when we >know there is absolutely no chance of infantry being present in the >location. > MR. OMNISCIENCE! Would you please go away! Using the Omniscient Player argument is like using a Reality Argument. It does not belong here. It is not welcome here. > > > Somebody prove me wrong. Please. I'm begging you. > >See above. > You haven't shown me squat. All you've shown me is that you believe I am wrong. Nice try. 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 12:24:01 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:24:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > >Not to mention that if Bruce B. is correct then one can not attack a >location that one is positive does not contain any enemy infantry. > MR. OMNISCIENCE! Leave! Leave now! What a crock. This might be the first time I have heard anyone argue a point based on the omniscience of the player. Hell, why not just remove Dummies from the board when one is positive that they are not actual units? Give me a break. 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 Mon Sep 6 12:31:16 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:29:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Bakken wrote: > But you did not attempt to answer that question. This is the key, IMO. > Just *when* are we allowed to make an IFT DR when using the > Infantry Target Type? > Whenever we hit a legal taregt, and the rules call for using the IFT as resolution vs that target. This includes the things mentioned in C3.3 as well as vs certain types of terrain, and vs vulnerable PRC, and a few more I guess. > But ... and help me out here ... if an Original IFT DR is required to have > *any effect at all* against terrain... where oh where is it > stated that one can make an IFT DR while attacking terrain for the sole purpose > of damaging that terrain? How can I be allowed to make an IFT DR if I > haven't hit any units? > I must give you a point here, I was too fast in my previous post. Against bridges, you use the same roll as vs any units, so there you can certainly make your IFT roll even when there's no units to hit. Against a building, I don't know... For the rest of your latest post, you make good points, but they can (partly) be argued against by pointing at the fact that you can hit and resolve effect vs a bridge without possibly hitting Infantry. Note that vs an empty bridge, you even get to gain 1/2" (small) Acquisition. To add more hyptothetical confusion. Assume you have a pretty large caliber Gun, and really need to set fire to an empty woods Location. You can obviously declare an attack on the ITT, but if you need to hit a potential HIP unit, can you choose to fire at a potential HIP very large Gun using its gunshield instead of TEM, thuse hitting on 8 instead of 5 (or instead of 7 if the woods was a separate target as I argue)? Can you do it if such a Gun exists in the scenario (I guess so), can you do it if such a Gun doesn't exist? In scenarios where there could be no HIP units in the Location, then such a Gun is just a good hypothetical target as any other. No, I want an errata explaining this completely to me. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 6 12:29:49 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:29:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > >Sigh...uhm, C3.41..."may be used to attack"...how does one "attack" with >ITT/ATT...uhm, you get a hit and then roll on the IFT. D'uh!!! > You tell me. Please. Show me how you learned at what times you may make an IFT DR. Go ahead. Demonstrate with a rules reference I can look up: When am I allowed to make an IFT DR? >BTW, does one add case 'K' to attack an "unmanned-Gun"? > If the Location is devoid of Known units, yes. > >What if you know...absolutely without a doubt...that no units are present >in the hex? > LMAO... Mr. Omniscience, you are just too much. The game doesn't care what the player knows. You can see all the pieces on the board, can't you? >None of the rules you noted earlier mentioned anything about rolling vs >"theoretical" units. So, if you are right then one can only attack empty >location if there is the potential for HIP enemy units in the scenario. > That's right. >C3.41..."may be used to attack". Just follow the standard sequence for how >one uses ATT/ITT attacks. Your just using it vs terrain instead of >infantry. > Okay, I'll follow it. Um, at what point in time may I make an IFT DR? (Psst, I'll give you a hint. It involves *units*...) > >C3.41..."may be used to attack". > Yep, it sure does say that. I don't know what it means, though, since I am not allowed to make an IFT DR unless I hit a *unit*. Keep trying. 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 Mon Sep 6 12:41:16 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 6 12:41:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > > >That's right. Even though we are told by C3.41 that we can attack a > >building, bridge, or any other Location, the only way we can even have >any > >effect on a terrain feature is by -- everyone say it with me now -- >making >a > >DR on the IFT. >Agreed. > Agreed. :-) > > Which is only possible when -- class, are you paying > > attention? -- attacking Infantry, Cavalry or Motorcyles. >No. Where does it say that those are the *only* instances you can roll on >the IFT? This rule (IMHO) merely provide the *general* way of handling >ordnance. Specific additions (like the effect vs. terrain,or the collateral >attack effect vs. vulnerable PRC is found elsewhere). > > The rule I previously quoted does not say that. Please see C3.32 and C3.33. *They* say that if you hit a "unit", you make a DR on the IFT. COWTRA, I must hit a *unit*. Nowhere, anywhere, does it say that I may make an Original IFT DR in any other circumstance. The terrain references you made mention that they can only occur when you make an IFT DR. Nowhere can I find a statement declaring I may make an IFT DR without hitting a unit. If you can find such a reference, please let me know. Oh, and please try to use quotes. :-) I'm a bit tired of hearing from Mr. Omniscience... That's just a quick-hitter response. I'll get back to you on the bridge... ;-) 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 aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Sep 6 13:04:41 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:04:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: <391q2v$84b67a@mxip18a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <002001c4944c$bf3df2f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Bruce B. wrote: >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K >> >> But ... and help me out here ... if an Original IFT DR is required to >> have >> *any effect at all* against terrain... where oh where is it stated that >> one >> can make an IFT DR while attacking terrain for the sole purpose of >> damaging >> that terrain? > And Tate, folloeing the lead of the head list magnate [guess who that would be? :) :) ], replied: > Sigh...uhm, C3.41..."may be used to attack"...how does one "attack" with > ITT/ATT...uhm, you get a hit and then roll on the IFT. D'uh!!! > Well, I think both of you are wrong in that neither position is supported fully, clearly and/or explicitly by the rules. This seems to me to be a case (as Ole the Rational One has written) that cries out for errata one way or another. As written, for this particular issue, they are a dog's breakfast. Wynn "Hubris R' Us" Polnicky From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 13:12:53 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:12:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <3a5ac4$870c1a@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/06 Mon PM 02:29:49 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, aslwynn@rogers.com, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > You tell me. > > Please. Show me how you learned at what times you may make an IFT DR. > When I attack with ITT and get a hit...I roll on the IFT. > Go ahead. > > Demonstrate with a rules reference I can look up: When am I allowed to make > an IFT DR? When you get a hit. The fact that C3.41 is substituting terrain for infantry is what your missing. > >BTW, does one add case 'K' to attack an "unmanned-Gun"? > > > > If the Location is devoid of Known units, yes. The "unmanned-Gun" isn't '?'. In fact SW/Gun shared the '?' status of their possesing unit. You would have an "unmanned-Gun" sharing the '?' status of a unit which is not in possesion of the weapon. That is a direct contradiction of the '?' rules. > > > >What if you know...absolutely without a doubt...that no units are present > >in the hex? > > > > LMAO... Mr. Omniscience, you are just too much. > > The game doesn't care what the player knows. You can see all the pieces on > the board, can't you? Sure, but your interpretation requires a hit vs units or a hit vs potential units. If the scenario in question has no enemy HIP and there are no visible enemy units in the location then according to your argument one can not attack the location because there is no possible infantry to hit. > >None of the rules you noted earlier mentioned anything about rolling vs > >"theoretical" units. So, if you are right then one can only attack empty > >location if there is the potential for HIP enemy units in the scenario. > > > > That's right. So if a scenario has no HIP then one can't attack terrain unless there is an actualy enemy unit present. > >C3.41..."may be used to attack". Just follow the standard sequence for how > >one uses ATT/ITT attacks. Your just using it vs terrain instead of > >infantry. > > > > Okay, I'll follow it. > > Um, at what point in time may I make an IFT DR? Per C3.41, after you hit the terrain. > (Psst, I'll give you a hint. It involves *units*...) (Psst...C3.41 doesn't require the presence of units.) (Psst...that's why we have C3.41 otherwise one couldn't attack terrain other than in the presence of enemy units.) (Pssst...you seem to have decided to start ignoring C3.41...Pssst, why?) (Psst...everyone can read these so why are we whispering?) > > > >C3.41..."may be used to attack". > > > > Yep, it sure does say that. I don't know what it means, though, since I am > not allowed to make an IFT DR unless I hit a *unit*. Really?! You don't know the process of using ITT as an attack? > Keep trying. I don't need to try...C3.41 has done all the work. C3.41 is really simple. You attack buildings/bridges/etc using ITT/ATT. I already know how ATT/ITT work. You have decided that C3.41 says: "...may be used to attack..." "infantry & buildings/infantry & bridges/infantry & unmanned-Gun/etc". It ain't so. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Sep 6 13:14:31 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:14:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Foxy Smoke. Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040906151248.01c156c0@pop3.direcway.com> Listers, When exiting a foxhole it costs 1MF. What if you pop smoke in your foxhole hex and then exit is it still 1? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Sep 6 13:18:06 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:18:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: Message-ID: <002501c4944e$9f5defb0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> ----- > Please see C3.32 and C3.33. *They* say that if you hit a "unit", you make a > DR on the IFT. > > COWTRA, I must hit a *unit*. > NO NO NO !!! Bruce, from whence comes the 'must'?? That is the part of your case that is the weakest; you are assuming that these rules provide an all-inclusive list of what must be hit in order to make an IFT DR. They do not! Now, I'm not one of those "I'm right and you're wrongs" debaters, so I am quite willing to acknowledge that your interpretation may be correct. But it *is* an interpretation, you're reading in that all-inclusive, if and only if, attribute that is not there. Mayber it should be, or maybe not. Wynn "Sitting Firmly on the Fence" Polnicky From damavs at alltel.net Mon Sep 6 13:20:58 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:20:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Foxy Smoke. In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040906151248.01c156c0@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040906151248.01c156c0@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040906161956.01caad68@mail.alltel.net> ron mosher wrote: >When exiting a foxhole it costs 1MF. What if you pop smoke in your foxhole >hex and then exit is it still 1? Yep. You only pay the smoke costs upon entry of the hex, since you're already there, no additional cost. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Sep 6 13:26:34 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:26:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: <3a5ac4$870c1a@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <002a01c4944f$ce10c7f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Tate wrote to Bruce B : > > Sure, but your interpretation ... Rigth on, Tate! A fine choice of words, interpretation is one I just used to Bruce becasue I believe that is what underlies his logic. > (Psst...everyone can read these so why are we whispering?) Ah, list humour is a wonderful thing, especially when from Tate. Tate further wrote: >> > >> >C3.41..."may be used to attack". >> > >> To which Bruce responded: >> Yep, it sure does say that. I don't know what it means, though, since I >> am >> not allowed to make an IFT DR unless I hit a *unit*. > And Tate re-responded: > Really?! You don't know the process of using ITT as an attack? > Well, I have to confess that Bruce's lack of comprehension here is understandable, since IMHO C3.421 is less than crystal clear about the mechanism for using the ITT to attack a building etc. Nonetheless, I remain inclined to believe that Tate's logic is the most reasonable. So, gentlemen, do we consider that it is time for a Perry Sez on the Perry Sez? Wynn "Sez Who?" Polnicky From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 13:34:45 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:34:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <391l71$8290g9@mxip19a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/06 Mon PM 02:24:01 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, aslwynn@rogers.com, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > MR. OMNISCIENCE! Leave! Leave now! > > What a crock. This might be the first time I have heard anyone argue a > point based on the omniscience of the player. > > Hell, why not just remove Dummies from the board when one is positive that > they are not actual units? > > Give me a break. No... You say that you can only attack terrain if you hit units. If there are no units to hit then you can't attack the terrain. Let's say you roll low enough to hit a HIP (case K) unit...but no such unit is present...then no IFT can be rolled, according to you, because there was no unit hit. So, if I am playing a scenario vs a side that has no HIP it would be pointless to fire at empty hexes because the only thing I can do is roll my opponents SAN. The fact that your interpretation leads to such rediculous inconsistancy tells me that you must be wrong. I am not arguing "omniscience"...I am arguing that your interpretation leads to foolishness. You screaming "OMNISCIENCE" doesn't change the fact that your interpretation creats problems for actual game play. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From aslwynn at rogers.com Mon Sep 6 13:58:00 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:58:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: <391l71$8290g9@mxip19a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <004701c49454$323a45e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Tate; > You say that you can only attack terrain if you hit units. If there are no > units to hit then you can't attack the terrain. Let's say you roll low > enough to hit a HIP (case K) unit...but no such unit is present...then no > IFT can be rolled, according to you, because there was no unit hit. > Good point. Wynn "I Have No Opinion, After All, I Am Married" Polnicky From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 13:59:53 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 13:59:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <391q2v$84eejv@mxip18a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/06 Mon PM 02:22:02 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > >Wrong...what C3.41 is telling us is that we can attack terrain even if we > >absolutely, possitivily know that no "infantry" are present. > > Ah, the omniscient player syndrome. > > First of all, C3.41 says no such thing about player knowledge of units. > Clearly you continue to miss the point. Let me try again... You have tied attacking terrain to attacking units. If no unit is present then, according to you, no IFT is rolled. If one fires at an empty hex and rolls low enough to hit (adding case K) but there is no HIP unit present then, according to you, no IFT is rolled. Now I as a player, I know my opponent has no HIP...why would I fire at an empty hex? I know there is no unit, and I know there will be no IFT vs the terrain, The only thing I can accomplish is to roll a SAN or malf my Gun. > >If your logic is correct then one can never attack terrain if one knows > >that there is absolutely no chance of any "infantry" present. > > The Omniscient Player again. Your cardboard soldiers don't know one thing > about the presence or absence of potentially hidden enemy cardboard > soldiers. Oh, OK, so I will fire at an empty building location hoping to rubble/flame it even though I know: 1) My opponent has no HIP 2) Even if I roll low enough to hit a HIP unit there won't be an IFT roll vs the terrain because there aren't any units present in the hex. 3) The only possible results are - a) no effect b) SAN c) malf I assume from your statement above Bruce, that when facing an opponent who's OB doesn't include HIP units you still have your forces searching for hidden enemy units? I mean your cardboard troops don't know there aren't any HIP right? So you, being the anti-Omniscient player purist that you are, would play your forces as though the entire enemy OB is HIP!?!? Yeah, right...now I need a break! > >Wrong...your logic is flawed. > > No, it's not. It's pretty solid, because I don't base it on the omniscience > of the player. Nor am I...see above. I am trying to make sense of your interpretation. You keep harping about "Omniscient players" while ignoring the obvious silliness of your interpretation. Understandable I suppose. > Mr. Omniscience. He knows conclusively when no enemy are present. I'll bet > a real soldier would love to have a skill like that. Excuse me...I thought this was a game. > What rule would that be? Uhm, the rule that says only units (and their possessed equipment) can be concealed. > Actually, what I'm saying is that you must behave > as if there is a hidden *unit* in the Location. And which rule is that stated in? > My conclusion sucks. I don't deny that. But according to a logical > connection of rules, that is what we are left with. In _your_ view it is logical. I find it completely illogical. > >The building isn't concealed...the unit is. > > > > Right. But in order to affect terrain, you must make an IFT DR... and in > order to make an IFT DR, you must hit a unit. No, C3.41 allows one to substitute terrain. > Nope. What you need to realize is that you are not allowed an IFT DR unless > you hit a unit. Have a look at C3.32 and C3.33. No IFT DR, no Rubble or > Flame. C3.41 is a higher number rule and thus takes precedence. This rules simple replaces units with terrain. My view of C3.41 is certainly as valid as the pretzel logic you have put forward. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Mon Sep 6 15:04:42 2004 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Mon Sep 6 14:03:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can an Leader lay a firelane? In-Reply-To: <20040906173719.74062.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000201c4945d$84018ce0$6401a8c0@NewDell> > A) SMC (8-1 ldr) with an LMG. May he lay a 1FP FL? > (rule states FL is one column below what is 'normally' > used for the MG. But of course, in this case, the LMG > would 'normally' use the 1FP column, while used by a > lone leader.) No, the MG is not in Good Order and thus cannot place a firelane. From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Sep 6 14:07:51 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Sep 6 14:26:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can an Leader lay a firelane? References: <20040906173719.74062.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <04f801c49457$791c9b40$a64d8918@klis.com> Robert asked: > A) SMC (8-1 ldr) with an LMG. May he lay a 1FP FL? > (rule states FL is one column below what is 'normally' > used for the MG. But of course, in this case, the LMG > would 'normally' use the 1FP column, while used by a > lone leader.) A lone SMC posessing a SW MG may not declare a Fire Lane because that MG is not considered to be in Good Order (A9.22). According to the Index and A.7, a SW is not GO unless it is fully manned. > B) IF this 1FP lane is allowed: The enemy dashed > across the street. May the leader with the LMG make a > .5FP attack (Area Fire for lone leader, Area Fire for > dash) vs the unit, in order to lay a FL? In other > words, may one make a fire attack, ever, of less than > 1 FP? As stated above, this specific situation is moot. More generally, I can't find anything in the rules that prevents an MG attack being made at less than 1FP for the sole purpose of placing a Fire Lane. OTOH, I can't come up with any circumstances where even a LMG would have its FP halved twice and still be legitimately able to place a Fire Lane, so I believe this is moot as well. David "resident of Moot Point, N.S." Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 6 19:12:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 19:12:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <001801c49425$7f9357c0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <001801c49425$7f9357c0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 11:23:43 -0400, "Wynn" wrote: >This is where I have difficulty. If the ONLY way one can attack a >building/bridge is by hitting a mythical HIPster, WHY the reference in C >3.41 to using ITT vs a bridge/building??? The two statements are not mutually exclusive, but this is not at all obvious. What Bruce B. is saying is that C3.41 says "You can use ITT to attack a building/bridge (but you have to hit a unit to have any effect)." -- with the part in parentheses being silent because the *other* rules are written that way, and C3.41 is assuming that you already know that. It's not a good argument, but it's not a fallacious one either. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Sep 6 19:19:07 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 19:19:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <3a57qo$7c9shh@mxip06a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <3a57qo$7c9shh@mxip06a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 13:56:09 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >Not to mention that if Bruce B. is correct then one can not attack a location that one is positive does not contain any enemy infantry. How would that follow? Aside from the fact that it's in no way implicit from anything Bruce B. has written, it's contrary to the entire principle. That's what "hypothetical" *means* Tate -- you play "let's pretend". "Let's pretend that there's a HIP squad in that building, now I'll try and hit it." The rules (as Bruce B. has argued) only require that a hypothetical unit be hit, not an actual one. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Sep 6 19:37:46 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 19:37:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can an Leader lay a firelane? In-Reply-To: <20040906173719.74062.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040905220643.79442.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> <20040906173719.74062.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 10:37:19 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >In other words, may one make a fire attack, ever, of less than 1 FP? Others have already answered your specific question regarding FL. This more general question deserves a more general answer, which is (I believe) "yes, but why would you?". In other words, you may make an attack of 1/2 FP if you want to, but nothing will happen as a result, except perhaps a SW Malfunction. (In the absence of a SW malf, it would not even trigger a Sniper, since no other result would be possible -- A14.1.) Actually I just thought of one legitimate reason why you might make such an attack -- to check valid LOS. You'd have to be pretty desperate to check LOS that way, since it *can* trigger a Sniper! This is not to say that 1/2 FP cannot *contribute* to an attack. For example, a 2-3-7 HS and a hero fire at a concealed unit at 4 hexes. Their combined FP is (2 x .5 x .5) + (1 x .5), or a total of "1". That's a valid attack, and you can even apply the hero's DRM. The ASL rule is, never discard your fractional FP. If you have enough of it it can add up to something useful. (I know someone who only plays ASL very occasionally, and whenever he does he insists on rounding fractional FP down. I keep telling him, you don't round it, you just ignore it when it's not useful.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Sep 6 19:43:07 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 19:43:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Foxy Smoke. In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040906151248.01c156c0@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040906151248.01c156c0@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 15:14:31 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >When exiting a foxhole it costs 1MF. What if you pop smoke in your foxhole >hex and then exit is it still 1? Yes. A24.7 It costs one additional MF/MP to enter a SMOKE ... Location during the MPh/RtPh. You're not entering a new Location by exiting a foxhole. (Note that SMOKE costs no extra MF during the APh! Veeerrry important for people who like to SMOKE their targets and then advance in for CC.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Sep 6 19:55:41 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 6 19:55:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: [asl-au] ASL rules ? In-Reply-To: <20040907111454.E904@babel.apana.org.au> References: <20040907091127.A904@babel.apana.org.au> <20040907111454.E904@babel.apana.org.au> Message-ID: <4k8qj0pjpqf5tdm10jmjfdo98fpj42irtb@4ax.com> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 11:14:54 +1000, John August wrote: >Playing the game is not a problem ... getting my paws on a copy of the >rules I can read, is. > >Any suggestions ? If you can't borrow a local player's copy, place a pre-order for a copy of the reprinted 2nd ed. rules, which should be coming out before the end of the year (one hopes!). I'd recommend "Games 4 Gamers" as probably the cheapest source of the reprint: http://www.games4gamers.net/modules/aslrb/aslrb.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 21:20:40 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 21:11:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <01C49468.205EA640.gr27134@charter.net> On Monday, September 06, 2004 9:19 PM, Bruce Probst [SMTP:bprobst@netspace.net.au] wrote: > On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 13:56:09 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: > > >Not to mention that if Bruce B. is correct then one can not attack a location that one is positive does not contain any enemy infantry. > > How would that follow? Aside from the fact that it's in no way implicit from > anything Bruce B. has written, it's contrary to the entire principle. That's > what "hypothetical" *means* Tate -- you play "let's pretend". "Let's pretend > that there's a HIP squad in that building, now I'll try and hit it." > > The rules (as Bruce B. has argued) only require that a hypothetical unit be > hit, not an actual one. There is only one problem with that...none of the rules Bruce B. noted even imply the "theoretic" presence of a unit being enough to allow an IFT roll. Look, I didn't make Bruce B. decide to hang his interpretative hat on the "only a hit vs a unit allows an IFT roll" concept. But, if one is going to place one's chapeau on such a concept then one has to live with it. Bruce B. pronounced "show me the rule"...OK, my response is...show me the rule that allows an IFT roll for a "theoretic" hit vs a "theoretic" unit. There ain't one. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 6 21:37:46 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 6 21:28:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <01C4946A.83B8FF40.gr27134@charter.net> On Monday, September 06, 2004 9:12 PM, Bruce Probst [SMTP:bprobst@netspace.net.au] wrote: > On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 11:23:43 -0400, "Wynn" wrote: > > >This is where I have difficulty. If the ONLY way one can attack a > >building/bridge is by hitting a mythical HIPster, WHY the reference in C > >3.41 to using ITT vs a bridge/building??? > > The two statements are not mutually exclusive, but this is not at all obvious. > > What Bruce B. is saying is that C3.41 says "You can use ITT to attack a > building/bridge (but you have to hit a unit to have any effect)." -- with the > part in parentheses being silent because the *other* rules are written that > way, and C3.41 is assuming that you already know that. > > It's not a good argument, but it's not a fallacious one either. Sure it is...to subscribe to Bruce B.'s "interpretation" one must accept that in scenarios where HIP is not present one would be foolish to attack terrain in empty locations. Why? Because, according to Bruce B., there has to be a real unit present (and hit) to allow an IFT roll. Now, I don't know about you or any one else...but I find this result of Bruce B.'s interpretation to be most definitely "fallacious". Particularly when you have a rule (C3.41) specifically devoted to telling players that they can/should attack empty locations. Also, what about the "unmanned-Gun" part. How is that an "unmanned-Gun" receives the '?' benefits of units ("theoretic" or otherwise) which are not in possession of said Gun? That is clearly at odds with the '?' rules. Sorry, but neither you, nor Bruce B., nor the "Perry Sez" have produced any satisfactory alternative to what the rules actually say. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Sep 6 22:34:26 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Sep 6 22:33:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C71D8@agalsrv03> I've been following the bulk of this with interest. Here's my take on it Assume a wooden building contains an unconcealed squad, a concealed squad and a HIP squad. Infantry Target type, Modified TH number is 8 and the only applicable TH modifiers are Cases K & Q. A TH DR of 6 will hit the unconcealed squad which is attacked on the IFT (and possible rubble/flame creation) but the concealed and HIP squads are not hit. If you roll a 6, I'm not going to tell you that there is a HIP unit there that you have missed Now remove the unconcealed squad, leaving only the concealed squad and the HIP squad. A TH DR of 4 is now required to hit the concealed squad and the HIP one. Assuming a hit, an attack is now made on the IFT (with possible/rubble/flame creation). If that attack causes a PTC or better, the Hip squad loses HIP and the concealed squad loses concealment. Now remove the concealed squad, leaving only the HIP one in the building. To the firer, the building could contain HIP units or it could just be an empty building. Again you will need a DR of 4 to hit the HIP unit(applying Case K & Q). Roll a 4 and you can make an IFT attack and if you cause a PTC or better, the squad loses HIP. If you don't get the PTC or better, I'm not going to tell you there is a HIP unit there. If your TH DR is a 5 or 6, I'm not going to tell you that you have missed hitting a HIP unit. I would also say that you can not make an IFT DR against the building (to try and rubble it) as you have not hit any unit. Perry's answer is also in line with the following "unofficial" Q&A from Scott Romanowski's compilationon. C6.2 If using Area Target Type at an empty hex, would Case K (concealed target) apply? A. Yes, unless firing SMOKE. [Compil5] C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? A. Yes. [Compil9] Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also re-printed in View from the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated 5) 26 November 1996 (VFTT11) 9) 27 February 1999 To argue that Case K is NA to TH attempts against otherwise empty Locations (that may or may not contain HIP units) would result in the following anomaly The defender has to weigh up the risk of rubble creation (eg from large calibre guns) and announce if there are HIP units in a Loc so as to apply Case K and turn a "hit" into a miss. Attacker finds out there are HIP units (although not what they are) despite not hitting them. Come on! Cheers Jon From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 00:05:47 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 00:05:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hollow Legions (2nd ed.) Counter Errata Message-ID: 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 From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 00:33:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 00:33:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <01C49468.205EA640.gr27134@charter.net> References: <01C49468.205EA640.gr27134@charter.net> Message-ID: <3vnqj0hlm9kenl1j030otcdlsp946k0mui@4ax.com> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:20:40 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >There is only one problem with that...none of the rules Bruce B. noted even >imply the "theoretic" presence of a unit being enough to allow an IFT roll. That's OK. Even if that's true (I'm not sure it is, but I can't be bothered to do the rules-diving to confirm it), the follow-up Q&A allowing attacks vs. empty terrain to flush out HIP units settles the issue. Obviously, you could not "flush out" anything if you weren't allowed to make an IFT DR vs. an empty hex (after hitting the HIP unit that may or may not be there) to determine whether there's something actually there or not. As far as I'm concerned there's nothing more to argue. We've established that the actual rules are (at best) poorly worded. Errata to clarify the exact intended point would be a Good Thing. In the meantime, in the absence of that errata, we have some Q&A which make it pretty clear what Perry thinks the "intended point" is, which just happens to co-incide with the way the game has actually been played for the last 20 years (regardless of the actual text of the rules). I don't think the world will shatter if we keep playing it that way while we wait for "the official Word". Whether the specific Perry Sez is 100% compliant with the current written rules or not is pretty much irrelevant to the actual point, I'd say .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Sep 7 03:08:06 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Tue Sep 7 03:06:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst wrote: > What Bruce B. is saying is that C3.41 says "You can use ITT to attack a > building/bridge (but you have to hit a unit to have any effect)." > -- with the part in parentheses being silent because the *other* rules are > written that way, and C3.41 is assuming that you already know that. > But how does that fit in with B6.31 which specifically makes it easier to hit a bridge than the unit on it? That rule would be nonsense if the hit wouldn't have any effect unless you also hit the unit on it. I've not seen either Bruce comment this yet. From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Sep 7 03:13:07 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Sep 7 03:11:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C71D8@agalsrv03> Message-ID: Hi, unces@lists.aslml.net] wrote: > Perry's answer is also in line with the following "unofficial" Q&A from > Scott Romanowski's compilationon. > > C6.2 If using Area Target Type at an empty hex, would Case K (concealed > target) apply? > A. Yes, unless firing SMOKE. [Compil5] > Its in line with this one. > C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP > units, does it > pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? > A. Yes. [Compil9] > ...but this one talks about hitting the HIP units, not the target Location. > To argue that Case K is NA to TH attempts against otherwise empty > Locations (that may or may not contain HIP units) would result in the > following anomaly The defender has to weigh up the risk of rubble > creation (eg from large calibre guns) and announce if there are HIP > units in a Loc so as to apply Case K and turn a "hit" into a miss No, you misunderstand. We who argue that the rules don't call for case K against the terrain vs. an empty Location, also argue that case K shall not be added against the Location containing a concealed unit eithr (but of course against the unit itself). From btdtall at yahoo.com Tue Sep 7 05:32:36 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Tue Sep 7 05:32:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Schuerzen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040907123236.10011.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Actually more informed then you think. The book was "Tigers in the Mud", written by Otto Carius, a tank commander who comments how they failed to stop shape charged rounds. You know it can be good when the Germans downgarde their own equipment, usually they praise it all to death in alsmost every history I have read. To add to this there is a web site that considers the very issue: http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust1.htm --- Bruce Probst wrote: > On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 23:27:47 -0700 (PDT), > wrote: > > > I just read that the Germans deveoloped > Schuerzen > >for ATR's, not shaped charge weapon protection. The > >Germans actually said that Schuerzen helped helped > >shape charge weapon rounds penetrate their armor by > >setting off the round in front of the armor. This > >allowed the "blow torch" effect of HEAT to melt the > >armor easier. The Germans actually said they tried > to > >keep Schuerzen off their tanks when dealing with > the > >Western allied forces because of Baz and Piat's. > >Interesting, huh ? > > Read where? Interesting, but not very well informed > IMO. Adding a layer of > air between the HEAT round and the target armour -- > and possibly distorting > the angle of attack by forcing a premature > detonation -- can only *reduce* the > likelihood of penetration, not enhance it, no matter > what the tank crews might > have thought. > > Of course, I'm neither an engineer nor a physics > expert, so maybe I'm > completely wrong, but I'd be interested to hear the > argument if I am. > > I think the reality in any case is probably that > most of the time schürzen > didn't make a damned bit of difference either way. > Half the time the tank > lost it just by driving around any way. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." > ASL FAQ > http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 7 06:04:06 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 7 05:54:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <01C494B1.3F4AB780.gr27134@charter.net> On Tuesday, September 07, 2004 2:33 AM, Bruce Probst [SMTP:bprobst@netspace.net.au] wrote: > On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:20:40 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: > > >There is only one problem with that...none of the rules Bruce B. noted even > >imply the "theoretic" presence of a unit being enough to allow an IFT roll. > > That's OK. Even if that's true (I'm not sure it is, but I can't be bothered > to do the rules-diving to confirm it), the follow-up Q&A allowing attacks vs. > empty terrain to flush out HIP units settles the issue. Obviously, you could > not "flush out" anything if you weren't allowed to make an IFT DR vs. an empty > hex (after hitting the HIP unit that may or may not be there) to determine > whether there's something actually there or not. Thanks Bruce P. for pointing out another reason why Bruce B.'s "interpretation" fails. Clearly an IFT roll must occur...regardless of whether a unit is present or not. That being the case, case 'K' would not apply vs terrain because terrain is not ever '?' nor does a unit impart it's '?' status to the terrain. Once again we are back where we started, that is, rules that clearly do not require case 'K' vs terrain opposed to a couple of arbitrary "Someone Sez" Q&A. There is not one single rule that even marginally supports the "Perry Sez" for applying case 'K' to terrain. > As far as I'm concerned there's nothing more to argue. We've established that > the actual rules are (at best) poorly worded. Errata to clarify the exact > intended point would be a Good Thing. In the meantime, in the absence of that > errata, we have some Q&A which make it pretty clear what Perry thinks the > "intended point" is, which just happens to co-incide with the way the game has > actually been played for the last 20 years (regardless of the actual text of > the rules). I don't think the world will shatter if we keep playing it that > way while we wait for "the official Word". Actually the Q&A doesn't reveal one single iota of what Perry was thinking. In fact Ole has raised the specter that this particular Q&A was in a sense "subcontracted" to one of the Scot's. Well to be blunt, I have never been very thrilled with the "Perry Sez" system and if this "subcontracting" is happening I am even less thrilled (if that were possible). > Whether the specific Perry Sez is 100% compliant with the current written > rules or not is pretty much irrelevant to the actual point, I'd say .... Ha!...only because it agrees with your originally unsupported position. Only because your afraid you will have to change the way you have been playing the last "20 years". Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 7 06:17:17 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 7 06:08:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <01C494B3.16C0AFC0.gr27134@charter.net> On Tuesday, September 07, 2004 12:34 AM, Cole, Jonathan [SMTP:JPCole@agric.wa.gov.au] wrote: > I've been following the bulk of this with interest. Here's my take on it > I would also > say that you can not make an IFT DR against the building (to try and rubble > it) as you have not hit any unit. Per C3.41 no unit need be hit. The terrain itself may be the target regardless of the presence of any units (HIP or otherwise). There is no allowance in the ASLRB for terrain to be '?'. A 6 THDR would miss any '?'/HIP units but would hit the terrain. > Perry's answer is also in line with the following "unofficial" Q&A from > Scott Romanowski's compilationon. The key is the "unofficial" part. > C6.2 If using Area Target Type at an empty hex, would Case K (concealed > target) apply? > A. Yes, unless firing SMOKE. [Compil5] This is no better than the current "Perry Sez"...what is the answer based on? What in the ASLRB supports this answer? Is it just a matter of "this is how it has always been done"? If one is gonna be a rules master then show it...where does the answer come from? > C6.2 If a gun fires at a "vacant" location searching for HIP units, does it > pay the +2 To Hit DRM for a concealed unit? > A. Yes. [Compil9] OK, vs a '?'/HIP unit one applies case 'K'. > Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and > also re-printed in View from the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated > 5) 26 November 1996 (VFTT11) > 9) 27 February 1999 > > > To argue that Case K is NA to TH attempts against otherwise empty Locations > (that may or may not contain HIP units) would result in the following > anomaly > The defender has to weigh up the risk of rubble creation (eg from large > calibre guns) and announce if there are HIP units in a Loc so as to apply > Case K and turn a "hit" into a miss. Attacker finds out there are HIP units > (although not what they are) despite not hitting them. Come on! Not true...according to the ASLRB the terrain is hit regardless of the presence of units. There is _NO_ rules support for applying case 'K' to the terrain regardless of the presence of units. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 7 07:53:01 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 7 07:53:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: Greetings, I had asked *when* are we allowed to make an IFT DR when using the Infantry Target Type? And Ole replied, >Whenever we hit a legal target I've been searching Chapter C very hard for references to "targets". In all cases that I have been able to find, the reference is to a unit being the target. Despite what C3.41 says about attacking a building, I can find nothing that says that a building is the target itself. Here is an example from B24.11: "If the building Location is not rubbled, use the Original IFT DR and any applicable DRM to resolve the attack on the target." This tells me that the target is something other than the building itself. If the building is the target, just how can the IFT resolve the attack? Will a building be subject to a MC? The rubble attempt was *not* the attack; the rubble attempt is a triggered event, and preempts any attack resolution that might occur. Ole continued, >and the rules call for using the IFT as >resolution vs that target. In C3.32 there is a direct statement regarding units: " ... and all [enemy units] that are hit are then attacked on the IFT with a single Effects DR..." To me, *this* is a rule calling for an IFT DR. I.e., this is the culminating second step of the "one- or two-step process" for the Infantry Target Type. Where is such a positive statement regarding buildings? I do not accept that C3.41 can be used to substitute the word "building" for "Infantry" when talking about targets. I have looked for an instruction to make an Effects DR on the IFT when *hitting* a *building*. I haven't been able to find one. So, I play what I am allowed -- to make an Effects DR versus units that are hit. The complement to that is -- I do not make an Effects DR unless units are hit. Even "potentially Hidden but the omniscient player knows his opponent does not have HIP" units. The dialog with Ole continues. >This includes the things mentioned in C3.3 Agreed. >as well as vs certain types of terrain I posit that even if the terrain is the target, as opposed to any would-be units in the terrain, you still use the *Infantry* Target Type. Therefore whether or not you hit the terrain is judged by the attack's effectiveness against targets susceptible to a *hit* on the Infantry Target Type. These would be unarmored targets. And when using the Infantry Target Type, an Effects DR is only made against *units* that are *hit*. With regards to buildings, B24.11 does start out by saying, "Any HE (only) attack >= 70mm (or HEAT attack) against a building hex..." But this statement does not mean that the building has been the *target* of the attack. If a building contains a Known unit, can the building be targeted separately from that unit? I really don't think so. The Known unit is the target of the attack. So, if the Infantry units are the target, is it really an "attack against a building hex"? Well yes, because this is just qualifying where the attack has taken place, and if it has taken place here, then when you make an Original IFT DR of KIA, you can possibly rubble it. Likewise, I believe that C3.41 is qualifying where and against what attacks can take place. It's an unfortunate statement, because it is so vague. The phrase "may attack" has given license to some for very broad interpretation, even though there is no defined "one- or two-step process" for conducting such an attack. Nor does there need to be. The rules for Infantry Target Type are complete unto themselves. And they involve units. Any effects on terrain are inherent with the Effects DR against *units*. Yes, even those hypothetical, pesky, could-not-possibly-have-because-I-am-Mr. Omniscience units. The reason I have no problem applying Case K to an empty hex, even though I know there could not possibly be any units there -- is because I see it as Game Mechanic. It is a way of inhibiting Mr. Omniscience from behaving irrationally. (Yes, yes, even though we all know that ASL is not really a "simulation", nor is it "realistic", there are some rules designed strictly to restrict Mr. Omniscience.) >For the rest of your latest post, you make good points, but they can >(partly) be argued against by pointing at the fact that you can hit and >resolve effect vs a bridge without possibly hitting Infantry. With respect, I must say you are wrong. B6.33 only says that HE attacks can destroy a bridge. It also says that Direct Fire attacks use the Infantry Target Type. See my arguments above. But it also says that "The same Original DR used on the IFT to resolve attacks against units on the bridge is used against the bridge itself." I interpret that to mean that an IFT DR versus units must occur (even the ones that Mr. Omniscience hates). The attack on the bridge is concurrent and inherent with the attack versus the units. If there are no units apparently present, you still must make an IFT DR to see if any "hidden" units are there, because only Mr. Omniscience knows for sure. And, as part of that IFT DR, you also resolve it against the bridge. In effect, I realize that this means from a practical standpoint that you are really only attacking the bridge, but as a part of the "one- or two-step process" the Game treats it as an Infantry Target attack, and so you must *hit* it as if an unarmored target was there. I believe that only units can be targets. >Note that vs >an empty bridge, you even get to gain 1/2" (small) Acquisition. I'm not sure that really matters. >To add more hyptothetical confusion. Assume you have a pretty large caliber >Gun, and really need to set fire to an empty woods Location. You can >obviously declare an attack on the ITT, but if you need to hit a potential >HIP unit, can you choose to fire at a potential HIP very large Gun using >its >gunshield instead of TEM, thuse hitting on 8 instead of 5 (or instead of 7 >if the woods was a separate target as I argue)? I'm not sure where you got those numbers. First of all, the Target Size modifiers would only apply if it turns a hit into a miss, etc. In your example of the hypothetical Gun... I will always assume that only Case K applies to any potentially hidden units, and if I feel I've gotten a hit I will say so. At which point you will either declare otherwise by revealing that a Target Size modifier applies (which you must do, even if it turns a miss into a hit), or I will have gain Game Knowledge that either there is no hidden Gun there or I have even hit such a potentially hidden Gun; but I must still make an IFT DR to determine this Game Knowledge for sure, i.e. reveal the fact of whether or not there are Hidden units present. I see the process as a Game Mechanic. Mr. Omniscience wouldn't think I would have to go through all that. >In scenarios where there could be no HIP units in the Location, then >such a Gun is just a good hypothetical target as any other. Oh, no! Mr. Omniscience has a Skandanavian cousin. >No, I want an errata explaining this completely to me. You got that right, so do I! We'll see how it turns out... Regards, Bruce "the views expressed in this post are only opinion and interpretation because I do not make the rules" Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 7 08:05:44 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 7 08:05:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > > > What Bruce B. is saying is that C3.41 says "You can use ITT to attack a > > building/bridge (but you have to hit a unit to have any effect)." > > -- with the part in parentheses being silent because the *other* rules >are > > written that way, and C3.41 is assuming that you already know that. > > >But how does that fit in with B6.31 which specifically makes it easier to >hit a bridge than the unit on it? That rule would be nonsense if the hit >wouldn't have any effect unless you also hit the unit on it. I've not seen >either Bruce comment this yet. > Hello! Well first of all, B6.31 is saying that Direct Fire TEM for targets on a non-pontoon bridge is +1. Every time you attack a bridge other than across a road depiction you must apply this TEM; on the IFT DR for Small Arms, as Case Q for TH attempts. The parenthetical reference to "(not against the bridge itself)" is to the Effects DR found in B6.33, I believe. (Since the bridge "TEM" in B6.33 is applied to the IFT DR, this appears to be an instance where some TEM is applied on the TH attempt (+1), and some TEM is applied on the IFT DR.) Even if you were attacking an otherwise empty bridge that Mr. Omniscience knows does not contain any units, you must still apply the +1 Case Q TEM if not across a road depiction. So, an empty bridge is not easier to hit that one containing Known units. Both apply Case Q of +1 when appropriate. (In fact, an empty bridge is *harder* to hit because you must apply Case K as well. IMNSHO, I must add. Perhaps that's why the mythical writers of the Tome allow you to place a 1/2" Acquired counter: to offset that.) 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 08:24:36 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 08:24:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:08:06 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >But how does that fit in with B6.31 which specifically makes it easier to >hit a bridge than the unit on it? That rule would be nonsense if the hit >wouldn't have any effect unless you also hit the unit on it. I've not seen >either Bruce comment this yet. Yep, that rule is a bit of a conundrum. Something else for the errata to straighten out. Oh well. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Nobody gets me. I'm the wind, baby." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 08:40:23 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 08:40:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <01C494B1.3F4AB780.gr27134@charter.net> References: <01C494B1.3F4AB780.gr27134@charter.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 08:04:06 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >Clearly an IFT roll must occur...regardless of whether a unit is present or not. Good, you understand that much. >That being the case, case 'K' would not apply vs terrain Except Bruce B. has argued otherwise, so I'm afraid I'm a bit mystified as to why you think he didn't. Unless, of course, you weren't paying attention. Is that possible, he ponders rhetorically? Case K does apply if the only units that can be hit (theoretically or otherwise) are HIP or concealed. To "hit" the terrain you must hit the units in that terrain (even if those units are only theoretical). >because terrain is not ever '?' nor does a unit impart it's '?' status to the terrain. I agree, but please show me where that fact is relevant to either the question or the answer ...? >Once again we are back where we started, Well, you are, clearly. >Only because your afraid you will have to change the way you have been >playing the last "20 years". Yes, I *am* afraid of that, and with very good reason: it would suck mightily. Are you suggesting that *you've* always played that ordnance attacks vs. concealed/HIP targets might "accidentally" hit the terrain (i.e., if they miss *only* because of Case K) and thus require additional IFT DR to see if the terrain is "damaged" by that fire (which most of the time it won't be)? In other words, adding in additional mental effort and time-wasting DR that will only very rarely yield a result? Are you suggesting that you think playing that way would be an improvement? Bruce B. seems to think so but I don't believe him; I don't think he realised what he was saying. (Of course, I have no trouble in believing that you don't know what you're saying either.) I think Ole is arguing simply because he doesn't believe that what the rules *say* and what people *do* are in agreement, and he doesn't like that. It's a fair and reasonable point and I have no inherent complaint about that, but I think the case is blown out of proportion: we know what we want it to say, I'm sure one day the rules will actually say it, and in the meantime we all carry on as normal. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Nobody gets me. I'm the wind, baby." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 08:52:00 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 08:52:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4klrj01mkvumm7uhsfe5c528l1b8oc0h9g@4ax.com> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:53:01 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Despite what C3.41 says about attacking a building, I can find >nothing that says that a building is the target itself. Well, in fairness to Ole's argument, I would point out that C3.41 has a very positive and direct assertion about buildings (etc.) being targets, and it hardly needs another rule to make that point legal. I personally think the *reason* that C3.41 says what it says is (only) two-fold: to allow people to shoot at buildings/bridges with intent to rubble them, and to permit shooting at empty hexes where you think HIP targets might be. Anything else is extrapolation -- which is fair in itself, I just don't think it's what the rule "intended" to happen. As for Ole's conundrum regarding B6.31, it could easily be resolved by making shooting-at-bridges an EXC to the "normal" process of requiring that Case K apply to attacks vs. empty Locations -- indeed one would think such an EXC is virtually mandatory given that (as he reminds us) ITT acquisition can be placed when shooting at a bridge (C6.5). If we accept that bridges (and only bridges) are a "special case", the rest falls into place naturally enough. Easy! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Nobody gets me. I'm the wind, baby." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 09:01:52 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 09:01:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Schuerzen In-Reply-To: <20040907123236.10011.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040907123236.10011.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 05:32:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: >Actually more informed then you think. The book was >"Tigers in the Mud", written by Otto Carius, a tank >commander ... who are usually the *worst* experts you can find. What, he got out and measured every shell penetration, after observing whether it was from a HEAT round or not? After determining in advance that the HEAT round would *not* have penetrated if it weren't for those pesky sch?rzen? I think that's unlikely. I'm sure Mr Carius believes what he wrote, but that doesn't mean he's correct. It's rather more likely that he saw the results of HEAT rounds passing through sch?rzen *and* armour and then concluded that sch?rzen were no good. Battlefield experience is terrific for formulating battlefield tactics, but not so good for accurate scientific results. The *physical* truth remains (unless my knowledge of physics is seriously screwed up): premature detonation and a layer of air will not enhance penetration. It may not seriously *impede* it, but it cannot *enhance* it. If it did, then the entire theory and practice of HEAT falls apart. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Nobody gets me. I'm the wind, baby." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 7 10:09:20 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 7 10:09:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: > >Are you suggesting that *you've* always played that ordnance attacks vs. >concealed/HIP targets might "accidentally" hit the terrain (i.e., if they >miss >*only* because of Case K) and thus require additional IFT DR to see if the >terrain is "damaged" by that fire (which most of the time it won't be)? In >other words, adding in additional mental effort and time-wasting DR that >will >only very rarely yield a result? > >Are you suggesting that you think playing that way would be an improvement? >Bruce B. seems to think so but I don't believe him; I don't think he >realised >what he was saying. (Of course, I have no trouble in believing that you >don't >know what you're saying either.) > I started out believing that. Now, I believe that Case K must apply when attacking any Location apparently empty of enemy units. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From vanderb2 at sbcglobal.net Tue Sep 7 14:22:56 2004 From: vanderb2 at sbcglobal.net (Chad M. VanDerBos) Date: Tue Sep 7 14:22:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Fall Officefest Message-ID: <002101c49520$d8605320$bd22d445@domainnotset.invalid> Forwarded for PJ : ASL Officefest, September 10th and 11th(this coming weekend), Starting anytime in the afternoon on Friday and running until late Saturday, 38500 Michigan Avenue, Wayne Michigan 48184, it is free, tell/bring a friend. pj Map / Directions: http://my.voyager.net/~vander/asl_officefest.htm From Qitah at adelphia.net Tue Sep 7 16:03:46 2004 From: Qitah at adelphia.net (Ivan Lindstrom) Date: Tue Sep 7 16:03:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <4k8qj0pjpqf5tdm10jmjfdo98fpj42irtb@4ax.com> Message-ID: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so out came the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO w/o maps 269 @ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ $60 = $46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A lot of money tied up in the preorders. I wish I could figure out the profit margin of the gross receipts for AoO and ASLRBv2. Ivan Lindstrom Qitah@adelphia.net From scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Sep 7 16:21:06 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Sep 7 16:21:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <218bafb218c3a3.218c3a3218bafb@us.army.mil> Hi- Must resist the urge to say how incompetent MMP is....... ----- Original Message ----- From: Ivan Lindstrom Date: Tuesday, September 7, 2004 6:03 pm Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so > out came > the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO > w/o maps 269 > @ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ > $60 = > $46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A > lot of > money tied up in the preorders. I wish I could figure out the > profit margin > of the gross receipts for AoO and ASLRBv2. > > Ivan Lindstrom > Qitah@adelphia.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 denis at teachlinux.com Tue Sep 7 16:22:01 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Tue Sep 7 16:22:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <218bafb218c3a3.218c3a3218bafb@us.army.mil> Message-ID: Too late.. On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > Hi- > > Must resist the urge to say how incompetent MMP is....... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ivan Lindstrom > Date: Tuesday, September 7, 2004 6:03 pm > Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so > > out came > > the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO > > w/o maps 269 > > @ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ > > $60 = > > $46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A > > lot of > > money tied up in the preorders. I wish I could figure out the > > profit margin > > of the gross receipts for AoO and ASLRBv2. > > > > Ivan Lindstrom > > Qitah@adelphia.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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 7 16:59:38 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 7 16:59:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: References: <218bafb218c3a3.218c3a3218bafb@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040907185915.01b830c8@pop3.direcway.com> At 06:22 PM 9/7/2004, denis@teachlinux.com wrote: >Too late.. Tabbie rides on a bus that seats only 1. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Sep 7 17:31:41 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Sep 7 17:32:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <22192472217736.22177362219247@us.army.mil> PVT Mosher, Is your rugrat kicking your ass agian in your 30th playing of an ASLSK scenario? You really need to go and find a new opponent because you sure are getting onery. Scott MMP's secondary mouthpiece writes > At 06:22 PM 9/7/2004, denis@teachlinux.com wrote: > >Too late.. > > Tabbie rides on a bus that seats only 1. > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > From leskramer at gmail.com Tue Sep 7 17:37:35 2004 From: leskramer at gmail.com (Les Kramer) Date: Tue Sep 7 17:37:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WFHQ In-Reply-To: <41361FB7.71A@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> <4135FE91.74C7@mb.sympatico.ca> <4135DD45.20407@charter.net> <41361FB7.71A@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: I have been away from the ASLML for a long time as it was very difficult to manage. I now have a GMAIL account setup to recieve the ASLML. The UI automatically keeps all the threads nested together. Shows which messages in the threads I have and haven't read and giving easy access back to the old messages when a new message in the thread appears. I have found it makes the ASLML readable again. And I have 1GByte of storage, so even with the long winded threads, I should be able to let all the message accumulate for a while before I will have to think about cleanup. From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 7 17:38:41 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 7 17:38:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <22192472217736.22177362219247@us.army.mil> References: <22192472217736.22177362219247@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040907193723.01b82f58@pop3.direcway.com> At 07:31 PM 9/7/2004, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: >You really need to go and find a new opponent because you sure are getting >onery. Sad attempt, but expected.<---note spelling, it is called a"Spell Checker". Tabbie rides on a bus that seats only 1. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 18:34:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 18:34:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> Message-ID: <08osj09u93ap6jbrc19gdedu8gu8asqi2s@4ax.com> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 19:03:46 -0400, "Ivan Lindstrom" wrote: >In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so out came >the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO w/o maps 269 >@ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ $60 = >$46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A lot of >money tied up in the preorders. *Potential* money. None of it has been spent by the customers, or received by MMP. >I wish I could figure out the profit margin of the gross receipts for AoO and ASLRBv2. Not all *that* much, I expect; but I don't begrudge MMP whatever profit they make -- after all, we want them to stay in business. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From garciagd at velocity.net Tue Sep 7 18:48:09 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Tue Sep 7 18:44:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> Message-ID: <001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> that is today's dollar value, by the time AOO come out who knows what a dollar will even be worth, maybe .25, or .10:>) I do not intend to be mean, but if I were MMP, I'd be getting embarassed. Come on now, AOO not out for what, 10 years now! I am certain there are many reasons (some would say excuses) why its not out. OK off the soap box and on to gaming:>) Peace Roger From garciagd at velocity.net Tue Sep 7 19:11:26 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Tue Sep 7 19:07:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> <001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is getting the better of me. Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall under. But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the AOO "situation"? I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to injury at times. As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. Peace Roger From aslml at aslwebdex.net Tue Sep 7 19:12:23 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Tue Sep 7 19:11:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <006e01c49549$488d7d80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> I apologize for asking a dumb question, but I haven't seen an estimate recently. Is there a current ETA for AoO, or have we stopped assigning ETAs for it? Larry (just wishing) Memmott ----- Original Message ----- From: "rwhelan" To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" ; ; "'John August'" ; Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:11 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > getting the better of me. > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall under. > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the AOO > "situation"? > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to > injury at times. > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > Peace > > Roger > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 keithdalton at verizon.net Tue Sep 7 19:25:34 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (Keith Dalton) Date: Tue Sep 7 19:23:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> Roger: We read every post. Although, I must admit, that whole Case K thing was taxing. And yours would not be deleted. You were expressing some understandable frustration. We don't delete posts on Consimworld for being critical of us. We delete posts for being racist, culturally insensitive, using unwarranted profanity or personally attacking other posters, or openly flamewar trolling. We're working the problems. Obviously we have some process issues that have gotten in the way. We've discussed them openly along with our steps to try to alleviate the situation, including entering into negotiations to contract out ASL layout work. That being said, the box layout for AOO was recently done and can be viewed on our preorder page. As we have stuff to update you, we'll make sure to spread the word. We take customer input and constructive criticism very seriously. Keith Dalton MMP Marketing Director ----- Original Message ----- From: "rwhelan" To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" ; ; "'John August'" ; Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 10:11 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > getting the better of me. > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall under. > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the AOO > "situation"? > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to > injury at times. > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > Peace > > Roger > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.749 / Virus Database: 501 - Release Date: 9/1/04 From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 7 19:30:07 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 7 19:30:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> <001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040907212854.01b4f5c0@pop3.direcway.com> At 09:11 PM 9/7/2004, rwhelan wrote: >But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the AOO >"situation"? Some more than others,...h*ll enuf said...Green Meanies, Now!!! For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From geb3 at inter.net Tue Sep 7 19:48:03 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Sep 7 19:44:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Chill out on AoO In-Reply-To: <006e01c49549$488d7d80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: Guys, MMP has said the components of AoO are in production in stages so they can piggyback work with other projects to manage costs. When all the parts have been made, the modules will then need to be assembled before they are shipped. This and all their other work will be done as soon as is economically and physically possible. Meanwhile, there are 10 other modules and 500+ scenarios out there to play, and I'll give that $177 grand number that Ivan pulled out of his butt to anyone who can step forward and prove they have been through them all. Why not take the time you spend whining to volunteer to proofread or playtest? How about an AAR or an article draft? To start, somebody could compile a set of clarifications to the rules on this Case K debate, which could be cross-checked and approved in time for J6. GOYA! But seriously, Bruce Probst is right when he talks about cash flow. MMP has to schedule production with the cash they have on hand. Printers want net 30, not a promissory note. They don't care how many pre-orders might be out there. Add to that MMP's "multi-manpower shortage" (which Uncle Sam sez YOU can help solve) and it's clear why things will continue to take time. Be patient, Grasshoppers. End of rant. I'm gonna think some more about Nijmegen. - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of aslml@aslwebdex.net Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:12 AM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? I apologize for asking a dumb question, but I haven't seen an estimate recently. Is there a current ETA for AoO, or have we stopped assigning ETAs for it? Larry (just wishing) Memmott ----- Original Message ----- From: "rwhelan" To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" ; ; "'John August'" ; Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:11 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > getting the better of me. > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall under. > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the AOO > "situation"? > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to > injury at times. > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > Peace > > Roger > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 sidirezegh at charter.net Tue Sep 7 19:52:35 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Tue Sep 7 19:52:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> <001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <413E73F3.3060006@charter.net> rwhelan wrote: >OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is >getting the better of me. > > What frustrates you, exactly? Running out of scenarios to play? >Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, >they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the >ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall under. > > Uh-oh, conspiracy theory! >But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the AOO >"situation"? > > I'm not. But I have about 1,500 or so scenaios I haven't played yet still. >I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to >injury at times. > > Once again, how have you been injured? And they haven't been silent at all. >As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > The answers I've seen involve: -finishing counter layout -having enough cash to actually print all the components -Chas From aslml at aslwebdex.net Tue Sep 7 20:27:24 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Tue Sep 7 20:27:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Chill out on AoO References: Message-ID: <008b01c49553$c3abfff0$ece63fc8@D5G57231> George, Thanks for the info, which I hadn't seen. That said, since you have 500+ scenarios to play, I guess you have no interest in AoO? Or maybe I am wrong. I think we all want to see the system completed. We all want to be able to brag that OUR SYSTEM can, in fact, represent any small scale conflict in WWII. And some of us have a particular interest in the actions which will be made available with AoO. For me, I want to see the system Finnished, to go beyond AoO. While it may be too much to ask that MMP break their backs (or their bank accounts) to get AoO out, I don't think it too much to ask that they occasionally let us know the status, or even an ETA (and this is not a complaint - I saw and appreciated Dalton's response). As far as making a contribution to the hobby, I think my WebDex and the thousands of hours I have put into it might qualify - most of us make our contribution in one way or another. And somehow I still manage to get three minutes to ask about AoO. Even if I was playtesting (and I have, but my location 1,000 miles from the nearest ftf opponent makes that difficult), I could probably have gotten up the energy to ask about AoO. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Bates" To: ; ; ; Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:48 PM Subject: Chill out on AoO > Guys, MMP has said the components of AoO are in production in stages so they > can piggyback work with other projects to manage costs. When all the parts > have been made, the modules will then need to be assembled before they are > shipped. This and all their other work will be done as soon as is > economically and physically possible. Meanwhile, there are 10 other modules > and 500+ scenarios out there to play, and I'll give that $177 grand number > that Ivan pulled out of his butt to anyone who can step forward and prove > they have been through them all. Why not take the time you spend whining to > volunteer to proofread or playtest? How about an AAR or an article draft? > To start, somebody could compile a set of clarifications to the rules on > this Case K debate, which could be cross-checked and approved in time for > J6. GOYA! > > But seriously, Bruce Probst is right when he talks about cash flow. MMP has > to schedule production with the cash they have on hand. Printers want net > 30, not a promissory note. They don't care how many pre-orders might be out > there. > > Add to that MMP's "multi-manpower shortage" (which Uncle Sam sez YOU can > help solve) and it's clear why things will continue to take time. Be > patient, Grasshoppers. > > End of rant. I'm gonna think some more about Nijmegen. > > - G > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of > aslml@aslwebdex.net > Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:12 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > I apologize for asking a dumb question, but I haven't seen an estimate > recently. Is there a current ETA for AoO, or have we stopped assigning ETAs > for it? > > Larry (just wishing) Memmott > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "rwhelan" > To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" > ; ; "'John August'" > ; > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:11 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > > getting the better of me. > > > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the > > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall > under. > > > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the > AOO > > "situation"? > > > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to > > injury at times. > > > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > > > Peace > > > > Roger > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 20:27:46 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 20:27:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Chill out on AoO In-Reply-To: References: <006e01c49549$488d7d80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: <60vsj0tcdf00b6869d0egqivorealrvlm0@4ax.com> On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 11:48:03 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >End of rant. I'm gonna think some more about Nijmegen. Make sure you wash your hands afterwards. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 7 20:32:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 7 20:32:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> Message-ID: <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 22:25:34 -0400, "Keith Dalton" wrote: >We're working the problems. Obviously we have some process issues that have >gotten in the way. We've discussed them openly along with our steps to try >to alleviate the situation, including entering into negotiations to contract >out ASL layout work. I don't want to interfere with the whole "be patient" thing, Keith, but I have to take exception with the above: none of this has been mentioned recently on the ASLML. >That being said, the box layout for AOO was recently done and can be viewed >on our preorder page. This is the first time this has been mentioned on the ASLML. >As we have stuff to update you, we'll make sure to spread the word. It appears that your "word-spreading" techniques need a little additional work. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From Nathaniel.Mallet1 at rogers.com Tue Sep 7 20:31:39 2004 From: Nathaniel.Mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Tue Sep 7 20:35:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Administrative Messages Message-ID: <413E7D1B.8010403@rogers.com> Hello, My computer died last Thursday, and as I'm on vacation, I took my sweet time fixing it. That means that any emails sent to me, or any administrative requests to the ASL ML (like subscriptions) have been held in the email queue. I've dealt with the subscriptions, and I'll be going through the emails soon. I apologize for the delay. Nat From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Tue Sep 7 20:42:23 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Tue Sep 7 20:40:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: The Reverse of Case K (was The Case For Case K) Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C7370@agalsrv03> For those arguing that Case K is not applicable to ITT TH attempts against empty terrain. If I understand your point correctly, you are saying Case K applies to concealed/HIP units, but not against the actual terrain. So assuming a wooden building with a Modified TH number of 8 (and no other TH DRM apart from Cases K & Q), you are saying that any TH attempt will hit the HIP units on a DR of 4 or less, but that a DR of 5 or 6 will hit the building with possible rubble/flame creation. How do you then reconcile this argument with the case when there are negative target based TH modifiers (eg Case J3 FFNAM or vs. over-stacked personnel). For example, you fire ITT at a squad using NAM in a wooden building. Modified TH number is 8, TH DRM are +2 for building and -1 FFNAM, for a net TH DRM of -1. Your original TH DR is a 9, so you hit the moving squad. Are you going to argue that although the squad moving inside the building is hit, Rubble/Flame creation is not possible because you haven't *hit* the actual building terrain? NA? :) [The one specific exception to this that I can think of where you can hit a unit but not the hex/Location (and it is in the rules) is firing WP when there are negative Target based TH DRM. It is possible to hit moving/over-stacked units with WP (and cause them to take a WP MC) without actually hitting the hex and placing a WP counter.] If we agree that a Location containing only HIP units is in effect an "empty" Loc and that vice versa an "empty" may contain a HIP target, then the following must apply; A12.13 says Ordnance attacks apply the Case K TH DRM vs a concealed unit. A12.3 says HIP is a form of concealment and that Hidden status is considered the equal of concealment C6.2 says Ordnance firing at a hidden/concealed target must add +2 DRM of Case K, with the exception of using the Area Target Type to fire Smoke at an otherwise empty hex C3.41 is what allows you to fire ATT/ITT at otherwise "empty" hexes to search for HIP units or to try and create rubble/flame. Possible Rubble/Flame creation is a "by-product" affect on the terrain using the IFT DR once you have scored a hit against a target in that terrain, including a (possible) HIP unit therein an otherwise empty hex. So for me, Case K applies when firing on an empty hex [EXC: SMOKE] (as per the Perry Sez and previous unofficial Q&A in my last post), unless you can show me the rule that says Case K is NA when firing at empty hexes that don't contain HIP units. Cheers Jon From sidirezegh at charter.net Tue Sep 7 20:43:28 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Tue Sep 7 20:43:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> Message-ID: <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> I know this List is preferred by some, but it would also be good to point out to folks that there is more to ASL's internet life these days than the ASL Mail List. Both: -ConsimWorld http://www.consimworld.com/ and -Warfare HQ http://www.warfarehq.com/index.php?page=asl/asl_news.php are good sources of information on what's going on in ASL and tend to be frequented by a much larger audience than the Mail List. There is more company representation at those places too (MMP, HoB, etc). So I suspect that's why the Mail List tends to be the last to know any kind of news. Frankly, the ASLML is backwater these days. :-) -Chas Bruce Probst wrote: >On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 22:25:34 -0400, "Keith Dalton" >wrote: > > > >>We're working the problems. Obviously we have some process issues that have >>gotten in the way. We've discussed them openly along with our steps to try >>to alleviate the situation, including entering into negotiations to contract >>out ASL layout work. >> >> > >I don't want to interfere with the whole "be patient" thing, Keith, but I have >to take exception with the above: none of this has been mentioned recently on >the ASLML. > > >>That being said, the box layout for AOO was recently done and can be viewed >>on our preorder page. >> >> > >This is the first time this has been mentioned on the ASLML. > > > >>As we have stuff to update you, we'll make sure to spread the word. >> >> > >It appears that your "word-spreading" techniques need a little additional >work. > > > From scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Sep 7 21:01:35 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Sep 7 21:04:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <23ae85623b011a.23b011a23ae856@us.army.mil> Now thats a new one on me, MMP takes customer input seriously? ya right. Perhaps paying lipservice the regimes fanatical flunky's (hi PVT mosher) but customer input is not in MMP creed. And why should it be? They have the exclusive rights to ASL, so why should they care what we say or think? Man, it will be an awesome day when MMP give up ASL and or goes down the toilet. Scott The partisan MMP's Minister of Propaganda writes; <> From geb3 at inter.net Tue Sep 7 21:19:18 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Sep 7 21:16:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Luv the Web Dex! In-Reply-To: <008b01c49553$c3abfff0$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: Got it book marked and come back regularly for new stuff. Salute! Sure, I wanna see AoO finished, but I'll still be happy with ASL even if it never sees the light of day. I also don't think we should kid ourselves about AoO making the system complete. There's always more new things over the horizon. How about Haaka Paale? I'm just as eager to see the Finns. ... or the North Koreans. ... or... BTW, you can PBeM playtest with me if u like, dude. - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml@aslwebdex.net [mailto:aslml@aslwebdex.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 12:27 PM To: George Bates; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: Chill out on AoO George, Thanks for the info, which I hadn't seen. That said, since you have 500+ scenarios to play, I guess you have no interest in AoO? Or maybe I am wrong. I think we all want to see the system completed. We all want to be able to brag that OUR SYSTEM can, in fact, represent any small scale conflict in WWII. And some of us have a particular interest in the actions which will be made available with AoO. For me, I want to see the system Finnished, to go beyond AoO. While it may be too much to ask that MMP break their backs (or their bank accounts) to get AoO out, I don't think it too much to ask that they occasionally let us know the status, or even an ETA (and this is not a complaint - I saw and appreciated Dalton's response). As far as making a contribution to the hobby, I think my WebDex and the thousands of hours I have put into it might qualify - most of us make our contribution in one way or another. And somehow I still manage to get three minutes to ask about AoO. Even if I was playtesting (and I have, but my location 1,000 miles from the nearest ftf opponent makes that difficult), I could probably have gotten up the energy to ask about AoO. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Bates" To: ; ; ; Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:48 PM Subject: Chill out on AoO > Guys, MMP has said the components of AoO are in production in stages so they > can piggyback work with other projects to manage costs. When all the parts > have been made, the modules will then need to be assembled before they are > shipped. This and all their other work will be done as soon as is > economically and physically possible. Meanwhile, there are 10 other modules > and 500+ scenarios out there to play, and I'll give that $177 grand number > that Ivan pulled out of his butt to anyone who can step forward and prove > they have been through them all. Why not take the time you spend whining to > volunteer to proofread or playtest? How about an AAR or an article draft? > To start, somebody could compile a set of clarifications to the rules on > this Case K debate, which could be cross-checked and approved in time for > J6. GOYA! > > But seriously, Bruce Probst is right when he talks about cash flow. MMP has > to schedule production with the cash they have on hand. Printers want net > 30, not a promissory note. They don't care how many pre-orders might be out > there. > > Add to that MMP's "multi-manpower shortage" (which Uncle Sam sez YOU can > help solve) and it's clear why things will continue to take time. Be > patient, Grasshoppers. > > End of rant. I'm gonna think some more about Nijmegen. > > - G > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of > aslml@aslwebdex.net > Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:12 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > I apologize for asking a dumb question, but I haven't seen an estimate > recently. Is there a current ETA for AoO, or have we stopped assigning ETAs > for it? > > Larry (just wishing) Memmott > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "rwhelan" > To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" > ; ; "'John August'" > ; > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:11 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > > getting the better of me. > > > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the > > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall > under. > > > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the > AOO > > "situation"? > > > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to > > injury at times. > > > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > > > Peace > > > > Roger > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 7 22:48:18 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 7 22:48:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <3a5bqj$7ohn03@mxip04a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/09/07 Tue AM 09:53:01 CDT > To: oleboe@broadpark.no, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > >Whenever we hit a legal target > > I've been searching Chapter C very hard for references to "targets". In all > cases that I have been able to find, the reference is to a unit being the > target. Despite what C3.41 says about attacking a building, I can find > nothing that says that a building is the target itself. Can you find any other rule that allows the creation of THH other than the rule that allows it? So I guess that means we can't create THH since no other rule other than the THH rule allows it. Sheeeeesh... > Here is an example from B24.11: "If the building Location is not rubbled, > use the Original IFT DR and any applicable DRM to resolve the attack on the > target." > > This tells me that the target is something other than the building itself. > If the building is the target, just how can the IFT resolve the attack? > See C3.41... > Will a building be subject to a MC? The rubble attempt was *not* the > attack; the rubble attempt is a triggered event, and preempts any attack > resolution that might occur. See C3.41... > Where is such a positive statement regarding buildings? See C3.41... > I do not accept > that C3.41 can be used to substitute the word "building" for "Infantry" when > talking about targets. See C3.41..."The Infantry Target Type (3.32) attacks a specific Location rather than an entire hex" See C3.32..."other than that resulting from damage to terrain". > I have looked for an instruction to make an Effects DR on the IFT when > *hitting* a *building*. I haven't been able to find one. See C3.41... > So, I play what I am allowed -- to make an Effects DR versus units that are > hit. See C3.41... > The complement to that is -- I do not make an Effects DR unless units > are hit. Erroneous logic. You start out trying to prove your point using circular logic. No surprise that you ended up exactly where you wanted to be. >Even "potentially Hidden but the omniscient player knows > his opponent does not have HIP" units. No support for the "theoretical unit" theory in the rules. > >as well as vs certain types of terrain > > I posit that even if the terrain is the target, as opposed to any would-be > units in the terrain, you still use the *Infantry* Target Type. Therefore > whether or not you hit the terrain is judged by the attack's effectiveness > against targets susceptible to a *hit* on the Infantry Target Type. These > would be unarmored targets. dodedodedo...dodedodedo... > And when using the Infantry Target Type, an Effects DR is only made against > *units* that are *hit*. Bzzzzzt...oh, sorry, the answer we were looking for was _see C3.41_...but thanks for playing. And Johnny what do we have for our departing contestant. > With regards to buildings, B24.11 does start out by saying, "Any HE (only) > attack >= 70mm (or HEAT attack) against a building hex..." But this > statement does not mean that the building has been the *target* of the > attack. Sez You... > If a building contains a Known unit, can the building be targeted separately > from that unit? No...can an unconcealed and a concealed unit in a location targeted separately? No... What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? > I really don't think so. The Known unit is the target > of the attack. All eligible targets in the location (including the location...see C3.41) are targets of the attack...what the h*ll is your point?!?!? > Likewise, I believe that C3.41 is qualifying where and against what attacks > can take place. It's an unfortunate statement, because it is so vague. The > phrase "may attack" has given license to some for very broad interpretation, > even though there is no defined "one- or two-step process" for conducting > such an attack. Sure there is. C3.41 says to use the ITT/ATT process for the attack. It is really very simply. > Nor does there need to be. The rules for Infantry Target Type are complete > unto themselves. And they involve units. Any effects on terrain are > inherent with the Effects DR against *units*. Yes, even those hypothetical, > pesky, could-not-possibly-have-because-I-am-Mr. Omniscience units. > 1) There is no rule that allows IFT rolls vs none existent units for purposes of rubble creation. 2) Terrain can not be concealed, only units can. 3) C3.41 specifies that one uses the ITT/ATT process for attacking terrain. 4) Nothing you have stated is supported by the rules. > The reason I have no problem applying Case K to an empty hex, even though I > know there could not possibly be any units there -- is because I see it as > Game Mechanic. It is a way of inhibiting Mr. Omniscience from behaving > irrationally. The Bakken Interpretation: "You apply case 'K' but even if you get a hit you can't roll the IFT unless there is an actual unit present." Excuse me if I don't immediately sign-up for this nonsense. > (Yes, yes, even though we all know that ASL is not really a "simulation", > nor is it "realistic", there are some rules designed strictly to restrict > Mr. Omniscience.) You can keep ranting about "Mr.Omniscience" all you want. It want make "Mr. Cunundrum" go away. > If there are no units apparently present, you still must make an IFT DR to > see if any "hidden" units are there, because only Mr. Omniscience knows for > sure. No, unless there is an actual unit present no IFT roll can be made. Hey, it's your "theory" not mine...live with it or drop it. > I believe that only units can be targets. Despite a rule that clearly and unabashedly states the contrary. > I'm not sure that really matters. Sure...only those rules that would support your theory matter...understandable. > I see the process as a Game Mechanic. Mr. Omniscience wouldn't think I > would have to go through all that. I understand what you "see the process as". I am just waiting for any rules reference that supports it...or contradicts C3.41 which clearly tells me that I don't need to give a d*mn about units because I can just fire at the terrain. > Oh, no! Mr. Omniscience has a Skandanavian cousin. Look, we all understand the concept of a "red herring". Beating that dead horse only makes your argument look even weaker than it already obviously is. It isn't "omniscience". It is Ole and I making you live up to your own theory...which you have yet to do. > You got that right, so do I! Really, then stop postulating these obviously bogus theories about "theoretical" units. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 7 22:57:17 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 7 22:57:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/07 Tue AM 10:40:23 CDT > To: "gr27134@charter.net" , > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > > Except Bruce B. has argued otherwise, so I'm afraid I'm a bit mystified as to > why you think he didn't. Unless, of course, you weren't paying attention. Is > that possible, he ponders rhetorically? He argued "unsuccesfully" is my point. > Case K does apply if the only units that can be hit (theoretically or > otherwise) are HIP or concealed. If I have concealed and unconcealed targets in a location are all targets treated as concealed? No, they clearly are not. Then since C3.41 makes building/etc leagal targets why are they treated as concealed based on the actual/theoretic presences of other concealed targets? IOW, for Bruce B. and Bruce P. to be correct the presence of even one '?' target should imbue all targets with '?' status...not just the terrain. Once again, terrain can never be concealed. Only units can be '?'. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From asl at howardhowardfine.com Tue Sep 7 23:01:53 2004 From: asl at howardhowardfine.com (ASL) Date: Tue Sep 7 23:02:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Chill out on AoO In-Reply-To: References: <006e01c49549$488d7d80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040908010105.01bda9c8@mail.howardhowardfine.com> Of course, the longer MMP waits, the more credit cards that were used to pre-order AoO expire... c At 11:48 AM 08/09/2004 +0900, George Bates wrote: >Guys, MMP has said the components of AoO are in production in stages so they >can piggyback work with other projects to manage costs. When all the parts >have been made, the modules will then need to be assembled before they are >shipped. This and all their other work will be done as soon as is >economically and physically possible. Meanwhile, there are 10 other modules >and 500+ scenarios out there to play, and I'll give that $177 grand number >that Ivan pulled out of his butt to anyone who can step forward and prove >they have been through them all. Why not take the time you spend whining to >volunteer to proofread or playtest? How about an AAR or an article draft? >To start, somebody could compile a set of clarifications to the rules on >this Case K debate, which could be cross-checked and approved in time for >J6. GOYA! > >But seriously, Bruce Probst is right when he talks about cash flow. MMP has >to schedule production with the cash they have on hand. Printers want net >30, not a promissory note. They don't care how many pre-orders might be out >there. > >Add to that MMP's "multi-manpower shortage" (which Uncle Sam sez YOU can >help solve) and it's clear why things will continue to take time. Be >patient, Grasshoppers. > >End of rant. I'm gonna think some more about Nijmegen. > > - G > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >[mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of >aslml@aslwebdex.net >Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:12 AM >To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > >I apologize for asking a dumb question, but I haven't seen an estimate >recently. Is there a current ETA for AoO, or have we stopped assigning ETAs >for it? > >Larry (just wishing) Memmott > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "rwhelan" >To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" >; ; "'John August'" >; >Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:11 PM >Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > > getting the better of me. > > > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have the > > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall >under. > > > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the >AOO > > "situation"? > > > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult to > > injury at times. > > > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > > > Peace > > > > Roger > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > >_______________________________________________ >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 JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Tue Sep 7 23:36:20 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Tue Sep 7 23:34:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: ASL: The Reverse of Case K with errata (was The Case For Case K) Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C73CE@agalsrv03> My mistake in my previous posting, 2nd paragraph. The net TH DRM is of course +1. I have amended below(indicated with *). I also left out part of a sentence, also indicated with * Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Cole, Jonathan > Sent: Wednesday, 8 September 2004 11:47 AM > To: ASL Mailing List (aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net); Bruce Bakken; > Bruce Probst; Ole B?e; Tate Rogers > Subject: ASL: The Reverse of Case K (was The Case For Case K) > > For those arguing that Case K is not applicable to ITT TH attempts against > empty terrain. > If I understand your point correctly, you are saying Case K applies to > concealed/HIP units, but not against the actual terrain. So assuming a > wooden building with a Modified TH number of 8 (and no other TH DRM apart > from Cases K & Q), you are saying that any TH attempt will hit the HIP > units on a DR of 4 or less, but that a DR of 5 or 6 will hit the building > with possible rubble/flame creation. > > How do you then reconcile this argument with the case when there are > negative target based TH modifiers (eg Case J3 FFNAM or vs. over-stacked > personnel). > For example, you fire ITT at a squad using NAM in a wooden building. > Modified TH number is 8, TH DRM are +2 for building and -1 FFNAM, for a > net TH DRM of *+1*. Your original TH DR is a *7*, so you hit the moving squad. > Are you going to argue that although the squad moving inside the building > is hit, Rubble/Flame creation is not possible because you haven't hit > the actual building terrain, *since FFNAM is NA for the actual building*? :) > [The one specific exception to this that I can think of where you can hit > a unit but not the hex/Location (and it is in the rules) is firing WP when > there are negative Target based TH DRM. It is possible to hit moving/over- > stacked units with WP (and cause them to take a WP MC) without actually > hitting the hex and placing a WP counter.] > > If we agree that a Location containing only HIP units is in effect an > "empty" Loc and that vice versa an "empty" may contain a HIP target, then > the following must apply; > A12.13 says Ordnance attacks apply the Case K TH DRM vs a concealed unit. > A12.3 says HIP is a form of concealment and that Hidden status is > considered the equal of concealment > C6.2 says Ordnance firing at a hidden/concealed target must add +2 DRM of > Case K, with the exception of using the Area Target Type to fire Smoke at > an otherwise empty hex > C3.41 is what allows you to fire ATT/ITT at otherwise "empty" hexes to > search for HIP units or to try and create rubble/flame. > Possible Rubble/Flame creation is a "by-product" affect on the terrain > using the IFT DR once you have scored a hit against a target in that > terrain, including a (possible) HIP unit therein an otherwise empty hex. > > So for me, Case K applies when firing on an empty hex [EXC: SMOKE] (as > per the Perry Sez and previous unofficial Q&A in my last post), unless you > can show me the rule that says Case K is NA when firing at empty hexes > that don't contain HIP units. > > Cheers > Jon > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 01:05:03 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 01:05:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:43:28 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >I know this List is preferred by some, but it would also be good to >point out to folks that there is more to ASL's internet life these days >than the ASL Mail List. And as everyone knows, it's impossible to post information to two different electronic resources, right? >So I suspect that's why the Mail List tends to be the last to know any kind of news. I suspect that "oops, I forgot to tell those guys about it" is the more likely reason. Consimworld is a *terrible* "source of information" *unless you frequent it religiously* -- especially in busy forums like MMP's. Hundreds of messages get posted every day -- a few even useful and on-topic -- but it's impossible to *find* a specific message even if you know what to look for (and God help you if you're just trying to browse to see *if* anything interesting was posted recently). So even though messages can (in theory) hang around forever -- a good thing for research purposes -- they get drowned by all the messages that follow them -- a bad thing for casual usage. Forums like WarfareHQ are a bit better in terms of message organisation, but suffer from the fact they they are SLOOOOWWWW. At times I feel like writing a novel inbetween each page refresh. Again, this discourages casual usage. The *ideal* "source of information" would be the company website, except that apparently MMP are too busy making ephemeral postings to Consimworld to actually bother updating the "news" page there on anything approaching a regular basis. The ultimate point is that individuals who choose to dedicate their valuable time to one particular resource -- rather than spend all day haunting several -- should not be ostracised by a company that wants them as customers. It's not like the ASLML is *obscure*. It's been around for years, it's existence is well-known by MMP, and it's sole function is talking about ASL. In my books that means it should rank highly on MMP's list of "places to post ASL news". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 01:05:32 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 01:05:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <23ae85623b011a.23b011a23ae856@us.army.mil> References: <23ae85623b011a.23b011a23ae856@us.army.mil> Message-ID: On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 23:01:35 -0500, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: >Scott The partisan You spelt "moron" wrong. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 01:44:53 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 01:44:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 0:57:17 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >IOW, for Bruce B. and Bruce P. to be correct the presence of even one '?' target should imbue all targets with '?' status...not just the terrain. Tate, I don't think you should participate in these discussions if you can't understand even the basics of what is being discussed. Bruce B. and I have been discussing attacking *empty* Locations ... so, necessarily, all targets in those Locations are (treated as being) HIP. (EXC: bridges.) The terrain *in* that Location -- or the actual Location itself -- are *not* concealed, BUT THAT ISN'T IMPORTANT, because the issue is "how does that terrain get damaged?". The obvious answer is "by being hit". Hence the follow-up question is "how do we know when the terrain has been hit?". While C3.41 permits buildings and other terrain to be attacked, the Q&A "clarifies" (or "modifies", if you prefer) that to actually hit (and hence possibly damage) the terrain, you have to hit *either* an actual unit in that building, *or* hit a theoretical HIP unit in that terrain (which requires the application of Case K). Bridges are an EXC to this -- you can attack and hit a bridge as though it were an (unconcealed) unit itself. (Implicit in the combination of B6.31, B6.33 and C6.5.) It's really very simple. Even you should be able to grasp it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From iago at quicksilver.net.nz Wed Sep 8 01:57:41 2004 From: iago at quicksilver.net.nz (Peter Palmer) Date: Wed Sep 8 01:59:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.2.20040908204544.00a30370@pop.qsi.net.nz> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:43:28 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >I know this List is preferred by some, but it would also be good to >point out to folks that there is more to ASL's internet life these days >than the ASL Mail List. But the only dedicated such. CSW is moving/has moved to a subscription driven model in part and as such lacks the direct utility. As Bruce mentioned, the interface is far less utilitarian for disseminating news by comparison to an email list with the proper subject headers automatically visible rather than having to go through the rigmarole of outline format. Plus with RHB's newer and more frequent appearance in the MMP folder there's even less chance of being able to easily access MMP announcements. WargamesHQ has to be one of the worst sites I've seen recently for clunkiness and ease of navigation. It's a royal pain in the butt to navigate from the front page, where the separate areas are nondescript and poorly defined. The mailing list at least has the benefit of simplicity, is easier to use, can be read while offline and can be archived locally. The distinct decrease in MMP visibility on the ML isn't the fault of the ASLML as a method, but can be laid at the door of MMP itself, despite the disingenous posts to the contrary. -- Peter-James Palmer Home e-mail: iago_at_quicksilver.net.nz 24/7 e-mail: synicbast_at_hotmail.com Day e-mail: peter_at_nothing-but.net.nz From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Sep 8 02:08:11 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Wed Sep 8 02:09:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: References: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <1094634491.413ecbfb38320@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, Quoting Bruce Probst : > While C3.41 permits buildings and other terrain to be attacked, the Q&A > "clarifies" (or "modifies", if you prefer) that to actually hit (and hence > possibly damage) the terrain, you have to hit *either* an actual unit in > that > building, *or* hit a theoretical HIP unit in that terrain (which requires > the > application of Case K). > > Bridges are an EXC to this -- you can attack and hit a bridge as though it > were an (unconcealed) unit itself. (Implicit in the combination of B6.31, > B6.33 and C6.5.) > > It's really very simple. Even you should be able to grasp it. > Bruce P: Why do you get yourself winded up enough to write such nonsense? First, if Bridges are an exception, where does the rules tell you to treat it differently with respect to case K? (nowhere). And secondly, if we have proved anything during the last week, we have proved that this is about as far from very simple as it can get. If you think *this* is really very simple, then I don't want to be part of complicated rule debates :-) -- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? From ctewks at yahoo.com Wed Sep 8 03:44:46 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed Sep 8 03:44:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <08osj09u93ap6jbrc19gdedu8gu8asqi2s@4ax.com> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> <08osj09u93ap6jbrc19gdedu8gu8asqi2s@4ax.com> Message-ID: <413EE29E.6020805@yahoo.com> AR is still an asset :) -Chuck Bruce Probst wrote: >On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 19:03:46 -0400, "Ivan Lindstrom" >wrote: > > > >>In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so out came >>the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO w/o maps 269 >>@ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ $60 = >>$46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A lot of >>money tied up in the preorders. >> >> > >*Potential* money. None of it has been spent by the customers, or received by >MMP. > > > >>I wish I could figure out the profit margin of the gross receipts for AoO and ASLRBv2. >> >> > >Not all *that* much, I expect; but I don't begrudge MMP whatever profit they >make -- after all, we want them to stay in business. > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Sep 8 04:10:03 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Wed Sep 8 04:11:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] My final take on case K In-Reply-To: <413EE29E.6020805@yahoo.com> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> <08osj09u93ap6jbrc19gdedu8gu8asqi2s@4ax.com> <413EE29E.6020805@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1094641803.413ee88be0a3f@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, I feel I've exhausted myself (and probably more than 99% of the list members), so this will be my famous last post on the subject (until I see something I think I need to answer, of course)... To sum it up, I think the questions boil down to: 1) Disregarding SMOKE, can a bridge/building/empty hex/whatever be *hit* even when no Infantry (or similar) is hit. If so, there's no ASLRB reason to add case K. C3.41 more than implies so, but C3.3 doesn't. If you cannot, then C3.41 should be put in a trash can with lid on, but then its no new thing that rules are misleading. B24.11 can be interpreted to imply that you roll the IFT roll if hitting the building even when there are no units there, certainly the fact that it talks about "levels hit", not "levels with units hit" implies this. Still, this could be sloppy wording. 2) The two Bruces maintain that you must hit Infantry (or similar) to be able to roll the IFT roll that can have terrain effects, and they say that a non-existant, HIP Infantry is used when no real unit exists. They say that this must be true, since C3.3 only allows IFT roll after having hit a Infantry/Cavalry/Motorcycle target. But there's one big hole in this argument, IMHO, I know of *no* place in the rule that lets you roll on the IFT when you have *not* hit anything. Bruce B and P have assumed so, but just as I have assumed that you can roll on the IFT when you hit a building only, this is an assumption, and nothing you find stated in the ASLRB (or if so, I have certainly overlooked it). So for either of those two interpretations to work, one must assume something that the ASLRB says: * If you think terrain can be affected without adding case K (or having hit a non-concealed unit), you must assume that you can make an IFT roll only to see the effect vs. the terrain. * If you think terrain can be affected with case K when there are no units there, you must assume that you can make an IFT roll vs. non-existant HIP units. Since neither can be found in the ASLRB, the ASLRB is either broken, or there is a third option, which I fear and suspect was Don Greenwood's intention: I suspect that he only thought of three uses of ordnance: 1) Hit a unit (real, dummy or HIP) 2) Place Acquisition 3) Place SMOKE I don't think he ever thought of the possibility of actually targeting an empty hex/Location in the hope of getting a terrain effect, but added the terrain effects as a side effect of 1) above. If he had intended an empty hex to be attacked in the hope of getting a terrain effect, he would have written how or included an example. With the lack of those, I conclude that the intention was never there. I must admit that this is what happens 99.9% of playings as well: How many fires at empty hexes in the hipe of rubbling it when you know there's no unit there? (not many). So if one shall play exactly as written, with COWTRA firmly in mind, there is absolutely no way you get to destroy that empty bridge/building or setting fire to that empty woods hex. I guess this is ASL physics at its finest :-) Anyway, its been an enlightening journey into some of the darkest corridors of the ASLRB. Only such a pity that Don Greenwodd never arranged for those corridors to meet. From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 8 04:29:34 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 8 04:34:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan><000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> Message-ID: <000901c49597$1de406a0$f301010a@gecac.org> Hello! I would like to thank Keith for giving us an update. I am glad to see that MMP still reads this list (though I agre the Case K thing was starting to give my delete finger a workout):>) I guess I presumes that since Perry asks for someone on Consim world to cross post, that MMP had stopped reading the list. not that I would blame them in a way, they gotta put up with people like us whining all the time:>)) Sorry again for the bad Kharma Peace Roger From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 8 04:48:39 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 8 04:53:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Chill out on AoO References: <006e01c49549$488d7d80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> <5.2.0.9.0.20040908010105.01bda9c8@mail.howardhowardfine.com> Message-ID: <002f01c49599$c8ce1360$f301010a@gecac.org> > Of course, the longer MMP waits, the more credit cards that were used to > pre-order AoO expire... now THIS is funny, as a matter of fact, I better call and check mine:>) Peace Roger From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Wed Sep 8 06:15:38 2004 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Wed Sep 8 05:14:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Chill out on AoO In-Reply-To: <002f01c49599$c8ce1360$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <000201c495a5$ef8accd0$6401a8c0@NewDell> >now THIS is funny, as a matter of fact, I better call and >check mine:>) Had to fax my own new expiration date last February. Only three more years before I have to fax another one. Will AOO make it? From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 8 05:20:28 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Sep 8 05:27:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] My final take on case K Message-ID: Ok, I'll stop as well. But ... > >* If you think terrain can be affected with case K when there are no units >there, you must assume that you can make an IFT roll vs. non-existant HIP >units. > Unless you subscribe to the Mr. Omniscience theory of ASL, there is only *one way* to know whether a Location is devoid of enemy units (without actually entering the Location). You must make a DR on the IFT, and hope to get a "PTC" or better. Unfortunately, those arguing on your side of the fence keep behaving as if it is the TH attempt that discovers hidden units. But first of course, you *must* get a "hit", and to do that versus an empty Location, you must apply Case K because any units that might be there are considered Hidden. That's what *I* think the rules tell us. (I also believe that's what errata will eventually tells us, too.) I utterly reject the argument of, "but I know the opponent has no HIP units". That is Omniscient Player Syndrome at its worst. All done. Carry on. Sorry (or maybe glad? ) to have ticked so many people off with my "erroneous logic". (Which hasn't been disproved, IMO.) 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 keithdalton at verizon.net Wed Sep 8 05:37:53 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Wed Sep 8 05:37:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <20040908123753.SMZX1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Yes Scott, we do take customer input seriously. It is you we take lightly. > > From: scott.holst@us.army.mil > Date: 2004/09/07 Tue PM 11:01:35 CDT > To: Keith Dalton > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > Now thats a new one on me, MMP takes customer input seriously? ya right. Perhaps paying lipservice the regimes fanatical flunky's (hi PVT mosher) but customer input is not in MMP creed. And why should it be? They have the exclusive rights to ASL, so why should they care what we say or think? > > Man, it will be an awesome day when MMP give up ASL and or goes down the toilet. > > Scott The partisan > > MMP's Minister of Propaganda writes; > < on our preorder page. As we have stuff to update you, we'll make sure to > spread the word. We take customer input and constructive criticism very > seriously. > > Keith Dalton > MMP Marketing Director>> > > > > > From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 8 04:55:04 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 8 05:46:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Chill out on AoO Message-ID: Of course, the longer MMP waits, the more credit cards that were used to pre-order AoO expire... c AS DO THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE CC P At 11:48 AM 08/09/2004 +0900, George Bates wrote: >Guys, MMP has said the components of AoO are in production in stages so >they >can piggyback work with other projects to manage costs. When all the parts >have been made, the modules will then need to be assembled before they are >shipped. This and all their other work will be done as soon as is >economically and physically possible. Meanwhile, there are 10 other >modules >and 500+ scenarios out there to play, and I'll give that $177 grand number >that Ivan pulled out of his butt to anyone who can step forward and prove >they have been through them all. Why not take the time you spend whining >to >volunteer to proofread or playtest? How about an AAR or an article draft? >To start, somebody could compile a set of clarifications to the rules on >this Case K debate, which could be cross-checked and approved in time for >J6. GOYA! > >But seriously, Bruce Probst is right when he talks about cash flow. MMP >has >to schedule production with the cash they have on hand. Printers want net >30, not a promissory note. They don't care how many pre-orders might be >out >there. > >Add to that MMP's "multi-manpower shortage" (which Uncle Sam sez YOU can >help solve) and it's clear why things will continue to take time. Be >patient, Grasshoppers. > >End of rant. I'm gonna think some more about Nijmegen. > > - G > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >[mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of >aslml@aslwebdex.net >Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:12 AM >To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > >I apologize for asking a dumb question, but I haven't seen an estimate >recently. Is there a current ETA for AoO, or have we stopped assigning >ETAs >for it? > >Larry (just wishing) Memmott > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "rwhelan" >To: "rwhelan" ; "Ivan Lindstrom" >; ; "'John August'" >; >Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:11 PM >Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > > > > OK I apologize for taking that shot at MMP, and AOO, but frustration is > > getting the better of me. > > > > Of course I am not even certain anyone from MMP reads the ASLML anymore, > > they'd probably rather stick to the Consimworld forums where they have >the > > ability to delete troll like comments, which I guess mine would fall >under. > > > > But seriously, aren't we all a bit more than a little frustrated at the >AOO > > "situation"? > > > > I understand they know we are frustrated, but their silence adds insult >to > > injury at times. > > > > As God is my witness, I do not understand what is taking so long. > > > > Peace > > > > Roger > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > >_______________________________________________ >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 _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From scott.holst at us.army.mil Wed Sep 8 05:50:31 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Sep 8 05:51:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <27d5ef227d991c.27d991c27d5ef2@us.army.mil> Ok, so why are there no products for this year? Why did MMP leave out the desert rules from FKaC when all of it CUSTOMERS requested that those rule be included? Why a 2nd edition ASLRB when MMP's CUSTOMER's did not want this undertaken? WHY unmounted boards when most MMP's CUSTOMER's want mounted boards? WHY ASLSK when most of MMP's CUSTOMER's prefered Seeing the old SQUAD LEADER cleaned up and revised? I can go on but the point is, MMP really does not care what I or anybody else thinks, they prefer to do what they want with little regard for it so called customers, yes there are a few fanatics out there whom are will support MMP no matter what. Sad but expected. Scott The MMP mouth piece writes; <> From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 8 06:37:54 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 8 06:38:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <27d5ef227d991c.27d991c27d5ef2@us.army.mil> References: <27d5ef227d991c.27d991c27d5ef2@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040908083438.0194b7a8@pop3.direcway.com> At 07:50 AM 9/8/2004, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: >MMP really does not care what I Chuckle, probably got one thing right.... But, the rest is unsupported drivel. Of the 20% of WHG ASLers(100+) that voted, over 65% were "content", at least, with MMPs work...So all your "most"s go down the toilet. But, we can expect you to ignore facts on your hate filled self-imposed mission. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Sep 8 06:47:17 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 8 06:47:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> Message-ID: <413F0D65.6090400@charter.net> Bruce Probst wrote: > <>And as everyone knows, it's impossible to post information to two > different electronic resources, right? > Of course not, Bruce. But since I don't control MMP, maybe you should tell MMP this instead. At this point, I'm used to hunting for information because I generally know where to find it, be it from MMP or Heat of Battle or whomever. And the ASLML is generally not a good source of information on the current news of the game. So instead of waiting for it to be spoon-fed, I go find the information, unlike the fat old lazy fart denizens of this crusty worthless mail list, and I don't blame others for my lack of initiative. ;-) >I suspect that "oops, I forgot to tell those guys about it" is the more likely >reason. > > Yes, probably right. >The *ideal* "source of information" would be the company website... > > Agreed. Supposedly some sort of update to the website is underway that will facilitate this. >The ultimate point is that individuals who choose to dedicate their valuable >time to one particular resource -- rather than spend all day haunting several >-- should not be ostracised by a company that wants them as customers. It's >not like the ASLML is *obscure*. It's been around for years, it's existence >is well-known by MMP, and it's sole function is talking about ASL. In my >books that means it should rank highly on MMP's list of "places to post ASL >news". > > Sadly the point is probably that the ASLML *just doesn't matter that much* any longer. -Chas From Nathaniel.Mallet1 at rogers.com Wed Sep 8 06:55:46 2004 From: Nathaniel.Mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Wed Sep 8 06:58:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <27d5ef227d991c.27d991c27d5ef2@us.army.mil> References: <27d5ef227d991c.27d991c27d5ef2@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <413F0F62.2070900@rogers.com> >> Why a 2nd edition ASLRB when MMP's CUSTOMER's did not want this undertaken? Are you serious? You're one of the top visitors on the ASL ML and the forums, and you're seriously saying that customers don't want the ASL Rule Book? In the past two month on the ASLML alone, there have been half a dozen inquiries about the status of the ASLRB, and exactly 0 saying that MMP is wasting its time on it. You're inconsistent in your complaints, and much of them are false. Your ASLRB is one example, and your statement that Squad Leader be brought back is another. On the Forums a while back, someone was asking if they should spend money buying Squad Leader from EBay to get into ASL, and the resounding answer was no, the ASLSK was better. Many even said that SL wasn't even worth it for the boards. Your biggest misconception is that MMP doesn't care about its customers. Many have asked questions about if/when products were received after MMP announced they had shipped, and in all cases, MMP has responded. They've even responded directly to me on a few occasions, and I'm quite sure I'm not special enough to receive that kind of attention. I also think that the fact that they've been quite polite and courteous to you proves how much they do care about their customers. Nat scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: >Ok, so why are there no products for this year? Why did MMP leave out the desert rules from FKaC when all of it CUSTOMERS requested that those rule be included? Why a 2nd edition ASLRB when MMP's CUSTOMER's did not want this undertaken? WHY unmounted boards when most MMP's CUSTOMER's want mounted boards? WHY ASLSK when most of MMP's CUSTOMER's prefered Seeing the old SQUAD LEADER cleaned up and revised? I can go on but the point is, MMP really does not care what I or anybody else thinks, they prefer to do what they want with little regard for it so called customers, yes there are a few fanatics out there whom are will support MMP no matter what. Sad but expected. > > >Scott > >The MMP mouth piece writes; ><> > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >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 keithdalton at verizon.net Wed Sep 8 06:59:36 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Wed Sep 8 06:59:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <20040908135937.MBPI28868.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Okay, Scott # 2, I'll bite, what the hell. > > Ok, so why are there no products for this year? We've already hashed out our production issues in my first email that ignited this little flamage. We're going to contract out MMP's ASL layout work to speed up this process. That's the holdup. We know the problem and we're addressing it. >Why did MMP leave out the desert rules from FKaC when all of it CUSTOMERS requested that those rule be included? Cost. If we had put in the desert stuff with everything involved in the module -- let's face it, what good are the rules without overlays, the extra counter sheet, desert scenarios, and the boards -- the price would've been north of $150. Oh, and can you show me a survey where everyone -- that's right, everyone, a census survey of all the ASL players, because that's what you typed -- wanted the desert stuff included in FKAC? I'd really like to see that. We know there are desert fans -- but from listening to customers, we determined more people wanted the Brit OB. The plan was sound, and as we get the layout bottleneck cleared up the pace of reprinting should pick up. >Why a 2nd edition ASLRB when MMP's CUSTOMER's did not want this undertaken? Really? Comments about the second edition have been very positive to us, with the exception of some of the early print run binders not holding up. Once again, back up your statements with facts, not your beliefs. That may work on the cable news talk show circuit, but not with me. >WHY unmounted boards when most MMP's CUSTOMER's want mounted boards? Not a decision we made lightly, and if the new style boards had not been accepted in the ASL Starter Kit, we would not have made the move. We tested the market. Most of the feedback we got was positive, especially when it came to saving weight and ease of use. We didn't make assumptions or do what we wanted to do. >WHY ASLSK when most of MMP's CUSTOMER's prefered Seeing the old SQUAD LEADER cleaned up and revised? Really? Show me the survey research you conducted. I'd be interested. BTW, the ASL Starter Kit has been a phenomenal success. You wouldn't beleive the number of players who have written us emails and letters stating they bought one for a son/ nephew/ daughter/ etc. and now all they want to do is learn ASL. > Sad but expected. Yep, your diatribes are that. Scott, as I've said before, I have the utmost respect for your service. Anytime you've offered constructive criticism, I've welcomed it. The personal attacks grand stereotypical statements, and statements of opinion you try to construe as fact are not. Sincerely, Keith Dalton MMP Marketing Director From geb3 at inter.net Wed Sep 8 07:05:00 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Sep 8 07:01:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Accounting 101 (WAS: AoO Coming out?) In-Reply-To: <413EE29E.6020805@yahoo.com> Message-ID: This isn't about AR. No goods have been delivered yet, so no billings have occurred. These are just unfulfilled orders at the moment. They can also be cancelled at any time without prejudice. - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Chuck T Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 7:45 PM To: bprobst@netspace.net.au Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net; 'John August' Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? AR is still an asset :) -Chuck Bruce Probst wrote: >On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 19:03:46 -0400, "Ivan Lindstrom" >wrote: > > > >>In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so out came >>the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO w/o maps 269 >>@ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ $60 = >>$46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A lot of >>money tied up in the preorders. >> >> > >*Potential* money. None of it has been spent by the customers, or received by >MMP. > > > >>I wish I could figure out the profit margin of the gross receipts for AoO and ASLRBv2. >> >> > >Not all *that* much, I expect; but I don't begrudge MMP whatever profit they >make -- after all, we want them to stay in business. > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" >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 > > > _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Sep 8 07:04:05 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Sep 8 07:06:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <28cf85528d0a4a.28d0a4a28cf855@us.army.mil> Well Ron- Since you seem to be MMP's secondary mouth piece and biggest supporter, perhaps you could tell the rest of us why MMP decided to drop the German / Russian rare vehicles from AoO which was originally promised when AoO went up for its Pxx last year. Why Beyond valor is still not in print? Why is the ASLRB still OOP? Doomed Battalions? Code of Bushido? ect ect Why there are no products coming out this year other then a journal if that? MMP promised to post the desert rules to their websight, where are they? Its been several months and nothing. As I said before, MMP will publish AoO but I dont think its gonna be that good judging from past efforts........ Lets hope those bozo's dont screw-up VotG to badly but I aint holding my breath. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: ron mosher Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2004 8:37 am Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > At 07:50 AM 9/8/2004, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > >MMP really does not care what I > > Chuckle, probably got one thing right.... > > But, the rest is unsupported drivel. Of the 20% of WHG > ASLers(100+) that > voted, over 65% were "content", at least, with MMPs work...So all > your > "most"s go down the toilet. > > But, we can expect you to ignore facts on your hate filled self- > imposed > mission. > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > From aslwynn at rogers.com Wed Sep 8 07:10:13 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Wed Sep 8 07:10:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Mounted vs UnMounted References: <20040908135937.MBPI28868.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <005401c495ad$8fb74510$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> I personally prefer unmounted boards, if only because they keep costs down dramatically, although I recognize that there are a bunch of folks out there wedded to the mounted versions, >>WHY unmounted boards when most MMP's CUSTOMER's want mounted boards? > > Not a decision we made lightly, and if the new style boards had not been > accepted in the ASL Starter Kit, we would not have made the move. We > tested the market. Most of the feedback we got was positive, especially > when it came to saving weight and ease of use. We didn't make assumptions > or do what we wanted to do. > Wynn "Newly Married, Not Interested in Mounting Boards" Polnicky From aslwynn at rogers.com Wed Sep 8 07:13:12 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Wed Sep 8 07:13:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The ASLML As a Source of ASL Info References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6><32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com><413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> Message-ID: <005d01c495ad$fa0ddd70$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> I absolutely agree with Bruce. The ASLML is convenient, easy to access and read and one can be assured that no messages have been missed inadvertently. Wynn "Not a Luddite" Polnicky Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 4:05 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:43:28 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >I know this List is preferred by some, but it would also be good to >point out to folks that there is more to ASL's internet life these days >than the ASL Mail List. And as everyone knows, it's impossible to post information to two different electronic resources, right? >So I suspect that's why the Mail List tends to be the last to know any kind >of news. I suspect that "oops, I forgot to tell those guys about it" is the more likely reason. Consimworld is a *terrible* "source of information" *unless you frequent it religiously* -- especially in busy forums like MMP's. Hundreds of messages get posted every day -- a few even useful and on-topic -- but it's impossible to *find* a specific message even if you know what to look for (and God help you if you're just trying to browse to see *if* anything interesting was posted recently). So even though messages can (in theory) hang around forever -- a good thing for research purposes -- they get drowned by all the messages that follow them -- a bad thing for casual usage. Forums like WarfareHQ are a bit better in terms of message organisation, but suffer from the fact they they are SLOOOOWWWW. At times I feel like writing a novel inbetween each page refresh. Again, this discourages casual usage. The *ideal* "source of information" would be the company website, except that apparently MMP are too busy making ephemeral postings to Consimworld to actually bother updating the "news" page there on anything approaching a regular basis. The ultimate point is that individuals who choose to dedicate their valuable time to one particular resource -- rather than spend all day haunting several -- should not be ostracised by a company that wants them as customers. It's not like the ASLML is *obscure*. It's been around for years, it's existence is well-known by MMP, and it's sole function is talking about ASL. In my books that means it should rank highly on MMP's list of "places to post ASL news". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" 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 garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 8 07:35:27 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 8 07:40:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <20040908135937.MBPI28868.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <001a01c495b1$15805b20$f301010a@gecac.org> hello! OK, enough:>) Please lets put this flame war to bed. I was the one who realy seemed to have gotten this ball rolling and for that I apologize. Keith deserves a FLAK jacket for all the BS he get flung at him. I feel respncible for this thread, it serves me right for posting an e-mail when in a bad mood. Can't we just leave it at "we all want AOO" and "MMP is doing their damnest to get things out the door" and leave it at that:>) Believe me, the last thing I wanted was a "lets all bash MMP" thread, which once again, is where certain people are taking it. Please lets let it drop:>) Peace Roger (throwing the olive branch out there) From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 8 07:39:04 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 8 07:44:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <20040908135937.MBPI28868.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> <001a01c495b1$15805b20$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <002f01c495b1$96d97440$f301010a@gecac.org> WOW I forgot to hit SPELL check before sending, talk about embarrassing:>( Sorry about that! Peace Roger From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 8 08:09:27 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 8 08:09:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <28cf85528d0a4a.28d0a4a28cf855@us.army.mil> References: <28cf85528d0a4a.28d0a4a28cf855@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040908094734.0194bae8@pop3.direcway.com> At 09:04 AM 9/8/2004, the gadfly wrote: >Since you seem to be MMP's secondary mouth piece and biggest supporter, Not quite right, I figure the biggest supporters are the 6 guys that voted in the WHQ poll that MMP could do no wrong. I'm not in that group. As for "mouthpiece", just pointing out the facts vs screaming "MMP can do no right" seems to be the qualification in your mind. >perhaps you could tell the rest of us why MMP decided to drop the German / >Russian rare vehicles from AoO which was originally promised when AoO went >up for its Pxx last year. Appears that a decision was made to exclude these by the Development team, maybe due to playtesting time and a desire to do a module just devoted to the AoO. >Why Beyond valor is still not in print? Your memory is still selective, they print these over a period of time to avoid a massive cost on the core modules that aren't in the greatest of demand(compare pre-pub numbers, AoO and BV). Now that demand has picked up, probably due to ASLSK, BV is on pre-pub and will be out, not soon, but sooner than would have been. Also, what to put in it has been a consideration. They recently decided to make it a stand alone module with 10(?) maps, and include several OOP scenarios that need to be fine tuned(you were in on that discussion). This will slow things down. >Why is the ASLRB still OOP? Would have been out in Spring, but the printer snafu was explained on the various fora. If you don't believe the printer snafu posts, just consider the recent HOB printer snafu, and CHs need to go thru 5+ printers to get a barely acceptable product line. >Doomed Battalions? Code of Bushido? ect ect Which do you want the team to work on first? Next? etc. etc...there are limits for a niche product. >Why there are no products coming out this year other then a journal if that? See all the above, plus the ASLSK took some time this year, also the year isn't over...Another point is, you will be the last to know if any product is coming out, just look in the mirror. >MMP promised to post the desert rules to their websight, where are they? Don't recall this, only that they were considering it, I could be wrong tho. >As I said before, MMP will publish AoO but I dont think its gonna be that >good judging from past efforts........ Have no idea what you are talking/ranting about here. MMPs counters have received rave reviews, their maps are as good as AHs were, scenarios seem to be the same mix and quality as AHs. What is your beef, other than their slow publishing schedule? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From ctewks at yahoo.com Wed Sep 8 13:30:44 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed Sep 8 13:30:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Accounting 101 (WAS: AoO Coming out?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <413F6BF4.2000909@yahoo.com> yeah OK good point.... glad I took marketing and not accounting :) -Chuck George Bates wrote: >This isn't about AR. No goods have been delivered yet, so no billings have >occurred. > >These are just unfulfilled orders at the moment. They can also be cancelled >at any time without prejudice. > > - G > > >-----Original Message----- >From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >[mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Chuck T >Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 7:45 PM >To: bprobst@netspace.net.au >Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net; 'John August' >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? > > >AR is still an asset > >:) > >-Chuck > >Bruce Probst wrote: > > > >>On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 19:03:46 -0400, "Ivan Lindstrom" >>wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>>In cruising the web and checked the MMP site and was curious, so out came >>>the calculator. AoO with boards: 1402 @ $84 = $117,768 and AoO w/o maps >>> >>> >269 > > >>>@ $48 = $12,912 for a total of $130,680. The ASLRBv2 adds 778 @ $60 = >>>$46,680 to the pot for a grand total on ASL stuff of $177,360. A lot of >>>money tied up in the preorders. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>*Potential* money. None of it has been spent by the customers, or received >> >> >by > > >>MMP. >> >> >> >> >> >>>I wish I could figure out the profit margin of the gross receipts for AoO >>> >>> >and ASLRBv2. > > >>> >>> >>Not all *that* much, I expect; but I don't begrudge MMP whatever profit >> >> >they > > >>make -- after all, we want them to stay in business. >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >>Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >>"He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" >>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 >> >> >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >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 Wed Sep 8 13:35:23 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Sep 8 13:38:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Good Night Sweet Prince Message-ID: <2ebccd12ebf2d0.2ebf2d02ebccd1@us.army.mil> Hi- Played this one today and both games were very close, the Germans lost but this was more akin to my opponent (hi Rich) passing MC left and right. Lost by two points : ( Anyway, on roar, this scenario is listed as 53 vs 22 in favor of the Danish. Well, I think its balanced. Scott From gr27134 at charter.net Wed Sep 8 13:56:15 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Wed Sep 8 13:56:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <3a6eho$7m58fh@mxip07a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/08 Wed AM 03:44:53 CDT > To: Tate Rogers , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 0:57:17 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: > > Tate, I don't think... Hurray, final Bruce P. admits the truth. The fact that you can't understand the point is of no concern to me. The bottom line is that both Bruce's would have the '?' status of units apply to the terrain. There is no such rule. As well, they don't believe that terrain can be a target sans enemy units. I think it is very simple and straight forward. Terrain is a legal target (C3.41) and terrain is _NEVER_ '?'. What I see are folks that realize that they have been playing it wrong and don't want to change. Thus they have cobbled together whatever half-a*sed verbiage they can to support their desire not to change. I am not particularly interested in changing the way I play this either. However, what we need is an errata not just some off-the-cuff Q&A. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Sep 8 18:28:51 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Sep 8 18:27:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C747F@agalsrv03> Hi Tate You state Case K is NA to terrain but may have missed my post where I asked if that is so, then negative target based TH modifiers (FFNAM, overstacking, Hazardous Movement)must also be NA to the terrain Example: Ordnance fires at a squad using NAM in a wooden building at 6 hex range using ITT. Modified TH # is 8. Original TH DR is a 7 which becomes an 8 against the squad (+2 building, -1 FFNAM) which is a hit against the squad. However using your argument FFNAM can not apply to the building and so the Final TH DR against the actual terrain is 9, which would be a miss against the actual terrain by your reasoning. Are you now going to make an IFT attack against the squad (it was hit after all) but say you can't cause rubble/flame creation since you didn't hit the actual terrain? Another point to consider is that the Chapter C divider says Case K is "vs Concealed Target (or Area Fire; C.4) (C6.2) I've NRBH to check the wording of C.4, but from memory doesn't it say that Ordnance uses Case K instead of halving FP for cases of Area Fire. If you fire Infantry small arms at an empty hex it is Area Fire and the FP is halved. It would then follow that if you fire ordnance at an empty hex, it is Area Fire and so Case K is applicable Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Tate Rogers [mailto:gr27134@charter.net] > Sent: Thursday, 9 September 2004 4:56 AM > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > > From: Bruce Probst > > Date: 2004/09/08 Wed AM 03:44:53 CDT > > To: Tate Rogers , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > > > On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 0:57:17 -0500, Tate Rogers > wrote: > > > > Tate, I don't think... > > Hurray, final Bruce P. admits the truth. > > The fact that you can't understand the point is of no concern to me. > > The bottom line is that both Bruce's would have the '?' status of units > apply to the terrain. There is no such rule. As well, they don't believe > that terrain can be a target sans enemy units. > > I think it is very simple and straight forward. Terrain is a legal target > (C3.41) and terrain is _NEVER_ '?'. What I see are folks that realize that > they have been playing it wrong and don't want to change. Thus they have > cobbled together whatever half-a*sed verbiage they can to support their > desire not to change. > > I am not particularly interested in changing the way I play this either. > However, what we need is an errata not just some off-the-cuff Q&A. > > 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 From gr27134 at charter.net Wed Sep 8 18:43:01 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Wed Sep 8 18:43:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <3a5ac4$8b5rkq@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Cole, Jonathan" > Date: 2004/09/08 Wed PM 08:28:51 CDT > To: Tate Rogers , bprobst@netspace.net.au, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net, Bruce Bakken , > Ole B?e , > Jim McLeod > > Subject: RE: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > Hi Tate > You state Case K is NA to terrain but may have missed my post where I asked > if that is so, then negative target based TH modifiers (FFNAM, overstacking, > Hazardous Movement)must also be NA to the terrain No, I read it...twice. I then decided to ignore it because it was simply silly. Your post appears to have gone unnoticed by most everyone else in the discussion as well. There is no rule that allows terrain to be '?'. There are rules that allow the application of the negative modifier. Regardless of what you might think, it is pretty much as simple as that. Thanks, Tater (One Mean Spud!) From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Sep 8 18:46:25 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Sep 8 18:44:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Case K Madness Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C7498@agalsrv03> Hi Jim The new computer must be working :) My comments on your mailing prefaced with ** Listerz; ? Anyway, it seems that the situation currently sits at; ? - the ASLRB allows one to fire on a seemingly unoccupied terrain without Case K ** I agree the ASLRB says you can target an empty hex. I don't see anywhere in the rules that says Case K is NA when firing on seemingly unoccupied terrain - Perry's Q&A requires the application of Case K in the above situation. ? Consider this for a moment and get your extrapolators out.? What about OBA and HIP units?? While there is no TH DR for OBA attacks, OBA may still attack empty hexes without any penalty.? Does that give a clue?in regard to?what Mr. Greenwood's intent was?on the subject of this discussion?? ** Well case K is applicable to ordnance firing on HIP units, since HIP is a form of concealment. OBA is a specific case that is in the rules ? And, if Perry's Q&A is based on disallowing some real or perceived?game sleazery,?hoping to rubble a building?in order to eliminate a HIP unit is indeed making your point the?hard way.? ? Jon makes a good point in his example of a moving unit imparting it's FFNAM DRM on terrain.? This is dipping into the abstraction well a bit but having the terrain take a hit due to the?moving unit's DRM can be chalked up to "that is how the game works". ** As is applying Case K to empty hexes/Locations that may/may not contain HIP units ? My take on this is; a) There is no reason why terrain can't be targeted and hit. ** Agreed ? b) Terrain can not be "?" so no Case K should apply when firing at empty hexes/Locations. ** Disagree. Firing at an empty hex is Area Fire so Case K applies ? c) If a unit is hit, the terrain shares the pain regardless of any negative DRM caused by moving units. ** Agreed and that is how I play it. Hit the unit and you have hit the terrain ? d) Anyone who wants to do recce' by fire to find HIP'sters is welcome to do so.? The chances are likely greater that a Sniper attack will be generated or the weapon firing will malf' and with all the potential likely hiding spots out there for the HIP guy, it is generally?a waste of, and takes too much of,?time. ** Definitely agreed :). Half squads are what you use to search for HIP units? ? Cheers Jon From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Sep 8 18:55:55 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Sep 8 18:54:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C74A6@agalsrv03> So you say there is no rule that says terrain can be concealed (so Case K is NA). The show me the rule that says terrain can use NAM and so justify applying Case J3 to terrain. Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Tate Rogers [mailto:gr27134@charter.net] > Sent: Thursday, 9 September 2004 9:43 AM > To: Cole, Jonathan; bprobst@netspace.net.au; aslml- > aslml.net@lists.aslml.net; Bruce Bakken; Ole B?e; Jim McLeod > Subject: RE: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > > From: "Cole, Jonathan" > > Date: 2004/09/08 Wed PM 08:28:51 CDT > > To: Tate Rogers , bprobst@netspace.net.au, > > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net, Bruce Bakken > , > > Ole B?e , > > Jim McLeod > > > > Subject: RE: Re: [Aslml] The Case for Case K > > > > Hi Tate > > You state Case K is NA to terrain but may have missed my post where > > I > asked > > if that is so, then negative target based TH modifiers (FFNAM, > overstacking, > > Hazardous Movement)must also be NA to the terrain > > No, I read it...twice. I then decided to ignore it because it was > simply silly. Your post appears to have gone unnoticed by most > everyone else in the discussion as well. > > There is no rule that allows terrain to be '?'. > > There are rules that allow the application of the negative modifier. > > Regardless of what you might think, it is pretty much as simple as > that. > > Thanks, > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) Cheers Jon From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Sep 8 19:25:57 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 8 19:25:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20040908204544.00a30370@pop.qsi.net.nz> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20040908204544.00a30370@pop.qsi.net.nz> Message-ID: <413FBF35.8080604@charter.net> Peter Palmer wrote: > WargamesHQ has to be one of the worst sites I've seen recently > for clunkiness and ease of navigation. It's a royal pain in the butt > to navigate from the front page, where the separate areas are > nondescript and poorly defined. A few others have said this but I don't see what's difficult about navigating it, frankly. I go there every day and don't have trouble negotiating the ASL section. Here's the main ASL Forum link: http://www.war-forums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30 There is a Main Forum, with individual topics, and a Sub-Forums section, with topics like AARs, Rules, Per Sez, and so on. Regards, Chas From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Sep 8 19:46:56 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Sep 8 19:48:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Case K Madness References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C7498@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <007d01c49617$8c3e64d0$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Jon wrote, Hi Jim The new computer must be working :) *********************************** It is just marvy! Jon, what of Pillboxes/Bunkers? This is a reality argument of sorts but B30.7 says that "?"/HIP units do not recieve Case K if resident in a PB/Bunker and are fired upon by Ordnance. I know that a pillbox is a pillbox and a building is a building but from a size POV, they can be very similar indeed. Your C.4 quote is also very compelling in that it indeed draws "?" units under the case K umbrella. But, we should next go to A12.3 and read lines 6 and 7. But again, what if there are no HIP units in the scenario? Reality argument again, I've read many accounts of how tankers would fire HE into suspected enemy positions in buildings. More often than not, 3 or 4 rounds later that house is trashed. It would be safe to assume that anyone still inside would not be too happy. My bottom line, this is a game designer issue. The rules say we do not need case K as stated in this debate, someone call Mac or Greenwood and get this straightened out. BTW, anyone else out there have a smashing good garden this year? I've just enjoyed a splendid salad of romaine and leaf lettuce with spinach, cucumber and roma tomatoes ... bloody good stuff. We ar having another corn feast this weekend and on Saturday morning it is pan fries and onions. All fresh from my garden, also known as the "Heroes of Red Oktober Agricultural Collective Farm #2". :) =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 20:39:47 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 20:39:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Case K Madness In-Reply-To: <005401c4960b$913d8030$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <005401c4960b$913d8030$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <11kvj055ik18rs9teshn4g5cjctm3fdris@4ax.com> On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 18:59:36 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >Consider this for a moment and get your extrapolators out. What about OBA and HIP units? While there is no TH DR for OBA attacks, OBA may still attack empty hexes without any penalty. Does that give a clue in regard to what Mr. Greenwood's intent was on the subject of this discussion? Not that I can tell. OBA is a completely separate issue -- it doesn't have to roll "To Hit", and is never penalised for concealment/HIP any way. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 20:54:16 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 20:54:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <000901c49597$1de406a0$f301010a@gecac.org> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan><000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <000901c49597$1de406a0$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 07:29:34 -0400, "rwhelan" wrote: >I guess I presumes that since Perry asks for someone on Consim world to >cross post, that MMP had stopped reading the list. Perry has some issue with his e-mail software: for some reason he cannot send in plain text only, and the ASLML only accepts plain-text messages. Hence, he cannot send anything directly to the ASLML himself, but I know he does read it. (I've offered to assist him with this mail problem, but he says he's working on it.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 21:09:04 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 21:09:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <413F0D65.6090400@charter.net> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> <413F0D65.6090400@charter.net> Message-ID: <05lvj01fg0u5fei8l8ee1l7oklld7ad06b@4ax.com> On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 06:47:17 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >Sadly the point is probably that the ASLML *just doesn't matter that >much* any longer. I have no idea what you mean by that statement. Do you mean that no-one posts here, and no-one reads it? Well, obviously not. Do you mean that the people who only subscribe to the ASLML are not "real" ASL players? I would hope not. Do you believe that MMP doesn't want them as customers? That seems unlikely. Or do you believe that MMP have no interest in the opinion of anyone who reads the ASLML, or that no-one who posts to the ASLML has any opinion worth taking note of? Again, I would hope not, but if that was the case, I'd like them to come out and *say so* so that we can use our time more profitably. The only sense in which I can think the ASLML "matters" to MMP (as a company) is that it's a place where dedicated ASL players hang out. In other words, it's a convenient place to find a sizable chunk of their market. In that respect, it matters as much as it *ever did*. The fact that ASL players *also* hang out in *other places* does not imply that the ASLML does not actually exist, nor does it imply that nothing worthwhile is ever discussed here. I know that some people prefer other methods of online-interaction. That's fine, I have no problem with that, but I object strongly to the accusation that "I don't matter" simply because I don't share their preferences! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 8 21:22:31 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 8 21:22:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <1094634491.413ecbfb38320@webmail.broadpark.no> References: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> <1094634491.413ecbfb38320@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <00mvj09p9ugdlfgufpqi50n0empap67ivm@4ax.com> On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 11:08:11 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >Bruce P: Why do you get yourself winded up enough to write such nonsense? Which particular nonsense are you referring to? >First, if Bridges are an exception, where does the rules tell you to treat it >differently with respect to case K? (nowhere). Nowhere? I would think it's implied rather strongly in the knowledge that Case K can't normally be combined with 1/2" acquisition, and the direct statement that 1/2" acquisition can be used on bridges-as-targets. >And secondly, if we have proved anything during the last week, we have proved >that this is about as far from very simple as it can get. It *is* very simple. We've proved that the rules don't actually say what we want them to say. We know what we want them to say because *no-one* plays by the way they *do* say. We have Perry Sez that highlights the way the rules are *supposed* to work, which, by no small co-incidence, is the way we've all been playing it all along (allowing for minor adjustments to an individual's awareness of particular rules -- in my case, the differences between bridges and buildings as targets). So I say, fine, let's keep playing it that way. And then we have you making a fuss about what the rules actually do say, because ... well, why, exactly? We all agree (I think) that *some* sort of errata would be a good idea. How much more do we have to agree on that point? All you and Tate are *really* complaining about is that you don't like the way Perry handles Q&A. We've had this discussion before, and it was pretty boring when it was *new*. It's not any more exciting now. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au Wed Sep 8 21:35:16 2004 From: Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au (Richard Weiley) Date: Wed Sep 8 21:35:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned crew and overrun Message-ID: A rampaging half track (SPW 251/1) declares an overrun upon entering an enemy occupeid location but prior to executing the overrun the crew is pinned by defensive first fire. Is the only effect halving of the overrun's fp due to pinning? Is the halftrack prevented from conducting further overruns during that movement phase (due to the restrictions on pinned units using ROF). TIA Richard ****************************************************************************** This email message, including any attached files, is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The NSW Department of Commerce prohibits the right to publish, copy, distribute or disclose any information contained in this email, or its attachments, by any party other than the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete it from your system. No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the NSW Department of Commerce by email. The views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Department, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of NSW Department of Commerce. The NSW Department of Commerce accepts no liability for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email and recommends that the recipient check this email and any attached files for the presence of viruses. ****************************************************************************** From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Sep 8 21:54:16 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Sep 8 21:54:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan><000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan><000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6><000901c49597$1de406a0$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <009301c49629$1000cd10$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Bruce P. wrote, Perry has some issue with his e-mail software: for some reason he cannot send in plain text only, and the ASLML only accepts plain-text messages. Hence, he cannot send anything directly to the ASLML himself, but I know he does read it. (I've offered to assist him with this mail problem, but he says he's working on it.) As have I except that I will now channel Perry's thoughts to the mailing list ... Perry sez regarding this Case K business, "You people are idiots, stop worrying about what the rules say, thats my job. I will tell you what the rules mean, never mind what they say. Just play the damn game and buy more MMP stuff and yes, you _do_ need three J5's. Now leave me alone so I can answer this next Q&A, my magic 8 ball is on a roll ..." <> So sayeth Perry the keeper of truth, dispenser of wisdom. =Jim= From sidirezegh at charter.net Wed Sep 8 22:12:45 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Wed Sep 8 22:12:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <05lvj01fg0u5fei8l8ee1l7oklld7ad06b@4ax.com> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> <413F0D65.6090400@charter.net> <05lvj01fg0u5fei8l8ee1l7oklld7ad06b@4ax.com> Message-ID: <413FE64D.60105@charter.net> Bruce Probst wrote: >Chas Argent wrote: > > >>Sadly the point is probably that the ASLML *just doesn't matter that >>much* any longer. >> >> > >I have no idea what you mean by that statement. > > Basically I mean that, between the endless flame wars, mail list address changes and problems, signal-to-noise ratios, and the advent of other online forms of communication, the ASLML has dropped to the bottom of the totem pole in importance. How many people actually post messages that discuss anything here any more? I can name about a dozen or so people who do on any sort of regular basis, then there are others who post infrequently at best. You are easily the most visible at this point Bruce, followed by Mr. Bakken, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Boe, and so on. But by & large it's an incredibly small number of people. As to actual subscribing lurkers, I have no way of saying. >Or do you believe that MMP have no interest in the opinion of anyone who reads >the ASLML, or that no-one who posts to the ASLML has any opinion worth taking >note of? > > I just think the ML is much less *vital* now than it was many moons ago, so it's easy for many players, and probably MMP, to overlook it in favor of some other medium. As to opinions, certainly those of this list are as valid as any; but if Tate Rogers falls over in the forest and Brian Youse isn't around to hear him, does he make a sound? >The only sense in which I can think the ASLML "matters" to MMP (as a company) >is that it's a place where dedicated ASL players hang out. In other words, >it's a convenient place to find a sizable chunk of their market. In that >respect, it matters as much as it *ever did*. The fact that ASL players >*also* hang out in *other places* does not imply that the ASLML does not >actually exist, nor does it imply that nothing worthwhile is ever discussed >here. > > I would debate the "sizable chunk" part, but everything else you say is certainly fair. And certainly a great many extemely helpful topics are covered here. >I know that some people prefer other methods of online-interaction. That's >fine, I have no problem with that, but I object strongly to the accusation >that "I don't matter" simply because I don't share their preferences! > > I said the List didn't matter that much, not you, or anyone else here. But it might be good to recognize that you inhabit a place that the internet highway has bypassed. And that's why people who only subscribe to this List tend to be the last ones to hear the "latest" scoop on ASL news. From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Sep 8 22:20:34 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Sep 8 22:19:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C754B@agalsrv03> Just had a look. There are 303 members subscribed to the ASLML, plus a further 150 who receive it in digest mode Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Chas Argent [mailto:sidirezegh@charter.net] > Sent: Thursday, 9 September 2004 1:13 PM > To: ASL List > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? > > Bruce Probst wrote: > > >Chas Argent wrote: > > > > > >>Sadly the point is probably that the ASLML *just doesn't matter that > >>much* any longer. > >> > >> > > > >I have no idea what you mean by that statement. > > > > > Basically I mean that, between the endless flame wars, mail list address > changes and problems, signal-to-noise ratios, and the advent of other > online forms of communication, the ASLML has dropped to the bottom of > the totem pole in importance. > > How many people actually post messages that discuss anything here any > more? I can name about a dozen or so people who do on any sort of > regular basis, then there are others who post infrequently at best. You > are easily the most visible at this point Bruce, followed by Mr. Bakken, > Mr. Rogers, Mr. Boe, and so on. But by & large it's an incredibly small > number of people. As to actual subscribing lurkers, I have no way of > saying. > > >Or do you believe that MMP have no interest in the opinion of anyone who > reads > >the ASLML, or that no-one who posts to the ASLML has any opinion worth > taking > >note of? > > > > > I just think the ML is much less *vital* now than it was many moons ago, > so it's easy for many players, and probably MMP, to overlook it in favor > of some other medium. > > As to opinions, certainly those of this list are as valid as any; but if > Tate Rogers falls over in the forest and Brian Youse isn't around to > hear him, does he make a sound? > > >The only sense in which I can think the ASLML "matters" to MMP (as a > company) > >is that it's a place where dedicated ASL players hang out. In other > words, > >it's a convenient place to find a sizable chunk of their market. In that > >respect, it matters as much as it *ever did*. The fact that ASL players > >*also* hang out in *other places* does not imply that the ASLML does not > >actually exist, nor does it imply that nothing worthwhile is ever > discussed > >here. > > > > > I would debate the "sizable chunk" part, but everything else you say is > certainly fair. And certainly a great many extemely helpful topics are > covered here. > > >I know that some people prefer other methods of online-interaction. > That's > >fine, I have no problem with that, but I object strongly to the > accusation > >that "I don't matter" simply because I don't share their preferences! > > > > > I said the List didn't matter that much, not you, or anyone else here. > But it might be good to recognize that you inhabit a place that the > internet highway has bypassed. And that's why people who only subscribe > to this List tend to be the last ones to hear the "latest" scoop on ASL > news. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 steve at kerch.freeserve.co.uk Wed Sep 8 23:23:54 2004 From: steve at kerch.freeserve.co.uk (Steve Kercher) Date: Wed Sep 8 23:23:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can you help ? In-Reply-To: <20040908190418.A279C985CD@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: Hi, I'm having a clear out and need to get rid of my Squad Leader and ASL stuff. If there's any of you from Britain that are interested (as a whole not individual elements) then please contact me - I'll accept any offer (including free but you collect). Items that I've got and can remember - Original Squad Leader (from c1979) Cross of Iron Crescendo of Doom Anvil of Victory Couple of additional scenario booklets ASL manual Beyond Valour Paratrooper Partisan Yanks The last Hurrah West of Alamein Hollow Legions Croix de Guerre Doomed Battalions Kampfgruppe Peiper I and II (but no instructions for II - it came with a set of I instructions instead !!) Pegasus Bridge ASL annuals for 90, 91, 93b and 96 (I might have 89, 93a and 95 still) Mixed in is, I think, the boards, instructions, counters for Avalon Hill's Tobruk. Most of this has been used, or read, so is not perfect but as far as I am aware it is all still there. So anyone interested ? Contact me off list and don't forget that this is only available if you live in Britain as you'll need to collect. Cheers, Steve From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 8 12:53:01 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 8 23:43:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: Scott For the record, the Rare Russians and Rare Germans were removed from the module LONG before the product went to PXXX. I fought tooth and nail to get them included but MMP argued that they not be included. Their decision was based on a)there being a loss in focus by including them, B) the LARGE number of potential vehicles would ovehwelm the product c) the added cost of adding 1 2 or 3 more countersheets, d)againg the loss of focus on the scenarios going from the Minors to Rare G/R actions. That being said MMP and Ihave reached a tentative agreement to produce a Rare Vehicles Module/Action Packtype product couple of boards couple or three countersheets. This is a LONG way away due to MMP's publishing commitments. But the vehicle notes are 90 to95 % done, six to eight scenarios are done with more being developed, two boards are slated for inclusion. In the long term this is a MUCH better approach. And again this was all agreed to LONG before AoO went to PXXX. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: scott.holst@us.army.mil To: ron mosher CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:04:05 -0500 Well Ron- Since you seem to be MMP's secondary mouth piece and biggest supporter, perhaps you could tell the rest of us why MMP decided to drop the German / Russian rare vehicles from AoO which was originally promised when AoO went up for its Pxx last year. Why Beyond valor is still not in print? Why is the ASLRB still OOP? Doomed Battalions? Code of Bushido? ect ect Why there are no products coming out this year other then a journal if that? MMP promised to post the desert rules to their websight, where are they? Its been several months and nothing. As I said before, MMP will publish AoO but I dont think its gonna be that good judging from past efforts........ Lets hope those bozo's dont screw-up VotG to badly but I aint holding my breath. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: ron mosher Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2004 8:37 am Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > At 07:50 AM 9/8/2004, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > >MMP really does not care what I > > Chuckle, probably got one thing right.... > > But, the rest is unsupported drivel. Of the 20% of WHG > ASLers(100+) that > voted, over 65% were "content", at least, with MMPs work...So all > your > "most"s go down the toilet. > > But, we can expect you to ignore facts on your hate filled self- > imposed > mission. > > > 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 _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 9 05:19:53 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 9 05:19:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Collective Farm Madness References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C7498@agalsrv03> <007d01c49617$8c3e64d0$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000e01c49667$4fb49890$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Geez, Jim, I know that the prairies are the last bastion of Canadian socialism, but isn't this a little extreme? > All fresh from my garden, also known as the "Heroes of Red Oktober > Agricultural Collective Farm #2". > Wynn "Didn't Vote for Jack Layton" Polnicky From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 9 05:25:42 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 9 05:25:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: Message-ID: <001701c49668$20464da0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Paul; Your e-mail was VERY good news to me, with the exception of the part about the Rare Russ/Ger stuff being a long way into the future. I truly look forward to this. I have never berated MMP for its production schedule, but I sure do wish things could proceed just a little more quickly. Sigh. And before anyone tells me to 'help MMP' by offering my services, let me assure you that I have done so. Wynn "On ASL Life Support" Polnicky > Scott > > For the record, the Rare Russians and Rare Germans were removed from the > module LONG before the product went to PXXX. > > I fought tooth and nail to get them included but MMP argued that they not > be included. Their decision was based on a)there being a loss in focus by > including them, B) the LARGE number of potential vehicles would ovehwelm > the product c) the added cost of adding 1 2 or 3 more countersheets, > d)againg the loss of focus on the scenarios going from the Minors to Rare > G/R actions. > > That being said MMP and Ihave reached a tentative agreement to produce a > Rare Vehicles Module/Action Packtype product couple of boards couple or > three countersheets. This is a LONG way away due to MMP's publishing > commitments. But the vehicle notes are 90 to95 % done, six to eight > scenarios are done with more being developed, two boards are slated for > inclusion. In the long term this is a MUCH better approach. And again > this was all agreed to LONG before AoO went to PXXX. > > > > > Paul Kenny > From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 9 05:27:56 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 9 05:27:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan><000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan><000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6><000901c49597$1de406a0$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <002201c49668$6fb514c0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Yet another reason why I like the ASLML: plain text. Bruce Probst wrote: "Perry has some issue with his e-mail software: for some reason he cannot send in plain text only, and the ASLML only accepts plain-text messages. " Wynn "Plain but Has a Wonderful Personality" Polnicky From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 9 05:35:27 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 9 05:35:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K References: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net><1094634491.413ecbfb38320@webmail.broadpark.no> <00mvj09p9ugdlfgufpqi50n0empap67ivm@4ax.com> Message-ID: <002901c49669$7cc90da0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Bruce Probst Wrote: > It *is* very simple. So that is why we've seen the subject discussed and disputed by reputable ASL folks for some days and dozens of posts? Come now, Bruce. Unless you have some direct insight from God, I would submit that any dispassionate outside observer of the ASLML would say that it is anything but simple. > We've proved that the rules don't actually say what we > want them to say. We know what we want them to say > because *no-one* > plays by the way they *do* say. Not true. Some (including me) have played them the 'other' way. > We all agree (I think) that *some* sort of > errata would be a good idea. You have got that part right, for sure. Wynn "On His First Cup of Coffee" Polnicky From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 9 06:07:22 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Thu Sep 9 06:08:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <002901c49669$7cc90da0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net><1094634491.413ecbfb38320@webmail.broadpark.no> <00mvj09p9ugdlfgufpqi50n0empap67ivm@4ax.com> <002901c49669$7cc90da0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <1094735242.4140558a382f6@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi Bruce P (and others), I want to give you an apology for using the ASLML to say that your statement was nonsense. I think that after this long discussion, stating that its all really very simple, as you did, is a provocation, but I'm sorry for being winded up by it. I think Wynn's last post was a good summary of how such a statement is received though. As for other arguments, I will keep my promise of shutting up. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 9 06:27:08 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 9 06:27:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned crew and overrun Message-ID: Hello, Richard. > >A rampaging half track (SPW 251/1) declares an overrun upon entering an >enemy occupeid location but prior to executing the overrun the crew is >pinned by defensive first fire. >Is the only effect halving of the >overrun's fp due to pinning? I would say no. The only halving of FP I can find is if the AFV becomes Immobile or detroyed before it can resolve its OVR. Once declared, I would say the OVR FP is unaffected if the Crew becomes Pinned before OVR resolution. This is a related statement from D7.11, 2nd Ed: "... combat results vs Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP." I do not believe that Pinning the crew will change the FP for an OVR that has already been declared. >Is the halftrack prevented from conducting >further overruns during that movement phase (due to the restrictions on >pinned units using ROF). > The halftrack could continue to conduct OVR because an AFV receives 2 FP as its base, with no reference to armament. I don't believe that ROF is relevant to an OVR attack. When adding the MG to the OVR FP, the MG would be halved once (Bounding Fire), halved again (Pinned), and then tripled (TPBF). The ability to conduct multiple OVR does not appear to be contingent upon maintaining ROF. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Sep 9 06:56:55 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Sep 9 06:57:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC marked Units Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040909085255.019526b0@pop3.direcway.com> Listoids, I know that a 'zerk is marked with a CC counter on entry to enemy Location, it then can fire TPB, halved at the enemy, per the Tome, in the AFPh. Is a HW/Banzai in the same situation able to fire in AFPh? I think so but search of Tome is unproductive... :( For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 9 08:00:36 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 9 08:05:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC marked Units Message-ID: > >I know that a 'zerk is marked with a CC counter on entry to enemy Location, >it then can fire TPB, halved at the enemy, per the Tome, in the AFPh. > >Is a HW/Banzai in the same situation able to fire in AFPh? I think so but >search of Tome is unproductive... :( > Perhaps this answers it ... A25.235, 2nd Ed, page A52: "A unit that has been part of a HW may use Advancing Fire ... if otherwise able to..." The EXC does not apply to Advancing Fire, so I would answer "yes" to your question. 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 mastadon61 at cox.net Thu Sep 9 09:30:06 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Thu Sep 9 09:30:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The ASLML is dead. Long live the ASLML Message-ID: <20040909163006.DQFE29934.fed1rmmtao07.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Hi All, Dead? Really? I've been subscribed to the ASLML on/off for most of it's existence. I don't mind the flame wars. I don't mind the idiots. I do miss some of the old time regulars (Tom Repetti) who used to post some great stuff, but I still regularly read this list mainly because it's easier. The Warfare HQ and Consim forums are a pain to navigate compared to basic text email. And what important ASL info gets posted there that eventually doesn't appear here? So I get my ASL info a week later than the rest of the world. I'm not in that big of a hurry. I like the rules discussions. In particular I appreciate that Ole has returned! He's usually right. Really, I've met Scott Holst and in person, he's not the jerk he comes off as on the list. Something about the nature of email make his comments harsh and mean-spirited. Behind his childish and vindictive prose is somebody who does love and play ASL. What's so wrong with that? One last comment. Nobody's getting rich producing ASL. It's a niche hobby. I appreciate MMPs efforts keeping ASL alive. I don't believe any of the other groups could have done as good a job. Not HOB, not TOT, and especially not CH. Don Hancock From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 9 09:37:20 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 9 09:37:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: The ASLML is dead. Long live the ASLML Message-ID: <3a6eho$7nigvv@mxip07a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: > And what important ASL info gets posted there that eventually doesn't appear here? So I get my ASL info a week later than the rest of the world. I'm not in that big of a hurry. Others have lamented that they are not getting updates or informarion fast enough here. Obviously it doesn't bother everyone, however... ;-) -Chas From denis at teachlinux.com Thu Sep 9 09:43:53 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Thu Sep 9 09:43:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The ASLML is dead. Long live the ASLML In-Reply-To: <20040909163006.DQFE29934.fed1rmmtao07.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: Have to agree with Tom here. The fourms are nice, but since they started to move I stopped visiting them. I can read the ML from just about anywhere in the wrold vers needing a browser to read the fourms. Denis On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > Hi All, > > Dead? Really? I've been subscribed to the ASLML on/off for most of it's existence. I don't mind the flame wars. I don't mind the idiots. I do miss some of the old time regulars (Tom Repetti) who used to post some great stuff, but I still regularly read this list mainly because it's easier. The Warfare HQ and Consim forums are a pain to navigate compared to basic text email. And what important ASL info gets posted there that eventually doesn't appear here? So I get my ASL info a week later than the rest of the world. I'm not in that big of a hurry. > > I like the rules discussions. In particular I appreciate that Ole has returned! He's usually right. > > Really, I've met Scott Holst and in person, he's not the jerk he comes off as on the list. Something about the nature of email make his comments harsh and mean-spirited. Behind his childish and vindictive prose is somebody who does love and play ASL. What's so wrong with that? > > One last comment. Nobody's getting rich producing ASL. It's a niche hobby. I appreciate MMPs efforts keeping ASL alive. I don't believe any of the other groups could have done as good a job. Not HOB, not TOT, and especially not CH. > > Don Hancock > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 hofors at lysator.liu.se Thu Sep 9 09:46:49 2004 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: Thu Sep 9 09:47:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Schuerzen In-Reply-To: (Bruce Probst's message of "Wed, 08 Sep 2004 02:01:52 +1000") References: <20040907123236.10011.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Bruce Probst writes: > Battlefield experience is terrific for formulating battlefield tactics, but > not so good for accurate scientific results. The *physical* truth remains > (unless my knowledge of physics is seriously screwed up): premature detonation > and a layer of air will not enhance penetration. It may not seriously > *impede* it, but it cannot *enhance* it. If it did, then the entire theory > and practice of HEAT falls apart. > Shape charged weapons have an ideal stand off distance. Having an armour plate farther or closer than this distance ideal distance will results in degraded performance. If you have a well-designed warhead, schurzen/sand bags/whatever will lessen the armour penetration. But, there might be circumstances were adding a wire mesh (for example) too close to the armour will increase the armour penetration, because the warhead that hit you we were designed with a too short stand off distance. I think I've heard that the German Panzerfaust were just such an example of an imperfect design. And I think one of the reasons for better performance of post-WWII HEAT projectiles were optimized stand off distances. However, given the large distance between the plate and the schurzen on typical German AFVs, I very much doubt that German schurzen of WWII would improve the armour penetration of any allied HEAT warheads. Regards, Mattias From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 9 10:01:03 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 9 10:01:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: "The Liri Valley" Message-ID: <391ph9$7orl5l@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> I've just finished Mark Zuehlke's "The Liri Valley: Canada's World War II Breakthrough To Rome" and wanted to pass along a high recommendation to anyone who might be interested in the topic. It's a terrific book, interlaced with excellent first-hand accounts and insightful tactical and strategic analysis. There is a wealth of tactical coverage and the book is replete with potential ASL scenarios, always a plus. Zuehlke has also written two other books that cover Canada's contributions to the Italian campaign, "Ortona" and "The Gothic Line". "Ortona" is next up on my list although technically I am reading them out of order, but that's how I got them :-) publisher: Douglas & McIntyre ISBN:1-55365-013-1 published: 2001 492 pages retail price: $18.95 USD Regards, Chas From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Sep 9 10:10:57 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Sep 9 10:13:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: "The Liri Valley" In-Reply-To: <391ph9$7orl5l@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <391ph9$7orl5l@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040909121018.01b5a5e0@pop3.direcway.com> At 12:01 PM 9/9/2004, Chas Argent wrote: >'ve just finished Mark Zuehlke's "The Liri Valley: Canada's World War II >Breakthrough To Rome" Wait a minute...you READ a book, when you owe me a turn!!! :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 9 10:13:14 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 9 10:14:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: "The Liri Valley" Message-ID: <3a5bqj$7r6qkf@mxip04a.cluster1.charter.net> LOL...well, you know, man does not live by ASL alone... -Chas > > From: ron mosher > Date: 2004/09/09 Thu PM 05:10:57 GMT > To: Chas Argent , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT: "The Liri Valley" > > At 12:01 PM 9/9/2004, Chas Argent wrote: > >'ve just finished Mark Zuehlke's "The Liri Valley: Canada's World War II > >Breakthrough To Rome" > > Wait a minute...you READ a book, when you owe me a turn!!! :) > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > From caise at juno.com Thu Sep 9 14:18:28 2004 From: caise at juno.com (caise@juno.com) Date: Thu Sep 9 14:19:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Maps Message-ID: <20040909.141849.5883.592858@webmail06.nyc.untd.com> I have been away for awhile moving, so if this is redundant I apologize. I have just looked at the AOO preorder page and it says 4 mounted maps 48-51. I thought AOO was going to have 5 maps, 48-52. What happened to Map52? Thanks, Caise ________________________________________________________________ Get your name as your email address. Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today! From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 9 14:21:28 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 9 14:21:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Maps Message-ID: <391ogq$7mqj6i@mxip03a.cluster1.charter.net> I believe 52 is slated for release in Haakaa Paalle, the Finnish module (hope I spelled that properly...) -Chas > > From: "caise@juno.com" > Date: 2004/09/09 Thu PM 09:18:28 GMT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] AOO Maps > > > I have been away for awhile moving, so if this is redundant I apologize. I have just looked at the AOO preorder page and it says 4 mounted maps 48-51. I thought AOO was going to have 5 maps, 48-52. What happened to Map52? > > Thanks, > > Caise > > ________________________________________________________________ > Get your name as your email address. > Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more > Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today! > _______________________________________________ > 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 tweniger at telusplanet.net Thu Sep 9 14:39:50 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Thu Sep 9 14:40:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Collective Farm Madness In-Reply-To: <000e01c49667$4fb49890$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C7498@agalsrv03> <007d01c49617$8c3e64d0$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <000e01c49667$4fb49890$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <1094765990.28485.2.camel@kitchen> On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 06:19, Wynn wrote: > Geez, Jim, I know that the prairies are the last bastion of Canadian > socialism, but isn't this a little extreme? > > > All fresh from my garden, also known as the "Heroes of Red Oktober > > Agricultural Collective Farm #2". > > > > Wynn "Didn't Vote for Jack Layton" Polnicky > ...And they have all of us capitalists pinned against the mountains and oilfields! -- Virtually, Tom '$ in my eyes' W From afantozzi at tiscali.it Wed Sep 8 15:58:46 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Thu Sep 9 14:56:53 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] My final take on case K In-Reply-To: <1094641803.413ee88be0a3f@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <000601c496b7$ab754f30$ec0f0a3e@andrea> Ole B?e writes... > Since neither can be found in the ASLRB, the ASLRB is either > broken, or there is > a third option, which I fear and suspect was Don Greenwood's > intention: > > I suspect that he only thought of three uses of ordnance: > > 1) Hit a unit (real, dummy or HIP) > 2) Place Acquisition > 3) Place SMOKE > > I don't think he ever thought of the possibility of actually > targeting an empty > hex/Location in the hope of getting a terrain effect, but > added the terrain > effects as a side effect of 1) above. If he had intended an > empty hex to be > attacked in the hope of getting a terrain effect, he would > have written how or > included an example. With the lack of those, I conclude that > the intention was > never there. I joned this discussion only now but I think that Ole B?e is here absolutely correct. I agree that there can be a rule problem but IMHO it is mostly a design "problem" (or "choice" if you prefer). It seems that designers were never really worried about the fact that someone would deliberately target something different from an enemy unit (and, btw, this has not even much to do with case K). This is demonstrated by the fact that, usually, in ASL "misses" are not resolved in any way. We all know that a shell must land somewhere and an HE shell will probably explode (and could have some effect against the terrain); if not in the target hex probably in an adjacent hex. For me the biggest example about this is with Bombs. When a bomb misses an infantry target it is not resolved but the bomb still explodes (realistically speaking) and might start fires, rubble buildings, etc. Another example is with SMOKE. When we miss with SMOKE no SMOKE is placed but (again, realistically speaking) the SMOKE should be placed because the SMOKE rounds do land somewhere. I think that designers did an attempts in this direction: for those who started with squad leader (and its gamettes), someone will remember that (IIRC) one rule in COI required that a miss by a gun with a certain caliber had to be resolved in an adjacent hex along the LOF at half FP (or something like that). And in GI:AOV there was the "Building" target type along with the Infantry/Vehicle target types. If these things have been dropped there must have been a good reason, or at least some kind of reasoning. IMHO, allowing to affect terrain independently on the presence of units adds much more complexity and dice rolling for very little reward. We'd have to check every time if terrain is hit when a unit is missed and roll dice for Shellholes/Rubble/Flames/Mine-Destruction, etc. Realistically speaking I admit that it would be nice to have the possibility to target a building in hope to level it down... but that would be a very rare occasion in a scenario. Also, the "problem" is not only confined to ordnance... a FT firing at an empty grain has its FP halved for Area Fire and so has less probability of putting that grain on fire. This is surely not realistic. The FT should have the same probability of starting a fire regardless of the presence of enemy unit. To summarize, I do not think we need an errata. Eventually we would need a redesign to include some aspects that have been left off from the game. Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Wed Sep 8 16:03:14 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Thu Sep 9 14:57:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] From Case K to Smoke Message-ID: <000701c496b7$af0294a0$ec0f0a3e@andrea> While I was reading the posts about case K and firing at building I reconsidered one thing about smoke... Firing smoke into an empty hex. TH is usually 7 (goes up to 9 if within 12 hexes); no DRMs. Now that same hex contains a vehicle with small size... I incur in a +1 DRM... Does not sound strange to you? I am not firing at the vehicle... I am firing at the hex (pardon, Location) containing the vehicle. Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004 From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Sep 9 15:29:19 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Sep 9 15:29:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Case K Madness Message-ID: <3a5ac4$8eec9a@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/08 Wed PM 10:39:47 CDT > To: "mcleods" , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] Re: Case K Madness > > On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 18:59:36 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: > > >Consider this for a moment and get your extrapolators out. What about OBA and HIP units? While there is no TH DR for OBA attacks, OBA may still attack empty hexes without any penalty. Does that give a clue in regard to what Mr. Greenwood's intent was on the subject of this discussion? > > Not that I can tell. OBA is a completely separate issue -- it doesn't have to > roll "To Hit", and is never penalised for concealment/HIP any way. > Exactly...why is that. Because the actual target of OBA is what? The hexes in the FFE. The units are being attacked as consequence of the hexes being target. Thus, case K/'?' doesn't apply. The effect of the OBA vs the hexes is not dependant on the presence of units because any units present aren't being targeted. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From albcann at warwick.net Thu Sep 9 16:06:59 2004 From: albcann at warwick.net (al cann) Date: Thu Sep 9 16:07:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6><32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com><413E7FE0.70809@charter.net><413F0D65.6090400@charter.net><05lvj01fg0u5fei8l8ee1l7oklld7ad06b@4ax.com> <413FE64D.60105@charter.net> Message-ID: <004701c496c1$b6abbf60$e78006d8@DGYPG541> I used to post to the list, but I'm tired of not seeing what post -- posted. Apparently something with my computer doesn't jive with the workings of the list -- and I'm not computer-literate enough to figure out how to fix it. The only reason this has gotten through is that I have replied to another lister's post. Al Cann ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chas Argent" To: "ASL List" Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 1:12 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? > Bruce Probst wrote: > > >Chas Argent wrote: > > > > > >>Sadly the point is probably that the ASLML *just doesn't matter that > >>much* any longer. > >> > >> > > > >I have no idea what you mean by that statement. > > > > > Basically I mean that, between the endless flame wars, mail list address > changes and problems, signal-to-noise ratios, and the advent of other > online forms of communication, the ASLML has dropped to the bottom of > the totem pole in importance. > > How many people actually post messages that discuss anything here any > more? I can name about a dozen or so people who do on any sort of > regular basis, then there are others who post infrequently at best. You > are easily the most visible at this point Bruce, followed by Mr. Bakken, > Mr. Rogers, Mr. Boe, and so on. But by & large it's an incredibly small > number of people. As to actual subscribing lurkers, I have no way of saying. > > >Or do you believe that MMP have no interest in the opinion of anyone who reads > >the ASLML, or that no-one who posts to the ASLML has any opinion worth taking > >note of? > > > > > I just think the ML is much less *vital* now than it was many moons ago, > so it's easy for many players, and probably MMP, to overlook it in favor > of some other medium. > > As to opinions, certainly those of this list are as valid as any; but if > Tate Rogers falls over in the forest and Brian Youse isn't around to > hear him, does he make a sound? > > >The only sense in which I can think the ASLML "matters" to MMP (as a company) > >is that it's a place where dedicated ASL players hang out. In other words, > >it's a convenient place to find a sizable chunk of their market. In that > >respect, it matters as much as it *ever did*. The fact that ASL players > >*also* hang out in *other places* does not imply that the ASLML does not > >actually exist, nor does it imply that nothing worthwhile is ever discussed > >here. > > > > > I would debate the "sizable chunk" part, but everything else you say is > certainly fair. And certainly a great many extemely helpful topics are > covered here. > > >I know that some people prefer other methods of online-interaction. That's > >fine, I have no problem with that, but I object strongly to the accusation > >that "I don't matter" simply because I don't share their preferences! > > > > > I said the List didn't matter that much, not you, or anyone else here. > But it might be good to recognize that you inhabit a place that the > internet highway has bypassed. And that's why people who only subscribe > to this List tend to be the last ones to hear the "latest" scoop on ASL > news. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sep 9 18:34:04 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Sep 9 18:40:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Collective Farm Madness References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7C7498@agalsrv03><007d01c49617$8c3e64d0$e527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <000e01c49667$4fb49890$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <004001c496d7$1cb2a020$e40ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Wynn wrote, > Geez, Jim, I know that the prairies are the last bastion of Canadian > socialism, but isn't this a little extreme? Nyet, uh, I mean, no not at all Wynn. You must mean Saskatchewan. Here in Manitoba we have the NDP who act like the Torie's but with more of a Liberal agenda. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Sep 9 18:45:36 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu Sep 9 18:45:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: "The Liri Valley" References: <391ph9$7orl5l@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <004701c496d7$df4c4870$e40ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Chas wrote, > I've just finished Mark Zuehlke's "The Liri Valley: Canada's World War II > Breakthrough To Rome" and wanted to pass along a high recommendation to > anyone who might be interested in the topic. It's a terrific book, > interlaced with excellent first-hand accounts and insightful tactical and > strategic analysis. There is a wealth of tactical coverage and the book is > replete with potential ASL scenarios, always a plus. This is indeed a good book Chas, read it twice so far. > Zuehlke has also written two other books that cover Canada's contributions > to the Italian campaign, "Ortona" and "The Gothic Line". "Ortona" is next > up on my list although technically I am reading them out of order, but > that's how I got them :-) Ortona is a far better book IMO. Whereas "The Liri Valley" stays mainly at the level of higher units, Ortona stays mostly at the section, platoon and company level. It also speaks a great deal from the German and Itlaian civilian perspective. A more visceral read in my point of view. Read it well Chas, a fair bit of information for the Ortona HASL was taken from this book. =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 9 19:19:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 9 19:20:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] From Case K to Smoke In-Reply-To: <000701c496b7$af0294a0$ec0f0a3e@andrea> References: <000701c496b7$af0294a0$ec0f0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 01:03:14 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >Firing smoke into an empty hex. TH is usually 7 (goes up to 9 if within 12 >hexes); no DRMs. >Now that same hex contains a vehicle with small size... I incur in a +1 >DRM... > >Does not sound strange to you? I am not firing at the vehicle... I am firing >at the hex (pardon, Location) containing the vehicle. Yes, ASL is full of little oddities like that. The moral is don't try and drop SMOKE on small targets . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 9 19:23:27 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 9 19:23:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: "The Liri Valley" In-Reply-To: <004701c496d7$df4c4870$e40ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <391ph9$7orl5l@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> <004701c496d7$df4c4870$e40ba18e@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <4141101F.8010005@charter.net> Jim Mcleod wrote: > Chas wrote, > >> Zuehlke has also written two other books that cover Canada's >> contributions to the Italian campaign, "Ortona" and "The Gothic >> Line". "Ortona" is next up on my list although technically I am >> reading them out of order, but that's how I got them :-) > > Ortona is a far better book IMO. Whereas "The Liri Valley" stays > mainly at the level of higher units, Ortona stays mostly at the > section, platoon and company level. It also speaks a great deal from > the German and Itlaian civilian perspective. A more visceral read in > my point of view. Read it well Chas, a fair bit of information for > the Ortona HASL was taken from this book. I was wondering about that...good to know & I'm really looking forward to reading it! Thanks for the input. Regards, Chas From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 9 19:32:05 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 9 19:32:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned crew and overrun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 14:35:16 +1000, "Richard Weiley" wrote: >A rampaging half track (SPW 251/1) declares an overrun upon entering an >enemy occupeid location but prior to executing the overrun the crew is >pinned by defensive first fire. Is the only effect halving of the >overrun's fp due to pinning? I agree with Bruce B. -- pinning the crew has *absolutely no effect* on the FP of the OVR that has already been declared. (An easy thing to overlook! I'm sure I've played this wrong in the past.) >Is the halftrack prevented from conducting >further overruns during that movement phase (due to the restrictions on >pinned units using ROF). Not at all. The ability to conduct an OVR is based solely on having the MP available, and has nothing to do with ROF. Note that any *subsequent* OVR (declared after the crew has been pinned) will have reduced FP (because of the already-existing Pin condition) -- the MG FP will be halved (in addition to other modifications), as Bruce B. indicated. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 9 19:34:46 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 9 19:34:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <413FE64D.60105@charter.net> References: <005d01c4952e$ee201250$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC><001101c49545$e4e966c0$09c7d342@whelan> <000501c49549$2639f420$09c7d342@whelan> <000e01c4954b$1fac7c20$e654cd97@f2e8w6> <32vsj0pacsi4bs09viel8i9minr6v3arft@4ax.com> <413E7FE0.70809@charter.net> <413F0D65.6090400@charter.net> <05lvj01fg0u5fei8l8ee1l7oklld7ad06b@4ax.com> <413FE64D.60105@charter.net> Message-ID: <7j42k0h1vhn1sd6q5a58o7n134rrra3i5t@4ax.com> On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 22:12:45 -0700, Chas Argent wrote: >But it might be good to recognize that you inhabit a place that the >internet highway has bypassed. Funny, I can still hear the traffic. >And that's why people who only subscribe >to this List tend to be the last ones to hear the "latest" scoop on ASL >news. No, we're the last to hear because MMP constantly forget to post any news here. *Why* they are so forgetful is another question altogether. Mr Dalton? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 9 19:39:02 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 9 19:39:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The Case for Case K In-Reply-To: <002901c49669$7cc90da0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <391r9h$8gs536@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net><1094634491.413ecbfb38320@webmail.broadpark.no> <00mvj09p9ugdlfgufpqi50n0empap67ivm@4ax.com> <002901c49669$7cc90da0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:35:27 -0400, "Wynn" wrote: >Bruce Probst Wrote: > >> It *is* very simple. > >So that is why we've seen the subject discussed and disputed by reputable >ASL folks for some days and dozens of posts? I'll grant that there was an element of tongue-in-cheek in what I posted, but please note that I didn't say that the *rules* were "simple". What I meant was "how we deal with this" is very simple (and I do mean that, quite sincerely). I think if you re-read what I wrote with that context in mind it may seem a little less nonsensical. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 9 19:45:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 9 19:45:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Case K Madness In-Reply-To: <3a5ac4$8eec9a@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <3a5ac4$8eec9a@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:29:19 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >Exactly...why is that. Because it's a different rule that uses different concepts to other rules and does not draw on (nor affect) those other rules. Surely that's obvious? (Tate's "reality" argument as to "what OBA is really doing" snipped as being irrelevant.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From mgk at umd.edu Thu Sep 9 20:50:38 2004 From: mgk at umd.edu (Matt Kirschenbaum) Date: Thu Sep 9 20:50:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] mint Annual 97 to trade Message-ID: <4141248E.200@umd.edu> I have a mint condition copy of the 97 ASL Annual (including the Nhpum Ga map, also mint) that I would like to swap for one of the following: * A 96 Annual that was very good or better; it doesn't have to be strictly "mint" but there should be no major creases, tears, stains, markings, loose or missing pages, or odors. * Journal 2; willing to pay some value-added depending on condition and completeness. * Doomed Battalions, 2nd edition; willing to pay some value-added depending on condition and completeness. The last 97 I saw went for $77 on eBay (item #5918142837). If serious about any of the above and are able to complete the trade in a timely manner (i.e., you don't take two weeks to return an email) please drop me a line at mgk@umd.edu. Happy to provide references upon request; may ask you to do same. Thanks-- From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Sep 10 00:11:49 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri Sep 10 00:10:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] From Case K to Smoke In-Reply-To: <000701c496b7$af0294a0$ec0f0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: Hi, > While I was reading the posts about case K and firing at building I > reconsidered one thing about smoke... > > Firing smoke into an empty hex. TH is usually 7 (goes up to 9 if within 12 > hexes); no DRMs. Now that same hex contains a vehicle with small size... > I incur in a +1 DRM... > > Does not sound strange to you? I am not firing at the vehicle... > I am firing at the hex (pardon, Location) containing the vehicle. > Yes, it sounds strange, but not necessarily more strange than much other ASL physics. To give you something to think about, isn't it possible to hit the hex (and thus get to place SMOKE) without hitting the vehicle? Look at A24.31 which deals with the effects of WP. It 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" Note specifically the "when the WP is placed ... or when hit by WP" Doesn't this indicate that WP can be placed without the unit being hit (and vice versa when the vehicle is a large target)? Possibly, or it could mean something entirely else. And no, I'm not going to follow up any debate here :-) From btdtall at yahoo.com Fri Sep 10 13:33:46 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Fri Sep 10 13:34:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] test Message-ID: <20040910203346.26116.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Shop for Back-to-School deals on Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com/backtoschool From Vicca at v21.me.uk Fri Sep 10 14:57:33 2004 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Peter Vicca) Date: Fri Sep 10 15:04:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned crew and overrun References: Message-ID: <003601c49781$30ce2c50$0b00000a@home> Not quite on topic here but we hadthe unedifying sight of a ht with passengers getting hit by DF which caused the passengers to break. What happens if the HT stops ADJACENT to an enemy unit? Do the pasengers disembark and rourt away? What if the HT stops in a hexcontainng enemy units? Do the pasengers surrender? I really do not know how to handle this one (as a result we just trundled the ht away. Also the ht with its broken passengers are now in a hex containing a leader. The leader is not a passenger. Can he rally the squad on the HT? Thanks for your help. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Bakken" To: ; Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 2:27 PM Subject: RE: [Aslml] Pinned crew and overrun > Hello, Richard. > > > > >A rampaging half track (SPW 251/1) declares an overrun upon entering an > >enemy occupeid location but prior to executing the overrun the crew is > >pinned by defensive first fire. > > >Is the only effect halving of the > >overrun's fp due to pinning? > > I would say no. The only halving of FP I can find is if the AFV becomes > Immobile or detroyed before it can resolve its OVR. Once declared, I would > say the OVR FP is unaffected if the Crew becomes Pinned before OVR > resolution. > > This is a related statement from D7.11, 2nd Ed: "... combat results vs > Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP." > > I do not believe that Pinning the crew will change the FP for an OVR that > has already been declared. > > >Is the halftrack prevented from conducting > >further overruns during that movement phase (due to the restrictions on > >pinned units using ROF). > > > > The halftrack could continue to conduct OVR because an AFV receives 2 FP as > its base, with no reference to armament. > > I don't believe that ROF is relevant to an OVR attack. > > When adding the MG to the OVR FP, the MG would be halved once (Bounding > Fire), halved again (Pinned), and then tripled (TPBF). > > The ability to conduct multiple OVR does not appear to be contingent upon > maintaining ROF. > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 > From mountainview at westelcom.com Fri Sep 10 15:27:58 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Fri Sep 10 15:27:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] From Case K to Smoke References: Message-ID: <007a01c49785$6f65bec0$0e8c6b0c@NewhpGeorge> From: "Ole B?e" > Look at A24.31 which deals with the effects of WP. It 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" > > Note specifically the "when the WP is placed ... or when hit by WP" > Doesn't > this indicate that WP can be placed without the unit being hit (and vice > versa when the vehicle is a large target)? Possibly, or it could mean > something entirely else. Well, yes, WP is "placed" by OBA, and that placement does not require a "hit". This is the crux of this matter, which I have been loosely following, rgarding non-OBA "hits" for an effect vs. the terrain itself. I'm pretty sure I brought up this very issue/subject way back when I was an ASLML newbie, and my opponent-exposure was low. I think I was duly fried for having such the heretical thought that the +2 Case K would not apply to an "empty" hex when no HIP is in play (or for the sake of only getting an effect vs. the terrain itself, regardless of potential-HIP/?). The crux of the matter is that all other DRM related to infantry target-status *do* apply to getting a result that would *also* apply to the terrain. We allow terrain effects when the infantry target is hit due to FFNAM and/or Overstacked (ETC), right? A three-hex shot at Woods vs. FFNAM Infantry will "hit" the Infantry on an "8" [+1/-1]. Theoretically, the Woods themselves should not "suffer" the -1 now, should they? (The Woods, themselves, are (should?) only hit on a "7" [+1].) But, we all roll the Kindle with an original HE KIA in this instance. No one argues this, or sees anything "wrong" with this (but those who don't want to apply Case K should accept it as rote that such an instance should *not* hit the terrain). Concurrently, the +2 should then also apply. If it does *not*, then neither does FFNAM/Overstacked/Hazardous-Movement/ETC, and many of your "infantry hits" won't be allowed to affect the terrain they are "in". Doesn't sound right, and it's more "dumb" than forcing the +2 for Case K, which keeps consistent with the application of all other infantry target-status DRMs that also allow a "hit" vs. the terrain. You must hit a theoretical infantry target to get an effetc vs. the terrain. If there's no KEU, add the +2. Granted, it does not make sense that a completely empty building (or occupied by "?") be harder to "hit" than one occupied by KEUs, but, it is (for me), simply easier and more consistent, if we apply all other infantry target-based DRMs to obtain a potential effect vs. the terrain itself. I can easily play it with no extra +2, but I will also disallow an effect vs. terrain if FFNAM/Overstacked/ETC for potential effects vs. the terrain alone. I have been known to target terrain for effect on occaision, and I apply the +2. Almost categoriacally, both I, and my opponent, agree it's a bit "dumb", but it is at least, consistent, and causes less headaches. FWIW, targeting terrain is more likely to wake up your opponent's Sniper anyway (the Original KIA you'll need is probably also the SAN), so it's a double edged sword. I also agree that being able to get SMOKE to hit a King Tiger being easier than the same shot vs. an SPW 251/1 is ridiculous - an easy fix to just omit target size applying to SMOKE. I have encountered many players that agree to that. Since I have been blessed with great VASL PBeM opponents, and YES (!!!), *local* FtF opportunities as of late, I have not been too active lately. I aplogize, but don't expect any more posts for me on the subject - this is just my 2 cents. Christopher Fleury Sgt. Meikle's Bunker Mountain View Cottage Lewis, NY USS Iowa; BB-61 Camp Dudley #12557 ASL 6+1 From jmmcleod at mts.net Fri Sep 10 16:26:56 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Fri Sep 10 16:27:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] From Case K to Smoke References: <007a01c49785$6f65bec0$0e8c6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <002501c4978d$aac66c50$d027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Chris wrote, > Granted, it does not make sense that a completely empty building (or > occupied by "?") be harder to "hit" than one occupied by KEUs, but, > it is (for me), simply easier and more consistent, if we apply all other > infantry target-based DRMs to obtain a potential effect vs. the terrain > itself. Reality Argument Alert! Chris, adding Case K when trying to hit an otherwise empty building can perhaps be rationalized as the shots are not as effectively placed on the target building due to the fact that there is no "target unit" in the building. > I can easily play it with no extra +2, but I will also disallow an effect > vs. terrain if FFNAM/Overstacked/ETC for potential effects vs. the > terrain alone. You know, after reading that, an effect on terrain due to gunfire should only happen when the terrain in question is actually hit. This is not how I viewed this before. If a target is hit only by virtue of FFNAM and the building it is in would otherwise not be hit, so be it. The shots fired were effective enough versus a unit making itself more exposed to fire due to its movement. I'll buy into that. > I have been known to target terrain for effect on occaision, and I apply > the +2. Almost categoriacally, both I, and my opponent, agree it's a > bit "dumb", but it is at least, consistent, and causes less headaches. Ya' know, I do not believe that I ever have. If I fired at terrain to gain an Aqu' and gained a hit, I do not believe that I would roll for effects. I'm not certain on this though. > FWIW, targeting terrain is more likely to wake up your opponent's > Sniper anyway (the Original KIA you'll need is probably also the SAN), > so it's a double edged sword. Agreed. > I also agree that being able to get SMOKE to hit a King Tiger being easier > than the same shot vs. an SPW 251/1 is ridiculous - an easy fix to just > omit target size applying to SMOKE. I have encountered many players > that agree to that. Agreed. > Since I have been blessed with great VASL PBeM opponents, and YES > (!!!), *local* FtF opportunities as of late, I have not been too active > lately. > I aplogize, but don't expect any more posts for me on the subject - this > is > just my 2 cents. Its never too late to chime in Chris. :) =Jim= From tqr at mindspring.com Fri Sep 10 18:05:11 2004 From: tqr at mindspring.com (Tom Repetti) Date: Fri Sep 10 18:05:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Timoshenko's SSR8 Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.1.20040910190501.00b63da8@pop.mindspring.com> Question about G1 Timoshenko's Attack. SSR8 in my copy of the scenario says "All level 2 buildings are treated as single story buildings". This is actually confusing because I'm not sure what they mean by "level 2 buildings". What happens to buildings that have no stairwells but do normally have upper levels (ie, levels 0 and 1)? Tom From sidirezegh at charter.net Fri Sep 10 18:20:09 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Fri Sep 10 18:20:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Timoshenko's SSR8 In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.1.20040910190501.00b63da8@pop.mindspring.com> References: <5.1.1.6.1.20040910190501.00b63da8@pop.mindspring.com> Message-ID: <414252C9.1060303@charter.net> Tom- According to my notes of a playing I had of this scenario last year, we interpreted this SSR to mean all two story houses and Row houses were what this SSR was referring to; i.e., multi-hex buildings with no stairwell symbol. Don't know if that was the right call but that's how we played it. Many "early" ASL scenarios have weirdness in their SSRs like this one. In fact, the same scenario specifically mentions that the stream is Shallow, which is unnecessary because unless otherwise stated by SSR streams are always considered to be Shallow. I guess everybody was still learning the game and so some of this stuff crept in. :-0 Regards, Chas Tom Repetti wrote: > > Question about G1 Timoshenko's Attack. > > SSR8 in my copy of the scenario says "All level 2 buildings are > treated as single story buildings". > > This is actually confusing because I'm not sure what they mean by > "level 2 buildings". What happens to buildings that have > no stairwells but do normally have upper levels (ie, levels 0 and 1)? > > Tom > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Sep 10 19:51:36 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 10 19:51:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Pinned crew and overrun In-Reply-To: <003601c49781$30ce2c50$0b00000a@home> References: <003601c49781$30ce2c50$0b00000a@home> Message-ID: <3mp4k0t4qneti8hvq1ka1l5apaadkoh56b@4ax.com> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:57:33 +0100, "Peter Vicca" wrote: >Not quite on topic here but we hadthe unedifying sight of a ht with >passengers getting hit by DF which caused the passengers to break. What >happens if the HT stops ADJACENT to an enemy unit? Do the pasengers >disembark and rourt away? No. D6.1: "Passengers may remain in their vehicle even while broken .... Otherwise, a broken Passenger may remain in its vehicle free from rout requirements even if enemy units are ADJACENT, in the same hex, or the vehicle is moving toward an enemy unit (even to OVR)." >Also the ht with its broken passengers are now in a hex containing a leader. >The leader is not a passenger. Can he rally the squad on the HT? Yes, if the ht is non-moving (i.e., Stopped). D6.651: "Likewise, a non-Passenger leader may only affect Passengers of a non-moving (C.8) vehicle, but regardless of whether they are CE." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 10 20:18:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 10 20:18:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Timoshenko's SSR8 In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.1.20040910190501.00b63da8@pop.mindspring.com> References: <5.1.1.6.1.20040910190501.00b63da8@pop.mindspring.com> Message-ID: <35q4k05nd6ieha33jbcou8d2jhl75ghbq9@4ax.com> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:05:11 -0600, Tom Repetti wrote: >Question about G1 Timoshenko's Attack. > >SSR8 in my copy of the scenario says "All level 2 buildings are treated as >single story buildings". > >This is actually confusing because I'm not sure what they mean by "level 2 >buildings". What happens to buildings that have >no stairwells but do normally have upper levels (ie, levels 0 and 1)? The rulebook only defines three "heights" of buildings (ignoring 3rd-level Locations, steeples, etc.): B23.21 "Single Story House"; B23.22 "Two Story House"; and B23.23 "Multi-Story Building". The SSR apparently half-knows this, since it tells us to turn "level 2 buildings" (vague term) into "single-story buildings" (explicit term). Unfortunately it doesn't tell us what it means by "level 2 buildings". Buildings with exactly 2 levels? Or buildings with level 2 Locations (i.e., with printed stairwells)? Gah. The SSR could have made this perfectly clear by simply sticking to the terms actually used in the rules, or otherwise explicitly identifying the intended buildings. I'd lean to the interpretation that the SSR means "buildings with Level 2 Locations", i.e., the two buildings with printed stairwells on board 22, because "level 2", like "single-story building", *is* a specific term, even if it's not one normally applied to describe a type of building. I think you'll need a Q&A to get any sort of "definitive" answer, though. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From the.colonel at clara.co.uk Sat Sep 11 04:01:07 2004 From: the.colonel at clara.co.uk (The Colonel) Date: Sat Sep 11 04:01:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? References: Message-ID: <007401c497ee$a3bba1d0$80c4a850@homepc> > > I fought tooth and nail to get them included but MMP argued that they not be > included. Their decision was based on a)there being a loss in focus by > including them, B) the LARGE number of potential vehicles would ovehwelm the > product c) the added cost of adding 1 2 or 3 more countersheets, d)againg > the loss of focus on the scenarios going from the Minors to Rare G/R > actions. This reasoning actually makes sense as there is already enough in AoO. > > That being said MMP and Ihave reached a tentative agreement to produce a > Rare Vehicles Module/Action Packtype product couple of boards couple or > three countersheets. This is a LONG way away due to MMP's publishing > commitments. But the vehicle notes are 90 to95 % done, six to eight > scenarios are done with more being developed, two boards are slated for > inclusion. In the long term this is a MUCH better approach. And again this > was all agreed to LONG before AoO went to PXXX. Good grief if MMP say it is a long off when will it appear??? One for the grandchildren to watch out for ;-) I suppose that is why many would like them to appear in AoO, as least that way you will get them sooner rather than later...much much later. To be honest I wish MMP would let a third party produce specialist interest modules like this, maybe your own organisation? This would let them concentrate on the larger products/ campaign games. In some way this would offset there limited resources and improve their product release schedule. You appear to know quite a bit about this product, how about a listing of the vehicles that will appear? Surely no harm can be done by doing that? This way we will know if an 'Extremely Rare Vehicles Action Pack' needs to be produced :-) I quite like the look of your 'Leningrad Pack' and will be ordering that one. You also mention the 'Oblivion Pack', which Axis nations will be covered in this one please? I for one am hoping to see some actions involving the Axis minors/ vs the partisans in the Balkans, in recent years a lot of new information has been released on operations carried out in that area. the colonel From homercles11 at hotmail.com Sat Sep 11 06:10:00 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Sat Sep 11 06:10:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? Message-ID: Good grief if MMP say it is a long off when will it appear??? One for the grandchildren to watch out for ;-) I suppose that is why many would like them to appear in AoO, as least that way you will get them sooner rather than later...much much later. >>>>MUCH MUCH MUCH Later!! To be honest I wish MMP would let a third party produce specialist interest modules like this, maybe your own organisation? This would let them concentrate on the larger products/ campaign games. In some way this would offset there limited resources and improve their product release schedule. >>>>Can of worms opening there. I think there may be other business models >>>>that would work here. Like contracting with a TPP to get the product to >>>>99% then slapping a MMP sticker on it, (allowing for MMP to have input >>>>during hte development process to assure they are satisfied with quality >>>>is one model) You appear to know quite a bit about this product, how about a listing of the vehicles that will appear? Surely no harm can be done by doing that? This way we will know if an 'Extremely Rare Vehicles Action Pack' needs to be produced :-) <<<<<<< No need for and ERVAP! :o) Partial Listing from memory Captured Italian tanks, tankettes, HT and AC FT PzI PzIc PzIF PzII with flotation devices PzIII and PzIV mit Schwimmkorpen Neubaufarzeug B1-bis in German service including FT variants SPW 250/11 SPW 251/17 Captured T-34 PSW P178 (the Panhard in German service) the LSW BIV remote control DC BIV with psk used in Berlin 88L on halftrack 37L 50L Portee 15cm sIG on the hetzer Diana RSO 75mm Pak auf RSO PzI AA vehicle Italians 47 Autocannon Milmart Japanese couple of early war tanks Ke-NI LT SHI KI MT Couple of Gun Tanks Russian T-18 T-40S T-27 OT-27 PT-34 Engineering vehicles NI Terror Tanks T-80 Zis-30 several AC Allied Minor/British Overalwagon Carriers Alviss Strassler AC Light AA Tanks MkII MT -Matilda Frog C15TA There are others I am working on that escape me at the moment. I quite like the look of your 'Leningrad Pack' and will be ordering that one. You also mention the 'Oblivion Pack', which Axis nations will be covered in this one please? I for one am hoping to see some actions involving the Axis minors/ vs the partisans in the Balkans, in recent years a lot of new information has been released on operations carried out in that area. >>>>The Oblivion Pack covers the Axis Minor nations to be incorporated in >>>>AoO and includes a couple of Slovakian scenarios, a couple of Rumanian >>>>scenarios, a few Bulgarian vs German scenarios, a couple Rum vs >>>>Hungarian scenarios, a Partisan Yugo vs. Croatian/Germans and a few >>>>others that escape me at the moment. should be an excellent complement >>>>to AoO. Paul _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From albcann at warwick.net Sat Sep 11 08:33:13 2004 From: albcann at warwick.net (al cann) Date: Sat Sep 11 08:33:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cancellation of night +1 LV night hindrance Message-ID: <000a01c49814$a7716190$8f8006d8@DGYPG541> Fellows, Thanks again to all of you who responded with help so I could again post to the list. Computer illiteracy is a tough thing you know. Could anyone explain to me why the +1 LV night hindrance is NA if the target hex contains any terrain whose topmost height is at least a full level higher than the firer? I know that logic doesn't always prevail in ASL, but in my experience I usually can see the logic behind the proactive rules -- it is often only the consequences of some rules that lead to illogical results. Thanks, Al Cann From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Sep 11 08:56:02 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Sep 11 08:54:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cancellation of night +1 LV night hindrance In-Reply-To: <000a01c49814$a7716190$8f8006d8@DGYPG541> Message-ID: Hi, Al Cann wrote: > Could anyone explain to me why the +1 LV night hindrance is NA if the > target hex contains any terrain whose topmost height is at least a full > level higher than the firer? I know that logic doesn't always prevail in > ASL, but in my experience I usually can see the logic behind the proactive > rules -- it is often only the consequences of some rules that lead to > illogical results. > This one is fully explained in footnote E8: "The sky at night is to some degree always less dark than the area below the skyline; therefore, anything that rises above the skyline (e.g., buildings, tree lines) stand out in silhouette and are much more noticeable. Moreover, such features provide a rough point of reference by which size and distance can be estimated. To help visualize this concept, picture a tree line silhouetted against the horizon at night. Since a rough estimate of the trees' height can be made, it is not too hard to calculate the approximate distance to them. A unit in Open Ground with no nearby noticeable terrain features would thus have an advantage when trading shots with an enemy at the base of that tree line, since all the enemy could see would be gunflashes emanating from somewhere in a sea of darkness." --------------------------------------- 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 Sat Sep 11 08:59:01 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Sep 11 08:57:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, > Good grief if MMP say it is a long off when will it appear??? One for > the grandchildren to watch out for ;-) > I suppose that is why many would like them to appear in AoO, as least that > way you will get them sooner rather than later...much much later. > Its of course possible to interpret this more positively. It is possible for even MMP to learn, and one can hope that their accuracy when it comes to predicting release dates has improved after a few promises that were a tiny bit off mark :-) From aslwynn at rogers.com Sat Sep 11 11:24:31 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sat Sep 11 11:24:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Promises References: Message-ID: <004301c4982c$95248cc0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Ole/et al; As my kids used to say, "... but Dad, you PROMISED..." when in actuality I had done nothing of the sort. Saying, for example, "OK, maybe we can try to go to Disneyland next summer" is NOT a *promise* of anything. I've been reading this list for many years, and I have to see anyone from MMP make anything like a *promise* or *commitment* here with respect to delivery dates of new product. What they have committed to, as any good company should, is customer service and quality. One can argue whether they have fulfilled that, but in this customer's opinion, they have. Having said all of that, I'm as disappointed as many that new ASL products have not been available more quickly. I have a suspicion/fear that ASL is no longer the priority for MMP that it once was. Wynn "I Promise to be a Responsible Lister" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ole B?e" To: Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 11:59 AM Subject: RE: Re: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? > Hi, >> Good grief if MMP say it is a long off when will it appear??? One >> for >> the grandchildren to watch out for ;-) >> I suppose that is why many would like them to appear in AoO, as least >> that >> way you will get them sooner rather than later...much much later. >> > Its of course possible to interpret this more positively. It is possible > for > even MMP to learn, and one can hope that their accuracy when it comes to > predicting release dates has improved after a few promises that were a > tiny > bit off mark :-) > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 aslml at aslwebdex.net Sun Sep 12 19:49:08 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Sun Sep 12 19:51:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] On the Hoss' Side (J14) Questions Message-ID: <57983.209.91.247.2.1095043748.squirrel@login.cerga.lunarpages.com> Maybe I'm just dense, but there are a couple of things about setup in this scenario that I don't understand. Hope someone out there can help. 1. The U.S. set-up area is defined as on/North of D11-E11-F11-G11-H10-J10-K10-L9. What about row I? I'm guessing I10, but it could as well be I11 (couldn't mean that no setup is allowed on I, right? 2. The Japanese may set up one additional Cave Complex, per SSR 3. SR KR 6 states that "these (additional Cave Complexes) may not intrude upon any KR Cave Complex. Taken together, does this mean that the additional CC may not overlap the Kakazu Saddle Cave Complex, even though it is not in play in this scenario? Thanks, Larry Memmott From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Sep 12 21:01:33 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Sep 12 21:01:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] On the Hoss' Side (J14) Questions In-Reply-To: <57983.209.91.247.2.1095043748.squirrel@login.cerga.lunarpages.com> References: <57983.209.91.247.2.1095043748.squirrel@login.cerga.lunarpages.com> Message-ID: <5n5ak0ltfk4emji72ns84kme0ciiqd5enb@4ax.com> On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:49:08 -0700 (PDT), aslml@aslwebdex.net wrote: >Maybe I'm just dense, but there are a couple of things about setup in this >scenario that I don't understand. Hope someone out there can help. You're not the only one. I've never played this scenario, but I've looked at it and obviously had questions, because I have some penciled remarks on my copy .... Note that there is also some official errata: ASL J14 (On The Hoss' Side) The playing area extends through hexrow L, not K. {J4} (Does anyone know how you find the errata from the Journals on the MMP website? I couldn't locate *any* link to this. The "Journal 2" page has some errata listed, but the above entry isn't included with it. My God but that website is a mess.) >1. The U.S. set-up area is defined as on/North of >D11-E11-F11-G11-H10-J10-K10-L9. What about row I? I'm guessing I10, but >it could as well be I11 (couldn't mean that no setup is allowed on I, >right? This one is explainable: given that you have a choice of two hexes (I10, I11), one of which is north and one of which is south, and the set up instructions say you're on the "north" side, then I10 must be the intended hex on that alternate hexrow. What *isn't* so easy to explain is why D11 is in the set up instructions at all, given that supposedly it's not in play! >2. The Japanese may set up one additional Cave Complex, per SSR 3. SR KR >6 states that "these (additional Cave Complexes) may not intrude upon any >KR Cave Complex. Taken together, does this mean that the additional CC >may not overlap the Kakazu Saddle Cave Complex, even though it is not in >play in this scenario? Yes. All the KR SSR are in effect. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From sgtono at yahoo.com Sun Sep 12 22:02:43 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Sun Sep 12 22:02:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] On the Hoss' Side (J14) Questions In-Reply-To: <5n5ak0ltfk4emji72ns84kme0ciiqd5enb@4ax.com> Message-ID: <20040913050243.99690.qmail@web51303.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/aslerr-j5.php http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/aslerr-j4.php --- Bruce Probst wrote: > On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:49:08 -0700 (PDT), > aslml@aslwebdex.net wrote: > > >Maybe I'm just dense, but there are a couple of > things about setup in this > >scenario that I don't understand. Hope someone out > there can help. > > You're not the only one. I've never played this > scenario, but I've looked at > it and obviously had questions, because I have some > penciled remarks on my > copy .... Note that there is also some official > errata: > > ASL J14 (On The Hoss' Side) The playing area extends > through hexrow L, not > K. {J4} > > (Does anyone know how you find the errata from the > Journals on the MMP > website? I couldn't locate *any* link to this. The > "Journal 2" page has some > errata listed, but the above entry isn't included > with it. My God but that > website is a mess.) > > >1. The U.S. set-up area is defined as on/North of > >D11-E11-F11-G11-H10-J10-K10-L9. What about row I? > I'm guessing I10, but > >it could as well be I11 (couldn't mean that no > setup is allowed on I, > >right? > > This one is explainable: given that you have a > choice of two hexes (I10, I11), > one of which is north and one of which is south, and > the set up instructions > say you're on the "north" side, then I10 must be the > intended hex on that > alternate hexrow. > > What *isn't* so easy to explain is why D11 is in the > set up instructions at > all, given that supposedly it's not in play! > > >2. The Japanese may set up one additional Cave > Complex, per SSR 3. SR KR > >6 states that "these (additional Cave Complexes) > may not intrude upon any > >KR Cave Complex. Taken together, does this mean > that the additional CC > >may not overlap the Kakazu Saddle Cave Complex, > even though it is not in > >play in this scenario? > > Yes. All the KR SSR are in effect. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle > meat!" > 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 > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Shop for Back-to-School deals on Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com/backtoschool From bryanb at bnm.co.za Sun Sep 12 23:32:12 2004 From: bryanb at bnm.co.za (Bryan Brinkman) Date: Sun Sep 12 23:30:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Coming out? In-Reply-To: <002201c49668$6fb514c0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <000801c4995b$8208b960$23000060@brinkman.local> Wynn Polnicky wrote "Yet another reason why I like the ASLML: plain text." Agreed. That plus the fact that as someone has said to navigate forums is a time-consuming basis. The majority of us are very busy and don't have time to troll multiple different interest groups forums. I currently do so for a pc game that I bought, and subscribe to another 5 mailing lists on various subject matter. I am also a member of the ASL forums - but can't even remember when last I tried to navigate it. Simply put - plain text mailing list (digest or not - and I am a non-digest subscriber) is for me the easiest method of getting my daily ASL fix. The other bonus is that I can download my e-mail at the end of the working day and then read it at home when and if I have time (I only 24/7 access at work, but no e-mail at home at present). There is very little time during the working day to surf the forums. I.E. The ASLML works for me - and yes I am one of those lurkers. But a total subscriber base of +_ 450 is a lot less than 5 years ago when the list was in the 800-900 region. Bryan From geb3 at inter.net Mon Sep 13 00:55:19 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Sep 13 00:52:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf? Message-ID: I have stumbled onto some information about a late-war German guided weapon called the XT-7 "Rottkappchen." Originally, this was apparently an aircraft-mounted 88mm rocket but it seems there was an effort to mount their rails on artillery carriages for use in an anti-tank role to defeat Soviet heavy armor. Very little information out there that I have been able to locate so I'm guessing this is something else that never made it past the prototype stage, but I wouldn't mind if someone out there could prove me wrong. Another cool weapon that came up in my search was the "Fliegerschreck", or "Luftfaust," a multi-tube shoulder-fired 20mm anti-aircraft rocket launcher. Apparently, some of these babies actually made it to the field before the end of hostilities. Wonder if they actually felled any Jabos. Here's a photo and link to Lexikon Der Wehrmacht if you can read German: http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/Bilderseitenneu/Luftfaust.htm. George "Rocket Man" Bates Now in progress: J53 "Setting The Stage", German vs. David Olie SASL M13 "Recon", Free French vs. German ENEMY 77 "Le Herisson", German vs. Hideaki Iwanaga From asl at thuring.com Mon Sep 13 10:55:47 2004 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Mon Sep 13 10:52:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4145DF23.5020208@thuring.com> George Bates wrote: > I have stumbled onto some information about a late-war German guided weapon > called the XT-7 "Rottkappchen." Originally, this was apparently an > aircraft-mounted 88mm rocket but it seems there was an effort to mount their > rails on artillery carriages for use in an anti-tank role to defeat Soviet > heavy armor. Very little information out there that I have been able to > locate so I'm guessing this is something else that never made it past the > prototype stage, but I wouldn't mind if someone out there could prove me > wrong. It should only be one "t", or Rotk?pchen in German. There is some info in Portugese on http://www.terravista.pt/Ancora/1212/X7.htm - the initial data says Gross weight: 9,0 kg Carregado Combust?vel: 6,5 kg [guess this is propellant] Explosive weight: 0,130 kg [weight of warhead explosives] Impulse: 68/5,5 kg Velocidade: 98 m/segundo [velocity] Reach: 1,200 meters. The rest is (according to the translator babelfish): The "X7 Rotkaepchen" also was one projecto of the responsibility of the Dr. Kramer of the DVL. The inquiry pulled out in 1943 when still one year later the X7 was thought that this rocket of 2.5 kg would be a launched antitank land missile, would be transformed into an air-to-ground missile. Fellow creature to a mortar ogive of 15 cm with wing and a tail with stabilizers, removed its propulsion of a solid fuel engine, the WASAG 109-506. The remote control was carried through through a very similar handle to the used one in the X4. One believes that about 300 X7s had been constructed in the Ruhrstahl in Brackwede and that the mechanical works in Neubrandenburg (its proprietor was Fritz Heber). Tests of shot in flight had been carried through with a Focke Wulf 190, but the system never would see use operational, to the exception of the moment where German units removing of the front east had found great stored numbers of X-7s in Aladin-Hoele ("aladino cave") close to Stolberg, in the Harz they had obtained to use them as vulgar mortar garnets. ".. vulgar mortar garnets" - yeah, watch out! :-) > Another cool weapon that came up in my search was the "Fliegerschreck", or > "Luftfaust," a multi-tube shoulder-fired 20mm anti-aircraft rocket launcher. > Apparently, some of these babies actually made it to the field before the > end of hostilities. Wonder if they actually felled any Jabos. Here's a > photo and link to Lexikon Der Wehrmacht if you can read German: > http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/Bilderseitenneu/Luftfaust.htm. > > George "Rocket Man" Bates Translation at http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de%2FWaffen%2Fflugabwehrwaffen-R.htm%23Luftfaust&lp=de_en Enter all as one URL if broken into many lines. regards, Lars -- Linux rivendel 2.4.20-18.9 #1 Thu May 29 06:54:41 EDT 2003 i686 athlon 19:35:00 up 14 days, 4:26, 4 users, load average: 0.01, 0.05, 0.02 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Sep 13 14:08:27 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Mon Sep 13 14:28:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] (no subject) Message-ID: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> Dear Listers. Can a CT AFV enter an enemy occupied Fortified Building Location containing one or more enemy squads? I would say yes since B23.922 specifically limits infantry movement only. If the answer is yes, then I assume that the Crew of that AFV could abandon the AFV in a subsequent MPh and so enter the Fortified Location even if enemy units are currently present. I do not remember is ther is any CT AFV with passenger capacity... If so this could be a tactic to enter an enemy occupied fortified building location with infantry... move the vehicle in the fortified building location and then dismount the infantry... Andrea --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004 From jtracy at bankofny.com Mon Sep 13 14:41:47 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Mon Sep 13 14:41:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] (no subject) Message-ID: Andrea writes: > move the vehicle in the fortified building > location and then dismount the infantry... First you'll have to survive the upcoming CCPh. If you do, you'll likely be held in melee - I'm not sure, but I don't think you can abandon in that situation. No matter, because if you survive the *next* CCPh (opposing player turn), you will be able to advance in with your own infantry on your own next player turn, as due to the continuing melee the defender will not be in good order. It's risky, but it could work. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From tommyl at twcny.rr.com Mon Sep 13 15:27:06 2004 From: tommyl at twcny.rr.com (Thomas Lynch) Date: Mon Sep 13 15:27:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> Message-ID: Actually under B23.9221 Breach, you are referred to B23.711. The last line of B23.711 indicates that as long as the AFV doesn't fall into the cellar or rubble the hex (per B23.41), a breach is located in the hexside entered by the AFV - this would allow any other infantry to advance in via that hexside. On 9/13/04 5:08 PM, "Andrea" wrote: > Dear Listers. > > Can a CT AFV enter an enemy occupied Fortified Building Location containing > one or more enemy squads? I would say yes since B23.922 specifically limits > infantry movement only. > > If the answer is yes, then I assume that the Crew of that AFV could abandon > the AFV in a subsequent MPh and so enter the Fortified Location even if > enemy units are currently present. > I do not remember is ther is any CT AFV with passenger capacity... If so > this could be a tactic to enter an enemy occupied fortified building > location with infantry... move the vehicle in the fortified building > location and then dismount the infantry... > > Andrea > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 roni at hourihane.com Mon Sep 13 15:28:24 2004 From: roni at hourihane.com (Roni Hourihane) Date: Mon Sep 13 15:28:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Newbie Questions from Somebody Who Should Know Better Message-ID: <200409132228.CIS72702@ms2.netsolmail.com> 1). An MMC with an lmg breaks. Does it have the option of dropping the lmg, or must it take it with it? If it can drop it when it breaks, can it also do so at any time during it's rout? Also, can an broken unit transfer the LMG to a non- broken unit? I say, no, n/a, no. My opponent says yes, yes, yes. 2). Section B23 something or other on the subject of Stairwells indicates that it only costs 1 mp to move either up or down both explicit and implicit stairwells. The elevation rules indicate that all increases in elevation costs twice the usual movement cost, but only to a new hex. I say only 1 mp both ways because it's still the same hex. My opponent says 2 mp up, 1 mp down because it's an elevation change. Waddyathink? Roni Hourihane roni@hourihane.com 703-476-1648 Cure Autism Now From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Sep 13 15:56:10 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?US-ASCII?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Mon Sep 13 15:54:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Newbie Questions from Somebody Who Should Know Better In-Reply-To: <200409132228.CIS72702@ms2.netsolmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, Roni Hourihane wrote > 1). An MMC with an lmg breaks. Does it have the option of > dropping the lmg, or must it take it with it? If it can drop > it when it breaks, can it also do so at any time during it's > rout? It has no choise. It must drop it at the start of its rout if it exceeds the units Portage capacity. If not, it cannot drop it. (A10.4) > Also, can an broken unit transfer the LMG to a non-broken unit? > No (the unit must be in Good Order to transfer (A4.431), but a leader can attempt to recover it during the RPh (instead of rallying troops) or MPh (A4.44). > I say, no, n/a, no. My opponent says yes, yes, yes. > You're right. I provided rule references you can show him. > 2). Section B23 something or other on the subject of > Stairwells indicates that it only costs 1 mp to move either > up or down both explicit and implicit stairwells. The > elevation rules indicate that all increases in elevation > costs twice the usual movement cost, but only to a new hex. > OK. > I say only 1 mp both ways because it's still the same hex. > My opponent says 2 mp up, 1 mp down because it's an > elevation change. > That your opponent is incorrect. No crest line is crossed, and B23.4 says: "Infantry spend ... one MF to change levels within a building in a stairwell hex (whether printed or inherent)." --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 13 18:05:29 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 13 18:05:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] (no subject) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6fgck0h481kjt53u1t0vn7p4barrdjhfco@4ax.com> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 17:41:47 -0400, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: >First you'll have to survive the upcoming CCPh. If you do, you'll likely >be held in melee - I'm not sure, but I don't think you can abandon in that >situation. Vehicles are never "held in melee". I cannot see anything in D5.4 to prevent a vehicle crew from abandoning while enemy infantry occupy the same Location. However, I can't see any reason why the enemy infantry could not fire at the crew (TPBF) while they were doing this, and the crew would have to survive unpinned and in Good Order to successfully abandon. ... Or perhaps not. A11.7 says that a Stopped non-Abandoned "unbroken" vehicle holds all enemy infantry in the same Location in Melee. Obviously this vehicle will remain "non-Abandoned" until the crew successfully abandons it; in which case the enemy infantry can't shoot at them, because if they successfully stop the crew from abandoning, they were never allowed to shoot at them in the first place ...! My brain hurts. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 13 18:19:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 13 18:19:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> References: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <1vgck09f14nco9bi280hvr972r0nok0cp9@4ax.com> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:08:27 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >Can a CT AFV enter an enemy occupied Fortified Building Location containing >one or more enemy squads? I would say yes since B23.922 specifically limits >infantry movement only. Correct. >If the answer is yes, then I assume that the Crew of that AFV could abandon >the AFV in a subsequent MPh and so enter the Fortified Location even if >enemy units are currently present. Well ... that's one way of doing it, I suppose, but it's not what I'd call the *recommended* way! Better to use other infantry to enter the Fortified Location while your AFV is holding the bad guys in Melee (assuming that it survives). Of course, the presence of a vehicle in Melee always gives the other guy first attack. Vehicles are a two-edged sword. >I do not remember is ther is any CT AFV with passenger capacity All vehicles have passenger capacity (depending on the year) -- they're called "Riders" (D6.2) (although for many vehicles the only permitted Rider is a sole SMC). However, you can't enter a Building Location while carrying Riders (B23.41) (EXC: Factory entrances, B23.742). There appears to be one vehicle that can legally transport troops through a building: the Japanese Type 94. It's a close-topped fully-tracked AFV with 2PP of portage capacity -- which means it can carry up to 4 SMC. Load it up with heroes and away you go! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From ahohnsbehn at nc.rr.com Mon Sep 13 19:52:15 2004 From: ahohnsbehn at nc.rr.com (Arthur Hohnsbehn) Date: Mon Sep 13 19:52:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] When AOO is coming out. References: <20040913190239.035C6985A1@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <001601c49a05$d9cf1e00$d525b841@JACK> I didn't see anything about an ETA. Is that because they don't know or.. it is a plot to ship out AOO with the least e-mails. Yes that's it. Everything have been printed for weeks, they just want to mail all 12,000 at the same time so that the person who is order number 11,999 won't keep asking where is my order. Only time will tell! :) From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 13 20:28:29 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 13 20:28:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Case K Madness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 9:45 PM > To: Tate Rogers; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: Case K Madness > > > On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:29:19 -0500, Tate Rogers > wrote: > > (Tate's "reality" argument as to "what OBA is really doing" > snipped as being irrelevant.) A similar fate as suffered by Bruce P.'s gonads... BTW, not a "reality argument". OBA, by rule, targets "hexes" not "units". Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From geb3 at inter.net Mon Sep 13 23:09:26 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Sep 13 23:06:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Grognard sighting In-Reply-To: <20040913153138.N92714@yes.devclue.com> Message-ID: Welcome back, Fish. Where have you been hiding? - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Fish Flowers Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 7:40 AM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Newbie Questions from Somebody Who Should Know Better On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Roni Hourihane wrote: > 1). An MMC with an lmg breaks. Does it have the option of > dropping the lmg, or must it take it with it? If it can drop > it when it breaks, can it also do so at any time during it's > rout? Also, can an broken unit transfer the LMG to a non- > broken unit? > > I say, no, n/a, no. My opponent says yes, yes, yes. You are correct. See the last half of A10.4, particularly the bit which states "must rout with any SW <= its IPC limits if it possessed such items when it broke ... Once it starts its rout, a unit may neither Recover nor Abandon SW." Also see A4.431, "Stacks may be freely rearranged to change possession of SW/Guns -- but in all cases only between different Good Order unpinned units in the same Location." > 2). Section B23 something or other on the subject of Stairwells > indicates that it only costs 1 mp to move either up or down both > explicit and implicit stairwells. The elevation rules indicate that all > increases in elevation costs twice the usual movement cost, but only to > a new hex. > > I say only 1 mp both ways because it's still the same hex. My opponent > says 2 mp up, 1 mp down because it's an elevation change. Given that A4.133 explicitly states that elevation changes are only charged double MF when entering a new hex, I don't see that your buddy the rules lawyer has a leg to stand upon. -- Fish. _______________________________________________ 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 keithdalton at verizon.net Tue Sep 14 05:37:40 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Tue Sep 14 05:37:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] When AOO is coming out. Message-ID: <20040914123740.QATD28066.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Don't give us any ideas. ;-) > > From: "Arthur Hohnsbehn" > Date: 2004/09/13 Mon PM 09:52:15 CDT > To: > Subject: [Aslml] When AOO is coming out. > > I didn't see anything about an ETA. Is that because they don't know or.. it > is a plot to ship out AOO with the least e-mails. Yes that's it. > Everything have been printed for weeks, they just want to mail all 12,000 at > the same time so that the person who is order number 11,999 won't keep > asking where is my order. Only time will tell! :) > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 mpeebles at columbus.rr.com Tue Sep 14 08:15:49 2004 From: mpeebles at columbus.rr.com (Michael Peebles) Date: Tue Sep 14 08:15:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] How do you spike a gun? References: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <000801c49a6d$b7ace290$0a00a8c0@Bob> Greetings, How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? Thus far, I have only found how to destroy the gun in close combat or as a target. What if the gun is totally alone and nekkid, with no defenders? Thanks, Michael From aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Sep 14 08:31:09 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Sep 14 08:31:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] How do you spike a gun? References: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> <000801c49a6d$b7ace290$0a00a8c0@Bob> Message-ID: <003b01c49a6f$dc2f9610$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Michael; A9.73 SW SELF-DESTRUCTION "A SW/Gun/vehicular-weapon may be destroyed or deliberately malfunctioned (instead of firing it) by the unit or inherent crew possessing it during amy PFPh/DFPh ..." Wynn "Well-Practiced at Destroying His Own Weapons" Polnicky > Greetings, > > How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? Thus far, I have only found > how to destroy the gun in close combat or as a target. What if the gun is > totally alone and nekkid, with no defenders? > > Thanks, > Michael > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From jtracy at bankofny.com Tue Sep 14 08:35:29 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Tue Sep 14 08:35:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] How do you spike a gun? Message-ID: > How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? If it is manned and able to fire, you can disable it in lieu of firing it in a friendly fire phase. Sadly this means an ordinary (non-Heroic) SMC cannot destroy a gun, as I found out to my displeasure in a game of Totsugeki. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 14 08:39:57 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 14 08:40:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] How do you spike a gun? In-Reply-To: <000801c49a6d$b7ace290$0a00a8c0@Bob> References: <002901c499d8$63e0f790$90040a3e@andrea> <000801c49a6d$b7ace290$0a00a8c0@Bob> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040914103934.0193cab8@pop3.direcway.com> At 10:15 AM 9/14/2004, Michael Peebles wrote: >How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? A9.73 SW SELF-DESTRUCTION: A SW/Gun/vehicular-weapon may be destroyed or deliberately malfunctioned (instead of firing it) by the unit or inherent crew possessing it during any PFPh/DFPh in which the weapon and possessing unit would otherwise still be allowed to fire it (see 8.4 for DFPh restrictions). A unit/inherent crew may malfunction/destroy only as many weapons as it could fire were it not engaged in their malfunction/destruction. Such destruction counts as use of a SW. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rln22 at yahoo.com Tue Sep 14 09:09:49 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Tue Sep 14 09:09:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Spiking with IF? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040914103934.0193cab8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <20040914160949.52740.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> is one allowed to use 'intensive fire' to do this? that is, fire away until you've lost rate, then spike, by declaring IF? RN PS: NRBH --- ron mosher wrote: > At 10:15 AM 9/14/2004, Michael Peebles wrote: > >How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? > > A9.73 SW SELF-DESTRUCTION: A SW/Gun/vehicular-weapon > may be destroyed or > deliberately malfunctioned (instead of firing it) by > the unit or inherent > crew possessing it during any PFPh/DFPh in which the > weapon and possessing > unit would otherwise still be allowed to fire it > (see FINAL FIRE:>8.4 for DFPh restrictions). A > unit/inherent crew may > malfunction/destroy only as many weapons as it could > fire were it not > engaged in their malfunction/destruction. Such > destruction counts as use of > a SW. > > > > 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 > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Sep 14 09:22:52 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Sep 14 09:23:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Spiking with IF? References: <20040914160949.52740.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005001c49a77$16362750$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Well, Intensive Fire will ONLY spike a Gun if you really need the Gun to remain operational. :) Real answer: Of course, but it's not nearly as reliable as spiking it per A9.73, the Malf # just goes down by 2. Wynn "Thing I'll Get Spiked Tonight" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 12:09 PM Subject: [Aslml] Spiking with IF? > is one allowed to use 'intensive fire' to do this? > that is, fire away until you've lost rate, then spike, > by declaring IF? > > RN > > PS: NRBH > > > > --- ron mosher wrote: > >> At 10:15 AM 9/14/2004, Michael Peebles wrote: >> >How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? >> >> A9.73 SW SELF-DESTRUCTION: A SW/Gun/vehicular-weapon >> may be destroyed or >> deliberately malfunctioned (instead of firing it) by >> the unit or inherent >> crew possessing it during any PFPh/DFPh in which the >> weapon and possessing >> unit would otherwise still be allowed to fire it >> (see > FINAL FIRE:>8.4 for DFPh restrictions). A >> unit/inherent crew may >> malfunction/destroy only as many weapons as it could >> fire were it not >> engaged in their malfunction/destruction. Such >> destruction counts as use of >> a SW. >> >> >> >> 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 >> > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Sep 14 09:29:56 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Sep 14 09:29:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Spiking with IF? References: <20040914160949.52740.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005901c49a78$12b177f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Oops, just answered this perhaps too hastily! I had *thought* you could only deliberately malfunction per A9.73 if you could fire w/o IF, but can't find the refs to back up that supposition. Perhaps I was thinking of assembling/disassembling a weapon rather than IF. ?? Wynn 'Already Spiked' Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Nelson" To: Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 12:09 PM Subject: [Aslml] Spiking with IF? > is one allowed to use 'intensive fire' to do this? > that is, fire away until you've lost rate, then spike, > by declaring IF? > > RN > > PS: NRBH > > > > --- ron mosher wrote: > >> At 10:15 AM 9/14/2004, Michael Peebles wrote: >> >How does one go about spiking a gun in ASL? >> >> A9.73 SW SELF-DESTRUCTION: A SW/Gun/vehicular-weapon >> may be destroyed or >> deliberately malfunctioned (instead of firing it) by >> the unit or inherent >> crew possessing it during any PFPh/DFPh in which the >> weapon and possessing >> unit would otherwise still be allowed to fire it >> (see > FINAL FIRE:>8.4 for DFPh restrictions). A >> unit/inherent crew may >> malfunction/destroy only as many weapons as it could >> fire were it not >> engaged in their malfunction/destruction. Such >> destruction counts as use of >> a SW. >> >> >> >> 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 >> > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 aslbunker at yahoo.com Tue Sep 14 16:30:00 2004 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Tue Sep 14 16:30:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker #19 is at the Printer... Message-ID: <20040914233000.97738.qmail@web51710.mail.yahoo.com> Please respond to my aslbunker@aol.com account, Thank You very much, Vic. Greetings from the Bunker and hello to the Mailing List. I'm pleased to report that Dispatches from the Bunker Issue #19 is at the printers, and should be shipping out by Oct. 1st. It will contain 3 scenarios, with actions from 1940+1944 ETO/1945 PTO represented, including from the Grossdeutschland, Lorraine, and later Philippines series. Jim Torkelson has another fine article, this one on OVHS, we have our Tactical Tips including Carl Nogueira's look at Interrogation. Meanwhile, Dispatches from the Bunker Issue #18 made its debut at the Nor'Easter Tournament in March. It contains the usual 3 scenarios, an analysis of Hill 621 by Jim T, Carl Nogueira's Tactical Tips, and all our usual features. The scenarios this time are a diverse group, including the latest in the Early Philippines Series: Taking a Stand at Rosario (Large Japanese combined arms attack on mixed Philippines defense including elite Philippine Scouts and Coastal Defense elements on Boards 46 & 49), another fine Steve Johns' design: Riding the Coattails (Slovak infantry company attacking a Polish Border Defense unit in the '39 Polish Campaign, good tournament style offering), and finally, the next scenario in Tom Morin's ongoing Tunisian series: The Killing Ground (a hard hitting German combined arms Kampfgruppe attacking dug in American infantry at El Guettar, this is a 2 part action with OBA being the big equalizer for the GIs). A little something for every ASL player, we hope, as always. This 12 page ASL Amateur Newsletter is brought to you by the New England ASL Community twice a year now, for the Nor'Easter in March and the Bunker Bash in September. If this sounds like Snakeyes from your Flamethrower attack on that enemy 3-5-7 Bunker, 4 Issue subscriptions (and all BackIssues) are available, and here's 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 #18: 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, Western Union, or Pay-Pal, this is an Amateur Effort and our Hobby, not a Full Time 'Business' :-) BackIssues: Issue #01 is our FREE Preview Issue available with any New Subscription or upon request with a #10 SASE. All other BackIssues (#02 - #17) are $3.50 Each in the USA or $4.00 Each outside the States. Large orders of $40.00 or more are negotiable on price and subject to a discount, e-mail me for details. The Works: A 4 Issue Subscription + All BackIssues (a $69.00 value in the USA or $79.00 value elsewhere) will be discounted to $55.00 in the USA or $65.00 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!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From daveolie at eastlink.ca Tue Sep 14 19:03:34 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue Sep 14 19:27:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: Congrats on a good game, Suomi Message-ID: <009f01c49acb$47e5d620$a64d8918@klis.com> Hey, Finnish ASL brothers. Congratulations to your team on a great game in the final of the World Cup of Hockey. David "wanted to see a good game before the NHL goes down the toilet" Olie From mastadon61 at cox.net Tue Sep 14 19:49:56 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Tue Sep 14 19:50:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux Message-ID: <20040915024958.UGLK15130.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> I'm trying to install VASL on linux and get the following error message. Unable to install. Unable to create /home/don/vasl/VASL.mod. It looks like VASSAL and vasl/UsersGuide and various README's appear in the vasl directory, but not the VASL.mod. Thanks for your help. Don Hancock From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 14 20:54:17 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 14 20:54:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Spiking with IF? In-Reply-To: <20040914160949.52740.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040914103934.0193cab8@pop3.direcway.com> <20040914160949.52740.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <76ffk0lsfpfldpgtmu16qkk862sm8ahk3h@4ax.com> On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 09:09:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >is one allowed to use 'intensive fire' to do this? >that is, fire away until you've lost rate, then spike, >by declaring IF? Assuming that the weapon is *allowed* to use IF, yes. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From tweniger at telusplanet.net Wed Sep 15 04:33:06 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Wed Sep 15 04:33:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux Message-ID: <1095247986.7184.4.camel@basement> Greetings Don, Take a look inside your /tmp directory. The vasl package should be there. Just rename it to vasl.mod and copy it to the working directory. HtH -- Virtually, Tom W From eit11205 at yahoo.com Wed Sep 15 06:43:11 2004 From: eit11205 at yahoo.com (CLAYTON QUEEN) Date: Wed Sep 15 06:43:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size Message-ID: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> Still working on how to post to the list using my yahoo address and not my aol address. But I'll try this while in yahoo and see if it works. Sorry if you keep seeing this. What is the counter notation for a vehicle having a Target Size of -3 or -4 and what vehicles have this Target Size? Thanks for the help. cq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From pferraro at greenepa.net Wed Sep 15 07:07:48 2004 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Wed Sep 15 07:13:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size In-Reply-To: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > Still working on how to post to the list using my > yahoo address and not my aol address. Due to past history with AOL, no AOL user may post to the ASLML. Period. Paul From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 15 08:01:01 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 15 08:01:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size In-Reply-To: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040915095953.01941078@pop3.direcway.com> At 08:43 AM 9/15/2004, CLAYTON QUEEN wrote: >What is the counter notation for a >vehicle having a Target Size of -3 or -4 and what >vehicles have this Target Size? Just wandered thru the equip charts and didn't see any -3 or -4. Might want to pull out Annual '91 for the Maus and see if they had it there. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From philip at enter.net Wed Sep 15 08:09:41 2004 From: philip at enter.net (Phil Pomerantz) Date: Wed Sep 15 08:12:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size References: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20040915095953.01941078@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <000c01c49b36$07306d50$7196c1d8@Pinchas> I believe the Goliath is a -3 Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "CLAYTON QUEEN" ; Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 11:01 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Target Size > At 08:43 AM 9/15/2004, CLAYTON QUEEN wrote: > >What is the counter notation for a > >vehicle having a Target Size of -3 or -4 and what > >vehicles have this Target Size? > > Just wandered thru the equip charts and didn't see any -3 or -4. Might want > to pull out Annual '91 for the Maus and see if they had it there. > > > 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 pyoung at cwhealth.net Wed Sep 15 08:13:30 2004 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Wed Sep 15 08:19:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040915095953.01941078@pop3.direcway.com> References: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20040915095953.01941078@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <41485C1A.1020407@cwhealth.net> Indeed the Maus did have a -3 size modifier. For that counter, they placed a red dot just below the red armor factors to signify that size. Don't know if any officially released counters ever need that though. Pete ron mosher wrote: > At 08:43 AM 9/15/2004, CLAYTON QUEEN wrote: > >> What is the counter notation for a >> vehicle having a Target Size of -3 or -4 and what >> vehicles have this Target Size? > > > Just wandered thru the equip charts and didn't see any -3 or -4. Might > want to pull out Annual '91 for the Maus and see if they had it there. > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > -- Peter Young pyoung@cwhealth.net http://firstfire.blogspot.com From eit11205 at yahoo.com Wed Sep 15 08:47:01 2004 From: eit11205 at yahoo.com (CLAYTON QUEEN) Date: Wed Sep 15 08:47:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size Message-ID: <20040915154701.72714.qmail@web40405.mail.yahoo.com> Boy you guys need to play something with Landing Craft. I just found what I was looking for this this morning. There are two landing craft that are large. One has a -3 and has a red dot under the red armor factors and the -4 craft has two red dots under the armor factors. By the way the -3 and -4 are drms and they are shown in the vehicle listing and rules. Large targets are - to hit and small targets are + to hit. Thanks for the idea on the Maus. I did looked it up to get an idea on the notation for super large targets. Thanks for the help and the thought. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 15 09:32:28 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 15 09:32:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size In-Reply-To: <000c01c49b36$07306d50$7196c1d8@Pinchas> References: <20040915134311.67686.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20040915095953.01941078@pop3.direcway.com> <000c01c49b36$07306d50$7196c1d8@Pinchas> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040915113134.01941418@pop3.direcway.com> At 10:09 AM 9/15/2004, Phil Pomerantz wrote: >I believe the Goliath is a -3 on the charts it is a +3 for +3 to TH DR I guess ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From keithdalton at verizon.net Wed Sep 15 11:04:30 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Wed Sep 15 11:04:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Multi-Man Publishing is pleased to announce it and game industry leader Hasbro, Inc., have completed the process of extending its exclusive licensing agreement for former Avalon Hill wargame titles in a multi-year deal. The agreement, which will keep Multi-Man Publishing (MMP) producing the signature board games Advanced Squad Leader and the Area Movement Series late into the decade, furthers a relationship between the two companies that began in 1998. ?We?re very pleased that Hasbro has shown and continues to show faith in us as producers of quality game products,? MMP President Curt Schilling said. ?We are grateful for their continued support.? Hasbro purchased the Avalon Hill wargame line in 1998 from Baltimore-based Monarch Avalon. MMP has produced titles of the line since that time under license. Advanced Squad Leader is widely regarded as the greatest World War II tactical board game ever created. MMP plans to revive two more currently dormant Avalon Hill titles - Panzerblitz and the card-based game Up Front From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 15 11:38:21 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 15 11:44:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension References: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <00b401c49b53$2e60c060$f301010a@gecac.org> Congratulations, MMP. How long is the agreement for? The press release says multi-year. Peace Rog From damavs at alltel.net Wed Sep 15 11:55:13 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Wed Sep 15 11:55:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: <20040915185513.QUNX2612.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Roger Whelan "rwhelan" writes: > How long is the agreement for? > > The press release says multi-year. It also says: "...late into the decade." I'd make a SWAG at 5 years which would likely be a similar length to the '98 deal that was just renegotiated, presuming the original actually expired and there was a period of negotiation. I'm just looking forward to Tabby's response to the good news :-) Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net From Vicca at v21.me.uk Wed Sep 15 11:56:12 2004 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Peter Vicca) Date: Wed Sep 15 11:56:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension References: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <006d01c49b55$ac28b190$152ca8c0@home> This really is the best news I've heard today! Well done MMP. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 7:04 PM Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Multi-Man Publishing is pleased to announce it and game industry leader Hasbro, Inc., have completed the process of extending its exclusive licensing agreement for former Avalon Hill wargame titles in a multi-year deal. The agreement, which will keep Multi-Man Publishing (MMP) producing the signature board games Advanced Squad Leader and the Area Movement Series late into the decade, furthers a relationship between the two companies that began in 1998. "We're very pleased that Hasbro has shown and continues to show faith in us as producers of quality game products," MMP President Curt Schilling said. "We are grateful for their continued support." Hasbro purchased the Avalon Hill wargame line in 1998 from Baltimore-based Monarch Avalon. MMP has produced titles of the line since that time under license. Advanced Squad Leader is widely regarded as the greatest World War II tactical board game ever created. MMP plans to revive two more currently dormant Avalon Hill titles - Panzerblitz and the card-based game Up Front _______________________________________________ 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 borelalain at yahoo.fr Wed Sep 15 11:55:26 2004 From: borelalain at yahoo.fr (Alain Borel) Date: Wed Sep 15 12:01:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension In-Reply-To: <00b401c49b53$2e60c060$f301010a@gecac.org> References: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> <00b401c49b53$2e60c060$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <4148901E.5040304@yahoo.fr> rwhelan wrote: > Congratulations, MMP. > > How long is the agreement for? > > The press release says multi-year. Will that be enough to finish and print AoO? Too easy to miss ;-) Alain Borel Chavannes, Switzerland From keithdalton at verizon.net Wed Sep 15 12:09:47 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Wed Sep 15 12:09:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: <20040915190947.MOOZ24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Ladies and gentlemen, Shecky Borel! > > From: Alain Borel > Date: 2004/09/15 Wed PM 01:55:26 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension > > rwhelan wrote: > > > Congratulations, MMP. > > > > How long is the agreement for? > > > > The press release says multi-year. > > Will that be enough to finish and print AoO? > > Too easy to miss ;-) > > Alain Borel > Chavannes, Switzerland > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Sep 15 12:16:50 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Sep 15 12:20:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: <4ad21704acfd2a.4acfd2a4ad2170@us.army.mil> Hi- And here I thought MMP was strapped for cash since they could not afford to reprint ASL modules. Scott The Minister of Propaganda writes; > Multi-Man Publishing is pleased to announce it and game industry > leader Hasbro, Inc., have completed the process of extending its > exclusive licensing agreement for former Avalon Hill wargame > titles in a multi-year deal. > > The agreement, which will keep Multi-Man Publishing (MMP) > producing the signature board games Advanced Squad Leader and the > Area Movement Series late into the decade, furthers a relationship > between the two companies that began in 1998. > > ?We?re very pleased that Hasbro has shown and continues to show > faith in us as producers of quality game products,? MMP President > Curt Schilling said. ?We are grateful for their continued > support.? > > Hasbro purchased the Avalon Hill wargame line in 1998 from > Baltimore-based Monarch Avalon. MMP has produced titles of the > line since that time under license. > > Advanced Squad Leader is widely regarded as the greatest World War > II tactical board game ever created. > > MMP plans to revive two more currently dormant Avalon Hill titles - > Panzerblitz and the card-based game Up Front > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sep 15 12:34:53 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed Sep 15 12:34:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dash, and rof In-Reply-To: <4ad21704acfd2a.4acfd2a4ad2170@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <20040915193453.77813.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Listers, Situation (in J27, a VERY fun scen): 447 with leader, in a stone building behind a hedge, dash over the hedge and into the street, on the way to another stone wall and Non-OG hex on the other side of the street. Dasterdly German down the street un-HIPS a 75 INF piece. Fires with an unobstructed LOS to the middle of the street hex (but, and it likely matters not at all, has no LOS to any part of the just jumped-over hedge), DR 2,5. Rof. First of all, with a base of 8 to hit, are the total mods +2 for the dash?That is, were we correct that FFMO/FFNAM do NOT apply to a dashing infantry unit? We thought the Final DR was a 9 and therefore a miss. However, rate was held. I said shoot again, as, as far as I know, climbing over the hedge, and then going into the street hex, represents the expenditure of 2MF in the street hex. Thus, despite my high-tailing it across the street, the GUN actually had time to take the second shot, on my second MF expended. Luckily, my opponent disagreed, resorting to a 'reality' argument, and claimed that he couldn't see the hedge it took me so long to climb over, and thus only had that one quick shot at me in the street. I 'gave in' and hopped the next stone wall unscathed. Was I correct, and therefore lucky? And what about the dashing TH mods? yours, RN _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From ctewks at yahoo.com Wed Sep 15 12:44:47 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed Sep 15 12:44:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dash, and rof In-Reply-To: <20040915193453.77813.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040915194447.94032.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com> you're correct his reality argument has nothing to do with the rules :) 2mf expended = 2 potential shots Chuck --- Robert Nelson wrote: > Listers, > > Situation (in J27, a VERY fun scen): 447 with leader, > in a stone building behind a hedge, dash over the > hedge and into the street, on the way to another stone > wall and Non-OG hex on the other side of the street. > > Dasterdly German down the street un-HIPS a 75 INF > piece. Fires with an unobstructed LOS to the middle of > the street hex (but, and it likely matters not at all, > has no LOS to any part of the just jumped-over hedge), > DR 2,5. Rof. > > First of all, with a base of 8 to hit, are the total > mods +2 for the dash?That is, were we correct that > FFMO/FFNAM do NOT apply to a dashing infantry unit? > > We thought the Final DR was a 9 and therefore a miss. > However, rate was held. I said shoot again, as, as far > as I know, climbing over the hedge, and then going > into the street hex, represents the expenditure of 2MF > in the street hex. Thus, despite my high-tailing it > across the street, the GUN actually had time to take > the second shot, on my second MF expended. > > Luckily, my opponent disagreed, resorting to a > 'reality' argument, and claimed that he couldn't see > the hedge it took me so long to climb over, and thus > only had that one quick shot at me in the street. I > 'gave in' and hopped the next stone wall unscathed. > > Was I correct, and therefore lucky? > > And what about the dashing TH mods? > > yours, > RN > > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.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 > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Sep 15 12:40:13 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Sep 15 12:45:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension References: <4ad21704acfd2a.4acfd2a4ad2170@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <00ce01c49b5b$d1e6a760$f301010a@gecac.org> hello > And here I thought MMP was strapped for cash since they could not afford to reprint ASL modules. What does this have to do with anything? Man I thought I was bad, will you let anything be said without bashing MMP. Yeah I can see it now, Hasbro takes over ASL and then we get ASL RISK. Would you be happy then? That would be real good for the hobby. The "agreement" could be that MMP does all the work and Hasbro gets a cut of the profits. We are talking corporate America:>) If you had a large group of corporate suits breathing down your neck, maybe you'd be careful before printing stuff too. Sorta like the movie "Goodfellas" "building burns down?, "F" you PAY ME" "business slow? "F" you PAYME" etc. Lets let MMP be happy for few minutes at least:>) Rog From scott.holst at us.army.mil Wed Sep 15 13:08:22 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Sep 15 13:10:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: <4b5f9104b611fa.4b611fa4b5f910@us.army.mil> Hi- I could care less what MMP does as long as ASL gets somekind of support. I guess PaulXXX on eBay wont be able to sell his Panzerbliz verients anymore. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: rwhelan Date: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 2:40 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension > hello > > > And here I thought MMP was strapped for cash since they could > not afford > to reprint ASL modules. > > What does this have to do with anything? > > Man I thought I was bad, will you let anything be said without > bashing MMP. > > Yeah I can see it now, Hasbro takes over ASL and then we get ASL RISK. > Would you be happy then? > > That would be real good for the hobby. > > The "agreement" could be that MMP does all the work and Hasbro > gets a cut of > the profits. We are talking corporate America:>) > > If you had a large group of corporate suits breathing down your > neck, maybe > you'd be careful before printing stuff too. > > Sorta like the movie "Goodfellas" > > "building burns down?, "F" you PAY ME" > > "business slow? "F" you PAYME" > > etc. > > Lets let MMP be happy for few minutes at least:>) > > Rog > > From belisarius at dsl.pipex.com Wed Sep 15 15:16:38 2004 From: belisarius at dsl.pipex.com (Andy McMaster) Date: Wed Sep 15 15:16:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux In-Reply-To: <1095247986.7184.4.camel@basement> References: <1095247986.7184.4.camel@basement> Message-ID: <200409152316.38861.belisarius@dsl.pipex.com> Hi, I tried installing VASL on SuSE 9.1 and got the same message. Then tried installing the beta (4.2b6) and that worked fine. Still haven't got round to actually playing anyone yet but find it really useful for planning scenarios! Andy On Wednesday 15 September 2004 12:33, Tom Weniger wrote: > Greetings Don, > > Take a look inside your /tmp directory. The vasl package should be > there. Just rename it to vasl.mod and copy it to the working directory. > HtH From BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Wed Sep 15 15:16:52 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Wed Sep 15 15:16:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: <1095286612.d606d27cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> I expect that I know just about as much about the particulars of MMP's financials as Scott, i.e., zip, nada, bupkiss, or the number of sentient beings in Congress. However, my thought on the same matter could be a positive one, rather than Scott's negative: Oh, this explains why they haven't been publishing stuff, they've needed to get together the scratch to pay the license fee. I see it as a positive sign that MMP plans to support ASL. If it didn't, simple fiscal logic says- DON'T SPEND MONEY YOU DON'T NEED TO!!!!! If, as Scott has vociferously (sp?) asserted in the past, MMP plans to leave ASL behind, WHY THE HELL ARE THEY RENEWING AND PAYING THE LICENSE FEE? Seems simple and logical to me. Anyone care to poke holes in this thought? :-) Brian "'Fee'-ed up!" Pickering -----Original Message----- From: scott.holst@us.army.mil To: keithdalton@verizon.net Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:16:50 -0500 Subject: Re: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Hi- And here I thought MMP was strapped for cash since they could not afford to reprint ASL modules. Scott The Minister of Propaganda writes; > Multi-Man Publishing is pleased to announce it and game industry > leader Hasbro, Inc., have completed the process of extending its > exclusive licensing agreement for former Avalon Hill wargame > titles in a multi-year deal. > > The agreement, which will keep Multi-Man Publishing (MMP) > producing the signature board games Advanced Squad Leader and the > Area Movement Series late into the decade, furthers a relationship > between the two companies that began in 1998. > > ?We?re very pleased that Hasbro has shown and continues to show > faith in us as producers of quality game products,? MMP President > Curt Schilling said. ?We are grateful for their continued > support.? > > Hasbro purchased the Avalon Hill wargame line in 1998 from > Baltimore-based Monarch Avalon. MMP has produced titles of the > line since that time under license. > > Advanced Squad Leader is widely regarded as the greatest World War > II tactical board game ever created. > > MMP plans to revive two more currently dormant Avalon Hill titles - > Panzerblitz and the card-based game Up Front > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 15 15:50:25 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 15 15:50:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension In-Reply-To: <00ce01c49b5b$d1e6a760$f301010a@gecac.org> References: <4ad21704acfd2a.4acfd2a4ad2170@us.army.mil> <00ce01c49b5b$d1e6a760$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040915174611.0193f328@pop3.direcway.com> At 02:40 PM 9/15/2004, rwhelan wrote: >Lets let MMP be happy for few minutes at least:>) Please don't feed the gadfly by replying...he's in my Junk mail box that empties without any input from me. Really don't want to see even abbreviated replies to his spew. Remember your mail program has an ignore list. Remember ConSim has an ignore list. Remember WarfareHq has an ignore list. Heaven, it's like he went away. :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 15 15:53:46 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 15 15:58:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension In-Reply-To: <4148901E.5040304@yahoo.fr> References: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> <00b401c49b53$2e60c060$f301010a@gecac.org> <4148901E.5040304@yahoo.fr> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040915175200.0193f580@pop3.direcway.com> At 01:55 PM 9/15/2004, Alain Borel wrote: >Will that be enough to finish and print AoO? > >Too easy to miss ;-) Beat me to it old boy... :) >Alain Borel >Chavannes, Switzerland You know an ASLer in Switzerland that goes by the handle "Robin" over on the Warfare forum? If not, maybe he's in your neck of the woods. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From pyoung at cwhealth.net Wed Sep 15 16:32:01 2004 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Wed Sep 15 16:32:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040915174611.0193f328@pop3.direcway.com> References: <4ad21704acfd2a.4acfd2a4ad2170@us.army.mil> <00ce01c49b5b$d1e6a760$f301010a@gecac.org> <6.1.2.0.0.20040915174611.0193f328@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <4148D0F1.8050602@cwhealth.net> ron mosher wrote: > At 02:40 PM 9/15/2004, rwhelan wrote: > >> Lets let MMP be happy for few minutes at least:>) > > > Please don't feed the gadfly by replying...he's in my Junk mail box > that empties without any input from me. Really don't want to see even > abbreviated replies to his spew. > > Remember your mail program has an ignore list. > Remember ConSim has an ignore list. > Remember WarfareHq has an ignore list. You know, I just decided today to start reading the WHQ site more often. :) Thanks to Don Maddox for pointing that out. > > Heaven, it's like he went away. :) -- Peter Young pyoung@cwhealth.net http://firstfire.blogspot.com From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 15 12:45:25 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 15 18:54:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Message-ID: Fanatic Enterprises is pleased to announce a new product: French AFV Cards. These are player aids similar to those previously published by Avalon Hill for the German, Russian, American and British OOB. These AFV cards cover the French OOB. What you get: 9 pages of bond. Each page contains 4 vehicle cards. Each vehicle card summarizes in a readily usable format the applicable game information for each of the French armed and armored vehicles. 36 vehicles in total are included. Each vehicle card presents the vehicles vital stats along with boxes for keeping track of special ammo, armor leaders and weapons. In addition, each card will show the related special notes for that vehicle relative to game play. Each French AFV Card pack costs $8 +$2 S&H in the US or +$4 S&H for out of the US. As a special offer buy the Italian AFV Cards (normally $6/pack) AND the French AFV cards for $12+ $2 or $4 S&H for US or international shipping respectively. Packs can be paid for by paypal using the email address Paul_Kenny@rve.com if using a paypal account WITHOUT a credit card or using the email address homercles11@Hotmail.com if using a paypal account WITH a credit card. OR By check or money order to Paul Kenny PO Box 644 Haddonfield, NJ 08033 Check out my website http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ for additional information. Thanks for your support. BTW I will try to get a sample card up on the website soon. Thanks Paul _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From tweniger at telusplanet.net Wed Sep 15 19:50:30 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Wed Sep 15 19:50:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux In-Reply-To: <1095282727.2968.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1095247986.7184.4.camel@basement> <1095282727.2968.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1095303030.2986.3.camel@kitchen> On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 15:12, Clinton Sanderson wrote: > I have been having this same problem for some time. This solution is > a work around. But, I had to change my bash script to start the > Vassal engine rather Vasl. If you don't then Vasl tries to update > every time because the last install failed. Then the problem is you > can't get the latest version of Vasl unless you go through the > install-fail-copy cycle periodically. Not a big problem, but it would > be cool if it would work. I have looked at everything I can think of > on the Linux side, e.g. rights, space, but have a come up empty. I > suspect something with javaws, but I haven't really dug into it. If > this is common problem, maybe those in the know can see what they can > find. > > Clint Sanderson > > On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 07:33, Tom Weniger wrote: > > Greetings Don, > > > > Take a look inside your /tmp directory. The vasl package should be > > there. Just rename it to vasl.mod and copy it to the working directory. > > HtH Greetings Clint, I have spoken with Rodney about this problem a few months ago. He does test it out on his Linux box (forget which distro he uses) and does not have the problem. AFAIK, he is still working on it. Perhaps it is time to check in with him again. -- Virtually, Tom W From mastadon61 at cox.net Wed Sep 15 20:46:48 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Wed Sep 15 20:47:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux Message-ID: <20040916034650.PYUX20972.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Thanks Tom, you're a genius! another question. I've been launching it using webstart and it goes back and downloads the same files (I think) then fails to run. Then, VASSAL comes up and I start VASL. Is there an easier way? What's the full java command to run vasl.mod? Thanks, Don Hancock > > From: Tom Weniger > Date: 2004/09/15 Wed AM 07:33:06 EDT > To: ASL Playpen > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL install on linux > > Greetings Don, > > Take a look inside your /tmp directory. The vasl package should be > there. Just rename it to vasl.mod and copy it to the working directory. > HtH > > -- > Virtually, > Tom W > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Sep 15 21:04:45 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed Sep 15 21:07:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Kenny's latest; was: Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension References: Message-ID: <016801c49ba2$5cf0aae0$a64d8918@klis.com> Paul wrote: > What you get: 9 pages of bond. Each page contains 4 vehicle cards. How can you describe something printed on bond as "cards"? Please explain. David "shaken, not stirred" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 15 22:18:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 15 22:18:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dash, and rof In-Reply-To: <20040915193453.77813.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <4ad21704acfd2a.4acfd2a4ad2170@us.army.mil> <20040915193453.77813.qmail@web52608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:34:53 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >First of all, with a base of 8 to hit, are the total >mods +2 for the dash?That is, were we correct that >FFMO/FFNAM do NOT apply to a dashing infantry unit? Correct. A4.63: "(Cases J3 and J4 do not apply in the Road Location)". Case J does apply, hence the +2 DRM. >We thought the Final DR was a 9 and therefore a miss. >However, rate was held. I said shoot again, as, as far >as I know, climbing over the hedge, and then going >into the street hex, represents the expenditure of 2MF >in the street hex. Thus, despite my high-tailing it >across the street, the GUN actually had time to take >the second shot, on my second MF expended. Right. 2 MF were expended in the Road Location, so the gun can fire again -- this time with -1 Acquisition. >Luckily, my opponent disagreed, resorting to a >'reality' argument, and claimed that he couldn't see >the hedge it took me so long to climb over, and thus >only had that one quick shot at me in the street. I >'gave in' and hopped the next stone wall unscathed. An excellent reason not to pay attention to "reality arguments" -- as often as not, they're wrong -- as in this case. The additional MF expenditure for walls/hedges are spent *in the Location being entered* (B.2). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Gamera is really neat, he is filled with turtle meat!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From borelalain at yahoo.fr Wed Sep 15 23:12:54 2004 From: borelalain at yahoo.fr (Alain Borel) Date: Wed Sep 15 23:18:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension In-Reply-To: <20040915190947.MOOZ24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> References: <20040915190947.MOOZ24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <41492EE6.6070603@yahoo.fr> keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > Ladies and gentlemen, Shecky Borel! OK, seriously now: congratulations to MMP for closing this deal! It's nice to hear that Hasbro sees you as a reliable business partner... I think it's a good omen for the future of our beloved hobby :-) Alain From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Sep 15 07:49:46 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed Sep 15 23:46:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size Message-ID: Umm why? BTW AOL S*&%S. Paul ----Original Message Follows---- From: Paul Ferraro To: CLAYTON QUEEN CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Target Size Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:07:48 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) > Still working on how to post to the list using my > yahoo address and not my aol address. Due to past history with AOL, no AOL user may post to the ASLML. Period. Paul _______________________________________________ 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 bryanb at bnm.co.za Wed Sep 15 23:55:24 2004 From: bryanb at bnm.co.za (Bryan Brinkman) Date: Wed Sep 15 23:53:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension In-Reply-To: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <002901c49bba$2471b2f0$23000060@brinkman.local> Congrats MMP! Great news - well that and ASL is now going to be stocked in a store in South Africa again! I hear that some ASL starter packs are on order for a shop in Port Elizabeth. Bryan 'so now we have another few years of moot input from Mr Holst' OK - sorry, I'll put the food away :) -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of keithdalton@verizon.net Sent: 15 September 2004 08:05 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Hasbro, Multi-Man Publishing Ink Licensing Extension Multi-Man Publishing is pleased to announce it and game industry leader Hasbro, Inc., have completed the process of extending its exclusive licensing agreement for former Avalon Hill wargame titles in a multi-year deal. From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Thu Sep 16 02:17:22 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Thu Sep 16 02:17:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux In-Reply-To: <20040916034650.PYUX20972.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20040916034650.PYUX20972.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: <41495A22.10506@mbj.nifty.com> I just made a little script file using the info on the web site and put the file in my PATH. I just type VASL (the file name) from the command prompt--no download and I can use it when not connected to the internet. I am sure you could make a nice icon shortcut if you really wanted to. mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > Thanks Tom, > you're a genius! > > another question. I've been launching it using webstart and it goes back and downloads the same files (I think) then fails to run. Then, VASSAL comes up and I start VASL. Is there an easier way? What's the full java command to run > vasl.mod? > > Thanks, > > Don Hancock > > >>From: Tom Weniger >>Date: 2004/09/15 Wed AM 07:33:06 EDT >>To: ASL Playpen >>Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL install on linux >> >>Greetings Don, >> >>Take a look inside your /tmp directory. The vasl package should be >>there. Just rename it to vasl.mod and copy it to the working directory. >>HtH >> >>-- >>Virtually, >>Tom W >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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 asloser at kolumbus.fi Thu Sep 16 08:07:42 2004 From: asloser at kolumbus.fi (Tuomo Lukkari) Date: Thu Sep 16 08:11:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: OT: Congrats on a good game, Suomi Message-ID: <000901c49bfe$eb5f3420$f89fba50@elisalaajakaista.fi> An congratulations for you on winning the cup! We were close, see you in the final next time around... >Congratulations to your team on a great game in the final of the World Cup >of Hockey. -Tuomo From dreenstra at comcast.net Thu Sep 16 08:46:36 2004 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Thu Sep 16 08:48:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001b01c49c04$59deea80$0302a8c0@mba.wfu.edu> Paul, What, you been sleepin' under a rock for the past three months? The whole reason the ASLML went down a few months back was that AOL threatened the company that hosts the List with being blacklisted as a spam source, all because one (or maybe a few, they wouldn't give any details) of its users *voluntarily* signed up to receive messages from the List, then complained to AOL that they were receiving Spam from it. Dave Reenstra "Shoot all the lawyers, then the AOL users" >-----Original Message----- >From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >[mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Paul Kenny >Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 10:50 AM >To: pferraro@greenepa.net; eit11205@yahoo.com >Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Target Size > > > >Umm why? > >BTW AOL S*&%S. > >Paul > >----Original Message Follows---- >From: Paul Ferraro >To: CLAYTON QUEEN >CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Target Size >Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:07:48 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) > > > > Still working on how to post to the list using my > > yahoo address and not my aol address. > >Due to past history with AOL, no AOL user may post to the >ASLML. Period. > > > >Paul > >_______________________________________________ >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/ > >_______________________________________________ >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 Thu Sep 16 09:17:23 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Thu Sep 16 09:46:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Target Size Message-ID: I actually missed that. Ironic considering that AOL sent me spam whereby I ended up getting and having to pay for 2 AOL accounts without my knowledge. Scum action from such a large company. Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs Including: Fanatic Pack #1, Fanatic Pack #2, Fanatic Pack #3 and Battlin' Bastards of Bataan plus the recently released Leningrad Pack. Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ----Original Message Follows---- From: "David Reenstra" Reply-To: To: "'Paul Kenny'" ,, CC: Subject: RE: [Aslml] Target Size Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:46:36 -0400 Paul, What, you been sleepin' under a rock for the past three months? The whole reason the ASLML went down a few months back was that AOL threatened the company that hosts the List with being blacklisted as a spam source, all because one (or maybe a few, they wouldn't give any details) of its users *voluntarily* signed up to receive messages from the List, then complained to AOL that they were receiving Spam from it. Dave Reenstra "Shoot all the lawyers, then the AOL users" >-----Original Message----- >From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >[mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Paul Kenny >Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 10:50 AM >To: pferraro@greenepa.net; eit11205@yahoo.com >Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Target Size > > > >Umm why? > >BTW AOL S*&%S. > >Paul > >----Original Message Follows---- >From: Paul Ferraro >To: CLAYTON QUEEN >CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Target Size >Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:07:48 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) > > > > Still working on how to post to the list using my > > yahoo address and not my aol address. > >Due to past history with AOL, no AOL user may post to the >ASLML. Period. > > > >Paul > >_______________________________________________ >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/ > >_______________________________________________ >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 dgour.asl at gmail.com Thu Sep 16 11:15:00 2004 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu Sep 16 11:15:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Opponent Message-ID: <764636a604091611155d0be724@mail.gmail.com> Is there a "best spot" to look for VASL opponent or have I already found it with this list? Looking for someone to play a relatively small ETO/RF scenario. Would be my first VASL game so take that into consideration. -- Darren Gour From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 16 11:24:11 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 16 11:24:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] New ASL Club - Ottawa, Canada References: <20040915180430.VMXQ1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <002c01c49c1a$5d615880$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Brother ASLers; Some ASL diehards in Ottawa are founding an informal ASL club in the area. We plan to meet once a month or so to play FtF so that we can curse our dice and lack of tactical skill (as applicable) in person. No dues will be collected, any and all ASL skill levels welcome. Newbies/list skulkers/ASL wannabes are all encouraged to come and visit us. Any who would like to check us out are more than welcome to contact either Wynn "Hidden Movement" Polnicky at the return e-mail ( aslwynn@rogers.com ) or (613) 253-8196, or Adrian "Still Searching for a Nickname" Earle at adrian_earle@hotmail.com ASL Forever! Wynn From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Sep 16 11:32:48 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Sep 16 11:33:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Opponent In-Reply-To: <764636a604091611155d0be724@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a604091611155d0be724@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040916133031.01b67718@pop3.direcway.com> At 01:15 PM 9/16/2004, Darren Gour wrote: >Is there a "best spot" to look for VASL opponent or have I already >found it with this list? VASL itself has opportunities, just post in mail area. or http://www.war-forums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30&&s=b2dc3f673fcf1e03ad170e3482048f83& For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From geb3 at inter.net Thu Sep 16 16:04:10 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Sep 16 16:01:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AAR: A74 Valhalla Bound (long, but worth it) Message-ID: I'm a little behind on AARs, so I begin with my most recent spanking as the SS at the hands of Shuji Zaha's & Comrade Chairman Dong-Il Chang's Red Waves on Sunday. Three Panthers succumbed to CHs (one an improbable hit) less than a turn after coming on board. Late war heavy metal has been getting a lot of play in this town recently, as Malcolm Rutledge also dropped a game of J59 "Friday the 13th" as the squareheads against the battle-wizened Keita Suzuki (we're told it's all because the sN7s wouldn't pop smoke, but I think an opponent who had a hand in translating the ASLRB into Japanese also might have shown him a few tricks). A few weeks earlier, Dong-Il and I took the SS against Malcolm in G33 "Awakening of Spring." These desperate struggles in the Heavy Payload Era certainly do have their own attraction. For those of you who haven't tried this scenario it's a classic Soviet frontal assault against thinly-spread but well-armed Nazis trying to stave off the inevitable. The Reds come in 2 lines: Seven 8-morale SMG and rifle squads mounted on IS2s & T34/85s make up the first wave, followed by and equal number of 7-morale squads on ISU122s and SU-85s. Opposing them are 6 SS squads bearing the usual assortment of implements of destruction available in 1945, plus 2 SPW251/1 and a HIP PSW234/4. This Aufklaerung screen will be reinforced by a Zug of PzKw VGs on T2. Ivan has a choice of VC, but must decide before setup to either exit 42VP from E to W across the length of a board and a half, or take 5 out of 13 stone buildings in the German left rear w/o losing 13 or more AFVs. From where I sit, street fighting high morale late war Germans armed to the teeth with rockets and hiding in stone buildings seemed the tougher task, so I guessed Shuji & Dong-Il would be coming hard across the relatively open German right (board 4 and half of 11) and over the rise to exit. With this in mind I decided that all but two squads would set up in depth on the more congested center and left of the playing area. A squad/LMG and two dummy stacks set up ahead of the HIP MMG that would cover their fall-back. The reserve was made up of two 658/PSKs stacked with the two halftracks on the roads running down the woodsy back end of board 17. In T1(G), the crews would abandon and scrounge their halftracks, trade their LMGs for the PSKs in the AdvPh and go armor hunting. The halftracks would then make excellent roadblocks and retreat/rout paths. Once they came on, 3 of the 5 Panthers would take up hull down positions on the right to cover the open ground approaches. Their 2 brothers would enfilade that open ground from the woods on the left side and also contest any secondary thrust coming down board 17. I put the HIP PSW 234/4 far forward on the right board edge with some HIP infantry support in the form of a 658/LMG and the 149/DC. My thinking here was to let all AFVs move past the Pakwagen's position and then let the 2nd to last ISU122 have it in the flank. When one of his brothers would then turn to confront the threat, out would pop the (tank hunter) hero with his nasty surprise. If my Panthers were able to get into position, this would box the Reds between the tanks, the main body of infantry on the left and the AC & remaining infantry on the right. Then the feeding frenzy could begin. T1 and T2(R) were uneventful. As expected, all Soviets in both waves came on board as riders. There was some concealment stripping and the 658/MMG & 9-1 broke a leader and CR-ed a squad that wandered into its sights, then was able to grow concealment again in it's initial hidden position in L1 of the 17W row building in the German half of T1. They dropped concealment again in T2(R) to pick off a leader plus a squad in a boresighted location on the left. All my concealed stacks just pulled back slowly and orderly as planned. Then the fur began to fly. T2(G) started on a positive note when snowfall increased to heavy in the RPh. I thought this would really make my superior gunnery, penetration and RoF even more advantageous, plus make it easier for infantry to displace with the LV canceling out FFMO/FFNAM. But signs that something was about to go desperately wrong appeared early in my MPh even before the tanks came on. A concealed 127/PSK moving forward to take up a blocking position was wiped out by a lucky long range ISU122 shot. Another very low IFT DR from a T34/85 HE round KIA'd a 658/LMG that was assault moving to put a PF on an IS2. I thought I had a golden opportunity as it had just gone fanatic from the IS2's RMG. Although infantry is precious in this scenario, "These things happen", I thought. Then it was time for the armor to roll on (all CE and BU to get where they needed to go). Here's a chronology of the nightmare: Panther 1 moves up the road on board 10 and slides neatly behind the wall at the road junction in front of the buildings, where it could see over the abandoned HT to an IS2 behind a wall and out across the open ground to a T34/85 parked behind a hedge. As expected, Panther 1's BFF shot missed, but the IS2 responded by changing TCA and firing ATT HE, rolling 1, 1, 1 for an improbable critical hit; stunning and recalling the Panther. I was expecting an attrition rate of a tank per turn, so I felt I had just drawn my number. Panther 2 also moved up the left side, parked a little behind Panther 1's position and poked its muzzle out between some woods over the same open ground to cover (but miss) aforesaid T34/85, who then swung his turret around and rolled a 2, burning Panther 2 with APCR. Geez. Panther 3 was commanded by Mr. 10-2, and rolled up the board 11 road onto the rise and over to the far right promontory, managing a 1 hexside HD maneuver. His BF shot wasted an IS2 parked with a T34/85 behind another wall just about 10 hexes opposite. That T34 then rolled a 2 on an APCR shot in its PFPh, and Mr. 10-2 did not make it out of the tank. Panther 4 followed #3 but went HD behind the wall at the base of the rise. Panther 5 took a HD position further down the rise at what should have been a "V" formation, but was now missing it's left wing. Their BFF shots also went wide. I was now officially in trouble. However, there were a few bright spots: - Panther 4 took out an ISU122 and its 527 rider from about 16 hexes away in the T3(R) DFPh. - The second 127/PSK nailed the T34/85 that took out Panther 2. - That HD IS2 responsible for Panther 1's demise and a 628 wasted their Prep Fire on an adjacent dummy stack that didn't go way until it was finally bumped in the T3(R) movement phase. The IS2 then fell to an IF PFPh shot from Panther 5 in T3(G). - The HIP 658/LMG backing up the HIP Pakwagen on the far right caught the Russian truck carrying a 127 & MMG as it labored across open ground and set it afire, scratching 3 more VP. - Panther 4 was also able to take out the T34/85 that bested Panther 3/10-2 when it attempted to run past him. But I did myself in in one important respect. As the remaining Soviet armor moved out in T3(R), an ISU122 presented his side armor to the HIP PSW234/4, who rolled a hit, kept concealment and got rate. It looked like that Big Red SPG was going down, but as I was about to place my "?" counter on board, I realized that although he was a CT AFV, his movement type did not allow him to enter or set up in buildings like 4P1, where I had put him. Illegal setup: I was forced to scratch the Pakwagen. Unfortunately, when the hero leapt from cover a few seconds earlier to drop his candy gram on another ISU122 carrying a 458/LMG & 8-0, he couldn't pass a 1MC from the riders and died of his wounds. The Soviet 1st wave did most of the damage, but In the top of T4 Dong-Il got in the game again with a 17-hex range 1, 2 DR from one of his ISU122s in Prep to shock Panther 4, which allowed another of Shuji's T34/85s to close and destroy it with a BFF side shot. Sadly, the last 2 Panthers fields of fire did not overlap enough for Panther 5 to cover its approach. Since it was getting late a decision had to be made by the German half of T4. When a DM658/LMG trapped forward on the left wing failed to self rally, it left only 1 Panther, 3 squads, an MMG & 2 LMGs, a 9-1 and a 7-0 between Ivan and the exits. With the way almost clear most of their armor could make it off in 2 turns. The squad that failed the self rally was probably going to die for failure to rout, and the 658/LMG with the 8-1 on the right was now too far forward to have much effect on the game. Although my remaining forces could have strongly contested a building control victory, rather than try to continue on the next game day, I decided to put myself out of my misery and concede. As it turns out, those tricksy Bolsheviks were aiming for the building control VCs, and we might have gone down to the last DR to determine a winner. Oh well, I just have to put this game in the "hard lessons" column and do what I can to have a better match next time. Besides, now I too can finally moan & groan that I have been diced. What added insult to injury was that none of these low ammo and B# monster guns broke. Not one. All those 2s and 3s were also conveniently below my SAN of 4. Rats. Now that I've had my chance to wallow in self-pity I feel I can stand in comradeship with the rest of you whiners out there. Rah! But seriously, aside from the Pakwagen's illegal setup, there is not too much that I would alter in my game plan. Things could easily have gone the other way (perhaps that's the drawback of late war tank battles?). That doesn't mean I won't be looking carefully for flaws or missed opportunities. This game's ASLRB discovery: The Case L point blank DRMs do _not_ apply to moving/non-stopped targets. You'd think something as big as a tank would be easier to hit at less than 100 meters (unless it's right on top of you and you can't traverse quickly enough), moving or not, but it ain't so. I also finally got it through my head that BFF shots are eligible for RoF, but not Acq. The reverse is true for shots in the AdvFPh. Congratulations and "Spaciba!" to Shuji & Dong-Il for a great day of gaming. George "Thank you sir! May I have another?" Bates Now in progress: J53 "Setting The Stage", German vs. David Olie SASL M13 "Recon", Free French vs. German ENEMY 77 "Le Herisson", German vs. Hideaki Iwanaga From geb3 at inter.net Thu Sep 16 17:08:30 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Sep 16 17:05:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Paging Pete Phillipps Message-ID: Been out of touch for some time now. Will someone in Leicester search the pubs, look for him under the football grandstands and check to make sure if his bike is in the garage? Appreciate the he'p. George "craving some beer nourishment right now" Bates Yokohama, Japan Now in progress: J53 "Setting The Stage", German vs. David Olie SASL M13 "Recon", Free French vs. German ENEMY 77 "Le Herisson", German vs. Hideaki Iwanaga From Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au Thu Sep 16 17:53:53 2004 From: Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au (Richard Weiley) Date: Thu Sep 16 17:54:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AAR: A74 Valhalla Bound (long, but worth it) Message-ID: George Your aar brought back some good memories of playing this scenario. One tactic I applied as the German was that during setup I sat my opponent down in front of the TV and put on the Chronos video featuring the Panther tank - 45 minutes of German propaganda footage completely intimidated him even before the Panthers got on the map. When the Panthers eventually entered I had the exact opposite experience as you and the panzers obliterated the Russian spearhead in advancing fire and the next defensive fire phase. My other memory is of that damn PSW 234/4. I had it HIP'ed in an ambush position (in woods) facing west in order to fire into the rear of soviet tanks as they passed. The positioning was perfect, at the end of the Russian movement phase he had between 4 and 6 soviet AFV's within its CA within 6 hexes all rear target facing, all loaded with riders. With the defensive fire phase and prep fire phase to look forward to I placed the AC on the map saying something about how these opportunities don't come along very often and the only thing that could possibly go wrong now would be to malf the gun. Of course my first to hit roll was boxcars. Thankfully the aforementioned Panthers saved the day. Might be time to get this one back on the table. regards Richard ****************************************************************************** This email message, including any attached files, is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The NSW Department of Commerce prohibits the right to publish, copy, distribute or disclose any information contained in this email, or its attachments, by any party other than the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete it from your system. No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the NSW Department of Commerce by email. The views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Department, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of NSW Department of Commerce. The NSW Department of Commerce accepts no liability for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email and recommends that the recipient check this email and any attached files for the presence of viruses. ****************************************************************************** From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 16 19:03:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 16 19:03:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AAR: A74 Valhalla Bound (long, but worth it) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 08:04:10 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Besides, now I too can finally moan & groan that I have been diced. What >added insult to injury was that none of these low ammo and B# monster guns >broke. Not one. All those 2s and 3s were also conveniently below my SAN of >4. Rats. Now that I've had my chance to wallow in self-pity I feel I can >stand in comradeship with the rest of you whiners out there. Rah! Now you know why Godzilla gets so agro. He rolls crappy dice. Who amongst us can honestly say that we haven't wanted to crush Tokyo beneath our feet after rolling 3 boxcars in a row? (Excellent AAR.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From wrongway at nowonline.net Thu Sep 16 19:12:13 2004 From: wrongway at nowonline.net (pete shelling) Date: Thu Sep 16 19:15:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MMP license agreement question Message-ID: <008501c49c5b$c09713e0$13148304@default> anybody in the know: Could MMP even sell existing product without a licensing agreement? If not, it's easy to see how this could contribute to the delay of new product. Obviously, it would be a bad decision to print 5000 copies of new stuff if you weren't sure you could move it. Just curious. Pete "guess I can keep designing scenarios after all" Shelling From sblanton at nc.rr.com Thu Sep 16 19:48:20 2004 From: sblanton at nc.rr.com (Scott Blanton) Date: Thu Sep 16 19:48:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: Trip to Sydney Message-ID: <000f01c49c60$cb117950$7702a8c0@coruscant> Hello, Here is a question for the boys down under. I'm headed down to Sydney in a couple of weeks. I'm going to be hanging out the first week of Oct. What kind of things should I visit while I'm there? Thanks for all the hints! Scott Blanton Cary, NC From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Sep 16 19:54:53 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Sep 16 19:54:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT: Trip to Sydney In-Reply-To: <000f01c49c60$cb117950$7702a8c0@coruscant> References: <000f01c49c60$cb117950$7702a8c0@coruscant> Message-ID: <414A51FD.1000508@charter.net> Australian chicks come to mind. Chas "Fair dinkum, I think 'em" Argent ...Scott Blanton wrote: >Hello, > >Here is a question for the boys down under. I'm headed down to Sydney in a >couple of weeks. I'm going to be hanging out the first week of Oct. What >kind of things should I visit while I'm there? Thanks for all the hints! > >Scott Blanton >Cary, NC > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Fri Sep 17 01:01:56 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Fri Sep 17 01:02:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MMP license agreement question In-Reply-To: <008501c49c5b$c09713e0$13148304@default> References: <008501c49c5b$c09713e0$13148304@default> Message-ID: <414A99F4.90807@mbj.nifty.com> pete shelling wrote: > > Pete "guess I can keep designing scenarios after all" Shelling WOOT! That means quality ASL stuff is OTW! From jtracy at bankofny.com Fri Sep 17 08:08:36 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Fri Sep 17 08:08:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AAR: A74 Valhalla Bound (long, but worth it) Message-ID: Outstanding AAR! You didn't use Road Bonus to get those Panthers in position, did you? I think the ground snow prohibits it. Sounds like crappy luck with those bad boys. I agree, exiting is the way to go for the Rooskies - the Germans are praying for fight in the town but I think that VC is just there to keep 'em honest. This baby was a howling dog in the original version when the Reds had three or maybe even four (!) more turns to get the job done! > This game's ASLRB discovery: The Case L point > blank DRMs do _not_ apply to moving/non-stopped > targets. This might be a typo, but Case L is NA to *Motion*/Non-Stopped targets and firers - big difference, as this makes the Dance o' Death viable. Running up and stopping adjacent to an enemy AFV, you can hit 'em on a seven, assuming BU, normal size target, and T/ST shooter. Throw in an AL and a gutsy CE, and it just gets groovier. Thanks again for the AAR, JR JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From geb3 at inter.net Fri Sep 17 08:42:13 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Sep 17 08:39:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A74 AAR Q&A In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Snipping JR's gushing praise of my prose, we cut to the chase: -----Original Message----- You didn't use Road Bonus to get those Panthers in position, did you? I think the ground snow prohibits it. BATES: SSR1 is pretty specific when it says, "Ground snow (E3.72) is in effect, but ignore _vehicular_ (ital) movement penalties (E3.724)." We took this to mean that enough snow had accumulated to make the ground white and hobnailed boots slide on slopes, but that the road movement rate was still available. Jeez, we used to drive like maniacs with 4 or 5 inches on the ground in the Twin Cities. Sounds like crappy luck with those bad boys. I agree, exiting is the way to go for the Rooskies - the Germans are praying for fight in the town but I think that VC is just there to keep 'em honest. This baby was a howling dog in the original version when the Reds had three or maybe even four (!) more turns to get the job done! BATES: If the Reds only option was to take the buildings, people would be whining up and down that the scenario was unbalanced. With a concentrated force, Jerry would skulk and whittle them down on approach and then grind up whatever was left in the streets. I can't believe anyone would think about extending this monster out to 10 or 12 turns. Inconceivable. > This game's ASLRB discovery: The Case L point > blank DRMs do _not_ apply to moving/non-stopped > targets. This might be a typo, but Case L is NA to *Motion*/Non-Stopped targets and firers - big difference, as this makes the Dance o' Death viable. Running up and stopping adjacent to an enemy AFV, you can hit 'em on a seven, assuming BU, normal size target, and T/ST shooter. Throw in an AL and a gutsy CE, and it just gets groovier. BATES: It should indeed be _motion_. Apologies for being sloppy. However, I as the firer was stationary, and I was most bummed to finally discover that I did not get a -2 just because the pissant T34 trying to get into my hip pocket was moving. Thanks again for the AAR BATES: Thanks for taking the time to read it. When's your next visit to Tokyo? From jtracy at bankofny.com Fri Sep 17 08:46:21 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Fri Sep 17 08:46:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A74 AAR Q&A Message-ID: > BATES: SSR1 is pretty specific when it says, > "Ground snow (E3.72) is in effect, but ignore > _vehicular_ (ital) movement penalties (E3.724)." Ah, cool, I remembered the ground snow but not the SSR. In fact, every time I played it the Germs put some Panthers in HD on the hill, and that's not possible (I think) without road movement. > I can't believe anyone would think about > extending this monster out to 10 or 12 turns. It was the original Rout Report version, but give someone credit, they recognized a good scenario when they saw one and snipped the turns down and made it great. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 17 09:41:27 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 17 09:41:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A74 AAR Q&A In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:46:21 -0400, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: >> I can't believe anyone would think about >> extending this monster out to 10 or 12 turns. > >It was the original Rout Report version, but give someone credit, they >recognized a good scenario when they saw one and snipped the turns down >and made it great. The original "Valhalla Bound" (X11) was 9.5 turns; A74 is 8 turns. They're otherwise pretty much identical, except for some SSR changes: in the original, the Germans could HIP 3 MMC (rather than 2 squad-equivalents), and were not allowed to Bore Sight. Also, buildings still had their upper levels. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jtracy at bankofny.com Fri Sep 17 10:11:24 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Fri Sep 17 10:11:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A74 AAR Q&A Message-ID: > The original "Valhalla Bound" (X11) was 9.5 > turns; A74 is 8 turns. Good grief, my brain must be leaking out my ears. Again. Well, even two extra turns would be a helluva boost to the Bolshie chances. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Sep 17 14:10:34 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Sep 17 14:10:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Assemble/disassemble..argh! Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040917160537.019d6d10@pop3.direcway.com> At 12:11 PM 9/17/2004, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: >Good grief, my brain must be leaking out my ears. Know that feeling.. :) Your part of turn, Prep fire, you assemble mortar, it is marked Prepped, but your squad can shoot inherent right? ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From janusz.maxe at unf.se Fri Sep 17 14:14:08 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Fri Sep 17 14:14:12 2004 Subject: VB: [Aslml] Assemble/disassemble..argh! Message-ID: -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: Janusz Maxe Skickat: den 17 september 2004 23:14 Till: 'ron mosher' ?mne: SV: [Aslml] Assemble/disassemble..argh! Yes, and if it's the Soviet 80mm piece, and late in the war, it can fire once too. Check the ordnance notes. Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r ron mosher > Skickat: den 17 september 2004 23:11 > Till: jtracy@bankofny.com; bprobst@netspace.net.au > Kopia: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > ?mne: [Aslml] Assemble/disassemble..argh! > > > At 12:11 PM 9/17/2004, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: > >Good grief, my brain must be leaking out my ears. > > Know that feeling.. :) > > Your part of turn, > > Prep fire, you assemble mortar, it is marked Prepped, but > your squad can > shoot inherent right? > > > 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 strangerequests at hotmail.com Fri Sep 17 14:52:33 2004 From: strangerequests at hotmail.com (Strange Requests) Date: Fri Sep 17 14:52:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels Message-ID: Ok gents, I'm here at the Arnhem ASKL tournament (aar to follow) and an interesting question came up that can either go under the crack head category or under the whoa category. Unfortunately, can't find in the rb whether its allowed or not. Heres the question: Can german infantry declare a gun duel? ie, Russian tank is adjacent to german infantry unit and decides to fire its MG's prior to movement so no MP's have been expended. Can the inf unit declare a gun duel using its inherent SW and attempt to roll for fausts? If it expended MP's it would fall under def first fire. The rules say to treat SW as ordinance. Either only vehicles can declare gun duels or its anyone manning a SW. Next question, can a pinned vehicle crew still try to roll for smoke grenades? Thanks in Advance. _________________________________________________________________ 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 Sep 17 18:17:37 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Fri Sep 17 18:14:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A74 AAR: Another illegal setup! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Bruce just points out something we all missed during play: SSR1 also mandates that "all buildings are ground level only." Somehow we played through this, but my HIP 658/MMG & 9-1 should have had to have been removed, too. Sigh... - 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: Saturday, September 18, 2004 1:41 AM To: jtracy@bankofny.com; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: A74 AAR Q&A On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:46:21 -0400, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: >> I can't believe anyone would think about >> extending this monster out to 10 or 12 turns. > >It was the original Rout Report version, but give someone credit, they >recognized a good scenario when they saw one and snipped the turns down >and made it great. The original "Valhalla Bound" (X11) was 9.5 turns; A74 is 8 turns. They're otherwise pretty much identical, except for some SSR changes: in the original, the Germans could HIP 3 MMC (rather than 2 squad-equivalents), and were not allowed to Bore Sight. Also, buildings still had their upper levels. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." 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 oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Sep 18 01:57:27 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sat Sep 18 01:55:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Strange Requests [strangerequests@hotmail.com] wrote: > Can german infantry declare a gun duel? ie, Russian tank is adjacent to > german infantry unit and decides to fire its MG's prior to movement so no > MP's have been expended. Yes, as per C5.33. > Can the inf unit declare a gun duel using its > inherent SW and attempt to roll for fausts? Yes. > If it expended MP's it would > fall under def first fire. The rules say to treat SW as ordinance. Either > only vehicles can declare gun duels or its anyone manning a SW. Only the moving vehicle can normally declare a Gun Duel, as per C2.2401, however any DEFENDER may also declare it as per C5.33 if the attacking vehicle declares BFF *before* expending any MP, as is the case for you. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 18 01:58:51 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 18 01:59:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Assemble/disassemble..argh! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040917160537.019d6d10@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040917160537.019d6d10@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 16:10:34 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >Your part of turn, > >Prep fire, you assemble mortar, it is marked Prepped, but your squad can >shoot inherent right? Yes (if it's a full squad); no if it's a HS or crew. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 18 02:02:21 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 18 02:02:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A74 AAR Q&A In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7aunk097o2j6ep5jot6djtfbni60ggenvo@4ax.com> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:11:24 -0400, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: >Good grief, my brain must be leaking out my ears. Again. I wouldn't worry; with all the scenarios you must have played I don't know how you keep them all straight in your head. I have trouble remembering what I did last week. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 18 02:30:33 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 18 02:30:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:52:33 -0400, "Strange Requests" wrote: >Can german infantry declare a gun duel? ie, Russian tank is adjacent to >german infantry unit and decides to fire its MG's prior to movement so no >MP's have been expended. Can the inf unit declare a gun duel using its >inherent SW and attempt to roll for fausts? If it expended MP's it would >fall under def first fire. The rules say to treat SW as ordinance. Either >only vehicles can declare gun duels or its anyone manning a SW. Yes. As the DEFENDER, you could declare a "Gun Duel" with inherent FP if you think it may help you (e.g., vs. a CE vehicle). C5.33 says that the DEFENDER is allowed to declare a Gun Duel in this situation (the only time the DEFENDER may do so; Gun Duels are normally only declared by the ATTACKER). There is no restriction given on the source of DEFENDER fire so permitted. (C2.2401 talks about *vehicles* declaring Gun Duels, but it's addressing the specific case of the ATTACKER using Bounding First Fire; obviously, a DEFENDER can never be using "Bounding First Fire" so there should not be any further restriction attached.) What I'm not so sure about it is whether a DEFENDER that is *not* the target of the attack can declare a Gun Duel. C2.2401 says that a vehicle may only declare a Gun Duel vs. a DEFENDER attacking it -- so the ATTACKER can't use a Gun Duel to shoot one non-firing target before someone else shoots him. It seems logical to extend the same restriction to the C5.33 provision (i.e., only the actual DEFENDER being shot at can try for the Gun Duel) but it's not completely clear IMO. >Next question, can a pinned vehicle crew still try to roll for smoke >grenades? Yes, provided that the other restrictions of D13.35 are abided by (e.g., a CT AFV, if Pinned, would be BU, and thus could not use smoke grenades). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Sep 18 06:03:58 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sat Sep 18 06:02:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst wrote: > What I'm not so sure about it is whether a DEFENDER that is *not* > the target of the attack can declare a Gun Duel. C2.2401 says that a > vehicle may only declare a Gun Duel vs. a DEFENDER attacking it -- > so the ATTACKER can't use a Gun Duel to shoot one non-firing target > before someone else shoots him. Agreed, but this is partly due to the mechanics, which only allows the currently moving vehicle to perform BFF. > It seems logical to extend the same restriction to the C5.33 provision > (i.e., only the actual DEFENDER being shot at can try for the Gun Duel) > but it's not completely clear IMO. > I don't think this is logical. I think it's much more logical that any DEFENDER should be able to declare the Gun Duel, since any DEFENDER is normally allowed to attack the vehicle when the vehicle moves. Moreover, I cannot see any restriction of this kind in C5.33 either. It says: "...a DEFENDER can still declare a Gun Duel..." -- not "the DEFENDER being shot at" From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Sep 18 08:04:50 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Sep 18 08:04:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels Message-ID: > >What I'm not so sure about it is whether a DEFENDER that is *not* the >target >of the attack can declare a Gun Duel... It >seems logical to extend the same restriction to the C5.33 provision (i.e., >only the actual DEFENDER being shot at can try for the Gun Duel) but it's >not >completely clear IMO. > I'm a little puzzled why you think this is not clear. C5.33 pretty obviously states "a DEFENDER", with no reference to which DEFENDER is the target. It's so direct, that I can't see any logical permutations being required and I don't agree with your assertion about it being a logical extension to limit the Gun Duel to the target of the BFF attack. But then again, you and I have crossed swords before over Gun Duels, haven't we? :-) ;-) (I sent Perry several questions after our original Gun Duel duel, but he never replied. I admit, my questions were fairly extensive, and the answers probably not easily gleaned.) 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 cardboard.killer at verizon.net Sat Sep 18 11:34:15 2004 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Sat Sep 18 10:32:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c49dae$1b72b870$6401a8c0@NewDell> >Agreed, but this is partly due to the mechanics, which only >allows the currently moving vehicle to perform BFF. A question I had was what if the squad blows its first PF check? May it then attempt another as part of the same gun duel? From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Sep 18 14:01:09 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Sep 18 14:01:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels Message-ID: > >A question I had was what if the squad blows its first PF check? May it >then attempt another as part of the same gun duel? > Sure, why not? Making a PF is the same as using a SW, regardless of whether the PF Check was successful. Since a squad could fire two SW as the result of the same MP expenditure, IMO there is no difference in this case wrt Gun Duel by a DEFENDER. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 18 19:35:34 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 18 19:36:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: <000001c49dae$1b72b870$6401a8c0@NewDell> References: <000001c49dae$1b72b870$6401a8c0@NewDell> Message-ID: <51spk05q5kj5j6lc7mkl6p2mj7mndvoos6@4ax.com> On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:34:15 -0500, "Brian W" wrote: >A question I had was what if the squad blows its first PF check? May it >then attempt another as part of the same gun duel? I agree with Bruce B.; unlike ROF, attempting two PF from a single squad is not dependent on how many MP the moving unit is spending, so it should be permitted. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 18 19:40:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 18 19:56:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 15:03:58 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >> What I'm not so sure about it is whether a DEFENDER that is *not* >> the target of the attack can declare a Gun Duel. C2.2401 says that a >> vehicle may only declare a Gun Duel vs. a DEFENDER attacking it -- >> so the ATTACKER can't use a Gun Duel to shoot one non-firing target >> before someone else shoots him. > >Agreed, but this is partly due to the mechanics, which only allows the >currently moving vehicle to perform BFF. Only partly, though. Any DEFENDER might want to shoot at the moving vehicle, but the moving vehicle may not want to shoot at that firing unit -- it may have a different target in mind. If that target is not firing at it, it can't declare a Gun Duel. >I don't think this is logical. I think it's much more logical that any >DEFENDER should be able to declare the Gun Duel, since any DEFENDER is >normally allowed to attack the vehicle when the vehicle moves. >Moreover, I cannot see any restriction of this kind in C5.33 either. It >says: "...a DEFENDER can still declare a Gun Duel..." -- not "the DEFENDER >being shot at" Agreed, agreed ... but then, I also think it's logical that a moving vehicle might want to squeeze a shot off at a particular target before a different DEFENDER shoots it -- but that's explicitly not permitted. It strikes me as slightly odd that in the reverse situation there is no such limitation, which is why I'm uncertain .... Perhaps I'm just thinking about it too hard. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 18 19:49:41 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 18 19:59:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0espk0pngr3740v6ein8ru1ntopr61etqt@4ax.com> On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:04:50 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >I'm a little puzzled why you think this is not clear. Ha, ha! You know, I was *going* to write that *explicitly* any old DEFENDER, not just the target, could attempt the Gun Duel, but then I thought "but that's not the situation in the 'normal' Gun Duel situation -- the Gun Duel exists *only* between firer and target. If I state the reverse as being 'obviously' true in the 'DEFENDER Gun Duel', someone is bound to question my certainty about it because of this!" So I hedged my bets and everyone beats me up on it. Clearly, I need better training in being cautious . >But then again, you and I have crossed swords before over Gun Duels, haven't >we? :-) ;-) > >(I sent Perry several questions after our original Gun Duel duel, but he >never replied. I admit, my questions were fairly extensive, and the answers >probably not easily gleaned.) Ditto, and ditto. But the previous dispute about Gun Duels had nothing to do with this situation. To summarise: I agree that C5.33, as written, does not limit the DEFENDER-declared Gun Duel to be *only* between firer and target. However, given that the ATTACKER-declared Gun Duel does only exist between firer and target, I wonder if this was the *intent* of C5.33. I suppose we'll never know. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Sep 18 20:55:40 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Sep 18 20:55:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Gun Duels Message-ID: > >So I hedged my bets and everyone beats me up on it. Clearly, I need better >training in being cautious . > That'll teach you! Head down and full steam ahead, as always. You'll just get beat up in either case... :-) Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx From aslml at aslwebdex.net Sat Sep 18 21:49:22 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Sun Sep 19 06:12:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: Looking for a game - VASL email Message-ID: <000001c49e4a$4b430b30$0700a8c0@D5G57231> The game of Raate Road (ASL A 54) I was playing came to a premature end. My opponent apparently up and quit ASL (and I didn't think I was that bad an opponent!). I was really getting into the game, and would love to find someone else to play it (or, failing that, something else). Anyone interested? I can usually turn around a log file in 24 hours or less, and would prefer someone who can do the same. Prefer IIFT, but will play IFT if you can't handle that many columns. Larry Memmott From rjmosher at direcway.com Sun Sep 19 12:01:41 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sun Sep 19 12:01:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC Melee FG strange Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919135649.01946bc8@pop3.direcway.com> Listeroids, Lone Japn MMC Banzais into hex with bad guys and survives, all the Japn MMCs in the world are ringing him in adjacent hexes after movement. It is now AFPh, Can the adjacent Japn MMCs fire into the CC hex? Can they form a FG with the Banzai dude? If they can: is FP against him only the ringing "friends" or does it include his own? ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Sep 19 12:50:42 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sun Sep 19 12:48:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC Melee FG strange In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919135649.01946bc8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ron Mosher wrote: > Lone Japn MMC Banzais into hex with bad guys and survives, all the Japn > MMCs in the world are ringing him in adjacent hexes after movement. > That's what he deserves from being a bad guy. > It is now AFPh, > > Can the adjacent Japn MMCs fire into the CC hex? > Yes. All Locations within Normal Range and in LOS can be targeted. > Can they form a FG with the Banzai dude? > Yes, as long as they fire at the Banzai dude's Location - since he cannot fire out of its Location containing a KEU. > If they can: is FP against him only the ringing "friends" or does it > include his own? > Only the bad guys are affected by this attack. The banzai dude isn't affected at all by friendly fire. A7.4 says: "...with the outcome of such fire affecting all those enemy (or Melee) units in the target Location". So friendly units are only affected if there is Melee, which is not yet the case here. From smcbee at midtnn.net Sun Sep 19 13:04:47 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Sun Sep 19 13:04:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC Melee FG strange In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919135649.01946bc8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <000001c49e83$f1bb60f0$d0f69904@steves> Hi, Ok, sounds bad (or good, depending on who you are). Yes, they can fire into the CC hex. Nothing prevents this and since the location is not marked with a Melee counter, only enemy units will be affected. I would guess so, as I was unable to find anything that said a unit marked with a CC counter cannot fire during the AFPh. Not sure what you mean by your last statement as fire into a CC location can only affect enemy units. I could be wrong about the unit being able to fire, but hey, at least it's a starting point. Steve Ron asked: Lone Japn MMC Banzais into hex with bad guys and survives, all the Japn MMCs in the world are ringing him in adjacent hexes after movement. It is now AFPh, Can the adjacent Japn MMCs fire into the CC hex? Can they form a FG with the Banzai dude? If they can: is FP against him only the ringing "friends" or does it include his own? From sgtono at yahoo.com Sun Sep 19 13:12:53 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Sun Sep 19 13:12:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC Melee FG strange In-Reply-To: <000001c49e83$f1bb60f0$d0f69904@steves> Message-ID: <20040919201253.8782.qmail@web51310.mail.yahoo.com> Steve and Ole, You may now play taps for my American squads. Keith --- Steve McBee wrote: > Hi, > > Ok, sounds bad (or good, depending on who you are). > > Yes, they can fire into the CC hex. Nothing > prevents this and since the > location is not marked with a Melee counter, only > enemy units will be > affected. > > I would guess so, as I was unable to find anything > that said a unit marked > with a CC counter cannot fire during the AFPh. > > Not sure what you mean by your last statement as > fire into a CC location can > only affect enemy units. > > I could be wrong about the unit being able to fire, > but hey, at least it's a > starting point. > > Steve > > Ron asked: > Lone Japn MMC Banzais into hex with bad guys and > survives, all the Japn > MMCs in the world are ringing him in adjacent hexes > after movement. > > It is now AFPh, > > Can the adjacent Japn MMCs fire into the CC hex? > > Can they form a FG with the Banzai dude? > > If they can: is FP against him only the ringing > "friends" or does it > include his own? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From rjmosher at direcway.com Sun Sep 19 15:20:21 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sun Sep 19 15:20:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919171847.01b79ec0@pop3.direcway.com> Gang, Banzai dude on top of AMI broken leader at end of AFPh, can leader rout in RtPh, I think so...but.. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From smcbee at midtnn.net Sun Sep 19 15:27:42 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Sun Sep 19 15:27:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919171847.01b79ec0@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <000001c49e97$e6915130$18f49904@steves> Yep. Unless it is held in Melee, a unit can always route. Steve Ron asks: Gang, Banzai dude on top of AMI broken leader at end of AFPh, can leader rout in RtPh, I think so...but.. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From s.deller at charter.net Sun Sep 19 21:07:34 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Sun Sep 19 21:07:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout References: <000001c49e97$e6915130$18f49904@steves> Message-ID: <003101c49ec7$5b8f1240$2083b018@DHT8S631> Ron, The broken American leader may rout from the Japanese MMC in his location since their are not yet in Melee, but only if the leader has a viable rout path free from other enemy units. BTW, Steve and Ole were correct: the Japanese MMC may FG at the unit(s) in CC. Cheers, Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve McBee" To: "'ron mosher'" ; "'aslml-aslml.net@lists'" Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 6:27 PM Subject: RE: [Aslml] CC and rout > Yep. Unless it is held in Melee, a unit can always route. > > Steve > > Ron asks: > Gang, > > Banzai dude on top of AMI broken leader at end of AFPh, can leader rout in > RtPh, I think so...but.. > > 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 s.deller at charter.net Sun Sep 19 21:15:18 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Sun Sep 19 21:15:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> Gentlemen, Interesting guidance from Perry on the handling of AFV Crews and Armor Leaders during the RB CG RePh. Cheers, Sean > 1. Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even if > there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used in > "infantry" mode)? Yes to both. > 2. May a surviving AL re-man another vehicle in his platoon? A vehicle > from another platoon? Yes, in the normal manner during the course of a scenario, until the Armor Leader's PLtn is withdrawn. > 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their platoon is > Withdrawn? > Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole > survivor of its platoon? No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Sep 19 21:17:56 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Sep 19 21:18:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC Melee FG strange In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919135649.01946bc8@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919135649.01946bc8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 14:01:41 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >Lone Japn MMC Banzais into hex with bad guys and survives, all the Japn >MMCs in the world are ringing him in adjacent hexes after movement. > >It is now AFPh, > >Can the adjacent Japn MMCs fire into the CC hex? Sure, assuming they have LOS. There is no melee yet. (Of course, they could fire even if there *was* a Melee, but I guess what you mean is, will the Japanese unit be affected -- to which the answer is "no".) >Can they form a FG with the Banzai dude? Yes, again assuming mutual LOS. (It *is* possible to be in adjacent hexes with no LOS, but I guess that is not the situation here.) >If they can: is FP against him only the ringing "friends" or does it >include his own? I don't understand your question. The unit in the hex is tripled and halved (TPBF + Area Fire); adjacent surrounding units are at normal value (PBF + Area Fire). Add 'em all up and let 'er rip. Or fire them individually, or some combination thereof. Whatever you think will work best. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Sep 19 21:19:43 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Sep 19 21:19:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919171847.01b79ec0@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040919171847.01b79ec0@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <3hmsk055bfnm4iujuet6uc88olgq5jisau@4ax.com> On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:20:21 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >Banzai dude on top of AMI broken leader at end of AFPh, can leader rout in >RtPh, I think so...but.. He *must* rout. He's not held in Melee. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From janusz.maxe at unf.se Mon Sep 20 01:42:02 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Mon Sep 20 01:42:04 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] CC and rout Message-ID: So, Rob have played this game before, right. He's no newbie? And still, he confuses CC with melee. Is he alone in this? I don't think so. What does the CC counter placed when two opposing sides are in the same location mean? That you can't fire out of the hex? Is that it. Because the distinction and confusion between CC and melee is quite unnecessary. Units enters each others hexes, fine. Then a round of CC is resoloved, and then, and only then, is a Melee counter placed and all the special rules for units in melee (no fire, no rout, not GO) come into play. WHy did they make this rule harder? Janusz From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Sep 20 02:14:44 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Sep 20 02:12:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Janusz Maxe wrote: > So, Rob have played this game before, right. > He's no newbie? > > And still, he confuses CC with melee. Is he alone in this? > No, don't think so. > I don't think so. What does the CC counter placed when two > opposing sides are in the same location mean? That you can't fire > out of the hex? Is that it. The fire out of hex restriction is *not* dependant on the existance of a CC counter. EX: If a unit survives a CC attack while remaining concealed, it is not locked in Melee, and does not have a CC counter. It can still not fire out of the hex, but it can move out of it (which it couldn't if beneath a CC counter). >From skimming the rules, I find that a CC counter means that: 1) you cannot advance out of the Location (A4.7) 2) you cannot move out of the Location (E1.13) 3) you *can* rout (A7.211) 4) there is not yet Melee (A8.31, A12.151, A15.432, D6.5) 5) a DEFENDER cannot perform *non*-CC Reaction Fire (D7.21) > Because the distinction and confusion between CC and melee is > quite unnecessary. Units enters each others hexes, fine. Then a > round of CC is resoloved, and then, and only then, is a Melee > counter placed and all the special rules for units in melee (no > fire, no rout, not GO) come into play. > > WHy did they make this rule harder? > I think its quite necessary to allow berserks, and HW/Banzai units to fire against enemies in its Location after the charge. I don't think the distinction is much of a problem, the problem is that the effect of a CC counter is spread out among the rules. A11 should have a paragraph listing all the above, *and* also specifically mention that fire into a CC Location only affects enemy units, as this is often overlooked. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 03:03:02 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 03:02:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3eatk0576g4i63tvtdool4d7n6m059eki2@4ax.com> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:14:44 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >>From skimming the rules, I find that a CC counter means that: > >1) you cannot advance out of the Location (A4.7) >2) you cannot move out of the Location (E1.13) Note that is a particular situation involving zero NVR and attacks vs. a moving unit ... the presence of a CC marker does not "generically" prevent movement out of the Location, but only in the exact case as described specifically in E1.13. >3) you *can* rout (A7.211) >4) there is not yet Melee (A8.31, A12.151, A15.432, D6.5) >5) a DEFENDER cannot perform *non*-CC Reaction Fire (D7.21) >I don't think the distinction is much of a problem, the problem is that the >effect of a CC counter is spread out among the rules. A11 should have a >paragraph listing all the above, *and* also specifically mention that fire >into a CC Location only affects enemy units, as this is often overlooked. Can't argue with that. The biggest single "effect" of the CC marker is the prohibition of Advance movement; otherwise, it's mostly useful as a reminder that "there could be some Close Combat activities in this Location to take care of". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From mountainview at westelcom.com Mon Sep 20 04:04:12 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Mon Sep 20 04:04:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders References: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <02e401c49f01$91a96d00$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> "Consistently" ridiculous. Since a Surviving AL becomes an inherent part of its surviving Crew, he should share the fate/destiny of said Surviving Crew. Either both stay, or both leave. "Consistenty" inconsistent: If *two* (or more) Crews are the only surviving elements of an AFV Platoon, the AL gets to *stay* (based on Perry's answer to #3). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Deller" To: "ASLML" Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 12:15 AM Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > Gentlemen, > > Interesting guidance from Perry on the handling of AFV Crews and Armor > Leaders during the RB CG RePh. > > Cheers, > Sean > >> 1. Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even if >> there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used in >> "infantry" mode)? > > > Yes to both. > > >> 2. May a surviving AL re-man another vehicle in his platoon? A vehicle >> from another platoon? > > > Yes, in the normal manner during the course of a scenario, until the Armor > Leader's PLtn is withdrawn. > > >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their platoon > is >> Withdrawn? >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole >> survivor of its platoon? > > > No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon Sep 20 05:28:44 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Mon Sep 20 05:28:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders References: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> <02e401c49f01$91a96d00$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <000b01c49f0d$5f052360$2083b018@DHT8S631> I interpreted Perry's reply as intended to prevent the accumulation of ALs during the course of the CG. Surviving crews remain to fight on as infantry, ALs go when their platoon is Withdrawn, even if that requires a Withdrawl DR solely for the surviving AL. Seems reasonable to me. I don't see how you've interpreted #3 to mean ALs remain. Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mountain View Cottage" To: "ASLML" Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 7:04 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > "Consistently" ridiculous. > > Since a Surviving AL becomes an > inherent part of its surviving Crew, > he should share the fate/destiny of > said Surviving Crew. > > Either both stay, or both leave. > > "Consistenty" inconsistent: If *two* > (or more) Crews are the only surviving > elements of an AFV Platoon, the AL > gets to *stay* (based on Perry's answer > to #3). > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Deller" > To: "ASLML" > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 12:15 AM > Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > > > Gentlemen, > > > > Interesting guidance from Perry on the handling of AFV Crews and Armor > > Leaders during the RB CG RePh. > > > > Cheers, > > Sean > > > >> 1. Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even if > >> there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used in > >> "infantry" mode)? > > > > > > Yes to both. > > > > > >> 2. May a surviving AL re-man another vehicle in his platoon? A vehicle > >> from another platoon? > > > > > > Yes, in the normal manner during the course of a scenario, until the Armor > > Leader's PLtn is withdrawn. > > > > > >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their platoon > > is > >> Withdrawn? > >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole > >> survivor of its platoon? > > > > > > No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Mon Sep 20 05:48:12 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Sep 20 05:46:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CC and rout In-Reply-To: <3eatk0576g4i63tvtdool4d7n6m059eki2@4ax.com> Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > >>From skimming the rules, I find that a CC counter means that: > > > >1) you cannot advance out of the Location (A4.7) > >2) you cannot move out of the Location (E1.13) > and Bruce Probst answered: > Note that is a particular situation involving zero NVR and attacks vs. a > moving unit ... the presence of a CC marker does not "generically" prevent > movement out of the Location, but only in the exact case as described > specifically in E1.13. > You're correct, at least formally, but I cannot recall any situation where a unit marked with a CC counter is allowed to move during the MPh, so in essence, this can be considered a general CC rule. Note that most other situations where units are marked with CC, they explicitely must end its MPh (EX: HW, Banzai, Berserk, HIP Japanese detection), which therefore can be extended to the general rule of E1.13. From smcbee at midtnn.net Mon Sep 20 06:18:29 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Mon Sep 20 06:19:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: <000b01c49f0d$5f052360$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <000001c49f14$59ab5720$f6f39904@steves> Actually Perry's answer to all of this is supported by the rules: O11.6142, last sentence: "A Withdrawn result Eliminates each remaining non-Isolated AFV (even if abandoned/immobilized) of that platoon, as well as each armor leader originally entered with that Platoon (if any)." Note that nothing is said about the tank-less crews, which means that they are not affected by the withdrawal, but the armor leader is. So, why is Perry's answer "Consistently ridiculous?" This has been in the rules since Red Barricades came out (I checked in my first edition copy as well). Take care, Steve > "Consistently" ridiculous. > > Since a Surviving AL becomes an > inherent part of its surviving Crew, > he should share the fate/destiny of > said Surviving Crew. > > Either both stay, or both leave. > > "Consistenty" inconsistent: If *two* > (or more) Crews are the only surviving > elements of an AFV Platoon, the AL > gets to *stay* (based on Perry's answer > to #3). From pete at rockdata.com Mon Sep 20 08:33:39 2004 From: pete at rockdata.com (pete@rockdata.com) Date: Mon Sep 20 08:34:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Message-ID: <45693.143.127.131.4.1095694419.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> I just heard a little rumor that AoO is going to be out by the end of the year. Pete From scott.holst at us.army.mil Mon Sep 20 08:40:31 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Mon Sep 20 08:40:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Message-ID: <7b5316f7b58227.7b582277b5316f@us.army.mil> Yes, but which year? ----- Original Message ----- From: pete@rockdata.com Date: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:33 am Subject: [Aslml] AoO > I just heard a little rumor that AoO is going to be out by the end > of the > year. > > Pete > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 denis at teachlinux.com Mon Sep 20 08:45:03 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Mon Sep 20 08:45:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO In-Reply-To: <7b5316f7b58227.7b582277b5316f@us.army.mil> Message-ID: Screw AoO, whens the new rule book coming out? Denis On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > Yes, but which year? > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: pete@rockdata.com > Date: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:33 am > Subject: [Aslml] AoO > > > I just heard a little rumor that AoO is going to be out by the end > > of the > > year. > > > > Pete > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Sep 20 09:24:58 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Mon Sep 20 09:25:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040920162458.3293.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Does this mean that all the other projects are backed up the same amount of time as well ? I suppose the new journal won't be out until next summer. Maybe Aoo will come out in Novemeber if Boston loses the play offs. hmmmmmmmmmmmmm --- denis@teachlinux.com wrote: > > Screw AoO, whens the new rule book coming out? > > Denis > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > > > Yes, but which year? > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: pete@rockdata.com > > Date: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:33 am > > Subject: [Aslml] AoO > > > > > I just heard a little rumor that AoO is going to > be out by the end > > > of the > > > year. > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From denis at teachlinux.com Mon Sep 20 09:30:38 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Mon Sep 20 09:30:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO In-Reply-To: <20040920162458.3293.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I hope MMP was just sitting on the stuff waiting for the new Lic. deal to be put to bed. Denis On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > Does this mean that all the other projects are backed > up the same amount of time as well ? I suppose the new > journal won't be out until next summer. Maybe Aoo will > come out in Novemeber if Boston loses the play offs. > hmmmmmmmmmmmmm > --- denis@teachlinux.com wrote: > > > > > Screw AoO, whens the new rule book coming out? > > > > Denis > > > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > > > > > Yes, but which year? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: pete@rockdata.com > > > Date: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:33 am > > > Subject: [Aslml] AoO > > > > > > > I just heard a little rumor that AoO is going to > > be out by the end > > > > of the > > > > year. > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Mon Sep 20 09:45:48 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Mon Sep 20 09:45:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Message-ID: <7c0cadd7c0b096.7c0b0967c0cadd@us.army.mil> Hi- Actually, I think MMP renewed the license for Curts ego. It kinda reminds of the scene from Stalingrad the movie: All the ASL players are standing before opel blitz truck with food in the dead of winter and the MMP guys, in the truck, are saying that the ragged ASL'ers who desented against them must appologize or not get fed. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: denis@teachlinux.com Date: Monday, September 20, 2004 11:30 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] AoO > > I hope MMP was just sitting on the stuff waiting for the new Lic. > deal to > be put to bed. > > Denis > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > > > Does this mean that all the other projects are backed > > up the same amount of time as well ? I suppose the new > > journal won't be out until next summer. Maybe Aoo will > > come out in Novemeber if Boston loses the play offs. > > hmmmmmmmmmmmmm > > --- denis@teachlinux.com wrote: > > > > > > > > Screw AoO, whens the new rule book coming out? > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, but which year? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: pete@rockdata.com > > > > Date: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:33 am > > > > Subject: [Aslml] AoO > > > > > > > > > I just heard a little rumor that AoO is going to > > > be out by the end > > > > > of the > > > > > year. > > > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 tychog at co.wasco.or.us Mon Sep 20 09:55:38 2004 From: tychog at co.wasco.or.us (Tycho Granville) Date: Mon Sep 20 09:55:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO In-Reply-To: <7c0cadd7c0b096.7c0b0967c0cadd@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <002601c49f32$a86ca490$6600490a@WascoCo.local> > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > scott.holst@us.army.mil > > Hi- > > Actually, I think MMP renewed the license for Curts ego. It > Err... Why? I suspect Hasbro would let loose the newbie lawyers if *everybody* started making ASL stuff without paying any licensing fees. Tycho From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 20 10:29:08 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 20 10:29:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: <3a5840$7ocu8k@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Steve McBee" > Date: 2004/09/20 Mon AM 08:18:29 CDT > To: "'Sean Deller'" , > "'Mountain View Cottage'" , > "'ASLML'" > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > Actually Perry's answer to all of this is supported by the rules: > > O11.6142, last sentence: "A Withdrawn result Eliminates each remaining > non-Isolated AFV (even if abandoned/immobilized) of that platoon, as well as > each armor leader originally entered with that Platoon (if any)." > Which also eliminates the crew. There is no allowance for a crew to be treated as a separate entity than the AL. > Note that nothing is said about the tank-less crews, which means that they > are not affected by the withdrawal, but the armor leader is. > D3.43 says the AL "ceases to exist once the crew takes counter form". How can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". So, one rolls withdrawl...the vehicles and all (existing) AL are removed...any crews afoot remain. OK, subsequently that crew re-mans a vehicle and now we have an AL back. it didn't exist until it was in a vehicle. I would hazard that at the end of the current scenario should that AL still be in a vehicle it would be recalled. However, what is to prevent one from bailing AL's just before the scenario end? Once out, they "cease to exist". What we have, as usual, is an off the HIP PS which didn't take everything (rules?) into consideration. The AL and it's crew should be removed...not just the AL. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Sep 20 10:45:37 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon Sep 20 10:50:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AoO In-Reply-To: <002601c49f32$a86ca490$6600490a@WascoCo.local> References: <7c0cadd7c0b096.7c0b0967c0cadd@us.army.mil> <002601c49f32$a86ca490$6600490a@WascoCo.local> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040920124304.019527c0@pop3.direcway.com> At 11:55 AM 9/20/2004, Tycho Granville wrote: >Err... Why? I suspect Hasbro would let loose the newbie lawyers if >*everybody* started making ASL stuff without paying any licensing fees. Please don't quote the gadfly, he's on a lot of ignore lists, because nothing we can say will change his posting, and only feeds a real sad case's ego. Remember all lists have "ignore" features and your mail program does too. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From pete at rockdata.com Mon Sep 20 12:21:10 2004 From: pete at rockdata.com (pete@rockdata.com) Date: Mon Sep 20 12:21:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] save the crews.....and Curt's ego Message-ID: <17584.143.127.131.4.1095708070.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> Those surviving armor crews are great to man heavy weapons in a support by fire type role. Keep em back in a building and up high. They need a good, but not great field of fire. (Having too big a field of fire means that more people can shoot you.) You don't need to keep a leader with them as they can self rally. They are a great asset to have, but more so for the russians. Q: How can Curt have an ego? He plays for those sh_t heads in Boston. He'd be better off going back to the Diamondbacks or even playing for the Mariners. How can you be proud of a team that beats up old men? Curt even called Pedro a punk. Pete "Yankee fan" Belford From rln22 at yahoo.com Mon Sep 20 15:42:31 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Mon Sep 20 15:42:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040920224231.83906.qmail@web52603.mail.yahoo.com> Folks, About to play Blocking Action at Lipki (A44) and I want to attempt some 'fog of war'. I have a huge KV (9mp), a T34 M40 (17mp) and two BTs (23mp). I come in concealed, and plan to go around both flanks of a large forest between me and my enemy. I want to split the tanks into two platoons (the heavys and the BTs) and send them, concealed and using platoon movement (only the KV has a radio), so that the defender must split his afvs, not knowing where the big bad boys are. Now, my question regards counting MPs while moving concealed tanks, and how I might maintain this ruse against even the most pedantic opponent. A) When moving a concealed afv, what exactly must one call out beyond mere numbers? VCA change (without saying which way)? Start and stop, I imagine. But nothing about buttoning up. B) If my KV and T34 are platoon moving (PM) together, what happens when one comes to the number nine? May I merely say, 'one more hex for 9, then stay there in motion'? In other words, what happens to the MP of a tank moving in PM, when its partner runs out? (if one does have to account for all movement, then I would have to point to the concealed T34 and say, 'this one changes its VCA 8 more times, and stays there in motion'. Please say this is silly and wrong!) Thus, it is my hope to bring in two platoons, each counting only 9mp for the first two turns (and bringing up loads of infantry in trucks), in the hopes that he will be completely at a loss as to where my KV is. I hope I can do this... yours, RN __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mountainview at westelcom.com Mon Sep 20 15:53:29 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Mon Sep 20 15:53:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders References: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> <02e401c49f01$91a96d00$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> <000b01c49f0d$5f052360$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <033f01c49f64$a7c4b910$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> 3 x PzIII all get whacked, but all three Crews survive, and one Crew has a 9-1 AL. The Platoon does not roll for Withdraw. The surviving Crews fight on, including the AL. This AL will *not*, *ever* leave the map due to Withdrawl, until it (the Crew) is the *last* such Crew from that original Platoon, and that Crew gets "Withdrawn", which, remarkably will only "Withdraw" the AL. The crew gets to stay. That's what #3 says. And that's kinda dumb. For all the others that keep arguing the fate of an AL from a Surviving Crew of a Platoon that *gets* Withdrawn (based on my only other post on this subject), be advised: I'm not talking about that situation. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Deller" To: "Mountain View Cottage" ; "ASLML" Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders >I interpreted Perry's reply as intended to prevent the accumulation of ALs > during the course of the CG. Surviving crews remain to fight on as > infantry, ALs go when their platoon is Withdrawn, even if that requires a > Withdrawl DR solely for the surviving AL. Seems reasonable to me. I > don't > see how you've interpreted #3 to mean ALs remain. > > Sean > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mountain View Cottage" > To: "ASLML" > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 7:04 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > >> "Consistently" ridiculous. >> >> Since a Surviving AL becomes an >> inherent part of its surviving Crew, >> he should share the fate/destiny of >> said Surviving Crew. >> >> Either both stay, or both leave. >> >> "Consistenty" inconsistent: If *two* >> (or more) Crews are the only surviving >> elements of an AFV Platoon, the AL >> gets to *stay* (based on Perry's answer >> to #3). >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sean Deller" >> To: "ASLML" >> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 12:15 AM >> Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders >> >> >> > Gentlemen, >> > >> > Interesting guidance from Perry on the handling of AFV Crews and Armor >> > Leaders during the RB CG RePh. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Sean >> > >> >> 1. Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even > if >> >> there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used > in >> >> "infantry" mode)? >> > >> > >> > Yes to both. >> > >> > >> >> 2. May a surviving AL re-man another vehicle in his platoon? A vehicle >> >> from another platoon? >> > >> > >> > Yes, in the normal manner during the course of a scenario, until the > Armor >> > Leader's PLtn is withdrawn. >> > >> > >> >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their > platoon >> > is >> >> Withdrawn? >> >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole >> >> survivor of its platoon? >> > >> > >> > No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 janusz.maxe at unf.se Mon Sep 20 16:39:31 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Mon Sep 20 16:39:39 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. Message-ID: I THINK the KV platoon won't be a problem, the T-34 must stay in motion when the KV runs out of MPs. The BTs will give it away, though. They can't stay in motion at 9 MPs, and if they stop at 9 then have to delay to 23, and state so to your opponent. Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r Robert Nelson > Skickat: den 21 september 2004 00:43 > Till: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > ?mne: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. > > > Folks, > > About to play Blocking Action at Lipki (A44) and I > want to attempt some 'fog of war'. > > I have a huge KV (9mp), a T34 M40 (17mp) and two BTs > (23mp). > > I come in concealed, and plan to go around both flanks > of a large forest between me and my enemy. I want to > split the tanks into two platoons (the heavys and the > BTs) and send them, concealed and using platoon > movement (only the KV has a radio), so that the > defender must split his afvs, not knowing where the > big bad boys are. > > Now, my question regards counting MPs while moving > concealed tanks, and how I might maintain this ruse > against even the most pedantic opponent. > > A) When moving a concealed afv, what exactly must one > call out beyond mere numbers? VCA change (without > saying which way)? Start and stop, I imagine. But > nothing about buttoning up. > > B) If my KV and T34 are platoon moving (PM) together, > what happens when one comes to the number nine? May I > merely say, 'one more hex for 9, then stay there in > motion'? In other words, what happens to the MP of a > tank moving in PM, when its partner runs out? (if one > does have to account for all movement, then I would > have to point to the concealed T34 and say, 'this one > changes its VCA 8 more times, and stays there in > motion'. Please say this is silly and wrong!) > > Thus, it is my hope to bring in two platoons, each > counting only 9mp for the first two turns (and > bringing up loads of infantry in trucks), in the hopes > that he will be completely at a loss as to where my KV > is. I hope I can do this... > > yours, > RN > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Sep 20 16:09:13 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Sep 20 16:59:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: <003101c49f6d$cf4f7840$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Test. =Jim= From sambelcher at cablespeed.com Mon Sep 20 17:07:01 2004 From: sambelcher at cablespeed.com (Sam Belcher) Date: Mon Sep 20 17:07:07 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: NRBH, but I think platoons have to start and stop together. Am I wrong? On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:39:31 +0200 "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >I THINK the KV platoon won't be a problem, the T-34 must >stay in motion when the KV runs out of MPs. The BTs will >give it away, though. They can't stay in motion at 9 MPs, >and if they stop at 9 then have to delay to 23, and >state so to your opponent. > >Janusz > >> -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- >> Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >> [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r >>Robert Nelson >> Skickat: den 21 september 2004 00:43 >> Till: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >> ?mne: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. >> >> >> Folks, >> >> About to play Blocking Action at Lipki (A44) and I >> want to attempt some 'fog of war'. >> >> I have a huge KV (9mp), a T34 M40 (17mp) and two BTs >> (23mp). >> >> I come in concealed, and plan to go around both flanks >> of a large forest between me and my enemy. I want to >> split the tanks into two platoons (the heavys and the >> BTs) and send them, concealed and using platoon >> movement (only the KV has a radio), so that the >> defender must split his afvs, not knowing where the >> big bad boys are. >> >> Now, my question regards counting MPs while moving >> concealed tanks, and how I might maintain this ruse >> against even the most pedantic opponent. >> >> A) When moving a concealed afv, what exactly must one >> call out beyond mere numbers? VCA change (without >> saying which way)? Start and stop, I imagine. But >> nothing about buttoning up. >> >> B) If my KV and T34 are platoon moving (PM) together, >> what happens when one comes to the number nine? May I >> merely say, 'one more hex for 9, then stay there in >> motion'? In other words, what happens to the MP of a >> tank moving in PM, when its partner runs out? (if one >> does have to account for all movement, then I would >> have to point to the concealed T34 and say, 'this one >> changes its VCA 8 more times, and stays there in >> motion'. Please say this is silly and wrong!) >> >> Thus, it is my hope to bring in two platoons, each >> counting only 9mp for the first two turns (and >> bringing up loads of infantry in trucks), in the hopes >> that he will be completely at a loss as to where my KV >> is. I hope I can do this... >> >> yours, >> RN >> >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________ >> Do you Yahoo!? >> Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! >> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 >> >_______________________________________________ >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 Mon Sep 20 17:59:37 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Mon Sep 20 17:59:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders References: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> <02e401c49f01$91a96d00$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> <000b01c49f0d$5f052360$2083b018@DHT8S631> <033f01c49f64$a7c4b910$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <004601c49f76$445d77b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> > 3 x PzIII all get whacked, but all three Crews survive, > and one Crew has a 9-1 AL. > The Platoon does not roll for Withdraw. > The surviving Crews fight on, including the AL. My understanding of the Perry Sez #3 is that these crews would remain to fight on, but that the AL would be subjected to a Withdrawl DR each RePh. Maybe I'm slow, but I am having a tough time reaching your conclusion on #3. Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mountain View Cottage" To: "Sean Deller" ; "ASLML" Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > 3 x PzIII all get whacked, but all three Crews survive, > and one Crew has a 9-1 AL. > > The Platoon does not roll for Withdraw. > > The surviving Crews fight on, including the AL. > > This AL will *not*, *ever* leave the map > due to Withdrawl, until it (the Crew) is the > *last* such Crew from that original Platoon, > and that Crew gets "Withdrawn", which, > remarkably will only "Withdraw" the AL. > The crew gets to stay. > > That's what #3 says. > > And that's kinda dumb. > > For all the others that keep arguing the fate of > an AL from a Surviving Crew of a Platoon that > *gets* Withdrawn (based on my only other post > on this subject), be advised: I'm not talking about > that situation. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Deller" > To: "Mountain View Cottage" ; "ASLML" > > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 8:28 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > > >I interpreted Perry's reply as intended to prevent the accumulation of ALs > > during the course of the CG. Surviving crews remain to fight on as > > infantry, ALs go when their platoon is Withdrawn, even if that requires a > > Withdrawl DR solely for the surviving AL. Seems reasonable to me. I > > don't > > see how you've interpreted #3 to mean ALs remain. > > > > Sean > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mountain View Cottage" > > To: "ASLML" > > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 7:04 AM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > > > > >> "Consistently" ridiculous. > >> > >> Since a Surviving AL becomes an > >> inherent part of its surviving Crew, > >> he should share the fate/destiny of > >> said Surviving Crew. > >> > >> Either both stay, or both leave. > >> > >> "Consistenty" inconsistent: If *two* > >> (or more) Crews are the only surviving > >> elements of an AFV Platoon, the AL > >> gets to *stay* (based on Perry's answer > >> to #3). > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Sean Deller" > >> To: "ASLML" > >> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 12:15 AM > >> Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > >> > >> > >> > Gentlemen, > >> > > >> > Interesting guidance from Perry on the handling of AFV Crews and Armor > >> > Leaders during the RB CG RePh. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Sean > >> > > >> >> 1. Are surviving AFV crews retained for use in the next scenario? Even > > if > >> >> there isn't an available AFV for them to crew (i.e., they will be used > > in > >> >> "infantry" mode)? > >> > > >> > > >> > Yes to both. > >> > > >> > > >> >> 2. May a surviving AL re-man another vehicle in his platoon? A vehicle > >> >> from another platoon? > >> > > >> > > >> > Yes, in the normal manner during the course of a scenario, until the > > Armor > >> > Leader's PLtn is withdrawn. > >> > > >> > > >> >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their > > platoon > >> > is > >> >> Withdrawn? > >> >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole > >> >> survivor of its platoon? > >> > > >> > > >> > No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > 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 tychog at co.wasco.or.us Mon Sep 20 18:09:41 2004 From: tychog at co.wasco.or.us (Tycho Granville) Date: Mon Sep 20 18:09:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: <004601c49f76$445d77b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <004101c49f77$acb8bfd0$6600490a@WascoCo.local> Who the Hell leaves trained armor crews and hot-shot, decorated tank commanders to fight on as infantry in Stalingrad?!? If you do, make sure to track where the AL is so I can get the extra CVP for waxing him :) Tycho *vastly amused* > > 3 x PzIII all get whacked, but all three Crews survive, > > and one Crew has a 9-1 AL. > > The Platoon does not roll for Withdraw. > > The surviving Crews fight on, including the AL. From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Mon Sep 20 20:30:56 2004 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Mon Sep 20 19:29:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c49f8b$6908ee40$6401a8c0@NewDell> >I THINK the KV platoon won't be a problem, the T-34 must stay >in motion when the KV runs out of MPs. The BTs will give it >away, though. They can't stay in motion at 9 MPs, and if they >stop at 9 then have to delay to 23, and state so to your opponent. The BT will not have to stop to delay (a curious side benefit of platoon move); I would suggest, however, a simple house rule that MP's are not counted out load for concealed 5/8" counters. That will solve your problems, be fun, and be more realistic. From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Sep 20 19:50:48 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Sep 20 19:53:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open Message-ID: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz! >From Canada, they came from sea to sea and from many points in between and to that company was joined five players from the United States (four from Minnesota and one from Ohio). All told we were 29 players and over three days and five rounds of ASL action we had a most enjoyable weekend of great gaming, gamesmanship and camaraderie. At this time, I will now cut to the chase and announce, with all the humility as can be scraped together of course, that yours truly ended the tournament with a 5-0 record and won the 2004 CASLO. But hey, I didn't mean to. In round One we had an odd number of players and me being the TD, I was willing to sit the round out and let the lowest seeded player play instead of taking a Bye. However, he did not mind taking a Bye and so I played. In round by round action, First, we enjoyed a toast to the CASLO with a fine scotch, a 10 year old Glen Morangie aged in Port casks. Round one saw the top half of the field prevail over the lower half although the eventual tournament winner should have handily lost his first match. That did not happen as the guy who should very well have won elected to meet the CVP VC by trying to eliminate a broken squad instead of exiting units off map for an easy win. But it gets worse. We played Hana Saku, my own design ... ahem, but listen, it was my third selection and I gave him choice of sides. I can't say fairer than that now, can I. :) Round Two saw two upsets as last year's CASLO champ, Darren Kovacs, went down to Robert Steele and Bill Bird was knocked into the 1-1 column by fellow Winnipeg ASL Club member Dwayne Matheson. Round Three had another upset of sorts when Calgary's Tom Weniger went to 3-0 by defeating fellow Albertan Gerry Proudfoot in "J9, A Stiff Fight". The Mini-Tournament began in round Three and Kevin Seime, Dion Loach, Michael Rodgers and Jeff Papas all advanced to the second round of the Mini. In other Round three action, Weniger, Kelln and McLeod we accompanied by With Matheson's win the CASLO would have a single undefeated player as tournament winner after Five rounds. Round Four was a real kicker of a round and featured six playings of that WCW Classic, "Eye Of The Tiger" (3 German wins to 3 Russian wins). In this round, Proudfoot re-grouped to defeat Robert Steele, a win that put M. Proudfoot back in contention for an upper rank finish for the tournament. George Kelln ended Dwayne Matheson's march to glory in a tough playing of another WCW Classic, "Abandon Ship!". Completing the pairing for the championship round was McLeod whose dice were hot and Weniger's were not, in a very fun playing of "EotT". Tom began the game well, potting a MKIV with a shot in the AFPh from a T-34 as well as nailing a Puma with an MG shot. But in the end, a fired up Tiger and a pumped up group of stormtroopers were the deciding factors. Back in the Mini, Dion Loach's Soviets stopped the Germans in "Bread Factory #2" and Jeff Papas led the French to victory over Michael Rodgers in L'Herrison. The Round Five Championship matches were as follows: Main CASLO Tournament, McLeod v. Kelln in AP12, Cream Of The Crop" and in the Mini it was Loach v. Papas in "A25, Cold Crocodiles". When the dice had settled, Dion's Croc's dodged Jeff's non-existent PF's and McLeod's Russian's stopped the hobnail booted Germans on the edge of a village somewhere in Russia. Gerry Proudfoot put a lock on third Place as his Gerbil-Jaegers were able to keep the Legion at bay in "75, Strangers In A Strange Land". Dwayne Matheson capped a very strong weekend of gaming with a win in the fjords of Norway over Tom Weniger, a win which secured Fourth place for Dwayne. Here are the final ranking of the 2004 Canadian ASL Open, 1. McLeod, Jim 2. Kelln, George 3. Proudfoot, Gerry 4. Matheson, Dwayne 5. Loach, Dion 6. Weniger, Tom 7. Steele, Robert 8. Suderman, Paul 9. Kurtz, Kurt 10. Dionne, Jack 11. Rodgers, Michael 12. Lehner, Gary 13. Kovacs, Darren 14. Papas, Jeff 15. Lentz, David 16. Knippel, Steve 17. Thomas, Tim 18. Bird, Bill 19. McGhee, Dan 20. Knoll, Brad 21. Houliston, Craig 22. Bourgeault, Michael 23. Bellamy, Blair 24. Messner, Tony 25. Seime, Kevin 26. Escobedo, Andre 27. Fedak, Brent 28. Levreault, Ron 29. Ball, Blake >From what I have heard, everything went reasonably well at this year's CASLO and next year should be even better as Kevin Seime indicated that he would be bringing up another four guys from Minnesota to share in the fun in 2005. Many thanks to my more than able tournament staff, Bill Bird and Gerry Proudfoot, you two made my job much easier. Thanks also go out to MMP, Heat Of Battle, Ron Levreault and George Kelln. These individuals and groups contributed prizes to be awarded at the CASLO, something that makes the fun just a little bit more so. Anyway, the 2004 CASLO is in the books and I hope to see you all again next year for more fun with dice! =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 20:34:44 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 20:35:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: <3a5840$7ocu8k@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <3a5840$7ocu8k@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:29:08 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >Which also eliminates the crew. There is no allowance for a crew to be treated as a separate entity than the AL. Of course there is; the normal ASL rules. When an AFV is eliminated, the crew may survive, and if it does, continues an independent existence. Does anything in the RB rules indicate that this is not true for RB? No. Is there anything in the RB rules that specifically say withdrawn AFV also withdraw crews who are no longer in an AFV? No. Therefore, *nothing happens to the crew*. However, the RB rules *do* specifically say that AL are withdrawn (O11.6142) -- so they are. >D3.43 says the AL "ceases to exist once the crew takes counter form". How can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". It has no game functions, but it doesn't "cease to exist" in the sense that it never comes back -- you do note its presence, in case the crew re-enters a vehicle. Therefore, you erase the side-note that you wrote when the crew survived; e.g., if you wrote "Crew #5 has an inherent 8-1 AL", you'd cross that note out when the AFVs are withdrawn. Simple! (Some people might place the AL counter on top of the crew counter, rather than writing a side-note; in that case, you'd simply remove the AL counter. Simple!) >So, one rolls withdrawl...the vehicles and all (existing) AL are removed...any crews afoot remain. OK, subsequently that crew re-mans a vehicle and now we have an AL back. No, because the AL has been withdrawn, per the Q&A. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 20:39:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 20:40:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: <033f01c49f64$a7c4b910$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> References: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> <02e401c49f01$91a96d00$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> <000b01c49f0d$5f052360$2083b018@DHT8S631> <033f01c49f64$a7c4b910$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:53:29 -0400, "Mountain View Cottage" wrote: >This AL will *not*, *ever* leave the map >due to Withdrawl, until it (the Crew) is the >*last* such Crew from that original Platoon, >and that Crew gets "Withdrawn", which, >remarkably will only "Withdraw" the AL. >The crew gets to stay. > >That's what #3 says. You apparently need remedial English lessons, because it says nothing of the sort: >>> >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their platoon is Withdrawn? >>> >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole survivor of its platoon? >>> > >>> > No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. If the platoon is Withdrawn, the crews remain, but the AL don't. *That's* what it says. To put it another way, if any of the surviving crews had an AL, they don't any more (if the platoon withdraws). It's not exactly a brain-twister. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 21:18:41 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 21:18:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: <20040920224231.83906.qmail@web52603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040920224231.83906.qmail@web52603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 15:42:31 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >Now, my question regards counting MPs while moving >concealed tanks, and how I might maintain this ruse >against even the most pedantic opponent. > >A) When moving a concealed afv, what exactly must one >call out beyond mere numbers? VCA change (without >saying which way)? Start and stop, I imagine. But >nothing about buttoning up. The MPs expended as they are expended. Yes. Yes. Correct (changing BU status costs no MP). However, remember that BU status can only change *once* during the MPh, so you need to remember what your status is at all times -- you don't want to cheat by entering BU, becoming CE to move fast down a road, and then end the MPh BU again. (When a vehicle is *set up* concealed, for example when entering from off-board, you don't have to openly declare the BU status -- A12.2.) (However, in many cases it's *easier* to just declare your BU status, especially if you plan to do a lot of moving around completely out of LOS.) >B) If my KV and T34 are platoon moving (PM) together, >what happens when one comes to the number nine? May I >merely say, 'one more hex for 9, then stay there in >motion'? In other words, what happens to the MP of a >tank moving in PM, when its partner runs out? (if one >does have to account for all movement, then I would >have to point to the concealed T34 and say, 'this one >changes its VCA 8 more times, and stays there in >motion'. Please say this is silly and wrong!) It's silly and wrong. When in Platoon, the "fast" tanks are always permitted to simply delay (whether Stopped or not) when the "slow" tank runs out of MP. >Thus, it is my hope to bring in two platoons, each >counting only 9mp for the first two turns (and >bringing up loads of infantry in trucks), in the hopes >that he will be completely at a loss as to where my KV >is. I hope I can do this... Here is where you'll have trouble. Both of your platoons has considerably more than 9 MP available to them (even though, for one of those platoons, most of those MP will be spent in delay), and you do have to account for all of them. As Brian said, you could adopt a house rule, but that's all it is: a house rule. Normal rules require that all MPs be accounted for -- including MP spent in delay. Even with the normal rules there are ways you could disguise this, though. For example, you could spend up to 9 MP to bring one of the AFV adjacent to a woods hex, and then claim that you want to enter the woods hex by expending all your MP -- which of course you can't do after already starting movement, so you'd have to end the MPh in Motion at that point. The other AFVs in the platoon don't need to be adjacent to the woods hex; they simply end the MPh in Motion as well. This trick only works for terrain types that don't cost a fixed amount of MPs to enter, otherwise you'd have to declare how many MPs you were using (or trying to use). And, of course, in the next MPh you decide you don't want to enter the woods after all, and continue moving elsewhere. Now, you could argue that this is all silly and unrealistic, and you may have a point; but you could make the same argument about a lot of rules in ASL, so it doesn't really get you very far. More practically, you could just accept that in this scenario the precise location of the KV is very difficult to disguise. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 21:20:24 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 21:20:40 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6uavk0hjs8nkc0j0pnovp97j5o95in921p@4ax.com> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:07:01 -0500, "Sam Belcher" wrote: >NRBH, but I think platoons have to start and stop >together. Am I wrong? You're right, but that's not the issue here. The point is, the MP need to be counted, whether you're stopped or not. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 21:26:39 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 21:26:59 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:39:31 +0200, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >I THINK the KV platoon won't be a problem, the T-34 must stay in motion when the KV runs out of MPs. The BTs will give it away, though. They can't stay in motion at 9 MPs, and if they stop at 9 then have to delay to 23, and state so to your opponent. The KV platoon still has a problem: when the KV runs out of MP, the T-34 does not simultaneously run out of MP: it's just that the only thing it's allowed to do with its remaining MP is spend them in delay (whether stopped or not). That delay still has to be declared. You're correct though: the basic issue is that the number of MP being spent (no matter what it is you're doing) must be declared. The only way around this that I can think of (that doesn't invoke a house rule) is by attempting to expend MP in an action that is not a fixed cost (e.g., entering woods by expending "all" MP). Disguising the location of the KV is very difficult. Personally I wouldn't expend much energy in attempting to do so; just accept that the German will know where it is and make plans accordingly. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 20 21:37:33 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 20 21:37:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open In-Reply-To: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 21:50:48 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >At this time, I will now cut to the chase and announce, with all the >humility as can be scraped together of course, that yours truly ended the >tournament with a 5-0 record and won the 2004 CASLO. Congratulations, but an interesting (cultural?) note: while in Australia we would have no problem in letting the TD play along with everyone else (better than having him just sit there and twiddle his thumbs!), I believe that he would normally be automatically disqualified from taking an actual winning place -- i.e., no prizes, no trophies. Is it different elsewhere? Not a big thing, I guess, and if everyone present was happy with the result then of course there's no real issue -- it just struck me as being a little odd, is all. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "We're getting into a whole weird area here." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Sep 21 04:02:38 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue Sep 21 04:02:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open References: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001601c49fca$82dcb8d0$0b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; I wrote, >At this time, I will now cut to the chase and announce, with all the >humility as can be scraped together of course, that yours truly ended the >tournament with a 5-0 record and won the 2004 CASLO. Bruce replied, Congratulations, Thanks Bruce. Bruce continues, but an interesting (cultural?) note: while in Australia we would have no problem in letting the TD play along with everyone else (better than having him just sit there and twiddle his thumbs!), I believe that he would normally be automatically disqualified from taking an actual winning place -- i.e., no prizes, no trophies. Is it different elsewhere? Not a big thing, I guess, and if everyone present was happy with the result then of course there's no real issue -- it just struck me as being a little odd, is all. **************************************** Up here Bruce, once you are in the tournament you are in the tournament win or lose. In other tournaments the TD may wish to sit out due to his duties as TD. However, we have a tournament staff of three people, the TD and his two Assistant TD's. Between these three all the admin' jobs were well taken care of. With regard to the masses being happy with my victory over them, I say this ... let them eat second place! :) Actually, there is a disturbing coincidence in what happened this year. In each of the three years that I have TD's the CASLO, I have won the event. OK, once, fine, twice I'll put down to coincidence but three times! There is a bloody conspiracy going on here Bruce, corruption all around. I'll be sure to get to the bottom of it. Fixes being in aside, I did have a question to post regarding using Smoke in the phasing players MPh by the defending player. However, I checked in my cherished ASOP last night and all was made known. I was in fact correct. All hail, the ASOP! =Jim= From mountainview at westelcom.com Tue Sep 21 04:46:54 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Tue Sep 21 04:48:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders References: <005501c49ec8$70249530$2083b018@DHT8S631> <02e401c49f01$91a96d00$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> <000b01c49f0d$5f052360$2083b018@DHT8S631> <033f01c49f64$a7c4b910$2b926b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <005701c49fd0$b2b755f0$a18d6b0c@NewhpGeorge> > You apparently need remedial English > lessons, because it says nothing of the > sort: Spare the insults, it's unnecessary. >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of their platoon >> is Withdrawn? >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole >> survivor of its platoon? >>> No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. > If the platoon is Withdrawn, the crews remain, but the AL don't. *That's* > what it says. Does the 11.6142 Withdrawal dr occur if only Crews survive? IOW, are Crews considerd a "part thereof". I would say "no", but perhaps that's wrong. In my previous example, would the three Crews with no AFV roll for Withdrawal? I would say no. Perry seems to support this, but with a "typical" added twist: Look at #3, question 2. Perry Sez the dr is *only* made, effectively, *if* there's an AL present, and *only* if one Crew remains. If there there is only *one* surviving non-AL Crew (or two, or three), *no* Withdrawal dr is made (it's not necessary, since the Crews, themselves, will not Withdraw). If there are three surviving Crews, even *with* an AL, no dr is made (until only *one* surviving Crew is left, and that Crew also has an AL, at which point, said dr can only Withdraw the AL). An AFV Platoon will *not* roll for Withdrawal if all that survives is Crews, except in the instance where only *one* surviving Crew exists, *and* that Crew also contains an AL. That's what #3 says. > To put it another way, if any of the surviving crews had an AL, they don't > any > more (if the platoon withdraws). Agreed, but what's scewed up is, at what point do those surviving Crews/ALs roll for Withdrawal? (Assuming the Platoon never had any surviving AFV which which to make a Withdrawal dr.) > It's not exactly a brain-twister. No, it's not. It just lets an AL hang around until he's part of the sole surviving Crew of a Platoon, that, up until that point, never had to roll for Withdrawal. From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 21 05:47:42 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 21 05:47:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:35 PM > To: Tate Rogers; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:29:08 -0500, Tate Rogers > wrote: > > >Which also eliminates the crew. There is no allowance for a crew > to be treated as a separate entity than the AL. > > Of course there is; the normal ASL rules. When an AFV is > eliminated, the crew > may survive, and if it does, continues an independent existence. Per the standard rules the AL "ceases to exist" once the crew takes counter form. How can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". Per a previous example, if three AFV are destroyed and all three crew and an AL survive then no withdrawal roll would be made (according to Perry) because no AFV or AL currently "exist" on board. Once in crew form the AL does not "exist" independently of the crew. This is per the standard rules. > However, the RB rules *do* specifically say that AL are withdrawn > (O11.6142) -- so they are. This rule is speaking to AFV and any AL currently in AFV. It is not speaking to crew that are afoot. I suppose one could bend it to include the crew...but that would be a matter of interpretation. Note also the very last "...(if any)..." If the only thing remaining on board are crew then no withdrawal roll is made because no AFV or AL currently "exist". > > >D3.43 says the AL "ceases to exist once the crew takes counter > form". How can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". > > It has no game functions, but it doesn't "cease to exist" in the > sense that it > never comes back -- you do note its presence, in case the crew re-enters a > vehicle. Therefore, you erase the side-note that you wrote when the crew > survived; e.g., if you wrote "Crew #5 has an inherent 8-1 AL", you'd cross > that note out when the AFVs are withdrawn. Simple! (Some people > might place > the AL counter on top of the crew counter, rather than writing a > side-note; in > that case, you'd simply remove the AL counter. Simple!) Great...now just point me to where these mechanics are listed in the ASLRB and we will both be happy. Huh, what's that you say, you mean you just made all that up off the cuff?! So none of that is noted anywhere in the ASLRB? That was all just your _opinion_ of how you think it is to be handled? > No, because the AL has been withdrawn, per the Q&A. Q&A...what Q&A? Oooooohhh...you mean this unofficial Perry Sez that conflicts with the body of the rules. Yeah, sure... Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Tue Sep 21 08:21:28 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Tue Sep 21 08:21:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open In-Reply-To: References: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > Congratulations, but an interesting (cultural?) note: while in Australia we > would have no problem in letting the TD play along with everyone else (better > than having him just sit there and twiddle his thumbs!), I believe that he > would normally be automatically disqualified from taking an actual winning > place -- i.e., no prizes, no trophies. Is it different elsewhere? > Depends. At the tournament I run, the TD team plays only a spoiler role, and only if the numbers are odd. But I've seen other TDs at local tournaments participate and win. If the scenarios are announced in advance, the TD doesn't really have much of an advantage, so it's not a big deal. It's not like there's more than pride at stake anyway. Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Sep 21 09:11:06 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Sep 21 09:09:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: <005701c49fd0$b2b755f0$a18d6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: Hi, (From the recent Perry sez:) > >> 3. Are these surviving crews Withdrawn if the remainder of > their platoon > >> is Withdrawn? > >> Would you make a Withdrawal dr for a surviving crew if it is the sole > >> survivor of its platoon? > > >>> No to both for crews. Yes to both for Armor Leaders. > Bruce P wrote: > > If the platoon is Withdrawn, the crews remain, but the AL > > don't. *That's* what it says. > Agreed. Then Mountain View Cottage wrote: > Does the 11.6142 Withdrawal dr occur if only Crews survive? IOW, are > Crews considerd a "part thereof". I would say "no", but perhaps that's > wrong. No, no roll if only crews are remaining, according to the above Q&A. > In my previous example, would the three Crews with no AFV roll for > Withdrawal? > I would say no. Perry seems to support this, but with a "typical" added > twist: > > Look at #3, question 2. Perry Sez the dr is *only* made, effectively, *if* > there's an AL present, and *only* if one Crew remains. If there there is > only *one* surviving non-AL Crew (or two, or three), *no* Withdrawal dr is made > (it's not necessary, since the Crews, themselves, will not Withdraw). If > there are three surviving Crews, even *with* an AL, no dr is made (until only *one* > surviving Crew is left, and that Crew also has an AL, at which point, said > dr can only Withdraw the AL). > I am pretty sure that you're misreading the Q&A. You're reading too much into it (or maybe too little). First, it says that if there are only crews remaining (no AFV and no AL), then there is no dr. We all agree there. Then it says that if there are no AFV, but a crew with an AL, then there is a dr for the AL. It does *not* say that the crew with the AL *must* be the only remaining crew. It only asks what happens when the AL-crew is the only remaining. The question could instead ask if you make a dr when there are one *or more* crews (but no AFV). I'm 100% sure that the answer would then be: "Yes, but only if one crew had an AL" > An AFV Platoon will *not* roll for Withdrawal if all that > survives is Crews, > except in the instance where only *one* surviving Crew exists, *and* that > Crew also contains an AL. > You misread the *one* surviving crew part into the Q&A, IMO. I see why, because the Q only asked about that. That's a general problem with the Q&A, IMHO. They only answer how that *specific* situation is handled. You cannot generalize it in any way. The Q&A would be better off, if replaced by a general statement, something like (in this case): Surviving crew outside their AFV are not affected by withdrawal. However, any Armor Leader is affected and will be removed from an onboard crew if its platoon withdraws. If there are no AFV left, roll for withdrawal for Armor Leaders only (if any). From hofors at lysator.liu.se Tue Sep 21 10:22:35 2004 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: Tue Sep 21 10:22:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] storing unmounted mapboards Message-ID: Hi, how do people fold their unmounted map boards? Exactly on the middle? Is it a problem that the center dot is on the crease? Regards, Mattias From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 10:29:43 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 21 10:32:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: > > > > O11.6142, last sentence: "A Withdrawn result Eliminates each remaining > > non-Isolated AFV (even if abandoned/immobilized) of that platoon, as >well as > > each armor leader originally entered with that Platoon (if any)." > > > >Which also eliminates the crew. I disagree. Crews are a different entity than an Armor Leader. >There is no allowance for a crew to be treated as a separate entity than >the AL. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that crews and ALs are "separate entities". To whit: D3.42: "The inherent crew of a vehicle always has the same Morale Level as any Armor Leader in that vehicle. Should the Armor Leader pass/fail his MC/TC, the crew passes/fails also; a separate MC/TC DR for each is never made." If crews and ALs were not separate entities, that entire paragraph would be unnecessary. You would simply say: "Armor Leaders replace Crews for all purposes when in an AFV." There is more: D3.43: "An Armor Leader affects only its own vehicle/crew..." It's written in the form of a possessive. The AL's crew. They are separate. > >D3.43 says the AL "ceases to exist once the crew takes counter form". How >can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". > Has your Armor Leader ever had to Bail Out, or has it passed a Survival DR? What happens to your Armor Leader? Have you ever used it again by having that Crew re-enter a vehicle? How do you know which Crew might again qualify for an Armor Leader? So does the Armor Leader still exist or not? >So, one rolls withdrawl...the vehicles and all (existing) AL are >removed...any crews afoot remain. >OK, subsequently that crew re-mans a >vehicle and now we have an AL back. it didn't exist until it >was in a >vehicle. I would hazard that at the end of the current scenario should that >AL still be in a >vehicle it would be recalled. However, what is to prevent >one from bailing AL's just before the >scenario end? Once out, they "cease >to exist". > I am totally not buying your ultra-literal interpretation of "cease to exist". I understand your focus on that phrase, but it's a losing argument. It is simply an unfortunate choice of phrase, that should be changed. Pound away at it if you wish, but it won't get you anywhere. >What we have, as usual, is an off the HIP PS which didn't take everything >(rules?) into consideration. The AL and it's crew should be removed...not >just the AL. > Well, I might agree with that. I also happen to believe that it is not unreasonable to Withdraw the AL but leave the Crew. It's just a game mechanic to get the Armor Leader out of the front line if his armor is gone. I also happen to believe that the Perry Sez in this instance was pretty consistent with my own understanding of how the rules handle Armor Leaders. I just wish it could have been asked, and perhaps answered, more clearly. 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 paul at paulhart.com Tue Sep 21 10:46:27 2004 From: paul at paulhart.com (Paul Hart) Date: Tue Sep 21 10:44:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] storing unmounted mapboards In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <415068F3.8030608@paulhart.com> Personally I don't like the crease, so I laminate and cut them in 1/2. They then neatly store in a 8.5x11 plastic protector sheet and handle being taped backtogether. One 1/2 to 1 inch binder can hold almost all the non-enlarged maps. Mattias R?nnblom wrote: >Hi, > >how do people fold their unmounted map boards? Exactly on the middle? Is >it a problem that the center dot is on the crease? > >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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 11:03:19 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 21 11:03:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: Hello, Chris. > >3 x PzIII all get whacked, but all three Crews survive, >and one Crew has a 9-1 AL. > I'm with you. >The Platoon does not roll for Withdraw. > Sure enough correct because there are no AFV left. >The surviving Crews fight on, including the AL. > So it would seem. >This AL will *not*, *ever* leave the map >due to Withdrawl, until it (the Crew) is the >*last* such Crew from that original Platoon, >and that Crew gets "Withdrawn", which, >remarkably will only "Withdraw" the AL. >The crew gets to stay. > >That's what #3 says. > I do not agree with your interpretation of Q3. It's far more narrow than that. However, you do raise an interesting point. Only AFV of the Plt (or a part thereof) must roll for Withdrawal. If you look at the RG table, there are no crews or ALs listed with the AFV. IMO, neither crews nor subsequent Armor Leaders are considered "a part thereof" for purposes of Withdrawal. Therefore, if all AFV are destroyed, there is no Withdrawal dr... and if any crew survived with its Armor Leader, it would appear that the Armor Leader gets to stay... and neither the crews of that Plt nor the Armor Leader need ever take a Withdrawal dr... *if* you believe that neither crews nor ALs constitute "a part thereof" the Platoon. Very interesting. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 11:12:16 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 21 11:13:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: > >Surviving crew outside their AFV are not affected by withdrawal. I think we can all agree to that. >However, any Armor Leader is affected and will be removed from an onboard >crew if its >platoon withdraws. Sure, if the Platoon is forced to Withdraw, the Armor Leader goes as well... but not the crew, which gets to stay. Okay. >If there are no AFV left, roll for withdrawal for Armor >Leaders only (if any). I can agree with you that this is what the Perry Sez is saying. However, IMO that is not a clarification, it is an Errata. It totally changes what O11.6142 says. You now have to add "including an Armor Leader" after "or part thereof". In effect, what Perry has said is that Armor Leaders are considered a "part thereof" of the Platoon, but crews are not considered a "part thereof" of the Platoon. While I may agree with it from a game mechanic point of view, I do not believe this is supported by the rules without further errata to make it so. Without this particular Q&A to "clear things up" for us, I daresay we could not have independently gleaned with conclusion from the ASLRB. I sure hope there's errata issued, or we'll be hearing this question again some day... Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 11:14:50 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 21 11:16:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: Errata to previous post... > >Hello, Chris. > >> >>3 x PzIII all get whacked, but all three Crews survive, >>and one Crew has a 9-1 AL. >> > >I'm with you. > >>The Platoon does not roll for Withdraw. >> > >Sure enough correct because there are no AFV left. > Except that now Perry is saying that the Platoon does have to roll for Withdrawal if there is still an Armor Leader present. Kinda awkward without Errata... 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 11:29:50 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Sep 21 11:29:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: > >Per the standard rules the AL "ceases to exist" once the crew takes counter >form. How can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". Per a previous >example, if three AFV are destroyed and all three crew and an AL survive >then no withdrawal roll would be made (according to Perry) because no AFV >or >AL currently "exist" on board. > I see your point about "Armor Leader". This concept or "thing" called "Armor Leader" is never in play unless it occupies an AFV. That is a literal interpretation, and I am willing to accept that in game terms. >Once in crew form the AL does not "exist" independently of the crew. This >is >per the standard rules. > I see your point now. > > However, the RB rules *do* specifically say that AL are withdrawn > > (O11.6142) -- so they are. > >This rule is speaking to AFV and any AL currently in AFV. It is not >speaking >to crew that are afoot. I suppose one could bend it to include the >crew...but that would be a matter of interpretation. > To follow your conclusion, the mere mention of "Armor Leader" means that it must be occupying an AFV, otherwise the word "Armor Leader" has absolutely no meaning of any kind. Okay, I get where you're coming from now. (I think I do.) The problem then is getting rid of the crew's potential for an Armor Leader when the Platoon is utterly and completely no longer in play, either by elimination outright, or by Withdrawal. (Ah yes, the independent existence of crews... my how they tend to cause us trouble. Anybody remember the whole Prisoner crew CVP discussion?) According to the ASLRB, a Platoon only takes a Withdrawal dr if an AFV remains. According to the Perry Sez (evidently), the inherently potential Armor Leader that remains with a crew is considered a "part thereof" of the Platoon, and so must also roll for Withdrawal even if no AFV remain. I understand the game intent of removing an Armor Leader when its armor is gone... but I think it is not sufficiently addressed with this latest series of Q&A. Tate, you can basically just disregard my earlier post to you on this subject. (If you haven't blasted back already... ) Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Tue Sep 21 12:56:52 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Tue Sep 21 13:17:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: <1095796612.d6421bdcBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Bruce sayeth: I understand the game intent of removing an Armor Leader when its armor is gone... but I think it is not sufficiently addressed with this latest series of Q&A. I've been trying to keep up with this discussion (somewhat of a rarity for me, I know...), and haven't seen the following addressed. I suspect it's part of what Bruce says is "not sufficiently addressed": (Kinda tricky, and not very likely, but bear with me, if you would, for arguments' sake) :-) Let's say that, during Day X, a crew + AL is out of its vehicle. Just for arguments' sake, it made its crew survival roll, and thus can't re-populate its original vehicle. During the rest of Day X, the AL is considered part of the crew, but doesn't have any game effects, because it isn't crewing a vehicle. The platoon is not Recalled, for one or more game days. On a subsequent game day (X + n?), the owner brings in another AFV platoon. Maybe one of these new AFVs misses an MC or something (yeah, foolish-enough to go trundling about Stalingrad CE, you get what you ask for...), and subsequently gets whacked. The FIRST crew (+ AL, remember) now moves in and makes itself comfortable. Voila, a crewed, mobile AFV again! OK, enough setup. Question: ????? On which platoon Recall roll will this AFV (crew/AL from Platoon I, but physically of type from Platoon II) be Recalled? First platoon, from which crew/AL came? Second platoon, from which vehicle came? Both? Rules quotations, please. (Show your work, include all assumptions, and put down your pencil at the end....) << (The recovering professor in me shows.) OK, back to Lurk Mode... Brian "Bored at work" Pickering From btdtall at yahoo.com Tue Sep 21 13:15:02 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Tue Sep 21 13:30:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: <20040921201502.40433.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Was just flippin through old journal four and noticed that there was an advertisement listing VOTG available for pre-order in 2003. Any news on this product yet ? _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From keithdalton at verizon.net Tue Sep 21 13:49:46 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Tue Sep 21 13:49:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: <20040921204946.GHZV23744.out010.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Hi: It's behind AOO in the layout/production pile. When AOO gets you, VOTG goes on the preorder list. Keith > > From: > Date: 2004/09/21 Tue PM 03:15:02 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] VOTG > > Was just flippin through old journal four and noticed > that there was an advertisement listing VOTG available > for pre-order in 2003. Any news on this product yet ? > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Sep 21 13:52:12 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Sep 21 13:52:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: <8c9ff0b8c9ca3e.8c9ca3e8c9ff0b@us.army.mil> Matt- MMP is still draging its feet trying to seal the deal with the new layout company to releave the "Bottle neck" of products. Knowing MMP, these talks will most likely go on for many many months to come. But they did get the license for ASL again this year. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: btdtall@yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 3:15 pm Subject: [Aslml] VOTG > Was just flippin through old journal four and noticed > that there was an advertisement listing VOTG available > for pre-order in 2003. Any news on this product yet ? > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 21 13:57:26 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 21 13:57:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG In-Reply-To: <20040921204946.GHZV23744.out010.verizon.net@outgoing.veriz on.net> References: <20040921204946.GHZV23744.out010.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040921155623.01b56880@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:49 PM 9/21/2004, keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: >When AOO gets you, VOTG goes on the preorder list. You guys notice this. Looks like to get VoTG you have to get AoO. New marketing gimmick. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 21 14:01:10 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 21 14:01:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 12:30 PM > To: gr27134@charter.net; smcbee@midtnn.net; s.deller@charter.net; > mountainview@westelcom.com; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > > I disagree. Crews are a different entity than an Armor Leader. Not once they take counter form. There is nothing that distinguishes them at all rules wise while the crew is in counter form. > >There is no allowance for a crew to be treated as a separate entity than > >the AL. > > There is plenty of evidence to suggest that crews and ALs are "separate > entities". To whit: > > D3.42: "The inherent crew of a vehicle always has the same Morale > Level as > any Armor Leader in that vehicle. Should the Armor Leader pass/fail his > MC/TC, the crew passes/fails also; a separate MC/TC DR for each is never > made." > > If crews and ALs were not separate entities, that entire > paragraph would be > unnecessary. You would simply say: "Armor Leaders replace Crews for all > purposes when in an AFV." All of which only apply when the crew/AL is in a vehicle. None of which apply once the crew is out of the AFV. Show me one rule where the AL has any effect outside the crew counter once the crew is afoot...just one. Right, there isn't. The crew doesn't exist as a unit until it bails...at which point the AL "ceases to exist" and is indistinguishable from the crew. > There is more: > > D3.43: "An Armor Leader affects only its own vehicle/crew..." > It's written > in the form of a possessive. The AL's crew. They are separate. > > > > >D3.43 says the AL "ceases to exist once the crew takes counter > form". How > >can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist". > > > > Has your Armor Leader ever had to Bail Out, or has it passed a > Survival DR? > What happens to your Armor Leader? Have you ever used it again by having > that Crew re-enter a vehicle? How do you know which Crew might again > qualify for an Armor Leader? > > So does the Armor Leader still exist or not? Well, depends on whether you play by the rules or not. Based on the rules I believe that when afoot there is no distinction between the AL and the crew...they are represented by the same unit. A game effect that recalls that leader would recall the crew. To make it any different would require a specific rule...not just some off-handed yes/no response to a question. > >So, one rolls withdrawl...the vehicles and all (existing) AL are > >removed...any crews afoot remain. >OK, subsequently that crew re-mans a > >vehicle and now we have an AL back. it didn't exist until it >was in a > >vehicle. I would hazard that at the end of the current scenario > should that > >AL still be in a >vehicle it would be recalled. However, what is > to prevent > >one from bailing AL's just before the >scenario end? Once out, > they "cease > >to exist". > > > > I am totally not buying your ultra-literal interpretation of "cease to > exist". I understand your focus on that phrase, but it's a > losing argument. > It is simply an unfortunate choice of phrase, that should be changed. > > Pound away at it if you wish, but it won't get you anywhere. Not trying to get anywhere...I am right where I need to be, in the ASLRB. Any argument against my point has to come from somewhere out in the ether of opinion/interpretation. > >What we have, as usual, is an off the HIP PS which didn't take > everything > >(rules?) into consideration. The AL and it's crew should be > removed...not > >just the AL. > > > > Well, I might agree with that. 1) The rule only allows recall of existing AL "...(if any)..." 2) The AL "ceases to exist" once the crew bails. 3) The _only_ way to get the AL per current rules is if the crew goes also. Perry can "Sez" all he wants...I'll go with the rules. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 21 14:03:35 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 21 14:03:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 1:30 PM > To: gr27134@charter.net; bprobst@netspace.net.au; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > Tate, you can basically just disregard my earlier post to you on this > subject. (If you haven't blasted back already... ) Ooooops...to late... Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 21 14:10:04 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 21 14:10:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders 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 B?e > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:11 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > > Surviving crew outside their AFV are not affected by withdrawal. However, > any Armor Leader is affected and will be removed from an onboard > crew if its > platoon withdraws. If there are no AFV left, roll for withdrawal for Armor > Leaders only (if any). Impossible...why? Because per the rules no crew that is in counter form has an AL. They "cease to exist" once the crew takes counter form. So, if all that remains are crew then there is no withdrawal roll because there are no AL. The AL only re-exists when/if the crew re-enters an AFV. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Sep 21 14:31:49 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Sep 21 14:29:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > > Surviving crew outside their AFV are not affected by > > withdrawal. However, any Armor Leader is affected and will be > > removed from an onboard crew if its platoon withdraws. If there are > > no AFV left, roll for withdrawal for Armor Leaders only (if any). > and Tate responded: > Impossible...why? Because per the rules no crew that is in > counter form has > an AL. They "cease to exist" once the crew takes counter form. So, if all > that remains are crew then there is no withdrawal roll because > there are no > AL. The AL only re-exists when/if the crew re-enters an AFV. > Note that what I wrote above was a (IMO) proper generalization of the Perry sez in question. Whether this Perry sez is in accordance with the rules or not is another matter. But I maintain that per the Perry sez, my above statement is true. From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 21 14:33:20 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 21 14:33:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG In-Reply-To: <20040921201502.40433.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040921201502.40433.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040921163118.01b56738@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:15 PM 9/21/2004, btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: >Was just flippin through old journal four and noticed >that there was an advertisement listing VOTG available >for pre-order in 2003. Any news on this product yet ? News on the forum is VoTG will be pre-pub'd when AoO is shipped. So best guess is sometime in Spring next year for pre-pub, 6-12 months later for print. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From geb3 at inter.net Tue Sep 21 15:04:02 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue Sep 21 15:00:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] storing unmounted mapboards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: laminate them and store them flat, don't fold - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Mattias R?nnblom Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 2:23 AM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] storing unmounted mapboards Hi, how do people fold their unmounted map boards? Exactly on the middle? Is it a problem that the center dot is on the crease? 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 aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Sep 21 15:14:06 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Sep 21 15:14:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open - A(e)SOP's Fable References: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <001601c49fca$82dcb8d0$0b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000f01c4a028$5023b570$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Once upon a time there was an ASL tournament director who was such a proponent of the A(e)SOP and applied it so vigorously that he would always win whenever he was directed a tournament. Like any good fable, the moral(e) of the story is left to the reader. Wynn "Next Up: Tortoise and the Panther, wherein the tortoise is able to keep plodding along and would have won the race but is overrun and crushed by the steel monster in the first hex" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "mcleods" To: ; Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 7:02 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open > Listerz; > > I wrote, > >>At this time, I will now cut to the chase and announce, with all the >>humility as can be scraped together of course, that yours truly ended the >>tournament with a 5-0 record and won the 2004 CASLO. > > Bruce replied, > > Congratulations, > > Thanks Bruce. > > Bruce continues, > > but an interesting (cultural?) note: while in Australia we > would have no problem in letting the TD play along with everyone else > (better > than having him just sit there and twiddle his thumbs!), I believe that he > would normally be automatically disqualified from taking an actual winning > place -- i.e., no prizes, no trophies. Is it different elsewhere? > > Not a big thing, I guess, and if everyone present was happy with the > result > then of course there's no real issue -- it just struck me as being a > little > odd, is all. > > **************************************** > > Up here Bruce, once you are in the tournament you are in the tournament > win or lose. In other tournaments the TD may wish to sit out due to his > duties as TD. However, we have a tournament staff of three people, the TD > and his two Assistant TD's. Between these three all the admin' jobs were > well taken care of. > > With regard to the masses being happy with my victory over them, I say > this ... let them eat second place! :) > > Actually, there is a disturbing coincidence in what happened this year. > In each of the three years that I have TD's the CASLO, I have won the > event. OK, once, fine, twice I'll put down to coincidence but three times! > There is a bloody conspiracy going on here Bruce, corruption all around. > I'll be sure to get to the bottom of it. > > Fixes being in aside, I did have a question to post regarding using Smoke > in the phasing players MPh by the defending player. However, I checked in > my cherished ASOP last night and all was made known. I was in fact > correct. > > All hail, the ASOP! > > > > =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 aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Sep 21 15:49:21 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Sep 21 15:49:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open References: <004001c49f86$224f6880$1327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001801c4a02d$3cbb3210$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> What about the $100,000 cash prize for the ASL champion, huh? Wynn "Reading ASL Rules So That He Can Win Big and Buy a New House" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Snow" To: "Bruce Probst" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > >> Congratulations, but an interesting (cultural?) note: while in Australia >> we >> would have no problem in letting the TD play along with everyone else >> (better >> than having him just sit there and twiddle his thumbs!), I believe that >> he >> would normally be automatically disqualified from taking an actual >> winning >> place -- i.e., no prizes, no trophies. Is it different elsewhere? >> > > Depends. At the tournament I run, the TD team plays only a spoiler role, > and only if the numbers are odd. But I've seen other TDs at local > tournaments participate and win. > > If the scenarios are announced in advance, the TD doesn't really have much > of an advantage, so it's not a big deal. It's not like there's more than > pride at stake anyway. > > 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 sambelcher at cablespeed.com Tue Sep 21 16:38:14 2004 From: sambelcher at cablespeed.com (Sam Belcher) Date: Tue Sep 21 16:38:13 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. In-Reply-To: <6uavk0hjs8nkc0j0pnovp97j5o95in921p@4ax.com> Message-ID: <000e01c4a034$10b11200$917ba8c0@dicetower4> I believe the post was talking about one tank "remaining in motion" while another tank of the same platoon stopped. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 9:20 PM > To: Sam Belcher; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: SV: [Aslml] MP counting and concealment. > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:07:01 -0500, "Sam Belcher" > > wrote: > > >NRBH, but I think platoons have to start and stop > >together. Am I wrong? > > You're right, but that's not the issue here. The point is, the MP need to > be > counted, whether you're stopped or not. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "We're getting into a whole weird area here." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From loquitor1991 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 19:06:07 2004 From: loquitor1991 at hotmail.com (George Lytle) Date: Tue Sep 21 19:07:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: I believe VOTG will hit its Pxxx in a little over a month once it is listed. It gets listed once AoO comes off the list. On October 1, 2004 AoO will have been on the Preorder list for one year. History tends to repeat itself. Each year I am in this hobby I get more and more pessimistic. _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Sep 21 19:28:00 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Sep 21 19:28:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040921212657.0195e970@pop3.direcway.com> At 09:06 PM 9/21/2004, George Lytle wrote: >I believe VOTG will hit its Pxxx in a little over a month once it is listed. Little tiny problem with this. It will have no Pxxx number. Starting to think we were suckered with that. :( ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From asl at howardhowardfine.com Tue Sep 21 20:34:56 2004 From: asl at howardhowardfine.com (ASL) Date: Tue Sep 21 20:35:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040921212657.0195e970@pop3.direcway.com> References: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040921223351.00c0d430@mail.howardhowardfine.com> You are right. Let's face it, MMP is doing nothing on AoO. c At 09:28 PM 21/09/2004 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >At 09:06 PM 9/21/2004, George Lytle wrote: >>I believe VOTG will hit its Pxxx in a little over a month once it is listed. > >Little tiny problem with this. It will have no Pxxx number. Starting to >think we were suckered with that. :( > > >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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Sep 21 22:25:43 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Sep 21 22:25:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: <906a010906eb4a.906eb4a906a010@us.army.mil> Hi- Remember; MMP has a "Bottle Neck of Products" Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: ASL Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 10:34 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] VOTG > > You are right. Let's face it, MMP is doing nothing on AoO. > > c > > At 09:28 PM 21/09/2004 -0500, ron mosher wrote: > >At 09:06 PM 9/21/2004, George Lytle wrote: > >>I believe VOTG will hit its Pxxx in a little over a month once > it is listed. > > > >Little tiny problem with this. It will have no Pxxx number. > Starting to > >think we were suckered with that. :( > > > > > >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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 loquitor1991 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 21 22:47:14 2004 From: loquitor1991 at hotmail.com (George Lytle) Date: Tue Sep 21 22:48:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: I am confused....why wont VotG have a Pxx number....its not a core mod and should have a Pxxx just like OVHS >From: ron mosher >To: George Lytle ,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] VOTG >Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:28:00 -0500 > >At 09:06 PM 9/21/2004, George Lytle wrote: >>I believe VOTG will hit its Pxxx in a little over a month once it is >>listed. > >Little tiny problem with this. It will have no Pxxx number. Starting to >think we were suckered with that. :( > > >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 _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 21 23:19:23 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 21 23:19:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8v52l05dlv0he4vo69a6vs7ldb4dq1qk7q@4ax.com> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:47:42 -0500, "Tate Rogers" wrote: >Per the standard rules the AL "ceases to exist" once the crew takes counter >form. Don't be stupid -- you *know* it still exists, because that AL would reappear if the crew loaded into a new vehicle. The rules say that, too (in the very same sentence, no less). Are you arguing that only the first half of the sentence is true? If not, how do you explain that this thing that "doesn't exist" can, in fact, come into existence? In other words, it's your typical Tate Rogers fatuous argument: the rules only say what you want them to say when you want them to say it. >How can one withdraw something that doesn't "exist" You were using some method to remember that the AL was present with that crew. Whatever method you were using, you now forget it. It's very easy, Tate, even you should be able to manage that. >Per a previous >example, if three AFV are destroyed and all three crew and an AL survive >then no withdrawal roll would be made (according to Perry) because no AFV or >AL currently "exist" on board. No, as Ole has already demonstrated, that is not what the Q&A says. >Great...now just point me to where these mechanics are listed in the ASLRB >and we will both be happy. You must be joking. So, are you saying that you automatically forget that an AL is present with a surviving crew, because the rulebook didn't tell you how to remember it? What a sad life you must lead. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 21 23:32:34 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 21 23:32:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040921223351.00c0d430@mail.howardhowardfine.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040921212657.0195e970@pop3.direcway.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20040921223351.00c0d430@mail.howardhowardfine.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:34:56 -0500, ASL wrote: >You are right. Let's face it, MMP is doing nothing on AoO. *You* face it, if you want; the rest of us probably know that producing a product is a process, and most steps in that process are invisible to outsiders. It doesn't mean that those steps don't exist. MMP have *seriously* dropped the ball on AoO. It should have been released either late last year or early this year -- the content was done, all that was required was to turn that content into printed matter -- i.e., layout and printing. It's this step that has been handled badly (and we don't know why, because MMP haven't told us). However, it is a far cry from "handled badly" to "doing nothing at all". Only Tabby is stupid enough to claim that MMP are *deliberately* doing nothing about AoO. Others should be smart enough to not sink to his level. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Sep 22 04:01:19 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed Sep 22 04:01:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: TD AAR: 2004 Canadian ASL Open Message-ID: <002b01c4a093$7df93fe0$4a27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Perry wrote, The World Boardgaming Championships encourage TDs to play and win their tournaments. The thinking is to encourage TDs to volunteer to run their favorite game. Of course, in the 13 years of DonCon, no ASL TD has ever competed in his own tournament. Nor do the TDs in the important tourneys south of the border: ASLOK, WO, ASL Open, WCW, etc. FWIW *********************************************************** Well, up here in Canada the CASLO works like this. The CASLO is sponsored by the Canadian ASL Association which in turn elects a TD to run the CASLO. The candidates for the TD position are nominated by the Charter Members and the nominee may decline the nomination if he so desires. Once elected, the TD selects two other CASLA Charter Members to serve as Assistant TD's. The three (TD, and 2 ATD's) are collectively known as the "Tournament Staff" and are responsible for doing all the organizational work involved in running the CASLO (ie: selecting a scenario list, booking the hotel, t-shirt design etc.). Once the CASLO roars into action, the teamwork really starts to pay off. If one or two of the tournament staff are still playing, the third member of the staff can attend to any administrative duties that need to be done or answer any questions that are asked by the players themselves. Between rounds, the entire staff works on the round pairings and in getting things setup for the next round of gaming. If the TD needs to go out and grab something to eat, one of the ATD's will assume control of the tournament in his absence. On occasion there may also arise a time when extra hands are needed on deck. At the CASLO there has always been quite a few attendees at the tournament who are willing to pitch in and help because they have done the TD/ATD job in the past. We run the CASLO as a team effort but as in any team, there has to be a captain and in the tournament, the TD is the captain but the captain of the team still plays. After a successful CASLO, the TD may get a thumbs up from the boys for a good show but the reality is running the CASLO is very much a team effort, it is not just one person doing everything. If the TD's of the tournaments you mention wish to sit out their events, fine by them as that is there prerogative but I'll be damned if I will miss out in playing in the CASLO. The only time that will happen is if I am unable to attend. Just my humble opinion Perry but missing out in playing the guys from out of town that I've come to know over the years simply because I happen to be the TD of the CASLO in any given year is not acceptable. If others have an objection to such a thing then I suggest that they should not dwell on it too much. There is precious little time to play the game as it is and missing out on a weekend of gaming for the sake of appearances is dang near sacrilegious. Again, just my humble opinion. =Jim= From keithdalton at verizon.net Wed Sep 22 05:41:53 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Wed Sep 22 05:41:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: <20040922124154.YOEJ28066.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> VOTG will have a p#. It is not a core module. Keith > > From: "George Lytle" > Date: 2004/09/22 Wed AM 12:47:14 CDT > To: rjmosher@direcway.com, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VOTG > > I am confused....why wont VotG have a Pxx number....its not a core mod and > should have a Pxxx just like OVHS > > > >From: ron mosher > >To: George Lytle ,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >Subject: Re: [Aslml] VOTG > >Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:28:00 -0500 > > > >At 09:06 PM 9/21/2004, George Lytle wrote: > >>I believe VOTG will hit its Pxxx in a little over a month once it is > >>listed. > > > >Little tiny problem with this. It will have no Pxxx number. Starting to > >think we were suckered with that. :( > > > > > >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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! > http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/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 rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 22 05:59:06 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 22 05:59:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG In-Reply-To: <20040922124154.YOEJ28066.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.veriz on.net> References: <20040922124154.YOEJ28066.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040922075810.01a02648@pop3.direcway.com> At 07:41 AM 9/22/2004, keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: >VOTG will have a p#. It is not a core module. Yep, forgot that. It's been a long time since the last non-core module came out, and you know us old guys..... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From scott.holst at us.army.mil Wed Sep 22 06:35:48 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Sep 22 06:37:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Message-ID: <940b4839406c60.9406c60940b483@us.army.mil> Bruce and all As far as MMP is concerned; They have proved time and time again that they are incompetent and lack that special verv of enthusiasm to publish ASL. Why renewal a license for a game and publish zip? Why squander your playtest assets that you inherited from AH? Why submit projects to MMP knowing full well the wait might be years upon years before its published? Why renewal a license and not get a clause in there saying that they can sub license ASL out? This would have been a win win situation for everybody. Ya, I?m hated, but someone has to step up and ask the tough questions. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce Probst Date: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 1:32 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] VOTG > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:34:56 -0500, ASL > wrote: > >You are right. Let's face it, MMP is doing nothing on AoO. > > *You* face it, if you want; the rest of us probably know that > producing a > product is a process, and most steps in that process are invisible to > outsiders. It doesn't mean that those steps don't exist. > > MMP have *seriously* dropped the ball on AoO. It should have been > releasedeither late last year or early this year -- the content > was done, all that was > required was to turn that content into printed matter -- i.e., > layout and > printing. It's this step that has been handled badly (and we > don't know why, > because MMP haven't told us). > > However, it is a far cry from "handled badly" to "doing nothing at > all". > Only Tabby is stupid enough to claim that MMP are *deliberately* > doing nothing > about AoO. Others should be smart enough to not sink to his level. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" > 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 geb3 at inter.net Wed Sep 22 08:47:41 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Wed Sep 22 08:44:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] >CLICK< ... nothing happens Message-ID: Is it possible for mine attacks to roll a dud? Is this considered a TK DR per C7.35? Or, because a detonation has occurred, are we beyond that? I don't think a DR12 means anything in this case, but I would like there to be some small possibility that one of my AFVs might survive an AT mine attack unscathed. Anybody want to lend some comfort to my rulebook fantasies? George "flick of my Bic" Bates Now in progress: J53 "Setting The Stage", German vs. David Olie SASL M13 "Recon", Free French vs. German ENEMY 77 "Le Herisson", German vs. Hideaki Iwanaga From gr27134 at charter.net Wed Sep 22 08:49:03 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Wed Sep 22 08:49:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders Message-ID: <3ds8t6$7uqa7b@mxip20a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/09/22 Wed AM 01:19:23 CDT > To: , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Perry Sez: RB CG AFV Crews and Armor Leaders > > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:47:42 -0500, "Tate Rogers" wrote: > > >Per the standard rules the AL "ceases to exist" once the crew takes counter > >form. > > Don't be stupid -- Hey, gotta clue for you...I didn't write the rule. For some reason the designers decided that they wanted AL to be treated as completely none existent when the crew has bailed. Per the rules, while the crew is in counter form, the AL does not exist for _ANY_ rules purposes. Whether one makes a simple side note on scrap paper or whether one constructs a multi-page matrix to keep up with which crew is which...the AL is "none existent" for rules purposes until the specific crew climbs back in an AFV. If you don't like that then have the rules changed. An off-the-cuff, unOfficial, "Perry Sez" isn't enough. > you *know* it still exists, because that AL would reappear > if the crew loaded into a new vehicle. Regardless of player omnipotence, AL do not "exist" for any rules purposes while the crew is in counter form. The rules say that, too (in the very > same sentence, no less). Are you arguing that only the first half of the > sentence is true? Actually, if AL's still exist while the crew is afoot, why would they need note that the AL is back in action once the crew is back in an AFV...it would be patently obvious that the AL is in play because he never left. OTOH, if he "ceases to exist" then the rules would need to note how he comes back. Hmmm...interesting that this is exactly what the rules, in fact, do. > If not, how do you explain that this thing that "doesn't > exist" can, in fact, come into existence? Actually I don't have to explain it because I didn't write the rules. What I can tell you is that the rules are very explicit: 1) crew in counter form = AL none-existent for rules purposes 2) crew inherent = AL exists for rules purposes > In other words, it's your typical Tate Rogers fatuous argument: the rules only > say what you want them to say when you want them to say it. > Hmmm...are you contending that the rules don't say "ceases to exist". That is a pretty difficult argument to make since it is right there in black&white. Look, I think it is fairly simple. The designers decided they didn't want any foolishness with AL's once said AL is out of the AFV. So they make it clear that for any/all rules AL's are non-existent while the crew is in counter form. They then specifically note that once back in the AFV the AL is back in play. > You must be joking. So, are you saying that you automatically forget that an > AL is present with a surviving crew, because the rulebook didn't tell you how > to remember it? What a sad life you must lead. Life is very joyous actually. One can use any method to keep up with which crew regenerates the AL (BTW, side notes are not a rules purpose). Regardless of this, for all rules purposes, the AL "ceases to exist" while the crew is in counter form. That is what the rules say...you can spew & sputter, whin & cry, fling all manner of insults at me...it doesn't change what the rules clearly say. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From janusz.maxe at unf.se Wed Sep 22 08:59:29 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Wed Sep 22 08:59:43 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] >CLICK< ... nothing happens Message-ID: Once, I took some time to think about the "dud"-rule. Why does it exist? This is my conclusion: There should be no such thing in ASL as an automatic result. There should always be at least a small risk of something going wrong. Since an ordnance attack is fired even if the weapon malfunctions, you can get shots that will have an automatic hit result (VTT 10, -2 AQ). When rolling on the IFT, even a hit from a 150mm rounf doesn't mean atomatic elimination. An IFT roll of "12" results only in hard MC, that can always be passed by a HOB-roll. On the TK, on the other hand, a roll of "12" can still easily mean elimination. So, the DUD was invented to make it at least possible for a light vehicle to survive the PFPh from a heavy gun. So, turning to the question of AT-mines, you can remain mobile after driving into an minefield, since the rules prohibit placement of more than 5 points of AT-mines in a single location. Thus no need for a DUD-rule. Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fran: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]For George Bates > Skickat: den 22 september 2004 17:48 > Till: ASL Mailing List > Amne: [Aslml] >CLICK< ... nothing happens > > > Is it possible for mine attacks to roll a dud? Is this > considered a TK DR > per C7.35? Or, because a detonation has occurred, are we > beyond that? I > don't think a DR12 means anything in this case, but I would > like there to be > some small possibility that one of my AFVs might survive an > AT mine attack > unscathed. Anybody want to lend some comfort to my rulebook > fantasies? > > George "flick of my Bic" Bates > > Now in progress: > J53 "Setting The Stage", German vs. David Olie > SASL M13 "Recon", Free French vs. German ENEMY > 77 "Le Herisson", German vs. Hideaki Iwanaga > > _______________________________________________ > 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 hennies at xs4all.nl Wed Sep 22 11:01:44 2004 From: hennies at xs4all.nl (Hennie van der Salm) Date: Wed Sep 22 11:01:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Arnhem ASL Tournament Message-ID: <21563.80.126.202.250.1095876104.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> I just updated the Arnhem ASL Tournament website with complete results. You can also find pictures of the tournament at http://www.xs4all.nl/~hennies Hennie van der Salm From ddmath at shaw.ca Wed Sep 22 14:11:11 2004 From: ddmath at shaw.ca (Dwayne Matheson) Date: Wed Sep 22 14:12:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] How to unsubscribe now Message-ID: <000001c4a0e8$aff4a840$6401a8c0@dwayne> I have been looking for a way to un-sub since I have to be away from my computer for a while but the only info I can find is for the asl-forums.net list info. I know that it is changed, but how do I unsub now? The MMP webpage references us to the old ASL forums, and all I could find archived (which I usually keep) is asl-forums.net as well. Thanks in advance! Dwayne --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 17/Sep/2004 From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 22 14:40:44 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 22 14:40:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] How to unsubscribe now In-Reply-To: <000001c4a0e8$aff4a840$6401a8c0@dwayne> References: <000001c4a0e8$aff4a840$6401a8c0@dwayne> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040922164024.01968988@pop3.direcway.com> At 04:11 PM 9/22/2004, Dwayne Matheson wrote: >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 ya go. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From tweniger at telusplanet.net Wed Sep 22 16:49:56 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Wed Sep 22 16:49:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux In-Reply-To: <20040916034650.PYUX20972.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20040916034650.PYUX20972.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: <1095896995.27865.2.camel@laptop> On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 21:46, mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > Thanks Tom, > you're a genius! > > another question. I've been launching it using webstart and it goes back and downloads the same files (I think) then fails to run. Then, VASSAL comes up and I start VASL. Is there an easier way? What's the full java command to run > vasl.mod? > > Thanks, > > Don Hancock > Greetings Don, I got this command from the user's guide installation chapter: $JAVA_HOME/javaws/javaws http://www.vasl.org/ws/vasl.jnlp I prefer to launch VASSAL first, then load the vasl.mod module. -- Virtually, Tom W From mastadon61 at cox.net Wed Sep 22 19:10:35 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Wed Sep 22 19:10:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning Message-ID: <20040923021035.OFQK2849.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Hi All, I'm trying to help a friend learn the night rules. What are the best scenarios for learning the night rules? Is there an easy way to get a list of all the night scenarios included in the Modules, Annuals, and Journals? He's also got PB and ABtF. I remember there used to be a web site that you could submit queries like this too. Is it still around? Thanks for your help, Don Hancock From mastadon61 at cox.net Wed Sep 22 19:20:35 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Wed Sep 22 19:20:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL install on linux Message-ID: <20040923022036.NHCH21381.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Hi Tom, That command launchs VASL, but it still forces an install, which still fails. Thanks, Don Hancock > > From: Tom Weniger > Date: 2004/09/22 Wed PM 07:49:56 EDT > To: mastadon61@cox.net > CC: ASL Playpen > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] VASL install on linux > > On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 21:46, mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > > Thanks Tom, > > you're a genius! > > > > another question. I've been launching it using webstart and it goes back and downloads the same files (I think) then fails to run. Then, VASSAL comes up and I start VASL. Is there an easier way? What's the full java command to run > > vasl.mod? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Don Hancock > > > Greetings Don, > > I got this command from the user's guide installation chapter: > $JAVA_HOME/javaws/javaws http://www.vasl.org/ws/vasl.jnlp > > I prefer to launch VASSAL first, then load the vasl.mod module. > > -- > Virtually, > Tom W > > From aslml at aslwebdex.net Wed Sep 22 19:26:18 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Wed Sep 22 19:26:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning References: <20040923021035.OFQK2849.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: <009f01c4a114$b5c98fc0$6601a8c0@D5G57231> Don, Suggest you take a look at the Chapter E section of the ASLWebDex (www.aslwebdex.net). There is some good stuff on the net to help you learn. To answer your specific question, JR Tracy in his article "Bring on the Night," of which an draft version is on the net and linked from the WebDex, says: "Taking the Left Tit" (ASL Scenario 20) doesn't involve a lot of units or extra complications. "Cat and Mouse," ASL Scenario A19 in the '90 Annual, is also a good scenario for a first game. Both the German and the American players get variable extra units including vehicles. If both sides agree, simplify the game by ignoring the options that add vehicles to the OBs and set the EC to Normal." "The Grognard Speaks: "Learning ASL, One Scenario at a Time" By Bob Smith, in Hit the Beach 6:2:6 (April 2001, Southern California ASL Club) has recommendations for best scenarios to start with. It is also linked from the Chapter E page. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:10 PM Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning > Hi All, > > I'm trying to help a friend learn the night rules. What are the best scenarios for learning the night rules? Is there an easy way to get a list of all the night scenarios included in the Modules, Annuals, and Journals? He's also got PB and ABtF. I remember there used to be a web site that you could submit queries like this too. Is it still around? > > Thanks for your help, > > Don Hancock > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Sep 22 21:08:07 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Wed Sep 22 21:08:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: <20040923040807.5124.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Listers- A couple of questions regarding AFV's in the DFF: If a tank turns its VCA 2 hexspines to fire its BMG and then turns its TCA two hexpsines to fire its CMG at another target, what would be the hexspine total DRM be if it turned its TCA two more hexspines to fire its MA ? Also, can an AFV turn its VCA to use its BMG and then turn its VCA to fire its CMG or MA in the same DFF ? Thanks in Advance _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 22 22:38:42 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 22 22:38:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] >CLICK< ... nothing happens In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <91o4l01906hi5etnumdaislaarr7dbligo@4ax.com> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 00:47:41 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Is it possible for mine attacks to roll a dud? Is this considered a TK DR >per C7.35? Or, because a detonation has occurred, are we beyond that? I >don't think a DR12 means anything in this case, but I would like there to be >some small possibility that one of my AFVs might survive an AT mine attack >unscathed. Anybody want to lend some comfort to my rulebook fantasies? No, AT mines don't "dud": they are not TK DR, which are the only things that can yield a "dud" result (C7.35). Technically, they're IFT DR. B28.52 "Each A-T mine attacks on the 36+ column of the IFT. ... Vs an AFV a 4 KIA results in a Burning Wreck, a KIA results in elimination, and any other result causes Immobilization." The "12" falls into the "any other result" category. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 22 22:41:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 22 22:41:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning In-Reply-To: <20040923021035.OFQK2849.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20040923021035.OFQK2849.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:10:35 -0400, wrote: >I'm trying to help a friend learn the night rules. What are the best scenarios for learning the night rules? Is there an easy way to get a list of all the night scenarios included in the Modules, Annuals, and Journals? He's also got PB and ABtF. I remember there used to be a web site that you could submit queries like this too. Is it still around? There are suggestions for "beginner" scenarios on various topics in the ASL FAQ. See my .sig below. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 22 23:05:13 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 22 23:05:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <20040923040807.5124.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040923040807.5124.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:08:07 -0700 (PDT), wrote: > A couple of questions regarding AFV's in the DFF: What do you mean by "DFF"? Normally it stands for Defensive First Fire; is the tank you're referring to the ATTACKER or the DEFENDER? Is it the MPh or the DFPh? It makes a difference because a moving vehicle (the ATTACKER in the MPh) cannot change CA by firing a weapon (C5.13). You must use *movement* to face the direction you want to fire in. Case A is not applicable. Assuming you mean a "normal" firing situation (i.e., not Bounding First Fire): >If a tank turns its VCA 2 hexspines to fire its BMG >and then turns its TCA two hexpsines to fire its CMG >at another target, what would be the hexspine total >DRM be if it turned its TCA two more hexspines to fire >its MA ? Fast turret: +3+1 +1+1 +1+1 = +8. Slow turret: +3+1 +2+1 +1+1 = +9. The applicable rule is D3.51. >Also, can an AFV turn its VCA to use its BMG >and then turn its VCA to fire its CMG or MA in the >same DFF ? Of course. The Case A modifiers remain cumulative: you get +3 for the first VCA change and an additional +1 for each change after that. You can't "lose" Case A DRM incurred in that fire phase except when the *same* weapon is firing a subsequent shot (i.e., due to ROF or Intensive Fire). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Sep 22 23:39:04 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Wed Sep 22 23:40:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: References: <20040923040807.5124.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1095921544.41526f88c83b5@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, > On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:08:07 -0700 (PDT), wrote: > > >If a tank turns its VCA 2 hexspines to fire its BMG > >and then turns its TCA two hexpsines to fire its CMG > >at another target, what would be the hexspine total > >DRM be if it turned its TCA two more hexspines to fire > >its MA ? > and Bruce Probst answered: > Fast turret: +3+1 +1+1 +1+1 = +8. > Slow turret: +3+1 +2+1 +1+1 = +9. > > The applicable rule is D3.51. > Unfortunately, Bruce's answer is wrong. The correct is simply to only count the *last* CA change: Fast Turret: +2 Slow Turret: +3. This is actually clearly stated in D3.51: If, after firing [after the first CA change], [it] wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12). It then goes on to tell that it applies to VCA changes too. So only the last CA change is ever counted for DRM. Assume a situation where your (fast) TCA and VCA are aligned, but unfortnately with your back to the enemy. You want to fire at the enemy as effectively as possible, and also to get the VCA changed at least 2 hex-spines in the right direction for maximum protection. The simple way would be to fire while changing the VCA three hexspines for a total DRM of +5. But it can be done better. First, change both the VCA and TCA 2 hexspines and fire the BMG (or CMG) at a target inside the new CA, with a DRM of +4. Then change the TCA only, to fire at the enemy tank for a DRM of +1 only. I guess your opponent will be surprised when his AFV goes up in flames. There is one catch though (isn't there always one). The intermediate target(s) *must* be Known enemy units. If not, you cannot change the CA further that phase. > >Also, can an AFV turn its VCA to use its BMG > >and then turn its VCA to fire its CMG or MA in the > >same DFF ? > > Of course. The Case A modifiers remain cumulative: you get +3 for the first > VCA change and an additional +1 for each change after that. > As already pointed out, the Case A modifiers do *not* remain cumulative. You get +3 for the first VCA change, and +3 for the second, but those are not cumulative. I guess Bruce P. mixes this up with the situation where as part of *one* shot, the AFV changes its VCA, and also changes the TCA relatively to the VCA. In this case, both the VCA change, and the TCA change relatively to the VCA is added. > You can't "lose" Case A DRM incurred in that fire phase except when the > *same* weapon is firing a subsequent shot (i.e., due to ROF or Intensive > Fire). Yes you can lose the old when you gain a new. -- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? From geb3 at inter.net Thu Sep 23 00:04:35 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Sep 23 00:01:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] "Bring On The Night" Correction In-Reply-To: <009f01c4a114$b5c98fc0$6601a8c0@D5G57231> Message-ID: Since both JRs are probably fast asleep at this hour, let me step in to make one correction to Larry's post. The (masterful) article in question was actually authored by J.R. VanMechelen, and was recently reprinted in _Out of the Attic_, to boot. This is not to say that Herr Tracy does not possess some crafty "night moves" of his own. You'd best watch yourself against both of 'em. George "performing a follow-the-sun public service" Bates Now in progress: J53 "Setting The Stage", German vs. David Olie SASL M13 "Recon", Free French vs. German ENEMY 77 "Le Herisson", German vs. Hideaki Iwanaga -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of aslml@aslwebdex.net Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 11:26 AM To: mastadon61@cox.net; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning Don, Suggest you take a look at the Chapter E section of the ASLWebDex (www.aslwebdex.net). There is some good stuff on the net to help you learn. To answer your specific question, JR Tracy in his article "Bring on the Night," of which an draft version is on the net and linked from the WebDex, says: "Taking the Left Tit" (ASL Scenario 20) doesn't involve a lot of units or extra complications. "Cat and Mouse," ASL Scenario A19 in the '90 Annual, is also a good scenario for a first game. Both the German and the American players get variable extra units including vehicles. If both sides agree, simplify the game by ignoring the options that add vehicles to the OBs and set the EC to Normal." "The Grognard Speaks: "Learning ASL, One Scenario at a Time" By Bob Smith, in Hit the Beach 6:2:6 (April 2001, Southern California ASL Club) has recommendations for best scenarios to start with. It is also linked from the Chapter E page. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:10 PM Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning > Hi All, > > I'm trying to help a friend learn the night rules. What are the best scenarios for learning the night rules? Is there an easy way to get a list of all the night scenarios included in the Modules, Annuals, and Journals? He's also got PB and ABtF. I remember there used to be a web site that you could submit queries like this too. Is it still around? > > Thanks for your help, > > Don Hancock > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 scott at sgstewart.com Thu Sep 23 02:50:49 2004 From: scott at sgstewart.com (Scott G. Stewart) Date: Thu Sep 23 02:53:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MTR/Smoke understanding Message-ID: <41529C79.4050302@sgstewart.com> I spent a lot of time tonight concentrating on the ASL Mortar and SMOKE rules, and found some items I must have mis-learned in the past. Could anyone please confirm if my new understandings are correct? A) Mortars do not have Smoke unless specifically listed on the counter/notes. Thus, U.S. Mortars have WP, but NO Smoke; German 50mm Mortar has no Smoke. B) No acquisition can be gained while placing SMOKE; any acquisition is lost after SMOKE placement. C) Leadership may modify SW MTR To Hit, but does not apply to Gun To Hit . Thank you for the help. -- Scott Stewart From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 05:06:05 2004 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu Sep 23 05:06:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <1095921544.41526f88c83b5@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <20040923120605.66698.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> This situation came up at ASLOK a couple of years ago. Our initial interpretation of the rule was as Bruce puts forth. A more detailed reading of the rule made us question that and see the possiblity of Ole's interpretation of the rule as written. Perry was sitting at the next table, so we asked him. After looking long and hard at the rule and stroking his beard, he called it as Ole would, but you could tell he didn't like it. Of course, there is no documentation for this call.....possibly a good topic for an offical question? Jazz --- Ole Bře wrote: > Hi, > > > On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:08:07 -0700 (PDT), wrote: > > > > >If a tank turns its VCA 2 hexspines to fire its BMG > > >and then turns its TCA two hexpsines to fire its CMG > > >at another target, what would be the hexspine total > > >DRM be if it turned its TCA two more hexspines to fire > > >its MA ? > > > and Bruce Probst answered: > > > Fast turret: +3+1 +1+1 +1+1 = +8. > > Slow turret: +3+1 +2+1 +1+1 = +9. > > > > The applicable rule is D3.51. > > > Unfortunately, Bruce's answer is wrong. > > The correct is simply to only count the *last* CA change: > Fast Turret: +2 > Slow Turret: +3. > > This is actually clearly stated in D3.51: > > If, after firing [after the first CA change], [it] wishes to fire at another > target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based > only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12). > > It then goes on to tell that it applies to VCA changes too. > > So only the last CA change is ever counted for DRM. > > Assume a situation where your (fast) TCA and VCA are aligned, but unfortnately > with your back to the enemy. You want to fire at the enemy as effectively as > possible, and also to get the VCA changed at least 2 hex-spines in the right > direction for maximum protection. > > The simple way would be to fire while changing the VCA three hexspines for a > total DRM of +5. > > But it can be done better. First, change both the VCA and TCA 2 hexspines and > fire the BMG (or CMG) at a target inside the new CA, with a DRM of +4. Then > change the TCA only, to fire at the enemy tank for a DRM of +1 only. I guess > your opponent will be surprised when his AFV goes up in flames. > > There is one catch though (isn't there always one). The intermediate target(s) > *must* be Known enemy units. If not, you cannot change the CA further that > phase. > > > > >Also, can an AFV turn its VCA to use its BMG > > >and then turn its VCA to fire its CMG or MA in the > > >same DFF ? > > > > Of course. The Case A modifiers remain cumulative: you get +3 for the first > > VCA change and an additional +1 for each change after that. > > > As already pointed out, the Case A modifiers do *not* remain cumulative. You get > +3 for the first VCA change, and +3 for the second, but those are not > cumulative. > > I guess Bruce P. mixes this up with the situation where as part of *one* shot, > the AFV changes its VCA, and also changes the TCA relatively to the VCA. In > this case, both the VCA change, and the TCA change relatively to the VCA is > added. > > > You can't "lose" Case A DRM incurred in that fire phase except when the > > *same* weapon is firing a subsequent shot (i.e., due to ROF or Intensive > > Fire). > > Yes you can lose the old when you gain a new. > > -- > If you cut off my head, what do I say? > Me and my body, or me and my head? > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Sep 23 05:40:58 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Thu Sep 23 05:42:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <20040923120605.66698.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040923120605.66698.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1095943258.4152c45a1d54c@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, Quoting Jazz : > This situation came up at ASLOK a couple of years ago. > > Our initial interpretation of the rule was as Bruce puts forth. A more > detailed reading of the rule made us question that and see the possiblity of > Ole's interpretation of the rule as written. > > Perry was sitting at the next table, so we asked him. After looking long and > hard at the rule and stroking his beard, he called it as Ole would, but you > could tell he didn't like it. > > Of course, there is no documentation for this call.....possibly a good topic > for an offical question? > I normally don't like to say that questioned rules are clear, but in this case I do. The rule is clear if you read D3.51 and its accompanying example, so there is no need for a Q&A. First, look at the definition of the Case A DRM at C5.1. It says: "The To Hit DRM penalty for firing a Gun at a target outside its current CA..." In the case we discuss (change while firing, then change again while firing a second shot, possibly with a different weapon) the current CA is the CA you have changed to, not the original (obviously, since that is no longer current :-) C5.1 does not hint at any cumulative case A DRM, so there's no reason to invent such a rule. Then look at D3.51. It says: 1) Once a vehicle fires any turret-mounted weapon, any of its other turret-mounted weapons which fire within the current respective CA must pay the same CA Change penalty as the first weapon which fired. Ok, this is an exception to the C5.1 rule. You also pay the case A DRM when firing with other weapons within the same CA as you changed to. Its not what we're discussing though, since we're discussing shots *outside* the new CA. 2) If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon (or the MA which has retained a Multiple ROF) wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA Ok, this is the meat. It says that after having fired [outside the old CA], you can fire outside the new CA, but THE CASE A TH DRM IS APPLICABLE ONLY ON THE MOVE FROM THE CURRENT TCA TO THE NEW TCA. Sorry for shouting, but when a clear sentence isn't understood, I thought it would help to shout it :-) 3) but only if the preceding shot(s) were taken at a Known enemy unit; otherwise no further change in TCA is allowed during that phase. Ok, a sensible restriction. Without it, one would always change CA while firing at a nearby empty hex to spend most of the case A DRM, and then only change the TCA one hexspine to fire at the real target. Don Greenwod added this (I believe) to keep this from being a major sleaze. Go job old Don. 4) These same principles also apply to bow-mounted weapons if changing the VCA to fire. Good. This applies to the VCA too. 5) If the VCA is changed, the TCA changes the same number of hexspines while retaining its position relative to the VCA. Yes. The TCA simply moves automatically with the VCA. Well known stuff. 6) Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in additional to the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change This points to the preceeding sentence. If you at the same time change the VCA, and the TCA relative to the VCA, you pay for both for your shot. The rest of D3.51 deals with BFF where case A doesn't apply. That's it. No indication of cumulative DRM, but an explicit rule telling that you only pay for the last CA change. I really don't see anything vague here. -- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? From jtracy at bankofny.com Thu Sep 23 05:59:26 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 05:57:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning Message-ID: Larry writes: > To answer your specific question, JR Tracy > in his article "Bring on the Night," As much as I wish I'd written that, it is actually the work of the Original JR, JR VanMechelen. It's an excellent article and essential reading before diving into the weird and wonderful world of ASL at Night. (the other) JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 07:36:43 2004 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu Sep 23 07:37:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <1095943258.4152c45a1d54c@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <20040923143643.96502.qmail@web40001.mail.yahoo.com> Hello Ole, --- Ole Bře wrote: . . . . > > > I normally don't like to say that questioned rules are clear, but in this case I > do. The rule is clear if you read D3.51 and its accompanying example, so there > is no need for a Q&A. > Well, thats what we came up with also after reading the rule. The only reason I mention an official Q&A is that when I brought this episode up on the list a year or two ago, there were many cries of *EXTREME* sleeze and some folks pretty up in arms (on the ASLML? Surely not...) that this was not how it "should" be... I suspect that it would take an official pronouncement from on high for this interpretation to gain common acceptance. I mean, it IS kinda gamey...don't you think? Jazz From jtracy at bankofny.com Thu Sep 23 08:45:45 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 08:44:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: > I mean, it IS kinda gamey...don't you think? This fix to this, if there is to be one, would be to limit the 'add on' TCA/VCA DRM penalty to the actual weapon that fired. I.e., turn TCA, pay +2 to fire MA, turn TCA another click, fire with MA at +1, but fire CMG at +3. This is not the way it reads now. I agree with the formal reading of Ole, but have always played it the other way. It does open up beaucoup opportunities for sleazosity. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 09:32:29 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 09:35:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <1095921544.41526f88c83b5@webmail.broadpark.no> References: <20040923040807.5124.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> <1095921544.41526f88c83b5@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:39:04 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >> >If a tank turns its VCA 2 hexspines to fire its BMG >> >and then turns its TCA two hexpsines to fire its CMG >> >at another target, what would be the hexspine total >> >DRM be if it turned its TCA two more hexspines to fire >> >its MA ? >> >and Bruce Probst answered: > >> Fast turret: +3+1 +1+1 +1+1 = +8. >> Slow turret: +3+1 +2+1 +1+1 = +9. >> >> The applicable rule is D3.51. >> >Unfortunately, Bruce's answer is wrong. It seems to me that the D3.51 EX supports it: "He decides not to fire his BMG because to do so he must change his VCA and that would require penalizing the first shot of all CA-restricted weapons firing as NT Gun Types rather than T Types (C5.11)." Note that it says "the first shot of all weapons", not "the next shot from any weapon". The second paragraph of the EX goes on to further reinforce this interpretation. >This is actually clearly stated in D3.51: > > If, after firing [after the first CA change], [it] wishes to fire at another > target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based > only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12). > >It then goes on to tell that it applies to VCA changes too. I believe what you are missing here is the statement "If the VCA is changed ... Any further changes of the TCA incur normal TCA Case A DRM in addition to the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change." >So only the last CA change is ever counted for DRM. I'm afraid that I must respectfully disagree. Your argument is true *only if* the VCA (only) or the TCA (only) changes. If *both* change, they become cumulative as I originally stated. >But it can be done better. First, change both the VCA and TCA 2 hexspines and >fire the BMG (or CMG) at a target inside the new CA, with a DRM of +4. Then >change the TCA only, to fire at the enemy tank for a DRM of +1 only. I guess >your opponent will be surprised when his AFV goes up in flames. I certainly would be surprised; indeed, I would explain to my opponent that he is reading the rules incorrectly. This very example is in the D3.51 EX, 2nd paragraph, which uses the example of the VCA being changed in order to fire the BMG, and then the TCA further changes in order to fire the MA -- which (it says explicitly) has a +5 TH DRM, because of the cumulative VCA and TCA change. If what you were saying is correct, the EX would say that the BMG fire would "void" the VCA penalty, and the turret would only pay the +1. >I guess Bruce P. mixes this up with the situation where as part of *one* shot, >the AFV changes its VCA, and also changes the TCA relatively to the VCA. In >this case, both the VCA change, and the TCA change relatively to the VCA is >added. Well, no; I read the entire rules paragraph, and the accompanying EX, which it seems to me you have not done. However, I do concede that I was unaware of the case of the VCA (only) or the TCA (only) changing that the DRM are *not* cumulative. In other words, it is legal to change TCA to fire the CMG, and then change TCA again to fire the MA, and the MA only pays the second CA change DRM, not both -- I would have originally argued (and have always played) otherwise. *Why* they only become cumulative when *both* VCA and TCA change I don't understand, but there you have it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Sep 23 09:16:56 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Sep 23 09:40:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MTR/Smoke understanding References: <41529C79.4050302@sgstewart.com> Message-ID: <013601c4a18b$c0ce7b20$a64d8918@klis.com> Scott wrote: > I spent a lot of time tonight concentrating on the ASL Mortar and SMOKE > rules There are more enjoyable ways to spend an evening, but I'll assume you already know that. > and found some items I must have mis-learned in the past. Could > anyone please confirm if my new understandings are correct? O.K., I'll have a stab. > A) Mortars do not have Smoke unless specifically listed on the > counter/notes. Correct. Always check your Ordnance listings. > Thus, U.S. Mortars have WP, but NO Smoke; German 50mm > Mortar has no Smoke. The U.S. M2 60mm has WP7, *but only in 1945* (or by SSR, for example, in KGP). The M19 60mm has WP6 in 1945 only. The other three U.S. mortars have WP8 or 10, depending on type, as standard. No U.S. mortar has Smoke. The German 50mm has no Smoke or WP. (I've noticed a fair number of guys assuming that it does or should.) > B) No acquisition can be gained while placing SMOKE; any acquisition is > lost after SMOKE placement. Correct. C6.56. > C) Leadership may modify SW MTR To Hit, but does not apply to Gun To Hit . Correct. A7.531 and D3.4. David "a light smoker" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 09:42:41 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 09:43:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MTR/Smoke understanding In-Reply-To: <41529C79.4050302@sgstewart.com> References: <41529C79.4050302@sgstewart.com> Message-ID: <1ou5l0lbkrphcq1moqj8fngtsq7bk190j7@4ax.com> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 02:50:49 -0700, "Scott G. Stewart" wrote: >A) Mortars do not have Smoke unless specifically listed on the >counter/notes. Thus, U.S. Mortars have WP, but NO Smoke; German 50mm >Mortar has no Smoke. Correct. (C8.9) >B) No acquisition can be gained while placing SMOKE; any acquisition is >lost after SMOKE placement. Correct. (C6.56) >C) Leadership may modify SW MTR To Hit, but does not apply to Gun To Hit . Correct (A7.531). (EXC: an Armor Leader can modify the Gun TH DR of his vehicle's MA -- D3.44). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From btdtall at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 09:53:22 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 09:54:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040923165322.65722.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Looking at it from a realism point of view it would make sense if it is cummulative. A turn is only 2 minutes of real time and in my example that means the VCA/TCA was turning 9 times. That's some fast turnin considering even thought units move one at a time (besides wave, banzai,platoon, column, etc.)for game mechanics where as in real life they are all moving at once. I brought up this questionable situation because I have designed a scenario for playtest and hopefully it will get scrutinized at ASLOK this year. So just to make sure here though: you can turn your VCA to fire your BMG, then turn your VCA to fire your CMG, and then turn your VCA to fire your MA-and only the curernt turn applies to the shot-right ? --- jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: > > I mean, it IS kinda gamey...don't you think? > > This fix to this, if there is to be one, would be to > limit the 'add on' > TCA/VCA DRM penalty to the actual weapon that fired. > I.e., turn TCA, pay > +2 to fire MA, turn TCA another click, fire with MA > at +1, but fire CMG at > +3. This is not the way it reads now. I agree with > the formal reading of > Ole, but have always played it the other way. It > does open up beaucoup > opportunities for sleazosity. > > JR > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > The information in this e-mail, and any attachment > therein, is confidential and for use by the > addressee only. If you are not the intended > recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender > and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank > of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments > for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are > virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage > sustained as a result of viruses. > _______________________________________________ > 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 oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 23 10:00:11 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 23 09:57:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Jazz wrote: > > I mean, it IS kinda gamey...don't you think? > and JR Tracy added. > This fix to this, if there is to be one, would be to limit the 'add on' > TCA/VCA DRM penalty to the actual weapon that fired. I.e., turn TCA, pay > +2 to fire MA, turn TCA another click, fire with MA at +1, but > fire CMG at +3. This is not the way it reads now. I agree with the formal > reading of Ole, but have always played it the other way. It does open up > beaucoup opportunities for sleazosity. > I agree with you both to a certain degree. A Q&A is not the right tool for changing the rule though, but I would have no problem with an errata. I'm not sure that the sleaze is so big that it needs a fix though. After all, Don Greenwod was obsviously aware of the possible sleaze here, since the only reason for the part saying "...but only if the preceding shot(s) were taken at a Known enemy unit; otherwise no further change in TCA is allowed during that phase" is to stop this rule from becoming a *major* sleaze. I see now that Bruce P. still disagrees (I'll address this soon), so I guess a Q&A may be a good thing after all. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 09:58:37 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 09:59:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <20040923165322.65722.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040923165322.65722.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4vv5l0loctpsep2lovksh5fjng0v73uui7@4ax.com> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 09:53:22 -0700 (PDT), wrote: >So just to >make sure here though: you can turn your VCA to fire >your BMG, then turn your VCA to fire your CMG, and >then turn your VCA to fire your MA-and only the >curernt turn applies to the shot-right ? If it's *only* the VCA you're changing each time -- yes. +3 for the BMG, then only +1 for each of the CMG and MA. *This* part of the rule came as a complete surprise to me, so Ole shouldn't feel his post was completely wasted . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 23 10:13:25 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 23 10:14:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: My turn. I'm going to break it down step by step. It helps me keep it straight. >If a tank turns its VCA 2 hexspines to fire its BMG Case A DRM would be +4 for the BMG (+3 [NT Gun Type] +1 [additional spine change]). >and then turns its TCA two hexpsines to fire its CMG I am assuming that the TCA kept its relative position to the vehicle for the VCA change. It then changed its TCA and fired its CMG. I will assume a Fast Turret. Case A DRM would be +6 for the CMG (+4 [NT type hexspine change] +2 [T type TCA change]). Note that this is identical to the D3.51 EX, Page D10, Paragraph 3, ASLRB 2nd Ed. >at another target, what would be the hexspine total >DRM be if it turned its TCA two more hexspines to fire >its MA ? Case A DRM would be +2 for the MA (+2 [T Gun Type for TCA changes]). >From D3.51: "If, after firing, [e.g. your CMG] another turret-mounted weapon... wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA..." 'Nuff said. 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 btdtall at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 09:58:17 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 10:15:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MTR/Smoke understanding In-Reply-To: <41529C79.4050302@sgstewart.com> Message-ID: <20040923165817.8070.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> B) No acquisition can be gained while placing SMOKE; > any acquisition is > lost after SMOKE placement. > Unless shooting smoke at a cave...I think you get smoke acquisition --- "Scott G. Stewart" wrote: > I spent a lot of time tonight concentrating on the > ASL Mortar and SMOKE > rules, and found some items I must have mis-learned > in the past. Could > anyone please confirm if my new understandings are > correct? > > A) Mortars do not have Smoke unless specifically > listed on the > counter/notes. Thus, U.S. Mortars have WP, but NO > Smoke; German 50mm > Mortar has no Smoke. > > B) No acquisition can be gained while placing SMOKE; > any acquisition is > lost after SMOKE placement. > > C) Leadership may modify SW MTR To Hit, but does not > apply to Gun To Hit . > > Thank you for the help. > > -- Scott Stewart > > > _______________________________________________ > 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!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 23 10:35:17 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 23 10:36:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: >Unfortunately, Bruce's answer is wrong. > I agree. >The correct is simply to only count the *last* CA change: >Fast Turret: +2 >Slow Turret: +3. > In this case, correct, insofar as this is true only because this is the second turret-mounted weapon that is firing. >This is actually clearly stated in D3.51: > > If, after firing [after the first CA change], [it] wishes to fire at >another > target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable >based > only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12). > >It then goes on to tell that it applies to VCA changes too. > Careful now. What it says is, "These same principles also apply to bow-mounted weapons if changing the VCA to fire." All that means is that you handle Case A for bow-mounted weapons the same way you handle Case A for turret-mounted weapons. Bow-mounted weapons and turret-mounted weapons are treated independently >So only the last CA change is ever counted for DRM. > Well, I wouldn't say "ever"... >Assume a situation where your (fast) TCA and VCA are aligned, but >unfortnately >with your back to the enemy. You want to fire at the enemy as effectively >as >possible, and also to get the VCA changed at least 2 hex-spines in the >right >direction for maximum protection. > Okay. >The simple way would be to fire while changing the VCA three hexspines for >a >total DRM of +5. > Sure. >But it can be done better. First, change both the VCA and TCA 2 hexspines >and >fire the BMG (or CMG) at a target inside the new CA, with a DRM of +4. Then >change the TCA only, to fire at the enemy tank for a DRM of +1 only. I >guess >your opponent will be surprised when his AFV goes up in flames. > What is not clear from your example is whether the TCA retained is position relative to the VCA. I will assume that is the case. In this example, if you fire the BMG (i.e. a bow-mounted weapon)... and then change your TCA one hexspine... the first shot by any turret-mounted weapon would still be subject to the +4 NT DRM for change of VCA. "If the VCA is changed, the TCA changes the same number of hexspines while retaining its position relative to the VCA. Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in addition to the NT Case A DRM..." I guess that's pretty clear. If you first change your VCA, (while maintaining relative position with your TCA), and then change the TCA, you get whammied for the NT Case A for VCA, and the T Case A for TCA. This is also demonstrated quick nicely in the third and fourth paragraphs of the EX on Page D10. Now, if you had fired your *CMG*, then a subsequent change of TCA would only incur +1 for T Gun Type. *That* would be a most nifty move indeed. > >I guess Bruce P. mixes this up with the situation where as part of *one* >shot, >the AFV changes its VCA, and also changes the TCA relatively to the VCA. In >this case, both the VCA change, and the TCA change relatively to the VCA is >added. > Actually, if you change VCA, and then change the TCA relative to the vehicle, the first shot by any turret-mounted weapon would incur both the NT DRM (for VCA change) and the T DRM (for TCA change. It positively does not have to happen as "one shot"; i.e., you need not declare anything. See the quote above, and also the EX on Page D10, specifically the third and fourth paragraphs, demonstrate this nicely. _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 23 10:50:30 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 23 10:51:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: Wow, I'm a little perplexed... >I normally don't like to say that questioned rules are clear, but in this >case I >do. The rule is clear if you read D3.51 and its accompanying example, so >there >is no need for a Q&A. > I've done both, and I agree. > >Then look at D3.51. It says: > Let's go. >1) Once a vehicle fires any turret-mounted weapon, any of its other >turret-mounted weapons which fire within the current respective CA must pay >the >same CA Change penalty as the first weapon which fired. > > Ok, this is an exception to the C5.1 rule. You also pay the case A DRM >when > firing with other weapons within the same CA as you changed to. Its not >what > we're discussing though, since we're discussing shots *outside* the new >CA. > But it's not just "other weapons". It's *turret-mounted* weapons. A distinction. >2) If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon (or the MA which has >retained >a Multiple ROF) wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, >the >Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current >TCA >to the new TCA > > Ok, this is the meat. It says that after having fired [outside the old >CA], > you can fire outside the new CA, but THE CASE A TH DRM IS APPLICABLE >ONLY > ON THE MOVE FROM THE CURRENT TCA TO THE NEW TCA. > Again, this is only for *turret-mounted* weapons. > Sorry for shouting, but when a clear sentence isn't understood, I >thought > it would help to shout it :-) > Actually, I do not believe this is the sentence of contention. At least, not for me. >3) but only if the preceding shot(s) were taken at a Known enemy unit; >otherwise >no further change in TCA is allowed during that phase. > > Ok, a sensible restriction. Without it, one would always change CA while > firing at a nearby empty hex to spend most of the case A DRM, and then > only change the TCA one hexspine to fire at the real target. Don >Greenwod > added this (I believe) to keep this from being a major sleaze. Go job > old Don. > Okay. >4) These same principles also apply to bow-mounted weapons if changing the >VCA >to fire. > > Good. This applies to the VCA too. > Careful, now. Here's what it really says: "These same principles also apply to bow-mounted weapons if changing VCA to fire." All it is really saying is, if you fire more than one bow-mounted weapon, the same principles apply. Be careful that you do not mix bow-mounted with turret-mounted (which is what I believe you are doing), because they are treated independently. Firing a bow-mounted weapon does not relieve a turret-mounted weapon from paying NT Case A DRM for its first shot. >5) If the VCA is changed, the TCA changes the same number of hexspines >while >retaining its position relative to the VCA. > > Yes. The TCA simply moves automatically with the VCA. Well known stuff. > Uh-huh. And it doesn't even have to involve a shot, either. >6) Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in >additional to >the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change > > This points to the preceeding sentence. If you at the same time change >the > VCA, and the TCA relative to the VCA, you pay for both for your shot. > Sorry, here I do not agree with the interpretation. These VCA and TCA changes do not have to occur "at the same time" as part of a declared shot. >The rest of D3.51 deals with BFF where case A doesn't apply. That's it. No >indication of cumulative DRM, but an explicit rule telling that you only >pay >for the last CA change. I really don't see anything vague here. > What surprises me is your interpretation of that last sentence. And please don't make me quote the EX for you, which are very straightforward demonstrations of how a turret-mounted weapon must incur both NT DRM (for VCA change) and T DRM (for TCA change) when a turret-weapon fires. Now, if a *second* turret-mounted weapon were to fire, *then* the Case A DRM are begun anew from that point. The bottom line is this: If you change VCA, any subsequent fire incurs the NT Case A DRM for changing VCA. It doesn't matter whether it's turret-mounted or bow-mounted. If you change VCA, and then subsequently change TCA relative to the VCA, you also incur the T Case A DRM for change TCA in addition to the NT Case A DRM for changing VCA. Seriously, this is shown quite nicely in the 2nd Ed ASLRB, Page D10, EX Paragraph three and four. 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Sep 23 11:16:36 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Sep 23 11:16:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <4vv5l0loctpsep2lovksh5fjng0v73uui7@4ax.com> References: <20040923165322.65722.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> <4vv5l0loctpsep2lovksh5fjng0v73uui7@4ax.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040923131531.01b292b8@pop3.direcway.com> At 11:58 AM 9/23/2004, Bruce Probst wrote: >If it's *only* the VCA you're changing each time -- yes. +3 for the BMG, then >only +1 for each of the CMG and MA. Hmmm.. I was assuming each VCA change started a new sequence so +3 for all. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From jtracy at bankofny.com Thu Sep 23 11:29:05 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 11:28:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: I may be getting this wrong, but does open up a flaky anomaly? Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: The TCA changes one hexspine and fires the CMG with a +2 DRM. The MA then fires, also with a +2 DRM on its TH DR. Fine so far. Now, another fire phase, same AFV: The TCA changes one hexspine and fires the CMG with a +2 DRM. The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +1 DRM? Is this the correct conclusion from Ole et al's interpretation? Is the MA better off clicking one more hexspine than firing after the first click, by using the CMG to 'reset' the DRM counter? Curious, if true. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From jtracy at bankofny.com Thu Sep 23 11:40:00 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 11:40:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 Message-ID: Whoops, I miswrote - here's a new version that actually illustrates my point: Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. The MA then fires, also with a +3 DRM on its TH DR. Fine so far. Now, another fire phase, same AFV: The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? Is this the correct conclusion from Ole et al's interpretation? Is the MA better off clicking one more hexspine than firing after the first two clicks, by using the CMG to 'reset' the DRM counter? Curious, if true. JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 23 13:17:53 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu Sep 23 13:15:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I guess I should have listened to my own advice and not say that a questioned rule is clear. Not even my shouting helped, I'm afraid. I agree that Bruce Bakken's analyzis is the best, i.e: Case A DRM for several CA changes are cumulative if you first change the VCA to fire, and then changes the TCA to fire, due to the sentence in D3.51 saying: "Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in additional to the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change" As I've already written, I have always interpreted this to apply to its immediately preceeding sentence (about changing the VCA and TCA individually for the same shot), but some of the examples show that this is not correct. It is *not* cumulative if you only change the VCA or TCA twice, regardless of whether you fire the same or another weapon. There are some spots that haven't been highlighted though: 1) Assume a Fast turret AFV. It first changes the VCA one hexspine to fire the BMG (+3). It then changes the TCA two hexspines to fire the CMG, which I half-heartedly accept receive a +5 DRM. But what if it then changes the TCA one more hexspine to fire the MA? Does it pay +4, or only +1? It could be +4 for a further TCA change after having changed the VCA, or +1 for firing a turret-mounted weapon outside the CA of the last fired turret-mounted weapon as per the second sentence? 2) If an AFV first changes its TCA, and later changes its VCA, the case A DRM are *not* cumulative. The only time its cumulative is when first changing the VCA and then the TCA. But anyway, it was a lesson learned for me too, not only for Bruce Probst. Only Bruce Bakken came out of this as if he knew the answer all along, but that's only because he cheated and peeked at our answers before writing down his own. In school, we'd be kicked out for doing that... From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 23 13:22:51 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu Sep 23 13:19:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, JR Tracy wrote: > > Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > The MA then fires, also with a +3 DRM on its TH DR. > > Fine so far. > Yep, at least if it's my opponent's AFV and he misses. > Now, another fire phase, same AFV: > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? > Yes, sleazy bastard he is. I hope he still missed, or at least rolled my SAN. > Is this the correct conclusion from Ole et al's interpretation? Yes, unless someone points out that its wrong (I try really hard to be humble now). > Is the MA better off clicking one more hexspine than firing after the first two > clicks, by using the CMG to 'reset' the DRM counter? > > Curious, if true. > Yes, but note that there is one restriction. The intermediate CA change *must* be with an attack against a Known enemy unit. If the enemy was concealed (or HIP), the second CA change is not allowed. The only possible reason I can think of for this restriction is to limit the sleaze possibility. Its still nice when I can use it against my opponents though. From btdtall at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 14:10:20 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 14:22:55 2004 Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040923211020.18217.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Alright, everyone call Kevin's cell phone and read the DFF AFV debate to him on his voice mail. "Hey Kev, we noticed you were out of the office and wanted to keep you current, ya see these tank wants to fire it's CMG ......... " --- Kevin.Graves@wellsfargo.com wrote: > Hi, > > I will be out of the office the afternoon of Sept > 22nd. I will not be > checking email. If you have an issue that needs > urgent attention please call > my cell phone at 414 759 9700. > > Thanks, > > Kevin Graves. > DBA Group > 515 213 7492 > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 23 14:41:36 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 23 14:42:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions Message-ID: Greets, > >I guess I should have listened to my own advice and not say that a >questioned rule is clear. Not even my shouting helped, I'm afraid. > Hey, I found myself more than once typing "it's clear", but then took that phrase out. >I agree that Bruce Bakken's analyzis is the best, i.e: > Thanks. > >There are some spots that haven't been highlighted though: > >1) Assume a Fast turret AFV. It first changes the VCA one hexspine to fire >the BMG (+3). It then changes the TCA two hexspines to fire the CMG, which >I >half-heartedly accept receive a +5 DRM. I agree. >But what if it then changes the TCA >one more hexspine to fire the MA? Does it pay +4, or only +1? It could be >+4 >for a further TCA change after having changed the VCA, or +1 for firing a >turret-mounted weapon outside the CA of the last fired turret-mounted >weapon >as per the second sentence? > I believe it would only be +1, because it is the second turret-mounted weapon firing. As per the second sentence, as you say. >2) If an AFV first changes its TCA, and later changes its VCA, the case A >DRM are *not* cumulative. The only time its cumulative is when first >changing the VCA and then the TCA. > I see what you mean. That *is* interesting. >But anyway, it was a lesson learned for me too, not only for Bruce Probst. >Only Bruce Bakken came out of this as if he knew the answer all along, but >that's only because he cheated and peeked at our answers before writing >down >his own. Hey now, wait a minute! You guys got to the original question before I did. When that happens, I first read what you have to say before chiming in. It may be that there is nothing more that I can contribute. IMO, you both got it wrong, but in different ways, so I decided to reply to the original question with an answer that *I* believed was correct, and then responded to the various replies individually that you and Bruce P. had made. Even before reading other replies, I would have reached the same conclusion that I did. After all, it *is* pretty clear, isn't it? :-) ;-) (All I can say for certain, is that is how *I* interpret it...) >In school, we'd be kicked out for doing that... > Well, it isn't a test. And I am duty-bound to point out any perceived errors that my colleagues have put forth. Actually, I would probably get bumped up a grade or two for that... or made an instructor or something... certainly not kicked out. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx From dgour.asl at gmail.com Thu Sep 23 14:51:31 2004 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu Sep 23 14:52:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CASL Tournament AAR Message-ID: <764636a60409231451320d335e@mail.gmail.com> In addition to the tournament going on in Winnipeg this past weekend Sept 17-19 there was also an ASL event at Fallcon 17 in Calgary. Robert Oler was the TD and did a fine job. I think Robert managed to play one full game in addition to 1 or 2 first couple turn games but his sacrifice on our behalf was and is noted. Including those who did not play all 4 rounds I believe there were 11 or 12 people in total attendance. The tournament consisted of 4 rounds with five predetermined scenarios per round. Round 1 - (A59) Death at Carentan American Pre-registered smoke arrived on target in O5 allowing 9-2 and three squads to double-time all the way to O5 without being seen (+6-7 hindrance from all German setup locations) and then advance in still concealed to ambush the lone defenders of the key P4 building. What started out badly for the German only got worse as the Americans were able to break all of the German squads in the last American half turn before the German reinforcements and thus eliminate or capture all Germans on board and gain near total concealment. The German reinforcements split up and came in from both sides hoping for something good. When the American artillery began to hammer the closing Germans in the U9 tree line the hope for German victory vanished and the game was conceded at the end of German turn 5. The American balance provision of fanaticism in P4 though in effect, was never utilized. This scenario was played by 3 of the 4 pairs in round 1 and I think victory went to the Americans in each. The German player setup seems to be somewhat critical as the smoke really covers the initial American assault and the German player needs to insure there is something left by the time his reinforcements arrive in turn 3. American victory. Round 2 - (OA1) Road to St Lo This Deluxe scenario was a lot of fun despite some challenges with LOS and confusion caused by the SSR removing some printed Bocage. There were a number of shots taken that were later deemed blocked due to the in season Orchards on the victory hill and some misplaying of the Bocage rules along hex spines. The main thrust of the German attack initially appeared to come down the middle of the board with one PzIVH and a squad threatening the left through the sunken road way and two stacks moving concealed through the Bocage right of the middle sunken road. The main attack ran into some trouble with one of the PzIVHs bogging in the Bocage and the other finding it had no smoke. The scouts running down the middle sunken lane got shot up as they emerged. The American player had a screen of bazooka armed squads setup relatively forward that initially curtailed the German advance but would later prove costly. The main German firegroup with the heavy and medium got itself established in some bocage near the crossroads and began to whittle away at any Americans that showed themselves. The American cause started deteriorating in turn 2 when they broke their heavy machine gun. By this point two of their Bazooka teams had either been eliminated or broken and the advancing fire phase of German turn 2 saw the two concealed flame thrower armed half squads that had been sneaking up on the right break the last of the Bazooka teams on the right and set fire to some other poor Americans dug into the hill. At this point the American defense would have really come under a lot of pressure save for the immobilizing of on of the PzIVHs and the miring of a second as they burst out of the bocage. The breaking of the last bazooka team on the German left was allowed the sole remaining mobile PzIVH to advance up on the hill cutting rout paths and DMing a gaggle of Americans who were poised to re-enter the fight from the reverse slope tree line. At this point the Germans swarmed the hill taking advantage of the many blocked LOS's due to the level two Orchards and overwhelmed the last of the defenders. Fun scenario but be sure to bone up on the Wall Advantage and Bocage rules and pay careful attention to the LOS blockages created by the many Orchards. I think the American player needs to utilize the reverse slope defense here to some extent and keep at least on Bazooka back there to threaten and of the level two victory hexes. German Victory. Round 3 - (1) Fighting Withdrawal This was by far the closest game I played over the course of the weekend. The Russian player opted for an up front stand and hold rather than scenario namesake defense. Based on this setup the Finnish attack was geared towards destroying the Russian defenders while infiltrating their positions with deployed half squads to cut down on final fire opportunities. I think the Finnish strategy would have been more successful save for the fact that their big firegroup rolled 9s and 10s through the first two turns against the corresponding Russian group with an 8-1 and MMG. The Finnish also struggled making NMCs with half squads but was somewhat lucky in that their were not more KIA or K/# results as they ran through the streets past Russian strong points. The main Finnish attack progressed well down the Russian left but got stalled at the wall by the aforementioned 8-1/4-4-7/MMG/4-4-7 firegroup that just couldn't be broken. It looked like a berserk Finn Squad might finally take them before it diverted to a group of Russian conscripts that recently rallied and was killed in the street by their withering fire. The Finns finally managed to break through the right side and start sprinting down the road on the Finnish right with their load of prisoners in hand while what was left of the Russian right and center led by their sole remaining leader took to the road down the Finnish left with another recently promoted/created leader helping the second stack also make good time. A small group of Finns managed to see them before they turned the corner and took up the chase. In Russian turn 5 it all fell apart as a Finnish half squad that had ventured up onto Level 1 in the K4 building broke the lead group while the Finns who had followed the Russians took out the second stack just as it was about to disappear from view. At this time the Russian commander decided to raise the white flag rather than rout towards victory and potentially pull off a miracle. Classic scenario that remained a nail biter throughout play. The up front defense would have worked had it held out for another half turn before shattering completely. Finnish Victory Round 4 - (75) Stangers in a Strange Land This last scenario pitted a good number of early war French against a small group of Germans holding a major building and waiting for reinforcements. Weather was ground snow and the French had two reasonably armored early war tanks. Things looked ugly when the first French wind change resulted in a mild breeze. We were really hoping we wouldn't have to read the rules relating to drifts. The second French wind change saw another change but rather than strengthening the wind subsided. The French used a platoon movement combined with armored assault to move a strong force quickly up the main (18DD4) road while the rest of the infantry moved up to the BB5/CC5 wall and the main firegroup scampered over the AA6 wall into Z5 where they could advance to Z4 at the end of Turn 2. This was done relatively unmolested though the German did reveal nearly all his forward setup forces to bring them under relatively ineffective fire. Turn 3 saw some writing on the wall as the French beat up the German as they began to fall back to the main building. The German saw a 4 fp (-4) attack from the main FG (who were assembling their mediums in Z4) take out a leader and break a squad with a K/# result as they tried to reposition themselves from the far flank in 22O2. Another half squad was killed in E2 and the surviving leader pinned on his way back to the victory building. With half the initial German force now out of commission and the French only needing to be the sole side with a good order unit in the 22F3 building at a player turn end the French really pressed the assault and on French turn 4 managed to hold the last Germans in Melee to win the game prior to the German reinforcements entry. Another interesting scenario where the defender needs to either play a little conservative or keep a unit HIP in the victory building to assure that the much larger French force cannot steal the game without having to deal with the German reinforcements. French Victory A fun tournament, my first, that brought out most of the Calgary ASL stalwarts. Unfortunately the defending champion had a wedding to attend so was unable to defend his title. I look forward to next year. -- Darren Gour From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Sep 23 14:45:15 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Sep 23 14:58:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 Message-ID: > >Whoops, I miswrote - here's a new version that actually illustrates my >point: > >Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: >The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. >The MA then fires, also with a +3 DRM on its TH DR. > >Fine so far. > I agree. >Now, another fire phase, same AFV: >The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. >The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? > >Is this the correct conclusion from Ole et al's interpretation? I believe it is the correct conclusion. >Is the MA better off clicking one more hexspine than firing after the first >two >clicks, by using the CMG to 'reset' the DRM counter? > >Curious, if true. > Yes, it seems to me to be true. 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 aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 23 16:10:22 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 23 17:10:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL in the Evenings References: <41529C79.4050302@sgstewart.com> <013601c4a18b$c0ce7b20$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <004b01c4a1c2$817125e0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Scott Stewart wrote: > > >> I spent a lot of time tonight concentrating on the ASL Mortar and SMOKE >> rules To which David Olie replied: > There are more enjoyable ways to spend an evening, but I'll assume you > already know that. > Such as trying to grok the modifiers that apply when changing VCA/TCA coverd arcs, right? Wynn "Newly Wed" Polnicky From tychog at co.wasco.or.us Thu Sep 23 17:20:43 2004 From: tychog at co.wasco.or.us (Tycho Granville) Date: Thu Sep 23 17:20:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault Message-ID: <004a01c4a1cc$552624e0$6600490a@WascoCo.local> Hey All - Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the tank platoon are in different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in those same hexes? In effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of infantry and tanks using impulse movement? And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) Thanks, Tycho Tycho Granville Wasco County GIS Coordinator tychog@co.wasco.or.us (541)506-2658 From btdtall at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 17:26:02 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 17:26:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <004a01c4a1cc$552624e0$6600490a@WascoCo.local> Message-ID: <20040924002602.31511.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human wave in that mode if they want to.... (guess I am meaner) lol --- Tycho Granville wrote: > Hey All - > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > tank platoon are in > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > those same hexes? In > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > infantry and tanks > using impulse movement? > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > Thanks, > > Tycho > > Tycho Granville > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > (541)506-2658 > > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From btdtall at yahoo.com Thu Sep 23 17:56:34 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Sep 23 17:56:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040924005634.99589.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> So do we play this as Bruce and Ole have concluded on or do we handle this like Ole said Perry ruled on at ASLOK ? Do we need Perry to enforce this conclusion to make it official ? --- Ole Boe wrote: > Hi, > > JR Tracy wrote: > > > > Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG > with a +3 DRM. > > The MA then fires, also with a +3 DRM on its TH > DR. > > > > Fine so far. > > > Yep, at least if it's my opponent's AFV and he > misses. > > > Now, another fire phase, same AFV: > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG > with a +3 DRM. > > The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA > fires...with a +2 DRM? > > > Yes, sleazy bastard he is. I hope he still missed, > or at least rolled my > SAN. > > > Is this the correct conclusion from Ole et al's > interpretation? > Yes, unless someone points out that its wrong (I try > really hard to be > humble now). > > > Is the MA better off clicking one more hexspine > than firing after the > first two > > clicks, by using the CMG to 'reset' the DRM > counter? > > > > Curious, if true. > > > Yes, but note that there is one restriction. The > intermediate CA change > *must* be with an attack against a Known enemy unit. > If the enemy was > concealed (or HIP), the second CA change is not > allowed. > > The only possible reason I can think of for this > restriction is to limit the > sleaze possibility. Its still nice when I can use it > against my opponents > though. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Thu Sep 23 18:47:56 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Thu Sep 23 18:46:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> The answer is no, unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai etc. This is because multiple stacks of infantry in different hexes may not move simultaneously unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai or in Column. Previous Q&A supports this A4.2, D9.31 & D14.2 May more than one stack of infantry move simultaneously using Armored Assault if several vehicles are using Platoon Movement? A. Not ordinarily (e.g., only if using Human Wave, Banzai, or Column). [Compil3, Letter163] Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also re-printed in View From the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated 3) 27 June 1996 (VFTT9) Letters, 163) Tom Repetti to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 1 April 2002 Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: btdtall@yahoo.com [mailto:btdtall@yahoo.com] > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 8:26 AM > To: Tycho Granville > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human > wave in that mode if they want to.... > (guess I am meaner) lol > --- Tycho Granville wrote: > > > Hey All - > > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > > tank platoon are in > > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > > those same hexes? In > > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > > infantry and tanks > > using impulse movement? > > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > > Thanks, > > > > Tycho > > > > Tycho Granville > > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > > (541)506-2658 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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!? > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Sep 23 19:58:40 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu Sep 23 20:10:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Arnhem ASL Tournament References: <21563.80.126.202.250.1095876104.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <01b901c4a1e3$d170df60$a64d8918@klis.com> Hennie wrote: > I just updated the Arnhem ASL Tournament website with complete results. > You can also find pictures of the tournament at > http://www.xs4all.nl/~hennies I just had a look at these. Hennie, you really have to put some captions on these photos. It looks like you took a trip down to the Reichwald, and you and the other guys are looking over the Riley's Road battlefield. I notice that a couple of guys have their RR maps opened up for comparison. If so, please tell us what went on. While there was actually some media attention to the 60th anniversary of Market-Garden, you all went down to the Reichwald for a visit? Very cool. David "member of the Dutch Mafia, but out of the loop" Olie From dgour.asl at gmail.com Thu Sep 23 20:50:40 2004 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu Sep 23 20:51:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <764636a60409232050326652b9@mail.gmail.com> Hmm. That is interesting info though I don't have any of those sources at hand. We used the last sentance of D14.2 which stated "Platoon movment may be used in conjunction with Human-Wave/Armored-Assault." That seemed to say it for us. No where could I find a reference to multiple stacks of infantry not being able to participate though I don't dispute your references. I'd be interested to see anyone elses thoughts and I'll try to find the full text of the examples noted. -- Darren Gour On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:47:56 +0800, Cole, Jonathan wrote: > The answer is no, unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai etc. This is because > multiple stacks of infantry in different hexes may not move simultaneously > unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai or in Column. Previous Q&A supports this > > A4.2, D9.31 & D14.2 May more than one stack of infantry move simultaneously > using Armored Assault if several vehicles are using Platoon Movement? > A. Not ordinarily (e.g., only if using Human Wave, Banzai, or Column). > [Compil3, Letter163] > Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also > re-printed in View From the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated > 3) 27 June 1996 (VFTT9) > Letters, 163) Tom Repetti to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 1 April > 2002 > > Cheers > Jon > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: btdtall@yahoo.com [mailto:btdtall@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 8:26 AM > > To: Tycho Granville > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > > > Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human > > wave in that mode if they want to.... > > (guess I am meaner) lol > > --- Tycho Granville wrote: > > > > > Hey All - > > > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > > > > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > > > tank platoon are in > > > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > > > those same hexes? In > > > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > > > infantry and tanks > > > using impulse movement? > > > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Tycho > > > > > > Tycho Granville > > > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > > > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > > > (541)506-2658 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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!? > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Sep 23 20:57:01 2004 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu Sep 23 20:57:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <764636a604092320575c05a46c@mail.gmail.com> Another thought...what about riders? It would seem silly that 3 vehicles (2 in our case though our particular scenario was set prior to riders being available) could use platoon movement with riders. There is no specific mention that this is allowed though none saying it isn't. If it can be done you'd really have to start wondering why not with armored assault despite 14.2 seeming to indicate so? If it can't, that would be a stretch too. An odd case but I'm sure we'll get to the bottom of it here shortly. -- Darren Gour On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:47:56 +0800, Cole, Jonathan wrote: > The answer is no, unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai etc. This is because > multiple stacks of infantry in different hexes may not move simultaneously > unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai or in Column. Previous Q&A supports this > > A4.2, D9.31 & D14.2 May more than one stack of infantry move simultaneously > using Armored Assault if several vehicles are using Platoon Movement? > A. Not ordinarily (e.g., only if using Human Wave, Banzai, or Column). > [Compil3, Letter163] > Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also > re-printed in View From the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated > 3) 27 June 1996 (VFTT9) > Letters, 163) Tom Repetti to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 1 April > 2002 > > Cheers > Jon > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: btdtall@yahoo.com [mailto:btdtall@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 8:26 AM > > To: Tycho Granville > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > > > Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human > > wave in that mode if they want to.... > > (guess I am meaner) lol > > --- Tycho Granville wrote: > > > > > Hey All - > > > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > > > > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > > > tank platoon are in > > > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > > > those same hexes? In > > > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > > > infantry and tanks > > > using impulse movement? > > > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Tycho > > > > > > Tycho Granville > > > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > > > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > > > (541)506-2658 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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!? > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Sep 23 21:03:32 2004 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu Sep 23 21:03:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <764636a6040923210318137831@mail.gmail.com> Again, not disputing your q&a but A 4.2 (Mechanics of Movement) : ..."Infantry is moved one unit at a time unless beserk, in Column, or a MMC is using bonus MF gained by being part of a Human Wave, or moving with a leader, or gaining the TEM for moving with an AFV." I guess we surmised that since AFV normally move one at a time unless in a Platoon same would go for the infantry. -- Darren Gour On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:47:56 +0800, Cole, Jonathan wrote: > The answer is no, unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai etc. This is because > multiple stacks of infantry in different hexes may not move simultaneously > unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai or in Column. Previous Q&A supports this > > A4.2, D9.31 & D14.2 May more than one stack of infantry move simultaneously > using Armored Assault if several vehicles are using Platoon Movement? > A. Not ordinarily (e.g., only if using Human Wave, Banzai, or Column). > [Compil3, Letter163] > Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also > re-printed in View From the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated > 3) 27 June 1996 (VFTT9) > Letters, 163) Tom Repetti to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 1 April > 2002 > > Cheers > Jon > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: btdtall@yahoo.com [mailto:btdtall@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 8:26 AM > > To: Tycho Granville > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > > > Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human > > wave in that mode if they want to.... > > (guess I am meaner) lol > > --- Tycho Granville wrote: > > > > > Hey All - > > > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > > > > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > > > tank platoon are in > > > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > > > those same hexes? In > > > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > > > infantry and tanks > > > using impulse movement? > > > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Tycho > > > > > > Tycho Granville > > > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > > > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > > > (541)506-2658 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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!? > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Thu Sep 23 21:28:25 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Thu Sep 23 21:27:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B80AE1E@agalsrv03> NRBH but I don't see why it would be silly about AFVs using platoon movement and also carrying riders. You quoted the last sentance of D14.2 which stated "Platoon movment may be used in conjunction with Human-Wave/Armored-Assault." Note the "/" means and/or. So you can use Platoon Movement 1) with a Human Wave/Banzai where multiple stacks of Infantry can Armored Assualt (because by the HW rules they are moving as a "multi-hex" stack) or you can have a single stack of infantry use Armored Assualt with *one* of the vehicles that is using Platoon Movement. Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Darren Gour [mailto:dgour.asl@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 11:57 AM > To: Cole, Jonathan > Cc: btdtall@yahoo.com; Tycho Granville; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > Another thought...what about riders? > > It would seem silly that 3 vehicles (2 in our case though our > particular scenario was set prior to riders being available) could use > platoon movement with riders. There is no specific mention that this > is allowed though none saying it isn't. > > If it can be done you'd really have to start wondering why not with > armored assault despite 14.2 seeming to indicate so? If it can't, that > would be a stretch too. > > An odd case but I'm sure we'll get to the bottom of it here shortly. > > -- > Darren Gour > > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:47:56 +0800, Cole, Jonathan > wrote: > > The answer is no, unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai etc. This is > because > > multiple stacks of infantry in different hexes may not move > simultaneously > > unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai or in Column. Previous Q&A supports > this > > > > A4.2, D9.31 & D14.2 May more than one stack of infantry move > simultaneously > > using Armored Assault if several vehicles are using Platoon Movement? > > A. Not ordinarily (e.g., only if using Human Wave, Banzai, or Column). > > [Compil3, Letter163] > > Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also > > re-printed in View From the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated > > 3) 27 June 1996 (VFTT9) > > Letters, 163) Tom Repetti to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 1 > April > > 2002 > > > > Cheers > > Jon > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: btdtall@yahoo.com [mailto:btdtall@yahoo.com] > > > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 8:26 AM > > > To: Tycho Granville > > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > > > > > Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human > > > wave in that mode if they want to.... > > > (guess I am meaner) lol > > > --- Tycho Granville wrote: > > > > > > > Hey All - > > > > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > > > > > > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > > > > tank platoon are in > > > > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > > > > those same hexes? In > > > > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > > > > infantry and tanks > > > > using impulse movement? > > > > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Tycho > > > > > > > > Tycho Granville > > > > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > > > > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > > > > (541)506-2658 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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!? > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Thu Sep 23 22:17:24 2004 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu Sep 23 22:17:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B80AE1E@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B80AE1E@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <764636a6040923221728e4a77e@mail.gmail.com> No to belabor this but to sum up my many disconnected points I am saying silly in the sense that multiple infantry in multiple hexes can move as riders within platoon movement (there is no rule saying they can that I am aware of but you seem to agree in principle they can) but not as non-riders on the ground with armored assault despite the fact that the language of A4.2 and D14.2 specifically say it can be done (A4.2 "Infantry is moved one unit at a time unless...gaining the TEM for moving with an AFV" and D14.2 "..in conjunction with..Armored Assault.") I wish I could find a rule that says multiple hexes worth of infantry can only move at the same time in the following instances or even can't be done execept... The Q&A seems to be the only evidence it can't be done with multiple hexes of infantry. PS. I've been out of this for 8 years until a couple weeks ago and only have v1 rules. -- Darren Gour On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:28:25 +0800, Cole, Jonathan wrote: > NRBH but I don't see why it would be silly about AFVs using platoon movement > and also carrying riders. > > You quoted the last sentance of D14.2 which stated "Platoon movment may be > used in conjunction with Human-Wave/Armored-Assault." > Note the "/" means and/or. So you can use Platoon Movement 1) with a Human > Wave/Banzai where multiple stacks of Infantry can Armored Assualt (because > by the HW rules they are moving as a "multi-hex" stack) or you can have a > single stack of infantry use Armored Assualt with *one* of the vehicles that > is using Platoon Movement. > > Cheers > Jon > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Darren Gour [mailto:dgour.asl@gmail.com] > > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 11:57 AM > > To: Cole, Jonathan > > Cc: btdtall@yahoo.com; Tycho Granville; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > > > Another thought...what about riders? > > > > It would seem silly that 3 vehicles (2 in our case though our > > particular scenario was set prior to riders being available) could use > > platoon movement with riders. There is no specific mention that this > > is allowed though none saying it isn't. > > > > If it can be done you'd really have to start wondering why not with > > armored assault despite 14.2 seeming to indicate so? If it can't, that > > would be a stretch too. > > > > An odd case but I'm sure we'll get to the bottom of it here shortly. > > > > -- > > Darren Gour > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:47:56 +0800, Cole, Jonathan > > wrote: > > > The answer is no, unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai etc. This is > > because > > > multiple stacks of infantry in different hexes may not move > > simultaneously > > > unless part of a Human Wave, Banzai or in Column. Previous Q&A supports > > this > > > > > > A4.2, D9.31 & D14.2 May more than one stack of infantry move > > simultaneously > > > using Armored Assault if several vehicles are using Platoon Movement? > > > A. Not ordinarily (e.g., only if using Human Wave, Banzai, or Column). > > > [Compil3, Letter163] > > > Compilations of ASL questions received at asl_qa@anodyne.com and also > > > re-printed in View From the Trenches ("Compil" abbreviation), dated > > > 3) 27 June 1996 (VFTT9) > > > Letters, 163) Tom Repetti to Perry Cocke and reply, posted to ASLML 1 > > April > > > 2002 > > > > > > Cheers > > > Jon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: btdtall@yahoo.com [mailto:btdtall@yahoo.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, 24 September 2004 8:26 AM > > > > To: Tycho Granville > > > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault > > > > > > > > Not only can they do that, they can banzai and human > > > > wave in that mode if they want to.... > > > > (guess I am meaner) lol > > > > --- Tycho Granville wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey All - > > > > > Maybe I missed the fine print (I AM getting old...) > > > > > > > > > > May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the > > > > > tank platoon are in > > > > > different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in > > > > > those same hexes? In > > > > > effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of > > > > > infantry and tanks > > > > > using impulse movement? > > > > > And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Tycho > > > > > > > > > > Tycho Granville > > > > > Wasco County GIS Coordinator > > > > > tychog@co.wasco.or.us > > > > > (541)506-2658 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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!? > > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 Thu Sep 23 23:33:30 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 23:33:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:17:53 +0200, Ole B?e wrote: >I agree that Bruce Bakken's analyzis is the best, i.e: Cautiously , I also agree. >Case A DRM for several CA changes are cumulative if you first change the VCA >to fire, and then changes the TCA to fire, due to the sentence in D3.51 >saying: "Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in >additional to the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change" Right. (This was the bit I always understood.) >It is *not* cumulative if you only change the VCA or TCA twice, regardless >of whether you fire the same or another weapon. Right. (This was the bit that was new to me.) >There are some spots that haven't been highlighted though: > >1) Assume a Fast turret AFV. It first changes the VCA one hexspine to fire >the BMG (+3). It then changes the TCA two hexspines to fire the CMG, which I >half-heartedly accept receive a +5 DRM. But what if it then changes the TCA >one more hexspine to fire the MA? Does it pay +4, or only +1? It could be +4 >for a further TCA change after having changed the VCA, or +1 for firing a >turret-mounted weapon outside the CA of the last fired turret-mounted weapon >as per the second sentence? Well, previously I would have said "+4" without thinking about it. Now I'm not sure, but I *think* the VCA part remains cumulative for the rest of the fire phase ("any further changes"), so ... I guess I'd still say +4. >2) If an AFV first changes its TCA, and later changes its VCA, the case A >DRM are *not* cumulative. The only time its cumulative is when first >changing the VCA and then the TCA. That seems to be what it's saying. But it's weird. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 23:39:55 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 23:40:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:40:00 -0400, jtracy@bankofny.com wrote: >Now, another fire phase, same AFV: >The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. >The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? Isn't it only a +1 DRM, since it's the *second* TCA change this phase? >Is this the correct conclusion from Ole et al's interpretation? Is the MA >better off clicking one more hexspine than firing after the first two >clicks, by using the CMG to 'reset' the DRM counter? We're disputing the numbers, but the conclusion remains the same: yes. >Curious, if true. I don't know whether this rule needs errata, solid rewording or just more extensive examples. The whole thing just seems screwy to me. All I can say is that I prefer my original interpretation: it's all cumulative for the first shot of any weapon (which is the way everyone I know has always played it). Alas, that's about the one conclusion the rule *doesn't* support. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 23:44:01 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 23:44:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <004a01c4a1cc$552624e0$6600490a@WascoCo.local> References: <004a01c4a1cc$552624e0$6600490a@WascoCo.local> Message-ID: <9eg7l0tkbgdma4rgr8e63d4vkpe7hs7d3j@4ax.com> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 17:20:43 -0700, "Tycho Granville" wrote: >May one, using Platoon Movement where members of the tank platoon are in >different hexes, also Armored Assault infantry in those same hexes? In >effect, having (for instance), a 3-hex wide swath of infantry and tanks >using impulse movement? >And I mean in ASL, not Real Life :) The current answer to your question is: Yes, *if* those infantry are otherwise able to move in a multi-hex stack, e.g., Human Wave. The future answer to your question may not be the same. Stay tuned . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 23:46:55 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 23:47:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <764636a60409232050326652b9@mail.gmail.com> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> <764636a60409232050326652b9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2ig7l0hdse6nmudmrovfvf6k4v1n4drud6@4ax.com> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:50:40 -0600, Darren Gour wrote: >Hmm. That is interesting info though I don't have any of those sources at hand. > >We used the last sentance of D14.2 which stated "Platoon movment may >be used in conjunction with Human-Wave/Armored-Assault." That seemed >to say it for us. That rule is *not* overturning the basic requirements of conducting multi-hex simultaneous infantry movement -- i.e., it's not granting an allowance that the infantry don't otherwise have. >No where could I find a reference to multiple stacks of infantry not >being able to participate though I don't dispute your references. It's part of the normal rules for infantry movement. All that being said: this section of the rules is undergoing revision. Be prepared for possible changes in the future. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 23 23:49:07 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 23 23:49:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon Movement and Armored assault In-Reply-To: <764636a604092320575c05a46c@mail.gmail.com> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7EE168@agalsrv03> <764636a604092320575c05a46c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9ng7l01udmtk4016q63adrm43slsols01v@4ax.com> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:57:01 -0600, Darren Gour wrote: >Another thought...what about riders? > >It would seem silly that 3 vehicles (2 in our case though our >particular scenario was set prior to riders being available) could use >platoon movement with riders. There is no specific mention that this >is allowed though none saying it isn't. Why would it be silly? Riders are (for movement purposes) considered part of the vehicle that they are riding. In general terms, they just go wherever the vehicle goes, and they move however it moves. Infantry are not Riders, and different rules necessarily apply. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From aslml at aslwebdex.net Fri Sep 24 05:46:52 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Fri Sep 24 05:46:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning References: Message-ID: <000c01c4a234$9670caf0$6401a8c0@D5G57231> My appologies. I have never known which JR was "original" and which was "the other." Sorry, and thanks for the correction. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 7:59 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning > Larry writes: > > > To answer your specific question, JR Tracy > > in his article "Bring on the Night," > > > > As much as I wish I'd written that, it is actually the work of the > Original JR, JR VanMechelen. It's an excellent article and essential > reading before diving into the weird and wonderful world of ASL at Night. > > (the other) JR > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. > > From jtracy at bankofny.com Fri Sep 24 05:52:25 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Fri Sep 24 05:51:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Best night scenarios for learning Message-ID: Larry writes: > My appologies. I have never known which JR was > "original" and which was "the other." Sorry, > and thanks for the correction. No apology necessary. Heck, it was a compliment - to me, anyway! Of course, the Original JR might have a bone to pick with you.... (the other) JR ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein, is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and delete it from your computer. Although The Bank of New York attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 24 08:30:39 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 24 08:30:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] SP1 Raiders At Regi AAR Message-ID: <0cd8l0lv4bdae6644d4qe48dsoc1qjiusd@4ax.com> At our under-attended monthly meeting tonight, three of us (Neil Andrews, Joe Moro and myself) swapped seats playing multiple games of this scenario. First up was my Japanese vs. Neil's Marines, then I took the US vs. Joe, then Joe had the US vs. Neil. This is about as small as a scenario can get. 5.5 turns, 3.5 Japanese squads defending vs. 4.5 Marine squads. All the action takes place on Hill 604 on Board 36. The Marines have to clear the trail across the hill of Japanese MMC. ROAR indicates a slight Japanese bias; I'm surprised it's not worse, because the Japanese have a strong edge. The US balance (adding an additional squad) seems a little extreme, though -- I'd suggest adding a HS instead. They need the additional warm bodies for searching purposes, but they don't need the additional FP of a full squad. The basic American problem is that they have to find the Japanese (they're all HIP) and then either break or eliminate them. A canny Japanese player will squirrel away a HS off on an extreme edge of their permitted set-up area, revealing him on the last turn (it being unlikely that the US player will have found them) and moving to a victory location -- with the Marines easily being in no position to do anything about it (there aren't enough of them to string out a defensive line of any consequence). Once the Japanese are located it's a pretty straight-forward firefight, with the Japanese probably skulking as much as possible. The Marines certainly have the ability to do the necessary damage, *assuming* that they find everyone in time. My Japanese won vs. Neal basically because I had the good fortune of eliminating a couple of HS early in the piece, and then breaking both his leaders which took care of them for the rest of the game. (One was wounded, and the other was killed by the Sniper.) Simply put, he lacked the manpower and movement to search every hex he needed to search in the time available. My US win vs. Joe was more bizarre. My Marines suffered chronic fright: they could not pass a MC, no matter what. However, the ones who weren't broken were *dynamite* in CC. I was consistently winning Ambushes, and rolling pretty well on top of that. (I created *three* 8-1 leaders during the game -- one from a self-rally, the other two in CC! On the other hand, I lost two HS to Fate on NMC results.) Joe unwisely revealed his last HIP HS early, which relieved me of the task of searching for it -- so it came down to the relatively simple job of slaughtering the Japanese in CC. It still took the full 5.5 turns to do it though. Fighting Neal, Joe's Marines were too cautious -- too much Assault Moving and not enough biffo. This made Neal's Japanese win virtually guaranteed, unfortunately. (It's a *Schwerpunkt* scenario -- which means "faster, pussycat, kill, kill"!) Conclusion: it's an interesting scenario to play, if you want something quick -- but if you play it for money, take the Japanese. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Sep 24 12:30:59 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Sep 24 12:31:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Beta Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924142850.019daa40@pop3.direcway.com> Listomaniacs, Can you use the VASL install defaults over the web with the beta, and not screw-up the regular ver 4 installation, already resident on your PC machine? ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Fri Sep 24 13:22:10 2004 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (Kenn) Date: Fri Sep 24 13:23:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Beta In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924142850.019daa40@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924142850.019daa40@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <415481F2.90506@wideopenwest.com> ron mosher wrote: > Listomaniacs, > > Can you use the VASL install defaults over the web with the beta, and > not screw-up the regular ver 4 installation, already resident on your > PC machine? > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > _Ron, I have both running on my machine without any issues. Also, there was no additional work required during the Beta install. Kenn From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Sep 24 13:31:12 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Sep 24 13:31:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Beta In-Reply-To: <415481F2.90506@wideopenwest.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924142850.019daa40@pop3.direcway.com> <415481F2.90506@wideopenwest.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924153035.01959cf8@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:22 PM 9/24/2004, Kenn wrote: >I have both running on my machine without any issues. >Also, there was no additional work required during the Beta install. Thanks, I now go forth into unknown territory..... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From jim.white at dol.net Fri Sep 24 20:43:55 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Fri Sep 24 20:50:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT CG-III question Message-ID: <04ec01c4a2b1$e30986e0$6501a8c0@workstation1> CG3.11: "Prior to the start of any CG scenario, each SFCP must be assigned to a Naval Battery...for the duration of the CG Scenario..." CG3.2: "...the Marine player receives...in CGIII...two modules of 120+mm NOBA for each CG scenario *after* the initial CG scenario" Now I'm assuming this means I do NOT have NOBA during the initial CG scenario (despite reading AARs which seemed to indicate the Marine's did have it during the initial CG scenario). My question is this: Do I have to assign my OB-given SFCPs a battery even if they can't be used during the intial CG scenario? Or have I totally missed something and in fact I do have NOBA during the initial CG scenario? Also...other than the fact that I want Formations F1-F5 to completely enter ASAP to allow the Follow-On Battalion to enter ASAP (if needed) per CG2.4...why would I send in my SFCP's during the initial CG scenario if I can't use them? The only reason I can think of is that maybe they will survive and be ashore for the start of the PM scenario...thereby allowing quicker use of the now definitely available NOBA batteries. Thanks in advance, Jim From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Fri Sep 24 21:39:58 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Fri Sep 24 21:40:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Searching for Sam Tyson Message-ID: <4154F69E.7040300@mbj.nifty.com> Sam, I have a question about the maps you sent my friend earlier. He finally got around to getting them and there were more than just the RB map inside. Please get back to me so we can get this straightened out. We will send the extra ones back if you need. We only needed the RB map. Will -- ("`-/")_.-'"``-._ . . `; -._ )-;-,_`) (v_,)' _ )`-.\ ``-' _.- _..-_/ / ((.' ((,.-' ((,/ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Sep 24 22:26:00 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Sep 24 22:26:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT CG-III question In-Reply-To: <04ec01c4a2b1$e30986e0$6501a8c0@workstation1> References: <04ec01c4a2b1$e30986e0$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:43:55 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >CG3.11: "Prior to the start of any CG scenario, each SFCP must be assigned >to a Naval Battery...for the duration of the CG Scenario..." > >CG3.2: "...the Marine player receives...in CGIII...two modules of 120+mm >NOBA for each CG scenario *after* the initial CG scenario" > >Now I'm assuming this means I do NOT have NOBA during the initial CG >scenario (despite reading AARs which seemed to indicate the Marine's did >have it during the initial CG scenario). I agree. (You do have Naval Bombardment though.) >My question is this: Do I have to >assign my OB-given SFCPs a battery even if they can't be used during the >intial CG scenario? Or have I totally missed something and in fact I do >have NOBA during the initial CG scenario? Since the assignment of a NOBA Battery only lasts for the duration of the scenario (CG 3.11), there seems to be no need to so assign them if they have nothing to be assigned to . >Also...other than the fact that I want Formations F1-F5 to completely enter >ASAP to allow the Follow-On Battalion to enter ASAP (if needed) per >CG2.4...why would I send in my SFCP's during the initial CG scenario if I >can't use them? Why indeed? >The only reason I can think of is that maybe they will >survive and be ashore for the start of the PM scenario...thereby allowing >quicker use of the now definitely available NOBA batteries. That would be my conclusion too. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Sep 25 06:46:46 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat Sep 25 06:47:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 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: Thursday, September 23, 2004 3:23 PM > To: jtracy@bankofny.com > Cc: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > > > Hi, > > JR Tracy wrote: > > > > Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > > The MA then fires, also with a +3 DRM on its TH DR. > > > > Fine so far. > > > Yep, at least if it's my opponent's AFV and he misses. > > > Now, another fire phase, same AFV: > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > > The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? > > > Yes, sleazy bastard he is. I hope he still missed, or at least rolled my > SAN. Shouldn't the DRM be +1? The TCA has already hit two hexspine changes (+2/+1). Wouldn't the third one be just +1? BTW, this opens up a whole range of sleaze. I hope there is an errata in our future. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud! From jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Sep 25 08:02:25 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat Sep 25 08:03:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 References: Message-ID: <006501c4a310$ac378360$2b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; Tate wrote, > Shouldn't the DRM be +1? The TCA has already hit two hexspine changes > (+2/+1). Wouldn't the third one be just +1? > > BTW, this opens up a whole range of sleaze. I hope there is an errata in > our > future. I agree Tate. For example, You turn your VCA around 3 pips, for a +5 DRM and fire your CMG. You then turn your TCA (assume a fast turret) 1 pip to fire at the CMG's target, which lewts say is a vehicle, and voila! One only pays a +1 DRM to that shot. That is nonsense as far as I am concerned, the actual wording in the ASLRBv.2 notwithstanding. =Jim= From aslwynn at rogers.com Sat Sep 25 09:01:28 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sat Sep 25 09:01:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 References: <006501c4a310$ac378360$2b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001d01c4a318$eb1ff820$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Sacrilege! > That is nonsense as far as I am concerned, the actual wording in the > ASLRBv.2 notwithstanding. > Thus from the guy that says he wields a literal reading of the ASOP as his righteous weapon. So, if it's in the ASOP it's the Word, but if it's 'only' in the text of the rules it's 'nonsense' eh? Wynn "Consistency is as Consistency Does" Polnicky From rln22 at yahoo.com Sat Sep 25 10:46:47 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Sat Sep 25 10:46:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Firing HE into CC (not melee) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040925174647.2430.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Listers, First of all, had to give up on my 9mp BT platoon movement in Lipki, as I didn't want to make up a house rule. Thanks for setting me straight. Now, a situation arose that I had trouble figuring out. The two BT were in motion on the forest road. German 9-2 and 467 rush up and jump in CC. No result from the CC, so, no melee, as AFV in motion. We leave the CC counter on, just to remind ourselves of target selection limits, etc. Russian turn. MPh. BTs want to hurt the Germans, and keep them frozen. First MP is to stop this platoon, then MGs, from both in hex BT and ADJ. Now, ADJ BT wants to fire 45L HE at German infantry. Is it correct that, although the AFV is now stopped, there still exists no melee, and thus a shot at the inf will in no way affect the 'brother' BT sharing the hex with the German infantry? Further, if melee had existed, how is this resolved? If the ADJ BT fires ITT HE at the locked inf, how (if at all) does the shell affect the 'in melee' BT? Thanks, RN __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From aslwynn at rogers.com Sat Sep 25 11:20:01 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sat Sep 25 11:20:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Firing HE into CC (not melee) References: <20040925174647.2430.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002601c4a32c$46485310$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Robert/RN; Per A11.15, Melee only exists after conclusion of the first CC. Furthermore, the ASOP, the sequence contained in which takes precedence over the body of the rules, has CC counters flipped to Melee in step 8.31B, and thus supports this. Since no melee was created in the first CC phase per your description, none exists in the Russian MPh when the BTs stop, since a CC Phase has yet to be conducted with the conditions in existence to create a melee, ie. with the BTs stopped in the infantry's hex. This will reult in a Melee if the tanks opt to stay therein. > Listers, > > First of all, had to give up on my 9mp BT platoon > movement in Lipki, as I didn't want to make up a house > rule. Thanks for setting me straight. > > Now, a situation arose that I had trouble figuring > out. > > The two BT were in motion on the forest road. German > 9-2 and 467 rush up and jump in CC. No result from the > CC, so, no melee, as AFV in motion. We leave the CC > counter on, just to remind ourselves of target > selection limits, etc. > > Russian turn. MPh. BTs want to hurt the Germans, and > keep them frozen. First MP is to stop this platoon, > then MGs, from both in hex BT and ADJ. > Now, ADJ BT > wants to fire 45L HE at German infantry. Is it correct > that, although the AFV is now stopped, there still > exists no melee, and thus a shot at the inf will in no > way affect the 'brother' BT sharing the hex with the > German infantry? Your analysis above is correct. Your fire will not cause any harm to the BT in the hex, since no Melee exists (yet). > > Further, if melee had existed, how is this resolved? > If the ADJ BT fires ITT HE at the locked inf, how (if > at all) does the shell affect the 'in melee' BT? > If firing at a Melee, *ALL* targets in the Location can be Hit (per the last sentence of A11.15). > Thanks, > RN > You're welcome, Wynn "FWP" Polnicky From stefano.cuccurullo at virgilio.it Sat Sep 25 18:17:21 2004 From: stefano.cuccurullo at virgilio.it (stefano cuccurullo) Date: Sat Sep 25 18:17:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Interdiction NMC References: <20040925190232.BAD9F985AD@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <002801c4a366$930645b0$84b73152@stef5k2r1klbbs> What if a unit subject to interdiction NMC roll 1,1? beyond HoB, does it rally itself immediately? Thanks in advance Stefano "Kyrill" Cuccurullo ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2004 9:02 PM Subject: Aslml-aslml.net Digest, Vol 93, Issue 1 > Send Aslml-aslml.net mailing list submissions to > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > aslml-aslml.net-request@lists.aslml.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > aslml-aslml.net-owner@lists.aslml.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Aslml-aslml.net digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. VASL Beta (ron mosher) > 2. Re: VASL Beta (Kenn) > 3. Re: VASL Beta (ron mosher) > 4. BRT CG-III question (James S. White Jr.) > 5. Searching for Sam Tyson (Will Fleming) > 6. Re: BRT CG-III question (Bruce Probst) > 7. RE: DFF AFV Questions, take 2 (Tate Rogers) > 8. Re: DFF AFV Questions, take 2 (mcleods) > 9. Re: DFF AFV Questions, take 2 (Wynn) > 10. Firing HE into CC (not melee) (Robert Nelson) > 11. Re: Firing HE into CC (not melee) (Wynn) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:30:59 -0500 > From: ron mosher > Subject: [Aslml] VASL Beta > To: "aslml-aslml.net@lists" > Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924142850.019daa40@pop3.direcway.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > Listomaniacs, > > Can you use the VASL install defaults over the web with the beta, and not > screw-up the regular ver 4 installation, already resident on your PC machine? > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:22:10 -0400 > From: Kenn > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL Beta > To: ron mosher , > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Message-ID: <415481F2.90506@wideopenwest.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > ron mosher wrote: > > > Listomaniacs, > > > > Can you use the VASL install defaults over the web with the beta, and > > not screw-up the regular ver 4 installation, already resident on your > > PC machine? > > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > > > _Ron, > > > I have both running on my machine without any issues. > Also, there was no additional work required during the Beta install. > > > Kenn > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:31:12 -0500 > From: ron mosher > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL Beta > To: Kenn , ron mosher > , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040924153035.01959cf8@pop3.direcway.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > At 03:22 PM 9/24/2004, Kenn wrote: > >I have both running on my machine without any issues. > >Also, there was no additional work required during the Beta install. > > Thanks, I now go forth into unknown territory..... > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:43:55 -0400 > From: "James S. White Jr." > Subject: [Aslml] BRT CG-III question > To: "ASL Mailing List" > Message-ID: <04ec01c4a2b1$e30986e0$6501a8c0@workstation1> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > CG3.11: "Prior to the start of any CG scenario, each SFCP must be assigned > to a Naval Battery...for the duration of the CG Scenario..." > > CG3.2: "...the Marine player receives...in CGIII...two modules of 120+mm > NOBA for each CG scenario *after* the initial CG scenario" > > Now I'm assuming this means I do NOT have NOBA during the initial CG > scenario (despite reading AARs which seemed to indicate the Marine's did > have it during the initial CG scenario). My question is this: Do I have to > assign my OB-given SFCPs a battery even if they can't be used during the > intial CG scenario? Or have I totally missed something and in fact I do > have NOBA during the initial CG scenario? > > Also...other than the fact that I want Formations F1-F5 to completely enter > ASAP to allow the Follow-On Battalion to enter ASAP (if needed) per > CG2.4...why would I send in my SFCP's during the initial CG scenario if I > can't use them? The only reason I can think of is that maybe they will > survive and be ashore for the start of the PM scenario...thereby allowing > quicker use of the now definitely available NOBA batteries. > > Thanks in advance, > > Jim > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 13:39:58 +0900 > From: Will Fleming > Subject: [Aslml] Searching for Sam Tyson > To: ASLML Distribution > Message-ID: <4154F69E.7040300@mbj.nifty.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > Sam, > > I have a question about the maps you sent my friend earlier. He finally > got around to getting them and there were more than just the RB map > inside. > > Please get back to me so we can get this straightened out. We will send > the extra ones back if you need. We only needed the RB map. > > Will > > > -- > > > ("`-/")_.-'"``-._ > . . `; -._ )-;-,_`) > (v_,)' _ )`-.\ ``-' > _.- _..-_/ / ((.' > ((,.-' ((,/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:26:00 +1000 > From: Bruce Probst > Subject: Re: [Aslml] BRT CG-III question > To: "James S. White Jr." > Cc: ASL Mailing List > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:43:55 -0400, "James S. White Jr." > wrote: > > >CG3.11: "Prior to the start of any CG scenario, each SFCP must be assigned > >to a Naval Battery...for the duration of the CG Scenario..." > > > >CG3.2: "...the Marine player receives...in CGIII...two modules of 120+mm > >NOBA for each CG scenario *after* the initial CG scenario" > > > >Now I'm assuming this means I do NOT have NOBA during the initial CG > >scenario (despite reading AARs which seemed to indicate the Marine's did > >have it during the initial CG scenario). > > I agree. (You do have Naval Bombardment though.) > > >My question is this: Do I have to > >assign my OB-given SFCPs a battery even if they can't be used during the > >intial CG scenario? Or have I totally missed something and in fact I do > >have NOBA during the initial CG scenario? > > Since the assignment of a NOBA Battery only lasts for the duration of the > scenario (CG 3.11), there seems to be no need to so assign them if they have > nothing to be assigned to . > > >Also...other than the fact that I want Formations F1-F5 to completely enter > >ASAP to allow the Follow-On Battalion to enter ASAP (if needed) per > >CG2.4...why would I send in my SFCP's during the initial CG scenario if I > >can't use them? > > Why indeed? > > >The only reason I can think of is that maybe they will > >survive and be ashore for the start of the PM scenario...thereby allowing > >quicker use of the now definitely available NOBA batteries. > > That would be my conclusion too. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:46:46 -0500 > From: "Tate Rogers" > Subject: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > To: "Ole Boe" , > Cc: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Ole Boe > > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 3:23 PM > > To: jtracy@bankofny.com > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net; > > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > > > > > > Hi, > > > > JR Tracy wrote: > > > > > > Consider an ST AFV with a CMG and an MA: > > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > > > The MA then fires, also with a +3 DRM on its TH DR. > > > > > > Fine so far. > > > > > Yep, at least if it's my opponent's AFV and he misses. > > > > > Now, another fire phase, same AFV: > > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > > > The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? > > > > > Yes, sleazy bastard he is. I hope he still missed, or at least rolled my > > SAN. > > Shouldn't the DRM be +1? The TCA has already hit two hexspine changes > (+2/+1). Wouldn't the third one be just +1? > > BTW, this opens up a whole range of sleaze. I hope there is an errata in our > future. > > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud! > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:02:25 -0500 > From: "mcleods" > Subject: Re: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > To: , "Ole Boe" , > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Message-ID: <006501c4a310$ac378360$2b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Listerz; > > Tate wrote, > > > Shouldn't the DRM be +1? The TCA has already hit two hexspine changes > > (+2/+1). Wouldn't the third one be just +1? > > > > BTW, this opens up a whole range of sleaze. I hope there is an errata in > > our > > future. > > I agree Tate. > > For example, You turn your VCA around 3 pips, for a +5 DRM and fire your > CMG. You then turn your TCA (assume a fast turret) 1 pip to fire at the > CMG's target, which lewts say is a vehicle, and voila! One only pays a +1 > DRM to that shot. That is nonsense as far as I am concerned, the actual > wording in the ASLRBv.2 notwithstanding. > > > > =Jim= > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 12:01:28 -0400 > From: "Wynn" > Subject: Re: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > To: "mcleods" , , "Ole Boe" > , > Cc: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Message-ID: <001d01c4a318$eb1ff820$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=response > > Sacrilege! > > > > That is nonsense as far as I am concerned, the actual wording in the > > ASLRBv.2 notwithstanding. > > > > Thus from the guy that says he wields a literal reading of the ASOP as his > righteous weapon. So, if it's in the ASOP it's the Word, but if it's 'only' > in the text of the rules it's 'nonsense' eh? > > Wynn "Consistency is as Consistency Does" Polnicky > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:46:47 -0700 (PDT) > From: Robert Nelson > Subject: [Aslml] Firing HE into CC (not melee) > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Message-ID: <20040925174647.2430.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Listers, > > First of all, had to give up on my 9mp BT platoon > movement in Lipki, as I didn't want to make up a house > rule. Thanks for setting me straight. > > Now, a situation arose that I had trouble figuring > out. > > The two BT were in motion on the forest road. German > 9-2 and 467 rush up and jump in CC. No result from the > CC, so, no melee, as AFV in motion. We leave the CC > counter on, just to remind ourselves of target > selection limits, etc. > > Russian turn. MPh. BTs want to hurt the Germans, and > keep them frozen. First MP is to stop this platoon, > then MGs, from both in hex BT and ADJ. Now, ADJ BT > wants to fire 45L HE at German infantry. Is it correct > that, although the AFV is now stopped, there still > exists no melee, and thus a shot at the inf will in no > way affect the 'brother' BT sharing the hex with the > German infantry? > > Further, if melee had existed, how is this resolved? > If the ADJ BT fires ITT HE at the locked inf, how (if > at all) does the shell affect the 'in melee' BT? > > Thanks, > RN > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 14:20:01 -0400 > From: "Wynn" > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Firing HE into CC (not melee) > To: "Robert Nelson" , > > Message-ID: <002601c4a32c$46485310$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Robert/RN; > > Per A11.15, Melee only exists after conclusion of the first CC. Furthermore, > the ASOP, the sequence contained in which takes precedence over the body of > the rules, has CC counters flipped to Melee in step 8.31B, and thus supports > this. Since no melee was created in the first CC phase per your description, > none exists in the Russian MPh when the BTs stop, since a CC Phase has yet > to be conducted with the conditions in existence to create a melee, ie. with > the BTs stopped in the infantry's hex. This will reult in a Melee if the > tanks opt to stay therein. > > > > > Listers, > > > > First of all, had to give up on my 9mp BT platoon > > movement in Lipki, as I didn't want to make up a house > > rule. Thanks for setting me straight. > > > > Now, a situation arose that I had trouble figuring > > out. > > > > The two BT were in motion on the forest road. German > > 9-2 and 467 rush up and jump in CC. No result from the > > CC, so, no melee, as AFV in motion. We leave the CC > > counter on, just to remind ourselves of target > > selection limits, etc. > > > > > > Russian turn. MPh. BTs want to hurt the Germans, and > > keep them frozen. First MP is to stop this platoon, > > then MGs, from both in hex BT and ADJ. > > > Now, ADJ BT > > wants to fire 45L HE at German infantry. Is it correct > > that, although the AFV is now stopped, there still > > exists no melee, and thus a shot at the inf will in no > > way affect the 'brother' BT sharing the hex with the > > German infantry? > > Your analysis above is correct. Your fire will not cause any harm to the BT > in the hex, since no Melee exists (yet). > > > > > Further, if melee had existed, how is this resolved? > > If the ADJ BT fires ITT HE at the locked inf, how (if > > at all) does the shell affect the 'in melee' BT? > > > > If firing at a Melee, *ALL* targets in the Location can be Hit (per the last > sentence of A11.15). > > > Thanks, > > RN > > > > You're welcome, > > Wynn "FWP" Polnicky > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > End of Aslml-aslml.net Digest, Vol 93, Issue 1 > ********************************************** From garciagd at velocity.net Sat Sep 25 19:02:45 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (roger whelan) Date: Sat Sep 25 18:58:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Install Message-ID: <000d01c4a36c$eb5f3fe0$09c7d342@rdwklw> Hello! Anyone else have trouble lately installing VASL? I get a new hard drive and it will not insall when I click the "launch latest version". Any thoughts? JAVA is up to date. Peace Rog From garciagd at velocity.net Sat Sep 25 19:38:45 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (roger whelan) Date: Sat Sep 25 19:34:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Install 2 References: <000d01c4a36c$eb5f3fe0$09c7d342@rdwklw> Message-ID: <000701c4a371$f1e0f3e0$09c7d342@rdwklw> Hello! OK when I click the Launch VASL link it save the program to open it launches in NOTEPAD. Renaming it, does not work and there is nothing in the properties that tells me what program to launch when clicking the file or link. any thoughts on how to change that? Peace Roger From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 25 21:27:38 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 25 21:27:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Firing HE into CC (not melee) In-Reply-To: <20040925174647.2430.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040925174647.2430.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:46:47 -0700 (PDT), Robert Nelson wrote: >The two BT were in motion on the forest road. German >9-2 and 467 rush up and jump in CC. No result from the >CC, so, no melee, as AFV in motion. We leave the CC >counter on, just to remind ourselves of target >selection limits, etc. > >Russian turn. MPh. BTs want to hurt the Germans, and >keep them frozen. First MP is to stop this platoon, >then MGs, from both in hex BT and ADJ. Now, ADJ BT >wants to fire 45L HE at German infantry. Is it correct >that, although the AFV is now stopped, there still >exists no melee, and thus a shot at the inf will in no >way affect the 'brother' BT sharing the hex with the >German infantry? It's correct for that reason; it's also correct because a vehicle can only be harmed by a shot that specifically targets it -- C3.31 (EXC: Area Target, Overstacking). >Further, if melee had existed, how is this resolved? >If the ADJ BT fires ITT HE at the locked inf, how (if >at all) does the shell affect the 'in melee' BT? The tank cannot be affected by an ITT shot (C3.32). Remember also that only the infantry can be classed as "in melee". Vehicles are *never* "held in melee" (A11.7). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Sep 25 21:32:27 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Sep 25 21:32:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Interdiction NMC In-Reply-To: <002801c4a366$930645b0$84b73152@stef5k2r1klbbs> References: <20040925190232.BAD9F985AD@che.dreamhost.com> <002801c4a366$930645b0$84b73152@stef5k2r1klbbs> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 03:17:21 +0200, "stefano cuccurullo" wrote: >What if a unit subject to interdiction NMC roll 1,1? beyond HoB, does it >rally itself immediately? Depends on the HOB result. If it Battle Hardens it also rallies. If it only generates a hero it doesn't. (If it goes berserk, well, I guess that's a type of "rally", too.) If it surrenders -- well, since it's being interdicted I guess it isn't ADJACENT to an enemy unit, so in that case it would be Disrupted. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From ctewks at yahoo.com Sat Sep 25 23:33:19 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Sat Sep 25 23:33:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL Install 2 In-Reply-To: <000701c4a371$f1e0f3e0$09c7d342@rdwklw> Message-ID: <20040926063319.23129.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com> you need to install the JRE = Java Runtime Environment RK has a link from www.vasl.org or you can go to java.sun.com -Chuck --- roger whelan wrote: > Hello! > > OK when I click the Launch VASL link it save the program to open it launches > in NOTEPAD. > > Renaming it, does not work and there is nothing in the properties that tells > me what program to launch when clicking the file or link. > > any thoughts on how to change that? > > Peace > > Roger > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Sep 26 06:43:06 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun Sep 26 06:43:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 References: <006501c4a310$ac378360$2b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <001d01c4a318$eb1ff820$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <001201c4a3ce$c26adbf0$0d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Wynn wrote, > Sacrilege! Pardon!? I wrote, >> That is nonsense as far as I am concerned, the actual wording in the >> ASLRBv.2 notwithstanding. Wynn replied, > Thus from the guy that says he wields a literal reading of the ASOP as his > righteous weapon. So, if it's in the ASOP it's the Word, but if it's > 'only' in the text of the rules it's 'nonsense' eh? Depends. My quibble with this TCA/VCA thing also carries over to other rules that I have quibblations with, as examples: - A7.353 - A20.21 - the cumulative LOS hindrance/DRM rule (ie: the +1 DRM for CX, grain hindrance vehicle are all cumulative instead of just a +1) - Platoon movment There ASOP details sequence of procedure and the the rules detail ho the procedure works. Two different animals in my opinion. =Jim= From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Sep 26 09:41:42 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun Sep 26 09:41:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 References: <006501c4a310$ac378360$2b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <001d01c4a318$eb1ff820$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> <001201c4a3ce$c26adbf0$0d27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <004901c4a3e7$b45db730$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Jim; My point was that you can't pick and choose rules. To say that the ASOP and the body are different 'animals' as you state below is misleading. Sure, they are 'different'. The ASOP lists sequence, and that sequence takes precedence over the body of the rules. OK. So what? I think what you are really saying is that you, personally, like the ASOP, and that you, personally, don't like A7.353 et cetera. Fine, but again so what? I too have my favourite rules. So? You can certainly pick which rules you don't like, of course. Your use of the word 'nonsense' was a little strong, though. Wynn 'By the Book' Polnicky Jim McLeod wrote: > Listerz, > > Wynn wrote, > >> Sacrilege! > > Pardon!? > > I wrote, > >>> That is nonsense as far as I am concerned, the actual wording in the >>> ASLRBv.2 notwithstanding. > > Wynn replied, > >> Thus from the guy that says he wields a literal reading of the ASOP as >> his righteous weapon. So, if it's in the ASOP it's the Word, but if it's >> 'only' in the text of the rules it's 'nonsense' eh? > > Depends. My quibble with this TCA/VCA thing also carries over to other > rules that I have quibblations with, as examples: > > - A7.353 > > - A20.21 > > - the cumulative LOS hindrance/DRM rule (ie: the +1 DRM for CX, grain > hindrance vehicle are all cumulative instead of just a +1) > > - Platoon movment > > There ASOP details sequence of procedure and the the rules detail ho the > procedure works. Two different animals in my opinion. > > > > > =Jim= > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Sep 26 11:13:27 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sun Sep 26 11:11:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, > > JR Tracy wrote: > > > Now, another fire phase, same AFV: > > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the CMG with a +3 DRM. > > > The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA fires...with a +2 DRM? > > > and Tate wrote: > Shouldn't the DRM be +1? The TCA has already hit two hexspine changes > (+2/+1). Wouldn't the third one be just +1? > No, +2. This is a *new* CA change, thus +2 for the first for a ST AFV. >From D3.51: "the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA" I.e. treat this as if this was the only CA change so far. At least that's how I read it. From btdtall at yahoo.com Sun Sep 26 12:22:42 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Sun Sep 26 12:22:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040926192242.15071.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Ole- So how do we play this from now on ? Do we go with the ruling Perry gave to you at ASLOK or do we go with this new interpretation ? --- Ole Boe wrote: > Hi, > > > > JR Tracy wrote: > > > > > Now, another fire phase, same AFV: > > > > The TCA changes *two* hexspines and fires the > CMG with a +3 DRM. > > > > The TCA changes one more hexspine, and the MA > fires...with a +2 DRM? > > > > > > and Tate wrote: > > Shouldn't the DRM be +1? The TCA has already hit > two hexspine changes > > (+2/+1). Wouldn't the third one be just +1? > > > No, +2. This is a *new* CA change, thus +2 for the > first for a ST AFV. > > >From D3.51: "the Case A TH DRM would be applicable > based only on the move > from the current TCA to the new TCA" > > I.e. treat this as if this was the only CA change so > far. At least that's > how I read it. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Sep 26 12:29:26 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Sun Sep 26 12:27:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: <20040926192242.15071.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > Ole- > So how do we play this from now on ? Do we go with > the ruling Perry gave to you at ASLOK or do we go with > this new interpretation ? > It wasn't me, but Jazz (IIRC) that mentioned Perry's ruling. I've never been to ASLOK, not even been in America at all... I think a question to Perry would be nice, and even nicer would be an answer from Perry to accompany the question :-) From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Sep 26 13:12:57 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun Sep 26 13:13:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 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: Sunday, September 26, 2004 2:29 PM > To: btdtall@yahoo.com > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > > > Hi, > btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > > > Ole- > > So how do we play this from now on ? Do we go with > > the ruling Perry gave to you at ASLOK or do we go with > > this new interpretation ? > > > It wasn't me, but Jazz (IIRC) that mentioned Perry's ruling. I've > never been > to ASLOK, not even been in America at all... > > I think a question to Perry would be nice, and even nicer would > be an answer > from Perry to accompany the question :-) Thing is that this can not in any way be answered by a "yes/no". If that is what we get it would be the height of irresponsibility. This requires an errata. _UNLESS_ Perry allows the rule to stand as written. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From btdtall at yahoo.com Sun Sep 26 16:38:06 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Sun Sep 26 16:38:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040926233806.4341.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Ole- Sorry, thought it was you. I must have erased the person who originally posted that reply from Perry at ASLOK. Never been to ASLOK ?...you should have game shame...tisk...tisk.. --- Ole Boe wrote: > Hi, > btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > > > Ole- > > So how do we play this from now on ? Do we go > with > > the ruling Perry gave to you at ASLOK or do we go > with > > this new interpretation ? > > > It wasn't me, but Jazz (IIRC) that mentioned Perry's > ruling. I've never been > to ASLOK, not even been in America at all... > > I think a question to Perry would be nice, and even > nicer would be an answer > from Perry to accompany the question :-) > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Sun Sep 26 17:06:51 2004 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Sun Sep 26 17:06:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: <20040926233806.4341.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040927000651.44872.qmail@web40003.mail.yahoo.com> Yup, it were me that asked Perry and added my recollection of his reply to the discussion. Unfortunately, I have not been keeping up with the nuanced and subtle ASL rules points that are being made in this exchange. The whole life thing you know..... As I recall (and it *was* a number of years ago), it was a Stug that turned VCA by 2 spines with his MG shooting at infantry as First Fire, followed by a 1 spine VCA turn for the MA shot at a vehicle that entered subsequently. I think that someone in the community should compose a question/questions to Perry. Ole, you really MUST get to ASLOK someday. T-H-E ultimate ASL binge. Jazz --- btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > Ole- > Sorry, thought it was you. I must have erased the > person who originally posted that reply from Perry at > ASLOK. Never been to ASLOK ?...you should have game > shame...tisk...tisk.. > > --- Ole Boe wrote: > > > Hi, > > btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > Ole- > > > So how do we play this from now on ? Do we go > > with > > > the ruling Perry gave to you at ASLOK or do we go > > with > > > this new interpretation ? > > > > > It wasn't me, but Jazz (IIRC) that mentioned Perry's > > ruling. I've never been > > to ASLOK, not even been in America at all... > > > > I think a question to Perry would be nice, and even > > nicer would be an answer > > from Perry to accompany the question :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_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 aslml at aslwebdex.net Sun Sep 26 18:17:56 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Sun Sep 26 18:18:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Semi-rules question - Raate Road, Skis, and VASL References: <0cd8l0lv4bdae6644d4qe48dsoc1qjiusd@4ax.com> Message-ID: <002001c4a42f$d3d36040$6401a8c0@D5G57231> In setting up Raate Road in VASL an interesting few questions came up. Finns set up first, and all units get skis. Finns also get 6 ?s. Given setup positions, Russians are unlikely to set up in view of many of the Finns, so concealment will be common, but the Ruskii will get a first glimpse at the Finns before setting up. Note that skis cannot be concealed in VASL. (I would say that this is a glitch in VASL, since they are effectively sw's, what do you all think?) The obvious move is to put the skis on top of all stacks, thus denying the Ruskii any significant information (since he can't inspect before game begins, and will see ?s grow on top of all or most units before he does get right of inspection). Any stack topped with a ? marker will immediatly be identified as a probably dummy stack. Questions: 1. Skis are inherent to all Finnish units. Do the dummies get skis? Seems reasonable, but I don't find anything about it in the RB (could be an oversight, though). 2. If the dummies do get skis, I presume that the number of potential skis would be one set per ?. That sound right? Or maybe one could trade in ?s for skis? (yeah, now I'm stretching). What do you guys think? Larry From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Sep 26 19:14:11 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Sep 26 19:14:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51 Maintaining CA Message-ID: In an attempt to clarify what this rule means (because I'm confused): An AFV with functioning BMG, CMG and MA (in a slow turret) is in 1F7, with VCA and TCA of G7/G8. Known enemy units are in 1G9, 1D8 and 1F6 (all at ground level). All of the following takes place in a single fire phase. (1) The AFV changes VCA (but not TCA) to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The Case A DRM is +3. Seems clear. (Unless it's not legal to leave the TCA unchanged while not firing any turret-mounted weapons? It actually makes the following examples easier if it's not legal.) (2) The TCA now changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. Is the Case A DRM only +2 (for a single TCA change) or +5 (for combined VCA and TCA change) or +6 (for a 2-spine change relative to the VCA, plus the VCA change)? (I *think* it's +6; the TCA has changed twice, even though one change occurred when no turret-mounted weapon fired. But I'm not sure. Also see above re: the questionable legality of this any way.) (3) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. Is the Case A DRM only +3 (for a 2-spine change) or +6 (for combined VCA and 2-spine change)? (I.E., when does the AFV *stop* paying for the VCA change? All D3.51 says is that it applies to "any further changes of the TCA" -- which implies for the remainder of the fire phase. So I'd say the answer is +6.) Now reset as before: (1) The TCA changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. The Case A DRM is +2 only. Again, this seems clear. (2) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. The Case A DRM is +3 only. Still seems clear (thanks to Ole's help; in the past I would have called it as +4). (3) The VCA changes to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The Case A DRM is still only +3. (Whether the TCA changes or not for this last shot is irrelevant.) Assuming I'm correct, the moral seems clear: leave any VCA changes to last if it all possible. Otherwise you'll keep paying for it with every shot. If the AFV also has a usable AAMG, do any of the Case A modifiers apply to it if it fires separately at any time? (I think no; D1.83.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From fred at sdccu.net Sun Sep 26 19:39:18 2004 From: fred at sdccu.net (Fred Timm) Date: Sun Sep 26 19:43:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51 Maintaining CA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41577D56.6050500@sdccu.net> Bruce Probst wrote: > In an attempt to clarify what this rule means (because I'm confused): > > An AFV with functioning BMG, CMG and MA (in a slow turret) is in 1F7, with VCA > and TCA of G7/G8. > > Known enemy units are in 1G9, 1D8 and 1F6 (all at ground level). > > All of the following takes place in a single fire phase. > > (1) The AFV changes VCA (but not TCA) to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The Case > A DRM is +3. Seems clear. (Unless it's not legal to leave the TCA unchanged > while not firing any turret-mounted weapons? It actually makes the following > examples easier if it's not legal.) When you change the VCA, the TCA must stay the same relative to the VCA so in this case the TCA must also change to F8/G8 > > (2) The TCA now changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. Is the Case A DRM > only +2 (for a single TCA change) or +5 (for combined VCA and TCA change) or > +6 (for a 2-spine change relative to the VCA, plus the VCA change)? (I > *think* it's +6; the TCA has changed twice, even though one change occurred > when no turret-mounted weapon fired. But I'm not sure. Also see above re: > the questionable legality of this any way.) In this case the case A DRM is +6, +3 for changing the VCA 1 hexside and +3 for changing the TCA 2 additional hexsides (from F8/G8 to F6/G7). > > (3) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. Is the Case A DRM > only +3 (for a 2-spine change) or +6 (for combined VCA and 2-spine change)? > (I.E., when does the AFV *stop* paying for the VCA change? All D3.51 says is > that it applies to "any further changes of the TCA" -- which implies for the > remainder of the fire phase. So I'd say the answer is +6.) Now the DRM is +9, +3 for the VCA, +3 for the CMG TCA change and +3 for the additional TCA change. Note that if in 2 you fired the MA and in 3 you use rate (or IF) to fire the MA again the case A DRM would be only +3. > > Now reset as before: > > (1) The TCA changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. The Case A DRM is +2 > only. Again, this seems clear. > > (2) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. The Case A DRM is > +3 only. Still seems clear (thanks to Ole's help; in the past I would have > called it as +4). No it is +5, +2 for the CMG TCA change and +3 for the TCA MA TCA change. > > (3) The VCA changes to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The Case A DRM is still > only +3. (Whether the TCA changes or not for this last shot is irrelevant.) Correct. > > Assuming I'm correct, the moral seems clear: leave any VCA changes to last if > it all possible. Otherwise you'll keep paying for it with every shot. > > If the AFV also has a usable AAMG, do any of the Case A modifiers apply to it > if it fires separately at any time? (I think no; D1.83.) Correct. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Sep 26 19:48:48 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Sep 26 19:48:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Semi-rules question - Raate Road, Skis, and VASL In-Reply-To: <002001c4a42f$d3d36040$6401a8c0@D5G57231> References: <0cd8l0lv4bdae6644d4qe48dsoc1qjiusd@4ax.com> <002001c4a42f$d3d36040$6401a8c0@D5G57231> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:17:56 -0500, wrote: >In setting up Raate Road in VASL an interesting few questions came up. > >Finns set up first, and all units get skis. Finns also get 6 ?s. Given >setup positions, Russians are unlikely to set up in view of many of the >Finns, so concealment will be common, but the Ruskii will get a first >glimpse at the Finns before setting up. Note that skis cannot be concealed >in VASL. (I would say that this is a glitch in VASL, since they are >effectively sw's, what do you all think?) I agree, I don't see any reason why they can't be concealed -- it's just that normally it doesn't really matter. >The obvious move is to put the >skis on top of all stacks, thus denying the Ruskii any significant >information (since he can't inspect before game begins, and will see ?s grow >on top of all or most units before he does get right of inspection). Any >stack topped with a ? marker will immediatly be identified as a probably >dummy stack. Yes ... hmm. >Questions: > >1. Skis are inherent to all Finnish units. Do the dummies get skis? Seems >reasonable, but I don't find anything about it in the RB (could be an >oversight, though). With Chapter E, an oversight is certainly possible, but the rules we have are pretty straightforward. Since skis *are* like SW in most respects -- most importantly, they exist in counter form -- I would say that dummies cannot be ski-equipped. As unpossessed items, they could not sit either above or beneath a dummy counter (i.e., they can't be concealed unless there's a real unit in possession, and a dummy can't pretend to possess them). >2. If the dummies do get skis, I presume that the number of potential skis >would be one set per ?. That sound right? Or maybe one could trade in ?s >for skis? (yeah, now I'm stretching). I don't see any way in which the dummies can pretend to possess skis, I'm afraid. It seems that in this scenario the best use of the dummies is to conceal unit identities prior to start of play, or to act as sniper bait. (The optimal way to resolve this kind of situation would be an SSR permitting ski counters to be kept off-map until their existence is verified, either by LOS or by use of their movement capabilities.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From sgtono at yahoo.com Sun Sep 26 19:57:40 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Sun Sep 26 19:57:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Semi-rules question - Raate Road, Skis, and VASL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040927025740.44631.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> If a dummy stack can move like it has a leader in it, why could it not also move as if it had skis? Keith --- Bruce Probst wrote: > On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:17:56 -0500, > wrote: > > >In setting up Raate Road in VASL an interesting few > questions came up. > > > >Finns set up first, and all units get skis. Finns > also get 6 ?s. Given > >setup positions, Russians are unlikely to set up in > view of many of the > >Finns, so concealment will be common, but the > Ruskii will get a first > >glimpse at the Finns before setting up. Note that > skis cannot be concealed > >in VASL. (I would say that this is a glitch in > VASL, since they are > >effectively sw's, what do you all think?) > > I agree, I don't see any reason why they can't be > concealed -- it's just that > normally it doesn't really matter. > > >The obvious move is to put the > >skis on top of all stacks, thus denying the Ruskii > any significant > >information (since he can't inspect before game > begins, and will see ?s grow > >on top of all or most units before he does get > right of inspection). Any > >stack topped with a ? marker will immediatly be > identified as a probably > >dummy stack. > > Yes ... hmm. > > >Questions: > > > >1. Skis are inherent to all Finnish units. Do the > dummies get skis? Seems > >reasonable, but I don't find anything about it in > the RB (could be an > >oversight, though). > > With Chapter E, an oversight is certainly possible, > but the rules we have are > pretty straightforward. Since skis *are* like SW in > most respects -- most > importantly, they exist in counter form -- I would > say that dummies cannot be > ski-equipped. As unpossessed items, they could not > sit either above or > beneath a dummy counter (i.e., they can't be > concealed unless there's a real > unit in possession, and a dummy can't pretend to > possess them). > > >2. If the dummies do get skis, I presume that the > number of potential skis > >would be one set per ?. That sound right? Or > maybe one could trade in ?s > >for skis? (yeah, now I'm stretching). > > I don't see any way in which the dummies can pretend > to possess skis, I'm > afraid. > > It seems that in this scenario the best use of the > dummies is to conceal unit > identities prior to start of play, or to act as > sniper bait. > > (The optimal way to resolve this kind of situation > would be an SSR permitting > ski counters to be kept off-map until their > existence is verified, either by > LOS or by use of their movement capabilities.) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Sep 27 00:48:21 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Mon Sep 27 00:46:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51 Maintaining CA In-Reply-To: <41577D56.6050500@sdccu.net> Message-ID: Hi, > Bruce Probst wrote: > > An AFV with functioning BMG, CMG and MA (in a slow turret) is > > in 1F7, with VCA and TCA of G7/G8. > > > > Known enemy units are in 1G9, 1D8 and 1F6 (all at ground level). > > > > All of the following takes place in a single fire phase. > > > > (1) The AFV changes VCA (but not TCA) to F8/G8 and fires BMG at > > 1G9. The Case A DRM is +3. Seems clear. (Unless it's not legal to > > leave the TCA unchanged while not firing any turret-mounted weapons? > > It actually makes the following > > examples easier if it's not legal.) > Fred Timm answered_ > When you change the VCA, the TCA must stay the same relative > to the VCA so in this case the TCA must also change to F8/G8 > Agreed. There is no rule allowing you to change the TCA when firing a bow-mounted weapon. (It is however allowed to change the VCA when firing a turret-mounted weapon), see D3.12. > > (2) The TCA now changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. Is > > the Case A DRM only +2 (for a single TCA change) or +5 (for combined > > VCA and TCA change) or +6 (for a 2-spine change relative to the VCA, plus > > the VCA change)? (I *think* it's +6; the TCA has changed twice, even > > though one change occurred when no turret-mounted weapon fired. > > But I'm not sure. > In this case the case A DRM is +6, +3 for changing the VCA 1 > hexside and +3 for changing the TCA 2 additional hexsides > (from F8/G8 to F6/G7). > Since (1) was NA, the TCA was F8/G8, so this TCA change is two hexspines, thus +3. This is then in addition to the VCA +3 DRM for a total +6. > > (3) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. Is > > the Case A DRM only +3 (for a 2-spine change) or +6 (for combined VCA and > > 2-spine change)? (I.E., when does the AFV *stop* paying for the VCA change? > > All D3.51 says is that it applies to "any further changes of the TCA" -- > > which implies for the remainder of the fire phase. So I'd say the answer > > is +6.) > > Now the DRM is +9, +3 for the VCA, +3 for the CMG TCA change > and +3 for the additional TCA change. Note that if in 2 you > fired the MA and in 3 you use rate (or IF) to fire the MA > again the case A DRM would be only +3. > Fred's answer is incorrect: Due to the second sentence of D5.31, you do now discard the DRM for the previous turret change. Whether you pay the +3 for the VCA change or not (for a total DRM of +3 or +6) is not clear IMHO. One one hand, D3.51 says: "If, ... another turret-mounted weapon (or the MA which has retained a Multiple ROF) wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA" So this tells to forget all previous case A DRM since the move to the current (old) TCA. But on the other hand, D3.51 also says: "Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in additional to the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change" ...which tells us to add the VCA DRM for all further TCA changes. This one needs a Q&A IMO. The rest of the rule is convoluted, but clear if thouroughly analyzed. > > Now reset as before: > > > > (1) The TCA changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. The > > Case A DRM is +2 only. Again, this seems clear. > > Agreed. > > (2) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. The > > Case A DRM is +3 only. Still seems clear (thanks to Ole's help; in the > > past I would have called it as +4). > > No it is +5, +2 for the CMG TCA change and +3 for the TCA MA > TCA change. > Fred, where have you been when we discussed this last week? Read the second sentence of D3.51 again. It says that the two TCA changes are not cumulative - you only count the last. So it is +3 as Bruce says. > > (3) The VCA changes to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The Case A > > DRM is still only +3. (Whether the TCA changes or not for this last shot > >is irrelevant.) > > Correct. > Agreed, however, the TCA is not allowed to change relative to the VCA. > > Assuming I'm correct, the moral seems clear: leave any VCA > > changes to last if it all possible. Otherwise you'll keep paying for it > > with every shot. > > I'm still not sure if you need to continue to pay for the VCA change more than for the first TCA change after the VCA change though (as explained above). > > If the AFV also has a usable AAMG, do any of the Case A > > modifiers apply to it if it fires separately at any time? (I think no; D1.83.) > > Correct. > Agreed. From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Sep 27 00:49:26 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Mon Sep 27 00:47:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > > I think a question to Perry would be nice, and even nicer would > > be an answer > > from Perry to accompany the question :-) > and Tate answered: > Thing is that this can not in any way be answered by a "yes/no". > If that is what we get it would be the height of irresponsibility. > This requires an errata. _UNLESS_ Perry allows the rule to stand as written. > I was thinking of the case where you first change the VCA, then the TCA and then the TCA again. Will the last TCA change have a case A DRM based on only the last TCA change, or on the VCA change + the last TCA change (I think its clear that the first TCA change is not counted)? This can be solved by a Q&A, although I would like an errata that makes it clear. I guess you're thinking of removing the possible sleaze of changing the TCA by firing a CMG, and then changing it again to fire the MA at the main target, to get only one hexspine change DRM for the last, main shot. If this is to change, we need an errata. Changing this by Q&A is highly undesirable, I agree to that. I'm not sure it needs a change though. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 27 00:56:47 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 27 00:57:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Semi-rules question - Raate Road, Skis, and VASL In-Reply-To: <20040927025740.44631.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040927025740.44631.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3nhfl0lh4h9alhev3gfr5gb1c5j418holg@4ax.com> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 19:57:40 -0700 (PDT), Keith Todd wrote: >If a dummy stack can move like it has a leader in it, >why could it not also move as if it had skis? Because skis are not units, nor are they inherent in a unit; they must actually exist, possessed by a unit, before you can make use of them. Similarly, you could not use a dummy wagon to transport real infantry. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 27 01:32:35 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 27 01:32:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51 Maintaining CA In-Reply-To: <41577D56.6050500@sdccu.net> References: <41577D56.6050500@sdccu.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 19:39:18 -0700, Fred Timm wrote: >When you change the VCA, the TCA must stay the same relative >to the VCA so in this case the TCA must also change to F8/G8 OK, I can agree with that. >> (2) The TCA now changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. Is the Case A DRM >> only +2 (for a single TCA change) or +5 (for combined VCA and TCA change) or >> +6 (for a 2-spine change relative to the VCA, plus the VCA change)? (I >> *think* it's +6; the TCA has changed twice, even though one change occurred >> when no turret-mounted weapon fired. But I'm not sure. Also see above re: >> the questionable legality of this any way.) > >In this case the case A DRM is +6, +3 for changing the VCA 1 >hexside and +3 for changing the TCA 2 additional hexsides >(from F8/G8 to F6/G7). Yes. >> (3) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. Is the Case A DRM >> only +3 (for a 2-spine change) or +6 (for combined VCA and 2-spine change)? >> (I.E., when does the AFV *stop* paying for the VCA change? All D3.51 says is >> that it applies to "any further changes of the TCA" -- which implies for the >> remainder of the fire phase. So I'd say the answer is +6.) > >Now the DRM is +9, +3 for the VCA, +3 for the CMG TCA change >and +3 for the additional TCA change. Note that if in 2 you >fired the MA and in 3 you use rate (or IF) to fire the MA >again the case A DRM would be only +3. Uh, no, as has been hashed out here over the last few days. Firing *any* turret-mounted weapon resets the TCA count, not just firing the same weapon again. The question is whether it resets the VCA count as well. >> (2) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. The Case A DRM is >> +3 only. Still seems clear (thanks to Ole's help; in the past I would have >> called it as +4). > >No it is +5, +2 for the CMG TCA change and +3 for the TCA MA >TCA change. Again, no, as above. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 27 01:35:56 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 27 01:36:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040923131531.01b292b8@pop3.direcway.com> References: <20040923165322.65722.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> <4vv5l0loctpsep2lovksh5fjng0v73uui7@4ax.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20040923131531.01b292b8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:16:36 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >At 11:58 AM 9/23/2004, Bruce Probst wrote: >>If it's *only* the VCA you're changing each time -- yes. +3 for the BMG, then >>only +1 for each of the CMG and MA. > >Hmmm.. I was assuming each VCA change started a new sequence so +3 for all. On reflection, I think you are correct. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From leonardus at mymail.ro Mon Sep 27 03:17:18 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Mon Sep 27 03:20:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please References: Message-ID: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Hello, I'm new here, and so on ASL. I tried to read all rule book, but I find very hard to play a game, especially on VASAL where is lacking the info needed (a deep one), and especially whn you have not anybody to play the boardgame. So many rules, so many specifications. I like this game a lot, it's the best ever encountered, despite the fact that it have no ''graphics'', like say others. For me, it fit me like a glove. It' s pure strategy, real, accurate, logical. Even is no match for SPWAW or SPWW2, despite the fact this games where very good (IMHO, they are lacking in deep). A first question is that: how do you manage from the first time to play ASL without errors (such missing some rules, or not apllying some modifiers, etc...) ? What sort of help you have ? If want, please, tell me what secondary docs/infos/stuff you used then.......a link will be very good. Or some other asistants, like ASLAP or SALSA. I find ASLAP very good but badly that remain on place just when it should go on.......here I load a scenario, but I don't see anywhere the map ?! only numbers, factors, etc..and the help is so thin..... Second, what do you know about the so-awaited game ASL from Matrix ? It is just 5 or 6 years now from the first announcement....... Thank you very much. L. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Mon Sep 27 05:25:20 2004 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Mon Sep 27 04:23:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please In-Reply-To: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <000801c4a48d$0e8f68c0$6401a8c0@NewDell> >A first >question is that: how do you manage from the first time to >play ASL without errors (such missing some rules, or not >apllying some modifiers, etc...) ? There are always errors in ASL. There are more in the beginning. Lots of play will help. >What sort of help you have? Local players helped me learn. >If want, please, tell me what secondary docs/infos/stuff >you used then.......a link will be very good. I also used "8 Steps to ASL", which can be found at: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/articles.php >Second, what do you know about the so-awaited game >ASL from Matrix ? I have never heard of it. From aslml at aslwebdex.net Mon Sep 27 05:52:46 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Mon Sep 27 05:52:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please References: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <001501c4a490$e56f9ec0$6401a8c0@D5G57231> Leonardus, Take a look at my website (www.aslwebdex.net), and especially at the newbie page (http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-newbie.html). There is an incredible amount of free information and advice on the internet for ASL and all (or most) of it is indexed on the WebDex. Then play a game. If you can't find a local opponent, advertise on the list (I always get several responses). And don't worry about mistakes, if you let your opponent know you are just starting I am certain he will patiently correct yours. The ONLY way to learn is to play. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leonardus" To: Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 5:17 AM Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please > > Hello, > > I'm new here, and so on ASL. I tried to read all rule book, but I find > very hard to play a game, especially on VASAL where is lacking the > info needed (a deep one), and especially whn you have not anybody to > play the boardgame. So many rules, so many specifications. I like this > game a lot, it's the best ever encountered, despite the fact that it > have no ''graphics'', like say others. For me, it fit me like a glove. > It' s pure strategy, real, accurate, logical. Even is no match for > SPWAW or SPWW2, despite the fact this games where very good (IMHO, > they are lacking in deep). A first question is that: how do you manage > from the first time to play ASL without errors (such missing some > rules, or not apllying some modifiers, etc...) ? What sort of help you > have ? If want, please, tell me what secondary docs/infos/stuff you > used then.......a link will be very good. Or some other asistants, > like ASLAP or SALSA. I find ASLAP very good but badly that remain on > place just when it should go on.......here I load a scenario, but I > don't see anywhere the map ?! only numbers, factors, etc..and the help > is so thin..... > Second, what do you know about the so-awaited game ASL from Matrix ? > It is just 5 or 6 years now from the first announcement....... > Thank you very much. > > > > > L. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Mon Sep 27 06:20:12 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Mon Sep 27 06:20:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please In-Reply-To: <001501c4a490$e56f9ec0$6401a8c0@D5G57231> References: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <001501c4a490$e56f9ec0$6401a8c0@D5G57231> Message-ID: <4158138C.6000707@mbj.nifty.com> Ahhh... I love it when a new player starts up. I think you have gotten some good advice, but I must say again that you shouldn't worry about mistakes and just have fun. Start with infantry scenarios and chapter A reading only what you think you need. Skip the rest. Add sections as you get more and more familiar with the game. Since it sounds like you read most of everything already, I would just focus on the stuff that you feel comfortable with and then add rules sections after you have played a bit. Hopefully, you can find an opponen near by, but if you have to, VASL can be a decent substitute. VASL is a great product, but that is just something else to learn. I wish you the best. Keep trying and don't give up if you are having fun. Even the great players had to learn from the ground up--Maybe Scott Drane is the lone exception. I think he was born with a rule book in his hand and won his first 100 games before he could walk. Will -- ("`-/")_.-'"``-._ . . `; -._ )-;-,_`) (v_,)' _ )`-.\ ``-' _.- _..-_/ / ((.' ((,.-' ((,/ From geb3 at inter.net Mon Sep 27 06:37:38 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon Sep 27 06:34:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please In-Reply-To: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: Three little words (and a URL): ASL Starter Kit http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/prodaslsk1.php Oh, and welcome! - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Leonardus Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 7:17 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please Hello, I'm new here, and so on ASL. I tried to read all rule book, but I find very hard to play a game, especially on VASAL where is lacking the info needed (a deep one), and especially whn you have not anybody to play the boardgame. So many rules, so many specifications. I like this game a lot, it's the best ever encountered, despite the fact that it have no ''graphics'', like say others. For me, it fit me like a glove. It' s pure strategy, real, accurate, logical. Even is no match for SPWAW or SPWW2, despite the fact this games where very good (IMHO, they are lacking in deep). A first question is that: how do you manage from the first time to play ASL without errors (such missing some rules, or not apllying some modifiers, etc...) ? What sort of help you have ? If want, please, tell me what secondary docs/infos/stuff you used then.......a link will be very good. Or some other asistants, like ASLAP or SALSA. I find ASLAP very good but badly that remain on place just when it should go on.......here I load a scenario, but I don't see anywhere the map ?! only numbers, factors, etc..and the help is so thin..... Second, what do you know about the so-awaited game ASL from Matrix ? It is just 5 or 6 years now from the first announcement....... Thank you very much. L. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! _______________________________________________ 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 Sep 27 07:16:56 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Mon Sep 27 07:23:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Scott Romanowski's Errata file Message-ID: <001e01c4a49c$a6e38ac0$f301010a@gecac.org> Hello! Perhaps I missed an announcement, did Scott release a new version of the Errata and Q&A? Either way, can someone please provide me with a link? Many thanks! Peace Roger "A Bumper sticker never changed anything register to vote" From MPitcavage at adl.org Mon Sep 27 07:34:30 2004 From: MPitcavage at adl.org (Pitcavage, Mark) Date: Mon Sep 27 07:35:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Gameplay Article Index Message-ID: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B952DB@nymail.adl.org> Hi. I'd like to announce a new addition to the Desperation Morale Central Web site! I've added an almost-comprehensive ASL Gameplay Article Index, a subject-indexed, hyperlinked, cross-referenced index of ASL magazine and newsletter articles on rules, series replays, tactical hints, scenario analysis, and more. Ever want to know how many articles on SMOKE usage have been written? Now you can track them all down. Hundreds of articles are indexed here. It is all available for FREE at http://www.desperationmorale.com. From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 27 07:36:05 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 27 07:36:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 Message-ID: <391r9h$alqd1h@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Ole Boe > Date: 2004/09/27 Mon AM 02:49:26 CDT > To: > Subject: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > > I guess you're thinking of removing the possible sleaze of changing the TCA > by firing a CMG, and then changing it again to fire the MA at the main > target, to get only one hexspine change DRM for the last, main shot. > > If this is to change, we need an errata. Changing this by Q&A is highly > undesirable, I agree to that. I'm not sure it needs a change though. > That is exactly what I was thinking of...and yes, it seems a little sleaze. It makes the dance-o-death a little more problematic. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 27 07:45:05 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Sep 27 07:46:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51 Maintaining CA Message-ID: > >In an attempt to clarify what this rule means (because I'm confused): > Hey, now you've got me thinking! >An AFV with functioning BMG, CMG and MA (in a slow turret) is in 1F7, with >VCA >and TCA of G7/G8. > >Known enemy units are in 1G9, 1D8 and 1F6 (all at ground level). > >All of the following takes place in a single fire phase. > >(1) The AFV changes VCA (but not TCA) to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The >Case >A DRM is +3. Seems clear. (Unless it's not legal to leave the TCA >unchanged >while not firing any turret-mounted weapons? It actually makes the >following >examples easier if it's not legal.) > Case A is +3 (NT Gun Type, 1 hexspine). As regards the legality of leaving the TCA in its hex facing, there is this: "If the VCA is changed, the TCA changes the same number of hexspines while retaining its position relative to the VCA." I take that to mean your TCA has also changed to F8/G8 when the VCA changes. I would also say that the only way to change the TCA relative to the VCA is by using normal CA change procedures. >(2) The TCA now changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. Is the Case A >DRM >only +2 (for a single TCA change) or +5 (for combined VCA and TCA change) >or >+6 (for a 2-spine change relative to the VCA, plus the VCA change)? (I >*think* it's +6; the TCA has changed twice, even though one change occurred >when no turret-mounted weapon fired. But I'm not sure. Also see above re: >the questionable legality of this any way.) > I would combine the TCA and VCA DRM for this shot. Note that your TCA change to F6/F7 would have occurred from F8/G8 (based on the earlier VCA change), so the TCA DRM would be +3, for a total Case DRM of +6 as you said. (+3 [VCA change of 1 hexspine] +2 [ST first hexspine change] +1 [ST second hexspine change]) This sentence covers it: "Any further changes of the TCA incurs normal TCA Case A DRM in addition to the NT Case A DRM of the VCA change [EXC Bounding First Fire...]" >(3) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. Is the Case A >DRM >only +3 (for a 2-spine change) or +6 (for combined VCA and 2-spine change)? >(I.E., when does the AFV *stop* paying for the VCA change? All D3.51 says >is >that it applies to "any further changes of the TCA" -- which implies for >the >remainder of the fire phase. So I'd say the answer is +6.) > Originally I would have replied that the correct answer is +3, based on the second sentence of D3.51: "If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon (or the MA which has retained a Multiple ROF) wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA... [Known units, etc.]" Your assertion that it could be +6 is perfectly valid, and I can certainly see a case to be made for it. There is this phrase from the first EX: "... change his VCA and that would require penalizing the first shot of all CA-restricted weapons firing as NT Gun Types rather than T Types." That actually matches a statement that you used early in the first discussion, from C5.11: "... the NT To Hit DRM apply to the first shot of all vehicular weapons (see also D3.51)." So there is consistency there. That means the MA would pay NT costs for its first shot, and the CMG would pay NT costs for its first shot (in addition to "normal TCA Case A DRM" for both). I have no problem with that. If the MA retained ROF, it would no longer pay NT costs for subsequent shots (unless the VCA changed again, and naturally TCA DRM would apply). I actually rather prefer that interpretation. However, it can be (and was) argued that any second turret-mounted weapon does not pay the "same CA Change penalty as the first weapon which fired." Though now it seems that "CA Change penalty" is a little vague. It wouldn't bother me a bit if an Errata modified the second sentence to "TCA Case A DRM", as opposed to just "Case A DRM". And perhaps a bit more definitive instruction regarding the application of NT DRM. >Now reset as before: > >(1) The TCA changes to F6/G7 and the CMG fires at 1F6. The Case A DRM is >+2 >only. Again, this seems clear. Yes. >(2) The TCA now changes to E7/E8 and the MA fires at 1D8. The Case A DRM >is >+3 only. Still seems clear (thanks to Ole's help; in the past I would have >called it as +4). I'm sure I have always played it this way. With regard to TCA changes only, that second sentence of D3.51 addresses it well, IMO. >(3) The VCA changes to F8/G8 and fires BMG at 1G9. The Case A DRM is still >only +3. (Whether the TCA changes or not for this last shot is >irrelevant.) I agree. >Assuming I'm correct, the moral seems clear: leave any VCA changes to last >if >it all possible. Otherwise you'll keep paying for it with every shot. Leave VCA changes until last: good idea. Keep paying for VCA changes with every shot: not sure. Certainly not *every* shot, but quite possibly every *first* shot of a weapon. >If the AFV also has a usable AAMG, do any of the Case A modifiers apply to >it >if it fires separately at any time? (I think no; D1.83.) No. Thanks for the Maintaining CA reset. 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 sgtono at yahoo.com Mon Sep 27 08:02:18 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Mon Sep 27 08:02:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please In-Reply-To: <4158138C.6000707@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: <20040927150218.15499.qmail@web51308.mail.yahoo.com> You will need to read Chapter B as well with Chapter A. I also have not heard of Matrix and ASL. Keith --- Will Fleming wrote: > Ahhh... > > I love it when a new player starts up. I think you > have gotten some > good advice, but I must say again that you shouldn't > worry about > mistakes and just have fun. > > Start with infantry scenarios and chapter A reading > only what you think > you need. Skip the rest. Add sections as you get > more and more > familiar with the game. Since it sounds like you > read most of > everything already, I would just focus on the stuff > that you feel > comfortable with and then add rules sections after > you have played a bit. > > Hopefully, you can find an opponen near by, but if > you have to, VASL can > be a decent substitute. VASL is a great product, > but that is just > something else to learn. > > I wish you the best. Keep trying and don't give up > if you are having > fun. Even the great players had to learn from the > ground up--Maybe > Scott Drane is the lone exception. I think he was > born with a rule book > in his hand and won his first 100 games before he > could walk. > > Will > > -- > > ("`-/")_.-'"``-._ > . . `; -._ )-;-,_`) > (v_,)' _ )`-.\ ``-' > _.- _..-_/ / ((.' > ((,.-' ((,/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 27 10:01:52 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 27 10:02:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51 Maintaining CA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:45:05 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >That actually matches a statement that you used early in the first >discussion, from C5.11: "... the NT To Hit DRM apply to the first shot of >all vehicular weapons (see also D3.51)." > >So there is consistency there. Not as consistent as I would like . C5.11 says "first shot"; D3.51 says "any further changes". To be consistent, that sentence in D3.51 would say something like "Any further changes of the TCA ... of the VCA change *for the first shot of each turret-mounted weapon*." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 27 10:20:00 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 27 10:20:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] sorry, a little help please In-Reply-To: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <004e01c4a47b$5a1b7ca0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <5vhgl0h2alri7kb8a0g6f7mbs1g1chgqbg@4ax.com> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:17:18 +0200, "Leonardus" wrote: >Hello, Hello, and welcome! >A first question is that: how do you manage >from the first time to play ASL without errors (such missing some >rules, or not apllying some modifiers, etc...) ? No ASL game is ever played without errors. The more experience you have, the fewer errors you will commit. Strive for perfection, but accept your limitations . >What sort of help you have ? In addition to the other suggestions and assistance you have received, please take the time to browse the ASL FAQ (address in my .sig, below). Many "beginner" questions are addressed there. >Second, what do you know about the so-awaited game ASL from Matrix ? Never heard of such a beast. Originally Avalon Hill were going to produce a computer game called "Advanced Squad Leader"; that game became "Close Combat" at Microsoft -- and of course it has no particular similarity to the boardgame ASL. Hasbro released "Squad Leader" as a computer game, but it too bears no particular resemblance to the board game (and from what I've heard it is not a very good game). There are no other plans for an "official" computer game based on ASL that I'm aware of. Obviously, though, there are plenty of computer games that have taken inspiration from ASL -- "Combat Mission" comes highly recommended by many ASL players. http://www.battlefront.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Sep 27 13:42:05 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon Sep 27 13:39:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: <391r9h$alqd1h@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > > I guess you're thinking of removing the possible sleaze of > > changing the TCA > > by firing a CMG, and then changing it again to fire the MA at the main > > target, to get only one hexspine change DRM for the last, main shot. > > > > If this is to change, we need an errata. Changing this by Q&A is highly > > undesirable, I agree to that. I'm not sure it needs a change though. > > > and Tate answered: > That is exactly what I was thinking of...and yes, it seems a > little sleaze. > > It makes the dance-o-death a little more problematic. > AFAIK, the dance-o-death is mostly performed during the MPh, where one or more ATTACKING AFV are trying to take out DEFENDER AFV. In this case, this "sleaze" will not matter at all. The ATTACKER cannot use it, since he has to change CA by expending MP, and the DEFENDER can hardly use it because he can only change CA by firing at the currently moving AFV. From jim.white at dol.net Mon Sep 27 16:18:46 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Mon Sep 27 16:20:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] More BRT CGIII Initial Scenario questions Message-ID: <017b01c4a4e8$5afc2b20$6501a8c0@workstation1> Almost ready to start this CG (finally)...I only have a few more administrative things to do like select Bombardment locations for example...which naturally creates a couple more questions for the List.... After the Japanese set up first (CG18.22)....followed by the Marines (CG18.24)...CG18.3 says "The Marine player declares and resolves any bombardments. Play then begins." Ok..moving to CG4 for the Bombardment rules...it says, "After resolving all Tarawa Naval Bombardment MC, place a Smoke counter in each land hex affected by the Bombardment (which counters are then flipped to their Dispersed side at the start of the immediately following Marine PFPh). Now is this Bombardment considered to be taking place in Marine Player Turn 1 PFPh? Seems appropriate...but I'm not sure...since if it does...then according to CG18.3 there is no possibility of a Rally Phase in Marine Player Turn 1 (whether it's needed or not is another story). If this is the case then the flipping of the Smoke counters to their Dispersed side would occur in the Marine Player Turn 2 PFPh (which as the Marines I hope is the case). However, if the Bombardment occurs first...then Marine Player Turn 1 Rally Phase...it seems they would be flipped in Marine Player Turn 1 PFPh...which would then beg the question as to why not just place Dispersed Smoke in the first place. What say the List? Next...on the extent of error dr for the Bombardment it says "...with halving being the only modification...". FRU? or FRD? I'm assuming FRU...but being the Marines I would like to think otherwise. Thanks in advance, Jim "reading all these rules is getting to me...getting my cardboard Marines shot at will be much more fun" White From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Sep 27 17:47:02 2004 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon Sep 27 17:47:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] D3.51, How It Should Be References: Message-ID: <008001c4a4f4$acbb5470$9e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz; We have a dozen posters giving eleven different ways this rule is to interpreted. That is fine but how, in your humble opinions should the rule work? Personally, I believe that it should go as such (using a fast turreted tank with a MA, CMG and a BMG in this example): - tank turns TCA 3 hexspines to fire at target with CMG, DRM is +3 - tank then turns TCA 1 hexspine more to fire MA, DRM is +4, MA retains ROF - tank turns VCA one hexspine and fires BMG, DRM is +3 - tank fires MA again in current CA, DRM is +3, ROF is retained - tank turns TCA 1 hexspine and fires MA, DRM is +1. That is how it should work IMHO. =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Sep 27 18:28:21 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Sep 27 18:28:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 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 B?e > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 3:42 PM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > > > Hi, > > I wrote: > > > I guess you're thinking of removing the possible sleaze of > > > changing the TCA > > > by firing a CMG, and then changing it again to fire the MA at the main > > > target, to get only one hexspine change DRM for the last, main shot. > > > > > > If this is to change, we need an errata. Changing this by Q&A > is highly > > > undesirable, I agree to that. I'm not sure it needs a change though. > > > > > > and Tate answered: > > > That is exactly what I was thinking of...and yes, it seems a > > little sleaze. > > > > It makes the dance-o-death a little more problematic. > > > AFAIK, the dance-o-death is mostly performed during the MPh, where one or > more ATTACKING AFV are trying to take out DEFENDER AFV. In this case, this > "sleaze" will not matter at all. > > The ATTACKER cannot use it, since he has to change CA by expending MP, and > the DEFENDER can hardly use it because he can only change CA by firing at > the currently moving AFV. I turret two spins and fire my CMG at the currently moving AFV. Now, no matter which way currently moving AFV moves, turns, etc...I shift just one spin and get a better shot than otherwise. IOW, I can see more than one way to take advantage during DFire. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From aslml at aslwebdex.net Mon Sep 27 19:02:30 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Mon Sep 27 19:02:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Scott Romanowski's Errata file References: <001e01c4a49c$a6e38ac0$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <003301c4a4ff$386cb2c0$6401a8c0@D5G57231> All the errata and q&a I could find is linked on the WebDex at http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-errata.html. If you find something more up-to-date, I'd appreciate your letting me know. Larry Memmott "A vote never changed anything either, register a gun - or don't register it." ----- Original Message ----- From: "rwhelan" To: Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 9:16 AM Subject: [Aslml] Scott Romanowski's Errata file > Hello! > > Perhaps I missed an announcement, did Scott release a new version of the > Errata and Q&A? > > Either way, can someone please provide me with a link? > > Many thanks! > > Peace > > Roger > > "A Bumper sticker never changed anything > register to vote" > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Sep 27 20:18:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Sep 27 20:19:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: D3.51, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <008001c4a4f4$acbb5470$9e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <008001c4a4f4$acbb5470$9e27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:47:02 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: >We have a dozen posters giving eleven different ways this rule is to >interpreted. That is fine but how, in your humble opinions should the rule >work? > >Personally, I believe that it should go as such (using a fast turreted tank >with a MA, CMG and a BMG in this example): > >- tank turns TCA 3 hexspines to fire at target with CMG, DRM is +3 > >- tank then turns TCA 1 hexspine more to fire MA, DRM is +4, MA retains ROF > >- tank turns VCA one hexspine and fires BMG, DRM is +3 > >- tank fires MA again in current CA, DRM is +3, ROF is retained > >- tank turns TCA 1 hexspine and fires MA, DRM is +1. That's how I have played it in the past. It's been established that the rule pretty clearly says otherwise for the part about TCA (only) changing, so those of us who were playing it that way were simply wrong ... no excuses. I don't think errata is *required* just to make us right . The only outstanding issue, really, is when the penalty for VCA goes away. I think it should apply only to the first shot of each weapon (which is what C5.11 says), but D3.51 muddies it up by appearing to make it more persistent. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Sep 28 00:41:52 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Sep 28 00:39:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Tate wrote: > I turret two spins and fire my CMG at the currently moving AFV. Now, no > matter which way currently moving AFV moves, turns, etc...I shift just one > spin and get a better shot than otherwise. IOW, I can see more > than one way to take advantage during DFire. > For this to be legal, the moving AFV must move out of the DEFENDER AFV's current TCA, after the CMG shot. If it remains withing the TCA, the DEFENDER's shot with MA must pay the Case A for the change when firing the CMG as well. Note that D3.51 says that the old TCA case C DRM goes away when firing at a target *outside* the current TCA. So it doesn't look like you can change do what you describe unless the AFV moves out of the TCA. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Sep 28 00:41:36 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 28 00:41:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] More BRT CGIII Initial Scenario questions In-Reply-To: <017b01c4a4e8$5afc2b20$6501a8c0@workstation1> References: <017b01c4a4e8$5afc2b20$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: <5t3il01l69u7sq64pd21au7lsa49uchmk7@4ax.com> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:18:46 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >After the Japanese set up first (CG18.22)....followed by the Marines >(CG18.24)...CG18.3 says "The Marine player declares and resolves any >bombardments. Play then begins." > >Ok..moving toCG4fortheBombardmentrules...itsays,Afterresolvingall >Tarawa Naval Bombardment MC, place a Smoke counter in each land hex affected >by the Bombardment (which counters are then flipped to their Dispersed side >at the start of the immediately following Marine PFPh). Now is this >Bombardment considered to be taking place in Marine Player Turn 1 PFPh? No, it's pre-game. >Seems appropriate...but I'm not sure...since if it does...then according to >CG18.3 there is no possibility of a Rally Phase in Marine Player Turn 1 >(whether it's needed or not is another story). If this is the case then the >flipping of the Smoke counters to their Dispersed side would occur in the >Marine Player Turn 2 PFPh (which as the Marines I hope is the case). No. The rule is telling you to place full-strength smoke counters in the affected hexes, which, like any other full-strength counters, are flipped to their Dispersed side at the beginning of the Marine PFPh. >However, if the Bombardment occurs first...then Marine Player Turn 1 Rally >Phase...it seems they would be flipped in Marine Player Turn 1 PFPh...which >would then beg the question as to why not just place Dispersed Smoke in the >first place. The rules are written this way because it's consistent with the normal SMOKE rules. If they were written the way you suggest, they would need to include an EXC to specify that they're *not* removed in the first Marine PFPh. Also, note that if Gusts are rolled on the very first RPh of the scenario, all of those smoke counters will be immediately dispersed in the RPh, and then *removed* in the first Marine PFPh! So don't roll Gusts! >Next...on the extent of error dr for the Bombardment it says "...with >halving being the only modification...". FRU? or FRD? I'm assuming >FRU...but being the Marines I would like to think otherwise. I'd assume FRU. The rule says it's a "C1.31 Error DR"; looking at C1.31 the only modifiers normally applicable are C1.4 Correction limits (NA to these bombardments) and C1.732 (halving due to pre-registered hex). This latter is always FRU, so I guess it should be FRU for these bombardments also. It should really be specified in T15.4 CG4, though, so you'd need to send a Q to Perry for a "definitive" answer. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Sep 28 00:56:04 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Tue Sep 28 00:53:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: D3.51, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, > On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:47:02 -0500, "mcleods" wrote: > > >Personally, I believe that it should go as such (using a fast > >turreted tank with a MA, CMG and a BMG in this example): > > > >- tank turns TCA 3 hexspines to fire at target with CMG, DRM is +3 > > > >- tank then turns TCA 1 hexspine more to fire MA, DRM is +4, MA > retains ROF > > > >- tank turns VCA one hexspine and fires BMG, DRM is +3 > > > >- tank fires MA again in current CA, DRM is +3, ROF is retained > > > >- tank turns TCA 1 hexspine and fires MA, DRM is +1. > and Bruce Probst answered: > That's how I have played it in the past. It's been established > that the rule pretty clearly says otherwise for the part about TCA (only) > changing, so those of us who were playing it that way were simply > wrong ... no excuses. I don't think errata is *required* just to make > us right . I agree (with the exception that I've not played it that way in the past). Those of you that think it needs to be changed, should consider that this is obviously a deliberate rule, since D3.51 also includes a restriction whos only meaning is to keep this possible sleaze under control. > The only outstanding issue, really, is when the penalty for VCA goes away. > I think it should apply only to the first shot of each weapon (which is what C5.11 > says), but D3.51 muddies it up by appearing to make it more persistent. > Agreed, but there are really two questions about this: 1) Does it go away on the second shot for a weapon within the same TCA? 2) Does it go away for a new turret-mounted weapon when changing the TCA for a second time (The second sentence of D3.51 says so, but not the one about further TCA changes in the same rule)? Also, another (IMHO) unclear part: Assume an AFV in G2 with TCA vs G1/H1. An enemy target is in G7. The AFV changes its TCA two spines (G3/H2) by firing the CMG vs the enemy for a +3 DRM (ST). If it then changes its TCA one more spine (F2/G3), while firing the MA at the same target, what's the DRM then? The first sentence of D3.51 says: "Once a vehicle fires any turret-mounted weapon, any of its other turret-mounted weapons which fire within the current respective CA must pay the same CA as the first weapon which fired." The second shot is fired from a new CA, so this seems to say +2 only. But the second sentence says: "If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon ... wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12)" The target is neither *another* target nor outside the current TCA, so this doesn't seem to apply. I guess we'll then have to fall back on C5.1, which only calls for counting the last change, thus +2, even though the second sentence of D3.51 seems to indicate otherwise. From ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 07:17:17 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Sep 28 07:17:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? Message-ID: <20040928141717.13740.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com> I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of re-printing COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that matter Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah Hillock rules, which appear in places like ABTF) ok rant mode off. Thanks for tuning in :) -Chuck ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From keithdalton at verizon.net Tue Sep 28 07:57:29 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Tue Sep 28 07:57:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? Message-ID: <20040928145729.NUNE24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Your reliable source is full of crap. We have every intention of reprinting COB, but we're going to get the rulebook and BV out first. What Brian actually related on consimworld under our folder in Post 22908 is that we're going to have to re-lay COB out from scratch -- no masters of the work exist in the material handed over to us from Avalon Hill. Keith Dalton MMP Marketing Director > > From: Chuck T > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 09:17:17 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? > > I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of re-printing > COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that matter > Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah Hillock > rules, which appear in places like ABTF) > > ok rant mode off. > > Thanks for tuning in :) > > -Chuck > > ===== > Chuck > ctewks@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 ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 08:29:24 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Sep 28 08:29:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? In-Reply-To: <20040928145729.NUNE24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <20040928152924.90990.qmail@web42101.mail.yahoo.com> With all due respect Keith -- I don't believe he is "full of crap"... I know he called MMP to re-order items for his store and he was, at the very least, left with the IMPRESSION this was true. From someone (me) who has been in the world of customer service, perception is often as, if not more important, than the truth. This had nothing to do with any posts anywhere. -Chuck --- keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > Your reliable source is full of crap. We have every intention of reprinting > COB, but we're going to get the rulebook and BV out first. > > What Brian actually related on consimworld under our folder in Post 22908 is > that we're going to have to re-lay COB out from scratch -- no masters of the > work exist in the material handed over to us from Avalon Hill. > > Keith Dalton > MMP Marketing Director > > > > > > > > > From: Chuck T > > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 09:17:17 CDT > > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? > > > > I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of > re-printing > > COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that matter > > Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah > Hillock > > rules, which appear in places like ABTF) > > > > ok rant mode off. > > > > Thanks for tuning in :) > > > > -Chuck > > > > ===== > > Chuck > > ctewks@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 > > > > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 08:35:29 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Sep 28 08:35:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment In-Reply-To: <20040928145729.NUNE24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <20040928153529.53662.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR for MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is someone who sells MMP products. -Chuck --- keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > Your reliable source is full of crap. We have every intention of reprinting > COB, but we're going to get the rulebook and BV out first. > > What Brian actually related on consimworld under our folder in Post 22908 is > that we're going to have to re-lay COB out from scratch -- no masters of the > work exist in the material handed over to us from Avalon Hill. > > Keith Dalton > MMP Marketing Director > > > > > > > > > From: Chuck T > > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 09:17:17 CDT > > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? > > > > I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of > re-printing > > COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that matter > > Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah > Hillock > > rules, which appear in places like ABTF) > > > > ok rant mode off. > > > > Thanks for tuning in :) > > > > -Chuck > > > > ===== > > Chuck > > ctewks@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 > > > > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From keithdalton at verizon.net Tue Sep 28 09:07:54 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Tue Sep 28 09:08:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment Message-ID: <20040928160755.FBCJ24490.out014.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> You're quite right Chuck, and I apologize. I lost my temper when I saw your post. I did not see a good reason for you to post a rumour which is a complete misrepresentation of our position on a subject like our product line to 450+ members instead of emailing me or someone else at MMP directly for confirmation or clarification. When I want to know if something is true or not, I go to the source. For future reference, unless I am out of town, I usually answer every email sent privately to me within 24 hours. K > > From: Chuck T > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 10:35:29 CDT > To: keithdalton@verizon.net, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment > > additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR for > MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is someone who > sells MMP products. > > -Chuck > > --- keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > > > Your reliable source is full of crap. We have every intention of reprinting > > COB, but we're going to get the rulebook and BV out first. > > > > What Brian actually related on consimworld under our folder in Post 22908 is > > that we're going to have to re-lay COB out from scratch -- no masters of the > > work exist in the material handed over to us from Avalon Hill. > > > > Keith Dalton > > MMP Marketing Director > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Chuck T > > > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 09:17:17 CDT > > > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? > > > > > > I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of > > re-printing > > > COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that matter > > > Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah > > Hillock > > > rules, which appear in places like ABTF) > > > > > > ok rant mode off. > > > > > > Thanks for tuning in :) > > > > > > -Chuck > > > > > > ===== > > > Chuck > > > ctewks@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 > > > > > > > > > > ===== > Chuck > ctewks@yahoo.com > From ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 09:11:57 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Sep 28 09:12:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment In-Reply-To: <20040928160755.FBCJ24490.out014.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: <20040928161157.3530.qmail@web42101.mail.yahoo.com> Well perhaps my audience wasn't exactly appropriate either and I didn't mean it in a "mean" way really, I meant it more as "why are MMP dealers hearing this" sort of thing. So back to playing......err working I mean :) -Chuck --- keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > You're quite right Chuck, and I apologize. > > I lost my temper when I saw your post. I did not see a good reason for you > to post a rumour which is a complete misrepresentation of our position on a > subject like our product line to 450+ members instead of emailing me or > someone else at MMP directly for confirmation or clarification. When I want > to know if something is true or not, I go to the source. > > For future reference, unless I am out of town, I usually answer every email > sent privately to me within 24 hours. > > K > > > > > > > > > From: Chuck T > > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 10:35:29 CDT > > To: keithdalton@verizon.net, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment > > > > additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR for > > MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is someone > who > > sells MMP products. > > > > -Chuck > > > > --- keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > > > > > Your reliable source is full of crap. We have every intention of > reprinting > > > COB, but we're going to get the rulebook and BV out first. > > > > > > What Brian actually related on consimworld under our folder in Post 22908 > is > > > that we're going to have to re-lay COB out from scratch -- no masters of > the > > > work exist in the material handed over to us from Avalon Hill. > > > > > > Keith Dalton > > > MMP Marketing Director > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Chuck T > > > > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 09:17:17 CDT > > > > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > > Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? > > > > > > > > I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of > > > re-printing > > > > COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that > matter > > > > Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah > > > Hillock > > > > rules, which appear in places like ABTF) > > > > > > > > ok rant mode off. > > > > > > > > Thanks for tuning in :) > > > > > > > > -Chuck > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > Chuck > > > > ctewks@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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > Chuck > > ctewks@yahoo.com > > > > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From gd891 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 28 09:10:56 2004 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd) Date: Tue Sep 28 09:13:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment In-Reply-To: <20040928153529.53662.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: But alas - the tone of your original note set the standard. Keith should not have sunk to your level, but without any verification, you spammed the list (now I sunk to that level) with inaccurate information. - Greg -----Original Message----- additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR for MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is someone who sells MMP products. -Chuck From ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 09:13:33 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Sep 28 09:14:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040928161333.57889.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> I contend my info isn't "inaccurate" but it is opinion and impressions.... and this dealer did say this to me.... perhaps his impression of what was said to him wasn't accurate and I agree I should have used a little more private channel to learn this. -Chuck --- gd wrote: > But alas - the tone of your original note set the standard. Keith > should not have sunk to your level, but without any verification, you > spammed the list (now I sunk to that level) with inaccurate information. > > - Greg > > -----Original Message----- > additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR > for MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is > someone who sells MMP products. > > -Chuck > > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From keithdalton at verizon.net Tue Sep 28 09:18:48 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Tue Sep 28 09:20:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment Message-ID: <20040928161849.OXFO24594.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> No harm, no foul. ;-) Could you email me the name of the vendor privately, so I can follow up? Keith > > From: Chuck T > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 11:13:33 CDT > To: gd , keithdalton@verizon.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment > > I contend my info isn't "inaccurate" but it is opinion and impressions.... and > this dealer did say this to me.... perhaps his impression of what was said to > him wasn't accurate and I agree I should have used a little more private > channel to learn this. > > -Chuck > > > --- gd wrote: > > > But alas - the tone of your original note set the standard. Keith > > should not have sunk to your level, but without any verification, you > > spammed the list (now I sunk to that level) with inaccurate information. > > > > - Greg > > > > -----Original Message----- > > additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR > > for MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is > > someone who sells MMP products. > > > > -Chuck > > > > > > > ===== > Chuck > ctewks@yahoo.com > From aslml at aslwebdex.net Tue Sep 28 11:04:38 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Tue Sep 28 11:05:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Updated Chapter N Now Available References: <0cd8l0lv4bdae6644d4qe48dsoc1qjiusd@4ax.com> Message-ID: <003701c4a585$ab9c30f0$6401a8c0@D5G57231> Reid Hutchinson's excellent ASL Armory has been updated and expanded and is available on the ASLWebDex at http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/awin-chn.html. The Armory has now been supplemented with a complete listing of all official ASL boards, mapsheets, and overlays. It also includes all the available counter errata. Truly a thing of beauty, available in Excell and html formats. Larry Memmott From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 28 13:08:10 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 28 13:08:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 Message-ID: <394f2f$ai5vfs@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Ole B?e > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 02:41:52 CDT > To: > Subject: RE: RE: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 > > Hi, > Tate wrote: > > I turret two spins and fire my CMG at the currently moving AFV. Now, no > > matter which way currently moving AFV moves, turns, etc...I shift just one > > spin and get a better shot than otherwise. IOW, I can see more > > than one way to take advantage during DFire. > > > For this to be legal, the moving AFV must move out of the DEFENDER AFV's > current TCA, after the CMG shot. If it remains withing the TCA, the > DEFENDER's shot with MA must pay the Case A for the change when firing the > CMG as well. The AFV stops...I change one hexspine in whichever direction still keeps the AFV in my CA. I have a new CA and the DRM drops. > Note that D3.51 says that the old TCA case C DRM goes away when firing at a > target *outside* the current TCA. So it doesn't look like you can change do > what you describe unless the AFV moves out of the TCA. All I need do is change one hexspin...such a change could well keep the enemy AFV in my _new_ CA. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 28 13:16:47 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 28 13:17:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment Message-ID: <3a5ama$8r0vc7@mxip05a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Chuck T > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 11:13:33 CDT > To: gd , keithdalton@verizon.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment > > I contend my info isn't "inaccurate" but it is opinion and impressions.... and > this dealer did say this to me.... perhaps his impression of what was said to > him wasn't accurate and I agree I should have used a little more private > channel to learn this. Oh, yeah, and then the rest of us would have had little to nothing interesting to read today!!! I find your attitude extremely selfish...you got to think of the rest of the ASLML! BTW, you guys got way to nice way to quick. I mean this thing could have blazed for a week or more in the right hands...pah, amateurs! Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Sep 28 13:19:08 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Sep 28 13:19:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment In-Reply-To: <3a5ama$8r0vc7@mxip05a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <20040928201908.50185.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com> ah yes Master Flamer....... I shall learn....... once I snatch the pebble from your hand........ -Padawan Chuck --- Tate Rogers wrote: > > From: Chuck T > > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 11:13:33 CDT > > To: gd , keithdalton@verizon.net, > > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: RE: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment > > > > I contend my info isn't "inaccurate" but it is opinion and impressions.... > and > > this dealer did say this to me.... perhaps his impression of what was said > to > > him wasn't accurate and I agree I should have used a little more private > > channel to learn this. > > Oh, yeah, and then the rest of us would have had little to nothing > interesting to read today!!! I find your attitude extremely selfish...you got > to think of the rest of the ASLML! > > BTW, you guys got way to nice way to quick. I mean this thing could have > blazed for a week or more in the right hands...pah, amateurs! > > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Sep 28 13:20:35 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Sep 28 13:20:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment Message-ID: <391ph9$8rgiod@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Chuck T > Date: 2004/09/28 Tue PM 03:19:08 CDT > To: Tate Rogers , gd , > keithdalton@verizon.net, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment > > ah yes Master Flamer....... I shall learn....... once I snatch the pebble from > your hand........ Careful...it may be hard and brown...but it may not be a pebble! ;-) Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From garymei at optonline.net Tue Sep 28 13:22:30 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Tue Sep 28 13:23:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Prisoners in Melee Message-ID: Can a guarding unit abandon a prisoner in melee? A20.5 says that the guard is allowed to in any friendly Rph/Aph. It doesn't mention that the guard has to be good order to do so. This could be a nasty surprise if you're in melee with 3 enemy squads, and suddenly he's now overstacked due to the freed prisoner(s)... From Nathaniel.Mallet1 at rogers.com Tue Sep 28 13:49:43 2004 From: Nathaniel.Mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Tue Sep 28 13:53:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules- additional comment In-Reply-To: <20040928153529.53662.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040928153529.53662.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4159CE67.8080704@rogers.com> In defense of Keith, "full of crap" is *exactly* what I had in mind when I read your original post. Then again, it's exactly what I have in mind when I read 90% of the posts on the ASLML. ;-) Nat Chuck T wrote: > additionally -- I think saying someone is "full of crap" isn't great PR for > MMP, hardly professional at all.... especially when that party is someone who > sells MMP products. > > -Chuck > > --- keithdalton@verizon.net wrote: > > >>Your reliable source is full of crap. We have every intention of reprinting >>COB, but we're going to get the rulebook and BV out first. >> >>What Brian actually related on consimworld under our folder in Post 22908 is >>that we're going to have to re-lay COB out from scratch -- no masters of the >>work exist in the material handed over to us from Avalon Hill. >> >>Keith Dalton >>MMP Marketing Director >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>From: Chuck T >>>Date: 2004/09/28 Tue AM 09:17:17 CDT >>>To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >>>Subject: [Aslml] PTO rules? >>> >>>I just heard from a reliable source that MMP has no intention of >> >>re-printing >> >>>COB -- fine and dandy, but what about Chapter G rules and for that matter >>>Chapter F too (which you need for little things like Desert and oh yeah >> >>Hillock >> >>>rules, which appear in places like ABTF) >>> >>>ok rant mode off. >>> >>>Thanks for tuning in :) >>> >>>-Chuck >>> >>>===== >>>Chuck >>>ctewks@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 >>> >> >> > > > ===== > Chuck > ctewks@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 Tue Sep 28 15:53:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Sep 28 15:53:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Prisoners in Melee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:22:30 -0400, Gary Mei wrote: >Can a guarding unit abandon a prisoner in melee? A20.5 says that the guard >is allowed to in any friendly Rph/Aph. It doesn't mention that the guard >has to be good order to do so. No. A20.5 *also* says that the guards "may only be relieved of that task during any friendly RPh/APh in which the prisoners -- if not involved in Melee with the Guard ...". Remember, as soon as a Melee exists, the prisoners are free to attack the Guard (A20.55). >This could be a nasty surprise if you're in melee with 3 enemy squads, and >suddenly he's now overstacked due to the freed prisoner(s)... It would be, if it were allowed, but in any case the enemy should already be aware that there is a potential third squad in the Location and accordingly would be unwise to send in more than two squads in the first place . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au Tue Sep 28 16:26:12 2004 From: Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au (Richard Weiley) Date: Tue Sep 28 16:27:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker Message-ID: Any word on the progress of the new issue? ****************************************************************************** This email message, including any attached files, is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The NSW Department of Commerce prohibits the right to publish, copy, distribute or disclose any information contained in this email, or its attachments, by any party other than the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete it from your system. No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the NSW Department of Commerce by email. The views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Department, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of NSW Department of Commerce. The NSW Department of Commerce accepts no liability for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email and recommends that the recipient check this email and any attached files for the presence of viruses. ****************************************************************************** From leonardus at mymail.ro Tue Sep 28 01:53:27 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Tue Sep 28 22:01:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] (no subject) Message-ID: <000801c4a5e7$792ae820$2b29fea9@LocalHost> I find on my search on net the excellent aid for ASL, the ASLAP, and I want to ask you if this soft go on or it was halted to the 5.99 version. No doubt that further improvements will be great ! Many thanks for this marvelous job ! Best regards, L. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Sep 29 05:42:21 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 29 05:42:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLAP In-Reply-To: <000801c4a5e7$792ae820$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000801c4a5e7$792ae820$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040929073736.0195d2f8@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:53 AM 9/28/2004, Leonardus wrote: >the ASLAP, and >I want to ask you if this soft go on or it was halted to the 5.99 That was the last mod, the programmer lost his ftf buddy, and a lot of his source code due to a monster computer crash, and wasn't able to keep up with the various hardware and software upgrades after that. :( He's a great guy, but has drifted away from the Game. :( Real Life does that sometimes, hopefully he drifts back. :) ASLAP was a great PBEM program for years, but has been supplanted by VASL. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From leonardus at mymail.ro Tue Sep 28 23:51:30 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Wed Sep 29 07:11:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be Message-ID: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Hi, >From the first lines I found an inaccuracy IMHO; which people think that an orchard have any TEM ? Do they know what is in fact an orchard ? I live very near from such one, and I can assure you that an orchard is a little wood in whole words.....it could give protection very well, so concealment, so fire hindrance. Why the wood have a +1 and an orchard not ? Maybe they thinking about orchards made from small bushes, like the underbrushes, but orchard means so, apple trees, plum trees, etc, too. I suggest an 0.5 TEM for orchard and the use of IIFT instead of IFT. What do you think ? And one last question: can be used foreign/enemy captured SW's ? And the enemy vehicles ? Thanks, L. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From kschindl at swissonline.ch Wed Sep 29 07:19:31 2004 From: kschindl at swissonline.ch (dr. charlie schindler) Date: Wed Sep 29 07:20:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> Hi i don't agree. The orchards today are quite a bit different from then and especially in Europe. The trees are not very close, laving a lot of open space between them. So in game terms the orchard rules make sense to me. Leonardus wrote: > Hi, > >>From the first lines I found an inaccuracy IMHO; which people think > that an orchard have any TEM ? > Do they know what is in fact an orchard ? I live very near from such > one, and I can assure you that an orchard is a little wood in whole > words.....it could give protection very well, so concealment, so fire > hindrance. Why the wood have a +1 and an orchard not ? Maybe they > thinking about orchards made from small bushes, like the underbrushes, > but orchard means so, apple trees, plum trees, etc, too. I suggest an > 0.5 TEM for orchard and the use of IIFT instead of IFT. > What do you think ? > And one last question: can be used foreign/enemy captured SW's ? > And the enemy vehicles ? > Thanks, > > > L. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Sep 29 09:15:29 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Sep 29 09:15:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040929110709.019561e8@pop3.direcway.com> At 01:51 AM 9/29/2004, Leonardus wrote: >Do they know what is in fact an orchard ? ...Why the wood have a +1 and an >orchard not ? ... If the terrain of a scenario is an exact duplicate of the actual terrain(and most are not), then if an over grown orchard is such that woods TEM would be appropriate; then a woods hex would be placed there, for it no longer is a well maintained orchard with evenly spaced trees and cleared lanes for easy harvesting. >I suggest an >0.5 TEM for orchard and the use of IIFT instead of IFT. The TEM is not a FP modifier, but a DR modifier in the column used, so the table used would not change the effect for there is no .5 modifiers in the column. (and be careful here: the Fire Table Wars are ready to flare at the simple mention of that other Fire Table, and religious wars are terrible to behold) >And one last question: can be used foreign/enemy captured SW's ? >And the enemy vehicles ? Yes, yes. Note the use modifiers though...A21 in ASLRB. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 29 18:13:31 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 29 18:13:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 08:51:30 +0200, "Leonardus" wrote: >From the first lines I found an inaccuracy IMHO; which people think >that an orchard have any TEM ? Do you want to play ASL, or do you want to play some other game? If you want to play ASL -- particularly if you want to play other people at ASL -- you have to accept the rules at face-value. You can do what you like in the privacy of your own home, but elsewhere you must expect that people are playing by the printed rules. >Do they know what is in fact an orchard ? I live very near from such >one, and I can assure you that an orchard is a little wood in whole >words.....it could give protection very well, so concealment, so fire >hindrance. Why the wood have a +1 and an orchard not ? Because ASL says that woods are one type of terrain and that orchard is a different type of terrain. If you think the "orchard" that is near you is good for lots of cover, then that means that ASL would call it "woods". Just because *you* call it an orchard doesn't mean that ASL would call it an orchard. Most important thing you have to remember about ASL: *every rule is an abstraction*. European villages don't typically have 40m-wide streets, for example, but you'll find plenty of them in ASL. It's how the game works. >I suggest an 0.5 TEM for orchard and the use of IIFT instead of IFT. >What do you think ? I think you need to keep reading; a fractional TEM cannot work (it modifies the DR; you can't roll fractions on dice). Whether you use IFT or IIFT is entirely up to you, but has nothing to do with the TEM of various terrain types. >And one last question: can be used foreign/enemy captured SW's ? >And the enemy vehicles ? Yes, and yes. See rule A21. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Sep 29 20:27:01 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed Sep 29 20:57:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <006d01c4a6a1$62d3a700$a64d8918@klis.com> Leonardus wrote: > >From the first lines I found an inaccuracy IMHO; which people think > that an orchard have any TEM ? > Do they know what is in fact an orchard ? I live very near from such > one, and I can assure you that an orchard is a little wood in whole > words.....it could give protection very well, so concealment, so fire > hindrance. Why the wood have a +1 and an orchard not ? >From the first sentence of B13.1, "Woods represent a forested area with dense undergrowth." From the first sentence of B14.1, "An orchard represents a thinly wooded area devoid of undergrowth." So the main difference is the undergrowth. In ASL, TEM is not strictly a matter of stopping bullets, shell fragments, etc. It's also a matter of restricting visibility. It's harder to see units in woods, so it's harder to place effective fire on them, because of the undergrowth. (As a side note, units have less protection against indirect fire in woods than they have in orchards, due to Airbursts (B13.3).) The undergrowth also makes it more difficult and time-consuming for a unit to move through woods, so the MF/MP cost for woods is greater than orchard. Bear in mind that all terrain in ASL is very much abstracted. A cultivated forest will have very little undergrowth, so it might be represented by orchard. Or it could be represented with the Pine Woods rules (P1.1 - .3) found in KGP. On the other hand, an overgrown orchard could be represented as Olive Groves (F13.5), which has +1 TEM, but with increased movement costs. Areas with lots of undergrowth and few trees are represented by Brush (B12.1 - .6) We also have rules for Forest (B13.7), plus two varieties of Jungle (G2.1 and 2.2), plus Palm Trees (G4.1), plus Swamp (G7.1 - .4). Did I say abstracted? Well, we still don't have rules for Taiga, Ornamental Gardens, or Bonsai Trees, so scenario designers are on their own there. But most of Mother Nature's handiwork is reasonably represented within the limits of the system. David "I think that I shall never see / A scenario as lovely as a tree" Olie From leonardus at mymail.ro Wed Sep 29 23:30:01 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Wed Sep 29 22:58:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> Message-ID: <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Hey, don't be angry, I just put a question..... Yes, an orchard have a lot of open space between trees, but I don't see why an open ground have TEM=0, and an orchard the same ! This trees offer some protection (a lot in some circumstances), especially with big trees. Don't you saw woods like orchards or orchards like woods ? Me, yes ! I do not comment the orchard hindrance, it's true, but a TEM of half a wood have it's a must for reality. In fact, I have an uncle who fought in eastern front on ww2, and tell me about one particular situation when the whole squad camed into enemy fire from 300 meters aprox, and only the orchard save them from sure death. Only 2 guys where injures but they still alive because they manage to hide behind ORCHARD TREES !!!!! Sorry, my opinion remain that an orchard must have a 1/2 TEM a wood have. And I do not intention to chamge the rules from rulebook :) L. > Hi > > i don't agree. The orchards today are quite a bit different from then > and especially in Europe. The trees are not very close, laving a lot of > open space between them. So in game terms the orchard rules make sense > to me. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From leonardus at mymail.ro Wed Sep 29 23:40:26 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Wed Sep 29 22:59:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <006d01c4a6a1$62d3a700$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <000301c4a6bb$36913e40$2b29fea9@LocalHost> > From the first sentence of B13.1, "Woods represent a forested area with > dense undergrowth." From the first sentence of B14.1, "An orchard > represents a thinly wooded area devoid of undergrowth." > So the main difference is the undergrowth. In ASL, TEM is not strictly a > matter of stopping bullets, shell fragments, etc. It's also a matter of > restricting visibility. So, what ? I don't comment this; it's true. It's harder to see units in woods, so it's harder > to place effective fire on them, because of the undergrowth. > (As a side note, units have less protection against indirect fire in woods > than they have in orchards, due to Airbursts (B13.3).) True. > The undergrowth also makes it more difficult and time-consuming for a unit > to move through woods, so the MF/MP cost for woods is greater than orchard. True again. > Bear in mind that all terrain in ASL is very much abstracted. A cultivated > forest will have very little undergrowth, so it might be represented by > orchard. Or it could be represented with the Pine Woods rules (P1.1 - .3) > found in KGP. Not yet reaf about that. Could you tell something ? On the other hand, an overgrown orchard could be represented > as Olive Groves (F13.5), which has +1 TEM, but with increased movement > costs. Not agreed. Most orchards have not undergrowth. Some have......for example in my region from almost 100 years exist apple orchards but between trees are cultivated medicinal herbs, and some of them are big ! They resemble with the undergrowth. > Areas with lots of undergrowth and few trees are represented by > Brush (B12.1 - .6) We also have rules for Forest (B13.7), plus two > varieties of Jungle (G2.1 and 2.2), plus Palm Trees (G4.1), plus Swamp > (G7.1 - .4). > Did I say abstracted? Well, we still don't have rules for Taiga, Ornamental > Gardens, or Bonsai Trees, so scenario designers are on their own there. But > most of Mother Nature's handiwork is reasonably represented within the > limits of the system. >From what I see, neither an accurate rule for orchard we don't have yet..... Don't be angry on me, just a personal tought. L. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au Wed Sep 29 23:11:03 2004 From: Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au (Richard Weiley) Date: Wed Sep 29 23:11:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Queries on gliders Message-ID: Fellow listerz Couple of questions arising from a recent playing of "On Silent Wings". 1. When do the occupants of gliders become eligible to be affected separately by attacks against their glider? For example after a glider lands if it is targeted in the defensive fire phase does fire effect the passengers (if it has no effect on the glider). If it does effect them at that time, are they placed on board then. I can see nowhere in the rules where to occupants are placed on board prior to the AFPh. So are the effects resolved in the cloaking display (this seems unlikely) or does any damage result against the glider take precedence and subject the passengers to the CR process at the time they disembark. 2.When do gliders become eligible sniper targets? 3. How is a successful sniper activation resolved versus the glider and/or its occupants prior to the AFPh? And while I'm at it 4. What effect does an existing AA counter (such as those in place at start in On Silent Wings) have on the ability of a manning crew to use its inherent FP. All the rules appear to refer to the gun itself - nothing about the crews. TIA Richard ****************************************************************************** This email message, including any attached files, is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The NSW Department of Commerce prohibits the right to publish, copy, distribute or disclose any information contained in this email, or its attachments, by any party other than the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete it from your system. No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the NSW Department of Commerce by email. The views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Department, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of NSW Department of Commerce. The NSW Department of Commerce accepts no liability for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email and recommends that the recipient check this email and any attached files for the presence of viruses. ****************************************************************************** From btdtall at yahoo.com Wed Sep 29 23:39:44 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Wed Sep 29 23:39:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000301c4a6bb$36913e40$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <20040930063944.14061.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Sorry, the half TEM concept is impossible. You know if you just set your guys up behind the orchard they will gee the +1 they need from hindrance form and you don't have to worry about those airbursts. Also consider that an orchard is really just a copse of tree's aligned symetrically. There isn't alot of cover when the enemy can make fire lanes betweeen the trees. So the lack of TEM makes sense. Also, note that palm trees are used in reference to orchard hexes and they lack the same undergrowh and open air in between the trees in the hex. If you are so adamant about making specific terrain changes then design your own scenarios using terrain SSR's. Problem solved...... . "Hey you know that stone building has too many moon roof windows, drop that tem to +2 against indirect fire" "Hey did you run in the grain back there ? Yeah, sure did. Well, it was really a strawberry field, did you pay the additional slippage MF for sliding when you squished them and slid ?" (Why isn't their a slippage MF for sliding on Sh*t when you are using sewer movenment ?...errata soon to be) "Hey did you know that you get an additional -1 DRM in CC if you are in an orange orchard hex ? Yep, when you throw oranges at your opponent it's gets citric acid in his eye and blinds him." Thank God for SSR's --- Leonardus wrote: > > > From the first sentence of B13.1, "Woods represent > a forested area > with > > dense undergrowth." From the first sentence of > B14.1, "An orchard > > represents a thinly wooded area devoid of > undergrowth." > > So the main difference is the undergrowth. In > ASL, TEM is not > strictly a > > matter of stopping bullets, shell fragments, etc. > It's also a > matter of > > restricting visibility. > > So, what ? I don't comment this; it's true. > > > It's harder to see units in woods, so it's harder > > to place effective fire on them, because of the > undergrowth. > > (As a side note, units have less protection > against indirect fire in > woods > > than they have in orchards, due to Airbursts > (B13.3).) > > True. > > > > The undergrowth also makes it more difficult and > time-consuming for > a unit > > to move through woods, so the MF/MP cost for woods > is greater than > orchard. > > True again. > > > > Bear in mind that all terrain in ASL is very much > abstracted. A > cultivated > > forest will have very little undergrowth, so it > might be represented > by > > orchard. Or it could be represented with the Pine > Woods rules > (P1.1 - .3) > > found in KGP. > > Not yet reaf about that. Could you tell something ? > > On the other hand, an overgrown orchard could be > represented > > as Olive Groves (F13.5), which has +1 TEM, but > with increased > movement > > costs. > > Not agreed. Most orchards have not undergrowth. Some > have......for > example in my region from almost 100 years exist > apple orchards but > between trees are cultivated medicinal herbs, and > some of them are big > ! They resemble with the undergrowth. > > > Areas with lots of undergrowth and few trees are > represented by > > Brush (B12.1 - .6) We also have rules for Forest > (B13.7), plus two > > varieties of Jungle (G2.1 and 2.2), plus Palm > Trees (G4.1), plus > Swamp > > (G7.1 - .4). > > Did I say abstracted? Well, we still don't have > rules for Taiga, > Ornamental > > Gardens, or Bonsai Trees, so scenario designers > are on their own > there. But > > most of Mother Nature's handiwork is reasonably > represented within > the > > limits of the system. > > >From what I see, neither an accurate rule for > orchard we don't have > yet..... > Don't be angry on me, just a personal tought. > > > L. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru > femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! > > _______________________________________________ > 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! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Sep 29 23:45:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Sep 29 23:45:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:30:01 +0200, "Leonardus" wrote: >Yes, an orchard have a lot of open space between trees, but I don't >see why an open ground have TEM=0, and an orchard the same ! Ah, but they're *not* the same. In Open Ground, you can suffer the -1 FFMO penalty if you're shot at while moving; that penalty cannot apply when the target is in an Orchard hex. Also, Orchards are concealment terrain; a unit can more easily grow concealment there (which is additional protection), and a concealed unit that uses assault movement through orchards will not lose its concealment. Finally, there is the LOS and Hindrance effects of shooting *through* Orchard hexes. There is more to terrain effects than just TEM! >Sorry, my opinion remain that an orchard must have a 1/2 TEM a wood >have. Aside from the fact that you *can't* have a TEM of "0.5", I hope you realise that you have not considered *all* the effects of terrain. I hope you *also* realise that if you're looking for "reality", you won't find it in ASL, except in your imagination. ASL is a *game* first and foremost. Finally, I hope you realise that by indicating that you're new to the game and then start going into the details of everything you think is wrong with it and how you wish the rules were different is not exactly going to endear you to more veteran players; more importantly, it's also not very productive: it won't help you learn how to play. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Sep 29 23:49:46 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Wed Sep 29 23:51:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <1096526986.415bac8acaabe@webmail.broadpark.no> Hi, Quoting Leonardus : > Hey, don't be angry, I just put a question..... I haven't seen anyone being angry now. Everyone disagrees with you for (at least) two reasons though. > Yes, an orchard have a lot of open space between trees, but I don't > see why an open ground have TEM=0, and an orchard the same ! This > trees offer some protection (a lot in some circumstances), especially > with big trees. Don't you saw woods like orchards or orchards like > woods ? Me, yes ! If the orchards are like woods, then they should be represented as woods in the game. > I do not comment the orchard hindrance, it's true, > but a TEM of half a wood have it's a must for reality. But unfortunately, its an impossibility in ASL. How do you add 0.5 to a DR? You cannot, since all DR results have whole numbers, you either must add 1 or 0. > In fact, I have > an uncle who fought in eastern front on ww2, and tell me about one > particular situation when the whole squad camed into enemy fire from > 300 meters aprox, and only the orchard save them from sure death. Only > 2 guys where injures but they still alive because they manage to hide > behind ORCHARD TREES !!!!! > Sorry, my opinion remain that an orchard must have a 1/2 TEM a wood > have. And I do not intention to chamge the rules from rulebook :) But this game system is not made for fractional DRM. It could be possible (and even make some sense) if we had fractional Hindrance. Shooting through 3 0.5TEM Hindrances and into a 0.5 TEM hex would then give a DRM of +2, but this is not how the DRM is built up - they are made up of whole numbers. Also note that even though the orchard TEM is 0, orchard give more protection than Open Ground. You can move into it without the -1 DRM for FFMO, and if Assault Moving, you don't loose concealment. So in a sense, the TEM is half of the TEM in woods, at least when moving. A (non-Assault Moving) unit moving into woods would receive a total DRM of 0 (+1 TEM, -1 FFNAM), in orchard a DRM of -1 (FFNAM) and in Open Ground a DRM of -2 (FFNAM, FFMO). A broken unit in orchard is also safe from interdiction, and need not rout away (unless adjacent enemy units), so orchards is in many ways something between woods and OG for safety. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 30 00:51:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 30 00:51:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Queries on gliders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <94cnl0pgrak8cmrgrlot04afrbhuqlhq0p@4ax.com> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:11:03 +1000, "Richard Weiley" wrote: >1. When do the occupants of gliders become eligible to be affected >separately by attacks against their glider? For example after a glider >lands if it is targeted in the defensive fire phase does fire effect the >passengers (if it has no effect on the glider). In the AFPh. No. (Note that Curt Schilling in his article "Flight School" in the '96 Annual claims otherwise, but this is not supported by the rules. I could find no Q&A indicating otherwise.) >If it does effect them at that time, are they placed on board then. N/A. >I can see nowhere in the rules where to occupants are placed on board >prior to the AFPh. So are the effects resolved in the cloaking display >(this seems unlikely) or does any damage result against the glider take >precedence and subject the passengers to the CR process at the time they >disembark. Why would it be "unlikely" that the effects are resolved on the Cloaking Display? E8.41 lists exactly what the effects of Damage are on the Passengers and their equipment. >2.When do gliders become eligible sniper targets? When it's no longer Aerial (i.e., after it lands -- E8.22). An Immobilization result (A14.33) causes Damage (E8.3). The issue is whether the Glider occupants are also separately vulnerable to the Sniper attack. If they are, then the Sniper would attack them normally. If they aren't, the Sniper can't attack them at all. If we say that the occupants *are* vulnerable, it raises additional questions. E8.4 says that only when they are placed onboard in the AFPh do they "assume their own morale, FP, and leadership characteristics". Does this mean that a sniper that eliminates an offboard leader will not cause any LLMC? Does this mean that an offboard MMC cannot be broken by a Sniper attack? (We already know that they can't be Pinned -- E8.12.) I think it more likely that the offboard occupants are immune to the Sniper attack (other than the possible Damage result), just as they are immune to the effects of fire that does not Damage the glider. >3. How is a successful sniper activation resolved versus the glider >and/or its occupants prior to the AFPh? See above. Sniper results of "2" would be ignored. >4. What effect does an existing AA counter (such as those in place at >start in On Silent Wings) have on the ability of a manning crew to use >its inherent FP. All the rules appear to refer to the gun itself - >nothing about the crews. I don't think it has any effect. The crew can use their inherent FP subject to the normal restrictions. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Sep 30 02:53:06 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole =?iso-8859-1?b?Qvhl?=) Date: Thu Sep 30 02:54:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DFF AFV Questions, take 2 In-Reply-To: <394f2f$ai5vfs@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <394f2f$ai5vfs@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <1096537986.415bd7828665f@webmail.broadpark.no> > > Hi, > > Tate wrote: > > > I turret two spins and fire my CMG at the currently moving AFV. Now, no > > > matter which way currently moving AFV moves, turns, etc...I shift just > > > one spin and get a better shot than otherwise. IOW, I can see more > > > than one way to take advantage during DFire. > > > > > For this to be legal, the moving AFV must move out of the DEFENDER AFV's > > current TCA, after the CMG shot. If it remains withing the TCA, the > > DEFENDER's shot with MA must pay the Case A for the change when firing the > > CMG as well. > > The AFV stops...I change one hexspine in whichever direction still keeps the > AFV in my CA. I have a new CA and the DRM drops. > > All I need do is change one hexspin...such a change could well keep the enemy > AFV in my _new_ CA. > I don't understand exactly what you mean, but I'll tru to answer it anyway. For the DEFENDER to use this "sleaze?", the moving AFV must be along a Hex Grain, since it is only the hexes along the Hex Grain that is inside two different CAs. Granted, if the AFV stops adjacent, all six adjacent hexes are aong a Hex Grain, and thus inside two different CAs. But if it stops two hexes away, only half of the hexes are inside two CAs, and only one third three hexes away etc. So the moving AFV can counter this by not stopping on a hex belonging to the DEFENDER's Hex Grain. This is not possible (or desirable) all the time however, so some times the DEFENDER gets to "sleaze" away a +1 DRM (or +2 if in woods/building), but at a cost of using up two (instead of one) of the possible CA changes that it can use to keep its frontal armor towards the ATTACKERs. A little gamey, but not a big slease, IMHO. -- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? From ctewks at yahoo.com Thu Sep 30 04:26:57 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Thu Sep 30 04:26:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <20040930112657.3977.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> orchard isnt the same as open ground -- moving in an orchard negates FFMO for instance :) -Chuck --- Leonardus wrote: > > Hey, don't be angry, I just put a question..... > Yes, an orchard have a lot of open space between trees, but I don't > see why an open ground have TEM=0, and an orchard the same ! This > trees offer some protection (a lot in some circumstances), especially > with big trees. Don't you saw woods like orchards or orchards like > woods ? Me, yes ! I do not comment the orchard hindrance, it's true, > but a TEM of half a wood have it's a must for reality. In fact, I have > an uncle who fought in eastern front on ww2, and tell me about one > particular situation when the whole squad camed into enemy fire from > 300 meters aprox, and only the orchard save them from sure death. Only > 2 guys where injures but they still alive because they manage to hide > behind ORCHARD TREES !!!!! > Sorry, my opinion remain that an orchard must have a 1/2 TEM a wood > have. And I do not intention to chamge the rules from rulebook :) > > L. > > > Hi > > > > i don't agree. The orchards today are quite a bit different from > then > > and especially in Europe. The trees are not very close, laving a lot > of > > open space between them. So in game terms the orchard rules make > sense > > to me. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe > ele.ro! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Sep 30 17:16:41 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu Sep 30 17:16:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Inaugural Meeting - Ottawa ASL Club Saturday, 16 October References: <003001c4a74b$41f33460$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <004b01c4a74b$ed1bbba0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Announcing the first meeting of the newly formed Ottawa ASL Club!! Come and enjoy the conviviality of some face to face ASL. Grognards, newbies and anything in between welcome. Place: Wynn Polnicky's war room, 87 Patterson Crescent, Carleton Place, Ontario (just west of Ottawa, see below my sig for detailed directions). Phone (613) 253-8196. Date: Saturday, 16 October. 9 A.M. until whenever. There are no time limits; you can play until sunrise on Sunday if you wish. I'll provide lots of ASL table space, munchies, fizzies, brewskies and plenty of ASL war stories. All you need to bring is yourself and a willingness to have fun. What'll we play? Anything you want that's ASL! I've got all the official ASL stuff (EXC: Starter Kit) and some 3rd party. What should you bring? Your ASL travel kit if you've got one in case we run out of stuff to play with. Please let me know if you plan to attend so I can prepare enough table space. Wynn "ASL is my Middle Name" Polnicky Directions: from Ottawa: take 417 to Hwy 7 to Carleton Place. At the light by Canadian Tire/Tim Horton's, turn right onto McNeely, then make a left on to Patterson Crescent at the 3rd light. Veer left at the 5 way intersection at the stop sign. Park on your right, 87 Patterson will be on your left. >From Kingston or points east: follow Hwy 15 north through Smiths Falls to Carleton Place. Make a right at the lights onto Hwy 7, left at the lights by Tim Horton's /Canadian Tire onto Mcneely. As above, turn left at the 3rd light which will be Patterson. From william.stoppel at verizon.net Thu Sep 30 20:29:36 2004 From: william.stoppel at verizon.net (william.stoppel) Date: Thu Sep 30 17:28:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Inaugural Meeting - Ottawa ASL Club Saturday, 16 October In-Reply-To: <004b01c4a74b$ed1bbba0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: Isn't there a ASL tournament in Canada near Toronto? Thanks, Bill -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Wynn Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 5:17 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Inaugural Meeting - Ottawa ASL Club Saturday, 16 October Announcing the first meeting of the newly formed Ottawa ASL Club!! Come and enjoy the conviviality of some face to face ASL. Grognards, newbies and anything in between welcome. Place: Wynn Polnicky's war room, 87 Patterson Crescent, Carleton Place, Ontario (just west of Ottawa, see below my sig for detailed directions). Phone (613) 253-8196. Date: Saturday, 16 October. 9 A.M. until whenever. There are no time limits; you can play until sunrise on Sunday if you wish. I'll provide lots of ASL table space, munchies, fizzies, brewskies and plenty of ASL war stories. All you need to bring is yourself and a willingness to have fun. What'll we play? Anything you want that's ASL! I've got all the official ASL stuff (EXC: Starter Kit) and some 3rd party. What should you bring? Your ASL travel kit if you've got one in case we run out of stuff to play with. Please let me know if you plan to attend so I can prepare enough table space. Wynn "ASL is my Middle Name" Polnicky Directions: from Ottawa: take 417 to Hwy 7 to Carleton Place. At the light by Canadian Tire/Tim Horton's, turn right onto McNeely, then make a left on to Patterson Crescent at the 3rd light. Veer left at the 5 way intersection at the stop sign. Park on your right, 87 Patterson will be on your left. >From Kingston or points east: follow Hwy 15 north through Smiths Falls to Carleton Place. Make a right at the lights onto Hwy 7, left at the lights by Tim Horton's /Canadian Tire onto Mcneely. As above, turn left at the 3rd light which will be Patterson. _______________________________________________ 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 at howardhowardfine.com Thu Sep 30 17:47:19 2004 From: asl at howardhowardfine.com (ASL) Date: Thu Sep 30 17:47:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: References: <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040930194114.01e3bc30@mail.howardhowardfine.com> Bruce makes excellent points. The sheer brilliance of the design of this game has always fascinated me. The Morale/ELR/BI mechanics for replicating the psychological disintegration of a combat unit are particularly nifty. Yeah, there's a lot of rules (and from a learning POV, I do have the advantage of having started with SL in '77) but I think they do a really admirable job of simulating the infinitely more complex "real " world. All except that bit about TEM applying to To Hit rolls rather than to To Kill, but then that's just the old SL'er in me... ;-) c At 04:45 PM 30/09/2004 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote: >On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:30:01 +0200, "Leonardus" wrote: > > >Yes, an orchard have a lot of open space between trees, but I don't > >see why an open ground have TEM=0, and an orchard the same ! > >Ah, but they're *not* the same. In Open Ground, you can suffer the -1 FFMO >penalty if you're shot at while moving; that penalty cannot apply when the >target is in an Orchard hex. > >Also, Orchards are concealment terrain; a unit can more easily grow >concealment there (which is additional protection), and a concealed unit that >uses assault movement through orchards will not lose its concealment. >Finally, there is the LOS and Hindrance effects of shooting *through* Orchard >hexes. There is more to terrain effects than just TEM! > > >Sorry, my opinion remain that an orchard must have a 1/2 TEM a wood > >have. > >Aside from the fact that you *can't* have a TEM of "0.5", I hope you realise >that you have not considered *all* the effects of terrain. > >I hope you *also* realise that if you're looking for "reality", you won't find >it in ASL, except in your imagination. ASL is a *game* first and foremost. > >Finally, I hope you realise that by indicating that you're new to the game and >then start going into the details of everything you think is wrong with it and >how you wish the rules were different is not exactly going to endear you to >more veteran players; more importantly, it's also not very productive: it >won't help you learn how to play. > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"By this time my lungs were aching for air!" >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 leonardus at mymail.ro Thu Sep 30 06:53:01 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Thu Sep 30 21:37:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be References: <20040930063944.14061.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000401c4a779$0a515400$2b29fea9@LocalHost> > If you are so adamant about making specific terrain > changes then design your own scenarios using terrain > SSR's. Problem solved...... . What's this SSR ? And I want to ask you what difference is between TEM +1 and hindrance +1 ? For example, in a simple fire engagement a unit fired in orchard have the same DRM than one in a wood ? Leo. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From leonardus at mymail.ro Thu Sep 30 06:57:35 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Thu Sep 30 21:37:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <000501c4a779$0bc29740$2b29fea9@LocalHost> >>>I hope you *also* realise that if you're looking for "reality", you won't find it in ASL, except in your imagination. ASL is a *game* first and foremost. Oh, yes, it's the best strategy game ever seen....I think it's extremelly real and accurate; only minor adjustements, if want or not, but helas ! in this game anytime you can use house rules ! >>>Finally, I hope you realise that by indicating that you're new to the game and then start going into the details of everything you think is wrong with it and how you wish the rules were different is not exactly going to endear you to more veteran players; more importantly, it's also not very productive: it won't help you learn how to play. Sorry, I just don't want to say something is wrong, only I put questions....... Leo. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From leonardus at mymail.ro Thu Sep 30 07:03:57 2004 From: leonardus at mymail.ro (Leonardus) Date: Thu Sep 30 21:38:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <1096526986.415bac8acaabe@webmail.broadpark.no> Message-ID: <000601c4a779$0d10c220$2b29fea9@LocalHost> > > Also note that even though the orchard TEM is 0, orchard give more protection > than Open Ground. You can move into it without the -1 DRM for FFMO, and if > Assault Moving, you don't loose concealment. So in a sense, the TEM is half of > the TEM in woods, at least when moving. Here is my point ! Why the orchard give you protection when moving (it's true) and not when stay there ? It's almost absurd. And I'm sure that this fractional 1/2 TEM can be handled some way to depict reality. Maybe other dice roll or dices rolls ? Leo. --------------------------------------------------------------- Castiga un telefon cu Personalitate! Exclusiv pentru femei, exclusiv pe ele.ro! From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Thu Sep 30 21:49:11 2004 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (Kenn) Date: Thu Sep 30 21:50:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000401c4a779$0a515400$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <20040930063944.14061.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> <000401c4a779$0a515400$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <415CE1C7.2080705@wideopenwest.com> >What's this SSR ? >And I want to ask you what difference is between TEM +1 and hindrance >+1 ? For example, in a simple fire engagement a unit fired in orchard >have the same DRM than one in a wood ? > >Leo. > > > 1) Scenario Specific Rules. Rules in a scenario that modify normal ASL behavior. Changing the TEM of Orchard for a scenario where you believe the Orchards could afford that level of protection could be one. 2) TEM usually block LOS. Hindrances can be shot through...up to a point where you can no longer take a valid shot. (+6) 3) No. If a unit is in an Orchard hex there is no TEM. If they shoot through an Orchard hex there is a +1. In the Woods you get the +1. Behind them you (usually) have no LOS. Kenn From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Thu Sep 30 21:55:10 2004 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (Kenn) Date: Thu Sep 30 21:56:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000501c4a779$0bc29740$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <000501c4a779$0bc29740$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <415CE32E.4050902@wideopenwest.com> >Oh, yes, it's the best strategy game ever seen....I think it's >extremelly real and accurate; only minor >adjustements, if want or not, but helas ! in this game anytime you can >use house rules ! > > Minor adjustments? Use SSR. House Rules...be careful. One of the beauties of ASL is that you can play pretty much any action in WWII, and you can play FtF in just about any city. That is because we all use the same rules. House rules may change how you play, and that could have a large impact on playing a real game of ASL. Don't like skulking? use a house rule to disallow it, but you will get smoked in a real game if you choose not to use it. Reality arguments? Stay away from them. It is a game, and many of the rule decisions were made in the interest of game play. Kenn From kmonte at wideopenwest.com Thu Sep 30 22:05:17 2004 From: kmonte at wideopenwest.com (Kenn) Date: Thu Sep 30 22:06:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000601c4a779$0d10c220$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <1096526986.415bac8acaabe@webmail.broadpark.no> <000601c4a779$0d10c220$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <415CE58D.5010007@wideopenwest.com> >Here is my point ! Why the orchard give you protection when moving >(it's true) and not when stay there ? > > It negates FFMO. That is because it is not open ground, so there should be some benefit for not walking in the open trying to catch bullets. Once MPh is over, FFMO does not apply and there is no TEM, since it is obvious that hiding behind an orchard tree versus an Oak tree can not possibly afford the same protection, and woods are a +1 TEM, orchards must be less. 0 is less. (oops, a touch of reality in that explanation, sorry) >It's almost absurd. > > Good thing it is not absurd or something would have to be done. >And I'm sure that this fractional 1/2 TEM can be handled some way to >depict reality. Maybe other dice roll or dices rolls ? > > Reality? therein lay madness. ITEMFT? Incremental TEM Fire Table? Good luck finding anyone that wants to take that on. Talks about skewing every scenario that it is used with. Kenn From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 30 22:47:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Sep 30 22:47:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] orchard, How It Should Be In-Reply-To: <000601c4a779$0d10c220$2b29fea9@LocalHost> References: <000c01c4a630$48caae60$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <415AC473.6020607@swissonline.ch> <000201c4a6bb$34aa7ce0$2b29fea9@LocalHost> <1096526986.415bac8acaabe@webmail.broadpark.no> <000601c4a779$0d10c220$2b29fea9@LocalHost> Message-ID: <23rpl09a68kjogav10c9n9ujr552p3vtju@4ax.com> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:03:57 +0200, "Leonardus" wrote: >Here is my point ! Why the orchard give you protection when moving >(it's true) and not when stay there ? They *do* give you protection. They just don't give you TEM. If you don't understand the difference, it's because you are new to ASL and are not yet familiar with how the game *actually plays*. The veterans of this game are telling you: TEM is not the whole story. Don't focus on it to the exclusion of other considerations. As for house rules: outside of your house they have no meaning, and will likely cause you *problems* if you want to ever play anyone not currently sitting in your house. Don't expect help or encouragement with them. In any case, you would be well advised to become thoroughly familiar with the rules *as they are* before you decide to start changing them. ASL is a game of finely-balanced interactions: everything ties in to everything else. If you mess around with one component you risk bringing the whole thing down to an unmanageable mess. I don't know what your situation is, or what the state of inter-European travel is like these days, but the best advice I can give you is to make the effort, if at all possible, to get to one of the European ASL tournaments (I guess the ones in Germany would be closest to you) and sit face-to-face with people already familiar with the game. You will learn more in two days of tournament play than you could learn in six months of reading the rules alone at home. And you'll have fun, too! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "By this time my lungs were aching for air!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ