From janusz.maxe at unf.se Sun Aug 1 07:08:02 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Sun Aug 1 07:12:21 2004 Subject: VB: [Aslml] FT39 Stutzpunkt Riva Bella Message-ID: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A0FF1@sesob03.sobernet.net> I think it is a shellhole overlay (used in earlier FT, so maybe from the magazine). If it follows the same pattern as B5, G5 and W5 then use one of these instead. Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r David Goldman > Skickat: den 31 juli 2004 22:25 > Till: ASL Mailing List > ?mne: [Aslml] FT39 Stutzpunkt Riva Bella > > > This scenario (FT39 Stutzpunkt Riva Bella) from the new Le > Franc Tireur > calls for an overlay Sh5. Anyone know where this overlay comes from? > > David Goldman > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 1 04:27:47 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 1 07:39:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Quick Residual FP question Message-ID: <028901c477d5$55169820$57080a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, a Japanese Light Mortar fires as First Fire during the enemy MPh and does not keep ROF. Its attack is modified by a +4 TH DRM for firingh through two WP hexes. I think the attack leaves no RFP because this +4 DRM would lower by 4 columns the amount of RFP left. Is it correct? To be more generic, is *any* TH DRM (due to conditions outside the target hex) considered a condition that would lessen the amount of RFP left? The rules only quote BU but I think that also other conditions (e.g. CA change, Hindrances...) would apply. Thank you Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.720 / Virus Database: 476 - Release Date: 14/07/2004 From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sun Aug 1 08:10:30 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sun Aug 1 08:20:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Quick Residual FP question References: <028901c477d5$55169820$57080a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <00c101c477d9$b95b6640$a64d8918@klis.com> Andrea wrote: > a Japanese Light Mortar fires as First Fire during the enemy MPh and does > not keep ROF. Its attack is modified by a +4 TH DRM for firingh through two > WP hexes. I think the attack leaves no RFP because this +4 DRM would lower > by 4 columns the amount of RFP left. Is it correct? Yes, this is correct. A8.26. > To be more generic, is *any* TH DRM (due to conditions outside the target > hex) considered a condition that would lessen the amount of RFP left? Yes. > The > rules only quote BU but I think that also other conditions (e.g. CA change, > Hindrances...) would apply. Well, in fact the ASLRBv2 version of A8.26 mentions CX, BU, Stun, leadership modifier (if positive), and hexside/bridge TEM of the target Location. This is not an all-inclusive list, but instead a set of examples. Height Advantage and LV DRM are the only specific exceptions. David "a little light mortar music" Olie From asl1 at bellsouth.net Sun Aug 1 11:07:47 2004 From: asl1 at bellsouth.net (asl1@bellsouth.net) Date: Sun Aug 1 11:07:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Onslaught to Orsha Message-ID: <20040801180747.PKOB1788.imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Hi fellow ASLer's, Would like to have a go with the OtO pack. First the scenarios followed by a CG. VASL PBeM and/or live VASL play .. about 2 - 4 mailings a week. Continued success to all! Cheers, PK Mason From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 1 22:36:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 1 22:36:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Quick Residual FP question In-Reply-To: <00c101c477d9$b95b6640$a64d8918@klis.com> References: <028901c477d5$55169820$57080a3e@andrea> <00c101c477d9$b95b6640$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <5hkrg0pslcavrivqag9olco6n9s0lf2chf@4ax.com> On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:10:30 -0300, David Olie wrote: >> The rules only quote BU but I think that also other conditions (e.g. CA change, >> Hindrances...) would apply. >Well, in fact the ASLRBv2 version of A8.26 mentions CX, BU, Stun, leadership >modifier (if positive), and hexside/bridge TEM of the target Location. This >is not an all-inclusive list, but instead a set of examples. Height >Advantage and LV DRM are the only specific exceptions. Indeed, the A8.26 EX go on to show residual being reduced for terrain hindrances, hedges, and walls. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Joel, you magnificent bastard! I read your menu!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Mon Aug 2 07:42:12 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Mon Aug 2 07:42:15 2004 Subject: VB: [Aslml] FT39 Stutzpunkt Riva Bella In-Reply-To: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A0FF1@sesob03.sobernet.net> References: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A0FF1@sesob03.sobernet.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Aug 2004, Janusz Maxe wrote: > > I think it is a shellhole overlay (used in earlier FT, so maybe from the > magazine). If it follows the same pattern as B5, G5 and W5 then use one > of these instead. Why would they make a special overlay rather than just use Shellhole counters for the five hexes? I guess some people just can't get enough overlays. :-) Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From asl1 at bellsouth.net Mon Aug 2 08:16:58 2004 From: asl1 at bellsouth.net (asl1@bellsouth.net) Date: Mon Aug 2 08:17:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Onslaught To Orsha Message-ID: <20040802151658.GMFD1788.imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Morning, Thanks to all who replied .. I have an opponent. Continued success to all! Cheers, PK Mason From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Aug 2 10:23:49 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon Aug 2 10:27:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Errata to Errata J4? Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040802122014.01b4bbf8@pop3.direcway.com> Listomaniacs, Just entering the J4 errata in my eASLRB...these seem to be wrong: C13.3111: lines 3-4 replace "squads" with squad-equivalents". {J4} Should be 13.311, note extra "1"....easy fix E7.25: line 19 after "one hex," add "and to reduce any non-cliff Crest Line Blind hexes to zero if there is <= 1 level elevation difference (see B10.23),".{J4} The <= is right? or should it be >=? This one stumps me.... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From smcbee at midtnn.net Mon Aug 2 11:27:00 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Mon Aug 2 11:28:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Errata to Errata J4? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040802122014.01b4bbf8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <000001c478be$52e0f390$c0f19904@steves> Ron, I think it should be the >= one. The other way makes little sense. Take care, Steve Ron asked: E7.25: line 19 after "one hex," add "and to reduce any non-cliff Crest Line Blind hexes to zero if there is <= 1 level elevation difference (see B10.23),".{J4} The <= is right? or should it be >=? This one stumps me.... From afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Aug 2 13:50:47 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Mon Aug 2 14:02:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Rocket OBA Message-ID: <002801c478d3$c41a3160$680a0a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, I am in a middle of a RB CG and really need a quick reply! This is the situation: The Russian player (that's me!) has one Rocket OBA with one preregistered hex. The AR is placed in the preregistered hex directly as a FFE. C1.9 says "Rocket is inaccurate... therefore never gets the benefit of an Accuracy dr. Extent of error is automatic... After gaining battery access, the firer merely places his AR... rolls for error and places his FFE". So I think this is the correct sequence: the Accuracy dr is not made since Rocket OBA is inaccurate (C1.9). After that the subsequent Extent of Error dr is halved (FRU). Therefore tha maximum extent of error possible is 3 hexes when using the benefits of pre-registered fire (if a 6 is rolled). To summarize, this is the sequence: 1) Place FFE in the preregistred hex 2) Do not make accuarcy dr 3) Roll for direction & extent of error. Extent of error dr is halved (thus it will be 1 hex on a dr of 1 or 2, 2 hexes on a dr of 3 or 4, 3 hexes on a dr of 5 or 6) Is this correct? Is there any way in such a situation that the extent of error might be greater than 3 hexes? Thanks in advance to all who will reply! Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From ctewks at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:10:14 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Mon Aug 2 14:11:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Rocket OBA In-Reply-To: <002801c478d3$c41a3160$680a0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <20040802211014.75734.qmail@web42101.mail.yahoo.com> you have it correct -Chuck --- Andrea wrote: > Dear Listers, > I am in a middle of a RB CG and really need a quick > reply! This is the > situation: > > The Russian player (that's me!) has one Rocket OBA > with one preregistered > hex. The AR is placed in the preregistered hex > directly as a FFE. > C1.9 says "Rocket is inaccurate... therefore never > gets the benefit of an > Accuracy dr. Extent of error is automatic... After > gaining battery access, > the firer merely places his AR... rolls for error > and places his FFE". > > So I think this is the correct sequence: the > Accuracy dr is not made since > Rocket OBA is inaccurate (C1.9). After that the > subsequent Extent of Error > dr is halved (FRU). Therefore tha maximum extent of > error possible is 3 > hexes when using the benefits of pre-registered fire > (if a 6 is rolled). To > summarize, this is the sequence: > 1) Place FFE in the preregistred hex > 2) Do not make accuarcy dr > 3) Roll for direction & extent of error. Extent of > error dr is halved (thus > it will be 1 hex on a dr of 1 or 2, 2 hexes on a dr > of 3 or 4, 3 hexes on a > dr of 5 or 6) > > Is this correct? Is there any way in such a > situation that the extent of > error might be greater than 3 hexes? > > Thanks in advance to all who will reply! > > Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system > (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release > Date: 02/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From janusz.maxe at unf.se Mon Aug 2 16:06:17 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Mon Aug 2 16:10:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK new counter art? Message-ID: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A0FFC@sesob03.sobernet.net> I was fidgeting around with my old and new counters, when I noticed something. The broken side of the German 9-2 leader in ASLSK has his helmet and schmeiser (both on the ground) in different directions! Oh my! Are there any more differences between counters from different modules anyone have found? Janusz Maxe F?ltkonsulent UNF, G?teborg och Bohusl?n tel: 031-14 33 60 mobil: 0733-838310 e-post: janusz@unf.se Fj?rdel?ngg. 41, 427 13 G?teborg From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Tue Aug 3 15:46:49 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Mon Aug 2 23:47:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tank crew PIN stops movement Message-ID: <200408031546.49129.weflemi@mbj.nifty.com> A question came up during play of 57: The Battle for Rome. A CE SPG crew was hit by a 1MC which the crew passed by just enough, and is hit by a PIN result. This makes the AFV buttoned up by A7.82, but it says that the tank and crew are not pinned, but simply forced to go BU. I always played it that this ended the AFV's movement, but the rules don't say that explicitly--or at least we haven't found it yet. D5.3xxx doesn't cover the issue for AFV's in this case either since they don't get stunned. Can an AFV that has had it's CE crew go button up by suffering a PIN result off a MC (1MC) in this case, continue movement? If it can't, where does it say that? Thanks in advance, Will From oleboe at tiscali.no Tue Aug 3 00:25:29 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Tue Aug 3 00:25:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tank crew PIN stops movement In-Reply-To: <200408031546.49129.weflemi@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: <40FEE83000000434@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Will Fleming wrote: >A CE SPG crew was hit by a 1MC which the crew passed by just enough, >and is hit by a PIN result. This makes the AFV buttoned up by A7.82, >but it says that the tank and crew are not pinned, but simply forced >to go BU. That's right. >I always played it that this ended the AFV's movement, but the rules >don't say that explicitly--or at least we haven't found it yet. No, they don't say that. >Can an AFV that has had it's CE crew go button up by suffering a PIN >result off a MC (1MC) in this case, continue movement? Yes. >If it can't, where does it say that? Nowhere that I'm aware of, so they can. You got it right. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 3 01:03:10 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 3 01:03:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Errata to Errata J4? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040802122014.01b4bbf8@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040802122014.01b4bbf8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <52hug05qroqe8437367lklqcilbk3b5gha@4ax.com> On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:23:49 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >E7.25: line 19 after "one hex," add "and to reduce any non-cliff Crest Line >Blind hexes to zero if there is <= 1 level elevation difference (see >B10.23),".{J4} > >The <= is right? or should it be >=? This one stumps me.... No, it's correct. A non-cliff Crest Line may represent a difference in elevation of 1 level (the usual situation), or > 1 level (an Abrupt Elevation Change, B10.5). What the errata is saying (a little clumsily) is that as long as the non-cliff Crest Line does *not* represent an Abrupt Elevation Change, the Aerial LOS will reduce the blind hexes created by that non-cliff Crest Line to 0. [What E7.25 doesn't say is what happens to the Blind Hexes created by an Abrupt Elevation Change. An AEC is not, strictly speaking, a "LOS Obstacle", although it creates Blind Hexes in a similar manner (B10.23). *Presumably* the Blind Hexes are reduced to a minimum of 1 as with "true" LOS Obstacles -- but this is not actually stated.] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Joel, you magnificent bastard! I read your menu!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 3 01:46:36 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 3 01:46:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tank crew PIN stops movement In-Reply-To: <200408031546.49129.weflemi@mbj.nifty.com> References: <200408031546.49129.weflemi@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:46:49 -0700, Will Fleming wrote: >A CE SPG crew was hit by a 1MC which the crew passed by just enough, and is >hit by a PIN result. This makes the AFV buttoned up by A7.82, but it says >that the tank and crew are not pinned, but simply forced to go BU. That's right, as Ole has already said. Note that A7.82 indicates that the AFV must *remain* BU for the rest of the Player Turn, so if you're Pinned in the MPh you can't become CE again in the APh. That's why you should leave the Pin counter on the vehicle as a reminder, even though none of the other Pin effects apply. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Joel, you magnificent bastard! I read your menu!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at tiscali.no Tue Aug 3 02:24:29 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Tue Aug 3 02:24:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tank crew PIN stops movement In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <40FEE83000000450@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Bruce Probst answered: >Note that A7.82 indicates that the AFV must *remain* BU for the rest >of the Player Turn, so if you're Pinned in the MPh you can't become CE >again in the APh. >That's why you should leave the Pin counter on the vehicle as a >reminder, even though none of the other Pin effects apply. Thats correct, although OT AFV suffers another Pin effect (A7.82): The Inherent crew of an OT AFV remains CE vs a Pin result, but during that Player Turn is subject to the Case D To Hit DRM and the halving of all MG/IFE/FT/Canister FP, as well as prohibiting it from using Intensive Fire and Multiple ROF. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From jtracy at bankofny.com Tue Aug 3 06:47:06 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Tue Aug 3 06:48:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Recon Report Message-ID: AAR to follow, but the short and sweet version is, a New Jersey sweep! I lost early to Barry Smith (gory details in AAR) but Paul Sidhu, Gary Mei, Ron Duinskie, and Mike O'Leary all made it to 3-0. Ron then beat Gary, while Paul took down Mike. Paul then topped Ron in an incredibly violent Flames of Unrest - Paul's Partisans tried a board edge stuff job, and despite losing three squads to a single Goliath and eating a 5KIA, he pushed Ron over the CVP cap. Meanwhile Gary edged Mike to meet Paul in the final, in Cold Crocs, while I played Ron in Panzer Graveyard. I lost a mind-bending squeaker, while Gary's Brits topped Paul's Fallschirmjaegers. Three guys at 5- 1, but tiebreakers made Gary the champ, Paul the runner-up, and Ron third. I took fourth, Gary Trezza fifth, and Mark Pitcavage sixth. Attendance looked to be in the mid-thirties, up from last year and a hopeful sign for the future. Jeff Evich ran a good show, and managed to stay awake for some very late-night finishes. I had a blast, and I hope to see some more ugly ASLML mugs there next year. 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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Aug 3 06:57:15 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Aug 3 06:58:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Recon Report Message-ID: <1ae9f6bb1aea52bd.1aea52bd1ae9f6bb@us.army.mil> Hey JR- Did you ask the gamers if anything new is coming out for september for ASL? Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: jtracy@bankofny.com Date: Tuesday, August 3, 2004 8:47 am Subject: [Aslml] Recon Report > AAR to follow, but the short and sweet version is, a New Jersey > sweep! > I lost early to Barry Smith (gory details in AAR) but Paul Sidhu, > Gary Mei, Ron Duinskie, and Mike O'Leary all made it to 3-0. Ron > then beat Gary, while Paul took down Mike. Paul then topped Ron in > an incredibly violent Flames of Unrest - Paul's Partisans tried a > board edge stuff job, and despite losing three squads to a single > Goliath and eating a 5KIA, he pushed Ron over the CVP cap. Meanwhile > Gary edged Mike to meet Paul in the final, in Cold Crocs, while I > played Ron in Panzer Graveyard. I lost a mind-bending squeaker, > while Gary's Brits topped Paul's Fallschirmjaegers. Three guys at > 5- > 1, but tiebreakers made Gary the champ, Paul the runner-up, and Ron > third. I took fourth, Gary Trezza fifth, and Mark Pitcavage sixth. > > Attendance looked to be in the mid-thirties, up from last year and a > hopeful sign for the future. Jeff Evich ran a good show, and managed > to stay awake for some very late-night finishes. I had a blast, and > I hope to see some more ugly ASLML mugs there next year. > > 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 jtracy at bankofny.com Tue Aug 3 06:59:41 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Tue Aug 3 07:00:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Recon Report Message-ID: Scott asks: > Hey JR- > Did you ask the gamers if anything new is coming > out for september for ASL? Nah, too busy playing the game. 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 homercles11 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 3 08:46:41 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Tue Aug 3 08:46:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AFV Cards Message-ID: Howdy Has anyone created AFV Cards for the other nationalities? Italian, Japanese, Chinese, French, Allied Minor? 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/ _________________________________________________________________ MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/ From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Aug 3 11:33:29 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Aug 3 11:33:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Mounting(not that) the unmounted Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040803133114.01b46ee0@pop3.direcway.com> Listizens, Looking for the most successful way to mount the old unmounted paper maps on spare boards. Glue? Process? whatever aid would be appreciated.... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From danifirestine at prodigy.net Tue Aug 3 12:59:05 2004 From: danifirestine at prodigy.net (David & Nikki Firestine) Date: Tue Aug 3 12:59:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Mounting(not that) the unmounted References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040803133114.01b46ee0@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <000c01c47994$5555e5f0$6401a8c0@danifirestine> Ron, I have successfully mounted two maps using spray adhesive. I used 3M Super 77 spray adhesive that I found at Walmart. I used the following method; 1. Folded Mapboard in half. 2. Sprayed Mapboard half with the adhesive. 3. Applied the Map. 4. Let the Mapboard and Map dry for at least 6 hours. 5. Turned the Mapboard over and sprayed on the adhesive. 6. Wrapped the Map onto the second half of the board keeping it as tight as possible. 7. Let the Mapboard and Map dry for at least 6+ hours. I hope this helps, David Firestine ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "aslml-aslml.net@lists" Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 2:33 PM Subject: [Aslml] Mounting(not that) the unmounted > Listizens, > > Looking for the most successful way to mount the old unmounted paper maps > on spare boards. > > Glue? > > Process? > > whatever aid would be appreciated.... > > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Aug 3 13:28:25 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Aug 3 13:28:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Mounting(not that) the unmounted In-Reply-To: <000c01c47994$5555e5f0$6401a8c0@danifirestine> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040803133114.01b46ee0@pop3.direcway.com> <000c01c47994$5555e5f0$6401a8c0@danifirestine> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040803152737.01b539d8@pop3.direcway.com> At 02:59 PM 8/3/2004, David & Nikki Firestine wrote: >I hope this helps, >David Firestine Thanks David, does this method help hold the map in the center crack? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From aslgrognerd at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 04:29:13 2004 From: aslgrognerd at yahoo.com (mark walz) Date: Wed Aug 4 04:29:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: ASL 007 Dash For the Bridge Entry Question Message-ID: <20040804112913.58349.qmail@web50004.mail.yahoo.com> Gents, The entry conditions for Ivan state that they must enter along the east side of the map. Typically would you infer they must enter turn one or would you infer on/after turn 1. Thanks in advance Mark __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From smcbee at midtnn.net Wed Aug 4 04:47:54 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Wed Aug 4 04:48:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: ASL 007 Dash For the Bridge Entry Question In-Reply-To: <20040804112913.58349.qmail@web50004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000201c47a18$e8e40d40$c3f39904@steves> Hi Mark, If the entry conditions had specifically stated on/after then that would be correct. Since it doesn't, Ivan must enter on turn 1. Take care, Steve Mark asked: The entry conditions for Ivan state that they must enter along the east side of the map. Typically would you infer they must enter turn one or would you infer on/after turn 1. From afantozzi at tiscali.it Wed Aug 4 06:57:33 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Wed Aug 4 07:32:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Building Question Message-ID: <007c01c47a2f$ca91c960$680a0a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, can a unit at the first level of 23Y7 advance at the first level of 23X7? I am not really convinced that this move is legal... What do you think? Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Aug 4 07:55:57 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed Aug 4 07:55:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <007c01c47a2f$ca91c960$680a0a3e@andrea> References: <007c01c47a2f$ca91c960$680a0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040804095530.01b47ae8@pop3.direcway.com> At 08:57 AM 8/4/2004, Andrea wrote: >can a unit at the first level of 23Y7 advance at the first level of 23X7? Yes. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Thu Aug 5 02:09:09 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Wed Aug 4 10:09:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tank crew PIN stops movement In-Reply-To: <40FEE83000000450@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> References: <40FEE83000000450@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <200408050209.09259.weflemi@mbj.nifty.com> On Tuesday 03 August 2004 02:24, Ole Boe wrote: Ole/Bruce, Thanks for the great info. I don't know if I played this wrong before, but I certainly conceived of it incorrectly. Will > Hi, Bruce Probst answered: > >Note that A7.82 indicates that the AFV must *remain* BU for the rest > >of the Player Turn, so if you're Pinned in the MPh you can't become CE > >again in the APh. > >That's why you should leave the Pin counter on the vehicle as a > >reminder, even though none of the other Pin effects apply. > > Thats correct, although OT AFV suffers another Pin effect (A7.82): > > The Inherent crew of an OT AFV remains CE vs a Pin result, but during that > Player Turn is subject to the Case D To Hit DRM and the halving of all > MG/IFE/FT/Canister FP, as well as prohibiting it from using Intensive Fire > and Multiple ROF. ----------------------- > If you cut off my head, what do I say? > Me and my body or me and my head? > > Ole Boe > oleboe@tiscali.no > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Wed Aug 4 18:43:41 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Aug 4 18:47:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77AF4E@agalsrv03> Greetings all I have some questions on using MOL against AFVs The Rear Armour TK modifier can apply to a MOL attack against an AFV. No problem here. When attacking with a MOL from the same hex, a MOL is assumed to have scored a Rear hit, otherwise the Target Facing determines the facing hit. Suppose a PBF MOL attack is made against an AFV such that the attack is through the Rear Turret facing but the Front Hull facing? How is the target facing determined to know if to apply the Rear armour TK modifier or not? C3.9 refers to the location of hits by using the coloured dr of the TH DR. However MOLs don't have a TH DR, only the TK roll. Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of the MOL attack? Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack. Would a Hull hit automatically negate the MOL attack? If the attack above is negated, suppose the MOL TK DR has a "1"for its coloured dr and the target AFV's Location also contains burnable terrain (eg grain), is a Flame still placed in the target Location? Any help gratefully received. TIA Cheers Jon From oleboe at tiscali.no Thu Aug 5 00:05:05 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Thu Aug 5 00:05:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <40FEE7B40000061C@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Cole, Jonathan wrote: >The Rear Armour TK modifier can apply to a MOL attack against an >AFV. No problem here. ...except that the HE&Flame to Kill table erroneously indicates otherwise, but you're right, it can apply. >When attacking wi h a MOL from the same hex, a MOL is assumed to >have scored a Rear hit, otherwise the Target Facing determines the >facing hit. Correct. >Suppose a PBF MOL attack is made against an AFV such that the attack >is through the Rear Turret facing but the Front Hull facing? How is >the target facing determined to know if to apply the Rear armour >TK modifier or not? > >C3.9 refers to the location of hits by using the coloured dr of the >TH DR. However MOLs don't have a TH DR, only the TK roll. >Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of >the MOL attack? Yes, you use the TK roll to determine hit Location when there is no TH roll. There is a Perry sez about this. >Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack Would a Hull hit >automatically negate the MOL attack? Yes, it seems so. DC is an exception to the HD rules, so MOL against the hull of an AFV will be negated if the AFV is HD. >If the attack above is negated, suppose the MOL TK DR has a >1"for its coloured dr and the target AFV's Location also contains >burnable terrain (eg grain), is a Flame still placed in the target >Location? A good question. I'm not sure, but I think the answer is yes. A22 does not require that you hit the AFV for t e Flame to be placed. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From byouse at cablespeed.com Thu Aug 5 06:11:08 2004 From: byouse at cablespeed.com (Brian Youse) Date: Thu Aug 5 06:11:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DAVID OLIE PLS DROP ME A LINE! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Subject says it all... From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 5 07:05:08 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 5 07:06:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: ASL 007 Dash For the Bridge Entry Question In-Reply-To: <20040804112913.58349.qmail@web50004.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040804112913.58349.qmail@web50004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9if4h09mt8go8d3179aef12ichtnqnajl4@4ax.com> On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 04:29:13 -0700 (PDT), mark walz wrote: >The entry conditions for Ivan state that they must >enter along the east side of the map. > >Typically would you infer they must enter turn one or >would you infer on/after turn 1. They must enter on Turn 1, because no option is granted to do otherwise. A2.5. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 5 07:10:52 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 5 07:11:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <007c01c47a2f$ca91c960$680a0a3e@andrea> References: <007c01c47a2f$ca91c960$680a0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <5mf4h0p0l8d22c5hhbo1gt2u7cr8ek6gtg@4ax.com> On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 15:57:33 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >can a unit at the first level of 23Y7 advance at the first level of 23X7? Of course. >I am not really convinced that this move is legal... What do you think? I can't think what would make you think that there was any question about it. If you need a specific rules reference, A4.7 & B23.25 should do it. The two locations are at the same level of the same building and are not separated by any sort of gap or obstacle, so they are ADJACENT, and so you may advance from one to the other. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 5 07:34:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 5 07:34:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: <40FEE7B40000061C@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> References: <40FEE7B40000061C@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <3eg4h0d1l2761abholc31kobogn1i1vgjf@4ax.com> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 09:05:05 +0200, "Ole Boe" wrote: >>Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of >>the MOL attack? >Yes, you use the TK roll to determine hit Location when there is no TH roll. >There is a Perry sez about this. Do you have a specific citation? I couldn't find corroborating evidence of this (not that I claim to have an exhaustive collection of Perry Sez). Note that there is old Q&A to clarify that a coloured dr of "6" will negate a TK attack vs. an AFV. (A22.6111 only specifies "IFT DR".) A22.612 Is a MOL TK attempt negated if the Original colored dr of the TK DR is a "6"? A. Yes -- and the A22.6111 effects of the "6" dr apply too. [An93a; An95w; An96; Mw] >>Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack >>Would a Hull hit automatically negate the MOL attack? >Yes, it seems so. DC is an exception to the HD rules, so MOL against the >hull of an AFV will be negated if the AFV is HD. I agree, this seems to be the case. >>If the attack above is negated, suppose the MOL TK DR has a >>1"for its coloured dr and the target AFV's Location also contains >>burnable terrain (eg grain), is a Flame still placed in the target >>Location? >A good question. I'm not sure, but I think the answer is yes. A22 does not >require that you hit the AFV for the Flame to be placed. I agree; it seems plain to me that the "1" effects still apply (especially when you consider the Q&A above noting that the "6" effects can still apply). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Aug 5 08:09:53 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Aug 5 08:10:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: <3eg4h0d1l2761abholc31kobogn1i1vgjf@4ax.com> References: <40FEE7B40000061C@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> <3eg4h0d1l2761abholc31kobogn1i1vgjf@4ax.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040805100839.01b51638@pop3.direcway.com> At 09:34 AM 8/5/2004, Bruce Probst wrote: >Do you have a specific citation? I couldn't find corroborating evidence of >this (not that I claim to have an exhaustive collection of Perry Sez). Closest I can find over on the ASL Forum: >This is a question concerning rule C7.21 and HE&Flame TK Table > >Rules C7.21 says "The Basic TK# vs an AFV hit (or attacked by FT...) in >its armored Rear Target Facing is always incresed by one". HE&Flame TK >Table says (Note B, for FT) that ONLY TK# modifiers are "Half if Long >range, +1 if CE, +2 if OT" Does rule C7.21 really apply for FT/DC/MOL >attacks vs AFV's? Yes, since it is not specifically negated in C7.344. >If the answer is YES, does it apply the same if the AFV is fired >through the Hull Rear Target Facing & Turret Front Target Facing (or >viceversa), due to different VCA and TCA? To see if the Rear Target Facing applies, you must use the VCA for a Hull Hit or use the TCA for a Turret Hit (C3.9). ....Perry MMP Maybe my second question wasn't clear enough, as I didn't mention I was referring to a FT attack. Or, does the FT Original TK# DR serve to know the Location of the Hit? My ASLRB is v1, maybe C3.9 is different in v2. Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 6:05 am Post subject: ---------- ..And here goes Perry clarification: > As FT attacks makes > no TH, do you use the FT Original TK# DR to determine the Location of > the Hit (Hull, Turret), in order to know if Case A applies or not? Yes, use the TK DR. ....Perry MMP For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com Thu Aug 5 12:51:27 2004 From: Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com (Paul.Sidhu@us.sanofi.com) Date: Thu Aug 5 12:43:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL vs HD Message-ID: Jonathan Cole wrote: >Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack Would a Hull hit >automatically negate the MOL attack? Ole replied: Yes, it seems so. DC is an exception to the HD rules, so MOL against the hull of an AFV will be negated if the AFV is HD. Ole/Jonathan, I disagree, I don't think it's clear. For FT/MOL attacks vs vehicles there is no TK application of TEM, vehicle size, or hindrances (except for those listed of CE, OT, motion/moving target, rear, height advantage) so I would think HD does not apply. I could also make a (hold on to your hat) realism argument that the fire can 'splash' onto a HD vehicle almost as effectively as a non-HD vehicle. Seems like a good candidate for a Q&A for Perry. Perry, Is a MOL or FT attack vs. a vehicle which gets a hull hit (using the TK DR) negated by HD status? -Paul Important: The Information in this e-mail belongs to Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc., is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of, or reliance on, the contents of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying back to the sending e-mail address, and delete this e-mail message from your computer. From homercles11 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 13:26:22 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Thu Aug 5 13:26:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] New Product Announcement Message-ID: NEW PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT Fanatic Enterprises is pleased to announce the release of Italian OOB AFV Cards. These cards are similar and attempt to meet the same function of the officially released Russian, German, American and British AFV cards. These player aids come on card stock with four vehicles to a card all printed on one side of the card. There are 8 cards in the Italian AFV Card Pack. Each pack is $6 + shipping and handling. For more details see my website http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ Future sets will cover the French, Japanese, Chinese, and Allied Minor Vehicles and eventually the Axis Minor vehicles. 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/ _________________________________________________________________ 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 Aug 5 13:32:48 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 13:32:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >I have some questions on using MOL against AFVs > I read up on this over breakfast. I am currently NRBH, but I still remember my conclusions. >The Rear Armour TK modifier can apply to a MOL attack against an AFV. No >problem here. >When attacking with a MOL from the same hex, a MOL is assumed to have >scored >a Rear hit, otherwise the Target Facing determines the facing hit. > Right, use the Target Facing, which is defined in Chapter D (I believe D6.4?). There is even an illustration showing how to apply it. This is the only definition of Target Facing that can apply to a MOL, IMO. > >Suppose a PBF MOL attack is made against an AFV such that the attack is >through the Rear Turret facing but the Front Hull facing? How is the target >facing determined to know if to apply the Rear armour TK modifier or not? > Such does not apply to MOL, COWTRA. > >C3.9 refers to the location of hits by using the coloured dr of the TH DR. > Right. There is no TH DR for a MOL, and thus the provisions for "hitting" a turret Aspect do not apply. > >However MOLs don't have a TH DR, only the TK roll. > Exactly. > >Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of the >MOL attack? > I would say no, because there is no provision for it. The MOL rules say to use the Target Facing, which is defined in Chapter D. The turret Aspect Target Facing is not a factor for MOL. > >Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack. Would a Hull hit >automatically negate the MOL attack? > For MOL, there is no such thing as a "turret hit" or a "hull hit". It becomes a mute point. > >If the attack above is negated, suppose the MOL TK DR has a "1"for its >coloured dr and the target AFV's Location also contains burnable terrain >(eg >grain), is a Flame still placed in the target Location? > I would say yes, because the rules for MOL versus AFV do not except it. That is My Opinion. 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 Aug 5 13:38:39 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 13:38:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > > >C3.9 refers to the location of hits by using the coloured dr of the > >TH DR. However MOLs don't have a TH DR, only the TK roll. > > >Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of > >the MOL attack? > >Yes, you use the TK roll to determine hit Location when there is no TH >roll. >There is a Perry sez about this. > If there is indeed a Perry Sez about this, I would suggest that he is wrong! Such an errata is totally unnecessary, and I would argue with Perry to reconsider. We are told clearly to use the Target Facing. The default definition for Target Facing is found in Chapter D (NRBH). Any exceptions to the default Target Facing requirements would be mentioned, as they are in C3.9 (?) when establishing the turret Aspect. Furthermore (Reality Argument Coming), since AF have no effect on MOL, what is the benefit of receiving Rear Target Facing? I would argue that it's because of the engine. Which is located in the hull of the vehicle (i.e. the VCA) and not the turret. And the effects of which is handled just fine with the default Target Facing rules. I believe it would be Unrealistic to give a benefit to a Turret Rear Target Facing. > >Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack > Would a Hull hit > >automatically negate the MOL attack? > >Yes, it seems so. DC is an exception to the HD rules, so MOL against the >hull of an AFV will be negated if the AFV is HD. > Only if you believe that an Aspect must be determine, which I reject. TEM does not apply; HD does not apply. It is also irrelevant, if you believe (as I do) that you may disregard the turret Aspect for MOL. Them's My Opinions. 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 Aug 5 13:44:15 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 13:44:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > >>Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of > >>the MOL attack? > > >Yes, you use the TK roll to determine hit Location when there is no TH >roll. > >There is a Perry sez about this. > >Do you have a specific citation? I couldn't find corroborating evidence of >this (not that I claim to have an exhaustive collection of Perry Sez). > I would be My Opinion that Perry would be mistaken to judge in this manner for this situation. > > >>Suppose an AFV is Hull Down to a PBF MOL attack > >>Would a Hull hit automatically negate the MOL attack? > > >Yes, it seems so. DC is an exception to the HD rules, so MOL against the > >hull of an AFV will be negated if the AFV is HD. > >I agree, this seems to be the case. > I disagree. I read it this morning (NRBH now), but there is nothing I can find about turret/hull Aspect applying to MOL. If you don't have to determine Hit Location (which is irrelevant for MOL), and TEM does not apply... My conclusion is that an AFV *does not* receive a HD benefit for a MOL attack. > >>If the attack above is negated, suppose the MOL TK DR has a > >>1"for its coloured dr and the target AFV's Location also contains > >>burnable terrain (eg grain), is a Flame still placed in the target > >>Location? > > >A good question. I'm not sure, but I think the answer is yes. A22 does >not > >require that you hit the AFV for the Flame to be placed. > >I agree; it seems plain to me that the "1" effects still apply (especially >when you consider the Q&A above noting that the "6" effects can still >apply). > Sure it still applies, because the MOL versus AFV rules do not create an exception. Just like the MOL versus AFV rules do not mention target Aspect, only Target Facing, which is defined in Chapter D. I believe that a summary judgement to use the TK DR as the "hit Location" is far beyond a simple clarification. It would be a change to the rule; an addition to the rule. And totally unnecessary. It's all about COWTRA in this instance, IMO. MOL do not use TH DR; the MOL rules don't mention it; apply Target Facing per Chapter D and don't read any more into it. 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 Aug 5 13:49:18 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 13:49:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: I want to make sure I am understanding these correctly... > >Closest I can find over on the ASL Forum: > > >This is a question concerning rule C7.21 and HE&Flame TK Table > > > >Rules C7.21 says "The Basic TK# vs an AFV hit (or attacked by FT...) in > >its armored Rear Target Facing is always incresed by one". HE&Flame TK > >Table says (Note B, for FT) that ONLY TK# modifiers are "Half if Long > >range, +1 if CE, +2 if OT" Does rule C7.21 really apply for FT/DC/MOL > >attacks vs AFV's? > > >Yes, since it is not specifically negated in C7.344. > It appears that here, Perry is affirming that the Rear Target Facing applies to a MOL. > > >If the answer is YES, does it apply the same if the AFV is fired > >through the Hull Rear Target Facing & Turret Front Target Facing (or > >viceversa), due to different VCA and TCA? > > >To see if the Rear Target Facing applies, you must use the VCA for a Hull >Hit or use the TCA for a Turret Hit (C3.9). > >....Perry >MMP > > >Maybe my second question wasn't clear enough, as I didn't mention I was >referring to a FT attack. Or, does the FT Original TK# DR serve to know the >Location of the Hit? My ASLRB is v1, maybe C3.9 is different in v2. > In this second question then, Perry was referring to a FT, and again not to MOL... >---------- >..And here goes Perry clarification: > > > As FT attacks makes > > no TH, do you use the FT Original TK# DR to determine the Location of > > the Hit (Hull, Turret), in order to know if Case A applies or not? > >Yes, use the TK DR. > >....Perry >MMP > And again this talks about FT, and not MOL. So far, I don't see a Perry Sez about using the TK DR as Hit Location for MOL. Am I correct in that understanding? If so, I would argue that Hit Location *should not* apply to MOL, and Perry would be correct not to deem it otherwise. JMO, Of Course. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Discover the best of the best at MSN Luxury Living. http://lexus.msn.com/ From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 5 14:16:50 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 5 14:17:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <391ogq$57uaso@mxip03a.cluster1.charter.net> > > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/05 Thu PM 03:38:39 CDT > To: oleboe@tiscali.no, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > > > >C3.9 refers to the location of hits by using the coloured dr of the > > >TH DR. However MOLs don't have a TH DR, only the TK roll. > > > > >Does the coloured dr of the MOL TK roll also serve as the location of > > >the MOL attack? > > > > >Yes, you use the TK roll to determine hit Location when there is no TH > >roll. > >There is a Perry sez about this. > > > > If there is indeed a Perry Sez about this, I would suggest that he is wrong! > Such an errata is totally unnecessary, and I would argue with Perry to > reconsider. What about a situation where the enemy vehicle has it's Hull and Turret in different directions. If the rear target facing DRM is applicable to a MOL attack and the enemy AFV is presenting the rear of the turret and the front of the hull to the MOL user one must determine which is hit in order to apply the TK DRM. Or, are you saying that if either hull or turret rear facing is presented then the DRM applies? > I believe it would be Unrealistic to give a benefit to a Turret Rear Target > Facing. It is good to know that is what you believe is realistic. Sadly though, the rules do not agree. According to the rules it is the rear (turret or hull) that allows the DRM...realism not withstanding. So it is one of two things: 1) The TK DR acts as hit location. 2) If either turret or hull rear is presented then the DRM applies (no hit location determination required). Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 5 14:28:30 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 5 14:28:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <391to2$54r561@mxip14a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/05 Thu PM 03:32:48 CDT > To: JPCole@agric.wa.gov.au, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > The turret Aspect Target Facing is not a factor for MOL. Where is this rule found? One minute you say, "oh no, it can't be because there is no rule provizion for it"...then immediatly turn around and make a statement like the above which is no where to be found in the ASLRB. The pretzel logic this requires is astounding. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 15:57:21 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 15:57:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: Ah, Tater resurfaces! Most very excellent... > >What about a situation where the enemy vehicle has it's Hull and Turret in >different directions. If the rear target facing DRM is applicable to a MOL >attack and the enemy AFV is presenting the rear of the turret and the front >of the hull to the MOL user one must determine which is hit in order to >apply the TK DRM. > >Or, are you saying that if either hull or turret rear facing is presented >then the DRM applies? > No. I'm saying that the Rear Armor Modification only applies if the LOS enters the hex across a hexside of the Rear Target Facing as defined in D3.2. I.e., the vehicle's rear, with no regard to the facing of the turret. Turret/hull Aspect is not relevant; only the vehicle's Target Facing matter. Let's see what we can construe from the actual rules, shall we? A22.612: "... the Target Facing determines the facing hit." Index: "Target Facing: D3.2 [Hit Location: C3.9]" D3.2: "Target Facing is determined as depicted in the diagram, depending on which target hexside is crossed by the firing unit's LOS." The diagram shows a Pz VIE, with the familiar depiction of how to determine Target Facing. It so happens that Target Facing is established by the VCA. No mention of Aspect. C3.9: "An ordnance hit versus a vehicle strikes its ... (etc) ... of the Original TH DR." Since a MOL is neither an ordnance attack, nor uses TH DR, then C3.9 (Location of Vehicular Hits) does not apply to MOL. Furthermore, A22.612 makes no mention of Hit Location, so there is no reason to reference C3.9 in the first place. It is a very, very straightforward progression using simple COWTRA. We are told, simply and explicitly, to use Target Facing to determine whether the Rear Armor Modification applies to MOL. The Target Facing definition is found in D3.2. There is a simple diagram showing what Target Facing means. Since A22.612 makes no mention of Hit Location (C3.9), we don't use it. Since C3.9 mentions TH DR, and MOL do not have TH DR, then C3.9 does not apply to MOL. COWTRA, so simple it hurts. In order to determine whether you qualify for the Rear Armor Modification, use Target Facing as defined in D3.2. Don't go any further, because there is nothing -- *anywhere* in the rules, mind you -- that tells us to establish a Hit Location for MOL. I see nothing wrong with this. If you toss a MOL through the Rear Target Facing of a vehicle -- i.e. in its rear VCA as defined by the D3.2 diagram -- you receive the Rear Armor Modification to the TK. If it's not in the vehicle's Rear Target Facing, you don't receive it. That make sense, because that's where the rear of the vehicle is where the engine is located. I posit that since MOL do not use a TH process, is not ordnance, does not use TH DR, and does not instruct us otherwise, then C3.9 Hit Location does not apply to MOL. I also insist that there is *nothing* in the rules that says otherwise, therefore I apply COWTRA and use Target Facing as defined in D3.2. Using Rules Only, prove me wrong. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 16:08:04 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 16:08:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > > > The turret Aspect Target Facing is not a factor for MOL. > >Where is this rule found? > Friend, you've got it backwards. You need to prove to me that the Aspect rule (C3.9) applies to MOL. It doesn't. Target Aspect applies to TH DR. MOL does not use TH DR. Therefore, C3.9 does not apply to MOL. Easy. COWTRA. >One minute you say, "oh no, it can't be because there is no rule provizion >for it"...then immediatly turn around and make a statement like the above >which is no where to be found in the ASLRB. The pretzel logic this requires >is astounding. > Well, show me where there is a rule provision using target Aspect for MOL? There is none. The statement I made above does not appear in the ASLRB. There is no statement that says, "turret Aspect Target Facing does not apply to MOL." The absence of such a statement does not mean that an Aspect *does* apply to MOL, however. We do not use the absence of a negation to conclude that something is allowed. We determine what is allowed and what is applied by what is specifically mentioned as a rule, and then note any exceptions for that rule. Turret Aspect Target Facing is mentioned for an ordnance hit and TH DR. There is no exception for MOL given. Therefore it applies *only to* a TH DR, *or* unless mentioned specifically elsewhere in the rules. It is not mentioned for MOL. Ergo, it is not used for MOL. This is not pretzel logic. This is almost COWTRA 101. Please, demonstrate to me that the ASLRB instructs us to apply Location of Vehicular Hits to a MOL attack. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 16:27:51 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu Aug 5 16:28:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >It is good to know that is what you believe is realistic. Sadly though, the >rules do not agree. According to the rules it is the rear (turret or hull) >that allows the DRM...realism not withstanding. > No, according to the rules, -- which you should trouble yourself to actually quote once in a while -- it is the rear "Target Facing". What does "Target Facing" mean? That is defined in D3.2. >So it is one of two things: >1) The TK DR acts as hit location. Where is this stated about MOL... *anywhere*?!? >2) If either turret or hull rear is presented then the DRM applies (no hit >location determination required). > Um... no Hit Location is required anyway because no TH DR are used. It says "Target Facing"... follow index to D3.2... follow D3.2 to diagram... use diagram to determine Target Facing. Ouch, that is so simple it hurts. Disregard turret Aspect or hull Aspect. They are utterly *irrelevant* for MOL. Not stated anywhere. Or are they? Do not tout opinion as fact. Prove your facts with references to the rules. 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 krynndm at speakeasy.net Thu Aug 5 18:45:18 2004 From: krynndm at speakeasy.net (Tom Mueller) Date: Thu Aug 5 18:34:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.2.20040805204254.01c260d0@mail.speakeasy.net> At 06:08 PM 8/5/2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: A thorough and clear demonstration of COWTRA, and at the expense of one of Tate Roger's posts for bonus points. If there was a ASLRB entry for COWTRA, this could be the EX. Good job, Bruce! >> > >> > The turret Aspect Target Facing is not a factor for MOL. >> >>Where is this rule found? > >Friend, you've got it backwards. You need to prove to me that the Aspect >rule (C3.9) applies to MOL. It doesn't. Target Aspect applies to TH DR. >MOL does not use TH DR. Therefore, C3.9 does not apply to MOL. > >Easy. COWTRA. > >>One minute you say, "oh no, it can't be because there is no rule >>provizion for it"...then immediatly turn around and make a statement like >>the above which is no where to be found in the ASLRB. The pretzel logic >>this requires is astounding. > >Well, show me where there is a rule provision using target Aspect for MOL? >There is none. > >The statement I made above does not appear in the ASLRB. There is no >statement that says, "turret Aspect Target Facing does not apply to MOL." > >The absence of such a statement does not mean that an Aspect *does* apply >to MOL, however. We do not use the absence of a negation to conclude that >something is allowed. > >We determine what is allowed and what is applied by what is specifically >mentioned as a rule, and then note any exceptions for that rule. Turret >Aspect Target Facing is mentioned for an ordnance hit and TH DR. There is >no exception for MOL given. Therefore it applies *only to* a TH DR, *or* >unless mentioned specifically elsewhere in the rules. > >It is not mentioned for MOL. Ergo, it is not used for MOL. > >This is not pretzel logic. This is almost COWTRA 101. Tom Mueller Ah, DSL! And Athlon 1900+! "Hey, what is it about the gates of Hell that compels people to wander into them?!" - Crow T. Robot, 'Pod People' From S.Eckhart at cox.net Thu Aug 5 19:41:55 2004 From: S.Eckhart at cox.net (Steve Eckhart) Date: Thu Aug 5 19:41:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Calling Randy Pinkley Message-ID: <019301c47b5e$eff21ae0$0300a8c0@NBN1266> Randy, I have not heard from you in a while. Have you changed email addresses? Steve Eckhart From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 5 19:45:38 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 5 19:45:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 6:28 PM > To: gr27134@charter.net; oleboe@tiscali.no; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > It says "Target Facing"... follow index to D3.2... follow D3.2 to > diagram... > use diagram to determine Target Facing. The diagram is an example and is clearly not all inclusive. The example used is one of a turreted AFV which has the TCA/VCA synchronized. This, as we all know, is not always the case. Look at the last sentence of D3.12: "The Target Facing of any turret/upper superstructure hit is based on the target's TCA - not its VCA." Clearly the "Facing" is not solely dependant on the Hull. The turret and hull can and very often do have a different facing. That being the case a MOL attack vs a vehicle which is presenting a rear TCA facing and a front VCA facing creates a problem if one has no mode to determine hit location. > Ouch, that is so simple it hurts. Yes, so simple...and so utterly erroneous. I feel your pain. > Disregard turret Aspect or hull Aspect. They are utterly > *irrelevant* for > MOL. Not stated anywhere. Or are they? See D3.12...clearly VCA and TCA can have different facings...even to the point of being opposite of each other. > > Do not tout opinion as fact. Prove your facts with references to > the rules. See above. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 5 20:14:22 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 5 20:14:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 6:08 PM > To: gr27134@charter.net; JPCole@agric.wa.gov.au; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > > > > > The turret Aspect Target Facing is not a factor for MOL. > > > >Where is this rule found? > > > > Friend, you've got it backwards. You need to prove to me that the Aspect > rule (C3.9) applies to MOL. It doesn't. Target Aspect applies > to TH DR. > MOL does not use TH DR. Therefore, C3.9 does not apply to MOL. 1) I am not trying to prove C3.9 applies to MOL. It doesn't...I agree. 2) It is clear that MOL does get the C7.21 DRM 3) Each turreted AFV has two separate and distinct rear target facings depending on the TCA/VCA (D3.12 last sentence). 4) Because of #2 & #3 the statement "turret Aspect Target Facing is not a factor for MOL" is flat wrong. It does matter because the MOL is eligible for the C7.21 DRM if the attack is against a rear target facing. Bottom line, a MOL attack DR uses the principles of C3.9 to determine which target facing is used in the case of an attack vs a turreted AFV which has none-synchronized TCA/VCA. > Easy. COWTRA. Ha! You wish! > Well, show me where there is a rule provision using target Aspect > for MOL? Try C7.21 where it says that MOL is eligible for the rear target facing DRM. That is a target aspect rule that specifically mentions MOL. > Please, demonstrate to me that the ASLRB instructs us to apply > Location of > Vehicular Hits to a MOL attack. Hit location...no, but that wasn't your statement. Your statement was "target facing" (see above). Thus, see C7.21...this is a "target facing" rule which deals with MOL. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 5 20:34:56 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 5 20:35:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 5:57 PM > To: gr27134@charter.net; oleboe@tiscali.no; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > Ah, Tater resurfaces! Most very excellent... > > > > >What about a situation where the enemy vehicle has it's Hull and > Turret in > >different directions. If the rear target facing DRM is > applicable to a MOL > >attack and the enemy AFV is presenting the rear of the turret > and the front > >of the hull to the MOL user one must determine which is hit in order to > >apply the TK DRM. > > > >Or, are you saying that if either hull or turret rear facing is > presented > >then the DRM applies? > > > > No. I'm saying that the Rear Armor Modification only applies if the LOS > enters the hex across a hexside of the Rear Target Facing as defined in > D3.2. I.e., the vehicle's rear, with no regard to the facing of > the turret. > Turret/hull Aspect is not relevant; only the vehicle's Target Facing > matter. That completely ignores D3.11 and D3.12 which clearly define that the hull and turret have separate facings depending on their independent CA's. You make the assumption that the diagram in C3.2 is all inclusive. It isn't. It is a simplistic basic example that was easy to deal with and less confusing than using a diagram showing the TCA 180 from the VCA. > Let's see what we can construe from the actual rules, shall we? > > A22.612: "... the Target Facing determines the facing hit." > > Index: "Target Facing: D3.2 [Hit Location: C3.9]" > > D3.2: "Target Facing is determined as depicted in the diagram, > depending on > which target hexside is crossed by the firing unit's LOS." The diagram > shows a Pz VIE, with the familiar depiction of how to determine Target > Facing. It so happens that Target Facing is established by the VCA. No > mention of Aspect. > > C3.9: "An ordnance hit versus a vehicle strikes its ... (etc) ... of the > Original TH DR." Since a MOL is neither an ordnance attack, nor > uses TH DR, > then C3.9 (Location of Vehicular Hits) does not apply to MOL. > Furthermore, > A22.612 makes no mention of Hit Location, so there is no reason > to reference > C3.9 in the first place. > > It is a very, very straightforward progression using simple COWTRA. Only if one completely ignores D3.11 and D3.12. > We are told, simply and explicitly, to use Target Facing to determine > whether the Rear Armor Modification applies to MOL. The Target Facing > definition is found in D3.2. There is a simple diagram showing > what Target > Facing means. It is a basic example...not all inclusive. > Since A22.612 makes no mention of Hit Location (C3.9), we don't use it. > Since C3.9 mentions TH DR, and MOL do not have TH DR, then C3.9 does not > apply to MOL. > > COWTRA, so simple it hurts. In order to determine whether you > qualify for > the Rear Armor Modification, use Target Facing as defined in > D3.2. Don't go > any further, because there is nothing -- *anywhere* in the rules, > mind you > -- that tells us to establish a Hit Location for MOL. COWTRA only works when you use all the rules. See D3.11 and D3.12. > I see nothing wrong with this. If you toss a MOL through the Rear Target > Facing of a vehicle -- i.e. in its rear VCA as defined by the > D3.2 diagram > -- you receive the Rear Armor Modification to the TK. If it's not in the > vehicle's Rear Target Facing, you don't receive it. That make sense, > because that's where the rear of the vehicle is where the engine > is located. Per D3.11 and D3.12 the hull and turret can have different (even exact opposite) rear target facings. > I posit that since MOL do not use a TH process, is not ordnance, does not > use TH DR, and does not instruct us otherwise, then C3.9 Hit > Location does > not apply to MOL. I agree...no hit location used or needed. The MOL TK roll uses the principles of C3.9 o determine which target facing is affected. This is only an issue with turreted AFV's which are currently presenting more than one facing to the MOL attack. > I also insist that there is *nothing* in the rules that says otherwise, > therefore I apply COWTRA and use Target Facing as defined in D3.2. > > Using Rules Only, prove me wrong. See above...your whole premise is based on ignoring D3.11 and D3.12. The diagram example used for D3.2 is clearly not all inclusive. The turret and hull facing of a turreted AFV are not always synchronized. The rear facing of a vehicle is not solely dependant on the VCA. I have proven all this. You hung your hat on the D3.2 diagram being an all inclusive player aid and it isn't. It was merely the base line example that would be easiest to diagram. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 5 20:47:31 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 5 20:47:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.2.20040805204254.01c260d0@mail.speakeasy.net> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Tom Mueller > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 8:45 PM > To: Bruce Bakken; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > At 06:08 PM 8/5/2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: > A thorough and clear demonstration of COWTRA, and at the expense > of one of > Tate Roger's posts for bonus points. If there was a ASLRB entry for > COWTRA, this could be the EX. > Good job, Bruce! Try again... Bruce's premise is completely erroneous. It is based on the assumption that the D3.2 diagram is all encompassing. It isn't...Bruce has ignored D3.11 and D3.12. The D3.2 diagram is an example of the base line target facing when the turret and hull have the same CA. However, this is the easiest example of target facing to diagram. But, it isn't the only possible example. The Perry Sez solves the original issue by using the principles of C3.9 to determine which rear target facing (hull/turret) would be effected for purposes of C7.21. Bruce says this solution isn't needed because rear target facing is solely dependant on the VCA. That is clearly not correct per D3.11 and D3.12. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 5 22:57:54 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 5 22:58:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9p46h0p3r1ct0crvh982gv0skm5ouvd267@4ax.com> On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:44:15 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >I believe that a summary judgement to use the TK DR as the "hit Location" is >far beyond a simple clarification. It would be a change to the rule; an >addition to the rule. And totally unnecessary. I think that's considerably overstating the case, Bruce. There are other rules that work similarly, and they work that way because it's important to determine what target facing is being used. The question, therefore, is whether it's equally important for FT/MOL? The answer is clearly "yes". D3.2 is not the sole discussion on Target Facing, which is just as well, because if it was there would be no provision for turret facing *at all*, for *any* type of fire directed vs. the AFV. Fortunately, we know that this is not the case, as (somewhat bizarrely) the important rule about turrets is found at C3.9 (which D3.2 doesn't even refer to!). The important thing about C3.9 is that it explicitly states that the turret, if struck, determines the Target Facing -- i.e., it overrides everything found in D3.2. In essence, D3.2 really tells us nothing other than how the target "arcs" are defined on the hexgrid; the *important* information is in C3.9. This is reinforced by both A22.612 and C3.71, which emphasises that it's the rear *Target Facing* that is relevant. Given that a FT/MOL's TK# is increased if the target's rear facing is struck, and the facing is determined by whether the turret or the hull is struck -- i.e., C3.9 is the determining rule, NOT D3.2 -- a mechanism for determining it is indeed important. The use of the TK DR as that mechanism is utterly unsurprising given that the same mechanism is used by *other* weapons that also do not need to make a TH DR. (Even the mightiest multi-hex OBA barrage must determine whether it strikes the hull or the turret.) Hit Location is an important AFV combat concept; you can't just wave your hands and make it go away when it's inconvenient. [The logical extension of *your* argument, Bruce, is that C3.9 is *overruled* by D3.2. It is, after all, the higher rule number, and it makes no exceptions for C3.9, which it clearly contradicts on the matter of defining Target Facing. Therefore, C3.9 is only relevant for determining what AF is used (when relevant), and Target Facing is *always* defined by D3.2. Personally, I don't believe that, but it is what *you're* arguing, if you follow it through.] [Why has this important concept not come up in a question long before now? I'd be willing to wager it's because most people rely on the QRDC, which *completely omits* C3.71 from the list of modifiers for FT/MOL attacks ....] The HD issue I'm less happy about; the rules are somewhat contradictory. D4.2 makes no EXC for FT/MOL, therefore FT/MOL attacks must have some mechanism for determining whether the hull is hit or not. On the other hand, D4.21 specifies that a target is only HD if the attack would be penalised by TEM, which is not true for FT attacking on the IFT (although it *is* true for MOL attacking on the IFT!). I would cautiously conclude that FT *are* exempt from worrying about HD and that MOL are not. Given that they need to worry about it, a mechanism for determining it must exist; again, we are only left with the TK DR as that mechanism. Frankly, I'm boggled by the concept that the rules have the foresight to tell us explicitly how to determine the Target Facing when the firer of the FT/MOL is in the same Location as the target, and yet completely omit the far-more-likely case of the firer being in a different Location! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 5 23:11:17 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 5 23:11:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.2.20040805204254.01c260d0@mail.speakeasy.net> References: <6.0.1.1.2.20040805204254.01c260d0@mail.speakeasy.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:45:18 -0500, Tom Mueller wrote: >A thorough and clear demonstration of COWTRA Well, er, except it's built on false principles. In other words, Bruce B. is actually using COWSOTRA: Concentrating On What Some Of The Rules Allow, while ignoring what other, more relevant rules are discussing. D3.2 only "defines" Target Facing in the particular situation of the TCA and VCA co-inciding. When that's not true, it ceases to apply, and other rules come into play. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 05:00:03 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 05:00:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > > > It says "Target Facing"... follow index to D3.2... follow D3.2 to > > diagram... > > use diagram to determine Target Facing. > >The diagram is an example and is clearly not all inclusive. The example >used >is one of a turreted AFV which has the TCA/VCA synchronized. This, as we >all >know, is not always the case. > Granted. >Look at the last sentence of D3.12: >"The Target Facing of any turret/upper superstructure hit is based on the >target's TCA - not its VCA." > True... when it is important to distinguish a "hit" on either the turret or the hull. >Clearly the "Facing" is not solely dependant on the Hull. The turret and >hull can and very often do have a different facing. That being the case a >MOL attack vs a vehicle which is presenting a rear TCA facing and a front >VCA facing creates a problem if one has no mode to determine hit location. > Again true... if it is necessary to determine the hit location. > >See D3.12...clearly VCA and TCA can have different facings...even to the >point of being opposite of each other. > Yes they can. I agree that it is sometimes important. > >See above. > You've given a fairly decent summation of how TCA and VCA can present different Target Facings. Where is the rule stating that MOL uses Hit Location? 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 Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com Fri Aug 6 05:14:19 2004 From: Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com (Paul.Sidhu@us.sanofi.com) Date: Fri Aug 6 05:11:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] The good, the bad and the ugly - 2004 WBC AAR part I In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Listeroids, Had a great time at the 2004 WBC near Baltimore. My buds Ron Duenskie and Gary Mei drove down with me and we ended up taking 1st, 2nd and 3rd. On the way back we discussed who was the good, bad and ugly- needless to say opinions varied. Thanks to Jeff Evich for organizing a smooth and fun tourney. The pre-con idea seemed to work well as most people participated in the Sat-Sun portion without having to take Monday off. About half stuck around for Monday. Total participation was back up to the mid-thirties. Game 1 J88 Escape to Wiltz vs Rob Seulowicz Dr Rob is a friend from NYC and a good asl'er with whom I had a great desert game at ASLOK where I had my greatest piece of ASL luck ever - 8 black cards in a row from an 8-4 draw pile. We diced for sides and I got the germans. This one has a plt of 447s in a blocking position against the exit of about 15 US squads led by a 10-2, with a stuart and an M8 AC. The kicker is that a company of 9 467/447s is chasing the GIs so the US has to pull off a fighting withdrawal plus an overrun of the 447 platoon, no easy task. I split up the german company into two groups, one heading towards bd 17 village and one taking the hill board road. Rob loaded a squad on the stuart and booked towards the hill but allowed me free access to the 17w4 level 1 bldg, so in turn 2 I sent 3 squads plus 2 MMG and a lmg up to level 1 there. This severely restricted the turn 2 US entry and drew the attention of Mr 10-2. Turns 3-5 the GIs beat up on both halves of the german company and by the end of turn 6 only 1 GO 447 and 1.5 broken squads were left. However this drew too much strength away from the exit and Rob ran out of time. 1-0 Game 2 G33 Awakening of Spring vs Barry Smith Barry from Ithica, NY had just squeaked out a win from my bro JR Tracy (who self-rallied and came back to take 4th) so I knew he was someone to watch out for. This very cool 1945 heavy metal scenario has 10 AFVs (2 KT, 2 Tigers, 4 Panthers, 2 Jgpz V) with 16 nasty 658/548 SS squads vs 10 rusky 458/447 with 85L and 100L guns. The germans needs to cross 3.5 boards and (the usual VC pick) exit about 1/2 their OB (36 VP). Tn 3 the russions get 3 IS-2m and 3 SU-100s. One key issue is that all the russion afv's and the 100L gun can kill german AFVs but only the KT and JgPzV 88LLs can kill the IS-2s. The 85L gun and the Panthers and Tigers are essentially infantry support. I had played this one before and knew the russians didn't have enough force to stop both halves of the german attack. So I decided to put all the russions on their left side and let the germans run free on the other. The 100L killed a KT and a Panther and then spent the rest of the game dueling with a HD KT to no effect except to keep the KT out of the rest of the armor melee. Barry had the rest of his troops do a student body left to bypass my defenders. By turn 3 the SS were well established on half of Bd 17 with the russian infantry pressuring their flank. However Barry made a mistake in using a panther and both Tiger Is to screen his force from the tn 3 russian afv's. With little chance of harm I rolled up the 3 IS-2s - scratch 3 panzers. Turns 4+5 the mist intensified while the german infantry and remaining tanks penetrated the bd 17 woods mass. The repositioned IS-2s and Su-100s took on the 4 remaining german afvs and killed 3. While their was only 3 cvps of infantry lost on each side, the loss of most of the german armor caused Barry to throw it in. A good fun game. 2-0 Game 3 Directive Number Three vs Ken Dunn Local Ken designed the excellent OVHS historical module (thanks Ken). We picked this manly 6/41 armor fest. I had played it and before selecting sides we agreed that the germans got the balance (one more PzIII) and also could use platoon move (sleaze). We diced for sides and I got the russians. They have 3 T-34s and 16 assorted Bt-5/other afvs, and 6 motocross squads vs 2 75* PzIV, (now) 4 PzIII with short 50's, 8 Pz38s, 2 PzIIs and 4 HTs with 468s. The russians need to exit and/or kill about 13 afvs. I set up and in my pre-turn to brought almost everyone on my far right. Ken got the first turn and moved to the bd 16/43 intersection. Rus tn 1 I sent one bt-5 and the AC and all the squads towards the koresh compound on bd 43. A couple long range 1(-2) shots handed me two broken hs, the rest disembarked into the compound behind the HD BT-5. Meanwhile one t34 stalled and the other pulled up in front of 3 german tanks on my far right. ken promptly rolled a 3 to DI one T34, then gunned down the abandoning crew, ouch. A few BT-5s stopped to cover the butts of the T34s while most stayed in motion to the rear. Gt2 the HD Bt-5 was gunned down and Ken moved both PzIIs to knock out the AC. The T34 knocked out a PZiii. Rt2 The T34 up front knocked out another panzer and the 2nd t34 moved up but then immobilized on a boxcars starting back up to change VCA after taking a point blank bounding fire shot (sure wish I could have changed VCA with an MG shot but that's not allowed in the MPh). The mass of Bt's also advanced close to the board edge in the bd 16 wheatfield, staying in motion except for a couple in the very front. Meanwhile in the center my lmg shocked a HT (which eventually died) and a 447 and a berserk 447 were able to take out the 2 Pz IIs in CC after they malfed their MAs shooting at the retreating AC. So a secondary sector paid off big with the killing 3 afvs. Gt3 Ken sent over a bunch of panzers to the area around the end of the hedge on bd 16 to take shots on any passing bt-5s and the T34 claimed its 3rd victim (with my personal 8-1 AL). Rt3 ken took about a dozen shots at a pair of BT-5s who crashed into the woods (passing their +4 bog check) without any result. This let me exit the needed BT-5s for the win. 3-0 to be continued... Cheers, Paul Sidhu paul.sidhu@us.sanofi.com Important: The Information in this e-mail belongs to Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc., is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of, or reliance on, the contents of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying back to the sending e-mail address, and delete this e-mail message from your computer. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 05:12:30 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 05:12:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >Bottom line, a MOL attack DR uses the principles of C3.9 to determine which >target facing is used in the case of an attack vs a turreted AFV which has >none-synchronized TCA/VCA. > Based on what? > >Try C7.21 where it says that MOL is eligible for the rear target facing >DRM. >That is a target aspect rule that specifically mentions MOL. > Oh. > >Hit location...no, but that wasn't your statement. Your statement was >"target facing" (see above). Thus, see C7.21...this is a "target facing" >rule which deals with MOL. > I believe I said that the turret Aspect Target Facing is not regarded for MOL. Yes, you must account for the possibility of a rear *Target Facing* when using MOL. That is defined in D3.2, which I take as the default definition for Target Facing unless specifically mentioned otherwise. Which it is not for MOL. 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 Fri Aug 6 05:23:02 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 05:23:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >You make the assumption that the diagram in C3.2 is all inclusive. It >isn't. >It is a simplistic basic example that was easy to deal with and less >confusing than using a diagram showing the TCA 180 from the VCA. > No, I make no claims that D3.2 is all-inclusive. What I claim is that D3.2 is the default definition of what Target Facing is. When told to use Target Facing -- with no other reference to turret or hull Aspect -- D3.2 is the *only* reference we have to go by. It is the default. Any other attempt to distinguish between a "turret hit" and a "hull hit" must be explicitly mentioned. Which it is not for MOL. > > > > It is a very, very straightforward progression using simple COWTRA. > >Only if one completely ignores D3.11 and D3.12. > Nope. D3.11 defines what the VCA is. D3.12 defines what the TCA is. TCA is important for many other things besides just Hit Location. The MOL do not differentiate between VCA/TCA, nor between turret Aspect and hull Aspect. MOL rules say "Target Facing", simply. And "Target Facing" is *defined* in D3.2. > >It is a basic example...not all inclusive. > More than just a basic example, D3.2 is actually the default definition of what Target Facing means. Any differentiation between the hull and turret must use a specific rule. C3.9 does that, but only for ordnance and TH DR. There is no differentiation for MOL. > >COWTRA only works when you use all the rules. See D3.11 and D3.12. > COWTRA works when you use what the rules allow you to use. The rules do not allow you to use a TH DR to determine Hit Location for MOL. The rules do not allow you to use a TK DR to determine Hit Location for MOL. Therefore, according to what the rules allow -- COWTRA -- there is no differentiation between turret and hull for MOL. For MOL, we use the default definition of Target Facing -- which is *only* defined in D3.2 and nowhere else. > >I agree...no hit location used or needed. The MOL TK roll uses the >principles of C3.9 o determine which target facing is affected. > Based on what? What rule tells us to use the MOL TK DR to "use the principles of C3.9"? > >You hung your hat on the D3.2 diagram being an all inclusive player aid and >it isn't. It was merely the base line example that would be easiest to >diagram. > You misunderstand me. I hang my hat on D3.2 being the default definition of D3.2, which we must apply as Target Facing unless specifically mentioned otherwise -- i.e. as with C3.9. D3.2 is no mere example. It is the definition upon which Target Facing is based. 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 05:25:38 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 05:25:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >The Perry Sez solves the original issue by using the principles of C3.9 to >determine which rear target facing (hull/turret) would be effected for >purposes of C7.21. Bruce says this solution isn't needed because rear >target >facing is solely dependant on the VCA. That is clearly not correct per >D3.11 >and D3.12. > Oh, so now you're in favor of Perry Sez??? ;-) Read it again. With regards to Hit Location, the Perry Sez in question is referring to FT. Not MOL. And I have only argued that *for MOL*, we can use the D3.2 definition of Target Facing and not worry about the turret Aspect. Besides which, that's what the *rules* tell us to do, and I am still waiting for someone to show me a direct rule which indicates that Hit Location is relevant to MOL. 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 Fri Aug 6 06:07:13 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 06:07:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > >A thorough and clear demonstration of COWTRA > >Well, er, except it's built on false principles. > Wrong. It's based on the default. > >In other words, Bruce B. is actually using COWSOTRA: Concentrating On What >Some Of The Rules Allow, while ignoring what other, more relevant rules are >discussing. > I only refer to the relevant rules. > >D3.2 only "defines" Target Facing in the particular situation of the TCA >and >VCA co-inciding. When that's not true, it ceases to apply, and other rules >come into play. > You're wrong. D3.2 is the default definition. In the case where a turret Target Facing must be determined, it is made in reference to this default. In other words, in order to differentiate for turret Target Facing, there must first be a baseline foundation against which to compare it. That baseline is D3.2. In other words, D3.2 applies at all times unless specifically mentioned otherwise. One of those "otherwise" situations occurs when a turret is "hit", in which case the Target Facing is based on the TCA. When not explicitly mentioned, the Target Facing is established by the VCA as illustrated in the D3.2 example. Is there a "turret hit" for MOL? No, Hit Location is not relevant (because not mentioned) and therefore we need not distinguish for the turret. Therefore the default applies. And that would be D3.2. COWTRA. I am staying completely within the bounds of written ASLRB text. 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 gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 06:22:50 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 06:22:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <391to2$5687b9@mxip14a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 07:25:38 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, krynndm@speakeasy.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > >The Perry Sez solves the original issue by using the principles of C3.9 to > >determine which rear target facing (hull/turret) would be effected for > >purposes of C7.21. Bruce says this solution isn't needed because rear > >target > >facing is solely dependant on the VCA. That is clearly not correct per > >D3.11 > >and D3.12. > > > > Oh, so now you're in favor of Perry Sez??? ;-) Please allow me to clarify my position on Perry Sez: 1) I think, as a proceedure/process, it stinks...but it is all we got. 2) Relative to #1 I take each Perry Sez on it's own merits. I try to be objective about them. 3) I have both agreed and disagreed with Perry Sez in the past. > Read it again. > > With regards to Hit Location, the Perry Sez in question is referring to FT. > Not MOL. Look at C7.344..."FT/MOL". Looks to me like the intention is to have them treated pretty much the same for TK purposes. Certainly, their TK numbers are different but, generally speaking (as with AP ammo) the rules for how to handle the TK is practically identical. > And I have only argued that *for MOL*, we can use the D3.2 definition of > Target Facing and not worry about the turret Aspect. Which is not in the rules. There is a turret "rear target facing" (RTF) and there is a hull RTF. Sometime those two seperate RTF are not syncd. For those un-syncd RTF vs FT/MOL one must be able to determine which RTF is affected. > Besides which, that's what the *rules* tell us to do... The rules tell us two things: a) What RTF is (D3.11-D3.2)...Hull RTF and Turret RTF are not mutually inclusive/exclusive. b) C7.21 applies to FT/MOL. Taking both a & b together one must come to the conclusion that a mechanism for determining which RTF is affected by a FT/MOL is needed. Perry has settled on the principles of C3.9. And I agree with the concept. and I am still waiting > for someone to show me a direct rule which indicates that Hit Location is > relevant to MOL. Well, seeing as how no one has argued for such a point I suspect you will wait a very long time. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 06:27:08 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 06:27:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > >I believe that a summary judgement to use the TK DR as the "hit Location" >is > >far beyond a simple clarification. It would be a change to the rule; an > >addition to the rule. And totally unnecessary. > >I think that's considerably overstating the case, Bruce. There are other >rules that work similarly > ... for instance? >and they work that way because it's important to >determine what target facing is being used. > And, when necessary, the rules state explicitly to determine Hit Location. > >The question, therefore, is >whether it's equally important for FT/MOL? The answer is clearly "yes". > Ah, there you go with the "clearly" talk. It is *not* "clearly yes". >D3.2 is not the sole discussion on Target Facing, which is just as well, >because if it was there would be no provision for turret facing *at all*, >for >*any* type of fire directed vs. the AFV. Fortunately, we know that this is >not the case, as (somewhat bizarrely) the important rule about turrets is >found at C3.9 (which D3.2 doesn't even refer to!). > Maybe not the sole discussion, but D3.2 is the *definition* of Target Facing. Any exception -- such as for turrets -- must be explicitly mentioned somewhere. They are mentioned in C3.9, in the context of ordnance TH DR. >The important thing about C3.9 is that it explicitly states that the >turret, >if struck, determines the Target Facing -- i.e., it overrides everything >found >in D3.2. > *The* important thing about C3.9 is that it only applies to ordnance TH DR, unless another rule specifically mentions to use it. >In essence, D3.2 really tells us nothing other than how the target >"arcs" are defined on the hexgrid > Actually, D3.2 defines what Target Facing is. It is the default to use when establishing Target Facing. This default is only overridden when specifically mentioned. ; the *important* information is in C3.9. >This is reinforced by both A22.612 and C3.71, which emphasises that it's >the >rear *Target Facing* that is relevant. > Yep. And the default "Target Facing" definition is found in D3.2. Any exceptions -- such as for turrets -- must be stated somewhere. C3.9 is important for ordnance TH DR, in order to determine the correct AF to use. C3.9 is otherwise only important if referred to elsewhere in the rules. >Given that a FT/MOL's TK# is increased if the target's rear facing is >struck, >and the facing is determined by whether the turret or the hull is struck -- The MOL rules say nothing about whether the turret or hull is struck. >i.e., C3.9 is the determining rule, NOT D3.2 -- a mechanism for determining >it >is indeed important. > C3.9 is important only when a TH DR is used, so that we may determine the correct AF to use. >The use of the TK DR as that mechanism is utterly >unsurprising given that the same mechanism is used by *other* weapons that >also do not need to make a TH DR. > ... for instance? >(Even the mightiest multi-hex OBA barrage >must determine whether it strikes the hull or the turret.) > Yeah, and it is *explicitly stated*. >Hit Location is an >important AFV combat concept; you can't just wave your hands and make it go >away when it's inconvenient. > I'm not "making it go away". I'm stating that Hit Location is not relevant for MOL attacks. >[The logical extension of *your* argument, Bruce, is that C3.9 is >*overruled* >by D3.2. It is, after all, the higher rule number, and it makes no >exceptions >for C3.9, which it clearly contradicts on the matter of defining Target >Facing. > That would be correct using Rules Order Precedence. I'm not going there, however... >Therefore, C3.9 is only relevant for determining what AF is used >(when relevant), and Target Facing is *always* defined by D3.2. >Personally, I >don't believe that, but it is what *you're* arguing, if you follow it >through.] > What I am arguing is that the Target Facing defined in D3.2 is the default. By extension, the VCA determines the default Target Facing unless specifically mentioned elsewhere. When a turret is hit by ordnance, we are told to base the Target Facing "on its TCA, not its VCA". I take that as meaning that the VCA is the default Target Facing, unless there is some rule to account for a turret hit. MOL do not account for turret "hits". > >The HD issue I'm less happy about; the rules are somewhat contradictory. >D4.2 >makes no EXC for FT/MOL, therefore FT/MOL attacks must have some mechanism >for >determining whether the hull is hit or not. On the other hand, D4.21 >specifies that a target is only HD if the attack would be penalised by TEM, >which is not true for FT attacking on the IFT (although it *is* true for >MOL >attacking on the IFT!). I would cautiously conclude that FT *are* exempt >from >worrying about HD and that MOL are not. Given that they need to worry >about >it, a mechanism for determining it must exist; again, we are only left with >the TK DR as that mechanism. > This is compelling. Too bad the rules don't address it. (I'm not trying to be sarcastic.) >Frankly, I'm boggled by the concept that the rules have the foresight to >tell >us explicitly how to determine the Target Facing when the firer of the >FT/MOL >is in the same Location as the target, and yet completely omit the >far-more-likely case of the firer being in a different Location! > Well, *I* am perfectly comfortable using the default definition given in D3.2 for MOL. The rules don't state otherwise, and I don't see any reason to conjure some mechanism to determine whether the MOL "hit" the turret. You can argue all you want about the "combat principle" of Hit Location, etc., etc. But you are arguing what The Rules Should Say. The MOL rules do not account for Hit Location, nor do I believe they should. And in case you've forgotten, I stated in my original reply to the question that, based on what the rules say, my conclusions were My Opinion. Now please stop arguing about "principles", and show me a rule that causes me to determine Hit Location for MOL... 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 From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 06:42:57 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 06:43:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3a57rt$55a67c@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 08:07:13 CDT > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, krynndm@speakeasy.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > D3.2 is the default definition. In the case where a turret Target Facing > must be determined, it is made in reference to this default. > Hmmm...it seems COWTRA has quickly gone out the window for Mr.Bakken. Please give me a rules reference for the D3.2 diagram/rule being "the default definition" of target facing. It seems the very specific rules of D3.11 & D3.12 have thrown Bruce for a loop. So much so that he has decided to "make it up" as he goes along. > In other words, in order to differentiate for turret Target Facing, there > must first be a baseline foundation against which to compare it. That > baseline is D3.2. That is a total assumption not supported by the rules. What D3.2 shows us is the simplest case for target facing. They didn't have room to detail a diagram for every possible permutation of turret vs hull CA. So they used the easiest/simplest view. That is all that D3.2 is about. > In other words, D3.2 applies at all times unless specifically mentioned > otherwise. WOW! Bruce has now taken COWTRA shot it in the head a couple of times, cut it into small peices, tossed it in a drum of acid, and dumped it in the bay. I expect to receive a dead fish wrapped in a copy of the page 1 from the ASLRBv2 any day now. > One of those "otherwise" situations occurs when a turret is "hit", in which > case the Target Facing is based on the TCA. When not explicitly mentioned, > the Target Facing is established by the VCA as illustrated in the D3.2 > example. Bruce, will the services for COWTRA be at the church or grave side? > Is there a "turret hit" for MOL? No, Hit Location is not relevant (because > not mentioned) and therefore we need not distinguish for the turret. > Therefore the default applies. And that would be D3.2. > > COWTRA. Nothing you have said regarding D3.2 is COWTRA. It is totally fictitious. There is no "default" aspect noted in the rule for D3.2. Your just making that up. D3.2 shows one possible example of RTF. To extrapolate anything more from it is fallacious. > I am staying completely within the bounds of written ASLRB text. > Bwaaaaahahahahahaha... Oh, man, that was great. I wish I could have seen your face when you typed that part. I bet your were dead-panning it all the way...like looking serious and stuff. Your great at this Bruce. I mean, if I hadn't been playing this game for 17+ years I probably would have fallen for it hook, line, & sinker! I will be smiling all day after that one...thanks Bruce. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 07:07:32 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:07:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > > > D3.2 is the default definition. In the case where a turret Target >Facing > > must be determined, it is made in reference to this default. > > > >Hmmm...it seems COWTRA has quickly gone out the window for Mr.Bakken. >Please give me a rules reference for the D3.2 diagram/rule being "the >default definition" of target facing. Index, page 25, 2nd Ed ASLRB. "Target Facing: D3.2" > >Nothing you have said regarding D3.2 is COWTRA. It is totally fictitious. >There is no "default" aspect noted in the rule for D3.2. Just the Index, which defines Target Facing as D3.2. And then there's D3.2, which tells us to use the diagram to determine Target Facing. And then there's the diagram: "Target Facing is determined as depicted in the diagram, depending on which target hexside is crossed by the firing unit's LOS." That seems like a "default" to me. Very explicit. To use any other point of reference would require a specific statement, such as "a turret hit uses the TCA to determine Target Facing". I have no problem with that. The problem is that "turret hit" has no relevance to MOL. Or does it? Show me where? > >I will be smiling all day after that one...thanks Bruce. > You're welcome. 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 gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 07:18:05 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:18:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3948se$56ig84@mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 08:27:08 CDT > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > >In essence, D3.2 really tells us nothing other than how the target > >"arcs" are defined on the hexgrid > > > > Actually, D3.2 defines what Target Facing is. It is the default to use when > establishing Target Facing. This default is only overridden when > specifically mentioned. There is _NO_ such default statement in D3.2. I find it amazing how one second you all, "it doesn't say that in the rules" and then try to back your agument with a statement that is no where to be found in the ASLRBv2. "Yes, we must use COWTRA...except for this part which supports my argument". The D3.2 is not a default...it is a specific example for one potential view of TCA/VCA RTF. The easiest and simplest view to diagram. You are making a huge leap in assumption for what D3.2 actually represents. A total departure from COWTRA. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 07:22:51 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:22:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <393hhm$36glms@mxip20a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 07:23:02 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, oleboe@tiscali.no, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > >You make the assumption that the diagram in C3.2 is all inclusive. It > >isn't. > >It is a simplistic basic example that was easy to deal with and less > >confusing than using a diagram showing the TCA 180 from the VCA. > > > > No, I make no claims that D3.2 is all-inclusive. > > What I claim is that D3.2 is the default definition of what Target Facing > is. Please site the rule that states _specifically_ that D3.2 is the "default definition" of target facing. If you can't then your so called "COWTRA" argument is total hypocracy. You can't challenge others to "show you the rule" and then base your whole argument on a none existent rule. There is no such thing in the ASLRB as the "default" target facing...your just pulling that out of your whazoo. Nothing you have outlined regarding the use of a "default" target facing can be found anywhere in the rules. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 07:23:04 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:23:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > > And I have only argued that *for MOL*, we can use the D3.2 definition of > > Target Facing and not worry about the turret Aspect. > >Which is not in the rules. There is a turret "rear target facing" (RTF) and >there is a hull RTF. Sometime those two seperate RTF are not syncd. For >those un-syncd RTF vs FT/MOL one must be able to determine which RTF is >affected. > The *only time* we have to distinguish between a turret Target Facing and a hull Target Facing is if either is "hit". The only time a turret/upper superstructure is "hit" is if there is a TH DR. Or in the case of DC, where we are *explicitly told* to use the Position DR for Hit Location. Or for OBA/Indirect Fire, where we are *explicitly told* to use the IFT DR for Hit Location. If not explicitly directed, the *only* time that Hit Location -- and thus, which of the turret/hull is "hit" -- is when ordnance use a TH DR, and AF must apply. > >The rules tell us two things: >a) What RTF is (D3.11-D3.2)...Hull RTF and Turret RTF are not mutually >inclusive/exclusive. >b) C7.21 applies to FT/MOL. > No, D3.11 defines VCA, and D3.12 defines TCA. D3.11 further says to use VCA for Target Facing for a "hull hit", and D3.12 says to use TCA for Target Facing for a "turret/upper superstructure hit". In the absence of any "hit" differentiation, then D3.2 stands... by the diagram. >Taking both a & b together one must come to the conclusion that a mechanism >for determining which RTF is affected by a FT/MOL is needed. Perry has >settled on the principles of C3.9. And I agree with the concept. > Taking both a) and b) together, and barring any differentiation to the contrary, we can only apply D3.2 to the situation. That's *all* that the rules state about MOL. > and I am still waiting > > for someone to show me a direct rule which indicates that Hit Location >is > > relevant to MOL. > >Well, seeing as how no one has argued for such a point I suspect you will >wait a very long time. > The reason no one has argued for Hit Location for MOL, is that it does not exist. If Hit Location for MOL does not exist, then how can C3.9 apply? If C3.9 does not apply to MOL, it stands that TCA is irrelevant for MOL. If TCA is irrelevant for MOL, then how can Target Facing be applied to MOL? Quite simply. First, go to the Index to find "Target Facing". Follow the entry to D3.2. Read D3.2 and apply the diagram, like we're instructed. Then stop. You're done. COWTRA, that is how it works for MOL. Any other extrapolation for Target Facing is not supported by the rules themselves. These extrapolations are only conjured by reference to other rule mechanics; one may argue that MOL *should* be treated the same way, and I might even agree. I am arguing that MOL *are not* treated the same way. If it came down to it, I would argue with Perry to just leave it well enough alone. To change it would require Errata, because where else is a TK DR used to determine Hit Location? 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 From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 07:27:04 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:27:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3a5h63$5cl4gt@mxip11a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 07:12:30 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, JPCole@agric.wa.gov.au, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > >Bottom line, a MOL attack DR uses the principles of C3.9 to determine which > >target facing is used in the case of an attack vs a turreted AFV which has > >none-synchronized TCA/VCA. > > > > Based on what? The "Perry Sez"...certainly a poor argument but, like I said, it is all we got. OTOH, the "Perry Sez" is certainly no worse than this fictitious "default target facing" BS you keep spouting regarding D3.2. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 07:32:09 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:32:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3a5840$4cbq6o@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 07:00:03 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, oleboe@tiscali.no, aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: RE: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > Where is the rule stating that MOL uses Hit Location? I nwill show you my none existant rule when you show me yours regarding "default target facing". Seriously, there isn't one hence the need for the "Perry Sez". I find this "Perry Sez" prefferable to the "default target facing" concept which might create it's own set of issues. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 07:32:56 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:32:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >Please site the rule that states _specifically_ that D3.2 is the "default >definition" of target facing. If you can't then your so called "COWTRA" >argument is total hypocracy. > Index & Glossary. Page 25. "Target Facing: D3.2". If that is not a definition, then what is? My understanding and use of the word "default" is based on common usage, not ASLRB-Speak. It is what should be applied unless directed otherwise or some other condition supercedes it. Unless I am told otherwise (e.g. for Hit Location purposes), I would accept a definition as a default. >You can't challenge others to "show you the rule" and then base your whole >argument on a none >existent rule. I was once told that the Index is an official part of the rules. 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 gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 07:35:01 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:35:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <394f2f$56bcbq@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> > > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 09:07:32 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, bprobst@netspace.net.au, krynndm@speakeasy.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > > > > D3.2 is the default definition. In the case where a turret Target > >Facing > > > must be determined, it is made in reference to this default. > > > > > > >Hmmm...it seems COWTRA has quickly gone out the window for Mr.Bakken. > >Please give me a rules reference for the D3.2 diagram/rule being "the > >default definition" of target facing. > > Index, page 25, 2nd Ed ASLRB. > > "Target Facing: D3.2" And it specifically states "default target facing etc."...Bzzzzt, I don't think so. You assumptions regarding the rule not withstanding. ...but hey, thanks for playing. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From steven.dennis at autodesk.com Fri Aug 6 07:36:54 2004 From: steven.dennis at autodesk.com (Steven Dennis) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:36:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: Holy Shit!! You guys both need to be smacked! I am attempting to read the ASLML as a break during my training today and you guys are KILLING ME!!!!! I live close enough to Bruce B. to smack him, anybody want to take care of Tate for me?? Steve -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Tate Rogers Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 10:35 AM To: Bruce Bakken; bprobst@netspace.net.au; krynndm@speakeasy.net; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 09:07:32 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, bprobst@netspace.net.au, krynndm@speakeasy.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > > > > D3.2 is the default definition. In the case where a turret Target > >Facing > > > must be determined, it is made in reference to this default. > > > > > > >Hmmm...it seems COWTRA has quickly gone out the window for Mr.Bakken. > >Please give me a rules reference for the D3.2 diagram/rule being "the > >default definition" of target facing. > > Index, page 25, 2nd Ed ASLRB. > > "Target Facing: D3.2" And it specifically states "default target facing etc."...Bzzzzt, I don't think so. You assumptions regarding the rule not withstanding. ...but hey, thanks for playing. 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 Fri Aug 6 07:48:41 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:48:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3a5h63$5cm6ur@mxip11a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Steven Dennis" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 09:36:54 CDT > To: > Subject: RE: Re: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > Holy Shit!! > > You guys both need to be smacked! I am attempting to read the ASLML as a > break during my training today and you guys are KILLING ME!!!!! > > I live close enough to Bruce B. to smack him, anybody want to take care > of Tate for me?? > > Steve Ha...if it weren't for Bruce and I you wouldn't anything _to_ read. ...and your welcome. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 07:53:10 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 07:53:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >Holy Shit!! > Steve, you need to relax and just enjoy the ride! >You guys both need to be smacked! I am attempting to read the ASLML as a >break during my training today and you guys are KILLING ME!!!!! > But you love it, don't you? Don't you? Besides, the ASLML has been really lame lately. Come on, we need *something* to read besides SSR questions, AARs, or another "MMP sucks" rant... >I live close enough to Bruce B. to smack him, anybody want to take care >of Tate for me?? > Just try it, big boy. ;-) If you live close enough to me, then why the hell aren't we playing? Contact me off-list if you're interested, perhaps we can cook something up (time permitting). Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Planning a family vacation? Check out the MSN Family Travel guide! http://dollar.msn.com From styson at fchoice.com Fri Aug 6 08:18:13 2004 From: styson at fchoice.com (Sam Tyson) Date: Fri Aug 6 08:18:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Balance Provisions Message-ID: Are there any recommendations for: KE5 Beyond the Pakfronts Germ 42, Russ 21 J54 Showtime Russ 16, Germ 6 Is the printed balance enough in these two? From ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk Fri Aug 6 08:21:31 2004 From: ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Binyamin=20Jones?=) Date: Fri Aug 6 08:21:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Warning Don't Read the Mol vs AFV thread! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040806152131.89134.qmail@web25101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> it's really a shitty flame b e n ___________________________________________________________ How much mail storage do you get for free? Yahoo! Mail gives you 100MB! Get Yahoo! Mail http://uk.mail.yahoo.com From william.stoppel at verizon.net Fri Aug 6 11:35:31 2004 From: william.stoppel at verizon.net (william.stoppel) Date: Fri Aug 6 08:33:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Balance Provisions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I think the balance for KE5 is sufficient to balance the scenario. In Showtime the balance isn't the important thing. Its all in the bid IMO. He who moves first is going to win the scenario 9 out of 10 times. Bill -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Sam Tyson Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 8:18 AM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Balance Provisions Are there any recommendations for: KE5 Beyond the Pakfronts Germ 42, Russ 21 J54 Showtime Russ 16, Germ 6 Is the printed balance enough in these two? _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 tiscali.no Fri Aug 6 08:36:38 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Fri Aug 6 08:37:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <40FEE830000005C4@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, I won't bother to go into all the inticate details, but to me it looks like Bruce Bakken has one big problem with his argument, that seems to have been overlooked by Tate and Bruce Probst: If I've understood BB correctly, he's saying that C3.9, D3.11 and D3.12 don't apply since they're talking of where an AFV is being *hit*, and MOL doesn't have a To Hit roll, and therefore only D3.2 apllies. So far so good. But in my rulebook, D3.2 starts: "When an AFV is hit..." Of special interest is the word "hit". So to me it seems that if C3.9, D3.11 and D3.12 don't apply to non-ordnance like MOL, then D3.2 doesn't apply either (with the exception of an in-hex MOL attack, which is said to use rear target facing). So if we're to use BB's strict COWTRA, it seems to me that there's no target facing at all, which is a bit problematic since a MOL attack gets a +1 TK if hitting the rear target facing :-) ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com Fri Aug 6 09:35:39 2004 From: Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com (Paul.Sidhu@us.sanofi.com) Date: Fri Aug 6 09:28:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2004 WBC AAR part 2- 21, J87, A25 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 2004 WBC AAR continued, Game 4 - 21 Among the Ruins vs Mike O Leary Mike is another local fellow. Dice gave me the germans in this city fight with 23 666s plus a ft, 4 mmgs and 3 shermans needing to move 24 hexrows and exit 10 squads in 10 turns against 12 548s with 14 dummies, 4HMG/MMG, 2 PSK, a SAN of 6, some 2 SE of HIP and a 20L(20) gun. One interesting part of this one is that the germans sets up 10 rubble counters to channel US movements. I figured the US would try to move in a big blob down one of the two boards. so I set up to try to encourage a push down the german left. I didn't think I had the stength or number of troops top fight a fighting withdrawl so I tried to set up in strength on my left to stuff an attack there. Rubble went in 20 P10, P9, O8, T1, T2 and 21Q2, P1, O1, S7, S8. The 20L was in 20T10, 2 HIP 238/PSK in 20S5 and 20Q6(IIRC) in crest. HIP HMGs in 20U2(level 1) with the 9-2 and 21K2(2) with the 8-1. A stack of 4 dummies were in 21k3(2)(IIRC) and 20AA1(3) to try to draw early tank SMOKE shots. 548/MMGs were in 20T1 and 20R3. The rest of the dummies and troops were spread across the front. Mike spread out across both boards with a stack of 4 MMG/hs and the tanks set to suppress the suspected HMG locations. He took opportunity fire and just ranged in on the dummy stacks with HE. On board 21 Mike made slow but steady progress pushing me out of the rowhouse. Then I self-broke and routed most of my guys across the graveyard to where a couple squads were providing overwatch. Meanwhile on Bd 21 Mike had a hard time breaking out of the rowhouse area due to the FG limitations. A couple 666s on his right flank scampered through and found the 20L (scared them by tearing a chunk out of a bldg, but didn't have LOS to them). They found the HIP PSK dude in crest who burned the sherman at 4 hex range (on a 5). Mike shermans continued missing most of their HE shots and his MMG stack kept gacking its fire attacks. My 9-2 HMG stack then backed off a hex to the rear of its bldg where it could shoot unmolested at the US troops in the graveyard and proceeded to tear them up badly, giving my retreating troops a breather to reform. In the end Mike's losses started to add up and he threw in the towel. Good fun game. 4-0 Game 5 J87 Flames of Unrest vs Ron Duenskie That night I got matched up with my regular NJ gaming buddy Ron. He knew I wanted to play this one so he graciously choose it. He asked if I had a preference and I did but didn't want to give up the balance. He said he wanted the germans and I wanted the partisans so that's what we did. This is an interesting scenario in which 15 partisan squads with a 10-2, 10 dummies, 4 RB go up against 12 838/467 with 2 FT plus 2 sturmtigers, a tiger 1, a stug and 2 goliaths. The germans get CVP plus extra vp for crossing two boards and being next to the canal. The partisans can exit starting turn 5 which avoids potential casualties and increases the german CVP requirement. In addition the germans have a 23 CVP cap. There is a very cool SSR (which Jeff Evich wrote) gives the partisans 8 inherent FT attacks which have 12 FP (or an 8TK vs afv!) on a 1 or 2 dr. The game starts off with 4 flames and 6 rubble placed alternatively by the players before setup. We had flames in 45 EE4, FF6, X5 and 23 F9 and rubble in 45 DD1, FF2, V6, BB4 (which fell into BB3), CC8 and 23E9 (which fell into D9). I decided to try a board edge stuff to keep the germans from gaining a foothold and using their FP advantage. I fortified ee4/ee4(1), ee2, dd3, aa2, put RB in cc6/dd5, cc2/dd2, ee3/ff3, and aa3/Z2. HIP 10-2/337/lmg in ee4(1) [hoping theflame wouldn't turn into a blaze on a 10+], and 527x2, 80,70 and 2 DCs in ee2. 527 in ee2, 527x2 in dd2, 337x2 in ee3, 337 in ee4(1), Y3 (wa) and DD4. 337x2 +lmg in aa2 and bb2(1). dummies went in ee8, dd6(1), dd5, w2 and u2. Ron came straight in for the kill. However both sturmtigers failed their sN9 rolls in gg6 and dd0. an 8(-1) shot k slashed a hs entering gg6 which convinced him to advance on most of his infantry. the stug ate a FT in EE0. too cool. in Pt1 I broke up most of the germans in the ddo/eeo area but they managed to rout into gg1. The sturm in ddo got a 5KIA (!) on bb2(1). I advanced a 527 onto the sturm but missed it in CC and the sN rolled an 11 for NE. In Gt2 a sturm with a plt of infantry moved to dd4 after the tiger broke the squads with the 10-2. The ft and a dc killed them off except just wounding the lonely 10-2. both goliaths went for ee2 and the second one made it and got a 4 on the effects roll to wipe out about 5 partisan squads in the area (some of whom were behind the roadblocks which had 0 tem to the goliath). in Rt2 a berserk hs ran into the sturmtigers hex to prevent him from firing (can't shoot into own hex) while a 7-0 went heroic and rallied two squads. The 7-0 placed a dc on the sturm but the 16 TK vs 18 armor had NE. however in advancing fire a 337 found a MOL to burn the sturmtiger (which we speculated should blow up far more spectacularly than even a goliath). in Gt3 an 8-1 boxcarred a rally with a fatal wound to get to the 23rd CVP. at that point I only had about 4 GO squads and would have to have been very lucky to inflict more CVP. A pyrrhic victory perhaps, but I'll take it. An awesome pulse pounding game! 5-0 In previous years that would have been enough to take 1st as I was the last undefeated player but this year in a sadistic twist (for those of us having to drive 3 hours home) there was yet another round to play. Game 6 A25 Cold Crocs vs Gary Mei Gary is my other NJ regular partner. We just finished up a CG of Dien Bien Phu and know each other's style very well. The dice gave me the germans. I put hip hs in 24 p7 and 24 f5 and the 88ll guns in 23t8 and 23t10, hoping to cause some initial tank losses. I set up my 9-2 with both the HMG and MMG in 24 V8 where it killed a hs in cc10 on gt1 after pinning it on a 16 flat shot in BT1. in BT2 gary put his AR in a hex where he had no LOS and I cancelled the mission (per my option, strangely enough, in the rules). I took a 3 hex PF shot to burn one tank and Gary malf'ed the MA of another (although he soon repaired it). In BT3 both 88s shot (a mistake in hindsight as the crocs then knew they had an open field) and one got a crit on the 9-2 AL's tank. I also sent a squad over the canal to claim VP bldgs on the far side since they were outside german at start setup area and therefore uncontrolled. Since this was the championship I played pretty strictly including not allowing Gary to shoot smoke or call OBA after shooting regular fire attacks and not letting him continue one tank's movement after he went on to other units (which allowed me to then roll up my Jagdpnzers and blow it away, although fate intervened and I disbaled/recalled one anyway, for an even trade). I did let Gary keep a hs which he tried to move over a non-existant bridge and also allowed him to reposition his OBA observer which was outside his allowed set up area. Then the hurting began. One 88 malf'ed and the OBA began its pounding. My 9-2 broke on a 8 flat croc shot and was captured (along with eventually most of my OB) since my hipster couldn't hit the stopped tank right next to him (argh!). While I killed one of the crocs with a 2 hex pf shot, Gary methodically rolled up my defenses for the win. 5-1 In hindsight one of the 88's should have been positioned to knock out the croc's, Oh well, live and learn. So the three NJ guys each were undefeated against others and, since Gary had lost earlier to Ron, we had lost once to each other A to b, b to c, and c to a. It came down to tie breakers with Gary's opponents having had the most wins so he took home the gold (or at least the plaque). Nice job Gary! Thanks again to Perry, Brian and Jeff for throwing a most excellent tourney. Cheers, Paul Sidhu paul.sidhu@us.sanofi.com Important: The Information in this e-mail belongs to Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc., is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of, or reliance on, the contents of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying back to the sending e-mail address, and delete this e-mail message from your computer. From geoffreymorris at optusnet.com.au Fri Aug 6 09:35:45 2004 From: geoffreymorris at optusnet.com.au (geoffreymorris) Date: Fri Aug 6 09:36:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Another BV 3rd Ed. scenario nomination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004401c47bd3$6d18bc30$ae2b1cd3@poky> Personally, I would prefer the "Penetration of Princess Sandra", out now on DVD! ;-] -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of George Bates Sent: 14 July 2004 13:43 To: ASL Mailing List Subject: [Aslml] Another BV 3rd Ed. scenario nomination Has anybody suggested A17 "The Penetration of Rostov" yet? Looks like another knock-down, drag out city fight on the way to the Volga in 1942. 16 x 467 Landsers w/some IGs vs. 10 x 458 NKVD troops w/a 10-0 & lotsa dummies on board 1. Haven't played this yet, but I think I will soon. What's the scuttlebutt on this one amongst you listoids? George "evil minion of MMP" 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 _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 11:00:41 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 11:00:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3a6eho$5aptvk@mxip07a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Ole Boe" > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 10:36:38 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > overlooked by Tate and Bruce Probst: WHAT?!?! Them is fighten words pard! > So far so good. But in my rulebook, D3.2 starts: "When an AFV is hit..." > Of special interest is the word "hit". So to me it seems that if C3.9, D3.11 > and D3.12 don't apply to non-ordnance like MOL, then D3.2 doesn't apply > either (with the exception of an in-hex MOL attack, which is said to use > rear target facing). Hmmm...very good point. > So if we're to use BB's strict COWTRA, it seems to me that there's no target > facing at all, which is a bit problematic since a MOL attack gets a +1 TK > if hitting the rear target facing :-) Which is the very problem the "Perry Sez" tries to address. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From sambelcher at cablespeed.com Fri Aug 6 12:41:54 2004 From: sambelcher at cablespeed.com (Sam Belcher) Date: Fri Aug 6 12:41:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Balance Provisions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: If this were true, I'd expect a more even result in ROAR. Uness you're saying that 75% of the time the Russian moves first?? On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:35:31 -0700 "william.stoppel" wrote: >I think the balance for KE5 is sufficient to balance the >scenario. In >Showtime the balance isn't the important thing. Its all >in the bid IMO. He >who moves first is going to win the scenario 9 out of 10 >times. > >Bill > >-----Original Message----- >From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net >[mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf >Of Sam Tyson >Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 8:18 AM >To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: [Aslml] Balance Provisions > > >Are there any recommendations for: > > KE5 Beyond the Pakfronts Germ 42, Russ 21 > > J54 Showtime Russ 16, Germ 6 > >Is the printed balance enough in these two? > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.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 Fri Aug 6 13:46:37 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 13:46:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Warning Don't Read the Mol vs AFV thread! Message-ID: <3948se$5ei5rj@mxip08a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Binyamin Jones > Date: 2004/08/06 Fri AM 10:21:31 CDT > To: Bruce Bakken , steven.dennis@autodesk.com, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] Warning Don't Read the Mol vs AFV thread! > > it's really a shitty flame Oh yeah, and this is just a so much better post to read. Jeeez... Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 14:03:27 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 14:03:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >If I've understood BB correctly, he's saying that C3.9, D3.11 and D3.12 >don't apply since they're talking of where an AFV is being *hit*, and MOL >doesn't have a To Hit roll, and therefore only D3.2 apllies. > You misunderstand. My point is that there is no such thing as a "turret hit" or a "hull hit" for MOL. I also assert that Hit Location (C3.9) is not relevant for MOL. Show me any cross-reference between Hit Location and MOL... >So far so good. Well, no... >But in my rulebook, D3.2 starts: "When an AFV is hit..." >Of special interest is the word "hit". So to me it seems that if C3.9, >D3.11 >and D3.12 don't apply to non-ordnance like MOL, then D3.2 doesn't apply >either (with the exception of an in-hex MOL attack, which is said to use >rear target facing). > Nice try. A22.612 says: "... the Target Facing determines the facing hit." So there is still a "hit" involved, to put it that way. It's purpose is to determine Target Facing, just like A22.612 says. But what is Target Facing? Let's see... Index... D3.2... okay, no problem. >So if we're to use BB's strict COWTRA, it seems to me that there's no >target >facing at all, which is a bit problematic since a MOL attack gets a +1 TK >if hitting the rear target facing :-) Nope, wrong again. A22.612 actually uses the word "hit" in relation to Target Facing. So it is consistent -- and no surprise to me -- that the defining rule for Target Facing (D3.2) should start out with "When an AFV is hit..." The only time that a TCA is used to determine Target Facing is for a turret hit. Which is determined by Hit Location (C3.9)... which is specifically invoked by certain rules when applicable (DC, OBA)... and which is not mentioned at all for MOL... Therefore, all that we can use for a MOL Target Facing "hit" is D3.2 -- which we found by referring to the index, and whose paragraph title is "TARGET FACING", which says, "Target Facing is determined as depicted in the diagram..." The diagram illustrates a vehicle and shows Front/Side/Rear in relationship to that vehicle's VCA. Unless a rule specifically tells me to use the TCA for Target Facing, it is this diagram that I am instructed to use. I need not speculate any further, because the MOL rules do not mention Hit Location (in the same manner as say DC or OBA does). Even if it occurs to me to check out the Hit Location rules, there is still nothing there that applies to a MOL attack. So, by staying fully within what the rules say about MOL, I have fully Concentrated On What The Rules Allow. I have not willfully ignored any rules; they simply do not apply to MOL. Next! 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 Fri Aug 6 14:08:55 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 14:08:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Warning Don't Read the Mol vs AFV thread! Message-ID: You might say we're engaging in a "flame war". I wouldn't, but you might... Bruce Bakken >From: Binyamin Jones >To: Bruce Bakken , steven.dennis@autodesk.com, >aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Warning Don't Read the Mol vs AFV thread! >Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 16:21:31 +0100 (BST) > >it's really a shitty flame > >b e n > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ >How much mail storage do you get for free? Yahoo! Mail >gives you 100MB! Get Yahoo! Mail http://uk.mail.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From afantozzi at tiscali.it Fri Aug 6 02:34:27 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Fri Aug 6 15:55:49 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20040804203444.01d8ca58@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> Hi Seth! Hi Bruce! I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open ground. I have difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level of 23X8 could enter directly 23X7. Given how the building is drawn, it seems that to enter 23X8 from 23X7 a unit should go in 23Y7 first.... but that's a reality argument... Andrea > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Seth W Fancher [mailto:swfancher@mindspring.com] > Inviato: gioved? 5 agosto 2004 2.37 > A: afantozzi@tiscali.it > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] Building Question > > > Sure it can. B23.23 multi-story building speaks to this type > of structure. > > Why may I ask, do you think it should not be allowed? > > Seth > > > > At 09:57 AM 8/4/2004, you wrote: > >Dear Listers, > >can a unit at the first level of 23Y7 advance at the first > level of 23X7? > >I am not really convinced that this move is legal... What do > you think? > > > >Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > > > >--- > >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > >Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 > > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Aug 6 16:31:38 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Aug 6 16:33:49 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040804203444.01d8ca58@mindspring.com> <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040806182841.01ba84d0@pop3.direcway.com> At 04:34 AM 8/6/2004, Andrea wrote: >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open ground. I >have difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level of 23X8 could enter >directly 23X7. Given how the building is drawn, it seems that to enter 23X8 >from 23X7 a unit should go in 23Y7 first.... but that's a reality >argument... ????? there is no bldg in X8 on board 23 your initialquestion was: "can a unit at the first level of 23Y7 advance at the first level of 23X7?" no mention of the x8 ghost bldg? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Aug 6 16:33:29 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Aug 6 16:33:58 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040804203444.01d8ca58@mindspring.com> <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040806183257.01b4c718@pop3.direcway.com> At 04:34 AM 8/6/2004, Andrea wrote: >Given how the building is drawn, it seems that to enter 23X8 >from 23X7 a unit should go in 23Y7 first Now if you are talking Y8? instead of x8? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com Fri Aug 6 17:02:07 2004 From: nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Fri Aug 6 17:04:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41141BFF.5060109@rogers.com> Only on the ASLML does a flame war turn into threats, which then turns into a new gaming partnership. Nat Bruce Bakken wrote: >> >> Holy Shit!! >> > > Steve, you need to relax and just enjoy the ride! > >> You guys both need to be smacked! I am attempting to read the ASLML as a >> break during my training today and you guys are KILLING ME!!!!! >> > > But you love it, don't you? Don't you? > > Besides, the ASLML has been really lame lately. Come on, we need > *something* to read besides SSR questions, AARs, or another "MMP sucks" > rant... > >> I live close enough to Bruce B. to smack him, anybody want to take care >> of Tate for me?? >> > > Just try it, big boy. ;-) > > If you live close enough to me, then why the hell aren't we playing? > Contact me off-list if you're interested, perhaps we can cook something > up (time permitting). > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ > Planning a family vacation? Check out the MSN Family Travel guide! > http://dollar.msn.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 gr27134 at charter.net Fri Aug 6 18:51:33 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri Aug 6 18:51:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions 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 Bruce > Bakken > Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 4:03 PM > To: oleboe@tiscali.no; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > A22.612 says: "... the Target Facing determines the facing hit." > > So there is still a "hit" involved, to put it that way. It's > purpose is to > determine Target Facing, just like A22.612 says. > > But what is Target Facing? Let's see... Index... D3.2... okay, > no problem. Right D3.2 gives an example of target facing...alternatively, a diagram showing the turret in a 180 position from the hull would also be an example of target facing...a diagram showing the turret at a 90 degree...etc...etc. Each such diagram would be a fully valid, legal, and per rule example of target facing. But, the designers didn't feel the need to diagram each and every potential example of target facing. The designers assumed that there would probably only be, at most, one numb noggin who would ever fixate on the single, simplest case, they chose as being the only example possible. > So, by staying fully within what the rules say about MOL, I have fully > Concentrated On What The Rules Allow. I have not willfully ignored any > rules; they simply do not apply to MOL. Pah...you have willfully ignored any rule that didn't support your completely fabricated "default target facing" concept. But I must say...I admired your spunk! Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 19:27:59 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri Aug 6 19:28:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > > > A22.612 says: "... the Target Facing determines the facing hit." > > > > So there is still a "hit" involved, to put it that way. It's > > purpose is to > > determine Target Facing, just like A22.612 says. > > > > But what is Target Facing? Let's see... Index... D3.2... okay, > > no problem. > >Right D3.2 gives an example of target facing... > You can't just dismiss D3.2 as just giving "an example of target facing..." It is *the* defined rule for Target Facing. It is the *only* Index reference for Target Facing. [Hit Location is given as a related topic, but C3.9 says absolutely nothing about any mechanic used for MOL.] The rule itself is *called*... "TARGET FACING". D3.2 is no mere example of Target Facing. In every instance where the TCA is used for Target Facing, it is explicitly stated. If the TCA is not explicitly stated to be used for Target Facing, what can we use? Oh, the rule that defines it. D3.2. "TARGET FACING". >alternatively, a diagram >showing the turret in a 180 position from the hull would also be an example >of target facing...a diagram showing the turret at a 90 degree...etc...etc. > Sure. Now *those* would be *examples*. But they would *only* be examples of Target Facing *if* the Target Facing is based upon the TCA. Of course, a Target Facing based upon the TCA is only valid when a rule instructs us to use Hit Location to determine Target Facing. The rules that instruct us to do so are those for ordnance (TH DR, does not apply to MOL), those for DC (Position DR, does not apply to MOL), and those for OBA (IFT DR, does not apply to MOL). There may be others, I can't think of them right now... but I am equally sure that they also do not apply to MOL. >Each such diagram would be a fully valid, legal, and per rule example of >target facing. > A Target Facing for TCA is *only* relevant when we *are explicitly instructed to use TCA for Target Facing*. >But, the designers didn't feel the need to diagram each and >every potential example of target facing. > I see. You are presuming to be in the mind of the designers, eh? You were there, I suppose? They consulted with you, so you know what they were thinking, eh? I thought that arguments of What The Designers Intended were in the same category as Reality Arguments... i.e., not to be applied to rules interpretations. >The designers assumed ... really? They did? >that there >would probably only be, at most, one numb noggin who would ever fixate on >the single, simplest case, they chose as being the only example possible. > Ah, you've reach the "name calling" stage. So now I am a "numb noggin". Last time I was a "numbskull". > > > So, by staying fully within what the rules say about MOL, I have fully > > Concentrated On What The Rules Allow. I have not willfully ignored any > > rules; they simply do not apply to MOL. > >Pah...you have willfully ignored any rule that didn't support your >completely fabricated "default target facing" concept. > One can't be said to "ignore" a rule that does not apply. I am fully aware of the presence of TCA, and that TCA *can* be used to apply Target Facing... but only when we are *explicitly instructed* to consider Hit Location. I am also fully aware of the CC rules... and the Portage rules... and the Overrun rules... But none of those apply to MOL either, so I do not consider them for MOL attacks. Likewise, I do not consider TCA for determining Target Facing for MOL. The reason I do not consider TCA Target Facing for MOL is because there is no mention of TCA in the MOL rules, and there is no mention of MOL in the Hit Location for Target Facing rules. > >But I must say...I admired your spunk! > "Admired", past tense? Rubbish. No one has ever proved to me (you least of all) that Hit Location applies to MOL attacks. You can bitch and grouse all you want about what you *think* should be the case. But until you show me *any* rule that cross-references Hit Location with a MOL attack... Oh, that's right, you can't. Because it doesn't exist. Since you've reached the name-calling stage, I can take that to mean that any further discussion with you on this matter is pointless. I'll continue the discussion with anyone who wishes to demonstrate via a rule reference that I should consider Hit Location for MOL attacks. I doubt that there will be any takers, since I have shown that there is no connection between a MOL attack and Hit Location. Nowhere, no how. Not in *my* copy of the 2nd Ed ASLRB. Buh-bye. 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 Fri Aug 6 21:58:33 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 6 21:59:09 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040804203444.01d8ca58@mindspring.com> <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:34:27 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open ground. It certainly is. However, that's not the hexside you were asking about, which was 23X7/Y7. >I ave difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level of 23X8 could enter >directly 23X7. So do I, given that 23X8 is an Open Ground hex and there is no "first level". Are you possibly referring to 23X7/Y8? If your question is actually "can a unit advance from 23X7(1) to 23Y8(1)", then the answer is "no", because that hexside is entirely Open Ground, i.e., those two Locations are not ADJACENT and .... Oh. I think I see your point. As far as I can tell, there is *no* rule that specifies that 23X7/Y8 are *not* ADJACENT in the upper levels! The relevant rule is B23.25 which indicates that the only requirement for ADJACENT is to be adjacent, same-level, and not a Rowhouse (or same hex and connected by a stairwell). What an unusual rules-hole. [A similar hole was only recently plugged -- it wasn't until errata printed in J5 (!) that LOS was granted between different levels of hex-pairs like this -- e.g., 23X7(0) to 23Y8(2)!] This is probably one of those things that everyone has always *assumed* to be the case ("infantry can't walk in mid-air"), and the assumption was so strong that no-one ever bothered to actually put it down in writing. Oh, Perry ...! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Aug 6 22:25:56 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 6 22:25:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 09:27:08 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >>I think that's considerably overstating the case, Bruce. There are other >>rules that work similarly >... for instance? OBA is the obvious example. You even admit as much later, and yet keep asking for examples. >Ah, there you go with the "clearly" talk. It is *not* "clearly yes". Yeah, it is. It's "clearly yes" because Target Facing is important in determining whether the rear modifier is applicable or not. >Maybe not the sole discussion, but D3.2 is the *definition* of Target >Facing. ... except when the TCA and the VCA don't co-incide, where it becomes *useless* as a "definition". To argue otherwise is fatuous. >>Given that a FT/MOL's TK# is increased if the target's rear facing is >>struck, and the facing is determined by whether the turret or the hull is struck -- > >The MOL rules say nothing about whether the turret or hull is struck. Here you're being fatuous again. The MOL rules don't, but C7.21 tells us that it's important whether the rear Target Facing has been struck or not when using FT/MOL, and the rear Target Facing is determined by whether the Turret or the Hull has been "hit" when the VCA and the TCA don't coincide (which, again, is a situation not described by D3.2, so invoking D3.2 is *pointless* in that situation). (D3.11 and D3.12 both say as much, also.) >I'm not "making it go away". I'm stating that Hit Location is not relevant >for MOL attacks. ... when the TK rules state otherwise, quite explicitly. >You can argue all you want about the "combat principle" of Hit Location, >etc., etc. But you are arguing what The Rules Should Say. No, I'm arguing what the Rules DO say: they say that Target Facing is important for FT/MOL attacks, and yet provide no mechanism for determining what the applicable Target Facing *is* when the VCA and TCA do not co-incide. D3.2 is NOT the answer, because it does not address that situation. >Now please stop arguing about "principles", and show me a rule that causes >me to determine Hit Location for MOL... See above. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Aug 6 22:34:00 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 6 22:34:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:53:10 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Besides, the ASLML has been really lame lately. Come on, we need >*something* to read besides SSR questions, AARs, or another "MMP sucks" >rant... While I agree about the rest, the one area in which the ASLML is currently "particularly lame" is the lack of AARs. I don't play frequently enough to make the difference, and I suck at writing AARs any way, but I try what I can. What about the rest of you guys? Surely some of us actually *play* this game! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Aug 6 22:54:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 6 22:55:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] J54 "Showtime" balance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 14:41:54 -0500, "Sam Belcher" wrote: >If this were true, I'd expect a more even result in ROAR. >Uness you're saying that 75% of the time the Russian moves >first?? That seems unlikely. The German wins ties, so the German can guarantee that he moves first by bidding "3". On the other hand, it's a brave Russian who risks giving the Germans an additional Tiger, so I'd argue that in most cases the Germans need only bid "2". That will give them the first move most of the time, and on the rare occasion it doesn't, that extra Tiger is worth its weight in gold. The other bids seem irrelevant to me. They're kind of interesting, but there will be very few games that they'll see play IMO, unless both players are particularly timid. (And if that's the case, the Germans will almost certainly lose any way.) The "problem" with this scenario (in terms of balance) is that the VC ask the Germans to do a lot. The German balance -- an extra sMG ht -- will certainly help them, but I don't know if it will be a big enough help in itself -- ht being particularly fragile in battles like this. The Russians are no pushover, and with the right mix of forces need not even be overly concerned about the Tigers. If the Germans don't pick the Tigers, the Russian job becomes even easier. The scenario is certainly fun to play despite the balance problems, but I think to realistically give the Germans an even chance the forces on each side would need some adjustment -- probably a little bit more German infantry and fewer Russian AFVs (or, of course, simply adjust the EVP needed downward -- say to 30?). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 06:42:30 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Aug 7 06:42:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: I am going to make one final effort to make my point. Please try to keep an open mind about what I am saying, because seriously, I think the respondents to my posts are a bit ossified about the necessity of a Hit Location being required in all cases. Read it very slowly, if you have to. Digest it before you respond. > > >Ah, there you go with the "clearly" talk. It is *not* "clearly yes". > >Yeah, it is. It's "clearly yes" because Target Facing is important in >determining whether the rear modifier is applicable or not. > I have *never* said that Target Facing was not important. What I have stated was that Hit Location is not important, and not relevant to MOL. Please study those two terms very carefully. Use the Index, if necessary. > >Maybe not the sole discussion, but D3.2 is the *definition* of Target > >Facing. > >... except when the TCA and the VCA don't co-incide, where it becomes >*useless* as a "definition". To argue otherwise is fatuous. > I see. You believe I am "complacently silly or inane; silly; foolish". Well thank you very much. (In all of the attitude I have thrown at you lately, I have never called you "foolish". I have never called you anything, actually.) The term "Target Facing" *does* have a definition. It is found in the "Index & Glossary". The Index points us specifically to a rule, number D3.2. The rule in question is even *called* "TARGET FACING". "Target Facing" applies to *all* vehicles. Every single one of them. Nowhere within that defining paragraph is there any reference to a TCA, and whether the TCA and VCA coincide. I reject the contention that such a situation was omitted due to complexity. It would have been very simple to include a turret on the same diagram, or to include a smaller diagram immediately below it. Or to add a brief phrase or EXC about TCA. The reason I refer to D3.2 as the "default" definition is because there is absolutely no other definition given in the ASLRB for what a Target Facing is. This *is* what Target Facing is. The only time a TCA is used for Target Facing is when there is a "turret hit". These situations are clearly indicated. They are conditional. Even when used, to determine a TCA Target Facing is impossible without reference to D3.2. I'll come back to TCA. Please read D2.32 and D2.321 *very* carefully. They deal with Bypass Target Facing. In these paragraphs, the language is very similar to D3.2. In 37 lines of text, the term "Target Facing" is applied in relation to the VCA. Even the TCA for Bypass is described in relation to this Target Facing. An example: "A TCA change to or through a Bypass side Target Facing." In other words, the relationship of the turret to the vehicle is given by its relationship to the Target Facing. If there was any such thing as an independent "TCA Target Facing", why wouldn't there be an adjective to clarify the VCA Target Facing? I.e., the above quote should say, "A TCA Target Facing to or through a Bypass side VCA Target Facing". But that is not necessary, because *by default* the Target Facing is always based on the VCA. By *default*, meaning that one *always* starts with the VCA when talking and reading and learning about Target Facing. In both D3.2 and D2.32, Target Facing is *defined* by its relationship to the VCA. > > > >The MOL rules say nothing about whether the turret or hull is struck. > >Here you're being fatuous again. > Well thank you again. And I happen to think that you are being close-minded. >The MOL rules don't, but C7.21 tells us that >it's important whether the rear Target Facing has been struck or not when >using FT/MOL > I do not deny that. >and the rear Target Facing is determined by whether the Turret >or the Hull has been "hit" when the VCA and the TCA don't coincide (which, >again, is a situation not described by D3.2, so invoking D3.2 is >*pointless* >in that situation). (D3.11 and D3.12 both say as much, also.) > A rear Target Facing is determined by LOS crossed. That is clearly described in D3.2 and D2.32. We only use the TCA for Target Facing when a turret Aspect has been hit, and when we are explicitly instructed to use TCA. > >I'm not "making it go away". I'm stating that Hit Location is not >relevant > >for MOL attacks. > >... when the TK rules state otherwise, quite explicitly. > Since you claim that Hit Location is explicitly stated in the TK rules, let's quote them in full, shall we? "The Basic TK# vs an AFV hit (or attacked by FT/DC/MOL) in its armored rear Target Facing is always increased by one. All aircraft hits vs an armored Target Facing/Aspect (C3.9) qualify for the rear Target Facing modification. Otherwise, normal Target Facing rules apply." Not one "explicit" word about Hit Location in there, unless you are talking about an aircraft hit on an armored Aspect. Even that is an oblique reference at best to Hit Location. In fact, with regards to MOL, it doesn't even use the word "hit" at all ("... an AFV hit (or attacked..."), and the wording is almost identical to the MOL rules in that *all* it says is "rear Target Facing". > >No, I'm arguing what the Rules DO say: they say that Target Facing is >important for FT/MOL attacks, and yet provide no mechanism for determining >what the applicable Target Facing *is* when the VCA and TCA do not >co-incide. > The Target Facing of a vehicle never changes, regardless of the relationship between the TCA and VCA. We are told in D3.12 to use the TCA for Target Facing when "any turret/upper superstructure" is hit. *How* do we determine when a turret "hit" is even important? In other words, when do we even care about whether the turret is hit? 1) "the colored dr of the Original TH DR" (ordnance) 2) "DC Position DR also serves as the hit location DR" (DC) 3) "original IFT DR vs an AFV to determine the hit location" (OBA, Area) In each of the above three cases, it doesn't matter whether or not the TCA and VCA do not coincide. But, the above three cases are the *only* times we even care about the TCA Target Facing. > >D3.2 is NOT the answer, because it does not address that situation. > This is what you're not getting, so try very hard to grasp this: the Target Facing is *always* based on the VCA unless we are told explicitly to use the TCA to determine Target Facing. And this: the *only* time we need care about the turret Target Facing is when there is need to distinguish between a "turret hit" and a "hull hit". This is called Hit Location. And finally: the *only* time we need to care about Hit Location is... *when we are told to*. The fact of the matter is, we are told exactly what a Target Facing is. We are also told when to *instead* use the TCA for Target Facing. I happen to feel that the rules are just fine and adequately address MOL attacks (and FT, for that matter), because Target Facing is defined, and I have no problem that the turret has no bearing on whether MOL benefits from a rear Target Facing (which, after all, is by default based on the VCA). You happen to feel that the Hit Location mechanism is missing for MOL, and is necessary. You have also been *trying* to use the rules to demonstrate that it is relevant for MOL, and IMO you have failed. The Target Facing rules are sufficient unto themselves. The exception occurs when we are told to base Target Facing on the TCA, which by the way we are *not* told to do in the case of MOL. > >See above. > I looked. I didn't see it. All I gathered from your circuitous reasoning is that you think I am foolish. Pull some words from the ASLRB, put some quotation marks around them, and thereby demonstrate 1) that Target Facing is not defined by default as based on the VCA; and 2) that to use TCA for Target Facing is even necessary for MOL. Good luck. Your assumptions are getting in your way. Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 10:49:40 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 7 07:49:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2004 WBC AAR part 2- 21, J87, A25 References: Message-ID: <41151634.2E10@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; ... hippety hop through the mailing list to read a peck of posts on MOL attack ... oh my, what is this? A stack of dry kindling in the form of Paul's very fine AAR. And what have we here? Why its a WP grenade ... Hmmmmm ... Must resist urge to toss grenade onto kindling and start Blaze ... must resist ... ah screw it! "Pling" "BOOOOM" Paul wrote; > Since this was the championship I played pretty strictly including not > allowing Gary to shoot smoke or call OBA after shooting regular fire > attacks and not letting him continue one tank's movement after he went on > to other units (which allowed me to then roll up my Jagdpnzers and blow it > away, although fate intervened and I disbaled/recalled one anyway, for an > even trade). I did let Gary keep a hs which he tried to move over a > non-existant bridge and also allowed him to reposition his OBA observer > which was outside his allowed set up area. I am not sure if Paul is trolling here but this excerpt from his AAR is amusing; "Since this was the championship I played pretty strictly including not allowing Gary to shoot smoke or call OBA after shooting regular fire attacks and not letting him continue one tank's movement after he went on to other units." In any match, at any tournament I would expect my opponent to abide by all the rules in the ASLRB, it is a competition afterall. What you do with the rules at home among friends is up to you but on the tournmaent field we will use all the rules all the time and we will not try to shame our opponent into letting us fire Smoke after we have popped off a burst with our kill stack. =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Aug 7 08:24:56 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat Aug 7 08:25:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Where is the "Otherwise" (was: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions) 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 Bruce > Bakken > Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 8:43 AM > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > Pull some words from the ASLRB, put some quotation marks around them, and > thereby demonstrate 1) that Target Facing is not defined by > default as based > on the VCA; and 2) that to use TCA for Target Facing is even > necessary for > MOL. > > Good luck. Your assumptions are getting in your way. And your _assumptions_ that there is any such thing as "default target facing" gets in yours. In fact there is no "default". It is either a rear target facing or not. The turret and hull can have different rear target facings. There is no conflict between D3.11-.12 and D3.2 because D3.2 is simply one single example of how to determine target facing. You have not presented one single shred of evidence to support your "default" claim. By standard ASL convention, one can not use any rule as a "default" unless the word "otherwise" is used. If you are correct then somewhere in D3.11-D3.2 the following statement (or something similar) should appear: "...otherwise the D3.2 diagram is used to determine target facing..." There could be more than one wording but it is absolutely critical that the word "otherwise" and "D3.2" appear in the statement. That is how every other ASL "default" rule works. Such a statement never appears anywhere in D3.11-.2, C3.9, or C7.21. Bottom line, D3.2 is not a default. The diagram in D3.2 is nothing more than the easiest example to visualize. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From ogiancola at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 08:36:21 2004 From: ogiancola at hotmail.com (Oliver Giancola) Date: Sat Aug 7 08:36:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] J54 "Showtime" balance Message-ID: Bruce, Good points. It seems to me that the Russian wants to bid 3, for two reasons. First, if he wins, he gets to bring on his tanks first, which will allow him to get into position and start shooting when the German comes on. If he doesn't, the German will move first and be able shoot at the Russian, potentially. In a 5.5 turn scenario, a Russian first-turn entry can make a big difference. Second, if there is a draw, the Russian gets the FB. The FB can help shoot up the German half-tracks (including the 251/sMG), which make up a large portion the German Armor OB, and thus, potential EVP. For these reasons, the key Russian decision as I see it is to pick the high ROF, 57L/57LL-equipped vehicles: the 3 Churchills and 4 SU-57s. These are very good at shooting up the German half-tracks, and even the Tigers (if the SUs can get A5). These guns are especially useful in the last turn or so, when the German will be pushing as many vehicles as he can off-board, hoping the Russian player blows ROF. In this regard, the extra h-t provided by the balance may come in handy. All of this seems to force the German to take the 2 FB in Chit 2. If he were to bid 3, he could most likely draw and get nothing. If he wins, he'd get to move first and get an extra Tiger; I don't think the Russian can let that happen, and so will want to bid 3 to prevent this. So, the German may want to pick Chit #2 and be sure of getting something useful, albeit at the cost of moving second. The German FB can also take on the Russian fighters. Perhaps the best thing the German can do is to pick one board (either 19 or 46) to exit, swamping the defenses there. Oliver >From: Bruce Probst >Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au >To: "Sam Belcher" >,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: [Aslml] J54 "Showtime" balance >Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 15:54:58 +1000 > >On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 14:41:54 -0500, "Sam Belcher" > >wrote: > > >If this were true, I'd expect a more even result in ROAR. > >Uness you're saying that 75% of the time the Russian moves > >first?? > >That seems unlikely. The German wins ties, so the German can guarantee >that >he moves first by bidding "3". On the other hand, it's a brave Russian who >risks giving the Germans an additional Tiger, so I'd argue that in most >cases >the Germans need only bid "2". That will give them the first move most of >the >time, and on the rare occasion it doesn't, that extra Tiger is worth its >weight in gold. > >The other bids seem irrelevant to me. They're kind of interesting, but >there >will be very few games that they'll see play IMO, unless both players are >particularly timid. (And if that's the case, the Germans will almost >certainly lose any way.) > >The "problem" with this scenario (in terms of balance) is that the VC ask >the >Germans to do a lot. The German balance -- an extra sMG ht -- will >certainly >help them, but I don't know if it will be a big enough help in itself -- ht >being particularly fragile in battles like this. The Russians are no >pushover, and with the right mix of forces need not even be overly >concerned >about the Tigers. If the Germans don't pick the Tigers, the Russian job >becomes even easier. > >The scenario is certainly fun to play despite the balance problems, but I >think to realistically give the Germans an even chance the forces on each >side >would need some adjustment -- probably a little bit more German infantry >and >fewer Russian AFVs (or, of course, simply adjust the EVP needed downward -- >say to 30?). > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"His only crime was being born delicious!" >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 _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Aug 7 08:38:56 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat Aug 7 08:39:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 9:28 PM > To: gr27134@charter.net; oleboe@tiscali.no; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: RE: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > > > > > A22.612 says: "... the Target Facing determines the facing hit." > > > > > > So there is still a "hit" involved, to put it that way. It's > > > purpose is to > > > determine Target Facing, just like A22.612 says. > > > > > > But what is Target Facing? Let's see... Index... D3.2... okay, > > > no problem. > > > >Right D3.2 gives an example of target facing... > > > > You can't just dismiss D3.2 as just giving "an example of target > facing..." > > It is *the* defined rule for Target Facing. It is the *only* Index > reference for Target Facing. [Hit Location is given as a related > topic, but > C3.9 says absolutely nothing about any mechanic used for MOL.] > > The rule itself is *called*... "TARGET FACING". > > D3.2 is no mere example of Target Facing. D3.2 is the starting point. But by no means is it cart blanc to ignore any other rule related to target facing (D3.11-.12). Such a use for an index reference would be unprecedented. I see no reason to continue this since it has dawned on me that it is has never been a matter of convincing you. I believe you are fully aware that there is no such thing as "default target facing". I think this is the classic Bakken attempt to make a point about how poorly the ASLRB is written as a rule book. So, until the next debate...see ya. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 08:49:37 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Aug 7 08:49:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >D3.2 is the starting point. > Yep. Against which all other references to Target Facing must be compared if we are to make any sense of them. >But by no means is it cart blanc to ignore any >other rule related to target facing (D3.11-.12). > I haven't ignored any rule related to Target Facing. I am stating -- and have stated -- that Hit Location (the only other rule that can change the point of reference to Target Facing) does not apply to MOL. Nobody has convinced me otherwise by ASLRB example. Quotes or otherwise. > >Such a use for an index >reference would be unprecedented. > Hardly. We have nowhere else to turn when seeking an ASL definition. > >I see no reason to continue this since it has dawned on me that it is has >never been a matter of convincing you. I believe you are fully aware that >there is no such thing as "default target facing". > It is not defined as such in the rule book. However, Target Facing is defined (both in D3.2 and for Bypass) in relation to the VCA. Any other reference to Target Facing must specific that something *other* that VCA is used. Absent any such reference, Target Facing is always based on the VCA, just like the rule tells us to. (Take a good look at the diagram.) > >I think this is the >classic Bakken attempt to make a point about how poorly the ASLRB is >written >as a rule book. > That would be a good enough reason. I just also happen to believe that there is no need to differentiate between TCA and VCA for FT and MOL. That is why it is never, and has never, been referenced in the ASLRB. The Target Facing rule is sufficient unto itself. By definition the Target Facing is based on the VCA. Too bad if you don't like it. There it is, clearly shown in D3.2, and clearly stated in the Bypass Target Facing rules as well. > >So, until the next debate...see ya. > Caio. Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 14:18:27 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 7 11:13:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2004 Canadian ASL Open Update: 07 August References: <41073186.7402@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <41154723.7F21@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; CASLO UPDATE INFORMATION: 1. If you are sure you are booking a room at the Viscount Gort for the tournament, please be sure to mention that you are attending the CASLO and you will receive their corporate room rate of $85 per night (plus taxes). Here is the hotel contact information. Viscount Gort Hotel 1670 Portage Avenue. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Phone: 204.775.0451 Fax: 204.772.2161 Email: info@viscount-gort www.viscount-gort.com/main.htm 2. CASLO Fee Structure (all prices are in Canadian $). Registration Fee 30.00 T-Shirt 20.00/25.00 for XXL Beer Mug 25.00 Coffee Mug 20.00 3. Tournament Dates: Friday, 17 September to Sunday, 19 September, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. There will be 5 rounds of hack n' slash with the winner being the player with the highest point total. 4. Pre-registrants are asked to pre-register on/before 31 August 2004. Contact Jim McLeod, CASLO Tournament Director. 5. The CASLO Tournament Guide is being placed onto the CASLA Website today. Here is the CASLA website address; http://members.shaw.ca/casla/home.htm 6. If you have any questions, please give me a shout. =Jim= From ogiancola at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 11:23:14 2004 From: ogiancola at hotmail.com (Oliver Giancola) Date: Sat Aug 7 11:23:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] J54 "Showtime" balance Message-ID: I should amend what I wrote regarding bidding. Here's how the bidding would work (more correctly, this time, I think): R3-0, G3 = German moves first, Russian gets FB or OBA R3, G2-0 = Russian moves first, German gets Tiger or 9-2 group R2-0, G2 = German moves first, Russian gets 458+LMG or MOL R2, G1-0 = Russian moves first, German gets FB or OBA R1-0, G1 = German moves first, Russian gets Hero+ATR or 8-1 AL R1, G0 = Russian moves first, German gets 9-1 AL or 658 R0, G0 = Russian moves first, German gets nothing I agree, Bruce, that the first two groups are where the key decisions are. Meaning, I could imagine most players on both sides bidding sides 2 or 3. The Germans may want to bid 2 to prevent the Russians from getting the FB, and in the hope that the Russians will bid 3 and thus give the Germans an extra Tiger (or, the 9-2 on the 251/sMG?) . That's probably the best case for the German player. If I were the Russian, I would bid 3. In the first 2 groups of situations above, doing so would either let me move first to take up positions against the extra Tiger and its friends, or I'd get the FBs. I could live with either of those choices. My hope, in doing so, is that the German bids 3, in which he gets nothing but the first move, and I'd get FBs. That's probably the best case for the Russians. (Note that, except in the mini-CG, there is no case where both sides would have FBs onboard, despite what I wrote earlier). Oliver _________________________________________________________________ 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 Sat Aug 7 12:32:26 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Sat Aug 7 12:32:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage Message-ID: <1091907146.5868.1.camel@kitchen> Greetings All, Here's the sitrep: A hs declares DT and moves 4 MF to enter a hex with a 5PP SW AND recover it. Can it continue to move or has it reached its limit? Any references/Q&A/PS would be appreciated. -- Virtually, Tom W From swfancher at mindspring.com Sat Aug 7 06:44:57 2004 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Sat Aug 7 12:47:59 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040804203444.01d8ca58@mindspring.com> <004f01c47c07$8707b0e0$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040807094023.01de2e90@mindspring.com> Hi Andrea! I think the coordinates may be mixed up! If your question is whether a unit could move from L1 in 23X7 directly to L1 in 23Y8, then I would agree with that...the intervening hexside is all OG. 23X8 is an entirely OG hex on my map...so no, a unit could not "jump" one story high and then into the building. Your original question...23Y7 is in the center of the building...and clearly 23Y7.1 is ADJACENT to 23X7.1. Are we mixing up coordinates? As I said, if you meant 23X7 and 23Y8, then I agree that movement should not be allowed directly between the two hexes at any level other than ground level. Be well. Seth At 05:34 AM 8/6/2004, Andrea wrote: >Hi Seth! Hi Bruce! >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open ground. I >have difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level of 23X8 could enter >directly 23X7. Given how the building is drawn, it seems that to enter 23X8 >from 23X7 a unit should go in 23Y7 first.... but that's a reality >argument... > >Andrea > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > > Da: Seth W Fancher [mailto:swfancher@mindspring.com] > > Inviato: gioved? 5 agosto 2004 2.37 > > A: afantozzi@tiscali.it > > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] Building Question > > > > > > Sure it can. B23.23 multi-story building speaks to this type > > of structure. > > > > Why may I ask, do you think it should not be allowed? > > > > Seth > > > > > > > > At 09:57 AM 8/4/2004, you wrote: > > >Dear Listers, > > >can a unit at the first level of 23Y7 advance at the first > > level of 23X7? > > >I am not really convinced that this move is legal... What do > > you think? > > > > > >Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > > > > > >--- > > >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > >Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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 > > > > > > --- > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > >--- >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 13:04:24 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Aug 7 13:04:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage Message-ID: > >Greetings All, > Greetings, Tom >Here's the sitrep: A hs declares DT and moves 4 MF to enter a hex with a >5PP SW AND recover it. Can it continue to move or has it reached its >limit? > If I understand correctly, the HS had expended 3 MF, then spent 1 MF to Recover the SW, for a total movement expenditure of 4 MF. Is this correct? This is very interesting. A HS using Double Time has an IPC of 2 PP, and a movement allotment of 6 MF. If it Portages a 5 PP SW, the difference between the Portage cost and the IPC is deducted from the increased movement allotment for Double Time. Thus, if the HS was Portaging the 5 PP SW at the start of ITs MPh, it would have only 3 MF. (4 MF + 2 MF [CX] - 3 MF [3 PP > IPC] = 3) It appears to me that if it has already expended 3 MF prior to the Recovery attempt... and since the Recovery attempt would put its expenditure at 4 MF... then a Doubling Timing HS may not attempt to Recover a 5 PP SW if it has already expended 3 MF, because the Recovery attempt would put it at 4 MF expended, and that exceeds the 3 MF allotment for a Doubling Timing HS that is Portaging a 5 PP SW. Thus, I would conclude that the Recovery attempt is not even allowed in your example, because the Recovery attempt would cause the HS to exceed its movement allotment. References: A4.44 ("Portage cost is assessed per item carried, not distance traveled") A4.42 ("An Infantry unit loses one MF for each PP carried in excess of its PP") A4.43 ("If a unit drops possession of a SW/Gun at the start of an allowed phase prior to expending-MF... that SW/Gun is assumed to have been unpossessed (and hence not portaged by that unit)...") That's my opinion. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From oleboe at tiscali.no Sat Aug 7 15:12:06 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sat Aug 7 15:12:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <40FEE8300000060C@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Bruce Bakken answered this question: >>Here's the sitrep: A hs declares DT and moves 4 MF to enter a hex with a >>5PP SW AND recover it. Can it continue to move or has it reached its >>limit? > >If I understand correctly, the HS had expended 3 MF, then spent >1 MF to Recover the SW, for a total movement expenditure of 4 MF. >Is this correct? > >This is very interesting. ... >It appears to me that if it has already expended 3 MF prior to the >Recovery attempt... and since the Recovery attempt would put its >expenditure at 4 MF... then a Doubling Timing HS may not attempt to >Recover a 5 PP SW if it has already expended 3 MF because the Recovery >attempt would put it at 4 MF expended, and that exceeds the 3 MF >allotment for a Doubling Timing HS that is Portaging a 5 PP SW. > >Thus, I would conclude that the Recovery attempt is not even allowed >in your example, because the Recovery attempt would cause the HS to >exceed its movement allotment. This conclution is incorrect. The recovery attempt can be done, but the HS will not be allowed to move any further if the recovery attempt succeds. The portage cost is *not* assessed until the carrying unit expends an MF while carrying the SW, so in this case it expends its 4th (or 5th or 6th for that matter) MF to recover the SW. Only after this MF expenditure is the SW recovered, and the deduction of 3 MF due to portage cost will not be done unless it expends another MF, which it cannot do as per Bruce's explanation above. I.e. Bruce's explanation is not valid for the recovery attempt, but for any MF expenditures *thereafter*. >References: > >A4.44 ("Portage cost is assessed per item carried, not distance traveled") I guess you mean A4.4 here. The cruicial point missing from Bruce's analysis is the continuation of the sentence he quotes. It continues: "even if a unit carries a SW during only one MF expenditure before dropping it, that unit may not recoup the portage cost used for that SW for use in the remainder of its MPh" As you see, it indicates that the unit must posess it for >= one MF. >A4.42 ("An Infantry unit loses one MF for each PP carried in excess of >its PP) Correct, but it is not considered carried unless the unit expends one MF while having it. >A4.43 ("If a unit drops possession of a SW/Gun at the start of an >allowed phase prior to expending-MF... that SW/Gun is assumed to have >been unpossessed (and hence not portaged by that unit)...") ...and the same will also apply if it recovers it and not expends any MF thereafter. In both cases are no MF spent while possessing the SW. For the final argument, check the A96 Q&A: A4.4 & A4.44 If a unit Recovers the SW at the end of its MPh (i.e., it expends no MF after gaining possession of the SW), is the portage cost assessed? A. No. {96} ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 17:08:53 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Aug 7 17:08:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage Message-ID: > >For the final argument, check the A96 Q&A: > >A4.4 & A4.44 If a unit Recovers the SW at the end of its MPh (i.e., it >expends >no MF after gaining possession of the SW), is the portage cost assessed? >A. No. {96} > Works for me. This *is* an *Official* Q&A, after all. ;-) Of course, you might have answered the question immediately with this Q&A, but I guess then you couldn't have gone to such great lengths to prove that I was wrong. I reckon you must have enjoyed it on *this* occasion. The conclusion is not as easily deduced as your explanation suggests, based on the rule wording. (I can hear it coming: "It's obviously clear.") ... guess I was just being foolish again. That's why there are Q&A, I suppose. But I have to wonder... since the 2nd Ed ASLRB was published *after* this Q&A, why wasn't the Q&A incorporated into the 2nd Ed ASLRB? Normally, I would disregard any Q&A that pre-dated the 2nd Ed ASLRB as no longer relevant, if it wasn't incorporated into the update. This particular instance could have been easily included as a simple sentence in the same breath as the "if it drops possession before moving" sentence. But no... rather than easily reading it, we have to ponder, look for it in the rules, and finally check with *another* source... which we may or may not have access to ... ... excuse me while I get this out of my system ... THE ENTIRE Q&A PROCESS SUCKS JAGGED ROCKS!!! Okay ... it didn't really help, but ... carry on... Bruce "*mightily* ticked off with the ASLRB structure" Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 7 20:42:41 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 7 20:42:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 09:42:30 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >I have *never* said that Target Facing was not important. What I have >stated was that Hit Location is not important, and not relevant to MOL. And what we have stated in response is that you are wrong, because to determine Target Facing you *must* determine Hit Location. You can't have it both ways. >I see. You believe I am "complacently silly or inane; silly; foolish". >Well thank you very much. I did not call you fatuous. I said that you were using a fatuous argument. I credit you with the intelligence to distinguish between the two. >The reason I refer to D3.2 as the "default" definition is because there is >absolutely no other definition given in the ASLRB for what a Target Facing >is. This *is* what Target Facing is. ... except when the TCA and VCA don't co-incide, as several other rules go to the trouble of pointing out, and which you appear to be determined to ignore because it's inconvenient to your argument. Well, we're not ignoring them. >Well thank you again. And I happen to think that you are being >close-minded. Because I don't agree with your argument? That's a very narrow definition of "close-minded". Do you think I haven't considered your argument? I have, and I reject it. It has insufficient support given what is said elsewhere. >"The Basic TK# vs an AFV hit (or attacked by FT/DC/MOL) in its armored rear >Target Facing is always increased by one. All aircraft hits vs an armored >Target Facing/Aspect (C3.9) qualify for the rear Target Facing modification. > Otherwise, normal Target Facing rules apply." > >Not one "explicit" word about Hit Location in there, unless you are talking >about an aircraft hit on an armored Aspect. Even that is an oblique >reference at best to Hit Location. No, I'm talking about the "rear Target Facing" phrase, and when the TCA and VCA do not co-incide, you need to determine Hit Location to verify whether the rear Target Facing has in fact been "hit". Perhaps I exaggerated when I said "explicitly"; I should have perhaps used "conclusively". >In fact, with regards to MOL, it doesn't even use the word "hit" at all >("... an AFV hit (or attacked..."), and the wording is almost identical to >the MOL rules in that *all* it says is "rear Target Facing". Careful. You've already argued previously that MOL attacks do "hit" their target. You can't have it both ways. And how, exactly, do you determine "rear Target Facing" when the VCA and TCA don't co-incide? The answer is not to be found in D3.2, because it doesn't address that situation *at all*. This is what you refuse to accept, and it's the point where your entire argument fails. >>D3.2 is NOT the answer, because it does not address that situation. > >This is what you're not getting, so try very hard to grasp this: the Target >Facing is *always* based on the VCA unless we are told explicitly to use the >TCA to determine Target Facing. No, *you're* the one "not getting it". I understand what you say. I believe you to be wrong. I have explained, in very clear terms, why you are wrong. D3.2 is not a strong argument -- indeed, when the VCA and TCA do not co-incide, it isn't *any* kind of argument. We don't need to be "told explicitly to use the TCA", we only need to be "told explicitly to determine the Target Facing". Which, in the case of FT/MOL, we are. >Pull some words from the ASLRB, put some quotation marks around them, and >thereby demonstrate 1) that Target Facing is not defined by default as based >on the VCA; and 2) that to use TCA for Target Facing is even necessary for >MOL. Again? I've already done it, more than once; it's not my problem if you refuse to read it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 7 20:55:01 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 7 20:55:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] J54 "Showtime" balance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0f8bh0h8c434rp3uvetv7knq1d7t05mfms@4ax.com> On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:23:14 -0400, "Oliver Giancola" wrote: >Here's how the bidding would work (more correctly, this time, I think): > >R3-0, G3 = German moves first, Russian gets FB or OBA >R3, G2-0 = Russian moves first, German gets Tiger or 9-2 group >R2-0, G2 = German moves first, Russian gets 458+LMG or MOL >R2, G1-0 = Russian moves first, German gets FB or OBA > >I agree, Bruce, that the first two groups are where the key decisions are. >Meaning, I could imagine most players on both sides bidding sides 2 or 3. >The Germans may want to bid 2 to prevent the Russians from getting the FB, >and in the hope that the Russians will bid 3 and thus give the Germans an >extra Tiger (or, the 9-2 on the 251/sMG?) . That's probably the best case >for the German player. > >If I were the Russian, I would bid 3. In the first 2 groups of situations >above, doing so would either let me move first to take up positions against >the extra Tiger and its friends, or I'd get the FBs. I could live with >either of those choices. My hope, in doing so, is that the German bids 3, in >which he gets nothing but the first move, and I'd get FBs. That's probably >the best case for the Russians. I would argue, however, that giving the Germans an extra Tiger for the sake of moving first is counter-productive. The terrain that the Russians enter in has a lot of cover potential, and they don't need to go too far to get into good firing positions; the Germans can't move far enough in their first turn to threaten many of them. First-turn movement is really not that crucial for the Russians; they'll still be where they need to be when the Germans come calling. As the Russian, I would not bid higher than "2" for that reason. As the German, I would not bid higher than "2" because I see a Russian bid of "3" as actually advantageous for the German, and a German bid of "3" is disadvantageous (the Russian FB could put a lot of hurt into the Germans; no sensible Russian player is going to choose the OBA). Losing that extra turn of movement is rough, but being attacked by FB is even rougher IMO. On the other hand, a bid of "2" gives the Russians only a minor benefit -- MOL are too unreliable to be a serious threat, and a single 4-5-8 is not going to be enough to make a difference to the end game. And, of course, there's no reason for either side to bid lower than "2". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 7 21:03:59 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 7 21:04:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2004 WBC AAR part 2- 21, J87, A25 In-Reply-To: <41151634.2E10@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <41151634.2E10@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 10:49:40 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >I am not sure if Paul is trolling here but this excerpt from his AAR is >amusing; > > "Since this was the championship I played pretty strictly including not >allowing Gary to shoot smoke or call OBA after shooting regular fire >attacks and not letting him continue one tank's movement after he went >on to other units." I also found this remark rather odd. I don't consider the above "playing strictly"; it's "playing ASL". In a non-tournament game with a player I don't play frequently, I will usually *remind* them if it looks like they're about to forget their OBA or play SMOKE out of sequence. I don't do this more than a couple of times though; after that if they forget, too bad. That's ASL, and I don't think it has anything to do with "playing strictly". My *regular* opponents already know that I won't remind them if they forget. In a tournament game I certainly expect my opponent to know the important rules of the game (unless I know he's new to the game). Not firing SMOKE out of order is one of those important rules. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 7 21:10:11 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 7 21:10:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 20:08:53 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >But I have to wonder... since the 2nd Ed ASLRB was published *after* this >Q&A, why wasn't the Q&A incorporated into the 2nd Ed ASLRB? Alas, there are several (well, a few; not too many) older Q&A for which this question can be asked. I suppose someone might put forward the argument that the compilers of 2nd ed. were "only human" or something equally ridiculous, but I reject the implication that mere humans had anything to do with writing the Rules to The Game. Indeed, some sections of Chapter E are definitive proof that humans had *no involvement* with writing the Rules .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 7 21:23:53 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 7 21:23:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 20:08:53 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >>A4.4 & A4.44 If a unit Recovers the SW at the end of its MPh (i.e., it expends >>no MF after gaining possession of the SW), is the portage cost assessed? >>A. No. {96} > >This particular instance could have been easily included as a simple >sentence in the same breath as the "if it drops possession before moving" >sentence. Actually, it is in the rules ... kinda sorta. In A4.4 we see the phrase "Otherwise, an unbroken Infantry unit can pick up and drop items at any point in its move provided it has sufficient MF to do so (subject to 4.431 and 4.4)." Neither A4.431 or A4.4 discuss the effect of excess PP costs, so we can disregard the references to those rules. So looking at the essence of what this phrase says: "An Infantry unit can pick up ... items ... provided it has sufficient MF to do so." IOW, the unit only needs sufficient MF to *pick the item up*; actually carrying it somewhere is a different kettle of fish. Which is essentially what the Q&A says. (What the rule *doesn't* make crystal clear is that there is a difference between "picking up an item" and "portaging an item" -- the former refers only to gaining possession of it, the latter refers to going somewhere *with* it.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From markgreenman at earthlink.net Sat Aug 7 22:05:01 2004 From: markgreenman at earthlink.net (Mark Greenman) Date: Sat Aug 7 22:05:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] J54 "Showtime" balance In-Reply-To: <0f8bh0h8c434rp3uvetv7knq1d7t05mfms@4ax.com> References: <0f8bh0h8c434rp3uvetv7knq1d7t05mfms@4ax.com> Message-ID: <4115B47D.1010300@earthlink.net> Hello, Bruce Probst wrote: > [snip] > >I would argue, however, that giving the Germans an extra Tiger for the sake of >moving first is counter-productive. The terrain that the Russians enter in >has a lot of cover potential, and they don't need to go too far to get into >good firing positions; the Germans can't move far enough in their first turn >to threaten many of them. First-turn movement is really not that crucial for >the Russians; they'll still be where they need to be when the Germans come >calling. > > > I believe, as the Russians, more significant than getting the first move is denying the Germans the extra MPh. With a scenario length of 5.5 turns, the difference is between 5 and 6 MPhs as the attacker. This is especially significant for this EVP/(and board progress) based scenario. From garymei at optonline.net Sun Aug 8 00:48:21 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Sun Aug 8 00:56:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WBC AAR Message-ID: Another wonderful WBC tournament. Many thanks to Jeff Evich for making sure everything ran smoothly, and my buddy Paul Sidhu for driving me down to Maryland and back. Game 1, Cattern's Position vs Arthur Davis. Arthur Davis was a relative newbie with regards to PTO, so we chose the simplest scenario in this round. I got the Japanese in this scenario with 6.5 squads, 1 228/mmg, and 2 leaders to defend against 9.5 tough 8 morale Australian squads. The Japanese later get 5 more squads to counterattack on turn 4. An interesting twist is that the initial Japanese forces are setup under No Move counters until they are either attacked, or have LOS to a known enemy unit. The Japanese can remove a number of No Move counters equal to the turn number in each of their rally phases. I setup most of my forces along the jungle line, with a squad in the victory hut. My HIP 237s were in the two kunai hexes in front of the woods line, hoping for some rout cutting shenanigans, or a 6-1 first fire shot against a Aussie stack. Arthur setup 9-1/3 648s with lmg along with a 248/mtr facing my right side and the rest facing my left side. He made a critical error by leaving a 248 in LOS of most of my force, which would've removed all the No Move counters instantly. I allowed him to correct that mistake by placing the hs a hex back out of LOS. The first turn saw Arthur cautiously move up without triggering any Japanese. He advanced 2 stacks adjacent to a 347/lmg/foxhole that I had guarding my left side. My 4+1 prep fire was ineffective, and his 24+1 return fire merely pinned me. In his turn 2, he opened up with everything, step reducing a couple of squads but freeing me from the No Move counters. After that, I played a skulking game. A couple of highlights included me bagging a broken 9-1/648 by advancing a HIP 237 and killing them in HTH close combat. The key moment of the game was when I had a 9-1/228/mmg/2 126s with enemy units in 4 adjacent hexes. I decide to take the risk and prep fire at a 8-1/2.5 458 stack, knowing that I could kill the stack if I broke him. I whiff on the 12+0 shot, but assault move a 10-1/2 448 stack adjacent. His defensive fire resulted in a 30+1 and 24+0 shot, but miraculously left a 128 crew still alive. That was critical since my advancing fire shot broke 1.5 squads who died for failure to rout. If the crew had died, those squads would've had an escape route. By turn 8, both sides were very bloodied, mostly due to close combats and FTR. Art had a 8-1/458 adjacent to 2 victory locations, so he needed another mmc to take the other location, since that 458 could only take 1 location. He had only one 648 in position, and it had to run 6+0 and 8+0 attacks to get adjacent. He passed the first MC, but pinned on the second, giving me the win. If he had passed the MC, he would've had a 8-1/458 on one victory location, and a 648 on the other. It would've been extremely difficult for me to kick him out of a location with the 2.5 squads that I had available. 1-0 Game 2, Acts of Defiance vs Ted Nugent. I had the Germans in this classic. Ted setup his infantry mostly back, 2 T-44s in front. I broke a 527 with my killstack of 9-2/3 467/lmg/mmg, and later vaporized it in advancing fire with many 548 squads. However, disaster struck when the sniper found my 9-2 and all 3 squads broke on the LLMC. I rushed his 2 up front tanks with lots of infantry. Both tanks died on his turn 2 movement phase from fausts or schrecks. He missed a LOS from my TD and rolled up both 122L assault guns in its los. I kill one, but break the MA on the other after immobilizing the second. I manage to get a 838 adjacent, but even though it pulled a atmm and needed a 10, (-1 assault engineer, -3 atmm, -1 immobilized, -1 no functioning mg), I roll a 12. His return attack vaporize my poor 338 survivor with a 2. Ted managed to get off a fire mission from his OBA, but I was able to deduce where his observer was. Even though I missed, Ted figured that 7-0 was dead if he stayed, since I had a decent amount of firepower aimed at the hex and 2 area acqs from the brummbar. He pulled the observer back where it later tried dashing across the street and got vaporized by a 30+0 from a brummbar hit. My 75LL broke its MA again and repaired it again before finally finishing off his second assault gun. The loss of his tanks early was too difficult for Ted to overcome. I was able to methodically roll up his infantry, and by the end of turn 4, he had just one good order 127 left. 2-0 Game 3, Kampgruppe at Karachev vs Ken Mioduski. I was the Russians with 12 squads and 4 tanks vs 8 defending 8 morale squads, 75L, hmg, mmg, 50 mtr. I need to either inflict 25 cvp, exit 32 vp, or capture all buildings without losing 38 cvp. The first 4 turns resulted in mixed results as I lost a tank to the 75L's BS hex, but I managed to kill about 6-7 cvp of German infantry, including a 8-0 that I forgot to make a capture attempt with and killed instead. My tanks were crashing through the woods with abandon, passing about 5 bog checks. The 75L was annoying, breaking a couple of Russian squads and surviving 2 12+3 and 3 12+1 attacks from 9-2/458/.50 cal before finally breaking on a 2+2 advancing fire shot. Go figure. I managed to capture the crew and gun for 8 cvp. And then his Stug had a fire phase from hell. First my T-34 prep fires and hits with APCR, but rolls a dud. I intensive fire and bounce that. Then I start moving my tanks and the Stug gets 4 ROF, resulting in 5 shots, 2 dead tanks, 1 dud round on my 9-1 AL tank, and breaking a 458 that had crept up behind him. And then on my left side, I get 5 squads in 2 adjacent hexes to a 548/lmg defender. I rush a 628/DC to try and draw fire, but a covering 248 breaks him with a 4+0 shot, even though he has 9 morale. And then the 548/lmg spray fires a 8+1 shot and breaks 4 out of 5 squads, but battle hardens and creates a hero for the survivor. The 458/hero advances into CC and wins after 2 player turns. The key to the game was Ken's last player turn. I had 20 cvp at that point, with 1 surviving tank. I had a hero in melee with a 468. The cvp victory condition was my only realistic chance of victory. Ken, thinking he had 5 cvp buffer, moves a 248 cx to dm a couple of my broken stacks. In defensive fire, I fire into the melee with my hero vs his 468. My first 12+1 does nothing, but my tank managed to get a 1MC with its 6+1 mg shot which my hero passed but his squad broke. In the CC phase, my hero gets a 1-4 (-4) capture attempt, and succeeds, giving me 4 cvp for the captured squad. All of a sudden, I only need 1 cvp for the win! It was fairly easy for me to surround his cx 248 and kill it for the win during my last turn. Without his squad breaking, I would've had to charge my remaining t34 against his Stug head on to have any chance of achieving the necessary 5 cvp. A wild game with many swings that could've gone either way. 3-0. Game 4, Action at Kommerscheidt vs Ron Duenskie. Ron was one of my 2 regular gaming opponents, so we knew each other well. I was the Americans. I setup my 81 mtr on the level 2 hill on my right, and setup all my mmgs and observer in 2nd level buildings. To make a long story short, my 81 mtr broke early and never repaired, and 2 tanks broke their MAs including the 9-2 AL which promptly recalled. Ron sniffed out my observer and managed to break and kill him with long range mmg shots led by his 9-2 leader with repeated ROF. Even though I had 3 FBs on turn 5, it was too little too late. They did tremendous damage to the Germans, but the Americans had nothing left to fight back with. An amusing incident was when Ron's OBA actually helped me slightly. I had 2 broken squads and 1 broken leader who normally would've had to surrender. However, they were actually able to rout through his OBA because of the +1 hindrance which negated interdiction! At least *something* managed to survive the 16+0 OBA shot, whereas everything would've surrendered if it wasn't there. 3-1. Game 5, Abandon Ship vs Mike O'Leary. I was the Americans in this one, with 11.5 747s with great leadership vs 14 German squads and 4 tanks. I had the 10-2/747/mmg in the 1st level of the building on the American left that straddled the board 24 valley. A key moment occurred early when Mike rolled a 2 with his Mk 4 mgs and pinned my 10-2 while breaking the 747 in defensive fire. I decide against self breaking the 10-2 and risk trying to rally the squad needing a 7. I succeed. In German prep fire, Mike had no smoke with his Mark 4, missed my 10-2 with a regular to hit despite having 2 acqs, and his Panther couldn't roll its sN when it rolled up. He then dispersed his squads, trying to limit the damage my 10-2 could do. I spray fired a 2-2/ 2-1 against a squad in the open adjacent to a broken squad in the woods and rolled a 3. Both squads died. With the ROF, I sprayfired again at 2 other squads in woods and under a tank at 2-1. I rolled a 5, and both squads broke, with a 12 from the 2nd squad. With the carnage on this flank, the Germans were behind the 8 ball with no infantry support for the tanks. Even when the 10-2 rolled a 12 on a self rally after it broke, it wasn't enough for the Germans to make any progress along the American left. The Germans made better progress on the right side, but the infantry was fairly easy to bottle up due to the nature of the terrain. Eventually, I kill a tank with a bazooka and another recalls by rolling a 12 on a 8+1 advancing fire shot. Mike concedes. 4-1. Game 6, Cold Crocodiles vs Paul Sidhu. In any previous year, Paul would've been the champ since he was the last undefeated player at 5-0. However, there was a change this year. The person with the best record after all 6 games would be the winner. I was the British and sent 4 squads and 2 tanks on each side. Paul setup to give me an immediate bloody nose and hit my 8-0/2 squad armor assaulting stack with a 16+0 shot from his 9-2/hmg/mmg through 2 brush hexes. Fortunately for me, he rolls a 11 and only pins a 247. He sustains fire at 6-1 when I armor assault a 9-1/2 squad stack through his bore sighted hex and again only pins a squad. Otherwise, turn 1 was uneventful. In German 1, he kills the 247 that was previously pinned. He manages to pull a panzerfaust and kills a Challenger at 3 hexes range. I break the MA of my Cromwell shooting back. Things didn't look good for the British. I did manage to immediately repair the MA during the next rally phase. We had a mini-Sitzkrieg on the British left since Paul didn't want to attack me and I didn't quite dare to approach the 9-2 stack. On the other side, things were a little more exciting. I drive up my Cromwell with 9-2 armor leader behind a wall right into Paul's boresighted hex. My 10-2/2 458s was in that hex as well. The 88 misses on the shot and misses on the intensive fire shot. When it looked like the Cromwell was about to get away, Paul reveals the 2nd 88LL only 2 hexes away from the first 88. He rolls a 2 and burns the tank despite having to change CA. With the ROF, he shoots up the infantry, pinning the 10-2/458 and breaking the other 458. I self break the 10-2, not wanting to face 2 88LLs, one with 2 acqs and the other with boresighting in the hex. The first 88LL breaks in Paul's prep fire phase. When my reinforcements came on, I knew exactly where the 88LL's were, and the Crocs could run rampant. I drive up one croc and break his 9-2 and pin the 2 548s with a 8+0 3 hex shot while they were concealed. My other croc was missed twice by a picket 548, and roasted it with a 36+0 shot, resulting in a k/4. I drive my Cromwell to where it could cover the road behind the 9-2's building. Paul reveals a 238 in the woods hex adjacent, but couldn't find a panzerfaust. Thus the 9-2 and 237 survivor of the the 36+0 shot were forced to surrender. In Paul's turn 4, the 238 (encircled during advancing fire) manages to find the panzerfaust, but fails to hit needing a 7. This forces the 2 548/hmg/mmg stack to prep fire instead of retreating. My defensive fire breaks one 548, forcing it to surrender. The other one pins. I break his 238 next to my Challenger, and it dies for FTR. During my half of the turn, I get aggressive and move one croc within 2 hexes of the surviving 548. It promptly finds a PF and burns the croc but breaks itself in the process, and surrenders. I do the mass charge, since his only defender left in this area was a 8-0/lmg which promptly gets hit with a smoke mortar and then is charged and captured in cc by 2 squads. On the other side, I brain fart and forget to move my remaining Challenger when a 548 gets aggressive next to it. It gets killed by one of Paul's TDs, although the other one breaks its MA and recalls after disabling it. At this point, it was just a lot of mopping up. The British left was absolutely unstoppable with the croc breaking one 548 per turn, and the cromwell doing a lot of damage as well. Every German who broke eventually was captured. I actually had a 247 with 2.5 squads of prisoners along with the 9-2 rush off the board. I left a 8-0 leader behind as sniper bait just in case the sniper activated. It would be a disaster if the sniper broked the 247, freeing the 9-2 with 2.5 squads in my backfield. Speaking of snipers, I rolled about 30 5's in this scenario, but Paul only rolled 2 1's and 2 or 3 2's during the scenario. At the end, I had about 6 squads, 2 leaders, 1 228, and 2 88LL's captured for mega bonus cvp. 5-1 At this point, Paul, Ron, and myself were all 5-1. I had beaten Paul, Paul had beaten Ron, and Ron had beaten me. So it came to the next tiebreaker, and apparently my opponents had more wins than Paul or Ron's. I was the winner on a tiebreaker, Paul was second, and Ron was third. As far as I'm concerned though, all three of us equally deserved the win. From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Aug 8 01:24:53 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (WYNN POLNICKY) Date: Sun Aug 8 01:24:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Wynn's Return Message-ID: <001201c47d21$2e38e590$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> In case anyone is interested, I'm back after about a month of living with no fixed address.. Wynn "No Longer Homeless" Polnicky From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 8 01:23:21 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 8 01:26:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper Attack Message-ID: <00a901c47d21$4af80ee0$c7130a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, A Mortar attacks in the PFPh. On its TH DR it activates the enemy's SAN. Then the Mortar attack is resolved on the IFT and the enemy's SAN is rolled again. Is the enemy eligible for two Sniper attacks? Or only one Sniper attack is made since the TH/IFT rolls are part of the same attack?. I would be me most grateful if you could quote the relevant rules that apply. Thank you in advance Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From oleboe at tiscali.no Sun Aug 8 01:31:14 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun Aug 8 01:31:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <40FEE83000000612@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, I commented Bruce Bakkens's response, and wrote: >>For the final argument, check the A96 Q&A: >> >>A4.4 & A4.44 If a unit Recovers the SW at the end of its MPh (i.e., it >>expends >>no MF after gaining possession of the SW), is the portage cost assessed? >>A. No. {96} > ..and BB answered >Works for me. This *is an *Official* Q&A, after all. ;-) > >Of course, you might have answered the question immediately with >this Q&A, but I guess then you couldn't have gone to such great >lengths to prove that I was wrong. I reckon you must have enjoyed >it on *this* occasion. Don't we all -- at least I'm not making a fuzz about it :-) Seriously though, I first answered as best I could, and then remembered to look for the Q&A. I let my main arguments stand however, since I though those were important, because (se below)... >The conclusion is not as easily deduced as your explanation suggests, >based on the rule wording. (I can hear it coming: "It's obviously >clear.") ... guess I was just being foolish again. It isn't obviously clear, but the fact that A4.4 says "...even if a unit carries a SW during only one MF expenditure..." indicates that a SW must be posessed while spending MF. >But I have to wonder... since the 2nd Ed ASLRB was published >*after* this Q&A, why wasn't the Q&A incorporated into the 2nd Ed >ASLRB? Normally, I would disregard any Q&A that pre-dated the 2nd >Ed ASLRB as no longer relevant, if it wasn't incorporated into >the update. I would also disregard any pre 2nd Ed Q&A, but in this question I think the Q&A is only the final nail. The quoted sentence from A4.4, and the fact that its logical to treat posession in *one* way: the PP deducts MF only if MF is spent, tells me that this Q&A is still true. That's why I wanted to argue quite a bit in addition to quote the Q&A - not because I took pleasure in proving you wrong, sorry about that :-) >This particular instance could have been easily included as a simple >sentence in the same breath as the "if it drops possession before >moving" sentence. Or even better, rewrite it to a general statement about having to spend MF while posessing the SW, for it to be considered carried. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From oleboe at tiscali.no Sun Aug 8 01:36:30 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun Aug 8 01:36:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper Attack In-Reply-To: <00a901c47d21$4af80ee0$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <40FEE83000000614@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, "Andrea" wrote: >A Mortar attacks in the PFPh. On its TH DR it activates the >enemy's SAN. Then the Mortar attack is resolved on the IFT and >the enemy's SAN is rolled again. >Is the enemy eligible for two Sniper attacks? Or only one Sniper >attack is made since the TH/IFT rolls are part of the same attack?. Two attacks. A14.1 says: "A player is subject to Sniper attack during any PFPh, MPh, DFPh or AFPh whenever he makes a TH, MC, TC, non-OBA IFT, or Entrenching, Original DR " In this case, he first makes a TH DR which is subject to SAN, and then a non-OBA IFT attack, which also is subject to SAN. Its simple as that. Note that To kill rolls don't generate sniper attacks though, so when attacking an AFV, only the TH roll can generate sniper (plus any collateral IFT attacks of course). ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From geb3 at inter.net Sun Aug 8 01:44:46 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Aug 8 01:41:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] my model Mk III Message-ID: Back to ASL after wrapping-up a couple of nasssty little projectses. Still gotta send David a move! Fairly well-detailed plastic 1:144 tank models sell here for about 300 yen and you can even find them on the toy shelf in convenience stores. Some of them even have a piece of gum inside. Thus far I've picked up everything from Kubelwagens & M3 HTs to Jagdtigers & ISU 152s (hey, come to think of it, why no Chi-Has?). I haven't used them for DASL yet but perhaps someday there'll be an opportunity. Recently, Doyusha issued a 6-model PzKw III series, and the mystery unit in my box was an Ausf. G/H in desert camouflage. One thing about it that really bugs me, however, is that there are 3 jerry cans (presumably for extra water) sitting on the top of the front of the turret. These things would completely block the view forward from the commander's cupola. I can't figure out why anyone would put them there when they could easily be stowed out of the way on the rear deck, or lashed to the rear/sides of the hull or turret. What in jiminy could have been the historical basis for this? Anybody seen any archive photos from North Africa with German AFVs sporting jerry cans on their superstructures? Or maybe this model was lend-leased to the Italians? >>>DUCK<<< George "ready with my x-acto blade" 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 04:41:27 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Aug 8 04:41:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DT & portage Message-ID: > > > >Of course, you might have answered the question immediately with > >this Q&A, but I guess then you couldn't have gone to such great > >lengths to prove that I was wrong. I reckon you must have enjoyed > >it on *this* occasion. >Don't we all -- at least I'm not making a fuzz about it :-) > Oh, go ahead. No harm in it... > >That's why I wanted to argue quite a bit in addition to quote the Q&A - >not because I took pleasure in proving you wrong, sorry about that :-) > No worries, mate. Enjoy yourself, that's what we're here for... I've been really, *really* feisty lately... Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 04:42:56 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Aug 8 04:42:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Wynn's Return Message-ID: Oh... were you gone? ;-) :-) Welcome back! 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 janusz.maxe at unf.se Sun Aug 8 04:44:35 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Sun Aug 8 04:49:01 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] WBC AAR Message-ID: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1007@sesob03.sobernet.net> > 838 adjacent, but even though it pulled a atmm and needed a > 10, (-1 assault > engineer, -3 atmm, -1 immobilized, -1 no functioning mg), I > roll a 12. His > return attack vaporize my poor 338 survivor with a 2. Return attack by what? Do an AFV without any MG have any attack? Janusz From janusz.maxe at unf.se Sun Aug 8 04:58:27 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Sun Aug 8 05:02:53 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] my model Mk III Message-ID: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1008@sesob03.sobernet.net> > Fairly well-detailed plastic 1:144 tank models sell here for > about 300 yen > and you can even find them on the toy shelf in convenience > stores. Some of > them even have a piece of gum inside. Thus far I've picked > up everything > from Kubelwagens & M3 HTs to Jagdtigers & ISU 152s (hey, come > to think of > it, why no Chi-Has?). I haven't used them for DASL yet but > perhaps someday > there'll be an opportunity. Wow. How cool is that! Are they painted? I want some toooooooo! Janusz "loving DASL" Maxe From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Aug 8 05:22:17 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun Aug 8 05:22:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Wynn's Return References: Message-ID: <003d01c47d42$58a701b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> > Oh... were you gone? > Yes, I was gone, but not forgotten. Well, uh, wait a minute, . . . > > Welcome back! > Thanks, Bruce. Good to be back. I 'was' gonna ask, though maybe I shouldn't: any news in the past month? Don't tell me: I've missed the sold-out edition of AoO, the IIFT has finally been declared sacriligeous, MMP has been taken over by CH! ... :) Wynn "Not a Troll, Honest" Polnicky From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 8 05:40:28 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 8 05:40:34 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] WBC AAR In-Reply-To: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1007@sesob03.sobernet.net> References: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1007@sesob03.sobernet.net> Message-ID: <7k7ch093rp8ge9bc5pvhfscogs62ln336d@4ax.com> On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 13:44:35 +0200, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >> 838 adjacent, but even though it pulled a atmm and needed a >> 10, (-1 assault engineer, -3 atmm, -1 immobilized, -1 no functioning mg), I >> roll a 12. His return attack vaporize my poor 338 survivor with a 2. > >Return attack by what? Do an AFV without any MG have any attack? No. There should not have been any "return attack" in this instance. AFVs without usable MGs or other close defence weapons just have to sit there and take it if assaulted in CC, and hope that the opponent rolls a "12" and suffers Crew Small Arms casualty reduction (A11.621). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 8 05:48:01 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 8 05:48:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] my model Mk III In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 17:44:46 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >What in jiminy could have been the historical basis for this? Anybody seen >any archive photos from North Africa with German AFVs sporting jerry cans on >their superstructures? Actually, yes; but the photo in question is of a panzer being offloaded from a ship, not actually being driven anywhere! Model sculptors are generally employed for their ability to create accurate scale reproductions (and in some extreme cases you have to wonder even about that), not necessarily for their historical or military knowledge. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Sun Aug 8 08:54:16 2004 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Sun Aug 8 07:53:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WBC AAR In-Reply-To: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1007@sesob03.sobernet.net> Message-ID: <000201c47d5f$f6263240$6401a8c0@NewDell> > Return attack by what? Do an AFV without any MG have any > attack? Not usually, unless you have a sN From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 11:21:28 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 8 08:15:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Wynn's Return References: <003d01c47d42$58a701b0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <41166F28.2FE0@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Wynn wrote: > I 'was' gonna ask, though maybe I shouldn't: any news in the past month? > Don't tell me: I've missed the sold-out edition of AoO, the IIFT has finally > been declared sacriligeous, MMP has been taken over by CH! ... Actually Wynn, it has been a rather busy month on the ol' list, traffic is way up and you named three topics that were bandied about ... however, 1. AoO has been cancelled due to lack of interest, ie: pre-orders, by new players. Even if all the existing grogs bought three copies each, MMP would still lose their collective shirts on this module and, if published, AoO would bankrupt MMP in the end. Of course this would mean the end of ASL as we know it. [read #3 below ... "The Empire Strikes Back"...] 2. The IIFT is now the "Official" Fire Table of the game (I found this to be especially good news). This came as a bit of a surprise and all I can say is, "be careful in what you ask Perry". 3. Ray Tapio is now Schilling's agent. Therefore by extension of that state of affairs, it would be easy to assume that Ray would have some influence on what Curt does with MMP. The switch from mounted maps to cardstock maybe the first indicator that the Tapio fox is in the MMP henhouse. I'm not totally pleased with all of those developments but it has made for good reading on the list, and that is what really matters. =Jim= From garymei at optonline.net Sun Aug 8 08:47:17 2004 From: garymei at optonline.net (Gary Mei) Date: Sun Aug 8 08:47:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WBC AAR In-Reply-To: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1007@sesob03.sobernet.net> Message-ID: Replace that modifier with CE (it has an aamg). It was a week ago, so my memory is a little unreliable. :) -----Original Message----- From: Janusz Maxe [mailto:janusz.maxe@unf.se] Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 7:45 AM To: Gary Mei; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: SV: [Aslml] WBC AAR > 838 adjacent, but even though it pulled a atmm and needed a > 10, (-1 assault > engineer, -3 atmm, -1 immobilized, -1 no functioning mg), I > roll a 12. His > return attack vaporize my poor 338 survivor with a 2. Return attack by what? Do an AFV without any MG have any attack? Janusz From krynndm at speakeasy.net Sun Aug 8 09:44:09 2004 From: krynndm at speakeasy.net (Tom Mueller) Date: Sun Aug 8 09:33:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.2.20040808112749.01bf9950@mail.speakeasy.net> At 08:42 AM 8/7/2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: >I am going to make one final effort to make my point. Please try to keep >an open mind about what I am saying, because seriously, I think the >respondents to my posts are a bit ossified about the necessity of a Hit >Location being required in all cases. [snip a second, clearer explanation of his exegesis] Since I agree with Bruce B.'s reading, that only the "vca" Target Facing matters for MOL(and FT), I will emphasize that the rules for determining turret or hull *hits* only applies in specific cases, and MOL/FT isn't one - they don't "hit" - whereas OBA/Area TT for instance can have a different effect depending on H/T "hit." I am reminded of another case that might confuse the issue: some (very few) AFV have unarmored rear turrets; the rules for MOL/FT don't specify that the AFV might become unarmored when attacked, hinting that turret facing is NA to MOL/FT attacks. Another case, Hull Down. I don't read anywhere in D4.2 that being HD makes a vehicle immune to MOL, although it "[makes] that portion of the target incapable of being hit by Direct or Small Arms/non-ordnance fire." This quote suggests it would apply to MOL/FT (non-ordnance) attacks, meaning not much I suppose; MOL/FT don't need to secure a hit, so never hit a target aspect, even though Target Facing can still affect the TK#. Of course that supposition is open to argument; but in play I would insist my opponent do it my way, it makes more sense. ;] From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Aug 8 11:12:29 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun Aug 8 11:06:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <01C47D49.5BFCDF40.gr27134@charter.net> On Sunday, August 08, 2004 11:44 AM, Tom Mueller [SMTP:krynndm@speakeasy.net] wrote: > At 08:42 AM 8/7/2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: > >I am going to make one final effort to make my point. Please try to keep > >an open mind about what I am saying, because seriously, I think the > >respondents to my posts are a bit ossified about the necessity of a Hit > >Location being required in all cases. > [snip a second, clearer explanation of his exegesis] > Since I agree with Bruce B.'s reading, that only the "vca" Target > Facing matters for MOL(and FT), I will emphasize that the rules for > determining turret or hull *hits* only applies in specific cases, and > MOL/FT isn't one - they don't "hit" - whereas OBA/Area TT for instance can > have a different effect depending on H/T "hit." As Ole pointed out, if you problem is "hit" then D3.2 wouldn't apply either because it references "hit" in the very first sentence. The issue isn't "hit". The issue is how to determine whether the rear target facing DRM applies. This DRM applies to either/both the turret rear or hull rear. Some mechanism is required to determine the applicability of the C7.21 DRM when only one (turret or hull) rear is presented to the MOL attack. Perry has chosen the principles of C3.9 which is completely consistent with other type attacks that do not "hit" but do need to know if the C7.21 DRM is in play. BB has hung his argument on the fiction that D3.2 is the "default" for target facing. Even if he were right, it would not be an excuse to ignore the D3.11-.12 rules. > Of course that supposition is open to > argument; but in play I would insist my opponent do it my way, it makes > more sense. ;] No, it doesn't make more sense...and is inconsistent with how other "none-hit" attacks are handled as regards target facing. If I were your opponent, I would insist on using the Perry Sez since it will eventually become part of the "Official" rules. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 14:15:59 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 8 11:08:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2004 WBC AAR part 2- 21, J87, A25 References: <41151634.2E10@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <4116980F.7738@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bruce Probst wrote: > In a non-tournament game with a player I don't play frequently, I will usually > *remind* them if it looks like they're about to forget their OBA or play SMOKE > out of sequence. I don't do this more than a couple of times though; after > that if they forget, too bad. That's ASL, and I don't think it has anything > to do with "playing strictly". My *regular* opponents already know that I > won't remind them if they forget. Same here Bruce. > In a tournament game I certainly expect my opponent to know the important > rules of the game (unless I know he's new to the game). Not firing SMOKE out > of order is one of those important rules. Agreed. Winning a tournament with a slack application/following of the rules is akin to a "juiced" athelete winning gold at the Olympics or Barry Bonds smacking another one into the Bay ... thats nice and all but he needs a chemical to do it so what is the big deal. =Jim= From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 12:02:36 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Aug 8 12:02:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >If I were your opponent, I would insist on using the Perry Sez since it >will eventually become part of the "Official" rules. > Don't hold your breath. BB _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From sgtono at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 12:51:50 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Sun Aug 8 12:51:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] NW ASL Tourney Message-ID: <20040808195150.8168.qmail@web51302.mail.yahoo.com> The Berserk Commissars are pleased to host the 10th Annual Wild West Fest the last full weekend in August. Come join us for a weekend of Advanced Squad Leader fun. If you're interested in the format we've planned, http://w3.gorge.net/pro6man/wwf10format.html We've put together a collection of prizes, T-shirts, and trinkets so no one goes home empty handed. Along with the tournament sequence of scenarios there will be prizes awarded to the winner of the "Hero" and "Tank Rumble" games. For those of you down on your luck, the poor souls who come under the sniper's gunsights the most, and the fellow who "voluntarily" de-evolves his troops will get some special sympathy. Registration: Registration can be in advance or at the door. You can register in advance by sending a $20.00 (USD) check to: Keith Todd PO Box 23153 Tigard, OR 97281 You can also register at the door for a surprisingly low $25.00 (USD). Lodgings: The Berserk Commissars have arranged a special room rate and a group of rooms with the Shilo Inn. Shilo Inn 2300 S.W. Hazelfern Rd. Tigard, Or. 97223 503-639-2226 Reference WWF or War game convention Room rate if booked BEFORE the 20th. will be $59.00 per night two queen beds, breakfast of sorts (coffee, muffin, juice, some cereals), and the most fun you can have with your cloths on in a room full of guys! Dates the 27th-29th but we will have the room open for pregame fun starting the 26th. Transportation: Take I-5 to the Lake Oswego/Durham Exit 290. You can see their Inn sign from the freeway, it's on the west side. A map to the facility can be retrieved here. The Hotel is also easily accessable by TriMet bus lines 36, 38, 76, 96. All stop at Tualaty Park and Ride Directly across the street from the Shilo Inn. Food and stuff: The great thing about this venue is that it's close to all of the staples any self respecting ASL'r would ever need. You need grease, salt, sugar, or beer? Well it will be close by… Primary Berserk Commissar Contact: Keith Todd sgtono@yahoo.com http://w3.gorge.net/pro6man/wwf10info.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Sun Aug 8 23:22:03 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Sun Aug 8 23:20:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B328@agalsrv03> Hi all The Close Combat table has the following CC DRM "by unpinned...Japanese (G1.64) vs Infantry/Cavalry in HtH CC (unless Ambushed) -1" However there is no mention of this DRM being negated by being Ambushed in G1.64. The rule says "Each Japanese Hand-to-Hand CC attack receives an extra -1 DRM unless every Japanese Infantry/Cavalry unit participating in that attack is pinned/Unarmed" Is anyone aware of any errata for the CC table or if being ambushued does actually negate this DRM for the Japanese. As an aside, is it correct that, apart from Deluxe scenarios, the only times a Jap unit(s) could be ambushed and the CC be HtH would be against Ghurka or Chinese Dare-Death? Also, under what circumstances would CC not be HtH when Japanese and Chinese Dare Death MMC are involved? Wouldn't it always be HtH? TIA Cheers Jon From oleboe at tiscali.no Mon Aug 9 00:59:56 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon Aug 9 01:00:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B328@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <40FEE8300000065B@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >The Close Combat table has the following CC DRM >"by unpinned...Japanese (G1.64) vs Infantry/Cavalry in HtH CC >(unless Ambushed) -1" > >However there is no mention of this DRM being negated by being >Ambushed in G1.64. The rule says "Each Japanese Hand-to-Hand CC >attack receives an extra -1 DRM unless every Japanese Infantry/Cavalry >unit participating in that attack is pinned/Unarmed" You're abolutely correct, and the chart is wrong. Note that the Japanese cannot declare HtH if Ambushed, I guess its therefore (unless Ambushed) is in the chart. So when the Japanese is Ambushed, the only way it can be HtH is if the opponent can declare HtH. This is a possibility though, if the opponent is Japanese Dare-Death or Gurkha, or if playing Deluxe ASL, or by SSR. In those cases the opponent will almost always declare HtH after having ambushed the Japanese, and if the Japanese survive, they get their -1 DRM. >Is anyone aware of any errata for the CC table or if being ambushued >does actually negate this DRM for the Japanese. There is one errata, but its not official, its on my IIFT(M)QRDC :-) The IIFT(M)QRDC can be found at http://home.no.net/oboe/ It fixes the above and a lot more errors in the official charts... As an aside, is it correct that, apart from Deluxe scenarios, the only times a Jap unit(s) could be ambushed and the CC be HtH would be against Ghurka or Chinese Dare-Death? Also, under what circumstances would CC not be HtH w >en Japanese and Chinese Dare Death MMC are involved? Wouldn't it always be HtH? TIA Cheers Jon _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo. >gi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Aug 9 01:09:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Aug 9 01:09:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.2.20040808112749.01bf9950@mail.speakeasy.net> References: <6.0.1.1.2.20040808112749.01bf9950@mail.speakeasy.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:44:09 -0500, Tom Mueller wrote: >MOL/FT isn't one - they don't "hit" Ah, but they do! Bruce B. proved that. What you mean is that they don't roll "To Hit". Which is certainly true, but isn't the point of the argument. An attack need not roll TH for Hit Location to be important. > I am reminded of another case that might confuse the issue: some >(very few) AFV have unarmored rear turrets; the rules for MOL/FT don't >specify that the AFV might become unarmored when attacked, hinting that >turret facing is NA to MOL/FT attacks. You're right; you're confusing the issue. Vs. an AFV with an unarmoured aspect, hit location becomes irrelevant for *any* attack that need not roll "TH" (D5.311). In essence, the vehicle is not treated as an AFV vs. such attacks, and since the discussion has been about AFVs as targets, it's a moot point. >Another case, Hull Down. I don't >read anywhere in D4.2 that being HD makes a vehicle immune to MOL, although >it "[makes] that portion of the target incapable of being hit by Direct or >Small Arms/non-ordnance fire." This quote suggests it would apply to >MOL/FT (non-ordnance) attacks, meaning not much I suppose; MOL/FT don't >need to secure a hit, so never hit a target aspect, even though Target >Facing can still affect the TK#. You apparently missed an entire segment of the argument. HD has already been addressed and the rest of us have moved on. HD is NA vs. a FT attack (because TEM is NA vs. a FT attack); an AFV *can* be HD vs. a MOL attack (again. because TEM *is* applicable to MOL attacks, and the HD rules do not otherwise exempt MOL; and thus, again, Hit Location needs to be determined). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Aug 9 01:25:29 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Aug 9 01:25:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B328@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B328@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <6dceh0decalmav6ok9l30g1foo4oeeeft3@4ax.com> On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 14:22:03 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >The Close Combat table has the following CC DRM >"by unpinned...Japanese (G1.64) vs Infantry/Cavalry in HtH CC (unless >Ambushed) -1" You mean "the QRDC CC table with the list of incorrect and missing modifiers"? The one several of us were discussing on this forum only a week or so ago? The reason why a number of people turn instead to Ole Boe's excellent, comprehensive and accurate alternative-QRDC? >However there is no mention of this DRM being negated by being Ambushed in >G1.64. The rule says "Each Japanese Hand-to-Hand CC attack receives an extra >-1 DRM unless every Japanese Infantry/Cavalry unit participating in that >attack is pinned/Unarmed" Ignore what the QRDC tells you. It's occasionally accurate, but apparently that's more by good fortune than good planning. Use Ole's tables instead. >Is anyone aware of any errata for the CC table or if being ambushued does >actually negate this DRM for the Japanese. I don't care what the CC table says; G1.64 is clear enough. (No, there is no errata for the QRDC on this point.) >As an aside, is it correct that, apart from Deluxe scenarios, the only times >a Jap unit(s) could be ambushed and the CC be HtH would be against Ghurka or >Chinese Dare-Death? Barring an SSR otherwise permitting HtH CC, that seems correct. >Also, under what circumstances would CC not be HtH when Japanese and Chinese >Dare Death MMC are involved? Wouldn't it always be HtH? No; if the ATTACKER was entirely Pinned/Withdrawing, but not Ambushed, it would not be HtH. The DEFENDER only ever gets to choose whether it's HtH or not if they successfully Ambush the ATTACKER. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at tiscali.no Mon Aug 9 01:33:51 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon Aug 9 01:33:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions In-Reply-To: <6dceh0decalmav6ok9l30g1foo4oeeeft3@4ax.com> Message-ID: <40FEE83000000665@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Jonathan Cole wrote: >>Also, under what circumstances would CC not be HtH when Japanese and >>Chinese Dare Death MMC are involved? Wouldn't it always be HtH? ...and Bruc Probst answered (thanks for the kind words about the IIFT(M)QRDC btw Bruce) >No; if the ATTACKER was entirely Pinned/Withdrawing, but not Ambushed, >it would not be HtH. The DEFENDER only ever gets to choose whether >it's HtH or not if they successfully Ambush the ATTACKER. That's correct, but also note that HtH is NA from/vs Pillbox or PRC, while the Chinese -1 DRM not in HtH is available vs Personnel, both aboard vehicles and inside Pillboxes. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 06:02:40 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Aug 9 06:02:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TEM and MOL vs AFV Was: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > > >MOL/FT isn't one - they don't "hit" > >Ah, but they do! Bruce B. proved that. What you mean is that they don't >roll >"To Hit". Which is certainly true, but isn't the point of the argument. >An >attack need not roll TH for Hit Location to be important. > But, an attack needs to specify that Hit Location applies. > >You apparently missed an entire segment of the argument. HD has already >been >addressed and the rest of us have moved on. HD is NA vs. a FT attack >(because >TEM is NA vs. a FT attack); an AFV *can* be HD vs. a MOL attack (again. >because TEM *is* applicable to MOL attacks, and the HD rules do not >otherwise >exempt MOL; and thus, again, Hit Location needs to be determined). > Well, I never chimed in on the HD issue. I didn't want to interfere with the point I was making about Target Facing. I guess now is a good time to weigh in. TEM does not apply to a MOL attack versus an AFV. C7.344, last sentence: "Other factors (e.g.,... TEM ...) do not modify the Basic TK#." If TEM does not modify the Basic TK# of a MOL attack, at what other point could TEM possibly apply to a MOL attack versus an AFV? I'll tell you: no other time. TEM does not apply to MOL attacks versus AFV. (How would you apply TEM if the AFV was in a Woods or Building? Well?) If TEM does not apply, then this from B9.36 also does not apply: "Any vehicular target fired on by Direct Fire subject to wall TEM is considered HD..." Wall TEM does not apply to MOL attacks versus AFV, therefore AFV cannot possibly be HD across a Wall hexside to MOL attacks against AFV. Thus, again, Hit Location is not relevant to MOL attacks versus AFV. 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 rjwoloszyn at tycoelectronics.com Mon Aug 9 06:32:29 2004 From: rjwoloszyn at tycoelectronics.com (Woloszyn, Raymond J.) Date: Mon Aug 9 06:32:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information Message-ID: <9D3B0450F951D7119FA30002A589D39008E99681@ammex009.amp.com> Has anyone on this mailing list or other forums seen any official or unofficial pronouncements that ASLOK will take place at the usual time and place? I know that some people have already bombarded Mark Nixon with inquiries without success. Probably the best informal information might come from Shelling, Haywood or Sisler. If someone has any OHIO MILITARY RESERVE G2 on the situation, please post. Some of us would like to book airline reservations. I remember Bill Conner saying that ASLOK would take place on its own no matter what. I trust it has not come to that. I checked the mailing list and did not see anything definitive. If I missed something about ASLOK, I beg your pardon for the waste of bandwidth. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 07:03:02 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Aug 9 07:03:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: > >If I were your opponent, I would insist on using the Perry Sez since it >will eventually become part of the "Official" rules. > Oh, I forgot to mention... You can't shove an unofficial Q&A down someone's throat. For a dispute of rules interpretation, you would have to resolve it some other way. Then, hop on the ASLML and shove it down their throat... if you can, that is. 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 gr27134 at charter.net Mon Aug 9 07:26:26 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Aug 9 07:26:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <391s2r$5g19lc@mxip15a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/09 Mon AM 09:03:02 CDT > To: gr27134@charter.net, krynndm@speakeasy.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Re: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > > >If I were your opponent, I would insist on using the Perry Sez since it > >will eventually become part of the "Official" rules. > > > > Oh, I forgot to mention... > > You can't shove an unofficial Q&A down someone's throat. For a dispute of > rules interpretation, you would have to resolve it some other way. > True, true...however, barring my opponent being able to present something superior (i.e., conclusive irrefutable rules evidence as opposed to making up something) I don't see any reason not to use what we have...which would be the "Perry Sez". Good, bad, or indifferent it is the only game in town. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Aug 9 07:30:06 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Aug 9 07:30:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TEM and MOL vs AFV Was: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions Message-ID: <3a5ama$5hih86@mxip05a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/09 Mon AM 08:02:40 CDT > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, krynndm@speakeasy.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] TEM and MOL vs AFV Was: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions > > > Thus, again, Hit Location is not relevant to MOL attacks versus AFV. > I also had not commented on the HD part: 1) I agree with BB that AFV are not HD to a MOL attack. No TEM is applicable to MOL vs AFV. 2) I disagree on the Hit location part because...etc, etc. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From garciagd at velocity.net Mon Aug 9 08:53:22 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Mon Aug 9 08:49:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information References: <9D3B0450F951D7119FA30002A589D39008E99681@ammex009.amp.com> Message-ID: <000f01c47e29$018b93e0$09c7d342@whelan> Hello! I've asked the ASLML and Consim world a couple of times, and have had no answers. If you find anythingout, please let me know. Many thanks! Peace Rog From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Aug 9 09:10:44 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Aug 9 09:10:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions Message-ID: <3a5840$4itvp7@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Ole Boe" > Date: 2004/08/09 Mon AM 03:33:51 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions > > Hi, > Jonathan Cole wrote: > >>Also, under what circumstances would CC not be HtH when Japanese and > >>Chinese Dare Death MMC are involved? Wouldn't it always be HtH? > ...and Bruc Probst answered (thanks for the kind words about the IIFT(M)QRDC > btw Bruce) > > >No; if the ATTACKER was entirely Pinned/Withdrawing, but not Ambushed, > >it would not be HtH. The DEFENDER only ever gets to choose whether > >it's HtH or not if they successfully Ambush the ATTACKER. > That's correct, but also note that HtH is NA from/vs Pillbox or PRC, while > the Chinese -1 DRM not in HtH is available vs Personnel, both aboard vehicles > and inside Pillboxes. Where does it say the DEFENDER gets to declare HtH if they ambush the ATTACKER (assuming no SSR or nationality rule). Looking at J2.31 it specifically notes that "only" ATTACKER can declare and "only" if they aren't ambushed. It says nothing about a DEFENDER declaring HtH. I looked at Ambush and didn't see any reference to HtH for DEFENDER. Looks to me like the normal result from an ATTACKER being ambushed is that no HtH would be declared. The Japs (G1.64) are the only ones that have a specific exception to this in the regular rules. In fact the statement "or Ambushes" in G1.64 would be superfluous if the norm was that an Ambushing DEFENDER could declare HtH. The only other exception would be an SSR that allowed an ambushing DEFENDER to declare HtH. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From asl_scottj at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 10:40:36 2004 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Mon Aug 9 10:40:38 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question Message-ID: A strong case can be made that B23.25's discussion of ADJ is *only* talking about LOS...not about ability to *move* -- notice that the following sentences are only about LOS. Common Sense says that 'air walking' is NA (which you allude to) and further strengthens the case that B23.25 is only about LOS. Is this really worth Perry's time to 'clear up'? Surely no-one would seriously expect to play that such Locations are ADJ based solely on B23.25...and ignoring A.8?? Such a person would immediately drop to my "do not play" list... Scott Jackson aka Stonewall >From: Bruce Probst >Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au >To: , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question >Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:58:33 +1000 > >On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:34:27 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: > > >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open ground. > >It certainly is. However, that's not the hexside you were asking about, >which >was 23X7/Y7. > > >I ave difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level of 23X8 could >enter > >directly 23X7. > >So do I, given that 23X8 is an Open Ground hex and there is no "first >level". > >Are you possibly referring to 23X7/Y8? > >If your question is actually "can a unit advance from 23X7(1) to 23Y8(1)", >then the answer is "no", because that hexside is entirely Open Ground, >i.e., >those two Locations are not ADJACENT and .... > >Oh. I think I see your point. As far as I can tell, there is *no* rule >that >specifies that 23X7/Y8 are *not* ADJACENT in the upper levels! > >The relevant rule is B23.25 which indicates that the only requirement for >ADJACENT is to be adjacent, same-level, and not a Rowhouse (or same hex and >connected by a stairwell). > >What an unusual rules-hole. [A similar hole was only recently plugged -- >it >wasn't until errata printed in J5 (!) that LOS was granted between >different >levels of hex-pairs like this -- e.g., 23X7(0) to 23Y8(2)!] > >This is probably one of those things that everyone has always *assumed* to >be >the case ("infantry can't walk in mid-air"), and the assumption was so >strong >that no-one ever bothered to actually put it down in writing. > >Oh, Perry ...! > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"His only crime was being born delicious!" >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 _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at tiscali.no Mon Aug 9 10:53:52 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon Aug 9 10:53:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions In-Reply-To: <3a5840$4itvp7@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <40FEE830000006C6@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Tate Rogers wrote: >Where does it say the DEFENDER gets to declare HtH if they ambush >the ATTACKER (assuming no SSR or nationality rule). Looking at >J2.31 it specifically notes that "only ATTACKER can declare and >"only" if they aren't ambushed. It says nothing about a DEFENDER >declaring HtH. I looked at Ambush and didn't see any reference to >HtH for DEFENDER. That's correct... >Looks to me like the normal result from an ATTACKER being ambushed >is that no HtH would be declared. Right, however... > The Japs (G1.64) are the only ones that have a specific exception >to this in the regular rules. In fact the statement "or Ambushes" >in G1.64 would be superfluous if the norm was that an Ambushing >DEFENDER could declare HtH. The only other exception would be an SSR >that allowed an ambushing DEFENDER to declare HtH. As you write, the Japanese gets to declare HtH if being DEFENDER if they Ambushes the ATTACKER, however this also applies to the two other groups that can declare HtH sans SSR: Gurkhas and Dare-Death Chinese. So in any Japanese vs Dare-Death or Gurkhas, HtH can almost always be declared, normally by the ATTACKER, but by the DEFENDER if he ambushes the ATTACKER. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Aug 9 11:59:30 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Aug 9 11:59:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions Message-ID: <3948se$5f5tk5@mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Ole Boe" > Date: 2004/08/09 Mon PM 12:53:52 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions > > As you write, the Japanese gets to declare HtH if being DEFENDER if they > Ambushes the ATTACKER, however this also applies to the two other groups > that can declare HtH sans SSR: Gurkhas and Dare-Death Chinese. So in any > Japanese vs Dare-Death or Gurkhas, HtH can almost always be declared, normally > by the ATTACKER, but by the DEFENDER if he ambushes the ATTACKER. > OK, I found the Dare-Death rule and they are covered under: "G18.62 CC: Dare-Death MMC enter into and resolve Hand-to-Hand CC as if they were Japanese." Where is the rule for Gurkhas? Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From oleboe at tiscali.no Mon Aug 9 13:04:02 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon Aug 9 13:04:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions In-Reply-To: <3948se$5f5tk5@mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: <40FEE830000006DD@cpfe6.be.tisc.dk> Hi, On the question of HtH declaration by DEFENDERs that ambushes the ATTACKER, Tate wrote: >OK, I found the Dare-Death rule and they are covered under: >"G18.62 CC: Dare-Death MMC enter into and resolve Hand-to-Hand CC >as if they were Japanese." > >Where is the rule for Gurkhas? In the 2. ed ASLRB (it was changed for the 99? errata that came with DB, and later in the 2. ed.), under A25.43 GURKHA: "Whenever >= one unbroken Gurkha Infantry unit is the ATTACKER in CC/Melee or Ambushes the enemy in CC, that CC/Melee may become Hand-To-Hand (J2.31) at the option of the Gurkha player unless every such Gurkha unit participating in it was Ambushed in that phase and/or is withdrawing/pinned." More or less a copy of the Japanese HtH rule, except that HtH is voluntarily for the Gurkha. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 14:05:37 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Aug 9 14:05:48 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question Message-ID: I would argue that a unit may never Advance into a hex that it could not move directly into during the MPh. I'm not prepared to back that up with rule references at the moment. However, I did find this in B23.422, last sentence: "A unit may never ... move directly from an upper-level Location to a different building." Not exactly addressing this issue, since technically the hexes in question are part of the same building. In concept, I think the quoted prohibition would apply equally to advancing between 23X7 and 23Y7. ... just gotta love those ASL rules... Regards, Bruce Bakken >From: "Scott Jackson" >To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, >afantozzi@tiscali.it,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question >Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 10:40:36 -0700 > >A strong case can be made that B23.25's discussion of ADJ is *only* talking >about LOS...not about ability to *move* -- notice that the following >sentences are only about LOS. > >Common Sense says that 'air walking' is NA (which you allude to) and >further strengthens the case that B23.25 is only about LOS. > >Is this really worth Perry's time to 'clear up'? Surely no-one would >seriously expect to play that such Locations are ADJ based solely on >B23.25...and ignoring A.8?? Such a person would immediately drop to my "do >not play" list... > >Scott Jackson >aka Stonewall > > > >>From: Bruce Probst >>Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au >>To: , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >>Subject: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question >>Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:58:33 +1000 >> >>On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:34:27 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >> >> >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open >>ground. >> >>It certainly is. However, that's not the hexside you were asking about, >>which >>was 23X7/Y7. >> >> >I ave difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level of 23X8 could >>enter >> >directly 23X7. >> >>So do I, given that 23X8 is an Open Ground hex and there is no "first >>level". >> >>Are you possibly referring to 23X7/Y8? >> >>If your question is actually "can a unit advance from 23X7(1) to 23Y8(1)", >>then the answer is "no", because that hexside is entirely Open Ground, >>i.e., >>those two Locations are not ADJACENT and .... >> >>Oh. I think I see your point. As far as I can tell, there is *no* rule >>that >>specifies that 23X7/Y8 are *not* ADJACENT in the upper levels! >> >>The relevant rule is B23.25 which indicates that the only requirement for >>ADJACENT is to be adjacent, same-level, and not a Rowhouse (or same hex >>and >>connected by a stairwell). >> >>What an unusual rules-hole. [A similar hole was only recently plugged -- >>it >>wasn't until errata printed in J5 (!) that LOS was granted between >>different >>levels of hex-pairs like this -- e.g., 23X7(0) to 23Y8(2)!] >> >>This is probably one of those things that everyone has always *assumed* to >>be >>the case ("infantry can't walk in mid-air"), and the assumption was so >>strong >>that no-one ever bothered to actually put it down in writing. >> >>Oh, Perry ...! >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >>Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >>"His only crime was being born delicious!" >>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 > >_________________________________________________________________ >Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! >http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 19:36:24 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 9 16:31:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information References: <9D3B0450F951D7119FA30002A589D39008E99681@ammex009.amp.com> <000f01c47e29$018b93e0$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <411834A8.283A@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Roger wrote: > > Hello! > > I've asked the ASLML and Consim world a couple of times, and have had no > answers. > > If you find anythingout, please let me know. > > Many thanks! Roger, Ray, et al, Looks like ASLOK is off for this year and that is a sad thing. However, there is a silver lining on this otherwise black and omnibulous cloud. You can come on up to Winnipeg for the CASLO (17-19 September). The timing of the CASLO is a little earlier than that of ASLOK but 5 weeks is good enough lead time to book your flights. And to show that I am a fair kinda' guy, you can either partake in the Main CASLO tournament or, you can gun around the clock for the 54 (+/-) hours that we have the game room booked for. And, buy a beer mug and you drink free all weekend. I can't say fairer than that now can I. From swfancher at mindspring.com Mon Aug 9 16:22:24 2004 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Mon Aug 9 17:02:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040809190555.01d938e0@mindspring.com> I've been following this thread with interest...ok, maybe that's a bit of a stretch! :-) I figured I would throw another MOL on the fire to see what I could stoke up. You can each determine which target facing of yours that I strike. D3.12 says that "The Target Facing of any turret/upper superstructure hit is based on the target's TCA-not it's VCA." Fair enough - I know what that means when firing ordnance using a To Hit table. C3.9 tells me that "An ordnance hit vs a vehicle strikes its turret...." Ordnance in the Index and Glossary is "any weapon which must score a hit on a To Hit Table before rolling again on the IFT or To Kill Table to resolve that hit." So, while a MOL-Projector is Ordnance, a regular MOL is not. So, which rule is incomplete? The A22 MOL should require a Location DR? Or D3 should explain how to apply the Target Facing better? In the end, I think whichever way you go will require one of those rules extrapolations. In the end though, I think that not using a pseudo Hit Location is more in line with the ASLRB since it does not add something that is not there. How to deal with the +1 Case A DRM? I would apply it based on the VCA of the vehicle. I think Tate and Bruce P are correct that there is nothing explicit in the ASLRB that says to do this. But I don't see anything explicitly supporting their contention either. My completely irrelevant reality argument for this: liquid flows downward...even burning liquid. The most vulnerable point of the AFV is going to be the rear deck, where the engine exhaust and vents are located, as well as the extra vehicle fuel (if the vehicle has any). Given the flow dynamics of a MOL, it is likely that regardless of the turret facing of the AFV, if the back of the hull gets hit, these areas will be affected. So, if an AFV chooses to place the most vulnerable part of the vehicle towards the enemy (or the enemy sneaks around behind the AFV), then the AFV should be a greater risk. Supported 100% by the ASLRB? No. But then, I haven't seen or heard anything else better here. So, who wants to ask Perry? Be well all! Seth From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Aug 9 17:09:56 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Aug 9 17:08:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B3D0@agalsrv03> I sent the questions to Perry a couple of days ago. No reply as yet. > > So, who wants to ask Perry? > > Be well all! > > Seth Cheers Jon From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 20:47:48 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 9 17:40:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B3D0@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <41184564.72CC@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Jon C. wrote: > I sent the questions to Perry a couple of days ago. No reply as yet. He's still howling at the moon over this one. A "Q" like this is Mol thing likely rates a 5, or maybe even a 6 day bender. :) =Jim= From frango1000 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 9 21:55:47 2004 From: frango1000 at sbcglobal.net (David Goldman) Date: Mon Aug 9 21:55:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for Mike Van Hoy Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20040809235346.00bad8b0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Mike, If you're out there in the ether, please contact me, your email notice for the next ASL Day bounced. If anyone is in touch with Mike please have him contact me. David Goldman From steven.linton at bigpond.com Tue Aug 10 00:08:36 2004 From: steven.linton at bigpond.com (Steven Linton) Date: Tue Aug 10 00:03:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information In-Reply-To: <411834A8.283A@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <9D3B0450F951D7119FA30002A589D39008E99681@ammex009.amp.com> <000f01c47e29$018b93e0$09c7d342@whelan> <411834A8.283A@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <192B4A4A-EA9C-11D8-9067-000A277AD614@bigpond.com> Jim, What do you base this statement on - the lack of information, or some inside knowledge? Or are you just desperate to get people to come to Canada? Steve "I was only kidding with the death of ASLOK story, honest" Linton On 10/08/2004, at 12:36 PM, Jim McLeod wrote: > Listerz; > > Roger wrote: >> >> Hello! >> >> I've asked the ASLML and Consim world a couple of times, and have had >> no >> answers. >> >> If you find anythingout, please let me know. >> >> Many thanks! > > Roger, Ray, et al, > > Looks like ASLOK is off for this year and that is a sad thing. > > However, there is a silver lining on this otherwise black and > omnibulous > cloud. You can come on up to Winnipeg for the CASLO (17-19 September). > The timing of the CASLO is a little earlier than that of ASLOK but 5 > weeks is good enough lead time to book your flights. > > And to show that I am a fair kinda' guy, you can either partake in the > Main CASLO tournament or, you can gun around the clock for the 54 (+/-) > hours that we have the game room booked for. > > And, buy a beer mug and you drink free all weekend. I can't say fairer > than that now can I. > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Aug 9 16:23:08 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Tue Aug 10 00:27:59 2004 Subject: R: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <010b01c47eab$72535db0$c7130a3e@andrea> Hi Bruce, thank you for the reply. Maybe you could make some extrapolation and prove that such an advance cannot be done! Serioulsy speaking, I made this advance in a game I am currently playing and after doing that I said to myself that such an advance would not be possible. I checked the rules, errata, Q&A but I could not find anything prohibiting it. It seemed perfectly legal. In my game I corrected this advance (I am still convinced it is not legal) but I think the rule is poorly written and needs some clarification even if some common sense would suffice! Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Bruce Bakken [mailto:bakken_80@hotmail.com] > Inviato: luned? 9 agosto 2004 23.06 > A: asl_scottj@hotmail.com; bprobst@netspace.net.au; > afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question > > > I would argue that a unit may never Advance into a hex that > it could not > move directly into during the MPh. I'm not prepared to back > that up with > rule references at the moment. > > However, I did find this in B23.422, last sentence: "A unit > may never ... > move directly from an upper-level Location to a different building." > > Not exactly addressing this issue, since technically the > hexes in question > are part of the same building. In concept, I think the > quoted prohibition > would apply equally to advancing between 23X7 and 23Y7. > > ... just gotta love those ASL rules... > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken > > > > >From: "Scott Jackson" > >To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, > >afantozzi@tiscali.it,aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >Subject: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question > >Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 10:40:36 -0700 > > > >A strong case can be made that B23.25's discussion of ADJ is > *only* talking > >about LOS...not about ability to *move* -- notice that the following > >sentences are only about LOS. > > > >Common Sense says that 'air walking' is NA (which you allude to) and > >further strengthens the case that B23.25 is only about LOS. > > > >Is this really worth Perry's time to 'clear up'? Surely > no-one would > >seriously expect to play that such Locations are ADJ based solely on > >B23.25...and ignoring A.8?? Such a person would immediately > drop to my "do > >not play" list... > > > >Scott Jackson > >aka Stonewall > > > > > > > >>From: Bruce Probst > >>Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au > >>To: , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >>Subject: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question > >>Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:58:33 +1000 > >> > >>On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:34:27 +0200, "Andrea" > wrote: > >> > >> >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is completely open > >>ground. > >> > >>It certainly is. However, that's not the hexside you were > asking about, > >>which > >>was 23X7/Y7. > >> > >> >I ave difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level > of 23X8 could > >>enter > >> >directly 23X7. > >> > >>So do I, given that 23X8 is an Open Ground hex and there is > no "first > >>level". > >> > >>Are you possibly referring to 23X7/Y8? > >> > >>If your question is actually "can a unit advance from > 23X7(1) to 23Y8(1)", > >>then the answer is "no", because that hexside is entirely > Open Ground, > >>i.e., > >>those two Locations are not ADJACENT and .... > >> > >>Oh. I think I see your point. As far as I can tell, there > is *no* rule > >>that > >>specifies that 23X7/Y8 are *not* ADJACENT in the upper levels! > >> > >>The relevant rule is B23.25 which indicates that the only > requirement for > >>ADJACENT is to be adjacent, same-level, and not a Rowhouse > (or same hex > >>and > >>connected by a stairwell). > >> > >>What an unusual rules-hole. [A similar hole was only > recently plugged -- > >>it > >>wasn't until errata printed in J5 (!) that LOS was granted between > >>different > >>levels of hex-pairs like this -- e.g., 23X7(0) to 23Y8(2)!] > >> > >>This is probably one of those things that everyone has > always *assumed* to > >>be > >>the case ("infantry can't walk in mid-air"), and the > assumption was so > >>strong > >>that no-one ever bothered to actually put it down in writing. > >> > >>Oh, Perry ...! > >> > >>---------------------------------------------------------------- > >>Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > >>Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > >>"His only crime was being born delicious!" > >>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 > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > >http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > >Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus > voter tools and > more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Aug 9 16:11:52 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Tue Aug 10 00:30:52 2004 Subject: R: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <010901c47eab$6ba26a10$c7130a3e@andrea> Hi Scott, thank you for the reply. However, it was me who made this (illegal) advance. After advancing that way I found myself very concerned that such an advance would really be possible. So I checked the rules and I found nothing; this is why I posted to the list. I am not surely playing it that way... I was only curious that the rules allow such an advance. I hope you will not drop me from your list! Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Scott Jackson [mailto:asl_scottj@hotmail.com] > Inviato: luned? 9 agosto 2004 19.41 > A: bprobst@netspace.net.au; afantozzi@tiscali.it; > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question > > > A strong case can be made that B23.25's discussion of ADJ is > *only* talking > about LOS...not about ability to *move* -- notice that the following > sentences are only about LOS. > > Common Sense says that 'air walking' is NA (which you allude > to) and further > strengthens the case that B23.25 is only about LOS. > > Is this really worth Perry's time to 'clear up'? Surely no-one would > seriously expect to play that such Locations are ADJ based solely on > B23.25...and ignoring A.8?? Such a person would immediately > drop to my "do > not play" list... > > Scott Jackson > aka Stonewall > > > > >From: Bruce Probst > >Reply-To: bprobst@netspace.net.au > >To: , aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > >Subject: Re: R: [Aslml] Building Question > >Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:58:33 +1000 > > > >On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:34:27 +0200, "Andrea" > wrote: > > > > >I had this doubt because the 23X8/23X7 hexside is > completely open ground. > > > >It certainly is. However, that's not the hexside you were > asking about, > >which > >was 23X7/Y7. > > > > >I ave difficulties figuring how a unit on the first level > of 23X8 could > >enter > > >directly 23X7. > > > >So do I, given that 23X8 is an Open Ground hex and there is > no "first > >level". > > > >Are you possibly referring to 23X7/Y8? > > > >If your question is actually "can a unit advance from > 23X7(1) to 23Y8(1)", > >then the answer is "no", because that hexside is entirely > Open Ground, > >i.e., > >those two Locations are not ADJACENT and .... > > > >Oh. I think I see your point. As far as I can tell, there > is *no* rule > >that > >specifies that 23X7/Y8 are *not* ADJACENT in the upper levels! > > > >The relevant rule is B23.25 which indicates that the only > requirement for > >ADJACENT is to be adjacent, same-level, and not a Rowhouse > (or same hex and > >connected by a stairwell). > > > >What an unusual rules-hole. [A similar hole was only > recently plugged -- > >it > >wasn't until errata printed in J5 (!) that LOS was granted between > >different > >levels of hex-pairs like this -- e.g., 23X7(0) to 23Y8(2)!] > > > >This is probably one of those things that everyone has > always *assumed* to > >be > >the case ("infantry can't walk in mid-air"), and the > assumption was so > >strong > >that no-one ever bothered to actually put it down in writing. > > > >Oh, Perry ...! > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- > >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > >"His only crime was being born delicious!" > >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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 05:53:46 2004 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Tue Aug 10 05:53:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information In-Reply-To: <9D3B0450F951D7119FA30002A589D39008E99681@ammex009.amp.com> Message-ID: <20040810125346.10527.qmail@web60906.mail.yahoo.com> Despite what Mr Canuck says (which is wrong), it appears ASLOK is a go this year. I received the following from Pete S.: >> If I recall correctly, there is a contract for the >> same hotel, but this is likely the last year there. >> Oct 4-10, I would presume. Also got a response from Bret Hildebran about the above: >> I believe what Pete says is true. >> I've been trying to get ahold of Mark & have had >> little success. All I've gotten is a ping that >> he's around, but busy - I think he's traveling a >> lot for his job. Once I'm able to talk w/Mark I >> hope to get a copy of the flyer out on the net ASAP. This is the latest intell I have received as of Friday August 6. Kevin Meyer --- "Woloszyn, Raymond J." wrote: > Has anyone on this mailing list or other forums > seen any official or > unofficial pronouncements that ASLOK will take place > at the usual time and > place? I know that some people have already > bombarded Mark Nixon with > inquiries without success. Probably the best > informal information might > come from Shelling, Haywood or Sisler. If someone > has any OHIO MILITARY > RESERVE G2 on the situation, please post. Some of > us would like to book > airline reservations. > > I remember Bill Conner saying that ASLOK would > take place on its own no > matter what. I trust it has not come to that. > > I checked the mailing list and did not see > anything definitive. If I > missed something about ASLOK, I beg your pardon for > the waste of bandwidth. > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From smcbee at midtnn.net Tue Aug 10 06:08:33 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:08:51 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <010901c47eab$6ba26a10$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <000001c47edb$2baa86b0$1ff59904@steves> Here is why it is impossible to make an advance from 23X7L1 to 23Y8L1 (or L2): There is a clear LOS from 23X8 to 23Y7. No part of the 23Y7 building lies between the X8/Y7 hexspine. Which means that 23X7 and 23Y8 are not connected the same way as X7 and X6 or Y8 - Z7. If this building was a factory, to move from one to the other would mean that the unit moving would have to spend 2 MF to enter the building. Also, while the ground level (and cellar level) of both locations are ADJACENT, the upper levels are only adjacent. I really wish that this building had been picked for the B23.25 illustration. It would have been much better Hope that helps, if not, keep asking. There are other building locations that have the same characteristics (23CC2L1 cannot move to 23DD2L1 for example). Take care, Steve From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 10 06:13:09 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:13:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Japanese HtH CC questions In-Reply-To: <3a5840$4itvp7@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> References: <3a5840$4itvp7@mxip01a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 11:10:44 -0500, Tate Rogers wrote: >Where does it say the DEFENDER gets to declare HtH if they ambush the ATTACKER (assuming no SSR or nationality rule). Looking at J2.31 it specifically notes that "only" ATTACKER can declare and "only" if they aren't ambushed. It says nothing about a DEFENDER declaring HtH. I looked at Ambush and didn't see any reference to HtH for DEFENDER. You're correct; I misremembered the Chapter J rules. What I stated *is* true for Japanese (G1.64), Dare-Death Chinese (G18.62) and Gurkha (A25.43), however. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 10 06:18:45 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:18:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TEM and MOL vs AFV Was: A22.612 MOL vs AFV questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 09:02:40 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >But, an attack needs to specify that Hit Location applies. ... or that Target Facing is important. Those pesky rules, Bruce! If only they didn't make those inconvenient statements! >TEM does not apply to a MOL attack versus an AFV. C7.344, last sentence: >"Other factors (e.g.,... TEM ...) do not modify the Basic TK#." Fair point. I obviously missed this. I retract my earlier statement. HD is NA vs both FT & MOL, for the same reason (TEM is NA). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 06:28:06 2004 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:28:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information In-Reply-To: <9D3B0450F951D7119FA30002A589D39008E99681@ammex009.amp.com> Message-ID: <20040810132806.7854.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com> Has anybody tried calling the ASLOK Hotel and asking for rooms at the ASLOK rate during Oct 4-10? RADISSON INN 7230 ENGLE ROAD MIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS, OHIO 44130 440-243-4040 Kevin Meyer --- "Woloszyn, Raymond J." wrote: > Has anyone on this mailing list or other forums > seen any official or > unofficial pronouncements that ASLOK will take place > at the usual time and > place? I know that some people have already > bombarded Mark Nixon with > inquiries without success. Probably the best > informal information might > come from Shelling, Haywood or Sisler. If someone > has any OHIO MILITARY > RESERVE G2 on the situation, please post. Some of > us would like to book > airline reservations. > > I remember Bill Conner saying that ASLOK would > take place on its own no > matter what. I trust it has not come to that. > > I checked the mailing list and did not see > anything definitive. If I > missed something about ASLOK, I beg your pardon for > the waste of bandwidth. > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 steven.dennis at autodesk.com Tue Aug 10 06:28:33 2004 From: steven.dennis at autodesk.com (Steven Dennis) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:29:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for Tom Cvetinovich email Message-ID: Anybody got an address for Tommy? Steve From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 10 06:29:42 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:29:52 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 10:40:36 -0700, "Scott Jackson" wrote: >A strong case can be made that B23.25's discussion of ADJ is *only* talking >about LOS...not about ability to *move* -- notice that the following >sentences are only about LOS. You are obviously joking, Scott. B23.25 is the *definition* of when two building Locations are ADJACENT, and as any quick perusal of the Glossary will tell you, ADJACENT implies an ability to advance. If B23.25 had meant "LOS only" it would have *said* "LOS only", and not used the term ADJACENT to mean something unique for this rule. I have no intention of reading each rule and asking myself the question "now, what definition of ADJACENT should I apply to my understanding of this rule?". Thus, if a rule tells you two Locations are indeed ADJACENT, even though the "normal" evidence would indicate otherwise, we have two options: either there is an error in the rule, or we are misinterpreting the evidence. I'm quite convinced the latter is not true in this case, which leaves us with the former. >Is this really worth Perry's time to 'clear up'? Errors in the rules are *always* worth Perry's time to clear up. Either a rule says what it means, or it doesn't; if it doesn't, it needs to be fixed. If no-one goes to the trouble of fixing broken rules, what's the point of asking rules questions at all? You might as well just answer every question with "who cares; play it however you damned well want to". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jtracy at bankofny.com Tue Aug 10 06:37:30 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:38:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for Tom Cvetinovich email Message-ID: > Anybody got an address for Tommy? When you find him, remind him he owes me a T-34/85. 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 damavs at alltel.net Tue Aug 10 06:42:48 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:42:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Update Message-ID: <20040810134248.GFXE17206.ispmxmta05-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Rumors of ASLOK's demise have been greatly exaggerated. There will be an ASLOK XIX. It will be in greater Cleveland. It will be on the dates discussed on the list of Oct. 3rd thru the 11th (minis start Wed. the 6th, Grofaz Thursday the 7th & ending Sunday the 10th). It will be at the same hotel as always although it's now a Quality Inn rather than a Radisson. Unfortunately I have not been succesful in getting in touch with our point man, Mark Nixon. I did call the hotel today to confirm that we have a contract for the 3rd thru the 11th & they are expecting us. We have a hotel, we'll make the rest happen, rest assured. So you should be able to make reservations for the hotel now: QUALITY INN 7230 ENGLE ROAD MIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS, OHIO 44130 440-243-4040 " Make your hotel reservations with the Quality Inn. Rooms are $78.00 per night. Be sure to specify ASL OKTOBERFEST to get this reduced rate (standard room rates are $40-$60 higher). Make your reservations with the hotel early and tell them it is for ASL Oktoberfest to get the reduced rate. Free airport shuttle! Same hotel we have occupied since 1996." I am presuming the room rate has stayed constant since last year. Do note that the hotel has changed Management and is no longer a Radisson, but now is a "Quality Inn" - phone number remains the same. I have updated the flyers and have them ready to go, at least electronically, but want to talk with Mark before generally releasing them. Hopefully that will occur this week. Regardless - the hotel is expecting us, Oct. 3 thru 11, you should be able to book plane tix and the hotel w/o risk. I'll update more after I talk w/Mark... And finally as a teaser - the planned minis follow (hopefully they format OK). Let me know if you have any questions & I'll do my best to answer them. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net WEDNESDAY MINI (10/6) THURSDAY THEME (10/7) _____Oldied But Goodies _____Night _____Island Hoppin? _____Master of the Monster Hexes (Deluxe) _____They Came From Above (air drop) _____King of the Jungle _____Winter Wonderland _____Paper Tigers _____Dancin? in the Desert _____Twilight Of The Reich _____Tincans & Popguns (early war) _____Fading into Bolivia (minors) _____Buckeye?s Best Battles (OH designers) _____The Crazy 88s FRIDAY MINI (10/8) SATURDAY MINI (10/9) _____Banzai! _____Spitting into the Wind _____Schwerpunkt #10 _____Attack by Halftrack _____Stiff Upper Lip (Brits) _____Pete?s ?Publish Or Perish Playtest? _____Heavy Metal _____Mother Russia _____Journal-istic Integrity _____10-2 (or better) Good Buddy _____Freeing the French _____For the Emperor [Grofaz Minis ? signup up Thursday night/Friday morning if 2-0] -xxx-Best of the Best [Grofaz mini] -xxx-Stormtrooper Follies [Grofaz mini] From damavs at alltel.net Tue Aug 10 06:46:00 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:46:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information Message-ID: <20040810134600.UIUT10030.ispmxmta06-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Great minds think alike - or something like that. I just did - it's now a Quality Inn, but they expect us October 3rd thru the 11th. See my prior email for more details. Hope to see you there... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net kevin meyer writes: > Has anybody tried calling the ASLOK Hotel and > asking for rooms at the ASLOK rate during Oct 4-10? > > RADISSON INN > 7230 ENGLE ROAD > MIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS, OHIO 44130 > 440-243-4040 > > Kevin Meyer > > --- "Woloszyn, Raymond J." > wrote: > > > Has anyone on this mailing list or other forums > > seen any official or > > unofficial pronouncements that ASLOK will take place > > at the usual time and > > place? I know that some people have already > > bombarded Mark Nixon with > > inquiries without success. Probably the best > > informal information might > > come from Shelling, Haywood or Sisler. If someone > > has any OHIO MILITARY > > RESERVE G2 on the situation, please post. Some of > > us would like to book > > airline reservations. > > > > I remember Bill Conner saying that ASLOK would > > take place on its own no > > matter what. I trust it has not come to that. > > > > I checked the mailing list and did not see > > anything definitive. If I > > missed something about ASLOK, I beg your pardon for > > the waste of bandwidth. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.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 > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Aug 10 06:45:59 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:46:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Lives! Message-ID: > There will be an ASLOK XIX. Thanks for the update, Bret. Nice try, Jim - I always knew Clan McLeod was a pack of sneaky buggers, you just can't turn your back on them. 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 Tue Aug 10 06:57:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 06:57:37 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:05:37 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >I would argue that a unit may never Advance into a hex that it could not >move directly into during the MPh. I'm not prepared to back that up with >rule references at the moment. That's a strange argument; many hexes cannot be entered by Infantry in the MPh that can be entered in the APh. Most hexes containing a Known armed enemy unit, for instance (A4.14). But it's a moot point; there is no rule indicating that infantry *cannot* cross such upper-level building "empty" hexsides in the MPh, and given that B23.25 says that they are ADJACENT, such movement is implied. (For the record, *all* movement is "implied"; there isn't actually a statement anywhere that I could find that says the equivalent of "units move by leaving one hex and entering the next, and that next hex must be adjacent to the first". Except maybe in Chapter K.*) There *is* a rule that specifies that you can't move up/down building *levels* unless there's a stairwell (B23.4) -- but the move in question involves no change of level, so it's irrelevant. >However, I did find this in B23.422, last sentence: "A unit may never ... >move directly from an upper-level Location to a different building." > >Not exactly addressing this issue, since technically the hexes in question >are part of the same building. So, when you say "not exactly addressing the issue", you mean "not addressing the issue at all". I hope no-one's misinterpreting what I've been saying. I *completely agree* that upper-level building Locations (at the same relative level) not connected by a building depiction anywhere along their shared hexside should *not* be considered ADJACENT. Indeed, I've never seen anyone argue otherwise. Unfortunately, that's not what the rule actually *says*, so it should be changed accordingly. [*Indeed, if one wanted to argue that units can just teleport across the map to any hex they like, providing they have sufficient MF to enter that hex and are not otherwise prohibited from entering it, you would be hard-pressed to find any specific rule indicating otherwise -- although there's no shortage of examples etc. that certainly *imply* otherwise. Again, it's a "everyone knows it so we don't have to write it" rule, along with the "eliminated units are removed from the map", another infamous non-rule.] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 10 07:07:02 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 07:07:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A In-Reply-To: <41184564.72CC@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B3D0@agalsrv03> <41184564.72CC@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:47:48 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >A "Q" like this is Mol thing likely rates a 5, or maybe even a 6 day >bender. 5, 6 days? Pah. I've asked Perry questions that he hasn't answered over *two years* later. I'm sure glad a game wasn't hanging on the response . In computer terms, I suspect that I've sent Perry into an infinite loop. Fortunately, he's obviously multi-processor capable, and can continue answering lesser questions in the meantime. However, his CPU speed is degraded as a consequence -- too many questions and he'll probably just grind to a halt .... ... Or go on a murder-spree like Hal did. Whatever; I don't live anywhere near Baltimore . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 10 07:08:52 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 07:09:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20040809190555.01d938e0@mindspring.com> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040809190555.01d938e0@mindspring.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:22:24 -0400, Seth W Fancher wrote: >I think Tate and Bruce P are correct that >there is nothing explicit in the ASLRB that says to do this. But I don't >see anything explicitly supporting their contention either. ... apart from the Perry Sez, you mean . "That's why they're known as 'clarifications'." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 10 08:13:26 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 10 08:13:38 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: <000001c47edb$2baa86b0$1ff59904@steves> References: <010901c47eab$6ba26a10$c7130a3e@andrea> <000001c47edb$2baa86b0$1ff59904@steves> Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:08:33 -0500, "Steve McBee" wrote: >Here is why it is impossible to make an advance from 23X7L1 to 23Y8L1 (or >L2): There is a clear LOS from 23X8 to 23Y7. No part of the 23Y7 building >lies between the X8/Y7 hexspine. Which means that 23X7 and 23Y8 are not >connected the same way as X7 and X6 or Y8 - Z7. OK. Now please cite the rule that says this lack of connection prohibits movement. (Or alternately, that there must be a connection to allow movement.) Good luck. >Also, while the ground level (and >cellar level) of both locations are ADJACENT, the upper levels are only >adjacent. Please quote the rule that says this, too. My copy of B23.25 quite explicitly says that *all* the levels are ADJACENT. The *only* requirement is that they be the same level, adjacent, and no intervening LOS obstacle such as a rowhouse wall. Look, everyone knows that they *shouldn't* be ADJACENT. No-one *wants* them to be ADJACENT. The issue is what the rules *actually say* -- and therefore the rule needs to be changed. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Tue Aug 10 08:24:28 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Tue Aug 10 08:24:31 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > [*Indeed, if one wanted to argue that units can just teleport across the map > to any hex they like, providing they have sufficient MF to enter that hex and > are not otherwise prohibited from entering it, you would be hard-pressed to > find any specific rule indicating otherwise -- although there's no shortage of > examples etc. that certainly *imply* otherwise. Again, it's a "everyone knows Examples are part of the rules, so they count. You'll also be pretty hard pressed to defend this since the entry cost of a hex is dependent on which hexside is being crossed. If teleporting were allowed, hexside TEM would always be NA. > it so we don't have to write it" rule, along with the "eliminated units are > removed from the map", another infamous non-rule.] > You would have to be using a new definition of "eliminated." In my vocabulary, "eliminated" is not the same as "retained." Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From garciagd at velocity.net Tue Aug 10 16:59:21 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Tue Aug 10 16:55:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] From Perry: WBC AAR Message-ID: <000701c47f36$0e7ab1e0$09c7d342@whelan> WBC tourney ASL Starter Kit #1 Thirty players (including me) Champion: Kevin Boles Runner Up: Allen Hill Third Place: Andy Maly 4th Nathan Hill 5th Alan Dickson 6th Matt Kirschenbaum The tournament was proceeded the night before by a demonstration using the blown up boards and big foamboard counters. We had over 24 for the first hour and about half that many stayed for the second hour of teaching. Tourney format was single elimination with one assigned scenario per round that was only announced after match-ups were made. Players were matched up randomly (those with copies of the game vs those without) using squad counters for chit pulls. Once matched up, players determined sides randomly ("1-3, I'm the Germans"). Then, if both players wanted to switch sides, they could. I seriously considered using the Balance mechanism in picking sides but decided that would be more trouble than it was worth, especially if I was going to be the one explaining it. Round One saw 14 playings of S1 Retaking Vierville: nine American wins vs five German wins, as alternating groups of reinforcement groups (minus support weapons) battle it out for the board y village. Several very close adjudications could have gone either way, most notably against Andres Dunn (son of the designer Ken Dunn), as his game came down to the last dice roll to see if Alan Dickson could pass a 1MC for the win (he could). Lots of newbie rules questions the whole round kept me hopping. Round Two saw 6 playings of S2 War of the Rats, as two first-round winners withdrew. Four Russian wins vs two German wins, as the Germans have to cross a Stalingrad street to take 3 buildings from the outnumbered Russians. Lots fewer questions. Round Three saw the top six players (above) advance into close combat against each other in S5 Clearing Colleville. The Germans won all three games, and the better player won all three games, as the Americans could not take the heart of the board y village from the Germans and their heavy machine gun. Andrew Maly beat Matt Kirschenbaum with a rate of fire tear from the heavy, Allen Hill beat Alan Dickson in a close game, and Kevin Boles beat Nathan Hill. Andrew had things well in hand fairly earlier on, as he had in the first two rounds as well. He was actually my pick to win the whole thing, as I knew him to be an excellent player of whatever he picked up. He had played his share of SL and ASL back in the day, but hadn't picked up a rule book in years and hadn't played any of the Starter Kit scenarios. He fit the mold for one of the types of players I was hoping to encourage into the tourney and perhaps back into ASL. With three undefeated players left, it looked like we were going to five rounds. I had said at the start of the third round that I would play one of the winners, but I decided that that would not be fair. How would it look if one of them beat me? So I decided to recruit the grognardiest guy in the Hunt room, none other than Bruno Sinigaglio, and match him up against Andrew. Bruno is also a master of many games, and I knew he had gotten in a couple of Starter Kit scenarios at ConsimWorld's MonsterCon earlier this year. I sat down the three winners to explain what was coming up, but before I could Andrew asked Kevin and Allen how much ASL experience they had. Kevin replied that he had only had the ASLSK for less than a month but had been working real hard at it, and Allen said he had played some SL back in the 80s and a bit of Solitaire ASL since then. Andrew then said that those two should battle it out for first place, as he had way more ASL experience than they did and already had WBC wood, and there was no need to bring in a fifth round. I assured Andrew that we could accommodate five rounds and that there was no need for him to drop out, but he insisted on letting Allen and Kevin play for the championship. I was secretly glad, because I didn't want to go to five rounds, but disappointed that Andrew would not be in the final. Of course, when I told him that I had lined up Bruno to play, he was all ready to go for another scenario off the books. The final round saw Allen Hill set up the defending Americans in S4 Welcome Back, with Kevin attacking with the Germans. Andrew (with another heavy machine gun to man) was also defending against Bruno's Germans, who have to punch through board y the short way and exit through the middle half of the map, with a chance that snow will fall to help hinder attacks. In both games the Germans split their forces with a big group to the left and a smaller group to the right where the American heavy machine gun threatened to shut things down. In both games the German right flank made good progress at the cost of heavy casualties. On the other side, Andrew conceded the middle (figuring he could collapse on the Germans there), whereas Allen conceded the far left flank, knowing that the attackers would have to move towards the middle to exit. In both games the Germans had the upper hand entering the end game, only to be stymied by the Desperation Self Rally of a key American squad. In Andrew's game, his self-rallied squad and flamethrower were then able to toast the enemy surrounding them, leaving Bruno without enough troops to exit. In Allen's game his key self rally over on the German right flank was quickly offset by his disabling the heavy machine gun that was covering the German left flank from its central location. Careful maneuvering and good dice rolling saw Kevin able to exit just enough of his force to win in a very close game. A great ending to a successful event. Highlights include: a father and son team (runner up Allen Hill and 12-year old Nathan Hill) making it to the semi-finals; adjudicating a game against Andres, the son of my good friend Ken Dunn-that will teach Andres to beat me in a Euro; watching several relatively more experienced players guide their opponents through the first round game (including newbie Chris Palermo helping clueless newbie Mark Yoshikawa make it through their match); and finding a loophole to allow me to nominate Andrew Maly for the Sportsman Award (he didn't withdraw in order to allow someone else to advance). I was very encouraged by the Starter Kit tourney and the turnout for the demo. I was happy with the ASL Recon precon. 36 players is the most in four years, 50% more than last year. Someone please cross post this to the ASLML. From swfancher at mindspring.com Tue Aug 10 18:25:27 2004 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Tue Aug 10 18:25:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040809190555.01d938e0@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040810212116.01df8a18@mindspring.com> Did I miss a Perry Sez specific to a MOL? Or was it that lame one about the FT that was trying to be extrapolated to apply to a MOL? An FT is an FT and a MOL is a MOL. Some things work the same...some don't. IMO, the fact that there is a rule that applies to a FT means just that. Extending it to apply to a MOL gives it more impact than intended. I hate the "clarifications." Especially the ones that contradict the 2 rule sections that were actually clear before someone asked a silly question and got a stupid answer! :-) Be well. Seth At 10:08 AM 8/10/2004, Bruce Probst wrote: >On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:22:24 -0400, Seth W Fancher >wrote: > > >I think Tate and Bruce P are correct that > >there is nothing explicit in the ASLRB that says to do this. But I don't > >see anything explicitly supporting their contention either. > >... apart from the Perry Sez, you mean . > >"That's why they're known as 'clarifications'." > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"His only crime was being born delicious!" >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 19:27:40 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Aug 10 19:27:42 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question Message-ID: Man, we all need to get lives... But, since I don't currently have one... > >Please quote the rule that says this, too. My copy of B23.25 quite >explicitly >says that *all* the levels are ADJACENT. > You must have a different copy of the 2nd Ed ASLRB than I do. You are reading more into B23.25 than what it actually says. It *says* that units in a building are ADJACENT "only if" they are on the same level or connected by a stairwell. I.e., being on the same level is a *prerequisite* for units in a building to be ADJACENT if not connected by a stairwell. This is *not* the same as saying that all units on the same level of a bulding and in adjacent hexes are *automatically* ADJACENT. The rule only states that such units can be considered ADJACENT *only if* those conditions exist. [The EXC rules out the possibility of being ADJACENT on the upper levels of a Rowhouse.] Certainly, it would be possible for units in the same level of a building and in adjacent hexes to not be considered ADJACENT. A Rowhouse wall is one specific example cited. The absence of other specific examples does not mean that more examples do not exist. If you are not able to enter an adjacent Location during the MPh (disregarding enemy presence), then you certainly are not able to Advance into that Location during the APh. > >The *only* requirement is that they >be the same level, adjacent, and no intervening LOS obstacle such as a >rowhouse wall. > Wrong. These are certainly requirements, but they are *not* necessarily the *only* requirements, and it *does not say* these are the only requirements. It says that such units are ADJACENT *only if* ... etc. > >Look, everyone knows that they *shouldn't* be ADJACENT. > Units on the same level of a building and in adjacent hexes are not necessarily ADJACENT, nor is B23.25 stating that they *are* always considered ADJACENT. >No-one *wants* them >to be ADJACENT. > Well, I can agree with that. But since I am *not* told that they are *always* considered ADJACENT, I don't have the issue of being forced to accept them as always ADJACENT. > >The issue is what the rules *actually say* -- > The rule only says that in order to be considered ADJACENT, they must be on the same level and either in an adjacent hex or in a stairwell hex. This is *not* the same as stating that they are *always* considered ADJACENT if those criteria are met, only that those criteria must be met in order to be considered ADJACENT. > >and therefore >the rule needs to be changed. > What needs to be changed is not necessarily B23.25, but rather B23.421-.422, which talks about Upper Levels. There should be something in there about only being able to enter an upper level of a building from the same level of that building across a building hexside. That's what should be changed, IMO. And while you're at it, you better hurry up and change the Bypass rules too. You know, there is nothing in there that says Bypass must take place on the Ground Level. Technically, units on Level One could also use Bypass movement to enter an adjacent building hex at Level One... 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 Aug 10 20:11:17 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Aug 10 20:11:18 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question Message-ID: > > >I would argue that a unit may never Advance into a hex that it could not > >move directly into during the MPh. I'm not prepared to back that up with > >rule references at the moment. > >That's a strange argument; many hexes cannot be entered by Infantry in the >MPh >that can be entered in the APh. Most hexes containing a Known armed enemy >unit, for instance (A4.14). > I chose not to elaborate out of tiredness. A simple amendment of "disregarding enemy presence" should dispell your objection. > >But it's a moot point; there is no rule indicating that infantry *cannot* >cross such upper-level building "empty" hexsides in the MPh, > Since when does there have to be a rule stating what "cannot" be done? I thought the litmus test of ASL rules is what is stated *can* be done... and if not stated as "can be done", then it cannot be done. >and given that >B23.25 says that they are ADJACENT > It certainly does not state categorically that they are *always* considered ADJACENT. You are reading more into it than what is there. It *only* states that units are considered ADJACENT "only if" they are in adjacent hexes or in a stairwell hex. The conditions are prerequisites; they are not the definition of what ADJACENT means in the upper levels of a building. >(For the >record, *all* movement is "implied"; there isn't actually a statement >anywhere >that I could find that says the equivalent of "units move by leaving one >hex >and entering the next, and that next hex must be adjacent to the first". > That *is* a curious ommission, talk about taking things for granted. I agree that it is an incredible oversight that movement is not somehow defined as occurring by moving from one adjacent hex into another adjacent hex. I couldn't find it either. > >There *is* a rule that specifies that you can't >move up/down building *levels* unless there's a stairwell (B23.4) > This is a classic example of how rules are consistently mis-stated in their negation. The rule *actually says* (your favorite phrase): "... Infantry spend ... one MF to change levels within a building in a stairwell hex ... " The difference? I have repeated what the rule actually says, while you have paraphrased its meaning in its negative. Restating something in its negative can sometimes change its meaning in subtle ways. An example: Your statement implies that changing building levels is never possible without a stairwell, and omits the possibility of Scaling -- meaning that your statement is technically incorrect. However, by stating the rule correctly (in its positive meaning), there is no conflict of any kind with Scaling, because the original quote remains valid. I only point this out because it is a favorite technique of yours (and of others) to phrase rules in their negation. If one is not extremely careful, new meanings can be assigned to a statement by incorrectly paraphrasing its negation. > >However, I did find this in B23.422, last sentence: "A unit may never ... > >move directly from an upper-level Location to a different building." > > > >Not exactly addressing this issue, since technically the hexes in >question > >are part of the same building. > >So, when you say "not exactly addressing the issue", you mean "not >addressing >the issue at all". > No... when I say "not exactly addressing the issue", I mean it is an analoguous situation that can be a guide in the absence of anything more directly stated. > >Unfortunately, that's not what the rule actually *says*, so it should be >changed accordingly. > Perhaps it would help when you claim what a rule "actually says", if you quoted the rule and then read it. You are claiming that the rule says more than it does. The rule ACTUALLY SAYS that units are ADJACENT "only if"... which is not the same as saying "always if". >[*Indeed, if one wanted to argue that units can just teleport across the >map >to any hex they like, providing they have sufficient MF to enter that hex >and >are not otherwise prohibited from entering it, you would be hard-pressed to >find any specific rule indicating otherwise -- although there's no shortage >of >examples etc. that certainly *imply* otherwise. Again, it's a "everyone >knows >it so we don't have to write it" rule, along with the "eliminated units are >removed from the map", another infamous non-rule.] Yeah, the problem is that ASL players want every single Verb and Noun to be a Defined Term. Are you suggesting that "Elimination" should be a defined ASL Term that would somehow make it more meaningful than common usage? Bah. It drives me nuts (and that's a short drive) that the ASLRB *is* inconsistent in how it defines terminology. Personally, I would be in favor of some key terminology additions, and consistent application of them. It could make some things A Lot Easier. But what *really* ticks me off is that we need to have conversations such as these precisely *because* the ASLRB is so inconsistent and poorly organized, etc., etc., ... ... 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 20:24:11 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Aug 10 20:24:12 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question Message-ID: > >B23.25 is the *definition* of when two >building Locations are ADJACENT > No, it is not. The rule says "only if" ... etc. They are minimum requirements for units to be considered ADJACENT. The rule does not say "always if" ... If it did, those would be absolute requirements, which is more akin to a definition. > >Thus, if a rule tells you two Locations are indeed ADJACENT > B23.25 does not claim that two such Locations are *always* considered ADJACENT, only that they can be ADJACENT "only if" the minimum criteria are met. > >Errors in the rules are *always* worth Perry's time to clear up. Either a >rule says what it means, or it doesn't; if it doesn't, it needs to be >fixed. > But who's going to notice if it never becomes Official? Or care? > >If no-one goes to the trouble of fixing broken rules, what's the point of >asking rules questions at all? > So that we may have pleasant conversation and enlightened discussion. Duh. > >You might as well just answer every question >with "who cares; play it however you damned well want to". > Oh. I thought that's what people did anyway... 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 From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Tue Aug 10 23:29:05 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Tue Aug 10 20:25:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Information References: <20040810125346.10527.qmail@web60906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4119BCB1.426F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; kevin meyer wrote: > Despite what Mr Canuck says (which is wrong), it > appears ASLOK is a go this year. I received the > following from Pete S.: To kevin and all other who fear the worst, Dudes ... DUDES! You're panicking men, pull yourselves together ... no wonder your 1st Liners have a 6 ML. ;) Dial in your "sense o' humour" fer' cryin' out loud. Makes me wonder what you would do in an actual ASL emergency. Remember the crisis when AH was sold to HASBRO? There were reports of players jumping off of their dice towers ... oh the humanity ... A tragedy to be sure but on the upside, the gene pool did in fact benefit from the purge. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Tue Aug 10 23:31:39 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Tue Aug 10 20:25:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B3D0@agalsrv03> <41184564.72CC@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <4119BD4B.6930@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bruce Probst wrote: > 5, 6 days? Pah. I've asked Perry questions that he hasn't answered over *two > years* later. I'm sure glad a game wasn't hanging on the response . Speaking of two years, was there ever a resolution regarding the "Skylight LOS" Q? =Jim= From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 20:36:26 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Aug 10 20:36:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A Message-ID: > >... Or go on a murder-spree like Hal did. Whatever; I don't live anywhere >near Baltimore . > Listen, I'm not particularly thin-skinned, nor am I fanatic about "political correctness". However ... In the United States, a statement such as this might be considered at the least insensitive, and at worst a threat and investigated. ... times *have* changed around here since 9/11... and Oklahoma City ... and Columbine... Regards, Bruce "not fond of murder jokes" 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 From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Tue Aug 10 21:05:39 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Tue Aug 10 21:03:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Skylight LOS (was MOL attacks and Case A) Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B633@agalsrv03> Jim asked > Speaking of two years, was there ever a resolution regarding the >"Skylight LOS" Q? Perry's reply to my questions are below. Note Perry's comments in his answer to question 4. The recent errata in Journal 5 now negates "Skylight LOS within the same building. B23.25: at the end add "LOS to a unit in a building Location [EXC: rooftop Location] can exist only if drawn to an ADJACENT unit or (for LOS between different hexes) if the LOS as it enters the hex does not cross a hexside within the building depiction (e.g., in contrast to 1X3/1X4). No maps handy to cite a specific example but picture the following. Hex A2 is a level 2 hill, A3 is level 0 open ground, A4 is a woods hex, and there is a two story house in hexes A5-A6. A2 obviously has LOS to A3 and A4. A2 does not have LOS to the ground level of A5 due to the blind hex cast by the woods in A4 but A2 does have LOS to the Level 1 location of A5. Prior to the J5 errata, A2 would also have had LOS to the Level 1 Location of A6 (The "skylight" effect). However with the J5 errata there is no "skylight" LOS as the LOS from A2 to A6(level 1) crosses a hexside within the A5-A6 building depiction as it enters A6. All the best, Jim Cheers Jon From: PerryCocke[SMTP:perrycocke@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, 28 October 2002 4:45 To: Cole, Jonathan Subject: Re: Rules question resubmitted >Subject: ASL: Rules question resubmitted > > > 1) Does a unit at Level 2 have a LOS over a Level 1-1/2 obstacle to an >enemy > > unit in a Level 1 Location in the hex directly behind the obstacle Yes; A6.21. > > Example: > > A unit in 3M2 (Level 2) has a LOS over the Two story house L4-M5 to hex >L5 > > because L5 is a Level 1 hill hex (A6.4) > > If L5 were in fact a Single hex Two story house (B31.3), would LOS exist > > between 3M2 (Level 2) and 3L5 (level 1)? Yes. > > 2) Is the following published Q&A still correct for 2nd edition rules > > > > A6.21 & A6.4 Does a unit at Level 2 have a LOS over a Level 1-1/2 >obstacle > > six hexes away to an enemy unit at Level 1 in the hex directly behind >the > > obstacle? > > A. Yes. [An95w; An96; Mw] Yes. > > 3) Chapter K, page K8, 2nd paragraph: > > The last sentance says "A one level obstacle, or a 1.5 level obstacle in > > this case, never blocks LOS between a second level hex and a first level > > hex." > > > > Can "first level hex" be read as "first level Location"? Yes. > > 4) A6.4 says "Blind hexes cannot be seen by the firer unless the blind >hex > > is at an elevation >= the full-level height of the obstacle (in which >case > > it is not a 'Blind' hex after all)." > > > > If the base level of a "Blind" hex is at a level < the full level height >of > > an obstacle but a Location(s) of that Blind hex are at an elevation >= >the > > full-level height of the obstacle (eg upper level building locations), >does > > a higher level firer have LOS to these upper level Locations? Yes. [Should weconsider erraticizing this by adding "unless they are the same building"?] > > 5) A6.4 says "Blind hexes cannot be seen by the firer unless the blind >hex > > is at an elevation >= the full-level height of the obstacle (in which >case > > it is not a 'Blind' hex after all)." > > > > Can this be interpreted (my emphasis added) as: > > -Locations- in Blind hexes can not be seen by the firer unless such > > -Locations- are at an elevation >= the full-level height of the obstacle >(in > > which case they are not 'Blind -Locations- after all)." Yes. Thanks for your patience. ....Perry MMP From ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 11 02:27:31 2004 From: ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Binyamin=20Jones?=) Date: Wed Aug 11 02:27:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OtO AAR In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77B633@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <20040811092731.73590.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> i found this on an old computer last night. It's my final PT report to Steve from OtO +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Pt Report OtO Ben Jones (Russian) Wayne Burgess (German) German Strategy The lessons we have learnt from previous playings are: ? Russians must, initially, concentrate their attack on one flank. ? German Mobility is greatly hampered by Russian air. ? Fortifications are a German?s best friend. ? Infantry rules; avoid toys. ? The Southern bridge area is better to attack, while there is little cover, the open terrain allows the Russian to mass supporting fires. With these lessons in mind, Wayne has used my set up from our first playing. His purchases are 467 coy, 447 coy x2, 2x88L, 2x75L, 3x82mm, 3xHMG, 100mm OBA, 5xforts. There are three main positions; position A, around the northern gully (z34), Position B (R28 Woods) and Position C, around the Bridge. A and C are two company positions supported by AT guns and MTR?s. Area B is a supporting position with 2 MTR?s, 2 AT guns and 2 HMG?s. AT guns and MTR?s are positioned to support the infantry, HMG?s to lay firelanes across the map to support the other positions. A screen of dummies, ? squads and HIP full squads is set up along the 38-41 hex rows. The OB given mines are laid on the three roads to prevent rapid tank exploitation. Wire is set 4 hexes in front of the main positions to break up human waves. FPP are spent solely on trenches, PB?s, HIP and dummies. The German strategy is to defend the position which is attacked in situ. There will be no reinforcement from the other position. OBA observer is situated in the B position to support either flank. Russian Strategy Purchases, 447 coyx2, 458 coyx2, 527 coy, 2x82m MTR?s, 2x 76* INF, 2x HMG, 70mm OBAx2, CBM, 2x FB. Position C is to be attacked. On board are the mortars, INF guns HMG?s and a rifle coy to dig foxholes. Turn ? they will prep the German positions making a hole for the 5 following companies and armour. With the reduced minefield cost, I expected the German to mine himself in heavily, so any attack will be proceeded by PT tanks. My plan is to smash through this flank and hook around the back of positions B and A. To this end I have spent extra CPP?s to but trucks for the guns, these will be used to transport a breakthrough company into the German rear. First CG Scen Russian lays 2 bombardments in same place on position C with shits from 4 inf guns and 4 mtr?s, ? of German force there broken. The Russian brings on all tanks rushing along south board edge. German DFire is ineffective as heavy rain starts. Subsequent Russian D fire is also less effective in rain but leadership, acq and weight of firepower balance this. Germans die in place. By turn three the Russian panzerkiel is closing with the German trenchline. Once again, reinforcements from position A are interdicted by Russian FB?s. (NB without guidance we are playing +2 to Sighting task check during rain). Position B knocks out three tanks, however, the 88?s backing up position C have been knocked out, by bombardment and then by MTR fire. Turn 4 sees two 458 coys mass to HW the Germans. However, The Russian, with significantly fewer FB?s than in previous testings cannot subdue all positions and HMG?s in position A and B take a toll of the advancing Russians with Firelanes reaching out to a full 16 hexes. By this time enough of the Germans broken in the first couple of turns are rallied. These stalwarts hold off the surviving 458?s who break up on the wire. On turn 5, 13 Russian 458?s are dead, broken and then killed by a 100mm Harassing fire mission. 6 tanks have been killed, 3 by AT guns and 3 by HIP squads with PF?s. The Russians have broken into position C but only control ? of the trenches. The position is still firmly in German hands. By moving MG?s through the gullies and trenches around C, the Germans are able to form a death star which after advancing into a trench are able to destroy the remaining Russians in the trench. However, 6 hexes away forms another HW of 527?s. The German draws red for OBA. One of the HMG protecting the position malfs and the 527?s are able to close. A burning wreck in the death star?s position is enough to allow the Russians to close for CC. The game ends on turn 7. The Russians have lost 7 tanks and 18 SE?s. The Germans have lost 37 points and the bridge. Lessons Learned ? HMG firelanes are devastating when leader directed, even when against 9ML troops. ? The Russians should use 150mm OBA to hammer supporting positions and PB?s. ? Do not waste your FB?s on point attacks during rain. Save them to interdict troops moving to reinforce your schwerepunkt. Conclusion The Russians should have broken through but did not pay enough attention to suppressing HMG?s and AT guns in position B. RePH - German Strategy With position A strong and position B n German hands there is little to do but reinforce, lay mines and repeat yesterdays performance. The German is reduced to crewing two guns with ? squads as their crews died. Purchases: 467 coy, 447 coy, 100 mm OBA, forts x2, ass plt. The 467 coy is to replace that lost earlier and will reman the C position. The forts will be used to construct another trench system (position D) around the M23 culvert. This is to prevent a Russian breakthrough when they shatter area C. The Assault platoon is to stay off board forming a reserve. Each company also gives 2 squads to stay off board to form a provisional reserve company. At the moment there are 11 squads in this reserve and the ass platn. Position A will stay as is. The support position in B will also be reinforced with a couple of LMG squads. RePH - Russian Strategy The Russian buys 447 coy, Gds SMG coy, 150mm OBA, 120mm RKT OBA (both pre reg). This brings the total force to 5.5 companies and 4 modules of OBA. Position C is weak, Russians can set up 4 hexes from it (due to FH?s dug last CG scen. The plan is to use the MTR?s, HMG?s, OBA and tanks in direct fire to obliterate position C and B and to HW any remnants. The main objective is to break through and start taking some red dots. Hopefully catching the Germans second defence line before it can be fully manned. Second CG Scenario No rain, the Russians open up with devastating artillery fire. 150mm oba smashes position B and the only on target rkt barrage I have ever used falls perfectly on position C. When the inf guns, MTR?s and MG?s have finished there are only 3 GO squads holding position C. A human wave by a 447 and ? a 527 coy sweeps away these remnants leaving The Russians in control of the entire bridge position by T3. The German?s second line (D) is too far away to actively contribute to the defence of position C. Two guns malfs s they are manned by ? squads not crews. Capitalising on the lack of rain the Russians lay their only smoke ffe across position D allowing 4 tanks to move behind the position while 3 more human waves rush across the open ground. The 150mm OBA continues to play havoc with position B, switching to harassing fire to pin reinforcements from position A. The German is tempted to bring on his provisional company but does not want to face marauding t34?s. Russians casualties are light while the Germans lose 5 guns and a full company. The marauding tanks (through vehicular crew sleaze) are able to capture two red dots (D22 and I41) effectively encircling the Germans in position D. As 100 mm oba strikes the Russians go to ground on the K27 gully. The scen finishes on turn 6 again. The Germans have lose 50 CVP, as well as 2 more red dots. The Russian total now is 7 VP. Lessons Learned ? 447 companies cannot hold as much ground as 467?s. ? The Russians have a *lot* of firepower, beware as the German, evn PB?s won?t save you. ? Always pre reg your rocket OBA. Conclusion A solid day?s fighting for the Russians. They have smashed one battle position and smothered another, setting themselves up for a deep penetration and forcing the Germans to counterattack, a role this kampfgruppe is ill suited for. RePH German Strategy The Germans are in a quandary; with an enemy force in their rear they need to counterattack to eject them. With position B gone they cannot simply interdict any reinforcing units. Instead of reacting to the enemy the German commander decides to take the initiative and counter attack. By reinforcing position D it may be possible to cut off the Russian company in the rear. The purchases reflect this. Ass plt, pioneer plt, StuH 42, 44FB, Stuka 42, 150mm oba. Position D, now surrounded on the east, west and south is reinforced with a platoon withdrawn from position A. The guns covering position A are also withdrawn and dug in around Q17 to support the counterattack. The two ass plts and the pioneer plt are situated in the grain around I11 ready to hit the Russian foxholes while position D cuts them apart with MG fire and OBA. RePH Russian Strategy With one of his flanks turned, I feel that Wayne will counterattack. This will create an opening somewhere, which I intend to exploit with armour. I buy: 2KV FT sections, 3 KV1S sections. I still have a large advantage in infantry. I intend to creep along the southern board edge and reinforce my isolated 447 coy before it is overwhelmed. Third CG Scen The German sets up heavily to counterattack the isolated Russian company. However, position A is now denuded of troops and, I suspect, guns. I decide to switch my armoured attack from relieving the isolated coy to smashing the now weakened position A and breaking through along the north edge. After a protracted argument with Wayne, in which I deny that I am a bastard and admit that I am not clever enough to have baited this trap, I unleash the KV?s or War! While his 838?s destroy my isolated coy for failure to rout, my KV fist burns out position A, gunfire suppresses the infantry, and as I suspected there are no AT guns protecting his troops. He uses his FB?s and stukas to kill two tanks, but I get two mistaken attacks that I use to further pound position A! Steady fire from Mr. 10-3 in the old German trenches of position C and B weakens position D and tempts me to encircle his troops, but Vpitis gets the better of me, and aided by rain I exit 6 KV?s from the west board edge while taking two more red dots. Russians now on 14 VP?s. They control the majority of the map with two German companies dug in along the railroad in the centre of the map and the remnants of the elite platoons occupying my foxholes in the I14 area. Lessons Learned ? Armoured mobility is wonderful. ? Never lave troops without AT support. ? Mistaken attacks are terrible for personal morale. Conclusion Very close going into the last CG scen. Much closer than in the last playings. With the German player constrained to set-up along the railroad or in a narrow strip along the west edge the Russians are in a powerful position. Able to concentrate on either board edge I figure that they should be able to exit enough points to win. The German, to be able to stop thid will have to invest in vehicles, expensive and high risk as the Russian sets up second. RePH Russian Strategy With my exploitation and exit strategy in mind I by: KV1sx2, 447 coy, KVpt34x2, FBx2. I intend to place them on the most open wing and rush them off as soon as possible. If he does use vehicles, I will use the FB?s to whack them. RePH German Strategy I have not had feedback from Wayne on this area so I cannot comment. Personally I think he was running scared. I know he purchased Nashorns, Marders and StuGs and very little infantry. Fourth and Final CG Scen Wayne sets up with 4 vehicles along the southern flank and what looks like a company of infantry. The Northern flank is clear and I suspect that it is gun alley. I set up all my armour 11 tanks, and a 447 coy within 18 hexes of the west edge to run the gauntlet. I am counting on the remaining infantry in position C to suppress his infantry while I waltz off. The game begins with the traditional barrage of MTR and HMG fire, still directed by 10-3 who has survived numerous sniper and two crits to become the longest serving 10-3 I have ever had. Return fire is slack. My 447 company sets off towards the board edge to scout out an exit for the armour. Very quiet; too quiet. By turn 3 the German infantry in the centre of the map are dying like flies, a single immobilised tank causing them to die for FTR. However, on turn 4 my 447 company uncovers the plot. While my tanks have been sitting in motion delaying, Wayne has 6 vehicles Hip in front of me. Luckily the two Nashorns are uncovered by infantry that STUNS one on a 12 MC and burns another in CC. IN his DFF my 5 FB?s devastate his OT Marders and the remaining Nashorn. Even a 50mm mtr gets a kill. On turn 5 his armoured ambush is no more and I waltz off 9 tanks. With casualties mounting in the central battle I am up to 18 VP?s. The game ends on turn 6 with the Germans running away from me trying not to get killed. German Win. 2 VP?s short. Bugger. Lessons Learned ? Don?t try to be too eager to exit VP?s. Use them *then* exit them ? Beware HIP tanks on this map. ? Defensive positions are cool, but rapid breakthroughs can make them obsolete. ? Wayne?s a lucky bastard. Conclusion Well Mr. D, you?ve done a good job. This version is a lot better than the initial couple we played. The VP says it all. Very close to a win. If I had delayed a tank or two to take a couple of red dots more I would have won. The Russian airpower is now much better, you get the initial bite with the 4 FB?s in the first CG scen, but after there is not constant Russian air for the German player to worry about. This makes for a better game as there is some manoeuvre now for the German rather than just a sit and shoot defence. We both agree we would like to see more normal tanks. As nether of us has used minefields much, we just seem to be spazzin around with these slow awkward tanks. Can we have more t34 M43?s in the counter mix please? Please! This is really important. I have panthers coming out of my ears and only 6 t34 m43?s! Seriously though, this version feels much more balanced. God news indeed. The bad news is that Wayne is going to Australia for a month. By the time you read this he will have already left. I will not have another opponent till (I think 17th July) when I have a good friend coming for 3.5 days to test this. Till then I am fed up of ASL and intend to play some much needed OCS. For the next month I will happily re-read new versions, but I am played out until Mid July. Please take note of the comments I have sent you attached to previous drafts. I do not want to have to correct the same stuff three times. Thanks for the opportunity to test this mate. You have done really well, look forward to the next version. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From gr27134 at charter.net Wed Aug 11 04:11:15 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Wed Aug 11 04:11:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A Message-ID: <394f2f$5j224b@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: "Bruce Bakken" > Date: 2004/08/10 Tue PM 10:36:26 CDT > To: bprobst@netspace.net.au, jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A > > > > >... Or go on a murder-spree like Hal did. Whatever; I don't live anywhere > >near Baltimore . > > > > Listen, I'm not particularly thin-skinned, nor am I fanatic about "political > correctness". However ... > > In the United States, a statement such as this might be considered at the > least insensitive, and at worst a threat and investigated. > > ... times *have* changed around here since 9/11... and Oklahoma City ... and > Columbine... I hope and pray that Bruce is speaking just for himself... I know he isn't speak for this American... I have no intention of giving the likes of the Osama's, McKvee's(sp?), and the Columbine idiots of the world the satisfaction of making me change my personal sensibilities. The reference was freaking hilarious. I laughed and was not offended even one iota. Any one in authority who may have noticed would likely laugh or, at worst, ignore the statement. That is assuming some uptight busy-body (_NOT_! a reference to BB) didn't make a big deal about it. Sadly, BB's (and others) reaction is exactly what terrorists are after...I refuse to comply. It isn't the times that have changed...it is the people living in the times that change. Thanks, Tate Rogers From keithdalton at verizon.net Wed Aug 11 05:19:49 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Wed Aug 11 05:19:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OtO AAR Message-ID: <20040811121949.TDML23440.out009.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> "First CG Scen Russian lays 2 bombardments in same place on position C with shits from 4 inf guns and 4 mtr?s, ? of German force there broken. " Sounds like a crappy day to be a German. ;-) Keith From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 05:23:52 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed Aug 11 05:23:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A Message-ID: > >I hope and pray that Bruce is speaking just for himself... > Of course. When have I ever presumed to speak for anybody but myself? >I know he isn't speak for this American... > >I have no intention of giving the likes of the Osama's, McKvee's(sp?), and >the Columbine idiots of the world the satisfaction of making me change my >personal sensibilities. > My sensibilities with regards to "murder" jokes has been the same for most of my adult life. I don't think they're funny. I don't even like it when someone says in jest, "I'm gonna kill you." I would have commented the same way if he had instead said "go postal". Not Funny. > >Sadly, BB's (and others) reaction is exactly what terrorists are after...I >refuse to comply. It isn't the times that have changed...it is the people >living in the times that change. > I should have left out the reference to terrorist acts, I did not intend my comment to be more than a personal opinion. And anyway, since when has it become okay to express oneself with language of violence? I believe this culture has adopted the language of violence too cavalierly. We think it's *funny* when someone mentions a "murder spree", as long as it is in the "proper" context (i.e. as a joke). How hilarious. I understand the context in which it was said; it is perhaps unfair of me to pull that one line out. On balance, the *entire* story could be seen as funny. My smile turns to a frown when a punch-line or kicker statement makes a reference to killing people. That's just me; and I won't apologize for gently chiding people about their choices of humor. And times *have* changed. Gun violence has become so common-place in this culture (television, video games, movies) that our language has thoughtlessly added references of violence to everyday speech. IMO, there's something wrong with that. I don't live in fear. But I feel I can remind people about the choices they make when using language. Language is power; and the language people use can influence how they think. Language of violence is one of the few things I will issue an unsolicited personal opinion about. I believe that voicing my opinion is a corrective to just sitting idly and accepting it, even when expressed as a joke. Okay, I'm done. I'm not going to be drawn into a debate on the subject; of course, anyone is free to express their opinions about what I've just said. Just don't expect me to participate any further, because I have nothing more to add ... 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 hmielants at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 05:48:54 2004 From: hmielants at yahoo.com (Hans Mielants) Date: Wed Aug 11 05:48:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OtO AAR In-Reply-To: <20040811092731.73590.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040811124854.22078.qmail@web41509.mail.yahoo.com> > Ø The Southern bridge area is better to attack, > while > there is little cover, the open terrain allows the > Russian to mass supporting fires. I don't agree. While it is clear the Russians need to create a schwerpunkt on one side of the railway the southern approach is weakened by the hill in the north which dominates the battlefield. Some guns on the hill can cause a huge amount of damage. Key to success, wherever you go, is the smoke. If it starts to rain to soon it becomes a shootout. Clearly the Russians are limited in smoke to balance the game. Hans From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 07:04:50 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 11 07:04:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:23:52 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >That's just me; and I won't apologize for >gently chiding people about their choices of humor. And I won't apologise for completely ignoring your gentle chiding . I think that leaves us even . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 07:16:11 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 11 07:16:16 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33akh0puha4tog1etl8ngvc8mempr1inav@4ax.com> On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:27:40 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >You must have a different copy of the 2nd Ed ASLRB than I do. Well, that would certainly be one explanation for your arguments. >Certainly, it would be possible for units in the same level of a building >and in adjacent hexes to not be considered ADJACENT. A Rowhouse wall is one >specific example cited. Actually, it's a specific EXCEPTION. >The absence of other specific examples does not >mean that more examples do not exist. No, but the absence of other specific EXCEPTIONS usually do mean that other EXCEPTIONS don't exist. (Of course, there are always exceptions to this general rule about exceptions.) >If you are not able to enter an adjacent Location during the MPh >(disregarding enemy presence), then you certainly are not able to Advance >into that Location during the APh. I don't disagree at all. Now please cite the rule prohibiting such movement in the MPh. It's not rocket science, folks. The rule is wrong and needs fixing. I think it should be fixed in B23.25, but if you want to fix it in B23.421 or wherever I'd accept that too -- just so long as it's fixed *somewhere*. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 07:45:10 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 11 07:45:15 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9iakh0p49811k297joq9n7qq3hsv1saj2i@4ax.com> On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:11:17 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >>But it's a moot point; there is no rule indicating that infantry *cannot* >>cross such upper-level building "empty" hexsides in the MPh, > >Since when does there have to be a rule stating what "cannot" be done? I >thought the litmus test of ASL rules is what is stated *can* be done... and >if not stated as "can be done", then it cannot be done. Oh, for heaven's sake Bruce, why are you always so determined to prove that black may be white? The rules *do* say that upper building levels can be entered from other upper building levels at the same level (B23.421). Indeed, the rule goes to the trouble of pointing out that it's no different to movement at ground level. THEREFORE, since there is no rule ... continue per my quote above. >It *only* states that units are considered ADJACENT "only if" they are in >adjacent hexes or in a stairwell hex. The conditions are prerequisites; >they are not the definition of what ADJACENT means in the upper levels of a >building. Uh, yes they are, since there is no *other* definition. Are you *sure* you don't own a rulebook that says different things to what everyone else's copy says? >No... when I say "not exactly addressing the issue", I mean it is an >analoguous situation that can be a guide in the absence of anything more >directly stated. No, you *actually* mean it's a rule referring to a completely different situation and you're hoping that it can be applied here too, even though there's no direct evidence for it; i.e., it's what you *want* the rule to say, even though it doesn't. I seem to recall *you* chiding *me* for making exactly this kind of point in other recent rules arguments. Please make up your mind as to whether it's acceptable argument technique or not. >You are claiming that the rule says more than it does. The rule ACTUALLY >SAYS that units are ADJACENT "only if"... which is not the same as saying >"always if". Well, since {adjacent building hexes not separated by rowhouse hexsides} *are* "always" {adjacent building hexes not separated by rowhouse hexsides}, what on earth is your point? Are you suggesting that *non-adjacent* building hexes of the same building at the same level might in some way *also* be considered ADJACENT? Please elaborate. >Are you suggesting that "Elimination" should be a defined >ASL Term that would somehow make it more meaningful than common usage? Bah. "Common usage"? The "common usage" of the word "elimination" usually involves physical destruction or death. Well, the game counters aren't "alive" so they can't be "killed", but physical destruction is certainly possible. Do you set fire to every counter that is "eliminated" in your games, or do you eat them and then pass them (thus invoking another "common usage" of the word "elimination")? Oh wait, you mean the rules simply mean "remove the piece from the game board"? Wow. Does your dictionary really say that? The truth is that we really only intuitively know that "elimination" means "remove the counter from the board" because we've played other games (whether it be checkers or chess or other wargames). It's not a definition we learned in formal education, nor is it one we can learn from a dictionary. What I'm *suggesting* is that ASL has a number of assumptions built in. Some of those assumptions are fairly trivial -- the concept that movement is from one adjacent hex to the next, for instance; elimination of game pieces is another. We also assume that units in the game must obey certain laws of physics, such as being unable to defy gravity. Unfortunately, *in this particular instance*, the ability to defy gravity happens to be currently enshrined within the definition of ADJACENT building hexes. ADJACENT is not a "trivial assumption", it's a critical game definition that has impact on many different rules. When it's defined, it needs to be defined *accurately*. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 07:50:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 11 07:50:21 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Building Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:24:11 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >>Errors in the rules are *always* worth Perry's time to clear up. Either a >>rule says what it means, or it doesn't; if it doesn't, it needs to be fixed. > >But who's going to notice if it never becomes Official? Or care? ?? Who said anything about it "never becoming official"? Official Errata is published on a regular basis (well, as regular as the Journals get). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 07:55:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 11 07:55:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20040810212116.01df8a18@mindspring.com> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040809190555.01d938e0@mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.2.20040810212116.01df8a18@mindspring.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:25:27 -0400, Seth W Fancher wrote: >Did I miss a Perry Sez specific to a MOL? Not that I'm aware of. >Or was it that lame one about the FT I wouldn't know. I haven't seen any "lame" Perry Sez concerning FT recently -- only the perfectly sensible one about using TK DR to determine Target Facing. >that was trying to be extrapolated to apply to a MOL? I'll grant you that extrapolation is currently necessary, but it's hardly an unreasonable extrapolation given that Target Facing has an identical effect on both FT and MOL TK, and that neither makes a TH DR. >Extending it to apply to a MOL gives it more impact than intended. Hardly. >I hate the "clarifications." Especially the ones that contradict the 2 >rule sections that were actually clear before someone asked a silly >question and got a stupid answer! :-) I hate such "clarifications" too; fortunately it's not the case here. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From towheadedmule at cox.net Wed Aug 11 09:33:52 2004 From: towheadedmule at cox.net (Russell Martin) Date: Wed Aug 11 09:36:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VotG map Message-ID: <001c01c47fc0$ffe43210$0100a8c0@dumdum> Hey List, Any work being done on the VotG Map for VASL. I would like to know how soon after the release (when that is) we can play using VASL. Thanks Doc Martin From jbarber at meic.org Wed Aug 11 10:00:45 2004 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Wed Aug 11 10:00:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL: some things I'd like to see Message-ID: Citizens, First, a big public thank you to Rodney and all the other VASL elves out there. I love VASL and wouldn't get to play THE game without it. Excellent job and after an adjustment period I'm a huge fan of VASL 4.x. That being said, there are a few tweaks I'd like to see. I didn't know where else to send this and I know some of the elves peruse the list so here they are: 1. Make a tab in the counter window for basic counters. Not a big deal but three tabs of basic, informational and units would be more convenient. 2. Somehow prevent the mouse rollover from displaying an opponent's stack. They aren't always in LOS and you don't always have right of inspection but try as I might I sometimes get the mouse too close to them and see the whole stack anyway. 3. Make all my DRs 1,1 or 1,2 (EXC: when I make my opponents' MCs) 4. Make the QRDC window like the counter window so you can leave it open and access it separately from the controls window. 5. Not have the log report every little tweak to a stack or informational counter move. That's about it. Nothing major, well except for the DR thing. I think Rod & Co. about have this thing nailed. Good job guys. -- Jeff "not an elf" Barber From garciagd at velocity.net Wed Aug 11 10:03:00 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Wed Aug 11 10:07:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL: some things I'd like to see References: Message-ID: <005f01c47fc5$0f530380$f301010a@gecac.org> hello! I agree VASL is the greatest thing since sliced bread! Thanks to Rodney and Co, along with all the VASL CABAL elves who make this possible. > 4. Make the QRDC window like the counter window so you can leave it open and access it separately from the controls window. I agree 1000%! make that 10,000%! I would love toopen it, leave it minimized instead of opening it evey time. Peace Roger From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 14:58:33 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 11 14:58:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Completely OT request, not ASL related in the slightest Message-ID: Apologies for the off-topicness, but I need a friendly North American and you guys hate me less than most . I have a strong desire to make a DVD purchase that I can only make if I live in North America ... which obviously I don't. It's a new MST3K DVD that comes with a "bonus free disk" only to people who purchase it via a particular channel, and that channel is not open to furriners like me. (I could easily buy the DVD through normal online stores, I've bought plenty of Region 1 DVDs that way, but I don't get the free disk if I do that in this instance.) Basically, I need someone in USA or Canada to buy the disk for me and then ship it to me. I can make payment via PayPal (preferably) or money order. If you think you can help me out, contact me off-list and I'll get you all the relevant details. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "His only crime was being born delicious!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From swfancher at mindspring.com Wed Aug 11 16:46:38 2004 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Wed Aug 11 16:48:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MOL Attacks and Case A In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040809190555.01d938e0@mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.2.20040810212116.01df8a18@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040811194244.01e04288@mindspring.com> Assuming that I recall the FT Q&A correctly...as I said earlier (I know...lame reality argument!)...I think a MOL is likely to allow the fuel to flow downwards onto an exposed engine. The FT that shoots a flame will actually ht something and seek to go straight in or up (heat rising). So, if you hit a tank initially in the turret with an FT, I think it will affect the turret and higher (ie nothing but air), whereas as MOL will affect the turret and below. At least we'll (hopefully!) have an answer in the somewhat near future. At least, well before VotG is released which is probably the next time this Q will be most sorely needed! Be well. Seth At 10:55 AM 8/11/2004, Bruce Probst wrote: >On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:25:27 -0400, Seth W Fancher >wrote: > > >Did I miss a Perry Sez specific to a MOL? > >Not that I'm aware of. > > >Or was it that lame one about the FT > >I wouldn't know. I haven't seen any "lame" Perry Sez concerning FT recently >-- only the perfectly sensible one about using TK DR to determine Target >Facing. > > >that was trying to be extrapolated to apply to a MOL? > >I'll grant you that extrapolation is currently necessary, but it's hardly an >unreasonable extrapolation given that Target Facing has an identical effect on >both FT and MOL TK, and that neither makes a TH DR. > > >Extending it to apply to a MOL gives it more impact than intended. > >Hardly. > > >I hate the "clarifications." Especially the ones that contradict the 2 > >rule sections that were actually clear before someone asked a silly > >question and got a stupid answer! :-) > >I hate such "clarifications" too; fortunately it's not the case here. > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"His only crime was being born delicious!" >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 11 18:05:37 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Wed Aug 11 18:05:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Completely OT request, not ASL related in the slightest Message-ID: <184670-2200484121537573@M2W063.mail2web.com> >Apologies for the off-topicness, but I need a friendly North American and >you guys hate me less than most . Tom Mueller has kindly stepped up to the plate (first among many offers), thanks to everyone who responded! Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bignoodle at earthlink.net Wed Aug 11 18:14:12 2004 From: bignoodle at earthlink.net (donald holland) Date: Wed Aug 11 18:14:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Completely OT request, not ASL related in the slightest Message-ID: <410-22004841211412113@earthlink.net> > Tom Mueller has kindly stepped up to the plate (first among many offers), > thanks to everyone who responded! > That's Tom Servo for ya.... he's the silt of the earth Don "Damn Spell Checker" Holland bignoodle@earthlink.net The 7th best poker player on the Internet..... at least tonight. Heading to the rebirth of ASLOK. The only place on earth I'm considered a chick magnet. From btdtall at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 01:29:39 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Thu Aug 12 01:29:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... Message-ID: <20040812082939.70815.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Listers- Does anyone actually know the name of the vision slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. Thanks in advance. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From towheadedmule at cox.net Thu Aug 12 01:33:36 2004 From: towheadedmule at cox.net (Russell Martin) Date: Thu Aug 12 01:34:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... In-Reply-To: <20040812082939.70815.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002f01c48047$131122e0$0100a8c0@dumdum> I think it is viewport Doc Martin -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of btdtall@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:30 AM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... Listers- Does anyone actually know the name of the vision slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. Thanks in advance. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. 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 mountainview at westelcom.com Thu Aug 12 03:23:45 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Thu Aug 12 03:23:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... References: <002f01c48047$131122e0$0100a8c0@dumdum> Message-ID: <019801c48056$74fb1010$4f8c6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Aperture. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell Martin" To: ; Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 4:33 AM Subject: RE: [Aslml] A word needed.... > I think it is viewport > > Doc Martin > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > btdtall@yahoo.com > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:30 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > Listers- > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > Thanks in advance. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > 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 gr27134 at charter.net Thu Aug 12 03:24:27 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu Aug 12 03:24:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... Message-ID: <391ph9$5r8pth@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> Howsabout- visionslit _OR_ grenadehole Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) > From: "Russell Martin" > Date: 2004/08/12 Thu AM 03:33:36 CDT > To: , > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > I think it is viewport > > Doc Martin > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > btdtall@yahoo.com > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:30 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > Listers- > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > Thanks in advance. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > 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 geb3 at inter.net Thu Aug 12 03:38:16 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Aug 12 03:35:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Where you stand depends on where you sit (WAS: A word needed....) In-Reply-To: <391ph9$5r8pth@mxip02a.cluster1.charter.net> Message-ID: These last two choices show just how important it is to consider the speaker's perspective. - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Tate Rogers Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 7:24 PM To: Russell Martin; btdtall@yahoo.com; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] A word needed.... Howsabout- visionslit _OR_ grenadehole Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) > From: "Russell Martin" > Date: 2004/08/12 Thu AM 03:33:36 CDT > To: , > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > I think it is viewport > > Doc Martin > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > btdtall@yahoo.com > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:30 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > Listers- > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > Thanks in advance. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > 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 > _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 towheadedmule at cox.net Thu Aug 12 03:53:59 2004 From: towheadedmule at cox.net (Russell Martin) Date: Thu Aug 12 03:54:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: Where you stand depends on where you sit (WAS: A word needed....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003801c4805a$af61ca10$0100a8c0@dumdum> According to the German Military Handbook, Chapter V, para 4.4, pg 266, a port for a MG is known as a "loophole" and for a gun is known as an "embrasure." Of course, it may it be known as different things in different armies. Doc -----Original Message----- From: George Bates [mailto:geb3@inter.net] Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 4:38 AM To: Tate Rogers; Russell Martin; btdtall@yahoo.com; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Where you stand depends on where you sit (WAS: A word needed....) These last two choices show just how important it is to consider the speaker's perspective. - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Tate Rogers Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 7:24 PM To: Russell Martin; btdtall@yahoo.com; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: RE: [Aslml] A word needed.... Howsabout- visionslit _OR_ grenadehole Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) > From: "Russell Martin" > Date: 2004/08/12 Thu AM 03:33:36 CDT > To: , > Subject: RE: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > I think it is viewport > > Doc Martin > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > btdtall@yahoo.com > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:30 AM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > Listers- > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > Thanks in advance. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > 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 > _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 Thu Aug 12 05:56:43 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Thu Aug 12 05:56:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... Message-ID: > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > Thanks in advance. Embrasure is the word you're looking for. Mail-slot works too. 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 tiscali.no Thu Aug 12 06:01:08 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Thu Aug 12 06:01:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF Message-ID: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Hi, A little while ago I got a nasty surprise about the rules when trying to split up my infantry stack. What I did was to move a stack consisting of 3 squads and a leader 3 MF, then declare smoke placement in an adjacent hex for the 4th+5th MF. I declared it with all three to have a good chance of being successful. The result was that although I was successful with 2 squads, the last squad rolled 6, and thus had to end its movement. Now, that's no problem I thought. I just split the one squad off, and continue movement with the leader and 2 squads for their 6th MF. But I was pointed to A4.12 which requires a unit using leader bonus to begin and end *the* MPh stacked with the leader. So since I had used one of the leader bonus MF, I had to stop with the leader and 2 other squads as well. A more general way of describing this, is that whenever a stack has used its 5th MF and one MMC breaks, pins or is otherwise prohibited from continue movement, the other must stop as well. Now, that came as a surprise to me, so I wondered if I was the only one who had overlooked this, or if this error is common? Its more though. When fine-reading A4.12, I also found the sentence saying: "Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit.". Now consider a case where such a leader-led stack has moved 5 MF (and thus spent one bonus MF). I have always thought that I at this point could declare double time to gain 1 additional MF, thus letting the stack move 7 MF. But according to the above sentence I cannot: I'm free to declare DT (and become CX), and technically I gain a 7th MF, but I cannot use it! Since the stack has spent one of the two leader bonus MF already and those two must be the last MF spent, the 1 MF gained by DT cannot be spent. So, am I the only one who has played this wrong for years too? ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From keithdalton at verizon.net Thu Aug 12 06:18:28 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (keithdalton@verizon.net) Date: Thu Aug 12 06:18:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... Message-ID: <20040812131828.ZCUQ3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> How about death orifice? > > From: jtracy@bankofny.com > Date: 2004/08/12 Thu AM 07:56:43 CDT > To: > CC: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > > Thanks in advance. > > Embrasure is the word you're looking for. Mail-slot works too. > > 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 geb3 at inter.net Thu Aug 12 06:29:12 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Thu Aug 12 06:26:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RE: "Death Orifice?" (WAS: A word needed....) In-Reply-To: <20040812131828.ZCUQ3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: No, only Dolan and Bunten have those. - G -----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: Thursday, August 12, 2004 10:18 PM To: jtracy@bankofny.com; btdtall@yahoo.com Cc: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] A word needed.... How about death orifice? > > From: jtracy@bankofny.com > Date: 2004/08/12 Thu AM 07:56:43 CDT > To: > CC: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net, > aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] A word needed.... > > > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > > Thanks in advance. > > Embrasure is the word you're looking for. Mail-slot works too. > > 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 > _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 gd891 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 06:37:43 2004 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd) Date: Thu Aug 12 06:41:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... In-Reply-To: <20040812131828.ZCUQ3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Message-ID: What does this have to do with my mother-in-law??? >On Behalf Of keithdalton@verizon.net >Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] A word needed.... >How about death orifice? >> >> From: jtracy@bankofny.com >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] A word needed.... > >> > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision >> > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for >> > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is >> > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. >> > Thanks in advance. >> >> Embrasure is the word you're looking for. Mail-slot works too. >> >> JR > From philippe-vaillant at wanadoo.fr Thu Aug 12 08:34:34 2004 From: philippe-vaillant at wanadoo.fr (Philippe) Date: Thu Aug 12 08:35:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL game wanted References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <001101c48082$04efba60$0200a8c0@philou> Hi all, Being back on ASL after a 3 years break, I'd like to play a PBEM VASL game. I'm looking for something small, involving mainly infantry. Why not from J3 : By ourselves (J41) Grebbe end (J42) Strongpoint 11 (J46, I love PTO) Blood Enemies (J48, with air support) Friday the 13th (J59) I havent't check the odds for those games, does ROAR still exist ? May someone post the adress ? Thanks and cya Philippe From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Aug 12 09:43:23 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Aug 12 09:43:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL game wanted In-Reply-To: <001101c48082$04efba60$0200a8c0@philou> References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> <001101c48082$04efba60$0200a8c0@philou> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040812114152.01bd8e20@pop3.direcway.com> At 10:34 AM 8/12/2004, Philippe wrote: >does ROAR still exist ? May >someone post the adress ? Welcome back, you can checkout, but you can never leave...:) http://www.jrvdev.com/ROAR/VER1/default.asp Also, ASL ladder at: http://www.warfarehq.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30 For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From denis at teachlinux.com Thu Aug 12 12:47:01 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Thu Aug 12 12:47:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... In-Reply-To: <20040812082939.70815.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Fireing port.. On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 btdtall@yahoo.com wrote: > Listers- > Does anyone actually know the name of the vision > slit/space in a pillbox ? I can never find a word for > it. The opening in which the gun protrudes out or is > used for visual purposes by the pillbox occupants. > Thanks in advance. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Aug 12 14:19:35 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Aug 12 14:21:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A word needed.... In-Reply-To: References: <20040812082939.70815.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040812161544.01b5d338@pop3.direcway.com> At 02:47 PM 8/12/2004, denis@teachlinux.com wrote: >Fireing port.. from "To Lose a Battle" by Horne: Paperback, page 315: "One particularly troublesome pillbox...." fn 4 fn 4: "Many of which, it will be remembered, had never received the vital armour plates protecting their embrasures." "embrasures" appears to be the British/English...h*ll with it..Limeys' word.... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 12 19:30:04 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Thu Aug 12 19:30:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF Message-ID: <134210-2200485132304197@M2W099.mail2web.com> Ole writes: >A more general way of describing this, is that whenever a stack has used >its 5th MF and one MMC breaks, pins or is otherwise prohibited from >continue movement, the other must stop as well. I'm NRBH, but I thought any unit *incapable* of further movement due to an adverse combat result simply dropped off "automatically", at no penalty to the rest of the stack. If what you say is true, it's something of a surprise to me too. Now, whether the mandatory "cease movement" of a SMOKE dr of "6" counts similarly to this I'm not sure. I would be inclined to think that this *would* cause the whole stack to stop movement (no matter on what MF it was expended on). >Its more though. When fine-reading A4.12, I also found the sentence saying: >"Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit.". > >Now consider a case where such a leader-led stack has moved 5 MF (and thus >spent one bonus MF). I have always thought that I at this point could >declare double time to gain 1 additional MF, thus letting the stack move 7 >MF. But according to the above sentence I cannot: I'm free to declare DT >(and become CX), and technically I gain a 7th MF, but I cannot use it! >Since the stack has spent one of the two leader bonus MF already and those >two must be the last MF spent, the 1 MF gained by DT cannot be spent. Hmm. That doesn't seem right, but whether it's because the rule is phrased poorly or you're missing something, I can't say at this time. I'll have a closer look when I get home. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 12 22:03:55 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 12 22:04:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:01:08 +0200, "Ole Boe" wrote: >Now, that's no problem I thought. I just split the one squad off, and continue >movement with the leader and 2 squads for their 6th MF. But I was pointed >to A4.12 which requires a unit using leader bonus to begin and end *the* >MPh stacked with the leader. So since I had used one of the leader bonus >MF, I had to stop with the leader and 2 other squads as well. > >A more general way of describing this, is that whenever a stack has used >its 5th MF and one MMC breaks, pins or is otherwise prohibited from continue >movement, the other must stop as well. Well, on a more thorough examination, I have to say that it appears that you are correct. The provisions of A4.12 are quite specific, and no other rule appears to have any exception that I could find. If there were any such exception I'd expect to find it in A4.2, which is where stack movement is discussed. However, there are some interesting Q&A: A4.12 If units of different MF capabilities are moving as a stack, and if the slowest unit is eliminated, breaks, or pins, are the other units limited to the MF available to the stack at the start of its MPh? A. No. [Compil8] A4.12 If a leader is moving with an MMC whose MF are limited due to excess PP and the MMC is eliminated, breaks or pins, is the leader limited by the excess PP? A. No. [Compil8] [Compil 8) 18 September 1998] Neither of these made their way into any "official" status, but both clearly carry the *assumption* that if a stack is moving with leader bonus and some part of the stack has to stop, the rest can keep going -- and, indeed, may even have more MF to spend than they thought they had when they started. (The questions don't refer to leader bonus directly, but it is the rules reference that they're associated with.) I'm not sure what to make of this. I *suspect* that *nobody* plays the rule in the way it appears to be written, and if that's the case the rule is "wrong" and needs correction (I'm not sure how that correction would be worded, however -- perhaps a statement that any unit forced to stop movement or otherwise break away from the stack is exempt from the "must remain stacked with the leader" requirements of A4.12). On the other hand, maybe most people play this as its written and it's only a few of us who are surprised by it. If so, well, d'oh! >Its more though. When fine-reading A4.12, I also found the sentence saying: >"Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit.". > >Now consider a case where such a leader-led stack has moved 5 MF (and thus >spent one bonus MF). I have always thought that I at this point could declare >double time to gain 1 additional MF, thus letting the stack move 7 MF. But >according to the above sentence I cannot: I'm free to declare DT (and become >CX), and technically I gain a 7th MF, but I cannot use it! >Since the stack has spent one of the two leader bonus MF already and those >two must be the last MF spent, the 1 MF gained by DT cannot be spent. I found this: A4.12 A stack with one leader and 2 MMC expends 6 MF. The leader and one MMC wish to go CX to gain 1 MF to place a DC. Must the other MMC also go CX, or can it end its MPh "before" the other units go CX? A. Yes, it goes CX because it has used leader bonus; it must "remain stacked" with that leader (i.e., must act as a single unit). {MR} I don't remember who "MR" is, but this is quite an old Q&A. It clearly carries the assumption that the leader's CX-bonus can be spent after the inherent leader bonus. I think that logically this *must* be true (otherwise we have the absurd situation that you describe). I think the order of expenditure should be: 1) Unit's inherent MF 2) Road or ski bonus 3) Unit's CX bonus 4) Leader bonus 5) Leader CX bonus ... but of course this isn't what the rule actually says. Sigh. (Maybe 2) and 3) should be swapped, and there may be other bonus types that I've forgotten about, but if there are they would be inserted before 4).) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Fri Aug 13 00:44:24 2004 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Fri Aug 13 00:42:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <000f01c48109$5a883060$8510c80a@posh3> Gentlemen The problem is that you are confusing normal MF allotment with Bonus MF. MF gained by Double Time are added to the normal MF allotment (A4.5). Thus those are not Bonus MF. Bonus MF are Leader Bonus MF (A4.12) which are always spent last. Special Bonus MF, such as Road Bonus and Ski Bonus, have their own rules. Then consider these examples: EX: A stack of one squad and one leader moves together and has spent 5 MF. 4 of those MF are the stack's normal MF allotment and 1 MF is a Bonus MF from the Leader Bonus. Now they decide to declare Double Time thus gaining 1 additional normal MF. At this point, the stack is considered to have used its 5 normal MF allotment and so still has its 2 Bonus MF left to spend because Leader Bonus MF are always considered to be spent last. No problems so far. EX: A stack of two squads and one leader moves together and has spent 3 MF. Now both squads declare smoke placement in an adjacent hex for the 4th+5th MF, thus now having spent all of the normal MF allotment and 1 Bonus MF. One squad rolls a 6 and is pinned. The other squad and the leader then moves on by using the remaining Bonus MF. This is possible because: ...A4.12 says: Any Good Order MMC which begins and ends *its* MPh/APh stacked with a leader [...] is eligible for a two MF bonus during that MPh/APh, provided it moves with that leader in a combined stack [...]. Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit. For the squad that rolled a 6, *its* MPh is over. And it did indeed begin and end its MPh stacked with the leader. Now the other squad can move on with the leader and then end *its* MPh in the next hex. No rules have been broken as I see it. The conclusion is that there were two issues in Ole's post. The correct placement of the Double Time MF and the confusion about *its* MPh and *the* MPh. Hope that helped. Kenneth ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "Ole Boe" ; Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 7:03 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:01:08 +0200, "Ole Boe" wrote: >Now, that's no problem I thought. I just split the one squad off, and continue >movement with the leader and 2 squads for their 6th MF. But I was pointed >to A4.12 which requires a unit using leader bonus to begin and end *the* >MPh stacked with the leader. So since I had used one of the leader bonus >MF, I had to stop with the leader and 2 other squads as well. > >A more general way of describing this, is that whenever a stack has used >its 5th MF and one MMC breaks, pins or is otherwise prohibited from continue >movement, the other must stop as well. Well, on a more thorough examination, I have to say that it appears that you are correct. The provisions of A4.12 are quite specific, and no other rule appears to have any exception that I could find. If there were any such exception I'd expect to find it in A4.2, which is where stack movement is discussed. However, there are some interesting Q&A: A4.12 If units of different MF capabilities are moving as a stack, and if the slowest unit is eliminated, breaks, or pins, are the other units limited to the MF available to the stack at the start of its MPh? A. No. [Compil8] A4.12 If a leader is moving with an MMC whose MF are limited due to excess PP and the MMC is eliminated, breaks or pins, is the leader limited by the excess PP? A. No. [Compil8] [Compil 8) 18 September 1998] Neither of these made their way into any "official" status, but both clearly carry the *assumption* that if a stack is moving with leader bonus and some part of the stack has to stop, the rest can keep going -- and, indeed, may even have more MF to spend than they thought they had when they started. (The questions don't refer to leader bonus directly, but it is the rules reference that they're associated with.) I'm not sure what to make of this. I *suspect* that *nobody* plays the rule in the way it appears to be written, and if that's the case the rule is "wrong" and needs correction (I'm not sure how that correction would be worded, however -- perhaps a statement that any unit forced to stop movement or otherwise break away from the stack is exempt from the "must remain stacked with the leader" requirements of A4.12). On the other hand, maybe most people play this as its written and it's only a few of us who are surprised by it. If so, well, d'oh! >Its more though. When fine-reading A4.12, I also found the sentence saying: >"Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit.". > >Now consider a case where such a leader-led stack has moved 5 MF (and thus >spent one bonus MF). I have always thought that I at this point could declare >double time to gain 1 additional MF, thus letting the stack move 7 MF. But >according to the above sentence I cannot: I'm free to declare DT (and become >CX), and technically I gain a 7th MF, but I cannot use it! >Since the stack has spent one of the two leader bonus MF already and those >two must be the last MF spent, the 1 MF gained by DT cannot be spent. I found this: A4.12 A stack with one leader and 2 MMC expends 6 MF. The leader and one MMC wish to go CX to gain 1 MF to place a DC. Must the other MMC also go CX, or can it end its MPh "before" the other units go CX? A. Yes, it goes CX because it has used leader bonus; it must "remain stacked" with that leader (i.e., must act as a single unit). {MR} I don't remember who "MR" is, but this is quite an old Q&A. It clearly carries the assumption that the leader's CX-bonus can be spent after the inherent leader bonus. I think that logically this *must* be true (otherwise we have the absurd situation that you describe). I think the order of expenditure should be: 1) Unit's inherent MF 2) Road or ski bonus 3) Unit's CX bonus 4) Leader bonus 5) Leader CX bonus ... but of course this isn't what the rule actually says. Sigh. (Maybe 2) and 3) should be swapped, and there may be other bonus types that I've forgotten about, but if there are they would be inserted before 4).) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 tiscali.no Fri Aug 13 02:22:51 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Fri Aug 13 02:22:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <000f01c48109$5a883060$8510c80a@posh3> Message-ID: <40FEE9C6000009C9@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Hi, "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: >The problem is that you are confusing normal MF allotment with >Bonus MF. Ok... >MF gained by Double Time are added to the normal MF allotment (A4.5). >Thus those are not Bonus MF. Agreed. >Bonus MF are Leader Bonus MF (A4.12) which are always spent last. >Special Bonus MF, such as Road Bonus and Ski Bonus, have their own >rules. Ok. >Then consider these examples: >EX: A stack of one squad and one leader moves together and has spent >5 MF. 4 of those MF are the stack's normal MF allotment and 1 MF is a >bonus MF from the Leader Bonus. Now they decide to declare Double Time >thus gaining 1 additional normal MF. At this point, the stack is >considered to have used its 5 normal MF allotment and so still has its >2 Bonus MF left to spend because Leader Bonus MF are always considered >to be spent last. No problems so far. So you're saying that the 5th MF is a bonus MF when spent, but then *changes* into a normal MF later? That seims weird. To me, the 5th MF either was, or was not a bonus MF. I wish you're right though. >EX: A stack of two squads and one leader moves together and has spent >3 MF. Now both squads declare smoke placement in an adjacent hex for >the 4th+5th MF, thus now having spent all of the normal MF allotment >and 1 Bonus MF. One squad rolls a 6 and is pinned. The other squad and >the leader then moves on by using the remaining Bonus MF. This is >possible because: >...A4.12 says: Any Good Order MMC which begins and ends *its* MPh/APh >stacked with a leader [...] is eligible for a two MF bonus during that >MPh/APh, provided it moves with that leader in a combined stack [...]. >Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit. But that's not what A4.12 says. A4.12 *said* that in the first edition, but the second edition changes this to *the* MPh/APh. I don't know why it changed, and I think the change is completely stupid, but the change is there - until we can get Perry to change it back :-) The rest of your post is therefore moot. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Aug 13 03:02:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 13 03:02:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <000f01c48109$5a883060$8510c80a@posh3> References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> <000f01c48109$5a883060$8510c80a@posh3> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:44:24 +0200, "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: >The problem is that you are confusing normal MF allotment with Bonus MF. No, we're not, but never mind. >MF gained by Double Time are added to the normal MF allotment (A4.5). Thus those are not Bonus MF. Correct. No-one was saying anything different. >EX: A stack of one squad and one leader moves together and has spent 5 MF. 4 of those MF are the stack's normal MF allotment and 1 MF is a Bonus MF from the Leader Bonus. Now they decide to declare Double Time thus gaining 1 additional normal MF. At this point, the stack is considered to have used its 5 normal MF allotment and so still has its 2 Bonus MF left to spend because Leader Bonus MF are always considered to be spent last. No problems so far. But the squad had already spent 5 MF *before* it went CX. That 5th MP *had to be* a Leader bonus MF. You're saying that it *was* a bonus MF, but isn't any more, it's retroactively turned into a double-time MF. That's a subtlety of interpretation I don't really expect to find in the ASL rules. >...A4.12 says: Any Good Order MMC which begins and ends *its* MPh/APh No, it doesn't. 1st edition *used* to say that, but errata was issued in the 95w Annual: A4.12 In line 2, change "its" to "the". [An95w; An96; Mw] This change was thus incorporated into the 2nd edition. >No rules have been broken as I see it. Unfortunately you're looking at the wrong rules. If you're going to try and win arguments with 1st ed. rules, at least make sure you're looking at one that has all the errata incorporated. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Fri Aug 13 03:18:19 2004 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Fri Aug 13 03:16:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF References: <40FEE9C6000009C9@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <001901c4811e$db577380$8510c80a@posh3> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ole Boe" To: Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 11:22 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF > Hi, > "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: > > >The problem is that you are confusing normal MF allotment with > >Bonus MF. > Ok... > > >MF gained by Double Time are added to the normal MF allotment (A4.5). > >Thus those are not Bonus MF. > Agreed. > > >Bonus MF are Leader Bonus MF (A4.12) which are always spent last. > >Special Bonus MF, such as Road Bonus and Ski Bonus, have their own > >rules. > Ok. > > >Then consider these examples: > >EX: A stack of one squad and one leader moves together and has spent > >5 MF. 4 of those MF are the stack's normal MF allotment and 1 MF is a > >bonus MF from the Leader Bonus. Now they decide to declare Double Time > >thus gaining 1 additional normal MF. At this point, the stack is > >considered to have used its 5 normal MF allotment and so still has its > >2 Bonus MF left to spend because Leader Bonus MF are always considered > >to be spent last. No problems so far. > So you're saying that the 5th MF is a bonus MF when spent, but then *changes* > into a normal MF later? That seims weird. To me, the 5th MF either was, or > was not a bonus MF. I wish you're right though. Yes thats what I'm saying. At the time it was a Bonus MF, but Double Time changes that fact. > > >EX: A stack of two squads and one leader moves together and has spent > >3 MF. Now both squads declare smoke placement in an adjacent hex for > >the 4th+5th MF, thus now having spent all of the normal MF allotment > >and 1 Bonus MF. One squad rolls a 6 and is pinned. The other squad and > >the leader then moves on by using the remaining Bonus MF. This is > >possible because: > > >...A4.12 says: Any Good Order MMC which begins and ends *its* MPh/APh > >stacked with a leader [...] is eligible for a two MF bonus during that >MPh/APh, > provided it moves with that leader in a combined stack [...]. > >Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit. > But that's not what A4.12 says. A4.12 *said* that in the first edition, but > the second edition changes this to *the* MPh/APh. > > I don't know why it changed, and I think the change is completely stupid, > but the change is there - until we can get Perry to change it back :-) > > The rest of your post is therefore moot. Doh. I was looking at my personal e-rulebook and I had not changed that particular word from the 1st edition rules. So that is my bad. In that case, and in case we cannot get this corrected by Perry, the whole stack indeed has to stop with the pinned unit. Cheers Kenneth > ----------------------- > If you cut off my head, what do I say? > Me and my body or me and my head? > > Ole Boe > oleboe@tiscali.no > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 philippe-vaillant at wanadoo.fr Fri Aug 13 03:23:34 2004 From: philippe-vaillant at wanadoo.fr (Philippe) Date: Fri Aug 13 03:23:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL game wanted References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> <001101c48082$04efba60$0200a8c0@philou> <6.1.2.0.0.20040812114152.01bd8e20@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <002b01c4811f$988ca560$0200a8c0@philou> Hi Priest, Thanks for the links. > Welcome back, you can checkout, but you can never leave...:) I cant't agree more :-) All my ASL stuff has been stored in a deepcellar for years since I thaught I would never play again. A few weeks ago, watching "Band of brother on TV" I asked to myself : "I wonder if any ASL scenario depicts any fight of easy company". I then looked for the annual containing an article about scenarios of Normandy, found it under the dust (sorry Priest), opened it and...and argh ! I immediatly felt addicted to the game...again. BTW, I found two opponents and this is enough, Doctor said more was too risky for my health...for the moment :-) Cya Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Philippe" ; Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 6:43 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL game wanted > At 10:34 AM 8/12/2004, Philippe wrote: > >does ROAR still exist ? May > >someone post the adress ? > > > http://www.jrvdev.com/ROAR/VER1/default.asp > > Also, ASL ladder at: http://www.warfarehq.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30 > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Aug 13 03:27:03 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 13 03:27:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <40FEE9C6000009C9@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> References: <000f01c48109$5a883060$8510c80a@posh3> <40FEE9C6000009C9@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:22:51 +0200, "Ole Boe" wrote: >But that's not what A4.12 says. A4.12 *said* that in the first edition, but >the second edition changes this to *the* MPh/APh. As I said in my other reply, that errata first appeared in the 95w Annual -- i.e., pre-Perry. >I don't know why it changed, and I think the change is completely stupid, >but the change is there - until we can get Perry to change it back :-) It was not a stupid change. Without it, it would be legal for a squad+leader to move together for 4 MF, the squad then expends 2 MF to throw SMOKE into an adjacent Location (thus ending *its* MPh) and then the Leader continues on moving for another 2 MF. The squad is stacked with the leader for the entirety of *its* MPh, but the leader can still move on and leave it behind. (Note that this move does not contradict the following very old Q&A: A4.2 If a stack of units are moving together, and a unit in the stack expends MF to place a SMOKE grenade/DC or to Recover a SW, then must the other units in the stack also expend the same MF if they are to continue to move together as a stack? A. Yes. [Gen22.6; An89; An95w; An96; Mw] ... because after the squad attempts the SMOKE placement, the Leader is not interested in "continuing to move together as a stack" and thus not required to also spend the SMOKE-placement MF!) Changing the "its" to "the" ensured that the squad and leader must indeed spend the whole of *both* their moves stacked together for the squad to get the bonus MF. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From sgtono at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 12:11:17 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Fri Aug 13 12:11:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] One WeeK Remaining Message-ID: <20040813191117.26218.qmail@web51306.mail.yahoo.com> ONLY ONE week remaining to get special rate on rooms!!!! The Berserk Commissars are pleased to host the 10th Annual Wild West Fest the last full weekend in August. Come join us for a weekend of Advanced Squad Leader fun. If you're interested in the format we've planned, http://w3.gorge.net/pro6man/wwf10format.html We've put together a collection of prizes, T-shirts, and trinkets so no one goes home empty handed. Along with the tournament sequence of scenarios there will be prizes awarded to the winner of the "Hero" and "Tank Rumble" games. For those of you down on your luck, the poor souls who come under the sniper's gunsights the most, and the fellow who "voluntarily" de-evolves his troops will get some special sympathy. Registration: Registration can be in advance or at the door. You can register in advance by sending a $20.00 (USD) check to: Keith Todd PO Box 23153 Tigard, OR 97281 You can also register at the door for a surprisingly low $25.00 (USD). Lodgings: The Berserk Commissars have arranged a special room rate and a group of rooms with the Shilo Inn. Shilo Inn 7300 S.W. Hazelfern Rd. Tigard, Or. 97223 503-639-2226 Reference WWF or War game convention Room rate if booked BEFORE the 20th. will be $59.00 per night two queen beds, breakfast of sorts (coffee, muffin, juice, some cereals), and the most fun you can have with your cloths on in a room full of guys! Dates the 27th-29th but we will have the room open for pregame fun starting the 26th. Transportation: Take I-5 to the Lake Oswego/Durham Exit 290. You can see their Inn sign from the freeway, it's on the west side. A map to the facility can be retrieved here. The Hotel is also easily accessable by TriMet bus lines 36, 38, 76, 96. All stop at Tualaty Park and Ride Directly across the street from the Shilo Inn. Food and stuff: The great thing about this venue is that it's close to all of the staples any self respecting ASL'r would ever need. You need grease, salt, sugar, or beer? Well it will be close by… Primary Berserk Commissar Contact: Keith Todd sgtono@yahoo.com http://w3.gorge.net/pro6man/wwf10info.html P.S. For any that show up on Thursday, I will be available for gaming!! Keith __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From oleboe at tiscali.no Fri Aug 13 12:41:43 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Fri Aug 13 12:42:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <40FEE9C600000A10@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Hi, I wrote: >>But that's not what A4.12 says. A4.12 *said* that in the first >>edition, but the second edition changes this to *the* MPh/APh. And Bruce Probst answered: >As I said in my other reply, that errata first appeared in the 95w >Annual -- i.e., pre-Perry. Good, then I didn't offend Perry by stating that the change was stupid :-) >>I don't know why it changed, and I think the change is completely stupid, >>but the change is there - until we can get Perry to change it back :-) > >It was not a stupid change. Without it, it would be legal for a >squad+leader to move together for 4 MF, the squad then expends 2 MF >to throw SMOKE into an adjacent Location (thus ending *its* MPh) and >then the Leader continues on moving for another 2 MF. The squad is >stacked with the leader for the entirety of *its* MPh, but the leader >can still move on and leave it behind. I still think the change was stupid - stupid changes can still have a reason :-) The above problem could have been fixed by making clear that a unit must be *moving as a stack* with the leader for all of its MPh to get the bonus MF. In the above example, they split up their movement on the instant that the squad expends MF without the Leader doing the same. A4.12 already says: "provided it moves with that leader in a combined stack". If this sentence was clarified to "provided it moves with that leader in a combined stack for *its* entire MPh", then the above problem would have been solved without the IMHO bad effect that one pinned unit in a stack stops the entire stack *if* they have used one leader bonus MF. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From wrongway at nowonline.net Fri Aug 13 13:42:49 2004 From: wrongway at nowonline.net (pete shelling) Date: Fri Aug 13 13:45:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] hello everyone! Message-ID: <001401c48176$1a9c6e40$fb168304@default> Hey, I finally made it back to the list after wondering what happened back in April! Anybody out there seen Mark Nixon? Pete 'don't any more about ASLOk than any of you guys' Shelling From afantozzi at tiscali.it Fri Aug 13 08:45:10 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Fri Aug 13 14:25:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <01a601c4817b$f5157080$c7130a3e@andrea> Dear listers, I have played this for years but lately I have some doubts... An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. without making a TH DR first)? If the answer is "yes", may that same ATR doubled to 2FP for PBF? May (or actually must) the ATR combine its 1FP with the CMG when firing at the same target... in other words does Mandatory FG rules apply? Thank you in advance Andrea Fantozzi --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Fri Aug 13 13:51:08 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Fri Aug 13 14:25:59 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <01ab01c4817c$00651990$c7130a3e@andrea> Hi! I do not think you played it incorrectly. Actually, A4.12 says that a unit receives a 2MF bonus if *it* moves with that leader in a combined stack. Therefore there is no requirement for the leader to remain with the unit that receives the bonus; it is the unit that must stay with the leader and not vice-versa. If at some point (even on the 5th or greater MF) the unit is no more capable of "keeping up" with the leader (it becomes pinned, broken, etc...) this can have no effect on the leader (again he is not required to stay with that unit). Additionaly, since only the squad is required to move with the leader in a combined stack, if a squad is broken/pinned on its 5th MF and then left behind, it still has satisfied the A4.12 requirements since, as long as it moved, it moved with the leader as a stack. The key to the correct interpretation of A4.12 (IMO) is that there is no requirement for the leader to remain with the unit (but only for the unit to remain with the leader and this is a *very* important difference). Some rules-lawyer could (at this point) only try to state that, since the unit did not stay with the leader, it could not use the extra MF... But this would mean to "undo" the move of the unit and maybe also the condition that forced it to stop "early"... I mean... assume the following situation... 1) Your Squad + Leader move as a stack. 2) On the 5th MF an enemy unit fires on the stack and pins the squad (only) 3) The Leader expends its 6th MF to enter in another hex At this point your opponent says that the squad could not use that 5th MF since it did not move with the leader in a combined stack... But then if it could not use that 5th MF it could not be fired upon... therefore it would not be pinned... I do not think this makes any sense.. The other question you pose is that, since "Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit", CX cannot be declared by a "Squad+Leader" stack if it has already expended 5 or more MF. I think that the "Bonus MF" thing was introduced to enforce that if the leader breaks it cannot give any more MF to any MMC stacked with him (otherwise someone could say that, if for example a leader breaks on its 3rd MF, the player cannot say that the first two MF expended were the "Bonus MF"). In addition I think that any form of extra MF are a sort of Bonus MF, i.e. MF that allow to move beyond the standard MF allotment for infantry (there is no strong definition of either Bonus MF or Extra MF). In this sense, Leader Bonus, Double Time, Road Bonus are all forms of bonus MF. Indeed I think that the strongerst argument is to be found with the Road Bonus. If you were right Road Bonus would never be possible (by a MMC+Leader stack) because you are eligible to spend an extra MF on road only after expenditure of all of your MF (on road). But, if you had to spend the Leader-Bonus-MF last you would never be able to use the extra MF for road bonus (because you could not spend that MF as the last MF). And this clearly contradicts either A4.5 and B3.4. At least that's why I play it like you Andrea > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]Per conto di Ole Boe > Inviato: gioved? 12 agosto 2004 15.01 > A: ASL > Oggetto: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF > > > Hi, > > A little while ago I got a nasty surprise about the rules > when trying to > split up my infantry stack. > > What I did was to move a stack consisting of 3 squads and a > leader 3 MF, > then declare smoke placement in an adjacent hex for the > 4th+5th MF. I declared > it with all three to have a good chance of being successful. > The result > was that although I was successful with 2 squads, the last > squad rolled > 6, and thus had to end its movement. > > Now, that's no problem I thought. I just split the one squad > off, and continue > movement with the leader and 2 squads for their 6th MF. But I > was pointed > to A4.12 which requires a unit using leader bonus to begin > and end *the* > MPh stacked with the leader. So since I had used one of the > leader bonus > MF, I had to stop with the leader and 2 other squads as well. > > A more general way of describing this, is that whenever a > stack has used > its 5th MF and one MMC breaks, pins or is otherwise > prohibited from continue > movement, the other must stop as well. > > Now, that came as a surprise to me, so I wondered if I was > the only one > who had overlooked this, or if this error is common? > > > Its more though. When fine-reading A4.12, I also found the > sentence saying: > "Bonus MF are always the last to be expended by a moving unit.". > > Now consider a case where such a leader-led stack has moved 5 > MF (and thus > spent one bonus MF). I have always thought that I at this > point could declare > double time to gain 1 additional MF, thus letting the stack > move 7 MF. But > according to the above sentence I cannot: I'm free to declare > DT (and become > CX), and technically I gain a 7th MF, but I cannot use it! > Since the stack has spent one of the two leader bonus MF > already and those > two must be the last MF spent, the 1 MF gained by DT cannot be spent. > > So, am I the only one who has played this wrong for years too? > ----------------------- > If you cut off my head, what do I say? > Me and my body or me and my head? > > Ole Boe > oleboe@tiscali.no > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From homercles11 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 14:40:34 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Fri Aug 13 14:40:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: I would say that the MA could not fire on the IFT unless it had obtained a hit or if it had IFE. So no 1 FP for the MA unless obtains hit on TH table. 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: "Andrea" Reply-To: afantozzi@tiscali.it To: Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200 Dear listers, I have played this for years but lately I have some doubts... An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. without making a TH DR first)? If the answer is "yes", may that same ATR doubled to 2FP for PBF? May (or actually must) the ATR combine its 1FP with the CMG when firing at the same target... in other words does Mandatory FG rules apply? Thank you in advance Andrea Fantozzi --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 _______________________________________________ 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 _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From btdtall at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 14:42:45 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Fri Aug 13 14:42:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Word Found.... Message-ID: <20040813214245.87160.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Listers- Yes "embrasure" was the word we were looking for according to dictionary.com. I would like to thank all for their contributions. It would have been tough to go to my aunt with some of your recommendations. I was thinking "concrete spitting anus of death", but decided against it.... See you all at ASLOK through the embrasure __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From sidirezegh at charter.net Fri Aug 13 14:53:33 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Fri Aug 13 14:53:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <411D385D.60309@charter.net> I would agree with Paul. C13.24 is referring specifically to SW ATRs & their ability to fire directly at Personnel with 1 FP as Small Arms Fire. -Chas "But what the heck do I know" Argent Paul Kenny wrote: > I would say that the MA could not fire on the IFT unless it had > obtained a hit or if it had IFE. So no 1 FP for the MA unless obtains > hit on TH table. > > > 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: "Andrea" > Reply-To: afantozzi@tiscali.it > To: > Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200 > > Dear listers, > I have played this for years but lately I have some doubts... > An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. > > May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. > without making a TH DR first)? > If the answer is "yes", may that same ATR doubled to 2FP for PBF? > May (or actually must) the ATR combine its 1FP with the CMG when > firing at > the same target... in other words does Mandatory FG rules apply? > > Thank you in advance > > Andrea Fantozzi > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 jbarber at meic.org Fri Aug 13 16:17:22 2004 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Fri Aug 13 16:17:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Ambush withdrawal Message-ID: I think this was discussed recently but can't remember. If a pinned unit actually manages to achieve an ambush, may it exercise ambush withdrawal (A11.41)? TIA, -- Jeff Barber From smcbee at midtnn.net Fri Aug 13 17:44:55 2004 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Fri Aug 13 17:45:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Ambush withdrawal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c48197$f2906290$1ff49904@steves> No, A11.41, 1st sentence says "Any Infantry (unless pinned/berserk/Disrupted) that is part of a force which has qualified for Ambush has the opportunity to decline..." Take care, Steve Jeff asked: I think this was discussed recently but can't remember. If a pinned unit actually manages to achieve an ambush, may it exercise ambush withdrawal (A11.41)? From Qitah at adelphia.net Fri Aug 13 17:52:57 2004 From: Qitah at adelphia.net (Ivan Lindstrom) Date: Fri Aug 13 17:55:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] hello everyone! In-Reply-To: <001401c48176$1a9c6e40$fb168304@default> Message-ID: <002b01c48199$0d7ea700$6501a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> Hi Pete, Long time no see. Ivan Lindstrom Qitah@adelphia.net -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of pete shelling Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 4:43 PM To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] hello everyone! Hey, I finally made it back to the list after wondering what happened back in April! Anybody out there seen Mark Nixon? Pete 'don't any more about ASLOk than any of you guys' 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 From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Sat Aug 14 00:36:40 2004 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Sat Aug 14 00:34:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF References: <01ab01c4817c$00651990$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <000b01c481d1$703f6f90$8510c80a@posh3> > In addition I think that any form of extra MF are a sort of Bonus MF, i.e. > MF that allow to move beyond the standard MF allotment for infantry (there > is no strong definition of either Bonus MF or Extra MF). In this sense, > Leader Bonus, Double Time, Road Bonus are all forms of bonus MF. > Andrea A MF increase do to Double Time is not considered Bonus MF. They are MF added to your normal MF allotment. So Leader Bonus MF are always spent after Double Time MF. Road Bonus has its own rules in chapter B. (No chapter B handy). But the deeper we dig into these rules, the darker it gets! Kenneth From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 14 03:48:21 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 14 03:48:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question In-Reply-To: <01a601c4817b$f5157080$c7130a3e@andrea> References: <01a601c4817b$f5157080$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. > >May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. >without making a TH DR first)? No. p.H71 [Note Q] Can the vehicular ATR fire on infantry with 1 FP in the same manner as a SW ATR? If yes, may it form a FG with any vehicular MGs? A. No. No. {MS} (Another old Q&A not found in Scott R.'s compilation.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From steven.linton at bigpond.com Sat Aug 14 06:42:43 2004 From: steven.linton at bigpond.com (Steven Linton) Date: Sat Aug 14 06:37:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for JR Tracy Message-ID: Could JR please contact me? His email addressing is bouncing. Steve From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 14 10:25:27 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 14 07:24:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF References: <40FEE7B400000A04@cpfe4.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <411E4B07.3458@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Interesting topic, I may even dust off my rulebook and check it out. Are we to assume that the last MF's a unit expends _must_ be the Leader Bonus MF's (if those MF's are in fact available)? What if our stack expends 4 MF's moving down a road, 1 MF in Road Bonus and then 2 MF's for the Leader bonus. Is that stack prohibited from declaring DT for 1 more MF if it decides to do so? >From a RAPOV (Reality Argument Point Of View), attacking infantry moving forward are told to stop for nothing, just move forward. It seems odd that a stack of >1 MMC and a Leader would be forced to stop moving (not being able to use the remaining Leader Bonus MF) due to a MMC in that stack becoming Pinned. BTW, Ole, what were you thinking? Moving a stack of MMC with a Leader in the enemies LOS is an invitation to KIA sadness on your part. :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 14 10:55:54 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 14 07:49:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF References: <40FEE9C6000009C9@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <411E522A.5E73@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Are we perhaps reading a little too much into what A4.12 says? In a nutshell, a MMC is _eligible_ for the 2 MF Leader Bonus if it remains with the Leader for the entire MPh. If that MMC Pins or Breaks, it is no longer eligible for the remaining Leader Bonus MF if that Leader leaves the Pinned/Broken units Location as that MMC did not end its MPh with that Leader. EX. 2 Squads and a Leader start the MPh as a stack and expend their 5th MF (Leader Bonus MF) to enter a hex. A DFF attack pins a Squad but there is no effect vs. the remaining Squad and Leader which then expend a 6th MF (Leader Bonus MF) to enter another hex. I see no problem with the above example. And what if a MMC in a stack with another MMC and Leader goes Berserk due to a fire attack caused during the expenditure of a Leader Bonus MF? The Berserk dude is not going to end the MPh with the Leader. Does his running off to oblivion end the movement of those he left behind? However ... the last line of A4.12 is worrisome, "Bonus MF are "always" (my emphasis) the last to be expended by a moving unit." That tells me that once I use a Leader Bonus MF I can kiss any DT MF I may decide to use good-bye. This is something that I have not considered before. =Jim= From damavs at alltel.net Sat Aug 14 11:06:45 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Sat Aug 14 11:06:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Flyer In-Reply-To: <001401c48176$1a9c6e40$fb168304@default> References: <001401c48176$1a9c6e40$fb168304@default> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814135425.01c27e50@mail.alltel.net> Greetings listers, Thanks for your patience regarding final ASLOK info... A text version of the ASLOK XIX flyer follows - I'll also post it on the ASL Forums and other ASL sites. It should be up on the ASLOK web site before long and also paper copies sent by conventional mail before long. Go ahead and starting dropping those pre-regs in the mail to Mark. Anyway, I finally got ahold of Mark and we went through a few iterations of the flyer. The only significant change is Mark was able to negotiate the room rates down to $69 a night - down from $79 last year. Please do note that the number of rooms ASLOK uses significantly reduces the cost of the convention so please make sure to tell the hotel you're part of the "OKTOBERFEST" block - both to guarantee you the $69 rate and also to ensure they count your room towards ASLOK. If you have any questions/feedback regarding the minis, please contact me directly... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net ******************* ASLOK XIX - YEAR 2004 OCTOBER 3rd - 10th, 2004 THE PLAYER'S FEST WELCOME TO ASLOK 2004!! I look forward to seeing you all at ASLOK 2004, the 19th year of our annual ASL gaming week(end). As always there will be plenty of ASL wildmen gaming at the ASLOK hotel as early as Saturday, October 2nd and into the wee hours of Monday, October 11th! NEW in 2004: FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI TOURNAMENTS! ASLOK is THE PLAYER'S FEST, a festival of gaming and gamesmanship as much as it is a competitive tournament. Play is OPEN and uninhibited; many play just for the fun of it while others delve into the Big Weekend Tournament, THE GROFAZ. ASLOK WEEK features at least 28 individual Tournaments (usually about 33 or more total) with plaques and cash awarded to all winners as well as to at least four places in GROFAZ. At ASLOK the word is 'Do What Suits You'. You will find grognards, rookies, experts and average players alike. You will find comradeship, good gaming, interesting talk, some new materials and you are bound to learn and teach a few things at ASLOK. ENJOY! HOW ASLOK WORKS Most games at ASLOK are "OPEN" games, played for the fun of it. Find any opponent and pick any scenario; this is the 'festival' of ASLOK, a celebration of a great game. The main tournament at ASLOK is THE GROFAZ which begins Thursday. All players are automatically entered in GROFAZ. Once out of GROFAZ contention, players continue with OPEN and MINI-Tournament action. THEME and MINI's are more structured than GROFAZ and OPEN gaming. These are single elimination events using AVALONCON style scenario selection. MANEUVERS are intended for new players to get their feet wet. Helpful guidance from an ASL pro is included. The USA vs WORLD CUP runs from arrival until the end of Tuesday, October 5th. Above all, whatever you do, HAVE A GOOD TIME! AGENDA SUNDAY-TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3rd-5th 2004: Early arrivals roll in. ALL play this year is in the Grand Ballroom. Open play and USA vs WORLD CUP on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday. If arriving at the hotel before Sunday, contact Mark Nixon for early gunning. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6th 2004: At 8:00 AM, MINI tournament action begins. Wednesday MINI's begin at 8:00 AM sharp and do NOT apply towards GROFAZ. Plenty of OPEN action is also available. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 7th 2004: At 8:00 AM gunning begins in GROFAZ and Thursday THEME events where MINI-Tournaments all began. OPEN play continues. Wed. MINI-Tournament winners awarded at 6:00 PM. GROFAZ 2-0 contenders can sign-up for GROFAZ FRIDAY MINI!!!!! FRIDAY, OCTOBER 8th 2004: GROFAZ and OPEN gaming continue. Friday MINI's and GROFAZ MINI's kick-off promptly at 8:00 AM. Awards presented to Thursday THEME Tournament winners at 6:00 PM. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 9th 2004: More GROFAZ and OPEN gaming. At 8:00 AM more MINI-Tournaments kick-off. Awards made to Friday MINI-Tournament winners at 6:00 PM. SUNDAY, OCTOBER 10th 2004: GROFAZ and OPEN gaming surge onward. Add-on MINI-Tournaments start at 8:00 AM, interest allowing. Awards presented to Saturday MINI-Tournament winners at about 2:OO PM. Awards presented to GROFAZ winner, runner-up and other top finishers sometime, probably very late Sunday or early Monday morning. Congrat-'yawn'-lations guys! MONDAY, OCTOBER 11th 2004: GROFAZ and OPEN gaming wrap-up. All out of the arena before noon. Many thanks, happy trails, see ya in 2005 for our huge shindig to celebrate ASLOK XX! OPEN GAMING OPEN play is THE RULE at ASLOK. Most games played are of the OPEN variety in which two players simply agree to play, select a scenario on their own and determine balance/sides via any mutually agreed manner. It truly is as simple as that. GROFAZ NOTE: NEW FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI'S INFO FOR 2004!!! The Big Weekend Tournament (THE GROFAZ) officially begins Thursday morning at 8:00 AM, although only two Thursday games can count towards GROFAZ. Players arriving Friday are also free to compete in GROFAZ, although their time burden will be more of a factor. Any players arriving fresh on the scene Saturday morning and hoping to seriously challenge for GROFAZ Championship must immediately report to the TD so we can determine if and how we can fit that hope into the developing competition; it may not be possible at that late stage, in which case participation in MINI-Tournaments will be recommended. Players competing in GROFAZ must record their games on their P.I.S. and plan to play 8 games to win this event, (or the sole player who attains 7-0 or 6-0). GROFAZ contenders may play any one opponent only ONCE in a GROFAZ match, unless specifically permitted otherwise by Mark Nixon. There are no set starting times or "rounds" (EXC: optional Friday Grofaz Mini round #1 @ 8:AM Friday), although it is recommended players select scenarios and sleeping schedules which allow time to complete 4 or 5 games by Friday night and 6 or 7 by Saturday night, leaving only 1 or 2 more to play Sunday. For those in GROFAZ contention it is not wise to get too far ahead or behind this pace, and these individuals must remain in CC (Close Contact) with ASLOK TD's. Players competing in GROFAZ who win their first games must play their second games vs. other GROFAZ winners, winners of two games must play other two-game winners and so forth. (Thus, 1-0 plays 1-0, 6-0 plays 6-0, 1-1 plays 1-1, 4-1 plays 4-1, etc.) FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI'S: GROFAZ contenders who are 2-0 (ONLY!) can enter one of the special FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI events, and so compete in both GROFAZ and a Friday MINI concurrently. To ensure play in one of these events, players MUST report to Mark Nixon before 8:AM Friday, once they have attained a 2-0 GROFAZ record. THE WINNER OF GROFAZ: that player with the best record (probably undefeated) after 8 rounds, or that player who is the only one to reach 7-0 or 6-0. All ties will be resolved by: 1) previous head-to-head GROFAZ game, 2) a playoff game (only if time is available for both players), or 3) that tied player who played the toughest opponents [based on records in that GROFAZ event at the time they played - Mark Nixon will be final judge of that elucidation, but here is how it works: if your opponents' total W/L record was 22-3 when you played them (.88 PCT) you would finish ahead of a player with like record whose opponents were 14-2 when he played them (.875 PCT)]. Cash prizes (to be determined, although usually $200/1st, $100/2nd, $50/3rd and $50/4th) and plaques will be awarded for at least the top four finishers. THURSDAY THEME TOURNAMENTS Eight three-round single elimination mini-tournaments, each based on a WWII THEME, will begin promptly at 8:00 AM Thursday. Each is open to 8 players. Sign up for these is based on first come, first served at preregistration/registration. Unlike OPEN play and GROFAZ, these THEMES are designed to begin promptly at 8:00 AM and to be completed Thursday. Scenario selection is AVALONCON style, with three choices available per round from which each player picks the two he would most like to play. Lists of scenarios will NOT be circulated prior to Thursday morning. Because only two scenarios played Thursday can apply towards GROFAZ, the winner and runner-up of THEMES count two wins and no losses for GROFAZ, and must report immediately to the TD to arrange a FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI entry. (The winner will have actually won three scenarios, but does gain bragging rights, $10 and a plaque for winning his THEME, and also gains one leg-up on the all-important third tie-breaker for GROFAZ, as he will have defeated opponents with combined 3-0 records in GROFAZ, whereas the THEME runner-up will have defeated opponents with only 1-0 record at this point.) No other scenarios in the THEME events apply towards GROFAZ. Losers of round #1 can forget their one loss and losers of round #2 drop their one loss as well as their one win. Thus, THEMES provide a chance to win a small event as well as to pile up some GROFAZ wins, and all at no risk of suffering any GROFAZ losses. Losers of rounds #1 and #2 are free to immediately play up to 2 GROFAZ games on Thursday or jump into OPEN play. THEME winners and runners-up are finished with GROFAZ games for Thursday, but can still play OPEN games at their discretion. NOTE: Check the FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI info. MANEUVERS - ASL-STARTER KIT FRIENDLY INEXPERIENCED GAMERS! CLOSET ASL'RS! Played only a dozen games? Play only once a month? Get a rules refresher and warm-up your dice in action against other Green Sergeants before entering the Cauldron of ASLOK. Experienced gamer on hand to offer Leader Direction with quick answers/reference (assistance, not handholding) to those pesky rules which Bog down your game and leave you Shocked. Times for MANEUVERS are a bit flexible, although we expect them to occur both Tuesday and Friday after 6:30 PM; make sure to list your choice of day and time when you preregister. Maneuvers will be ASL-STARTER KIT friendly!! MINI-TOURNAMENTS (WED - FRI - SAT - SUN) Similar to Thursday THEME Tournaments in style, ASLOK MINI-Tournaments are designed for those who prefer a small one day event, those arriving fresh on the scene Wednesday, Friday, Saturday or Sunday morning and for those who find themselves knocked out of GROFAZ contention yet still Berserk for more tournament action. Events begin promptly at 8:00 AM, are 8 players each, three round, single elimination AVALONCON style events. Winners get $10 and a plaque. Except for FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI's, NON-THURSDAY MINI-TOURNAMENTS ARE NA FOR GROFAZ!! SUNDAY MINI-TOURNAMENTS: Subject to demand, NA for GROFAZ. FRIDAY GROFAZ MINI'S [NEW IN 2004!!!!] New at ASLOK to allow GROFAZers to also compete in Friday Mini action (WOOF!). Only GROFAZers who are 2-0 by Friday 8:00 AM can compete. Sign-up starts Thursday; as soon as you attain 2-0 GROFAZ status you can sign-up. You will be paired with a 2-0 GROFAZer for a Friday morning showdown. Friday GROFAZ Mini's count both for GROFAZ and for the single elimination GROFAZ Mini. The kicker?? This guarantees you an 8:00 AM Friday GROFAZ start time! Minis are: Best Of The Best and Stormtrooper Follies. USA vs WORLD CUP A rather informal event which begins as soon as players arrive, usually Saturday or Sunday. US players vs World players; everyone keeps track of their games vs competing players, and late Tuesday night the tally is final. A ten-year plaque records the winning team and final score. Year #1 was 2003, when the World team took the Cup with 19 wins vs 17 wins for the US. Also, MVP plaques and $10 cash are awarded to the top player on each team. ASLOK HOTEL INFO AND PREREGISTRATION PROCEDURE QUALITY INN & SUITES 7230 ENGLE ROAD MIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS, OHIO 44130 440-243-4040 Make your hotel reservations with the Quality Inn. Rooms are $69.00 per night. Mention OKTOBERFEST for reduced rate (standard room rates are $40-$60 higher). Make your reservations with the hotel early. Free airport shuttle! Same hotel since 1996! Before September 31st, 2004 send $20.00 to Mark Nixon to preregister for ASLOK. It is $25.00 after that date and at the door. All figures are in US dollars. Specify T-shirt size and quantity if you want these: Medium, Large and EXTRA Large are $10.00 each. Double-X-Large are $13.00 each, Triple-X-Large are $15.00 each. Quad-X-Large-Tall are $18.00 each. T-shirts are available in numbers based on pre-reg sales; order now to make sure you get what you want! Be sure to request Mini-Tournaments you would like to enter. You will be able to preregister for only one per day, but give me a rank in priority each day; I'll put you in your topmost pick which is still available for each day. Some Mini's will run more than once; where ASL fans demand it, we give it to them! Include your full name, address, phone number and email. If you would like to receive a mailed confirmation, please also include a SASE, or include your fax number if a fax'd confirmation will work. Be sure to check our official ASLOK web page at: http://www.nwsup.com/aslok/ for late changes, additions, hotel roommates, etc. You may email Mark Nixon at mnixon@voyager.net if you have any questions. ASLOK XIX - YEAR 2004 PREREGISTRATION FORM (TWO-PAGE FORM) NAME:_____________________________________________________________ ADDRESS:__________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ STATE/PROVINCE/COUNTRY:________________ POSTAL/ZIP CODE:__________ PHONE:____________________________ EMAIL:________________________ Make your check payable to: Mark Nixon and mail preregistration and T-shirt funds to: MARK NIXON 443 RICHMOND PARK WEST 201D RICHMOND HEIGHTS OH 44143 (PHONE: 440-473-1680 FAX: 440-449-9430) QTY $ SUBTOTALS PREREG: ($20.00 EACH)_______________ __________________ T-SHIRTS MEDIUM: ($10.00 EACH)________________ __________________ LARGE: ($10.00 EACH)_______________ __________________ XL: ($10.00 EACH)_______________ __________________ XXL: ($13.00 EACH)_______________ __________________ XXXL: ($15.00 EACH)_______________ __________________ 4XL-TALL: ($18.00 EA)_______________ __________________ TOTAL AMOUNT: $_________________ MINI-TOURNAMENTS AND THURSDAY THEME TOURNAMENTS (Rank your choices on each day: For example, 1=what you want, 2=next choice, 3, 4 etc. and then rank what you want the next day, and so on. Many of these will run more than once each day, based on demand.) WEDNESDAY MINI (10/6) THURSDAY THEME (10/7) _____Oldies But Goodies _____Night _____Island Hoppin' _____Master of the Monster Hexes(Deluxe) _____They Came From Above (Air Drop) _____King of The Jungle _____Winter Wonderland _____Paper Tigers _____Dancin' In The Desert _____Twilight Of The Reich _____Tincans & Popguns (Early War) _____Fading Into Bolivia (Minors) _____Buckeye's Best Battles (Ohio Designers) _____The Crazy 88's FRIDAY MINI (10/8) SATURDAY MINI (10/9) _____Banzai! _____Spitting Into The Wind _____Schwerpunkt #10 _____Attack By Halftrack _____"Stiff Upper Lip" (Brits) _____Pete's "Publish Or Perish Playtest" _____Heavy Metal _____Mother Russia _____Journal-istic Integrity _____10-2 (Or Better) Good Buddy _____Freeing The French _____For The Emperor MANEUVERS TUESDAY (WHAT TIME?)____________FRIDAY (WHAT TIME?)___________________ USA vs WORLD CUP WORLD CUP play ends Tuesday October 5th; enter only if you plan to play in this event, by giving me the day and time you plan to arrive at ASLOK:___________________________________ From oleboe at tiscali.no Sat Aug 14 14:17:20 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sat Aug 14 14:17:26 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <01ab01c4817c$00651990$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <40FEE9C600000A48@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Andrea wrote: >I do not think you played it incorrectly. >Actually, A4.12 says that a unit receives a 2MF bonus if *it* moves >with that leader in a combined stack. Therefore there is no requirement >for the leader to remain with the unit that receives the bonus it is >the unit that must stay with the leader and not vice-versa. If at some >point (even on the 5th or greater MF) the unit is no more capable of >"keeping up" with the leader (it becomes pinned, broken, etc...) this >can have no effect on the leader > (again he is not required to stay with that unit). But in the arguments above you're totally ignoring the first sentence of A4.12: "Any Good Order MMC which begins and ends the MPh/APh stacked with a leader ... is eligible for a two MF bonus" In the example you give, the squad that must stop, will *not* end the MPh stacked with the leader if the leader leaves. So you're saying that since the units has already spent its leader bonus without breaking any rule, then its ok to later break the requirement of A4.12? >Additionaly, since only the squad is required to move with the leader >in a combined stack, if a squad is broken/pinned on its 5th MF and then >left behind, it still has satisfied the A4.12 requirements since, as >long as it moved, it moved with the leader as a stack. Well, it fulfilled the requirement to move as a stack, but not the one of ending the MPh stacked with the leader. >Some rules-lawyer could (at this point) only try to state that, >since the unit did not stay with the leader, it could not use the >extra MF... But this would mean to "undo" the move of the unit and >maybe also the condition that forced it to stop "early"... That wouldn't make sense, I agree that. >I mean... assume the following situation... >1) Your Squad + Leader move as a stack. >2) On the 5th MF an enemy unit fires on the stack and pins the squad (only) >3) The Leader expends its 6th MF to enter in another hex >At this point your opponent says that the squad could not use that 5th >MF since it did not move with the leader in a combined stack... But then >if it could not use that 5th MF it could not be fired upon... therefore >it would not be pinned... I do not think this makes any sense.. No, but in the game I played (and moved such a stack), 1) and 2) happened, but *before* 3), my opponent pointed out that I now could *not* move my leader. The Pinned unit *must* end the MPh stacked with the leader - A4.12 is clear about that, and the only way to enforce that was to *not* move the leader to another hex. No taking way an already expended MF, but stopping me from expending the leaders 6th MF to move to another Location, since by doing that, I would break A4.12. ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From oleboe at tiscali.no Sat Aug 14 14:30:20 2004 From: oleboe at tiscali.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sat Aug 14 14:30:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF In-Reply-To: <411E522A.5E73@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <40FEE9C600000A49@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Hi, Jim McLeod wrote: >Are we perhaps reading a little too much into what A4.12 says? I sure hope so :-) >In a nutshell, a MMC is _eligible_ for the 2 MF Leader Bonus if >it remains with the Leader for the entire MPh. If that MMC Pins or >Breaks, it is no longer eligible for the remaining Leader Bonus MF >if that Leader leaves the Pinned/Broken units Location as that MMC >did not end its MPh with that Leader. That's certainly how I would like the rule to work, but unfortunately I think you're stretching what it says. It doesn't say anything about getting one while stacked, and then split up as that. I don't mean to be stubborn, but in the game I played, my opponent pointed out that the squad *had* received (and used) leader bonus MF, and A4.12 required that he be stacked with the leader for the entire MPh. I had never played that way, but since the rule said so, I had to fulfill this by the only way possible - to stop with my leader. I will do my best to get Perry to issue a Q&A or errata to get it to work as per your interpretation though. >And what if a MMC in a stack with another MMC and Leader goes Berserk >due to a fire attack caused during the expenditure of a Leader Bonus >MF? The Berserk dude is not going to end the MPh with the Leader. Does >his running off to oblivion end the movement of those he left behind? I don't have a clue... It shouldn't though. >However ... the last line of A4.12 is worrisome, "Bonus MF are "always" >(my emphasis) the last to be expended by a moving unit." > >That tells me that once I use a Leader Bonus MF I can kiss any DT MF I >may decide to use good-bye. This is something that I have not considered >before. If I may ease your mind, I can tell you that Perry has already told me not to read much into that, so just ignore it :-) =Jim= ----------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body or me and my head? Ole Boe oleboe@tiscali.no From keithdalton at verizon.net Sat Aug 14 16:08:45 2004 From: keithdalton at verizon.net (Keith Dalton) Date: Sat Aug 14 16:07:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Helped Wanted -- ASL Playtesters Message-ID: <000701c48253$a6b20ec0$5b5ccd97@f2e8w6> Hey gents: This is from Perry. He can't post for some technical reason. MMP needs your help. We have several projects that need playtesting, or will shortly. First things first, we still need work on the scenarios in Journal 6. That is an immediate need After that, our next concern will be the action packs from Ian Daglish (Normandy) and Pete Shelling (East Front) using new boards from Don Petros. Depending on how some things shake out, we will be looking for help on the Finnish module and on the two Historical ASL modules?Red October (Kible returns to Stalingrad) and Ortona (?Stalingrad? in Italy). We don?t pay cash, but a few good writeups can earn you a free game or half-off on one. If you are interested in being a playtester, or in increasing your ongoing participation, please write me (perrycocke@comcast.net) and playtest coordinator Kevin Valerien (Valerien@ciena.com). --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 8/4/04 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 15 00:48:44 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 15 00:53:18 2004 Subject: I: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <01f001c4829c$cd3fdc40$c7130a3e@andrea> I don't know why it was not displayed on the ASLML Andrea -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Paul Kenny [mailto:homercles11@hotmail.com] Inviato: venerd? 13 agosto 2004 23.41 A: afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Oggetto: RE: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question I would say that the MA could not fire on the IFT unless it had obtained a hit or if it had IFE. So no 1 FP for the MA unless obtains hit on TH table. 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: "Andrea" Reply-To: afantozzi@tiscali.it To: Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200 Dear listers, I have played this for years but lately I have some doubts... An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. without making a TH DR first)? If the answer is "yes", may that same ATR doubled to 2FP for PBF? May (or actually must) the ATR combine its 1FP with the CMG when firing at the same target... in other words does Mandatory FG rules apply? Thank you in advance Andrea Fantozzi --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 _______________________________________________ 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 _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 15 00:48:50 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 15 00:53:26 2004 Subject: I: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <01f101c4829c$cf8908f0$c7130a3e@andrea> -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Chas Argent [mailto:sidirezegh@charter.net] Inviato: venerd? 13 agosto 2004 23.54 A: Paul Kenny Cc: afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question I would agree with Paul. C13.24 is referring specifically to SW ATRs & their ability to fire directly at Personnel with 1 FP as Small Arms Fire. -Chas "But what the heck do I know" Argent Paul Kenny wrote: > I would say that the MA could not fire on the IFT unless it had > obtained a hit or if it had IFE. So no 1 FP for the MA unless obtains > hit on TH table. > > > 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: "Andrea" > Reply-To: afantozzi@tiscali.it > To: > Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200 > > Dear listers, > I have played this for years but lately I have some doubts... > An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. > > May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. > without making a TH DR first)? > If the answer is "yes", may that same ATR doubled to 2FP for PBF? > May (or actually must) the ATR combine its 1FP with the CMG when > firing at > the same target... in other words does Mandatory FG rules apply? > > Thank you in advance > > Andrea Fantozzi > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 > --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 15 00:48:55 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 15 00:53:36 2004 Subject: I: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <01f201c4829c$d1e632d0$c7130a3e@andrea> -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] Inviato: sabato 14 agosto 2004 12.48 A: afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. > >May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. >without making a TH DR first)? No. p.H71 [Note Q] Can the vehicular ATR fire on infantry with 1 FP in the same manner as a SW ATR? If yes, may it form a FG with any vehicular MGs? A. No. No. {MS} (Another old Q&A not found in Scott R.'s compilation.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 15 10:39:37 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 15 07:33:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leadership bonus MF References: <40FEE9C600000A49@cpfe9.be.tisc.dk> Message-ID: <411F9FD9.6E8D@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Ole Boe wrote: > I will do my best to get Perry to issue > a Q&A or errata to get it to work as per your interpretation though. Very good Ole, please post his reply. I wrote; > >And what if a MMC in a stack with another MMC and Leader goes Berserk > >due to a fire attack caused during the expenditure of a Leader Bonus > >MF? The Berserk dude is not going to end the MPh with the Leader. Does > >his running off to oblivion end the movement of those he left behind? Ole replied; > I don't have a clue... It shouldn't though. In this case, the now Berserk MMC; - has already expended a LB MF. - is not starting and ending its MPh stacked with the same Leader. This situation creates a bit of a rub as far as A4.12 is currently worded. There appears to be no EXC: in the Berserk rule regarding what happens when a Berserk unit that has already used 1-2 LB MF's and must now go on a Berserk Charge. If we pull out our extrapolators from their protective sheaths ... we could deduce that a moving stack of 2 MMC and 1 Leader could leave a MMC that has expended a LB MF (the 5th MF expended) and move into another hex (the 6th MF expended). I wrote; > >However ... the last line of A4.12 is worrisome, "Bonus MF are "always" > >(my emphasis) the last to be expended by a moving unit." > >That tells me that once I use a Leader Bonus MF I can kiss any DT MF I > >may decide to use good-bye. This is something that I have not considered before. Ole replied; > If I may ease your mind, I can tell you that Perry has already told me not > to read much into that, so just ignore it :-) Ole, I must try that in my next rules debate with Tate. :) That last little sentence is very much a potential trouble maker. Back to our Berserk example, barring an EXC: to the contrary, according to the last sentence of A4.12 a unit that has already expended part or all of its eligible LB MF(s) does not have to undertake a Berserk Charge if it goes Berserk on/after expending those LB MF(s), provided of course that we consider the newly Berserk unit to be a moving unit which it certainly was when it when Berserk. Based on how A4.12 is currently written, a very sound argument can made in support of the above Ole, Perry's un-published personal comments to you notwithstanding. =Jim= From s.deller at charter.net Sun Aug 15 08:32:45 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Sun Aug 15 08:32:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question References: <01f201c4829c$d1e632d0$c7130a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <001c01c482dd$1d1dc4d0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Bruce, That Q&A is interesting in that it appears to be at odds with this Perry Sez listed in Sam Belcher's Perry Sez compilation: >>>> C13.24. Does a vehicle mounted ATR also have a Small Arms 1FP? If answer is "yes", can it add the 1 FP to its MG attacks? Yes to both. >>>> Doesn't make sense to me. Cheers, Sean Deller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrea" To: Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 3:48 AM Subject: I: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Inviato: sabato 14 agosto 2004 12.48 > A: afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > > > On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: > > >An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. > > > >May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. > >without making a TH DR first)? > > No. > > p.H71 [Note Q] Can the vehicular ATR fire on infantry with 1 FP in the same > manner as a SW ATR? If yes, may it form a FG with any vehicular MGs? > A. No. No. {MS} > > (Another old Q&A not found in Scott R.'s compilation.) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 steven.linton at telstra.com Sun Aug 15 20:28:58 2004 From: steven.linton at telstra.com (steven.linton) Date: Sun Aug 15 20:29:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leaders and Flamethrowers Message-ID: <4fade74f9b22.4f9b224fade7@email.bigpond.com> Greetings all, I was reading the ASLSK rules the other day, and noted a reference to cowering and flamethrowers. Not recalling it from the larger tome, I set off to have a look, and the following question occured to me. A.10 talks about leader modifiers not applying to certain situations. The section on cowering (sorry, NRBH)talks about exemptions, and refers to firegroups that are not leader directed The FT scection mentions that leadeship DRM modifiers cannot apply to FT attacks. So: Can a leader direct the operation of a flamethrower purely for the purpose of preventing cowering? Seems to be OK, but it relies on a distinction between direction and DRMs that I'm not sure hasn't been debated previously. Steve > > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 15 20:43:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Sun Aug 15 20:43:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Leaders and Flamethrowers Message-ID: <10680-22004811634314753@M2W095.mail2web.com> >Can a leader direct the operation of a flamethrower purely for the >purpose of preventing cowering? Seems to be OK, but it relies on a >distinction between direction and DRMs that I'm not sure hasn't been >debated previously. Yes, it's permitted -- indeed I think it's the only instance in which leader direction can be applied when leader DRM is NA. (Other "leadership NA" attacks aren't subject to cowering, as far as I know.) (This question is answered in the FAQ, incidentally.) It was originally clarified in this Q&A: A7.53-.531 & A10.72 These seem to imply that leader direction and the application of a leader's DRM can be declared independently of each other. Is this true? A. No--the two are synonymous in all cases. However, if leader direction is used for an attack/action to whose DR/dr "triangle" applies, that leader's DRM/drm cannot apply to that DR/dr. {96} (The '96 Annual was only the most recent place that this Q&A appeared; it's actually much older than that.) The text of this Q&A didn't really get into 2nd ed. in any satisfactory fashion (an irritating omission, given how important it is), but I know of no reason to suspect that it's no longer true. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 15 21:06:56 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Sun Aug 15 21:06:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A Stormy Weekend Message-ID: <116870-2200481164656357@M2W078.mail2web.com> On a very cold and wet winter's day in Melbourne this weekend Neil Andrews, Gordon Stokes and I were appropriately playing AP9 "Red Storm" as a demo game at a local wargames club's open day. Amazing the number of people who passed by saying "gee, I used to play that game" or "I bought the rules to that game years ago and never understood them" or variations thereof. I declined to tell them the awful truth: you never get to understand them, no matter how long you've been playing . We told everyone who would listen about the ASLSK and our club's regular meetings ... maybe we'll even collect one or two of them as new regular players. Me, I was just happy because I found two old issues of "Fire & Movement" that I didn't have that I bought for the princely sum of $1. (Not to mention getting a copy of "Burma: The Longest War" in hard-cover for $10.) As for the game itself, well, we only ended up getting a few turns finished. My German defenders were trying hard but not really achieving much; a couple of Soviet tanks were either KIA or immobilised, but two Pz IVs were dead and one Recalled when the commander rolled a "12" on a NMC (from a 2+2 shot, of course!). And my great plan to blow the Bd 41 bridge to channel the Russians scuppered when the Set DC failed to destroy it, meanwhile Russian SU76 had burst through the Bd 17 woods like they weren't there (so much for "soft ground"), making the whole "defend the bridges" exercise somewhat moot. The Bd 10 village is all but overrun (a few defenders remain but I don't really expect them to achieve much) which means that in a turn or so the Russians will be charging down to the bottom half of the board. Eep. Time to put "Plan B" into operation, as soon as I figure out what it is. To be continued ... one day. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Aug 16 01:31:17 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Mon Aug 16 01:35:00 2004 Subject: I: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <021c01c4836b$c92745b0$c7130a3e@andrea> Again, this message wasn't showed on the list... So this "Perry Sez" means that a MA ATR attacks with 1FP and can be doubled/tripled to 2FP/3FP for PBF/TPBF.... And than it may (or must at this point if applying Mandatory FG) combine the ATR FP with MG FP. There are a lot of early-war AC that will benefit a lot from this! Andrea -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Sean Deller [mailto:s.deller@charter.net] Inviato: domenica 15 agosto 2004 17.33 A: afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net; bprobst@netspace.net.au Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Bruce, That Q&A is interesting in that it appears to be at odds with this Perry Sez listed in Sam Belcher's Perry Sez compilation: >>>> C13.24. Does a vehicle mounted ATR also have a Small Arms 1FP? If answer is "yes", can it add the 1 FP to its MG attacks? Yes to both. >>>> Doesn't make sense to me. Cheers, Sean Deller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrea" To: Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 3:48 AM Subject: I: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Inviato: sabato 14 agosto 2004 12.48 > A: afantozzi@tiscali.it; aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > > > On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:45:10 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: > > >An AFV has an ATR as its MA and a CMG. > > > >May the ATR attack an infantry target directly on the IFT with 1FP (i.e. > >without making a TH DR first)? > > No. > > p.H71 [Note Q] Can the vehicular ATR fire on infantry with 1 FP in the same > manner as a SW ATR? If yes, may it form a FG with any vehicular MGs? > A. No. No. {MS} > > (Another old Q&A not found in Scott R.'s compilation.) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 02/08/2004 From aslplayer at speakeasy.net Mon Aug 16 08:13:36 2004 From: aslplayer at speakeasy.net (aslplayer@speakeasy.net) Date: Mon Aug 16 08:13:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Paging Phil Pomerantz or Burnie Fox Message-ID: Still looking for you guys since I had my email change... Shoot me an email to this addy. Want to get our VASL games finished up! :) John "Was making a comeback...really..." Grimes From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Mon Aug 16 08:41:08 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Mon Aug 16 08:41:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tactiques Message-ID: <000601c483a7$73b42760$bce72f04@MORIA> Does anyone have a copy of the tactiques 6-10 scenarios? For some reason I don't have the PDF file from before. Will From sidirezegh at charter.net Mon Aug 16 09:13:22 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Mon Aug 16 09:13:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Tactiques Message-ID: <3a5bqj$65pg5k@mxip04a.cluster1.charter.net> Will- You can get them here > http://www.socalasl.com/ There is a page called "ASL Scenarios" which get you to all the Tactiques .pdfs. -Chas > From: "Will Fleming" > Date: 2004/08/16 Mon PM 03:41:08 GMT > To: > Subject: [Aslml] Tactiques > > > Does anyone have a copy of the tactiques 6-10 scenarios? For some reason I > don't have the PDF file from before. > > Will > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Mon Aug 16 17:00:36 2004 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Mon Aug 16 17:00:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker #19 Update Message-ID: <20040817000036.69574.qmail@web51705.mail.yahoo.com> Please respond to my aslbunker@aol.com account, Thank You very much, Vic. Greetings from the Bunker and hello to all at yasl. We have started proof reading and editing work on Issue #19, with a publishing date in September for the Bunker Bash. 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: 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!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Aug 16 18:32:27 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Aug 16 18:31:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez A9.5 Spraying Fire question Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77BBEE@agalsrv03> Most of you probably already knew this but here is Perry's answer to the question I sent him Cheers Jon -----Original Message----- From: perrycocke@comcast.net [mailto:perrycocke@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, 13 August 2004 6:58 AM To: Cole, Jonathan Subject: Re: A9.5 Spraying Fire question > A9.5 How is a 1KIA or K/# result on the IFT resolved when using Spraying > Fire? > > Previous Q&A from the 96 Annual and still on the MMP website is as follows: > A9.5 & C8.4 If Spraying Fire (regardless of its source) or canister > used vs. one Open Ground Location yields a 1KIA result, does the 1KIA > apply separately in each such Location? > > A. No, use Random Selection once for all targets eligible to receive > the 1KIA in those Locations. (Each such target that Random Selection > exempts from the 1KIA suffers a break result.) {96} > > However this Q&A may have been rescinded. > The A25. Example of the Human Wave seems to say that the K/# result applies > separately to each Location > > Does the KIA or K/# result apply separately in each Location or is the above > Q&A still correct? > The results apply separately in both Locations. Rule A7.301 was changed in the ASLRB 2nd edition. ....Perry MMP From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Aug 16 18:29:29 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Aug 16 18:32:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wall Advantage and Entrenchment question Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77BBEC@agalsrv03> Greetings Situation: A squad is behind a Wall in an Open Ground hex that contains a 1S Foxhole. At setup the squad is placed out of the foxhole, with Wall Advantage over the hex-side. 1) May the squad voluntarily drop WA at any time and be placed beneath the foxhole, even though it normally costs 1MF to enter a foxhole [and thus drop out of LOS of non Adjacent units that trace LOS across the wall hex-side]? 2) If yes to the above, may the squad then reclaim WA in a later turn when permitted (eg at the end of the Rally Phase) and be placed above the foxhole with a WA counter, even though it normally costs 1MF to exit a foxhole? Cheers Jon From damavs at alltel.net Mon Aug 16 18:48:48 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Mon Aug 16 18:49:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wall Advantage and Entrenchment question In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77BBEC@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B77BBEC@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040816214453.01d00ec0@mail.alltel.net> Cole, Jonathan wrote: >Situation: A squad is behind a Wall in an Open Ground hex that contains a 1S >Foxhole. At setup the squad is placed out of the foxhole, with Wall >Advantage over the hex-side. > >1) May the squad voluntarily drop WA at any time and be placed beneath the >foxhole, even though it normally costs 1MF to enter a foxhole [and thus drop >out of LOS of non Adjacent units that trace LOS across the wall hex-side]? No. You can never freely move beneath a foxhole like this unless it's the Movement or Advance Phase where MF are expended. So no free "now you see me, now you don't" magic tricks for the defender at other times... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Aug 16 22:28:28 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Mon Aug 16 22:28:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wall Advantage and Entrenchment question Message-ID: <216870-22004821752828141@M2W103.mail2web.com> >Situation: A squad is behind a Wall in an Open Ground hex that contains a >1S Foxhole. At setup the squad is placed out of the foxhole, with Wall >Advantage over the hex-side. > >1) May the squad voluntarily drop WA at any time and be placed beneath the >foxhole, even though it normally costs 1MF to enter a foxhole [and thus >drop out of LOS of non Adjacent units that trace LOS across the wall hex- >side]? No, the only way to enter a foxhole is by moving/routing/advancing into it. Dropping WA is *not* a form of movement. >2) If yes to the above, may the squad then reclaim WA in a later turn when >permitted (eg at the end of the Rally Phase) and be placed above the >foxhole with a WA counter, even though it normally costs 1MF to exit a >foxhole? No, the only way to exit a foxhole is by moving/routing/advancing out of it. Claiming WA is *not* a form of movement. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From thunderchief at ozemail.com.au Tue Aug 17 01:50:08 2004 From: thunderchief at ozemail.com.au (Adam Lunney) Date: Tue Aug 17 01:50:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Battle Zone Normandy Message-ID: <00ab01c48437$34833be0$f02354d2@pavilion> I have seen ads for this series of books "Battle Zone Normandy" which is said to consist of different books about the Normandy battles, the beaches, Villers-Bocage etc. Does anyone have any info on these and how they compare to the "Battleground Europe" series of books (of which I have about 10 and have found them to be excellent). Is this a cash in on the 60th Anniversary or a genuinely good series of books or both? Any help before my money is spent would be much appreciated! Adam. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 17 02:15:30 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 17 02:15:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question In-Reply-To: <001c01c482dd$1d1dc4d0$2083b018@DHT8S631> References: <01f201c4829c$d1e632d0$c7130a3e@andrea> <001c01c482dd$1d1dc4d0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:32:45 -0400, "Sean Deller" wrote: >That Q&A is interesting in that it appears to be at odds with this Perry Sez >listed in Sam Belcher's Perry Sez compilation: > >>>>> >C13.24. Does a vehicle mounted ATR also have a Small Arms 1FP? If answer >is "yes", can it add the 1 FP to its MG attacks? > >Yes to both. >>>>> > >Doesn't make sense to me. Well, I wasn't aware of the Perry Sez, and given that it's more recent than the Q&A I quoted (and is covering the rule more generally, to boot) I have to say that it's got overall precedence. Furthermore, I can't argue that it's "wrong", since it isn't directly contradicting anything in the rules (C13.24 is talking about ATR in general terms, not specifically as only a SW.) Whoever answered the Q&A I quoted obviously leant towards one interpretation, Perry has leant towards the other, and the rule is just vague enough to permit both (not at the same time, obviously). Them's the hazards of relying on ancient Q&A . I retract my previous answer, and I'll go with the Perry Sez in this case. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Mike, if I run out of vomit, can I have some of yours?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From aslbunker at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 03:42:15 2004 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Tue Aug 17 03:42:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker August Update Message-ID: <20040817104215.30262.qmail@web51705.mail.yahoo.com> Greetings from the Bunker and hello to all at the Mailing List. We have started proof reading and editing work on Issue #19, with a publishing date in September for the Bunker Bash. 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: 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 is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From s.deller at charter.net Tue Aug 17 04:30:16 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Tue Aug 17 04:30:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG III questions Message-ID: <002801c4844d$91e775b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> RB veterans, 1. What are the starting EC for CG III? CG SSR 1 says "Moderate" but RB SSR RB1 says "Moist." 2. Do the initial scenario OB-given RGs provide ELR mods during the next RePh? (I suspect not as O11.617 specifies "purchased" RG, but I would like confirmation) Cheers, Sean Deller From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Tue Aug 17 09:23:31 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Tue Aug 17 09:23:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question In-Reply-To: References: <01f201c4829c$d1e632d0$c7130a3e@andrea> <001c01c482dd$1d1dc4d0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > Whoever answered the Q&A I quoted obviously leant towards one interpretation, > Perry has leant towards the other, and the rule is just vague enough to permit > both (not at the same time, obviously). > If it had been clear, I wouldn't have sent in the Q&A back in 1994. :-) This is certainly a clarification rather than errata, and as Bruce says, everyone should be just fine with Perry's interpretation rather than Fortenberry or whoever was issuing the Q&A back then. Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Tue Aug 17 09:29:10 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Tue Aug 17 09:29:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MwCG Seeking PBEM for meaningful destruction Message-ID: <1092760150.34fd7d9cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Married with child IT geek seeks VASL PBEM opponent. Long-time player, but still sometimes grapples with basics. :-( Occasionally manages > 2 logfiles/week, but can't bet on it (q.v. the Married with child & IT Geek headers above...). Willing to take on any size game, any nationality. Reply here, or contact Brian Pickering, bpickering@csworld.com. From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Aug 17 13:44:50 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Aug 17 13:45:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <391l71$610bls@mxip19a.cluster1.charter.net> > > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/08/17 Tue AM 04:15:30 CDT > To: "Sean Deller" > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ATR-MA Question > > On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:32:45 -0400, "Sean Deller" > wrote: > > >That Q&A is interesting in that it appears to be at odds with this Perry Sez > >listed in Sam Belcher's Perry Sez compilation: > > > >>>>> > >C13.24. Does a vehicle mounted ATR also have a Small Arms 1FP? If answer > >is "yes", can it add the 1 FP to its MG attacks? > > > >Yes to both. > >>>>> > > > >Doesn't make sense to me. > > Well, I wasn't aware of the Perry Sez, and given that it's more recent than > the Q&A I quoted (and is covering the rule more generally, to boot) I have to > say that it's got overall precedence. > > Furthermore, I can't argue that it's "wrong", since it isn't directly > contradicting anything in the rules (C13.24 is talking about ATR in general > terms, not specifically as only a SW.) > > Whoever answered the Q&A I quoted obviously leant towards one interpretation, > Perry has leant towards the other, and the rule is just vague enough to permit > both (not at the same time, obviously). > > Them's the hazards of relying on ancient Q&A . > > I retract my previous answer, and I'll go with the Perry Sez in this case. > Sure, and if you wait long enough...ask the question again...you could very likely get a different answer. The problem isn't the use of old Q&A. The problem is the system. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From btdtall at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 17:55:54 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Tue Aug 17 17:56:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Human Wave Question Message-ID: <20040818005554.83272.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Listers- Lets say you have a human wave occuring that has two squads in three hexes (adjacent obviously). As the wave moves forward the middle part of the wave enters a building with an enemy unit on the count of a total 7 MF expended. The sides of the wave can't enter the building becaue they don't have enough MF, but can move one hex foward into an open gorund hex,while not increasing the range from the enemy unit in the middle. The question is can the units on the adjacent sides of the enemy unit split their impulse so that one unit can move forward while the other remains adjacent on the 7 MF impulse or do all units in a hex have to enter the same hex ? In short if one goes, they all go, if one stays, then they all stay. Thanks in advance __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 17 18:49:35 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Tue Aug 17 18:50:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Human Wave Question Message-ID: <106640-22004831814935929@M2W093.mail2web.com> >The question is can the units on the adjacent >sides of the enemy unit split their impulse so that >one unit can move forward while the other remains >adjacent on the 7 MF impulse or do all units in a hex >have to enter the same hex ? NRBH, but I think you're asking two different questions. 1) Can the stack split up and enter two different hexes? I believe the answer is yes, provided that either hex is a valid choice for HW entry. I don't think there's any requirement that the stack must keep moving as a stack for the duration of the HW. 2) Can part of the hex stop moving even though there is somewhere it can legally move to? I believe the answer is no, you must keep moving if at all possible. The rules specify what each participant in the HW *must* do each Impulse, and I'm pretty sure that "stop moving just because you want to" is not one of the listed options. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From tmorin2454 at comcast.net Tue Aug 17 20:06:31 2004 From: tmorin2454 at comcast.net (tmorin2454@comcast.net) Date: Tue Aug 17 20:07:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Update on Dispatches from the Bunker issue 19 Message-ID: <081820040306.6728.4122C7B700073B1900001A482200750784CBCACBCD02079D01039B@comcast.net> Forwarded from Vic Provost: Greetings from the Bunker and hello to all at the Mailing List. We have started proof reading and editing work on Issue #19, with a publishing date in September for the Bunker Bash. 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: 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 - #18) 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]' From s.deller at charter.net Tue Aug 17 20:19:25 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Tue Aug 17 20:20:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] More Perry Sez on the ATR-MA Question Message-ID: <009501c484d2$2a5700c0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Andrea/Bruce, I asked Perry about the conflicting Q&A and he has reinforced his position. The first question below is his affirmation of his previous answer. The following three questions further explain the capabilities of an ATR MA. Cheers, Sean >>>> > C13.24. Does a vehicle mounted ATR also have a Small Arms 1FP? If answer > is "yes", can it add the 1 FP to its MG attacks? Yes to both. > If so, does the vehicle's ATR MA benefit from PBF/TPBF (if applicable)? Yes. > Is the ATR's 1 FP included in the vehicle's OVR FP calculation (presumably > multiplied by 3/2 and added)? No; see D7.11. > Does C13.25 allow a vehicle leader to apply his leadership modifier to any > ATR MA attack on the IFT? D3.44 allows an Armor Leader to modify an ATR MA TH or IFT DR. ....Perry MMP From bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com Tue Aug 17 22:45:03 2004 From: bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Tue Aug 17 22:37:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] MwCG Seeking PBEM for meaningful destruction Message-ID: <20040818053611.AC94E985A1@che.dreamhost.com> Thanks, all! I've got multiple responses. Now, I just need to go through, pick one, and get back to them. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Beakes [mailto:puckstop31@comcast.net] > Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 7:26 PM > To: 'Brian Pickering (ASL)' > Cc: bpickering@csworld.com > Subject: RE: [Aslml] MwCG Seeking PBEM for meaningful destruction > > Hi, > > Brian Beakes, fellow IT geek here. :) I am game if you > are. You pick the scenario and I pick the side? Or if you > have something in mind, please let me know. > > Thanks, > Brian > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > Brian Pickering (ASL) > Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 12:29 PM > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] MwCG Seeking PBEM for meaningful destruction > > Married with child IT geek seeks VASL PBEM opponent. > > Long-time player, but still sometimes grapples with basics. :-( > > Occasionally manages > 2 logfiles/week, but can't bet on it > (q.v. the Married with child & IT Geek headers above...). > > Willing to take on any size game, any nationality. > > Reply here, or contact Brian Pickering, bpickering@csworld.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 thunderchief at ozemail.com.au Wed Aug 18 01:29:18 2004 From: thunderchief at ozemail.com.au (Adam Lunney) Date: Wed Aug 18 01:30:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Products Message-ID: <00a701c484fd$7608d860$6f2354d2@pavilion> Apart from Schwerepunkt 10, what "new" gear will be for sale at ASLOK? I'm after as much as I can get without having to pay for shipping :-) Also, does anyone know of the status of the "training video" from last year? As one of the many "stars" (my interpretation) of the feature I'm after a copy! Adam. From afantozzi at tiscali.it Tue Aug 17 15:50:09 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Wed Aug 18 01:51:24 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] RB CG III questions In-Reply-To: <002801c4844d$91e775b0$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <004601c48500$49f58d60$c90e0a3e@andrea> NRBH so I can answer only #2 Only purchased units count for ELR DRM so OB Given units do not provide any modifier Andrea > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]Per conto di > Sean Deller > Inviato: marted? 17 agosto 2004 13.30 > A: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: [Aslml] RB CG III questions > > > RB veterans, > > 1. What are the starting EC for CG III? CG SSR 1 says > "Moderate" but RB > SSR RB1 says "Moist." > > 2. Do the initial scenario OB-given RGs provide ELR mods > during the next > RePh? (I suspect not as O11.617 specifies "purchased" RG, > but I would like > confirmation) > > Cheers, > Sean Deller > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004 From jtracy at bankofny.com Wed Aug 18 11:28:46 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Wed Aug 18 11:33:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Products Message-ID: Adam asks: > Apart from Schwerepunkt 10, what "new" gear will > be for sale at ASLOK? I'm after as much as I can > get without having to pay for shipping :-) The HoB "Beyond the Beachhead" product is a pretty slick package - they usually bring a bunch of stuff to ASLOK. MMP-wise, I hope at least the map of Tom Morin's VotG is on display - it looks 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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Wed Aug 18 11:45:32 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Wed Aug 18 11:50:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Products Message-ID: <885d59d885bea1.885bea1885d59d@us.army.mil> Hi- I think Tom's map was on display two years ago at ASLOK and Perry said VotG would see print last year. ah well. Its a very nice map too, hopefully Tom will bring copies of the map and scenarios and have some kind of VotG mini tourny. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: jtracy@bankofny.com Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 1:28 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASLOK Products > Adam asks: > > > Apart from Schwerepunkt 10, what "new" gear will > > be for sale at ASLOK? I'm after as much as I can > > get without having to pay for shipping :-) > > The HoB "Beyond the Beachhead" product is a pretty slick package - > they > usually bring a bunch of stuff to ASLOK. > > MMP-wise, I hope at least the map of Tom Morin's VotG is on > display - it > looks 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. > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Wed Aug 18 17:18:56 2004 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Wed Aug 18 17:18:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: <20040819001856.6487.qmail@web51709.mail.yahoo.com> Test __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Qitah at adelphia.net Wed Aug 18 18:04:18 2004 From: Qitah at adelphia.net (Ivan Lindstrom) Date: Wed Aug 18 18:04:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Test In-Reply-To: <20040819001856.6487.qmail@web51709.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c48588$747b9880$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> Seem to work Ivan Lindstrom Qitah@adelphia.net -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Vic Provost Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 8:19 PM To: ASL Mailing List Current May 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Test Test __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! 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 MPitcavage at adl.org Thu Aug 19 12:17:44 2004 From: MPitcavage at adl.org (Pitcavage, Mark) Date: Thu Aug 19 12:17:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Products Message-ID: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95089@nymail.adl.org> Unless there is a surprise, I think Schwerpunkt may be the only ASLOK release. Possible exceptions: 1. Heat of Battle springing a surprise with their desert commando pack thingie. 2. SoCal's Melee Pack 2. They've been very mum on this recently, so I am an official doubter. 3. Critical Hit's Vol 7 No 2 may be out by ASLOK, especially since it is a "greatest hits" sort of thing. Of course, their most recent release (which is *the* most recent ASL related release) on the Brachi hills will be available, I'm sure. 4. Some Ohio guys were working on a special neat little release, but real life intervened for the main person responsible and it is looking more likely like a next ASLOK release. From sidirezegh at charter.net Thu Aug 19 18:00:20 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Thu Aug 19 18:00:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Products In-Reply-To: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95089@nymail.adl.org> References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E02B95089@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: <41254D24.10209@charter.net> Pitcavage, Mark wrote: >2. SoCal's Melee Pack 2. They've been very mum on this recently, so I am >an official doubter. > > I wouldn't give up on this one just yet... -Chas From bignoodle at earthlink.net Thu Aug 19 18:46:16 2004 From: bignoodle at earthlink.net (donald holland) Date: Thu Aug 19 18:46:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLOK Products Message-ID: <410-22004852014616265@earthlink.net> > >2. SoCal's Melee Pack 2. They've been very mum on this recently, so I am > >an official doubter. > > > > > I wouldn't give up on this one just yet... I hope so. The last one was a beauty! From airius at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 13:47:50 2004 From: airius at yahoo.com (Wes Wagner) Date: Fri Aug 20 13:47:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! In-Reply-To: <20040820190318.8A380985A6@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> Is anyone alive out there? > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it > is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Aslml-aslml.net digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. ASLOK Products (Pitcavage, Mark) > 2. Re: ASLOK Products (Chas Argent) > 3. Re: ASLOK Products (donald holland) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From denis at teachlinux.com Fri Aug 20 13:57:21 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Fri Aug 20 13:57:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! In-Reply-To: <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I'm here, but I think everyone else has left the building.. Denis On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Wes Wagner wrote: > Is anyone alive out there? > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it > > is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Aslml-aslml.net digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. ASLOK Products (Pitcavage, Mark) > > 2. Re: ASLOK Products (Chas Argent) > > 3. Re: ASLOK Products (donald holland) > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Fri Aug 20 13:59:30 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Aug 20 13:59:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! In-Reply-To: <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040820190318.8A380985A6@che.dreamhost.com> <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040820155750.01b45df0@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:47 PM 8/20/2004, Wes Wagner wrote: >Is anyone alive out there? This is an auto response: No one but you, we machines want to know: What is your address, so we can correct that? From sambelcher at cablespeed.com Fri Aug 20 14:25:48 2004 From: sambelcher at cablespeed.com (Sam Belcher) Date: Fri Aug 20 14:25:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! In-Reply-To: <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Yep, barely On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Wes Wagner wrote: >Is anyone alive out there? > > >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it >> is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Aslml-aslml.net digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. ASLOK Products (Pitcavage, Mark) >> 2. Re: ASLOK Products (Chas Argent) >> 3. Re: ASLOK Products (donald holland) >> >> >> >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.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 Fri Aug 20 18:51:50 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Fri Aug 20 18:55:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! References: <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002a01c48721$bcfbb6e0$a64d8918@klis.com> Wes wrote the subject line: > Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! Our doctor recommended that we eat less. It's for our health. I suppose it's just one more sign of advancing age. > Is anyone alive out there? Not according to our doctor. David "a message from the AMA" Olie From bignoodle at earthlink.net Fri Aug 20 19:03:56 2004 From: bignoodle at earthlink.net (donald holland) Date: Fri Aug 20 19:03:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! Message-ID: <410-2200486212356265@earthlink.net> No content.... just padding the digest. Don "Big Filler" Holland bignoodle@earthlink.net Soon to be 2004 GROFAZ winner. From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sat Aug 21 02:07:36 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sat Aug 21 02:10:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper question Message-ID: <001301c4875e$7af049e0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, A successful sniper attack places the Sniper equidistant between two enemy occupied hexes. One hex is Open Ground; the other hex is a Bridge (counter) hex with units on the Bridge. Is a Bridge considered to have a 0 TEM for this purpose (so that I may choose which hex to attack), or are the units on the Bridge considered to be in +1 TEM? I'd say that for this purpose Bridge has a 0 TEM but would like to hear your opinion... Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From acann at pascack.k12.nj.us Fri Aug 20 07:27:41 2004 From: acann at pascack.k12.nj.us (Al Cann) Date: Sat Aug 21 03:46:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DC Heros Message-ID: Hi fellows! I'm having a little trouble with the language in Chapter G. Rather than getting into what is confusing, I will simplify my question. When a DC hero attacks an AFV, does he still have to conduct a DC position DR as per A23.5? Thanks for the help, Al Cann From aslwynn at rogers.com Sat Aug 21 03:57:34 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sat Aug 21 03:57:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! References: <20040820204750.50927.qmail@web41008.mail.yahoo.com> <002a01c48721$bcfbb6e0$a64d8918@klis.com> Message-ID: <001501c4876d$aa301780$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Perhaps people are actually PLAYING the game rather than talking about it. Wynn "Ever-Hopeful" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Olie" To: "Wes Wagner" Cc: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 9:51 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! > Wes wrote the subject line: > > > Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! > Our doctor recommended that we eat less. It's for our health. I suppose > it's just one more sign of advancing age. > > > Is anyone alive out there? > Not according to our doctor. > > David "a message from the AMA" Olie > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From philip at enter.net Sat Aug 21 04:36:25 2004 From: philip at enter.net (Phil Pomerantz) Date: Sat Aug 21 04:36:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper question References: <001301c4875e$7af049e0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: <001901c48773$18919780$7a98c1d8@Pinchas> Andrea The Lowest TEM applicable is applied (in the paragraph on alternate targets). I think the bridge would be considered to have a TEM of 0 for this Good to see life here as an aside who will be at ASLOK I will get there Monday afternoon Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrea" To: Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 5:07 AM Subject: [Aslml] Sniper question > Dear Listers, > A successful sniper attack places the Sniper equidistant between two enemy > occupied hexes. One hex is Open Ground; the other hex is a Bridge (counter) > hex with units on the Bridge. > Is a Bridge considered to have a 0 TEM for this purpose (so that I may > choose which hex to attack), or are the units on the Bridge considered to be > in +1 TEM? I'd say that for this purpose Bridge has a 0 TEM but would like > to hear your opinion... > > Andrea Fantozzi from Italy > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 philip at enter.net Sat Aug 21 04:37:26 2004 From: philip at enter.net (Phil Pomerantz) Date: Sat Aug 21 04:37:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DC Heros References: Message-ID: <002401c48773$3c29fcf0$7a98c1d8@Pinchas> Al I think so Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Cann" To: Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 10:27 AM Subject: [Aslml] DC Heros > Hi fellows! > > I'm having a little trouble with the language in Chapter G. Rather > than getting into what is confusing, I will simplify my question. > > When a DC hero attacks an AFV, does he still have to conduct a DC > position DR as per A23.5? > > Thanks for the help, > > Al Cann > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From s.deller at charter.net Sat Aug 21 06:28:20 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Sat Aug 21 06:28:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG DC Replenishment Message-ID: <000501c48782$ba337810$2083b018@DHT8S631> Gentlemen, O11.6134 states that a side may never retain more expended DC than it has "friendly, non-isolated Assault Engineer (only) squads." Does this mean that the DC allocated to the OB-given Strum Coy will not be retained (if expended) unless the German purchases a Pioneer Coy on the first day? Seems kind of odd that the Sturm Coy can't get its DC replenished since they are allocated two of them. Cheers, Sean Deller From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 09:24:16 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 21 06:41:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! References: <410-2200486212356265@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <41277730.34B4@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Don wrote: > No content.... just padding the digest. Part of it is that it is summer and people have stuff to do outside of ASL. Another thing perhaps is the lack of shiny new stuff to whine/praise over. The topic with the biggest drop in postings, IMO, is the tournament AAR. There is almost always one or two happening every month and only a smattering of posts regarding them. Dan tacks on this woof, > Soon to be 2004 GROFAZ winner. Don, Rich Summers said that in order to win something like the GROFAZ, one must have a certain amount of hate propelling them. He was recently divorced when he won his ASLOK crown. A bit drastic to some, but maybe not for others when placed beside the ASLOK laurel of victory. =Jim= From aslgrognerd at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 06:40:53 2004 From: aslgrognerd at yahoo.com (mark walz) Date: Sat Aug 21 06:41:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions Message-ID: <20040821134053.3359.qmail@web50008.mail.yahoo.com> Hi Listoids, Polish 437 hops on a wagon to retrieve a dm mmg. It is broken on a NMC on a 4 flat shot. .5 Did it even have to get on the wagon to grab the dm mmg? 1. Can it rout during the rout phase. If not, does it die for failure to rout if an enemey unit moves into an adjacent hex. 2. If it can not rout may the 7-0 which is not in the wagon but in the same hex attempt to assist it's rally in subsequent rally phases. 3. Does a wagon have an inherent crew so that in the next movement phase I can attempt moving the wagon away from the Hun Horde? Mark "Maybe I should go back to East Front II" Walz _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 09:39:16 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 21 06:41:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] CASLO TOURNAMENT REMINDER FOR 21 AUGUST 2004 Message-ID: <41277AB4.7562@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Only 27 more days until the CASLO begins! Here is a quickie reference of CASLO information: - WHEN?: Tournament Dates: Friday, 17 September to Sunday, 19 September, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. There will be 5 rounds of hack n' slash with the winner being the player with the highest point total. CASLO UPDATE INFORMATION: - WHERE?: Viscount Gort Hotel 1670 Portage Avenue. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Phone: 204.775.0451 Fax: 204.772.2161 Email: info@viscount-gort www.viscount-gort.com/main.htm - HOW MUCH?: Registration Fee 30.00 T-Shirt 20.00/25.00 for XXL Beer Mug 25.00 Coffee Mug 20.00 - WHO TO CONTACT?: Pre-registrants are asked to pre-register on/before 31 August 2004. Contact Jim McLeod, CASLO Tournament Director. - FOR MORE INFORMATION: Please visit the Canadian ASL Association website at, http://members.shaw.ca/casla/home.htm ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Please contact the 2004 CASLO Tournament Director. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 09:54:47 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 21 06:47:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG DC Replenishment References: <000501c48782$ba337810$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: <41277E57.5936@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Sean Deller wrote: > Gentlemen, Thats us mate, > Seems kind of odd that the Sturm Coy can't get its DC replenished since they are > allocated two of them. Bloody quartermasters! Next time that Ivan breaks through, I say that we put up a few signs directing them to the QM's office. The buggers will sure he** find those DC's then. Sean, if the UPS version of "BOOM" is lacking, how about some of the Air-Mailed variety? =Jim= From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 07:01:05 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Aug 21 07:01:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions Message-ID: > >Hi Listoids, > >Polish 437 hops on a wagon to retrieve a dm mmg. It >is broken on a NMC on a 4 flat shot. > >.5 Did it even have to get on the wagon to grab the >dm mmg? > No. Infantry in the same Location may Recover SW from a vehicle that is not in Motion. (A4.431) >1. Can it rout during the rout phase. If not, does >it die for failure to rout if an enemey unit moves >into an adjacent hex. > Broken Passengers may rout out of and be placed beneath the vehicle, but that ends its RtPh. (D6.1 and D5.311). A broken Passenger may remain in the vehicle, free from rout requirements, even if an enemy unit is ADJACENT. >2. If it can not rout may the 7-0 which is not in the >wagon but in the same hex attempt to assist it's rally >in subsequent rally phases. > Yes. (A10.7) >3. Does a wagon have an inherent crew so that in the >next movement phase I can attempt moving the wagon >away from the Hun Horde? > It does not have an Inherent Crew, but it would have an inherent driver. (D5.1) 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 Sat Aug 21 07:03:09 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sat Aug 21 07:03:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] DC Heros Message-ID: > > When a DC hero attacks an AFV, does he still have to conduct a DC >position DR as per A23.5? > Yes. G1.424: "The DC attack is otherwise resolved as if Placed", which would mean a Position DR. 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 BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Sat Aug 21 09:44:27 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Sat Aug 21 09:44:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! Message-ID: <1093106667.d669701cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> No. Not 'til I've had my caffeine. Brian Pickering -----Original Message----- From: Wes Wagner To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! Is anyone alive out there? > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it > is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Aslml-aslml.net digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. ASLOK Products (Pitcavage, Mark) > 2. Re: ASLOK Products (Chas Argent) > 3. Re: ASLOK Products (donald holland) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 Qitah at adelphia.net Sat Aug 21 11:56:51 2004 From: Qitah at adelphia.net (Ivan Lindstrom) Date: Sat Aug 21 11:56:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! In-Reply-To: <1093106667.d669701cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Message-ID: <006b01c487b0$a1d65a70$6401a8c0@IVANHOMEPC> Kenya AA? Ivan Lindstrom Qitah@adelphia.net -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Brian Pickering (ASL) Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 12:44 PM To: airius@yahoo.com Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! No. Not 'til I've had my caffeine. Brian Pickering -----Original Message----- From: Wes Wagner To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Smallest digest issue ever! Is anyone alive out there? > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it > is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Aslml-aslml.net digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. ASLOK Products (Pitcavage, Mark) > 2. Re: ASLOK Products (Chas Argent) > 3. Re: ASLOK Products (donald holland) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Aslml-aslml.net mailing list Aslml-aslml.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 sgtono at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 12:43:28 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Sat Aug 21 12:43:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WWF ASL Tourney Message-ID: <20040821194328.17109.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> The Berserk Commissars are pleased to host the 10th Annual Wild West Fest the last full weekend in August. Come join us for a weekend of Advanced Squad Leader fun. If you're interested in the format we've planned, click here. We've put together a collection of prizes, T-shirts, and trinkets so no one goes home empty handed. Along with the tournament sequence of scenarios there will be prizes awarded to the winner of the "Hero" and "Tank Rumble" games. For those of you down on your luck, the poor souls who come under the sniper's gunsights the most, and the fellow who "voluntarily" de-evolves his troops will get some special sympathy. Registration: Registration can be in advance or at the door. You can register in advance by sending a $20.00 (USD) check to: TBD You can also register at the door for a surprisingly low $25.00 (USD). Lodgings: The Berserk Commissars have arranged a special room rate and a group of rooms with the Shilo Inn. Shilo Inn 7300 S.W. Hazelfern Rd. Tigard, Or. 97223 503-639-2226 Reference WWF or War game convention Room rate if booked BEFORE the 20th. will be $59.00 per night two queen beds, breakfast of sorts (coffee, muffin, juice, some cereals), and the most fun you can have with your cloths on in a room full of guys! Dates the 27th-29th but we will have the room open for pregame fun starting the 26th. Transportation: Take I-5 to the Lake Oswego/Durham Exit 290. You can see their Inn sign from the freeway, it's on the west side. A map to the facility can be retrieved here. The Hotel is also easily accessable by TriMet bus lines 36, 38, 76, 96. All stop at Tualaty Park and Ride Directly across the street from the Shilo Inn. Food and stuff: The great thing about this venue is that it's close to all of the staples any self respecting ASL'r would ever need. You need grease, salt, sugar, or beer? Well it will be close by… Primary Berserk Commissar Contact: Keith Todd sgtono@yahoo.com http://w3.gorge.net/pro6man/wwf10info.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From neil at pegacat.com Sat Aug 21 14:21:06 2004 From: neil at pegacat.com (Neil Andrews) Date: Sat Aug 21 14:26:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Sam Belcher Where Are You Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040822071924.00aaf480@popa.melbpc.org.au> G'day The email subject says it all. Whats Sam's current email address Stay Safe Yours ============================ Neil Andrews Boronia, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia neil@pegacat.com ============================ From ogiancola at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 14:59:58 2004 From: ogiancola at hotmail.com (Oliver Giancola) Date: Sat Aug 21 15:00:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season Message-ID: I noticed this on page E27 today: "Players who wish to more accurately portray the individual attributes of specific aircraft types are encouraged to satisfy their whimsy with a bit of research and SSR of their own design. The existing rules framework allows for the easy insertion of varying armaments, such as Hans Rudel's special 37L cannon-equipped Stuka, or the various rocket/cannon armament of the Sturmovik, Hurricane, P-47, or Typhoon." Wisdom from the ages? Which of such SSRs have you seen that have worked, and haven't? Are plain FBs and DBs good enough, or getting boring? I'd also like to hear some war stories about the Riley's Road Typhoons (which, by the way, come with bombs, not rockets). Oliver _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Aug 21 17:59:50 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 21 17:59:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Sniper question In-Reply-To: <001301c4875e$7af049e0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> References: <001301c4875e$7af049e0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 11:07:36 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >A successful sniper attack places the Sniper equidistant between two enemy >occupied hexes. One hex is Open Ground; the other hex is a Bridge (counter) >hex with units on the Bridge. >Is a Bridge considered to have a 0 TEM for this purpose (so that I may >choose which hex to attack), or are the units on the Bridge considered to be >in +1 TEM? I'd say that for this purpose Bridge has a 0 TEM but would like >to hear your opinion... The specific wording of A14.21 is "Only the *lowest* (to a minimum of *zero*) in-hex TEM ... applicable to any eligible target currently occupying that hex, regardless of LOS, is considered in the comparison." Bridges have a +1 TEM vs. Direct Fire, except when the LOS is drawn directly along the connecting road depiction/hexsides (B6.31), when it's treated as Open Ground (i.e., 0 TEM). Vs. Indirect Fire, they *always* have a +1 TEM (B6.32). The important question here is what exactly is meant by "regardless of LOS" in A14.21. Does it mean "use whatever LOS you like to get you the lowest TEM"? Or does it mean "ignore LOS-dependant TEM"? I suspect that the first meaning is the intended one, which means that the bridge would be considered 0 TEM. It's not as clear as I would personally like, however. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sat Aug 21 18:16:15 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 21 18:16:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:59:58 -0400, "Oliver Giancola" wrote: >I noticed this on page E27 today: > >"Players who wish to more accurately portray the individual attributes of >specific aircraft types are encouraged to satisfy their whimsy with a bit of >research and SSR of their own design. The existing rules framework allows >for the easy insertion of varying armaments, such as Hans Rudel's special >37L cannon-equipped Stuka, or the various rocket/cannon armament of the >Sturmovik, Hurricane, P-47, or Typhoon." > >Wisdom from the ages? > >Which of such SSRs have you seen that have worked, and haven't? Are plain >FBs and DBs good enough, or getting boring? The only "variant" aircraft that I've ever used were the rocket-armed typhoons in HOB's "King Of the Hill". My feeling was that I'd rather have had plain ol' bombs; the rockets were useless. Low FP, hard to hit a target with them, and you couldn't fire your MG in the same attack run that you fired Rockets. All in all, personally I'm satisfied with the rulebook's "generic" approach to FB and I don't see a burning need for variantism here. If I want to play a game depicting the varied effects of different aircraft types and armaments on ground targets there are plenty to choose from. In the vast majority of ASL scenarios the actual aircraft types involved, and their specific armaments, were probably a complete mystery to the men on the ground. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sat Aug 21 18:45:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 21 18:45:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions In-Reply-To: <20040821134053.3359.qmail@web50008.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040821134053.3359.qmail@web50008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <89tfi0dprvip91ljsh6mp2ujs6cil3bmu6@4ax.com> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:40:53 -0700 (PDT), mark walz wrote: >Polish 437 hops on a wagon to retrieve a dm mmg. It >is broken on a NMC on a 4 flat shot. > >.5 Did it even have to get on the wagon to grab the >dm mmg? Yes. D6.5 (after errata) prohibits Recovery of SW by non-Passengers. (Even though the wording of A4.431 seems to permit it if the vehicle is not in Motion.) >1. Can it rout during the rout phase. If not, does >it die for failure to rout if an enemey unit moves >into an adjacent hex. Yes, it may rout off the vehicle (beneath it in the same Location) as its sole action in the RtPh. (D6.1, which refers back to D5.311.) It will not die for FTR if it stays in the vehicle (D6.1). >2. If it can not rout may the 7-0 which is not in the >wagon but in the same hex attempt to assist it's rally >in subsequent rally phases. Yes, but again the wagon must be stationary. D6.651. >3. Does a wagon have an inherent crew so that in the >next movement phase I can attempt moving the wagon >away from the Hun Horde? No inherent crew (wagons are unarmed), but there is an Inherent Driver -- D5.1. So yes the wagon can run away. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sat Aug 21 18:45:46 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 21 18:45:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4eufi011ft21ns826ko3q4lsd9fgu9np9a@4ax.com> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:01:05 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >No. Infantry in the same Location may Recover SW from a vehicle that is not >in Motion. (A4.431) Sadly this is not true Bruce. While the A4.431 wording certainly *implies* this, it is specifically prohibited by D6.5, last sentence (after errata has been applied): "SW carried by a vehicle's Passenger PP capacity can be unloaded/Recovered only by Passengers of the same vehicle." ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sat Aug 21 18:53:42 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat Aug 21 18:53:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] RB CG DC Replenishment In-Reply-To: <000501c48782$ba337810$2083b018@DHT8S631> References: <000501c48782$ba337810$2083b018@DHT8S631> Message-ID: On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:28:20 -0400, "Sean Deller" wrote: >O11.6134 states that a side may never retain more expended DC than it has >"friendly, non-isolated Assault Engineer (only) squads." Does this mean >that the DC allocated to the OB-given Strum Coy will not be retained (if >expended) unless the German purchases a Pioneer Coy on the first day? Correct. >Seems kind of odd that the Sturm Coy can't get its DC replenished since they are >allocated two of them. Only *real* Assault Engineers get the "use one, get 1 free" deal. Sort of like the difference between handing in a roll of film to be developed at a pharmacy and, er ... well doubtful analogies aside, the Sturm Co. don't get free replacements if there are no Assault Engineers around. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it. You need the FP/breaching ability. You can cry about how hard life is as a Sturm Co. *after* you've taken the factory. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 22:50:58 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 21 19:51:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season References: Message-ID: <41283442.6791@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bruce Probst wrote: > The only "variant" aircraft that I've ever used were the rocket-armed typhoons > in HOB's "King Of the Hill". My feeling was that I'd rather have had plain > ol' bombs; the rockets were useless. Low FP, hard to hit a target with them, > and you couldn't fire your MG in the same attack run that you fired Rockets. I'm no expert on FB rocket attacks but, was not the the effectivness of FB rockets versus attacks somewhat exaggerated? =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 23:14:29 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 21 20:06:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Keith Todd Message-ID: <412839C5.2150@mb.sympatico.ca> Paging Keith Todd, RSVP. =Jim= From thunderchief at ozemail.com.au Sun Aug 22 00:15:40 2004 From: thunderchief at ozemail.com.au (Adam Lunney) Date: Sun Aug 22 00:15:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season References: Message-ID: <007801c48817$d6d19020$eb3354d2@pavilion> Bruce + Oliver wrote: >I noticed this on page E27 today: >"Players who wish to more accurately portray the individual attributes of >specific aircraft types are encouraged to satisfy their whimsy with a bit of >research and SSR of their own design. The existing rules framework allows >for the easy insertion of varying armaments, such as Hans Rudel's special >37L cannon-equipped Stuka, or the various rocket/cannon armament of the >Sturmovik, Hurricane, P-47, or Typhoon." > >Wisdom from the ages? > >Which of such SSRs have you seen that have worked, and haven't? Are plain >FBs and DBs good enough, or getting boring? The only "variant" aircraft that I've ever used were the rocket-armed typhoons in HOB's "King Of the Hill". My feeling was that I'd rather have had plain ol' bombs; the rockets were useless. Low FP, hard to hit a target with them, and you couldn't fire your MG in the same attack run that you fired Rockets. All in all, personally I'm satisfied with the rulebook's "generic" approach to FB and I don't see a burning need for variantism here. If I want to play a game depicting the varied effects of different aircraft types and armaments on ground targets there are plenty to choose from. In the vast majority of ASL scenarios the actual aircraft types involved, and their specific armaments, were probably a complete mystery to the men on the ground. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au In a book I read recently "Fields of Fire" by Copp, relating to the Canadians in Normandy, he pretty much describes Typhoons and their rockets as you have above. Hard to hit a target etc, especially in the ASL sense and the rolling hills of Normandy, where a significant height for the guys on the ground was almost unable to be distinguished from the air. To me, the wonderful effectiveness of the Typhoons MAY be something akin to every member of the PBI being shot at with an 88 or being attacked by a Tiger tank. Typhoons may have been good vs trains and convoys, but that's not much of an ASL scenario is it? Or do people play Jabo quite a bit ? :-) Adam. From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sat Aug 21 17:10:48 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 22 02:54:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cave LOS question Message-ID: <004101c4882d$de8cece0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, I have one doubt on LOS from a Cave... ____ / \ / L0* \ \ / \____/ / \ / L0 \ \ / \____/ / \ / L1 \ \ / \____/ / \ / L2 \ \ / \____/ Here is the situation: Cave counter is placed in a hill hex that is at Level 2 (L2 in the diagram). The Entrance Hex is another hill hex that is at level 1 (L1 in the diagram). The Entrance Hex contains some Brush. The Cave Level is therefore Level 1 (i.e. the level of the Entrance Hex; G11.112). I whish to fire against a unit at Level 0 (L0* in the diagram; there is also another level 0 hex in between that is L0 without the asterisk). Applying G11.5 (LOS), even if the Cave is at Level 1, I have LOS to L0* because "LOS may be traced... to an elevation lower than the cave's if its Entrance Hex contanins no terrain ... whose obstacle height along that LOS is > that cave's level. Since Cave is at Level 1 and the Entrance Hex is at Level 1 I can see L0*. The Question is, does the +1 Hindrance for the Brush in the Entrance Hex apply to such fire? I'd say yes because the height of the Brush is 1.5 that is greater than the Cave's Level. If hex L1 contained, for example, a Rubble counter LOS would be blocked to L0*. Do you agree? Thank you Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 22 02:51:26 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 22 02:54:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Spigot Mortar Question Message-ID: <004601c4882d$e8771280$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Dear Listers, I am currently playing a scenario from KR and have one doubt about Sprigot Mortar Caves... Spigot Mortar Crew declares opportunity fire in its PFPh so as to be able to fire the MTR in the AFPh. The Entrance Hex of the Mortar Cave (but not the cave's hex; not that this matters anyway) is within the blast area of a FFE:C counter. Is the Mortar Crew immediately attacked by the FFE:C? Normally a FFE:C would attack any unit moving/routing and the Crew is using Haz Movement as per KR 5.2. However, the Crew is not really moving (no unit may even ever move in its PFPh) and this is enforced by the fact that no other unit may fire at the Crew when it declares Opportunity Fire and no unit could even be able to attack it in the MPh as First Fire. So, in the end, I'd say that the Crew is not attacked by the FFE:C. What the other players think? Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Sun Aug 22 03:16:21 2004 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz Martinez) Date: Sun Aug 22 03:16:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Beyond Valor box Message-ID: <20040822101621.28471.qmail@r-y-r.com> Hello listers. I?m looking for the Beyond Valor box. If it disturbs you, don?t throw away, send it to me! Are you interested in trade it with me? Contact with me at jdargaiz@yahoo.es Jesus From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Sun Aug 22 03:35:19 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Sun Aug 22 03:35:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Robert Hammond In-Reply-To: <20040822101621.28471.qmail@r-y-r.com> References: <20040822101621.28471.qmail@r-y-r.com> Message-ID: <412876E7.50704@mbj.nifty.com> Robert, Please send me the files again if you can. I lost a ton of emails due to switching outlook -> mozilla and unfortunately yours was one of them. I saw you sent me something when I was looking through a text mail file in my home directory. Will From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 04:50:05 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Aug 22 04:50:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions Message-ID: > > >No. Infantry in the same Location may Recover SW from a vehicle that is >not > >in Motion. (A4.431) > >Sadly this is not true Bruce. > Oh, don't be sad. It will be all right. > >While the A4.431 wording certainly *implies* >this, it is specifically prohibited by D6.5, last sentence (after errata >has >been applied): "SW carried by a vehicle's Passenger PP capacity can be >unloaded/Recovered only by Passengers of the same vehicle." > I didn't find the errata when I replied; I have subsequently tracked it down in J4. (Of course, I had to see if it was Official Errata, or "Perry Sez" Errata. You know, to see whether it could be disregarded... ) Needless to say, I have not updated my ASLRB with errata yet... IMO, the errata should also be included in A4.431, since A4.431 more than merely implies it is possible. Oh well. The moral of the story: keep digging, digging, and digging and eventually you *may* find the correct answer... 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 Sun Aug 22 05:30:18 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 05:30:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5p3hi0ln87ua013amomsd5h5d6dap19738@4ax.com> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:50:05 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >IMO, the errata should also be included in A4.431, since A4.431 more than >merely implies it is possible. Oh? Who was it who recently said: "We do not use the absence of a negation to conclude that something is allowed. We determine what is allowed and what is applied by what is specifically mentioned as a rule, and then note any exceptions for that rule." Don't get me wrong; I agree that at the very least there should be a reference to D6.5 in A4.431. But you would be mistaken if you think A4.431 has *anything* to say about recovering SW from a vehicle *not* in Motion. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 22 05:36:13 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 05:36:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: <41283442.6791@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <41283442.6791@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <8h4hi0hvuv0ukuvj06u1960sr7tkhihbgi@4ax.com> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:50:58 -0700, Jim McLeod wrote: >I'm no expert on FB rocket attacks but, was not the the effectivness of >FB rockets versus attacks somewhat exaggerated? I've heard that said; I don't know whether it's true or not, but if we take it as being true on face value, does it therefore follow that we should have an ASL situation where the German player doesn't take the Typhoons seriously because he knows that the likelihood of them scoring a kill is low? In reality such air attacks caused the Germans to scatter and hide -- *they* didn't know what the actual likelihood of being killed was! A strafing attack *should* be a scary thing. I don't mind if the game exaggerates their effectiveness in order to put the players in the right frame of mind. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 specialk9 at earthlink.net Sun Aug 22 05:46:40 2004 From: specialk9 at earthlink.net (Kevin Seime) Date: Sun Aug 22 05:47:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: <5066C76F-F439-11D8-AF05-000A95EC2FB6@earthlink.net> Just seeing if I'm getting through. Kevin From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 22 05:50:56 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 05:51:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Cave LOS question In-Reply-To: <004101c4882d$de8cece0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> References: <004101c4882d$de8cece0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:10:48 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >The Question is, does the +1 Hindrance for the Brush in the Entrance Hex >apply to such fire? I'd say yes because the height of the Brush is 1.5 that >is greater than the Cave's Level. If hex L1 contained, for example, a Rubble >counter LOS would be blocked to L0*. >Do you agree? No. Brush is a hindrance only if the LOS is traced along the same elevation (B12.2), or along a continuous slope (B.5) -- neither of which applies here. (Brush is NOT a "half-level hindrance" -- it has no "height" at all, really. But even if it were, it wouldn't matter -- it's still only a hindrance for same-level LOS or continuous slope.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "He's going to use that Guinea Pig as a guinea pig!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 22 06:09:19 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 06:09:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Spigot Mortar Question In-Reply-To: <004601c4882d$e8771280$0e0b0a3e@andrea> References: <004601c4882d$e8771280$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:51:26 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >Spigot Mortar Crew declares opportunity fire in its PFPh so as to be able to >fire the MTR in the AFPh. The Entrance Hex of the Mortar Cave (but not the >cave's hex; not that this matters anyway) is within the blast area of a >FFE:C counter. >Is the Mortar Crew immediately attacked by the FFE:C? Z KR5.2 says: "... attacks vs. such units [i.e., Mortar Cave occupants using Opportunity Fire] may target either Location [i.e., cave or entrance hex], both of which *must* be in play." I'd have to agree that an immediate OBA attack is required, because C1.34 says "A FFE:C ... is resolved only vs each unit that enters or becomes more vulnerable in a hex of its Blast Area." The placement of the Opportunity Fire counter, which invokes Hazardous Movement for the Mortar crew, is making the crew "more vulnerable", and there's no reason to assume this effect doesn't take place immediately. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 geb3 at inter.net Sun Aug 22 06:23:05 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Aug 22 06:20:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Mr. Bad Example Message-ID: Jeez, not only have I been playing bad ASL lately, I'm also finding I've been playing outlaw ASL in some respects. Sometimes my esteemed opponents have been making or missing these infractions, too. C'mon now, raise your hands and 'fess up if you got some of these rules wrong yourselves. Please share stories if you're feeling sheepish about other errors, too. 1) Only infantry and guns may opportunity fire. Vehicles may not per D3.3. 2) A leader may not attempt to deploy more than 1 squad per RPh (A1.31). Admit it lawbreaker, you too have failed to deploy on the first DR and then rolled for another squad in the same stack, haven't you? 3) Crossing a bridge on a road hex? Well, you have to enter the next road hex (B6.4). You may not enter other adjacent hexes to the left or right even if there is no barrier to crossing the hexside (apparently, the Romulans have installed force fields on all bridges). Don't believe me? Go ahead and look 'em up. While you're doing that, just make sure you also remember to screw that bolt on tightly so your company doesn't get sued, and don't forget to grunt something nice to your wife so you won't have to sleep on the sofa, either. George "slipped and fell down the learning curve" 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 geb3 at inter.net Sun Aug 22 06:31:26 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Aug 22 06:28:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 3-player scenario ideas Message-ID: Recently we've been having trouble getting a quorum on Sundays here in Yokohama, so I've scoured my scenario binders for good, clean menage a'trois fun. Here are some highlights. Anybody want to add to this list? 33 The Cossacks Are Coming (Croats & White Russians vs. Yugo Partisans) 95 (formerly A3) Descent into Hell (2 Ger glider teams vs. GBr) B The Tractor Works -or- C The Streets of Stalingrad (OK for 4, too, just roll for partners/sides then divide 'em up any old way) A74 Valhalla Bound (2 Soviet waves vs. SS) A86 Fighting Sparrow (Aussies & Dutch East Indies vs. IJA) AP1 The Ring (var Soviet battlegroups vs. Ger) G1 Timoshenko's Attack (3 Soviet thrusts vs. Ger, so 4 OK, too) G8 Recon in Force (Rangers swoop down on Nazis & Fascisti) G33 The Awakening of Spring (black SS & blue SS vs. Soviet, just finished playing with "Mad Kiwi" Rutledge & Comrade Chairman Chang, AAR soon) G46 Triumph Atop Taraldsvikfjell (Fr Foreign Legion & Norway vs. Ger) J29 The Capture of Balta (Ger & Rum vs. Soviet, but better give the StuG to the Rum player to be fair) J31 Lovat First Sight (GBr Airborne & Glider troops waiting for Commandos vs Ger at Pegasus Br) J36 Bridge of Verdalsora (GBr & Nor vs. Ger) J45 The Last Roadblock (More Froggies & Vikings vs. Nazis) J79 Rommel's Remedy (Jerry & his Eytie dogs vs Tommy) J83 Bloody Nose (Jerry & his Rumanian dogs vs Ivan) U2 Sweep for Bordj Toum Bridge (US Rifle & Engineers vs. Ger) U4 Climax at Nijmegen Bridge (Airborne & Irish Guards double-date SS & garrison troops, so OK for 4) U8 Weissenhof Crossroads (2 Ger columns vs. Joe) George "third wheel" 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 Sun Aug 22 06:31:27 2004 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Sun Aug 22 06:28:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Plastic models for DASL Message-ID: Several people inquired about these toys after my post about the PzKw III Ausf. G/H. Here are 3 sites you can visit to get a look. Pictures of Doyusha's 1:144 "Microarmor" models can be found by clicking the items on this page: http://www.doyusha-model.com/seihinmeisai-afv.htm. The items are in Japanese but once you click on them you'll recognize what they are. The other major producer is Takara. Their "World Tank Museum" (same scale) line can be found here, and the page is much more detailed and understandable: http://www.dct-net.co.jp/ktsite/wtm/index.html. Click on the Series 5 models first; the multimedia files for the others are a little buggy but they work fine once any of the Series 5 pieces are played. Note that they seem to have a real thing for the Porsche hull prototype model Tigers. Go figure. The alliterative Popy "Projeckt Panzer 00" series website has also just opened: http://www.popy-bg.co.jp/popynews/pp00_news.html. The Tiger I was in my first "mystery" box, and I'm kind of bummed because I really wanted a Wespe or an M3. Also, their Mk III apparently comes boxed with a 37mm PaK. Kewl. Still, when I compare this with my Doyusha version of the Tiger, there are some interesting differences (good & bad) in their detailing. The most notable is that the reverse traverse gun barrel rest is depicted as stowed on the rear end of the Doyusha model, while Popy has it mounted at the rear edge of the deck just aft of the starboard radiator grate. The Popy turret gunshield swivels up and down and the individual viewports on the commander's cupola are clearly depicted, but overall I think Doyusha did a better job. More prototype fun: My Popy Tiger also came with an alternate Henschel turret that has a somewhat sloped, hexagonal shape and mounts a very long-barreled 75mm gun and a rear MG (?). Vaguely similar to a Panther, but still a ways off. Anybody see photos of a model like this? I dunno if it's a Japanese fascination with "what if" situations, but I'm not really attracted to these non-production models. Another interesting thing about these models is that they can give you some idea of the relative size of the AFVs. It's easy to see why the KVs scared the bejeesus out of Mk III crews, and it's also clear that the PzKw V is a more massive (albeit somewhat lower & narrower) tank than the PzKw VIE. Put any of them next to a human figure, jeep or Kubelwagen and you can really understand that even the smallest of these monsters weren't really very small, and also why you have to pay a penalty to move yours through a road hex occupied by another one. These things sell for around 500 yen for a "mystery" box that contains one of the 5 or 6 models/color schemes in the series. If you want an already opened box so you can choose the one you want, usually stores charge double to let you do that. Older series are also more expensive as they become collector's items. If you can't find these in your own country but you're interested in acquiring some, let me know and I'll make a list of what's available in my local hobby store for you. Shipping should not be a very large expense since these things are so light. Air mail will probably cost the same as sea mail. George "used to be a male model" 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 philippe-vaillant at wanadoo.fr Sun Aug 22 06:38:27 2004 From: philippe-vaillant at wanadoo.fr (Philippe) Date: Sun Aug 22 06:38:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 3-player scenario ideas References: Message-ID: <001301c4884d$4f8370d0$0200a8c0@philou> Well, your list contains scenarios involving 3 countries but always 2 sides. TOT45 "Dog of war" is a real 3 players experience since each of them have different goals and that it introduces an original and specificical sequence of play. This scenario is FUN. BTW, does any other TOT45like exist ? Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Bates" To: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 3:31 PM Subject: [Aslml] 3-player scenario ideas > Recently we've been having trouble getting a quorum on Sundays here in > Yokohama, so I've scoured my scenario binders for good, clean menage a'trois > fun. Here are some highlights. Anybody want to add to this list? > > 33 The Cossacks Are Coming (Croats & White Russians vs. Yugo Partisans) > 95 (formerly A3) Descent into Hell (2 Ger glider teams vs. GBr) > B The Tractor Works -or- C The Streets of Stalingrad (OK for 4, too, just > roll for partners/sides then divide 'em up any old way) > A74 Valhalla Bound (2 Soviet waves vs. SS) > A86 Fighting Sparrow (Aussies & Dutch East Indies vs. IJA) > AP1 The Ring (var Soviet battlegroups vs. Ger) > G1 Timoshenko's Attack (3 Soviet thrusts vs. Ger, so 4 OK, too) > G8 Recon in Force (Rangers swoop down on Nazis & Fascisti) > G33 The Awakening of Spring (black SS & blue SS vs. Soviet, just finished > playing with "Mad Kiwi" Rutledge & Comrade Chairman Chang, AAR soon) > G46 Triumph Atop Taraldsvikfjell (Fr Foreign Legion & Norway vs. Ger) > J29 The Capture of Balta (Ger & Rum vs. Soviet, but better give the StuG to > the Rum player to be fair) > J31 Lovat First Sight (GBr Airborne & Glider troops waiting for Commandos vs > Ger at Pegasus Br) > J36 Bridge of Verdalsora (GBr & Nor vs. Ger) > J45 The Last Roadblock (More Froggies & Vikings vs. Nazis) > J79 Rommel's Remedy (Jerry & his Eytie dogs vs Tommy) > J83 Bloody Nose (Jerry & his Rumanian dogs vs Ivan) > U2 Sweep for Bordj Toum Bridge (US Rifle & Engineers vs. Ger) > U4 Climax at Nijmegen Bridge (Airborne & Irish Guards double-date SS & > garrison troops, so OK for 4) > U8 Weissenhof Crossroads (2 Ger columns vs. Joe) > > George "third wheel" 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 06:53:01 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Aug 22 06:53:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions Message-ID: > >Oh? Who was it who recently said: > >"We do not use the absence of a negation to conclude that something is >allowed. We determine what is allowed and what is applied by what is >specifically mentioned as a rule, and then note any exceptions for that >rule." > Nice quote. > >Don't get me wrong; I agree that at the very least there should be a >reference >to D6.5 in A4.431. But you would be mistaken if you think A4.431 has >*anything* to say about recovering SW from a vehicle *not* in Motion. > I was mistaken. I read it rather hurriedly, and applied my conclusions incorrectly. I still stand by the quote. 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 jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 22 09:50:06 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 22 13:17:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season References: <41283442.6791@mb.sympatico.ca> <8h4hi0hvuv0ukuvj06u1960sr7tkhihbgi@4ax.com> Message-ID: <4128CEBE.5918@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; I wrote, > >I'm no expert on FB rocket attacks but, was not the the effectivness of > >FB rockets versus attacks somewhat exaggerated? Bruce replied: > I've heard that said; I don't know whether it's true or not, but if we take it > as being true on face value, does it therefore follow that we should have an > ASL situation where the German player doesn't take the Typhoons seriously > because he knows that the likelihood of them scoring a kill is low? In > reality such air attacks caused the Germans to scatter and hide -- *they* > didn't know what the actual likelihood of being killed was! That is correct, the fear factor was in play. I never have been a huge fan of how tactical air support works in ASL. If one wishes to include the effects of such a thing in ASL, take up the story post-attack, ie: start the scenario with a few blazing wrecks scattered about. > A strafing attack *should* be a scary thing. I don't mind if the game > exaggerates their effectiveness in order to put the players in the right frame > of mind. Fair enough. =Jim= From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Sun Aug 22 13:37:14 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Sun Aug 22 13:37:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TAC1 Rules Lawyer Question Message-ID: <412903FA.90308@mbj.nifty.com> This question is for the translated scenario tactiques #1 "Dropping Off at Maleme?". Since SSR's always take precedence over the rules, shouldn't SSR #5 read: "The German SAN starts the game at 3 and then is increased by 1 at the start of game turn 3." I am not sure what to do if the German SAN is reduced to < 2 before game turn 3. Would you replace the counter and give the Germans a SAN of 2 on turn 3 and replace the counter? Will From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 22 03:11:11 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 22 13:39:02 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Sniper question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005f01c48887$e3c22310$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Hi Bruce, thank you for your reply. I've come to the same conclusion: 0 TEM for the bridge in this case. In my scenario this was pretty important; the difference was between an eliminated 8-1 Leader and a Broken HS. So it seems that in the end the Leader is eliminated... However, I do agree also that the rule is not crystal clear... Andrea > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Inviato: domenica 22 agosto 2004 3.00 > A: afantozzi@tiscali.it > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] Sniper question > > > On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 11:07:36 +0200, "Andrea" > wrote: > > >A successful sniper attack places the Sniper equidistant > between two enemy > >occupied hexes. One hex is Open Ground; the other hex is a > Bridge (counter) > >hex with units on the Bridge. > >Is a Bridge considered to have a 0 TEM for this purpose (so > that I may > >choose which hex to attack), or are the units on the Bridge > considered to be > >in +1 TEM? I'd say that for this purpose Bridge has a 0 TEM > but would like > >to hear your opinion... > > The specific wording of A14.21 is "Only the *lowest* (to a > minimum of *zero*) > in-hex TEM ... applicable to any eligible target currently > occupying that hex, > regardless of LOS, is considered in the comparison." > > Bridges have a +1 TEM vs. Direct Fire, except when the LOS is > drawn directly > along the connecting road depiction/hexsides (B6.31), when > it's treated as > Open Ground (i.e., 0 TEM). Vs. Indirect Fire, they *always* > have a +1 TEM > (B6.32). > > The important question here is what exactly is meant by > "regardless of LOS" in > A14.21. Does it mean "use whatever LOS you like to get you > the lowest TEM"? > Or does it mean "ignore LOS-dependant TEM"? > > I suspect that the first meaning is the intended one, which > means that the > bridge would be considered 0 TEM. It's not as clear as I > would personally > like, however. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Sun Aug 22 03:25:36 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Sun Aug 22 13:39:11 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions In-Reply-To: <89tfi0dprvip91ljsh6mp2ujs6cil3bmu6@4ax.com> Message-ID: <006001c48887$e70f2b30$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Hello all. Mark asks... > > >Polish 437 hops on a wagon to retrieve a dm mmg. It > >is broken on a NMC on a 4 flat shot. > > > >.5 Did it even have to get on the wagon to grab the > >dm mmg? > Bruce replies... > Yes. D6.5 (after errata) prohibits Recovery of SW by > non-Passengers. (Even > though the wording of A4.431 seems to permit it if the > vehicle is not in > Motion.) There is also a "Perry Sez" on this subject (I think this is the Errata that Bruce quotes): QUESTION --- D6.5: In your article "Keep On Truckin'", Journal #3, p. 63, bottom of first column, you say "To unload [an unpossessed SW on a truck] one must first be a Passenger (D6.5) in possession of it." Assuming the truck is not in Motion, why can't you just use A4.431 and have an Infantry unit in the same Location just Recover the SW? The Infantry, the truck and the SW are in the same Location, A4.431 allows Recovery of unpossessed SW in the same Location, and the only restriction is on SW on Motion vehicles. You are not unloading the SW, you are Recovering the SW. ANSWER --- Recovery by Infantry of a Passenger SW is NA. Add "/Recovered" in the last sentence of D6.5 after "unloaded" --- However, I do not agree that the squad remains broken on the Wagon. Since the squad is broken on the MF expenditure for gettin aboard, it remains broken in the hex but not on the Wagon. D6.4 says to "see 5.43 for attacks vs (un)loading Passengers"; if you look at the D5.43 example it says: "An Infantry unit attempting to enter and Inherentrly crew (or attempting to load on to any form of transport as a Passenger/Rider) does not succeed - and also fails to hook up a Gun if it were attempting to do so - if, due to defensive fire prompted by that MF/MP expenditure , it is pinned, eliminated or loses Good Order Status (or the vehicle is destroyed). Andrea Fantozzi from Italy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From william.stoppel at verizon.net Sun Aug 22 16:56:11 2004 From: william.stoppel at verizon.net (william.stoppel) Date: Sun Aug 22 13:53:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle In-Reply-To: <412903FA.90308@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: Playing a play test scenario and came up with an interesting question. In this scenario the Germans have 6 tanks. 4 are occupied and 2 are dummies that can neither move, shoot or be occupied by either side. Prior to knowing which were dummies I moved 2 squads in too CC one of the dummy tanks. I failed to kill them and since they did not shoot back I know it is a dummy tank. Question is am I held in melee? I say no, since I know it is a dummy tank (incidentally he subsequently moved a fourth tank so I know 100% it is a dummy). My opponent thinks they should be held in melee. I don't believe an unoccupied vehicle can hold me in melee. Thanks, Bill From sidirezegh at charter.net Sun Aug 22 14:04:08 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Sun Aug 22 14:04:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41290A48.6000800@charter.net> Bill- Only an non-Abandoned, "unbroken" [A12.1] vehicle can hold infantry in Melee; since there is no inherent crew, the vehicle is considered "broken", so there can be no Melee. Regards, Chas william.stoppel wrote: >Playing a play test scenario and came up with an interesting question. In >this scenario the Germans have 6 tanks. 4 are occupied and 2 are dummies >that can neither move, shoot or be occupied by either side. Prior to >knowing which were dummies I moved 2 squads in too CC one of the dummy >tanks. I failed to kill them and since they did not shoot back I know it is >a dummy tank. Question is am I held in melee? I say no, since I know it is >a dummy tank (incidentally he subsequently moved a fourth tank so I know >100% it is a dummy). My opponent thinks they should be held in melee. I >don't believe an unoccupied vehicle can hold me in melee. > >Thanks, > >Bill > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.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 Sun Aug 22 14:43:00 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sun Aug 22 14:42:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Bridge question Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040822163857.01b4ef80@pop3.direcway.com> Listzoids, Using the example in bridge section on page B5, ASLRBv2: Assume bridge is a two hex bridge, now extending into DD5 Assume German target is now in EE5 The LOS now crosses two bridge hexes of the same bridge, is the hindrance +2 or +1? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From damavs at alltel.net Sun Aug 22 14:45:28 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Sun Aug 22 14:45:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle In-Reply-To: References: <412903FA.90308@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040822173851.01c3cd48@mail.alltel.net> william.stoppel wrote: >Playing a play test scenario and came up with an interesting question. In >this scenario the Germans have 6 tanks. 4 are occupied and 2 are dummies >that can neither move, shoot or be occupied by either side. Does the SSR say they are "treated as real tanks for all other purposes"? Or something to that effect. It seems to me the SSR needs to be very clear when making up rules like this. > Prior to >knowing which were dummies I moved 2 squads in too CC one of the dummy >tanks. I failed to kill them and since they did not shoot back I know it is >a dummy tank. Question is am I held in melee? Mostly depends on the SSR. A by the rulebook "dummy" tank would have disappeared prior to ambush, since it's a dummy. These sound like they're supposed to be special "fake" tanks [as an aside, I'd suggest not using terms that have ASL definitions in SSRs for newly made up things] for which the answer is really it depends on the SSR. If the SSR just says they're dummies, then I'd say no melee (and argue they're gone). If the SSR says like a real tank, I'd say you're stuck. > I say no, since I know it is >a dummy tank (incidentally he subsequently moved a fourth tank so I know >100% it is a dummy). My opponent thinks they should be held in melee. I >don't believe an unoccupied vehicle can hold me in melee. Doesn't even sound like it's a real vehicle - but you're correct if it's modelled as an unoccupied vehicle, it can't hold you in melee. As part of the play test report, I'd suggest tightening up the SSR on the "fake" tanks & add provisions for CC/Melee. Do at least remember that a "fake" tank should be considered immobile (-2) and w/no manned MGs (-1) for a net -3 on the CC roll. Not sure my response helped, but if you can post the SSR defining the tanks, perhaps we can give a better answer. Regardless the SSR needs cleaned up if you didn't understand how to treat them in this case... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net From hobbies at revealed.net Sun Aug 22 15:23:19 2004 From: hobbies at revealed.net (Alex Key) Date: Sun Aug 22 15:13:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41291CD7.7070808@revealed.net> Bill, You're correct. The second sentence of A11.15 states, "Infantry are also held in Melee by enemy Cavalry, cyclists, and non-Abandoned, Stopped, "unbroken" (12.1) vehicles." The last sentence of A12.1 says in part, "A vehicle that has neither an inherent crew, nor Passenger(s), nor Rider(s), is considered "broken"...." Therefore Melee can't exist solely with a "broken" vehicle. Too bad I didn't know the rules for gaining control like these! ~8>) Charge On! Alex william.stoppel wrote: >Playing a play test scenario and came up with an interesting question. In >this scenario the Germans have 6 tanks. 4 are occupied and 2 are dummies >that can neither move, shoot or be occupied by either side. Prior to >knowing which were dummies I moved 2 squads in too CC one of the dummy >tanks. I failed to kill them and since they did not shoot back I know it is >a dummy tank. Question is am I held in melee? I say no, since I know it is >a dummy tank (incidentally he subsequently moved a fourth tank so I know >100% it is a dummy). My opponent thinks they should be held in melee. I >don't believe an unoccupied vehicle can hold me in melee. > >Thanks, > >Bill > > >_______________________________________________ >Aslml-aslml.net mailing list >Aslml-aslml.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 Sun Aug 22 15:55:11 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Sun Aug 22 15:55:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle Message-ID: > >william.stoppel wrote: >>Playing a play test scenario and came up with an interesting question. In >>this scenario the Germans have 6 tanks. 4 are occupied and 2 are dummies >>that can neither move, shoot or be occupied by either side. > >Does the SSR say they are "treated as real tanks for all other purposes"? >Or something to that effect. It seems to me the SSR needs to be very >clear when making up rules like this. > I agree. The use of the word "dummy" is a poor choice for the SSR. It seems to me that what we are dealing with (and what the SSR is *trying* to accommodate) are 6 tanks, 2 of which are actually abandoned. I.e., 6 "real" tanks, but only 4 of which are actually functional, and two of which are just sitting there. If that is the case, and what the SSR is trying to describe are two abandoned tanks (which are real, which can be seen, but which may not *do* anything and can only be discovered during CC), then IMO the SSR should include a provision for "discovering" whether the tank in question is "real" or abandoned ("dummy"). Of course, you are not held in Melee by an abandoned AFV... Oh well, that's just my take on it. The SSR sounds like it needs some work. 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 From Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au Sun Aug 22 17:20:48 2004 From: Richard.Weiley at commerce.nsw.gov.au (Richard Weiley) Date: Sun Aug 22 17:21:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Berserk return to normal Message-ID: Fellow listers, During its charge a berserk squad conducts an infantry overrrun against an SMC and eliminates it using the Close Combat procedure during the movement phase. My question is - Does the berserker return to normal immediately given that it has eliminated a unit using CC or does this mechanic apply only during the normal CC phase (ie. at the end of the turn)? If yes may the unit continue moving and how do you calculate how many MF it has remaining? Sorry I'm NRBH so I'm unable to supply relevant rules references. 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 william.stoppel at verizon.net Sun Aug 22 21:36:44 2004 From: william.stoppel at verizon.net (william.stoppel) Date: Sun Aug 22 18:34:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dummy/Decoy Tank SSR In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040822163857.01b4ef80@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: Thanks to all that weighed in on my dummy tank in melee question. Below is the actual SSR. By process of the 4 actual tanks having all moved and or fired I now know which two are the decoys. 2. Two German AFV are unmanned decoys, and may neither move nor fire, but they do provide TEM/hindrance. The German player secretly records which tanks are decoys before play. They cannot be manned by either side, and become wrecks normally. They are revealed as decoys only if they become wrecks and roll successfully for crew survival. No crew is placed on board. Bill From damavs at alltel.net Sun Aug 22 19:08:07 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Sun Aug 22 19:08:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dummy/Decoy Tank SSR In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040822163857.01b4ef80@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040822220019.01cf5ca8@mail.alltel.net> william.stoppel wrote: >Thanks to all that weighed in on my dummy tank in melee question. Below is >the actual SSR. By process of the 4 actual tanks having all moved and or >fired I now know which two are the decoys. > >2. Two German AFV are unmanned decoys, and may neither move nor fire, but >they do provide TEM/hindrance. The German player secretly records which >tanks are decoys before play. They cannot be manned by either side, and >become wrecks normally. They are revealed as decoys only if they become >wrecks and roll successfully for crew survival. No crew is placed on board. My take is the writer of the SSR didn't envision CC as an option. I would think in CC, it would have to be revealed to be a decoy as it is immobile (the neither move part) and has no usable MG (the fire part) so your opponent would have to inform you that you receive the -3 on the CC. I'd suggest amending the SSR line on revealing to be "They are revealed as decoys only if they become wrecks and roll successfully for crew survival, or if attacked in CC. Decoys do not hold enemy infantry in melee and fate is NA for any CC attacks against them." I'd presume you'd have to find out they were decoys when you attack them, if for no other reason than the negative DRM to the CC DR, and that since they are either not real/abandoned, they couldn't hold you in melee, although I'd suggest that be explicitly added to the SSR to avoid confusion. I tossed in the fate for kicks, YMMV... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net From s.deller at charter.net Sun Aug 22 20:54:54 2004 From: s.deller at charter.net (Sean Deller) Date: Sun Aug 22 20:55:00 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 3-player scenario ideas References: Message-ID: <007601c488c4$f38258f0$2083b018@DHT8S631> > Recently we've been having trouble getting a quorum on Sundays here in > Yokohama, so I've scoured my scenario binders for good, clean menage a'trois > fun. Here are some highlights. Anybody want to add to this list? > > G1 Timoshenko's Attack (3 Soviet thrusts vs. Ger, so 4 OK, too) George, If you are looking for something "completely different" try G1 with each of the three players defending on one board and attacking on another. Divide the defending Germans into three forces, then randomly assign them to the three players. After each sets up a defense, randomly assign the attacking Russians. The player who both breaks through as the attacker and holds as the defender is crowned ASL King for the week.. Guaranteed to keep everyone busy jumping back and forth to both sides of the table. Cheers, Sean From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 22 22:28:39 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 22:28:44 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] ASL: Wagon Questions In-Reply-To: <006001c48887$e70f2b30$0e0b0a3e@andrea> References: <89tfi0dprvip91ljsh6mp2ujs6cil3bmu6@4ax.com> <006001c48887$e70f2b30$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:25:36 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >However, I do not agree that the squad remains broken on the Wagon. Since >the squad is broken on the MF expenditure for gettin aboard, it remains >broken in the hex but not on the Wagon. D6.4 says to "see 5.43 for attacks >vs (un)loading Passengers"; if you look at the D5.43 example it says: "An >Infantry unit attempting to enter and Inherentrly crew (or attempting to >load on to any form of transport as a Passenger/Rider) does not succeed - >and also fails to hook up a Gun if it were attempting to do so - if, due to >defensive fire prompted by that MF/MP expenditure , it is pinned, eliminated >or loses Good Order Status (or the vehicle is destroyed). You are correct. I was assuming that the infantry was *already* loaded, and were broken afterwards -- but if the infantry is broken in the act of loading, it does not load at all, per D5.43. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 22 22:38:30 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 22:38:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 3-player scenario ideas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:31:26 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >Recently we've been having trouble getting a quorum on Sundays here in >Yokohama, so I've scoured my scenario binders for good, clean menage a'trois >fun. Here are some highlights. Anybody want to add to this list? Funnily enough, having recently gone through the same exercise (looking for a good 3-player game suitable for a demo), I came up with the following list: *** If there's only going to be the three of us, we need a scenario that's fairly large and thus display-friendly, and can handle a 3-way split easily. For display purposes I feel that we want to emphasise "normal" ASL, i.e., no HASL/DASL (which would otherwise be good for display). Keep things simple, ETO scenarios, as few "weird" rules as possible. When noting "balance" I try and keep in mind that a side split between 2 players is probably going to have more troubles than when 1 player controls all, simply because of different thinking, issues in coordinating attacks, etc. Some possibilities: 003 "The Czerniakow Bridgehead". Has an easy 3-way split: Russians/Partisans/Germans. No vehicles, though. Seems quite balanced on ROAR. 009 "To The Square". Some vehicles, lots of infantry. Not sure how we'd split it in a three-way -- 2 Russian players I guess. A little pro-Russian on ROAR -- the German balance is to shorten the game, which might work in our favour. 033 "The Cossacks Are Coming". Easy 3-way split -- Russian/Croatian/German. Rather pro-Axis, I'd suggest using the balance (upgrades Russian leaders). (Uses cavalry, but I think that's simple enough and will look interesting on display.) AP09 "Red Storm". Split German/Russian infantry/Russian AFVs. Apparently a little pro-German, may want to consider Russian balance (easier VC). A063 "Action At Balberkamp" Board-wise they don't come much bigger! Easy split: Norwegian/British/German, although the British may not enter for a little while. Seems balanced (I'm surprised it's been played frequently enough to know!). A066 "Counterstroke At Stonne" Split German at-start/German reinforcements/French. A little pro-French, give Germans the balance. J061 "In The Bag". Split US Task Force A/Task Force B/German. A little pro-German, I'd give the US the balance. I think that's plenty to choose from. Any of these should keep us going all day. *** ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 22 22:39:50 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 22:39:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 3-player scenario ideas In-Reply-To: <001301c4884d$4f8370d0$0200a8c0@philou> References: <001301c4884d$4f8370d0$0200a8c0@philou> Message-ID: <0n0ji0l1fgqr8asgddk78t2uu97mr5ct6r@4ax.com> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:38:27 +0200, "Philippe" wrote: >Well, your list contains scenarios involving 3 countries but always 2 sides. >TOT45 "Dog of war" is a real 3 players experience since each of them have >different goals and that it introduces an original and specificical sequence >of play. This scenario is FUN. BTW, does any other TOT45like exist ? Alas, "The Dogs Of War" is unique -- but it *is* a "must play". ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 22 23:00:34 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 23:00:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Plastic models for DASL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <271ji01uu1amdr4us458lr70t3s326i0cd@4ax.com> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:31:27 +0900, "George Bates" wrote: >More prototype fun: My Popy Tiger also came with an alternate Henschel >turret that has a somewhat sloped, hexagonal shape and mounts a very >long-barreled 75mm gun and a rear MG (?). Vaguely similar to a Panther, but >still a ways off. Anybody see photos of a model like this? I dunno if it's >a Japanese fascination with "what if" situations, but I'm not really >attracted to these non-production models. No photos of the vehicle with turret (I don't think that they were ever assembled), but a description of this one is in the indispensable "Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two" (Chamberlain, Doyle, Jentz) -- it's the VK3601(H). The 75mm cannon it was to have mounted was the 75mm KwK 42 L/70 tapered-bore gun, which was abandoned in favour of the 8.8cm used in the production Tiger because of the lack of tungsten. There were a total of 6 turrets built which were later used in permanent fortifications. You can see more info at http://www.achtungpanzer.com/heu.htm. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 22 23:14:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 23:14:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TAC1 Rules Lawyer Question In-Reply-To: <412903FA.90308@mbj.nifty.com> References: <412903FA.90308@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:37:14 +0900, Will Fleming wrote: >This question is for the translated scenario tactiques #1 "Dropping Off >at Maleme?". > >Since SSR's always take precedence over the rules, shouldn't SSR #5 read: > >"The German SAN starts the game at 3 and then is increased by 1 at the >start of game turn 3." > >I am not sure what to do if the German SAN is reduced to < 2 before game >turn 3. Would you replace the counter and give the Germans a SAN of 2 >on turn 3 and replace the counter? You're right, the SSR as written is sloppy and not much help. Given that it's an old scenario and the designer is (probably) not available to answer the question directly, you pretty much have to work out something equitable with your opponent. Your suggestion seems reasonable to me. For simplicity you might like to say that the SAN can't be reduced below "2" prior to Turn 3. An alternate approach would be to say that the SAN can't be reduced at all prior to Turn 3 (hence Sniper Checks would be NA and the Sniper Counter would not be an eligible target for the enemy Sniper until Turn 3). ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 22 23:21:35 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 22 23:21:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Bridge question In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040822163857.01b4ef80@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040822163857.01b4ef80@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:43:00 -0500, ron mosher wrote: >Using the example in bridge section on page B5, ASLRBv2: > >Assume bridge is a two hex bridge, now extending into DD5 > >Assume German target is now in EE5 > >The LOS now crosses two bridge hexes of the same bridge, is the hindrance >+2 or +1? All B6.2 says is that non-pontoon bridges "Hinder" LOS drawn through them. It doesn't specifically say what sort of Hindrance it is. That means we just follow the general definition for Hindrances, which is in A6.7, which defines the usual effect of Hindrance hexes as being +1 per Hindrance hex the LOS is traced through (with various EXC not applicable to this case). So the answer to your question would be "+2". ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Aug 23 00:34:12 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Aug 23 00:34:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Berserk return to normal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:20:48 +1000, "Richard Weiley" wrote: >During its charge a berserk squad conducts an infantry overrrun against >an SMC and eliminates it using the Close Combat procedure during the >movement phase. > >My question is - Does the berserker return to normal immediately given >that it has eliminated a unit using CC or does this mechanic apply only >during the normal CC phase (ie. at the end of the turn)? A15.46 says "CC", not "CCPh", so I'd have to say that the berserker returns to normal immediately. >If yes may the unit continue moving and how do you calculate how many >MF it has remaining? I don't think it has the option to continue moving afterwards, because (in general terms) the rules discuss the charge and (if possible) the entering of an enemy unit's Location, but nothing further; A15.431 says a unit that goes berserk *while* moving "must use the remainder of its MPh to charge" -- i.e., after the charge the unit has no MPh "left over". I don't think it's unreasonable to extrapolate that same principle to units who were already berserk at the start of the MPh, i.e., they too have no MPh "left over" when their charge is complete. I would therefore conclude that the fact that the SMC OVR permits the Berserker to make an immediate CC attack does not alter the fact that the Berserker, having performed its required charge, has thereby ended its MPh, and returning to normal won't "restart" its MPh. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Mon Aug 23 03:40:27 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Mon Aug 23 03:40:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Paratroop questions Message-ID: <4129C99B.20105@mbj.nifty.com> All, Each wing must designate its drop point prior to scenario setup (E9.12), but does the player have to specify which units are in each wing? Can the hex grain for each drop point be different than that chosen for other drop points? (i.e. the aircraft dropping the troops flying in from different directions?) Will From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Aug 23 07:23:08 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon Aug 23 07:23:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Paratroop questions In-Reply-To: <4129C99B.20105@mbj.nifty.com> References: <4129C99B.20105@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:40:27 +0900, Will Fleming wrote: >Each wing must designate its drop point prior to scenario setup (E9.12), >but does the player have to specify which units are in each wing? No, according to the ASOP: Assigning a drop point to each wing is in the "Pre-Game Sequence", while setting up sticks (which must be done before the sticks are assigned to wings) is in step 1.11A. >Can the hex grain for each drop point be different than that chosen for >other drop points? (i.e. the aircraft dropping the troops flying in >from different directions?) Well, Simon Spinetti certainly thought so: in his article "Jump Training", in J2, he writes: "Prior to scenario setup ... a Drop Point is designated for each Wing .... The hexgrain direction that will apply to all Wings is also designated at this point." I suspect that the reason he wrote this is because of the following Q&A: E9.12 May each Wing have a different Hex-grain alignment? A. No -- all must run parallel to each other, using a Hex-grain alignment secretly recorded by the paradrop player prior to scenario setup. [An95w; An96; Mw] This Q&A (and, I believe, Simon's article) was written before the 2nd edition rules were published. It appears that this Q&A has not been incorporated into 2nd edition *at all*. Deliberate omission or oversight? Beats me. The printed 2nd ed. rules (including the ASOP) don't have any rule that I could find indicating that hexgrain direction must be specified before the parachutes are placed on board (indeed E9.12 indicates that the Hexgrain Direction is not determined until the RPh of the turn of entry, after the actual Drop Point has been determined for the Wing), nor can I find any rule that specifies that all Wings must use the same "hexgrain direction". (What E9.12 says is that all Sticks of a Wing are placed "along the same Hex Grain", which of course is required so that they form a line; it's *not* saying that all Wings must use the "same Hex Grain", which would be difficult if not outright impossible, depending on the specific map configuration and Hex Grain chosen.) So, if you're using 1st edition rules, the answer to your question is a clear "no". Under 2nd edition, the answer is "sure, why not". Sigh. (If it *was* a deliberate decision not to include this Q&A in 2nd ed., I can't think of any good reason why; I don't recall anyone complaining about the Q&A when it was originally published.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Mon Aug 23 07:30:07 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Mon Aug 23 07:30:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > The only "variant" aircraft that I've ever used were the rocket-armed typhoons > in HOB's "King Of the Hill". My feeling was that I'd rather have had plain > ol' bombs; the rockets were useless. Low FP, hard to hit a target with them, > and you couldn't fire your MG in the same attack run that you fired Rockets. > My recollection was that they were pretty awesome. They had a TK number of 8, but I don't think the target got much armor benefit. I seem to recall killing Tigers with them. > All in all, personally I'm satisfied with the rulebook's "generic" approach to > FB and I don't see a burning need for variantism here. If I want to play a > game depicting the varied effects of different aircraft types and armaments on > ground targets there are plenty to choose from. In the vast majority of ASL > scenarios the actual aircraft types involved, and their specific armaments, > were probably a complete mystery to the men on the ground. > If MMP had an attitude like that, AOO would have been done years ago. :-) Seriously, I think a little variety is good as long as the rules are easy to implement. HOB's rocket-armed typhoon is an example of a good variant. Something like the fickle-B remote-controlled tank bomb would be an example of a not-so-good variant. :-) Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Aug 23 01:57:10 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Mon Aug 23 07:54:51 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Cave LOS question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <008b01c48920$f4f0ff50$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Hi Bruce, you are right! I missed the fact that Brush is a Hindrance only if the LOS is traced along the same elevation. However, if I attacked L0 instead of L0*, the Hindrance would apply since in this case this is a continuous slope. Right? Thank you Andrea > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst@netspace.net.au] > Inviato: domenica 22 agosto 2004 14.51 > A: afantozzi@tiscali.it > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Oggetto: Re: [Aslml] Cave LOS question > > > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:10:48 +0200, "Andrea" > wrote: > > >The Question is, does the +1 Hindrance for the Brush in the > Entrance Hex > >apply to such fire? I'd say yes because the height of the > Brush is 1.5 that > >is greater than the Cave's Level. If hex L1 contained, for > example, a Rubble > >counter LOS would be blocked to L0*. > >Do you agree? > > No. Brush is a hindrance only if the LOS is traced along the > same elevation > (B12.2), or along a continuous slope (B.5) -- neither of > which applies here. > > (Brush is NOT a "half-level hindrance" -- it has no "height" > at all, really. > But even if it were, it wouldn't matter -- it's still only a > hindrance for > same-level LOS or continuous slope.) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From afantozzi at tiscali.it Mon Aug 23 01:58:23 2004 From: afantozzi at tiscali.it (Andrea) Date: Mon Aug 23 07:55:01 2004 Subject: I: [Aslml] Spigot Mortar Question Message-ID: <008c01c48920$fb16c9f0$0e0b0a3e@andrea> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:51:26 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >Spigot Mortar Crew declares opportunity fire in its PFPh so as to be able to >fire the MTR in the AFPh. The Entrance Hex of the Mortar Cave (but not the >cave's hex; not that this matters anyway) is within the blast area of a >FFE:C counter. >Is the Mortar Crew immediately attacked by the FFE:C? Z KR5.2 says: "... attacks vs. such units [i.e., Mortar Cave occupants using Opportunity Fire] may target either Location [i.e., cave or entrance hex], both of which *must* be in play." I'd have to agree that an immediate OBA attack is required, because C1.34 says "A FFE:C ... is resolved only vs each unit that enters or becomes more vulnerable in a hex of its Blast Area." The placement of the Opportunity Fire counter, which invokes Hazardous Movement for the Mortar crew, is making the crew "more vulnerable", and there's no reason to assume this effect doesn't take place immediately. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004 From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Aug 23 08:10:12 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Aug 23 08:10:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle Message-ID: <391l71$6n6tko@mxip19a.cluster1.charter.net> > > From: Bret & Julie Hildebran > Date: 2004/08/22 Sun PM 04:45:28 CDT > To: "william.stoppel" , > "ASLML Distribution" > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Abandoned vehicle > > william.stoppel wrote: > >Playing a play test scenario and came up with an interesting question. In > >this scenario the Germans have 6 tanks. 4 are occupied and 2 are dummies > >that can neither move, shoot or be occupied by either side. > > Does the SSR say they are "treated as real tanks for all other purposes"? > Or something to that effect. It seems to me the SSR needs to be very > clear when making up rules like this. Agree... For example, unless the SSR is specific otherwise, the abandoned AFV would have to be marked as such as soon as an enemy unit is in LOS. They couldn't be '?' since they aren't GO. IOW, barring the SSR specifics to the contrary, an abondan vehicle is normally obvious without need to advance into the CC. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Aug 23 08:20:14 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon Aug 23 08:20:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season Message-ID: <394f2f$6r651e@mxip13a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: Bruce Probst > Date: 2004/08/22 Sun AM 07:36:13 CDT > To: jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca > CC: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Hurricane Season > > On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:50:58 -0700, Jim McLeod > wrote: > > A strafing attack *should* be a scary thing. I don't mind if the game > exaggerates their effectiveness in order to put the players in the right frame > of mind. Exactly!!! ASl is design for effect...not design for simulation. The effects of an airstrike goes beyond actually hitting anything. I believe any aircraft counter and/or SSR used should keep that in mind. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From steven.dennis at autodesk.com Mon Aug 23 08:25:05 2004 From: steven.dennis at autodesk.com (Steven Dennis) Date: Mon Aug 23 08:25:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OVHS CG question Message-ID: Guys, In an OVHS CG, if you purchase groups that are set to enter and it turns out to be an IDLE day, do they get to set up on board for the next scenario for free? I know that RB is like this but couldn't find it last night if OVHS is the same... Kinda sucks if they have to march on again! Steve From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Aug 23 11:15:31 2004 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon Aug 23 11:27:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Dummy/Decoy Tank SSR References: Message-ID: <009501c4893e$9b146800$a64d8918@klis.com> Bill wrote: > Thanks to all that weighed in on my dummy tank in melee question. Below is > the actual SSR. By process of the 4 actual tanks having all moved and or > fired I now know which two are the decoys. > > 2. Two German AFV are unmanned decoys, and may neither move nor fire, but > they do provide TEM/hindrance. The German player secretly records which > tanks are decoys before play. They cannot be manned by either side, and > become wrecks normally. They are revealed as decoys only if they become > wrecks and roll successfully for crew survival. No crew is placed on board. It sounds like this is a playtest for a SL to ASL conversion of the old CoI Scenario 105 "Night Battle At Noromaryevka". I hope it is, since I've been looking forward to this one being converted for years. If I'm right about this, then the SSR should also take into account the placement of the dummy tanks, unless this is covered in the set-up instructions as it was in the original. I'm not even sure the original CoI SSR is a good starting place for the wording of the ASL SSR; maybe it would be better to start from scratch and write it in ASL-ese. David "SSRs for Dummies" Olie From jim.white at dol.net Mon Aug 23 13:05:42 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Mon Aug 23 13:10:36 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Questions about BRT Message-ID: <006901c4894c$9b703b40$6501a8c0@workstation1> Long-time lurker...and (very) part-time player here. I have always wanted to play the big BRT campaign game as the Marines...God (or whatever superior being you chat with) help my cardboard jarheads). So although I've never found an opponent...every now and then I pull out the rules and try to come up with a Landing Schedule just for the hell of it. Right now...several questions for the List: 1. Can the Marines Deploy prior to placing them into the Landing Schedule? 2. What say the List about the pros/cons of sending Armor in on the first wave? 3. Why am I doing this when I'll probably never get to play it? Ummmmmm....never mind...don't answer that one. Thanks in advance, Jim "I'm only a lurker and I don't have a life either" White From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Mon Aug 23 14:51:18 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Mon Aug 23 14:51:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for Robert Hammond Message-ID: <412A66D6.9000505@mbj.nifty.com> All, If anyone has contact with Robert, please let him know I am looking for him. He didn't reply to my last message on this list. Thanks in advance, Will From denis at teachlinux.com Mon Aug 23 15:28:36 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Mon Aug 23 15:28:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Questions about BRT In-Reply-To: <006901c4894c$9b703b40$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: IMO I would not send a lot of amour in on the first wave since there is a pretty good chance of it getting killed off. However, I have never played BRT, but hope to someday. Denis On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, James S. White Jr. wrote: > Long-time lurker...and (very) part-time player here. I have always wanted > to play the big BRT campaign game as the Marines...God (or whatever superior > being you chat with) help my cardboard jarheads). So although I've never > found an opponent...every now and then I pull out the rules and try to come > up with a Landing Schedule just for the hell of it. Right now...several > questions for the List: > > 1. Can the Marines Deploy prior to placing them into the Landing Schedule? > > 2. What say the List about the pros/cons of sending Armor in on the first > wave? > > 3. Why am I doing this when I'll probably never get to play it? > Ummmmmm....never mind...don't answer that one. > > Thanks in advance, > > Jim "I'm only a lurker and I don't have a life either" White > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Mon Aug 23 16:05:30 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Mon Aug 23 16:05:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Scenario RB5 References: <001301c4884d$4f8370d0$0200a8c0@philou> <0n0ji0l1fgqr8asgddk78t2uu97mr5ct6r@4ax.com> Message-ID: <008c01c48965$b138fa20$25926b0c@NewhpGeorge> Listers, Any errata for this one? I can't find any, but it seems the Russians can really hassle the Germans with Sewer Units from Turn 1, hang for 20 Turns, and be in position to pop up in Russian Turn 21 to Control a bunch of Buildings. The CGs have SSR CG 18. RB5 does not have any such provision (that I can find), yet I feel that it "should". Additionally, I would welcome any/all commentary on this Scenario; I have never played it, belive it or not. TIA, Christopher Fleury Sgt. Meikle's Bunker Mountain View Cottage Lewis, NY USS Iowa; BB-61 Camp Dudley #12557 ASL 6+1 From janusz.maxe at unf.se Mon Aug 23 16:11:01 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Mon Aug 23 16:11:04 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] Scenario RB5 Message-ID: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A104D@sesob03.sobernet.net> Few sewerexits are IN buildings, and the Germans keep control with just 1 broken HS. One can also "hust" sewer units with a bunch of HSs. Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r Mountain View > Cottage > Skickat: den 24 augusti 2004 01:06 > Till: ASL Mailing List > ?mne: [Aslml] Scenario RB5 > > > Listers, > > Any errata for this one? > > I can't find any, but it seems the Russians can > really hassle the Germans with Sewer Units > from Turn 1, hang for 20 Turns, and be in > position to pop up in Russian Turn 21 to > Control a bunch of Buildings. > > The CGs have SSR CG 18. RB5 > does not have any such provision (that > I can find), yet I feel that it "should". > > Additionally, I would welcome any/all > commentary on this Scenario; I have > never played it, belive it or not. > > TIA, > > Christopher Fleury > Sgt. Meikle's Bunker > Mountain View Cottage > Lewis, NY > USS Iowa; BB-61 > Camp Dudley #12557 > ASL 6+1 > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 vanderb2 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 23 14:24:06 2004 From: vanderb2 at sbcglobal.net (Chad M. VanDerBos) Date: Mon Aug 23 18:42:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Officefest Message-ID: <001d01c48957$863692a0$14f2ff44@domainnotset.invalid> Forwarded for PJ... Guys, I am going to do a weekly broadcast leading up to Officefest. ASL Officefest, ASL action Friday and Saturday, September 10th and 11th, 2004, at 38500 Michigan Avenue, Wayne Michigan 48184. It is free, tell your friends, bring a bedroll and spend the night if you like. All levels of players welcome. Email me for more info, or just see you here. pj norton From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 24 00:55:41 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 24 00:55:45 2004 Subject: R: [Aslml] Cave LOS question In-Reply-To: <008b01c48920$f4f0ff50$0e0b0a3e@andrea> References: <008b01c48920$f4f0ff50$0e0b0a3e@andrea> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:57:10 +0200, "Andrea" wrote: >However, if I attacked L0 instead of L0*, the Hindrance would apply since in >this case this is a continuous slope. Right? Yes, I believe that is correct. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Aug 24 01:42:16 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 24 01:42:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:30:07 -0600 (MDT), Martin Snow wrote: >> The only "variant" aircraft that I've ever used were the rocket-armed typhoons >> in HOB's "King Of the Hill". My feeling was that I'd rather have had plain >> ol' bombs; the rockets were useless. Low FP, hard to hit a target with them, >> and you couldn't fire your MG in the same attack run that you fired Rockets. > >My recollection was that they were pretty awesome. They had a TK number >of 8, but I don't think the target got much armor benefit. I seem to >recall killing Tigers with them. Vehicular targets (and infantry targets, for that matter) have an additional +2 TH DRM, and the lower dr is doubled, in addition to whatever other modifiers might apply. (KOTH 3.21) IF you hit, you get a -1 TK DRM if you hit side or rear (and of course you use Aerial AF), but with 80mm HE that's still not very exciting against anything well-armoured. Killing a Tiger is doable, but not exactly *likely*. Granted the rules permit you four rocket attacks at once, but at such low odds I'm pretty sure it still works out overall to be less likely than a single bomb hit/kill. >Seriously, I think a little variety is good as long as the rules are easy >to implement. HOB's rocket-armed typhoon is an example of a good variant. I don't object to the variety, but I do object to the striving for "accuracy" resulting in a detriment to game play: the KOTH Typhoon rules may be an accurate simulation of the actual lethality of a Typhoon attack, but completely fail to yield the same psychological results as a consequence. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Aug 24 01:57:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 24 01:58:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Scenario RB5 In-Reply-To: <008c01c48965$b138fa20$25926b0c@NewhpGeorge> References: <001301c4884d$4f8370d0$0200a8c0@philou> <0n0ji0l1fgqr8asgddk78t2uu97mr5ct6r@4ax.com> <008c01c48965$b138fa20$25926b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:05:30 -0400, "Mountain View Cottage" wrote: >Any errata for this one? Soitenly! And it's (almost) brand-new, too: HASL RB5 (The Last Bid) In the German OB set up instructions after "rubble" add "and/or Trench adjacent to building/rubble". {J5} >I can't find any, but it seems the Russians can >really hassle the Germans with Sewer Units >from Turn 1, hang for 20 Turns, and be in >position to pop up in Russian Turn 21 to >Control a bunch of Buildings. Sure, if the Germans don't pay attention to where the sewer units are and forget to garrison the threatened buildings. (Not to mention that 20 turns of sewer movement has the potential to really backfire on the Russian player!) >Additionally, I would welcome any/all >commentary on this Scenario; I have >never played it, belive it or not. I've never played it either ... it's kind of, well, large. Not something you set up casually . ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Aug 24 02:13:25 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 24 02:13:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OVHS CG question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:25:05 -0400, "Steven Dennis" wrote: > In an OVHS CG, if you purchase groups that are set to enter and it >turns out to be an IDLE day, do they get to set up on board for the next >scenario for free? Sort of. It's closer to the KGP rules than the RB rules. Z2.5184 says that Panzer Lehr units and Canadian RG V4 may never set up "on board". Otherwise Z2.3 CG16 applies, but note that you have to pay attention to Setup areas and Entry areas -- Retained RG have to use the same area they were Retained from unless successfully Shifted (Z2.513). IOW, if you purchase a RG to enter in a particular area, but it is an idle day, it must still enter in that area on the next "real" day, unless you successfully Shift them on-map. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 steven.dennis at autodesk.com Tue Aug 24 06:40:37 2004 From: steven.dennis at autodesk.com (Steven Dennis) Date: Tue Aug 24 06:40:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Questions about BRT Message-ID: Jim Taylor and I played the first scenario of BRT and I as the Marines WOULD send armor in the first wave if I did this again. Even if they get killed they are wrecks! The best Japanese defense is 37L and they shouldn't take a big toll on the Shermans... Steve -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of denis@teachlinux.com Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 6:29 PM To: James S. White Jr. Cc: ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] Questions about BRT IMO I would not send a lot of amour in on the first wave since there is a pretty good chance of it getting killed off. However, I have never played BRT, but hope to someday. Denis On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, James S. White Jr. wrote: > Long-time lurker...and (very) part-time player here. I have always wanted > to play the big BRT campaign game as the Marines...God (or whatever superior > being you chat with) help my cardboard jarheads). So although I've never > found an opponent...every now and then I pull out the rules and try to come > up with a Landing Schedule just for the hell of it. Right now...several > questions for the List: > > 1. Can the Marines Deploy prior to placing them into the Landing Schedule? > > 2. What say the List about the pros/cons of sending Armor in on the first > wave? > > 3. Why am I doing this when I'll probably never get to play it? > Ummmmmm....never mind...don't answer that one. > > Thanks in advance, > > Jim "I'm only a lurker and I don't have a life either" White > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Tue Aug 24 07:58:34 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Tue Aug 24 07:58:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > Vehicular targets (and infantry targets, for that matter) have an additional > +2 TH DRM, and the lower dr is doubled, in addition to whatever other So hitting a large target (Tiger) you have a base 10, +2 (rocket), -1 (large) and double lower dr. To get a 9, you could roll a 5-2 or better. Contrast that with the normal bomb rules. You again have a base 10 with a -1 for large target, but you need half the modified TH number to get a direct hit, so you need to roll a 5 or less. Each plane has four rockets, but only one bomb. Without doing all the math, it seems like the rockets will hit more often. > modifiers might apply. (KOTH 3.21) IF you hit, you get a -1 TK DRM if you hit > side or rear (and of course you use Aerial AF), but with 80mm HE that's still > not very exciting against anything well-armoured. Killing a Tiger is doable, > but not exactly *likely*. > You always hit the rear target facing with a plane, don't you? The 8 armor on the tiger drops to something like a 4 (no chart handy). So if my recollection that the TK number is 8, then I think you have a final TK number of 5. Not super high, but with four shots, it's not out of the question. A bomb attacks on the IFT usually, and gets a +1 DRM from the armor. If it's not a direct hit, then it's half FP. Without having a chart in front of me, I'm guessing that you probably need to roll less than a 6 to have an effect. And the plane has only one bomb. > Granted the rules permit you four rocket attacks at once, but at such low odds > I'm pretty sure it still works out overall to be less likely than a single > bomb hit/kill. > I'm pretty sure that the odds of killing with four rockets is higher than killing with a single bomb. > I don't object to the variety, but I do object to the striving for "accuracy" > resulting in a detriment to game play: the KOTH Typhoon rules may be an > accurate simulation of the actual lethality of a Typhoon attack, but > completely fail to yield the same psychological results as a consequence. > If my math is correct, then the KOTH Typhoon is likely more effective than it was historically, but since I don't know how many planes were really involved in the battle, I don't know if their overall contribution to the fight is historical or not. But they were a fun component of the ASL game that I played, and that's more important to me. :-) It's been about 5 years since I played the CG, and the airplanes are the second most memorable part, so I think HOB achieved their design goal. The _most_ memorable part of the CG was OBA. In the first scenario, we had the 150mm roto-tiller than removed all the German trenches. It also removed all the squads defending those trenches. In the second scenario, the creeping barrage hit the 1 in 1200 chance of coming in two turns early, moving maximum extent in the worst possible direction and landing squarely on our line of British infantry. We took more casualties in the first pre-game turn than we had taken in the entire first scenario. Ka boom! Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From janusz.maxe at unf.se Tue Aug 24 08:06:19 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Tue Aug 24 08:06:23 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] Hurricane Season Message-ID: <5A75A637377A4249B83ACA0BC0510B5D7A1055@sesob03.sobernet.net> I've heard about a rule of thumb, that the number of enemy targets reported destroyed by an air attack is about 200% of the number the enemy regard as destroyed. Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r Martin Snow > Skickat: den 24 augusti 2004 16:59 > Till: Bruce Probst > Kopia: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > ?mne: Re: [Aslml] Hurricane Season > > > On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Bruce Probst wrote: > > > Vehicular targets (and infantry targets, for that matter) > have an additional > > +2 TH DRM, and the lower dr is doubled, in addition to > whatever other > > So hitting a large target (Tiger) you have a base 10, +2 (rocket), -1 > (large) and double lower dr. To get a 9, you could roll a > 5-2 or better. > > Contrast that with the normal bomb rules. You again have a > base 10 with a > -1 for large target, but you need half the modified TH number to get a > direct hit, so you need to roll a 5 or less. > > Each plane has four rockets, but only one bomb. Without doing all the > math, it seems like the rockets will hit more often. > > > modifiers might apply. (KOTH 3.21) IF you hit, you get a > -1 TK DRM if you hit > > side or rear (and of course you use Aerial AF), but with > 80mm HE that's still > > not very exciting against anything well-armoured. Killing > a Tiger is doable, > > but not exactly *likely*. > > > > You always hit the rear target facing with a plane, don't you? The 8 > armor on the tiger drops to something like a 4 (no chart > handy). So if > my recollection that the TK number is 8, then I think you > have a final TK > number of 5. Not super high, but with four shots, it's not out of the > question. > > A bomb attacks on the IFT usually, and gets a +1 DRM from the > armor. If > it's not a direct hit, then it's half FP. Without having a > chart in front > of me, I'm guessing that you probably need to roll less than > a 6 to have > an effect. And the plane has only one bomb. > > > Granted the rules permit you four rocket attacks at once, > but at such low odds > > I'm pretty sure it still works out overall to be less > likely than a single > > bomb hit/kill. > > > > I'm pretty sure that the odds of killing with four rockets is > higher than > killing with a single bomb. > > > I don't object to the variety, but I do object to the > striving for "accuracy" > > resulting in a detriment to game play: the KOTH Typhoon > rules may be an > > accurate simulation of the actual lethality of a Typhoon attack, but > > completely fail to yield the same psychological results as > a consequence. > > > > If my math is correct, then the KOTH Typhoon is likely more > effective than > it was historically, but since I don't know how many planes > were really > involved in the battle, I don't know if their overall > contribution to the > fight is historical or not. But they were a fun component of > the ASL game > that I played, and that's more important to me. :-) > > It's been about 5 years since I played the CG, and the > airplanes are the > second most memorable part, so I think HOB achieved their design goal. > The _most_ memorable part of the CG was OBA. In the first > scenario, we > had the 150mm roto-tiller than removed all the German > trenches. It also > removed all the squads defending those trenches. In the > second scenario, > the creeping barrage hit the 1 in 1200 chance of coming in two turns > early, moving maximum extent in the worst possible direction > and landing > squarely on our line of British infantry. We took more > casualties in the > first pre-game turn than we had taken in the entire first scenario. > > Ka boom! > > Marty > > > Martin Snow <*> > snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From craig.p.walters at monsanto.com Tue Aug 24 08:46:36 2004 From: craig.p.walters at monsanto.com (WALTERS, CRAIG P [AG/1000]) Date: Tue Aug 24 08:46:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Interesting war record - slightly off-topic Message-ID: A great obituary covering this vet's service. Craig ======================= William C. Baldwin 1924-2004 William Calvin "Babe" Baldwin, age 80, St. Joseph, passed away Saturday, Aug. 21, 2004, at his home from a courageous battle with lung cancer. Babe was born July 5, 1924, in St. Joseph, to William Taylor and Margaret Frances (Carroll) Baldwin. He had lived in St. Joseph all of his life. Babe enjoyed his family and loved them unconditionally. He will be sadly missed by all. Babe's favorite thing was to go fishing and hang with his best friend Benji, his brindle Chow. Babe was a Christian and a member of the Teamsters Local No. 460. Babe was an Army Veteran serving in World War II. He entered the service on March 1, 1943, at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. He took basic training at Fort Knox, Ky., and Camp Campbell, Ky. He was assigned to the 645th tank destroyer unit, 45th infantry division. He landed at Casablanca, North Africa, fighting in the invasions of Salerno, Italy, Ansio beachhead and the battles of Rome-Arno, Southern France, as well as the Rhineland and Central Europe campaigns with the 5th and 7th Army under General George Patton. He served as a tank destroyer driver and was wounded while pillbox hunting in France. He received four Bronze Stars, two Arrowheads, and the Good Conduct Medal during his service. Babe had worked for Swift Packing Co., Nick Schultz Electric, Enterprise Furniture, Albert's Kirwin Furniture and retired in 1985 after 13 years of service from Brown Transfer and Storage Company. Babe married Goldie Cecelia DeSpain on April 2, 1948, in St. Joseph. She survives of the home. Babe was preceded in death by his parents; a sister, Sarah Carroll; five brothers, Clarence, Donald, Elmer, Lester, and Joseph Baldwin; nephews, Daryl, Craig and Doug Baldwin. Babe is survived by two sons, Danny Baldwin and his wife, Linda, Roger Baldwin and his wife, Belinda; and a daughter, April Baldwin, all of St. Joseph; his grandchildren, Jeremy, Joshua, Vance, Sean and Andrew Baldwin, Charlotte Prine and Roger Holmes; great-grandchildren, Quinton, Ivory, Taylor, Ethan, and Daniel; step-great-grandchildren, William, Steven, and David; a brother, Donald "Baldy" Baldwin and his wife, Vivian, of San Bonita, Calif.; nieces, Donna Baldwin, of Santee, Calif., Jackie Umphress, of Tavares, Fla., Barbara Colley, Marilyn Alexander, Topeka, Kan., and Connie Baldwin, Georgia; nephews, Terry and John Baldwin, Portland, Ore., and several other nieces, nephews and cousins. Funeral services will be conducted at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 25, 2004, at the Rupp Chapel. Rev. Albert Shirley officiating. The interment will be at Mount Auburn Cemetery. The family will receive friends from 6 to 8:30 tonight, at the Rupp Funeral Home. Memorials are suggested to a charity of donor's choice. From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 08:59:26 2004 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Tue Aug 24 08:59:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season Message-ID: <20040824155926.80679.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> Heh, heh.....I remember it fondly.... The Roto-tiller was a bit of a downer, butthe the creeping barrage...that was truely sweet. Now if only I had played the CG CPP replenishment rules right, I could *REALLY* gloat... Jazz The enigmatic Dr. Snow wrote: . . . It's been about 5 years since I played the CG, and the airplanes are the second most memorable part, so I think HOB achieved their design goal. The _most_ memorable part of the CG was OBA. In the first scenario, we had the 150mm roto-tiller than removed all the German trenches. It also removed all the squads defending those trenches. In the second scenario, the creeping barrage hit the 1 in 1200 chance of coming in two turns early, moving maximum extent in the worst possible direction and landing squarely on our line of British infantry. We took more casualties in the first pre-game turn than we had taken in the entire first scenario. Ka boom! Marty Martin Snow <*> From Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com Tue Aug 24 13:26:31 2004 From: Paul.Sidhu at us.sanofi.com (Paul.Sidhu@us.sanofi.com) Date: Tue Aug 24 13:17:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: BRT In-Reply-To: <20040824190314.1187A985D5@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: Jim asks: Jim, Ive played this twice and it's amazing. 2. What say the List about the pros/cons of sending Armor in on the first wave? I think it's ok, but not the best approach. A couple well placed 75's can ruin the tanker's day and leave you way in the hole. Using the BB smoke is a lifesaver and gets the LVTs in close. The C7 survival number means many of them which then die turn 2 still have passengers that live and they set up the wrecks that make jap fire out past them increasingly ineffective. plus the way to kill the japs is with massive marine FP led by awesome leaders from behind the seawall. WP grenades, dcs and fts work pretty well too. I recommend two marine infantry companies per beach in the first wave. They die getting to the beach, but the 2nd wave then dies clearing the beachfront defenses, and the 3rd wave basically makes it alive. Both sides need to grab their cojones tight (although keeping their hands to themsleves) when you get ready to play as it's an amazing bloodbath. Best Regards, Paul Sidhu Important: The Information in this e-mail belongs to Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc., is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of, or reliance on, the contents of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by replying back to the sending e-mail address, and delete this e-mail message from your computer. From dave.connell at cougarcorp.com Tue Aug 24 14:01:30 2004 From: dave.connell at cougarcorp.com (Dave Connell) Date: Tue Aug 24 14:00:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Questions about BRT Message-ID: <826A31740CCE7242A2854D472371A9A2038456@trinity.cougarcorp.com> I am not a fan of sending in the Tanks until about the second wave. Denis is right that they will become wrecks pretty quick. Let the LVT become the wrecks providing what cover they can and hopefully exposing the bigger ordinance (if the Japanese player gets too excited about the turkey shoot). Nothing like a pair of well placed 75AA to ruin your jarhead day faster than it was already going to be. Bringing the tanks in around the second wave is probably better. Have fun. Persevere \per-se-vi(e)r\ : to persist in a state, enterprise, or undertaking in spite of counter influences, opposition, discouragement and/or your Japanese opponent saying, "ROF again! Lucky me!) Dave Connell -----Original Message----- From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of denis@teachlinux.com Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 3:29 PM To: James S. White Jr. Cc: ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] Questions about BRT IMO I would not send a lot of amour in on the first wave since there is a pretty good chance of it getting killed off. However, I have never played BRT, but hope to someday. Denis On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, James S. White Jr. wrote: > Long-time lurker...and (very) part-time player here. I have always wanted > to play the big BRT campaign game as the Marines...God (or whatever superior > being you chat with) help my cardboard jarheads). So although I've never > found an opponent...every now and then I pull out the rules and try to come > up with a Landing Schedule just for the hell of it. Right now...several > questions for the List: > > 1. Can the Marines Deploy prior to placing them into the Landing Schedule? > > 2. What say the List about the pros/cons of sending Armor in on the first > wave? > > 3. Why am I doing this when I'll probably never get to play it? > Ummmmmm....never mind...don't answer that one. > > Thanks in advance, > > Jim "I'm only a lurker and I don't have a life either" White > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Aug 24 17:41:28 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Tue Aug 24 17:41:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season Message-ID: <320000-22004832504128810@M2W057.mail2web.com> >So hitting a large target (Tiger) you have a base 10, +2 (rocket), -1 >(large) and double lower dr. To get a 9, you could roll a 5-2 or better. If you're attacking at 3 hexes. I think 4 hexes would be more usual, which drops the Hit# to 9, meaning you need a 4-2 or better. >Contrast that with the normal bomb rules. You again have a base 10 with a >-1 for large target, but you need half the modified TH number to get a >direct hit, so you need to roll a 5 or less. Yes, but a direct hit is an almost certain kill, and a near miss has a pretty good chance too (if I'm remembering the near-miss rules correctly; NRBH). >Each plane has four rockets, but only one bomb. Without doing all the >math, it seems like the rockets will hit more often. Can you fire all 4 at a single target however? (I thought it was no more than two?). >So if my recollection that the TK number is 8, then I think you have a >final TK number of 5. Not super high, but with four shots, it's not out >of the question. As I say, I'm not sure that you *get* four shots at a single target. Even if you do, I don't know that the actual numbers are as high as you claim. >It's been about 5 years since I played the CG, and the airplanes are the >second most memorable part I never used the aircraft in the CG, it was one of the scenarios -- and they were certainly memorable, but not in a good way. I can't recall the exact numbers but I *know* I would have been better off with a normal FB. >The _most_ memorable part of the CG was OBA. In the CG I was the German. On Day 1 I lost maybe two or three tanks and a handful of infantry; I think every single British AFV was destroyed and quite a bit of their infantry. No Tigers were involved; they were parked to the rear out of LOS, enjoying the sunshine . I had to contemplate driving one of my PzIV out of its revetment -- it was surrounded by burning British tanks and couldn't see a bloody thing . A quick look at the purchase charts indicated the British could not recover from such devastating losses, while the Germans would only get stronger, and the CG was declared a German victory. The British OBA was pretty uneventful -- definitely no "roto-tiller" effect. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Aug 25 00:49:27 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Aug 25 00:47:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Scenario J21 "Scobie Preserves" question Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B798065@agalsrv03> Greetings I played this scenario the other night, with a win for the British. The following situation didn't occur in the game but I thought of it afterwards. Two Partisan squads advance in for CC against one British squad. There is no Ambush. The Partisan declares his attack, 3:2 odds against the British squad. May both Partisan squads attempt to roll for the SSR given anti-infantry "ATMM mines", to increase their chances of getting the -2 CC DRM as per the SSR? With normal ATMM against AFV's, CC is seqential, and only one squad (with possibly a SMC) can attack the AFV. If the squad makes an ATMM check, the leader can't and vice versa. However for J21 I can see nothing to prevent both squads making a "Scobie Preserve" ATMM check, to increase the chance of having the -2 CC DRM. Thoughts anyone? Cheers Jon From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 25 02:50:59 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 25 02:51:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Scenario J21 "Scobie Preserves" question In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B798065@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B798065@agalsrv03> Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:49:27 +0800, "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >Two Partisan squads advance in for CC against one British squad. There is no >Ambush. The Partisan declares his attack, 3:2 odds against the British >squad. May both Partisan squads attempt to roll for the SSR given >anti-infantry "ATMM mines", to increase their chances of getting the -2 CC >DRM as per the SSR? I don't see why not. Furthermore, I don't see why the total CC DRM would not be -4 if both MMC units succeed (or even higher -- without overstacking, i.e., 6 HS, you could get -12!). There's nothing in the SSR that says it can only apply once in a given CC, and it's not addressed in the C13.7 rules either (for the reasons you state: it will never come up due to the mechanics of CC vs. AFV, so the rule doesn't need to say anything about it). C13.73 *does* address the special case of combined SMC-MMC attacks so presumably those rules apply as written -- i.e., either an SMC *or* an MMC can generate the DRM, but not both together. However, I would expect that all attempts would have to be predesignated. Fundamentally this is a case of the scenario designer not considering all the possible ramifications of his SSR. It's why you should always have a disinterested party read your designs -- to increase the chances of "but what if ...?" situations like this being caught *before* publication. MMP are normally pretty good about this but, alas, perfection is a hard thing to perfect . ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Wed Aug 25 08:30:45 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Wed Aug 25 08:30:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: <320000-22004832504128810@M2W057.mail2web.com> References: <320000-22004832504128810@M2W057.mail2web.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, bprobst@netspace.net.au wrote: > >So hitting a large target (Tiger) you have a base 10, +2 (rocket), -1 > >(large) and double lower dr. To get a 9, you could roll a 5-2 or better. > > If you're attacking at 3 hexes. I think 4 hexes would be more usual, which > drops the Hit# to 9, meaning you need a 4-2 or better. Why fire from so far away? I've never had a plane shot down, so I always fire at 3 hexes, not 4. > > >Contrast that with the normal bomb rules. You again have a base 10 with a > >-1 for large target, but you need half the modified TH number to get a > >direct hit, so you need to roll a 5 or less. > > Yes, but a direct hit is an almost certain kill, and a near miss has a > pretty good chance too (if I'm remembering the near-miss rules correctly; > NRBH). > As I recall, a near miss attacks as area fire, so even a big bomb is only attacking on the 18 FP column (16 column for some folks). I don't have the column memorized, but I'd guess you need a 5 or a 6 to kill. Not that much different than a rocket. > Can you fire all 4 at a single target however? (I thought it was no more > than two?). > Maybe it's 2 at a time, then the other two after moving forward a hex. Like I said, it's been a few years since I actually looked at those rules. > As I say, I'm not sure that you *get* four shots at a single target. Even > if you do, I don't know that the actual numbers are as high as you claim. > It's just like politics! Neither of us have any hard facts, but it's not limiting the discussion! > In the CG I was the German. On Day 1 I lost maybe two or three tanks and a > handful of infantry; I think every single British AFV was destroyed and > quite a bit of their infantry. No Tigers were involved; they were parked > to the rear out of LOS, enjoying the sunshine . I had to contemplate > driving one of my PzIV out of its revetment -- it was surrounded by burning > British tanks and couldn't see a bloody thing . A quick look at the > purchase charts indicated the British could not recover from such > devastating losses, while the Germans would only get stronger, and the CG > was declared a German victory. The British OBA was pretty uneventful -- > definitely no "roto-tiller" effect. > Even with the awesome roto-tiller, the CG was a German victory in our playing. But there were enough freak events that I wouldn't draw any conclusions about balance from our one playing. I guess the one conclusion we'd have to agree upon is that the rocket-firing aircraft do not unbalance the CG in favor of the British! Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From ddgoff at aep.com Wed Aug 25 13:05:00 2004 From: ddgoff at aep.com (ddgoff@aep.com) Date: Wed Aug 25 13:05:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] seeking Pittsburgh area game Message-ID: Folks, I'll be in beautiful Cranberry next week on business. I'll likely have Monday free if anyone would like to play a game. David ---------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it from the Nuclear Generation Group of American Electric Power are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. From jim.white at dol.net Wed Aug 25 13:52:55 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Wed Aug 25 14:00:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT Questions Message-ID: <017901c48ae5$8b503590$6501a8c0@workstation1> Just wanted to say thanks to those who took a moment to respond....both to the List and privately. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Aug 25 15:36:34 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed Aug 25 15:36:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Hurricane Season In-Reply-To: References: <320000-22004832504128810@M2W057.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <605qi01jco7lhb0ss4hj6b8nbpk8r829k9@4ax.com> On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:30:45 -0600 (MDT), Martin Snow wrote: >It's just like politics! Neither of us have any hard facts, but it's not >limiting the discussion! Damn right! >I guess the one conclusion we'd have to agree upon is that the rocket-firing aircraft do >not unbalance the CG in favor of the British! That's for sure. I don't know why they didn't just say "alright, *keep* your stinking hill, we don't care". ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Aug 25 21:58:51 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed Aug 25 21:57:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Ammo Shortage and J5 errata Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B7981DE@agalsrv03> Hi Tate & Bruce Following our discussion on this a while back, I resent some clearer questions to Perry. Here are his answers Cheers Jon -----Original Message----- From: perrycocke@comcast.net [mailto:perrycocke@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, 21 August 2004 7:03 AM To: JPCole@agric.wa.gov.au Subject: RE: Ammo Shortage and J5 errata >Subject: Ammo Shortage and J5 errata > >Recent errata in Journal 5 states "A19.131: line 10 replace "all B#" with >"all SW Original B#/X# [EXC: DC]" The Index definition of a SW is any >weapon >depicted on a half inch counter, so a Gun is not a SW. >1) With this erratum it seems that when Ammo Shortage (A19.131) is in >effect, a Gun's B# is not lowered or changed to an X# until an actual Low >Ammo counter is placed. Correct? Correct; D3.71. >Example: A Gun has an original B# 11. When Ammo Shortage is in effect, this >Gun is considered to have a Low Ammo # (LA#) of 10. The Gun will >malfunction >(and can be repaired) on a TH DR of 11 or 12, and have a Low Ammo counter >placed on a TH DR of 10. Correct? Yes. ?>It would seem that vehicular MGs are not >affected by Ammo Shortage unless they are the vehicle's MA. Is this >correct? Yes. >? Previous (unofficial) Q&A says >? A19.131 Does Low Ammo apply to AFV MG? >? A. No (unless MA), but Ammunition Shortage would (e.g., B# would be >? decreased by one, with original B# becoming X#). [Compil8] >Has this Q&A been superceded? Yes. ....Perry MMP From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Aug 26 14:49:09 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Aug 26 14:49:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826164641.01b541f8@pop3.direcway.com> Listizens, Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? I left my computers on for the auto update for the last couple of weeks and nada... :( For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Thu Aug 26 15:03:45 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Thu Aug 26 15:03:48 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic Message-ID: <1093557825.d66fea9cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> If you've got WXP Pro, it was only permitted (IIRC) today or yesterday. It went out to WXP Home ed. users a week or so ago. The idea was to spread it out a little, decreasing the hit on the servers. There might also have been a geographic component to it- if you're really interested, I can go back over the newsletters I've deleted over the past two weeks. :-) Brian Pickering MS Slave -----Original Message----- From: ron mosher To: "aslml-aslml.net@lists" Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:49:09 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic Listizens, Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? I left my computers on for the auto update for the last couple of weeks and nada... :( 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 weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Thu Aug 26 15:22:44 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Thu Aug 26 15:22:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: <1093557825.d66fea9cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> References: <1093557825.d66fea9cBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Message-ID: <412E62B4.806@mbj.nifty.com> Yup, I just got it for WinXP pro yesterday and haven't had any problems with it yet. My wife has a Japanese version of the OS and it isn't available for her just yet. 75MB if I remember. Will Brian Pickering (ASL) wrote: > If you've got WXP Pro, it was only permitted (IIRC) today or yesterday. It went out to WXP Home ed. users a week or so ago. The idea was to spread it out a little, decreasing the hit on the servers. > > There might also have been a geographic component to it- if you're really interested, I can go back over the newsletters I've deleted over the past two weeks. :-) > > Brian Pickering > MS Slave > > -----Original Message----- > From: ron mosher > To: "aslml-aslml.net@lists" > Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:49:09 -0500 > Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic > > Listizens, > > Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? > > I left my computers on for the auto update for the last couple of weeks and > nada... :( > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > From garciagd at velocity.net Thu Aug 26 15:28:45 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Thu Aug 26 15:24:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826164641.01b541f8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <001001c48bbc$0ed3f1a0$09c7d342@whelan> hello! As a network administrator, who has over 500 machines, I'd wait for the update to ensure there are no serious "bugs" (which there WILL be some bugs). >From what I read, this update changes a lot of the OS and when has Microsoft EVER got it right the first time:>) I only know one person who updated (a Gateway laptop). Now he has a brand new FDISKed hard drive, as the "update" messed totally crashed his machine and he had to start from scratch. IMHO, I always wait a few weeks to let others be the Microsoft Guinea Pig. The last XP update had patches right away. I turned off all the automatic updates on my machines at work. I'd also make certain I backed up all data before the update. just my two cents anyway. Peace Roger From sambelcher at cablespeed.com Thu Aug 26 15:44:01 2004 From: sambelcher at cablespeed.com (Sam Belcher) Date: Thu Aug 26 15:44:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826164641.01b541f8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: I'd wait a bit.... about 10 or 15% of the professionals who downloaded this are having problems. And there is a list of software that works "differently" after the SP2 install. I'd just wait a few weeks... Some people are starting to see the update notices. On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:49:09 -0500 ron mosher wrote: >Listizens, > >Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? > >I left my computers on for the auto update for the last >couple of weeks and nada... :( > > >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 jbarber at meic.org Thu Aug 26 15:55:08 2004 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Thu Aug 26 15:55:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Burning wreck LOS question Message-ID: OK, here's the situation: Say you have one of those long 3 or 4 hex row houses like 10AA4. There is a burning wreck in bypass of AA5 along the AA5/Z5 hexside. Is fire coming from the opposite side of the rowhouse, from DD4 for example into AA5 hindered by the wreck blaze? Similarly, what about fire from BB5 to AA4, hindered? Thanks in advance. -- Jeff Barber From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Aug 26 15:59:35 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu Aug 26 15:59:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826164641.01b541f8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826175903.01b52e70@pop3.direcway.com> At 05:44 PM 8/26/2004, Sam Belcher wrote: >I'd wait a bit.... about 10 or 15% of the professionals who downloaded >this are having problems. And there is a list of software that works >"differently" after the SP2 install. >I'd just wait a few weeks... Thanx everyone--think I'll turn off that update thingee..:) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From mountainview at westelcom.com Thu Aug 26 16:18:05 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Thu Aug 26 16:18:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826164641.01b541f8@pop3.direcway.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20040826175903.01b52e70@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <001601c48bc2$f583ac20$be8d6b0c@NewhpGeorge> I came home today and my PC was already screwed up. Now, with wife and two kids, that's not altogther unusual... ;-) But, my connection settings were gone, as was (informed by wife), the printer driver. Upon restart and trying to get everything back up, the update became available. I ran it. Mail works, looks like the Internet is OK too. VASL is working. So, for now, the *important* stuff is OK! I'll hafta check on other stuff as I go.... Will update y'all if needs be. Pun intended. :-) Christopher Fleury Sgt. Meikle's Bunker Mountain View Cottage Lewis, NY USS Iowa; BB-61 Camp Dudley #12557 ASL 6+1 ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Sam Belcher" ; "ron mosher" ; "aslml-aslml.net@lists" Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 6:59 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Way off topic > At 05:44 PM 8/26/2004, Sam Belcher wrote: >>I'd wait a bit.... about 10 or 15% of the professionals who downloaded >>this are having problems. And there is a list of software that works >>"differently" after the SP2 install. >>I'd just wait a few weeks... > > Thanx everyone--think I'll turn off that update thingee..:) > > > 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 jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Thu Aug 26 20:19:48 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Aug 26 17:12:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OARS Mort? Message-ID: <412EA854.5DBA@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; So what is the latest with OARS? Dead? Life support? Hurtin' bad? Whatever happened to its being absorbed by WHQ and how would it work? =Jim= From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 17:17:13 2004 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu Aug 26 17:17:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: <001601c48bc2$f583ac20$be8d6b0c@NewhpGeorge> Message-ID: <20040827001713.3814.qmail@web40002.mail.yahoo.com> Against my better judgement, I up-graded yesterday. Everything seems to run as before without doing any push-ups like re-installing drivers, etc.... Internet settings seemed just fine. There is an annoying feature that cuts out pop-ups. There are a lot of sites that I use, like my credit union account log in, that uses pop-ups. You can dis-able the pop-up disable (?) "feature" for a given web site. A bit of a pain until you've gone to the web sites and made them right. Not a big thing in the grand scheme of things. It has only been one day and the IT folks at work specifically told us to NOT install SP 2, but that was due to conflicts with specific corporate programs that I don't have on my personal machine. I'll let you know if things go South all of a sudden.... Jazz From nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com Thu Aug 26 17:50:23 2004 From: nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Thu Aug 26 17:53:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OARS Mort? In-Reply-To: <412EA854.5DBA@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <412EA854.5DBA@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <412E854F.8000409@rogers.com> Not dead. Not on life support. Not hurting. Just in statis. OARS will return at some point, I'm hoping soon. With the ASL Forums merger now complete, I can focus on OARS. BTW, I would like to hand it off to someone willing to take care of it, as I can't give it the time it deserves (as you've certainly noticed). If anyone is interested, please email me. I have to rewrite parts of it, and I'd rather do so in a way that will accomodate the next mainter best. As usual, this does NOT affect the ASLML in anyway. Nat Jim McLeod wrote: > Listerz; > > So what is the latest with OARS? > > Dead? > > Life support? > > Hurtin' bad? > > Whatever happened to its being absorbed by WHQ and how would it work? > > > =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 Thu Aug 26 21:43:42 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Thu Aug 26 18:36:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OARS Mort? References: <412EA854.5DBA@mb.sympatico.ca> <412E854F.8000409@rogers.com> Message-ID: <412EBBFE.5F9E@mb.sympatico.ca> Nathaniel Mallet wrote: > > Not dead. Not on life support. Not hurting. Just in statis. > > OARS will return at some point, I'm hoping soon. With the ASL Forums > merger now complete, I can focus on OARS. > > BTW, I would like to hand it off to someone willing to take care of it, > as I can't give it the time it deserves (as you've certainly noticed). > If anyone is interested, please email me. I have to rewrite parts of it, > and I'd rather do so in a way that will accomodate the next mainter best. > > As usual, this does NOT affect the ASLML in anyway. Nat, kudos to you for picking up OARS and bringing it along as far as you did. I checked out the WFHQ site (as an aside, "warefare" is one word is it not? "WHQ" seems to be more appropriate but I digress ...) and briefly looked at their Ladder system. It looks straight forward enough but one thing in particular caught my attnetion. The military rank being associated with one's rating is creepy. IMO cardboard commander wannabe's who attach a military rank to a game rating denigrate those who are actual serving members of the military. Again, JMO. The game rating mechanics of OARS, and its predecesor AREA, are tried and true. I hope that someone out there can take up the task and keep OARS going. =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 26 18:48:16 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (bprobst@netspace.net.au) Date: Thu Aug 26 18:48:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Burning wreck LOS question Message-ID: <103120-22004852714816815@M2W042.mail2web.com> >OK, here's the situation: Say you have one of those long 3 or 4 hex row >houses like 10AA4. There is a burning wreck in bypass of AA5 along the >AA5/Z5 hexside. Is fire coming from the opposite side of the rowhouse, >from DD4 for example into AA5 hindered by the wreck blaze? Similarly, >what about fire from BB5 to AA4, hindered? SMOKE is Inherent -- it always fills the entire Location. (NRBH so can't give you exact rules quote.) So there is SMOKE in every part of AA5 (including hexsides). The fact that the source of the SMOKE is in bypass is irrelevant. At the same time, it doesn't exist anywhere *outside* of the Location -- so there is no SMOKE in any hex adjacent to AA5. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Aug 26 23:23:16 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu Aug 26 23:23:19 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Burning wreck LOS question In-Reply-To: <103120-22004852714816815@M2W042.mail2web.com> References: <103120-22004852714816815@M2W042.mail2web.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:48:16 -0400, "bprobst@netspace.net.au" wrote: >At the same time, it doesn't exist anywhere *outside* of the Location -- so >there is no SMOKE in any hex adjacent to AA5. To qualify this statement -- of course a Mild Breeze means that SMOKE will drift downwind, and the SMOKE does exist in higher levels of the same *hex*, not just the Location .... ... but you knew what I meant, I hope . ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com Thu Aug 26 23:41:40 2004 From: bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Thu Aug 26 23:32:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: <20040827001713.3814.qmail@web40002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040827063210.20CF498588@che.dreamhost.com> Heck, the pop-up-stopper is one of the features I like the best. Of things I use everyday (SQL, Visual Studio, Outlook, IE) I haven't had any problems during the three months since I started dogfooding it (a "benefit" of working for the Dark Side...). We have seen some problems in the app we're developing, though- all fixed before SP2 went out the door. Even Ethereal (a network sniffer) was working well for me today, and that depends pretty-deeply on network functionality. Perfect? No, nothing is. However, after having to spend a couple hours each cleaning some of the co-workers' machines when they hit some spyware a month ago, I'm glad of anything that decreases the size of the target I present. Anyway, so long as you're behind SOME kind of firewall (software or hardware), and running anti-virus of SOME kind, feel free to hold off on updating. The risk isn't all that bad. Brian "Shill for Bill :-)" Pickering > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Jazz > Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 5:17 PM > To: Mountain View Cottage; aslml-aslml.net@lists > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Way off topic > > Against my better judgement, I up-graded yesterday. > > Everything seems to run as before without doing any push-ups > like re-installing drivers, etc.... > Internet settings seemed just fine. > > There is an annoying feature that cuts out pop-ups. There > are a lot of sites that I use, like my credit union account > log in, that uses pop-ups. You can dis-able the pop-up > disable (?) "feature" > for a given web site. A bit of a pain until you've gone to > the web sites and made them right. > Not a big thing in the grand scheme of things. > > It has only been one day and the IT folks at work > specifically told us to NOT install SP 2, but that was due to > conflicts with specific corporate programs that I don't have > on my personal machine. > > I'll let you know if things go South all of a sudden.... > > Jazz > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Aug 27 01:40:39 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Fri Aug 27 01:40:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AREA Rating System Message-ID: <412EF387.9080009@mbj.nifty.com> Does anyone remember the system for scoring people under the old AREA rating system from like 10 years ago? I just remember that you were started at 1500 and then awarded variable points based upon your rating as compared to your opponent. It was a zero sum game with players basically exchanging points depending on who won. Beating a lower ranked person resulted in you getting few points and your opponent losing fewer. Beating a higher ranked guy resulted in you getting more points and him losing more. Does anyone remember the exact formulas and any other details of the system? Will From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Aug 27 06:59:06 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Aug 27 06:59:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AREA Rating System In-Reply-To: <412EF387.9080009@mbj.nifty.com> References: <412EF387.9080009@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040827085833.01954148@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:40 AM 8/27/2004, Will Fleming wrote: >Does anyone remember the system for scoring people under the old AREA >rating system from like 10 years ago? I just remember that you were >started at 1500 and then awarded variable points based upon your rating as >compared to your opponent. They have a new system, but here is old one: http://www.wargameacademy.org/Area/area_scor.html For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Aug 27 07:01:41 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri Aug 27 07:02:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AREA Rating System In-Reply-To: <412EF387.9080009@mbj.nifty.com> References: <412EF387.9080009@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040827090055.019c1848@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:40 AM 8/27/2004, Will Fleming wrote: >It was a zero sum game with players basically exchanging points depending >on who won. > >Beating a lower ranked person resulted in you getting few points and your >opponent losing fewer. > >Beating a higher ranked guy resulted in you getting more points and him >losing more. > >Does anyone remember the exact formulas and any other details of the system? also, from same site: TWO PLAYER GAME SCORING SYSTEM: At the conclusion of a match, the loser should provide a victory chit to the winner which is forwarded to the appropriate administration. This can be done postally or by email. If done by email, the administrator should seek verification from both players. Point are won and lost according to the dictates of the Provisional Numeric Rating Chart. (Provisional status is only used in ASL) THE FORMULA A simple formula is used: 35+((Losing player's rating - Winning player rating)*0.5) For game ending in a draw: (Losing player's rating - Winning player rating)*0.5 ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From morrisgj at mscd.edu Fri Aug 27 07:51:29 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Fri Aug 27 07:51:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can OT vehicles setup in buildings, etc. Message-ID: <1197110077.1007711971@mscd.edu> Hello All: Can OT vehicles like Carriers setup in bog terrain? A2.9 Setup Limitations says "but vehicles can set up free of Bog/Immobilization in hexes whose entry might cause Bog". This would seem to allow carriers to setup in buildings, etc. However B23.41 Cellars says: "Only a fully-tracked, CT, BU AFV without Riders may enter a building obstacle" Thanks for your help. Gerry From jtracy at bankofny.com Fri Aug 27 07:57:31 2004 From: jtracy at bankofny.com (jtracy@bankofny.com) Date: Fri Aug 27 07:55:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can OT vehicles setup in buildings, etc. Message-ID: Gerry: OT vehicles may not set up in nor enter a building Location. However, a closed-top vehicle may, and if set up there, may be CE at the start of the game. If you enter during play you must be BU but may then go CE once 'inside' (assuming you don't land in the cellar). Hope this helps, 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 damavs at alltel.net Fri Aug 27 07:56:53 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Fri Aug 27 07:56:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can OT vehicles setup in buildings, etc. Message-ID: <20040827145653.XBIH17206.ispmxmta05-srv.alltel.net@[166.102.165.30]> Gerry (morrisgj@mscd.edu) writes: > Can OT vehicles like Carriers setup in bog terrain? Sure, presuming otherwise allowed to enter. > A2.9 Setup Limitations says "but vehicles can set up free of Bog/Immobilization in hexes whose entry might cause Bog". This would seem to allow carriers to setup in buildings, etc. Well it wouldn't prevent it, but it also doesn't allow it either. It just says you don't have to take a bog check if you set up in a hex where you'd normally take a bog check to enter. > However B23.41 Cellars says: "Only a fully-tracked, CT, BU AFV without Riders may enter a building obstacle" Right - OT vehicles can never be in a building proper, so no carriers in buildings, if that's what you're really asking. Carriers can setup for free in bog hexes they could legally enter though like woods, adjacent to marsh, etc. w/o taking a bog check. But buildings are a no-no for any OT vehicle. Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net From morrisgj at mscd.edu Fri Aug 27 08:16:25 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Fri Aug 27 08:16:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Offboard Observers in OVHS? Message-ID: Hello All: I don't think there are Offboard Observers available in OVHS but confused as CG8 mentions them. Cannot see any way to buy them so assume you cannot have them in OVHS despite the reference in CG8 (see below). Correct? OVHS CG8 (page Z25) states, "Each side is liminted to using a maximum of two OBA modules per CG scenario (with "usage" of a module for this purpose being defined as having its radio, fieldphone, or Offboard Observer in play at any time during a CG scenario)...Any radios, field phones, Offboard Observers,and pre-registered hexes are also eliminated." Thanks for you help, Gerry From pete at rockdata.com Fri Aug 27 12:19:47 2004 From: pete at rockdata.com (pete@rockdata.com) Date: Fri Aug 27 12:18:59 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Since we are off topic anyway..... Message-ID: <15636.143.127.131.4.1093634387.squirrel@www.rockdata.com> Forget the XP service pack. If, at all possible, try to avoid getting hit in the head with a tree. It really hurts and will continue to hurt even 10 days after the fact. Pete "Charlie you bastard" Belford From fingram at powercom.net Fri Aug 27 13:43:18 2004 From: fingram at powercom.net (Fred Ingram) Date: Fri Aug 27 13:43:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OARS Message-ID: Why not pass the torch to the ROAR site: work with the administrator there to add the little routine which does the comparison math. As mentioned before, ROAR already has all of the infrastructure needed for OARS except the calculation routine (which should be pretty darn simple thing to implement) Message: 11 Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:50:23 -0400 From: Nathaniel Mallet Subject: Re: [Aslml] OARS Mort? To: jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net Message-ID: <412E854F.8000409@rogers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Not dead. Not on life support. Not hurting. Just in statis. OARS will return at some point, I'm hoping soon. With the ASL Forums merger now complete, I can focus on OARS. BTW, I would like to hand it off to someone willing to take care of it, as I can't give it the time it deserves (as you've certainly noticed). If anyone is interested, please email me. I have to rewrite parts of it, and I'd rather do so in a way that will accomodate the next mainter best. As usual, this does NOT affect the ASLML in anyway. ========================================================= Fred B. Ingram: Project Manager - Universal Technical Systems Visit the UTS Website: http://www.uts.com Corporate Headquarters Rockford Trust Building 202 West State Street, Suite 700 Rockford, IL 61101 USA Business Phone (Primary): 815-963-2220 Business Phone (Secondary): 920-929-4065 Business FAX: 815-963-8884 Business E-mail: FredI@uts.com or fingram@powercom.net From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Aug 27 19:16:05 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Aug 27 17:13:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AREA Rating System References: <412EF387.9080009@mbj.nifty.com> Message-ID: <412FEAE5.1F91@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Will Fleming wrote: > Does anyone remember the system for scoring people under the old AREA > rating system from like 10 years ago? Yes. > I just remember that you were started at 1500 and then awarded variable points based > upon your rating as compared to your opponent. All players new to AREA did in fact start off their odyssey at 1500. > It was a zero sum game with players basically exchanging points > depending on who won. Pretty much. > Beating a lower ranked person resulted in you getting few points and > your opponent losing fewer. > > Beating a higher ranked guy resulted in you getting more points and him > losing more. > > Does anyone remember the exact formulas and any other details of the system? Will, I have the details in a binder downstairs. Basically, the point win/loss changed by 5 points for every 50 point multiple in the difference in ratings. IIRC, two players at 1500 would have 70 points on the table and that amount was halved so that the winner actually received 35 points and the loser would lose 35 points. If one player was 1551 and the other was 1500, the higher rated player would gain/lose 32 points and the lower rated player would gain 38 points, so on and so on. There was also a provision for new players to be termed as being Provisionally Rated players. The PR players would win/lose the full shot of points for their first 10 games. OARS used the exact same method of point determination. If you need further information Will, please give me a shout. Hmmmm, if no one picks up the ball here I will have to dust off my old AREA log book and start doing these things the old fashioned way again. :) =Jim= From diane-mike at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 27 19:42:14 2004 From: diane-mike at sympatico.ca (M Rodgers) Date: Fri Aug 27 19:42:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Q on SSR 3 in A69 Broich Bash Message-ID: <20040828024218.IOVD18869.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@DFMH1441> Anyone understand the point of SSR3? SSR 3: After German setup, but prior to the start of play, the US player must announce which edge (north, south, or west) his units will enter. I don't get it. The German player will see, after the German setup, on which edge the US player sets up the American units. So what is the point of announcing it? Am I missing something? TIA Michael ( near bashing own head over this one ) Rodgers diane-mike@sympatico.ca Montreal, Canada From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Aug 27 23:12:32 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Aug 27 20:05:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2004 CASLO: 21 Days Until The Fun Begins! Message-ID: <41302250.46A7@mb.sympatico.ca> Dice Monkeys! Only 21 days until battle begins! Please visit the CASLA website for more information. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Fri Aug 27 23:16:23 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Fri Aug 27 20:08:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OARS References: Message-ID: <41302337.7501@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz Fred wrote: > Why not pass the torch to the ROAR site: work with the administrator there > to add the little routine which does the comparison math. As mentioned > before, ROAR already has all of the infrastructure needed for OARS except > the calculation routine (which should be pretty darn simple thing to > implement) I have always thought that this was what should be done. JR, if you are out there, can this be done and would you be willing to do so? =Jim= From denis at teachlinux.com Fri Aug 27 20:18:25 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Fri Aug 27 20:18:28 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040826164641.01b541f8@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: I've had it for a few weeks,I think the day it came out. you need it? Denis On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, ron mosher wrote: > Listizens, > > Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? > > I left my computers on for the auto update for the last couple of weeks and > nada... :( > > > 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 mountainview at westelcom.com Fri Aug 27 20:48:31 2004 From: mountainview at westelcom.com (Mountain View Cottage) Date: Fri Aug 27 20:48:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Q on SSR 3 in A69 Broich Bash References: <20040828024218.IOVD18869.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@DFMH1441> Message-ID: <009201c48cb1$e4b5b470$be8d6b0c@NewhpGeorge> German Moves First. ----- Original Message ----- From: "M Rodgers" To: "ASLML" Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 10:42 PM Subject: [Aslml] Q on SSR 3 in A69 Broich Bash > Anyone understand the point of SSR3? > > SSR 3: After German setup, but prior to the start of play, the US player > must announce which edge (north, south, or west) his units will enter. > > I don't get it. The German player will see, after the German setup, on > which > edge the US player sets up the American units. So what is the point of > announcing it? Am I missing something? > > TIA > > Michael ( near bashing own head over this one ) Rodgers > diane-mike@sympatico.ca > Montreal, Canada > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Aug 27 21:02:21 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 27 21:02:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Can OT vehicles setup in buildings, etc. In-Reply-To: <1197110077.1007711971@mscd.edu> References: <1197110077.1007711971@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:51:29 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >Can OT vehicles like Carriers setup in bog terrain? Sure, any type of vehicle can set up in any type of terrain *that they're permitted to enter*. A2.9. >A2.9 Setup Limitations says "but vehicles can set up free of Bog/Immobilization in hexes whose entry might cause Bog". This would seem to allow carriers to setup in buildings, etc. No, now you're asking a different question. "Bog Terrain" is an inclusive term that describes many terrain types; buildings are only one of those types. The specific prohibition on OT vehicles in buildings is a separate issue to the general allowance of setup. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Fri Aug 27 21:12:43 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 27 21:12:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Offboard Observers in OVHS? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:16:25 -0600, morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >I don't think there are Offboard Observers available in OVHS but confused as CG8 mentions them. Cannot see any way to buy them so assume you cannot have them in OVHS despite the reference in CG8 (see below). Correct? > >OVHS CG8 (page Z25) states, "Each side is liminted to using a maximum of two OBA modules per CG scenario (with "usage" of a module for this purpose being defined as having its radio, fieldphone, or Offboard Observer in play at any time during a CG scenario)...Any radios, field phones, Offboard Observers,and pre-registered hexes are also eliminated." I think you are correct, there are no offboard observers in OVHS. What we have here, probably, is an adaptation of other rules (in this case, probably the KGP CG rules) where the fact that there are no offboard observers has been overlooked and thus mention of them has not been removed. (Or possibly, in playtest versions of the OVHS CG there were offboard observers and they were subsequently removed, without this rule being edited to match). I expect that this sort of thing will not be uncommon as MMP strive to use a "generic" set of CG rules that they copy and paste for each new CG. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com Fri Aug 27 21:29:05 2004 From: bpickeringasl at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Fri Aug 27 21:19:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828041932.9540D985AA@che.dreamhost.com> Or, just go to http://www.microsoft.com/protect Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > denis@teachlinux.com > Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 8:18 PM > To: ron mosher > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Way off topic > > > I've had it for a few weeks,I think the day it came > out. you need it? > > Denis > > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, ron mosher wrote: > > > Listizens, > > > > Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? > > > > I left my computers on for the auto update for the last couple of > > weeks and nada... :( > > > > > > For the nonce, > > ron > > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Aug 27 22:16:30 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri Aug 27 22:16:34 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Q on SSR 3 in A69 Broich Bash In-Reply-To: <20040828024218.IOVD18869.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@DFMH1441> References: <20040828024218.IOVD18869.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@DFMH1441> Message-ID: <9750j0hceuarelvqhnh35k6l8j96ohg04a@4ax.com> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:42:14 -0400, "M Rodgers" wrote: >I don't get it. The German player will see, after the German setup, on which >edge the US player sets up the American units. So what is the point of >announcing it? Am I missing something? The Germans are moving first, so there is no US setup prior to play. Don't forget the errata -- the direction of the "North" arrow should be reversed. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Sat Aug 28 06:05:46 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Sat Aug 28 06:05:50 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Patrick O'Brien Message-ID: <4130832A.6070109@mbj.nifty.com> Patrick, Are you here? I think a scenario got erroneously entered in the ROAR. Will From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sat Aug 28 07:27:15 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sat Aug 28 07:27:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <14c4c11824.1182414c4c@mscd.edu> Hello All: Finished 19AM as the Canadian. Have 9 LVP. Lost 16 squads, 8 Shermans and 1 Carrier A. Germans have lost 10.5 squads, 3 x 88s, 6 crews, 1 HMG, 2 x MMG, and 4 x LMG. I control area delineated by JJ9-U17-B19. Has anyone won this as the Canadians? How am I doing given the above? Would I be crazy not to buy the I1 Inf Coy on 19PM? Thinking of buying the Carrier section instead. I don't see how I will be able to take that many more LVP on 19PM as his RGs will be coming in close to some of these LVPs (will be right on many of them at end of turn 1). Any chance we can get some OVHS debate going here like we sometimes see on RB? I am trying to be a better player so would appreciate any help. Thanks very much, Gerry From denis at teachlinux.com Sat Aug 28 07:34:54 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Sat Aug 28 07:34:57 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Way off topic Message-ID: Better link, www.linux.com Sorry Brian, just had to do it.. ;) Denis On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Brian Pickering (ASL) wrote: > Or, just go to http://www.microsoft.com/protect > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of > > denis@teachlinux.com > > Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 8:18 PM > > To: ron mosher > > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Way off topic > > > > > > I've had it for a few weeks,I think the day it came > > out. you need it? > > > > Denis > > > > > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, ron mosher wrote: > > > > > Listizens, > > > > > > Anybody get the Windows vaporware, Service Pack 2, yet? > > > > > > I left my computers on for the auto update for the last couple of > > > weeks and nada... :( > > > > > > > > > For the nonce, > > > ron > > > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > > webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > > > > > > From rjmosher at direcway.com Sat Aug 28 07:38:24 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sat Aug 28 07:38:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane question Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040828093624.0195d398@pop3.direcway.com> Listomaniacs, Have laid a fire lane, using a 9-1 leader with the setup shot. Does he continue to negate the chance of cowering as the enemy runs thru the fire lane? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Sat Aug 28 07:44:17 2004 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (Klas Malmstrom) Date: Sat Aug 28 07:44:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane question In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040828093624.0195d398@pop3.direcway.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040828093624.0195d398@pop3.direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.1.20040828164314.01ab5bc8@pop.mail.yahoo.se> Hi, At 16:38 2004-08-28, ron mosher wrote: >Listomaniacs, > >Have laid a fire lane, using a 9-1 leader with the setup shot. Does he >continue to negate the chance of cowering as the enemy runs thru the fire lane? Fire Lane (as other Residual FP I believe) is not subject to cowering. See A7.9 A7.9: "Cowering affects all fire except that from a SMC, berserk or Fanatic unit, Fire Lane,....." Regards, Klas Malmstrom From rjmosher at direcway.com Sat Aug 28 08:08:45 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sat Aug 28 08:09:15 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane question In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.1.20040828164314.01ab5bc8@pop.mail.yahoo.se> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040828093624.0195d398@pop3.direcway.com> <6.1.2.0.1.20040828164314.01ab5bc8@pop.mail.yahoo.se> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040828100611.0195cff8@pop3.direcway.com> At 09:44 AM 8/28/2004, Klas Malmstrom wrote: >Fire Lane (as other Residual FP I believe) is not subject to cowering. >See A7.9 Thanks, CBF(Classic Brain F*rt) by me, was thinking of the old run the tank down the fire lane...trying to break the MG/not force Cower... d'oh. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From btdtall at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 18:48:39 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Sat Aug 28 18:48:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TCA Residual Fire Question Message-ID: <20040829014839.80505.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Listers- Residual Fire rules state that any positive modifier outside of the placed residual hex lowers the amount of resid for every positive DRM. They then offer examples like CX, BU, etc. I am assuming then that a TCA/VCA change would lower the resid as well. Let me know if I am wrong.....just double checkin here..Thanks in advance. _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sat Aug 28 20:34:40 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sat Aug 28 18:55:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <14c4c11824.1182414c4c@mscd.edu> Message-ID: <41314ED0.1495@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Gerry wrote, > Any chance we can get some OVHS debate going here like we sometimes see on RB? I am trying to be a better player so would appreciate any help. I can't help you with any OVHS advice as I have not played that CG yet. However, I am qualified on the topic of becoming a better player. Roll low. Hot dice have improved my game more than any amount of rules knowledge or tactical insight in ASL ever have. Hot dice ... absolutely ... hot dice are the key. ;) =Jim= From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sat Aug 28 19:17:35 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sat Aug 28 19:18:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <13ea41499b.1499b13ea4@mscd.edu> Hello Jim: I was sad to see your name in the From box. Kinda guessed how helpful you would be. Take care, Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim McLeod Date: Saturday, August 28, 2004 9:34 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > Listerz; > > Gerry wrote, > > > Any chance we can get some OVHS debate going here like we > sometimes see on RB? I am trying to be a better player so would > appreciate any help. > > I can't help you with any OVHS advice as I have not played that CG > yet. > However, I am qualified on the topic of becoming a better player. > > Roll low. > > Hot dice have improved my game more than any amount of rules knowledge > or tactical insight in ASL ever have. > > Hot dice ... absolutely ... hot dice are the key. > > ;) > > > =Jim= > > From jim.white at dol.net Sat Aug 28 19:40:00 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sat Aug 28 19:45:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT Deployment question again Message-ID: <047201c48d71$7c286720$6501a8c0@workstation1> I asked this question before and got an answer which made sense at the time (thanks M. Rodgers) where he stated I can go with the standard 10% rule or Marines can deploy freely since they are the Seaborne Assault side. However, looking at G14.1 it states "If a scenario is defined by SSR as being a Seaborne Assault..." Well one would think that invading Betio would be such a Seaborne Assault...yet I can find no reference or SSR stating such anywhere in Chapter T. Am I missing something here? Thanks, Jim From jim.white at dol.net Sat Aug 28 19:59:36 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sat Aug 28 20:00:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT LVT questions Message-ID: <047601c48d74$385f7800$6501a8c0@workstation1> The Vehicle Notes for the LVT(A)2 (Note 50) and the LVT2(m) (Note 59 in Chapter T) both reference U.S. Multi-Applicable Vehicle Notes H and Q. This raises a question: Note H refers you to the diagram for U.S. Vehicle Note 51 which clearly indicates separate Covered Arcs for the three machine guns. Note Q states "These MG may fire together as a FG or a separate targets..." How can these MG be used as a FG when they have fixed Covered Arcs that are different from each other? The only possible situation I can see is in the actual body of Note 51 (2nd paragraph) where it explains the Covered Arcs but with an Exception for CC...where I guess they are allowed to FG together. So which is it? Is Note H is correct? Or is Note Q correct? Or is the Exception in Note 51 the only time they can FG? Thanks in advance. Jim From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Aug 28 20:13:49 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat Aug 28 20:13:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <3a5ac4$7gke9a@mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net> > From: morrisgj@mscd.edu > Date: 2004/08/28 Sat AM 09:27:15 CDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > > Have 9 LVP. Lost 16 squads, 8 Shermans and 1 Carrier A. Germans have lost 10.5 squads, 3 x 88s, 6 crews, 1 HMG, 2 x MMG, and 4 x LMG. > > I control area delineated by JJ9-U17-B19. > > Has anyone won this as the Canadians? How am I doing given the above? > Yes, we wiped the board clean of the Nazi scourge. The scenario did go the full length but it was offer a good two turns before that. The last couple of turns was just peremiter consolidation. > Would I be crazy not to buy the I1 Inf Coy on 19PM? Thinking of buying the Carrier section instead. > I know a lot of folks like to debate buy this buy that for CG. The truth is, buy infantry...as much infantry as you can...whenever you can. This applies across any CG. > I don't see how I will be able to take that many more LVP on 19PM as his RGs will be coming in close to some of these LVPs (will be right on many of them at end of turn 1). > I have played this CG from both sides at least once. Based on that I would say...you'er hurtin for certain. Your are behind the curve. The Canucks must average almost 11 LVP per scenario. That means you have to attack. Otherwise the German can just keep going idle...which puts you further and further behind the curve. Thing is, the Canuck only gets two attack chits. Having to use one this early is probably a mortal blow. > Any chance we can get some OVHS debate going here like we sometimes see on RB? I am trying to be a better player so would appreciate any help. > The Canuck _MUST_ end the first scenario with at least 11 LVP. The only sure way to do that is to take the milk factory. Don't spread across to broad a front...concentrate your axis of attack along the paved road. It is the quickest way to the most LVP. The key is the placement and planning of the creepers. You need to roll in right behind the barrages. Taking advantage of the impact on the Germans as well as the +2 hinder. Drop smoke early and often. Every Canuck unit has some type of smoke capability. Don't worry about the AFV...sacrifice them gladly to preserve your infantry. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Aug 28 20:19:36 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat Aug 28 20:19:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane question Message-ID: <3a57rt$7ak6fq@mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net> > > From: ron mosher > Date: 2004/08/28 Sat AM 09:38:24 CDT > To: "aslml-aslml.net@lists" > Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane question > > Listomaniacs, > > Have laid a fire lane, using a 9-1 leader with the setup shot. Does he > continue to negate the chance of cowering as the enemy runs thru the fire lane? > FL is not subject to cowering (See A9.222). Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 29 01:23:58 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 29 01:24:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] TCA Residual Fire Question In-Reply-To: <20040829014839.80505.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040829014839.80505.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:48:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote: > Residual Fire rules state that any positive >modifier outside of the placed residual hex lowers the >amount of resid for every positive DRM. They then >offer examples like CX, BU, etc. I am assuming then >that a TCA/VCA change would lower the resid as well. >Let me know if I am wrong.....just double checkin >here..Thanks in advance. *Any* positive DRM from outside the Location ... so yes, TCA changes are one of the many types of positive DRM that can reduce the amount of residual placed. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 29 01:33:05 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 29 01:33:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT LVT questions In-Reply-To: <047601c48d74$385f7800$6501a8c0@workstation1> References: <047601c48d74$385f7800$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:59:36 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >The Vehicle Notes for the LVT(A)2 (Note 50) and the LVT2(m) (Note 59 in >Chapter T) both reference U.S. Multi-Applicable Vehicle Notes H and Q. This >raises a question: > >Note H refers you to the diagram for U.S. Vehicle Note 51 which clearly >indicates separate Covered Arcs for the three machine guns. Try reading Note H again. It refers you to the Vehicle Note 51 diagram while discussing the LVT4 *as an EX*. >Note Q states "These MG may fire together as a FG or a separate targets..." > >How can these MG be used as a FG when they have fixed Covered Arcs that are >different from each other? Because the reference to Vehicle Note 51 is *only* talking about the LVT4 (as an EX), *not* the LVT(A)2 or the LVT2(m) (or anything else). The AAMG on the LVT(A)2 and LVT(m) are *not* restricted in CA 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 Sun Aug 29 01:38:32 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 29 01:38:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT Deployment question again In-Reply-To: <047201c48d71$7c286720$6501a8c0@workstation1> References: <047201c48d71$7c286720$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:40:00 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >However, looking at G14.1 it states "If a scenario is defined by SSR as >being a Seaborne Assault..." Well one would think that invading Betio would >be such a Seaborne Assault...yet I can find no reference or SSR stating such >anywhere in Chapter T. > >Am I missing something here? Yes, you are missing the BRT SSR (on the back of scenario card BRT7). In particular, SSR BRT4. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 jim.white at dol.net Sun Aug 29 03:54:39 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sun Aug 29 03:55:14 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT Deployment question again References: <047201c48d71$7c286720$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: <048a01c48db6$98a45f90$6501a8c0@workstation1> Overheard on an LVT on the way to Betio: Private White: "Hey LT...don't you think we should split up a little?" Lt. Dumbass: "Now you know we are only allowed to do that with some of our troops" Private White: "Yea but isn't this a Seaborne Assault?" Lt. Dumbass: "I looked everywhere last night and no where did I see in our SSRs that this was a Seaborne Assault. Here...I'll show you. Lt. Dumbass then jumps over the side of the LVT and promptly disappears underwater for a few seconds popping back up soaking wet in the wake of the LVT as it continues on. Gunny Sergeant Probst watching Lt. Dumbass begin wading in then turns to Private White and says: "See...never listen to a 6+1" Private White: "Thanks BP...from now on I'll try to find and read all the SSRs myself" Jim "I *knew* this was an ocean" White ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "James S. White Jr." Cc: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 4:38 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] BRT Deployment question again On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:40:00 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >However, looking at G14.1 it states "If a scenario is defined by SSR as >being a Seaborne Assault..." Well one would think that invading Betio >would >be such a Seaborne Assault...yet I can find no reference or SSR stating >such >anywhere in Chapter T. > >Am I missing something here? Yes, you are missing the BRT SSR (on the back of scenario card BRT7). In particular, SSR BRT4. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 jim.white at dol.net Sun Aug 29 04:09:00 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sun Aug 29 04:10:09 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT LVT questions References: <047601c48d74$385f7800$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: <049e01c48db8$985b84d0$6501a8c0@workstation1> I guess this also explains why Note Q does NOT apply to the LVT4 :-) Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "James S. White Jr." Cc: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 4:33 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] BRT LVT questions On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:59:36 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >The Vehicle Notes for the LVT(A)2 (Note 50) and the LVT2(m) (Note 59 in >Chapter T) both reference U.S. Multi-Applicable Vehicle Notes H and Q. >This >raises a question: > >Note H refers you to the diagram for U.S. Vehicle Note 51 which clearly >indicates separate Covered Arcs for the three machine guns. Try reading Note H again. It refers you to the Vehicle Note 51 diagram while discussing the LVT4 *as an EX*. >Note Q states "These MG may fire together as a FG or a separate targets..." > >How can these MG be used as a FG when they have fixed Covered Arcs that are >different from each other? Because the reference to Vehicle Note 51 is *only* talking about the LVT4 (as an EX), *not* the LVT(A)2 or the LVT2(m) (or anything else). The AAMG on the LVT(A)2 and LVT(m) are *not* restricted in CA in any way. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavour." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jim.white at dol.net Sun Aug 29 06:03:50 2004 From: jim.white at dol.net (James S. White Jr.) Date: Sun Aug 29 06:10:05 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT Landing schedules Message-ID: <050f01c48dc8$a5b4c640$6501a8c0@workstation1> Referencing BRT CG2.4 for the playing of CG III. There are At-Start, Follow-On, Regimental Reserve, and Divisional Reserve BLT's available. No problems there. The Follow-On, Regimental Reserve, and Divisional Reserver BLT's are listed as Reinforcement Types and "None of these Reinforcement Types are available for entry until all units of the Marine player's At-Start BLT have completely entered the map [EXC: A Follow-On Battalion *may* (my emphasis) be eligible for entry when all of the At-Start BLT have entered each of their formations numbered from F1-F5......]" Question: the rules specify *may* be eligible...what is the criteria then that allows them to do that? Is it simply the F1-F5 criteria? If so then why didn't it just state that a Follow-On Battalion "is" eligible when that occurs? If there is some other criteria...where is it? Continuing within the CG2.4 paragraph: [EXC: .... However, if the Follow-On Battalion enters before any of the other Formations of those At-Start Battalions, then all Formations of the Follow-On Battalion must enter before any of the remaining At-Start BLT Formations may enter." Ok..taken in context this makes sense. My question though is this: Suppose I enter (during CG III) all three At-Start BLT's Formations F1 through F5 on the 20 AM CG Date. Now if for some reason I scheduled my (supposing I was allowed to per the first question above) complete Follow-On Battalion to enter in the First and Second Wave of the 20 PM CG Date...am I allowed to also Schedule some remaining Formations from the At-Start Battalions to enter in the Third Wave during that same Date since by the time Turn 5 rolls around the entire Follow-On Battalion will have theoretically already Entered the map? Or is it not allowed to even Schedule these remaining At-Start Formations until the entire Follow-On Battalion had Entered the map? Thanks, Jim From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 29 10:45:19 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 29 07:50:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <13ea41499b.1499b13ea4@mscd.edu> Message-ID: <4132162F.6CCA@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Gerry wrote, > Hello Jim: > > I was sad to see your name in the From box. Kinda guessed how helpful you would be. > > Take care, Gerry, sometimes hot dice are all that will save a persons game. I do not know how long you have been playing but if after digesting the rule book and having played 20 or so games one should have a fairly good grasp of the basics. You will also have a difficult time improving your game if you only play within a small circle of players. As much as some people "pooh-pooh" on tournaments, they are your best learning ground. But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there regardless of further experience and instruction. =Jim= From rln22 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 09:16:54 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Sun Aug 29 09:16:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Test In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040829161654.78799.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> First time on this format. Be gentle. Beseler __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Aug 29 10:25:32 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun Aug 29 10:25:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <13ea41499b.1499b13ea4@mscd.edu> <4132162F.6CCA@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <004e01c48ded$3072c510$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Jim; You are being far too humble. > But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or > discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there > regardless of further experience and instruction. > Wynn "Oh Lord, Pease Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood" Polnicky From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Aug 29 14:00:24 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun Aug 29 13:51:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> On Sunday, August 29, 2004 12:45 PM, Jim McLeod [SMTP:jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca] wrote: > > But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or > discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there > regardless of further experience and instruction. Jim, I think you are being far to hard on yourself! Just be patient...in time you will get it. Also, loosening that grip on your stainless steel ASOP couldn't hurt either. ;-) Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sun Aug 29 14:38:38 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sun Aug 29 14:38:41 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <1a5cd16e9c.16e9c1a5cd@mscd.edu> Hello All: Thanks for the help Tate. I did not get much cover out of two of the Creeping Barrages. I set them up in the West (I10), Center (R8), and East (MM7). West and East moved in both PFPh and DFPh. I had two fast CBs as each Kanga can move 7 hexes per turn. West came in one turn early and was too far in front of troops. Center was inaccurate and moved forward 3 hexes on dir/dis DR. East was accurate and gave me some cover. I now think I set these up too far forward (although the dice didn?t help). I was worried that if I set them closer to the N edge (entry area) that they might be inaccurate and drift that way. Probably needed to start them back 4 rows or so? If they drift towards the entry area I would just have to sacrifice some time as opposed to important bodies? Does anyone move two CBs in tandem over one area spaced maybe 4 hexes apart? The Germans had an upfront defense and they killed a lot of everything. I saved the Fireflies. What does one do with the Shermans? If you stop them to fire Smoke they are easy targets for the 88s with rof and consequent Acqs. Take care, Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: Tate Rogers Date: Saturday, August 28, 2004 9:13 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > > From: morrisgj@mscd.edu > > Date: 2004/08/28 Sat AM 09:27:15 CDT > > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > > Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > > > > Have 9 LVP. Lost 16 squads, 8 Shermans and 1 Carrier A. Germans > have lost 10.5 squads, 3 x 88s, 6 crews, 1 HMG, 2 x MMG, and 4 x LMG. > > > > I control area delineated by JJ9-U17-B19. > > > > Has anyone won this as the Canadians? How am I doing given the > above? > > > > Yes, we wiped the board clean of the Nazi scourge. The scenario > did go the full length but it was offer a good two turns before > that. The last couple of turns was just peremiter consolidation. > > > Would I be crazy not to buy the I1 Inf Coy on 19PM? Thinking of > buying the Carrier section instead. > > > > I know a lot of folks like to debate buy this buy that for CG. The > truth is, buy infantry...as much infantry as you can...whenever > you can. This applies across any CG. > > > I don't see how I will be able to take that many more LVP on > 19PM as his RGs will be coming in close to some of these LVPs > (will be right on many of them at end of turn 1). > > > > I have played this CG from both sides at least once. Based on that > I would say...you'er hurtin for certain. > > Your are behind the curve. The Canucks must average almost 11 LVP > per scenario. That means you have to attack. Otherwise the German > can just keep going idle...which puts you further and further > behind the curve. Thing is, the Canuck only gets two attack chits. > Having to use one this early is probably a mortal blow. > > > Any chance we can get some OVHS debate going here like we > sometimes see on RB? I am trying to be a better player so would > appreciate any help. > > > > The Canuck _MUST_ end the first scenario with at least 11 LVP. The > only sure way to do that is to take the milk factory. Don't spread > across to broad a front...concentrate your axis of attack along > the paved road. It is the quickest way to the most LVP. The key is > the placement and planning of the creepers. You need to roll in > right behind the barrages. Taking advantage of the impact on the > Germans as well as the +2 hinder. Drop smoke early and often. > Every Canuck unit has some type of smoke capability. Don't worry > about the AFV...sacrifice them gladly to preserve your infantry. > > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 29 18:17:04 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 29 15:10:25 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> Message-ID: <41328010.894@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Tate Rogers wrote: > Jim, > > I think you are being far to hard on yourself! Just be patient...in time you will get it. I'm always hoping that things will turn around Tate, the struggle is difficult. > Also, loosening that grip on your stainless steel ASOP couldn't hurt either. Disagree. The ASOP is the central column of truth and good in ASL. Without it, there is chaos, confusion and letting squads advance in the CCPh. =Jim= From garciagd at velocity.net Sun Aug 29 15:45:36 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Sun Aug 29 15:41:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> Message-ID: <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> Hello! > > But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or > > discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there > > regardless of further experience and instruction. you know, in a way I agree wholeheartedly. I seem to be at the same playing level now for some time. Since attending my first ASLOK in 2000 (which is when I consider my ASL career started, as I had played very little face to face before then), I did get better, but not a lot. My play level went up quickly right after that ASLOK, but it has not gotten a lot better since that initial "bump" in play level. At the last ASLOK (2003), I went 3-5, but have only won four games since (almost a year). Perhaps part of the problem is that I get most of my play via VASL PBEM. Now VASL is GREAT, but, I seem to get more out of FtF games. That's not to say anything against my VASL PBEM opponents, they are all great, I just seem to play better seeing a "real board" and moving "real counters". I read the Journals, Internet articles, Dispatches, etc. and I read the RB when I can, (of course I STILL cannot seem to remember rules):>), but I need to find more ways to get better. But in the end, for the most part, it is still the greatest game around and I have more fun loosing at ASL than winning at other games. What did some of you guys do to get better? Peace Roger From morrisgj at mscd.edu Sun Aug 29 17:00:44 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Sun Aug 29 17:00:47 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <1315614dde.14dde13156@mscd.edu> Hello Jim: I agree that players will plateau at a certain point. Given my experiences in tournament chess I think there is a possibility of some improvement still. Anyway I love trying to learn. No ftf and unfortunately only 1 x VASL game (OVHS CG) going so improvement will be slow. Take care, Gerry ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim McLeod Date: Sunday, August 29, 2004 11:45 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > Listerz; > > Gerry wrote, > > > Hello Jim: > > > > I was sad to see your name in the From box. Kinda guessed how > helpful you would be. > > > > Take care, > > Gerry, sometimes hot dice are all that will save a persons game. > I do > not know how long you have been playing but if after digesting the > rulebook and having played 20 or so games one should have a fairly > goodgrasp of the basics. You will also have a difficult time > improving your > game if you only play within a small circle of players. As much > as some > people "pooh-pooh" on tournaments, they are your best learning ground. > > But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or > discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there > regardless of further experience and instruction. > > > =Jim= > > > From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Aug 29 17:23:07 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun Aug 29 17:23:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <006501c48e27$862b2620$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Roger asked: > But in the end, for the most part, it is still the greatest game around > and > I have more fun loosing at ASL than winning at other games. > > What did some of you guys do to get better? > Play more, play different opponents, be humble with respect to others rules knowledge. Others will be wrong on specific points, but you'll still learn by listening and doing your research. But you've hit the most important point: it's more fun to lose at ASL than win at many other games. Wynn "Fun Guy but Still Sucks at ASL" Polnicky From janusz.maxe at unf.se Sun Aug 29 17:31:31 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Sun Aug 29 17:31:50 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: Truthfully, honestly try to answer: Why did I loose? Why did he win? What could I've done differently? What move/tactic can I learn from my opponent? If the answer to the two first questions always seem to include the words "dice" or "luck", either, ask how the opponent got into a position to win simlpy by being lucky. Rules are overrated in ASL Janusz > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Fr?n: aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-aslml.net-bounces@lists.aslml.net]F?r morrisgj@mscd.edu > Skickat: den 30 augusti 2004 02:01 > Till: jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca > Kopia: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > ?mne: Re: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > > > Hello Jim: > > I agree that players will plateau at a certain point. Given > my experiences in tournament chess I think there is a > possibility of some improvement still. > > Anyway I love trying to learn. No ftf and unfortunately only > 1 x VASL game (OVHS CG) going so improvement will be slow. > > Take care, > > Gerry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jim McLeod > Date: Sunday, August 29, 2004 11:45 am > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > > > Listerz; > > > > Gerry wrote, > > > > > Hello Jim: > > > > > > I was sad to see your name in the From box. Kinda guessed how > > helpful you would be. > > > > > > Take care, > > > > Gerry, sometimes hot dice are all that will save a persons game. > > I do > > not know how long you have been playing but if after digesting the > > rulebook and having played 20 or so games one should have a fairly > > goodgrasp of the basics. You will also have a difficult time > > improving your > > game if you only play within a small circle of players. As much > > as some > > people "pooh-pooh" on tournaments, they are your best > learning ground. > > > > But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or > > discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there > > regardless of further experience and instruction. > > > > > > =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 Sun Aug 29 20:51:44 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 29 18:01:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <1315614dde.14dde13156@mscd.edu> Message-ID: <4132A450.4765@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Gerry wrote, > I agree that players will plateau at a certain point. Given my experiences in tournament chess I think there is a possibility of some improvement still. > Anyway I love trying to learn. No ftf and unfortunately only 1 x VASL game (OVHS CG) going so improvement will be slow. No FtF and only VASL play will likely hold you back Gerry. I do not know where you live, but if it is at all possible, try to attend a tournament. The benefits are: - A lot of play in a short period of time. - Exposure to different styles of play. - Watching how better players play. - Critical ASL thinking within the limited timeframe of a tournament round. - Improving your rules knowledge. All good stuff. Having a person tell another how to improve their game is of limited usefulness IMO. Playing against someone who does some cool stuff gameplay wise is altogether different. That is something you will benefit from. Tossing Infantry smoke whilst using bypass movement. Who'da thunk? :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 29 21:05:11 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 29 18:01:21 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <4132A777.6E3F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; I wrote, > > > But, there are some players for whom no amount of advice and or > > > discussion can help. They play at a certain level and remain there > > > regardless of further experience and instruction. Roger replied, > you know, in a way I agree wholeheartedly. I seem to be at the same playing > level now for some time. Since attending my first ASLOK in 2000 (which is > when I consider my ASL career started, as I had played very little face to > face before then), I did get better, but not a lot. > > My play level went up quickly right after that ASLOK, but it has not gotten > a lot better since that initial "bump" in play level. At the last ASLOK > (2003), I went 3-5, but have only won four games since (almost a year). > > Perhaps part of the problem is that I get most of my play via VASL PBEM. > Now VASL is GREAT, but, I seem to get more out of FtF games. That's not to > say anything against my VASL PBEM opponents, they are all great, I just seem > to play better seeing a "real board" and moving "real counters". > I read the Journals, Internet articles, Dispatches, etc. and I read the RB > when I can, (of course I STILL cannot seem to remember rules):>), but I > need to find more ways to get better. Knowing the rules and applying them to one's benefit are two different beasts. Study of the game is good but it isFtF practice, practice, practice that will get you to the final at ASLOK ... that is, practice and the timely 2 that pulls your buns out of the fire. Anyone who insists that luck does not win games is mistaken. > But in the end, for the most part, it is still the greatest game around and > I have more fun loosing at ASL than winning at other games. Here here Roger, well said. > What did some of you guys do to get better? - Lose the fear of moving. - Understand how Defensive Fire works and use that knowledge to allow you to move your moving units more safely. - Be aggressive in the attack - Learn to defend, which IMO is harder than learning to attack. - Roll a bunch of 2's, 3's and 4's when you really need them. :) =Jim= From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Sun Aug 29 18:04:14 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Sun Aug 29 18:04:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. In-Reply-To: <1315614dde.14dde13156@mscd.edu> References: <1315614dde.14dde13156@mscd.edu> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: > I agree that players will plateau at a certain point. Given my > experiences in tournament chess I think there is a possibility of some > improvement still. Jim makes a very important point. An isolated group of players will only improve as quickly as the slowest member. If your tactics will beat all your buddies', then you've pretty much maxed out. You won't be able to tell if new strategies work better than old ones, because they both work just fine. It's when you go to a tournament and play new faces that you learn new tricks (or teach them). Who cares if you come out on top of the standings. The real gain at a tournament is when you say "Hey, I never thought of doing it that way!" Marty Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Aug 29 18:34:14 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 29 18:34:35 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. In-Reply-To: <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> Message-ID: <8n05j09q8r07767jr6ed853fcb9jk7gved@4ax.com> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:45:36 -0400, "rwhelan" wrote: >What did some of you guys do to get better? Play more; in particular, play people who I did not teach the rules to. They taught me things I had never considered. (I occasionally taught them stuff, too; every opponent has something to offer you.) (After all, a lot of the rules holes that have been identified have been from newbies asking questions like "but where does it *say* that?". But that's a different topic.) I have found that there's nothing quite so instructive as getting your arse thoroughly whomped, assuming that you pay attention to how it's being done of course. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 29 18:41:22 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 29 18:41:29 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9115j0tf11iov7r6oi87rgeea5jk8ccrbq@4ax.com> On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:31:31 +0200, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >Rules are overrated in ASL I disagree. You need to know how the rules work in order to exploit them. It's the *exploitation* of those rules that drive tactics. You don't need to know the rules to devise an overall plan, of course, and having a sound overall plan is the first, perhaps essential, step in gaining a victory. But understanding the minutia of when the opponent can and can't shoot at you, or *exactly* what you can do and when you can do it in order to minimise the opponent's options is absolutely crucial, and you can't get that understanding without a deep knowledge of the rules. Note that "knowledge of the rules" doesn't necessarily mean that you can quote them by heart; rather, I take it to mean that (a) you know that the rule exists (and what it means), and (b) you know where to find it when you need it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Sun Aug 29 19:01:46 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun Aug 29 19:01:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] BRT Landing schedules In-Reply-To: <050f01c48dc8$a5b4c640$6501a8c0@workstation1> References: <050f01c48dc8$a5b4c640$6501a8c0@workstation1> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 09:03:50 -0400, "James S. White Jr." wrote: >Referencing BRT CG2.4 for the playing of CG III. >Question: the rules specify *may* be eligible...what is the criteria then >that allows them to do that? Is it simply the F1-F5 criteria? Yes, I think so. (I haven't actually played the BRT CG myself, so I'm just following what the rules say.) >If so then why didn't it just state that a Follow-On Battalion "is" eligible when that >occurs? If there is some other criteria...where is it? There aren't other criteria, but there is the rest of the EXC to consider -- i.e., it *may* be eligible, but you may not want to do it because of what it will mean to the other reinforcing units. I guess it boils down to who you think you need on-map first. >Continuing within the CG2.4 paragraph: [EXC: .... However, if the Follow-On >Battalion enters before any of the other Formations of those At-Start >Battalions, then all Formations of the Follow-On Battalion must enter before >any of the remaining At-Start BLT Formations may enter." > >Ok..taken in context this makes sense. My question though is this: Suppose >I enter (during CG III) all three At-Start BLT's Formations F1 through F5 on >the 20 AM CG Date. Now if for some reason I scheduled my (supposing I was >allowed to per the first question above) complete Follow-On Battalion to >enter in the First and Second Wave of the 20 PM CG Date...am I allowed to >also Schedule some remaining Formations from the At-Start Battalions to >enter in the Third Wave during that same Date since by the time Turn 5 rolls >around the entire Follow-On Battalion will have theoretically already >Entered the map? Or is it not allowed to even Schedule these remaining >At-Start Formations until the entire Follow-On Battalion had Entered the >map? You schedule units by recording Turn of Entry (CG2.3) ... so you just need to record the Turns of Entry of the various Follow-On units, and then schedule the remaining At-Start units to enter after those. You just need to make sure that you don't schedule reinforcements to enter on a Turn after the scenario ends! (Which shouldn't be too hard; if I understand T15.6205 correctly, unlike most other CG the scenario length is not random.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 mastadon61 at cox.net Sun Aug 29 19:14:59 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Sun Aug 29 19:15:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] test Message-ID: <20040830021501.LPLQ6106.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> test From mastadon61 at cox.net Sun Aug 29 19:23:08 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Sun Aug 29 19:23:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] playing better ASL Message-ID: <20040830022311.QKEN12802.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Good thread. How to win? Rule #1 - Prep is for sissies. Don Hancock From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 29 22:48:56 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 29 19:45:52 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Paging Rick White Message-ID: <4132BFC8.4C10@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Paging Rick White ... Rick White ... Please drop me a line if you receive this message. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Sun Aug 29 22:53:11 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Sun Aug 29 19:46:03 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLML v. WFHQ Message-ID: <4132C0C7.1FF8@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Just pondering out loud here ... When comparing the ASLML "apple" to the WFHQ "orange", I very much prefer the ASLML "apple". I tried going through all the topics in WFHQ but it is tedious. I very much prefer the "gun and run" style of the ASLML plus, ... we have Tate Rogers AND the Bruces in spades. As they say, "'nuff said." =Jim= From steven.linton at telstra.com Sun Aug 29 20:16:06 2004 From: steven.linton at telstra.com (steven.linton) Date: Sun Aug 29 20:16:17 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. Message-ID: <653e34655730.655730653e34@email.bigpond.com> Now here's an interesting question: > > What did some of you guys do to get better? > Initially, I found the old email version of ASL useful - gave me the time to think about a range of options without boring my opponents to tears. Also let me spend a bit of time reading the rulebook with regard to actual situations (remember kiddies, Mike McGrath says 'read the rulebook at least once a year'). Tournaments, however, are the biggie. My game has improved markedly since I first went to ASLOK and Intensive Fire in '99 - and mainly because it helped me with a lot of little things in a range of unpredictable situations. My regular opponents are a great bunch of guys, but it is easy to develop a series of anti-X strategies after a while. Bruce mentioned how instructive getting thrashed can be. This is true, and calls to mind my number 1 rule of ASL. NEVER give up. Until it is physically impossible for you to win, keep playing. Try out tactics you wouldn't usually use, watch how efficient your opponent is in finishing you off, look at how you might have avoided the situation. My pet hate is players who conceed on turn 2 of a six turn game because their best leader just died. Especially when I've had to travel to play. Some of my opponents will maintain this is all bunk, and maintain that its all my good dice - or their bad dice. This is, on the whole, a load of crap. Sometimes you win games you have no right to because your dice are white hot: so what? It all averages out, but people always remember the extremes. How many people come up with the "I took out his last unit when I rolled a 7 for an NMC then he rolled an 8 and failed". Never - its always critical hits on tigers or battle-hardening conscripts on 36 -2 shots. Oh yes - and ignore Jim - he's never been out of Canada, and for very good reasons. :-) Steve From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Aug 29 20:57:47 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun Aug 29 20:49:16 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck (was: Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please.) Message-ID: <01C48E1B.9A8CDAC0.gr27134@charter.net> On Sunday, August 29, 2004 11:05 PM, Jim McLeod [SMTP:jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca] wrote: > > Anyone who insists that luck does not win games is mistaken. A snakes or boxcar can not be predicted and do not alone make/break any match. Being in position to take advantage of the roles is usually much more important than the rolls themselves. Why is it that we see pretty much the same folks finishing in the top of tourney after tourney. If luck was really that critical or even marginally significant...we would see a constant turn over of players at the top of the tourney circuit. But we don't. This tells me that there is a fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals always seem to have "good luck". OTOH, this fact would never prevent me from claiming I got diced! ;-) Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From weflemi at mbj.nifty.com Mon Aug 30 02:35:10 2004 From: weflemi at mbj.nifty.com (Will Fleming) Date: Mon Aug 30 02:35:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] playing better ASL In-Reply-To: <20040830022311.QKEN12802.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20040830022311.QKEN12802.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: <4132F4CE.3000306@mbj.nifty.com> Prep is for SMOKE :) Any wonder I suck playing the Russians? Will mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > Good thread. > > How to win? > > Rule #1 - Prep is for sissies. > > > 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 garciagd at velocity.net Mon Aug 30 04:31:15 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Mon Aug 30 04:35:31 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> <8n05j09q8r07767jr6ed853fcb9jk7gved@4ax.com> Message-ID: <000501c48e84$dc68cee0$f301010a@gecac.org> >I have found that there's nothing quite so instructive as getting your arse thoroughly whomped, Well this I agree on. One small case in point: Watching JR Tracey set up two Firelanes to mow my guys down as they tried to get across the board. I had to get to a certain place, he knew it, planned for it and, of course, mowed 'em down:>) Peace Roger From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 05:55:06 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Aug 30 05:55:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck (was: Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please.) Message-ID: > >A snakes or boxcar can not be predicted and do not alone make/break any >match. Being in position to take advantage of the roles is usually much >more important than the rolls themselves. > I believe Napoleon Bonaparte would agree with this. I remember reading this about Napoleon: When studying his opponent, Napoleon would ask whether the enemy commander was "bold". By this he meant, was his opponent "lucky". "Luck" in this context does not mean recklessly abandoning your fate to the vagaries of chance. Rather, Napoleon believed that one can only be lucky if one puts oneself in a position to take advantage of that luck. That has always stuck with me. It seems like pretty good advice, both in life and in ASL. > >This tells me that there is a >fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals always >seem to have "good luck". > I agree. I would add that consistency also seems to be a key to fundamental play. If confronted with a situation, the good players will deal with it the same way every time. They don't seem to try new things "on the fly". I suspect that the *really* good players are always aware of the odds during any given situation, and always make the choice that gives them the best odds of success. And they do this consistently. Then, when the dice speak, they are in a position to take immediate advantage. > >OTOH, this fact would never prevent me from claiming I got diced! > Yep, it does happen. It's the nature of the ASL beast. The way I have tried to mitigate the effects of Luck is by not placing myself in a situation whereby I can only succeed with a lucky dice roll. I.e., I try to avoid situations where I *need* a "2" to be successful. (During the End Game, I will sometimes try crazy things if it's really the only chance I have...) To rely upon luck is to invite defeat. To place oneself in a situation where the dice can result in "good" luck as opposed to just "bad" luck... therein lies opportunity. 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 jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 09:16:44 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 06:51:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <01C48DE1.4B32E080.gr27134@charter.net> <000d01c48e19$e673eca0$09c7d342@whelan> <8n05j09q8r07767jr6ed853fcb9jk7gved@4ax.com> <000501c48e84$dc68cee0$f301010a@gecac.org> Message-ID: <413352EC.364A@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Roger wrote, > One small case in point: Watching JR Tracey set up > two Firelanes to mow my guys down as they tried to get across the board. I > had to get to a certain place, he knew it, planned for it and, of course, > mowed 'em down:>) Well done JR! However, how often have you seen this same situation but the first MG cowers and the other rolls a 12? Of course you the canny squad leader foresaw something like this possibly happening and put a Leader with one of the MG's, just in case double rear their ugly head. But guess what? The Leader is with the MG that malf'd ... DOH! About the only thing one can truly expect in ASL is the unexpected. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 09:58:20 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 06:51:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck References: Message-ID: <41335CAC.4249@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; A fellow lister wrote, > >A snakes or boxcar can not be predicted and do not alone make/break any > >match. Disagree. It can happen. > > Being in position to take advantage of the roles is usually much > > more important than the rolls themselves. They work hand in hand IMO, it comes down to when the dood dice happen. Bruce replied, > I believe Napoleon Bonaparte would agree with this. Would this be the same Napoleon Bonaparte that got his butt whupped in Russia? The same guy who met his Waterloo in ... well, Waterloo? :) We'll give NB Austerlitz but his opponents there were fools. As they say, brains will get you so far and sooner or later everyone's luck runs out. > I remember reading this about Napoleon: When studying his opponent, > Napoleon would ask whether the enemy commander was "bold". By this he > meant, was his opponent "lucky". "Luck" in this context does not mean > recklessly abandoning your fate to the vagaries of chance. Rather, Napoleon > believed that one can only be lucky if one puts oneself in a position to > take advantage of that luck. I disagree Bruce. Napoleon may have been wondering if his opponent played by the accepted tactics of the day, in other words, will my opponent do something my troops will not expect and my troops will panick and run? Napoleon could plan around the fact that his opponent is an orthodox by the book general but he could not do the same if his opponent was unpredictable. > That has always stuck with me. It seems like pretty good advice, both in > life and in ASL. Ever watch that Clint Eastwood movie "Heartbreak Ridge"? If so, remember how recce' was always ambushed at the same spot? Does that fact make the ambusher a good ambusher or the ambushee a dope? > >This tells me that there is a > >fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals always > >seem to have "good luck". > I agree. Now, when we talk luck, are we talking about the dice because that it was I am referring to. Luck is not putting your HIP MG/Gun in just the right place. Luck is getting 8 shots from that same weapon. > I would add that consistency also seems to be a key to fundamental play. If > confronted with a situation, the good players will deal with it the same way > every time. They don't seem to try new things "on the fly". I suspect that > the *really* good players are always aware of the odds during any given > situation, and always make the choice that gives them the best odds of > success. And they do this consistently. OK, so if I know my opponent is going to hit my strongpoint, move his MG kill stack into that obvious overwatch position and then send a flank force behind the woods to get around my strongpoint, then my opponent is being consistent, correct? Now if this is the case, I would have, if available in this scenario, that overwatch position Boresighted with my nasty ol' mortar and have a HIPster covering that stretch of OG that my opponent must cross to get behind me. I love it when my opponent is consistent because I can anticipate what he is going to do and take the appropriate countermeasures to defeat him. By the way Bruce, Rommel would argue your comment, "They don't seem to try new things "on the fly"." Erwin seemed to have done not bad during his tenure as a Panzer Division Commander. ;) > Then, when the dice speak, they are in a position to take immediate > advantage. You may be confusing what constitutes luck in ASL Bruce, luck is only with the dice. Anything else that happens on the mapboards is a direct result of the players own decisions. The wisdom of your decision is very often directly related to the outcome of the diceroll your decision invited. > The way I have tried to mitigate the effects of Luck is by not placing > myself in a situation whereby I can only succeed with a lucky dice roll. > I.e., I try to avoid situations where I *need* a "2" to be successful. > (During the End Game, I will sometimes try crazy things if it's really the > only chance I have...) Everyone seems to focus on the "2" factor when discussing luck and ASL. Luck with dice is getting the number you need, not necessarily the lowest number possible. If you need a 7 to pass an NMC without pinning to exit a squad to win by 1 EVP, is that due to excessive luck? > To rely upon luck is to invite defeat. Agreed. > To place oneself in a situation where the dice can result in "good" luck as opposed to > just "bad" luck... therein lies opportunity. Agreed again, but in the end, the dice decide. =Jim= From snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu Mon Aug 30 07:16:43 2004 From: snowm at ucsu.colorado.edu (Martin Snow) Date: Mon Aug 30 07:16:46 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck (was: Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please.) In-Reply-To: <01C48E1B.9A8CDAC0.gr27134@charter.net> References: <01C48E1B.9A8CDAC0.gr27134@charter.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Aug 2004, Tate Rogers wrote: > On Sunday, August 29, 2004 11:05 PM, Jim McLeod > [SMTP:jmmcleod@mb.sympatico.ca] wrote: > > > > Anyone who insists that luck does not win games is mistaken. > > A snakes or boxcar can not be predicted and do not alone make/break any > match. Being in position to take advantage of the roles is usually much > more important than the rolls themselves. > The smaller the scenario, the larger effect a single DR can have. A CH on the 9-2 led MG nest can indeed be the deciding factor in a tournament-sized scenario. > Why is it that we see pretty much the same folks finishing in the top of > tourney after tourney. If luck was really that critical or even marginally > significant...we would see a constant turn over of players at the top of A lucky streak can certainly win a game. Probably two. But 3-0 on luck alone is unlikely, and a 4-0 record can't be the result of non-duck dice. > the tourney circuit. But we don't. This tells me that there is a > fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals always > seem to have "good luck". > A good player will almost always beat a rookie, but between two roughly equal players, the dice can have a significant effect. Martin Snow <*> snowm@ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/Home.html From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 13:32:18 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 10:24:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Where's OARS? Message-ID: <41338ED2.219A@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; I tried to find OARS at, http://oars.asl-forums.net ... and I find that all has moved to WFHQ. Fair enough, but once at WFHQ, there is no mention of OARS. I will assume that OARS is now "finito". Does anyone have JR's email address? I want to ask him if he can setup a rating system within ROAR. TIA. =Jim= From sgtono at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 12:36:31 2004 From: sgtono at yahoo.com (Keith Todd) Date: Mon Aug 30 12:36:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WFHQ Message-ID: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> Jim, Nat last said that he had the OARS stuff but I cannot find his address. I too find the WFHQ very klunky, so I am changing back from ASLML digest to individual. And thanks for the help with the Canadian ASLers. Keith _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 16:25:02 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 13:23:32 2004 Subject: [Aslml] 2003/2004 Top Canadian Competition Report Message-ID: <4133B74E.693F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Hail and welcome! The Ranking updates have been few this year but we are closing in on the only one that counts, the Final Ranking for the Top Canadian Competition for 2003/2004. With five tournaments to report on this year, we have Gerry Proudfoot pulling away from the herd with a comfortable 121.43 point lead. M. Proudfoot would appear to have a lock on things but the CASLO is coming up and we should have a field in the mid to high 20's for the final tournament of the CASLA tournament year. Also, there is a Manitoba tournament that needs to be reported yet so there will be an adjustment made to the rankings just before the CASLO. Anywho, here they are! The contenders for the Top Canadian Competition for 2003/2004! Rank Player Tourn. Played Total Points 1 PROUDFOOT, Gerry 4 298.32 2 L'ARCHEVEQUE, Bruno 3 176.89 3 EARLE, Adrian 1 161.10 4 KOVACS, Darren 1 100.62 5 BUTTERWORTH, David 1 96.66 6 WONG, Wai 1 80.55 7 ESCOBEDO, Andre 2 77.40 8 MCLEOD, Jim 1 67.08 9 McDIARMID, John 1 64.44 10 PAVLE, Chris 1 55.48 11 KNIPPEL, Steve 2 48.99 12 MacKENZIE, Robert 1 48.33 13 HOEKSTRA, J.P. 1 48.33 14 LINDBLAD, Erik 3 47.76 15 RAYMOND, J.P. 2 46.12 16 MATHESON, Dwayne 1 33.54 17 SUDERMAN, Paul 1 33.54 18 BELLAMY, Blair 1 32.22 19 SPENCE, Sean 1 27.74 20 BOURGEAULT, Mike 1 16.77 21 SCHOULS, Harvey 1 16.11 22 HOEKSTRA, Nick 1 16.11 23 WILLIAMS, Russell 1 16.11 24 DORION, Denis 2 15.54 25 OUELLETTE, Mathieu 1 15.54 26 RICHER, Pierre 1 15.24 27 RODGERS, Michael 2 15.24 28 HENRY, Brent 1 13.87 29 LEVREAULT, Ron 1 0.00 30 FEDAK, Brent 1 0.00 31 MARTIN, Mike 1 0.00 32 LAIMER, Eric 1 0.00 33 JOHNSTONE, Clayton 1 0.00 34 COLIC, Alex 1 0.00 35 GUERETTE, Francois 1 0.00 36 STRONG, Mike 1 0.00 37 FERNANDEZ, Luis 1 0.00 38 MCKOWN, Rick 1 0.00 Good gunning out there in cardboard hell and I hope to see you at the CASLO. =Jim= From wrongway at nowonline.net Mon Aug 30 14:11:03 2004 From: wrongway at nowonline.net (pete shelling) Date: Mon Aug 30 14:13:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] improving your ASL game Message-ID: <001a01c48ed5$dd46cf00$1d108304@default> 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 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 14:18:39 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Aug 30 14:18:42 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck Message-ID: > > I remember reading this about Napoleon: When studying his opponent, > > Napoleon would ask whether the enemy commander was "bold". By this he > > meant, was his opponent "lucky". "Luck" in this context does not mean > > recklessly abandoning your fate to the vagaries of chance. Rather, >Napoleon > > believed that one can only be lucky if one puts oneself in a position to > > take advantage of that luck. > >I disagree Bruce. Napoleon may have been wondering if his opponent >played by the accepted tactics of the day, in other words, will my >opponent do something my troops will not expect and my troops will >panick and run? > Well, don't disagree with me. I was only reporting what I read. If you don't agree with that assessment of Napoleon, take it up with the author. I believe it was from "The Face of Battle", but I'm not certain. (An outstanding book, by the way.) Perhaps I'll see if I can find it. > > >This tells me that there is a > > >fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals >always > > >seem to have "good luck". > > > I agree. > >Now, when we talk luck, are we talking about the dice because that it >was I am referring to. Luck is not putting your HIP MG/Gun in just the >right place. Luck is getting 8 shots from that same weapon. > When it comes to ASL, "luck" consists of how the dice play. That's what I essentially mean. As far as your example is concerned, ROF means diddlee-squat if the weapon is not at the right place. So not only do you have to be "lucky" with your dice (i.e. receive ROF), but you also have to be in the right place to take advantage of that luck (i.e. be in a position to fire at multiple targets). The former you cannot control; the latter you can control -- and if you are really lucky, the opponent will oblige by placing targets. Good luck for you that your MG was in just that place, good luck for you that your opponent waltzed down that path, and good luck with the dice rolling. Luck all around, but not exclusively dice play. > > I would add that consistency also seems to be a key to fundamental play. > If > > confronted with a situation, the good players will deal with it the same >way > > every time. They don't seem to try new things "on the fly". I suspect >that > > the *really* good players are always aware of the odds during any given > > situation, and always make the choice that gives them the best odds of > > success. And they do this consistently. > Before getting you to your reply, I would like to amend this a bit. What I mean by "consistency" in this context is in connection with how a player chooses among probabilities. At any given moment, there may be several options available to a player, each with a different probability of success. A "consistent" player, in that context, would without fail choose the option with the greatest probability of success; or at least, "play it the same" most times. This may or may not make the move predictable. >OK, so if I know my opponent is going to hit my strongpoint, move his MG >kill stack into that obvious overwatch position and then send a flank >force behind the woods to get around my strongpoint, then my opponent is >being consistent, correct? > That is not what I meant, exactly. To answer your question, I would suggest that certain tactics suggest themselves. Insofar as your opponent may "do the same thing" every time, I would agree that it is certainly consistent. It may also be predictable, which IMO is not necessarily that same as being consistent. >Now if this is the case, I would have, if available in this scenario, >that overwatch position Boresighted with my nasty ol' mortar and have a >HIPster covering that stretch of OG that my opponent must cross to get >behind me. > If the situation is really as predictable and clear-cut as you are laying out, then certainly you would respond as you describe. So what's the big deal? I would venture that many scenarios, once played, would lend themselves to a certain level of predictability, especially if both sides have already played the scenario. There are just so many options available, when it comes to specific strategies to meet the Victory Conditions. >I love it when my opponent is consistent because I can anticipate what >he is going to do and take the appropriate countermeasures to defeat >him. > You have outlined a pretty obvious situation, IMO. Using the tenets of sound tactics, you should be able to predict how your opponent might tackle the situation. Based on that prediction, you would take appropriate counter-measures. This has nothing to do with luck, and really not what I meant by "consistent". >By the way Bruce, Rommel would argue your comment, "They don't seem to >try new things "on the fly"." > The context you put it in, is not how I meant it. I can see how you could take my earlier comments that way. Certainly a good ASL player will try new things, but I don't believe such a player would be consistently successful by always trying new things, and certainly would not be successful by not consistently playing the highest probabilities. >Erwin seemed to have done not bad during his tenure as a Panzer Division >Commander. ;) > Is this the same commander that got "whupped" in El Alamein... and Tunisia... and Normandy? :-) > > Then, when the dice speak, they are in a position to take immediate > > advantage. > >You may be confusing what constitutes luck in ASL Bruce, luck is only >with the dice. > Of course. I'm not confused on the matter. >Anything else that happens on the mapboards is a direct >result of the players own decisions. The wisdom of your decision is >very often directly related to the outcome of the diceroll your decision >invited. > Well, yes. And the good players put themselves in positions whereby they *can* be "lucky". In other words, they put themselves in positions that optimize their chance for success and mitigate their chance for failure. ROF is worthless if your Gun is pointing the wrong way. Fire Lanes don't have a chance to wreak havoc is they aren't covering the avenues of approach. That good IFT DR comes to naught if you do not calculate the DRM > > The way I have tried to mitigate the effects of Luck is by not placing > > myself in a situation whereby I can only succeed with a lucky dice roll. > > I.e., I try to avoid situations where I *need* a "2" to be successful. > > (During the End Game, I will sometimes try crazy things if it's really >the > > only chance I have...) > >Everyone seems to focus on the "2" factor when discussing luck and ASL. >Luck with dice is getting the number you need, not necessarily the >lowest number possible. > I was using an example only. >If you need a 7 to pass an NMC without pinning to exit a squad to win by >1 EVP, is that due to excessive luck? > > > To rely upon luck is to invite defeat. > >Agreed. > > > To place oneself in a situation where the dice can result in "good" luck >as opposed to > just "bad" luck... therein lies opportunity. > >Agreed again, but in the end, the dice decide. > > > > =Jim= > _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From mastadon61 at cox.net Mon Aug 30 14:35:04 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Mon Aug 30 14:35:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] playing better ASL Message-ID: <20040830213504.DXIQ11100.fed1rmmtao11.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> > > From: Will Fleming > Date: 2004/08/30 Mon AM 05:35:10 EDT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] playing better ASL > > Prep is for SMOKE :) > You have smoke, lucky you. I believe the most important skill to learn in ASL is when to shoot prep fire and when to move. In a typical scenario, when I'm in doubt as to whether to shoot or not, I always move. This works for both attacker and defender. As defender, do you prep fire and hope to get lucky with the dice and take out his 9-2 led hmg stack in the building, or do you skulk back out of his LOS. As the attacker, except for a few key fire stacks (like the 9-2 led hmg), it's usually better to apply pressure by moving forward/around the defender. As mentioned previously, understand when the defender CANNOT shoot at you. A common tactic is to move a HS near or adjacent to a defender. Hopefully, he'll use his first fire, then that defending unit cannot shoot subsequent fire at anybody farther away. Another common tactic to prevent fire is to move an AFV into bypass of a key defending unit (AFV Sleeze). Another thing I like to do is to advance into the street adjacent to a defender to apply pressure. Back it up with lot's of firepower. If the defender stays to prep, you can hammer him in your defensive fire phase. Often they'll skulk away. If they come back, you can Prep with PBF, or move the unit last to restrict SFF. These are tactics that work for me. What do you guys commonly do? Thanks, Don Hancock > Any wonder I suck playing the Russians? > > Will > > mastadon61@cox.net wrote: > > Good thread. > > > > How to win? > > > > Rule #1 - Prep is for sissies. > > > > > > 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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 14:59:59 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon Aug 30 15:00:08 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck Message-ID: Crappage! I sent a double post... hit "send" instead of "save".... Sorry. :-( Most of the following is a repeat of my last post... > > I remember reading this about Napoleon: When studying his opponent, > > Napoleon would ask whether the enemy commander was "bold". By this he > > meant, was his opponent "lucky". "Luck" in this context does not mean > > recklessly abandoning your fate to the vagaries of chance. Rather, >Napoleon > > believed that one can only be lucky if one puts oneself in a position to > > take advantage of that luck. > >I disagree Bruce. Napoleon may have been wondering if his opponent >played by the accepted tactics of the day, in other words, will my >opponent do something my troops will not expect and my troops will >panick and run? > Well, don't disagree with me. I was only reporting what I read. If you don't agree with that assessment of Napoleon, take it up with the author. I believe it was from "The Face of Battle", but I'm not certain. (An outstanding book, by the way.) Perhaps I'll see if I can find it. > > >This tells me that there is a > > >fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals >always > > >seem to have "good luck". > > > I agree. > >Now, when we talk luck, are we talking about the dice because that it >was I am referring to. Luck is not putting your HIP MG/Gun in just the >right place. Luck is getting 8 shots from that same weapon. > When it comes to ASL, "luck" primarily consists of how the dice play. That's what I essentially mean. As far as your example is concerned, ROF means diddlee-squat if the weapon is not at the right place. So not only do you have to be "lucky" with your dice (i.e. receive ROF), but you also have to be in the right place to take advantage of that luck (i.e. be in a position to fire at multiple targets). The former you cannot control; the latter you can control -- and if you are really lucky, the opponent will oblige by placing targets. Good luck for you that your MG was in just that place, good luck for you that your opponent waltzed down that path, and good luck with the dice rolling. Luck all around, but not exclusively dice play. > > I would add that consistency also seems to be a key to fundamental play. > If > > confronted with a situation, the good players will deal with it the same >way > > every time. They don't seem to try new things "on the fly". I suspect >that > > the *really* good players are always aware of the odds during any given > > situation, and always make the choice that gives them the best odds of > > success. And they do this consistently. > Before getting to your reply, I would like to amend this a bit. What I mean by "consistency" in this context is in connection with how a player chooses among probabilities. At any given moment, there may be several options available to a player, each with a different probability of success. A "consistent" player, in that context, would without fail choose the option with the greatest probability of success; or at least, "play it the same" most times. This may or may not make the move predictable. >OK, so if I know my opponent is going to hit my strongpoint, move his MG >kill stack into that obvious overwatch position and then send a flank >force behind the woods to get around my strongpoint, then my opponent is >being consistent, correct? > That is not what I meant, exactly. To answer your question, I would suggest that certain tactics suggest themselves. Insofar as your opponent may "do the same thing" every time, I would agree that it is certainly consistent. It may also be predictable, which IMO is not necessarily the same as being consistent. >Now if this is the case, I would have, if available in this scenario, >that overwatch position Boresighted with my nasty ol' mortar and have a >HIPster covering that stretch of OG that my opponent must cross to get >behind me. > If the situation is really as predictable and clear-cut as you are laying out, then certainly you would respond as you describe. So what's the big deal? I would venture that many scenarios, once played, would lend themselves to a certain level of predictability, especially if both sides have already played the scenario. There are just so many options available, when it comes to specific strategies to meet the Victory Conditions. >I love it when my opponent is consistent because I can anticipate what >he is going to do and take the appropriate countermeasures to defeat >him. > You have outlined a pretty obvious situation, IMO. Using the tenets of sound tactics, you should be able to predict how your opponent might tackle the situation. Based on that prediction, you would take appropriate counter-measures. This has nothing to do with luck per se, and really not what I meant by "consistent". >By the way Bruce, Rommel would argue your comment, "They don't seem to >try new things "on the fly"." > The context you put it in, is not how I meant it. I can see how you could take my earlier comments that way. Certainly a good ASL player will try new things, but I don't believe such a player would be consistently successful by always trying new things, and certainly would not be successful by not consistently playing the highest probabilities. >Erwin seemed to have done not bad during his tenure as a Panzer Division >Commander. ;) > Is this the same commander that got "whupped" in El Alamein... and Tunisia... and Normandy? :-) > > Then, when the dice speak, they are in a position to take immediate > > advantage. > >You may be confusing what constitutes luck in ASL Bruce, luck is only >with the dice. > Of course. I'm not confused on the matter. >Anything else that happens on the mapboards is a direct >result of the players own decisions. The wisdom of your decision is >very often directly related to the outcome of the diceroll your decision >invited. > Well, yes. And the good players put themselves in positions whereby they *can* be "lucky". In other words, they put themselves in positions that optimize their chance for success and mitigate their chance for failure. ROF is worthless if your Gun is pointing the wrong way. Fire Lanes don't have a chance to wreak havoc if they aren't covering the avenues of approach. That good IFT DR comes to naught if you do not calculate the DRM and FP column that give you the best chance. > > The way I have tried to mitigate the effects of Luck is by not placing > > myself in a situation whereby I can only succeed with a lucky dice roll. > > I.e., I try to avoid situations where I *need* a "2" to be successful. > > (During the End Game, I will sometimes try crazy things if it's really >the > > only chance I have...) > >Everyone seems to focus on the "2" factor when discussing luck and ASL. >Luck with dice is getting the number you need, not necessarily the >lowest number possible. > I was using an example only. >If you need a 7 to pass an NMC without pinning to exit a squad to win by >1 EVP, is that due to excessive luck? > Not "excessive" luck... but you were lucky to roll the "7". But passing that NMC is meaningless if you are not in a position to take advantage -- in your example, by being in a position to exit the squad. > > To rely upon luck is to invite defeat. > >Agreed. > > > To place oneself in a situation where the dice can result in "good" luck >as opposed to > just "bad" luck... therein lies opportunity. > >Agreed again, but in the end, the dice decide. > I would agree that dice can have a tremendous impact on the outcome of a scenario, particularly of a very small scenario. However, when a scenario comes down to that "last dice roll", it doesn't necessarily make that final dice roll the all-important, lucky one. You have to take into account all of the lucky dice rolls throughout the entire scenario; in a larger scenario, the dice rolls should tend to even out for both players. That's why I usually tend to avoid those tiny scenarios. Too much can be rely on the outcome of a single DR. In the end, I believe it is the player's skill that will most often determine the outcome of a scenario. For my part, I'll try to play the best odds, and then take my chances with the dice. 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 pyoung at cwhealth.net Mon Aug 30 17:05:09 2004 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Mon Aug 30 17:07:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WFHQ In-Reply-To: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4133C0B5.1010007@cwhealth.net> Keith Todd wrote: >Jim, > >Nat last said that he had the OARS stuff but I cannot >find his address. > >I too find the WFHQ very klunky, so I am changing >back from ASLML digest to individual. > > It'll be interesting to see if the ASLML gets a bump in postings with the changeover of the ASL Forums to WFHQ. Last night I was looking over some of my old saved postings from the ASLML of about 4-5 years ago. Sure would be nice to see that level of traffic again. -- Peter Young pyoung@cwhealth.net http://firstfire.blogspot.com From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Aug 30 17:10:16 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Aug 30 17:08:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: German Ordnance Note B question Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B798618@agalsrv03> A question on the German Stielgranite 41 round(German Ordnance note B). Is this round available prior to May 1942? Or is it still considered HEAT and its availability governed by C8.3? If the latter, what is the "41" in the designation refer to? TIA Cheers Jon From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Mon Aug 30 17:22:46 2004 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon Aug 30 17:21:11 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: German airborne forces, Crete 1941 Message-ID: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B79861D@agalsrv03> Hi all Hoping someone with a larger library/reference source then me can help out here. I am investigating some actions between the German airborne and Australian troops on Crete. 1) I have a reference to anti-tank guns being used by German paras against Matilda tanks. What AT guns, in ASL terms, were used by the German airborne forces? 2) I have another reference to the Germans landing a company of light tanks from the 31st Panzer Regiment, 5th Panzer Div on about 27 May, 1941. These were used in the Retimo area on 29th May. What AFV's (in ASL terms) did the Germans land on Crete, be it tanks, armoured cars etc 3) The German Chapter H notes for the 75mm RCL state that they were used by the German airborne forces on Crete. Does anyone know of dates/locations where they were used, or how widespread was their issue within the German airborne forces for the Crete invasion. Many thanks Cheers Jon From morrisgj at mscd.edu Mon Aug 30 18:09:11 2004 From: morrisgj at mscd.edu (morrisgj@mscd.edu) Date: Mon Aug 30 18:09:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 4.1.3 using VASSAL 1.4.1 even though... Message-ID: <19d6417bcd.17bcd19d64@mscd.edu> Hello All: I just updated to the latest VASL (4.1.3). And I have also installed VASSAL 1.4.4. However when I clicked the VASL shortcut, VASL 4.1.3 uses VASSAL 1.4.1. Any help appreciated. Gerry From nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com Mon Aug 30 18:23:19 2004 From: nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Mon Aug 30 18:26:12 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Where's OARS? In-Reply-To: <41338ED2.219A@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <41338ED2.219A@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <4133D307.3090702@rogers.com> Hi Jim, I think my last email wasn't clear, so I'll repeat it again. > I will assume that OARS is now "finito". OARS is not finito. It's still alive and kicking, it's just not online. The reason it isn't online is that I've been busy with the ASL-Forums/Warfare HQ merge, and a new promotion at work. Now that things have calmed down, I'm working on getting OARS back online. > ... and I find that all has moved to WFHQ. Fair enough, but once at > WFHQ, there is no mention of OARS. Again, as I've stated several times, the ASL Forums merger does not affect OARS or the ASLML in any way, shape or form. All three resources are seperate entities. There was a discussion to add OARS to Warfare HQ, but that didn't pan out for technical reasons. I'm now looking into other solutions. One will be found, and OARS will be back online. Nat Jim McLeod wrote: > Listerz; > > I tried to find OARS at, > > http://oars.asl-forums.net > > ... and I find that all has moved to WFHQ. Fair enough, but once at > WFHQ, there is no mention of OARS. > > I will assume that OARS is now "finito". > > Does anyone have JR's email address? I want to ask him if he can setup > a rating system within ROAR. > > TIA. > > > =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 nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com Mon Aug 30 18:26:32 2004 From: nathaniel.mallet1 at rogers.com (Nathaniel Mallet) Date: Mon Aug 30 18:29:24 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASLML v. WFHQ In-Reply-To: <4132C0C7.1FF8@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4132C0C7.1FF8@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <4133D3C8.9000108@rogers.com> A lot of people feel that way, which is why the ASLML was kept seperate from the ASL Forums. There's just something about the mailing list that no other online forum, regardless of how good it is, will ever be able to match. It's also one of the reasons the ASLML and the ASL Forums were moved to seperate hosting facilities when it died in April. It was too important to risk losing because of a problem with another site. Nat Jim McLeod wrote: > Listerz; > > Just pondering out loud here ... > > When comparing the ASLML "apple" to the WFHQ "orange", I very much > prefer the ASLML "apple". > > I tried going through all the topics in WFHQ but it is tedious. I very > much prefer the "gun and run" style of the ASLML plus, ... we have Tate > Rogers AND the Bruces in spades. > > As they say, "'nuff said." > > > =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 Mon Aug 30 20:48:01 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 18:40:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck References: Message-ID: <4133F4F1.16EE@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bruce, I now understand what you were meaning by "being consistent", I see your point of view. I wrote, > >Erwin seemed to have done not bad during his tenure as a Panzer Division > >Commander. ;) Bruce replied, > Is this the same commander that got "whupped" in El Alamein... and > Tunisia... and Normandy? :-) Ah, you raise a good point. Rommel was a top notch divisional commander IMO. He was a victim of the "Peter Principle". Had Rommel stayed at the divisional command level he would have excelled throughout the war. He may have even survived since he likely would not have been implicated in the plot to kill Hitler although there was always the likelyhood of his meeting his doom in Russia. Rommel was out of his league in the circle of Army Command, again, JMO. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 20:57:07 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 18:40:44 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck References: Message-ID: <4133F713.478F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bruce wrote, > In the end, I believe it is the player's skill that will most often > determine the outcome of a scenario. For my part, I'll try to play the best > odds, and then take my chances with the dice. I have always asserted that the two, player skill and luck, are hopelessly intertwined in ASL. The amount of each that a player enjoys in any given scenario carries the day but I agree with you that player skill is the most dependable ... usually ... crap, did I read that VC wrong ... AGAIN! :) If winning at ASL came down purely to skill, Chess is a good example of skill being supreme in securing victory, then Mike McGrath would never lose. But he has lost and chances are he'll say, "I was f**k'n diced man ..." :) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 21:03:43 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Mon Aug 30 18:40:56 2004 Subject: [Aslml] WFHQ References: <20040830193631.20600.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> <4133C0B5.1010007@cwhealth.net> Message-ID: <4133F89F.6F@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Peter Young wrote: > It'll be interesting to see if the ASLML gets a bump in postings with the changeover of the ASL Forums to WFHQ. Last night I was looking over some of my old saved postings from the ASLML of about 4-5 years ago. Sure would be nice to see that level of traffic again. The level of traffic is up to us in many ways. Granted, there is not a whole lot to talk about. We need some new stuff from MMP, that is always a guaranteed kicker for traffic increase "it's too expensive" "the Germans are too blue" "the Russians are too brown ... oh wait, their Brits, hey ther're not brown enough" "we had to wait too long" "why didn't MMP take more time to get it right" "my feet stink ... whoops, wrong list, hehehe..." You get the idea. PARTICIPATE AND THERE SHALL BE TRAFFIC! =Jim= From tweniger at telusplanet.net Mon Aug 30 19:25:05 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Mon Aug 30 19:25:06 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck In-Reply-To: <4133F713.478F@mb.sympatico.ca> References: <4133F713.478F@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <1093919105.3343.19.camel@basement> On Mon, 2004-08-30 at 21:57, Jim McLeod wrote: > If winning at ASL came down purely to skill, Chess is a good example of > skill being supreme in securing victory, then Mike McGrath would never > lose. But he has lost and chances are he'll say, "I was f**k'n diced > man ..." 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. So, in the end, one can blame their dice for their fortune/misfortune. -- Virtually, Tom W From Vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Aug 31 00:54:23 2004 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Peter Vicca) Date: Tue Aug 31 00:54:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck References: Message-ID: <002501c48f2f$beeca070$0b00000a@home> I regularly play with someone who has no luck: his 2+2 shots never cause an MC while my 12 -1 shots cause his troops to break. His 50mm mtr goes on a ROF streak at my guys in a foxhole and has no result other than setting my SAN off 3 times while my single ht at his guys moving through a woodsd hex gets a result. Its not fair I'm lucky he is not. Luck comes from making sure the odds are stacked in your favour. ( I have another chap who is genuinely unlucky, solid player but you can bet the dice will desert him at some point in each game). As for Rommel and army command, could any commander have achieved more with the resources at his disposal? Certainly he energated (is that a word?) hus commands and achieved startling things with drive and energy. Was he right to ask for PzrDivs to be placed at the coast and thus deny any chance of a concentrated thrust? The divs moving to Normandy did suffercasualties but noit as severe as you may think and dispersal of Army reserve certainly caused proiblems. Yours Aye martin. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Bakken" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 10:59 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL Luck > Crappage! I sent a double post... hit "send" instead of "save".... Sorry. > :-( > > Most of the following is a repeat of my last post... > > > > I remember reading this about Napoleon: When studying his opponent, > > > Napoleon would ask whether the enemy commander was "bold". By this he > > > meant, was his opponent "lucky". "Luck" in this context does not mean > > > recklessly abandoning your fate to the vagaries of chance. Rather, > >Napoleon > > > believed that one can only be lucky if one puts oneself in a position to > > > take advantage of that luck. > > > >I disagree Bruce. Napoleon may have been wondering if his opponent > >played by the accepted tactics of the day, in other words, will my > >opponent do something my troops will not expect and my troops will > >panick and run? > > > > Well, don't disagree with me. I was only reporting what I read. If you > don't agree with that assessment of Napoleon, take it up with the author. I > believe it was from "The Face of Battle", but I'm not certain. (An > outstanding book, by the way.) Perhaps I'll see if I can find it. > > > > >This tells me that there is a > > > >fundamental method to good play. Players who follow the fundamentals > >always > > > >seem to have "good luck". > > > > > I agree. > > > >Now, when we talk luck, are we talking about the dice because that it > >was I am referring to. Luck is not putting your HIP MG/Gun in just the > >right place. Luck is getting 8 shots from that same weapon. > > > > When it comes to ASL, "luck" primarily consists of how the dice play. > That's what I essentially mean. > > As far as your example is concerned, ROF means diddlee-squat if the weapon > is not at the right place. So not only do you have to be "lucky" with your > dice (i.e. receive ROF), but you also have to be in the right place to take > advantage of that luck (i.e. be in a position to fire at multiple targets). > > The former you cannot control; the latter you can control -- and if you are > really lucky, the opponent will oblige by placing targets. Good luck for > you that your MG was in just that place, good luck for you that your > opponent waltzed down that path, and good luck with the dice rolling. > > Luck all around, but not exclusively dice play. > > > > I would add that consistency also seems to be a key to fundamental play. > > If > > > confronted with a situation, the good players will deal with it the same > >way > > > every time. They don't seem to try new things "on the fly". I suspect > >that > > > the *really* good players are always aware of the odds during any given > > > situation, and always make the choice that gives them the best odds of > > > success. And they do this consistently. > > > > Before getting to your reply, I would like to amend this a bit. > > What I mean by "consistency" in this context is in connection with how a > player chooses among probabilities. At any given moment, there may be > several options available to a player, each with a different probability of > success. A "consistent" player, in that context, would without fail choose > the option with the greatest probability of success; or at least, "play it > the same" most times. > > This may or may not make the move predictable. > > >OK, so if I know my opponent is going to hit my strongpoint, move his MG > >kill stack into that obvious overwatch position and then send a flank > >force behind the woods to get around my strongpoint, then my opponent is > >being consistent, correct? > > > > That is not what I meant, exactly. To answer your question, I would suggest > that certain tactics suggest themselves. Insofar as your opponent may "do > the same thing" every time, I would agree that it is certainly consistent. > It may also be predictable, which IMO is not necessarily the same as being > consistent. > > >Now if this is the case, I would have, if available in this scenario, > >that overwatch position Boresighted with my nasty ol' mortar and have a > >HIPster covering that stretch of OG that my opponent must cross to get > >behind me. > > > > If the situation is really as predictable and clear-cut as you are laying > out, then certainly you would respond as you describe. So what's the big > deal? > > I would venture that many scenarios, once played, would lend themselves to a > certain level of predictability, especially if both sides have already > played the scenario. There are just so many options available, when it > comes to specific strategies to meet the Victory Conditions. > > >I love it when my opponent is consistent because I can anticipate what > >he is going to do and take the appropriate countermeasures to defeat > >him. > > > > You have outlined a pretty obvious situation, IMO. Using the tenets of > sound tactics, you should be able to predict how your opponent might tackle > the situation. Based on that prediction, you would take appropriate > counter-measures. > > This has nothing to do with luck per se, and really not what I meant by > "consistent". > > >By the way Bruce, Rommel would argue your comment, "They don't seem to > >try new things "on the fly"." > > > > The context you put it in, is not how I meant it. I can see how you could > take my earlier comments that way. Certainly a good ASL player will try new > things, but I don't believe such a player would be consistently successful > by always trying new things, and certainly would not be successful by not > consistently playing the highest probabilities. > > >Erwin seemed to have done not bad during his tenure as a Panzer Division > >Commander. ;) > > > > Is this the same commander that got "whupped" in El Alamein... and > Tunisia... and Normandy? :-) > > > > Then, when the dice speak, they are in a position to take immediate > > > advantage. > > > >You may be confusing what constitutes luck in ASL Bruce, luck is only > >with the dice. > > > > Of course. I'm not confused on the matter. > > >Anything else that happens on the mapboards is a direct > >result of the players own decisions. The wisdom of your decision is > >very often directly related to the outcome of the diceroll your decision > >invited. > > > > Well, yes. And the good players put themselves in positions whereby they > *can* be "lucky". In other words, they put themselves in positions that > optimize their chance for success and mitigate their chance for failure. > > ROF is worthless if your Gun is pointing the wrong way. Fire Lanes don't > have a chance to wreak havoc if they aren't covering the avenues of > approach. That good IFT DR comes to naught if you do not calculate the DRM > and FP column that give you the best chance. > > > > The way I have tried to mitigate the effects of Luck is by not placing > > > myself in a situation whereby I can only succeed with a lucky dice roll. > > > I.e., I try to avoid situations where I *need* a "2" to be successful. > > > (During the End Game, I will sometimes try crazy things if it's really > >the > > > only chance I have...) > > > >Everyone seems to focus on the "2" factor when discussing luck and ASL. > >Luck with dice is getting the number you need, not necessarily the > >lowest number possible. > > > > I was using an example only. > > >If you need a 7 to pass an NMC without pinning to exit a squad to win by > >1 EVP, is that due to excessive luck? > > > > Not "excessive" luck... but you were lucky to roll the "7". But passing > that NMC is meaningless if you are not in a position to take advantage -- in > your example, by being in a position to exit the squad. > > > > To rely upon luck is to invite defeat. > > > >Agreed. > > > > > To place oneself in a situation where the dice can result in "good" luck > >as opposed to > just "bad" luck... therein lies opportunity. > > > >Agreed again, but in the end, the dice decide. > > > > I would agree that dice can have a tremendous impact on the outcome of a > scenario, particularly of a very small scenario. However, when a scenario > comes down to that "last dice roll", it doesn't necessarily make that final > dice roll the all-important, lucky one. You have to take into account all > of the lucky dice rolls throughout the entire scenario; in a larger > scenario, the dice rolls should tend to even out for both players. > > That's why I usually tend to avoid those tiny scenarios. Too much can be > rely on the outcome of a single DR. > > In the end, I believe it is the player's skill that will most often > determine the outcome of a scenario. For my part, I'll try to play the best > odds, and then take my chances with the dice. > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 davidridley at idx.com.au Tue Aug 31 01:01:10 2004 From: davidridley at idx.com.au (david Wilson) Date: Tue Aug 31 01:01:18 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> ** The Official Republican Convention Schedule * * August 30 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER read by Mel Gibson, while being flogged with a spiked leather strap wielded by Ann Coulter, who will enjoy it a little too much. * TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level from beige to ecru. * LEST WE FORGET -- HONORARY ROLL CALL of All Members of (and Friends of) Bush Administration Who Might Very Well Have Been Killed In Vietnam If It Hadn't Been For Nasty Trick Knees, Anal Cysts, Recurrent Headaches, and Highly-Placed, Overly-Protective Parents. (Sponsored by Tyson Chicken) * ANTONIN SCALIA speaks -- "SLAVERY: THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR FOREFATHERS, AND GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" (Sponsored by Wal-Mart).... From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Aug 31 01:41:35 2004 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue Aug 31 01:41:38 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: German Ordnance Note B question In-Reply-To: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B798618@agalsrv03> References: <722215A6F2230249BDC5EE2B3E86762B798618@agalsrv03> Message-ID: <01e8j0hqnni0vrm2oi58mcvlscaai8dd96@4ax.com> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:10:16 +0800, "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >A question on the German Stielgranite 41 round(German Ordnance note B). Is >this round available prior to May 1942? Or is it still considered HEAT and >its availability governed by C8.3? No. Yes. >If the latter, what is the "41" in the designation refer to? Beats me. It may have nothing to do with the year, it might simply be a model number or similar. Or, if it is the year, it could be the year it was approved and put on the planning board, but then would have taken some time to get into general production. For ASL purposes, it's unimportant. Some nice piccies at http://www.inert-ord.net/rod02h/stielgr/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Aug 31 03:57:16 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Aug 31 03:57:27 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040831055524.0193f708@pop3.direcway.com> At 03:01 AM 8/31/2004, david Wilson wrote: >OT joke Well that ruined the List's comeback, sigh... Thanks for nothing... No replies would seem appropriate. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From Vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Aug 31 04:16:12 2004 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Peter Vicca) Date: Tue Aug 31 04:16:32 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <9115j0tf11iov7r6oi87rgeea5jk8ccrbq@4ax.com> Message-ID: <004c01c48f4b$f2a14170$0b00000a@home> By far the best thing is to arrange for the Gewrmans to roll an 11 and a 12 for their leader generation in the first scenario and then kill 1 of their 5 leaders with a creeping barrage before the game actually starts! (We're still prodding buttock though) Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "Janusz Maxe" ; Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 2:41 AM Subject: Re: SV: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:31:31 +0200, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >Rules are overrated in ASL I disagree. You need to know how the rules work in order to exploit them. It's the *exploitation* of those rules that drive tactics. You don't need to know the rules to devise an overall plan, of course, and having a sound overall plan is the first, perhaps essential, step in gaining a victory. But understanding the minutia of when the opponent can and can't shoot at you, or *exactly* what you can do and when you can do it in order to minimise the opponent's options is absolutely crucial, and you can't get that understanding without a deep knowledge of the rules. Note that "knowledge of the rules" doesn't necessarily mean that you can quote them by heart; rather, I take it to mean that (a) you know that the rule exists (and what it means), and (b) you know where to find it when you need it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ctewks at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 04:36:31 2004 From: ctewks at yahoo.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue Aug 31 04:36:33 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL directory Message-ID: <20040831113631.56098.qmail@web42102.mail.yahoo.com> 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? Chuck ===== Chuck ctewks@yahoo.com From aslwynn at rogers.com Tue Aug 31 05:45:09 2004 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Tue Aug 31 05:45:10 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> Message-ID: <001001c48f58$59a8b860$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Sigh. What a shame. In the good old days of the ASLML this would have generated a horde of vitriolic responses and the topic would have spread as readily as a social disease to a wide variety of hot button US 'political' issues: freedom of expression, the right to bear arms, unilateralism, abortion, ... Now all we get is one muted reaction from Ron. Sniff. Getting sentimental as the years go by. Wynn "Remembering the Way Nostalgia Used To Be" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "david Wilson" To: "asl mailing list" Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 4:01 AM Subject: [Aslml] OT joke > ** The Official Republican Convention Schedule * * > > August 30 > > 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER read by Mel Gibson, while being flogged with a > spiked leather strap wielded by Ann Coulter, who will enjoy it a little > too much. > > * TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level from beige to ecru. > > * LEST WE FORGET -- HONORARY ROLL CALL of All Members of (and Friends of) > Bush Administration Who Might Very Well Have Been Killed In Vietnam If It > Hadn't Been For Nasty Trick Knees, Anal Cysts, Recurrent Headaches, and > Highly-Placed, Overly-Protective Parents. (Sponsored by Tyson Chicken) > > * ANTONIN SCALIA speaks -- "SLAVERY: THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR > FOREFATHERS, AND GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" (Sponsored by Wal-Mart).... > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From Vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Aug 31 05:56:30 2004 From: Vicca at v21.me.uk (Peter Vicca) Date: Tue Aug 31 05:56:45 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. References: <1315614dde.14dde13156@mscd.edu> <4132A450.4765@mb.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <008501c48f59$f321dac0$0b00000a@home> Another major benfit is discovering that you're not as bad as you thought you were. Yours Aye Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim McLeod" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 4:51 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Help for Canadians in OVHS. Please. > Listerz; > > Gerry wrote, > > > I agree that players will plateau at a certain point. Given my experiences in tournament chess I think there is a possibility of some improvement still. > > > Anyway I love trying to learn. No ftf and unfortunately only 1 x VASL game (OVHS CG) going so improvement will be slow. > > No FtF and only VASL play will likely hold you back Gerry. I do not > know where you live, but if it is at all possible, try to attend a > tournament. > > The benefits are: > > - A lot of play in a short period of time. > > - Exposure to different styles of play. > > - Watching how better players play. > > - Critical ASL thinking within the limited timeframe of a tournament > round. > > - Improving your rules knowledge. > > All good stuff. > > Having a person tell another how to improve their game is of limited > usefulness IMO. Playing against someone who does some cool stuff > gameplay wise is altogether different. That is something you will > benefit from. > > Tossing Infantry smoke whilst using bypass movement. Who'da thunk? :) > > > =Jim= > > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster@aslml.net > From john.slotwinski at nist.gov Tue Aug 31 07:06:24 2004 From: john.slotwinski at nist.gov (John Slotwinski) Date: Tue Aug 31 07:12:01 2004 Subject: [Aslml] improving your ASL game In-Reply-To: <001a01c48ed5$dd46cf00$1d108304@default> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040831095612.00ae83b0@mailserver.nist.gov> Guys: Those of you with the latest Journal might recognize some of these from the article on learning ASL that is in there, but I think they apply to both learning ASL and improving your ASL game: (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. (2) Play lots of different opponents. Playing people much better than you is the quickest way to improve your game but you should play people with a variety of skill levels relative to your own. (3) Read the rulebook at least once a year. You'll learn something new every time. (4) Study the game, especially all of the resources that are available on the web, like AARs and rules discussions. Read these things _critically_. (5) Play other games. Sounds heretical, but this may be just what the Doctor ordered if you find yourself burning out on ASL (something that is easy to do.) By playing other games you may also find new situations or strategies that you can port over to your ASL play. (6) Above all, have fun. Your game won't improve if you take it so seriously that you're not having a good time. 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 From john.slotwinski at nist.gov Tue Aug 31 07:12:05 2004 From: john.slotwinski at nist.gov (John Slotwinski) Date: Tue Aug 31 07:13:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] playing better ASL In-Reply-To: <20040830213504.DXIQ11100.fed1rmmtao11.cox.net@smtp.west.co x.net> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040831095617.00addf40@mailserver.nist.gov> Guys: At 05:35 PM 8/30/2004 -0400, mastadon61@cox.net wrote (with some snips added): >skulk back out of his LOS. As the attacker, except for a few key fire >stacks (like the 9-2 led hmg), it's usually better to apply pressure by >moving forward/around the defender. > >These are tactics that work for me. > >What do you guys commonly do? Good tips. One thing that I do differently when I'm on the attack - I almost always have my 9-2 up in the front leading the troops, as opposed to directing the HMG in the back. I've found that his -2 modifier is much more useful helping my assault guys pass their MCs and directing advancing fire shots. YMMV. js From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Aug 31 08:24:25 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Aug 31 08:24:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <3a5h63$7thmik@mxip11a.cluster1.charter.net> LOL... BTW... ** The Official Democratic Convention Schedule * * - Agenda Canceled: Kerry couldn't make up our minds. **************************************************** Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) > From: david Wilson > Date: 2004/08/31 Tue AM 03:01:10 CDT > To: asl mailing list > Subject: [Aslml] OT joke > > ** The Official Republican Convention Schedule * * > > August 30 > > 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER read by Mel Gibson, while being flogged with a > spiked leather strap wielded by Ann Coulter, who will enjoy it a little > too much. > > * TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level from beige to ecru. > > * LEST WE FORGET -- HONORARY ROLL CALL of All Members of (and Friends > of) Bush Administration Who Might Very Well Have Been Killed In Vietnam > If It Hadn't Been For Nasty Trick Knees, Anal Cysts, Recurrent > Headaches, and Highly-Placed, Overly-Protective Parents. (Sponsored by > Tyson Chicken) > > * ANTONIN SCALIA speaks -- "SLAVERY: THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR > FOREFATHERS, AND GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" (Sponsored by Wal-Mart).... > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Aug 31 08:36:54 2004 From: denis at teachlinux.com (denis@teachlinux.com) Date: Tue Aug 31 08:36:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> Message-ID: Why is someone from OZ seeing this before the rest of us? I guess thats what happens when you found a contry with Convicts.. ;) Denis On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, david Wilson wrote: > ** The Official Republican Convention Schedule * * > > August 30 > > 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER read by Mel Gibson, while being flogged with a > spiked leather strap wielded by Ann Coulter, who will enjoy it a little > too much. > > * TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level from beige to ecru. > > * LEST WE FORGET -- HONORARY ROLL CALL of All Members of (and Friends > of) Bush Administration Who Might Very Well Have Been Killed In Vietnam > If It Hadn't Been For Nasty Trick Knees, Anal Cysts, Recurrent > Headaches, and Highly-Placed, Overly-Protective Parents. (Sponsored by > Tyson Chicken) > > * ANTONIN SCALIA speaks -- "SLAVERY: THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR > FOREFATHERS, AND GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" (Sponsored by Wal-Mart).... > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 Tue Aug 31 11:57:46 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Tue Aug 31 08:50:30 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Luck References: <4133F713.478F@mb.sympatico.ca> <1093919105.3343.19.camel@basement> Message-ID: <4134CA2A.480C@mb.sympatico.ca> 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. =Jim= From jwise at draga.com Tue Aug 31 08:51:57 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Tue Aug 31 08:52:13 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <001001c48f58$59a8b860$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> <001001c48f58$59a8b860$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Wynn wrote: > Sigh. What a shame. In the good old days of the ASLML this would have generated > a horde of vitriolic responses and the topic would have spread as readily as a > social disease to a wide variety of hot button US 'political' issues: freedom > of expression, the right to bear arms, unilateralism, abortion, ... Eh, I think most of us just chalked it up to peevishness on Mr. Wilson's part that the more America sees of the candidate he seems to favor, the lower he goes in the polls. Besides, on the night that _John McCain_ speaks, even as Kerry's Vietnam record looks more and more dubious, suggesting that it's _this_ party which has a Vietnam problem is... amusing. And slavery? I may be a bit confused, but can you tell me the political party of any of the following: a.) Abraham Lincoln? b.) Bull Connor (sheriff who sicced attack dogs on peaceful marchers led by Martin Luther King, Jr.)? c.) Orval Faubus (Arkansas governor who called up the state national guard and declared that ``blood would run in the streets'' if school integration was attempted, requiring President Eisenhower to use the 101st Airborne to force integration)? d.) George Wallace, segregationist candidate for President of the US? e.) the two Senators who filibustered the Civil Rights Act (extra credit for their names)? f.) the congressional caucus that broke this filibuster and passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act? g.) the only former KKK member in the Congress (or any other branch of US government)? (Answers: a.) REPUBLICAN b.) DEMOCRAT c.) DEMOCRAT d.) DEMOCRAT e.) DEMOCRAT (Robert Byrd (still serving) and Albert Gore Sr. (father of the 2000 Democratic Presidential contender)) f.) REPUBLICAN g.) DEMOCRAT (Robert Byrd again, who said in his farewell letter to the Klan that he ``still shared their goals, but was leaving their organization to allow him to pursue them through other means'') ) On a brighter note, if any of you missed the actual line-up last night (those by John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and Ron Silver are the must-sees), see: http://www.cspan.org/videoarchives.asp?CatCodePairs=, for video... - -- Jim Wise jwise@draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFBNJ6gRxzMSZ/9vAMRAnkOAKCbbUbS2seFxLP5gH8Rhr+JIqDWtgCgtBSu KXCK6u7o7i8PlanHEEcz7KE= =Qx0X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com Tue Aug 31 10:10:34 2004 From: BPickeringASL at myrealbox.com (Brian Pickering (ASL)) Date: Tue Aug 31 10:10:37 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <1093972234.d64103dcBPickeringASL@myrealbox.com> Or perhaps some of us feel it struck just a little too close to home? :-P Brian "on the Left Coast" Pickering -----Original Message----- From: "Wynn" To: "david Wilson" , "asl mailing list" Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:45:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke Sigh. What a shame. In the good old days of the ASLML this would have generated a horde of vitriolic responses and the topic would have spread as readily as a social disease to a wide variety of hot button US 'political' issues: freedom of expression, the right to bear arms, unilateralism, abortion, ... Now all we get is one muted reaction from Ron. Sniff. Getting sentimental as the years go by. Wynn "Remembering the Way Nostalgia Used To Be" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "david Wilson" To: "asl mailing list" Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 4:01 AM Subject: [Aslml] OT joke > ** The Official Republican Convention Schedule * * > > August 30 > > 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER read by Mel Gibson, while being flogged with a > spiked leather strap wielded by Ann Coulter, who will enjoy it a little > too much. > > * TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level from beige to ecru. > > * LEST WE FORGET -- HONORARY ROLL CALL of All Members of (and Friends of) > Bush Administration Who Might Very Well Have Been Killed In Vietnam If It > Hadn't Been For Nasty Trick Knees, Anal Cysts, Recurrent Headaches, and > Highly-Placed, Overly-Protective Parents. (Sponsored by Tyson Chicken) > > * ANTONIN SCALIA speaks -- "SLAVERY: THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR > FOREFATHERS, AND GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" (Sponsored by Wal-Mart).... > > _______________________________________________ > Aslml-aslml.net mailing list > Aslml-aslml.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 pyoung at cwhealth.net Tue Aug 31 11:11:13 2004 From: pyoung at cwhealth.net (Peter Young) Date: Tue Aug 31 11:11:55 2004 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 4.1.3 using VASSAL 1.4.1 even though... In-Reply-To: <19d6417bcd.17bcd19d64@mscd.edu> References: <19d6417bcd.17bcd19d64@mscd.edu> Message-ID: <4134BF41.9010602@cwhealth.net> morrisgj@mscd.edu wrote: >Hello All: > >I just updated to the latest VASL (4.1.3). And I have also installed VASSAL 1.4.4. However when I clicked the VASL shortcut, VASL 4.1.3 uses VASSAL 1.4.1. > >Any help appreciated. > >Gerry > > I'm not an expert on VASSAL, but I recall Rodney Kinney saying one time that this could happen sometimes. Something about how the updates were processed and VASL wouldn't reflect the updated version number if the engine update didn't affect the VASL module. I forget the details, but recall that the upshot was that it didn't matter, ie, that your application is working just fine as it is. -- Peter Young pyoung@cwhealth.net http://firstfire.blogspot.com From jbarber at meic.org Tue Aug 31 11:44:20 2004 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue Aug 31 11:44:40 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> <001001c48f58$59a8b860$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: 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. Here's some McCain quotes from earlier this year before he was promised the national spotlight at the convention if only he would behave: "I believe my party has gone astray." "I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy," McCain said. "You can't fly in on an aircraft carrier and declare victory and have the deaths continue," McCain complained. "You can't do that." McCain said questions still linger about "whether we should have gone" to war with Iraq and that it "will be part of this presidential campaign" between Bush and Kerry. "I do not believe that [Kerry] is necessarily weak on defense," McCain expressed at the time. "I decry this negativism that's going on." > >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: http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/ >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): http://www.nhgazette.com/cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi?user_action=list&category=%20NEWS%3B%20Chickenhawks > >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, the champions of civil rights and minorities worldwide. Come on, this doesn't even make it to the giggle test, much less pass it. -- Jeff "LONG LIVE THE LIST!" Barber From jwise at draga.com Tue Aug 31 12:10:04 2004 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Tue Aug 31 12:10:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> <001001c48f58$59a8b860$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: -----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----- From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Aug 31 12:17:15 2004 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue Aug 31 12:15:43 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AH2 Commissar's House Message-ID: 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 From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 12:28:18 2004 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue Aug 31 12:28:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: << yawn >> _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Aug 31 12:58:11 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Aug 31 12:58:22 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040831145647.01b5e900@pop3.direcway.com> At 02:28 PM 8/31/2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: ><< yawn >> I tried Bruce, I really did. Now if Dad would just come home and separate the children. Nate? Where are you Nate? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From jbarber at meic.org Tue Aug 31 12:59:10 2004 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue Aug 31 12:59:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> <001001c48f58$59a8b860$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: All, I like engaging in these kinds of debates (but I'm a lobbyist and I do it for a living), others may not. As a public service, I'm taking my discussion with Mr. Wise private. If you wish to participate or read what I/we have to say, let me know and I'll be sure to CC you. -- Jeff Barber From garciagd at velocity.net Tue Aug 31 13:54:51 2004 From: garciagd at velocity.net (rwhelan) Date: Tue Aug 31 13:51:54 2004 Subject: [Aslml] AH2 Commissar's House References: Message-ID: <001501c48f9c$c2d92f60$09c7d342@whelan> Hello! I played this against an opponent of equal skill and got killed as the Russians. I'd give the Russians the blance if I ever played it again (unless the Russian player was much better than me). Peace Roger From janusz.maxe at unf.se Tue Aug 31 14:42:01 2004 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Tue Aug 31 14:42:03 2004 Subject: SV: [Aslml] AH2 Commissar's House Message-ID: 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 > From rln22 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 14:52:47 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Tue Aug 31 14:52:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive First Fire...alas, more clarification. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831215247.17517.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Listers, I find there are still nuances to this rule that I'd like clarified, so please, indulge me: 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'?) 2) If another 447 then moves 5 hexes away, is the inherent firepower of the 467 then subject to SFF restrictions? 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? I hope I've been clear, and eagerly await clarification. yours, Rob _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From rln22 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 15:18:48 2004 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Tue Aug 31 15:18:51 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ABtF Practice suggestions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831221848.45820.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Gentlemen, Looking for British vs Germans night practice for an upcoming CG of ABtF. Request: a non-HASL, in other words normal mapboard, scenario featuring elite British vs Germans, the latter perhaps with afvs. At least semi-urban would be nice, but is not important. Thanks in advance, Rob __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From sidirezegh at charter.net Tue Aug 31 15:22:36 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Tue Aug 31 15:22:39 2004 Subject: [Aslml] ABtF Practice suggestions. Message-ID: <391r9h$7s4udt@mxip16a.cluster1.charter.net> I think there are a few in Pegasus Bridge, but that would of course involve using the Pegasus Bridge map. I can't think of any urban Brit-vs-German night scenarios off the top of my head, but will take a look & see if I can find any. Regards, Chas > > From: Robert Nelson > Date: 2004/08/31 Tue PM 10:18:48 GMT > To: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] ABtF Practice suggestions. > > Gentlemen, > > Looking for British vs Germans night practice for an > upcoming CG of ABtF. > > Request: a non-HASL, in other words normal mapboard, > scenario featuring elite British vs Germans, the > latter perhaps with afvs. At least semi-urban would be > nice, but is not important. > > Thanks in advance, > > Rob > > > > __________________________________ > 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 krynndm at speakeasy.net Tue Aug 31 16:01:19 2004 From: krynndm at speakeasy.net (Tom Mueller) Date: Tue Aug 31 15:49:29 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Re: ABtF Practice suggestions = TOT In-Reply-To: <20040831221848.45820.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040831221848.45820.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20040831175055.01d77b48@mail.speakeasy.net> At 05:18 PM 8/31/2004, Robert Nelson wrote: >Looking for British vs Germans night practice for an >upcoming CG of ABtF. > >Request: a non-HASL, in other words normal mapboard, >scenario featuring elite British vs Germans, the >latter perhaps with afvs. At least semi-urban would be >nice, but is not important. If you can find it, TOT 26 'Free For All' or TOT 39 'Hot Time in the Old Town Tonight' are Night scenarios - I don't have the scen cards handy... And now I do. ;] TOT 18 'The Aller Waltz' has 648s vs 548s, no vehicles; same for TOT 19 'Liebe Elfriede.' TOT 26 has Cromwells, and 247 Brit hs. TOT 39 is exactly what you want for ABtF: German combined arms vs 458 Brits at Night. I've played this, and although it can be tough on the Germans it's a heck of game. I gave in an 8 on ROAR. If you can't produce these scenarios on your own, contact me privately. Tom Mueller Ah, DSL! And Athlon 1900+! "Joe Don whizzes it in record time!" - Crow T. Robot, 'Final Justice' From damavs at alltel.net Tue Aug 31 16:02:55 2004 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Tue Aug 31 16:02:54 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: <6.1.1.1.0.20040831185511.01cb1d20@mail.alltel.net> Robert Nelson wrote: >I find there are still nuances to this rule that >I'd like clarified, so please, indulge me: > >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'?) It should just go on the LMG only. If there's room, slide the LMG to the side of the squad & mark just the LMG First fired. In typical play I'll often slide it off the stack so I know there's something left to fire there & usually can recall what. Bigger scenarios it pays to mark precisely. This of course presumes no cowering. A cowering result would mark both as Finaled. >2) If another 447 then moves 5 hexes away, is the >inherent >firepower of the 467 then subject to SFF restrictions? No. Since the 467 has not yet shot it's inherent, it's at full FP. The LMG would be subject to SFF though and thus the proper shot would be to use the 467s inherent only. >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? Nope. The LMG could fire out to it's full range at any target it desired. The other trickier one that goes in here is that if you fire the inherent, but hold the light and then decide to fire both, the squad's SFF applies to the LMG IFF it is still the movement phase. In Final fire the same shot is better and the LMG isn't subject to SFF penalties. I don't understand why, but it's one of my favorite rules nuances. 'Course someone will likely tell me I'm wrong or it's been errata-ed away or something spoiling my bizarre little factoid... Bret Hildebran damavs@alltel.net ASLOK is coming... From tweniger at telusplanet.net Tue Aug 31 16:58:47 2004 From: tweniger at telusplanet.net (Tom Weniger) Date: Tue Aug 31 16:58:49 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> References: <41343046.5000200@idx.com.au> Message-ID: <1093996726.2916.2.camel@laptop> On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 02:01, david Wilson wrote: > ** The Official Republican Convention Schedule * * > Wait a minute. What happened to the Democratic Convention schedule? Oh, I forgot that it was seized courtesy of the Liberal Party of Canada. Silly me. -- Virtually, Tom W From scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Aug 31 17:56:40 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Aug 31 17:56:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <122791da1227ae9c.1227ae9c122791da@us.army.mil> delete ----- Original Message ----- From: ron mosher Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 2:58 pm Subject: RE: [Aslml] OT joke > At 02:28 PM 8/31/2004, Bruce Bakken wrote: > > ><< yawn >> > > I tried Bruce, I really did. Now if Dad would just come home and > separate > the children. > > Nate? Where are you Nate? > > > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Aug 31 18:43:36 2004 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue Aug 31 18:44:07 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke In-Reply-To: <122791da1227ae9c.1227ae9c122791da@us.army.mil> References: <122791da1227ae9c.1227ae9c122791da@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040831204232.01c0fec0@pop3.direcway.com> At 07:56 PM 8/31/2004, scott.holst@us.army.mil wrote: >delete Sorry deletion is not an option for you, you have been terminated. From aslml at aslwebdex.net Tue Aug 31 19:06:19 2004 From: aslml at aslwebdex.net (aslml@aslwebdex.net) Date: Tue Aug 31 19:06:17 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> Message-ID: <001201c48fc8$49996f80$ece63fc8@D5G57231> 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 From homercles11 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 19:04:28 2004 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Tue Aug 31 19:12:04 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: 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 From scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Aug 31 19:17:56 2004 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue Aug 31 19:18:02 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke Message-ID: <1230b1671230a22e.1230a22e1230b167@us.army.mil> Paul, why not join the Army and find out first hand whats going on in Iraq. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kenny Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 9:04 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > > 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 > wererequired 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 > yourselfthat 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 > candidatefor President, which fought (literally and violently) to > preventintegration of schools, and which filibustered the Civil > Rights Act > _and_ the Voting Rights Act, before doing a 180 degree turn and > callingfor 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 jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca Tue Aug 31 22:52:00 2004 From: jmmcleod at mb.sympatico.ca (Jim McLeod) Date: Tue Aug 31 19:45:27 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> Message-ID: <41356380.79C0@mb.sympatico.ca> Listerz; Bret wrote: > The other trickier one that goes in here is that if you > fire the inherent, but hold the light and then decide > to fire both, the squad's SFF applies to the LMG IFF > it is still the movement phase. In Final fire the same > shot is better and the LMG isn't subject to SFF penalties. I believe that the FF shot could only be made versus adjacent units. Depending on the circumstances, the defensive firer may want to fire at the enemy unit while it is not adjacent to the firer. > I don't understand why, but it's one of my favorite rules > nuances. 'Course someone will likely tell me I'm wrong > or it's been errata-ed away or something spoiling my > bizarre little factoid... All sounds good Bret. I have to say that the Defensive Fire rules are one of my favourite rule sections to read. Bret ends off with, > ASLOK is coming... Too true, as is the CASLO! 17 days until the fun begins and 18 days until you're trying to roll your dice in your CASLO beer mug ... too bad there was beer in it. It takes forever for the dice to sink to the bottom and the rolls themselves are a little messy. You might insist on using your oppoents game stuff. =Jim= From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Aug 31 20:45:14 2004 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue Aug 31 20:45:26 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke 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 Jeff Barber > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1:44 PM > To: Jim Wise > Cc: aslml-aslml.net@lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] OT joke > > > 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. Yes, shocking isn't it...that a political party would include someone with a dissenting view. Unlike the Demo's why it is one way or the highway...where the PC Nazis rule. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From davidridley at idx.com.au Tue Aug 31 20:58:13 2004 From: davidridley at idx.com.au (david Wilson) Date: Tue Aug 31 20:58:23 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT joke. Message-ID: <413548D5.9060004@idx.com.au> I meant to send this to the Aussie asml but accidently sent it to the BIG asml instead, I've enjoyed all the comments though, keep it up. It comes from the web site http://www.dissidentvoice.org/ From btdtall at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 21:04:50 2004 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall@yahoo.com) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:04:53 2004 Subject: [Aslml] OT Thread Message-ID: <20040901040450.97139.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Anybody else find it funny that people who play the most complex strategical game devised, don't understand how to assess unconventional warfare ? If you are one of these players...PLEASE...PLEASE....play me at ASLOK in a scenario involving partisans as I am sure their unconventional means will give me an easy victory........hell....you can have the balance too. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mastadon61 at cox.net Tue Aug 31 21:43:45 2004 From: mastadon61 at cox.net (mastadon61@cox.net) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:43:58 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A4.15 & A12.15 vs concealed SMC Message-ID: <20040901044349.EBK16651.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> 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 From sidirezegh at charter.net Tue Aug 31 21:53:19 2004 From: sidirezegh at charter.net (Chas Argent) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:53:20 2004 Subject: [Aslml] A4.15 & A12.15 vs concealed SMC In-Reply-To: <20040901044349.EBK16651.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20040901044349.EBK16651.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net> Message-ID: <413555BF.3090702@charter.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 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 > > >