Recommend
7 
 Thumb up
 Hide
42 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Advanced Squad Leader» Forums » Rules

Subject: So A-P mines makes A-T mines unfindable? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: asljr_rsp [+] [View All]
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If there are both A-P and A-T mines in a hex, is there any way to find out about the A-T mines before a tank drives into it?

Because if there were A-T mines only, and I Searched the hex and find a "minefield", I could step into it and if no dice are rolled, I could deduce they must all be A-T mines.
But if there are A-P mines, I can't make any assumptions about any A-T mines correct?

This is probably all "well, duh" stuff, but mines are new to me and I'm trying to figure out how to determine what kind of minefield is there...
If I knew there were only A-P mines, I could clear a path with a tank...

Maybe it's supposed to be that way and I should just avoid that hex or try a Clearance with infantry.

Btw, In lieu to spending all MFs, infantry can also move normally into a minefield hex, take the boom and still make a Clearance attempt during that turn, right?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Or should a successful Search reveal two Minefield counters, if there are indeed mines of both types?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Roundhill
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmb
Since A-P mines and A-T mines would be two separate minefields, I would place two counters after a successful search. I cannot find a rules reference, unfortunately.

As for clearing, I would say you are correct. Move normally into a minefield hex, survive the boom, and declare Clearance attempt. Using all your MFs to enter a known minefield only gives you the bonus of no minefield attack.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The reason I assumed only one counter is placed is that searching does not reveal the type nor the strength. If two were placed the types are as good as revealed.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Pollock
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Roundhill wrote:
Since A-P mines and A-T mines would be two separate minefields, I would place two counters after a successful search. I cannot find a rules reference, unfortunately.

As for clearing, I would say you are correct. Move normally into a minefield hex, survive the boom, and declare Clearance attempt. Using all your MFs to enter a known minefield only gives you the bonus of no minefield attack.


I concur on a search placing two counters mainly due to 2nd edition B28.1 & B28.48.

However, my reading of B24.74 Clearance is that it may only be attempted if you start in the mine location (having survived the BOOM on your previous turn) or if you use the attack-free method of moving into a Known minefield. You cannot move into an unknown minefield then immediately go TI that MPh with the survivors in an attempt to clear it; you have to move someone else into that now-Known minefield or wait for your next MPh.

But, that is just my interpretation of the rule. It does not specifically state that you could not have moved, just that you could not have fired. The reason I play it the way I do is because it seems odd for a unit to have no MF left and be able to go TI for the Clearance attempt, which in all other cases in B24.7 consumes all MF. Of course, that also makes it look legal, because all the other rules specifically state the move restriction, but B24.74 does not.

I could not find anything on this in the Q&A lists. Also, the ASOP does not add any info one way or the other.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Pollock
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've sent the following in via the MMP e-mail Q&A. Unless I hear otherwise, I'll try to remember to play it Brian's way, which is the best fit to COWTRA.

Question pertaining to B24.74:
A MMC moves into an unknown AP minefield and survives the attack unpinned, in Good Order and not having fired. May it now, as part of the same move, declare a Clearance attempt or must it wait until its next MPh?

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Richardson
United States
Lindsborg
Kansas
flag msg tools
mb
Brian Roundhill wrote:
Since A-P mines and A-T mines would be two separate minefields, I would place two counters after a successful search. I cannot find a rules reference, unfortunately.

Searching reveals the presence of minefields, but not their strength or type (A12.152), so I think only one counter would be placed. Placing two counters would be revealing the types of mines present: a violation of this rule.

Brian Roundhill wrote:
As for clearing, I would say you are correct. Move normally into a minefield hex, survive the boom, and declare Clearance attempt. Using all your MFs to enter a known minefield only gives you the bonus of no minefield attack.

No. A unit that wishes to clear mines must become TI (B24.74), but units that become TI cannot move during that Player Turn (A4.8).

EDIT: A closer reading of B24.74 reveals that a Good Order unit is allowed to spend all of its MF to enter a minefield location and become TI so as to allow a clearance attempt in the same Player Turn. This would be an exception to A4.8, but I don't see that a unit that entered a minefield location without spending all of its MF in that move would be allowed to declare mine clearance and become TI. Sorry for any confusion from my previous answer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Roundhill
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmb
richfam wrote:
Brian Roundhill wrote:
Since A-P mines and A-T mines would be two separate minefields, I would place two counters after a successful search. I cannot find a rules reference, unfortunately.

Searching reveals the presence of minefields, but not their strength or type (A12.152), so I think only one counter would be placed. Placing two counters would be revealing the types of mines present: a violation of this rule.


You may be right...I am taking a guess. If you reveal both minefields the hard way, there would be two minefield counters. That is why I guessed there would be two minefield counters after a successful search. But you are also right - it violates the spirit of A12.152.

Congratulations Miikka - you may have found the Schrodingers minefield.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Pollock
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You cannot move after becoming TI, but you are allowed to move before becoming TI, Searching being one example. B24.74 is the only instance in B24.7 that specifically does not prohibit non-adjacent movement (just firing) prior to the Clearance declaration. I don't have access to my 1st edition, so I don't know if it is different.

I was going to reiterate that B28.1 reads as if two counters should be placed after a search, but it finally sunk in after rerererereading A12.152 that the wording is 'minefields' (plural), not the singular, so that rule already covers what to do with multiple minefields in a searched hex; one counter fits the bill.

P.S. The SL rules are no help - clearance was done in the PFPh in SL.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hipsu wrote:
If there are both A-P and A-T mines in a hex, is there any way to find out about the A-T mines before a tank drives into it?


I couldn't find any Q&A on this. But I would say you are required to place both minefields on the board after a successful search. They are two separate fortifications and thus must be treated separately.

Quote:
Because if there were A-T mines only, and I Searched the hex and find a "minefield", I could step into it and if no dice are rolled, I could deduce they must all be A-T mines.
But if there are A-P mines, I can't make any assumptions about any A-T mines correct?


My previous answer makes this less relevant.

Quote:
Btw, In lieu to spending all MFs, infantry can also move normally into a minefield hex, take the boom and still make a Clearance attempt during that turn, right?


No they must start the movement phase in the location to make a clearance attempt.

Quote:
Or should a successful Search reveal two Minefield counters, if there are indeed mines of both types?


Yes, that's how I read it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Richardson
United States
Lindsborg
Kansas
flag msg tools
mb
Brent Pollock wrote:
You cannot move after becoming TI, but you are allowed to move before becoming TI, Searching being one example.

Yeah, I caught my error and added an EDIT to my original answer.

Brent Pollock wrote:
B24.74 is the only instance in B24.7 that specifically does not prohibit non-adjacent movement (just firing) prior to the Clearance declaration. I don't have access to my 1st edition, so I don't know if it is different.

I'll be interested to know what answer you get on your question to MMP. To me, B24.74 does prohibit non-adjacent movement before declaring a Clearance attempt, but I also see how it could be interpreted differently. It seems silly, however, to think that a squad can run halfway across a map *and* possibly clear a path through a minefield all in a single Player Turn. Clearing mines in reality is, I suspect, a slow, tedious process.

The B24.74 wording in the 1st edition rules seems similar to that in the 2nd edition rules (although I didn't do a word-by-word comparison), and I couldn't find anything in the various Q&A/Perry Sez compilations about this particular problem.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Richardson
United States
Lindsborg
Kansas
flag msg tools
mb
Mark Evans wrote:
They are two separate fortifications and thus must be treated separately.

I'd like to see a specific rules citation on this, if anyone can supply one.

They do not, for example, seem to be treated as separate fortifications for Clearance attempts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
richfam wrote:
Mark Evans wrote:
They are two separate fortifications and thus must be treated separately.

I'd like to see a specific rules citation on this, if anyone can supply one.

They do not, for example, seem to be treated as separate fortifications for Clearance attempts.


I don't think I can find a rules citation that claims to treat the two minefields as one. Lacking that, it would seem like the two minefields would be treated the same as wire and a roadblock for example. Two separate fortification, cleared separately. (i.e. clearing two minefields).

I think without a citation, I can contend that they are two distinct fortifications requiring two distinct clearance dice rolls. Somebody would have to cite the opposite to make show my interpretation to be in error.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My feelings after an overnight sleep:

The spirit of Searching seems to be that you find "some mines", type unknown, thus it seems only one counter should be placed to simulate that. But on the other hand, when we get down to it, I think the unknown type just means an unflipped counter and two should be placed if both are present. Yes, we know what they are, but that's meta information derived from the unfortunate fact that there are only two types of mines.

It's like the Dummy stack everyone knows is a Dummy stack because counters have been counted and it cannot be anything else, or because it was accidentally knocked over (meta information). But just because we know it's a Dummy it still has all its properties until it's actually revealed.

About the normal movement Clearance, I have a strong feeling it's a rule oversight for reasons mentioned in this thread and shouldn't be allowed.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
WBRP wrote:
it finally sunk in after rerererereading A12.152 that the wording is 'minefields' (plural), not the singular, so that rule already covers what to do with multiple minefields in a searched hex; one counter fits the bill.

I read it that its plural because it talks about all the searched hexes like it also says "Fortified Buildings". So I don't think the wording gives a clue here.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tuukka
Finland
Oulu
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Rule B28.5 states that: " A-T mines may compose a minefield hex of their own of from one to five factors, or be included in any strength from one to five factors in a normal A-P mine field"

So I think only one minefield counter should be used, as there is only one minefield present (with or without A-P mines).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LtUrban wrote:
Rule B28.5 states that: " A-T mines may compose a minefield hex of their own of from one to five factors, or be included in any strength from one to five factors in a normal A-P mine field"

So I think only one minefield counter should be used, as there is only one minefield present (with or without A-P mines).


HOLY CRAP!!! cry

I never noticed that sentence. That completely deflates my position. Ignore everything I just said while I go off and meditate on what a minefield is and is not.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok, but how is it included in practice? There's no counter that has both A-P and A-T values.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Pollock
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd treat them as one for clearance/detection and just use two markers once their factor/separate presence is known.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tuukka
Finland
Oulu
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Once both A-P & A-T factors have been revealed you can use two counters. Otherwise use just the unknown or A-P counter with factors and A-T counter without factors.

P.S.
I just glanced at the rules and there is no way of telling the factors in a A-T minefield except by entering/exiting A-T minefield and seeing the opponent's roll and if there is an attack or not. That's from the 1985 rules with a three minute study time though.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Roundhill
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmb
LtUrban wrote:
Rule B28.5 states that: " A-T mines may compose a minefield hex of their own of from one to five factors, or be included in any strength from one to five factors in a normal A-P mine field"

So I think only one minefield counter should be used, as there is only one minefield present (with or without A-P mines).


Missed that rule, so I now agree with your interpretation. One minefield counter revealed after a search.

More questions that I do not have answers for, though.
If the A-P minefield strength is determined, is the A-T strength also determined because it is the same minefield?
Since it is one minefield, one clearance roll clears both the A-P and A-T simultaneously?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tuukka
Finland
Oulu
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Rules say just "...revealing the minefield factors involved only when necessary to verify the IFT results [EXC: A-T mines do not attack Infantry/Cavalry; 28.5]". So I would say A-T factors remain unknown.

One successful clearance roll creates a TB even if there are both kinds of mines in the minefield.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Stewart
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
badge
It's sooo Hot out here...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LtUrban wrote:
Rules say just "...revealing the minefield factors involved only when necessary to verify the IFT results [EXC: A-T mines do not attack Infantry/Cavalry; 28.5]". So I would say A-T factors remain unknown.

One successful clearance roll creates a TB even if there are both kinds of mines in the minefield.


AT and AP mines attack on the IFT chart and you are right, IFT don't get attacked by the AT.

B28.1 "The presence of a minefield is not reveled until a unit susceptible to that type of attack enters that minefield Location or an MMC discovers it by Searching."

Other than the grammatical error of the "an MMC". The AT mines are not revealed sinced they didn't attack the MMC. Of course, a successful search will detect the AT mines, which could then be subjected to the TI Clearance attempt.

That would be classic if the MMC "cleared" a path through the Minefield only to have the tank detonate when hitting the AT mine Sgt. Schultz left behind!!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miikka Sohlman
Finland
Lahti
flag msg tools
I live in the city of Gulf, on the shores of Lake Water. This fun fact has nothing to do with this badge you're pointing at.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ASLChampion wrote:
Of course, a successful search will detect the AT mines

Except it wont. 12.152:
All Searched hexes (including all above-ground Locations in those hexes) automatically reveal their contents, including the presence of minefields (but not their type and strength).

That's the funny thing. The A-T mines are completely invisible in a hex containing both, until a vehicle drives into it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Pollock
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've given myself a note to submit this weekend a Q&A on minefield detection and clearance/TB usage. I'll keep you posted...unless someone else beats me to it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.