Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Advanced Squad Leader» Forums » Rules

Subject: Moving in stacks and failing to throw infantry smoke rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: asljr_rsp [+] [View All]
Ryan Powers
United States
Marble
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OK, we all know the rule "never move in stacks" and it would seem doubly applicable when in a position where smoke would be needed, but bear with me. A situation came up recently that had the potential to cause a question and so I'm asking it here.

First off we'll start with the basic case: one leader + one squad. By upping the MF to 6, it should be possible to smoke and still assault move, so that seems a decent reason to consider it. Or maybe you want to throw smoke (2 MF) into open ground move into it (2 more MF) and then keep moving, also possibly useful. Now that we have our motivation, the stack attempts to throw smoke but fails with a dr of 6.

Question 1: Is the squad done moving, or is the entire stack done moving? The rules seem to indicate the former but I'm not positive.

Question 2: Assuming just the unit is done moving, and not the entire stack, has the leader expended 2 MF?

OK. Now for the next version. Leader (Optional) + 2 (or more) squads. Squad #1 throws smoke and fails but *not* with a 6 (the 6 case is pretty much covered above.)

Question 3: If squad #2 wants to throw smoke is this MF 3 and 4 or still 1 and 2?

Thanks everyone.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Richardson
United States
Lindsborg
Kansas
flag msg tools
mb
Ryan Powers wrote:
Question 1: Is the squad done moving, or is the entire stack done moving? The rules seem to indicate the former but I'm not positive.

Only the squad is done moving. A24.1 specifically says "unit" and not "stack".

Ryan Powers wrote:
Question 2: Assuming just the unit is done moving, and not the entire stack, has the leader expended 2 MF?

Yes.

Units moving as a stack always expend MF simultaneously. So, if one unit in a stack declares that it will spend 2 MF on a smoke placement attempt, every unit in that stack expends 2 MF (even if they don't actually do anything with those MF). The only way to avoid this is to split the stack before the smoke placement attempt.

Ryan Powers wrote:
OK. Now for the next version. Leader (Optional) + 2 (or more) squads. Squad #1 throws smoke and fails but *not* with a 6 (the 6 case is pretty much covered above.)

Question 3: If squad #2 wants to throw smoke is this MF 3 and 4 or still 1 and 2?

It depends. If a unit in a stack expends MF for a smoke placement attempt, the other eligible units in the stack could also make their own smoke placement attempts using the same MF expenditure. So a stack with three squads could, with an expenditure of just 2 MF, attempt to place smoke into three ADJACENT hexes... or make three attempts to place smoke in a single ADJACENT hex, etc.

You could, of course, do it the other way: the stack spends 2 MF for one squad to make a smoke placement attempt, and then spends 2 more MF for a second squad to make another smoke placement attempt, but I can't imagine why you would ever want to waste MF in that manner.
6 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Powers
United States
Marble
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All of those fall in line with my interpretation as well. But there was just enough fuzziness that it was worth checking up on.

Thanks.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erez Ben-Aharon
Australia
Civic Square
ACT
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
richfam wrote:

It depends. If a unit in a stack expends MF for a smoke placement attempt, the other eligible units in the stack could also make their own smoke placement attempts using the same MF expenditure. So a stack with three squads could, with an expenditure of just 2 MF, attempt to place smoke into three ADJACENT hexes... or make three attempts to place smoke in a single ADJACENT hex, etc.


I am not sure you can do this, I believe you have to pre-declare stack MF expenditure ("my stack moves to zB3 for 2MF", or "my stack attempts to drop smoke in zB3 for 2MF"). So while you can make three attempts in a single ADJACENT hex, I don't believe you can attempt into 3 separate ADJACENT hexes - as long as you are spending it as stacked.

richfam wrote:

You could, of course, do it the other way: the stack spends 2 MF for one squad to make a smoke placement attempt, and then spends 2 more MF for a second squad to make another smoke placement attempt, but I can't imagine why you would ever want to waste MF in that manner.


Followup from my previous comment, I can see of one reason why to do this. First let me preface that. Since stack expenditure has to be predeclared (and again correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I have seen it in an FAQ somewhere), if you only wanted to drop smoke in a single hex, and have predeclared all 3 squads (in order to increase your odds, for example) to do so for only 2MF expenditure, and the first one succeeds - the 'auto-attempts' of the other two squads (which are no longer relevant, since you succeeded with the first) could possibly roll a 6 which would kill the movement for the rolling squad (which could possibly be both, if you roll two 6's). However if you are fairly certain you can make the smoke drop in one go (high exponent americans, or engineers, etc.) it might be better to just spend 2MF but declare the attempt just with the first one, thus not risking a failed attempt with the others.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Richardson
United States
Lindsborg
Kansas
flag msg tools
mb
Erez Ben-Aharon wrote:
I am not sure you can do this, I believe you have to pre-declare stack MF expenditure ("my stack moves to zB3 for 2MF", or "my stack attempts to drop smoke in zB3 for 2MF").

But the members of a stack can do different activities with a given MF expenditure: "Units moving as a stack expend MF simultaneously and need not spend MF for the same purpose, but must designate at the same time all actions for the same MF." (A4.2)

Erez Ben-Aharon wrote:
So while you can make three attempts in a single ADJACENT hex, I don't believe you can attempt into 3 separate ADJACENT hexes - as long as you are spending it as stacked.

"Units attempting to place SMOKE grenades must specify the hex they wish to place them in before rolling the placement dr, but are otherwise free to observe the placement attempts of previous moving units before designating their own placement attempts." (A24.1)

The rule clearly states that the target is designated before the placing unit rolls its placement dr, but it does not require that a target be designated before any other unit in the stack makes a placement dr, nor does it require that a target be designated at the time that the MF expenditure is announced. Indeed, the last part of this rule, about observing other placement attempts, only makes sense for units moving as a stack... as units moving individually, or making smoke placement attempts on different MF expenditures of a stack, would of course know the results of any previous placement attempts before they have to designate their target.

I can't find any Perry Sez or errata that changes or contradicts these two rules, so I believe my answer was correct.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Klas Malmstrom
Sweden
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
richfam wrote:
"Units attempting to place SMOKE grenades must specify the hex they wish to place them in before rolling the placement dr, but are otherwise free to observe the placement attempts of previous moving units before designating their own placement attempts." (A24.1)

The rule clearly states that the target is designated before the placing unit rolls its placement dr, but it does not require that a target be designated before any other unit in the stack makes a placement dr, nor does it require that a target be designated at the time that the MF expenditure is announced. Indeed, the last part of this rule, about observing other placement attempts, only makes sense for units moving as a stack... as units moving individually, or making smoke placement attempts on different MF expenditures of a stack, would of course know the results of any previous placement attempts before they have to designate their target.

I can't find any Perry Sez or errata that changes or contradicts these two rules, so I believe my answer was correct.

Looks that way to me too.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erez Ben-Aharon
Australia
Civic Square
ACT
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
richfam wrote:

I can't find any Perry Sez or errata that changes or contradicts these two rules, so I believe my answer was correct.


Wow...you do learn something new everyday ...you are most right, and the ironic thing I was looking for the 'errata/faq', but it was a reference to another one of your own posts...stating the exact same thing (I must have mixed it in my mind that it all has to be predesignated)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Powers
United States
Marble
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
richfam wrote:
Indeed, the last part of this rule, about observing other placement attempts, only makes sense for units moving as a stack... as units moving individually, or making smoke placement attempts on different MF expenditures of a stack, would of course know the results of any previous placement attempts before they have to designate their target.



That bit is really the key to the whole thing. Everything else falls into place once you realize that they pretty much *have* to be talking about a stack there.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.