Over stacked counters/units!

[Matt W]

Mike,

You probably got that from the flamethrower engineers. Most SSRs give attacking FLM(GUAS, etc.) units the ability to nullify first fire.

[Michael Murphy]

Matt, I'm pretty sure that you've identified my problem. On the other hand, think about this a moment. If you're assaulting dug-in or entrenched units, engineers with cool toys could certainly provide you with an equalizer. Maybe I'm on to something here with ENG negating First Fire in these situations. Nah, of course I'm not.

Use the rules as written is my motto. Reality arguments have no business here.

[Matt W]

Mike,

I always looked at the +1 column for engineers in assault against towns and entrenchments as the bonus for the toys. The flamethrower bonus is over the top (note that the flame throwing tanks, e.g. Satans in Saipan get the negation of first fire too). I like it because without it you need to have way too much force (and a lot of luck) to root out a strong defender in such circumstances.

I feel your pain re: the reality based argument and have had a number of long drawn out discussions in the past. In the end, we always use the rules as written (well, most of the time...)

[vince hughes]

Mike,

I always looked at the +1 column for engineers in assault against towns and entrenchments as the bonus for the toys. The flamethrower bonus is over the top (note that the flame throwing tanks, e.g. Satans in Saipan get the negation of first fire too). I like it because without it you need to have way too much force (and a lot of luck) to root out a strong defender in such circumstances.

I feel your pain re: the reality based argument and have had a number of long drawn out discussions in the past. In the end, we always use the rules as written (well, most of the time...)

The trouble with 'reality' based arguments is like many subjects is seen in differing ways by people, including people who have actually experienced some of the things being argued about.

Just because one person think's it realistic to "fill in the void", there will be others that have a completely different idea of 'reality' (I'm discluding those smoking drugs in this BTW )

Therefore, the written rule is the simple way to deal. Everybody on the same hymn sheet.

[Michael Murphy]

Mike,

I always looked at the +1 column for engineers in assault against towns and entrenchments as the bonus for the toys. The flamethrower bonus is over the top (note that the flame throwing tanks, e.g. Satans in Saipan get the negation of first fire too). I like it because without it you need to have way too much force (and a lot of luck) to root out a strong defender in such circumstances.

I feel your pain re: the reality based argument and have had a number of long drawn out discussions in the past. In the end, we always use the rules as written (well, most of the time...)

The trouble with 'reality' based arguments is like many subjects is seen in differing ways by people, including people who have actually experienced some of the things being argued about.

Just because one person think's it realistic to "fill in the void", there will be others that have a completely different idea of 'reality' (I'm discluding those smoking drugs in this BTW )

Therefore, the written rule is the simple way to deal. Everybody on the same hymn sheet.

@ Matt: Of course, you are correct about the +1 column modifier. Let's just say that I had combined a fallacious benefit (nullified first fire) with a real benefit (+1 column modifier). I stand corrected. My error created a über-counter at least the equal of an ASL Finn, US Marine, SS, or those 838 Engineers! I never set out to change the Tome.

(I'm discluding those smoking drugs in this BTW)

Does that mean that you're for those drugs or against them? Inquiring minds want to know.

[campsawyer]

Reality is just the perspective that you are looking at it with.

[Matt W]

I thought reality was a really tawdry genre of television programming...

[Michael Murphy]

Reality is for those people who can't handle drugs.