AT fire in assault hexes

[plloyd1010]

There was an interesting discussion over on ConSim about combat and AT fire in an assault hex. The basic discussion begins in a post prior to the liked post, but you'll get the gist. Eventually I proposed this hypothetical:

All 3 Soviet tanks activate and use AT fire on PzIII. The question being: Would trigger assault combat?
The consensus over there is that it would not.

[joe_oppenheimer]

Important to note that in the above example they start the turn already in the assault hex. I think we all agreed that the initial entry into the enemy occupied hex triggers assault.

[triangular_cube]

I always played that the AT fire would not trigger an assault retaliation, but I've misinterpreted rules before, so who knows. 

I must say though, that situations like this are very rare in my games at least. I would usually be pinning the tanks in assault with a sacrificial INF platoon while hammering away from the adjacent hexes for the  AT attacks. Maybe I'm just crazy though. 

[plloyd1010]

I never said it was likely. Indeed, I can't think of a tactical reason to create it. The situation was just the extreme logical end of the discussion.

[waynebaumber]

My thoughts are that it will trigger assault combat as the definition of assault is "combat which takes place between opposing units occupying the same hex" (12.0)

[cjsiam]

I would see the AT fire as instigating assault combat...The defenders get to respond...you only get to fire the AT as a choice OF type of Assault...its not normal AT

[joe_oppenheimer]

you only get to fire the AT as a choice OF type of Assault...its not normal AT

It would be clearer if that was specifically stated in 12.52. As it stands we're just all bringing our own interpretations in because it's never really defined.

[cjsiam]

Joe---I agree it could be clearer....I found these bits:

11.0 Anti-Tank Fire
Anti-Tank Fire targets an individual enemy vehicle unit within range - no other units in the hex with the target unit are affected in any way. Only trucks, jeeps, and AFVs may be attacked with Anti-Tank Fire (some game special rules may add other targets to this list). A unit with an Anti-Tank Fire value that occupies an assault hex may use Anti-Tank Fire against enemy vehicles in that hex instead of adding their Direct Fire value to the assault total.

To me this infers its part of an ASSAULT.... not an independent AT fire......I think this is where the conundrum lies

12.0 Assault
Assault combat takes place between opposing units occupying the same hex.

I (again) infer this to mean that if you are in the same hex, you are participating in ASSAULT combat---for AT, that is how you do your ASSAULT combat in same hex

12.3 Voluntary Combat
If an activated unit enters a hex which was already occupied by friendly and enemy units at the start of the moving unit's action segment, or if the turn begins with both sides' units in an assault hex, then the active player may choose whether or not to attack with those units this turn. If he attacks, any units that moved into the hex this turn, plus any undemoralized friendly units and leaders that began the turn in the assault hex and have not activated this turn, may attack if desired. Not all units must attack. However, all enemy units in the hex defend as one combined strength.

So (again) I infer this means if you make an ASSAULT combat happen, the defenders defend as one group/combined strength in an ASSAULT combat....

12.52 Fire Types in an Assault Hex
Units in an assault hex may not fire on targets outside the hex. They may not fire on the direct fire or bombardment tables. They may conduct Anti-Tank Fire attacks, but only against enemy vehicles in the same hex with them (there is no dice roll modifier for this). Units in an assault hex may not conduct opportunity fire against enemy units entering the hex to initiate or reinforce an assault (exceptions: Cavalry Charge, 15.31; Extended Assault or Overrun, see Optional Rules).

So---fire time in an ASSAULT hex---where units in the same hex conduct ASSAULTs can be AT.....
I think here is the place where the most confusion arises...calling it "Anti-Tank Fire attack" in this paragraph--but it taking place in a hex that enemy units share--it 
thus being an Assault hex----

So---the question does remain murky.....

Thinking about it....if an AT Fire Attack is going on---the enemy forces within the 200m hex are they just sitting back and taking it?
This is small arms and hand grenade range...so I think that is why it is ASSAULT combat,
and you don't fire (DF or AT) with impunity(no enemy response at this range),
instead you instigate a fire-fight that is either ASSAULT table or AT Fire based from the defenders....

Important because ASSAULT casualties would be simultaneous, where AT FIRE (not ASSAULT) would not....

I'm still troubled...

[triangular_cube]

Joe---I agree it could be clearer....I found these bits:

11.0 Anti-Tank Fire
Anti-Tank Fire targets an individual enemy vehicle unit within range - no other units in the hex with the target unit are affected in any way. Only trucks, jeeps, and AFVs may be attacked with Anti-Tank Fire (some game special rules may add other targets to this list). A unit with an Anti-Tank Fire value that occupies an assault hex may use Anti-Tank Fire against enemy vehicles in that hex instead of adding their Direct Fire value to the assault total.

To me this infers its part of an ASSAULT.... not an independent AT fire......I think this is where the conundrum lies

12.0 Assault
Assault combat takes place between opposing units occupying the same hex.

I (again) infer this to mean that if you are in the same hex, you are participating in ASSAULT combat---for AT, that is how you do your ASSAULT combat in same hex

12.3 Voluntary Combat
If an activated unit enters a hex which was already occupied by friendly and enemy units at the start of the moving unit's action segment, or if the turn begins with both sides' units in an assault hex, then the active player may choose whether or not to attack with those units this turn. If he attacks, any units that moved into the hex this turn, plus any undemoralized friendly units and leaders that began the turn in the assault hex and have not activated this turn, may attack if desired. Not all units must attack. However, all enemy units in the hex defend as one combined strength.

So (again) I infer this means if you make an ASSAULT combat happen, the defenders defend as one group/combined strength in an ASSAULT combat....

12.52 Fire Types in an Assault Hex
Units in an assault hex may not fire on targets outside the hex. They may not fire on the direct fire or bombardment tables. They may conduct Anti-Tank Fire attacks, but only against enemy vehicles in the same hex with them (there is no dice roll modifier for this). Units in an assault hex may not conduct opportunity fire against enemy units entering the hex to initiate or reinforce an assault (exceptions: Cavalry Charge, 15.31; Extended Assault or Overrun, see Optional Rules).

So---fire time in an ASSAULT hex---where units in the same hex conduct ASSAULTs can be AT.....
I think here is the place where the most confusion arises...calling it "Anti-Tank Fire attack" in this paragraph--but it taking place in a hex that enemy units share--it 
thus being an Assault hex----

So---the question does remain murky.....

Thinking about it....if an AT Fire Attack is going on---the enemy forces within the 200m hex are they just sitting back and taking it?
This is small arms and hand grenade range...so I think that is why it is ASSAULT combat,
and you don't fire (DF or AT) with impunity(no enemy response at this range),
instead you instigate a fire-fight that is either ASSAULT table or AT Fire based from the defenders....

Important because ASSAULT casualties would be simultaneous, where AT FIRE (not ASSAULT) would not....

I'm still troubled...

I don't think its quite as clear as you are proposing. 

Rule 11 also says, "no other units in the hex with the target unit are affected in any way". Engaging them in an assault combat and receiving retaliatory fire seems like an effect. 

Notably, the portion you highlighted from rule 11 was added in 4th edition and did not appear in 3rd, so it was certainly trying to clarify or alter SOMETHING. It could just be clarifying that the AT fire isnt free, and the unit cant also participate in an Assault table combat round. 

Rule 12 is saying that Assault combat can only occur in the same hex, but it doesnt say exclusively assault combat can occur in the hex. 

Rule 12.3, i dont think anyone is trying to argue that units engaging in an assault would not be under retaliatory fire. It is the nature of an assault that is in question. 

12.52 I think you are reading a bit into the definition of an assault hex that isnt there per the rules. An Assault Hex per rule defintion is only  "A hex containing both friendly and enemy combat units." The nature of being an assault hex does not imply that assault combat is taking place. Additionally, not all actions in an assault hex trigger assault. For example, after initial assault combat, the units may spend 2 or 3 turns recovering morale. It is still an Assault hex, even though no one is Assaulting each other. I dont think anyone is claiming that recovering morale would trigger retaliatory fire, even though it is an action in an assault hex?

To me at least, an Assault is a fire attack resolved on the Assault Table, and resoled per Assault Procedure. 

It all hinges on the interpretation of the new text in rule 11. And as Joe has said, we are all interpreting it differently. Unless we get an official clarification, either interpretation seems legitimate to me.

[cjsiam]

TC, don't disagree with you in much of what you say---as I said "murky"....

Some of the consequences trouble me though----
IF you can AT fire, without instigating an Assault response.....
Does that mean that later in that turn the Other side can attack those units with impunity---that is 
  those that AT fired have no attack back?.....

So in the above example if the units fired at the PzIII....as AT fire, and it did NOT instigate an Assault firefight,
the units could (even individually (see other ongoing thread about multiple assaults...) ) Attack the tanks (all at once) 
and suffer no return fire....

I guess that's plausible....the Russians being so focused on the PzIII they ignored the infantry ....

I have some trouble with a, for example, 37mm AT gun deciding it will AT fire at a Tank in the hex (for example) and
doing so without having to suffer a firefight response....thinking they could take the shots and NOT have to deal with 
return fire/ instigating a firefight seems .....well....skewed....

I agree we need a ruling......
Between this issue, and the "multiple assaults" question...the whole Assault mechanic may change for me...