Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
[Rules] AT fire *during* assault
03-28-2014, 04:46 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-28-2014, 05:14 PM by vince hughes.)
#16
RE: AT fire *during* assault
(03-28-2014, 07:31 AM)campsawyer Wrote: For item number 3, I believe the answer is no. Per 12.3 all enemy units in the hex must defend as one combined strength. The ATR at this point would be considered the enemy unit as the panzer initiated the assault. So they would have to defend with there DF rather than attack with their AT. This would also be similar to how short range INF AT works as well. They cannot use their AT on defense only when attacking.

From a practical perspective, I would not want to use the AT as the DF is higher anyway.

Alan,

That is reference to a completely different matter for 'Optional Combat' and has no reference to AT combat.

It is referencing the fact that although the attacker only moved one in, it can still can stir up his 'whole nest' of units, and that he would have to attack ALL the defenders and can not pick out just 1 or 2 enemy units in the hex to attack.

12.52 Is very specific telling us that AT units CAN fiire in the assault hex.

As a simple example. A German leader, PzIV, StGIIIG and INF unit assault a T34 on its own. They decide to attack as one AT attack with the StG and a DF attack with the PzIV and INF. (16pts = 13col +1 for leader, combined arms = 24col). The T34, then has a choice whether to attack with its DF factor, or try and take out the PzIV or StG with its AT. There is no reason I can see to stop it from doing this (or logic).

To take it further, your reading and explanation of it suggesting 1 x combined strength to defend. I would suggest you were thinking of more than one unit defending. I say that because if it is one unit in the hex, then using that mantra, if the 1 x unit has an AT value, it COULD then fire it because its using it as 1 combined strength of AT. This would then be plain silly.

I am suggesting that 12.3 has no bearing on the rule of 12.52 and hopefully Richvalle will read this before getting all his defending AT empowered units hamstrung.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-28-2014, 06:01 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-28-2014, 06:32 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by Matt W - 03-28-2014, 06:44 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-28-2014, 07:20 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by campsawyer - 03-28-2014, 07:31 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-28-2014, 07:52 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by Hugmenot - 03-28-2014, 08:55 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-28-2014, 09:00 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-28-2014, 05:11 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by Hugmenot - 03-28-2014, 11:54 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by tlangston28 - 03-29-2014, 12:12 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-28-2014, 04:46 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-28-2014, 07:31 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by campsawyer - 03-28-2014, 07:48 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by campsawyer - 03-28-2014, 09:41 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by richvalle - 03-28-2014, 11:49 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-28-2014, 12:04 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by richvalle - 03-28-2014, 12:05 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-28-2014, 12:13 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by Hugmenot - 03-29-2014, 05:27 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by campsawyer - 03-29-2014, 07:06 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by zaarin7 - 03-29-2014, 07:40 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-29-2014, 08:21 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-29-2014, 12:12 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by rerathbun - 03-29-2014, 12:31 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by rerathbun - 03-29-2014, 12:25 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-29-2014, 12:29 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by Hugmenot - 03-29-2014, 12:31 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-29-2014, 06:27 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-29-2014, 12:44 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by zaarin7 - 03-29-2014, 04:21 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-29-2014, 06:20 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-29-2014, 07:32 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by Matt W - 03-29-2014, 10:43 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-30-2014, 02:59 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by campsawyer - 03-30-2014, 04:16 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by vince hughes - 03-30-2014, 06:08 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by campsawyer - 03-30-2014, 01:12 PM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 04-01-2014, 01:04 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by larrymm - 03-30-2014, 07:09 AM
RE: AT fire *during* assault - by joe_oppenheimer - 03-30-2014, 08:02 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)