Having watched the back and forth among distinguished veterans of the PG ethos, I can only say I'm in awe of the depth of insight and reasoning on all sides of this question. It's thus with a great deal of trepidation that I add my own first attempt to clarify things based on what I hope is a close reading of the rules. Also, I'm very long-winded, so I apologize in advance for posting this...
Summary: There are 2 distinct types of assault combat, required (assault movement) and optional (ongoing assault combat). Required assault combat is conducted only with DF on the assault table. Optional assault combat allows for different types of activation among participating units, including (as argued below) activation for AT Fire. AT fire in an assault hex is handled like any other AT fire and thus targets of AT fire cannot return fire for that attack. Attacking units not activated for AT fire can activate for and conduct normal assaults against all enemy units.
Reasoning:
To my mind, the confusion about AT fire and Assault is due to the numerous references in the rules to the multi-unit effects of assault combat for both attacker and defender, e.g.
Quote:1.1 Rules Summary
Assault: ...Results affect all enemy units in the hex.
7.43 Assault: ...Assault fire affects all enemy units in the assault hex.
12.3 Optional Combat:...all enemy units in the hex defend as one combined strength.
12.4 Procedure:...Each player totals the direct fire values of all his units in the hex...
AT fire, on the other hand, is strictly one on one. So here we have a qualitative difference between assault fire and AT fire. This is confirmed by the annotation for 12.12 Exiting a Hex:
Quote:AT fire against exiting units
The "free shot" against exiting enemy units is conducted as an assault, on the Assault Table. Units with AT values may use their Direct Fire values in the assault, but may not use AT fire against the exiting units.
Note that late war infantry units with short range AT must be activated in order to use it. Therefore, they may not use their short range AT in addition to the "free shot."
The key here is "units with short range AT must be activated in order to use it." But any unit with AT must be activated in order to use it. In a non-assault hex, a unit targeted by AT fire does not get to fire back with AT nor with DF; it is not activated. With respect to AT fire, a unit in an assault hex is no different: if targeted by AT fire from a unit in the same hex, or from any other hex, the defending unit is not activated and thus may not return fire.
So when can defending units with AT in an assault hex return fire? Only when attacked on the assault table, and then the return fire must use DF factors only.
OK, but when can a unit use its AT to attack during assault combat? To me, assault combat breaks down into two phases, 1) assault movement, and 2) ongoing combat in an assault hex.
Phase 1 - Assault Movement. It is clear that a unit must activate for fire to use its AT, and activating for assault movement is activating for fire. However, the rules for assault movement read:
Quote:12.2 Required Combat
Assault combat must be resolved immediately when active units enter a hex containing enemy units and no friendly units. Resolve the assault after all active units which are to enter the assault hex this action segment have finished entering the hex.
All units of both sides in the hex must participate.
Per 12.2, assault movement results in a single assault combat consisting of all attackers against all defenders. As there is no distinction made for types of fire, and the rules repeatedly refer to results being applied to "all enemy units in the hex," combat in this case is limited to DF factors used on the assault table for both attacker and defender.
So, for assault movement (initiating an assault), we should consider AT-capable units on the attack as "in motion" and thus unable to use their AT fire, only DF (i.e., HE ammo and MGs). This interpretation (to my mind) balances nicely with the prohibition of AT fire during a free shot at exiting units.
Phase 2 - Ongoing Assault Combat. For units already in an assault hex, 12.11 applies:
Quote:Units which begin their activation in an assault hex or enter an existing assault hex are not required to assault, and can opt to recover morale, leave the hex, or do nothing (12.3).
We need to add "activate for AT fire" to these options. This is the only way to make sense of the rule references to using AT against a target in the same hex. If we allow this, then an AFV has the option to activate for assault as normal, combining its DF with other units, being subject to defensive fire, etc. Or the AFV can choose to activate for AT fire, conducted as normal AT fire (with no die roll mod due to being in same hex), against designated targets and without chance of return fire. Of course, a unit which activates for AT fire cannot activate for assault, and vice-versa.
As with any other fire activation, order of fire execution is up to the attacker. Just as a given unit can be targeted multiple times outside an assault hex, so can a given vehicle unit be targeted first by AT and than by an assault in the same turn (or vice-versa).
So how does this work with the example of the StuGIIIGs assaulting the T34s? Phase 1 - Assault movement - 3 StuGIIIGs enter the town hex and must use their 30 DF factors on the Assault Table, the 3 T34s returning fire in the same way. The StuGIIIGs get MOVE/FIRE markers, the T34s do not.
Phase 2 - Ongoing combat - On the Soviet's activation (assume all units have survived), the T34s have all the options of 12.11 plus the option to activate for AT fire. 1 T34 could fire at a specific StuGIIIG unit with AT, then the other 2 T34s could use their combined 16 DF on the assault table against all 3 StuGIIIGs. These 2 T34s would then be the defenders for the StuGIIIGs' return fire. All 3 T34s now have MOVE/FIRE markers. If all T34s elect AT fire, the StuGIIIGs have no return fire. So it goes....
If the Germans on their turn exit the hex, the T34s can take their "free shot" only on the assault table using their DF; no change here.
This all seems consistent and reasonable to me, but I wouldn't be surprised if no-one else agrees. And if you've read this far, well, thanks, and I can send aspirin if you need it.
