A Strange Bombardment 'Benefit'

[vince hughes]

Sometimes, in the more extreme desperate cases. There comes a time when you need to bombard a hex that contains your very own troops as well as the enemy.

Whilst playing Tony Langston yesterday, a strange modifier had to be applied that I have never considered before. probably because I must always have used OBA in such cases previously.

Anyway, point was, some on-board mortars were being used to bombard an assault hex. They had sight to the hex and received the +1 for bombarding the enemy (self-spotted) and then of course, I had to add that to the column to bombard my own troops too in the seperate dice roll used for such cases..

Seemed wierd having sight to the hex and yet enhancing my own shot against my own men. Two ways to look at it. I guess:

Better sight to the hex as a whole rather than individual unit detail so that justifies the +1 for general aim against them all OR

against that reasoning could be

As they can see the hex, they should be able to discern friend from foe better ?

[campsawyer]

You statement about better sight on the hex is the best justification. The units are also in assault to they could be intermixed and tougher to fully define who is friend and enemy too.

[vince hughes]

Yeah,

Just hurts adding a +1 to your own bombardment .... lol

[plloyd1010]

We ran into a similar issue a couple games back (think it was NoEl009), which we were playing 2x-blind. Our conclusion was that the +1 for firing at the hex was intended to be against spotted units. The rational was that the firing unit would be making its own adjustments, rather than spending time with the "little this way, little that" corrections from the FO. British 25 lbr's are sort our reference.

I expect, should it come up for us, we would not apply the +1 against friendly troops. I think the firer could keep off friendlies almost as well getting on enemies. As to intermixing units, this isn't a brawl, so you could find the main body of bad guys.

BtW, I've known 2 FO's. An uncle, an uncle who was in the Korean War, and a co-worker, who was in the Colorado National Guard.

[vince hughes]

Peter,

As the rules blithely state "+1 target is spotted by firing unit" and it was me doing the shooting I kind of felt obliged to add it despite my reservations. Had it been the opponent shooting I would have told him not to add it. However, he's cooked his goose now so that's one left in reserve for me in the future ... hehehe ! ( btw- I fortunately missed my own troops )

[plloyd1010]

Vince, you know I usually come down on the simulation side of these splits. Hence my position.

[campsawyer]

I was thinking about this a little more, should positive column shifts by an attacking or firing unit be mandatory or voluntary? In Vince's example, I could see for going the +1 for just trying to get a morale check on the enemy troops and preventing a kill on his own troops. If they have higher morale, they will probably be OK, while the lower morale enemy troops possibly disrupt or demoralize.

[vince hughes]

I was thinking about this a little more, should positive column shifts by an attacking or firing unit be mandatory or voluntary? In Vince's example, I could see for going the +1 for just trying to get a morale check on the enemy troops and preventing a kill on his own troops. If they have higher morale, they will probably be OK, while the lower morale enemy troops possibly disrupt or demoralize.

lol - You credit me with too much mercy !

In fact my guys were the lower moraled but dug-in. His were higher moraled but in a stack of 3 units for an extra +1. I was also risking friendly fire in adjacent hexes with a 1 or 2 roll.

This is the Alem Hamza SotM as desperate and furious Italian attempts to kick back the Indians continue. Tough, manic battle thats probably going to go the full 36 turns !

[tlangston28]

Peter,

As the rules blithely state "+1 target is spotted by firing unit" and it was me doing the shooting I kind of felt obliged to add it despite my reservations. Had it been the opponent shooting I would have told him not to add it. However, he's cooked his goose now so that's one left in reserve for me in the future ... hehehe ! ( btw- I fortunately missed my own troops )

I think I would have applied to to my roll as well if it were me in the shooting situation. When we read it, it sounded goofy but the modifier read "+1 Target Hex is spotted...".

Luckily, the Italian mortars haven't been as deadly as in other battles... lol!

[campsawyer]

I was thinking about this a little more, should positive column shifts by an attacking or firing unit be mandatory or voluntary? In Vince's example, I could see for going the +1 for just trying to get a morale check on the enemy troops and preventing a kill on his own troops. If they have higher morale, they will probably be OK, while the lower morale enemy troops possibly disrupt or demoralize.

lol - You credit me with too much mercy !

In fact my guys were the lower moraled but dug-in. His were higher moraled but in a stack of 3 units for an extra +1. I was also risking friendly fire in adjacent hexes with a 1 or 2 roll.

This is the Alem Hamza SotM as desperate and furious Italian attempts to kick back the Indians continue. Tough, manic battle thats probably going to go the full 36 turns !

No I was not thinking you are giving too much mercy, more likely trying to score a cheap M check on low morale troops, while higher rated troops pass without a problem.