Saipan:Caves

[campsawyer]

Let me add to the confusion: is it rational for enemy units to be both in and out of caves and active in the same assault? I would think being in a cave precludes you from firing out of it, unlike an entrenchment. Now I haven't seen the Saipan rules so maybe this is explicit already...?

Shad, That was my initial thinking and hence my statement on screening, but review of CSW postings on the topic, shows a discussion on this topic with entrenchments back in 2006. It was resolved with the split column resolution of the assault.

More discussion on this is invited.

[Shad]

I can rationalize people in an entrenchment shooting OUT. I cannot rationalize the same for caves given what I've seen/read about Japanese cave fortifications. They had narrow openings, had tunnels, and basically the soldiers tried to blow them to hell/burn up all the oxygen/avoid going in at all costs.

Was there ever a pitched battle with people standing in the mouth of the cave shooting at people outside with allies also outside in the same battle? I highly doubt it.

I don't think caves should have in+out assaults. I think it should be "all in" or "all out" only.

[campsawyer]

I can rationalize people in an entrenchment shooting OUT. I cannot rationalize the same for caves given what I've seen/read about Japanese cave fortifications. They had narrow openings, had tunnels, and basically the soldiers tried to blow them to hell/burn up all the oxygen/avoid going in at all costs.

Was there ever a pitched battle with people standing in the mouth of the cave shooting at people outside with allies also outside in the same battle? I highly doubt it.

I don't think caves should have in+out assaults. I think it should be "all in" or "all out" only.

Got it. You are advocating no defender fire when in a cave. A follow up question would be, should they screened, not take combat results, by units outside the cave?

[Shad]

Got it. You are advocating no defender fire when in a cave. A follow up question would be, should they screened, not take combat results, by units outside the cave?

Kind of. I'll give an example to make it clearer:

I have 2 JPN INF in a hex that has a cave. One INF is inside the cave, the other is outside (let's say he retreated into the hex or something).

You assault the hex with some Marines.

I am of the opinion that the first assault should be your Marines against only my 1 INF platoon that is outside the cave.

Then, if they are destroyed/driven off you would have to conduct another assault to root out my remaining platoon hiding in the cave.

Likewise, if you were in my hex and I wanted to initiate an assault, in order for BOTH platoons to take part I'd have to forego the defensive bonus of the cave and "come out".

But again, I'm writing this having not seen the new rules, so maybe it's a moot point?

Could you post a camera-phone shot of the caves special rules or something?

[JayTownsend]

Look at it this way, a cave fits in a 200 meter hex, it doesn't take all the hex up in most cases, units can be both inside and outside a cave. Units outside a cave do not get the benefits or protection of the cave and can be fired on normally, units in a cave must be assaulted, if enemy units are both inside and outside a cave when assaulted you resolve the combat and modifier separately on two different columns just like you would in an entrenchment for enemy units both inside and outside.

[campsawyer]

Got it. You are advocating no defender fire when in a cave. A follow up question would be, should they screened, not take combat results, by units outside the cave?

Kind of. I'll give an example to make it clearer:

I have 2 JPN INF in a hex that has a cave. One INF is inside the cave, the other is outside (let's say he retreated into the hex or something).

You assault the hex with some Marines.

I am of the opinion that the first assault should be your Marines against only my 1 INF platoon that is outside the cave.

Then, if they are destroyed/driven off you would have to conduct another assault to root out my remaining platoon hiding in the cave.

Likewise, if you were in my hex and I wanted to initiate an assault, in order for BOTH platoons to take part I'd have to forego the defensive bonus of the cave and "come out".

But again, I'm writing this having not seen the new rules, so maybe it's a moot point?

Could you post a camera-phone shot of the caves special rules or something?

You your thinking is the same as my "screened" unit theory. After re-reading old posts on entrenchments it is clear, one attack separate columns for ones inside and ones outside. Unfortunately, this was never in the 3rd edition rules, but seems the consensus to play for entrenchments/caves. I am good with this as this is platoon level combat, where there could be multiple cave openings as well as tunnels and spider holes, where the defenders can pop out of for First Fire attacks.

My main concerns are with wording of the defending column shift sentence should add to the end, " to the attackers firepower." Also the "(suffers more casualties than they inflict)" should be "(suffers worse combat result from the assault)", IMHO.

I still have a question on DF/BF 3 stack modifiers for units being both inside and outside the cave.

Here is some of the rule:

"For game purposes, they are similar to Entrenchments: a unit is either in a cave or outside of it. The Japanese player will receive a number of Cave markers that are placed on the map prior to game start, and are immovable. Only a Japanese unit may occupy the inside of a cave. The Japanese player must indicate if the unit is inside a cave by placing the unit underneath the cave marker. All Japanese units in a hex may be inside the cave, outside, or a combination of the two, but stacking limits remain as normal for such hexes. No unit may use direct fire or bombardment fire into or out of a cave. Therefore, units in a cave may only be attacked by assault. Units defending in a cave receive a -2 column modifier. If a player loses the assault (suffers more casualties than they inflict) all losing units and leaders must exit the cave hex completely just like normally exiting an assault hex, receiving the "free shot" as they exit. No unit may dig in while occupying a cave."

[JayTownsend]

There is no Fire First for Caves! As none was ever listed for Guadalcanal caves rules, I went with that as well.

American Engineers and Flamethrowers (FLM) both get that one column modifier in assaults, the only thing the FLM engineer can't do is clear mines. The Satan Flame Tanks will add a +3 modifier with assaults in addition to others. SDo try and always bring these type of units to cave assaults when available.

[JayTownsend]

My main concerns are with wording of the defending column shift sentence should add to the end, " to the attackers firepower." Also the "(suffers more casualties than they inflict)" should be "(suffers worse combat result from the assault)", IMHO.

From me:

I am not sure about the wording at the end either as it was added. But i could go either way with it and use it as stated or for less complication, assuming maybe John missed something, go with the normal assault hex rules with cave modifiers.

[campsawyer]

There is no Fire First for Caves! As none was ever listed for Guadalcanal caves rules, I went with that as well.

American Engineers and Flamethrowers (FLM) both get that one column modifier in assaults, the only thing the FLM engineer can't do is clear mines. The Satan Flame Tanks will add a +3 modifier with assaults in addition to others. SDo try and always bring these type of units to cave assaults when available.

Oops, that is one on me. I treated them like entrenchments for first fire. This should definitely be added as errata, especially if it states that caves are just like entrenchments. If there are exceptions those need to be spelled out.

I agree on the ENG/FLM, but they are tough to get close. They will be targeted on their approach and the FLM with their +1 on any DF/OF get them killed or demoralized quickly. I am looking to get the next scenario with one of those Satans.

[JayTownsend]

Treat them like entrenchments as units can be both in and out of them in the same hex and that they can use different combat modifier for that situation but no where does it state either on Guadalcanal or Saipan that they get fire-first, so it's not an errata.