From damavs at alltel.net Tue May 1 06:34:50 2007 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 9:34:50 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Residual Fire Question Message-ID: <20070501133450.OPHD5292.ispmxmta06-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> Chuck Payne writes: > I have a halftrack enter a hex containing a firelane and take the > firelane attack (4+2). After that (still on same MP though) an AT gun pops up > and kills the halftrack. The crew and one passanger survive. Do they take > the firelane again? Yes. They should qualify under the "more vulnerable" clause if nothing else as now they have a -1 for bailing out vs. the +2 they had when tucked safely inside their cozy AFV. What kind of piddly AT gun doesn't flame a halftrack anyway? Bret Hildebran damavs at alltel.net www.aslok.org From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed May 2 13:53:33 2007 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 16:53:33 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] New Product Announcement Message-ID: AVAILABLE ONLY DIRECT FROM FANATIC ENTERPRISES FANATIC ENTERPRISES is pleased to announce the release of the Budapest Pack; another fine scenario pack covering a variety of unique actions for the Advanced Squad Leader system. The scenario pack includes 18 scenarios covering a variety of actions in the Budapest Campaign. The scenarios are a good selection of east front, old fashioned style ASL action. A good variety of scenarios from large to tourney sized. In addition, I am pleased to announce the release of 2 new boards, FE 1 and FE 2. FE 1 is a rural board with some farms, a gully and some small hills. FE 2 is a city set atop a hill. The boards are on heavy card stock and each comes in two pieces that connect along the Q hexrow. I hope you enjoy this humble addition to the ASL system. Look forward to numerous scenarios featuring these boards in the future. A summary of the scenarios follows: FE 134 Kecskemet Clash: A moderately sized scenario set on boards w and FE1. This scenarios features a dug in Hungarian OOB including armor holding back a truly combined arms attack by the Russians including swarm of armor and infantry backed by air support and OBA. A truly meaty scenario. FE 135 Approach March: Here is a smallish tourney sized scenario full of replay value. Set on board 12. A small Hungarian force including a couple of Guns attempts to hold off a small force of Russian infantry backed by tanks and assault guns. FE 136 Impertinence Rewarded: Another meaty scenario this time set on boards FE1 13 and 12 this scenario features a good sized defending Russian force backed by AT Guns trying to hold off a swarm of Hungarian infantry backed by a few Zrinyi. FE 137 The Devil is in Trouble: Set on boards 17 and 44, German SS troops from the Dirlewanger Brigade wait for reinforcements from Hungarian armor against Russian infantry and armor. Can the Hungarians save the devil? FE 138 Tough as old Boots!: This one is set on boards 17 and 40. A combined arms force of Germans and Hungarians have to dig out some Russian defenders protected by a great deal of fortifications. FE 139 The Highest Value: The Germans are featured in this scenario set on boards 51 and z. A tough city fight with a large group of German infantry supported by a few pieces of armor including a captured Russian T-34 The Germans are attempting to take some buildings from a large Russian force. FE 140 Dorog Days: This is a medium sized scenario set on board y. A small tourney scenario pits the Russians versus a small force of Germans supported by a couple of Hungarian assault guns. The Russians are attempting to capture some buildings. FE 141 Attila: Defending Hungarian infantry attempt to hold the church on board FE 2 against a group of Rumanians backed by some Russian tanks. The Russians attack from board y. FE 142 Defense of Sashegy Hill: A large scenario featuring dug in Hungarians on boards 41 and 21. The Hungarians attempt to hold off a strong Russian infantry/armor force, holding buildings. FE 143 Home on the Grange: This one is set on boards 41 and 49. Russian infantry supported by some guns and using the sewers attempt to defend against a strong Russian infantry/armor force. FE 144 Hero of the Soviet Union: Here is another tourney scenario, this time set on board FE 2. The attacking Hungarian infantry attempt to capture the FE 2 church against a Russian infantry force supported by OBA. Lots of tourney and replay value for this one. FE 145 The Dead & the Dying: This one is set on board 21. Defending Hungarians including a Tiger tank attempt to hold the cemetery from an attacking Russian force supported by a tank. FE 146 Pest: Here is a moderate sized scenario set on boards w and 3. It features the Hungarians supported by crappy tankettes and German armor reinforcements attempting to capture some buildings from a large Russian force with fortifications. FE 147 Burn Baby Burn: This one is set on board 51. A medium sized Hungarian infantry force supported by a couple of flame throwing half-tracks attempting to capture some buildings from a Rumanian infantry force. FE 148 Breakout!: Here is a moderate sized scenario set on boards 20, 21, 41. It features the Hungarians supported by an assault gun trapped and attempting to break out of a ring of Russians. The Russians set up surrounding the Hungarians and should result in some bloody action. FE 149 Arpad Bridge: Yet another Tourney sized scenario, this one is set on boards 8 and 51. A small Hungarian infantry force supported by an artillery piece attempt to capture some buildings from a Rumanian infantry force. FE 150 Blue Danube: Yet another Tourney sized scenario, this one is set on board w. A small Hungarian infantry force supported by a few assault guns attempts to capture some buildings from a Russian infantry force reinforced by a FT T-34. FE 151 Brother Against Brother: A DASL scenario set on boards b and e. This one features turncoat Hungarians fighting against their erstwhile brothers. The Axis player supported by a couple of guns starts dug in on the hill and must hold the hill and an adjacent building from a powerful infantry group. Fanatic Enterprises continues to enlist the assistance of several ASL'ers as Playtesters and Proofreaders and wish to express my gratitude and thanks. The Budapest Pack can be purchased for $28/pack. The Blitzkrieg Pack can be purchased for $18/pack, the Luzon Pack, The Oblivion Pack, Fanatic Pack #4, Fanatic Pack # 3, Fanatic Pack #2 and Fanatic Pack #1 can each be purchased for $12/pack and the Balkan Warfare, Battlin' Bastards of Bataan Pack and Barbarossa Pack can be purchased for $10/pack while the Leningrad Pack can be purchased for $16/pack. Shipping and Handling is $2.50 for delivery in the US, or $5 for delivery overseas for the first pack. Add $1.25 for each additional pack in the US and $2.50 for each additional pack oversees. Please send check or money order to Paul Kenny, PO Box 644, Haddonfield, NJ 08033. I also accept Paypal under the name homercles11 at hotmail.com if paying with a Paypal account based on a credit card or under the name paul_kenny at rve.com if paying with a Paypal account NOT based on a credit card. Also please check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ Thanks again for your support. Paul Kenny Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ _________________________________________________________________ Exercise your brain! Try Flexicon. http://games.msn.com/en/flexicon/default.htm?icid=flexicon_hmemailtaglineapril07 From jpcole at westnet.com.au Thu May 3 16:45:56 2007 From: jpcole at westnet.com.au (Jon Cole) Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 07:45:56 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods Message-ID: <000601c78ddd$321d0540$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Hi Just want to make sure I have this correct. A 50mm SW Mortar Defensive First Fires at an OT CE AFV moving along a woods road hex. A hit is scored. Is the following correct for the attack resolution? The normal CE DRM (+2) is reduced by Airbursts (-1) , so the AFV is instead treated as unarmored as per D5.311. It (the AFV) is attacked on the 2FP column on the IFT (with no airburst TEM) as per A7.308 [D5.311]. So the *Vehicle number needed for a result is 4. Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF <=4 apply to the attack as well? The CE crew will be attacked by 2FP with -1 airburts and +2 CE DRMs. It is subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results Correct? TIA Cheers Jon From david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Fri May 4 06:38:32 2007 From: david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca (David Elder) Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 09:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <000601c78ddd$321d0540$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> References: <000601c78ddd$321d0540$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Message-ID: <463B3758.4020701@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> Hi Jon, Just something to consider - the following rule is under B13.3 Air Bursts - B13.31 - "Otherwise, the normal woods TEM is in effect. [EXC: a vehicle(s) in a woods-road hex is always considered on the road unless beneath a partial Trail Break counter]" I am interpreting this to mean that a vehicle on a woods-road is always considered on the road and not subject to the woods TEM unless under a partial Trail Break - if I am interpreting it correctly then I am wondering if Air Bursts are actually applicable in the situation you described. The wording seems a bit confusing and I don't see why 13.31 is listed under Air Bursts unless it is specifically relevant to Air Bursts. Cheers, David Jon Cole wrote: > Hi > > Just want to make sure I have this correct. > > A 50mm SW Mortar Defensive First Fires at an OT CE AFV moving along a woods > road hex. A hit is scored. > > Is the following correct for the attack resolution? > > The normal CE DRM (+2) is reduced by Airbursts (-1) , so the AFV is instead > treated as unarmored as per D5.311. > It (the AFV) is attacked on the 2FP column on the IFT (with no airburst TEM) > as per A7.308 [D5.311]. So the *Vehicle number needed for a result is 4. > > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF <=4 apply to the attack as well? > > The CE crew will be attacked by 2FP with -1 airburts and +2 CE DRMs. It is > subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results > > > Correct? > > TIA > > Cheers > Jon > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- David Elder University of Toronto david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Institute for Aerospace Studies Tel: 416-667-7891 or 905-839-8180 Fusion Research Group Fax: 416-667-7799 From kingbilly at actewagl.net.au Fri May 4 15:32:39 2007 From: kingbilly at actewagl.net.au (Bill) Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 08:32:39 +1000 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <000601c78ddd$321d0540$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> References: <000601c78ddd$321d0540$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Message-ID: <463BB487.7050402@actewagl.net.au> Jon Cole wrote: >Hi > >Just want to make sure I have this correct. > >A 50mm SW Mortar Defensive First Fires at an OT CE AFV moving along a woods >road hex. A hit is scored. > >Is the following correct for the attack resolution? > >The normal CE DRM (+2) is reduced by Airbursts (-1) , so the AFV is instead >treated as unarmored as per D5.311. >It (the AFV) is attacked on the 2FP column on the IFT (with no airburst TEM) >as per A7.308 [D5.311]. So the *Vehicle number needed for a result is 4. > >Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF <=4 apply to the attack as well? > > No, the vehicle is treated as unarmoured, and those modifiers only apply to armoured targets (AFV) (C1.55) I would say, though that the -1 for airbursts TEM would apply to the final DRM to determine a kill, raising the number to kill the unarmoured target to 5. >The CE crew will be attacked by 2FP with -1 airburts and +2 CE DRMs. It is >subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results > > Yes. See D5.311: Consequently the crew is not susceptible to Stun/Recall from such an attack; it is instead subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results. If it breaks it must rout from the vehicle using normal Infantry rout procedures /[EXC: it expends all its initial-RtPh MF to be placed beneath the vehicle]. /See D6.62 for passengers. Note that A7.308 states: All non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles/horse counters are resolved on the ?Vehicle line of the IFT using the same IFT DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the same Location. Given a 2FP attack with a +1 DRM for CE, any result you would get that would effect the crew on the IFT would also at least immobilise the halftrack. You would need a final DR of 6 to cause a PTC, but this would require a normal DR of 5, which against the now unarmoured target would get the -1 DRM for airbursts, equaling the star vihicle number of a 2FP attack. If the halftrack is eliminated by the attack the crew have to alos check for survival (A7.308 and D5.6). If the halftrack is immobilised the crew must pass an NTC to stay in the vehicle. Bill > >Correct? > >TIA > >Cheers >Jon > > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > From cfago at ix.netcom.com Fri May 4 17:18:11 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl Fago) Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 20:18:11 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <463BB487.7050402@actewagl.net.au> Message-ID: <005301c78eaa$e003abf0$6501a8c0@laptop> I don't think Bill has it right. The vehicle is still an AFV even if OT (otherwise why would C1.55 even have an OT DRM?) There is insufficient DRM to meet: "If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM reduced by Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts to < its normal CE DRM..." My take is that against the vehicle, the DRM is -2 (-1 for all AF less than 4 and -1 for OT). Air Burst DRM doesn't apply since it's presumably on the road portion of the woods-road hex (otherwise it does apply ... even in bypass.) Against the crew its +2 CE DRM only if Air Burst doesn't apply. Carl > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of Bill > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 6:33 PM > To: Jon Cole; aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods > > Jon Cole wrote: > > >Hi > > > >Just want to make sure I have this correct. > > > >A 50mm SW Mortar Defensive First Fires at an OT CE AFV moving along a > woods > >road hex. A hit is scored. > > > >Is the following correct for the attack resolution? > > > >The normal CE DRM (+2) is reduced by Airbursts (-1) , so the AFV is > instead > >treated as unarmored as per D5.311. > >It (the AFV) is attacked on the 2FP column on the IFT (with no airburst > TEM) > >as per A7.308 [D5.311]. So the *Vehicle number needed for a result is 4. > > > >Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF <=4 apply to the attack as > well? > > > > > No, the vehicle is treated as unarmoured, and those modifiers only apply > to armoured targets (AFV) (C1.55) I would say, though that the -1 for > airbursts TEM would apply to the final DRM to determine a kill, raising > the number to kill the unarmoured target to 5. > > >The CE crew will be attacked by 2FP with -1 airburts and +2 CE DRMs. It > is > >subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results > > > > > Yes. See D5.311: > Consequently the crew is not susceptible to Stun/Recall from such an > attack; it is instead subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results. If it breaks it > must rout from the vehicle using normal Infantry rout procedures /[EXC: > it expends all its initial-RtPh MF to be placed beneath the vehicle]. > > /See D6.62 for passengers. > > Note that A7.308 states: > All non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles/horse > counters are resolved on the DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the > same Location. > > Given a 2FP attack with a +1 DRM for CE, any result you would get that > would effect the crew on the IFT would also at least immobilise the > halftrack. You would need a final DR of 6 to cause a PTC, but this > would require a normal DR of 5, which against the now unarmoured target > would get the -1 DRM for airbursts, equaling the star vihicle number of > a 2FP attack. > If the halftrack is eliminated by the attack the crew have to alos check > for survival (A7.308 and D5.6). If the halftrack is immobilised the > crew must pass an NTC to stay in the vehicle. > > Bill > > > > >Correct? > > > >TIA > > > >Cheers > >Jon > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >aslml mailing list > >aslml at lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From payne-asl2 at nc.rr.com Fri May 4 17:23:33 2007 From: payne-asl2 at nc.rr.com (Chuck Payne) Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 00:23:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Aslml] Vehicle w PRC ? Gain Message-ID: Hi Guys, From A12.122, all such units in a stack making a ? dr roll does so individually using a separate dr for each unit. From the ? Gain/Loss Chart, Vehicles (and PRC) could be read as being a single unit for case K. The chart seems to override the 1st bullet under A12.122, which says Infantry can roll for ?. Since a vehicle is involved this bullet would not apply and the chart would take precedence. The situation in question is an SPW 251/1 with a squad passanger, which is out of LOS of all enemy units but in non-concealment terrain. Do I make just one dr and the SPW and squad gain ? only on a 1 and are treated as a single unit? Or do they each roll separately? If separately, would the passenger then get the +2 TEM modifier for the halftrack? Or is the TEM the hex's TEM. Thanks, Chuck From pjbarker at earthlink.net Fri May 4 17:36:05 2007 From: pjbarker at earthlink.net (paul barker) Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 17:36:05 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods Message-ID: <23607211.1178325365946.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> This is correct as I remember. The OT has to be, IN the woods or trail break. Sorry to bring that last item into the fray. Paul J. -----Original Message----- >From: Carl Fago >Sent: May 4, 2007 5:18 PM >To: aslml at lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods > >I don't think Bill has it right. The vehicle is still an AFV even if OT >(otherwise why would C1.55 even have an OT DRM?) There is insufficient DRM >to meet: > >"If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM reduced by >Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts to < its normal CE DRM..." > >My take is that against the vehicle, the DRM is -2 (-1 for all AF less than >4 and -1 for OT). Air Burst DRM doesn't apply since it's presumably on the >road portion of the woods-road hex (otherwise it does apply ... even in >bypass.) > >Against the crew its +2 CE DRM only if Air Burst doesn't apply. > >Carl > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] >> On Behalf Of Bill >> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 6:33 PM >> To: Jon Cole; aslml at lists.aslml.net >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods >> >> Jon Cole wrote: >> >> >Hi >> > >> >Just want to make sure I have this correct. >> > >> >A 50mm SW Mortar Defensive First Fires at an OT CE AFV moving along a >> woods >> >road hex. A hit is scored. >> > >> >Is the following correct for the attack resolution? >> > >> >The normal CE DRM (+2) is reduced by Airbursts (-1) , so the AFV is >> instead >> >treated as unarmored as per D5.311. >> >It (the AFV) is attacked on the 2FP column on the IFT (with no airburst >> TEM) >> >as per A7.308 [D5.311]. So the *Vehicle number needed for a result is 4. >> > >> >Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF <=4 apply to the attack as >> well? >> > >> > >> No, the vehicle is treated as unarmoured, and those modifiers only apply >> to armoured targets (AFV) (C1.55) I would say, though that the -1 for >> airbursts TEM would apply to the final DRM to determine a kill, raising >> the number to kill the unarmoured target to 5. >> >> >The CE crew will be attacked by 2FP with -1 airburts and +2 CE DRMs. It >> is >> >subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results >> > >> > >> Yes. See D5.311: >> Consequently the crew is not susceptible to Stun/Recall from such an >> attack; it is instead subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results. If it breaks it >> must rout from the vehicle using normal Infantry rout procedures /[EXC: >> it expends all its initial-RtPh MF to be placed beneath the vehicle]. >> >> /See D6.62 for passengers. >> >> Note that A7.308 states: >> All non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles/horse >> counters are resolved on the > DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the >> same Location. >> >> Given a 2FP attack with a +1 DRM for CE, any result you would get that >> would effect the crew on the IFT would also at least immobilise the >> halftrack. You would need a final DR of 6 to cause a PTC, but this >> would require a normal DR of 5, which against the now unarmoured target >> would get the -1 DRM for airbursts, equaling the star vihicle number of >> a 2FP attack. >> If the halftrack is eliminated by the attack the crew have to alos check >> for survival (A7.308 and D5.6). If the halftrack is immobilised the >> crew must pass an NTC to stay in the vehicle. >> >> Bill >> >> > >> >Correct? >> > >> >TIA >> > >> >Cheers >> >Jon >> > >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >aslml mailing list >> >aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From cfago at ix.netcom.com Fri May 4 17:40:43 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl Fago) Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 20:40:43 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Vehicle w PRC ? Gain In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005401c78eae$03636dd0$6501a8c0@laptop> The PRC share the concealment fate of the vehicle per the old rulebook, A12.2. So I would assume one roll for the vehicle and it's PRC share the result. Carl > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of Chuck Payne > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 8:24 PM > To: aslml at aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] Vehicle w PRC ? Gain > > Hi Guys, > > From A12.122, all such units in a stack making a ? dr roll does so > individually using a separate dr for each unit. > > From the ? Gain/Loss Chart, Vehicles (and PRC) could be read as being > a > single unit for case K. The chart seems to override the 1st bullet under > A12.122, which says Infantry can roll for ?. Since a vehicle is involved > this > bullet would not apply and the chart would take precedence. > > The situation in question is an SPW 251/1 with a squad passanger, > which is > out of LOS of all enemy units but in non-concealment terrain. > > Do I make just one dr and the SPW and squad gain ? only on a 1 and > are > treated as a single unit? > > Or do they each roll separately? > > If separately, would the passenger then get the +2 TEM modifier for > the > halftrack? Or is the TEM the hex's TEM. > > Thanks, > > Chuck > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From kingbilly at actewagl.net.au Fri May 4 19:07:38 2007 From: kingbilly at actewagl.net.au (Bill) Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 12:07:38 +1000 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <23607211.1178325365946.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <23607211.1178325365946.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <463BE6EA.5040208@actewagl.net.au> Of course you are both right. I overlooked the fact that it was in road woods. If it is on the road (ie entered using road movement rate) then it is treated as being in open ground. My answer assumed the HT was in a woods hex. That is the only time it would get airbursts. Becuase it got airbusrts it would be considered unarmoured. Bill paul barker wrote: >This is correct as I remember. The OT has to be, IN the woods or trail break. Sorry to bring that last item into the fray. > >Paul J. > >-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Carl Fago >>Sent: May 4, 2007 5:18 PM >>To: aslml at lists.aslml.net >>Subject: Re: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods >> >>I don't think Bill has it right. The vehicle is still an AFV even if OT >>(otherwise why would C1.55 even have an OT DRM?) There is insufficient DRM >>to meet: >> >>"If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM reduced by >>Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts to < its normal CE DRM..." >> >>My take is that against the vehicle, the DRM is -2 (-1 for all AF less than >>4 and -1 for OT). Air Burst DRM doesn't apply since it's presumably on the >>road portion of the woods-road hex (otherwise it does apply ... even in >>bypass.) >> >>Against the crew its +2 CE DRM only if Air Burst doesn't apply. >> >>Carl >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] >>>On Behalf Of Bill >>>Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 6:33 PM >>>To: Jon Cole; aslml at lists.aslml.net >>>Subject: Re: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods >>> >>>Jon Cole wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hi >>>> >>>>Just want to make sure I have this correct. >>>> >>>>A 50mm SW Mortar Defensive First Fires at an OT CE AFV moving along a >>>> >>>> >>>woods >>> >>> >>>>road hex. A hit is scored. >>>> >>>>Is the following correct for the attack resolution? >>>> >>>>The normal CE DRM (+2) is reduced by Airbursts (-1) , so the AFV is >>>> >>>> >>>instead >>> >>> >>>>treated as unarmored as per D5.311. >>>>It (the AFV) is attacked on the 2FP column on the IFT (with no airburst >>>> >>>> >>>TEM) >>> >>> >>>>as per A7.308 [D5.311]. So the *Vehicle number needed for a result is 4. >>>> >>>>Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF <=4 apply to the attack as >>>> >>>> >>>well? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>No, the vehicle is treated as unarmoured, and those modifiers only apply >>>to armoured targets (AFV) (C1.55) I would say, though that the -1 for >>>airbursts TEM would apply to the final DRM to determine a kill, raising >>>the number to kill the unarmoured target to 5. >>> >>> >>> >>>>The CE crew will be attacked by 2FP with -1 airburts and +2 CE DRMs. It >>>> >>>> >>>is >>> >>> >>>>subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>Yes. See D5.311: >>>Consequently the crew is not susceptible to Stun/Recall from such an >>>attack; it is instead subject to PTC/MC/K/KIA results. If it breaks it >>>must rout from the vehicle using normal Infantry rout procedures /[EXC: >>>it expends all its initial-RtPh MF to be placed beneath the vehicle]. >>> >>>/See D6.62 for passengers. >>> >>>Note that A7.308 states: >>>All non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles/horse >>>counters are resolved on the >>DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the >>>same Location. >>> >>>Given a 2FP attack with a +1 DRM for CE, any result you would get that >>>would effect the crew on the IFT would also at least immobilise the >>>halftrack. You would need a final DR of 6 to cause a PTC, but this >>>would require a normal DR of 5, which against the now unarmoured target >>>would get the -1 DRM for airbursts, equaling the star vihicle number of >>>a 2FP attack. >>>If the halftrack is eliminated by the attack the crew have to alos check >>>for survival (A7.308 and D5.6). If the halftrack is immobilised the >>>crew must pass an NTC to stay in the vehicle. >>> >>>Bill >>> >>> >>> >>>>Correct? >>>> >>>>TIA >>>> >>>>Cheers >>>>Jon >>>> >>>> >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>aslml mailing list >>>>aslml at lists.aslml.net >>>>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>>>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>aslml mailing list >>>aslml at lists.aslml.net >>>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>aslml mailing list >>aslml at lists.aslml.net >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Sat May 5 04:35:26 2007 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 07:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <463BE6EA.5040208@actewagl.net.au> Message-ID: <000101c78f09$7a000dd0$2f01a8c0@newscratch> >Of course you are both right. I overlooked the fact that >it was in road woods. If it is on the road (ie entered >using road movement rate) then it is treated as being >in open ground. Airbursts apply in a woods hex, whether in bypass, in a pillbox, in a building, or on a road, B13.3. From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Sat May 5 04:38:31 2007 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 07:38:31 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <005301c78eaa$e003abf0$6501a8c0@laptop> Message-ID: <000201c78f09$e8474150$2f01a8c0@newscratch> >I don't think Bill has it right. The vehicle is still an AFV even if > OT (otherwise why would C1.55 even have an OT DRM?) There is >insufficient DRM to meet: >"If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM reduced by >Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts to < its normal CE DRM..." Why is there insufficient DRM to meet the sentence you are quoting? Surely 2 - 1 = 1 and 1 is < 2 in any language. From cfago at ix.netcom.com Sat May 5 16:21:34 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl Fago) Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 19:21:34 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <000201c78f09$e8474150$2f01a8c0@newscratch> Message-ID: <006301c78f6c$1f456530$6501a8c0@laptop> No -1 DRM for Air Burst assuming its on the road. > Airbursts apply in a woods hex, whether in bypass, in a pillbox, in a building, or on a road, B13.3. Not true. B13.31 Carl > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian W [mailto:cardboard.killer at verizon.net] > Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 7:39 AM > To: cfago at ix.netcom.com; aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: RE: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods > > > >I don't think Bill has it right. The vehicle is still an AFV even if > > OT (otherwise why would C1.55 even have an OT DRM?) There is > >insufficient DRM to meet: > > >"If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM reduced by > >Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts to < its normal CE DRM..." > > Why is there insufficient DRM to meet the sentence you are quoting? > Surely 2 - 1 = 1 and 1 is < 2 in any language. From kingbilly at actewagl.net.au Sat May 5 16:30:19 2007 From: kingbilly at actewagl.net.au (Bill) Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 09:30:19 +1000 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <000101c78f09$7a000dd0$2f01a8c0@newscratch> References: <000101c78f09$7a000dd0$2f01a8c0@newscratch> Message-ID: <463D138B.2080005@actewagl.net.au> Brian W wrote: >>Of course you are both right. I overlooked the fact that >>it was in road woods. If it is on the road (ie entered >>using road movement rate) then it is treated as being >>in open ground. >> >> > >Airbursts apply in a woods hex, whether in bypass, in a pillbox, in a >building, or on a road, B13.3. > > > > > I see what you are saying. The exception at the end of 13.31 is a bit confusing, but does not seem to restrict the airburst TEM. 13.31 in effect treats units moving on the road portion of a woods/road hex as if they are moving in the open for fire coming down the road, but does not actually say they are treated as being in the open. If airbursts do apply, and it appears that they would, then the halftrack is treated as an unarmoured as per D5.311: If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM /reduced by Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts /to < its normal CE DRM, that AFV is instead treated as unarmored and the attack vs it?but not vs its PRC?is resolved (with no Air Burst TEM) either as per A7.308 <../ChA/ChA7.htm#7.308> (for non-ordnance/Indirect-Fire-HE) or on the proper TK Table using the pertinent Unarmored Vehicle TK#. C3.71 <../ChC/ChC3.htm#3.71> also applies if a HE CH occurred. Note I was wrong in my first answer regarding the airburst TEM. A7.308 states: All non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles/horse counters are resolved on the ?Vehicle line of the IFT using the same IFT DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the same Location. Airbursts would apply to the Personnel in the target, so I assumed it would also apply to the now "unarmoured" HT, but D5.311 gives a particular exemption for airbursts. Bill (no matter how often I read this rule book) Brodie From shmcbee at bellsouth.net Sat May 5 18:58:09 2007 From: shmcbee at bellsouth.net (Steve McBee) Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 20:58:09 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] NashCon ASL Tournament Message-ID: <000301c78f81$ff4d2ef0$6101a8c0@Steve> Hey, Sorry about the late announcement, but when life intervenes, it's hard to get back. May 25-27, 2007 will be the 6th (?) ASL tournament at NashCon. Website for information is at www.hmgs-midsouth.org. If you are in the Nashville area that weekend, drop on by. We will start Friday night at about 8 PM (maybe earlier) and it will run until late Saturday or early Sunday. Prizes will be announced either later on this week or at the Tournament. Later, Steve McBee From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Mon May 7 08:36:09 2007 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 11:36:09 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods In-Reply-To: <006301c78f6c$1f456530$6501a8c0@laptop> Message-ID: <000c01c790bd$70028320$2f01a8c0@newscratch> >Not true. B13.31 Yes true. B13.31 does not apply to indirect fire; B13.3 applies. From pjbarker at earthlink.net Mon May 7 10:47:45 2007 From: pjbarker at earthlink.net (paul barker) Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 10:47:45 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods Message-ID: <24738605.1178560065868.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Sorry, don't have the rules here, what does that mean? Paul J. -----Original Message----- >From: Brian W >Sent: May 7, 2007 8:36 AM >To: cfago at ix.netcom.com >Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Mtr fire on OT vehicle in woods > > >>Not true. B13.31 > >Yes true. B13.31 does not apply to indirect fire; B13.3 applies. > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From asl at howardhowardfine.com Fri May 11 17:08:14 2007 From: asl at howardhowardfine.com (ASL) Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 19:08:14 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Is anyone out there? Message-ID: <20070512001020.1653248003@diego.dreamhost.com> no mail for days... c From hobbies at revealed.net Fri May 11 17:41:56 2007 From: hobbies at revealed.net (Alex Key) Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 19:41:56 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Is anyone out there? In-Reply-To: <20070512001020.1653248003@diego.dreamhost.com> References: <20070512001020.1653248003@diego.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <46450D54.5040505@revealed.net> No...well, maybe. Tomorrow, Eye of the Tiger! Thanks, Scott! Alex ASL wrote: >no mail for days... > >c > > > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > From garciagd at velocity.net Fri May 11 17:38:57 2007 From: garciagd at velocity.net (Roger Whelan) Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 20:38:57 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Is anyone out there? In-Reply-To: <20070512001020.1653248003@diego.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: it seems to have been quiet. I actually checked my JUNK mail filter to see if it was blocking this address. Peace Roger -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of ASL Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 8:08 PM To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Is anyone out there? no mail for days... c _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From jpcole at westnet.com.au Fri May 11 17:49:10 2007 From: jpcole at westnet.com.au (Jon Cole) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 08:49:10 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road Message-ID: <000d01c7942f$5a6af040$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Hi I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows Cheers Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate >> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] >> > >> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a hit. >> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol >> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] >> > >> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to both >> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? > > Only to +1 Woods TEM > > >> > >> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs >> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a -1 >> > TEM instead..." >> > > > Yes, it is in a woods hex. > >> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex is a >> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) >> > >> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a green >> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on the >> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a partial >> > Trail Break counter)? >> > > > It applies to their vulnerable PRC. > . >> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE DRM >> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as if >> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the >> > vehicle (D5.311). >> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack on >> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a >> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? >> > > > No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 DRM > only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine its > fate. > > > ....Perry > MMP From pjbarker at earthlink.net Fri May 11 17:50:35 2007 From: pjbarker at earthlink.net (paul barker) Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 17:50:35 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Aslml] Is anyone out there? Message-ID: <24190643.1178931035373.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I still have a issue with Air Bursts that no one wants to work, bummer. Paul J. -----Original Message----- >From: ASL >Sent: May 11, 2007 5:08 PM >To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net >Subject: [Aslml] Is anyone out there? > > >no mail for days... > >c > > > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From pjbarker at earthlink.net Sat May 12 09:09:08 2007 From: pjbarker at earthlink.net (paul barker) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 09:09:08 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road Message-ID: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> OK, so here we see another huge bo-bo in the massive ASL rule book. Rule B.1 says the center dot determines the terrian in the hex, with the exception of buildings. But B13.1 says, oh forest road is still a forest? With all those rules you would think they could include forest-road with B1. The D5.311 really helps me though. It makes some vehicles even more unprotected. In a design though, I totally disagree. The forest roads I drove in Europe (except the Ardennes) where so wide that air burst would never be a threat when on the road. With all these rules and all these problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more probelms. I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's never happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only Squad Leader. For some, or most maybe, the ASL is just want they want. A game is usually 30% gaming and 70% rules verification/clarification. I am afraid I still love the game, even as different as it is, but I am truly a minority of epic proportions. How does everyone else feel? Paul J. PS. Yes, I was wrong about the forest road, bummer. -----Original Message----- >From: Jon Cole >Sent: May 11, 2007 5:49 PM >To: ASL Mailing List >Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > >Hi > >I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows > >Cheers >Jon > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM >Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > > >>> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate >>> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] >>> > >>> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a hit. >>> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol >>> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] >>> > >>> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to both >>> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? >> >> Only to +1 Woods TEM >> >> >>> > >>> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs >>> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a -1 >>> > TEM instead..." >>> > >> >> Yes, it is in a woods hex. >> >>> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex is a >>> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) >>> > >>> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a green >>> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on the >>> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a partial >>> > Trail Break counter)? >>> > >> >> It applies to their vulnerable PRC. >> . >>> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE DRM >>> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as if >>> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the >>> > vehicle (D5.311). >>> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack on >>> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a >>> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? >>> > >> >> No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 DRM >> only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine its >> fate. >> >> >> ....Perry >> MMP > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Sat May 12 09:42:50 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 11:42:50 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Paul, I dont believe that we need to get so bogged down in the rules - yes you can if you want, but stick to the charts they are very useful & use a litle common sense - get a feel of where your squads are mentally this helps. as for rule B.1 this deals with woods not a forest, a forest exists by SSR only and even then the air burst effect remains at -1.and vehicles cant enter a forest anyway except for a road and the rules would still apply since a forest is simply a level 2 obstacle and the TEM is +2(air bursts remain at -1) - pretty clear to me. Besides, B13.3 I think clearly deals with the issue at hand it seems clear to me - how D5.311 comes into play i dont know i think you're getting bogged down in the rules like i said. B13.1 says a woods hex is a woods hex regardless of weather there is a road in there or not and 13.3 clearly deals with air bursts on this road, -1 TEM good luck , arlen vanek ft worth tx ----- Original Message ----- From: "paul barker" To: "Jon Cole" ; "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > OK, so here we see another huge bo-bo in the massive ASL rule book. Rule > B.1 says the center dot determines the terrian in the hex, with the > exception of buildings. But B13.1 says, oh forest road is still a forest? > With all those rules you would think they could include forest-road with > B1. The D5.311 really helps me though. It makes some vehicles even more > unprotected. In a design though, I totally disagree. The forest roads I > drove in Europe (except the Ardennes) where so wide that air burst would > never be a threat when on the road. With all these rules and all these > problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more probelms. > I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's never > happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be > complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only Squad > Leader. For some, or most maybe, the ASL is just want they want. A game > is usually 30% gaming and 70% rules verification/clarification. > > I am afraid I still love the game, even as different as it is, but I am > truly a minority of epic proportions. > > How does everyone else feel? > > Paul J. > > PS. Yes, I was wrong about the forest road, bummer. > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Jon Cole >>Sent: May 11, 2007 5:49 PM >>To: ASL Mailing List >>Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >> >>Hi >> >>I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows >> >>Cheers >>Jon >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: >>To: >>Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM >>Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in >>woods-road >> >> >>>> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate >>>> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] >>>> > >>>> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a hit. >>>> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol >>>> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] >>>> > >>>> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to both >>>> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? >>> >>> Only to +1 Woods TEM >>> >>> >>>> > >>>> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs >>>> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a -1 >>>> > TEM instead..." >>>> > >>> >>> Yes, it is in a woods hex. >>> >>>> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex is a >>>> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) >>>> > >>>> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a >>>> > green >>>> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on the >>>> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a >>>> > partial >>>> > Trail Break counter)? >>>> > >>> >>> It applies to their vulnerable PRC. >>> . >>>> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE >>>> > DRM >>>> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as if >>>> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the >>>> > vehicle (D5.311). >>>> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack on >>>> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a >>>> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? >>>> > >>> >>> No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 DRM >>> only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine its >>> fate. >>> >>> >>> ....Perry >>> MMP >> >>_______________________________________________ >>aslml mailing list >>aslml at lists.aslml.net >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Sat May 12 13:39:43 2007 From: david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca (David Elder) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 16:39:43 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road In-Reply-To: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4646260F.6000507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> Hi Paul, For the record - I don't mind Perry's version at all - though I too am dubious from a reality point of view about the effect of Airbursts on a vehicle on a road - c'est la vie. However - this one I disagree with :) > With all these rules and all these problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more probelms. I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's never happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only Squad Leader. I played SL through GI quite a bit. One module would add a rule the next would remove it (or change it) - and this could happen several times. One that comes to mind was the HE near miss rule where if you were using large caliber onboard ordnance (like the Russian 300mm rockets) - if they missed the target hex then they would land somewhere adjacent - the idea being that wherever it hit would be nasty (if I am off with this example - please blame my memory - it was probably about 25 years ago :)). This was a balance issue among other things. I can also recall numerous rules arguments ... the game itself was lots of fun as long as you let the loudest win the argument and just played the game :) ASL in comparison, in my opinion, is an awesome improvement over SL+COI+COD+GI ... it may miss a couple of little things here and there and there is certainly room for a rules lawyer to practice but overall I'd say the system works much better than a simple compilation of the earlier game would have. Cheers, David From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Sat May 12 13:54:41 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 15:54:41 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: you also have to remember here that unarmored vehicle in most case is refering to a 1930's era truck - not much to these - not that a tree burst can take out a truck but...it is certainly possible for huge truck like limbs falling from say 40 ft in the air and it hits a model t ford - that truck is going to be f'd up bad. stick with rule B13. 3 ----- Original Message ----- From: "paul barker" To: "Jon Cole" ; "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > OK, so here we see another huge bo-bo in the massive ASL rule book. Rule > B.1 says the center dot determines the terrian in the hex, with the > exception of buildings. But B13.1 says, oh forest road is still a forest? > With all those rules you would think they could include forest-road with > B1. The D5.311 really helps me though. It makes some vehicles even more > unprotected. In a design though, I totally disagree. The forest roads I > drove in Europe (except the Ardennes) where so wide that air burst would > never be a threat when on the road. With all these rules and all these > problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more probelms. > I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's never > happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be > complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only Squad > Leader. For some, or most maybe, the ASL is just want they want. A game > is usually 30% gaming and 70% rules verification/clarification. > > I am afraid I still love the game, even as different as it is, but I am > truly a minority of epic proportions. > > How does everyone else feel? > > Paul J. > > PS. Yes, I was wrong about the forest road, bummer. > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Jon Cole >>Sent: May 11, 2007 5:49 PM >>To: ASL Mailing List >>Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >> >>Hi >> >>I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows >> >>Cheers >>Jon >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: >>To: >>Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM >>Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in >>woods-road >> >> >>>> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate >>>> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] >>>> > >>>> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a hit. >>>> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol >>>> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] >>>> > >>>> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to both >>>> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? >>> >>> Only to +1 Woods TEM >>> >>> >>>> > >>>> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs >>>> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a -1 >>>> > TEM instead..." >>>> > >>> >>> Yes, it is in a woods hex. >>> >>>> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex is a >>>> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) >>>> > >>>> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a >>>> > green >>>> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on the >>>> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a >>>> > partial >>>> > Trail Break counter)? >>>> > >>> >>> It applies to their vulnerable PRC. >>> . >>>> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE >>>> > DRM >>>> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as if >>>> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the >>>> > vehicle (D5.311). >>>> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack on >>>> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a >>>> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? >>>> > >>> >>> No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 DRM >>> only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine its >>> fate. >>> >>> >>> ....Perry >>> MMP >> >>_______________________________________________ >>aslml mailing list >>aslml at lists.aslml.net >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From bifrost at dial.pipex.com Sat May 12 15:16:51 2007 From: bifrost at dial.pipex.com (Anna Mancini) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 23:16:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road In-Reply-To: References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com> Arlen Vanek wrote: > you also have to remember here that unarmored vehicle in most case is > refering to a 1930's era truck - not much to these - not that a tree burst > can take out a truck but...it is certainly possible for huge truck like > limbs falling from say 40 ft in the air and it hits a model t ford - that > truck is going to be f'd up bad. > stick with rule B13. 3 > Just my 2p worth - my feeling on this is that if you're going to play ASL then play ASL - yeah sure some of the rules lead to consequences that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over the Physics of ASL commentary here: http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] but the fact is that even if you are fully aware that the rules lead to a situation which is not terribly 'realistic' (eg. the 'captives as management consultants' rule - check out the link above, scroll down; it's the only way the Russians can deploy!) them's the rules, and you either play the game by the rules, or you go looking for a simulation rather than a game. I admit I sometimes play ASL as if there were an RPG element eg. my Russians are rather more likely to undertake potentially suicidal manoevers than my Brits or French or Italians. But that's just me. I can exploit the rules to do this stuff, and so I sometimes do if the fit takes me. But I know perfectly well it's a board game not a battlefield simulation, and therefore the rules may well diverge at times from reality. We don't demand that Chess swaps the King and Queen roles just because in most historical circumstances it would have been the King taking the initiative and leading forces into battle - because the rules are the rules. If that means that sometimes, it diverges from reality - well that's just the nature of the beast. Isn't it? am -- Everyone has a bullet with their name on it. It's the ones marked 'To whom it may concern' that worry me. From cfago at ix.netcom.com Sat May 12 17:38:19 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl Fago) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 20:38:19 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000b01c794f7$01827bb0$6501a8c0@laptop> The original discussion centered around an armored halftrack. Perry's ruling clearly says that the armored halftrack on the road part of the woods-road is basically an unarmored vehicle for indirect fire. Carl > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of Arlen Vanek > Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 4:55 PM > To: paul barker; aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > > you also have to remember here that unarmored vehicle in most case is > refering to a 1930's era truck - not much to these - not that a tree burst > can take out a truck but...it is certainly possible for huge truck like > limbs falling from say 40 ft in the air and it hits a model t ford - that > truck is going to be f'd up bad. > stick with rule B13. 3 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "paul barker" > To: "Jon Cole" ; "ASL Mailing List" > > Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:09 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > > > > OK, so here we see another huge bo-bo in the massive ASL rule book. > Rule > > B.1 says the center dot determines the terrian in the hex, with the > > exception of buildings. But B13.1 says, oh forest road is still a > forest? > > With all those rules you would think they could include forest-road with > > B1. The D5.311 really helps me though. It makes some vehicles even > more > > unprotected. In a design though, I totally disagree. The forest roads > I > > drove in Europe (except the Ardennes) where so wide that air burst would > > never be a threat when on the road. With all these rules and all these > > problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more > probelms. > > I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's > never > > happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be > > complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only Squad > > Leader. For some, or most maybe, the ASL is just want they want. A > game > > is usually 30% gaming and 70% rules verification/clarification. > > > > I am afraid I still love the game, even as different as it is, but I am > > truly a minority of epic proportions. > > > > How does everyone else feel? > > > > Paul J. > > > > PS. Yes, I was wrong about the forest road, bummer. > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: Jon Cole > >>Sent: May 11, 2007 5:49 PM > >>To: ASL Mailing List > >>Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > >> > >>Hi > >> > >>I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows > >> > >>Cheers > >>Jon > >> > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: > >>To: > >>Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM > >>Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in > >>woods-road > >> > >> > >>>> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate > >>>> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] > >>>> > > >>>> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a > hit. > >>>> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol > >>>> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] > >>>> > > >>>> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to > both > >>>> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? > >>> > >>> Only to +1 Woods TEM > >>> > >>> > >>>> > > >>>> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs > >>>> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a > -1 > >>>> > TEM instead..." > >>>> > > >>> > >>> Yes, it is in a woods hex. > >>> > >>>> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex is > a > >>>> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) > >>>> > > >>>> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a > >>>> > green > >>>> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on > the > >>>> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a > >>>> > partial > >>>> > Trail Break counter)? > >>>> > > >>> > >>> It applies to their vulnerable PRC. > >>> . > >>>> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE > >>>> > DRM > >>>> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as if > >>>> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the > >>>> > vehicle (D5.311). > >>>> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack > on > >>>> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a > >>>> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? > >>>> > > >>> > >>> No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 > DRM > >>> only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine its > >>> fate. > >>> > >>> > >>> ....Perry > >>> MMP > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>aslml mailing list > >>aslml at lists.aslml.net > >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Sat May 12 20:44:53 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 22:44:53 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road References: <000b01c794f7$01827bb0$6501a8c0@laptop> Message-ID: the vehicle is not affected by airbursts only the occupants lets be realistic the rule b13.3 only talks of unarmored vehicles thats because armored vehicles are armored the occupants are sitting ducks av ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl Fago" To: Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 7:38 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > The original discussion centered around an armored halftrack. Perry's > ruling clearly says that the armored halftrack on the road part of the > woods-road is basically an unarmored vehicle for indirect fire. > > Carl > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net >> [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] >> On Behalf Of Arlen Vanek >> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 4:55 PM >> To: paul barker; aslml at lists.aslml.net >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >> >> you also have to remember here that unarmored vehicle in most case is >> refering to a 1930's era truck - not much to these - not that a tree >> burst >> can take out a truck but...it is certainly possible for huge truck like >> limbs falling from say 40 ft in the air and it hits a model t ford - that >> truck is going to be f'd up bad. >> stick with rule B13. 3 >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "paul barker" >> To: "Jon Cole" ; "ASL Mailing List" >> >> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:09 AM >> Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >> >> >> > OK, so here we see another huge bo-bo in the massive ASL rule book. >> Rule >> > B.1 says the center dot determines the terrian in the hex, with the >> > exception of buildings. But B13.1 says, oh forest road is still a >> forest? >> > With all those rules you would think they could include forest-road >> > with >> > B1. The D5.311 really helps me though. It makes some vehicles even >> more >> > unprotected. In a design though, I totally disagree. The forest roads >> I >> > drove in Europe (except the Ardennes) where so wide that air burst >> > would >> > never be a threat when on the road. With all these rules and all these >> > problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more >> probelms. >> > I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's >> never >> > happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be >> > complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only >> > Squad >> > Leader. For some, or most maybe, the ASL is just want they want. A >> game >> > is usually 30% gaming and 70% rules verification/clarification. >> > >> > I am afraid I still love the game, even as different as it is, but I am >> > truly a minority of epic proportions. >> > >> > How does everyone else feel? >> > >> > Paul J. >> > >> > PS. Yes, I was wrong about the forest road, bummer. >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> >>From: Jon Cole >> >>Sent: May 11, 2007 5:49 PM >> >>To: ASL Mailing List >> >>Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >> >> >> >>Hi >> >> >> >>I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows >> >> >> >>Cheers >> >>Jon >> >> >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >> >>From: >> >>To: >> >>Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM >> >>Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in >> >>woods-road >> >> >> >> >> >>>> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate >> >>>> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] >> >>>> > >> >>>> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a >> hit. >> >>>> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol >> >>>> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to >> both >> >>>> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? >> >>> >> >>> Only to +1 Woods TEM >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs >> >>>> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a >> -1 >> >>>> > TEM instead..." >> >>>> > >> >>> >> >>> Yes, it is in a woods hex. >> >>> >> >>>> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex >> >>>> > is >> a >> >>>> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a >> >>>> > green >> >>>> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on >> the >> >>>> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a >> >>>> > partial >> >>>> > Trail Break counter)? >> >>>> > >> >>> >> >>> It applies to their vulnerable PRC. >> >>> . >> >>>> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE >> >>>> > DRM >> >>>> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as >> >>>> > if >> >>>> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the >> >>>> > vehicle (D5.311). >> >>>> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack >> on >> >>>> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a >> >>>> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? >> >>>> > >> >>> >> >>> No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 >> DRM >> >>> only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine >> >>> its >> >>> fate. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> ....Perry >> >>> MMP >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>aslml mailing list >> >>aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > aslml mailing list >> > aslml at lists.aslml.net >> > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From bearlyonthehill at optonline.net Sun May 13 04:21:39 2007 From: bearlyonthehill at optonline.net (bearlyonthehill at optonline.net) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:21:39 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] test Message-ID: From cfago at ix.netcom.com Sun May 13 08:03:42 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl D. Fago) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:03:42 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road Message-ID: <33102168.1179068622437.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Nope. Not according to the "Perry sez" below. The vehicle is treated as unarmored for all purposes for the resolution of the indirect fire. Both the PRC and against the vehicle. Carl -----Original Message----- >From: Arlen Vanek >Sent: May 12, 2007 11:44 PM >To: cfago at ix.netcom.com, aslml at lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > >the vehicle is not affected by airbursts only the occupants > >lets be realistic the rule b13.3 only talks of unarmored vehicles thats >because armored vehicles are armored the occupants are sitting ducks > >av >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Carl Fago" >To: >Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 7:38 PM >Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > > >> The original discussion centered around an armored halftrack. Perry's >> ruling clearly says that the armored halftrack on the road part of the >> woods-road is basically an unarmored vehicle for indirect fire. >> >> Carl >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net >>> [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] >>> On Behalf Of Arlen Vanek >>> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 4:55 PM >>> To: paul barker; aslml at lists.aslml.net >>> Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >>> >>> you also have to remember here that unarmored vehicle in most case is >>> refering to a 1930's era truck - not much to these - not that a tree >>> burst >>> can take out a truck but...it is certainly possible for huge truck like >>> limbs falling from say 40 ft in the air and it hits a model t ford - that >>> truck is going to be f'd up bad. >>> stick with rule B13. 3 >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "paul barker" >>> To: "Jon Cole" ; "ASL Mailing List" >>> >>> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:09 AM >>> Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >>> >>> >>> > OK, so here we see another huge bo-bo in the massive ASL rule book. >>> Rule >>> > B.1 says the center dot determines the terrian in the hex, with the >>> > exception of buildings. But B13.1 says, oh forest road is still a >>> forest? >>> > With all those rules you would think they could include forest-road >>> > with >>> > B1. The D5.311 really helps me though. It makes some vehicles even >>> more >>> > unprotected. In a design though, I totally disagree. The forest roads >>> I >>> > drove in Europe (except the Ardennes) where so wide that air burst >>> > would >>> > never be a threat when on the road. With all these rules and all these >>> > problems I find the following true, more rules just make s more >>> probelms. >>> > I am sad to say that what we requested from Avalon Hill in the 80's >>> never >>> > happened. We just wanted the rules of SL, COI, COD, and GI to be >>> > complied, instead we got a monster game, with the hint of the only >>> > Squad >>> > Leader. For some, or most maybe, the ASL is just want they want. A >>> game >>> > is usually 30% gaming and 70% rules verification/clarification. >>> > >>> > I am afraid I still love the game, even as different as it is, but I am >>> > truly a minority of epic proportions. >>> > >>> > How does everyone else feel? >>> > >>> > Paul J. >>> > >>> > PS. Yes, I was wrong about the forest road, bummer. >>> > >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> >>From: Jon Cole >>> >>Sent: May 11, 2007 5:49 PM >>> >>To: ASL Mailing List >>> >>Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road >>> >> >>> >>Hi >>> >> >>> >>I posted the questions to Perry. His reply is as follows >>> >> >>> >>Cheers >>> >>Jon >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>----- Original Message ----- >>> >>From: >>> >>To: >>> >>Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:19 PM >>> >>Subject: Re: Spam: D5.311, , C1.55 & B13 Mortar fire on OT AFV in >>> >>woods-road >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> > An OT AFV enters a woods-road hex using the road movement rate >>> >>>> > [specifically it enters 47H8 from I9] >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > A 50mm SW mortar fires on the ATT at the moving AFV and scores a >>> hit. >>> >>>> > The LOS from mortar to target does not cross a green woods symbol >>> >>>> > [Specifically mortar is in 47H3, so LOS is H3 to H8] >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Does B13.31 only appy to the +1 woods TEM for Direct fire, or to >>> both >>> >>>> > +1 Woods TEM and -1 Airburst TEM? >>> >>> >>> >>> Only to +1 Woods TEM >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Does the -1 Airburst TEM apply as per B13.3 "All Indirect Fire vs >>> >>>> > unarmored, CE or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a >>> -1 >>> >>>> > TEM instead..." >>> >>>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes, it is in a woods hex. >>> >>> >>> >>>> > B13.3 says "All Indirect Fire....woods hex..". A wood-s road hex >>> >>>> > is >>> a >>> >>>> > woods hex which also contains a road (B13.1) >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Disregarding firephase and irrespective of whether LOS crosses a >>> >>>> > green >>> >>>> > woods symbol, does the -1 Airburst TEM apply against vehicles on >>> the >>> >>>> > road portion of a woods-road hex (i.e. a vehicle not beneath a >>> >>>> > partial >>> >>>> > Trail Break counter)? >>> >>>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> It applies to their vulnerable PRC. >>> >>> . >>> >>>> > If Airburst TEM is applicable, the AFV crew will have a reduced CE >>> >>>> > DRM >>> >>>> > (D5.311) and the mortar will resolve its attack on the OT AFV as >>> >>>> > if >>> >>>> > the AFV is unarmored and Airburst TEM is NA for the attack on the >>> >>>> > vehicle (D5.311). >>> >>>> > Does the C1.55 DRM for -1 OT and -1 All AF<=4 apply, if the attack >>> on >>> >>>> > an AFV is resolved as if it were an unarmored vehicle due to a >>> >>>> > reduction of its normal CE DRM (D5.311)? >>> >>>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> No. The vehicle is treated as unarmored using A7.308, and the C1.55 >>> DRM >>> >>> only applies vs armored vehicles that are using C1.55 to determine >>> >>> its >>> >>> fate. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ....Perry >>> >>> MMP >>> >> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>> >>aslml mailing list >>> >>aslml at lists.aslml.net >>> >>http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>> >>To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > aslml mailing list >>> > aslml at lists.aslml.net >>> > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>> > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >>> > >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aslml mailing list >>> aslml at lists.aslml.net >>> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun May 13 12:55:53 2007 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 21:55:53 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road In-Reply-To: References: <000b01c794f7$01827bb0$6501a8c0@laptop> Message-ID: <46476D49.4090201@broadpark.no> Hi, This Perry sez contains two different parts. The first is whether one shall really follow the letter of B13.3 when it says: "All Indirect Fire vs unarmored, CE, or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a -1 TEM instead" The Perry sez. tells us that "yes", when the quote says "hex" it really means "hex" - even if the unit is bypassing or using road movement. To me, both a "yes" or a "no" would seem pretty much as realistic as the other - it depends on how close to the roads the unit actually is. I have no problem imagining a unit moving close to the trees (but not inside them) suffering Air Bursts. So the fact that this Perry sez. confirms that the written rule is actually correct should be unproblematic - except for those who have chosen to interprete "woods hex" as "woods". The part second is really a general q about the effect of Air Bursts vs Open Topped AFV. About this, D5.311 says: "If an OT AFV's crew would receive a CE DRM /reduced by Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts/ to < its normal CE DRM, that AFV is instead treated as unarmored..." Since the first part of the Perry sez. settled that the OT AFV received Air Bursts, this part of D5.311 clearly tells us that the AFV is attacked as if unarmored - but only because it is OT. And it makes good sense since the shells come from above and the AFV is not armored in that direction. I don't really see any interpretation problems here, as long as it is settled that B13.3 is to be read exactly as written. From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Sun May 13 16:19:46 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 18:19:46 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road References: <000b01c794f7$01827bb0$6501a8c0@laptop> <46476D49.4090201@broadpark.no> Message-ID: yea, thats what i meant av ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ole B?e" To: "Arlen Vanek" Cc: ; Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 2:55 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road > Hi, > > This Perry sez contains two different parts. The first is whether one > shall really follow the letter of B13.3 when it says: "All Indirect Fire > vs unarmored, CE, or OT (even if BU) targets in a woods hex receives a -1 > TEM instead" > > The Perry sez. tells us that "yes", when the quote says "hex" it really > means "hex" - even if the unit is bypassing or using road movement. > To me, both a "yes" or a "no" would seem pretty much as realistic as the > other - it depends on how close to the roads the unit actually is. I have > no problem imagining a unit moving close to the trees (but not inside > them) suffering Air Bursts. > So the fact that this Perry sez. confirms that the written rule is > actually correct should be unproblematic - except for those who have > chosen to interprete "woods hex" as "woods". > > > The part second is really a general q about the effect of Air Bursts vs > Open Topped AFV. About this, D5.311 says: "If an OT AFV's crew would > receive a CE DRM /reduced by Elevation-Effects/Air-Bursts/ to < its normal > CE DRM, that AFV is instead treated as unarmored..." > > Since the first part of the Perry sez. settled that the OT AFV received > Air Bursts, this part of D5.311 clearly tells us that the AFV is attacked > as if unarmored - but only because it is OT. And it makes good sense since > the shells come from above and the AFV is not armored in that direction. > > > I don't really see any interpretation problems here, as long as it is > settled that B13.3 is to be read exactly as written. > From john.slotwinski at nist.gov Mon May 14 09:53:36 2007 From: john.slotwinski at nist.gov (John Slotwinski) Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 12:53:36 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez Mortar fire on OT AFV in woods-road In-Reply-To: <46476D49.4090201@broadpark.no> References: <000b01c794f7$01827bb0$6501a8c0@laptop> <46476D49.4090201@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070514125216.01eb9a10@mailserver.nist.gov> At 03:55 PM 5/13/2007, Ole B?e wrote: >I don't really see any interpretation problems here, as long as it is >settled that B13.3 is to be read exactly as written. In general, this is a pretty good rule-of-thumb. ;-) js From cduke at intelnett.com Mon May 14 15:03:41 2007 From: cduke at intelnett.com (Charles Duke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 16:03:41 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com> Message-ID: <001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over the > Physics of ASL commentary here: > > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat frustrated. Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to make something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way similar to "Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising Sun? I would certainly like to participate in such a project, if it existed. I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but I have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL didn't take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments into the game when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality of making games, not simulations. Yeah right, then why we have reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth it, and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes making a rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have found when designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is precisely the unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird situations, which require so many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry Sez's. OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... Charles From pjbarker at earthlink.net Mon May 14 19:00:35 2007 From: pjbarker at earthlink.net (paul barker) Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 19:00:35 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Aslml] RASL Message-ID: <27858550.1179194435641.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net> No, I totally agree. Gee how many pages are these rules and they say, "oh, it's just a game!" Name one other game that has this many rules (the game we call life not allowed as an answer). My wish is to either, simplify and make a game, or fix the "forest road is just a forest" with some more rules, like another chapter would make us stop playing. Ha, I laugh at those that say we will lose ASL games if you add more rules. Paul J. Forest road means nothing to Mr. Nixon -----Original Message----- >From: Charles Duke >Sent: May 14, 2007 3:03 PM >To: aslml at lists.aslml.net >Subject: [Aslml] RASL > > >> that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over the >> Physics of ASL commentary here: >> >> http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] > >I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat frustrated. >Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to make >something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way similar to >"Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising Sun? I would >certainly like to participate in such a project, if it existed. > >I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but I >have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL didn't >take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments into the game >when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality of making games, not >simulations. Yeah right, then why we have reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. >and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? > >At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth it, >and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes making a >rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have found when >designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is precisely the >unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird situations, which require so >many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry Sez's. > >OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... > >Charles > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From bignoodle at earthlink.net Mon May 14 19:07:30 2007 From: bignoodle at earthlink.net (donald holland) Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 21:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] RASL Message-ID: <380-2200752152730796@earthlink.net> Star Fleet Battles has a rule book several inches thick. The only game I know of that can compete. Don "Big Noodle" Holland bignoodle at earthlink.net VASL V5 ROCKS!!! > [Original Message] > From: paul barker > To: Charles Duke ; > Date: 5/14/2007 9:00:44 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > > No, I totally agree. Gee how many pages are these rules and they say, "oh, it's just a game!" Name one other game that has this many rules (the game we call life not allowed as an answer). My wish is to either, simplify and make a game, or fix the "forest road is just a forest" with some more rules, like another chapter would make us stop playing. Ha, I laugh at those that say we will lose ASL games if you add more rules. > > Paul J. > > Forest road means nothing to Mr. Nixon > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Charles Duke > >Sent: May 14, 2007 3:03 PM > >To: aslml at lists.aslml.net > >Subject: [Aslml] RASL > > > > > >> that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over the > >> Physics of ASL commentary here: > >> > >> http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] > > > >I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat frustrated. > >Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to make > >something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way similar to > >"Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising Sun? I would > >certainly like to participate in such a project, if it existed. > > > >I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but I > >have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL didn't > >take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments into the game > >when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality of making games, not > >simulations. Yeah right, then why we have reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. > >and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? > > > >At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth it, > >and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes making a > >rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have found when > >designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is precisely the > >unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird situations, which require so > >many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry Sez's. > > > >OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... > > > >Charles > > > >_______________________________________________ > >aslml mailing list > >aslml at lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From cduke at intelnett.com Mon May 14 19:45:04 2007 From: cduke at intelnett.com (Charles Duke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 20:45:04 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <27858550.1179194435641.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000e01c7969b$0ba9c080$661ea8c0@Duke> > No, I totally agree. Gee how many pages are these rules and they say, > "oh, it's just a game!" Name one other game that has this many > rules (the game we call life not allowed as an answer). My wish is to > either, simplify and make a game, or fix the "forest > road is just a forest" with some more rules, like another chapter > would make us stop playing. Ha, I laugh at those that say we will lose > ASL games if you add more rules. And the forest road rule could actually be made much more simple while at the same time addressing realism (or authenticity or what you want to call it). The problem is, we get lost in rules-lawyerism discussions and end up with arbitrary gamesmanship decisions that leave a lot of people unhappy. By purposely turning our backs to anything that smells of "realism argument" we are left only with lifeless words to work upon. Does it say "can" or "may". What does rule 4567.3214 warp 17 say. What did Perry say (all due respect). I say, when people who have decision power (MMP, Perry, etc.) will make a ruling, or change a rule, why not take realism in account in their decision? Not just words, numbers, convenience, etc. It is a golden chance. The community will respect the decision whatever it is, but IMO it would respect it MORE if it was based on something logical. Charles From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Mon May 14 21:47:56 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 23:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <27858550.1179194435641.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <000e01c7969b$0ba9c080$661ea8c0@Duke> Message-ID: i think all y'all should go back to playing axis and allies the rules are realistic enough. the hexes are only 20 meters max if you are hit with a mortar attack in an open air vehicle, armored or not - passangers are sitting ducks, at least least thats what my great uncle said and he fought in europe in wwii - i suggest you ask a vet they'll call these types of vehicles rolling purple heart heart cans and he also said that if you were in a woods and got attacked by any kind of ordinace - you had better be dug in deep stick with the rules and have fun its only a game av ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Duke" To: "paul barker" ; Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 9:45 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > > >> No, I totally agree. Gee how many pages are these rules and they say, >> "oh, it's just a game!" Name one other game that has this many >> rules (the game we call life not allowed as an answer). My wish is to >> either, simplify and make a game, or fix the "forest >> road is just a forest" with some more rules, like another chapter >> would make us stop playing. Ha, I laugh at those that say we will lose >> ASL games if you add more rules. > > And the forest road rule could actually be made much more simple while at > the same time addressing realism (or authenticity or what you want to call > it). The problem is, we get lost in rules-lawyerism discussions and end up > with arbitrary gamesmanship decisions that leave a lot of people unhappy. > By > purposely turning our backs to anything that smells of "realism argument" > we > are left only with lifeless words to work upon. Does it say "can" or > "may". > What does rule 4567.3214 warp 17 say. What did Perry say (all due > respect). > > I say, when people who have decision power (MMP, Perry, etc.) will make a > ruling, or change a rule, why not take realism in account in their > decision? > Not just words, numbers, convenience, etc. It is a golden chance. The > community will respect the decision whatever it is, but IMO it would > respect > it MORE if it was based on something logical. > > Charles > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From aslbunker at yahoo.com Tue May 15 17:09:07 2007 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 17:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Looking for JRV (need ROAR update) Message-ID: <108351.46075.qm@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Guys, looking for JRV, tried to submit the latest Dispatches scenarios for him to list on the ROAR site and 2 attempts at e-mailing him there came up with a weird error message. Thanks, Vic. Hello JR,Here are the scenarios from Dispatches from the Bunker #24: DB057 - The Bloody Torokina Perimeter - USA vs Japanese DB058 - Vossenack Church - USA vs German DB059 - Grind Them to Dust - Russian vs German Thanks again for your wonderful service to the hobby, your ASL Comrade, Vic. ____________________________________________________________________________________Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 From homercles11 at hotmail.com Tue May 15 17:11:45 2007 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 20:11:45 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for JRV (need ROAR update) In-Reply-To: <108351.46075.qm@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I got the same result trying to enter scenarios. Perhaps he is on vacatoin. ----Original Message Follows---- From: Vic Provost To: ASL Mailing List Current May 2004 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for JRV (need ROAR update) Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 17:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Hi Guys, looking for JRV, tried to submit the latest Dispatches scenarios for him to list on the ROAR site and 2 attempts at e-mailing him there came up with a weird error message. Thanks, Vic. Hello JR,Here are the scenarios from Dispatches from the Bunker #24: DB057 - The Bloody Torokina Perimeter - USA vs Japanese DB058 - Vossenack Church - USA vs German DB059 - Grind Them to Dust - Russian vs German Thanks again for your wonderful service to the hobby, your ASL Comrade, Vic. ____________________________________________________________________________________Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net _________________________________________________________________ Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the i?m Initiative now. It?s free. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_MAY07 From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Wed May 16 10:11:13 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 13:11:13 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] RASL In-Reply-To: <001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com> <001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> Message-ID: <332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> You would probably need to change the name of the game then to "Company Commander" or "Platoon Leader" :) ...... all hail realism -Chuck On 5/14/07, Charles Duke wrote: > > > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over the > > Physics of ASL commentary here: > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] > > I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat frustrated. > Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to make > something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way similar to > "Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising Sun? I would > certainly like to participate in such a project, if it existed. > > I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but I > have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL didn't > take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments into the game > when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality of making games, not > simulations. Yeah right, then why we have reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. > and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? > > At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth it, > and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes making a > rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have found when > designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is precisely the > unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird situations, which require so > many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry Sez's. > > OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... > > Charles > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From gd891 at hotmail.com Wed May 16 10:25:05 2007 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (g) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 12:25:05 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] RASL In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net><46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com><001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> <332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: The problem is that one man's reality is another man's fantasy. So a reality argument for one person is by definition a fantasy argument for the next guy. If we want to up the traffic of the mail list, lets drag out some oldies but goodies: A) Critical Hit - ASL savior or pariah. Discuss amongst yourselves B) Valor of the Guards - when the hell is MMP going to print this? And I hear all the scenarios are unbalanced dogs and the cardboard counters are too thin and its printed upside down (don't believe me, turn all the scenario cards 180 degrees and see for yourself). Greg Offering nothing constructive since 1992. On 5/14/07, Charles Duke wrote: > > > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over > > the Physics of ASL commentary here: > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] > > I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat frustrated. > Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to > make something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way > similar to "Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising > Sun? I would certainly like to participate in such a project, if it existed. > > I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but > I have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL > didn't take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments > into the game when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality > of making games, not simulations. Yeah right, then why we have reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. > and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? > > At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth > it, and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes > making a rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have > found when designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is > precisely the unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird > situations, which require so many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry Sez's. > > OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... > > Charles > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Wed May 16 11:06:46 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 13:06:46 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net><46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com><001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke><332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: not only VOTG but when is MMP going to release ANY of their pre-order items? i do know they had a major change in the warehouse location and that was supposed to be complete by mid-june. so let's hope by june we'll start to see some of our pre-orders start to ship along with For King and Country av ----- Original Message ----- From: "g" To: "'Charles Duke'" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:25 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > The problem is that one man's reality is another man's fantasy. So a > reality argument for one person is by definition a fantasy argument for > the > next guy. > > If we want to up the traffic of the mail list, lets drag out some oldies > but > goodies: > > A) Critical Hit - ASL savior or pariah. Discuss amongst yourselves > > B) Valor of the Guards - when the hell is MMP going to print this? And I > hear all the scenarios are unbalanced dogs and the cardboard counters are > too thin and its printed upside down (don't believe me, turn all the > scenario cards 180 degrees and see for yourself). > > Greg > Offering nothing constructive since 1992. > > > On 5/14/07, Charles Duke wrote: >> >> > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over >> > the Physics of ASL commentary here: >> > >> > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] >> >> I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat > frustrated. >> Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to >> make something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way >> similar to "Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising >> Sun? I would certainly like to participate in such a project, if it > existed. >> >> I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but >> I have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL >> didn't take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments >> into the game when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality >> of making games, not simulations. Yeah right, then why we have > reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. >> and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? >> >> At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth >> it, and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes >> making a rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have >> found when designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is >> precisely the unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird >> situations, which require so many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry > Sez's. >> >> OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... >> >> Charles >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From janusz.maxe at unf.se Wed May 16 14:18:25 2007 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 23:18:25 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net><46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com><001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke><332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: And AOO! I want AOO!!! Green meenies now! BTW, the RASL idea is OK, but some of us make do with a couple of house rules to take away the wierdest things. Here's mine: 1: VBM-sleaze is a nono, but overrun and then stay in hex is OK if it's not a silly vehicle like a HT or jeep. Costs more MPs, and actually has an attack vs the occupants. 2: A separate roll for "special-ammo depletion", just to take away that use of APCR vs low-odds speding targets, delib.-immob, HEAT vs buildings instead of HE and such. But making them a rule could be a problem. Not #2 really, but affects game-balance somewhat, while #1 as a rule would be strange. Slow vehicles, like churchills, couldn't navigate through a dense town using bypass if the buildings were enemy-occupied. Even dummies would stop the tanks from getting through. So if some rules bug you, make a sheet of house-rules and play with someone who agrees with you. Call it RASL so others won't confuse it with ASL when that sheet becomes 100-pages thick. If people complain about you being arrogant calling it RASL, beat them over their head with your RASL-rulebook. Janusz ________________________________ From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net on behalf of Arlen Vanek Sent: Wed 2007-05-16 20:06 To: g; 'Charles Duke' Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL not only VOTG but when is MMP going to release ANY of their pre-order items? i do know they had a major change in the warehouse location and that was supposed to be complete by mid-june. so let's hope by june we'll start to see some of our pre-orders start to ship along with For King and Country av ----- Original Message ----- From: "g" To: "'Charles Duke'" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:25 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > The problem is that one man's reality is another man's fantasy. So a > reality argument for one person is by definition a fantasy argument for > the > next guy. > > If we want to up the traffic of the mail list, lets drag out some oldies > but > goodies: > > A) Critical Hit - ASL savior or pariah. Discuss amongst yourselves > > B) Valor of the Guards - when the hell is MMP going to print this? And I > hear all the scenarios are unbalanced dogs and the cardboard counters are > too thin and its printed upside down (don't believe me, turn all the > scenario cards 180 degrees and see for yourself). > > Greg > Offering nothing constructive since 1992. > > > On 5/14/07, Charles Duke wrote: >> >> > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over >> > the Physics of ASL commentary here: >> > >> > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] >> >> I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat > frustrated. >> Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to >> make something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way >> similar to "Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising >> Sun? I would certainly like to participate in such a project, if it > existed. >> >> I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but >> I have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL >> didn't take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments >> into the game when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality >> of making games, not simulations. Yeah right, then why we have > reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. >> and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? >> >> At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth >> it, and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes >> making a rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have >> found when designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is >> precisely the unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird >> situations, which require so many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry > Sez's. >> >> OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... >> >> Charles >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From cduke at intelnett.com Wed May 16 15:12:10 2007 From: cduke at intelnett.com (Charles Duke) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 16:12:10 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com> <001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> <332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001201c79807$3fdb2cf0$661ea8c0@Duke> > The problem is that one man's reality is another man's fantasy. So a > reality argument for one person is by definition a fantasy argument for > the > next guy. Yes, this is a common anti-realism argument, but consensus can be reached. In the same line, one rules-lawyer's interpretation of an obscure rule is another rules-lawyer's folly. Anyone knows that total realism cannot be reached, short of reality itself, but in a simulation one strives to at least do the best with the tools at hand. Problem is, even calling the game a simulation is problematic to many. Someone said in this thread that the game is realistic enough, and I agree. However, the problem maybe is that in the struggle between those that see ASL as a simulation and those that see it as "just a game" (like Chinese checkers), the gamers have totally taken over. We simulationists don't have a say in anything, if a rule is being discussed or might be changed, our point of view is heresy. Realism arguments are forbidden. It would be interesting to take a poll among ASL'ers to see how many consider ASL just another game, and how many play it for its simulation value. Charles From cduke at intelnett.com Wed May 16 15:13:27 2007 From: cduke at intelnett.com (Charles Duke) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 16:13:27 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com> <001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> <332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001701c79807$6e0cbcb0$661ea8c0@Duke> > You would probably need to change the name of the game then to > "Company Commander" or "Platoon Leader" :) ...... all hail realism You know, coincidentally I have thought many times that Company Commander would have been a more adequate name for this game! Charles From aslbunker at yahoo.com Wed May 16 15:32:55 2007 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 15:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Looking for JRV (need ROAR update) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <190407.16117.qm@web32615.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thanks Paul so it's not just me, Vic. --- Paul Kenny wrote: > I got the same result trying to enter scenarios. > Perhaps he is on vacatoin. > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: Vic Provost > To: ASL Mailing List Current May 2004 > > Subject: [Aslml] Looking for JRV (need ROAR update) > Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 17:09:07 -0700 (PDT) > > Hi Guys, looking for JRV, tried to submit the latest > Dispatches scenarios for him to list on the ROAR > site > and 2 attempts at e-mailing him there came up with a > weird error message. Thanks, Vic. > > Hello JR,Here are the scenarios from > Dispatches from the Bunker #24: > DB057 - The Bloody Torokina Perimeter - USA vs > Japanese > DB058 - Vossenack Church - USA vs German > DB059 - Grind Them to Dust - Russian vs German > Thanks again for your wonderful service to the > hobby, > your ASL Comrade, Vic. > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________Be > > a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers > from someone who knows. > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster at aslml.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the > i?m Initiative now. > It?s free. > http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_MAY07 > > ____________________________________________________________________________________Give spam the boot. Take control with tough spam protection in the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_html.html From cduke at intelnett.com Wed May 16 15:50:40 2007 From: cduke at intelnett.com (Charles Duke) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 16:50:40 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] RASL References: <11793708.1178986148350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <46463CD3.3090704@dial.pipex.com> <001001c79673$bbb78340$661ea8c0@Duke> <332a4d030705161011p34ea874dofc5d92cf08d8f0fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002c01c7980c$a09cab40$661ea8c0@Duke> I already have a list of house rules, and use them with my main opponent (me, I play mostly solo). Would be hard to make anyone agree with *my* house rules, that's why a consensus project would be nice. But I'm only dreaming (if someone takes it seriously let me know!) Here's mine for ammo depletion: At scenario start, make a dr for each weapon, subtract that from the depletion value, and that is the number of shells available. For instance, a Su 122 with H9. dr=4. 9-4=5. That Su begins with 5 HEAT shells. The gunner knows he carries 5 HEAT shells and can use them when he sees fit, no luck involved. You need a side note on a piece of paper, but is that really so bad? I consider having 4 or 5 counters on top of an AFV worse. Side notes are used whenever HIP or mines exist, its not like we never use them. Have you calculated what the odds are of getting effective shots from depletable ammo types? I have, in a little article that appeared in the defunct Boardgamer magazine. Extremely low! With #'s lower than 7, the expected whole number of special ammo shots from a gun during a given scenario is ZERO. Seeing a Gun actually firing an APCR is so rare, especially since you don't really expect it because you are using it only as a potshot to get two TH DR, right? If it happens, oh well a bonus. But guns and tanks DID carry those ammo types, even if in limited quantity. I like to know when I tell my gunner, "load up APCR, Tiny!" that in fact APCR will be fired. Or if we ran out of APCR in the last battle, also know it beforehand. I want to see how APCR affected tank battles. This is an example of a rule that can be made more realistic, more satisfying, and actually simplified in the process. I know a little about this because I have designed games. Charles Janusz wrote > BTW, the RASL idea is OK, but some of us make do with a couple of house > rules to take away the wierdest things. Here's mine: > 1: VBM-sleaze is a nono, but overrun and then stay in hex is OK if it's > not a silly vehicle like a HT or jeep. Costs more MPs, and actually has an > attack vs the occupants. > 2: A separate roll for "special-ammo depletion", just to take away that > use of APCR vs low-odds speding targets, delib.-immob, HEAT vs buildings > instead of HE and such. > > But making them a rule could be a problem. Not #2 really, but affects > game-balance somewhat, while #1 as a rule would be strange. Slow vehicles, > like churchills, couldn't navigate through a dense town using bypass if > the buildings were enemy-occupied. Even dummies would stop the tanks from > getting through. > > So if some rules bug you, make a sheet of house-rules and play with > someone who agrees with you. Call it RASL so others won't confuse it with > ASL when that sheet becomes 100-pages thick. If people complain about you > being arrogant calling it RASL, beat them over their head with your > RASL-rulebook. > > Janusz > > ________________________________ > > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net on behalf of Arlen Vanek > Sent: Wed 2007-05-16 20:06 > To: g; 'Charles Duke' > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > > > > not only VOTG but when is MMP going to release ANY of their pre-order > items? > > i do know they had a major change in the warehouse location and that was > supposed to be complete by mid-june. so let's hope by june we'll start to > see some of our pre-orders start to ship along with For King and Country > > av > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "g" > To: "'Charles Duke'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:25 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > > >> The problem is that one man's reality is another man's fantasy. So a >> reality argument for one person is by definition a fantasy argument for >> the >> next guy. >> >> If we want to up the traffic of the mail list, lets drag out some oldies >> but >> goodies: >> >> A) Critical Hit - ASL savior or pariah. Discuss amongst yourselves >> >> B) Valor of the Guards - when the hell is MMP going to print this? And I >> hear all the scenarios are unbalanced dogs and the cardboard counters are >> too thin and its printed upside down (don't believe me, turn all the >> scenario cards 180 degrees and see for yourself). >> >> Greg >> Offering nothing constructive since 1992. >> >> >> On 5/14/07, Charles Duke wrote: >>> >>> > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us have probably ROFL over >>> > the Physics of ASL commentary here: >>> > >>> > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] >>> >>> I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, but also somewhat >> frustrated. >>> Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does any effort exist to >>> make something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a game variant in a way >>> similar to "Global War" which reformed Advanced Third Reich and Rising >>> Sun? I would certainly like to participate in such a project, if it >> existed. >>> >>> I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you say so (so don't), but >>> I have always thought that it was a pity that the developers of ASL >>> didn't take the opportunity to indeed factor in "realism" arguments >>> into the game when they made it. It was that "Avalon Hill" mentality >>> of making games, not simulations. Yeah right, then why we have >> reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. >>> and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World War 2 battles? >>> >>> At the level of complexity of ASL, it would certainly have been worth >>> it, and would not necessarily make the rules more complex (sometimes >>> making a rule more realistic actually decreases complexity, as I have >>> found when designing some house rule for my use). Many times, it is >>> precisely the unrealistic mechanics which produce those weird >>> situations, which require so many Q&A and illogical rulings and Perry >> Sez's. >>> >>> OK ready for the flames! The ASLML was kind of quiet anyway... >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aslml mailing list >>> aslml at lists.aslml.net >>> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >>> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >>> >> >> >> -- >> Chuck T >> chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.1/807 - Release Date: 16/05/2007 > 06:05 p.m. > > From mtrodgers99 at gmail.com Wed May 16 18:14:20 2007 From: mtrodgers99 at gmail.com (M Rodgers) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 21:14:20 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question Message-ID: <2b8228f00705161814w212f572fh6659abd8945e2c5@mail.gmail.com> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, Stone Building)? Thanks. -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From fred at sdccu.net Wed May 16 18:32:09 2007 From: fred at sdccu.net (Fred) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 18:32:09 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <2b8228f00705161814w212f572fh6659abd8945e2c5@mail.gmail.com> References: <2b8228f00705161814w212f572fh6659abd8945e2c5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <464BB099.9050402@sdccu.net> Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. Fred M Rodgers wrote: > Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, > Stone Building)? > > Thanks. > > From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Wed May 16 20:13:52 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 22:13:52 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question References: <2b8228f00705161814w212f572fh6659abd8945e2c5@mail.gmail.com> <464BB099.9050402@sdccu.net> Message-ID: if you want realism - join the freaking army and go ti iraq!! ASL is a GAME!!!! and a damn good one av ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred" To: "M Rodgers" Cc: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 8:32 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > > Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. > > Fred > > > M Rodgers wrote: >> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, >> Stone Building)? >> >> Thanks. >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From aslml at vftt.co.uk Thu May 17 06:24:33 2007 From: aslml at vftt.co.uk (Pete Phillipps) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 14:24:33 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. Message-ID: <2ab301c79886$b5959ff0$0501a8c0@satellitepro> Hi Everyone, A Rout Q has cropped up in a current VASL game of 112 Out Of Cowardice. A Broken unit is in 50F8 (a building), with an enemy vehicle in Bypass along the F8/F9 hexside. Can I Rout into F7 (a woods hex) and stay there? Pete "Many [wargame] battles have been fought and won by soldiers nourished on beer" - Frederick the Great, 1777 Download VIEW FROM THE TRENCHES (Britain's Premier ASL Journal) free from http://www.vftt.co.uk Get the latest news about HEROES(ASL in Blackpool) at http://www.vftt.co.uk/heroesdetails.asp Get the latest news about INTENSIVE FIRE (Britain's biggest ASL tournament) at http://www.vftt.co.uk/ifdetails.asp Get the latest UK ASL Tournament news at http://www.asltourneys.co.uk Support the best at http://www.manutd.com/ From jpcole at westnet.com.au Thu May 17 07:18:26 2007 From: jpcole at westnet.com.au (Jon Cole) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 22:18:26 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. References: <2ab301c79886$b5959ff0$0501a8c0@satellitepro> Message-ID: <003001c7988e$3c07f180$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Hi Pete I believe it's OK to stop in 50F7. A10.5 says you cant end a RtPh ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit that is unbroken and armed.neither CAFP of the F8-F9 hexside would have a LOS to F7, so a unit ending its Rout in F7 would not be ending its RtPh ADJACENT to a KEU. Cheers Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pete Phillipps" To: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:24 PM Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. > Hi Everyone, > > A Rout Q has cropped up in a current VASL game of 112 Out Of > Cowardice. A Broken unit is in 50F8 (a building), with an enemy vehicle in > Bypass along the F8/F9 hexside. Can I Rout into F7 (a woods hex) and stay > there? > > Pete > > "Many [wargame] battles have been fought and won by soldiers nourished on > beer" - Frederick the Great, 1777 > Download VIEW FROM THE TRENCHES (Britain's Premier ASL Journal) free from > http://www.vftt.co.uk > Get the latest news about HEROES(ASL in Blackpool) at > http://www.vftt.co.uk/heroesdetails.asp > Get the latest news about INTENSIVE FIRE (Britain's biggest ASL > tournament) > at http://www.vftt.co.uk/ifdetails.asp > Get the latest UK ASL Tournament news at http://www.asltourneys.co.uk > Support the best at http://www.manutd.com/ > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From damavs at alltel.net Thu May 17 07:27:45 2007 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 10:27:45 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. Message-ID: <20070517142745.NXLT21809.ispmxmta05-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> "Jon Cole" writes: > I believe it's OK to stop in 50F7. > > A10.5 says you cant end a RtPh ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit that is > unbroken and armed.neither CAFP of the F8-F9 hexside would have a LOS to F7, > so a unit ending its Rout in F7 would not be ending its RtPh ADJACENT to a > KEU. But given the brokie started in F8 itself & thus in LOS of the tank, the tank is still known to the brokie throughout its entire rout. Thus it can't stop in F7, since it started in LOS in F8 and the tank is still known throughout the rout. If the brokie had started out of LOS of the tank & never entered it, then it could rout to F7 & stay since the AFV would not be known... Bret Hildebran damavs at alltel.net www.aslok.org From stevenpleva at earthlink.net Thu May 17 13:59:06 2007 From: stevenpleva at earthlink.net (Steven Pleva) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 16:59:06 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] RASL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00bd01c798c6$3579a6a0$1400a8c0@ivorycc.internal> > I like to know when I tell my gunner, "load up APCR, Tiny!" What I like about your house rule is that you would APCR when your chances to hit are greatest. In regular ASL, we use APCR when are chances to hit are poor. I doubt that was doctrine in anyone's army. "Tony, there's a tank crossing the road, swing around quick and fire a Hail Mary with our last APCR round!" Also, the case D range penetration modifiers could be updated without messing up scenario balance. In general, they are too small at close range and too small at longer range, especially for smaller caliber weapons... Steve From btdtall at yahoo.com Thu May 17 15:50:45 2007 From: btdtall at yahoo.com (btdtall at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 15:50:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] RASL In-Reply-To: <002c01c7980c$a09cab40$661ea8c0@Duke> Message-ID: <237014.79851.qm@web50506.mail.re2.yahoo.com> A scenario from Out of Attic "Skirmish in the Snow" trys to simulate something similar with a SSR where you roll two dice and add +3 to each result. That is the amount of AP and HE rounds available for that AT gun with one AP round being APCR. --- Charles Duke wrote: > I already have a list of house rules, and use them > with my main opponent > (me, I play mostly solo). Would be hard to make > anyone agree with *my* house > rules, that's why a consensus project would be nice. > But I'm only dreaming > (if someone takes it seriously let me know!) > > Here's mine for ammo depletion: At scenario start, > make a dr for each > weapon, subtract that from the depletion value, and > that is the number of > shells available. For instance, a Su 122 with H9. > dr=4. 9-4=5. That Su > begins with 5 HEAT shells. The gunner knows he > carries 5 HEAT shells and can > use them when he sees fit, no luck involved. You > need a side note on a piece > of paper, but is that really so bad? I consider > having 4 or 5 counters on > top of an AFV worse. Side notes are used whenever > HIP or mines exist, its > not like we never use them. > > Have you calculated what the odds are of getting > effective shots from > depletable ammo types? I have, in a little article > that appeared in the > defunct Boardgamer magazine. Extremely low! With #'s > lower than 7, the > expected whole number of special ammo shots from a > gun during a given > scenario is ZERO. Seeing a Gun actually firing an > APCR is so rare, > especially since you don't really expect it because > you are using it only as > a potshot to get two TH DR, right? If it happens, oh > well a bonus. But guns > and tanks DID carry those ammo types, even if in > limited quantity. I like to > know when I tell my gunner, "load up APCR, Tiny!" > that in fact APCR will be > fired. Or if we ran out of APCR in the last battle, > also know it beforehand. > I want to see how APCR affected tank battles. This > is an example of a rule > that can be made more realistic, more satisfying, > and actually simplified in > the process. I know a little about this because I > have designed games. > > Charles > > > Janusz wrote > > BTW, the RASL idea is OK, but some of us make do > with a couple of house > > rules to take away the wierdest things. Here's > mine: > > 1: VBM-sleaze is a nono, but overrun and then stay > in hex is OK if it's > > not a silly vehicle like a HT or jeep. Costs more > MPs, and actually has an > > attack vs the occupants. > > 2: A separate roll for "special-ammo depletion", > just to take away that > > use of APCR vs low-odds speding targets, > delib.-immob, HEAT vs buildings > > instead of HE and such. > > > > But making them a rule could be a problem. Not #2 > really, but affects > > game-balance somewhat, while #1 as a rule would be > strange. Slow vehicles, > > like churchills, couldn't navigate through a dense > town using bypass if > > the buildings were enemy-occupied. Even dummies > would stop the tanks from > > getting through. > > > > So if some rules bug you, make a sheet of > house-rules and play with > > someone who agrees with you. Call it RASL so > others won't confuse it with > > ASL when that sheet becomes 100-pages thick. If > people complain about you > > being arrogant calling it RASL, beat them over > their head with your > > RASL-rulebook. > > > > Janusz > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net on behalf of > Arlen Vanek > > Sent: Wed 2007-05-16 20:06 > > To: g; 'Charles Duke' > > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > > > > > > > > not only VOTG but when is MMP going to release ANY > of their pre-order > > items? > > > > i do know they had a major change in the warehouse > location and that was > > supposed to be complete by mid-june. so let's hope > by june we'll start to > > see some of our pre-orders start to ship along > with For King and Country > > > > av > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "g" > > To: "'Charles Duke'" > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:25 PM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] RASL > > > > > >> The problem is that one man's reality is another > man's fantasy. So a > >> reality argument for one person is by definition > a fantasy argument for > >> the > >> next guy. > >> > >> If we want to up the traffic of the mail list, > lets drag out some oldies > >> but > >> goodies: > >> > >> A) Critical Hit - ASL savior or pariah. Discuss > amongst yourselves > >> > >> B) Valor of the Guards - when the hell is MMP > going to print this? And I > >> hear all the scenarios are unbalanced dogs and > the cardboard counters are > >> too thin and its printed upside down (don't > believe me, turn all the > >> scenario cards 180 degrees and see for yourself). > >> > >> Greg > >> Offering nothing constructive since 1992. > >> > >> > >> On 5/14/07, Charles Duke > wrote: > >>> > >>> > that may seem 'unrealistic' [and many of us > have probably ROFL over > >>> > the Physics of ASL commentary here: > >>> > > >>> > > http://home.earthlink.net/~zasl/asl-physics.html ] > >>> > >>> I just read that article, and indeed I'm ROFL, > but also somewhat > >> frustrated. > >>> Now I want to speak heresy and blasphemy. Does > any effort exist to > >>> make something like "RASL" (Realistic ASL) as a > game variant in a way > >>> similar to "Global War" which reformed Advanced > Third Reich and Rising > >>> Sun? I would certainly like to participate in > such a project, if it > >> existed. > >>> > >>> I love and play ASL, and won't stop because you > say so (so don't), but > >>> I have always thought that it was a pity that > the developers of ASL > >>> didn't take the opportunity to indeed factor in > "realism" arguments > >>> into the game when they made it. It was that > "Avalon Hill" mentality > >>> of making games, not simulations. Yeah right, > then why we have > >> reality-modeled tanks, guns, etc. > >>> and we are "gaming" (not simulating! :-J ) World > War 2 battles? > >>> > >>> At the level of complexity of ASL, it would > certainly have been worth > >>> it, and would not necessarily make the rules > more complex (sometimes > >>> making a rule more realistic actually decreases > complexity, as I have > >>> found when designing some house rule for my > use). Many times, it is > >>> precisely the unrealistic mechanics which > produce those weird > >>> situations, which require so many Q&A and > illogical === message truncated === ____________________________________________________________________________________Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting From jpcole at westnet.com.au Thu May 17 16:33:12 2007 From: jpcole at westnet.com.au (Jon Cole) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 07:33:12 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. References: <20070517142745.NXLT21809.ispmxmta05-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> Message-ID: <000e01c798db$bd7798e0$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Hi Bret I have to disagree with you on the following basis. You wrote "the tank is still known to the brokie throughout its entire rout.". Actually there is no rule that says this. The actual rule I think you are refering to is A10.51, the first 6-7 lines. Basically it is saying that 1) You can never Rout toward a KEU, while in its LOS, in a way that decreases the range in hexes between the routing unit and the KEU and 2) nor may the routing unit move toward an enemy unit that was previously a KEU in that Rout Phase, after leaving its LOS during that RtPh. In Pete's example, the broken unit started its RtPh in 50F8, so at zedro hex range to the KEU, the vehicle in Bypass. It routs to 50F7, so it has increased the range from the KEU at the start of its rout. At this point the brokie in 50F7 is not ADJACENT to a KEU as it is now out of its LOS. It is not trying to move back toward a KEU after having left its LOS previously in the RtPh. Cheers Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bret & Julie Hildebran" To: "Jon Cole" ; ; "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:27 PM Subject: Re: Re: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. > "Jon Cole" writes: >> I believe it's OK to stop in 50F7. >> >> A10.5 says you cant end a RtPh ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit that is >> unbroken and armed.neither CAFP of the F8-F9 hexside would have a LOS to >> F7, >> so a unit ending its Rout in F7 would not be ending its RtPh ADJACENT to >> a >> KEU. > > But given the brokie started in F8 itself & thus in LOS of the tank, the > tank is still known to the brokie throughout its entire rout. Thus it > can't stop in F7, since it started in LOS in F8 and the tank is still > known throughout the rout. > > If the brokie had started out of LOS of the tank & never entered it, then > it could rout to F7 & stay since the AFV would not be known... > > Bret Hildebran > damavs at alltel.net > www.aslok.org > > > From cfago at ix.netcom.com Thu May 17 18:34:49 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl D. Fago) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 21:34:49 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question Message-ID: <26319031.1179452090186.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Sounds like someone's off their Xanax. Carl -----Original Message----- >From: Arlen Vanek >Sent: May 16, 2007 11:13 PM >To: fred at ieee.org, M Rodgers >Cc: ASL Mailing List >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > >if you want realism - join the freaking army and go ti iraq!! >ASL is a GAME!!!! and a damn good one > >av >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Fred" >To: "M Rodgers" >Cc: "ASL Mailing List" >Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 8:32 PM >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > > >> >> Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. >> >> Fred >> >> >> M Rodgers wrote: >>> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, >>> Stone Building)? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu May 17 18:36:47 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 18:36:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <26319031.1179452090186.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070518013647.7889.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> True enough, but an understandable reaction....realism indeed.... --- "Carl D. Fago" wrote: > Sounds like someone's off their Xanax. > > Carl > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Arlen Vanek > >Sent: May 16, 2007 11:13 PM > >To: fred at ieee.org, M Rodgers > >Cc: ASL Mailing List > >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > > > >if you want realism - join the freaking army and go ti iraq!! > >ASL is a GAME!!!! and a damn good one > > > >av > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Fred" > >To: "M Rodgers" > >Cc: "ASL Mailing List" > >Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 8:32 PM > >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > > > > > >> > >> Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. > >> > >> Fred > >> > >> > >> M Rodgers wrote: > >>> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, > >>> Stone Building)? > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> aslml mailing list > >> aslml at lists.aslml.net > >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >aslml mailing list > >aslml at lists.aslml.net > >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From cfago at ix.netcom.com Thu May 17 18:40:33 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl D. Fago) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 21:40:33 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question Message-ID: <5164727.1179452433981.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Understandable reaction to a question about Chapter B Terrain chart?!?!? -----Original Message----- >From: Jazz >Sent: May 17, 2007 9:36 PM >To: "Carl D. Fago" , ASLML >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > >True enough, but an understandable reaction....realism indeed.... > > >--- "Carl D. Fago" wrote: > >> Sounds like someone's off their Xanax. >> >> Carl >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: Arlen Vanek >> >Sent: May 16, 2007 11:13 PM >> >To: fred at ieee.org, M Rodgers >> >Cc: ASL Mailing List >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question >> > >> >if you want realism - join the freaking army and go ti iraq!! >> >ASL is a GAME!!!! and a damn good one >> > >> >av >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "Fred" >> >To: "M Rodgers" >> >Cc: "ASL Mailing List" >> >Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 8:32 PM >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question >> > >> > >> >> >> >> Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. >> >> >> >> Fred >> >> >> >> >> >> M Rodgers wrote: >> >>> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, >> >>> Stone Building)? >> >>> >> >>> Thanks. >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> aslml mailing list >> >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >> >aslml mailing list >> >aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu May 17 19:19:37 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 19:19:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <5164727.1179452433981.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070518021937.20975.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well, no, but the previous discussions regarding reality. As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed synapse reactions, OK? Jeesh..... Jazz --- "Carl D. Fago" wrote: > Understandable reaction to a question about Chapter B Terrain chart?!?!? > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Jazz > >Sent: May 17, 2007 9:36 PM > >To: "Carl D. Fago" , ASLML > >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > > > >True enough, but an understandable reaction....realism indeed.... > > > > > >--- "Carl D. Fago" wrote: > > > >> Sounds like someone's off their Xanax. > >> > >> Carl > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> >From: Arlen Vanek > >> >Sent: May 16, 2007 11:13 PM > >> >To: fred at ieee.org, M Rodgers > >> >Cc: ASL Mailing List > >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > >> > > >> >if you want realism - join the freaking army and go ti iraq!! > >> >ASL is a GAME!!!! and a damn good one > >> > > >> >av > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: "Fred" > >> >To: "M Rodgers" > >> >Cc: "ASL Mailing List" > >> >Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 8:32 PM > >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > >> > > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. > >> >> > >> >> Fred > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> M Rodgers wrote: > >> >>> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, > >> >>> Stone Building)? > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> aslml mailing list > >> >> aslml at lists.aslml.net > >> >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >> >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > >> >> > >> >_______________________________________________ > >> >aslml mailing list > >> >aslml at lists.aslml.net > >> >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >> >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> aslml mailing list > >> aslml at lists.aslml.net > >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > >> > > > > > > From damavs at alltel.net Thu May 17 20:27:08 2007 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 23:27:08 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. In-Reply-To: <000e01c798db$bd7798e0$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> References: <20070517142745.NXLT21809.ispmxmta05-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> <000e01c798db$bd7798e0$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Message-ID: <20070518032532.KOAX3772.ispmxaamta05-gx.windstream.net@Sparky.alltel.net> Jon Cole wrote: >I have to disagree with you on the following basis. > >You wrote "the tank is still known to the brokie throughout its >entire rout.". Actually there is no rule that says this. The actual >rule I think you are refering to is A10.51, the first 6-7 lines. > >Basically it is saying that >1) You can never Rout toward a KEU, while in its LOS, in a way that >decreases the range in hexes between the routing unit and the KEU and >2) nor may the routing unit move toward an enemy unit that was >previously a KEU in that Rout Phase, after leaving its LOS during that RtPh. > >In Pete's example, the broken unit started its RtPh in 50F8, so at >zedro hex range to the KEU, the vehicle in Bypass. >It routs to 50F7, so it has increased the range from the KEU at the >start of its rout. >At this point the brokie in 50F7 is not ADJACENT to a KEU as it is >now out of its LOS. It is not trying to move back toward a KEU after >having left its LOS previously in the RtPh. After reading the rout rules in question, Jon has it right. Mea culpa. I was indeed mis-remembering how the rout toward a KEU clause was written. Sorry for the error... Bret Hildebran damavs at alltel.net www.aslok.org From cfago at ix.netcom.com Thu May 17 20:43:08 2007 From: cfago at ix.netcom.com (Carl D. Fago) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 23:43:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question Message-ID: <33208424.1179459788847.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I wish my synapse reactions were delayed! That would mean that I actually _had_ synapse reactions! Down my way it's standard protocol to turn off the thinking cap anyway. Carl -----Original Message----- >From: Jazz >Sent: May 17, 2007 10:19 PM >To: "Carl D. Fago" , ASLML >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question > >Well, no, but the previous discussions regarding reality. > >As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed synapse reactions, OK? > >Jeesh..... > >Jazz > >--- "Carl D. Fago" wrote: > >> Understandable reaction to a question about Chapter B Terrain chart?!?!? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: Jazz >> >Sent: May 17, 2007 9:36 PM >> >To: "Carl D. Fago" , ASLML >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question >> > >> >True enough, but an understandable reaction....realism indeed.... >> > >> > >> >--- "Carl D. Fago" wrote: >> > >> >> Sounds like someone's off their Xanax. >> >> >> >> Carl >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >From: Arlen Vanek >> >> >Sent: May 16, 2007 11:13 PM >> >> >To: fred at ieee.org, M Rodgers >> >> >Cc: ASL Mailing List >> >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question >> >> > >> >> >if you want realism - join the freaking army and go ti iraq!! >> >> >ASL is a GAME!!!! and a damn good one >> >> > >> >> >av >> >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >> >From: "Fred" >> >> >To: "M Rodgers" >> >> >Cc: "ASL Mailing List" >> >> >Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 8:32 PM >> >> >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Per the note at the bottom of the chart you get a -1 Rally DRM. >> >> >> >> >> >> Fred >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> M Rodgers wrote: >> >> >>> Can anyone tell me why some entries are underlined (e.g., Pillbox, >> >> >>> Stone Building)? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Thanks. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> aslml mailing list >> >> >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >> >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >> >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >> >> >aslml mailing list >> >> >aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >> >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >> >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> aslml mailing list >> >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Fri May 18 04:43:03 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 06:43:03 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. References: <20070517142745.NXLT21809.ispmxmta05-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net><000e01c798db$bd7798e0$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> <20070518032532.KOAX3772.ispmxaamta05-gx.windstream.net@Sparky.alltel.net> Message-ID: a tank is never broke and routs - that is for infantry units only. if you can show me where a "tank" breaks i'd be willing to hear you out - what rule is that? see, i dont ever remember making a morale check for a tank, you either miss the tank or its a hit and the hit should be resolved on the AFV destruction table a tank never routs av ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bret & Julie Hildebran" To: "Jon Cole" ; ; ; "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:27 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. > Jon Cole wrote: >>I have to disagree with you on the following basis. >> >>You wrote "the tank is still known to the brokie throughout its >>entire rout.". Actually there is no rule that says this. The actual >>rule I think you are refering to is A10.51, the first 6-7 lines. >> >>Basically it is saying that >>1) You can never Rout toward a KEU, while in its LOS, in a way that >>decreases the range in hexes between the routing unit and the KEU and >>2) nor may the routing unit move toward an enemy unit that was >>previously a KEU in that Rout Phase, after leaving its LOS during that >>RtPh. >> >>In Pete's example, the broken unit started its RtPh in 50F8, so at >>zedro hex range to the KEU, the vehicle in Bypass. >>It routs to 50F7, so it has increased the range from the KEU at the >>start of its rout. >>At this point the brokie in 50F7 is not ADJACENT to a KEU as it is >>now out of its LOS. It is not trying to move back toward a KEU after >>having left its LOS previously in the RtPh. > > After reading the rout rules in question, Jon has it right. Mea > culpa. I was indeed mis-remembering how the rout toward a KEU clause > was written. > > Sorry for the error... > > Bret Hildebran > damavs at alltel.net > www.aslok.org > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From jpcole at westnet.com.au Fri May 18 04:45:55 2007 From: jpcole at westnet.com.au (Jon Cole) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 19:45:55 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. References: <20070517142745.NXLT21809.ispmxmta05-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net><000e01c798db$bd7798e0$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> <20070518032532.KOAX3772.ispmxaamta05-gx.windstream.net@Sparky.alltel.net> Message-ID: <002201c79942$183a3e70$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Perhaps you need to read the original question posed more carefully before shooting from the hip :-) Cheers Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arlen Vanek" To: "Jon Cole" ; ; ; "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 7:43 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. >a tank is never broke and routs - that is for infantry units only. > if you can show me where a "tank" breaks i'd be willing to hear you out - > what rule is that? > > see, i dont ever remember making a morale check for a tank, you either > miss the tank or its a hit and the hit should be resolved on the AFV > destruction table > > a tank never routs > > av > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bret & Julie Hildebran" > To: "Jon Cole" ; ; > ; "ASL Mailing List" > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:27 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. > > >> Jon Cole wrote: >>>I have to disagree with you on the following basis. >>> >>>You wrote "the tank is still known to the brokie throughout its >>>entire rout.". Actually there is no rule that says this. The actual >>>rule I think you are refering to is A10.51, the first 6-7 lines. >>> >>>Basically it is saying that >>>1) You can never Rout toward a KEU, while in its LOS, in a way that >>>decreases the range in hexes between the routing unit and the KEU and >>>2) nor may the routing unit move toward an enemy unit that was >>>previously a KEU in that Rout Phase, after leaving its LOS during that >>>RtPh. >>> >>>In Pete's example, the broken unit started its RtPh in 50F8, so at >>>zedro hex range to the KEU, the vehicle in Bypass. >>>It routs to 50F7, so it has increased the range from the KEU at the >>>start of its rout. >>>At this point the brokie in 50F7 is not ADJACENT to a KEU as it is >>>now out of its LOS. It is not trying to move back toward a KEU after >>>having left its LOS previously in the RtPh. >> >> After reading the rout rules in question, Jon has it right. Mea >> culpa. I was indeed mis-remembering how the rout toward a KEU clause >> was written. >> >> Sorry for the error... >> >> Bret Hildebran >> damavs at alltel.net >> www.aslok.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > > From john.slotwinski at nist.gov Fri May 18 05:16:25 2007 From: john.slotwinski at nist.gov (John Slotwinski) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 08:16:25 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <20070518021937.20975.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <5164727.1179452433981.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <20070518021937.20975.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070518081546.01d95db0@mailserver.nist.gov> At 10:19 PM 5/17/2007, Jazz wrote: >As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed >synapse reactions, OK? Agreed. What were we talking about? From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Fri May 18 06:57:49 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 06:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20070518081546.01d95db0@mailserver.nist.gov> Message-ID: <298141.463.qm@web34513.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Was somebody talking? --- John Slotwinski wrote: > At 10:19 PM 5/17/2007, Jazz wrote: > >As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed > >synapse reactions, OK? > > Agreed. > > What were we talking about? > > > From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Fri May 18 07:08:22 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:08:22 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <298141.463.qm@web34513.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20070518081546.01d95db0@mailserver.nist.gov> <298141.463.qm@web34513.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <332a4d030705180708t7df9f83ep40dcdba31f27bff6@mail.gmail.com> Keep it down in there my show is on!!! On 5/18/07, Jazz wrote: > Was somebody talking? > > --- John Slotwinski wrote: > > > At 10:19 PM 5/17/2007, Jazz wrote: > > >As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed > > >synapse reactions, OK? > > > > Agreed. > > > > What were we talking about? > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From damavs at alltel.net Fri May 18 07:12:44 2007 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:12:44 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question Message-ID: <20070518141244.YBTZ718.ispmxmta06-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> Suddenly the lower list traffic of recent years makes a lot more sense... Jazz writes: > Was somebody talking? > > --- John Slotwinski wrote: > > > At 10:19 PM 5/17/2007, Jazz wrote: > > >As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed > > >synapse reactions, OK? > > > > Agreed. > > > > What were we talking about? From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Fri May 18 07:16:11 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 07:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <20070518141244.YBTZ718.ispmxmta06-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> Message-ID: <651149.18161.qm@web34505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I'd really rather than nothing happened "suddenly"....OK? BTW, I assume that now that I can pay for ASLOK via PayPal that I can e-mail you my completed paperwork? Friggin' stamps are going up yet again....and suddenly too...it all happens at the same time.... Jazz --- Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: > Suddenly the lower list traffic of recent years makes a lot more sense... > > Jazz writes: > > Was somebody talking? > > > > --- John Slotwinski wrote: > > > > > At 10:19 PM 5/17/2007, Jazz wrote: > > > >As we get older, there needs to be a certain tolerance for delayed > > > >synapse reactions, OK? > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > > > What were we talking about? > > > From damavs at alltel.net Fri May 18 07:26:06 2007 From: damavs at alltel.net (Bret & Julie Hildebran) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:26:06 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question Message-ID: <20070518142606.YUZN718.ispmxmta06-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> Jazz writes: > I'd really rather than nothing happened "suddenly"....OK? Sorry old-timer. Didn't mean to startle you :-) > BTW, I assume that now that I can pay for ASLOK via PayPal that I can e-mail you my completed > paperwork? Yep - just drop me an email w/your mini preferences & any other vital info and you're all set after paying via PayPal. I should be catching up on ASLOK pre-regs over the weekend. Last time I ran 'em we were running near double the rates of each of the last 2 years - bodes well for attendance hopefully. > Friggin' stamps are going up yet again... Like clockwork. I'm hoping everyone pre-regs early for ASLOK so we can save on flyer postage this year :-) Bret Hildebran damavs at alltel.net www.aslok.org From john.slotwinski at nist.gov Fri May 18 07:39:10 2007 From: john.slotwinski at nist.gov (John Slotwinski) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:39:10 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705180708t7df9f83ep40dcdba31f27bff6@mail.gmail.co m> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20070518081546.01d95db0@mailserver.nist.gov> <298141.463.qm@web34513.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <332a4d030705180708t7df9f83ep40dcdba31f27bff6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070518103850.01dc3c40@mailserver.nist.gov> At 10:08 AM 5/18/2007, Chuck T wrote: >Keep it down in there my show is on!!! ZZZZZZ...hey don't change the channel, I'm watching that!...ZZZZZZZZ From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Fri May 18 07:41:24 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 07:41:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Chapter B Terrain chart question In-Reply-To: <20070518142606.YUZN718.ispmxmta06-srv.windstream.net@webmail-relay.alltel.net> Message-ID: <634443.6270.qm@web34503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Not sure if it will be in by this weekend, but early next week for sure, so don't waste a stamp on me. Jazz --- Bret & Julie Hildebran wrote: > Jazz writes: > > I'd really rather than nothing happened "suddenly"....OK? > > Sorry old-timer. Didn't mean to startle you :-) > > > BTW, I assume that now that I can pay for ASLOK via PayPal that I can e-mail you my completed > > paperwork? > > Yep - just drop me an email w/your mini preferences & any other vital info and you're all set > after paying via PayPal. I should be catching up on ASLOK pre-regs over the weekend. Last time > I ran 'em we were running near double the rates of each of the last 2 years - bodes well for > attendance hopefully. > > > Friggin' stamps are going up yet again... > > Like clockwork. I'm hoping everyone pre-regs early for ASLOK so we can save on flyer postage > this year :-) > > Bret Hildebran > damavs at alltel.net > www.aslok.org > > > From cwebb1 at chartertn.net Sat May 19 07:21:42 2007 From: cwebb1 at chartertn.net (Forest Webb) Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 10:21:42 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Test... In-Reply-To: <00bd01c798c6$3579a6a0$1400a8c0@ivorycc.internal> Message-ID: <002801c79a21$096d1310$0200a8c0@home> Test From cwebb1 at chartertn.net Sat May 19 07:26:38 2007 From: cwebb1 at chartertn.net (Forest Webb) Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 10:26:38 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Code of Bushido In-Reply-To: <002801c79a21$096d1310$0200a8c0@home> Message-ID: <002901c79a21$b668fac0$0200a8c0@home> Been lurking here for quite awhile... Unfortunately in a rash decision I parted with my ASL collection a couple years ago...but I am in the process if slowly rebuilding it. Which leads to my question - Does anyone know of where I can acquire Code of Bushido other then e-bay? More precisely I am most interested in Chapter H for Code of Bushido for another project I am working on... Any help would be appreciated... From swfancher at mindspring.com Sat May 19 08:31:51 2007 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 11:31:51 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Code of Bushido In-Reply-To: <002901c79a21$b668fac0$0200a8c0@home> References: <002801c79a21$096d1310$0200a8c0@home> <002901c79a21$b668fac0$0200a8c0@home> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070519112814.02106ac0@mindspring.com> Shoot me an email off-list and let me know exactly what you're looking for (i.e. just Chapter H, also Chap G). I will be replacing my CoB in the near future and have originals that I am willing to sell. They are several years old but have been kept in page-protectors and appear to be unmarked. Some errata may have been penciled in, but more than likely not. Be well. Seth At 10:26 AM 5/19/2007, Forest Webb wrote: >Been lurking here for quite awhile... > >Unfortunately in a rash decision I parted with my ASL collection a couple >years ago...but I am in the process if slowly rebuilding it. > >Which leads to my question - Does anyone know of where I can acquire Code of >Bushido other then e-bay? More precisely I am most interested in Chapter H >for Code of Bushido for another project I am working on... Any help would be >appreciated... > > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat May 19 16:32:29 2007 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 01:32:29 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Rout Q. In-Reply-To: <003001c7988e$3c07f180$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> References: <2ab301c79886$b5959ff0$0501a8c0@satellitepro> <003001c7988e$3c07f180$6401a8c0@401b29ad67014ec> Message-ID: <464F890D.4000405@broadpark.no> Hi, Jon Cole wrote: > Hi Pete > I believe it's OK to stop in 50F7. > > A10.5 says you cant end a RtPh ADJACENT to a Known enemy unit that is > unbroken and armed.neither CAFP of the F8-F9 hexside would have a LOS to F7, > so a unit ending its Rout in F7 would not be ending its RtPh ADJACENT to a > KEU. > > Note that two units are ADJACENT if it is possible to advance and there is LOS between the two *Locations*. The fact that there is no LOS between the two *units* in question, doesn't make them non-ADJACENT. So the broken unit in F7 is ADJACENT to the bypassing AFV in F8. But since there is no LOS, the AFV is not Known, and stopping in F7 is therefore still legal. From bearlyonthehill at optonline.net Sun May 20 12:21:09 2007 From: bearlyonthehill at optonline.net (bearlyonthehill at optonline.net) Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 19:21:09 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: Alex - I hope this finds you well. Thanks for you help. Best regards, Gus From bearlyonthehill at optonline.net Sun May 20 12:40:43 2007 From: bearlyonthehill at optonline.net (bearlyonthehill at optonline.net) Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 19:40:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] VASL connection Message-ID: Listers - I would like you help. I cannot connect to VASL and I do not know why. I have followed all instructions but cannot connect. I appreciate any help you can give. Best regards Gus From john at winhaven.net Mon May 21 20:45:25 2007 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 22:45:25 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there Message-ID: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> I thought some of you might appreciate this 1/16 German Class "52" Locomotive http://www.onesixthcollectors.co.uk/clubforum/viewtopic.php?t=3989 John B From matt.larie at verizon.net Mon May 21 22:53:52 2007 From: matt.larie at verizon.net (Matt Evans) Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 22:53:52 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK#3 p28 CC Example -- Error? In-Reply-To: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> References: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Message-ID: <73DCE1B8-D25E-4234-9FC0-B7C419C5E6E7@verizon.net> Howdy! Well, I just got through reading through the ASLSK#3 rules and the "PAATC and Close Combat Example" on p28 I think has an error. In the very middle of the second column it states, "The German rolls a 5, equaling the # under the 3-2 column of the CCT...." The 3-2 column on the QRDC shows a 6, so the example should say, "...rolls a 6...." Correct? Thanx! Matt From janusz.maxe at unf.se Tue May 22 00:53:58 2007 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 09:53:58 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK#3 p28 CC Example -- Error? References: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> <73DCE1B8-D25E-4234-9FC0-B7C419C5E6E7@verizon.net> Message-ID: Most probably it should say "6" yes, since that is the number for 3-2 attacks. Janusz ________________________________ Fr?n: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net genom Matt Evans Skickat: ti 2007-05-22 07:53 Till: ASLML ?mne: [Aslml] ASLSK#3 p28 CC Example -- Error? Howdy! Well, I just got through reading through the ASLSK#3 rules and the "PAATC and Close Combat Example" on p28 I think has an error. In the very middle of the second column it states, "The German rolls a 5, equaling the # under the 3-2 column of the CCT...." The 3-2 column on the QRDC shows a 6, so the example should say, "...rolls a 6...." Correct? Thanx! Matt _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Tue May 22 03:41:38 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 06:41:38 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there In-Reply-To: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> References: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Message-ID: <332a4d030705220341k30645b09s1f1b6a1263b497b3@mail.gmail.com> the details in these pictures are amazing! - this is all minis? or computer generated images? -CT On 5/21/07, John Bartow wrote: > > I thought some of you might appreciate this 1/16 German Class "52" > Locomotive > > http://www.onesixthcollectors.co.uk/clubforum/viewtopic.php?t=3989 > > John B > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Tue May 22 05:37:31 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 07:37:31 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there References: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Message-ID: i'm speechless ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Bartow" To: "'ASLML'" Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 10:45 PM Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there > > I thought some of you might appreciate this 1/16 German Class "52" > Locomotive > > http://www.onesixthcollectors.co.uk/clubforum/viewtopic.php?t=3989 > > John B > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Tue May 22 06:10:51 2007 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 06:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705220341k30645b09s1f1b6a1263b497b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <959615.32698.qm@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> The figures are all 1/6th scale action figures, think GI Joes from the late '60s early 70s (roughly one foot or 30.5 cm tall). Much larger line of figures and accessories are currently available from vendors. Evidently the guy loves building large scale models and does very nice work. And people think our hobby is expensive. Kevin --- Chuck T wrote: > the details in these pictures are amazing! - this > is all minis? or > computer generated images? > > -CT > > On 5/21/07, John Bartow wrote: > > > > I thought some of you might appreciate this 1/16 > German Class "52" > > Locomotive > > > > > http://www.onesixthcollectors.co.uk/clubforum/viewtopic.php?t=3989 > > > > John B > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster at aslml.net > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ From bpickeri at gmail.com Tue May 22 07:53:18 2007 From: bpickeri at gmail.com (Brian Pickering) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 07:53:18 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705220341k30645b09s1f1b6a1263b497b3@mail.gmail.com> References: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> <332a4d030705220341k30645b09s1f1b6a1263b497b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <885c41aa0705220753u734d22f1od9aaabd21e52d1d@mail.gmail.com> One of the last pics shows the modeler standing next to the train. It is BIG! And physical, not a computer render. BLP On 5/22/07, Chuck T wrote: > the details in these pictures are amazing! - this is all minis? or > computer generated images? > > -CT > > On 5/21/07, John Bartow wrote: > > > > I thought some of you might appreciate this 1/16 German Class "52" > > Locomotive > > > > http://www.onesixthcollectors.co.uk/clubforum/viewtopic.php?t=3989 > > > > John B > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Brian Pickering bpickeri at gmail.com From asl at thuring.com Tue May 22 09:31:04 2007 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 18:31:04 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] If there are any train buffs out there In-Reply-To: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> References: <00af01c79c23$a55a85b0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Message-ID: <46531AC8.1000305@thuring.com> John Bartow wrote: > I thought some of you might appreciate this 1/16 German Class "52" > Locomotive > > http://www.onesixthcollectors.co.uk/clubforum/viewtopic.php?t=3989 > Thanks! I had seen it but lost the URL. It is truly amazing! Apparently done in only six weeks of work. Also intresting to read the comments on that forum. cheers, Lars > John B > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- "2b|!2b?" (Hamlet) ASL - http://www.thuring.com/asl Quotes - http://www.thuring.com/life/quotes.html From stewart.king at mtangel.edu Wed May 23 14:27:08 2007 From: stewart.king at mtangel.edu (Stewart King) Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 14:27:08 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? Message-ID: Dear listers, I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. Hopefully this time it will work... An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The question is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I thought I'd see what this list thought of the question. The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is Elite (C8.2)." I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's my logic: 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the core system applies. 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale despite not being elite. 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite Class for the purposes of HoB. 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by the scenario. A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic 447's. So whaddya think? Stewart No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 PM From cduke at intelnett.com Wed May 23 14:34:14 2007 From: cduke at intelnett.com (Charles Duke) Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 15:34:14 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? References: Message-ID: <001201c79d82$1c14c120$661ea8c0@Duke> This is a hard one. Your arguments are good, but I can imagine arguments to the contrary equally good. Calls for an arbitrary decision by those who make the rules, I think. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart King" To: "Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net" Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:27 PM Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? > Dear listers, > > I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. > Hopefully this time it will work... > > An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The > question > is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? > This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I thought > I'd see what this list thought of the question. > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to > have > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side > Morale > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > Elite (C8.2)." > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > my logic: > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > core system applies. > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined > morale > despite not being elite. > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would > be > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale > by > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > Class for the purposes of HoB. > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, > which > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent > into > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented > by > the scenario. > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite > and > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > 447's. > > So whaddya think? > > Stewart > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 > 3:59 > PM > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/815 - Release Date: 22/05/2007 > 03:49 p.m. > > From reamees at earthlink.net Thu May 24 04:16:30 2007 From: reamees at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 07:16:30 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [Aslml] 1/16 Photos Message-ID: <1396742.1180005390454.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net> There is a whole hobby out there with these Dragon and other figures. Many take famous WWII photos and stage them. Of course, like always the majority of the figures one can buy are German. Look at any scale model company and you will see German figures far outnumber other countries. Just look at ASL. How many more German squads do we need? "Zadra" From netwalker at internode.on.net Thu May 24 01:11:52 2007 From: netwalker at internode.on.net (Paul) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 18:11:52 +1000 Subject: [Aslml] Message Format In-Reply-To: <001201c79d82$1c14c120$661ea8c0@Duke> References: <001201c79d82$1c14c120$661ea8c0@Duke> Message-ID: <000001c79ddb$3044ea90$90cebfb0$@on.net> Hi, Why am I getting ALL THE MESSAGES INDIVIDUALLY AN DNOT IN ONE BIG EMAIL FOR THE DAY? Paul... -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Charles Duke Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2007 7:34 AM To: Stewart King; Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? This is a hard one. Your arguments are good, but I can imagine arguments to the contrary equally good. Calls for an arbitrary decision by those who make the rules, I think. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart King" To: "Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net" Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:27 PM Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? > Dear listers, > > I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. > Hopefully this time it will work... > > An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The > question > is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? > This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I thought > I'd see what this list thought of the question. > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to > have > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side > Morale > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > Elite (C8.2)." > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > my logic: > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > core system applies. > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined > morale > despite not being elite. > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would > be > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale > by > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > Class for the purposes of HoB. > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, > which > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent > into > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented > by > the scenario. > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite > and > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > 447's. > > So whaddya think? > > Stewart > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 > 3:59 > PM > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/815 - Release Date: 22/05/2007 > 03:49 p.m. > > _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From shmcbee at bellsouth.net Thu May 24 05:23:44 2007 From: shmcbee at bellsouth.net (Steve McBee) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 07:23:44 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Message Format In-Reply-To: <000001c79ddb$3044ea90$90cebfb0$@on.net> References: <001201c79d82$1c14c120$661ea8c0@Duke> <000001c79ddb$3044ea90$90cebfb0$@on.net> Message-ID: <000901c79dfe$5f1c9070$6101a8c0@Steve> Go to the website: http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net and subscribe to get the digest instead of the individual messages. Of course I could not access the website when I just now tried it. If you can't get it that way, then send an email to: webmaster at aslml.net. And please, don't take this the wrong way, but trim your messages, especially if you are not answering the question asked and change the message subject to something else. Hope that helps. Steve -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 3:12 AM To: 'Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net' Subject: [Aslml] Message Format Hi, Why am I getting ALL THE MESSAGES INDIVIDUALLY AN DNOT IN ONE BIG EMAIL FOR THE DAY? Paul... From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Thu May 24 07:29:06 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 10:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <332a4d030705240729h2fd8737cq3a074c02ed0f8685@mail.gmail.com> my 3 cents - I think the SSR identifies the whole force as Elite (Capital 'E') - so that's identifying them Elite for purposes of rules...... why else would then be IDd as such in an SSR?, case closed. on the BH piece - I'd tend to lean toward the BH to 658s as they're also SS. CT On 5/23/07, Stewart King wrote: > Dear listers, > > I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. > Hopefully this time it will work... > > An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The question > is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? > This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I thought > I'd see what this list thought of the question. > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > Elite (C8.2)." > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > my logic: > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > core system applies. > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale > despite not being elite. > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > Class for the purposes of HoB. > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by > the scenario. > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > 447's. > > So whaddya think? > > Stewart > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 > PM > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Thu May 24 08:59:10 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 10:59:10 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? References: <332a4d030705240729h2fd8737cq3a074c02ed0f8685@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: the thing is these SSR's are in pace for a reason (realism, hello?). this particular scenario takes place in 1945, these SS units are not what they were in say...1941-42. it even says in the lead in that they were not very well led. why do people question the SSR's anyway? why do we think that they are there? AV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck T" To: "Stewart King" Cc: "Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net" Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 9:29 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? > my 3 cents - > > I think the SSR identifies the whole force as Elite (Capital 'E') - > so that's identifying them Elite for purposes of rules...... why else > would then be IDd as such in an SSR?, case closed. > > on the BH piece - I'd tend to lean toward the BH to 658s as they're also > SS. > > CT > > On 5/23/07, Stewart King wrote: >> Dear listers, >> >> I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. >> Hopefully this time it will work... >> >> An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The >> question >> is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? >> This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I >> thought >> I'd see what this list thought of the question. >> >> The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to >> have >> Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side >> Morale >> Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force >> is >> Elite (C8.2)." >> >> I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. >> Here's >> my logic: >> >> 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only >> the >> core system applies. >> 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of >> elite >> squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined >> morale >> despite not being elite. >> 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section >> defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, >> 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as >> elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't >> have >> underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since >> A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would >> be >> first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side >> morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). >> 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale >> by >> ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite >> Class for the purposes of HoB. >> 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, >> which >> refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last >> sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force >> (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention >> that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of >> poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent >> into >> action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could >> spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented >> by >> the scenario. >> >> A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite >> and >> so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic >> 447's. >> >> So whaddya think? >> >> Stewart >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 >> 3:59 >> PM >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Thu May 24 10:03:02 2007 From: david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca (David Elder) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:03:02 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> Hi All, Here is my 2 cents: > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > Elite (C8.2)." > The SSR states "and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is Elite (C8.2)." Rule C8.2 states: "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German force as Elite. The wording is open to interpretation and asking Perry or the scenario designer is the only way to know for sure ... but since there was no requirement to state that the German force is Elite for the purposes of C8.2 since it is already SS - I would tend to interpret this to mean that the German Force is supposed to be considered Elite. Cheers, David > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > my logic: > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > core system applies. > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale > despite not being elite. > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > Class for the purposes of HoB. > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by > the scenario. > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > 447's. > > So whaddya think? > > Stewart > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 > PM > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- David Elder University of Toronto david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Institute for Aerospace Studies Tel: 416-667-7891 or 905-839-8180 Fusion Research Group Fax: 416-667-7799 From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Thu May 24 10:22:49 2007 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Klas_Malmstr=F6m?=) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 19:22:49 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> References: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <4655C9E9.2090100@yahoo.se> Hi, David Elder skrev: > > Rule C8.2 states: > > "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite > for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical > formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." > > Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all > purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion > numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German > force as Elite. The SSR only specifies that the 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are SS - it says nothing about the vehicles. Although the OoB says "SS-Panzerj?ger Abteilung 653" indicating that some vehicle are probably indeed SS. But it also says "and Flammkompanie 353" and whether this formation is SS or not isn't clear or which of the vehicles in the OoB belong to it, so the mention of C8.2 in SSR 4 is not 100 % redundant, IMHO. As far as I know the "Elite" in C8.2 has nothing to do with A1.25 CLASS. But I think that the "to be SS for all purposes." indicates that the Class of the MMCs should be regarded as Elite as well. Regards, Klas Malmstrom From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Thu May 24 10:07:54 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> References: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <332a4d030705241007u7b095f40na2ced178f1b498ff@mail.gmail.com> I am curious how this point is affecting the play of the scenario? I'd be interested to know how this fine point affects balance in this case. -Chuck On 5/24/07, David Elder wrote: > Hi All, > > Here is my 2 cents: > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have > > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale > > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > > Elite (C8.2)." > > > The SSR states "and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is Elite > (C8.2)." > > Rule C8.2 states: > > "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite > for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical > formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." > > Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all > purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion > numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German > force as Elite. > > The wording is open to interpretation and asking Perry or the scenario > designer is the only way to know for sure ... but since there was no > requirement to state that the German force is Elite for the purposes of > C8.2 since it is already SS - I would tend to interpret this to mean > that the German Force is supposed to be considered Elite. > > Cheers, > > David > > > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > > my logic: > > > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > > core system applies. > > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale > > despite not being elite. > > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be > > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by > > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > > Class for the purposes of HoB. > > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which > > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into > > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by > > the scenario. > > > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and > > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > > 447's. > > > > So whaddya think? > > > > Stewart > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 > > PM > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > -- > David Elder University of Toronto > david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Institute for Aerospace Studies > Tel: 416-667-7891 or 905-839-8180 Fusion Research Group > Fax: 416-667-7799 > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Thu May 24 11:57:03 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 11:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705241007u7b095f40na2ced178f1b498ff@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <477789.53137.qm@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> If this is the same discussion that was on the Forums last month...and judging by the question and the person asking it it seems to be.....it had to do with HOB DRMs. The battle-harden sequence is a new wrinkle that I do not recall from the previous discussion. --- Chuck T wrote: > I am curious how this point is affecting the play of the scenario? > I'd be interested to know how this fine point affects balance in this > case. > > -Chuck > > On 5/24/07, David Elder wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Here is my 2 cents: > > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have > > > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale > > > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > > > Elite (C8.2)." > > > > > The SSR states "and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is Elite > > (C8.2)." > > > > Rule C8.2 states: > > > > "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite > > for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical > > formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." > > > > Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all > > purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion > > numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German > > force as Elite. > > > > The wording is open to interpretation and asking Perry or the scenario > > designer is the only way to know for sure ... but since there was no > > requirement to state that the German force is Elite for the purposes of > > C8.2 since it is already SS - I would tend to interpret this to mean > > that the German Force is supposed to be considered Elite. > > > > Cheers, > > > > David > > > > > > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > > > my logic: > > > > > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > > > core system applies. > > > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > > > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale > > > despite not being elite. > > > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > > > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > > > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > > > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > > > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > > > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be > > > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > > > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > > > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by > > > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > > > Class for the purposes of HoB. > > > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which > > > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > > > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > > > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > > > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > > > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into > > > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > > > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by > > > the scenario. > > > > > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and > > > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > > > 447's. > > > > > > So whaddya think? > > > > > > Stewart > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 > > > PM > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aslml mailing list > > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > > > > > -- > > David Elder University of Toronto > > david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Institute for Aerospace Studies > > Tel: 416-667-7891 or 905-839-8180 Fusion Research Group > > Fax: 416-667-7799 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Thu May 24 11:59:35 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 14:59:35 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <477789.53137.qm@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <332a4d030705241007u7b095f40na2ced178f1b498ff@mail.gmail.com> <477789.53137.qm@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <332a4d030705241159s43d48648v78ac06ff0326ffa6@mail.gmail.com> I see - so essentially it's for those mostly rare occurrences that if they happened in a drove could theoretically upset the balance of the game. Hell if you get that many chances at BH then the game is unbalanced anyhow :) SSR 0 for all scenarios = no luck? :) Chuck On 5/24/07, Jazz wrote: > If this is the same discussion that was on the Forums last month...and judging by the question and > the person asking it it seems to be.....it had to do with HOB DRMs. > > The battle-harden sequence is a new wrinkle that I do not recall from the previous discussion. > > > --- Chuck T wrote: > > > I am curious how this point is affecting the play of the scenario? > > I'd be interested to know how this fine point affects balance in this > > case. > > > > -Chuck > > > > On 5/24/07, David Elder wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Here is my 2 cents: > > > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have > > > > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale > > > > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > > > > Elite (C8.2)." > > > > > > > The SSR states "and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is Elite > > > (C8.2)." > > > > > > Rule C8.2 states: > > > > > > "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite > > > for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical > > > formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." > > > > > > Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all > > > purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion > > > numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German > > > force as Elite. > > > > > > The wording is open to interpretation and asking Perry or the scenario > > > designer is the only way to know for sure ... but since there was no > > > requirement to state that the German force is Elite for the purposes of > > > C8.2 since it is already SS - I would tend to interpret this to mean > > > that the German Force is supposed to be considered Elite. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > > > > my logic: > > > > > > > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > > > > core system applies. > > > > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > > > > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale > > > > despite not being elite. > > > > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > > > > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > > > > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > > > > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > > > > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > > > > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be > > > > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > > > > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > > > > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by > > > > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > > > > Class for the purposes of HoB. > > > > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which > > > > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > > > > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > > > > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > > > > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > > > > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into > > > > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > > > > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by > > > > the scenario. > > > > > > > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and > > > > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > > > > 447's. > > > > > > > > So whaddya think? > > > > > > > > Stewart > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 > > > > PM > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > aslml mailing list > > > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > David Elder University of Toronto > > > david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Institute for Aerospace Studies > > > Tel: 416-667-7891 or 905-839-8180 Fusion Research Group > > > Fax: 416-667-7799 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aslml mailing list > > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > > > > > -- > > Chuck T > > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Thu May 24 13:18:01 2007 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (=?iso-8859-1?q?Klas=20Malmstr=F6m?=) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 22:18:01 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <477789.53137.qm@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <729419.50147.qm@web27911.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi, --- Jazz skrev: > If this is the same discussion that was on the Forums last month...and > judging by the question and > the person asking it it seems to be.....it had to do with HOB DRMs. > > The battle-harden sequence is a new wrinkle that I do not recall from the > previous discussion. They also have DCs in the scenario, so the usage of those by non-SMC are also affected. Regards, Klas Malmstrom ------------------------------------------------------- Klas Malmstrom Linkoping, Sweden Email: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se ------------------------------------------------------- L?t v?rk?nslorna spira! Hitta din tvillingsj?l p? Yahoo! Dejting: http://se.meetic.yahoo.net From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Thu May 24 14:09:49 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 16:09:49 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? References: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> <332a4d030705241007u7b095f40na2ced178f1b498ff@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: i dont belive the SSR's have to much to do with balance as is does historical acuracy. If you've played this game even a little you realize most of the scenarios are not exactly balanced - (italians) hehe AV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck T" To: "David Elder" Cc: "Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net" ; "Stewart King" Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 12:07 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? >I am curious how this point is affecting the play of the scenario? > I'd be interested to know how this fine point affects balance in this > case. > > -Chuck > > On 5/24/07, David Elder wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Here is my 2 cents: >> > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to >> > have >> > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side >> > Morale >> > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force >> > is >> > Elite (C8.2)." >> > >> The SSR states "and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is Elite >> (C8.2)." >> >> Rule C8.2 states: >> >> "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite >> for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical >> formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." >> >> Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all >> purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion >> numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German >> force as Elite. >> >> The wording is open to interpretation and asking Perry or the scenario >> designer is the only way to know for sure ... but since there was no >> requirement to state that the German force is Elite for the purposes of >> C8.2 since it is already SS - I would tend to interpret this to mean >> that the German Force is supposed to be considered Elite. >> >> Cheers, >> >> David >> >> >> > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. >> > Here's >> > my logic: >> > >> > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only >> > the >> > core system applies. >> > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of >> > elite >> > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined >> > morale >> > despite not being elite. >> > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section >> > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In >> > addition, >> > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined >> > as >> > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't >> > have >> > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. >> > Since >> > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they >> > would be >> > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side >> > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). >> > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined >> > morale by >> > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite >> > Class for the purposes of HoB. >> > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, >> > which >> > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the >> > last >> > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite >> > force >> > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my >> > contention >> > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of >> > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent >> > into >> > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could >> > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle >> > represented by >> > the scenario. >> > >> > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite >> > and >> > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than >> > fanatic >> > 447's. >> > >> > So whaddya think? >> > >> > Stewart >> > No virus found in this outgoing message. >> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 >> > 3:59 >> > PM >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > aslml mailing list >> > aslml at lists.aslml.net >> > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > >> >> >> -- >> David Elder University of Toronto >> david at starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Institute for Aerospace Studies >> Tel: 416-667-7891 or 905-839-8180 Fusion Research Group >> Fax: 416-667-7799 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net >> > > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From netwalker at internode.on.net Thu May 24 14:24:29 2007 From: netwalker at internode.on.net (Paul) Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 07:24:29 +1000 Subject: [Aslml] Message Format In-Reply-To: <000001c79ddb$3044ea90$90cebfb0$@on.net> References: <001201c79d82$1c14c120$661ea8c0@Duke> <000001c79ddb$3044ea90$90cebfb0$@on.net> Message-ID: <000001c79e49$ea6b72e0$bf4258a0$@on.net> Opps, Sorry for the caps lock error :) Paul... -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2007 6:12 PM To: 'Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net' Subject: [Aslml] Message Format Hi, Why am I getting ALL THE MESSAGES INDIVIDUALLY AN DNOT IN ONE BIG EMAIL FOR THE DAY? Paul... -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Charles Duke Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2007 7:34 AM To: Stewart King; Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? This is a hard one. Your arguments are good, but I can imagine arguments to the contrary equally good. Calls for an arbitrary decision by those who make the rules, I think. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart King" To: "Aslml at Lists. Aslml. Net" Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:27 PM Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? > Dear listers, > > I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. > Hopefully this time it will work... > > An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The > question > is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? > This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I thought > I'd see what this list thought of the question. > > The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to > have > Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side > Morale > Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is > Elite (C8.2)." > > I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's > my logic: > > 1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the > core system applies. > 2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite > squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined > morale > despite not being elite. > 3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section > defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, > 468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as > elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have > underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since > A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would > be > first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side > morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). > 4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale > by > ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite > Class for the purposes of HoB. > 5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, > which > refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last > sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force > (for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention > that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of > poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent > into > action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could > spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented > by > the scenario. > > A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite > and > so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic > 447's. > > So whaddya think? > > Stewart > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 > 3:59 > PM > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/815 - Release Date: 22/05/2007 > 03:49 p.m. > > _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From swfancher at mindspring.com Thu May 24 15:27:54 2007 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 18:27:54 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070524181359.044c27a0@mindspring.com> Well...while I take your point, I think you have misquoted A25.11 in a minor, but significant way. A25.11 says "SS squads/HS (6-5-8/3-4-8)are elite Class troops." So it does not say (as you have below) that 658 and 348 are elite. It says that all SS squads/HS are elite, and the parenthetical reference to 658/348 is just that, a parenthetical reference which I would infer to be an example rather than an explicit limitation on that rule. The SSR says that the 447/237 are considered SS for all purposes. Also, in the SSR it lists four attributes of SS troops...what is left from A25.11 are attributes when facing Russians, and the fact that (if elite) they will become Fanatic. In looking at A15.3, it says that an already elite MMC that BHs "also" becomes Fanatic. So they will improve to a Fanatic 467 (I think, since it is the next MMC type up that improves the least), or _perhaps_ a 658, but this implies that only 658/348 are SS, which is clearly not true (since you are playing with 447 SS MMC). My 2 cents. Be well. Seth At 05:27 PM 5/23/2007, Stewart King wrote: >Dear listers, > >I've sent this message a number of times but haven't gotten through. >Hopefully this time it will work... > >An issue came up in a recent playing of AP3 A Breezeless Day. The question >is, are the 447's in that scenario Elite for HoB and DC usage purposes? >This was fought out on the Gamesquad forums, inconclusively, and I thought >I'd see what this list thought of the question. > >The applicable SSR states: "All German 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are considered to have >Assault Fire capability, an underlined Morale, have their broken side Morale >Level increased by one, and to be SS for all purposes. The German Force is >Elite (C8.2)." > >I'm arguing they are not elite squads in the meaning of the rules. Here's >my logic: > >1. We're not playing A Bridge Too Far, so ABTF rules don't apply, only the >core system applies. >2. Having underlined morale doesn't make a squad/hs elite. Plenty of elite >squads don't have underlined morale. Partisan squads have underlined morale >despite not being elite. >3. Being SS doesn't make a squad/hs elite. In A25.11 (the rules section >defining the SS), 658/348 units are defined as elite Class. In addition, >468/248's that represent SS squads in early war scenarios are defined as >elite (and are so marked on their counters), but note that they don't have >underlined morale (unless so designated by ssr) and could elr sub. Since >A25.11 doesn't say differently, if they elr subbed (to a 467), they would be >first line (though presumably still having an increased broken-side >morale -- this is unclear but follows logically from the rule). >4. There are other scenarios in which 658's don't have underlined morale by >ssr and if they elr sub (to 447's) those 447's are explicitly not elite >Class for the purposes of HoB. >5. The SSR provision that makes the Force elite explicitly cites C8.2, which >refers to the ammo depletion numbers. In C8.2, it is clear (from the last >sentence "...majority squad type...") that some portion of an Elite force >(for the purposes of C8.2) could be non-elite squads. It's my contention >that the scenario designers intended to simulate a force composed of >poor-quality troops dragged out of rear-area assignments who were sent into >action along with SS tanks equipped with all the toys the Germans could >spare. This is in fact the historical situation in the battle represented by >the scenario. > >A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and >so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic >447's. > >So whaddya think? > >Stewart >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 5/23/07 3:59 >PM > > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu May 24 16:05:43 2007 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 19:05:43 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite and >so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic >447's. > If they are SS for all purposes, then they are Elite as per A25.11. If they Battle Harden, they would be Fanatic 4-4-7. Pretend like the "2" is not printed on the counter, and that it is instead replaced by a SS insignia. That will help remind you that they are SS "for all purposes". >So whaddya think? > I think your reasoning is inaccurate and flawed. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ PC Magazine?s 2007 editors? choice for best Web mail?award-winning Windows Live Hotmail. http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507 From arlenvanek at hotmail.com Thu May 24 16:22:39 2007 From: arlenvanek at hotmail.com (Arlen Vanek) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 18:22:39 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? References: Message-ID: A15.3 clearly states that an already elite mmc which is battle hardened becomes fanatic - that would make sense especially in this scenario because these particular ss troops are late in the war and do not have the fire power capabilities of earlier ss units - remember this is jan 45 there is no way a 447 can jump to a 658 in asl that is a clear violation of the integrity of the game ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Bakken" To: Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? > > >>A subordinate question. I would maintain that these 447's are not elite >>and >>so if they battle-harden they should turn into 658's rather than fanatic >>447's. >> > > If they are SS for all purposes, then they are Elite as per A25.11. > > If they Battle Harden, they would be Fanatic 4-4-7. > > Pretend like the "2" is not printed on the counter, and that it is instead > replaced by a SS insignia. That will help remind you that they are SS > "for > all purposes". > > >>So whaddya think? >> > > I think your reasoning is inaccurate and flawed. > > Regards, > Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ > PC Magazine's 2007 editors' choice for best Web mail-award-winning Windows > Live Hotmail. > http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From reamees at earthlink.net Sun May 27 10:24:13 2007 From: reamees at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 13:24:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [Aslml] Stockholm ASL Tournament Message-ID: <15721702.1180286653312.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Any word on who won this recent tournament? Got to know who might be the most deadly Scandanavian at ASLOK in 2007. Just don't report it was Antonius Block from "Det Sjunde Inseglet" although it wouldn't surprise me if Melvin Falk made a deal with the devil. Probably got the devil drunk and got the better deal. :) "Zadra" From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Sun May 27 10:25:52 2007 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Klas_Malmstr=F6m?=) Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 19:25:52 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Stockholm ASL Tournament In-Reply-To: <15721702.1180286653312.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <15721702.1180286653312.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4659BF20.5080503@yahoo.se> Hi, Raymond Woloszyn wrote: > Any word on who won this recent tournament? Got to know who might be the most deadly Scandanavian at ASLOK in 2007. Just don't report it was Antonius Block from "Det Sjunde Inseglet" although it wouldn't surprise me if Melvin Falk made a deal with the devil. Probably got the devil drunk and got the better deal. :) > Patrik Manlig (5-0). Regards, Klas Malmstrom From asl at thuring.com Sun May 27 10:33:11 2007 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 19:33:11 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Stockholm ASL Tournament In-Reply-To: <4659BF20.5080503@yahoo.se> References: <15721702.1180286653312.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <4659BF20.5080503@yahoo.se> Message-ID: <4659C0D7.5060406@thuring.com> Klas Malmstr?m wrote: > Hi, > > Raymond Woloszyn wrote: > >> Any word on who won this recent tournament? Got to know who might be the most deadly Scandanavian at ASLOK in 2007. Just don't report it was Antonius Block from "Det Sjunde Inseglet" although it wouldn't surprise me if Melvin Falk made a deal with the devil. Probably got the devil drunk and got the better deal. :) >> Ok, didn't see this answer before. /Lars > > Patrik Manlig (5-0). > > Regards, > Klas Malmstrom > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- "2b|!2b?" (Hamlet) ASL - http://www.thuring.com/asl Quotes - http://www.thuring.com/life/quotes.html From derek.tocher at btinternet.com Mon May 28 09:41:35 2007 From: derek.tocher at btinternet.com (Derek Tocher) Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 17:41:35 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] UK Ladder update Message-ID: <20070528170820.C0B9148004@diego.dreamhost.com> Guys, Just to let you know the Crusaders UK ASL Ladder has been updated with the results from DOUBLE ONE tournament in London earlier this month. The full ladder is at :- http://www.btinternet.com/~derek.tocher/Fullladder.htm and the active players ladder at :- http://www.btinternet.com/~derek.tocher/alternativeladder.htm Cheers From bearlyonthehill at optonline.net Tue May 29 18:39:34 2007 From: bearlyonthehill at optonline.net (bearlyonthehill at optonline.net) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 01:39:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] VASL Message-ID: Listers - I need your help. I tried to download the latest version of VASL and received this message; -VASL version 5.6 - Unable to load extension C:\Program File\VASSAL\VASL\boards: Unable to load extension C:\Program File\VASSAL\VASL\boards (Access is denied) - Unable to load extension C:\Program File\VASSAL\VASL\Scenarios: Unable to load extension C:\Program File\VASSAL\VASL\Scenarios (Access is denied) - Unable to load extension C:\Program File\VASSAL\VASL\UserGuide: Unable to load extension C:\Program File\VASSAL\VASL\UserGuide (Access is denied) - Extension VASL 4 v5.3 loaded Did I do something wrong? The extentions listed are correct in my program files, not sure why this message came about. Your help is very much appreciated. Regards; Gus From payne-asl2 at nc.rr.com Tue May 29 19:03:45 2007 From: payne-asl2 at nc.rr.com (Chuck Payne) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 02:03:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Aslml] Vehicles and Shellholes Message-ID: Hi Guys, Do vehicles get the +1 TEM from shellholes? I think they do, but it seems a little counter-intuitive that an AFV gets to hide in the shellhole. Also, on MOL-P's the rules say an AFV is affected exactly as if hit by a MOL. However, the only possible modifiers to its TK roll OT, rear and for CH. The +2 for motion/moving then would not apply, as the MOL-P has already paid that +2 on the TH DR. Thanks, Chuck From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Tue May 29 19:10:17 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:10:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Vehicles and Shellholes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <375593.18867.qm@web34509.mail.mud.yahoo.com> "B2.3 The conditional TEM of a shellhole is +1. It applies only to Infantry who are not Manhandling a Gun/Boat and is not cumulative with any other possible TEM." Applies only to infantry I'm thinkin? --- Chuck Payne wrote: > Hi Guys, > > Do vehicles get the +1 TEM from shellholes? I think they do, but it > seems a little counter-intuitive that an AFV gets to hide in the shellhole. > > Also, on MOL-P's the rules say an AFV is affected exactly as if hit by a > MOL. However, the only possible modifiers to its TK roll OT, rear and for > CH. The +2 for motion/moving then would not apply, as the MOL-P has already > paid that +2 on the TH DR. > > Thanks, > > Chuck > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From hofors at lysator.liu.se Wed May 30 08:02:22 2007 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 30 May 2007 17:02:22 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <4655C9E9.2090100@yahoo.se> References: <4655C546.60507@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca> <4655C9E9.2090100@yahoo.se> Message-ID: <87veea4ao1.fsf@isengard.friendlyfire.se> Klas Malmstr?m writes: > Hi, > > David Elder skrev: > > > > Rule C8.2 states: > > > > "8.2 ELITE: ... An armed-vehicle/weapon in a printed scenario is Elite > > for this purpose if so specified by an SSR or if the historical > > formation to which it belongs is either SS or Russian Guards. .." > > > > Since the SSR already says that the force is considered SS for all > > purposes - it is therefore already eligible for increased depletion > > numbers from C8.2 - it is thus redundant to also specify the German > > force as Elite. > > The SSR only specifies that the 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are SS - it says > nothing about the vehicles. Although the OoB says "SS-Panzerj?ger > Abteilung 653" indicating that some vehicle are probably indeed > SS. But it also says "and Flammkompanie 353" and whether this > formation is SS or not isn't clear or which of the vehicles in the > OoB belong to it, so the mention of C8.2 in SSR 4 is not 100 % > redundant, IMHO. > Are you sure it says "SS Panzerj?ger-Abteilung 653"? That battalion is an army outfit (ie not SS). Regards, Mattias From klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se Wed May 30 08:23:28 2007 From: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se (=?iso-8859-1?q?Klas=20Malmstr=F6m?=) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 17:23:28 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Aslml] Are SS 447's Elite? In-Reply-To: <87veea4ao1.fsf@isengard.friendlyfire.se> Message-ID: <955465.52222.qm@web27906.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> --- Mattias R?nnblom skrev: > Klas Malmstr?m writes: > > > The SSR only specifies that the 4-4-7s/2-3-7s are SS - it says > > nothing about the vehicles. Although the OoB says "SS-Panzerj?ger > > Abteilung 653" indicating that some vehicle are probably indeed > > SS. But it also says "and Flammkompanie 353" and whether this > > formation is SS or not isn't clear or which of the vehicles in the > > OoB belong to it, so the mention of C8.2 in SSR 4 is not 100 % > > redundant, IMHO. > > > > Are you sure it says "SS Panzerj?ger-Abteilung 653"? That battalion is > an army outfit (ie not SS). >From AP3 (downloaded from MMP), designation of the German OoB: "Elements of SS-Panzergrenadier Regiment 37, SS-Panzerj?ger Abteilung 653, and Flammkompanie 353" Regards, Klas ------------------------------------------------------- Klas Malmstrom Linkoping, Sweden Email: klas_malmstrom at yahoo.se ------------------------------------------------------- __________________________________________________________ G?r det l?ngsamt? Skaffa dig en snabbare bredbandsuppkoppling. S?k och j?mf?r hos Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.se/b/a/c_100015813_bredband.html?partnerId=96914325 From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Wed May 30 09:26:09 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:26:09 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] CH and rs question Message-ID: <332a4d030705300926y34cf106br43b26526f0154cf8@mail.gmail.com> Did I play this correctly: - German 50mm mtr fires at a stack of ???? (4) counters under a foxhole - ATT at range 12 TH7 +2 Case K - TH DR = 1,1 - effects DR = 1,6 (some units will take 8-1 on IFT and some will take 2+1 dependent on rs) - rs drs = 4,2,4 - top unit = 8-0 ldr middle = mmg and bottom = 747 squad - both ldr and squad get hit with 1mc (6 on the 8 column) Correct? -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From jbarber at meic.org Wed May 30 09:49:58 2007 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 10:49:58 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Vehicles and Shellholes In-Reply-To: <375593.18867.qm@web34509.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 5/29/07 8:10 PM, "Jazz" wrote: > "B2.3 The conditional TEM of a shellhole is +1. It applies only to Infantry > who are not > Manhandling a Gun/Boat and is not cumulative with any other possible TEM." > > Applies only to infantry I'm thinkin? That's what you get for thinkin. What if the infantry is pushing the vehicle? It doesn't say the TEM doesn't apply then. I think the vehicle would get the +1 if it was being pushed. What if the shellholes are full of water ala Flanders 1917 and the infantry is IN the boat, not manhandling it? Again, the +1 would apply. I think there's lots of wiggle room in this rule that needs further exploration. Jeff "that's what we need, rules for pushing vehicles" Barber From garciagd at velocity.net Wed May 30 10:04:02 2007 From: garciagd at velocity.net (roger whelan) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 13:04:02 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] CH and rs question References: <332a4d030705300926y34cf106br43b26526f0154cf8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001301c7a2dc$861e0e50$3903010a@gecac.org> > - both ldr and squad get hit with 1mc (6 on the 8 column) > > Correct? Looks right to me From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Wed May 30 10:10:51 2007 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 10:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] CH and rs question In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705300926y34cf106br43b26526f0154cf8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <386945.41286.qm@web34507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Yes "A.9 RANDOM SELECTION: ............ If a SW is picked to be revealed, reveal its possessor instead. If the SW is unpossessed, use the next lower dr of the Random Selection DR." At the very bottom of the A.9 section. Jazz --- Chuck T wrote: > Did I play this correctly: > > - German 50mm mtr fires at a stack of ???? (4) counters under a foxhole > > - ATT at range 12 TH7 +2 Case K > > - TH DR = 1,1 > > - effects DR = 1,6 (some units will take 8-1 on IFT and some will > take 2+1 dependent on rs) > > - rs drs = 4,2,4 > > - top unit = 8-0 ldr middle = mmg and bottom = 747 squad > > - both ldr and squad get hit with 1mc (6 on the 8 column) > > Correct? > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com Wed May 30 10:54:48 2007 From: chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com (Chuck T) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 13:54:48 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] CH and rs question In-Reply-To: References: <332a4d030705300926y34cf106br43b26526f0154cf8@mail.gmail.com> <386945.41286.qm@web34507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <332a4d030705301054wd517b97w3800a3bb4e711f96@mail.gmail.com> eh good point although the outcome after MC DRs is the same :) -Chuck On 5/30/07, Sam Tyson wrote: > Why 8 fp -1 and not 8fp -2 (inverted FH TEM for CH)? > > Sam > > > > > On 5/30/07, Jazz wrote: > > Yes > > > > "A.9 RANDOM SELECTION: ............ If a SW is picked to be revealed, > reveal its possessor > > instead. If the SW is unpossessed, use the next lower dr of the Random > Selection DR." > > > > At the very bottom of the A.9 section. > > > > Jazz > > > > > > --- Chuck T < chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Did I play this correctly: > > > > > > - German 50mm mtr fires at a stack of ???? (4) counters under a foxhole > > > > > > - ATT at range 12 TH7 +2 Case K > > > > > > - TH DR = 1,1 > > > > > > - effects DR = 1,6 (some units will take 8-1 on IFT and some will > > > take 2+1 dependent on rs) > > > > > > - rs drs = 4,2,4 > > > > > > - top unit = 8-0 ldr middle = mmg and bottom = 747 squad > > > > > > - both ldr and squad get hit with 1mc (6 on the 8 column) > > > > > > Correct? > > > > > > -- > > > Chuck T > > > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aslml mailing list > > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > > -- Chuck T chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com From aslbunker at yahoo.com Wed May 30 16:51:22 2007 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 16:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker May Update Message-ID: <535946.56941.qm@web32603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Greetings from the Bunker and hello to all at the Main ASL Mailing List. I just wanted to get our latest update out there with what is going on with our own Amateur ASL Newsletter, Dispatches from the Bunker. We are now busy at work on Issue #25,getting into the playtest on the 3 scenarios that will be included. Jim Torkelson will have another insightful article and Carl Nogueira will have more Terrain mayhem in the continuing Fire portion of his Making a Mess Tactical Tips Series. The Scenarios we have lined up are: Acorns in the Fire: Andy Clarke brings us an ETO combined arms action from New Years Day '45 with a company of GIs supported by 4 Shermans trying to clear a German defense, aided by a couple PzIVJ panzers, from the Board 19 crossroads. The US needs to make maximum use of its SMOKE and Firepower advantage to clean up this pocket of die hard defenders. Looks like this could be on many tourney lists down the line. Housing Crash: Ralph McDonald brings us more Eastern Front nastiness as a company of Ubermen SS 8-3-8 Assault Engineers crashes into a reinforced company of Russian Riflemen on Deluxe Boards b & d. Taking buildings on the other side of the SSR Anti-tank Ditch is the German Mission and the Russian defenders are in no mood to give them up. Tournament sized DASL fun. Send Us More... The Title maybe changing but this intense Tom Morin action has been exhumed from his filing cabinet and put into the playtest grinder. We were going to submit it to the venerable On All Fronts almost 15 years ago. It is the Japanese Night Assault on Wake Island 12 days after the initial attempt to take the Island was a complete disaster. This time they are assaulting the beach at night in this PTO mini-monster with 2 companies worth of 4-4-8s attacking a very mixed USA defense which has Marines, ad-hoc Naval personnel and even civilians manning the plethora of machine guns and ordnance available. It starts at night and sees twilight and eventually day as the fight proceeds inland over 10 very hard fought turns. The current Issue, #24, was released at the Nor'Easter Tournament last month. It of course has the usual 3 scenarios, with one PTO mini-monster, a very cool Eastern Front situation from Day 1 of Operation Barbarossa and yet another Tournament Classic in the making from Steve Johns: The Bloody Torokina Perimeter: A nasty Japanese attack on the fixed positions of the 37th Infantry Division on Bougainville with plenty of toys and fire power on both sides, with the Japanese looking to capture or destroy USA pillboxes/bunkers and/or exit through the American defense. Vossenack Church: Another good looking Steve John's tourney style offering with a German infantry company trying to take the church in the scenario title. Both sides (Ger. vs USA) are spilt into platoon sized groups as several smaller battles lead into the main action at the church. Lots of standard 1944 ETO ASL FUN with the chrome coming from the SSR defining the Church. Grind Them to Dust: The first in our new Eastern front series following the 6th Panzer Division in the Barbarossa offensive by new contributor Robert Hammond. Elements of the 6th have to hack there way through Boards 34 and 36 and have several Russian blocking positions trying to prevent their exit. Robert has obviously done his homework with this series and after a few tweaks this one looks like a fine addition to our scenario series. We also have a nice analysis article by Jim Torkelson on 2 scenarios released in last years ASL Journal: Lenin's Sons and Marders, Not Martyrs. Carl Nogueira will continue his Making a Mess series with more on Fire. I'll have a review of the 2006 Bunker Bash and the New York State ASL Championship along with a preview of the Nor'Easter Tourney. For those unfamiliar with Dispatches, it is a 12 page Amateur ASL Newsletter that comes to the greater ASL Community twice a year, sometime in March and September courtesy of the New England ASL Community, including the Bunker Crew and our yasl Brothers in Southern New England. It typically contains 3 New Scenarios, Analysis of each one, a Main Article on any aspect of the game system, Tactical Tips, ASL News and Tournament Updates from our region. You may now view samples of our work at the ASL Webdex at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/ The specific page is at: http://www.aslwebdex.net/aslwebdex/Publishers/Bunker/bunker.html Thanks to Larry Memmott for giving us space there, you can view pdf. files of Issues #01 & #09 there, including the always popular Mighty Maus scenario. IF this sounds like an optimal placement of your Hero's DC on that King Tiger about to overrun your HQ, Subscriptions and ALL Back-Issues are still available and here is how to get yours (all prices include S & H and PayPal Fees. Also Please make all checks/money orders out to Vic Provost, NOT Dispatches from the Bunker): 4 Issue Subscription (Starting with current Issue #24): In the USA: $15.00 (Check/Money Order/Cash or PayPal) Outside the States: $18.00 (International Postal Money Order,USA Currency or PayPal only. Sorry, NO Credit Cards, Personal Checks not drawn on a USA Bank, NO Western Union, this is an Old School Amateur Effort and our Hobby, not a Full Time 'Business' :-) If using PayPal please send your remittance in USA Funds via PayPal to: PinkFloydFan1954 at aol.com If using PayPal please also notify me here at aslbunker at aol.com with your shipping address and just what you are ordering, Thanks. Back-Issues and Bundles Back-Issues: Issue #01 is our FREE Preview Issue available with any New Subscription or upon request with a #10 SASE. All other Back-Issues (#02 - #23) are $4.00 Each in the USA or $4.50 Each outside the States. All 24 Issues in print (No subscription): $55.00 in the USA, $60.00 outside the states. The Works: All 24 Issues plus a 4 Issue Subscription, starting with current Issue #24 (27 Issues in total) $65.00 in the USA, $70.00 outside the states Make your remittance out to Vic Provost and send to: Vic Provost Dispatches from the Bunker P.O. Box 2024 Hinsdale MA 01235 USA Any other questions just reply to my e-mail at: aslbunker at aol.com and I'll do my best to answer your query. Thanks again to all my Contributors, Playtesters, and Subscribers, without whom the Newsletter would not be possible. Thanks for your time and consideration, your ASL Comrade, Vic Provost. 'SSR: All Occupants of the Bunker Location are considered Fanatic [A10.8]' ____________________________________________________________________________________ No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Thu May 31 05:30:12 2007 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 05:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Aslml] CH and rs question In-Reply-To: <332a4d030705300926y34cf106br43b26526f0154cf8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <967881.97081.qm@web60920.mail.yahoo.com> TEM of a foxhole for direct/indirect fire is +2, so a critical hit against those units would be a -2, not -1. Kevin --- Chuck T wrote: > Did I play this correctly: > > - German 50mm mtr fires at a stack of ???? (4) > counters under a foxhole > > - ATT at range 12 TH7 +2 Case K > > - TH DR = 1,1 > > - effects DR = 1,6 (some units will take 8-1 on IFT > and some will > take 2+1 dependent on rs) > > - rs drs = 4,2,4 > > - top unit = 8-0 ldr middle = mmg and bottom = 747 > squad > > - both ldr and squad get hit with 1mc (6 on the 8 > column) > > Correct? > > -- > Chuck T > chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email > webmaster at aslml.net > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 From garciagd at velocity.net Thu May 31 05:39:28 2007 From: garciagd at velocity.net (roger whelan) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 08:39:28 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] CH and rs question References: <967881.97081.qm@web60920.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006a01c7a380$bad2d870$3903010a@gecac.org> Good catch I did not see the FH part of the question ----- Original Message ----- From: "kevin meyer" To: Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 8:30 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] CH and rs question > TEM of a foxhole for direct/indirect fire is +2, so a > critical hit against those units would be a -2, > not -1. > > Kevin > > --- Chuck T wrote: > >> Did I play this correctly: >> >> - German 50mm mtr fires at a stack of ???? (4) >> counters under a foxhole >> >> - ATT at range 12 TH7 +2 Case K >> >> - TH DR = 1,1 >> >> - effects DR = 1,6 (some units will take 8-1 on IFT >> and some will >> take 2+1 dependent on rs) >> >> - rs drs = 4,2,4 >> >> - top unit = 8-0 ldr middle = mmg and bottom = 747 >> squad >> >> - both ldr and squad get hit with 1mc (6 on the 8 >> column) >> >> Correct? >> >> -- >> Chuck T >> chuck.tewksbury at gmail.com >> _______________________________________________ >> aslml mailing list >> aslml at lists.aslml.net >> http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >> To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email >> webmaster at aslml.net >> > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user > panel and lay it on us. > http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > >