From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 1 01:04:44 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 20:04:44 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] AoO Printing Quality In-Reply-To: <764636a60602282145s696bd57dx71e3a61077ab83e4@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60602282145s696bd57dx71e3a61077ab83e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 22:45:59 -0700, "Darren Gour" wrote: >Whatever it is the printing is incredibly crisp. Yes, with a saucy little red wine they're rather nibbly; hard to stop at just one. Is it immoral to stick your head inside the AoO box and just sniff for hours on end? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From gr27134 at charter.net Wed Mar 1 06:14:26 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 6:14:26 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> ---- Darren Gour wrote: > Well, I just got my AoO today -- shocked that the Platoon > Movement/changing the the game bru-haha hasn't been rekindled. No need...it is real simple. Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least very few) will use them: 1) Scenarios where it isn't required they won't be used since there is no real advantage any longer. 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless AFV) will be avoided. Historically (i.e., Human Wave changes) that is how most ASL players have handled this type change...that is, changing a rule that works just fine to assuage a vocal minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing playability. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From tompygo at comcast.net Wed Mar 1 07:21:18 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 09:21:18 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> Message-ID: <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> That's funny. I've been avoiding any scenario with radioless AFV until now because of the way the rules worked. In fact I even avoided scenarios where there was an obvious abuse of the rule. For example in Silesian Interlude the Russian can park both AFV on the hill. Don't even both with Hull down rolls during setup. They can just disappear off the hill out of LOS and reposition themselves after taking out a Panther or 2. Boy, that's fun! So, anyway, thank you MMP for the new rules. They aren't even that different from the old rules. If anyone is confused just apply this simple patch (Bruce will probably flay me alive for suggesting such a thing). Simple new Platoon movement rules. Start MP and Stop MP are now separate impulses during movement. Re: Human Wave. Oh yeah, it was a lot more playable when neither side agreed on what "same general direction" meant. That was also a lot of fun. Later, Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tate Rogers" To: "Darren Gour" Cc: "ASL List" Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 8:14 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > ---- Darren Gour wrote: > > Well, I just got my AoO today -- shocked that the Platoon > > Movement/changing the the game bru-haha hasn't been rekindled. > > No need...it is real simple. > > Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least very few) will use them: > 1) Scenarios where it isn't required they won't be used since there is no real advantage any longer. > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless AFV) will be avoided. > > Historically (i.e., Human Wave changes) that is how most ASL players have handled this type change...that is, changing a rule that works just fine to assuage a vocal minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing playability. > -- > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > _______________________________________________ > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 1 07:31:12 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:31:12 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060301092918.01c53920@direcway.com> At 09:21 AM 3/1/2006, Jeff Thompson wrote: >For example in Silesian Interlude the Russian can park both AFV on the hill. >Don't even both with Hull down rolls during setup. They can just disappear >off the hill out of LOS and reposition themselves after taking out a Panther >or 2. Boy, that's fun! And the problem with this is? Sorta like what was done..shoot and scoot.... but then it wasn't your version of reality. And as for your house rule...could have done that with the old rules....sigh..never get it.. :( ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From tompygo at comcast.net Wed Mar 1 07:50:06 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 09:50:06 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301092918.01c53920@direcway.com> Message-ID: <004701c63d47$cfeee4b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Consistency. So, the old rules allowed this with 2 or more AFV, but if there was only a single AFV they couldn't? It has nothing to do with reality. It's about consistency. If the rules came back and said, "No Shots may be taken at ANY vehicle until it enters a new hex." Well, then that's consistent too and I'd welcome such a rule. Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Jeff Thompson" ; "ASL List" Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > At 09:21 AM 3/1/2006, Jeff Thompson wrote: > >For example in Silesian Interlude the Russian can park both AFV on the hill. > >Don't even both with Hull down rolls during setup. They can just disappear > >off the hill out of LOS and reposition themselves after taking out a Panther > >or 2. Boy, that's fun! > > And the problem with this is? > > Sorta like what was done..shoot and scoot.... but then it wasn't your > version of reality. > > And as for your house rule...could have done that with the old > rules....sigh..never get it.. :( > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 1 07:57:21 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:57:21 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <004701c63d47$cfeee4b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301092918.01c53920@direcway.com> <004701c63d47$cfeee4b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060301095658.01c4ce70@direcway.com> At 09:50 AM 3/1/2006, Jeff Thompson wrote: >It has nothing to do with reality. It's about consistency. > >.... >Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Chuckle...you got that right at least!!! :) ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Wed Mar 1 08:18:09 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:18:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] consistency... and Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060301095658.01c4ce70@direcway.com> References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301092918.01c53920@direcway.com> <004701c63d47$cfeee4b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301095658.01c4ce70@direcway.com> Message-ID: <23065.65.222.202.26.1141229889.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Actually, no; the proper quotation (from Ralph Waldo Emerson) is "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." In other words, keeping things the same (like rules :-) just so as to have them same, to be afraid to say "Oops! Made a mistake! Better fix it," is to be small and weak. To admit that one can be wrong and able to change is the mark of a great mind. In context: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.--"Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood."--Is it so bad then to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood." http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/14.htm ron mosher said: > At 09:50 AM 3/1/2006, Jeff Thompson wrote: >>It has nothing to do with reality. It's about consistency. >> >>.... >>Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. > > Chuckle...you got that right at least!!! :) > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From Towheadedmule at cox.net Wed Mar 1 08:26:28 2006 From: Towheadedmule at cox.net (Russell Martin) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 10:26:28 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] consistency... and Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <23065.65.222.202.26.1141229889.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <000801c63d4c$e4d63450$6af10d44@YOUR47375C5FC1> In context: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines [EXC: God and/or Kali]. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do [see GEN 1.1]. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall [Plato: dialogue one]. Speak what you think now in hard words and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.--"Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood."--Is it so bad then to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood." [Read John Hill, Robert Medrow, Bob McNamara, etc, and the ASLRB] http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/14.htm From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Mar 1 09:37:03 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 17:37:03 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <030120061737.2895.4405DBBF000A6B0000000B4F22092299270E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Ahhh, don't worry about it Jeff, most of us see it the same way. Tate is just peeved that he wasn't consulted personally by MMP on how to change the rules. And especially that others were. Dave Reenstra -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Jeff Thompson" > That's funny. > > I've been avoiding any scenario with radioless AFV until now because of the > way the rules worked. In fact I even avoided scenarios where there was an > obvious abuse of the rule. > > For example in Silesian Interlude the Russian can park both AFV on the hill. > Don't even both with Hull down rolls during setup. They can just disappear > off the hill out of LOS and reposition themselves after taking out a Panther > or 2. Boy, that's fun! > > So, anyway, thank you MMP for the new rules. They aren't even that > different from the old rules. If anyone is confused just apply this simple > patch (Bruce will probably flay me alive for suggesting such a thing). > > Simple new Platoon movement rules. > > Start MP and Stop MP are now separate impulses during movement. > > Re: Human Wave. Oh yeah, it was a lot more playable when neither side > agreed on what "same general direction" meant. That was also a lot of fun. > > Later, > Jeff > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tate Rogers" > To: "Darren Gour" > Cc: "ASL List" > Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 8:14 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > > > > ---- Darren Gour wrote: > > > Well, I just got my AoO today -- shocked that the Platoon > > > Movement/changing the the game bru-haha hasn't been rekindled. > > > > No need...it is real simple. > > > > Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least very few) > will use them: > > 1) Scenarios where it isn't required they won't be used since there is no > real advantage any longer. > > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless AFV) will be > avoided. > > > > Historically (i.e., Human Wave changes) that is how most ASL players have > handled this type change...that is, changing a rule that works just fine to > assuage a vocal minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing > playability. > > -- > > Later- > > > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 1 11:36:15 2006 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:36:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Partial orchard vertices In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00602281215n40027f59l85d232ce5636fc99@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060301193615.26511.qmail@web52615.mail.yahoo.com> PB Map, LOS from NN16 to TT16. Do any of the partial orchard 'vertices' create a hindrance? Are there any hindrances to this shot? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 1 12:19:30 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 07:19:30 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Concealed with Prisoners? In-Reply-To: <022820061924.11414.4404A37C000ED0C900002C9622007348300E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <022820061924.11414.4404A37C000ED0C900002C9622007348300E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <6evb029gpc8m54i2r10bh0siv05vp65ue6@4ax.com> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:24:45 +0000, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: >I believe a Guard can be concealed, assuming they otherwise meet the criteria for being concealed. Since Prisoner units don't meet the definition of Good Order, they wouldn't be able to gain concealment. Neither do SW, yet they can be concealed when possessed by a unit that gains concealment. There's no problem with prisoners gaining concealment along with their guards. (A12 doesn't say anything *other than* units may gain concealment; there's only the lone statement in A12.11 that unconcealed SW and "non-units" are *not* eligible for concealment to imply anything otherwise.) Remember also to distinguish between "prisoners" (enemy unarmed units that are currently guarded, which are technically "non-units" since they have no movement capability of their own, and are not "Good Order" because they are captured) and "unarmed units" (unarmed units that are *not* currently being guarded, and therefore *are* units and *are* Good Order when not in Melee). Unarmed units are further divided into two types: (i) abandoned ex-prisoners (i.e., they were prisoners, but were voluntarily released by their guards) and (ii) all other unarmed units. This distinction is important because the elimination of abandoned ex-prisoners can invoke the Massacre rule. (The moral is, if you bother to *take* prisoners, don't change your mind and let them go without a very good reason!) >Once the Prisoners pass the NTC for an Escape attempt, the Guard can't do anything (can't even rout during the RtPh), until a Melee exists To clarify, since the Escape attempts occurs in the CCPh, the Melee will exist at the end of that phase, long before the next RtPh comes along. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 1 12:33:58 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 14:33:58 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] consistency... and Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <23065.65.222.202.26.1141229889.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.ne t> References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301092918.01c53920@direcway.com> <004701c63d47$cfeee4b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301095658.01c4ce70@direcway.com> <23065.65.222.202.26.1141229889.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060301143223.01bd0a60@direcway.com> At 10:18 AM 3/1/2006, Jan W. S. Spoor wrote: >Actually, no; the proper quotation (from Ralph Waldo Emerson) is Err..actually, yes....the reason for a lot of the HW/PM/etc. changes per the prime mover was, "consistency"--do try to keep up. :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 1 12:35:16 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 07:35:16 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> References: <10057425.1141222466906.JavaMail.root@fepweb09> <001d01c63d43$f95099b0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: <0n0c02pjbts5ant1dla5pt5o82v4cfi0b3@4ax.com> On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 09:21:18 -0600, "Jeff Thompson" wrote: >So, anyway, thank you MMP for the new rules. They aren't even that >different from the old rules. If anyone is confused just apply this simple >patch (Bruce will probably flay me alive for suggesting such a thing). > >Start MP and Stop MP are now separate impulses during movement. Why would I break out the whip for that? You've got 80% of the new rules correct right there. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would find the new rules "confusing", since they resemble the normal vehicular movement rules (where every discrete MP expenditure can provoke a Defensive First Fire attack) more closely than the old rules did. Of course, some people are ... hesitant ... to admit that they may perhaps have over-reacted a tad, and that their earlier negative reactions were motivated largely by spite and ignorance. Alas, it happens to all religions. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kevinkenneally at isot.com Wed Mar 1 15:28:55 2006 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:28:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] AoO Printing Quality In-Reply-To: References: <764636a60602282145s696bd57dx71e3a61077ab83e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1046.4.252.247.89.1141255735.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> > Is it immoral to stick your head inside the AoO box and just sniff for > hours > on end? Bruce, Is this the reason WHY your local Constable paid you a visit? Old men sniffing new boxes.... What's this world coming to? Kevin"Enjoyed my box in NC.... In a hotel room even" ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From kevinkenneally at isot.com Wed Mar 1 15:31:44 2006 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:31:44 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] From Brian on Consimworld In-Reply-To: <003101c63ce4$24d9c760$7779de18@klis.com> References: <003c01c63cb8$bf034770$6af10d44@YOUR47375C5FC1> <01a401c63cbd$bac695e0$7779de18@klis.com> <1109.4.253.41.49.1141173273.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> <003101c63ce4$24d9c760$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <1050.4.252.247.89.1141255904.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Dave, Do you take "Canadian money" for "investment purposes" into your IRA from "outside sources"? Kevin"Always willing to Brib... Ahem, Invest in an Officials IRA" > Kevin wrote: > >> I posted this to the SZO forums. Thye just HAD to see this posting. > Meh, whatever. No problem. Remind them what they're missing. Glad you > liked it, though. > >> Besides, I NOMINATED this post as a "Spuddy". > 1. Nominating a post for a Spuddy is usually the best way to make sure it > doesn't get one. Except in those cases where I arbitrarily change the > rule. > 2. Ahem. "The judges reward greatness in all posts to the ASLML, except > in > their own > messages or those of their spouses, relatives, or co-dependents!" > > David "let me be the judge of that" Olie > > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Mar 1 16:13:43 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 18:13:43 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <030120061737.2895.4405DBBF000A6B0000000B4F22092299270E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <002201c63d8e$2bbb8dc0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Dave wrote, > Ahhh, don't worry about it Jeff, most of us see it the same way. Tate is > just peeved that he wasn't consulted personally by MMP on how to change > the rules. And especially that others were. > > Dave Reenstra Actually, I didn't mind helping out at all. It is always nice to talk with Perry and the lads. :) =Jim= From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 1 18:32:58 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 20:32:58 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <002201c63d8e$2bbb8dc0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <030120061737.2895.4405DBBF000A6B0000000B4F22092299270E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> <002201c63d8e$2bbb8dc0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060301203130.01c4bd10@direcway.com> At 06:13 PM 3/1/2006, mcleods wrote: >It is always nice to talk with Perry and the lads. RotFLMAO... the day the "lads" or "Perry" listen to you in any fashion is the end of the Game. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Mar 1 20:54:22 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 22:54:22 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <030120061737.2895.4405DBBF000A6B0000000B4F22092299270E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net><002201c63d8e$2bbb8dc0$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060301203130.01c4bd10@direcway.com> Message-ID: <006101c63db5$60d67480$8027c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Ron wrote, > RotFLMAO... the day the "lads" or "Perry" listen to you in any > fashion is the end of the Game. :) =Jim= From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 1 23:44:46 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 18:44:46 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Concealed with Prisoners? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:30:02 -0600, "Ethan Strauss" wrote: >Still seems strange that you could effectively hide >behind a bush while guarding guys out in the open, but I guess it makes >sense in terms of rules. It seems strange because it *is* strange, and I assure you that it makes *no* sense. Fortunately, the rules don't expect you to do anything of the sort. Prisoners, like SW, are concealed whenever their guards are. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 1 23:45:38 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 18:45:38 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Concealed with Prisoners? In-Reply-To: <6evb029gpc8m54i2r10bh0siv05vp65ue6@4ax.com> References: <022820061924.11414.4404A37C000ED0C900002C9622007348300E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> <6evb029gpc8m54i2r10bh0siv05vp65ue6@4ax.com> Message-ID: <7k8d025thpk8r6fk453c4efksp9qt0b2sa@4ax.com> On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 07:19:30 +1100, Bruce Probst wrote: >(A12 doesn't say anything *other than* units may gain concealment; there's >only the lone statement in A12.11 that unconcealed SW and "non-units" are >*not* eligible for concealment to imply anything otherwise.) Errata: replace "unconcealed SW" with "unpossessed SW". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 2 00:46:52 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 09:46:52 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: Hi, I'm as subjective as any can be in this matter (since I lead the rewriting of the HW rules in '98 and the new Impulse Movement rules now), so take my arguments for what they're worth, but... Tate wrote: > > Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least very > few) will use them: > 1) Scenarios where it isn't required they won't be used since > there is no real advantage any longer. I agree that radio-equipped AFV can no longer avoid being fired on when starting and changing CA by using PM to teleport to the next hex before DFF. I think that's fine, because teleportation drives were not installed in most AFV's during WWII. Maybe such a rule makes sense if a WWIII ASL module comes out ;-) Seriously though, it will still be useful in certain situations, but not open for such abuse as the old rules: Voluntary PM may still be useful, by limiting the number of DFF per DEFENDER Gun to 1 before the 2/3 AFV have all entered a new hex. > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless AFV) will be avoided. > Why? According to the poll on the szo forum, more than 80% wanted this change. Why would they then avoid it afterwards? > Historically (i.e., Human Wave changes) that is how most ASL > players have handled this type change...that is, changing a rule > that works just fine I have heard several others saying the old rule worked just fine. But none of those were able to explain how the old rule actually worked, without violating the example or some of the old Q&A. If you are able to give such an explanation, then I'm going to be impressed. I will not be surprised if you cannot back it up though... But you also seem to imply that people now avoid scenarios where the HW rules are to be used. Given that 90% of PTO scenarios involve Banzai, I think that is flat out wrong. > to assuage a vocal minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing playability. I understand that you think you are the majority by default, but as said above, the poll on the szo displayed a major preference for the new IM rules. As for the '98 HW rules - the change there had nothing to do with "realism", only with creating a rule because the old HW rules effectively said "make up your own rule" - which were sort of ok before CoB, but not when the Japanese started to use the HW rules in most scenarios. From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Mar 2 05:50:20 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 5:50:20 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <1917968383.1141307420240.JavaMail.root@fepweb02> ---- "Ole B?e" wrote: > > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless AFV) will be avoided. > > > Why? According to the poll on the szo forum, more than 80% wanted this change. Why would they then avoid it afterwards? > Was that 80% of the szo forum...or 80% of the vocal minority that wanted a change. Certainly NOT the same thing. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Mar 2 05:57:49 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 5:57:49 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <438125861.1141307869824.JavaMail.root@fepweb02> ---- Bruce Probst wrote: > On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 09:21:18 -0600, "Jeff Thompson" > wrote: > > Of course, some people are ... hesitant ... to admit that they may perhaps > have over-reacted a tad, and that their earlier negative reactions were > motivated largely by spite and ignorance. Alas, it happens to all religions. > As opposed to being spiteful and ignorant on EVERY subject...eh, Bruce. You don't even have the excuse of religion. The original rule was fine. It worked and I never found it to be abused very much at all. In fact, after 20 years of playing ASL I might have used it a handful of times to avoid being shot at. I can't remember it ever being used against me...not to say that it wasn't. Just that the event didn't send me (or any of my opponents)into a diaper changing squall like it apparently did to some. And it isn't just the PM rules...it is the long slippery slope of changing rules for "realism" sake...and I suspect it won't end until the game has been made completely unplayable. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 2 06:18:09 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 15:18:09 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: Hi, Tate and I discuss vocal minorities, though I think it is pretty telling that he is not trying to back up his statment about the old HW rules working just fine... > ---- "Ole B?e" wrote: > > > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless > AFV) will be avoided. > > > > > Why? According to the poll on the szo forum, more than 80% > wanted this change. Why would they then avoid it afterwards? > > > > Was that 80% of the szo forum...or 80% of the vocal minority that > wanted a change. Certainly NOT the same thing. > -- It was 80% of the voters - and that's the best backed up number we have. It wasn't me who started talking about minorities or majorities though, it was you. Since you brought it up, and since you easily dismiss the forum poll, then I look forward to the backup you have for claiming that only a vocal minority like the change. ...or is it only something you say, because you know that saying that *you* don't like the change isn't very impressive? I understand that it is very easy to come up with statements like: "Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least very few) will use them" or "changing a rule that works just fine to assuage a vocal minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing playability" But the hard part is actually backing up those statements with any facts or even arguments at all. Since you don't, I guess it means you are unable to. From tompygo at comcast.net Thu Mar 2 07:00:29 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 09:00:29 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <1917968383.1141307420240.JavaMail.root@fepweb02> Message-ID: <002701c63e0a$0c4fa8a0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Well, even if only 5 people are on the forum, that'a 4 people that will not avoid them. Now I'm not the best at math, but 4 seems greater than "no one." And again, the rules are changed for "realism" sake? They are changed for consistency. Take my Silesian Interlude example. If the tanks are adjacent, they can't be hit. But if they are separated by a hex they can? Why don't you go play checkers. The rules haven't changed in a while and there is no semblence of realism to get in the way. Later, Jeff PS I'll go away soon. I always do. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tate Rogers" To: "Ole B?e" Cc: "ASL List" Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > ---- "Ole B?e" wrote: > > > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless AFV) will be avoided. > > > > > Why? According to the poll on the szo forum, more than 80% wanted this change. Why would they then avoid it afterwards? > > > > Was that 80% of the szo forum...or 80% of the vocal minority that wanted a change. Certainly NOT the same thing. > -- > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > _______________________________________________ > 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 jbarber at meic.org Thu Mar 2 08:17:36 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 09:17:36 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <438125861.1141307869824.JavaMail.root@fepweb02> Message-ID: On 3/2/06 6:57 AM, "Tate Rogers" wrote: > send me (or any of my opponents)into a diaper changing squall Ewwww!!! That is not a nice mental image Jeff "Use PM sleaze on me and I'll unleash a hurricane" Barber From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 2 12:23:08 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 07:23:08 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Partial orchard vertices In-Reply-To: <20060301193615.26511.qmail@web52615.mail.yahoo.com> References: <4e2cf5e00602281215n40027f59l85d232ce5636fc99@mail.gmail.com> <20060301193615.26511.qmail@web52615.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:36:15 -0800 (PST), Robert Nelson wrote: >PB Map, LOS from NN16 to TT16. Do any of the partial >orchard 'vertices' create a hindrance? Are there any >hindrances to this shot? Q2.2: "A Partial Orchard's effect on LOS/LOF is determined by which of the Partial Orchard's hexsides/vertices are crossed by that LOS/LOF." It then goes on to say that only two of the hex's four vertices are treated as Orchard vertices. However, none of that has anything to do with your example LOS, which runs down a bunch of Partial Orchard *hexsides*. In which case Q2.21 applies, which states in no uncertain terms that such a hexside is treated as an Orchard hexside only if it is "Orchard" on both sides of that hexside. So no, no hindrances at all. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Thu Mar 2 16:22:54 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:22:54 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) Message-ID: Hi all About to set up for a game and have the following question A12.34 and B 23.423 It appears are 5/8" Mortar with a small target size (C2.271) may set up emplaced and HIP in the ground level of a building, although it can not be fired from there. Is this correct? It doesn't feel right although it seems the rules allow it. Or is there something I have missed. TIA Cheers Jon This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Mar 2 16:32:43 2006 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 16:32:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060303003243.95775.qmail@web52601.mail.yahoo.com> Cannot find anything to challenge your obscure rules point. It does seem to be clearly the case that a small target mtr can setup in a building, and cannot fire out of it... --- "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: > Hi all > > About to set up for a game and have the following > question > > A12.34 and B 23.423 > It appears are 5/8" Mortar with a small target size > (C2.271) may set up > emplaced and HIP in the ground level of a building, > although it can not be > fired from there. Is this correct? It doesn't feel > right although it seems > the rules allow it. Or is there something I have > missed. > > TIA > > Cheers > Jon > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are > privileged and > confidential information > intended for use of the addressee.The > confidentiality and/or privilege is > not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been > transmitted to you in error. If > you received this > e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy > or take any action in > reliance on it; > (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture > immediately by return e-mail > to the sender; > (c) please delete the original e-mail. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From chas.argent at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 16:43:36 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 16:43:36 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sounds right. What a clever trick to pull on your opponent! He will never think to look for that Mortar there! -Chas On 3/2/06, Cole, Jonathan wrote: > Hi all > > About to set up for a game and have the following question > > A12.34 and B 23.423 > It appears are 5/8" Mortar with a small target size (C2.271) may set up > emplaced and HIP in the ground level of a building, although it can not be > fired from there. Is this correct? It doesn't feel right although it seems > the rules allow it. Or is there something I have missed. > > TIA > > Cheers > Jon > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and > confidential information > intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is > not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If > you received this > e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in > reliance on it; > (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail > to the sender; > (c) please delete the original e-mail. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Mar 2 17:01:42 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:01:42 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) References: Message-ID: <005001c63e5e$09cf3420$7727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Jon wrote, > Hi all > > About to set up for a game and have the following question > > A12.34 and B 23.423 > It appears are 5/8" Mortar with a small target size (C2.271) may set up > emplaced and HIP in the ground level of a building, although it can not be > fired from there. Is this correct? It doesn't feel right although it seems > the rules allow it. Or is there something I have missed. Jon, curious, but why would you want to setup a mortar in such a way? Is the Mortars surviving key to the VC or is having a HIP MMC in the building vital to you schemes and machinations toward victory? =Jim= From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Thu Mar 2 19:00:11 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 11:00:11 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) Message-ID: > > A12.34 and B 23.423 > > It appears are 5/8" Mortar with a small target size (C2.271) may set up > > emplaced and HIP in the ground level of a building, although it can not > be > > fired from there. Is this correct? It doesn't feel right although it > seems > > the rules allow it. Or is there something I have missed. > > Jon, curious, but why would you want to setup a mortar in such a way? > > Is the Mortars surviving key to the VC or is having a HIP MMC in the > building vital to you schemes and machinations toward victory? > > =Jim= Hi Jim In the scenario in question, the VC are to have a Good Order MMC in a certain area at game end. I am contemplating (and only contemplating at this stage) forgoing being able to fire the mortar (fields of fire are limited) and instead using the HIP capability to deny my opponent victory at game end if I can find a building where I think he won't traverse or go looking for a HIP Mortar All the best Cheers Jon This e-mail and files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressee. The confidentiality and/or privilege in this e-mail is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From skallan at att.com Thu Mar 2 20:04:22 2006 From: skallan at att.com (Allan, Scott K, CFSMD) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 22:04:22 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Depletion Numbers In-Reply-To: <005001c63e5e$09cf3420$7727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Folks, What does the "J" stand for on the backs of some vehicle counters --- within the Depletion Numbers?? For Example, on the US 'M4' tank, the SMOKE depletion number is "s5 J4+". Thanks. Scott Allan From chas.argent at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 20:16:30 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 20:16:30 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Depletion Numbers In-Reply-To: References: <005001c63e5e$09cf3420$7727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: The "J4" means "June '44", i.e. that Smoke Depletion number only applies from June '44 onward. Regards, Chas On 3/2/06, Allan, Scott K, CFSMD wrote: > Folks, > What does the "J" stand for on the backs of some vehicle > counters --- within the Depletion Numbers?? > > For Example, on the US 'M4' tank, the SMOKE depletion number is "s5 > J4+". > > Thanks. > > > Scott Allan > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From josrbu at samoatelco.com Thu Mar 2 21:26:11 2006 From: josrbu at samoatelco.com (josrbu@samoatelco.com) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 18:26:11 -1100 Subject: [Aslml] Latest Changes to HW rule Message-ID: <440738C3.15155.410E24@localhost> Hi All, I am unclear what the last sentence of D14.31 ('... all participants must end their MPh if one ... lacks necessary MF ...') is trying to say. Upon first reading that I feared the revisions had replaced the last sentence of A25.2322 ('If unable to move to a new Location, it must spend its remaining Impulses in its current Location'), which of course would have radically reduced the effectiveness of HWs in difficult/PTO terrain. Thankfully, it did not, and even the preceding sentence in D14.31 ('spend MP doing nothing') bears this out as well. It appears to be referring to a situation in which some participants in the Impulse have spent more MF than others. Is this correct, and if so, how does this happen given that all units spend the same MF each Impulse? Thanks in advance for any clarifications, Joshua Joshua O. Seamon Dept. of Marine & Wildlife Resources PO Box 3730 Pago Pago AS 96799 From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 2 22:53:29 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 07:53:29 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Latest Changes to HW rule In-Reply-To: <440738C3.15155.410E24@localhost> Message-ID: Hi, Joshua O. Seamon wrote: > I am unclear what the last sentence of D14.31 ('... all participants > must end their MPh if one ... lacks necessary MF ...') is trying to say. It means that if one unit has less MF/MP remaining than the others plan to spend during that Impulse, then the entire Impulse must stop - with an exception for wounded leaders. > Upon first reading that I feared the revisions had replaced the last > sentence of A25.2322 ('If unable to move to a new Location, it must > spend its remaining Impulses in its current Location'), which of > course would have radically reduced the effectiveness of HWs in > difficult/PTO terrain. > Thankfully, it did not, and even the preceding > sentence in D14.31 ('spend MP doing nothing') bears this out as > well. You're correct, D14.31 tells us that the other units cannot spend an MF/MP one lacks, which is not what A25.2322 is about - it is about a unit that has MF/MP left (and can spend the same number as the others), but is not able to enter a new Location. D14.31 would only apply in the latter case if this unit had less MF/MP than the others. > It appears to be referring to a situation in which some > participants in the Impulse have spent more MF than others. Is this > correct, Spot on. > and if so, how does this happen given that all units spend > the same MF each Impulse? > It doesn't happen with a *Human Wave*, but D14.31 is a generic rule for *all* types of Impulse Movement. And it certainly can happen for vehicles (which has a different number of MP), using PM or Convoy movement. I see that it can be somewhat confusing to mention "MF" in that part of D14.31, because no such situation is possible with a HW (except for the wounded leader which are excepted from the restriction). From swfancher at mindspring.com Thu Mar 2 23:15:27 2006 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (swfancher@mindspring.com) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 02:15:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <17385679.1141370127847.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Given the number of people who continue to buy AoO and VotG, I think it is pretty obvious that the entire universe of participants on the Forums is merely a fraction of the total players. Throw in the fraction of participants who actually chose to vote on this (what was the final tally?) I think it is pretty obvious to all but the most obtuse that a "vocal minority" of ASL players really see this as an important change that was worth making. Of course, when the J6 "errata" came out and I opined that I thought some of the "errata" were stupid, unnecessary, chang for the sake of change or anything else, this same argument ("a majority of people who voted agreed that [inserting a comma] in this sentence made this previously undecipherable sentenece crystal clear") was used. About a dozen people said this. About a dozen agreed with me. In the end, the vocal minority cared far more about it than did the majority of players, so the discussion faded. This is no longer a debate worth having. Some people think many rules need re-writing. These same people will spend their own time and energy re-writing the rule as they think it should be written. The irony is that many sentences can be read by two people and interpreted in different ways. Interestingly, many of these same people are the same ones who loudly boast of having two groups of "Perry Sez" (and errata in some cases): those they agree with (and that they will expect their opponents to follow) and those that they "put in the trash" and that they will refuse to play by. It's not about objectivity in the end. But in the end, it is MMPs game to do what they like. If the vocal minority have their ear, there is little that the silent majority can do about it. -----Original Message----- >From: Ole B?e >Sent: Mar 2, 2006 9:18 AM >To: Tate Rogers >Cc: ASL List >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > >Hi, > >Tate and I discuss vocal minorities, though I think it is pretty telling that he is not trying to back up his statment about the old HW rules working just fine... > >> ---- "Ole B?e" wrote: >> > > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless >> AFV) will be avoided. >> > > >> > Why? According to the poll on the szo forum, more than 80% >> wanted this change. Why would they then avoid it afterwards? >> > >> >> Was that 80% of the szo forum...or 80% of the vocal minority that >> wanted a change. Certainly NOT the same thing. >> -- >It was 80% of the voters - and that's the best backed up number we have. It wasn't me who started talking about minorities or majorities though, it was you. > >Since you brought it up, and since you easily dismiss the forum poll, then I look forward to the backup you have for claiming that only a vocal minority like the change. ...or is it only something you say, because you know that saying that *you* don't like the change isn't very impressive? > >I understand that it is very easy to come up with statements like: >"Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least very few) will use them" or >"changing a rule that works just fine to assuage a vocal minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing playability" > >But the hard part is actually backing up those statements with any facts or even arguments at all. Since you don't, I guess it means you are unable to. > >_______________________________________________ >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 ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk Fri Mar 3 00:29:15 2006 From: ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk (Binyamin Jones) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:29:15 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] Laurent Cunin, where are you? In-Reply-To: <17385679.1141370127847.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20060303082915.24793.qmail@web25715.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> looking for laurent cunin, i beleive he's living somewhere near cairo, anyone know where/contact details etc? b e n south sinai ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Mar 3 01:15:34 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 10:15:34 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <17385679.1141370127847.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Hi, swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > Given the number of people who continue to buy AoO and VotG, I > think it is pretty obvious that the entire universe of > participants on the Forums is merely a fraction of the total > players. Throw in the fraction of participants who actually > chose to vote on this (what was the final tally?) 61 for, 17 against. > I think it is > pretty obvious to all but the most obtuse that a "vocal minority" > of ASL players really see this as an important change that was > worth making. > I actually think you're right, but I also think that the ASL players who see this as a negative change is a *more* vocal", but *much smaller* minority. My impression is that the majority of players wouldn't use the old sleaze, either because they weren't aware of it, or because they found it too sleazy, so it didn't impact them much - unless they played new players on VASL or in a tournament that used the sleaze. In those cases quite a number of the majority would be more than a little upset. So my impression is that the rule is now changed to be more similar to how the non-vocal majority actually play it. This is only my impression though, and I don't mean to use the majority or minority to prove anything... > Of course, when the J6 "errata" came out and I opined that I > thought some of the "errata" were stupid, unnecessary, chang for > the sake of change or anything else, this same argument ("a > majority of people who voted agreed that [inserting a comma] in > this sentence made this previously undecipherable sentenece > crystal clear") was used. I'm not aware of any vote about any of the J6 errata. I do remember that we discussed the errata before, and that I believe you misunderstood quite a lot of it. You see it different of course :-) Anyway, the new PM rule are there to *change* the rule, while all of the J6 erratas were there to clarify existing rules without changing how they were played, so they're not comparable. > This is no longer a debate worth having. Some people think many > rules need re-writing. I think that if some rule is often questioned, misunderstood or contested, then a clarification is an improvement, and MMP has chosen to issue all official clarifications in the form of errata (which I think is a good idea). > These same people will spend their own > time and energy re-writing the rule as they think it should be > written. The irony is that many sentences can be read by two > people and interpreted in different ways. > The aim is of course to re-write sentences that are interpreted in different ways, so that there is one obvious interpretation only. I think all of the J6 errata succeeded in that. > Interestingly, many of these same people are the same ones who > loudly boast of having two groups of "Perry Sez" (and errata in > some cases): those they agree with (and that they will expect > their opponents to follow) and those that they "put in the trash" > and that they will refuse to play by. I think you're making this up. There are people who disagree with a number of the Perry sez, and I'm one of them, but "loudly boast"? I think it's a problem that Perry doesn't clarify whether a Perry sez is answered according to what Perry think the rule actually says, or according to what Perry think makes sense - even if the rule says something different. > It's not about objectivity in the end. But in the end, it is > MMPs game to do what they like. If the vocal minority have their > ear, there is little that the silent majority can do about it. > You seem to be assuming that the majority dislikes what MMP does. Do you have any supporting evidence for this, or do you simply assume that since *you* dislike it, then most other players must do so as well? From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Mar 3 01:17:20 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 20:17:20 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <17385679.1141370127847.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <17385679.1141370127847.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <54tf02hnbl17ald37ehe2sfafs2591hkp0@4ax.com> On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 02:15:27 -0500 (EST), swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: >Of course, when the J6 "errata" came out and I opined that I thought some of the "errata" were stupid, unnecessary, chang for the sake of change or anything else, this same argument ("a majority of people who voted agreed that [inserting a comma] in this sentence made this previously undecipherable sentenece crystal clear") was used. Which rule in particular are you talking about? The only J6 errata that involved anything like "inserting a comma to improve clarity" was actually replacing an ambiguous and thus potentially confusing "and/or" with a very straight-forward "and". In any case, I don't remember anyone *voting* on any part of it. Well, apart from Perry, that is. If I may steal a line from Terry Pratchett: So far as the ASL rules are concerned, MMP strongly believes in the democratic principle of "one man, one vote". Perry is that one man, so he gets the one vote. >In the end, the vocal minority cared far more about it than did the majority of players, so the discussion faded. It's probably true that the vast majority of ASL players don't really care *what* the rules say, as long as they can understand them and as long as those rules don't clash with whatever their individual concept of "the way the rules *should* work" might happen to be. Is that bad? I don't know. I'd like to think that more ASL players *should* be actively interested in what the rules say, but if they're not, I don't think that there's much anyone can do about it. Regardless, if MMP were to issue errata that made the majority have less understanding of the game than they had before, I daresay that they wouldn't stay silent for very long. Is there any evidence that this has actually happened? Not in *my* experience, but if someone has evidence of a new rule or item of errata causing hundreds of ASL players to go "huh?" than I'd be fascinated to hear of it. >The irony is that many sentences can be read by two people and interpreted in different ways. I don't see what's so "ironic" about it. Unless the sentence in question is really very ambiguous, one of those two people is simply *wrong*. Which very ambiguous sentence in particular did you have in mind? What errata was applied that did not reduce (if not eliminate) that ambiguity? >Interestingly, many of these same people are the same ones who loudly boast of having two groups of "Perry Sez" (and errata in some cases): those they agree with (and that they will expect their opponents to follow) and those that they "put in the trash" and that they will refuse to play by. No need to be coy Seth. To the best of my knowledge I'm the only person who "boasts" of agreeing with most Perry Sez and trashing the rest. If I'm "boasting" about anything when I say such things, it's only that I'm very confident in my ability to understand the rule in question based on what's printed. (I can't recall ever trashing a Perry Sez that answered a question that I was unable to answer myself.) And as that "same people", I can confidently say that I really don't understand what point you're trying to make. I can recall that you were upset because the errata required you to write very small, and you don't like having to do that (or something like that), but that doesn't have anything do with "vocal minorities", let alone the actual meaning of the errata; and in any case your complaint was answered by the provision of "sticky errata". Short of MMP actually visiting your house and applying the sticky errata in person, I don't see what else you could reasonably ask for. >If the vocal minority have their ear, there is little that the silent majority can do about it. "Silent" being the operative word. If they're silent, it's because they don't care (as you pointed out yourself). If they don't care, then they don't *want* to "do anything" about the dreaded "vocal minority". As an exit line your statement sounds deep, but means nothing .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Mar 3 01:31:59 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 20:31:59 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 11:00:11 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >In the scenario in question, the VC are to have a Good Order MMC in a >certain area at game end. I am contemplating (and only contemplating at this >stage) forgoing being able to fire the mortar (fields of fire are limited) >and instead using the HIP capability to deny my opponent victory at game end >if I can find a building where I think he won't traverse or go looking for a >HIP Mortar Bugger the fields of fire, this is a 5/8" MTR! Even spotted fire is better than no fire from such a beast. I never met a 5/8" MTR counter in my OB that I didn't instantly want to use to pound my opponent's forces into smooth red paste. "If my big MTR is HIP, it means it's not firing. And if it's not firing, something is very, very wrong." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Mar 3 01:42:49 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 20:42:49 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Depletion Numbers In-Reply-To: References: <005001c63e5e$09cf3420$7727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 20:16:30 -0800, "Chas Argent" wrote: >> What does the "J" stand for on the backs of some vehicle >> counters --- within the Depletion Numbers?? >The "J4" means "June '44", i.e. that Smoke Depletion number only >applies from June '44 onward. In other words, don't forget to *always* read the Chapter H notes. Let me restate that more clearly: ALWAYS READ THE CHAPTER H NOTES! [I'll never forget a game once where my opponent -- not a rank newbie -- had the Germans on the attack, and he started off by setting his 50mm MTR about sixteen hexes away on the top of a big hill where it had a terrific view of almost everything. I wondered what he was doing. His opening words for the first PFPh: "OK, now this MTR attempts to place smoke." He almost cried when I pointed out the two little flaws with this otherwise excellent plan.] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bo_siemsen at city.dk Fri Mar 3 02:14:52 2006 From: bo_siemsen at city.dk (bo_siemsen@city.dk) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 12:14:52 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060303100751.M40926@city.dk> > Bugger the fields of fire, this is a 5/8" MTR! Even spotted fire is > better than no fire from such a beast. I never met a 5/8" MTR > counter in my OB that I didn't instantly want to use to pound my > opponent's forces into smooth red paste. I share that sentiment. > "If my big MTR is HIP, it means it's not firing. And if it's not > firing, something is very, very wrong." OR ... it means "my big MTR is HIP and it stays hip (if outside LOS) if using spotted fire ... scenario SSR permitting, the spotter could also be HIP". It might not be the most effective way to use an 80mm MTR, but it sure is fun. :-) Bo Siemsen From josrbu at samoatelco.com Fri Mar 3 03:45:36 2006 From: josrbu at samoatelco.com (josrbu@samoatelco.com) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 00:45:36 -1100 Subject: [Aslml] Latest Changes to HW rule In-Reply-To: References: <440738C3.15155.410E24@localhost> Message-ID: <440791B0.4040.19C68F7@localhost> Thanks, Ole, that is exactly what I needed to know. Enjoy, Joshua > > I am unclear what the last sentence of D14.31 ('... > > all participants must end their MPh if one ... lacks > > necessary MF ...') is trying to say. > ... > > It appears to be referring to a situation in which > > some participants in the Impulse have spent more MF > > than others. Is this correct, > Spot on. > > > and if so, how does this happen given that all units > > spend the same MF each Impulse? > > > It doesn't happen with a *Human Wave*, but D14.31 is a > generic rule for *all* types of Impulse Movement. And > it certainly can happen for vehicles (which has a > different number of MP), using PM or Convoy movement. I > see that it can be somewhat confusing to mention "MF" > in that part of D14.31, because no such situation is > possible with a HW (except for the wounded leader which > are excepted from the restriction). From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Mar 3 03:59:00 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 12:59:00 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Latest Changes to HW rule Message-ID: <400c04df1764.44083d94@broadpark.no> Just wanted to follow up by saying that the *only* intentional change in the HW rules, was to prevent a unit from moving above/below a fortification *and* entering a new Location during the same Impulse - with the new rules, a unit must enter a new hex in one Impulse and move below any wire/foxhole etc. in its next Impulse. Any other possible changes to the HW rules were certainly *un*-intentional, and I hope none creeped in... From scott.holst at us.army.mil Fri Mar 3 05:50:23 2006 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 07:50:23 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <617739b6173c3b.6173c3b617739b@us.army.mil> Hi- Or you can do what I did and just chuck the new rules in the trash. I used to go to tournments alot, but now I avoid them just because I really do not want to deal with the "which Rules/ edition are you playing" game. Here in chicago most of us still play the old HW rules, PM rules and so on. No need to muddle through some computer engineers version of ASL rules. Believe me, I tried to desipher those new rules but they are written with an eye to a technical book. Sorry Oli, but you need to understand that not all ASL'er are computer engineers when you and perry revise those rules. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: swfancher at mindspring.com Date: Friday, March 3, 2006 1:15 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > Given the number of people who continue to buy AoO and VotG, I > think it is pretty obvious that the entire universe of > participants on the Forums is merely a fraction of the total > players. Throw in the fraction of participants who actually chose > to vote on this (what was the final tally?) I think it is pretty > obvious to all but the most obtuse that a "vocal minority" of ASL > players really see this as an important change that was worth making. > > Of course, when the J6 "errata" came out and I opined that I > thought some of the "errata" were stupid, unnecessary, chang for > the sake of change or anything else, this same argument ("a > majority of people who voted agreed that [inserting a comma] in > this sentence made this previously undecipherable sentenece > crystal clear") was used. About a dozen people said this. About > a dozen agreed with me. In the end, the vocal minority cared far > more about it than did the majority of players, so the discussion > faded. > This is no longer a debate worth having. Some people think many > rules need re-writing. These same people will spend their own > time and energy re-writing the rule as they think it should be > written. The irony is that many sentences can be read by two > people and interpreted in different ways. > > Interestingly, many of these same people are the same ones who > loudly boast of having two groups of "Perry Sez" (and errata in > some cases): those they agree with (and that they will expect > their opponents to follow) and those that they "put in the trash" > and that they will refuse to play by. > > It's not about objectivity in the end. But in the end, it is MMPs > game to do what they like. If the vocal minority have their ear, > there is little that the silent majority can do about it. > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Ole B?e > >Sent: Mar 2, 2006 9:18 AM > >To: Tate Rogers > >Cc: ASL List > >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > > > >Hi, > > > >Tate and I discuss vocal minorities, though I think it is pretty > telling that he is not trying to back up his statment about the > old HW rules working just fine... > > > >> ---- "Ole B?e" wrote: > >> > > 2) Scenarios where they would be required (i.e., radioless > >> AFV) will be avoided. > >> > > > >> > Why? According to the poll on the szo forum, more than 80% > >> wanted this change. Why would they then avoid it afterwards? > >> > > >> > >> Was that 80% of the szo forum...or 80% of the vocal minority > that > >> wanted a change. Certainly NOT the same thing. > >> -- > >It was 80% of the voters - and that's the best backed up number > we have. It wasn't me who started talking about minorities or > majorities though, it was you. > > > >Since you brought it up, and since you easily dismiss the forum > poll, then I look forward to the backup you have for claiming that > only a vocal minority like the change. ...or is it only something > you say, because you know that saying that *you* don't like the > change isn't very impressive? > > > >I understand that it is very easy to come up with statements like: > >"Having read the new rules I conclude that no one (or at least > very few) will use them" or > >"changing a rule that works just fine to assuage a vocal > minorities "realism" pet peeve while sacrificing playability" > > > >But the hard part is actually backing up those statements with > any facts or even arguments at all. Since you don't, I guess it > means you are unable to. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 jan.spoor at wybesse.net Fri Mar 3 05:58:09 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan Spoor) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 08:58:09 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <617739b6173c3b.6173c3b617739b@us.army.mil> References: <617739b6173c3b.6173c3b617739b@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <44084B71.3060408@wybesse.net> scott.holst at us.army.mil wrote: >No need to muddle through some computer engineers version of ASL rules. Believe me, I tried to decipher those new rules but they are written with an eye to a technical book. > Sorry, but I just have to show this to some of my non-ASL playing friends. I can see the tears of laughter pouring down their cheeks now. :-) "These folks play *ASL* and they're complaining about complex rules? You're joking, right?" No offense intended, Scott, but this is pretty hilarious. cheers, Jan Spoor From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Mar 3 07:23:51 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 7:23:51 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) Message-ID: <21294678.1141399431908.JavaMail.root@fepweb14> ---- Bruce Probst wrote: > On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 11:00:11 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" > wrote: > > "If my big MTR is HIP, it means it's not firing. And if it's not firing, > something is very, very wrong." This is of course, as any experienced ASL'er knows, a pretty stupid quote. Oh, wait, it's Bruce...OK, that explains it. A12.34 makes it clear that HIP Guns that are out of enemy LOS do not lose HIP when firing. Thus, a HIP MTR using spotted fire is able to both fire and retain HIP (assuming no enemy LOS to the MTR/mtr location). Thus, a MTR which is HIP doesn't necessarily mean it hasn't fired. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Mar 3 13:53:27 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 08:53:27 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP Mortar in a building (quick reply needed) In-Reply-To: <20060303100751.M40926@city.dk> References: <20060303100751.M40926@city.dk> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 12:14:52 +0200, bo_siemsen at city.dk wrote: >> "If my big MTR is HIP, it means it's not firing. And if it's not >> firing, something is very, very wrong." > >OR ... it means "my big MTR is HIP and it stays hip (if outside LOS) if >using spotted fire ... scenario SSR permitting, the spotter could also be >HIP". Well, yeah -- but my original statement has more drama. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From matt.larie at verizon.net Fri Mar 3 19:06:47 2006 From: matt.larie at verizon.net (Matt Evans) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:06:47 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Counter Errata - Question In-Reply-To: References: <20060303100751.M40926@city.dk> Message-ID: <6096576D-45B4-4186-8F22-A4A4F73F04EB@verizon.net> Sifting though AOO British counter errata, I have a question for someone in the know. The "Terrapin Mk I" counter in my CURRENT counter mix shows a wheeled vehicle (i.e., two white circles under the movement value). The CORRECTED AOO counter shows a tracked vehicle. The Chapter H note shows the wheeled vehicle and the note talks about the wheels. So...the question is, is the corrected AOO counter really corrected? Second, and I don't know if this is a printing thing or not, the box around the ID letter has TWO boxes...anyone see/have this? I presume this is a printing error and that it really just means on box? Thanx! Matt P.S. I have all the modules through the years, but the AOO counter errata for Italians are identical to the counters I have. I have all first edition stuff, so no new 2nd Ed modules. Again, what is supposed to be the difference for the Italian AOO counters? From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Mar 3 20:09:53 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 15:09:53 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Counter Errata - Question In-Reply-To: <6096576D-45B4-4186-8F22-A4A4F73F04EB@verizon.net> References: <20060303100751.M40926@city.dk> <6096576D-45B4-4186-8F22-A4A4F73F04EB@verizon.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:06:47 -0600, Matt Evans wrote: >The "Terrapin Mk I" counter in my CURRENT counter mix shows a wheeled >vehicle (i.e., two white circles under the movement value). >The CORRECTED AOO counter shows a tracked vehicle. >The Chapter H note shows the wheeled vehicle and the note talks about >the wheels. >So...the question is, is the corrected AOO counter really corrected? No. The counters provided in AoO are in error. The Terrapin has truck-type movement, as correctly noted in the vehicle listing, the original WoA counters and even the recent FKaC counters. >Second, and I don't know if this is a printing thing or not, the box >around the ID letter has TWO boxes...anyone see/have this? >I presume this is a printing error and that it really just means on box? Yes, this seems to be some sort of weird printing goof. >P.S. I have all the modules through the years, but the AOO counter >errata for Italians are identical to the counters I have. >I have all first edition stuff, so no new 2nd Ed modules. Again, >what is supposed to be the difference for the Italian AOO counters? All is explained on p.H172. Since you don't have 2nd ed. Hollow Legions, you don't need those counters. While we're on the subject of AoO counter errors, note also that the Hungarian vehicle crews have morale 7; they should be morale 6. (Their broken morale is correct.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From matt.larie at verizon.net Fri Mar 3 20:58:39 2006 From: matt.larie at verizon.net (Matt Evans) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 22:58:39 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Counter Errata - Question In-Reply-To: References: <20060303100751.M40926@city.dk> <6096576D-45B4-4186-8F22-A4A4F73F04EB@verizon.net> Message-ID: What do you mean I don't NEED those counters? Everyone needs counters! Heh...thanx for the reply. Ya know, over the years I made a special place for the Axis Minor vehicles and ordnance in my plano boxes. The stuff will fit just perfect, no more boxes to buy (I bought all my planos at the same time, they are the same shape, kind--off brand, actually). But NOOoooo...MMP has to create TWO kinds of Axis Minors...Hmmm...what to do.... I'm kinda liken' the two-tone colors tho. Look cool. And I like the fact they are German blue just for that reason. This'll be fun! Well, done with the errata counters...on to the real meaty ones.... Cut...cut...clip...clip...sort...fill...spill...sort again...fill...cut...clip... On Mar 3, 2006, at 10:09 PM, Bruce Probst wrote: > On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:06:47 -0600, Matt Evans > wrote: > >> The "Terrapin Mk I" counter in my CURRENT counter mix shows a wheeled >> vehicle (i.e., two white circles under the movement value). >> The CORRECTED AOO counter shows a tracked vehicle. >> The Chapter H note shows the wheeled vehicle and the note talks about >> the wheels. >> So...the question is, is the corrected AOO counter really corrected? > > No. The counters provided in AoO are in error. The Terrapin has > truck-type > movement, as correctly noted in the vehicle listing, the original > WoA counters > and even the recent FKaC counters. > >> Second, and I don't know if this is a printing thing or not, the box >> around the ID letter has TWO boxes...anyone see/have this? >> I presume this is a printing error and that it really just means >> on box? > > Yes, this seems to be some sort of weird printing goof. > >> P.S. I have all the modules through the years, but the AOO counter >> errata for Italians are identical to the counters I have. >> I have all first edition stuff, so no new 2nd Ed modules. Again, >> what is supposed to be the difference for the Italian AOO counters? > > All is explained on p.H172. Since you don't have 2nd ed. Hollow > Legions, you > don't need those counters. > > While we're on the subject of AoO counter errors, note also that > the Hungarian > vehicle crews have morale 7; they should be morale 6. (Their > broken morale is > correct.) > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > From swfancher at mindspring.com Sat Mar 4 03:14:01 2006 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (swfancher@mindspring.com) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 06:14:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <8701723.1141470841372.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- >From: Ole Boe Throw in the fraction of participants who actually >> chose to vote on this (what was the final tally?) >61 for, 17 against. Wow...78 people cared enough to have actually voted. Sounds like a change that was in much demand! > but I also think that the ASL players who see >this as a negative change is a *more* vocal", but *much smaller* minority. People who see this specific change as "bad"...yes I agree. Players who feel that change for the sake of change (to appease the 61 people who actually cared) is bad...I disagree. But, as you have noted, there is no actual evidence for this. But I have previously objected to situations such as this being bandied about as "a majority of players feel this way." If you feel you have a compelling argument - make it. Stand up and say "Because 61 of 88 players surveyed think this rule should be changed, ew are going to change it." Why aren't you comfortable presenting your "evidence" accurately if you feel it is so compelling? >My impression is that the majority of players wouldn't use the old sleaze, >either because they weren't aware of it, or because they found it too >sleazy, so it didn't impact them much - unless they played new players on >VASL or in a tournament that used the sleaze. In those cases quite a number >of the majority would be more than a little upset. I would be more than a little upset to play against someone who became more than a little upset because they lost a game because the other player was following the rules. I personally play for fun and do not want to play someone who is going to get all torgued up because someone did something that is perfectly legal, but they find distasteful. In point of fact, I at times get upset when one of my squads breaks/dies as a result of my opponents actions. But I don't let it get in the way of having a good time. >I'm not aware of any vote about any of the J6 errata. I do remember that we >discussed the errata before, and that I believe you misunderstood quite a >lot of it. You see it different of course :-) Yes, I think some of the changes were entirely unnecessary. Based on "common sense" if you will. >I think you're making this up. I'll make sure I forward you the next message. It should not take too long now that Perry has been able to start answering Q&A again. >You seem to be assuming that the majority dislikes what MMP does. Do you >have any supporting evidence for this, or do you simply assume that since >*you* dislike it, then most other players must do so as well? I think the majority of people simply want to play the game, and spend their time rolling dice instead of annotating the ASLRB with errata and clarifications. And I am happy to say that I cannot recall playing a single game that was significantly delayed by a rules question, or one where it could not be resolved amicably by the players, or one where one player was terribly upset because the other player "won" a dispute that was decided by a) asking someone else or b) rolling a die. But the more I read of these conversations, the more I realize how truly lucky I am in the people I play, because apparently there are some pretty uptight players out there. The more I read about this, the more I wonder why people would continue to play with people who are so unsportsmanlike? And again, and glad because I have thus far managed to avoid these people. IMO, this is similar to a situation in a sporting event where a single decision by a referee/umpire is cited as the cause for one team winning and the other losing. In point of fact, in any given game some events go for and against both sides. If someone cannot accept this as part of the game, I'd prefer they give up the game (and I would certainly not play them more than once). ASL is a game. It is supposed to be fun. If a single written rule would cause someone so much angst, they should probably look for a simpler game, with simpler rules. Then they can be assured that there will never be a problem. JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you are willing and able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be flaws. I just don't think that very many other people really care. From swfancher at mindspring.com Sat Mar 4 03:31:56 2006 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (swfancher@mindspring.com) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 06:31:56 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <16826538.1141471916948.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- >From: Bruce Probst >So far as the ASL rules are concerned, MMP strongly believes in the democratic >principle of "one man, one vote". Perry is that one man, so he gets the one >vote. Right. So when Perry speaks, we should listen. Regardless of whether we happen to like or agree with his decision. Not in *my* experience, but if someone has evidence of a new rule >or item of errata causing hundreds of ASL players to go "huh?" than I'd be >fascinated to hear of it. Which "clarified" original rule caused "hundreds" of ASL players to go "huh"? Plenty of "calrifications" and errata have left me thinking "Well, no duh!" >No need to be coy Seth. To the best of my knowledge I'm the only person who >"boasts" of agreeing with most Perry Sez and trashing the rest. Sorry to burst your bubble Bruce, but your not. You certainly probably do this as frequently as anyone. But there are plenty of people who quite often have stated on this list something akin to "I am not following that until it is made official, and even then I will piss and moan and cry about it." >If I'm "boasting" about anything when I say such things, it's only that I'm very >confident in my ability to understand the rule in question based on what's >printed. (I can't recall ever trashing a Perry Sez that answered a question >that I was unable to answer myself.) Didn't you just write above that Perry's is the only opinion that counts? At the end of the day, your confidence in your abillity to interpret a rule is entirely irrelevant when it is in opposition to Perry's. (And when you say "that I was unable to answer myself" don't you really mean "that you agreed with"?) >"Silent" being the operative word. If they're silent, it's because they don't >care (as you pointed out yourself). Or maybe they would rather just play the game rather than argue about whether a rule should or should not allow something. What a novel concept! If they don't care, then they don't >*want* to "do anything" about the dreaded "vocal minority". As an exit line >your statement sounds deep, but means nothing .... As you have much greater experience than I in making statements that sound deep but mean nothing, I will defer to your expertise. >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Mar 4 04:59:19 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 13:59:19 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <8701723.1141470841372.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Hi, swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > Players who feel that change for the sake of change (to appease > the 61 people who actually cared) is bad...I disagree. Could you elaborate what you mean with "change for the sake of change"? I certainly didn't want to change it just for the sake of change, but because I believe the old rule was broken. I respect that other disagree about the old rule, but I don't see why you need to put what I consider an unfair label on the reason for the change. > But, as > you have noted, there is no actual evidence for this. But I have > previously objected to situations such as this being bandied > about as "a majority of players feel this way." If you feel you > have a compelling argument - make it. I have never been hiding behind a group in my arguments. I have explained why I think the old rule was broken and why I think the new solution was the best. It was Tate who started to using "vocal minority" etc., and I only mentioned that the only poll that existed indicated that Tate was wrong. > Stand up and say "Because > 61 of 88 players surveyed think this rule should be changed, ew > are going to change it." That has never been the reason for me wanting this errata. > Why aren't you comfortable presenting > your "evidence" accurately if you feel it is so compelling? > Go back and read my mail. I think you must have misremembered something in it if you think I base the reasoning for the change on this poll. I would really prefer to see you argue against something I actually say, not against something you think I may possibly mean. > I would be more than a little upset to play against someone who > became more than a little upset because they lost a game because > the other player was following the rules. I personally play for > fun and do not want to play someone who is going to get all > torgued up because someone did something that is perfectly legal, > but they find distasteful. My opinion is that the old PM rule could lead to situations as the above, and that the new rule will avoid this - because the new rule makes sense to all during play. I'll be as free as to quote "KevinG" from an ongoing thread on the szo forum: "At ASLOK Steve Pleva and I decided before the start of our scenario (Silesian Interlude) not to allow Platoon Movement for radio equipped vehicles, since it can make a big difference for the Russian in that scenario. We wouldn't have to worry about that having that discussion now. So, if anything, I feel the PM clarifications have lessend the pre-game rules discussion, not increased it." That's a real-life example of why the old PM rule were broken, and why it needed a change. From scott.holst at us.army.mil Sat Mar 4 05:06:53 2006 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:06:53 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <14576114878a.14878a145761@us.army.mil> Hmmmm- I wonder when we are going to see the VBM sleaze freeze fix..............I know this must grive the realists nuts. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: Ole Boe Date: Saturday, March 4, 2006 6:59 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > Hi, > > swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > > > Players who feel that change for the sake of change (to appease > > the 61 people who actually cared) is bad...I disagree. > Could you elaborate what you mean with "change for the sake of > change"? I > certainly didn't want to change it just for the sake of change, > but because > I believe the old rule was broken. I respect that other disagree > about the > old rule, but I don't see why you need to put what I consider an > unfairlabel on the reason for the change. > > > But, as > > you have noted, there is no actual evidence for this. But I have > > previously objected to situations such as this being bandied > > about as "a majority of players feel this way." If you feel you > > have a compelling argument - make it. > I have never been hiding behind a group in my arguments. I have > explainedwhy I think the old rule was broken and why I think the > new solution was the > best. It was Tate who started to using "vocal minority" etc., and > I only > mentioned that the only poll that existed indicated that Tate was > wrong. > > Stand up and say "Because > > 61 of 88 players surveyed think this rule should be changed, ew > > are going to change it." > That has never been the reason for me wanting this errata. > > > Why aren't you comfortable presenting > > your "evidence" accurately if you feel it is so compelling? > > > Go back and read my mail. I think you must have misremembered > something in > it if you think I base the reasoning for the change on this poll. > I would > really prefer to see you argue against something I actually say, > not against > something you think I may possibly mean. > > > I would be more than a little upset to play against someone who > > became more than a little upset because they lost a game because > > the other player was following the rules. I personally play for > > fun and do not want to play someone who is going to get all > > torgued up because someone did something that is perfectly legal, > > but they find distasteful. > My opinion is that the old PM rule could lead to situations as the > above,and that the new rule will avoid this - because the new rule > makes sense to > all during play. I'll be as free as to quote "KevinG" from an > ongoing thread > on the szo forum: > > "At ASLOK Steve Pleva and I decided before the start of our scenario > (Silesian Interlude) not to allow Platoon Movement for radio equipped > vehicles, since it can make a big difference for the Russian in that > scenario. We wouldn't have to worry about that having that > discussion now. > So, if anything, I feel the PM clarifications have lessend the pre- > gamerules discussion, not increased it." > > That's a real-life example of why the old PM rule were broken, and > why it > needed a change. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jmmcleod at mts.net Sat Mar 4 05:39:16 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 07:39:16 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <8701723.1141470841372.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000e01c63f91$09b80320$0c27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Seth wrote, > JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you are willing and > able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be flaws. I just > don't think that very many other people really care. I care. :) I care that people like Ole are taking the time it takes to make the ASLRB a better package. =Jim= From rockgheba at gmail.com Sat Mar 4 07:48:35 2006 From: rockgheba at gmail.com (Mario Nadalini) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 16:48:35 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: <63bc1b0f0603040748n62b3d1d2l936af93899c8b6fa@mail.gmail.com> sorry for the bandwidth. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Mar 4 16:27:28 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 11:27:28 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <16826538.1141471916948.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <16826538.1141471916948.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 06:31:56 -0500 (GMT-05:00), swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: >Didn't you just write above that Perry's is the only opinion that counts? ... when issuing errata. Please do and try to keep up, Seth! > At the end of the day, your confidence in your abillity to interpret a rule is entirely irrelevant when it is in opposition to Perry's. Fortunately, I hold my own opinions in somewhat higher esteem than you do. I'd agree that my opinions probably won't count for much if I'm actually playing a game against Perry or one that Perry is adjudicating, but since that has yet to happen it comes down to what the rules actually say, and the decision-making process is between my actual opponent and I. A Perry Sez, being unofficial, is important to note but does not *in itself* constitute a "final answer". There are a number of examples where Perry has changed his mind; it would be foolish to consider a Perry Sez as the "last word". However, if Perry actually issues errata, that *is* the "last word" (barring some extraordinary circumstance). I note it in my rules and I abide by it as I abide with every other item of errata. I don't waste my time bitching and moaning about it, like *some* around here do. I certainly don't waste my time wondering "how many people really thought this was important". If Perry thought it was important, that's good enough for me. My only complaint is that IMO Perry doesn't find *enough* stuff "important" -- I'd like to see *all* errors corrected and ambiguities clarified (as much as is possible and practical, at any rate), not just a handful of them. >(And when you say "that I was unable to answer myself" don't you really mean "that you agreed with"?) No, I mean "unable to answer myself". >Or maybe they would rather just play the game rather than argue about whether a rule should or should not allow something. What a novel concept! IOW, they don't care. You're repeating yourself, and it doesn't strengthen your "argument" (using the term loosely) any more than it did the first time. >As you have much greater experience than I in making statements that sound deep but mean nothing, I will defer to your expertise. Have you finished bitching about the errata you don't like, Seth? Because I'm pretty sure that we both agree that the majority of ASL players don't care. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Mar 4 19:26:55 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 19:26:55 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <23466377.1141529215353.JavaMail.root@fepweb07> ---- swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > > >If I'm "boasting" about anything when I say such things, it's only that I'm very > >confident in my ability to understand the rule in question based on what's > >printed. (I can't recall ever trashing a Perry Sez that answered a question > >that I was unable to answer myself.) THANK GOD no one in ASL authority has ever been so confused as to believe Bruce had any "ability" to understand rules!!! -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Mar 4 20:08:50 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 20:08:50 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <9678801.1141531730863.JavaMail.root@fepweb07> ---- mcleods wrote: > > > JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you are willing and > > able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be flaws. I just > > don't think that very many other people really care. > > I care. :) > > I care that people like Ole are taking the time it takes to make the ASLRB a > better package. ..."better" being a highly subjective and personal opinion. The new PM rules don't make ASL better...just...different than it was before. From malm at gol.com Sat Mar 4 22:41:34 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:41:34 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <9678801.1141531730863.JavaMail.root@fepweb07> References: <9678801.1141531730863.JavaMail.root@fepweb07> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060305153307.02695f10@pop3.norton.antivirus> Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked in their old form? I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better package. At 01:08 p.m. 5/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: >---- mcleods wrote: > > > > > JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you are > willing and > > > able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be flaws. I just > > > don't think that very many other people really care. > > > > I care. :) > > > > I care that people like Ole are taking the time it takes to make > the ASLRB a > > better package. > >..."better" being a highly subjective and personal opinion. > >The new PM rules don't make ASL better...just...different than it was before. >_______________________________________________ >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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Sun Mar 5 03:14:02 2006 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 05:14:02 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <2d1bcb2cf398.2cf3982d1bcb@us.army.mil> Ah but the question beckons, if they are willing to change a 20+ year old rule like PM, whats to them from changing the VBM sleaze move? Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: Malcolm Rutledge Date: Sunday, March 5, 2006 0:41 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, > > Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked > in > their old form? > I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze > tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better > package. > > At 01:08 p.m. 5/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: > >---- mcleods wrote: > > > > > > > JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you > are > > willing and > > > > able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be > flaws. I just > > > > don't think that very many other people really care. > > > > > > I care. :) > > > > > > I care that people like Ole are taking the time it takes to > make > > the ASLRB a > > > better package. > > > >..."better" being a highly subjective and personal opinion. > > > >The new PM rules don't make ASL better...just...different than it > was before. > >_______________________________________________ > >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 malm at gol.com Sun Mar 5 03:48:32 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 20:48:32 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <2d1bcb2cf398.2cf3982d1bcb@us.army.mil> References: <2d1bcb2cf398.2cf3982d1bcb@us.army.mil> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060305204809.026fa5f0@pop3.norton.antivirus> And your point is? At 08:14 p.m. 5/03/2006, scott.holst at us.army.mil wrote: >Ah but the question beckons, if they are willing to change a 20+ >year old rule like PM, whats to them from changing the VBM sleaze move? > > >Scott > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Malcolm Rutledge >Date: Sunday, March 5, 2006 0:41 am >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > > > Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, > > > > Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked > > in > > their old form? > > I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze > > tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better > > package. > > > > At 01:08 p.m. 5/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: > > >---- mcleods wrote: > > > > > > > > > JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you > > are > > > willing and > > > > > able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be > > flaws. I just > > > > > don't think that very many other people really care. > > > > > > > > I care. :) > > > > > > > > I care that people like Ole are taking the time it takes to > > make > > > the ASLRB a > > > > better package. > > > > > >..."better" being a highly subjective and personal opinion. > > > > > >The new PM rules don't make ASL better...just...different than it > > was before. > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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 albcann at warwick.net Sun Mar 5 06:10:05 2006 From: albcann at warwick.net (al cann) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 09:10:05 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <2d1bcb2cf398.2cf3982d1bcb@us.army.mil> <6.2.3.4.0.20060305204809.026fa5f0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <002201c6405e$8219a4e0$fb14c7d0@DGYPG541> Different situation, Scott. Not that this is important in ASL, but the VBM rule makes sense. When that tank is in your face, it is not easy to overlook it. If I have a lion about to attack me, I'm not all that interested in what is happening in the distance. Al Cann ----- Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm Rutledge" To: Cc: "ASL List" Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 6:48 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > And your point is? > > At 08:14 p.m. 5/03/2006, scott.holst at us.army.mil wrote: >>Ah but the question beckons, if they are willing to change a 20+ >>year old rule like PM, whats to them from changing the VBM sleaze move? >> >> >>Scott >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: Malcolm Rutledge >>Date: Sunday, March 5, 2006 0:41 am >>Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes >> >> > Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, >> > >> > Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked >> > in >> > their old form? >> > I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze >> > tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better >> > package. >> > >> > At 01:08 p.m. 5/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: >> > >---- mcleods wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > JMO. And I respect that yours is different, and that you >> > are >> > > willing and >> > > > > able to spend time trying to fix what you perceive to be >> > flaws. I just >> > > > > don't think that very many other people really care. >> > > > >> > > > I care. :) >> > > > >> > > > I care that people like Ole are taking the time it takes to >> > make >> > > the ASLRB a >> > > > better package. >> > > >> > >..."better" being a highly subjective and personal opinion. >> > > >> > >The new PM rules don't make ASL better...just...different than it >> > was before. >> > >_______________________________________________ >> > >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 Mar 5 06:49:17 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:49:17 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <2d1bcb2cf398.2cf3982d1bcb@us.army.mil> Message-ID: Hi, > Ah but the question beckons, if they are willing to change a 20+ > year old rule like PM, whats to them from changing the VBM sleaze move? > Probably the fact that the rules that allow VBM freeze are not broken. Not the most realistic rules in the ASLRB, but they are pretty logical, and the opposing side have measures against it. There's nothing that stops MMP from changing the VBM freeze rule if they think it makes sense to do so, but why should they? Do you have any reason to think that they want to do so? You could just as well have asked the same question in '98 when MMP were willing to change the HW rules, in '92 when AH were willing to change the Fire Lane rules or in '87 when they were willing to add the upper level encirclement rules - just for the sake of realism ;-) From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Mar 5 11:50:22 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 11:50:22 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <11113489.1141588222832.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> ---- Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > And your point is? Your reply is the point. You see, sleaze is mostly a matter of opinion. It has nothing to do with reality or consistency and ever thing to do with that first game one got burned in with a particular tactic. From then on it was "sleaze" to that player. There was absolutely no need/reason to change the PM rules other than a handful of titty babies who got burned by the tactic once and resented it ever since. Not much of a basis for developing rules in my book. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Mar 5 11:55:28 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 11:55:28 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <29720395.1141588528575.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> ---- Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, > > Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked in > their old form? Yes, I can...because I used them in their old form and never had a problem. > I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze > tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better package. No, it makes it a different package...not better. There is no perfect ASL. Any attempt to achieve it will result in the eventual end of ASL. The perfect is the enemy of good enough. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Mar 5 12:05:35 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 12:05:35 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <28232021.1141589135368.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> ---- al cann wrote: > Different situation, Scott. Not that this is important in ASL, but the VBM > rule makes sense. When that tank is in your face, it is not easy to > overlook it. If I have a lion about to attack me, I'm not all that > interested in what is happening in the distance. Sure...it makes sense to you. But, as the PM rule change has demonstrated, all it takes is enough whiners complaining about VBM and it will happen. Now that players know that all they have to do is be extremely vocal about their particular rule pet peeve there is no limit to what might be changed in the future. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From tompygo at comcast.net Sun Mar 5 12:13:27 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 14:13:27 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <28232021.1141589135368.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> References: <28232021.1141589135368.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: <200603051413.27359.tompygo@comcast.net> Let's see. A "rule" was changed to define the word "impulse" and remove ambiguity to make the rules consistent. I tried to look up the rule "VBM sleeze" and "VBM freeze" and found no such rule. No where in the rule book does it say "If a vehicle is in your location you can'f fire out." I keep looking for this rule so that when they change it I can mark it in my book. Tate, please let me know where this rule exists so I can be ready for the change. On Sunday 05 March 2006 02:05 pm, Tate Rogers wrote: > ---- al cann wrote: > > Different situation, Scott. Not that this is important in ASL, but the > > VBM rule makes sense. When that tank is in your face, it is not easy to > > overlook it. If I have a lion about to attack me, I'm not all that > > interested in what is happening in the distance. > > Sure...it makes sense to you. But, as the PM rule change has demonstrated, > all it takes is enough whiners complaining about VBM and it will happen. > Now that players know that all they have to do is be extremely vocal about > their particular rule pet peeve there is no limit to what might be changed > in the future. > > > -- > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mar 5 12:14:27 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 21:14:27 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <11113489.1141588222832.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: Hi, Tate wrote: > You see, sleaze is mostly a matter of opinion. It has nothing to > do with reality or consistency and ever thing to do with that > first game one got burned in with a particular tactic. From then > on it was "sleaze" to that player. > It may well be that way for you Tate, that you are unable to look at something with dismay until you are burned by it yourself - but that doesn't mean that everybody else is like you. I have *never* been sleazed by the PM teleportation. I was the first player around here who got aware of it, and decided not to use it - something that all the other local players agreed to not do as well. > There was absolutely no need/reason to change the PM rules other > than a handful of titty babies who got burned by the tactic once > and resented it ever since. As if you know anything about my (or any others' reason). I'm pretty used to you stating such things as "facts" without even trying to back them up at all, so I'm not surprised that you continue to do so. I doubt that you even believe what you write yourself though. > Not much of a basis for developing rules in my book. No, but fortunately, some of us are mature enough to not only wanting to change the rule if we got burned by it. :-) If I wanted to be as childish as you in my argumentation, I could say that the only reason you like the old rule is because it makes you able to sleaze unprepared players. Fortunately, I'm not that childish, so I won't say that ;-) >> Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked in >> their old form? > > Yes, I can...because I used them in their old form and never had a problem. But I notice that you cannot explain how the old rules worked. How can they work fine when you're unable to explain them? But of course, it is *so* much easier to state your "facts" when you don't worry about backing them up by any arguments... > Sure...it makes sense to you. But, as the PM rule change has demonstrated, > all it takes is enough whiners complaining about VBM and it will happen. Your rants sound very much like whining. Fortunately, there is a difference between good arguments (which MMP may listen to) and bad whining (which they ignore). I understand that it's hard for you to see the difference, but the fact that they don't listen very much to you may be an indication... From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Mar 5 12:10:36 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 12:10:36 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <22048680.1141589436083.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> ---- Ole Boe wrote: > > There's nothing that stops MMP from changing the VBM freeze rule if they > think it makes sense to do so, but why should they? Same reason they changed the PM rules...whining, crying and complaining by enough vocal players. > Do you have any reason to think that they want to do so? Well, I didn't have any reason to believe that the PM rules would change. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Sun Mar 5 12:29:31 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 12:29:31 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> ---- Jeff Thompson wrote: > Let's see. A "rule" was changed to define the word "impulse" and remove > ambiguity to make the rules consistent. > > I tried to look up the rule "VBM sleeze" and "VBM freeze" and found no such > rule. No where in the rule book does it say "If a vehicle is in your > location you can'f fire out." I keep looking for this rule so that when they > change it I can mark it in my book. > > Tate, please let me know where this rule exists so I can be ready for the > change. Show me where the so called "AFV crab crawl rule" was. Oh, wait, there is no such rule...but amazingly they were able to effect this none existent "rule" by changing the PM rules. Show me where the so called "AFV teleport" rules were? Oh, wait, there is no such rule...and yet this none existent rule was eliminated by a change to the PM rules. I certainly hope you were being an idiot on purpose to make a point. Of course this would be easier to believe if you had actual made one...a point that is. --- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From tompygo at comcast.net Sun Mar 5 13:14:59 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 15:14:59 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> From an outdated page of the rules... "D14.2 ... The two or three AFV platoon (although not all of the platoon's AFV) must move one hex as a "multihex stack" of adjacent or same-hex units before any of them can be First Fired on (and also before they can Bounding First Fire). ..." Right there? I heard someone argue for "shoot and scoot." But you can't do that either. So that person was interpreting the rules incorrectly anyway. P.S. I hate that sleazy move where someone generates a hero and then uses the Advancing Fire Phase to break my squads. Heroes should be removed from the game. On Sunday 05 March 2006 02:29 pm, Tate Rogers wrote: > ---- Jeff Thompson wrote: > > Let's see. A "rule" was changed to define the word "impulse" and remove > > ambiguity to make the rules consistent. > > > > I tried to look up the rule "VBM sleeze" and "VBM freeze" and found no > > such rule. No where in the rule book does it say "If a vehicle is in > > your location you can'f fire out." I keep looking for this rule so that > > when they change it I can mark it in my book. > > > > Tate, please let me know where this rule exists so I can be ready for the > > change. > > Show me where the so called "AFV crab crawl rule" was. Oh, wait, there is > no such rule...but amazingly they were able to effect this none existent > "rule" by changing the PM rules. Show me where the so called "AFV teleport" > rules were? Oh, wait, there is no such rule...and yet this none existent > rule was eliminated by a change to the PM rules. > > I certainly hope you were being an idiot on purpose to make a point. Of > course this would be easier to believe if you had actual made one...a point > that is. --- > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > _______________________________________________ > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Sun Mar 5 13:49:45 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:49:45 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> At 03:14 PM 3/5/2006, Jeff Thompson wrote: >I heard someone argue for "shoot and scoot." But you can't do that either. >So that person was interpreting the rules incorrectly anyway. Tad off there, old bean... in the discussed scenario(do try to keep up)....the defender got to shoot...DFPh/Oppo's MPh...and then scoot in their MPh(PM) without taking a shot from the oppo..... The rule "worked", i.e. people could understand and apply it. Now if you want to define a working rule, as one you like, or a non-working rule, as one you don't like...then we will have a difference of opinion on what "works" mean. The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that was the only reason for the change. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Mar 5 14:23:31 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 23:23:31 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ron Mosher wrote: > > The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that > was the only reason for the change. > Just wanted to say that for once I agree with Ron. Some people (like Tate) think it worked fine. Some people (like me) thought it worked badly, so badly that we wanted to change it, and MMP agreed. Neither of the views are strictly wrong or right, since the view of which rule are best, is subjective. I will probably continue to support the new rules - not because I lead the rewrite, but because I think the new rules are very much better than the old (which is *why* I chose to rewrite it). I also have nothing against people defending the old rule. Arguing that PM teleportation is fine, or that it was so seldom used that it wasn't worth a rewrite are both valid, subjective arguments - which I happen to disagree with, with my own subjective arguments. What I really don't understand though, is that people like Tate feel the need to argue with a bunch of lies about *why* people like me wanted to change the rule and *why* Perry and Brian decided to change the rule and how they decide about errata. That's something Tate just don't know - just like I don't know *why* he som much want to attack the new rule that he need to invent the reasons instead of using some *real* reasons. Oh well. Sorry for using your post as the starting point for a rant Ron, now that you wrote a post about the PM rules that I actually can relate to ;-) From malm at gol.com Sun Mar 5 18:52:29 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 11:52:29 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 06:49 a.m. 6/03/2006, ron mosher wrote: >The rule "worked", i.e. people could understand and apply it. The same could be said for the old Squad Leader rules; that didn't stop anyone from coming up with ASL. Are you having a problem understanding and applying the rule now? >Now if >you want to define a working rule, as one you like, or a non-working >rule, as one you don't like...then we will have a difference of >opinion on what "works" mean. How about if we define a working rule as one which is consistent with the other rules. >The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that >was the only reason for the change. The old PM rules contained a glaring rules inconsistency which could be easily fixed (no offence Ole) without adding complexity...that was the only reason for the change. From malm at gol.com Sun Mar 5 18:58:50 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 11:58:50 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <29720395.1141588528575.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> References: <29720395.1141588528575.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060306115534.02700178@pop3.norton.antivirus> Tate, Can you honestly say that the new rule is any more difficult to understand and apply than the old one? Can you honestly say that the PM teleport was a good thing? Now, tell me again what it is that you have against this new rule? At 04:55 a.m. 6/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: >---- Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > > Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, > > > > Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked in > > their old form? > >Yes, I can...because I used them in their old form and never had a problem. > > > I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze > > tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better package. > >No, it makes it a different package...not better. There is no >perfect ASL. Any attempt to achieve it will result in the eventual >end of ASL. The perfect is the enemy of good enough. >-- >Later- > >Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 5 23:44:24 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:44:24 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Tantrums In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:49:45 -0600, ron mosher wrote: >The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that >was the only reason for the change. It's amazing how selective some people's memories are. It's true that the PM rules were essentially unchanged and unremarked on for years. Indeed, approximately 15 years. Then in 2000, the 2nd ed. rules came out. Amongst some other things, the PM rules were reworded slightly to clarify them. Nothing was *changed* -- the rule still worked exactly as it did under 1st ed. -- it was just easier to understand. That's when the howling began, as suddenly a whole bunch of players -- not just newbies, but mostly grognards -- realised exactly what that rule said. A new rule? No, an old rule suddenly made comprehensible. The ASLML -- this forum, right here -- had threads that went *on* and *on* and *on* about it. Everyone and their dog participated. Initially it was all about how MMP had "broken" the rule. Finally it began to sink in -- MMP had done nothing; the PM rules were *always* broken. ("Broken" in the sense of leading to a stupid result, not "broken" in the sense of being mechanically unworkable.) Now, which is better? A stupid rule that no-one understands, or a stupid rule that is plain to see? Either way, the rule remained stupid. That was an opinion that was shared by everyone who bothered to comment on the ASLML back then -- and I'm not just talking about the "usual suspects", I'm including many well-respected players not usually known for making complaints about *any* rules. I can't remember *anyone* stating that they were ever in favour of *not* fixing the rule, because it seemed that *everyone* recognised just how mind-bogglingly stupid it was. That point in time -- circa mid-2000 -- was when MMP was convinced that the PM rules needed to be fixed. Because they heard the screaming, saw what it was that people were screaming about, and realised that something should be done about it. Hey fellas! It took a few years, but you got *exactly* what you wanted. You got what *everyone* wanted. And yet a few known losers keep screaming; and we *know* that they're losers because they've forgotten that they once were screaming *for* this just as loudly as everyone else was. If anyone ever wanted to know why I consider that people like Tate Rogers, Ron Mosher, and Scott Holst have no credibility: here it is, right here. Scream all you like, guys. I'd be very surprised if MMP gives a shit what *you* think any more. Why should they? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 06:04:50 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 08:04:50 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> At 08:52 PM 3/5/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >The same could be said for the old Squad Leader rules; that didn't >stop anyone from coming up with ASL. Chuckle...and you still don't get it do you? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 06:06:44 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 08:06:44 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Tantrums In-Reply-To: References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080550.01c10760@direcway.com> At 01:44 AM 3/6/2006, Bruce Probst wrote: >the howling Now, feel better after your rant/howl/tantrum? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From malm at gol.com Mon Mar 6 07:50:42 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:50:42 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> You're right Ron, I don't get it! I have absolutely no idea what you are on about. As far as I can tell, you are trying to say that we should have stuck with Squad Leader because you don't like it when rules change. If that isn't it, why don't you explain what exactly it is that you are whining about, instead of just making snide comments. At 11:04 p.m. 6/03/2006, ron mosher wrote: >At 08:52 PM 3/5/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >>The same could be said for the old Squad Leader rules; that didn't >>stop anyone from coming up with ASL. > >Chuckle...and you still don't get it do you? > > >For the nonce, >ron >acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 08:17:08 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 10:17:08 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> At 09:50 AM 3/6/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >As far as I can tell, you are trying to say that we should have >stuck with Squad Leader because you don't like it when rules change. Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing players..... you want to repeat that? ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From dgour.asl at gmail.com Mon Mar 6 08:27:29 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 09:27:29 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> Message-ID: <764636a60603060827o2f37576au69ab268a21709bca@mail.gmail.com> My own opinion on the loss of players between SL and GI would be that it wasn't so much due to the rules changing, but instead because they were getting substantially more complex. ASL is the apex of that -- small revisions don't drive ASLers out. SL and ASL are like tee ball and the major leagues. Lots of people get lost along the way. I just hope we can convert some of the new starter kit people to the full game but I suspect most casual players will just want to stick at that level. -- Darren On 3/6/06, ron mosher wrote: > At 09:50 AM 3/6/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > >As far as I can tell, you are trying to say that we should have > >stuck with Squad Leader because you don't like it when rules change. > > Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing > players..... you want to repeat that? > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 tompygo at comcast.net Mon Mar 6 08:33:36 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:33:36 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> Message-ID: <001e01c6413c$706d91f0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> It's interesting that no one complained about the great Assault Move Bump rules change this much. In fact, if memory serves (and it hasn't lately) then MMP made the change counter to how they themselves played it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Malcolm Rutledge" ; "ron mosher" ; "Jeff Thompson" ; Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > At 09:50 AM 3/6/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > >As far as I can tell, you are trying to say that we should have > >stuck with Squad Leader because you don't like it when rules change. > > Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing > players..... you want to repeat that? > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > From tompygo at comcast.net Mon Mar 6 08:43:01 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:43:01 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> Message-ID: <002501c6413d$0bc44360$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> I know I was pretty pissed off when they made the change to this rule and actually had the gaul to add "unarmed" to the rule. That let all those gun toting trucks freeze me. With huge changes like this to the rules willy nilly, we would have chaos... oh wait From dreenstra at comcast.net Mon Mar 6 09:14:18 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 12:14:18 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060306115534.02700178@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <20060306171441.0ACC71BA99@che.dreamhost.com> With Tate's warped sense of reality, he can 'honestly say' that the moon is made of green cheese. What's the point of even trying to argue with him about this subject? Dave Reenstra > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of Malcolm Rutledge > Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 9:59 PM > To: Tate Rogers > Cc: ASL List > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > > Tate, > Can you honestly say that the new rule is any more difficult to > understand and apply than the old one? > Can you honestly say that the PM teleport was a good thing? > Now, tell me again what it is that you have against this new rule? > > At 04:55 a.m. 6/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: > >---- Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > > > Tate, and others who object to any changes to the rules, > > > > > > Can you honestly say that the HW and platoon movement rules worked in > > > their old form? > > > >Yes, I can...because I used them in their old form and never had a > problem. > > > > > I think that any change that gets rid on such ridiculous sleaze > > > tactics as the PM teleport definitely is making the ASLRB a better > package. > > > >No, it makes it a different package...not better. There is no > >perfect ASL. Any attempt to achieve it will result in the eventual > >end of ASL. The perfect is the enemy of good enough. > >-- > >Later- > > > >Tater (One Mean Spud!) > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 gr27134 at charter.net Mon Mar 6 09:55:52 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 9:55:52 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Tantrums Message-ID: <8305325.1141667752525.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> ---- Bruce Probst wrote: > On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:49:45 -0600, ron mosher wrote: > > The ASLML -- this forum, right here -- had threads that went *on* and *on* and > *on* about it. Everyone and their dog participated. I remember...there were about 4-5 people screaming and crying about it...out of 800-900 subscribers. Which is usually how things on the ASLML. That is a high noise level maintained by a very small number. > Either way, the rule remained stupid. That was an opinion that was shared by > everyone who bothered to comment on the ASLML back then -- and I'm not just > talking about the "usual suspects", I'm including many well-respected players > not usually known for making complaints about *any* rules. I can't remember > *anyone* stating that they were ever in favour of *not* fixing the rule, > because it seemed that *everyone* recognised just how mind-bogglingly stupid > it was. It was the usual 4-5 vocal MMP insiders. There were about as many that said "so what?" It wasn't anywhere near "everyone". It never is on the ASLML. > That point in time -- circa mid-2000 -- was when MMP was convinced that the PM > rules needed to be fixed. Because they heard the screaming, saw what it was > that people were screaming about, and realised that something should be done > about it. They heard the standard 4-5 "in crowd" screaming and, as usual, gave in. > If anyone ever wanted to know why I consider that people like Tate Rogers, Ron > Mosher, and Scott Holst have no credibility Yeah, well, I could potentialy regain credibility...but you, OTOH, will remain fat, dumb, and ugly the rest of your life. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Mon Mar 6 10:00:13 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:00:13 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes Message-ID: <30647140.1141668013910.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> ---- Jeff Thompson wrote: > It's interesting that no one complained about the great Assault Move Bump > rules change this much. In fact, if memory serves (and it hasn't lately) > then MMP made the change counter to how they themselves played it. I did complain...long and hard. But unless one is of the golden few one's complaints have little effect. Ole is one, Patrik Manlig is one, McLeod, 3-4 others. These guys whimper a little and it is guaranteed to change...regardless of what any other group of ASL players might have to say. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From malm at gol.com Mon Mar 6 10:10:46 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 03:10:46 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060307030556.025f1d88@pop3.norton.antivirus> So what you're saying is that you see this as a major change to the rules that is likely to drive players away? How many players do you see being lost over this issue? hundreds? ten? one? My money is on zero. At 01:17 a.m. 7/03/2006, ron mosher wrote: >At 09:50 AM 3/6/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >>As far as I can tell, you are trying to say that we should have >>stuck with Squad Leader because you don't like it when rules change. > >Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing >players..... you want to repeat that? > > >ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > From ldmmisselbrook at shaw.ca Mon Mar 6 10:35:21 2006 From: ldmmisselbrook at shaw.ca (Lee) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 11:35:21 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> Message-ID: <002601c6414c$b9904e80$fd719644@p3> There's way more to this,even though its a factor.The gamers who started with SL began to get older and get more interests.I feel speaking for myself, that ASL rekindled my interest in SL. Now its the main game I play but not the only one Now when you factor in reallife and TIME,it just get worse.Just my 2 cents. Lee in Edmonton > Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing > players..... you want to repeat that? From keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Mar 6 10:42:47 2006 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 13:42:47 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Status Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00603061042n3cdd5b0dj419d087437fc6c94@mail.gmail.com> Hi guys: Since I told everyone not to worry until March 5 and it's now March 6, I thought I would make sure that everyone knows the following: AOO is still shipping, and we have several hundred preorders left to ship. Also, we had a collating party this weekend to put together a bunch more for shipping. Thanks for your patience, Keith From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 10:44:18 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 12:44:18 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060307030556.025f1d88@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307030556.025f1d88@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306123908.01c5a7a8@direcway.com> At 12:10 PM 3/6/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >So what you're saying is that you see this as a major change to the >rules that is likely to drive players away? Have you seen a list of future changes the boys want? Have you compiled a list of all current changes just from ASLRBv2 a newbie needs to update v2 only? There is a breakpoint somewhere... Welcome to ASL...now after you get the ASLRB and BV..make sure you immediately buy AoO for the updated pages, and down load the sticky errata for about 20-30 pages from... well...a couple of sites...err..where you going?...... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Mar 6 10:49:11 2006 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 13:49:11 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Status In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00603061042n3cdd5b0dj419d087437fc6c94@mail.gmail.com> References: <4e2cf5e00603061042n3cdd5b0dj419d087437fc6c94@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00603061049h3829439eu5ad9b7adae01f8d9@mail.gmail.com> Errata: Thought I saw where we were having a collating session, and now I can't find the post I thought I saw. Consider that part of my previous post an hallucination induced by low blood sugar due to Weight Watchers. K On 3/6/06, keith dalton wrote: > Hi guys: > > Since I told everyone not to worry until March 5 and it's now March 6, > I thought I would make sure that everyone knows the following: > > AOO is still shipping, and we have several hundred preorders left to ship. > > Also, we had a collating party this weekend to put together a bunch > more for shipping. > > Thanks for your patience, > > Keith > From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 11:03:40 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 13:03:40 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <002601c6414c$b9904e80$fd719644@p3> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> <002601c6414c$b9904e80$fd719644@p3> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> At 12:35 PM 3/6/2006, Lee wrote: >The gamers who started >with SL began to get older and get more interests. Partially..but the changes/modules came fairly fast for a non-computer age...I recall opening GI, punching out just the first scenario, looking at the new counters/rules, shaking my head and putting all the SL stuff in a closet. Also, recall having many SL partners(wore out counters and boards for 2 sets), a few COI sidekicks, one COD oppo...and no GI interest from the guys at all. Unlike the new rules changers..I lived thru that time. >I feel speaking for >myself, that ASL rekindled my interest in SL. Seeing a few guys playing ASL at a tourney and learning the rules were set in concrete, no more SL to COI to COB, etc...rekindled mine. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From vicca at v21.me.uk Mon Mar 6 11:37:55 2006 From: vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:37:55 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> Message-ID: Frankly yes. Each time getting a better game.Do I wish torepeat that? Ypours Aye Martin -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of ron mosher Sent: 06 March 2006 16:17 To: Malcolm Rutledge; ron mosher; Jeff Thompson; aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes At 09:50 AM 3/6/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >As far as I can tell, you are trying to say that we should have >stuck with Squad Leader because you don't like it when rules change. Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing players..... you want to repeat that? ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. _______________________________________________ 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 vicca at v21.me.uk Mon Mar 6 11:37:56 2006 From: vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:37:56 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <002601c6414c$b9904e80$fd719644@p3> Message-ID: Strangely enough for the first time ever I had the PM teleport happen to me a couple of weeks ago. A shot through a woods gap couldnot be made. Did it break the scenario? Nope. Do I really care? Nope. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Lee Sent: 06 March 2006 18:35 To: ASLML Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes There's way more to this,even though its a factor.The gamers who started with SL began to get older and get more interests.I feel speaking for myself, that ASL rekindled my interest in SL. Now its the main game I play but not the only one Now when you factor in reallife and TIME,it just get worse.Just my 2 cents. Lee in Edmonton > Try this SL to COI to COD to GI.... and every time losing > players..... you want to repeat that? _______________________________________________ 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 vicca at v21.me.uk Mon Mar 6 11:45:23 2006 From: vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:45:23 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] AOO Status In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00603061049h3829439eu5ad9b7adae01f8d9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Quick get this guy a doughnut you know it's only a matter of time before the blood sugar drops so low the counters start looking good to eat... Yours Aye Martin -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of keith dalton Sent: 06 March 2006 18:49 To: ASL Mailing List Subject: Re: [Aslml] AOO Status Errata: Thought I saw where we were having a collating session, and now I can't find the post I thought I saw. Consider that part of my previous post an hallucination induced by low blood sugar due to Weight Watchers. K On 3/6/06, keith dalton wrote: > Hi guys: > > Since I told everyone not to worry until March 5 and it's now March 6, > I thought I would make sure that everyone knows the following: > > AOO is still shipping, and we have several hundred preorders left to ship. > > Also, we had a collating party this weekend to put together a bunch > more for shipping. > > Thanks for your patience, > > Keith > _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 6 12:14:17 2006 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (swfancher@mindspring.com) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:14:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <30303739.1141676057306.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Ah, it feels like the old days, all right. Now if The Pitcavage would just join in and set us straight by telling us all what we think about the rules changes, it would be perfect! My ASL time is very limited. Time spent updating the ASLRB comes from my playing time. I have stopped updating my ASLRB. At some point it will become obsolete. At that point I will probably simply stop playing...or at least only play with people who are not going to have a witch hunt if I don't have an ISO 9001 certified copy of the ASLRB. Some things are worth the time...playing ASL is one. Posting neverending errata and rules changes is not. IMO. I know...the usual suspects disagree vehemently. Which is fine...in the end, you can all get together and play each other, because the rest of the ASL world will be off playing something else, something that does not require the time commitment to simply keep the rules "up to date," let alone to read and understand them. From gd891 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 6 12:22:52 2006 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd891) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:22:52 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <30303739.1141676057306.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: > will be off playing something else, something that does not require the > time commitment to simply keep the rules "up to date," let alone to read > and understand them. Whoa! Back rules truck up! Since when is this so called "reading" required? Greg "I get the errata just for the pictures" Dahl From snow at lasp.colorado.edu Mon Mar 6 12:35:45 2006 From: snow at lasp.colorado.edu (Marty Snow) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 13:35:45 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> <002601c6414c$b9904e80$fd719644@p3> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, ron mosher wrote: > Seeing a few guys playing ASL at a tourney and learning the rules > were set in concrete, no more SL to COI to COB, etc...rekindled mine. > Don't the ASL rules come in a 3-ring binder because they are _not_ set in concrete? I seem to remember reading something by Don Greenwood that said the system was designed to be regularly updated. I agree that having basic rules overridden by COI/COB/GI was very difficult to manage as a player. But I do not agree that this tweak to the Platoon Movement rules falls into that category. Marty Marty Snow marty.snow at lasp.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/home.html From chris at evingar.eclipse.co.uk Mon Mar 6 13:15:03 2006 From: chris at evingar.eclipse.co.uk (Chris Netherton) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 21:15:03 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Burning Wreck in Bypass References: Message-ID: <00a501c64163$08d91510$0501a8c0@pooworldmot0yw> Hello! Does a burning wreck in Bypass of a woods/building Smoke out the whole hex as per B25.2 or do the provisions of D9.4 apply and the Hindrance is only applied to the hexside that the once beautiful tank was bypassing? Cheers Chris From dreenstra at comcast.net Mon Mar 6 13:21:13 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:21:13 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> Message-ID: <20060306212116.E00A61BB91@che.dreamhost.com> Ah, the classic "the world is a mystery to everyone but Ron Mosher" gambit. Well played Ron! That'll teach him. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of ron mosher > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:05 AM > To: Malcolm Rutledge; ron mosher; Jeff Thompson; aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > > At 08:52 PM 3/5/2006, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > >The same could be said for the old Squad Leader rules; that didn't > >stop anyone from coming up with ASL. > > Chuckle...and you still don't get it do you? > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > 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 dreenstra at comcast.net Mon Mar 6 13:27:48 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:27:48 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <20060306212751.B68B91BB67@che.dreamhost.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of ron mosher > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 2:04 PM > To: Lee; ASLML > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > > > Seeing a few guys playing ASL at a tourney and learning the rules > were set in concrete, no more SL to COI to COB, etc...rekindled mine. > > You saw guys with a rulebook in a three-ring binder and thought the rules were "set in concrete"?!? Now *that's* funny! Dave Reenstra From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 6 13:53:37 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:53:37 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <11113489.1141588222832.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: > >There was absolutely no need/reason to change the PM rules other than a >handful of titty babies who got burned by the tactic once and resented it >ever since. Not much of a basis for developing rules in my book. What a bunch of crap. The original Platoom Movement rule allowed the PM using player to circumvent the Defensive First Fire mechanic. In fact, it rendered Defensive First Fire as inoperative by allowing the AFV to expend a MP to Start, expend another MP to change CA, then expend yet another MP to enter a new hex -- all before allowing DFF. Sorry, that's a flaw in the rule because because it totally circumvents an important mechanic in the game system. And you say you were/are okay with that? Again, what a bunch of crap. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 6 14:01:45 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 23:01:45 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Updating the ASLRB (was: Platoon movement changes) In-Reply-To: <30303739.1141676057306.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Hi, swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > My ASL time is very limited. Time spent updating the ASLRB comes > from my playing time. I have stopped updating my ASLRB. Have you downloaded the sticky errata I created (http://home.no.net/oboe/)? By printing out that and gluing it onto your pages, you should get an updated ASLRB in less than an hour, so it doesn't detract very much from your playing time. I will of course create similar errata for J7 when the time comes. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 6 14:02:53 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:02:53 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >Just wanted to say that for once I agree with Ron. Some people (like Tate) >think it worked fine. Some people (like me) thought it worked badly, so >badly that we wanted to change it, and MMP agreed. Neither of the views are >strictly wrong or right, since the view of which rule are best, is >subjective. > Ole, I don't believe there is any reason to be accommodating on this issue. The rule did not work fine, as you well know. It allowed the player to circumvent an extremely important mechanic of the game system, namely Defensive First Fire. You recognized that it was a flaw in the rule itself, as did MMP. As did I, for that matter. > >I also have nothing against people defending the old rule. Arguing that PM >teleportation is fine, or that it was so seldom used that it wasn't worth a >rewrite are both valid, subjective arguments - which I happen to disagree >with, with my own subjective arguments. > Well, you are being kind and civil for its own sake. That's one thing I appreciate about your style. But I totally disagree with you that the viewpoint argued by Tate and by Ron is in any way a "valid" argument. They either refuse to accept, or are unable to recognize, that the old PM rule was allowing a distinct violation of the DFF principles. Whether or not either of them actually used the rule that way, or had it used that way against them, is utterly irrelevant. Just the fact that it was possible introduced a flaw in the game mechanic. I suppose the only "valid" argument is that it was perfectly reasonable that the ability to use Platoon Movement should be accompanied by the ability to circumvent Defensive First Fire. If that is indeed their argument, well... Let me just say that I, for one, am pleased that that attitude does not prevail. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 6 14:05:29 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:05:29 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Tantrums In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > >The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that > >was the only reason for the change. > >It's amazing how selective some people's memories are. > >It's true that the PM rules were essentially unchanged and unremarked on >for >years. Indeed, approximately 15 years. > >Then in 2000, the 2nd ed. rules came out. Amongst some other things, the >PM >rules were reworded slightly to clarify them. Nothing was *changed* -- the >rule still worked exactly as it did under 1st ed. -- it was just easier to >understand. > >That's when the howling began, as suddenly a whole bunch of players -- not >just newbies, but mostly grognards -- realised exactly what that rule said. > A >new rule? No, an old rule suddenly made comprehensible. > >The ASLML -- this forum, right here -- had threads that went *on* and *on* >and >*on* about it. Everyone and their dog participated. Initially it was all >about how MMP had "broken" the rule. Finally it began to sink in -- MMP >had >done nothing; the PM rules were *always* broken. ("Broken" in the sense of >leading to a stupid result, not "broken" in the sense of being mechanically >unworkable.) > >Now, which is better? A stupid rule that no-one understands, or a stupid >rule >that is plain to see? > >Either way, the rule remained stupid. That was an opinion that was shared >by >everyone who bothered to comment on the ASLML back then -- and I'm not just >talking about the "usual suspects", I'm including many well-respected >players >not usually known for making complaints about *any* rules. I can't >remember >*anyone* stating that they were ever in favour of *not* fixing the rule, >because it seemed that *everyone* recognised just how mind-bogglingly >stupid >it was. > >That point in time -- circa mid-2000 -- was when MMP was convinced that the >PM >rules needed to be fixed. Because they heard the screaming, saw what it >was >that people were screaming about, and realised that something should be >done >about it. > >Hey fellas! It took a few years, but you got *exactly* what you wanted. >You >got what *everyone* wanted. And yet a few known losers keep screaming; and >we >*know* that they're losers because they've forgotten that they once were >screaming *for* this just as loudly as everyone else was. > >If anyone ever wanted to know why I consider that people like Tate Rogers, >Ron >Mosher, and Scott Holst have no credibility: here it is, right here. >Scream >all you like, guys. I'd be very surprised if MMP gives a shit what *you* >think any more. Why should they? >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > >_______________________________________________ >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 _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 6 14:05:30 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:05:30 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Tantrums In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > >The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that > >was the only reason for the change. > >It's amazing how selective some people's memories are. > >It's true that the PM rules were essentially unchanged and unremarked on >for >years. Indeed, approximately 15 years. > >Then in 2000, the 2nd ed. rules came out. Amongst some other things, the >PM >rules were reworded slightly to clarify them. Nothing was *changed* -- the >rule still worked exactly as it did under 1st ed. -- it was just easier to >understand. > >That's when the howling began, as suddenly a whole bunch of players -- not >just newbies, but mostly grognards -- realised exactly what that rule said. > A >new rule? No, an old rule suddenly made comprehensible. > >The ASLML -- this forum, right here -- had threads that went *on* and *on* >and >*on* about it. Everyone and their dog participated. Initially it was all >about how MMP had "broken" the rule. Finally it began to sink in -- MMP >had >done nothing; the PM rules were *always* broken. ("Broken" in the sense of >leading to a stupid result, not "broken" in the sense of being mechanically >unworkable.) > >Now, which is better? A stupid rule that no-one understands, or a stupid >rule >that is plain to see? > >Either way, the rule remained stupid. That was an opinion that was shared >by >everyone who bothered to comment on the ASLML back then -- and I'm not just >talking about the "usual suspects", I'm including many well-respected >players >not usually known for making complaints about *any* rules. I can't >remember >*anyone* stating that they were ever in favour of *not* fixing the rule, >because it seemed that *everyone* recognised just how mind-bogglingly >stupid >it was. > >That point in time -- circa mid-2000 -- was when MMP was convinced that the >PM >rules needed to be fixed. Because they heard the screaming, saw what it >was >that people were screaming about, and realised that something should be >done >about it. > >Hey fellas! It took a few years, but you got *exactly* what you wanted. >You >got what *everyone* wanted. And yet a few known losers keep screaming; and >we >*know* that they're losers because they've forgotten that they once were >screaming *for* this just as loudly as everyone else was. > >If anyone ever wanted to know why I consider that people like Tate Rogers, >Ron >Mosher, and Scott Holst have no credibility: here it is, right here. >Scream >all you like, guys. I'd be very surprised if MMP gives a shit what *you* >think any more. Why should they? >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > >_______________________________________________ >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 _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 6 14:11:57 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 23:11:57 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> Message-ID: Hi Ron (and everyone else) > Seeing a few guys playing ASL at a tourney and learning the rules > were set in concrete, no more SL to COI to COB, etc...rekindled mine. > I'm really curious about where you got the "learning the rules were set in concrete" from. In the introduction of the first edition, Don Greenwod uses one paragraph to tell us that we should expect replacement pages, and the first pring contained coupons you could send in when the two first batches of replacement pages arrived. I guess you have already read it on the szo forum, but I'll repeat *some* of the rule changes that AH made during the first ten years of ASL (there's probably a lot more that I've forgot): 1) Making units in upper levels encircled if they don't have a path out. 2) Completely redoing the OBA rules 3) Change the Motion rules so that vehicles can be in Reverse Motion. 4) Changing the Fire Lane rules. 5) Add Infantry smoke grenade capability to AFV's 6) Restrict voluntary break to units that are within the normal range of a Known, armed enemy unit. 7) Changing the control rules so that SMC or unarmed units cannot gain control 8) Making SMC Pinned if they get wounded after having spent more than 3 MF. So I really wonder what kind of concrete you're thinking of, or whether you're suffering from a *very* selective memory? From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 6 14:38:10 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 23:38:10 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes In-Reply-To: <30647140.1141668013910.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> Message-ID: Hi, Tate wrote: > I did complain...long and hard. > But maybe whining is not the right way of complaining? > But unless one is of the golden few one's complaints have little > effect. Ole is one, Patrik Manlig is one, McLeod, 3-4 others. > These guys whimper a little and it is guaranteed to > change...regardless of what any other group of ASL players might > have to say. This is of course hyperbole in its purest form. Yes, some players have more influence with MMP than others, but that's because they are able to give useful input and back up their view with logical arguments (except of Bruce Probst of course, but someone has to be the exception which confirms the rule ;-) - instead of the hyperbolic whimpering and whining you so effectively demonstrate in this discussion. But to prove that I still not learn, I will even act as if you respond to logical arguments by pointing out that MMP decided *not* to allow multi-hex Armored Assault with a platoon even though I argued for it. If you were right about me being guaranteed a change if I whimper a little, then this rule would be official now. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 6 15:10:06 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:10:06 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> Message-ID: > >The rule "worked", i.e. people could understand and apply it. Now if >you want to define a working rule, as one you like, or a non-working >rule, as one you don't like...then we will have a difference of >opinion on what "works" mean. > Your definition of "worked", as meaning "people could understand and apply it", is simplistic. According to this view, a rule could be a terribly bad rule from a game system perspective, but the rule would still "work" if players understood and applied it. That's very bad system design, if you ask me. >The old PM rules worked....some people didn't like the results...that >was the only reason for the change. > Okay, so according to your definition, people "could understand and apply the old PM rules". Fine, what of it? It was still a bad rule. The old PM rules allowed the player to circumvent arguably one of the most important game mechanics and innovations of the ASL game system: Defensive First Fire. What you have declared is that the following rule "works": Allowing a PM-using AFV to Start, change CA, then enter a new hex before allowing DFF -- even though such a move violates the entire principle of DFF as being MP dependent, without any good game system reason for doing so. To claim that such a rule "works" within the ASL game system is obtuse. To argue that the only reason it was changed is because certain people didn't like it... Well, that's pretty obtuse as well. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:21:35 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:21:35 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: References: <25966493.1141590571868.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <200603051514.59666.tompygo@comcast.net> <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060306114224.0269aaa0@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306080405.01c51638@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060307004323.025f2d70@pop3.norton.antivirus> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306101625.01c59350@direcway.com> <002601c6414c$b9904e80$fd719644@p3> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306171851.01c14000@direcway.com> At 02:35 PM 3/6/2006, Marty Snow wrote: >Don't the ASL rules come in a 3-ring binder because they are _not_ set in >concrete? Has ANYONE said errata/examples and stuff like that is bad? >I agree that having basic rules overridden by COI/COB/GI was very >difficult to manage as a player. But I do not agree that this tweak to >the Platoon Movement rules falls into that category. Alone...no...but combined with other changes suggested(the massive PM and stacks attack?) and implemented by the changer demi-gods....or is that anti-gods... :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:25:04 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:25:04 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> At 02:14 PM 3/6/2006, swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > I have stopped updating my ASLRB. At some point it will become > obsolete. At that point I will probably simply stop playing...or > at least only play with people who are not going to have a witch > hunt if I don't have an ISO 9001 certified copy of the ASLRB. Some > things are worth the time...playing ASL is one. Posting > neverending errata and rules changes is not. IMO. I know...the > usual suspects disagree vehemently. Which is fine...in the end, > you can all get together and play each other, because the rest of > the ASL world will be off playing something else, something that > does not require the time commitment to simply keep the rules "up > to date," let alone to read and understand them. Yep.... already decided to explore other hobbies......in fact now putting in more time on another one...something I've never done before.... sigh. Always bought 2 of all official stuff...AoO was the last....Hawka Luggie..I MIGHT buy one of, more bloody changes. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:26:15 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:26:15 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <0IVQ00I2E6A7IQ@a34-mta03.direcway.com> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306125703.01c636a8@direcway.com> <0IVQ00I2E6A7IQ@a34-mta03.direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172537.01c55450@direcway.com> At 03:27 PM 3/6/2006, David Reenstra wrote: >You saw guys with a rulebook in a three-ring binder and thought the rules >were "set in concrete"?!? Now *that's* funny! Sigh.. you just don't get it..see other post..maybe the light will dawn..doubt it tho.... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:27:09 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:27:09 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: References: <11113489.1141588222832.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172647.01c64498@direcway.com> At 03:53 PM 3/6/2006, Bruce Bakken wrote: >And you say you were/are okay with that? The rule worked..you just didn't like it. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:28:04 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:28:04 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Updating the ASLRB (was: Platoon movement changes) In-Reply-To: References: <30303739.1141676057306.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172732.01c587b0@direcway.com> At 04:01 PM 3/6/2006, Ole Boe wrote: >I will of course create similar errata for J7 when the >time comes. Chuckle..I know..an Ole Boe change a page is all you ask. :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:31:44 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes In-Reply-To: References: <30647140.1141668013910.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306173121.01c5ef18@direcway.com> At 04:38 PM 3/6/2006, Ole Boe wrote: >I will even act as if you respond to >logical arguments by pointing out that MMP decided *not* to allow multi-hex >Armored Assault with a platoon even though I argued for it. If you were >right about me being guaranteed a change if I whimper a little, then this >rule would be official now. QED, gentlemen.....the bar is now open. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 15:32:39 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:32:39 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060305154157.01c0c998@direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306173211.01c6a0d8@direcway.com> At 05:10 PM 3/6/2006, Bruce Bakken wrote: >Your definition of "worked", as meaning "people could understand and >apply it", is simplistic. > >According to this view, a rule could be a terribly bad rule from a >game system perspective, but the rule would still "work" if players >understood and applied it. > >That's very bad system design, if you ask me. Err... tell it to Mac or Greenwood...... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From the.colonel at clara.co.uk Mon Mar 6 16:15:38 2006 From: the.colonel at clara.co.uk (The Colonel) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 00:15:38 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> Message-ID: <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> I am still waiting for my copy of AoO to arrive :-( When it finally gets here I will be able to see for myself what all the fuss is about. As an impartial observer, if Ole Boe says the change is good then that is good enough for me ;-) the colonel From iguana at chartertn.net Mon Mar 6 17:23:22 2006 From: iguana at chartertn.net (Douglas D. Williams) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 20:23:22 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <764636a60603060827o2f37576au69ab268a21709bca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000001c64185$b9e97b20$6501a8c0@computer1> Well, consider me "converted". ;-) It will take me a while, but I do intend to move on to full ASL. Already buying it, as a matter of fact.... Now back to lurking. > SL and ASL are like tee ball and the major leagues. Lots of > people get lost along the way. I just hope we can convert > some of the new starter kit people to the full game but I > suspect most casual players will just want to stick at that level. From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Mar 6 17:36:01 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 21:36:01 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Burning Wreck in Bypass References: <00a501c64163$08d91510$0501a8c0@pooworldmot0yw> Message-ID: <005701c64187$d68ea1e0$7779de18@klis.com> Chris asked: > Does a burning wreck in Bypass of a woods/building Smoke out the whole hex > as per B25.2 or do the provisions of D9.4 apply and the Hindrance is only > applied to the hexside that the once beautiful tank was bypassing? SMOKE from any source always fills the entire hex. In the case of a burning wreck it's a +2 Hindrance up to Level 4. This applies instead of the usual wreck Hindrance whether it's in bypass or not (B25.2). Also, the wreck Blaze can spread to the woods/building being bypassed per the normal Spreading Fire rules. (B25.14) David "this could get outa hand" Olie From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 6 18:13:05 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:13:05 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306201203.01c684e0@direcway.com> At 06:15 PM 3/6/2006, The Colonel wrote: >As an impartial observer, if Ole Boe says the change is good then that is >good enough for me > >the colonel The final argument for not changing any rules...... :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 6 23:00:13 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:00:13 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <30303739.1141676057306.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <30303739.1141676057306.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:14:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00), swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: >because the rest of the ASL world will be off playing something else There's been a lot of bizarre shit said over the last few days in this thread, but I strongly suspect that this tops the list. "I don't *want* to keep my rules up-to-date and free of errata, so I'll go off and sulk by myself in protest." Whatever keeps you amused, dude. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From swfancher at mindspring.com Tue Mar 7 01:32:07 2006 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (swfancher@mindspring.com) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 20:32:07 +1100 (GMT+11:00) Subject: [Aslml] Updating the ASLRB (was: Platoon movement changes) Message-ID: <33171099.1141723927405.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Hi Ole I actually have downloaded all the sticky errata (at least as of when I did it...) shortly after you posted that it was available. And the files remain unprinted and un-posted. Over the last two years, my postings to the ASLML have became far fewer and in between because generally I struggle for the 15 m,inutes per day it takes me to get through the ASLML. The _only_ reason I have actually been able to be so prolific in the last two weeks is because I am traveling for work through the end of March and have a little more time, waiting on colleagues (like right now). And when I do find I have 30 mins, it is spent trying to turn around a VASL game file that has probably been waiting for 5+ days. Fortunately my opponents are very tolerant. But anyway, in the grand scheme of things, investing an hour posting errata into the ASLRB is pretty low on my priority list, behind looking at the "new" scenarios thinking about which ones I would like to play, and other things. I do appreciate your effort to create/provide the sticky errata, and maybe for some it will make a difference. But for me, I am not one of those. -----Original Message----- >From: Ole Boe >Sent: Mar 7, 2006 9:01 AM >To: swfancher at mindspring.com, aslml at lists.aslml.net >Subject: Updating the ASLRB (was: Platoon movement changes) > >Hi, > >swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: >> My ASL time is very limited. Time spent updating the ASLRB comes >> from my playing time. I have stopped updating my ASLRB. > >Have you downloaded the sticky errata I created (http://home.no.net/oboe/)? >By printing out that and gluing it onto your pages, you should get an >updated ASLRB in less than an hour, so it doesn't detract very much from >your playing time. I will of course create similar errata for J7 when the >time comes. > > From swfancher at mindspring.com Tue Mar 7 02:10:41 2006 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (swfancher@mindspring.com) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 21:10:41 +1100 (GMT+11:00) Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <25328218.1141726242185.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Actually I am not sulking by myself Bruce. I played a great game against a great guy (Dave Wilson) in Sydney Australia just this past weekend. Met a bunch of other great guys too...fortunately for me they seemed far more interested in rolling the dice and having a good time than in looking for "bizarre shit" and rules to tweak. I was somewhat concerned that they might get "upset" or "uptight," since I did not have the latest errata posted in my ASLRB, but they seemed to handle it quite well. And my opponent and I even managed to work through an extraneous reference to air support in one of the SSR (neither side had any air support in the OB)! Took about 15 seconds! (OK, that is an exageration...it was at least 20.) So I am not sure who you are playing against that makes these changes so important, but I in Sydney at least it appears to make very little difference. For anyone traveling to Sydney: DEFINITELY try to get out to the Paddington Bears - great guys all! They typically meet on 1SAT at the Paddington-Woolahara RSL. Oh, and ask to see the trophy they have! Something about "Australian championship"...it seems to have been won by NSW for 8 of 10 years (is that right Bruce?). So it appears to me that being obsessively anal about to rules minutiae is not a requirement for good sportsmanship nor winning. At least in Australia. -----Original Message----- >From: Bruce Probst >Sent: Mar 7, 2006 6:00 PM >To: swfancher at mindspring.com >Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net >Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > >On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:14:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00), swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: > >>because the rest of the ASL world will be off playing something else > >There's been a lot of bizarre shit said over the last few days in this thread, >but I strongly suspect that this tops the list. > >"I don't *want* to keep my rules up-to-date and free of errata, so I'll go off >and sulk by myself in protest." > >Whatever keeps you amused, dude. >---------------------------------------------------------------- >Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au >Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 >"It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." >ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Mar 6 20:24:14 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 22:24:14 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com><00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306201203.01c684e0@direcway.com> Message-ID: <000e01c641dc$99cfc9a0$0527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, The Colonel wrote: >>As an impartial observer, if Ole Boe says the change is good then that is >>good enough for me >> >>the colonel Agreed colonel! :) > The final argument for not changing any rules...... :) > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL Ron, perhaps it is time for you to more fully explore those other hobbies you mentioned you were spending time on in an earlier post. You now have your AoO, why not just head out to pasture and let the ASL Game system mature into a truly fine game system. Change is obviouly not your thing and life in the pasture should suit you well. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Mar 7 03:45:12 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 05:45:12 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes References: <30647140.1141668013910.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> Message-ID: <000f01c641dc$9ab23a60$0527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Tate wrote, > I did complain...long and hard. > > But unless one is of the golden few one's complaints have little effect. > Ole is one, Patrik Manlig is one, McLeod, 3-4 others. These guys whimper a > little and it is guaranteed to change...regardless of what any other group > of ASL players might have to say. And so, it finally comes out ... Face it Tate, you're our "rule bitch" and whats more, you love it! Now get over here, come to heel and sniff the errata. :) =Jim= From scott.holst at us.army.mil Tue Mar 7 03:57:01 2006 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:57:01 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <8121d081404e.81404e8121d0@us.army.mil> Hi- I'm not a big fan of the HW and PM rules, but its good too see MMP taking a page out of Critical Hits! playbook and converting to a "Living Rules" type of ASLRB. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: mcleods Date: Monday, March 6, 2006 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > Listerz, > > The Colonel wrote: > > >>As an impartial observer, if Ole Boe says the change is good > then that is > >>good enough for me > >> > >>the colonel > > Agreed colonel! > > :) > > > The final argument for not changing any rules...... :) > > > > > > For the nonce, > > ron > > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > Ron, perhaps it is time for you to more fully explore those other > hobbies > you mentioned you were spending time on in an earlier post. > > You now have your AoO, why not just head out to pasture and let > the ASL Game > system mature into a truly fine game system. > > Change is obviouly not your thing and life in the pasture should > suit you > well. > > > > > > > =Jim= > > _______________________________________________ > 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 malm at gol.com Tue Mar 7 05:44:15 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 22:44:15 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes In-Reply-To: <30647140.1141668013910.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> References: <30647140.1141668013910.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060307224141.026ffdd8@pop3.norton.antivirus> Now I get it. It's personal. You don't like the people involved. Therefore anything they do to improve the game must be bad. At 03:00 a.m. 7/03/2006, Tate Rogers wrote: >I did complain...long and hard. > >But unless one is of the golden few one's complaints have little >effect. Ole is one, Patrik Manlig is one, McLeod, 3-4 others. These >guys whimper a little and it is guaranteed to change...regardless of >what any other group of ASL players might have to say. >-- >Later- > >Tater (One Mean Spud!) >_______________________________________________ >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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Mar 7 06:00:25 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 08:00:25 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <000e01c641dc$99cfc9a0$0527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306201203.01c684e0@direcway.com> <000e01c641dc$99cfc9a0$0527c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060307075857.01c60530@direcway.com> At 10:24 PM 3/6/2006, mcleods wrote: >Agreed colonel! Obviously you don't know the kind of "changes" the Colonel was for back in the hey-day of GEnie.....or you wouldn't so readily agree..... :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rockgheba at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 08:21:14 2006 From: rockgheba at gmail.com (Mario Nadalini) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 17:21:14 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Tournament North Italy (Verona) 8-10 September 2006 Message-ID: <63bc1b0f0603070821h48df92fja5c48f8bd92eda87@mail.gmail.com> Hi guys, I'm very proud to announce our first international ASL Tournament in Italy: IT-ASL-IA in Verona from 8 to 10 September 2006. Verona is a beautiful city in the North of Italy (just in case wives and fianc?e could be "gently" send to visit it ;)), well served by an airport and a train station. We are located inside the greatest Italian game conventions ever, Ver-Con (http://www.lareginadeigiochi.it)! Please note this site is still under construction! If you want to know more, please visit our web site: www.openground.it or write to: itaslia at gmail.com We are waiting for you, and don't forget our famous food and wine!! ;) Mario "I must forget the wine and start organizing" Nadalini -- Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it. Richard P. Feynman -- From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Mar 7 10:21:12 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:21:12 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <23049180.1141755672023.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> ---- scott.holst at us.army.mil wrote: > Hi- > > I'm not a big fan of the HW and PM rules, but its good too see MMP taking a page out of Critical Hits! playbook and converting to a "Living Rules" type of ASLRB. > Sure... Newbie walks into Game club with an ASLRB. Sees guys playing ASL... "hey can I play?" "Depends...what rule set do you have?" "Uhm, rules set?" "Yeah...do you have the 3rd Edition?" "Sure do..." "OK, with the original Ole PM rules or the second rewrite after the errata?" "Well, let me look..." "Does it include the Ch G reduction? How about the Ch B with the F terrain included?" "Well, I don't...hold on...let me open the bo.." "Did you get the VBM Freeze addendum from the Valor of the Italians HASL?" "VBM what???" "Yeah, and the McLeod smoke rules from the errata to Valor of The Italians...you got that?" "Uhm, did you say smoking Italians?" "There is also the UUV changes from Ignorance of the Lone Australian HASL by BP...you'll want that as well." "?????...tell you what...how about I give you a free ASLRB and you point me to the Axis and Allies table." Yeah...living rules equals dead game. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com Tue Mar 7 10:30:38 2006 From: AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com (Tuline, Andrew) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:30:38 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C11B@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> Well, there's something I doubt's ever going to happen. But hey, if it's got a .000001% chance of happening, let's post 'er on the list. . . . . -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Tate Rogers Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 10:21 AM To: scott.holst at us.army.mil Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes ---- scott.holst at us.army.mil wrote: > Hi- > > I'm not a big fan of the HW and PM rules, but its good too see MMP taking a page out of Critical Hits! playbook and converting to a "Living Rules" type of ASLRB. > Sure... Newbie walks into Game club with an ASLRB. Sees guys playing ASL... "hey can I play?" "Depends...what rule set do you have?" "Uhm, rules set?" "Yeah...do you have the 3rd Edition?" "Sure do..." "OK, with the original Ole PM rules or the second rewrite after the errata?" "Well, let me look..." "Does it include the Ch G reduction? How about the Ch B with the F terrain included?" "Well, I don't...hold on...let me open the bo.." "Did you get the VBM Freeze addendum from the Valor of the Italians HASL?" "VBM what???" "Yeah, and the McLeod smoke rules from the errata to Valor of The Italians...you got that?" "Uhm, did you say smoking Italians?" "There is also the UUV changes from Ignorance of the Lone Australian HASL by BP...you'll want that as well." "?????...tell you what...how about I give you a free ASLRB and you point me to the Axis and Allies table." Yeah...living rules equals dead game. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) _______________________________________________ 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 ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. From tompygo at comcast.net Tue Mar 7 10:34:18 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:34:18 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <23049180.1141755672023.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> Message-ID: <005301c64215$bf5b0e80$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Tate, I don't know where you play or who you play with, but I've NEVER been to a game club where the players are rude. I've NEVER been to any ASL gathering where the players are rude. I know that if I went to a game club and the players were that rude I'd leave too. Let's do a poll and let the 5 people on SZO that answer polls make the choice. Poll: "If a newbie walks up to you with an ASLRB in his hands while you are playing a game and asks to play, what would you do?" A) Say, "sure, sit down, let's play." B) Say, "What rules do you use? Cause I ain't playing someone who doesn't have all the details updated in his ASLRB." C) Say, "No!" D) Say, "First you have to pass this rules quiz. Cause I ain't playing someone who doesn't have the details updated in his ASLRB" E) Say, "Sure, as long as your name's not Tate." F) Point out the Axis and Allies table. and say, "I ain't playing someone who doesn't have all the details updated in his ASLRB." Later, Jeff PS. Sure, sit down, let's play. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tate Rogers" To: Cc: Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > ---- scott.holst at us.army.mil wrote: > > Hi- > > > > I'm not a big fan of the HW and PM rules, but its good too see MMP taking a page out of Critical Hits! playbook and converting to a "Living Rules" type of ASLRB. > > > > Sure... > > Newbie walks into Game club with an ASLRB. Sees guys playing ASL... > > "hey can I play?" > > "Depends...what rule set do you have?" > > "Uhm, rules set?" > > "Yeah...do you have the 3rd Edition?" > > "Sure do..." > > "OK, with the original Ole PM rules or the second rewrite after the errata?" > > "Well, let me look..." > > "Does it include the Ch G reduction? How about the Ch B with the F terrain included?" > > "Well, I don't...hold on...let me open the bo.." > > "Did you get the VBM Freeze addendum from the Valor of the Italians HASL?" > > "VBM what???" > > "Yeah, and the McLeod smoke rules from the errata to Valor of The Italians...you got that?" > > "Uhm, did you say smoking Italians?" > > "There is also the UUV changes from Ignorance of the Lone Australian HASL by BP...you'll want that as well." > > "?????...tell you what...how about I give you a free ASLRB and you point me to the Axis and Allies table." > > Yeah...living rules equals dead game. > -- > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > _______________________________________________ > 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 gr27134 at charter.net Tue Mar 7 10:38:36 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:38:36 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] ch-ch-ch-changes Message-ID: <5288317.1141756716328.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> ---- Malcolm Rutledge wrote: > Now I get it. Doubtful... > It's personal. No, well...except in your case... > You don't like the people involved. Therefore anything they do to > improve the game must be bad. That is pretty stupid...never said I didn't like anybody...maybe you need to hit the remedial reading course. Personally. I think Ole is a great guy...McLeod also. Would love to sit down and play them...would even let Ole use his pretty new PM rules. We could pick an early war scenario with radioless AFV...and you know what...we could use either set of PM rules (old vs new) and odds are very likely that it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference to fun, balance, result, style, etc. BTW, there is no denying the fact that there are about a half dozen or so players that have MMP's ear. You seem to think that merely stating this fact is somehow an insult...why? One would have to be a complete idiot (or newbie) to not already know this. The new PM rules don't fix anything because nothing was broken. In the last 20 years of ASL I have used the PM rules maybe 4-6 times...I suspect that is probably about average for most players. What's more in those 4-6 times the PM rules never really had any impact. Bottom line...it was pointless to change/rewrite them. That is how I see it...don't like it...TFB!!! Get over it or not -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Mar 7 10:40:33 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:40:33 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <5520334.1141756833437.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> ---- "Tuline wrote: > Well, there's something I doubt's ever going to happen. But hey, if it's > got a .000001% chance of happening, let's post 'er on the list. . . . . Hide and watch chief...it will be here before you know it. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From gr27134 at charter.net Tue Mar 7 10:43:27 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:43:27 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes Message-ID: <10361734.1141757007696.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> ---- Jeff Thompson wrote: > Tate, > > I don't know where you play or who you play with, but I've NEVER been to a > game club where the players are rude. I've NEVER been to any ASL gathering > where the players are rude. Jeff, here is an understatement..."you missed the point". I bet you get that a lot. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From jbarber at meic.org Tue Mar 7 11:02:41 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 12:02:41 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <005301c64215$bf5b0e80$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: Yeeeehaawwww!!!! Who says the list is dead? Long Live the List!!! Heck the PM changes were worth it just for this. Jeff "can rearrange tate rogers to spell "sage retort"" Barber From chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 11:23:14 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 11:23:14 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: References: <005301c64215$bf5b0e80$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> Message-ID: It's not dead, it just smells bad. Chas "death before disco" Argent On 3/7/06, Jeff Barber wrote: > Yeeeehaawwww!!!! > > Who says the list is dead? > > Long Live the List!!! > > Heck the PM changes were worth it just for this. > > Jeff "can rearrange tate rogers to spell "sage retort"" Barber > > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From tompygo at comcast.net Tue Mar 7 11:58:05 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 13:58:05 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <10361734.1141757007696.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> Message-ID: <009301c64221$b6ca40e0$2f34020a@JZTHOMPS> I do, but have never been sure what it means. Tate, I do get your point. You're saying that ASL games played by people that generaly don't play each other, at tournaments for example, will be hard pressed to be playing with the same rules because of the frequency and seemlingly whimsical nature of rules changes, not just errata and Q&A. And when two players don't play with the same rules unbeknownst to themselves, the ambiguity could blemish a perfectly good game, discouraging the players from playing the game at all. And beyond this is your example of the new player seeing a tangled mess and not a fun game. It's as if the absence of errata and Q&A has created a vacuum that can only be filled with wholesale changes. If it comes to your scenario I will be sad. And I also know that you do not wish this to happen but are merely pointing out one possible case, the worst case. I say we can overcome the obstacle. I remember getting into ASL around 1994. There was a lot of work to do to get all the errata/Q&A fixed up in the ASLRBv1. I was not discouraged and no games were spoiled while I was in the middle of doing the updates. ASL is a big game. If someone is going to be discouraged by a few pencil marks or stickers in their ASLRB then they are probably not an ASL player to begin with. And I suppose in a way, Tate, you are the voice of reason. Perhaps not the most pleseant voice but still one that doesn't take anything for granted. I understand what you are saying. I don't agree. We'll all know the end is near when it takes more than a week to reach 500 pre-orders for "Valor of the Italians." Later, Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tate Rogers" To: "Jeff Thompson" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 12:43 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > ---- Jeff Thompson wrote: > > Tate, > > > > I don't know where you play or who you play with, but I've NEVER been to a > > game club where the players are rude. I've NEVER been to any ASL gathering > > where the players are rude. > > Jeff, here is an understatement..."you missed the point". I bet you get that a lot. > -- > Later- > > Tater (One Mean Spud!) > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 7 12:26:43 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:26:43 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <25328218.1141726242185.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <25328218.1141726242185.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 21:10:41 +1100 (GMT+11:00), swfancher at mindspring.com wrote: >fortunately for me they seemed far more interested in rolling the dice and having a good time than in looking for "bizarre shit" and rules to tweak. Why do you think I am any different? Why do you think anyone is any different? I don't post rules discussions to the ASLML when I'm in the middle of a game. I don't read the rulebook in preference to actually playing a game. >I was somewhat concerned that they might get "upset" or "uptight," since I did not have the latest errata posted in my ASLRB, but they seemed to handle it quite well. ?? Why would anyone get upset or uptight about that? You're the *only* person in this thread who's indicated that errata causes *any* sort of trauma! >So I am not sure who you are playing against that makes these changes so important Only the rest of the ASL-playing world. I don't recall insisting that anyone without errata should not be allowed to play! >Something about "Australian championship"...it seems to have been won by NSW for 8 of 10 years (is that right Bruce?). That's the "State of Origin" trophy ... I don't know what the exact statistics are, but I would have guessed at something like 10 out of 12. At CanCon every year players from the same state (or group of states) have their tournament results compared to other states. Whichever state has the best record takes home the "State of Origin" trophy (it has its origins in a national rugby league competition). NSW (Sydney) has always had a solid core of active and talented players, so they tend to get the best results. >So it appears to me that being obsessively anal about to rules minutiae is not a requirement for good sportsmanship nor winning. At least in Australia. Certainly not. It's not an impediment, either. Just to summarise: you're the only person around here who's been whining that the rules keep getting updated regularly, and you can't write quickly enough to catch up. Let's cnsider that it would normally take half-an-hour (tops) to make errata notes from the latest Journal, and even less time to insert replacement pages. Reading and understanding a new piece of errata might take a little longer, let's round it out to an entire hour for the full process. No, let's be generous and assume two hours, if you're very slow indeed. I think it's tragic that you don't have approximately two hours to spare in a year (or two) for these kinds of updates, but why is that a reason for MMP to stop improving the rules wherever possible? And as you note, it doesn't stop you from actually playing the game. So remind me again what it is that you find so objectionable in the process? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It's gotta be humiliating to be tortured by a smurf." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From the.colonel at clara.co.uk Tue Mar 7 16:01:02 2006 From: the.colonel at clara.co.uk (The Colonel) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 00:01:02 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306201203.01c684e0@direcway.com> Message-ID: <00aa01c64243$63b95450$caeca850@homepc> > At 06:15 PM 3/6/2006, The Colonel wrote: >>As an impartial observer, if Ole Boe says the change is good then that is >>good enough for me >> >>the colonel > > The final argument for not changing any rules...... :) I always thought you were my friend Ron ;-) For more years than I care to remember we have stood 'shoulder to shoulder' on this list pressing for the Axis Minor vehicles to be completed. At the very least you could tell me which vehicles for brave little Slovakia have been included in AoO??? Looking at the rate MMP ship orders I doubt AoO will reach the distributors in England much before November :-( the colonel > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > > From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Mar 7 16:11:37 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:11:37 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <00aa01c64243$63b95450$caeca850@homepc> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306201203.01c684e0@direcway.com> <00aa01c64243$63b95450$caeca850@homepc> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060307180813.01c194a8@direcway.com> At 06:01 PM 3/7/2006, The Colonel wrote: >At the very least you could tell me which vehicles for brave little >Slovakia have been included in AoO??? Just for the Slovaks: 17. T vz 33(t): 18. LT vz 34: 19. PzKpfw IIA(g): 20. LT vz 40(t): 21. Marder III(t)H: 22. Kfz 1(g): 23. SdKfz 2(g): from my eASLRB :) of course there are the "Common" ones that can be used also. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From davevicks at yahoo.com Tue Mar 7 16:26:22 2006 From: davevicks at yahoo.com (David Vicks) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 16:26:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] HASL CASSINO? IWO JIMA? NORMANDY BEACHES? Message-ID: <20060308002622.85184.qmail@web52113.mail.yahoo.com> Design them and they will buy. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Mar 7 16:38:15 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:38:15 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] HASL CASSINO? IWO JIMA? NORMANDY BEACHES? In-Reply-To: <20060308002622.85184.qmail@web52113.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060308002622.85184.qmail@web52113.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060307183745.01c5f8f0@direcway.com> At 06:26 PM 3/7/2006, David Vicks wrote: >Design them and they will buy. Chuckle...only if from MMP or HOB.... :) ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Tue Mar 7 17:37:05 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 09:37:05 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question Message-ID: Hi I'm having a mental lapse today. Suppose there is an 8-0 and a 4-6-7 squad, both HIP in a grain/orchard/brush Location. During the opponent's MPh, an armed enemy AFV enters this location. What happens from here? As I understand it, the 8-0 and squad must either voluntarily drop concealment (HIP) and be placed on board, or else they take a combined PAATC using the lower morale of the squad. If the above is correct and the 8-0 and squad opt to take the PAATC and pass, are they placed on board under a "?" counter or do they remain HIP. Case A of the Concealment loss table says concealment is lost if the unit "fails a PAATC caused by a vehicle's entry of its Location" and HIP is a form of concealment. This would be important as if they are able to remain HIP by passing the PAATC, it doesn't reveal how many counters are in that Location, although the moving player will know there is something (at least one unit) there. All of the above would be the same if the HIP units were in a woods/buiding Location and the AFV actually enters that woods/building (not using Bypass). Of course if the AFV ends its MPh in bypass, concealment (HIP) is lost. TIA Cheers Jon This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Mar 7 19:26:26 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 21:26:26 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060307212537.01c5ac18@direcway.com> At 07:37 PM 3/7/2006, Cole, Jonathan wrote: >As I understand it, the 8-0 and squad must either voluntarily drop >concealment (HIP) and be placed on board, or else they take a combined PAATC >using the lower morale of the squad. Drop HIP, gain Conceal..do PAATC, if pass keep ?....if fail.. unconceal... ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From dgour.asl at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 19:40:11 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 20:40:11 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes In-Reply-To: <60fe68f80603071327r58656247p3017e0e1e208bc9a@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60602282043q17a0fa52vd4aac8d120a9519f@mail.gmail.com> <60fe68f80603071327r58656247p3017e0e1e208bc9a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <764636a60603071940u75211957t4a3afa6b6320da10@mail.gmail.com> Poor cute little devil -- who knew the fire would rage as hot. ;) -- Darren On 3/7/06, David Stanaway wrote: > I think this is appropriate. Darren, you caused a kitten to die. > > http://www.aripollak.com/platform2006/flamewar.jpg > > > On 2/28/06, Darren Gour < dgour.asl at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Well, I just got my AoO today -- shocked that the Platoon > Movement/changing the the game bru-haha hasn't been rekindled. > > Oops -- spilled some gasoline. Gotta go. > > -- > Darren > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 8 01:05:48 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 20:05:48 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <726t02tqcqsn8u4ko56ung8uv3vads7suj@4ax.com> On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 09:37:05 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >Suppose there is an 8-0 and a 4-6-7 squad, both HIP in a grain/orchard/brush >Location. During the opponent's MPh, an armed enemy AFV enters this >location. What happens from here? > >As I understand it, the 8-0 and squad must either voluntarily drop >concealment (HIP) and be placed on board, or else they take a combined PAATC >using the lower morale of the squad. Right. (A12.41) >If the above is correct and the 8-0 and squad opt to take the PAATC and >pass, are they placed on board under a "?" counter or do they remain HIP. >Case A of the Concealment loss table says concealment is lost if the unit >"fails a PAATC caused by a vehicle's entry of its Location" and HIP is a >form of concealment. This would be important as if they are able to remain >HIP by passing the PAATC, it doesn't reveal how many counters are in that >Location, although the moving player will know there is something (at least >one unit) there. If you read a little closer on the Concealment Loss/Gain table, you'll note that it says in Case C that taking a PAATC not caused by a vehicle entering your Location is not a concealment-loss activity. At first glance this might suggest that taking a PAATC that *is* caused by a vehicle entering your Location *is* a concealment-loss activity. Of course, that kind-of defeats the purpose of taking a PAATC to avoid loss of concealment , so I think we need to look at it a little more closely. It seems to me that the verbose EXC on the chart in Case C is only trying to counterpoint the Case A statement, but it does it somewhat clumsily. The act of *taking* a PAATC is not a concealment-loss activity under *any* circumstances that I can think of. The difference between Case A and Case C is that *failing* a PAATC is a concealment-loss activity *only if* the PAATC was caused by the entry of the vehicle into your Location (Case A). In all other cases that I could find, failing a PAATC resulted in the unit being Pinned, but no mention of losing concealment as well. The phrase "not caused by a vehicle entering its Location" could, I believe, be deleted from Case C without causing any other rules issues. There are a small number of activities that can cause a unit to lose HIP but not lose concealment, but as far as I can tell taking a PAATC is not listed as being one of them. The general rule must therefore apply, namely that concealment loss and HIP loss are identical (and hence retention of concealment and retention of HIP is likewise identical). So ... I think your HIP guys should be allowed to stay HIP if they pass the combined PAATC. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "No more questions! More boobies!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 8 05:16:58 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:16:58 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question In-Reply-To: <726t02tqcqsn8u4ko56ung8uv3vads7suj@4ax.com> References: <726t02tqcqsn8u4ko56ung8uv3vads7suj@4ax.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060308071441.01c60228@direcway.com> At 03:05 AM 3/8/2006, Bruce Probst wrote: >So ... I think your HIP guys should be allowed to stay HIP if they pass the >combined PAATC. Say what? A12.41 OVR: Should an "unbroken" (12.1) vehicle enter a concealed enemy's Location without using Bypass or a woods-road, all concealed enemy Personnel [EXC: those exempt from PAATC] in that Location must instantly either be revealed voluntarily (12.14) or take one combined PAATC (1PAATC if any of these ordinarily take 1PAATC) using the lowest current Morale Level among them, modified by the DRM of the best unpinned friendly Good Order leader present. A Dummy stack takes its PAATC with a Morale Level of 7. If that PAATC is failed, all those subjected to it are immediately pinned and revealed. If the Location contained no Known enemy unit when the vehicle entered it, OVR expenditure is NA until the combined PAATC (if any) has been resolved, after which the vehicle may conduct an OVR if able to (D7.1)). In all cases, if the PAATC is passed, those concealed units remain concealed and thus can be OVR only as Area Fire; if no OVR is made, the vehicle it still subject to attack (including CC Reaction Fire: D7.21) by any eligible unit(s) in the normal manner. ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From snow at lasp.colorado.edu Wed Mar 8 08:27:31 2006 From: snow at lasp.colorado.edu (Marty Snow) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 09:27:31 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Aslml] ASL license plate holder Message-ID: There's a company on the web that sells board-game related T-shirts and other junk, including some ASL paraphernalia. There's a license plate holder that says: I'd rather be playing Advanced Squad Leader ($7.95). http://www.meeplepeople.com There are also T-shirts with the same phrase. They also quote prices in Euros and GBP, but since I doubt that the plates are the same size, I can't see how they'd be much use outside the US. Marty Snow marty.snow at lasp.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/home.html From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 8 09:44:51 2006 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 09:44:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] A question about Mud EC and platoon movement Message-ID: <20060308174451.90324.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> Not trying to stir the pot just a simple quetion. I have in the past both used and witnessed others using platoon movement when EC are mud, in order to lessen the number of Bog die rolls which are made. The reasoning behind this was one Bog DR for the platoon, with random selection to choose which vehicle(s) are bogged, if all parts of the Bog Dr have been achieved (ie the DR is high enough and the platoon has moved far enough). No ASLRB handy so I think I described this correctly. Is this still a viable tactic with the new PM rules when using AFVs with radios? Kevin "General Mud" Meyer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 8 09:50:02 2006 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:50:02 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] J71 Question In-Reply-To: <20060308174451.90324.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: SSR says No Japanese unit may move/advance on Turn 1. However, should he become Berserk during the British Turn 1, can he stay put, ie which trumps, Berserker rules or SSR? And as a follow up suppose there is a flame placed in a hut containing Jap squads during the Brit Turn 1, and should that hut go to blaze during the Japanese Turn 1, are the Japs eliminated? Rolled a 1,1 on an AF shot during British Adv Fire Phase 1 Paul Kenny Owner of Fanatic Enterprises makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids Check out my website at http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com/ ---- From snow at lasp.colorado.edu Wed Mar 8 10:14:55 2006 From: snow at lasp.colorado.edu (Marty Snow) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 11:14:55 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Aslml] A question about Mud EC and platoon movement In-Reply-To: <20060308174451.90324.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060308174451.90324.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, kevin meyer wrote: > Not trying to stir the pot just a simple quetion. I think you mean "muddy the waters" rather than "stir the pot." Please try to keep your DUKWs in a row when malapropriating metaphors! Having never seen the change to the PM rules, I'm 99% confident in saying that I'm sure this tactic has not been affected. Marty Marty Snow marty.snow at lasp.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/home.html From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 8 10:44:43 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:44:43 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] A question about Mud EC and platoon movement In-Reply-To: <20060308174451.90324.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, Kevin Meyer wrote: > Is this still a viable tactic with the new PM rules > when using AFVs with radios? > Yes. From the new rules (D14.21): "If >= one AFV in the same platoon is subject to Bog/Mechanical-Reliability/Stall DR, only one DR per condition is made for the platoon at the end of the Impulse, before any attacks (14.32). If Bog/Immobilization occurs, Random Selection is then used--but only among the AFV that would normally have been Bogged/Immobilized by that Final DR (with different DRM potentially applying to different AFV)." This is (intended to be) substantially clearer than in the old rule, but without really changing the rule. I consider the rule wildly unrealistic and illogical, but it had to stay (IMHO) due to the balance effect on scenarios. From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 8 10:48:58 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:48:58 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] J71 Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, > SSR says No Japanese unit may move/advance on Turn 1. > > However, should he become Berserk during the British Turn 1, can he stay > put, ie which trumps, Berserker rules or SSR? > >From the index: "SSR (Scenario Special Rule): Always takes precedence over Game System rules" > And as a follow up suppose there is a flame placed in a hut > containing Jap > squads during the Brit Turn 1, and should that hut go to blaze during the > Japanese Turn 1, are the Japs eliminated? > No, the SSR puts no restriction on rout (assuming your paraphrase of it is correct), so the Japs can and must voluntary break and rout during their RtPh, according to B25.4. From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Mar 8 10:52:43 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 13:52:43 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] J71 Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060308185234.E57621BBA4@che.dreamhost.com> Hello Paul, SSR trumps any rule I believe. You could always voluntarily break to rout out of the flame, assuming your unit otherwise meets the criteria. The SSR says "no move/advance", not "no move/advance/rout". HtH, Dave Reenstra > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of Paul Kenny > Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 12:50 PM > To: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] J71 Question > > > > SSR says No Japanese unit may move/advance on Turn 1. > > However, should he become Berserk during the British Turn 1, can he stay > put, ie which trumps, Berserker rules or SSR? > > And as a follow up suppose there is a flame placed in a hut containing Jap > squads during the Brit Turn 1, and should that hut go to blaze during the > Japanese Turn 1, are the Japs eliminated? > > Rolled a 1,1 on an AF shot during British Adv Fire Phase 1 > > > Paul Kenny > > Owner of Fanatic Enterprises > makers of quality ASL scenario packs and play aids > > Check out my website at > > http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.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 gd891 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 8 11:02:23 2006 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd891) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 13:02:23 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL license plate holder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >There's a company on the web that sells board-game related T-shirts and other junk, including some ASL paraphernalia. >There's a license plate holder that says: I'd rather be playing Advanced Squad Leader ($7.95). Yet, I could not find the one that says "I'd rather be bitching about the platoon movement rules and their changes". You would think that would sell like hotcakes. Greg "How well do hotcakes really sell anyway?" Dahl From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 8 14:04:01 2006 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 14:04:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] finally, the mtr out of los q... In-Reply-To: <00a501c64163$08d91510$0501a8c0@pooworldmot0yw> Message-ID: <20060308220402.31393.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> so, it finally happens, and i can't remember what the rule interpretation is... My mtr hits an unconcealed sqd in level one of a building, with a 4, needed a 5. (base 7, spotted fire). In level 0, out of LOS, is a concealed enemy unit. Did I hit it? the hardest to hit unit, that I could have possibly hit, was the unconcealed unit.... so, looks like i hit concealed guy, though I wouldnt have...had he been in my LOS... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bo_siemsen at city.dk Wed Mar 8 14:09:38 2006 From: bo_siemsen at city.dk (Bo Siemsen, Danmark) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 23:09:38 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] finally, the mtr out of los q... In-Reply-To: <20060308220402.31393.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: no rule book here so I can't check - but I am certain that you can't affect it if you can't see it. Bo Siemsen -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]Pa vegne af Robert Nelson Sendt: 8. marts 2006 23:04 Til: Chris Netherton; ASL Mailing List Emne: [Aslml] finally, the mtr out of los q... so, it finally happens, and i can't remember what the rule interpretation is... My mtr hits an unconcealed sqd in level one of a building, with a 4, needed a 5. (base 7, spotted fire). In level 0, out of LOS, is a concealed enemy unit. Did I hit it? the hardest to hit unit, that I could have possibly hit, was the unconcealed unit.... so, looks like i hit concealed guy, though I wouldnt have...had he been in my LOS... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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 oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 8 14:26:37 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:26:37 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] finally, the mtr out of los q... In-Reply-To: <20060308220402.31393.qmail@web52607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, Robert Nelson wrote: > so, it finally happens, and i can't remember what the > rule interpretation is... > It seems you do after all :-) > My mtr hits an unconcealed sqd in level one of a > building, with a 4, needed a 5. (base 7, spotted > fire). In level 0, out of LOS, is a concealed enemy > unit. > > Did I hit it? the hardest to hit unit, that I could > have possibly hit, was the unconcealed unit.... > That's right, which is exactly what the exception in C3.33 cowers by saying: "a mortar also hits all target-hex units that are out of its firer's (Spotter's, if one is being used; 9.3) LOS if that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit (i.e., that received the highest net TH DRM for that shot)" > so, looks like i hit concealed guy, though I wouldnt > have...had he been in my LOS... > Yep :-) From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Mar 8 16:35:33 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 08:35:33 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question Message-ID: My interpretation was the same as Bruce's answer, namely that if the HIP units pass their PAATC when the AFV enters their Location, they would remain HIP. It is failing the PAATC caused by the vehicle entering that causes loss of concealment (Case A). The HIP rules say that HIP is treated the same as concealment except as specified in A12.2 (? NRBH). The situation I have presented is not one of those exceptions specified. So if the HIP units pass their PAATC they do not lose HIP (concealment) so by the rules are able to remain HIP. Interestingly, if the HIP units are exempt from PAATC, they would not take a PAATC when an AFV enters their Location and their HIP status would not be revealed and/or compromised. So the AFV would drive right through that Location without even suspecting HIP units are there if said units are exempt from PAATC. I will send the question to Perry. Cheers Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: ron mosher [mailto:rjmosher at direcway.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 8 March 2006 9:17 PM > To: bprobst at netspace.net.au; Cole, Jonathan > Cc: ASL Mailing List (aslml at lists.aslml.net) > Subject: Re: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question > > At 03:05 AM 3/8/2006, Bruce Probst wrote: > >So ... I think your HIP guys should be allowed to stay HIP if they pass > the > >combined PAATC. > > Say what? > > > A12.41 OVR: Should an "unbroken" (12.1) vehicle enter a concealed > enemy's Location without using Bypass or a woods-road, all concealed > enemy Personnel [EXC: those exempt from PAATC] in that Location must > instantly either be revealed voluntarily (12.14) or take one combined > PAATC (1PAATC if any of these ordinarily take 1PAATC) using the > lowest current Morale Level among them, modified by the DRM of the > best unpinned friendly Good Order leader present. A Dummy stack takes > its PAATC with a Morale Level of 7. If that PAATC is failed, all > those subjected to it are immediately pinned and revealed. If the > Location contained no Known enemy unit when the vehicle entered it, > OVR expenditure is NA until the combined PAATC (if any) has been > resolved, after which the vehicle may conduct an OVR if able to > (D7.1)). In all cases, if the PAATC is passed, those concealed units > remain concealed and thus can be OVR only as Area Fire; if no OVR is > made, the vehicle it still subject to attack (including CC Reaction > Fire: D7.21) by any eligible unit(s) in the normal manner. > > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 8 18:49:17 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 20:49:17 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060308204856.01c70e08@direcway.com> At 06:35 PM 3/8/2006, Cole, Jonathan wrote: >The HIP rules say that HIP is treated the same as concealment So you can OVR HIP units? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Wed Mar 8 21:18:04 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:18:04 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: ron mosher [mailto:rjmosher at direcway.com] > Sent: Thursday, 9 March 2006 10:49 AM > To: Cole, Jonathan; ron mosher; bprobst at netspace.net.au; Cole, Jonathan > Cc: ASL Mailing List (aslml at lists.aslml.net) > Subject: RE: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question > > At 06:35 PM 3/8/2006, Cole, Jonathan wrote: > > >The HIP rules say that HIP is treated the same as concealment > > So you can OVR HIP units? > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL Well you can OVR concealed units as per A12.41 that you quoted. "If the Location contained no Known enemy unit when the vehicle entered it, OVR expenditure is NA until the combined PAATC (if any) has been resolved, after which the vehicle may conduct an OVR if able to (D7.1)). In all cases, if the PAATC is passed, those concealed units remain concealed and thus can be OVR only as Area Fire; if no OVR is made, the vehicle it still subject to attack (including CC Reaction Fire: D7.21) by any eligible unit(s) in the normal manner." HIP is a form of concealment. I presume that if you know there are HIP units there because they took the required PAATC and passed, the AFV could then conduct an OVR as Area Fire Cheers Jon This e-mail and files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressee. The confidentiality and/or privilege in this e-mail is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 8 23:21:11 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:21:11 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: HIP unit question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2pkv021q5hgeqrq2a30pgkhbhegu56mkbu@4ax.com> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:18:04 +0800 , "Cole, Jonathan" wrote: >Well you can OVR concealed units as per A12.41 that you quoted. Right about now is when he'll post " you don't understand, grasshopper" to try and cover up his embarrassment. >HIP is a form of concealment. I presume that if you know there are HIP units >there because they took the required PAATC and passed, the AFV could then >conduct an OVR as Area Fire That would be my conclusion too. Indeed, I don't see any reason why you could not OVR an apparently-empty Location that you only *suspected* contained units immune to PAATC. The procedure would go something like this: * ATTACKER's vehicle enters apparently-empty Location. * if HIP DEFENDER chooses not to drop concealment voluntarily, he conducts the combined PAATC (if required) and if he passes, reveals nothing. If no PAATC is required, either because all HIP units present are immune, or because there are no HIP units at all, the DEFENDER simply does nothing. * ATTACKER (if able) expends the additional MP and declares an OVR, resolved as Area Fire vs. any units still concealed/HIP in addition to any other applicable modifiers. It seems pretty straight-forward to me. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Finally we meet, sack of mucous." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From pbelfordacm at yahoo.com Thu Mar 9 05:32:40 2006 From: pbelfordacm at yahoo.com (Pete Belford) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 05:32:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] CoB Message-ID: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> So I am reading through the MMP website and I notice Code of Bushido is listed as "Out of print and out of stock". What is the status on this module? Out of print suggests that it will never be reprinted again. To me, that is like, insane. The IJA are so cool to fight against and with. Pete __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Mar 9 08:16:26 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 10:16:26 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060309101233.01c21c88@direcway.com> At 07:32 AM 3/9/2006, Pete Belford wrote: >Out of >print suggests that it will never be reprinted again. >To me, that is like, insane. The IJA are so cool to >fight against and with. COB as we knew it will never be re-printed. COB and Gung-ho will be combined and issued together....according to the most recent from MMP. Also, there is another inherent delay, since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to redo the Chapter G rules....thank god the head demon was out of ASL when ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting... ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Thu Mar 9 08:20:55 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 17:20:55 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] CoB References: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20060309101233.01c21c88@direcway.com> Message-ID: <000801c64395$71604340$0300000a@posh> Also theres a bunch of Gung Ho! modules that need to be sold out first ;) Give MMP 2-3 years I'd say. Kenneth Knudsen ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: ; Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 5:16 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] CoB > At 07:32 AM 3/9/2006, Pete Belford wrote: > >Out of > >print suggests that it will never be reprinted again. > >To me, that is like, insane. The IJA are so cool to > >fight against and with. > > COB as we knew it will never be re-printed. > > COB and Gung-ho will be combined and issued together....according to > the most recent from MMP. Also, there is another inherent delay, > since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to redo the > Chapter G rules....thank god the head demon was out of ASL when > ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting... > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 scott.holst at us.army.mil Thu Mar 9 11:18:31 2006 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 13:18:31 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB Message-ID: <1f67d51f1dc7.1f1dc71f67d5@us.army.mil> Ha ha- Ya know Ron; if you had posted the same thing to the forums, the mods would have locked that thread. Anyway, who was the head demon that worked on the rules before ole? Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: ron mosher Date: Thursday, March 9, 2006 10:16 am Subject: Re: [Aslml] CoB > At 07:32 AM 3/9/2006, Pete Belford wrote: > >Out of > >print suggests that it will never be reprinted again. > >To me, that is like, insane. The IJA are so cool to > >fight against and with. > > COB as we knew it will never be re-printed. > > COB and Gung-ho will be combined and issued together....according > to > the most recent from MMP. Also, there is another inherent delay, > since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to redo the > Chapter G rules....thank god the head demon was out of ASL when > ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting... > > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 9 12:06:34 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 07:06:34 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 05:32:40 -0800 (PST), Pete Belford wrote: >So I am reading through the MMP website and I notice >Code of Bushido is listed as "Out of print and out of >stock". What is the status on this module? Out of >print suggests that it will never be reprinted again. ... in its original form. I don't think MMP have made a firm decision yet, but last I heard was that they were contemplating reprinting CoB and GH together in a PTO mega-module. Whether they do this or something else, all "out of print" really means is "it won't be back in stock for a while". There are no plans to let the Japanese "disappear". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Finally we meet, sack of mucous." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From aslbrad at hotmail.com Thu Mar 9 13:22:46 2006 From: aslbrad at hotmail.com (Brad K.) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 17:22:46 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Message-ID: Iss the somewhere on the web that the VASL5 extensions are up to date, organized, in one package or at least organized in one area? From aslbrad at hotmail.com Thu Mar 9 13:26:48 2006 From: aslbrad at hotmail.com (Brad K.) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 17:26:48 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for VASL Opps Message-ID: Hey guys, Looking for a regular PBeM/Live VASL opps to do a CG and a scenario series ie all Journal or General or Tactiques, etc.. Open to suggestions for these. Later Brad From the.colonel at clara.co.uk Thu Mar 9 14:34:43 2006 From: the.colonel at clara.co.uk (The Colonel) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 22:34:43 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060306172247.01c14148@direcway.com> <00cd01c6417c$43465230$fbc4a850@homepc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060306201203.01c684e0@direcway.com> <00aa01c64243$63b95450$caeca850@homepc> <7.0.1.0.0.20060307180813.01c194a8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <005001c643c9$aae61250$2d439ed9@homepc> Thanks Ron! the colonel ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "The Colonel" ; "ron mosher" ; Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 12:11 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Platoon movement changes > At 06:01 PM 3/7/2006, The Colonel wrote: >>At the very least you could tell me which vehicles for brave little >>Slovakia have been included in AoO??? > > Just for the Slovaks: > > 17. T vz 33(t): > > 18. LT vz 34: > > 19. PzKpfw IIA(g): > > 20. LT vz 40(t): > > 21. Marder III(t)H: > > 22. Kfz 1(g): > > 23. SdKfz 2(g): > > from my eASLRB :) > > of course there are the "Common" ones that can be used also. > > ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. > > > > From cjsloki at comcast.net Thu Mar 9 19:29:15 2006 From: cjsloki at comcast.net (cjs) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:29:15 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c643f2$cea4a0c0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> Hi, I was not sure of this one and thought I would ask the list. Do Russian lend lease Shermans have to use red to hit numbers in 1945? Thanks, Charles From smcbee at midtnn.net Thu Mar 9 19:42:43 2006 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 21:42:43 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks In-Reply-To: <000001c643f2$cea4a0c0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> Message-ID: <003101c643f4$b16204b0$03259a04@RoadWarrior> Red. See the National capabilities chart on the back of the OBA flowchart. Steve -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of cjs Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:29 PM To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks Hi, I was not sure of this one and thought I would ask the list. Do Russian lend lease Shermans have to use red to hit numbers in 1945? Thanks, Charles _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From malm at gol.com Thu Mar 9 20:00:13 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:00:13 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks In-Reply-To: <000001c643f2$cea4a0c0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> References: <000001c643f2$cea4a0c0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060310125908.025f9750@pop3.norton.antivirus> No. Check out your chapter H vehicle notes. At 12:29 p.m. 10/03/2006, cjs wrote: >Hi, > >I was not sure of this one and thought I would ask the list. Do Russian lend >lease Shermans have to use red to hit numbers in 1945? > >Thanks, > >Charles > >_______________________________________________ >aslml mailing list >aslml at lists.aslml.net >http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net >To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From daveolie at eastlink.ca Thu Mar 9 20:02:16 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:02:16 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks References: <003101c643f4$b16204b0$03259a04@RoadWarrior> Message-ID: <004701c643f7$71f061c0$7779de18@klis.com> Charles wrote: > I was not sure of this one and thought I would ask the list. Do Russian lend > lease Shermans have to use red to hit numbers in 1945? and Steve replied: > Red. See the National capabilities chart on the back of the OBA flowchart. Actually no, not in this case, Steve. The M4/76(a) uses black To Hit numbers, as mentioned in Russian Vehicle Note 19. Charles, the Vehicle and Ordnance notes are your best friends. Always check 'em out before play. David "not seeing red" Olie From cjsloki at comcast.net Thu Mar 9 20:07:28 2006 From: cjsloki at comcast.net (cjs) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 20:07:28 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks In-Reply-To: <004701c643f7$71f061c0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <000001c643f8$25880760$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> So true, thanks for the info. Charles -----Original Message----- From: David Olie [mailto:daveolie at eastlink.ca] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 8:02 PM To: Steve McBee; 'cjs'; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks Charles wrote: > I was not sure of this one and thought I would ask the list. Do Russian lend > lease Shermans have to use red to hit numbers in 1945? and Steve replied: > Red. See the National capabilities chart on the back of the OBA flowchart. Actually no, not in this case, Steve. The M4/76(a) uses black To Hit numbers, as mentioned in Russian Vehicle Note 19. Charles, the Vehicle and Ordnance notes are your best friends. Always check 'em out before play. David "not seeing red" Olie From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Mar 10 00:23:23 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 09:23:23 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] CoB Message-ID: <479d43235f79.4411458b@broadpark.no> Hi, Ron Mosher wrote: > Also, there is another inherent delay, > since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to redo the > Chapter G rules....thank god the head demon was out of ASL when > ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting... > I think I'll pass up the invitation to a flame war, and instead just clarify that none of the above is true. Ron wrote something similar about AoO a while ago, and it wasn't true then either. From bk_otj at hotmail.com Thu Mar 9 13:19:41 2006 From: bk_otj at hotmail.com (Bradley Knoll) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 14:19:41 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Message-ID: Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one place? From ecz at tim.it Thu Mar 9 08:52:49 2006 From: ecz at tim.it (Enrico) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 17:52:49 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL Tournament North Italy (Verona) 8-10 September 2006 References: <63bc1b0f0603070821h48df92fja5c48f8bd92eda87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00d001c64399$e66083e0$fc3d3d52@computer> Abbiamo gente anche dalla germania forse, andate al link di SZO http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=501867&posted=1#post501867 ciao E. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mario Nadalini" To: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 5:21 PM Subject: ASL Tournament North Italy (Verona) 8-10 September 2006 Hi guys, I'm very proud to announce our first international ASL Tournament in Italy: IT-ASL-IA in Verona from 8 to 10 September 2006. Verona is a beautiful city in the North of Italy (just in case wives and fianc?e could be "gently" send to visit it ;)), well served by an airport and a train station. We are located inside the greatest Italian game conventions ever, Ver-Con (http://www.lareginadeigiochi.it)! Please note this site is still under construction! If you want to know more, please visit our web site: www.openground.it or write to: itaslia at gmail.com We are waiting for you, and don't forget our famous food and wine!! ;) Mario "I must forget the wine and start organizing" Nadalini -- Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it. Richard P. Feynman -- -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.2/274 - Release Date: 03/03/2006 From chas.argent at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 05:27:23 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 05:27:23 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". Regards, Chas On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of the > extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one place? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From chas.argent at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 05:27:23 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 05:27:23 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". Regards, Chas On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of the > extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one place? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From smcbee at midtnn.net Fri Mar 10 05:30:05 2006 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 07:30:05 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks In-Reply-To: <004701c643f7$71f061c0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <001401c64446$c097a140$97f69904@RoadWarrior> Missed that one. Curses, foiled again! -----Original Message----- From: David Olie [mailto:daveolie at eastlink.ca] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 10:02 PM To: Steve McBee; 'cjs'; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Russian Lend Lease tanks Charles wrote: > I was not sure of this one and thought I would ask the list. Do Russian lend > lease Shermans have to use red to hit numbers in 1945? and Steve replied: > Red. See the National capabilities chart on the back of the OBA flowchart. Actually no, not in this case, Steve. The M4/76(a) uses black To Hit numbers, as mentioned in Russian Vehicle Note 19. Charles, the Vehicle and Ordnance notes are your best friends. Always check 'em out before play. David "not seeing red" Olie From AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com Fri Mar 10 08:35:53 2006 From: AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com (Tuline, Andrew) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:35:53 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Message-ID: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C12E@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> Didn't work for me. I did check out the goat pictures though . .. . :0 Andrew -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:27 AM To: Bradley Knoll Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". Regards, Chas On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of > the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one place? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent 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 ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. From AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com Fri Mar 10 08:35:53 2006 From: AndrewTuline at SierraSystems.com (Tuline, Andrew) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:35:53 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Message-ID: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C12E@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> Didn't work for me. I did check out the goat pictures though . .. . :0 Andrew -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:27 AM To: Bradley Knoll Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". Regards, Chas On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of > the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one place? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent 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 ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. From SchoulsH at APTEA.com Fri Mar 10 09:26:59 2006 From: SchoulsH at APTEA.com (Schouls, Harvey) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 12:26:59 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Southern Ontario ASL Tournament Message-ID: <4D4CC384C893874AB139F4D48B9C6EFA05A86B25@torf06290msg.corp.gaptea.com> I know this will be last minute for most people, but there is still room available for anyone who is interested in attending our upcoming tournament in Burlington, Ontario, Canada, April 7-9. For more info contact Harvey Schouls at schoulsh at aptea.com or Nick Hoekstra at nhoekstra at vdwengineering.com From styson at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 09:42:18 2006 From: styson at gmail.com (Sam Tyson) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:42:18 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Question Message-ID: Does a crew in a fordable location that fails its TC per PbR SSR 14.2 Disrupt, Break, or ELR? Thanks, Sam Tyson From pbelfordacm at yahoo.com Fri Mar 10 10:06:14 2006 From: pbelfordacm at yahoo.com (Pete Belford) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:06:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] new version of PTO rules Message-ID: <20060310180614.70770.qmail@web30314.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Will the new PTO rules add the missing part of the IJA army? I sure hope so, despite ASL being mainly a WW2 game and the missing capability is mostly post-WW2. It would be really nice not have to SSR that the "Japanese are wearing white gloves" anymore. Pete 'what was up with that in those godzilla movies anyway' Belford __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From chas.argent at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 11:02:37 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:02:37 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions In-Reply-To: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C12E@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> References: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C12E@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> Message-ID: Try "vasler" and "dumpster" instead; they may be case-sensitive, which is why VASLER didn't work. -Chas On 3/10/06, Tuline, Andrew wrote: > > > Didn't work for me. > > I did check out the goat pictures though . .. . > > :0 > > Andrew > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:27 AM > To: Bradley Knoll > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions > > The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ > > When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". > > Regards, > Chas > > On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of > > the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one > place? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent 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 > > > ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- > This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From chas.argent at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 11:02:37 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:02:37 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions In-Reply-To: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C12E@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> References: <29434F08AACE5B41A51D1E97F0FA4C5649C12E@SCVANEX3.sierrasys.com> Message-ID: Try "vasler" and "dumpster" instead; they may be case-sensitive, which is why VASLER didn't work. -Chas On 3/10/06, Tuline, Andrew wrote: > > > Didn't work for me. > > I did check out the goat pictures though . .. . > > :0 > > Andrew > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:27 AM > To: Bradley Knoll > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions > > The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ > > When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". > > Regards, > Chas > > On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of > > the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one > place? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent 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 > > > ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- > This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From craig.p.walters at monsanto.com Fri Mar 10 11:15:26 2006 From: craig.p.walters at monsanto.com (WALTERS, CRAIG P [AG/1000]) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:15:26 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Message-ID: <633248C3A654B740B4C2FFD67A42C6CA403923@NA1000EXM02.na.ds.monsanto.com> That did it. Thanks, Craig -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 1:03 PM To: Tuline, Andrew Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Try "vasler" and "dumpster" instead; they may be case-sensitive, which is why VASLER didn't work. -Chas On 3/10/06, Tuline, Andrew wrote: > > > Didn't work for me. > > I did check out the goat pictures though . .. . > > :0 > > Andrew > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:27 AM > To: Bradley Knoll > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions > > The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ > > When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". > > Regards, > Chas > > On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of > > the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one > place? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent 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 > > > ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- > This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive such information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. Please delete it and all attachments from any servers, hard drives or any other media. Other use of this e-mail by you is strictly prohibited. All e-mails and attachments sent and received are subject to monitoring, reading and archival by Monsanto. The recipient of this e-mail is solely responsible for checking for the presence of "Viruses" or other "Malware". Monsanto accepts no liability for any damage caused by any such code transmitted by or accompanying this e-mail or any attachment. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From craig.p.walters at monsanto.com Fri Mar 10 11:15:26 2006 From: craig.p.walters at monsanto.com (WALTERS, CRAIG P [AG/1000]) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:15:26 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Message-ID: <633248C3A654B740B4C2FFD67A42C6CA403923@NA1000EXM02.na.ds.monsanto.com> That did it. Thanks, Craig -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 1:03 PM To: Tuline, Andrew Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions Try "vasler" and "dumpster" instead; they may be case-sensitive, which is why VASLER didn't work. -Chas On 3/10/06, Tuline, Andrew wrote: > > > Didn't work for me. > > I did check out the goat pictures though . .. . > > :0 > > Andrew > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Chas Argent > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:27 AM > To: Bradley Knoll > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] VASL 5 Extensions > > The VASL dump, here: http://www.maryandmike.net/vasldump/ > > When prompted, the username is "VASLER" and the password is "dumpster". > > Regards, > Chas > > On 3/9/06, Bradley Knoll wrote: > > Is there somewhere on the web a place to grab the latest vesions of > > the extensions available as a batch or at least organized in one > place? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent 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 > > > ----Notice Regarding Confidentiality---- > This email, including any and all attachments, (this "Email") is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. Sierra Systems Group Inc. and its affiliates accept no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person resulting from any unauthorized use of or reliance upon this Email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or other use of this Email is prohibited. Please notify us of the error in communication by return email and destroy all copies of this Email. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive such information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. Please delete it and all attachments from any servers, hard drives or any other media. Other use of this e-mail by you is strictly prohibited. All e-mails and attachments sent and received are subject to monitoring, reading and archival by Monsanto. The recipient of this e-mail is solely responsible for checking for the presence of "Viruses" or other "Malware". Monsanto accepts no liability for any damage caused by any such code transmitted by or accompanying this e-mail or any attachment. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From bpickering at csworld.com Fri Mar 10 11:22:06 2006 From: bpickering at csworld.com (bpickering@csworld.com) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 14:22:06 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] new version of PTO rules Message-ID: <380-22006351019226163@M2W077.mail2web.com> But the "White Gloves" aren't IJA- they're JSDF. Brian Pickering Original Message: ----------------- From: Pete Belford pbelfordacm at yahoo.com Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:06:14 -0800 (PST) To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] new version of PTO rules Will the new PTO rules add the missing part of the IJA army? I sure hope so, despite ASL being mainly a WW2 game and the missing capability is mostly post-WW2. It would be really nice not have to SSR that the "Japanese are wearing white gloves" anymore. Pete 'what was up with that in those godzilla movies anyway' Belford __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From jbarber at meic.org Fri Mar 10 11:59:45 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 12:59:45 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for live VASL In-Reply-To: <001a01c62c35$98590ee0$7dd80250@GOPHER831MAIN> Message-ID: Dudes, I'm looking for a semi-regular (weekly or bi-weekly) live VASL opponent. I have two small kids so can't play until they're in the sack which means I can't start until around 9:00 pm Mountain time (GMT-7). I can usually play for 2-3 hours at a crack. Sunday nights would be best but other days work as well. I don't have voice so it would be standard text based. I have all the MMP stuff plus a few extras. Let me know if you're interested. Jeff Barber From gr27134 at charter.net Fri Mar 10 12:05:03 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 12:05:03 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] NashCon 2006 / ASL Tournament (Nashville/Franklin, TN, USA) Message-ID: <7195001.1142021103700.JavaMail.root@fepweb11> The annual NashCon ASL tournament will be this May 26, 27 & 28 (i.e., the annual whack a tater tourney). http://www.hmgs-midsouth.org 1st Place will be a copy of AoO (no maps). Other prizes are in the works. Hotel and registration info can be found at the above website. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Mar 10 16:14:37 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 11:14:37 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: %On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:42:18 -0600, "Sam Tyson" wrote: >Does a crew in a fordable location that fails its TC per PbR SSR 14.2 >Disrupt, Break, or ELR? PBr 14.2 specifies that Casualty Reduction only applies to heroic and unarmed units, therefore A19.12-.13 applies to *all* other units. Crews are immune to Unit Replacement (A19.11). I suspect therefore that they Disrupt, although it's a little unclear because crews ordinarily *never* Disrupt (since they're immune to both HOB and ELR failure), so A19.12-.13 doesn't mention them. A clear statement in the SSR would have been helpful. Unfortunately I have to say that the PBr SSR are, by-and-large, not as tightly written as they should have been; there are a number of minor rules glitches like this. None of it makes the game unplayable by any means, but I don't think enough eyes were passed over this one before publication. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Finally we meet, sack of mucous." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From iguana at chartertn.net Sat Mar 11 06:12:45 2006 From: iguana at chartertn.net (Douglas D. Williams) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:12:45 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Laminating aslsk style boards Message-ID: <000001c64515$e347c880$6501a8c0@computer1> I recently had my aslsk 1&2 and BV 3rd edition boards laminated at my local Kinkos and I am very pleased with the results. Kinkos used a 5 mil thickness laminate which makes them stiff and they lay perfectly flat on the table. A little pricey at a bit over $6 a board, I nevertheless consider it a good investment in that the boards are now "permanent" and will in all likelihood outlast me. After having these done, I must say that I prefer these new style laminated boards over the old style cardboard mounted ones, and I plan to eventually get then entire collection in this style. From matt.larie at verizon.net Sat Mar 11 18:19:39 2006 From: matt.larie at verizon.net (Matt Evans) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 20:19:39 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <000801c64395$71604340$0300000a@posh> References: <20060309133240.23865.qmail@web30302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20060309101233.01c21c88@direcway.com> <000801c64395$71604340$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: 2-3 years, huh? Lessee... 2-3 times [AOO-formula] = 27.5 years! Not bad... Heh. One module? It's gotta be bigger than AOO, I suspect!?! On Mar 9, 2006, at 10:20 AM, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > Also theres a bunch of Gung Ho! modules that need to be sold out > first ;) > Give MMP 2-3 years I'd say. > > Kenneth Knudsen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ron mosher" > To: ; > Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 5:16 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] CoB > > >> At 07:32 AM 3/9/2006, Pete Belford wrote: >>> Out of >>> print suggests that it will never be reprinted again. >>> To me, that is like, insane. The IJA are so cool to >>> fight against and with. >> >> COB as we knew it will never be re-printed. >> >> COB and Gung-ho will be combined and issued together....according to >> the most recent from MMP. Also, there is another inherent delay, >> since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to redo the >> Chapter G rules....thank god the head demon was out of ASL when >> ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting... >> >> >> ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 watkins.bill at verizon.net Sat Mar 11 21:22:45 2006 From: watkins.bill at verizon.net (Bill Watkins) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:22:45 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] COB Message-ID: <4413B025.800@verizon.net> Still in stock????? The bloody things are going for more than $80 on ebay! Bill Watkins From ktasl at comcast.net Sat Mar 11 21:47:07 2006 From: ktasl at comcast.net (Keith Todd) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 21:47:07 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] COB References: <4413B025.800@verizon.net> Message-ID: <000e01c64598$66a6a2a0$6401a8c0@MOOSE> Out of stock, near mint CoB for $80 is a good price. I paid $150 for mine 3 years ago. Keith ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Watkins" To: "ASLML" Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 9:22 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] COB > Still in stock????? The bloody things are going for more than $80 on ebay! > > Bill Watkins > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From iguana at chartertn.net Sun Mar 12 05:57:40 2006 From: iguana at chartertn.net (Douglas D. Williams) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 08:57:40 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein Message-ID: <000001c645dc$ede9c500$6501a8c0@computer1> Has West of Alamein ever been re-released in a 2nd edition? I am finding conflicting information regarding this. From chas.argent at gmail.com Sun Mar 12 06:26:02 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 06:26:02 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: <000001c645dc$ede9c500$6501a8c0@computer1> References: <000001c645dc$ede9c500$6501a8c0@computer1> Message-ID: Not yet. "For King and Country" was released a few years ago, which contains the British OoB. But a 2nd edition of WoA is still pending. It will include the Desert materials (boards, counters, Chapter F, etc) which were not released in FKaC. Regards, Chas On 3/12/06, Douglas D. Williams wrote: > Has West of Alamein ever been re-released in a 2nd edition? I am finding > conflicting information regarding this. > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 12 09:47:59 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 04:47:59 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: <000001c645dc$ede9c500$6501a8c0@computer1> References: <000001c645dc$ede9c500$6501a8c0@computer1> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 08:57:40 -0500, "Douglas D. Williams" wrote: >Has West of Alamein ever been re-released in a 2nd edition? I am finding >conflicting information regarding this. The ASL FAQ (see my .sig), although somewhat out of date in general, contains the information you need regarding "West of Alamein" (1st ed. -- British + Desert) and "For King And Country" (2nd ed. -- British only). A 2nd ed. WoA (i.e., just the desert stuff) is being planned. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From iguana at chartertn.net Sun Mar 12 10:07:13 2006 From: iguana at chartertn.net (Douglas D. Williams) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 13:07:13 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c645ff$ca94e350$6501a8c0@computer1> That is what I surmised, but I did find a couple of sources that claimed that the 2nd edition WoA had already been released, such as the Wikipedia entry for ASL pertaining to WoA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Squad_Leader_Modules#West_of_Alamein The Wiki entry for ASL is overall *very* well written and detailed, but I guess the author got a bit ahead of schedule on this part of the entry. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst at netspace.net.au] > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 12:48 PM > To: Douglas D. Williams > Cc: ASL Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Aslml] West of Alamein > > > On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 08:57:40 -0500, "Douglas D. Williams" > wrote: > > >Has West of Alamein ever been re-released in a 2nd edition? I am > >finding conflicting information regarding this. > > The ASL FAQ (see my .sig), although somewhat out of date in > general, contains the information you need regarding "West of > Alamein" (1st ed. -- British + > Desert) and "For King And Country" (2nd ed. -- British only). > > A 2nd ed. WoA (i.e., just the desert stuff) is being planned. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Sun Mar 12 10:54:24 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 19:54:24 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] COB References: <4413B025.800@verizon.net> Message-ID: <001501c64606$616bca40$0300000a@posh> It is the Gung Ho! module which is still in stock and keeps the new PTO module on the drawing board :) Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Watkins" To: "ASLML" Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 6:22 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] COB > Still in stock????? The bloody things are going for more than $80 on ebay! > > Bill Watkins > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mar 12 12:11:18 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:11:18 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] COB In-Reply-To: <001501c64606$616bca40$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: Hi, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > It is the Gung Ho! module which is still in stock and keeps the new PTO > module on the drawing board :) > I doubt it. I haven't heard anyone from MMP say so, and I don't really see any sense in that either. Those who buy Gung Ho must be people who already own CoB. And since they already own CoB, few of them will buy the new CoB/GH instead of the old GH. So a new CoB/GH shouldn't affect the sales of the old GH much anyway. From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Sun Mar 12 12:19:41 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:19:41 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] COB References: Message-ID: <002201c64612$4b8a2c60$0300000a@posh> Hi Ole With the new 2nd edition formated rules in the new module, no one would bother to buy the old module, wouldn't you say? Not that I would mind seeing the new module next month, I'll buy it for sure. I just dont see it happening :) Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ole Boe" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" ; "Bill Watkins" ; "ASLML" Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:11 PM Subject: RE: [Aslml] COB > Hi, > > Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > > > It is the Gung Ho! module which is still in stock and keeps the new PTO > > module on the drawing board :) > > > I doubt it. I haven't heard anyone from MMP say so, and I don't really see > any sense in that either. Those who buy Gung Ho must be people who already > own CoB. And since they already own CoB, few of them will buy the new CoB/GH > instead of the old GH. So a new CoB/GH shouldn't affect the sales of the old > GH much anyway. > > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sun Mar 12 12:24:29 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:24:29 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] COB In-Reply-To: <002201c64612$4b8a2c60$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: Hi, > With the new 2nd edition formated rules in the new module, no one would > bother to buy the old module, wouldn't you say? > Nah, I don't think so. The old GH should be cheaper, and give you the mounted boards (alongside the mounted CoB boards you already own). So there's probably little reason to buy the new module unless you prefer the new ASLSK style boards. But of course, I own CoB and GH and will doubtless aquire the new PTO module as well, so what I'm saying above may be total hogwash :-) MMP may of course choose to add more boards/scenarios as in BV, and update the rules. This will make the new module a better deal too, but I haven't heard anything about this... > Not that I would mind seeing the new module next month, I'll buy it for > sure. I just dont see it happening :) > No, I can guarantee that it will take quite some time to get it done even if MMP gets it out as fast as they can (after VoTG and J7). From pbelfordacm at yahoo.com Sun Mar 12 14:14:59 2006 From: pbelfordacm at yahoo.com (Pete Belford) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 14:14:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] laminating boards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060312221459.26386.qmail@web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > I recently had my aslsk 1&2 and BV 3rd edition > boards laminated at my local > Kinkos and I am very pleased with the results. > Kinkos used a 5 mil thickness > laminate which makes them stiff and they lay > perfectly flat on the table. A > little pricey at a bit over $6 a board, I > nevertheless consider it a good > investment in that the boards are now "permanent" > and will in all likelihood > outlast me. Yes I bought the unmounted boards and did the same thing. Some copy shops offer a matte finish which cuts out a lot of glare. Part of my boards are done matte, part done glossy. The matte ones are far better. Pete __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Sun Mar 12 16:25:51 2006 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 1:25:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Selling CH Soldier of the Negus on eBay Message-ID: <16384986.1142209551800.JavaMail.root@webmail01.auna.data> Hello guys I'm selling a mint condition Soldier of the Negus game on eBay. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8779687468 Goodbye Jesus From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Sun Mar 12 16:27:13 2006 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 1:27:13 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Selling CH Soldier of the Negus on eBay Message-ID: <14711184.1142209633541.JavaMail.root@webmail01.auna.data> Hello guys I'm selling a mint condition Soldier of the Negus game on eBay. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8779687468 Goodbye Jesus From indiabooks at optusnet.com.au Sun Mar 12 17:50:26 2006 From: indiabooks at optusnet.com.au (Indian Ink (South Asia Books)) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:50:26 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question Message-ID: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> Blank Hi guys, I have a gully/stream question: During the advance phase can a mmc + leader INTO the shallow stream (- 1 elevation) advance out of the gully on the adjacent hex (brush) hex (0 elevation)? my opponent says no..according to him during adavnce a unit cannot change elevation AND move into a different hex at the same time..so all i can do is to advance in crest status.. I have shown him the exception for this rule ( eg: fortications) but i could not find a specific mention for gullies.. Does anyone know the specificc reference ... Thank you in advance Joe From chas.argent at gmail.com Sun Mar 12 18:23:14 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:23:14 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question In-Reply-To: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> References: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> Message-ID: You're IN a Gully and wish to advance into an adjacent Brush hex at level 0? Certainly you can do this. 4MF will cause CX status, however, as this is an Advance vs Difficult Terrain (A4.72). aRegards, Chas On 3/12/06, Indian Ink (South Asia Books) wrote: > Blank > Hi guys, > > I have a gully/stream question: > > During the advance phase can a mmc + leader INTO the shallow stream (- 1 > elevation) advance out of the gully on the adjacent hex (brush) hex (0 > elevation)? > > my opponent says no..according to him during adavnce a unit cannot change > elevation AND move into a different hex at the same time..so all i can do is > to advance in crest status.. > > I have shown him the exception for this rule ( eg: fortications) but i could > not find a specific mention for gullies.. > > Does anyone know the specificc reference ... > > Thank you in advance > > Joe > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From dreenstra at comcast.net Sun Mar 12 19:06:39 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:06:39 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question In-Reply-To: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> Message-ID: <20060313030700.A83531BAC7@che.dreamhost.com> Yes, the units in question can perform this advance, provided that they are not already marked with a CX counter. Changing elevation doubles the cost of the brush hex to 4MF, which is a Advance vs Difficult Terrain. Perhaps that is what your opponent is quibbling about? Otherwise, he's wrong. HtH, Dave Reenstra > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of Indian Ink (South Asia Books) > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 8:50 PM > To: aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question > > Blank > Hi guys, > > I have a gully/stream question: > > During the advance phase can a mmc + leader INTO the shallow stream (- 1 > elevation) advance out of the gully on the adjacent hex (brush) hex (0 > elevation)? > > my opponent says no..according to him during adavnce a unit cannot > change > elevation AND move into a different hex at the same time..so all i can do > is > to advance in crest status.. > > I have shown him the exception for this rule ( eg: fortications) but i > could > not find a specific mention for gullies.. > > Does anyone know the specificc reference ... > > Thank you in advance > > Joe > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jr at hellcat.com Sun Mar 12 20:18:29 2006 From: jr at hellcat.com (J. R. Tracy) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 23:18:29 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Joe writes: > my opponent says no..according to him during adavnce a unit cannot > change elevation AND move into a different hex at the same time..so > all i can do is to advance in crest status.. You can certainly do the gully->brush Advance, as an Advance vs Difficult Terrain. As for the above, if that were true, you wouldn't be able to even Advance onto a hill from a lower level. JR, finally able to post again From indiabooks at optusnet.com.au Sun Mar 12 20:27:54 2006 From: indiabooks at optusnet.com.au (Indian Ink (South Asia Books)) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:27:54 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question References: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> <2b8228f00603122009w6a703356h9cd65342fdf73b52@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <019701c64656$80270350$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> Sorry if the question was not clear...yes the units at the end of the movement phase are IN the shallow stream (-1 level). Can in the AdPh advance from this location on the adjacent hex which is a brush hex at 0 level? What i need is a rule reference showing that this is allowed so that i can show it to my opponent..he is new but keen to learn!! regards Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: M Rodgers To: Indian Ink (South Asia Books) Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question You question needs to be more clear. Are the units already IN the shallow stream? If yes, then the answer is yes. If not, then are they on level zero? The units could not advance from level zero, INTO the adjacent shallow stream and then out of the gully to an adjacent hex. On 3/12/06, Indian Ink (South Asia Books) wrote: Blank Hi guys, I have a gully/stream question: During the advance phase can a mmc + leader INTO the shallow stream (- 1 elevation) advance out of the gully on the adjacent hex (brush) hex (0 elevation)? my opponent says no..according to him during adavnce a unit cannot change elevation AND move into a different hex at the same time..so all i can do is to advance in crest status.. I have shown him the exception for this rule ( eg: fortications) but i could not find a specific mention for gullies.. Does anyone know the specificc reference ... Thank you in advance Joe _______________________________________________ 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 -- Michael Rodgers Montreal From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 12 20:39:51 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:39:51 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: <000401c645ff$ca94e350$6501a8c0@computer1> References: <000401c645ff$ca94e350$6501a8c0@computer1> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 13:07:13 -0500, "Douglas D. Williams" wrote: >The Wiki entry for ASL is overall *very* well written and detailed, but I >guess the author got a bit ahead of schedule on this part of the entry. Ah, well. The nice think about a Wiki is that anyone can update an entry. The terrible thing about a Wiki is that anyone can update an entry. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From scottgreenman at comcast.net Sun Mar 12 21:20:30 2006 From: scottgreenman at comcast.net (Scott Greenman) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:20:30 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question In-Reply-To: <019701c64656$80270350$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> References: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> <2b8228f00603122009w6a703356h9cd65342fdf73b52@mail.gmail.com> <019701c64656$80270350$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> Message-ID: <4415011E.8000007@comcast.net> The rule that shows your opponent they are wrong is A4.7. It says: "Infantry units ... may use the APh to move one hex horizontally or vertically (to a different ADJACENT building level Location of the same hex) but not both. A unit may not change both its Location within a hex and also the hex it is in during the same APh although it could change both elevation and hex in an APh by advancing to an adjacent hex of different elevation such as a hill or Depression." The second sentence explicitly allows your move. The first sentence vertical restriction only applies to building levels which don't apply here. The second wouldn't stop you because you are not changing Location within a hex. Crest status does not create an additional Location in the hex - see the Index definition of Location and the crest/foxhole rules. Scott Indian Ink (South Asia Books) wrote: > Sorry if the question was not clear...yes the units at the end of the > movement phase are IN the shallow stream (-1 level). Can in the AdPh > advance from this location on the adjacent hex which is a brush hex at 0 > level? > > > What i need is a rule reference showing that this is allowed so that i can > show it to my opponent..he is new but keen to learn!! > > regards > Joe > > From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 12 21:21:46 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:21:46 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Gully/Stream question In-Reply-To: <019701c64656$80270350$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> References: <005501c64640$80c08630$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> <2b8228f00603122009w6a703356h9cd65342fdf73b52@mail.gmail.com> <019701c64656$80270350$b5ab1cd3@INDIANINK> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:27:54 +1100, "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" wrote: >What i need is a rule reference showing that this is allowed so that i can >show it to my opponent..he is new but keen to learn!! A4.7: "A unit may not change both its Location within a hex and also the hex it is in during the same APh **although it could change both elevation and hex in an APh by advancing to an adjacent hex of different elevation such as a hill or Depression.**" (my emphasis) Your opponent is probably confused by the wording of A4.7, which is understandable, as it somehow managed to avoid the great "hex/Location" update. If all he reads is "... may use the APh to move one hex horizontally or vertically ... but not both" then he may well have gained a false impression. What he needs to remember, however: * Changing levels is not *in itself* a "change of hex". You can change levels without changing hex (typically, in a building). So what does the rule mean when it talks about "changing a hex vertically"? * There is a whole phrase after "vertically" which cannot be simply ignored, although its placement in parentheses invites exactly that response. It's here where it defines what "changing a hex vertically" is actually supposed to mean: "(to a different ADJACENT building level Location of the same hex)". In other words, A4.7 introduces and defines a term ("vertical hex") that is not only more confusing than helpful, but is never used again. The entire problem could be avoided if the rule properly used "Location" instead ... for example: "... may use the APh to move to a new Location horizontally or vertically, but not both. No more than one such Location may be entered although it could change both elevation and hex in an APh by advancing to an adjacent hex of different elevation such as a hill or Depression. The advance may even be used to enter/exit an entrenchment in the same or a new Location (even if on different levels). ...." (This could be expanded to note special cases like Climbing and Pillboxes, but it's not really necessary since the various rules for same already cover them adequately.) (I don't like the current circular reasoning in the rules: the Index defines an Accessible Location as somewhere you can get to using Advance, and A4.7 uses the term Accessible as part of its definition.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Sun Mar 12 22:58:46 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 14:58:46 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez RE Overrun and Bog question Message-ID: This was probably obvious to all but me :) Cheers Jon -----Original Message----- From: perrycocke at comcast.net [mailto:perrycocke at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, 11 March 2006 10:20 PM To: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Subject: FW: RE: ASL: Overrun and Bog question; MMP Q&A > >During its MPh an Armoured Car (AC) becomes ADJACENT to an known enemy >infantry unit. The AC announces it will enter the infantry unit's Location >and conduct an Overrun, and announces the MP expenditure for the Overrun >combined with the cost of entry into that Location. The hex side crossed by >the AC is a Hedge hex side and so the AC must take a Bog Check DR which it >fails. As per B9.4, the AC is now Bogged in the hex it attempted to leave. > >Does the announced Overrun still occur (albeit at half firepower as the AC >is now Immobile [D7.11]) even though the AC has not entered the enemy >unit's Location? ? No. ? ....Perry MMP This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 04:24:33 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 06:24:33 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <479d43235f79.4411458b@broadpark.no> References: <479d43235f79.4411458b@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313061801.01c2bcb8@direcway.com> At 02:23 AM 3/10/2006, Ole B?e wrote: >I think I'll pass up the invitation to a flame >war, and instead just clarify that none of the >above is true. Ron wrote something similar about >AoO a while ago, and it wasn't true then either. Chuckle, what part isn't true? My opinion you are the head rules demon? My opinion that your involvement in ASLRBv2 would have slowed down its publication? My posting that you have stated you want to change/rewrite large parts of Chap G? Please check out the difference, between opinions and facts cited, before running out your "truth" BS. You seem to call all opinions you don't agree with "lies", and wave that as a talisman..... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 04:30:50 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 06:30:50 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] COB In-Reply-To: References: <001501c64606$616bca40$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313062850.01c28750@direcway.com> At 02:11 PM 3/12/2006, Ole Boe wrote: >And since they already own CoB, few of them will buy the new CoB/GH >instead of the old GH. Err..check out BVv3 sales with the floppy maps...think the old dudes will buy the combined PTO package in similar numbers...just to get the maps and possibly to get the new Chap. H notes, plus the more "square" MMP counters. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From iguana at chartertn.net Mon Mar 13 04:42:52 2006 From: iguana at chartertn.net (Douglas D. Williams) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 07:42:52 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] eratta for 1st edition Message-ID: <000001c6469b$a54c3cf0$6501a8c0@computer1> >From what I understand, there are still portions of the ASL rules that are only available in 1st edition format, such as the desert rules, the pacific theater rules, the chapter H notes for Americans, etc. Would someone be so kind as to provide a link to the current eratta for these? From styson at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 05:21:01 2006 From: styson at gmail.com (Sam Tyson) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 07:21:01 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] J97 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That's the conclusion we came to as well regarding the rule. We played it so the crew became disrupted, since "no effect" definitely did not feel right at the time either. Perhaps Perry can clear it up. Sam On 3/10/06, Bruce Probst wrote: > %On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:42:18 -0600, "Sam Tyson" wrote: > > >Does a crew in a fordable location that fails its TC per PbR SSR 14.2 > >Disrupt, Break, or ELR? > > PBr 14.2 specifies that Casualty Reduction only applies to heroic and unarmed > units, therefore A19.12-.13 applies to *all* other units. > > Crews are immune to Unit Replacement (A19.11). > > I suspect therefore that they Disrupt, although it's a little unclear because > crews ordinarily *never* Disrupt (since they're immune to both HOB and ELR > failure), so A19.12-.13 doesn't mention them. A clear statement in the SSR > would have been helpful. > > Unfortunately I have to say that the PBr SSR are, by-and-large, not as tightly > written as they should have been; there are a number of minor rules glitches > like this. None of it makes the game unplayable by any means, but I don't > think enough eyes were passed over this one before publication. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Finally we meet, sack of mucous." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 13 05:23:51 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 14:23:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] CoB Message-ID: Hi, I answered Ron's original post: > >I think I'll pass up the invitation to a flame > >war, and instead just clarify that none of the > >above is true. Ron wrote something similar about > >AoO a while ago, and it wasn't true then either. > and Ron replied: > Chuckle, what part isn't true? > My opinion you are the head rules demon? > You may call me what you want, I really don't care. But if you by "head" mean that I'm in control or can decide about rule changes, then that part is certainly not true. But since you don't see what "none of the above is true" means, then let me quote your mail that I answered again, and comment it a bit further: You wrote: >>> Also, there is another inherent delay, >>> since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to redo the >>> Chapter G rules.... It is *not* true that I am now insisting that I want to redo the Chapter G rules, and it is of course therefore *not* true that this causes another inherent delay either. > My opinion that your involvement in ASLRBv2 would > have slowed down its publication? But you didn't state it as an opinion, you wrote: >>>thank god the head demon was out of ASL when >>> ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting... Anyway, I *was* involved in ASLRBv2 - and didn't slow it down. Ask Perry if you want to. So nothing is true in this part of your post either. ...and that's all from your original post. It can still be summarized: Nothing in it was true. If you disagree, then you're welcome to point out which part of it that actually was true. :-) > Please check out the difference, between opinions > and facts cited, before running out your "truth" > BS. You seem to call all opinions you don't agree > with "lies", and wave that as a talisman..... > I'm tempted to answer here. You wrote "there is another inherent delay". I agree that this is not a fact - because it is not true - but it is certainly made to look like a fact. It is of course convenient to hide behind "opinions" instead of admitting that one was caught in stating incorrect "facts". But you're welcome to explain which of your original sentences that is written to look like an opinion and not a "fact". From watkins.bill at verizon.net Mon Mar 13 07:48:44 2006 From: watkins.bill at verizon.net (Bill Watkins) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:48:44 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] [aslml] COB Message-ID: <4415945C.1060809@verizon.net> Actually, I think all the back and forth about producing or not producing new modules based on how much is in stock or which kind of buyer will want which boards, etc, is nothing more than market researchers justifying their pay. Let's face it, we ASLers are not the most discriminating buyers. If somebody announces a new module or collection of scenarios, our only reaction is "Gimme!" Bill W From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 07:51:52 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 09:51:52 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313094210.01c26c98@direcway.com> At 07:23 AM 3/13/2006, Ole B?e wrote: >Anyway, I *was* involved in ASLRBv2 - Let's see ..you have posted that at about the time of the rules clean-up and re-write you had dropped ASL due to RL issues, and that there was a section you wished you'd had a hand in...I don't know if you meant for the entire time or part of rules re-write... >I'm tempted to answer Chuckle...little pedantic here..try to keep up and do develop your own on-line persona,plus the knee-jerk kindergarten, "liar-liar-pants on fire" is a little juvenile. >It is of course convenient to hide behind "opinions" .. No-one hides behind opinions, they just state them, and they don't say "In my opinion.." every time they state one, do look up opinion in the dictionary, and do try to keep up.... And this one is a lulu, "It is *not* true that I am now insisting that I want to redo the Chapter G rules.." An artful dodge if I ever saw one. Elsewhere you have indicated a desire to rewrite at least some of these: panji, caves, paddies, and amph assaults.... guess rewriting "part" of the rules is not rewriting the rules...chuckle. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 13 09:55:19 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 04:55:19 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] eratta for 1st edition In-Reply-To: <000001c6469b$a54c3cf0$6501a8c0@computer1> References: <000001c6469b$a54c3cf0$6501a8c0@computer1> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 07:42:52 -0500, "Douglas D. Williams" wrote: >From what I understand, there are still portions of the ASL rules that are >only available in 1st edition format, such as the desert rules, the pacific >theater rules, the chapter H notes for Americans, etc. Would someone be so >kind as to provide a link to the current eratta for these? All the current rules errata can be found here: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/asl2ed-errata.htm (Actually this page needs to be updated to include the errata found in AoO, but that's a minor issue at this time.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 13 10:10:49 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:10:49 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313094210.01c26c98@direcway.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ron and I continue the quarrel... > Let's see ..you have posted that at about the > time of the rules clean-up and re-write you had > dropped ASL due to RL issues, and that there was > a section you wished you'd had a hand in... Yes, there are sections I wish I could have provided more input to, but I didn't due to RL. > I don't know if you meant for the entire time or > part of rules re-write... > So when you wrote: "thank god the head demon was out of ASL when ASLRBv2 was done..or we'd still be waiting" You didn't actually have any idea of how much I was actually involved? Good to know how well your statements are founded ;-) > >It is of course convenient to hide behind "opinions" .. > > No-one hides behind opinions, they just state > them, and they don't say "In my opinion.." every > time they state one, do look up opinion in the > dictionary, and do try to keep up.... > I asked in my last post, which sentence in your original post that looked like an opinion, and which sentence in your post that was true. I'm not asking if you are able to make a sentence that *vaguely* recembles what you originally wrote, and which is true and/or looks like an opinion. I'm asking which of your original sentences that were either true or looked like an opinion or both. I notice that you're unable to quote any such sentence. I think that is quite telling. > An artful dodge if I ever saw one. Elsewhere you > have indicated a desire to rewrite at least some > of these: panji, caves, paddies, and amph > assaults.... guess rewriting "part" of the rules > is not rewriting the rules...chuckle. > Well, what you actually wrote was: >>> Also, there is another inherent delay, >>> since the rules-demons are now insisting they want to >>> redo the Chapter G rules" You may well change the last line to "redo *parts* *of* the Chapter G rules". It still doesn't look like anything but a false fact, and it is still not true. I neither insist nor plan to rewrite any part of the chapter G rules. From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 13:21:21 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:21:21 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313094210.01c26c98@direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313151651.01c6f368@direcway.com> At 12:10 PM 3/13/2006, Ole Boe wrote: >You may well change the last line to >"redo *parts* *of* the Chapter G rules". It still doesn't look like anything >but a false fact, and it is still not true. I neither insist nor plan to >rewrite any part of the chapter G rules. Chuckle...here's what you said: "What I really would like to do though, is to get hold of chapter G before republication of CoB, and make sure that the revised chapter G is about half as long as the old. The Hut, Panji, Cave, Rice Paddy, Landing Craft, Beaches & Seaborne Assault chapters are the ones that desperately need some work. .." Here's what I said....: "...the rules-demons are now insisting they WANT to redo the Chapter G rules.." (emphasis added...) Problems with the word "want"? Similar to "opinion" problems? :) ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 13 13:54:25 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 22:54:25 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313151651.01c6f368@direcway.com> Message-ID: Hi, read at leisure :-) > Chuckle...here's what you said: > > "What I really would like to do though, is to get hold of chapter G > before republication of CoB, and make sure that the revised chapter G > is about half as long as the old. > > The Hut, Panji, Cave, Rice Paddy, Landing Craft, Beaches & Seaborne > Assault chapters are the ones that desperately need some work. .." > > Here's what I said....: > > "...the rules-demons are now insisting they WANT to redo the Chapter > G rules.." (emphasis added...) > Oh, so you managed to get *half* of *one* sentence *almost* correct. Never mind that what you did *not* quote from the same sentence was "Also, there is another inherent delay, since..." - something that is still not true. But *NO* I never insisted that I wanted to redo chapter G. I only mentioned the idea in a long thread on the SZO forum about rule changes that people were wishing for or thinking of. I understand that you're obsessed with me and my influence on ASL, so I'm not surprised that you're taking this out of its context (and of course ignore all the other rule change suggestions in that same thread since they're not by me) and make up some idea about the CoB reprint being delayed due to this. But it's still not true. > Problems with the word "want"? Similar to "opinion" problems? :) > No. If you go back to my original post, you'll see that I simply stated "none of the above is true". I didn't say anything about whether it was your opinion or not. For all I know, you may have the opinion that the moon is a blue cheese and that CoB will not be reprinted until it turns into a red apple. None of that is true either. Anyway, I'm finished with this quarrel with you for now. But I will probably clarify that your statement or opinion or whatever you choose to call it, is wrong the next time that you invent such a new non-existing reason for a delay with the new CoB too. At least as long as you feel the need to include me and not the moon in your "opinions". From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 14:03:30 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:03:30 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313151651.01c6f368@direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313160216.01c72bc8@direcway.com> At 03:54 PM 3/13/2006, Ole Boe wrote: >I'm finished with this quarrel with you for now. I notice that you're unable to respond to the "WANT" portion. I think that is quite telling. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From john at winhaven.net Mon Mar 13 14:42:13 2006 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:42:13 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313160216.01c72bc8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <014301c646ef$5fe8faf0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> How about you guys do Samurai swords at 20 paces? :o) -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of ron mosher Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:04 PM To: Ole Boe; ron mosher; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] CoB At 03:54 PM 3/13/2006, Ole Boe wrote: >I'm finished with this quarrel with you for now. I notice that you're unable to respond to the "WANT" portion. I think that is quite telling. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL _______________________________________________ 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 14:59:11 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:59:11 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <014301c646ef$5fe8faf0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313160216.01c72bc8@direcway.com> <014301c646ef$5fe8faf0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313165846.01c854c8@direcway.com> At 04:42 PM 3/13/2006, John Bartow wrote: >How about you guys do Samurai swords at 20 paces? But..but..my arms aren't that long!!!! :) ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From john at winhaven.net Mon Mar 13 15:24:59 2006 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:24:59 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313165846.01c854c8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <015301c646f5$5926ba80$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> That was the point :o) -----Original Message----- From: ron mosher [mailto:rjmosher at direcway.com] Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:59 PM To: John Bartow; 'ron mosher'; 'Ole Boe'; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: RE: [Aslml] CoB At 04:42 PM 3/13/2006, John Bartow wrote: >How about you guys do Samurai swords at 20 paces? But..but..my arms aren't that long!!!! :) ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From robertthepastor at juno.com Mon Mar 13 19:12:43 2006 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:12:43 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] looking for games Message-ID: <20060313.191243.48440.0.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Does anyone have a current e-mail address for Tim in Alaska who sells games? Thanks and take care, Robert From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Mar 13 18:03:36 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:03:36 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313160216.01c72bc8@direcway.com><014301c646ef$5fe8faf0$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> <7.0.1.0.0.20060313165846.01c854c8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <007301c64715$74e926c0$d827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, John Bartow wrote: >>How about you guys do Samurai swords at 20 paces? Ron replied, > But..but..my arms aren't that long!!!! :) While Ron is figuring out what to do (you are supposed to attack the other guy Ron), Ole "Blood Axe" Boe's Viking heritage will surface (he will toss aside the katana and instead use his trusty battle-axe) as he charges at Ron and lops off Ron's head with one blow. It *is* the Viking way afterall ... :) =Jim= From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Mar 13 19:15:41 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:15:41 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB In-Reply-To: <015301c646f5$5926ba80$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060313165846.01c854c8@direcway.com> <015301c646f5$5926ba80$6402a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060313211521.01be7ad8@direcway.com> At 05:24 PM 3/13/2006, John Bartow wrote: >That was the point :o) EVIL man!!! :) ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From scott.holst at us.army.mil Mon Mar 13 19:18:32 2006 From: scott.holst at us.army.mil (scott.holst@us.army.mil) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:18:32 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] CoB Message-ID: Hi- Also, I think its a +3 Bane Axe vs argumentive ASL'er's. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: mcleods Date: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:03 pm Subject: Re: [Aslml] CoB > Listerz, > > > John Bartow wrote: > > >>How about you guys do Samurai swords at 20 paces? > > Ron replied, > > > But..but..my arms aren't that long!!!! :) > > While Ron is figuring out what to do (you are supposed to attack > the other > guy Ron), Ole "Blood Axe" Boe's Viking heritage will surface (he > will toss > aside the katana and instead use his trusty battle-axe) as he > charges at Ron > and lops off Ron's head with one blow. > > It *is* the Viking way afterall ... > > :) > > > =Jim= > > _______________________________________________ > 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 watkins.bill at verizon.net Mon Mar 13 20:52:40 2006 From: watkins.bill at verizon.net (Bill Watkins) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:52:40 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Looking For Games Message-ID: <44164C18.7010205@verizon.net> for those who don't know who Tim is, his company is Hobby Craft. His email is hobbycraft at gci.net. I've bought lots of ASL stuff from him. Good prices and quick shipping, even from frozen Alaska to me in New Jersey. I recommend him, although I really wish he'd put up a website! Bill Watkins From dgour.asl at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 22:39:31 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:39:31 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> I recently wrote a program to monitor ROAR and make it more searchable. For those who care about such things these are the top 12 scenarios reported to ROAR the past two weeks. I know I've asked this before but does everyone report all their games there? If no, why not? Just don't care or interface issues, or? Top Scenarios on ROAR past two weeks 113 Liberating Bessarabia 7 J98 Lend-Lease Attack 4 FrF2 Maczek Fire Brigade 4 119 Ancient Feud 3 PB-I Coup de main 3 HP14 Cracking Skulls 3 J94 Kempf at Melikhovo 3 13 Le Manoir (The Manor) 3 CH14 Ninety Minute War 3 A33 Tettau's Attack 3 SP123 The Badger's Breath 3 J67 The Lawless Roads 3 Darren From dgour.asl at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 22:40:46 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:40:46 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Chicago Open warm-up games Message-ID: <764636a60603132240r6063cd80i1cb6c9ba9044e17b@mail.gmail.com> Looks like I'm going to make it for the Chicago Open but coming in on Wednesday afternoon. Anyone up for some warm-up games? Contact me directly. Thanks. -- Darren From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 01:34:13 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:34:13 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> Hi Darren I think reports should only go to one place and mine goes to WARS. If you want a real picture you should compare ROAR to WARS. Cheers Kenneth Knudsen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Gour" To: "ASL List" Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:39 AM Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > I recently wrote a program to monitor ROAR and make it more > searchable. For those who care about such things these are the top 12 > scenarios reported to ROAR the past two weeks. > > I know I've asked this before but does everyone report all their games > there? If no, why not? Just don't care or interface issues, or? > > Top Scenarios on ROAR past two weeks > > 113 Liberating Bessarabia 7 > J98 Lend-Lease Attack 4 > FrF2 Maczek Fire Brigade 4 > 119 Ancient Feud 3 > PB-I Coup de main 3 > HP14 Cracking Skulls 3 > J94 Kempf at Melikhovo 3 > 13 Le Manoir (The Manor) 3 > CH14 Ninety Minute War 3 > A33 Tettau's Attack 3 > SP123 The Badger's Breath 3 > J67 The Lawless Roads 3 > > Darren > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 14 01:44:40 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:44:40 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:34:13 +0100, "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: >I think reports should only go to one place Why? Data doesn't get diluted if it's stored in more than one place. >and mine goes to WARS. What the heck is WARS? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 14 01:58:59 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:58:59 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <864d1212gmt33uemsg69ml0l864vdt9j82@4ax.com> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:39:31 -0700, "Darren Gour" wrote: >I know I've asked this before but does everyone report all their games >there? I'm someone who does, but lots of people don't. >If no, why not? Just don't care or interface issues, or? I suspect that "just don't care" sums it up pretty well. I have considerable distrust about ROAR's usefulness as a "balance indicator". Few -- *very* few -- scenarios gather sufficient information to be able to make any sort of accurate determination, but too many people read too much into the ROAR results. (A ROAR record of "3-3" does not tell you that a scenario is perfectly balanced, nor does a result of "5-1" tell you that it's horribly unbalanced; neither result tells you anything, really, other than "this scenario has been played six times".) What I find ROAR very useful for is: * Finding out what scenarios are being played (or, alternately, what scenarios are being avoided); * What the people who played those scenarios thought about them (i.e., was it a good ASL experience or not); * On a purely personal level, it's a convenient method of recording what scenarios I've played and when, and who I played against. Too many games have disappeared from my memory into the mists of time; recording the results in ROAR serves as a handy reminder. Using ROAR to determine "balance" comes a very distant last. (Of course, lately most of the scenarios I've been playing are playtests of one sort or another, and they don't even get recorded on ROAR. ) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 02:08:06 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 11:08:06 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <002a01c6474f$30a0a260$0300000a@posh> http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/wfhq-ld-faq.php > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce Probst" > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:44 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two > weeks > > > On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:34:13 +0100, "Kenneth Knudsen" > wrote: > > >I think reports should only go to one place > > Why? Data doesn't get diluted if it's stored in more than one place. > > >and mine goes to WARS. > > What the heck is WARS? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > From chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 05:06:56 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 05:06:56 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: Every game that I play goes into ROAR; since WARS is a Ladder, only those games which my opponent and I agree will be WARS-rated go to into WARS. The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go to ROAR. JMHO. Regards, Chas On 3/14/06, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > Hi Darren > > I think reports should only go to one place and mine goes to WARS. > If you want a real picture you should compare ROAR to WARS. > > Cheers > Kenneth Knudsen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Darren Gour" > To: "ASL List" > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:39 AM > Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > > > > I recently wrote a program to monitor ROAR and make it more > > searchable. For those who care about such things these are the top 12 > > scenarios reported to ROAR the past two weeks. > > > > I know I've asked this before but does everyone report all their games > > there? If no, why not? Just don't care or interface issues, or? > > > > Top Scenarios on ROAR past two weeks > > > > 113 Liberating Bessarabia 7 > > J98 Lend-Lease Attack 4 > > FrF2 Maczek Fire Brigade 4 > > 119 Ancient Feud 3 > > PB-I Coup de main 3 > > HP14 Cracking Skulls 3 > > J94 Kempf at Melikhovo 3 > > 13 Le Manoir (The Manor) 3 > > CH14 Ninety Minute War 3 > > A33 Tettau's Attack 3 > > SP123 The Badger's Breath 3 > > J67 The Lawless Roads 3 > > > > Darren > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 05:09:54 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 05:09:54 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: Bruce, WARS is the "{W}argaming {A}utomated {R}ecord {S}ystem" at SZO. Basically its a warganing a ladder, and ASL is one of the games it emcompasses; there are several others. Here is the link to its main page: http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/ladder.php -Chas On 3/14/06, Bruce Probst wrote: > >and mine goes to WARS. > > What the heck is WARS? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 05:47:51 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 14:47:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> Hi Chas > Every game that I play goes into ROAR; since WARS is a Ladder, only > those games which my opponent and I agree will be WARS-rated go to > into WARS. No its not only a ladder. If you want a game recorded without getting it on th ladder you can choose so. WARS is *also* a game recording system as ROAR is. You can go here to check the loss/win ratio: http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/wfhq-ld-all-players.php?searchtype=s&ladder=Advanced+Squad+Leader&SortOption=6 The only difference is that WARS is fairly new and thus only have 2100+ recordings while ROAR have many more. The smart thing about WARS is that you get both the ladder and the recording system. No more need for several systems. > > The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go to ROAR. > > JMHO. And IMO every game should go to WARS. > > Regards, > Chas > > > On 3/14/06, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > Hi Darren > > > > I think reports should only go to one place and mine goes to WARS. > > If you want a real picture you should compare ROAR to WARS. > > > > Cheers > > Kenneth Knudsen > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Darren Gour" > > To: "ASL List" > > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:39 AM > > Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > > > > > > > I recently wrote a program to monitor ROAR and make it more > > > searchable. For those who care about such things these are the top 12 > > > scenarios reported to ROAR the past two weeks. > > > > > > I know I've asked this before but does everyone report all their games > > > there? If no, why not? Just don't care or interface issues, or? > > > > > > Top Scenarios on ROAR past two weeks > > > > > > 113 Liberating Bessarabia 7 > > > J98 Lend-Lease Attack 4 > > > FrF2 Maczek Fire Brigade 4 > > > 119 Ancient Feud 3 > > > PB-I Coup de main 3 > > > HP14 Cracking Skulls 3 > > > J94 Kempf at Melikhovo 3 > > > 13 Le Manoir (The Manor) 3 > > > CH14 Ninety Minute War 3 > > > A33 Tettau's Attack 3 > > > SP123 The Badger's Breath 3 > > > J67 The Lawless Roads 3 > > > > > > Darren > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent at gmail.com > From chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 06:11:38 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 06:11:38 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: Why not do both? On 3/14/06, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go to > ROAR. > > > > JMHO. > > And IMO every game should go to WARS. -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 06:16:52 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 15:16:52 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. And I believe WARS is the one to go with. Now if only the ROAR data could somehow be transferred to WARS everything would be dandy. Cheers Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chas Argent" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" Cc: "ASL List" Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > Why not do both? > > > On 3/14/06, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > > > The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go to > > ROAR. > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > And IMO every game should go to WARS. > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent at gmail.com > From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 06:28:37 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 15:28:37 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> <4416D1C4.6050102@wybesse.net> Message-ID: <004701c64773$985cfd80$0300000a@posh> You are missing the point. WARS have both ladder and reporting built into it. ROAR does not. No one is questioning the amount of data on ROAR vs WARS. Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Spoor" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:23 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > I dunno. ROAR works fine for me. Maybe the WARS data should be shifted; > after all, there's less of it. > > Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. And I believe > > WARS is the one to go with. > > Now if only the ROAR data could somehow be transferred to WARS everything > > would be dandy. > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > From KEVIN.GRAVES at wellsfargo.com Tue Mar 14 06:47:05 2006 From: KEVIN.GRAVES at wellsfargo.com (KEVIN.GRAVES@wellsfargo.com) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 08:47:05 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks Message-ID: Can one report data into WARS without participating in the ladder? Personally, I have no wish to be in any sort of ladder. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Kenneth Knudsen Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:29 AM To: Jan Spoor Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks You are missing the point. WARS have both ladder and reporting built into it. ROAR does not. No one is questioning the amount of data on ROAR vs WARS. Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Spoor" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:23 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > I dunno. ROAR works fine for me. Maybe the WARS data should be shifted; > after all, there's less of it. > > Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. And I believe > > WARS is the one to go with. > > Now if only the ROAR data could somehow be transferred to WARS everything > > would be dandy. > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > _______________________________________________ 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 chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 07:44:25 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 07:44:25 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes, you can report to games to WARS as non-rated. -Chas On 3/14/06, KEVIN.GRAVES at wellsfargo.com wrote: > Can one report data into WARS without participating in the ladder? > Personally, I have no wish to be in any sort of ladder. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Kenneth Knudsen > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:29 AM > To: Jan Spoor > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past > twoweeks > > You are missing the point. > WARS have both ladder and reporting built into it. ROAR does not. > No one is questioning the amount of data on ROAR vs WARS. > > Ken > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jan Spoor" > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:23 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past > two weeks > > > > I dunno. ROAR works fine for me. Maybe the WARS data should be > shifted; > > after all, there's less of it. > > > > Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > > Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. And I > believe > > > WARS is the one to go with. > > > Now if only the ROAR data could somehow be transferred to WARS > everything > > > would be dandy. > > > > > > Cheers > > > Ken > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From jbarber at meic.org Tue Mar 14 07:45:10 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 08:45:10 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <004701c64773$985cfd80$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: I put all of my games into ROAR and have just started adding them to WARS as well. I think both are useful. ROAR because it has the largest data set and for all the reasons Bruce mentioned earlier. The feature I like best about WARS is that it has room for comments beyond just the scenario rating. I think as WARS grows this will be particularly useful. I don't see why there isn't room for both. It takes all of another 30 seconds to enter your games into both. Jeff "hey what ever happened to that AREA thing" Barber From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 08:41:52 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:41:52 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: Message-ID: <000f01c64786$32c63c80$0300000a@posh> Hi Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Barber" To: Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 4:45 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks > I put all of my games into ROAR and have just started adding them to WARS as > well. I think both are useful. ROAR because it has the largest data set > and for all the reasons Bruce mentioned earlier. > > The feature I like best about WARS is that it has room for comments beyond > just the scenario rating. I think as WARS grows this will be particularly > useful. Yes this adds a third dimension to it, which is the mini AARs atached to each report (if the author actually type it in). > > I don't see why there isn't room for both. It takes all of another 30 > seconds to enter your games into both. Just think it would be nice to have everything in one place. If the ROAR data could be added to WARS it would be perfect. If not, double-posting would make a combined (ROAR + WARS) count misleading and in time would make a merger impossible. > > Jeff "hey what ever happened to that AREA thing" Barber There is a European AREA rating being constructed at the moment. Please contact Philippe Rohmer for more details. Regards Ken From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Tue Mar 14 08:44:57 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 11:44:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <004701c64773$985cfd80$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> <4416D1C4.6050102@wybesse.net> <004701c64773$985cfd80$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <22367.65.222.202.26.1142354697.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > You are missing the point. > WARS have both ladder and reporting built into it. ROAR does not. > No one is questioning the amount of data on ROAR vs WARS. Nope, don't really think I'm missing the point. IMO, there should be an effort to have as much data about ASL games played as possible in one place for data consitency and ease of use. I don't want to be on some other ladder (my local club ladder is just fine, thanks), so WARS ladder is of no interest to me. ROARS has been around for years and is a reliable, ASL-only site, which to me means that it's much more likely to last. SZO is a commercial site that's ttrying to sell me all sorts of things I'm not interested in and which has lots of content about stuff I could care less about. IMO, it's less likely to provide a reliable home for long-term ASL data than a deicated site maintained by a hobbyist, like ROAR. I don't really think it's necessary to have only one or the other, but if people feel there should be, then I think it should be ROAR. From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 09:02:37 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:02:37 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> <4416D1C4.6050102@wybesse.net> <004701c64773$985cfd80$0300000a@posh> <22367.65.222.202.26.1142354697.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <001601c64789$18e880e0$0300000a@posh> Hi Jan > Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > > You are missing the point. > > WARS have both ladder and reporting built into it. ROAR does not. > > No one is questioning the amount of data on ROAR vs WARS. > > Nope, don't really think I'm missing the point. IMO, there should be an > effort to have as much data about ASL games played as possible in one > place for data consitency and ease of use. My words exactly. And that place should be WARS, with the old ROAR data added. > I don't want to be on some > other ladder (my local club ladder is just fine, thanks), so WARS ladder > is of no interest to me. Who is talking about a ladder? I am talking about the WARS reporting system. Nobody will ask you to join any ladder. > ROARS has been around for years and is a > reliable, ASL-only site, which to me means that it's much more likely to > last. This is a new aspect of the discussion. Which site is most likely to last? We have all seen AREA go down as well as the one before it. So it is indeed very important that we get a place on the web that will last. So which one is likely to last the longest? I dont think anyone can say for sure. Maybe both will last *forever*. I am personally not afraid any of the two will disappear. > SZO is a commercial site that's ttrying to sell me all sorts of > things I'm not interested in and which has lots of content about stuff I > could care less about. There are banner advert, yes. So what? It pays for bandwith and maintenance. The site is free to use. > IMO, it's less likely to provide a reliable home > for long-term ASL data than a deicated site maintained by a hobbyist, like > ROAR. As in my comments above, I dont think the two site differ much in that respect. > > I don't really think it's necessary to have only one or the other, but if > people feel there should be, then I think it should be ROAR. > This contradicts your first sentence: "IMO, there should be an effort to have as much data about ASL games played as possible in one place for data consitency and ease of use" So I'm a little confused about that point. Regards Kenneth Knudsen From peter.rogneholt at home.se Tue Mar 14 09:06:19 2006 From: peter.rogneholt at home.se (Peter Rogneholt) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:06:19 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh><4416D1C4.6050102@wybesse.net><004701c64773$985cfd80$0300000a@posh><22367.65.222.202.26.1142354697.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> <001601c64789$18e880e0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <004201c64789$9da0f1a0$fd1afb53@privat> Hi Guys ROAR is worth a lot more than WARS since I cannot see how the scenarios is rated in terms of balance on WARS. That is the ONLY thing I see most people use it for. If that is added to WARS and WARS have ROAR data incorporated, then after the implementation of that, I might switch to WARS. Med V?nliga H?lsningar (Regards) Peter "Commissar Piotr" Rogneholt peter.rogneholt at home.se From dreenstra at comcast.net Tue Mar 14 09:13:19 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:13:19 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <031420061713.16007.4416F9AF0001A22B00003E8722007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Why not the other way around? Find a way to port WARS data to ROAR? The latter has been around a lot longer and is where most (of those who report) people report their games. Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard about WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there wasn't really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to splinter the hobby. JMHO. Dave Reenstra -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Kenneth Knudsen" > Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. And I believe > WARS is the one to go with. > Now if only the ROAR data could somehow be transferred to WARS everything > would be dandy. > > Cheers > Ken > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chas Argent" > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" > Cc: "ASL List" > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:11 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two > weeks > > > > Why not do both? > > > > > > On 3/14/06, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > > > > > The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go > to > > > ROAR. > > > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > > > And IMO every game should go to WARS. > > > > -- > > Chas Argent > > Medford, OR, USA > > chas.argent 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 chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 09:16:58 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 09:16:58 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <031420061713.16007.4416F9AF0001A22B00003E8722007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <031420061713.16007.4416F9AF0001A22B00003E8722007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players is simply a nice by-product. -Chas On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard about WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there wasn't really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to splinter the hobby. > > JMHO. > > Dave Reenstra -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 09:25:02 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:25:02 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks References: <031420061713.16007.4416F9AF0001A22B00003E8722007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <002101c6478c$3aed1f90$0300000a@posh> Right. But now its turned into a reporting system and also with mini AAR's. I'd like to see the Balance option that Peter mentioned though. I'd present it to the techies. Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chas Argent" To: Cc: "ASL List" Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 6:16 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks > My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a > Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder > of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is > useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players > is simply a nice by-product. > > -Chas > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard about WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there wasn't really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to splinter the hobby. > > > > JMHO. > > > > Dave Reenstra > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent 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 dreenstra at comcast.net Tue Mar 14 09:53:20 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <031420061753.21959.441703100005E53F000055C722070208530E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Not intended, perhaps, but the effect is still the same, no? If you want to create a ladder, create a ladder. Adding the mini-AAR feature and tracking scenario balance kind of seems outside the bounds of what a ladder would be used for. Most of the WARS interface (the scenario and player pick-lists in particular) seems pretty clunky to me, but to each his own. Granted, it would be nice if ROAR allowed users to add some additional comments about the scenario, that would be useful, particularly for explaining why a player rated a scenario the way they did (questions on balance, just wasn't very fun, had some bad Taco Bell for lunch?). Is JR still open to making changes to ROAR? Dave -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Chas Argent" > My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a > Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder > of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is > useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players > is simply a nice by-product. > > -Chas > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard about > WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there wasn't > really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to splinter > the hobby. > > > > JMHO. > > > > Dave Reenstra > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent at gmail.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 14 10:01:02 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 05:01:02 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <8t0e125dl0mdm1549c0ffq05kl3kqnqtvp@4ax.com> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 15:16:52 +0100, "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: >Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. You said that before, but you still haven't explained why. I have no interest in a Ladder system, so why would I want to see WARS replace ROAR, especially if it means dumping all the data that ROAR has built up over the last few years? ROAR suits my needs (such as they are) perfectly adequately. "Please try our new Wheel Mk 2 -- this time it's even rounder!" ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Mar 14 10:10:00 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:10:00 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> <8t0e125dl0mdm1549c0ffq05kl3kqnqtvp@4ax.com> Message-ID: <003001c64792$830814a0$0300000a@posh> As I said in another post, if some report to ROAR and some report to WARS and some report to both, we will not have an accuate overview. The longer it continues like this, the more inaccurate it will become. Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:01 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 15:16:52 +0100, "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: >Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. You said that before, but you still haven't explained why. I have no interest in a Ladder system, so why would I want to see WARS replace ROAR, especially if it means dumping all the data that ROAR has built up over the last few years? ROAR suits my needs (such as they are) perfectly adequately. "Please try our new Wheel Mk 2 -- this time it's even rounder!" ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 10:50:05 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:50:05 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <031420061753.21959.441703100005E53F000055C722070208530E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <031420061753.21959.441703100005E53F000055C722070208530E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: As far as I know, JR adds scenarios to the ROAR database as they are published, but ROAR itself has not fundamentally changed. I'm sure that's the idea, however, because it is performing the task for which it's designed. Regards, Chas On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > Not intended, perhaps, but the effect is still the same, no? If you want to create a ladder, create a ladder. Adding the mini-AAR feature and tracking scenario balance kind of seems outside the bounds of what a ladder would be used for. Most of the WARS interface (the scenario and player pick-lists in particular) seems pretty clunky to me, but to each his own. > > Granted, it would be nice if ROAR allowed users to add some additional comments about the scenario, that would be useful, particularly for explaining why a player rated a scenario the way they did (questions on balance, just wasn't very fun, had some bad Taco Bell for lunch?). Is JR still open to making changes to ROAR? > > Dave > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "Chas Argent" > > My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a > > Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder > > of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is > > useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players > > is simply a nice by-product. > > > > -Chas > > > > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard about > > WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there wasn't > > really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to splinter > > the hobby. > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > > > Dave Reenstra > > > > -- > > Chas Argent > > Medford, OR, USA > > chas.argent at gmail.com > > > -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From dreenstra at comcast.net Tue Mar 14 12:16:35 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:16:35 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <031420062016.24667.441724A3000032B40000605B22007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> I don't think much has changed with ROAR (other than new scenarios being added) since JR added the option to search for players names and scenarios in addition to using the pick lists. That was a few years ago. I agree that ROAR performs the task for which it was designed, I just think there are a few things it could do a little better. Certainly not enough to warrant someone designing a tool that duplicates its functionality though. Dave -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Chas Argent" > As far as I know, JR adds scenarios to the ROAR database as they are > published, but ROAR itself has not fundamentally changed. > > I'm sure that's the idea, however, because it is performing the task > for which it's designed. > > Regards, > Chas > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > Not intended, perhaps, but the effect is still the same, no? If you want to > create a ladder, create a ladder. Adding the mini-AAR feature and tracking > scenario balance kind of seems outside the bounds of what a ladder would be used > for. Most of the WARS interface (the scenario and player pick-lists in > particular) seems pretty clunky to me, but to each his own. > > > > Granted, it would be nice if ROAR allowed users to add some additional > comments about the scenario, that would be useful, particularly for explaining > why a player rated a scenario the way they did (questions on balance, just > wasn't very fun, had some bad Taco Bell for lunch?). Is JR still open to making > changes to ROAR? > > > > Dave > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > From: "Chas Argent" > > > My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a > > > Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder > > > of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is > > > useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players > > > is simply a nice by-product. > > > > > > -Chas > > > > > > > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > > > > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard > about > > > WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there > wasn't > > > really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to > splinter > > > the hobby. > > > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > > > > > Dave Reenstra > > > > > > -- > > > Chas Argent > > > Medford, OR, USA > > > chas.argent at gmail.com > > > > > > > > > -- > Chas Argent > Medford, OR, USA > chas.argent at gmail.com From dgour.asl at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 12:19:42 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:19:42 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <031420062016.24667.441724A3000032B40000605B22007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <031420062016.24667.441724A3000032B40000605B22007374780E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <764636a60603141219y408af772rd51fd0a50b5b1f0e@mail.gmail.com> I agree in so much as ultimately what I'd like to see happen is the addition to ROAR of some additional reporting tools + the ability to upload richly formatted AARs (picture, text, uploadable PDFs). The bad part of this would be that it might displace the portion of the aslwebdex that I use most often but it would be great to have it all in one place. -- Darren On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > I don't think much has changed with ROAR (other than new scenarios being added) since JR added the option to search for players names and scenarios in addition to using the pick lists. That was a few years ago. > > I agree that ROAR performs the task for which it was designed, I just think there are a few things it could do a little better. Certainly not enough to warrant someone designing a tool that duplicates its functionality though. > > Dave > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "Chas Argent" > > As far as I know, JR adds scenarios to the ROAR database as they are > > published, but ROAR itself has not fundamentally changed. > > > > I'm sure that's the idea, however, because it is performing the task > > for which it's designed. > > > > Regards, > > Chas > > > > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > Not intended, perhaps, but the effect is still the same, no? If you want to > > create a ladder, create a ladder. Adding the mini-AAR feature and tracking > > scenario balance kind of seems outside the bounds of what a ladder would be used > > for. Most of the WARS interface (the scenario and player pick-lists in > > particular) seems pretty clunky to me, but to each his own. > > > > > > Granted, it would be nice if ROAR allowed users to add some additional > > comments about the scenario, that would be useful, particularly for explaining > > why a player rated a scenario the way they did (questions on balance, just > > wasn't very fun, had some bad Taco Bell for lunch?). Is JR still open to making > > changes to ROAR? > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > > From: "Chas Argent" > > > > My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a > > > > Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder > > > > of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is > > > > useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players > > > > is simply a nice by-product. > > > > > > > > -Chas > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > > > > > > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard > > about > > > > WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there > > wasn't > > > > really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to > > splinter > > > > the hobby. > > > > > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > > > > > > > Dave Reenstra > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Chas Argent > > > > Medford, OR, USA > > > > chas.argent at gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Chas Argent > > Medford, OR, USA > > chas.argent 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 ktasl at comcast.net Tue Mar 14 12:20:01 2006 From: ktasl at comcast.net (ktasl@comcast.net) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:20:01 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <031420062020.23529.441725710008C2EE00005BE92200763692049C0E9B05@comcast.net> Stability should be a major factor in this argument. ROAR is not dependent on advertising dollars and has someone running who has a genuine interest in ASL. The ASL Forums already has a history of being moved three times. I forget its first host but he was an avid ASL player who could not afford the costs and time, even with HOB's support. So Don Maddox offered to take it on his server, which then went Armchair General and now to SGZO(?). This new site is an intensive cookie generating site following every click you make. I am sure that the ASL forum people are being "statistically" traced for advertising clicks, how detailed, I do not know. When this site goes for "upgrades", forums are dropped, for what reasons again I do not know. Don Maddox seems to be a great guy and all, but he is not ASL inclined as JR by far. I say report all games to ROAR, so no history is lost. Keith -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: dreenstra at comcast.net > Why not the other way around? Find a way to port WARS data to ROAR? The latter > has been around a lot longer and is where most (of those who report) people > report their games. > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard about > WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. there wasn't > really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to splinter > the hobby. > > JMHO. > > Dave Reenstra > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "Kenneth Knudsen" > > Because it would be ideal if we only had one reporting system. And I believe > > WARS is the one to go with. > > Now if only the ROAR data could somehow be transferred to WARS everything > > would be dandy. > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Chas Argent" > > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" > > Cc: "ASL List" > > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:11 PM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two > > weeks > > > > > > > Why not do both? > > > > > > > > > On 3/14/06, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > > > > > > > > The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go > > to > > > > ROAR. > > > > > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > > > > > And IMO every game should go to WARS. > > > > > > -- > > > Chas Argent > > > Medford, OR, USA > > > chas.argent 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 dreenstra at comcast.net Tue Mar 14 12:34:00 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:34:00 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <031420062034.22017.441728B80005CC0E0000560122058864420E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Has anyone ever used the Contact ROAR feature to send in feature requests? I'm just curious if JR is responsive to these suggestions. Dave -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Darren Gour" > I agree in so much as ultimately what I'd like to see happen is the > addition to ROAR of some additional reporting tools + the ability to > upload richly formatted AARs (picture, text, uploadable PDFs). > > The bad part of this would be that it might displace the portion of > the aslwebdex that I use most often but it would be great to have it > all in one place. > > -- > Darren > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > I don't think much has changed with ROAR (other than new scenarios being > added) since JR added the option to search for players names and scenarios in > addition to using the pick lists. That was a few years ago. > > > > I agree that ROAR performs the task for which it was designed, I just think > there are a few things it could do a little better. Certainly not enough to > warrant someone designing a tool that duplicates its functionality though. > > > > Dave > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > From: "Chas Argent" > > > As far as I know, JR adds scenarios to the ROAR database as they are > > > published, but ROAR itself has not fundamentally changed. > > > > > > I'm sure that's the idea, however, because it is performing the task > > > for which it's designed. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Chas > > > > > > > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > > Not intended, perhaps, but the effect is still the same, no? If you want > to > > > create a ladder, create a ladder. Adding the mini-AAR feature and tracking > > > scenario balance kind of seems outside the bounds of what a ladder would be > used > > > for. Most of the WARS interface (the scenario and player pick-lists in > > > particular) seems pretty clunky to me, but to each his own. > > > > > > > > Granted, it would be nice if ROAR allowed users to add some additional > > > comments about the scenario, that would be useful, particularly for > explaining > > > why a player rated a scenario the way they did (questions on balance, just > > > wasn't very fun, had some bad Taco Bell for lunch?). Is JR still open to > making > > > changes to ROAR? > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > > > From: "Chas Argent" > > > > > My memory of the beginnings of WARS was that it was intended to be a > > > > > Ladder, Dave, so no splintering was intended. ASL has not had a Ladder > > > > > of any kind since the old Ladder went *poof*. The fact that there is > > > > > useful information about scenarios which can be input by the players > > > > > is simply a nice by-product. > > > > > > > > > > -Chas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/14/06, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Just cuz it's newer doesn't mean it's better. The features I've heard > > > about > > > > > WARS tells me it's just doing something ROAR is already doing, i.e. > there > > > wasn't > > > > > really a need for WARS to be developed in the first place, except to > > > splinter > > > > > the hobby. > > > > > > > > > > > > JMHO. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dave Reenstra > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Chas Argent > > > > > Medford, OR, USA > > > > > chas.argent at gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Chas Argent > > > Medford, OR, USA > > > chas.argent 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 JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au Tue Mar 14 15:47:44 2006 From: JPCole at agric.wa.gov.au (Cole, Jonathan) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:47:44 +0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL: Perry Sez HIP unit and AFV entry question Message-ID: Got the following reply on this for the questions I sent Perry. Cheers Jon -----Original Message----- From: perrycocke at comcast.net [mailto:perrycocke at comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, 14 March 2006 9:48 PM To: Cole, Jonathan Subject: Re: ASL: HIP unit and AFV entry question > An armed, "unbroken" AFV enters a Location containing one or more HIP units > during that AFV's MPh. The HIP units do not voluntarily drop Concealment > (HIP) and so are required to take a PAATC. > > If the HIP units pass this PAATC, are they placed on board under a "?" > counter or do they remain HIP? > HIP. > If they remain HIP, may the AFV conduct an Overrun as Area Fire on the HIP > units, if otherwise able to do so? > Yes. > If the HIP units are immune to PAATC, is there any requirement to inform the > opposing player that there are HIP units in the Location his vehicle has > entered? > No. ? ....Perry MMP This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for use of the addressee.The confidentiality and/or privilege is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify the Department of Agriculture immediately by return e-mail to the sender; (c) please delete the original e-mail. From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Mar 14 16:05:21 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:05:21 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com><001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <000801c647c4$28047260$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Chas wrote, > Every game that I play goes into ROAR; since WARS is a Ladder, only > those games which my opponent and I agree will be WARS-rated go to > into WARS. > > The long & short of it, though, is that EVERY game you play should go to > ROAR. > > JMHO. > > Regards, > Chas WARS is also a scenario w/l database and it has an area to write a brief AAR on the scenario played. WARS is also has a player rating function. In other words, WARS is more than a "ladder". I report all my matches into WARS. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Mar 14 16:27:50 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:27:50 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com><001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh><003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <008901c647ce$4d0758c0$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Chas wrote, > Why not do both? WARS is one stop shopping so to speak. If a person has the inclination to report to both services, thats fine. However, if I were to choose one over the other, I would choose WARS since that service does more. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Mar 14 16:29:15 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:29:15 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks References: Message-ID: <008a01c647ce$4e198c10$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Kevin wrote, > Can one report data into WARS without participating in the ladder? > Personally, I have no wish to be in any sort of ladder. Yes. Simply opt to enter the game as "non-rated". BTW, WARS is a snap to use. =Jim= From peter.rogneholt at home.se Tue Mar 14 18:00:11 2006 From: peter.rogneholt at home.se (Peter Rogneholt) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 03:00:11 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenariospasttwoweeks References: <008a01c647ce$4e198c10$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <000801c647d4$31d29140$fd1afb53@privat> Hi Guys Jim McLeod once again tries to tell us things that are not completely in correspondence with the truth. One cannot opt to not be on the Ladder at WARS, you can choose what types of points that are registered on WARS. WARS cannot keep ratings on balance as ROAR does. WARS is more cumbersome and complicated to use than ROAR. At WARS you cannot just enter a player you played if he is not alraedy registered with WARS, as you can with ROAR. WARS do not have all the scenarios listed that ROAR has. Jim McLeod was at the lead to change WARS to what it is today where one can enter games played 20 years ago and they still affect ratings a lot, even if other players is a lot better today, the old incorrect rating still counts. I have tried this I state above by entering false reports and I know it works this way due to it, no matter what Jim and Kenneth states to the opposite. I hope we can continue to use ROAR to get a fair idea on scenario balance, for AARs, use the Forum to record such. Easier to use and nicer to read. Med V?nliga H?lsningar (Regards) Peter "Commissar Piotr" Rogneholt peter.rogneholt at home.se > Listerz, > > Kevin wrote, > >> Can one report data into WARS without participating in the ladder? >> Personally, I have no wish to be in any sort of ladder. > > Yes. > > Simply opt to enter the game as "non-rated". > > BTW, WARS is a snap to use. > From chas.argent at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 19:36:13 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:36:13 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks In-Reply-To: <008901c647ce$4d0758c0$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <008901c647ce$4d0758c0$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On 3/14/06, mcleods wrote: > If a person has the inclination to report to both services, thats fine. > However, if I were to choose one over the other, I would choose WARS since > that service does more. And I would choose ROAR if I only used one. WARS needs to be around a lot longer to convince me that is has staying power as a record. ROAR achieved that long ago, -Chas Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Tue Mar 14 20:04:26 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan Spoor) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:04:26 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <4417924A.1080809@wybesse.net> I have yet to hear an argument in favour of WARS that doesn't apply twice over (or more) to ROAR, other than the ladder, which many of us don't care to use, or the mini AAR feature. Is there some reason other than the miniAAR feature (which, to be honest, I am not going to want to bother to use for many of my games) to use WARS? From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 14 21:14:49 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:14:49 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <003001c64792$830814a0$0300000a@posh> References: <764636a60603132239i5a26c244o6ca680de80e123bd@mail.gmail.com> <001601c6474a$749128a0$0300000a@posh> <003701c6476d$e3be1350$0300000a@posh> <003c01c64771$f0c50c80$0300000a@posh> <8t0e125dl0mdm1549c0ffq05kl3kqnqtvp@4ax.com> <003001c64792$830814a0$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <5l8f12dfrjjk25m67b9dvetd7hev7116jb@4ax.com> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:10:00 +0100, "Kenneth Knudsen" wrote: >As I said in another post, if some report to ROAR and some report to WARS >and some report to both, we will not have an accuate overview. >The longer it continues like this, the more inaccurate it will become. Sounds like an excellent reason to continue reporting to ROAR, then. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 14 21:19:26 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:19:26 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <031420062034.22017.441728B80005CC0E0000560122058864420E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <031420062034.22017.441728B80005CC0E0000560122058864420E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:34:00 +0000, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: >Has anyone ever used the Contact ROAR feature to send in feature requests? I'm just curious if JR is responsive to these suggestions. I've sent little notes from time to time, they can't have been very important as I can't remember what they were or if JR bothered to implement them . The only notable thing I'd like to see in ROAR is an option to export reports to some sort of downloadable file. I know other folks have done tools to do this, but they're not on the ROAR site so I don't know where to find them when I need them .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From janusz.maxe at unf.se Wed Mar 15 05:50:23 2006 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:50:23 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive fire into sewer Message-ID: An enemy unit moves through sewers, but is discovered at the manhole location by my unit. Can my unit DFF, SFF and FPF? If it can First Fire, can it Final Fire during the DFPh. Janusz From play_asl_838 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 15 06:16:21 2006 From: play_asl_838 at yahoo.com (kevin meyer) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 06:16:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060315141621.90177.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com> I'll cast a vote for ROAR. Don't care for ladders. But what I would really like to see is an up to date Chronology of War. Latest version I have is version 7, last updated 1/17/02. Is there a more current version available somewhere? Kevin Meyer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From smcbee at midtnn.net Wed Mar 15 06:18:24 2006 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:18:24 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive fire into sewer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <002401c6483b$533d3b70$6ff69904@RoadWarrior> Well, yes, but only by the unit in the manhole location. B8 doesn't limit the Defensive Fire by that unit so the DFire principles apply. Steve -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Janusz Maxe Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:50 AM To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Defensive fire into sewer An enemy unit moves through sewers, but is discovered at the manhole location by my unit. Can my unit DFF, SFF and FPF? If it can First Fire, can it Final Fire during the DFPh. Janusz _______________________________________________ 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 jbarber at meic.org Wed Mar 15 08:49:43 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:49:43 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: <4417924A.1080809@wybesse.net> Message-ID: On 3/14/06 9:04 PM, "Jan Spoor" wrote: > Is there some reason other > than the miniAAR feature (which, to be honest, I am not going to want to > bother to use for many of my games) to use WARS? Not that I can see. But I do find it a pretty groovy feature when used. Jeff Barber From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Wed Mar 15 09:10:43 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:10:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks In-Reply-To: References: <4417924A.1080809@wybesse.net> Message-ID: <55904.63.125.4.210.1142442643.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Fair enough; I have no problem with groovy. :-) To each his own. Jeff Barber wrote: > On 3/14/06 9:04 PM, "Jan Spoor" wrote: > >> Is there some reason other >> than the miniAAR feature (which, to be honest, I am not going to want to >> bother to use for many of my games) to use WARS? > > Not that I can see. But I do find it a pretty groovy feature when used. > > > Jeff Barber From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Mar 15 10:03:28 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:03:28 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks Message-ID: <031520061803.19465.441856F0000914F900004C0922073007930E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Jim writes: > > BTW, WARS is a snap to use. > > > > > =Jim= I beg to differ. The drop down lists for scenario and player are inferior to having some sort of query tool. This is how ROAR used to work. JR has (thankfully) updated ROAR to allow both options. Let alone the fact that most players are listed in WARS by "handles" instead of actual names. If I play someone at a tourney and neglect to ask him his "WARS handle" at the time, forget reporting the game after the fact. JMO, Dave Reenstra From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Wed Mar 15 10:10:33 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:10:33 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks References: <031520061803.19465.441856F0000914F900004C0922073007930E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001001c6485b$c0e402b0$0300000a@posh> Dave You can find the real names. Not as easy as on ROAR, granted, but its doable. I'll see what I can do to ask the admins for improvements though :) Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "mcleods" ; ; ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:03 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks > Jim writes: > > > > > BTW, WARS is a snap to use. > > > > > > > > > > =Jim= > > I beg to differ. The drop down lists for scenario and player are inferior to having some sort of query tool. This is how ROAR used to work. JR has (thankfully) updated ROAR to allow both options. Let alone the fact that most players are listed in WARS by "handles" instead of actual names. If I play someone at a tourney and neglect to ask him his "WARS handle" at the time, forget reporting the game after the fact. > > JMO, > Dave Reenstra From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Mar 15 12:10:37 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past two weeks Message-ID: <031520062010.80.441874BD000DECC80000005022073007930E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Not that I've ever found. I'm not sure what the story is there, I imagine that Scott Brady (the gentleman who created/maintained the CoW according to the Yankee ASL site) has drifted away from ASL. I'd likely be willing to take on the task of updating it, if Scott (or someone who can speak for him) is still out there. Dave Reenstra -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: kevin meyer > I'll cast a vote for ROAR. Don't care for ladders. > > But what I would really like to see is an up to > date Chronology of War. Latest version I have > is version 7, last updated 1/17/02. Is there a > more current version available somewhere? > > Kevin Meyer > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.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 kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Wed Mar 15 12:18:43 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:18:43 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks References: <031520062010.80.441874BD000DECC80000005022073007930E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <000401c6486d$a864eee0$0300000a@posh> Funny enough, this task is already being done. Just head on over to the SZO forums and check out the thread. You should go more often :-) Kenneth ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "kevin meyer" ; Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:10 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios past twoweeks > Not that I've ever found. I'm not sure what the story is there, I imagine that Scott Brady (the gentleman who created/maintained the CoW according to the Yankee ASL site) has drifted away from ASL. > > I'd likely be willing to take on the task of updating it, if Scott (or someone who can speak for him) is still out there. > > Dave Reenstra > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: kevin meyer > > I'll cast a vote for ROAR. Don't care for ladders. > > > > But what I would really like to see is an up to > > date Chronology of War. Latest version I have > > is version 7, last updated 1/17/02. Is there a > > more current version available somewhere? > > > > Kevin Meyer > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.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 rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 15 14:44:10 2006 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:44:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Unloading from a Marder... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Gents, sqd expend 1mf unloading from a marder. DFF, 6even, snakes. 1KIA. Is the crew of this OT AFV subject to a general collateral attack? 1) is infantry in the act of unloading still deemed PRC? (believe this to be a key question here) 2) are the Marder's 4 unloading MPs occurring simultaneously with the 1mf, for purposes of DFF? thanks! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rjmosher at direcway.com Wed Mar 15 14:56:20 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:56:20 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> At 12:03 PM 3/15/2006, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: >Let alone the fact that most players are listed in WARS by "handles" >instead of actual names. If I play someone at a tourney and neglect >to ask him his "WARS handle" at the time, forget reporting the game >after the fact. And WARS is a joke....but they won't let you opt out! Initially the WARS ladder was a fun ladder for all..the noobie that played 10 games and lost them..slowly went up the ladder, and was ahead of the noobie that only played 1 scenario and lost. Now the noobie that lost 1 is ahead of the noobie that played 10! Chuckle..dumb sh-ts. And just like I warned them..some guys will pad their stats with old wins and get in the top ten and stay there forever....just like everyone's favorite player on the old similar ASLML ladder...RB. Hell..I even told them if you're in the top 10 you don't have to play anyone, but your buddy who loses to you ,and you'll stay there...that's proving truer than I thought...I haven't played anyone(well--reported playings) and moved from 7th to 3rd..last time I checked about a month ago. WARS is worthless......but the neo-commies demand that you use it, if you entered any of the on-line tourneys organized on their forum(including now the venerable CyberASL Open, which is no longer "open" of course). Last time I checked my draft card was out of date and I wasn't a member of any authoritarian/socialist party.... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From jbarber at meic.org Wed Mar 15 15:47:33 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:47:33 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] FW: What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oh, Curmudgeonly one, On 3/15/06 3:56 PM, "ron mosher" wrote: > (including now the venerable CyberASL Open, which is no longer > "open" of course) The venerable CyberASL Open is and shall remain open. There is no requirement that you report your match to WARS. That was one of the understandings when John Provan passed the baton. Jeff "CyberASL Open Co-Co-Director" Barber From kevinkenneally at isot.com Wed Mar 15 17:52:40 2006 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:52:40 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Unloading from a Marder... In-Reply-To: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1054.4.253.41.155.1142473960.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Do Marders have enough PPs to carry a Squad MMC? > Gents, > > sqd expend 1mf unloading from a marder. DFF, 6even, > snakes. 1KIA. Is the crew of this OT AFV subject to a > general collateral attack? > > 1) is infantry in the act of unloading still deemed > PRC? (believe this to be a key question here) > > 2) are the Marder's 4 unloading MPs occurring > simultaneously with the 1mf, for purposes of DFF? > > thanks! > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.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 > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From rln22 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 15 18:10:10 2006 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:10:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Unloading from a Marder... In-Reply-To: <1054.4.253.41.155.1142473960.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Message-ID: <20060316021010.94697.qmail@web52615.mail.yahoo.com> AFV = 14pp, n'est-ce pas? Is there something about OT vehicles I missed? --- kevinkenneally at isot.com wrote: > Do Marders have enough PPs to carry a Squad MMC? > > > > Gents, > > > > sqd expend 1mf unloading from a marder. DFF, > 6even, > > snakes. 1KIA. Is the crew of this OT AFV subject > to a > > general collateral attack? > > > > 1) is infantry in the act of unloading still > deemed > > PRC? (believe this to be a key question here) > > > > 2) are the Marder's 4 unloading MPs occurring > > simultaneously with the 1mf, for purposes of DFF? > > > > thanks! > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.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 > > > > > > ************************************** > Computer problems? ................... > ..............http://www.multibyte.net > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From chas.argent at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 18:43:24 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:43:24 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Unloading from a Marder... In-Reply-To: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hiya- On 3/15/06, Robert Nelson wrote: > sqd expend 1mf unloading from a marder. DFF, 6even, > snakes. 1KIA. Is the crew of this OT AFV subject to a > general collateral attack? Yes; it is a General Collateral Attack since it applies to all occupants of that Location (though the Crew would receive CE benefits). See D.8. > 1) is infantry in the act of unloading still deemed > PRC? (believe this to be a key question here) Only Infantry (and Cavalry/Horse-drawn Vehicles) can expend MF; therefore as soon as a PRC expends MF it is no longer PRC. > 2) are the Marder's 4 unloading MPs occurring > simultaneously with the 1mf, for purposes of DFF? Presumably, yes. > thanks! You're welcome! -Chas -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 15 21:24:15 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:24:15 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Errata for 2nd ed. (reprint) Charts & Dividers Message-ID: <4cqh12hdg0gu1atk7em045lnc1ua66fs1c@4ax.com> The Charts and Dividers included in the recent 2nd ed. rules reprint were supposed to be updated to correct all known errata. Unfortunately, the execution did not quite live up to the intention: A11.11 Close Combat Table on blue/gray QRDC: DRM for Gurkha/Japanese vs Infantry should be "-1" not "-2". [This table on the pink divider correctly shows the DRM as "-1". This errata was first published in J3.] Support Weapons Chart on the pink divider: In the "PF, PFk" line, remove note "B" from the "1 IPC(2PP Max) SMC" column. [The version of the table on the blue/grey QRDC is correct. This errata debuted in the 2nd ed. reprint but has not yet been published in a Journal.] A24 Smoke Summary chart on the green divider: In the WP row replace "U.S./British" with "U.S./British/Japanese/Chinese"; in the Mild Breeze column delete note "K". [This is new errata for the 2nd ed. reprint that has not yet been published in a Journal.] A24 Smoke Summary chart on the green divider: The fifth and sixth rows of this chart should have a "Dispersed WP" (+1 DRM) counter illustration, not a full-strength WP (+2 DRM) counter illustration. [New error introduced in 2nd ed. reprint.] A24 Smoke Summary chart on the green divider: The fifth row of the chart (White Dispersed WP) replace "U.S./British" with "U.S./British/Japanese/Chinese". [New error introduced in 2nd ed. reprint, since it should have been changed to match the new errata as above.] D2.5 ESB DRM Table on blue/gray QRDC: in the "+1" row after "Russian(r)" add ", all Chinese". [The version of the table on the grey divider is correct. This errata debuted in the 2nd ed. reprint but has not yet been published in a Journal.] D4.22 Hull Down Maneuver chart on the gray divider and blue/grey QRDC: add "-1 attempt at setup". [The table on the grey divider omits the "-1". The QRDC is missing the errata completely. This errata was first published in J3.] A./G. NATIONAL CAPABILITIES CHART (on reverse of OBA Flowchart): The American Army 3-3-7 HS should have its morale underlined. The American Army 5-4-6 squad should have its FP underlined. The American USMC 6-6-8 squad should not have its Range underlined. [Previously unnoticed errors. Applicable to original 2nd ed. printing also.] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Wed Mar 15 22:39:17 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:39:17 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> Message-ID: <001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh> ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" > WARS is worthless......but the neo-commies demand that you use it, if > you entered any of the on-line tourneys organized on their > forum(including now the venerable CyberASL Open, which is no longer > "open" of course). Last time I checked my draft card was out of date > and I wasn't a member of any authoritarian/socialist party.... > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating such! Kenneth Knudsen From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 16 00:06:18 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:06:18 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Unloading from a Marder... In-Reply-To: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060315224410.30520.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:44:10 -0800 (PST), Robert Nelson wrote: >sqd expend 1mf unloading from a marder. DFF, 6even, >snakes. 1KIA. Is the crew of this OT AFV subject to a >general collateral attack? Of course (unless they're BU), although CE DRM applies normally. >1) is infantry in the act of unloading still deemed >PRC? (believe this to be a key question here) Not key at all, actually. It's a General Collateral Attack (D.8B); the squad could have been Armoured Assaulting with the Marder instead of dismounting and the result would be the same. All vulnerable targets in the Location are attacked. (In particular refer to Footnote 3 of the Collateral Attack Table.) However, to answer your question: no. See D5.43: "FFNAM: An Inherent crew Abandoning its vehicle as per 5.41 (as well as any other Personnel unit entering/exiting a vehicle) is considered *Infantry* and subject to FFNAM (until pinned) vs all attacks declared against it due to either its embarking/debarking MF expenditure or the vehicle's simultaneous MP/MF expenditure (6.4; 6.5). ...." Why is that rule buried under "Abandonment", I hear you ask? That's a very good question, and I'm glad you asked it. Now, back to work. >2) are the Marder's 4 unloading MPs occurring >simultaneously with the 1mf, for purposes of DFF? See above. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 16 00:24:40 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:24:40 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive fire into sewer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:50:23 +0100, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >An enemy unit moves through sewers, but is discovered at the manhole location by my unit. > >Can my unit DFF, SFF and FPF? Well, all types of Defensive First Fire attacks [EXC: aircraft] require the expenditure of MF/MP (A8.1), and that's not happening here; the Sewer Emergence dr occurs at the end of the moving unit's MPh, and Sewer Movement does not involve the expenditure of MF, as such, so DFF/SFF/FPF can't occur in response to it. >If it can First Fire, can it Final Fire during the DFPh. Well, if DFF were allowed, certainly; but I suspect (as above) that in fact Final Fire is the only Defensive Fire option permitted. Remember however that Hazardous Movement DRM always applies regardless of phase (B8.3). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "How do you lose a whole naked woman?" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 16 04:40:17 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:40:17 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive fire into sewer Message-ID: Hi, > On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:50:23 +0100, "Janusz Maxe" > wrote: > > >An enemy unit moves through sewers, but is discovered at the > manhole location by my unit. > > > >Can my unit DFF, SFF and FPF? > and Bruce Probst wrote: > Well, all types of Defensive First Fire attacks [EXC: aircraft] > require the > expenditure of MF/MP (A8.1), and that's not happening here; the Sewer > Emergence dr occurs at the end of the moving unit's MPh, and Sewer > Movementdoes not involve the expenditure of MF, as such, so > DFF/SFF/FPF can't occur in response to it. > Bruce's answer is correct, but I just wanted to point out that the ASOP is a good tool for such questions. DFF is performed in step 3.38D, while the sewer emergency dr is performed in step 3.41A, so the ASOP shows that the sewer dr is made after any possible DFF. Finding out this in the ASOP is a breeze if you're using the eASOP I made :-) From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Thu Mar 16 04:53:30 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan Spoor) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:53:30 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Defensive fire into sewer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44195FCA.1010205@wybesse.net> Ole B?e wrote: > ... the sewer emergency dr ... To quote Holly from Red Dwarf: (in a listless, toneless voice) "Emergency. Emergency. There's an emergency going on." pause "It's still going on." I think Ole means the sewer *emergence* dr. A sewer emergency would be a much more serious dr. :-) That's when you're using sewer movement and someone in a nearby building flushes... (On second thought, the "sewer emergency" is probably when the MMC feel when they discover they are not only in a war zone with people shooting at them, not only in a sewer, but LOST in a sewer in a war zone with people shooting at them...) From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Mar 16 05:12:31 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:12:31 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: <001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> <001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> At 12:39 AM 3/16/2006, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: >This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating such! Check my long discussions with the Commissariat for any of the various tourneys, including CyberASL where they said this was the last year without using WARS....and my pleading with them to let me opt out...it's all there..you must be reading some other forum... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Mar 16 05:16:05 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:16:05 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: <7ec9371e0603151949h7444081axe238837effa9af0b@mail.gmail.co m> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> <7ec9371e0603151949h7444081axe238837effa9af0b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060316071256.01c30478@direcway.com> At 09:49 PM 3/15/2006, Tom Weniger wrote: > > >Cry me a river, princess.... Err..Tom...I simply don't like a format that allows cheaters/manipulators to prosper....whining is usually by guys who go down the ladder when a new one was intro'd....I went up, it benefited me..but it still sucks. The WARS thing is meaningless, why use it. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Thu Mar 16 05:25:39 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:25:39 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> <001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh> <7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> Message-ID: <003301c648fd$1e3e4140$0300000a@posh> You surely havent had any discussions with me or any of the other tournament directors of the Cyber ASL Open. I think you are confusing the tourney with the ladder. What we are saying is that you need to be signed up for the forum in order to participate in the tournament. There is no requirement whatsoever to be a member of the WARS ladder. The reason why participants must be a member of the forum is that it helps us keeping track of the them. Running an online tournament with 100+ participants is a pain in the butt if you cannot communicate with them. No Cyber ASL games are required to be reported to any ladders or even ROAR, only to us so we can keep the bracket updated. All your opt-out discussions belong elsewhere. Ranting is one thing, but spreading false rumours about Cyber ASL Open is another. Regards Kenneth Knudsen ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" ; "ron mosher" Cc: Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:12 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks > At 12:39 AM 3/16/2006, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > >This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating such! > > Check my long discussions with the Commissariat for any of the > various tourneys, including CyberASL where they said this was the > last year without using WARS....and my pleading with them to let me > opt out...it's all there..you must be reading some other forum... > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > From jbarber at meic.org Thu Mar 16 06:39:17 2006 From: jbarber at meic.org (Jeff Barber) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:39:17 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> Message-ID: Ron, Not meaning to add any fuel to the fire but here's a link to the CyberASL Open Tourney regulations. http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32799 As you will see, no requirement that you report anywhere. For what its worth, Ken, Kenn Monte and I had a llllooonnggg deliberation about moving the home of the tournament to SZO. I was initially opposed as I'm not a big fan of the site. I think it has worked well though as we nearly doubled the size of the tournament this year (assuming size is a measure of success, that is). While I took some convincing to agree to move the tournament, one thing I won't ever agree to is making it anything but completely open. Jeff On 3/16/06 6:12 AM, "ron mosher" wrote: > At 12:39 AM 3/16/2006, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: >> This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating such! > > Check my long discussions with the Commissariat for any of the > various tourneys, including CyberASL where they said this was the > last year without using WARS....and my pleading with them to let me > opt out...it's all there..you must be reading some other forum... > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jwise at draga.com Thu Mar 16 07:27:29 2006 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:27:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: References: <000401c645ff$ca94e350$6501a8c0@computer1> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Bruce Probst wrote: >On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 13:07:13 -0500, "Douglas D. Williams" > wrote: > >>The Wiki entry for ASL is overall *very* well written and detailed, but I >>guess the author got a bit ahead of schedule on this part of the entry. > >Ah, well. The nice think about a Wiki is that anyone can update an entry. The >terrible thing about a Wiki is that anyone can update an entry. Indeed. Put differently: ``Wikipedia is like a public toilet -- when you need it, you're sure glad it's there, but you never know who used it last.'' - -- Jim Wise jwise at draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFEGYPlhfG1+Pg8jmsRAgO4AKD4wdaPRETnjngBJtRYlbhmNOu/UgCg1Tje qMh/B5FIKEFtgPtec3XAASM= =zBVr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Thu Mar 16 08:15:07 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:15:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: References: <000401c645ff$ca94e350$6501a8c0@computer1> Message-ID: <43076.65.222.202.26.1142525707.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> True, but interestingly enough, when Wikipedia was tested recently, it was found to have an error rate roughly comparable to the Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/online-encyclopedias-put-to-the-test/2005/12/14/1134500913345.html Jim Wise wrote: > On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Bruce Probst wrote: > >>On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 13:07:13 -0500, "Douglas D. Williams" >> wrote: >> >>>The Wiki entry for ASL is overall *very* well written and detailed, but >>> I >>>guess the author got a bit ahead of schedule on this part of the entry. >> >>Ah, well. The nice think about a Wiki is that anyone can update an >> entry. The >>terrible thing about a Wiki is that anyone can update an entry. > > Indeed. Put differently: > > ``Wikipedia is like a public toilet -- when you need it, you're sure > glad it's there, but you never know who used it last.'' > > - -- > Jim Wise > jwise at draga.com From jwise at draga.com Thu Mar 16 08:26:18 2006 From: jwise at draga.com (Jim Wise) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:26:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] West of Alamein In-Reply-To: <43076.65.222.202.26.1142525707.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> References: <000401c645ff$ca94e350$6501a8c0@computer1> <43076.65.222.202.26.1142525707.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Jan W. S. Spoor wrote: >True, but interestingly enough, when Wikipedia was tested recently, it was >found to have an error rate roughly comparable to the Encyclopedia >Britannica. > >http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/online-encyclopedias-put-to-the-test/2005/12/14/1134500913345.html This is sort of a nonsense metric, actually -- read the article. Only 42 articles from each publication were compared, and only on the _most_ verifiable subjects (the kind either publication would be likely to get right). Out of this tiny fraction of the subjects found in each publication, a much tinier number of errors were compared (3 in EB vs. 4 in Wikipedia). This is _far_ too tiny a sample set to mean much. And even given the vagueness of the result, the headline is spin - -- this meaningless comparison could just as easily have been headlined: ``Wikipedia at least 33% less accurate than EB, study shows'' . More telling, perhaps, would be other recent high-profile cases of Wikipedia inaccuracy, such as their being sued by a man who they accused of complicity in the JFK assassination after they reprinted someone-or-other's wild conspiracy theory about the event as unquestioned fact... - -- Jim Wise jwise at draga.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFEGZGuhfG1+Pg8jmsRAsCVAKCtADfNoR7ZgyhJRzO8O6HjTaVJ1QCg4hjh /FDz/6kKeSLatrn8e7vsimI= =pfwE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Mar 16 13:12:34 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:12:34 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060316151211.01b9eb10@direcway.com> At 08:39 AM 3/16/2006, Jeff Barber wrote: >While I took some convincing to agree to move the tournament, one thing I >won't ever agree to is making it anything but completely open. Good to hear...as for next year I'll wait and see.... ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From aslwynn at rogers.com Thu Mar 16 15:39:05 2006 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 18:39:05 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios pasttwoweeks References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com><001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh><7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> <003301c648fd$1e3e4140$0300000a@posh> Message-ID: <006301c64952$d07592f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Kenneth; Ah, but I (for example) *am* a "member" of the forums/fora, but would say that I check there *perhaps* once every two months or less often (to advertise the Ottawa ASL club). So being a member would in no way whatsoever allow anyone to "communicate" with me. Besides, I had thought for the VASL Open that was done via the Yahoo group? Or am I behind the times, again? In any case, I have limited time and patience to deal with electronic flim-flammery that changes frequently when I have a system, known as "Face to Face ASL" that provides all of the enjoyment needed. I am not a technophobe, and do occasionally VASL, but find even its rate of change annoying. In any case, I found your comment potentially misleading. Forum membership does not necessarily ease communication. Wynn "If It Ain't Broke Don't Fix It" Polnicky ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kenneth Knudsen" To: "ron mosher" Cc: Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios pasttwoweeks > You surely havent had any discussions with me or any of the other > tournament > directors of the Cyber ASL Open. I think you are confusing the tourney > with > the ladder. > > What we are saying is that you need to be signed up for the forum in order > to participate in the tournament. There is no requirement whatsoever to be > a > member of the WARS ladder. > The reason why participants must be a member of the forum is that it helps > us keeping track of the them. Running an online tournament with 100+ > participants is a pain in the butt if you cannot communicate with them. > > No Cyber ASL games are required to be reported to any ladders or even > ROAR, > only to us so we can keep the bracket updated. > > All your opt-out discussions belong elsewhere. > > Ranting is one thing, but spreading false rumours about Cyber ASL Open is > another. > > Regards > Kenneth Knudsen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ron mosher" > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" ; "ron mosher" > > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:12 PM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios > pasttwoweeks > > >> At 12:39 AM 3/16/2006, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: >> >This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating > such! >> >> Check my long discussions with the Commissariat for any of the >> various tourneys, including CyberASL where they said this was the >> last year without using WARS....and my pleading with them to let me >> opt out...it's all there..you must be reading some other forum... >> >> >> For the nonce, >> ron >> acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 dgour.asl at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 16:07:25 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:07:25 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: <006301c64952$d07592f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> <001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh> <7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> <003301c648fd$1e3e4140$0300000a@posh> <006301c64952$d07592f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <764636a60603161607y3da83131i7df99abe6cf29c76@mail.gmail.com> Nope -- the Yahoo group has either gone the way of the dinosaur or at minimum been relegated to to junk trunk. You must now post to that weird forum thingy that threads your message it mysterious and wonderful ways. Maybe we should warp back in time and setup a usenet newsgroup and get everyone some news clients. Then we can at least see new posts and threaded discussion in a meaningful way. I for one find the forums awful for trying to keep up with stuff. I'm sure others love it. -- Darren On 3/16/06, Wynn wrote: > Kenneth; > > Ah, but I (for example) *am* a "member" of the forums/fora, but would say > that I check there *perhaps* once every two months or less often (to > advertise the Ottawa ASL club). So being a member would in no way whatsoever > allow anyone to "communicate" with me. Besides, I had thought for the VASL > Open that was done via the Yahoo group? Or am I behind the times, again? > > In any case, I have limited time and patience to deal with electronic > flim-flammery that changes frequently when I have a system, known as "Face > to Face ASL" that provides all of the enjoyment needed. > > I am not a technophobe, and do occasionally VASL, but find even its rate of > change annoying. > > In any case, I found your comment potentially misleading. Forum membership > does not necessarily ease communication. > > Wynn "If It Ain't Broke Don't Fix It" Polnicky > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kenneth Knudsen" > To: "ron mosher" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:25 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios > pasttwoweeks > > > > You surely havent had any discussions with me or any of the other > > tournament > > directors of the Cyber ASL Open. I think you are confusing the tourney > > with > > the ladder. > > > > What we are saying is that you need to be signed up for the forum in order > > to participate in the tournament. There is no requirement whatsoever to be > > a > > member of the WARS ladder. > > The reason why participants must be a member of the forum is that it helps > > us keeping track of the them. Running an online tournament with 100+ > > participants is a pain in the butt if you cannot communicate with them. > > > > No Cyber ASL games are required to be reported to any ladders or even > > ROAR, > > only to us so we can keep the bracket updated. > > > > All your opt-out discussions belong elsewhere. > > > > Ranting is one thing, but spreading false rumours about Cyber ASL Open is > > another. > > > > Regards > > Kenneth Knudsen > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ron mosher" > > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" ; "ron mosher" > > > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:12 PM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios > > pasttwoweeks > > > > > >> At 12:39 AM 3/16/2006, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > >> >This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating > > such! > >> > >> Check my long discussions with the Commissariat for any of the > >> various tourneys, including CyberASL where they said this was the > >> last year without using WARS....and my pleading with them to let me > >> opt out...it's all there..you must be reading some other forum... > >> > >> > >> For the nonce, > >> ron > >> acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 chas.argent at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 16:31:30 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:31:30 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios pasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: <006301c64952$d07592f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com> <001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh> <7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> <003301c648fd$1e3e4140$0300000a@posh> <006301c64952$d07592f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: On 3/16/06, Wynn wrote: > Ah, but I (for example) *am* a "member" of the forums/fora, but would say > that I check there *perhaps* once every two months or less often (to > advertise the Ottawa ASL club). So being a member would in no way whatsoever > allow anyone to "communicate" with me. When you joined the Forums, didn't you give an email address? This would allow anyone to email you directly. or Private Message you. I thought registering an email address was required, but I may be mis-remembering. >Besides, I had thought for the VASL > Open that was done via the Yahoo group? Or am I behind the times, again? No, tha Yahoo group is long gone. > In any case, I have limited time and patience to deal with electronic > flim-flammery that changes frequently when I have a system, known as "Face > to Face ASL" that provides all of the enjoyment needed. > I am not a technophobe, and do occasionally VASL, but find even its rate of > change annoying. And you are lucky; there are many ASLers (myself included) who don't have much in the way of FtF play and so the electronic medium of VASL is a life-saver. One man's flim-flammery, I suppose... A downside of this is that there are probably many players (like you) who don't *need* to care about the electronic end of the ASL world - because they have another outlet - and so may feel a certain indifference towards it. To others the electronic environment (including web sites like Strategy Zone Online) actually matters, and is a larger part of their hobby. But I guess I can understand why the fact that it is continually in motion might be disturbing to someone who only "checks in" once every two months. -Chas -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Thu Mar 16 16:57:29 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:57:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Scots ASLers? Message-ID: <51692.65.222.202.26.1142557049.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Speaking of how useful the Internet can be to those separated by distance for other ASLers, I am curious to know what list members can tell me about the state of ASL play in Scotland. I may have an opportunity to move there in the next year or two, and I'm curious as to whether I should pack my ASLRB. I saw a few lists of contacts when I Googled, but most seemed somewhat dated. Jan Spoor From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Mar 15 16:45:40 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:45:40 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios pasttwoweeks References: <031520061803.19465.441856F0000914F900004C0922073007930E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <000601c6496a$d84d1850$1727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Dave writes, > I beg to differ. The drop down lists for scenario and player are inferior > to having some sort of query tool. This is how ROAR used to work. JR has > (thankfully) updated ROAR to allow both options. Let alone the fact that > most players are listed in WARS by "handles" instead of actual names. If > I play someone at a tourney and neglect to ask him his "WARS handle" at > the time, forget reporting the game after the fact. I will concede that point Dave. I really do hate the "handle" thing. All players should be listed by their real name. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Mar 16 18:38:05 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 20:38:05 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenariospasttwoweeks References: <008a01c647ce$4e198c10$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <000801c647d4$31d29140$fd1afb53@privat> Message-ID: <000b01c6496b$d2d153e0$1727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Peter writes, " Hi Guys Jim McLeod once again tries to tell us things that are not completely in correspondence with the truth. One cannot opt to not be on the Ladder at WARS," Where did I say this Peter? "you can choose what types of points that are registered on WARS. WARS cannot keep ratings on balance as ROAR does." WARS give you the w/l record of a scenario does it not? "WARS is more cumbersome and complicated to use than ROAR. At WARS you cannot just enter a player you played if he is not alraedy registered with WARS, as you can with ROAR." I suppose that WARS is trying to keep any false reports out. Seems with ROAR you can enter a false name for an opponent and then start entering results. "WARS do not have all the scenarios listed that ROAR has." Yup, that is a deal breaker ... "Jim McLeod was at the lead to change WARS to what it is today where one can enter games played 20 years ago and they still affect ratings a lot, even if other players is a lot better today, the old incorrect rating still counts." Well thats a load of crap. Whe the question was put forth, I responded along the line of going back 2-3 years. Better yet, start it from scratch. It really did not matter to me. "I have tried this I state above by entering false reports and I know it works this way due to it, no matter what Jim and Kenneth states to the opposite. I hope we can continue to use ROAR to get a fair idea on scenario balance, for AARs, use the Forum to record such. Easier to use and nicer to read." To each their own Peter. =Jim= From chas.argent at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 19:38:11 2006 From: chas.argent at gmail.com (Chas Argent) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:38:11 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenariospasttwoweeks In-Reply-To: <000b01c6496b$d2d153e0$1727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <008a01c647ce$4e198c10$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <000801c647d4$31d29140$fd1afb53@privat> <000b01c6496b$d2d153e0$1727c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: On 3/16/06, mcleods wrote: > "WARS do not have all the scenarios listed that ROAR has." > > Yup, that is a deal breaker ... How? Players have the ability to add any scenario they wish which is not already in the system. All it takes is a request to one of the Admins, which usually gets approed within a matter of hours (and sometimes quite a bit faster). -Chas -- Chas Argent Medford, OR, USA chas.argent at gmail.com From ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk Thu Mar 16 20:45:40 2006 From: ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk (Binyamin Jones) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 04:45:40 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] Scots ASLers? In-Reply-To: <51692.65.222.202.26.1142557049.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <20060317044540.96872.qmail@web25709.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> there's lots of them all over. but they're all weird and speak funny, like "prup fiure phase" and "och my wee men are broken" check out the asl forums, there's a lot of active scots players there. please get in contact with gary marshall in kirkcaldy. he's a new father and needs more asl. or, come to egypt.... b e n --- "Jan W. S. Spoor" wrote: > Speaking of how useful the Internet can be to those > separated by distance > for other ASLers, I am curious to know what list > members can tell me about > the state of ASL play in Scotland. I may have an > opportunity to move there > in the next year or two, and I'm curious as to > whether I should pack my > ASLRB. I saw a few lists of contacts when I Googled, > but most seemed > somewhat dated. > > Jan Spoor > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Fri Mar 17 00:50:15 2006 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 09:50:15 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios pasttwoweeks References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315164444.01c73c88@direcway.com><001001c648c4$59267400$0300000a@posh><7.0.1.0.0.20060316065225.01c72e38@direcway.com> <003301c648fd$1e3e4140$0300000a@posh> <006301c64952$d07592f0$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <002401c6499f$cf936950$0300000a@posh> Hi Wynn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wynn" To: "Kenneth Knudsen" ; "ron mosher" Cc: Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:39 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios pasttwoweeks > Kenneth; > > Ah, but I (for example) *am* a "member" of the forums/fora, but would say > that I check there *perhaps* once every two months or less often (to > advertise the Ottawa ASL club). So being a member would in no way whatsoever > allow anyone to "communicate" with me. I have access to your email address which is THE way to communicate online with people. Not only that, but I have the email addresses of all the participants of the Cyber ASL Open grouped together, so to make it nice and easy to send them all an update. You can be participating in Cyber VII and you will only get updates for that one. So in case the email address you provided is actually working and being read, I have an excellent way of communicating with you, even if you only checks in to the actual forum every so often. > Besides, I had thought for the VASL > Open that was done via the Yahoo group? Or am I behind the times, again? The Yahoo group is still there, albeit with no activity. It will be officially closed later this year. > In any case, I have limited time and patience to deal with electronic > flim-flammery that changes frequently when I have a system, known as "Face > to Face ASL" that provides all of the enjoyment needed. Well lucky you and the best of luck. > I am not a technophobe, and do occasionally VASL, but find even its rate of > change annoying. > > In any case, I found your comment potentially misleading. Forum membership > does not necessarily ease communication. In this case, it helps a lot, which is why we moved it in the first place. Kenneth Knudsen > > Wynn "If It Ain't Broke Don't Fix It" Polnicky > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kenneth Knudsen" > To: "ron mosher" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:25 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROARscenarios > pasttwoweeks > > > > You surely havent had any discussions with me or any of the other > > tournament > > directors of the Cyber ASL Open. I think you are confusing the tourney > > with > > the ladder. > > > > What we are saying is that you need to be signed up for the forum in order > > to participate in the tournament. There is no requirement whatsoever to be > > a > > member of the WARS ladder. > > The reason why participants must be a member of the forum is that it helps > > us keeping track of the them. Running an online tournament with 100+ > > participants is a pain in the butt if you cannot communicate with them. > > > > No Cyber ASL games are required to be reported to any ladders or even > > ROAR, > > only to us so we can keep the bracket updated. > > > > All your opt-out discussions belong elsewhere. > > > > Ranting is one thing, but spreading false rumours about Cyber ASL Open is > > another. > > > > Regards > > Kenneth Knudsen > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ron mosher" > > To: "Kenneth Knudsen" ; "ron mosher" > > > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:12 PM > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] What people are playing - Top ROAR scenarios > > pasttwoweeks > > > > > >> At 12:39 AM 3/16/2006, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > >> >This is simply not true Ron. Please point me to any reference stating > > such! > >> > >> Check my long discussions with the Commissariat for any of the > >> various tourneys, including CyberASL where they said this was the > >> last year without using WARS....and my pleading with them to let me > >> opt out...it's all there..you must be reading some other forum... > >> > >> > >> For the nonce, > >> ron > >> acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 bo_siemsen at city.dk Fri Mar 17 00:50:21 2006 From: bo_siemsen at city.dk (bo_siemsen@city.dk) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Scots ASLers? In-Reply-To: <20060317044540.96872.qmail@web25709.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <51692.65.222.202.26.1142557049.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> <20060317044540.96872.qmail@web25709.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060317084120.M62381@city.dk> I know one, Ian Percy out of Aberdeen. Nice guy. Also father of a young child so limited free-time is an issue. I'm sure he'd appreciate some new opposition. ian.percy at virgin.net. Regards Bo Siemsen On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 04:45:40 +0000 (GMT), Binyamin Jones wrote > there's lots of them all over. > > but they're all weird and speak funny, like "prup > fiure phase" and "och my wee men are broken" > > check out the asl forums, there's a lot of active > scots players there. please get in contact with gary > marshall in kirkcaldy. he's a new father and needs > more asl. > > or, come to egypt.... > > b e n > > --- "Jan W. S. Spoor" wrote: > > > Speaking of how useful the Internet can be to those > > separated by distance > > for other ASLers, I am curious to know what list > > members can tell me about > > the state of ASL play in Scotland. I may have an > > opportunity to move there > > in the next year or two, and I'm curious as to > > whether I should pack my > > ASLRB. I saw a few lists of contacts when I Googled, > > but most seemed > > somewhat dated. > > > > Jan Spoor > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just > 8p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.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 mvh Bo Siemsen -- Cybercity Webhosting (http://www.cybercity.dk) From janusz.maxe at unf.se Fri Mar 17 01:08:19 2006 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:08:19 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] VB: RE: sewer D-fire; MMP Q&A References: <000c01c64986$bb7fd480$a069f853@e5y4s0> Message-ID: ----- Ursprungligt meddelande ----- Fr?n: Till: Skickat: Thursday, March 16, 2006 5:19 AM ?mne: FW: RE: sewer D-fire; MMP Q&A > > > >ASOP 3.41A seems to imply that no First fire can be directed against just > >detected sewer units, only Final fire. Is this correct? > > No First Fire from above-ground vs sewer units. > > ....Perry > MMP From ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk Fri Mar 17 11:32:56 2006 From: ibncalb at yahoo.co.uk (Binyamin Jones) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 19:32:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] Scots ASLers? In-Reply-To: <20060317084120.M62381@city.dk> Message-ID: <20060317193256.60682.qmail@web25712.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> > Also father of a young > > child so limited free-time is an issue. ...... > >> he's a new father and > needs more asl. don't get the wrong idea, the scots asl'rs aren't all shag mad beasts. a lot of them are jaffas due to all the english nuclear testing in the highlands b e n ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From towheadedmule at cox.net Fri Mar 17 12:37:53 2006 From: towheadedmule at cox.net (Russell Martin) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:37:53 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Question: Mortar spotter Message-ID: <441B1E21.6030407@cox.net> > can a sqd that has been designated as a mortar spotter deploy? > > if true, does the spotter status deploy with one of the hs similar to a sw? > Yes to both. ....Perry MMP From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Sat Mar 18 06:59:18 2006 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 15:59:18 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Last call for CH Soldiers of the Negus on eBay Message-ID: <27368641.1142693958418.JavaMail.root@webmail01.auna.data> Hello guys I'm selling a mint condition CH Soldiers of the Negus game on eBay. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8779687468 The auction ends tomorrow. Goodbye Jesus From robertthepastor at juno.com Sat Mar 18 19:08:32 2006 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 19:08:32 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Errata for 2nd ed. (reprint) Charts & Dividers Message-ID: <20060318.191835.10036.3.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Bruce P kindly informed us many things. Thank you, Bruce! However, two mistakes are noted for this "errata", which are as follows: 1) Support Weapons Chart on the pink divider: In the "PF, PFk" line, remove note "B" from the "1 IPC(2PP Max) SMC" column. [The version of the table on the blue/grey QRDC is correct. This errata debuted in the 2nd ed. reprint but has not yet been published in a Journal.] * On _my_ copy of the blue/grey QRDC, the note "B" is present. 2) A24 Smoke Summary chart on the green divider: The fifth and sixth rows of this chart should have a "Dispersed WP" (+1 DRM) counter illustration, not a full-strength WP (+2 DRM) counter illustration. [New error introduced in 2nd ed. reprint.] * On _my_ copy of the green divider, neither rows show a +2 DRM WP counter. However, the fifth row _does_ show a white counter, not a grey counter. Take care, Robert "offering corrections and reproofs for the ASL faithful" Hammond From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 19 10:04:28 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 05:04:28 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] (fwd) E1.2-.3 Concealment/HIP Loss at Night Message-ID: This was discussed a couple of months back (specifically about HIP units on a rooftop at night). Perry seems to be more confident of the Chapter E language than I am, but that's OK I guess. I certainly don't have any problem with these answers. *** On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 16:22:02 +0000, perrycocke at comcast.net wrote: >E1.2 tells us that Concealed/HIP units lose Concealment/HIP as if they were >in Concealment Terrain, regardless of what the terrain actually is. > >E1.3 then reminds us that Concealment Loss/Gain at Night is identical to >that of day, barring the EXC in E1.31 (which deals with movement). Hence, any >non-movement-related reason for loss of concealment during the day still >applies during Night (EXC: Fortifications E1.16), correct? Except that all terrain is considered Concealment terrain for Concealment Loss purposes; E1.2. >So, would Infantry that would *ordinarily* AUTOMATICALLY lose >concealment/HIP during the day *solely* for not being in Concealment >Terrain still do so at Night? No. >E.G.: > >A12.34: If a non-Emplaced Gun is set up "?"/HIP in non-Concealment Terrain, >will it automatically lose "?"/HIP as per Case H on the Concealment >Loss/Gain Table at Night? No. >A12.34: Will an Emplaced Gun that is set up HIP in non-Concealment Terrain >automatically lose HIP if a Good Order enemy ground unit has LOS to it (and >is within NVR)? No. >B23.82: May a unit on a Rooftop at Night remain "?"/HIP if an enemy Good >Order ground unit is within 16 hexes, at the same or higher level, and within >NVR? Yes. ....Perry MMP *** ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From albcann at warwick.net Sun Mar 19 10:28:25 2006 From: albcann at warwick.net (al cann) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 13:28:25 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fortified building locations Message-ID: <000f01c64b82$ea090850$2213c7d0@DGYPG541> Gents, I do not see why the answer to these questions shouldn't be yes due to COWTRA -- but I am making sure. And since there is hardly any traffic on the list these days, I wanted to add something. 1 -- If an FBL is taken over by an enemy squad, does it become a FBL for the enemy now? 2 -- If an FBL is entered by an enemy, subsequently vacated, and then reoccupied by a friendly squad -- is it still an FBL? Thanks, Al Cann From dmgillies at comcast.net Sun Mar 19 10:59:57 2006 From: dmgillies at comcast.net (David Gillies) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:59:57 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> Hi All, I want to place an alternate hex grain fire lane so that it covers enemy exit hexes. To do so, would require me to place the fire lane marker in a fictitious hex offboard. Can I still do this? In my particular situation it appears some of the fire may travel partly offboard before reaching the second exit hex (see below). Is that still ok? Situation: Playing ASL 21. Board configuration is: 21 20 MMC w/HMG in 21E2 (with WA) wants to declare alternate hex grain FL that covers both 20GG5 and 20GG6 (plus everything else along the way). Is this doable? Thanks, Dave From hofors at lysator.liu.se Sun Mar 19 11:32:33 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 19 Mar 2006 20:32:33 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> References: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: "David Gillies" writes: > I want to place an alternate hex grain fire lane so that it covers enemy > exit hexes. To do so, would require me to place the fire lane marker in a > fictitious hex offboard. Can I still do this? In my particular situation > it appears some of the fire may travel partly offboard before reaching the > second exit hex (see below). Is that still ok? > > Situation: Playing ASL 21. Board configuration is: > > 21 > > 20 > > MMC w/HMG in 21E2 (with WA) wants to declare alternate hex grain FL that > covers both 20GG5 and 20GG6 (plus everything else along the way). Is this > doable? > No. The longest legal firelane along that alternate hexgrain is to 20GG5 (since the hex beyond 20GG6 is outside the board and thus not in LOS). Regards, Mattias From vicca at v21.me.uk Sun Mar 19 12:34:40 2006 From: vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 20:34:40 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Fortified building locations In-Reply-To: <000f01c64b82$ea090850$2213c7d0@DGYPG541> Message-ID: the answer to both of these is yes. Control wiull transfere but the building location is still fortified. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of al cann Sent: 19 March 2006 18:28 To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Fortified building locations Gents, I do not see why the answer to these questions shouldn't be yes due to COWTRA -- but I am making sure. And since there is hardly any traffic on the list these days, I wanted to add something. 1 -- If an FBL is taken over by an enemy squad, does it become a FBL for the enemy now? 2 -- If an FBL is entered by an enemy, subsequently vacated, and then reoccupied by a friendly squad -- is it still an FBL? Thanks, Al Cann _______________________________________________ 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 davevicks at yahoo.com Sun Mar 19 12:48:21 2006 From: davevicks at yahoo.com (David Vicks) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 12:48:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Pontoon Bridges? Message-ID: <20060319204821.98542.qmail@web52109.mail.yahoo.com> HI, Is there a scenario that uses Pontoon Bridges big or small? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reamees at earthlink.net Sun Mar 19 13:24:19 2006 From: reamees at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 16:24:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Aslml] "Bitter Ender" Update Message-ID: <6924313.1142803459454.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> About thirty players participated in this year's tournament with Mika Harviala winning it all. He beat Dave Stephens this afternoon by playing the Slovaks in a "Bunker" scenario against the Poles. He also knocked me out earlier also by playing the Slovaks against my Hungarians in a Paul Kenny scenario. Seemed AoO type stuff was real popular. Yours truly went 4-1 with my best performance against David Reenstra in a "Schwerpunk" "Expelling the Guards" scenario. I helped David on to his win in the flaming tank award by getting him off to a good first round start by killing off eight of his German Panzers and immobilizing the only other two. The usual good time was had by all. Thanks, Chuck Payne, TD! Ray "Guards Brigkom" Woloszyn From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Sun Mar 19 18:09:45 2006 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:09:45 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c64bc3$5c756060$2f01a8c0@newscratch> >(since the hex beyond 20GG6 is outside the board and thus not in LOS). I think it is the off board that is key, not the in LOS, since a firelane can be placed beyond LOS but not off-board. Still I doubt I would even think of that in the heat of a game, since it seem natural to put the firelane counter out to GG6 and make it point down the hex spine. From daveolie at eastlink.ca Sun Mar 19 16:36:15 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 20:36:15 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <000001c64bd4$7fc366a0$7779de18@klis.com> David wrote: > > I want to place an alternate hex grain fire lane so that it covers enemy > > exit hexes. To do so, would require me to place the fire lane marker in a > > fictitious hex offboard. Can I still do this? In my particular situation > > it appears some of the fire may travel partly offboard before reaching the > > second exit hex (see below). Is that still ok? Yes, I see no reason why you can't do this. There's nothing in the rules that says you can't. Basically, FL counters (unlike Resid. counters) are not used to mark any specific hex/Location of the playing area but instead to define the limits of the FL of the playing area. > > Situation: Playing ASL 21. Board configuration is: > > > > 21 > > > > 20 > > > > MMC w/HMG in 21E2 (with WA) wants to declare alternate hex grain FL that > > covers both 20GG5 and 20GG6 (plus everything else along the way). Is this > > doable? Yes, this looks perfectly doable to me, and diabolically clever, if I might add. :-) Mattias replied: > No. The longest legal firelane along that alternate hexgrain is to > 20GG5 (since the hex beyond 20GG6 is outside the board and thus not in > LOS). LOS has little to do with the placement of FL counters. In the example to A9.221 on pg. A21, the FL marker must be placed in a hex that is out of LOS (at least at Level 0) from the firing hex due to the wall on the K6/K7 hexside. Also, a FL marker can be placed in a hex that is out of LOS to the firer due to hindrances (through 6+ grain hexes, for example). David "that's gonna leave a mark" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 19 20:33:14 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:33:14 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fortified building locations In-Reply-To: <000f01c64b82$ea090850$2213c7d0@DGYPG541> References: <000f01c64b82$ea090850$2213c7d0@DGYPG541> Message-ID: <4tbs12pg1q7d7c7uoandscil73djm90rbd@4ax.com> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 13:28:25 -0500, "al cann" wrote: >1 -- If an FBL is taken over by an enemy squad, does it become a FBL for the >enemy now? > >2 -- If an FBL is entered by an enemy, subsequently vacated, and then >reoccupied by a friendly squad -- is it still an FBL? Yes and yes. Nothing says "forever" like a fortified building Location. Well, apart from breaches and rubbling, any way. And walls. They're even more "forever". Now you know why European towns maintain their wonderful "Olde Worlde" charm. There's no way known to knock the bloody things down. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 19 20:49:20 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:49:20 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Perry Sez re: A7.4 & C3.33 Attacking friendly units Message-ID: These questions were prompted by the Series Replay in Journal 6, where one of the players deliberately fired ATT at a hex containing a friendly unit solely for the purposes of gaining acquisition, but ended up blowing up his own unit with a CH. It seemed odd to me that you could just go ahead and shoot your own units like that, even if an ATT attack is inherently non-discriminatory. I guess it seemed odd to Perry too. I would *guess* that the corollary to the last question and answer is that the presence of any enemy unit (which of course includes Dummies) in a hex *does* permit the use of ATT, no matter how many friendlies there might be; but under what circumstances (i.e., does the enemy unit have to be in LOS of the attacking weapon/spotter? Or is merely being present somewhere in the hex sufficient?) is still not completely clear. I should have asked follow-up questions! *** On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 00:10:56 +0000, perrycocke at comcast.net wrote: >A7.4 says "A unit/weapon may purposely attack a friendly unit(s) only if >specifically allowed to by the rules governing a particular circumstance >(e.g., Prisoners, Melee, OBA); see C3.33 for Area Target Type." > >Does this reference to C3.33 mean that Area Target Type is *also* one of >those "particular circumstances"? (If so, wouldn't it make more sense to move >the C3.33 reference inside the parentheses?) May a Gun use the Area Target >Type to attack a hex containing *only* friendly units? Yes. (Probably.) No. ....Perry MMP *** ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Mar 19 21:38:11 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:38:11 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> References: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:59:57 -0800, "David Gillies" wrote: >I want to place an alternate hex grain fire lane so that it covers enemy >exit hexes. To do so, would require me to place the fire lane marker in a >fictitious hex offboard. Can I still do this? In my particular situation >it appears some of the fire may travel partly offboard before reaching the >second exit hex (see below). Is that still ok? > >Situation: Playing ASL 21. Board configuration is: > >21 > > 20 > >MMC w/HMG in 21E2 (with WA) wants to declare alternate hex grain FL that >covers both 20GG5 and 20GG6 (plus everything else along the way). Is this >doable? Probably not. A2.51 prevents fire attacks in an offboard Location, and placing a Fire Lane probably counts as "making an attack" (at least for this purpose). A9.221 requires that the FL counter be placed in a hex along the Alternate Hex Grain "spine". Frustrating, but them's the rules. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From hofors at lysator.liu.se Sun Mar 19 23:49:06 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 20 Mar 2006 08:49:06 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <000001c64bd4$7fc366a0$7779de18@klis.com> References: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> <000001c64bd4$7fc366a0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: David Olie writes: > > No. The longest legal firelane along that alternate hexgrain is to > > 20GG5 (since the hex beyond 20GG6 is outside the board and thus not in > > LOS). > > LOS has little to do with the placement of FL counters. In the example to > A9.221 on pg. A21, the FL marker must be placed in a hex that is out of LOS > (at least at Level 0) from the firing hex due to the wall on the K6/K7 > hexside. Also, a FL marker can be placed in a hex that is out of LOS to the > firer due to hindrances (through 6+ grain hexes, for example). > You're right. FL counters may be placed regardless of whether the firer has LOS or not. However, I'm a little confused by the A9.222 EX, which suggests that a FL counter can't be placed beyond an obstacle which blocks LOF. "The existence of any obstacle(s) in Z5/Z6 would not prevent the HMG from establishing a Fire Lane to/past EE6 (assuming the LOF is not blocked), but would prohibit non-Snap-Shot Fire Lane Residual FP attacks in hexes that lack a LOS (as per 9.22) from Y6." When being off-board you're certainly not in LOS of anyone, but can you be in LOF? The rules aren't clear on that point, as far as I can tell. That said, I'd go for your interpretation in actual play. Regards, Mattias From charleeh at earthlink.net Mon Mar 20 06:47:21 2006 From: charleeh at earthlink.net (Charlie Hamilton) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:47:21 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] NorEaster X Results Message-ID: <116b01c64c2d$31a47aa0$7601a8c0@COMMUNISA07QK9> Hi gang, NorEaster X wrapped up yesterday, with 41 die-hard ASLers battling it out for glory, prizes, and most of all, a good time. Here are the results: Main Tourney 1st - Paul Sidhu, who nudged out Scott Romanowskin in the final to go 5-0 to win a beautiful Joe Leoce diorama 2nd - Carl Nogueira, who went 5-1 for a plaque and a Dispatches from the Bunker subscription, courtesy of Vic Provost 3rd - Tom Morin, who snuck up on the field to go 5-1 and win a plaque Mini Tourney Keith Hill beat out John Worden in a tense 3rd round final to win the plaque. We had a large field this year for the mini, with 8 ASLers battling it out. Starter Kit Mini Tourney Andrew Carpentier and Rick Lambour were co-winners, with Rick taking home the plaque and Andrew snagging a Journal 6 courtesy of MMP Team Tourney The juggernaut that was Team 4 ran away with this, thanks to Paul Sidhu's 5-0 run, and three wins each by Andy Clarke and Keith Hill. They each got a plaque. We had a well-stocked raffle pool, with about half the attendees walking away with some excellent prizes. Thanks to everyone who made the trip and to everyone who supplied prizes for the winners and the raffle (Tom Morin, Vic Provost, John Richards, Scott Romanowski, Joe Leoce, Jim Torkelson, MMP - apologies if I forgot someone here). Thanks also to Joe Gochinski who provided scenario books, HIP sheets, and mini-IFTs (note that there is a bit of errata with the IFTs). Thanks especially to the folks who did all the work behind the scenes to make it happen: Mike Allexenberg, Carl Nogueira, Bruce Carson, and the highly secretive scenario selection cabal. See you next year in Marlboro. Charlie Hamilton TAHD (Tournament and Hospitality Director) From ian.pollard831 at ntlworld.com Mon Mar 20 06:48:54 2006 From: ian.pollard831 at ntlworld.com (Ian Pollard) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:48:54 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Updated ASL Heroes website Message-ID: <000001c64c2d$68e0a570$7dd80250@GOPHER831MAIN> As you all know (well the UK ASLers amongst us), ASL Heroes 2006 finished last week at the not so sunny seaside resort of Blackpool; the town having snow for the first time in seven years!! I have just updated the website for Heroes with this years pictures and prize winners. The site is at: http://www.aslheroes.co.uk Thanks to Pete Phillips, Dominic McGrath and Derek Tocher for organising the event and here's looking forward to seeing everyone at next years tourney Ian Pollard Give me a bunch of Japanese and I can guarantee you 90% losses (for my Japanese that is!!) -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 17/03/2006 From charleeh at earthlink.net Mon Mar 20 06:58:38 2006 From: charleeh at earthlink.net (Charlie Hamilton) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:58:38 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] NorEaster lost and found Message-ID: <117401c64c2e$c52dfd90$7601a8c0@COMMUNISA07QK9> Someone left a nicely laminated Hi3 overlay at NorEaster. Drop us an email and we'll get it back to you. Charlie From skallan at att.com Mon Mar 20 07:08:58 2006 From: skallan at att.com (Allan, Scott K, CFSMD) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:08:58 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] NorEaster lost and found In-Reply-To: <117401c64c2e$c52dfd90$7601a8c0@COMMUNISA07QK9> Message-ID: Speaking of "lost and found" Charlie................I 'lost' 5 matches somewhere in the hotel.........did you happen to find any of those??? During my long drive home, I formulated a list of individuals I believe responsible for those matches, and they are: Vic Provost Ted Wilcox Bruce Bender Brian Sullivan (the next time I play DD, my reinforcements will be stapled to the back of my hand...) Gerard Ragusa Please have hotel security look into this and get back to me.... ---------------------- Seriously, I had a blast (again) ---- thanks to you, Mike A., Joe L., Vic and company for putting this tourney together. See you all soon! S. Scott Allan AT&T Corp. Supplier Management Division Office: (908) 234-5634 -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Charlie Hamilton Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:59 AM To: yasl at yahoogroups.com; aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] NorEaster lost and found Someone left a nicely laminated Hi3 overlay at NorEaster. Drop us an email and we'll get it back to you. Charlie _______________________________________________ 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 20 10:01:01 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 05:01:01 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> <000001c64bd4$7fc366a0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <4nqt12dgaqr7lq01254g0m9jk8v99dqkjj@4ax.com> On 20 Mar 2006 08:49:06 +0100, Mattias R?nnblom wrote: >When being off-board you're certainly not in LOS of anyone, but can you >be in LOF? The rules aren't clear on that point, as far as I can >tell. The Index defines LOF as "LOS along which an attack has been traced". I think that's poor phrasing, since I suspect that by "LOS" it actually means "straight line", but however you define it you still run into the same problems: there is no LOS to an offboard Location; you cannot make an attack into an offboard Location. Not even an OBA FFE on a board edge can attack units that are offboard, even if they would be within the blast area if they were onboard. I'm not aware of any provision in the rules for placement of FP into an offboard Location. Without such a provision I don't see how it can be claimed that extending a FL offboard is legal. The real problem here is the alternate hexgrain FL requirement that the FL counter be placed in a "spine" hex. I don't understand why that requirement exists; it makes no sense to me. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 20 12:12:26 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:12:26 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst wrote: > The Index defines LOF as "LOS along which an attack has been > traced". I think that's poor phrasing, since I suspect that by "LOS" it > actually means "straight line", I agree. No attack has been traced to the FL counter, since it is usually placed beyond the attacked hex, so LOF cannot be taken literally here. > but however you define it you still run into the same > problems: there is no LOS to an offboard Location; you cannot make > an attack into an offboard Location. None of those two issues are a problem for placing a FL counter, as there is no requirement about LOS or possible attack. You're generally free to place it out of LOS and outside the MG's range. > I'm not aware of any provision in the rules for placement of FP > into an offboard Location. Without such a provision I don't see how it can > be claimed that extending a FL offboard is legal. > The FP part is irrelevant, since there is considered to be Residual FP from the fire lane only in those Locations that are in LOS and within normal range of the MG. So putting down a FL counter doesn't meant that there is (or will be) any attack or FP in that hex. So the only thing that would prevent such a FL placement, is if the offboard hex is not a "hex", since the FL counter must be placed in a hex with a hexspine that points back to the MG. Everything else in the FL rules are ok if the FL counter is outside the playing area, but the problem is that this offboard hex probably doesn't fulfill the requrements of being such a hex. > The real problem here is the alternate hexgrain FL requirement that > the FL counter be placed in a "spine" hex. I don't understand why that > requirementexists; it makes no sense to me. I agree. Alternatively, we could add "/beyond" after "along" in the first sentence of A9.221, so that it says: "A Fire Lane may also be declared along/beyond an Alternate Hex Grain..." That would solve the problem. From robertthepastor at juno.com Mon Mar 20 14:02:27 2006 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:02:27 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Oops Message-ID: <20060320.140227.24460.3.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, I pointed out "mistakes" that I thought Bruce P had posted reticent about the ASLRB. Please, disregard what I posted as Bruce is correct. What Bruce was posting about was the _reprinted 2nd edition _ dividers and charts which were printed last year. I was looking at my copies from 2000. Sorry for any confusion. Well done, Bruce. Take care, Robert "reticent and apologetic" Hammond From cardboard.killer at verizon.net Mon Mar 20 14:45:49 2006 From: cardboard.killer at verizon.net (Brian W) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <4nqt12dgaqr7lq01254g0m9jk8v99dqkjj@4ax.com> Message-ID: <000401c64c70$09a5b260$2f01a8c0@newscratch> >The real problem here is the alternate hexgrain FL requirement >that the FL counter be placed in a "spine" hex. I've never thought about it before, that that means a MG with an "odd" numbered range cannot place an alternative hex grain firelane out to its maximum range. Strange. From davevicks at yahoo.com Mon Mar 20 15:37:00 2006 From: davevicks at yahoo.com (David Vicks) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:37:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Deployment? Message-ID: <20060320233700.32961.qmail@web52102.mail.yahoo.com> HELLO. What do the rules meen when they say you can or can't set up deployed? Can 6-2-8's set up as a half squads?With or without a SMC: LDR,Hero, Commissar? Are there going to be Airborne Pathfinders in AP#3? Pre D-DAY Landings? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From smcbee at midtnn.net Mon Mar 20 18:18:04 2006 From: smcbee at midtnn.net (Steve McBee) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:18:04 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Deployment? In-Reply-To: <20060320233700.32961.qmail@web52102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003b01c64c8d$b1dfed20$35f19904@RoadWarrior> Russians cannot deploy at all (EXC Guards of prisoners). Can't remember the rule, but it's in the national capabilities rule section. Basically if the rules say you cannot setup deployed, you cannot setup deployed. If they say you can, then you can. Later, Steve -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of David Vicks Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:37 PM To: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Deployment? HELLO. What do the rules meen when they say you can or can't set up deployed? Can 6-2-8's set up as a half squads?With or without a SMC: LDR,Hero, Commissar? Are there going to be Airborne Pathfinders in AP#3? Pre D-DAY Landings? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 20 19:15:29 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:15:29 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <20060319190004.282EC1BB89@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: > >I want to place an alternate hex grain fire lane so that it covers enemy >exit hexes. To do so, would require me to place the fire lane marker in a >fictitious hex offboard. Can I still do this? > No. A9.221: "... but must place the counter itself in a hex... " A "hex" is physically defined as "the area inside the six hexsides which compose a hex, including those hexsides and their vertices". Since a "hex" can only be found on a "board", and since the only boards in play are "all specified board sections depicted in the scenario Board Configuration Diagram" [A2.1], there is no such thing as an "offboard hex". The only provision for anything "offboard" is found in A2.51-.52, and even at that, "Fire and LOS between the mapboard and any setup board is not allowed..." Sorry, no dice. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 20 19:25:04 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:25:04 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <000001c64bd4$7fc366a0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: > > >LOS has little to do with the placement of FL counters. In the example to >A9.221 on pg. A21, the FL marker must be placed in a hex that is out of LOS >(at least at Level 0) from the firing hex due to the wall on the K6/K7 >hexside. > Not true, and I believe the EX you cite is flawed. Here's my evidence. A9.22: "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP *in its Location*..." [emphasis added] The EX states, "Neither Fire Lane could affect J5, because the LOS to the center dot of that hex's Level 0 Location is blocked..." In other words, the EX is in direct contradiction to the rule. The rule states that Residual FP occurs in the counter's Location, whereas the EX gives a case where that is not true. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 20 19:27:44 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:27:44 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >When being off-board you're certainly not in LOS of anyone, but can you >be in LOF? The rules aren't clear on that point, as far as I can >tell. > Index for LOF: "The LOS along which an attack has been traced" No LOS, no LOF. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From kevinkenneally at isot.com Mon Mar 20 19:14:14 2006 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:14:14 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Deployment? In-Reply-To: <003b01c64c8d$b1dfed20$35f19904@RoadWarrior> References: <20060320233700.32961.qmail@web52102.mail.yahoo.com> <003b01c64c8d$b1dfed20$35f19904@RoadWarrior> Message-ID: <1146.4.227.17.194.1142910854.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Agree with Steve on the Russians unable to deploy.... It's under Chapter A 22(?). Soonest, Kevin > Russians cannot deploy at all (EXC Guards of prisoners). Can't remember > the > rule, but it's in the national capabilities rule section. > > Basically if the rules say you cannot setup deployed, you cannot setup > deployed. If they say you can, then you can. > > Later, > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of David Vicks > Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:37 PM > To: aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Deployment? > > HELLO. > > What do the rules meen when they say you can or > > can't set up deployed? > > Can 6-2-8's set up as a half squads?With or > > without a SMC: LDR,Hero, Commissar? > > Are there going to be Airborne Pathfinders > > in AP#3? Pre D-DAY Landings? > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.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 > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Mon Mar 20 19:39:21 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:39:21 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >None of those two issues are a problem for placing a FL counter, as there >is no requirement about LOS or possible attack. You're generally free to >place it out of LOS and outside the MG's range. > Since "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location..." [A9.22], it seems to me that the FL must at least be placed within the MG's Normal Range. This is further borne out by the continuation of the sentence, "... that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center dot." In order for the FL counter itself to exert FP, it must therefore be in Normal Range and LOS. If it is not in Normal Range nor in LOS, then it cannot exert Residual FP. Well, if it cannot exert Residual FP, that breaks the rule that says "... FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location". That appears to me to be a contradiction. The EX also contradicts the rule itself. >The FP part is irrelevant, since there is considered to be Residual FP from >the fire lane only in those Locations that are in LOS and within normal >range of the MG. So putting down a FL counter doesn't meant that there is >(or will be) any attack or FP in that hex. > I believe it does, because of the first sentence in the second paragraph of A9.22. You are not required to place the FL counter in the hex that was attacked, but it most certainly must be placed in LOS and in Normal Range. That is the only possible way that the FL counter can exert FP "in its Location". >So the only thing that would prevent such a FL placement, is if the >offboard hex is not a "hex", since the FL counter must be placed in a hex >with a hexspine that points back to the MG. There is no such thing as an "offboard hex". Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From ktasl at comcast.net Mon Mar 20 20:06:49 2006 From: ktasl at comcast.net (Keith Todd) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:06:49 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Deployment? References: <20060320233700.32961.qmail@web52102.mail.yahoo.com><003b01c64c8d$b1dfed20$35f19904@RoadWarrior> <1146.4.227.17.194.1142910854.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Message-ID: <002401c64c9c$e1797380$6401a8c0@MOOSE> If there is no SSR that prohibits deployment and your nationality is capable of it. You can deply up to 10% of your initial forces (fractions rounded up) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Steve McBee" Cc: Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Deployment? > Agree with Steve on the Russians unable to deploy.... It's under Chapter > A 22(?). > > Soonest, > > Kevin > > > Russians cannot deploy at all (EXC Guards of prisoners). Can't remember > > the > > rule, but it's in the national capabilities rule section. > > > > Basically if the rules say you cannot setup deployed, you cannot setup > > deployed. If they say you can, then you can. > > > > Later, > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > > On Behalf Of David Vicks > > Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:37 PM > > To: aslml at lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Deployment? > > > > HELLO. > > > > What do the rules meen when they say you can or > > > > can't set up deployed? > > > > Can 6-2-8's set up as a half squads?With or > > > > without a SMC: LDR,Hero, Commissar? > > > > Are there going to be Airborne Pathfinders > > > > in AP#3? Pre D-DAY Landings? > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.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 > > > > > > ************************************** > Computer problems? ................... > ..............http://www.multibyte.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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 20 20:43:19 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:43:19 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:12:26 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >None of those two issues are a problem for placing a FL counter, as there is no requirement about LOS or possible attack. You're generally free to place it out of LOS and outside the MG's range. You certainly are *not* free to place it outside of the MG's range, as the Fire Lane can only be declared if the initial attack is within Normal Range, and the Fire Lane can only attack units that are within the MG's Normal Range. A9.22. >> I'm not aware of any provision in the rules for placement of FP >> into an offboard Location. Without such a provision I don't see how it can >> be claimed that extending a FL offboard is legal. >> >The FP part is irrelevant, since there is considered to be Residual FP from the fire lane only in those Locations that are in LOS and within normal range of the MG. So putting down a FL counter doesn't meant that there is (or will be) any attack or FP in that hex. Uh ... yes, that's *exactly* what placing a FL counter means. You can't place it in a hex that it can't (potentially) attack. Again, that's a requirement specified in A9.22 (first sentence, 2nd paragraph). >I agree. Alternatively, we could add "/beyond" after "along" in the first sentence of A9.221, so that it says: "A Fire Lane may also be declared along/beyond an Alternate Hex Grain..." That would solve the problem. No, because simply adding that word in that place does not negate the last sentence of A9.221 (1st paragraph). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 20 20:45:40 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:45:40 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <000401c64c70$09a5b260$2f01a8c0@newscratch> References: <4nqt12dgaqr7lq01254g0m9jk8v99dqkjj@4ax.com> <000401c64c70$09a5b260$2f01a8c0@newscratch> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:45:49 -0500, "Brian W" wrote: >>The real problem here is the alternate hexgrain FL requirement >>that the FL counter be placed in a "spine" hex. > >I've never thought about it before, that that means a MG with an "odd" >numbered range cannot place an alternative hex grain firelane out to its >maximum range. Strange. It has been noted as a rules oddity in the past (I think it was first noticed by Wayne Hadady). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 20 20:49:02 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:49:02 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <591v121mk56860foium90i492e01angp8e@4ax.com> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:27:44 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Index for LOF: "The LOS along which an attack has been traced" > >No LOS, no LOF. Well, that's simply not true. I've already pointed out that the Index definition is less than ideal; your specific statement is easily proven false by considering the action of a FL at night, which can extend beyond NVR (E1.71). So there clearly *is* a LOF (along which the FL extends) even into hexes for which there is no LOS. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 20 20:51:18 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:51:18 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:39:21 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >There is no such thing as an "offboard hex". Well, that's not true either, as the concept of offboard hexes is discussed in A2.51. If they didn't exist, you couldn't set up your reinforcements in them (as this rule requires), could you? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 20 20:54:02 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:54:02 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Oops In-Reply-To: <20060320.140227.24460.3.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20060320.140227.24460.3.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:02:27 -0800, Robert M Hammond wrote: >Well done, Bruce. Ha! He seeks to mollify my righteous wrath. I will still use his empty skull as my dice cup, by Crom! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Mar 20 20:51:06 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:51:06 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: Message-ID: <008601c64ca6$a9dc3160$7779de18@klis.com> Bruce wrote: > In order for the FL counter itself to exert FP, it must therefore be in > Normal Range and LOS. If it is not in Normal Range nor in LOS, then it > cannot exert Residual FP. As I mentioned before, Bruce, it's perfectly possible to place a FL counter into a hex that is out of LOS (through 6+ hindrances, for example). See A9.22.. David "I'm sure I wrote an article on this" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Mar 20 21:14:16 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 01:14:16 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <4nqt12dgaqr7lq01254g0m9jk8v99dqkjj@4ax.com> <000401c64c70$09a5b260$2f01a8c0@newscratch> Message-ID: <008701c64ca6$a9f62200$7779de18@klis.com> Brian wrote: > >I've never thought about it before, that that means a MG with an "odd" > >numbered range cannot place an alternative hex grain firelane out to its > >maximum range. Strange. and Bruce replied: > It has been noted as a rules oddity in the past (I think it was first noticed > by Wayne Hadady). O.K., fine. None of this cantabula answers Dave Gillies' question: is the FL from 21E2 to 20GG5 and GG6 legal or not? I've written an article on FL and this seems perfectly legitimate to me, even if it might seem that the FL counter might have to be placed slightly off-board in order to accommodate the restrictions of the hex grid. I'll write a query to Mr. Perry and ask for a ruling. Sheesh. David "who said anything about common sense?" Olie From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Mon Mar 20 21:58:54 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan Spoor) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:58:54 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Updated ASL Heroes website In-Reply-To: <000001c64c2d$68e0a570$7dd80250@GOPHER831MAIN> References: <000001c64c2d$68e0a570$7dd80250@GOPHER831MAIN> Message-ID: <441F961E.3020406@wybesse.net> Ian Pollard wrote: > As you all know (well the UK ASLers amongst us), ASL Heroes 2006 finished > last week at the not so sunny seaside resort of Blackpool; the town having > snow for the first time in seven years!! > > I have just updated the website for Heroes with this years pictures and > prize winners. > > The site is at: http://www.aslheroes.co.uk > Och, lovely to see these fine Scots ASLers I've been having the pleasure of corresponding with the past few days! :-) Jan Spoor From malm at gol.com Mon Mar 20 22:55:10 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:55:10 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060321155218.0266f4b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 01:43 p.m. 21/03/2006, Bruce Probst wrote: >On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:12:26 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: > >Uh ... yes, that's *exactly* what placing a FL counter means. You can't place >it in a hex that it can't (potentially) attack. Again, that's a requirement >specified in A9.22 (first sentence, 2nd paragraph). The example at the top of page A21 has a FL counter in a hex that it cannot attack. From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 20 23:46:03 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:46:03 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > >None of those two issues are a problem for placing a FL counter, > >as there is no requirement about LOS or possible attack. You're > >generally free to place it out of LOS and outside the MG's range. > > > and Bruce Bakken answered: > Since "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of > Residual FP in its Location..." [A9.22], > it seems to me that the FL must at least be placed within the MG's > Normal Range. > Then you see wrong :-) >This is further borne out by the > continuation of the sentence, "... that is within the MG's Normal > Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their > LOS to the hex center dot." > > In order for the FL counter itself to exert FP, it must therefore > be in Normal Range and LOS. If it is not in Normal Range nor in LOS, > then it cannot exert Residual FP. > Agreed. That’s what the rule above tells us. It tells us that the only hexes between the MG and the FL Counter (inclusive) that are attacked, are those within normal range and LOS. For this restriction to have any meaning at all, there must be possible to have the FL counter outside normal range. To sum it up: 1) A9.22 first tells us where the FL counter can be placed: “that Hex Grain must include the MG's hex and its First Fire target hex, but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex” Note that there is *no* LOS or range requirement here. 2) A9.22 then tells us that those hexes along this hexgrain that is within LOS and normal range is attacked. Or in other words: The LOS and range restrictions are not used when placing the FL counter, but when performing the actual attacks. > Well, if it cannot exert Residual FP, that breaks the rule that > says "... FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location". > ...”that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry “ You must read the complete sentence. > That appears to me to be a contradiction. The EX also contradicts > the rule itself. Which is a good indication that you misread something. In this case, you thought the LOS/range restrictions applied to the placement of the FLC, while it actually applies to the effect. > You are not required to place the FL counter in the hex that was > attacked, but it most certainly must be placed in LOS and in Normal > Range. No. It only has *effect* in LOS and within normal range. I quoted the rule for where you can place it, and there are no LOS/range restrictions there. The restriction is on where it has effect, but that is a different thing. From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Mar 20 23:54:07 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:54:07 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst wrote: > You certainly are *not* free to place it outside of the MG's > range, Why? > as the Fire Lane can only be declared if the initial attack is within > Normal Range, Yes, and the rule tells us that "...he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the [target hex]" So placing it beyond the initial attacked hex is clearly legal. > and the Fire Lane can only attack units that are within the MG's > Normal Range. A9.22. > Yes, it only *attacks* units that are within the FL counter and within the Normal Range. So what? That doesn't limit the *placement* of the counter. Where the counter can be placed and where it actually attacks are two different things. You already understand this regarding LOS, so why is it harder to separate those regarding range? > >The FP part is irrelevant, since there is considered to be > >Residual FP from the fire lane only in those Locations that are in > >LOS and within normal range of the MG. So putting down a FL > >counter doesn't meant that there is (or will be) any attack or FP > >in that hex. > > Uh ... yes, that's *exactly* what placing a FL counter means. You > can't place it in a hex that it can't (potentially) attack. Again, that's a > requirementspecified in A9.22 (first sentence, 2nd paragraph). > Please quote any rule which tells me I cannot *place* the FL counter in a hex I cannot attack. Again - placement of the FL counter and attacks by the same are two different things, exactly because the sentence you think of, so please keep the two items separated - or show me a sentence that says you cannot *place* the FL counter in a Location it cannot attack. From robertthepastor at juno.com Mon Mar 20 23:43:13 2006 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:43:13 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Oops Message-ID: <20060320.235644.85476.1.RobertThePastor@juno.com> LOL! How DID you know it was empty?!? :) Robert On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:54:02 +1100 Bruce Probst writes: > On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:02:27 -0800, Robert M Hammond > wrote: > > >Well done, Bruce. > > Ha! He seeks to mollify my righteous wrath. I will still use his empty skull > as my dice cup, by Crom! > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > > From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 21 01:18:45 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:18:45 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, Brian W wrote: > >The real problem here is the alternate hexgrain FL requirement > >that the FL counter be placed in a "spine" hex. > > I've never thought about it before, that that means a MG with an "odd" > numbered range cannot place an alternative hex grain firelane out > to its maximum range. Strange. > This is fortunately *not* a problem, since such an MG can place a FL out to its maximum range by placing the FL *counter* one hex beyond its maximum range. There is no range restriction on the placement of the FL counter, but there is a range and LOS restriction on the *effect* of this FL. An MG with range 7 can place the FL counter on the hex that is 8 hexes away, thus getting an effect on the hexes in the 0-7 range that are within LOS. The FL counter may well be placed 10, 12 or 50 hexes away too, but there's not much use in that, so I won't advice it. :-) From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 21 01:34:59 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:34:59 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: One more post from me, and I'm done, at least until I get some answers ;-) Bruce Bakken wrote: > A9.221: "... but must place the counter itself in a hex... " > Yep, that's the (only thing) that may prevent the placement of the FL in question. > A "hex" is physically defined as "the area inside the six hexsides > which compose a hex, including those hexsides and their vertices". > Since a "hex" can only be found on a "board", and since the only boards in play > are "all specified board sections depicted in the scenario Board > Configuration Diagram" [A2.1], there is no such thing as an "offboard hex". > I generally agree. There's a bit more to it than that, but possibly not enough to save this FL... > The only provision for anything "offboard" is found in A2.51-.52, > and even at that, "Fire and LOS between the mapboard and any setup board is > not allowed..." > But the Fire and LOS part is irrelevant for the *placement* of a FL counter, as thoroughly discusses and also shown in the A9.221 example. So the (only) relevant question is if an offboard "hex" is sufficient as a hex in A9.221's "...but must place the counter itself in a hex with a hexspine that points directly back to the MG" As you wrote above, according to A2, there's no offboard hexes, so the answer seems to be "no". But I'm still not completely happy with this answer, for a couple of reasons. One is that logically, realistically and for playability, I think it should be allowed. That's of course not enough to make it legal though :-( But another reason is that contrary to A2, the offboard "hexes" are still used in some cases. One example is the Random Direction DR, where SR/FFE or sniper counters may land in an offboard "hex". Logically, I see no reason why one couldn't place the FL counter in an offboard hex as well. But as you said, an offboard "hex" is not really a hex, so I guess it's not allowed. :-( From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 02:32:45 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:32:45 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:54:07 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >> You certainly are *not* free to place it outside of the MG's >> range, >Why? For the reasons previously stated. >So placing it beyond the initial attacked hex is clearly legal. I never said otherwise. >Yes, it only *attacks* units that are within the FL counter and within the Normal Range. So what? That doesn't limit the *placement* of the counter. ?? And the point of placing the counter in a hex that it can't attack (even if this were legal, which it clearly isn't) would be ...? Before you start arguing for something, I think you should make sure that there's some point to it. >Please quote any rule which tells me I cannot *place* the FL counter in a hex I cannot attack. COWTRA, baby. Please quote the rule that says you *can*. I'm not going to waste my time in a fruitless search for rules that prohibit what isn't allowed in the first place. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 02:35:15 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:35:15 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <008701c64ca6$a9f62200$7779de18@klis.com> References: <4nqt12dgaqr7lq01254g0m9jk8v99dqkjj@4ax.com> <000401c64c70$09a5b260$2f01a8c0@newscratch> <008701c64ca6$a9f62200$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 01:14:16 -0400, David Olie wrote: >O.K., fine. None of this cantabula answers Dave Gillies' question: is the >FL from 21E2 to 20GG5 and GG6 legal or not? I thought I'd answered it pretty clearly, myself. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 02:44:41 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:44:41 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060321155218.0266f4b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20060321155218.0266f4b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:55:10 +0900, Malcolm Rutledge wrote: >The example at the top of page A21 has a FL >counter in a hex that it cannot attack. So it does. It doesn't alter the fact that A9.22 explicitly states "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location ...." That makes the EX wrong. It's all very well for Ole to try and argue that you can place the FL counter in any hex that seems convenient at the time*, but the actual rules are a bit more specific. * "OK, I'm going to place the FL counter over here, way way over here, back in the centre of your concealed defensive position. Now, let me string a LOS to see which hexes the FL can actually attack. Wow, I didn't know I had a LOS there! That's handy to know ... Oops, LOS to that hex is blocked. Let's check this one ... excuse me? What are you blabbering about, you don't see a rule prohibiting me from doing this, do you? Ole doesn't see one, so it's legal!" ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 21 03:28:16 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:28:16 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, > On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:55:10 +0900, Malcolm Rutledge > wrote: > > >The example at the top of page A21 has a FL > >counter in a hex that it cannot attack. > and Bruce Probst answered: > So it does. It doesn't alter the fact that A9.22 explicitly > states "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form > of Residual FP in its Location ...." > Why can't you quote the end of the sentence too: "...that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry " The hex in question is legally placed as per the first part of A9.22, but doesn't exert any RFP since it is not in the LOS of the manning Infantry as per the last part of the sentence I quoted. > That makes the EX wrong. > No, that shows that you've overlooked the last part of the sentence in question, so your intepretation is wrong and the EX correct. > It's all very well for Ole to try and argue that you can place the > FL counter in any hex that seems convenient at the time*, but the > actual rules are a bit more specific. > No. The actual rule requires the FL counter to be placed in a (alternate) hex grain along/beyond the initial target. That's all restriction there is to the *placement* of the counter. And the example shows that this is the correct interpretation. Why is it so hard to see that *placement* of a FL counter has less restrictions than the *attack* of a FL? Even the example shows that there is a difference here, and the connection between the two restrictions is only imaginary. > * "OK, I'm going to place the FL counter over here, way way over > here, back in the centre of your concealed defensive position. > Now, let me string a LOS to see which hexes the FL can actually attack. > Wow, I didn't know I had a LOS > there! That's handy to know ... Oops, LOS to that hex is > blocked. Let's check this one ... excuse me? Free LOS checks are illegal due to A6.11. Didn't you know this Bruce? And since there is no LOS requirement for the *placement* of a FL counter, then there's of course not legal to check LOS when placing it either. > What are you blabbering > about, you don't see a rule prohibiting me from doing this, do you? > I was going to state that you should stop acting like a fool, because it doesn't suit you, but I actually think it suits you rather well. You obviously don't care much about actual rules when you make up such foolish examples, but may I remind you of A6.11, which tells us when LOS checks can be made. I don't see your foolish example in A6.11, so it prohibits you from doing this. > Ole doesn't see one, so it's legal!" > I see one, and don't blaim me just because you overlooked A6.11 :-) From davevicks at yahoo.com Tue Mar 21 06:22:43 2006 From: davevicks at yahoo.com (David Vicks) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:22:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] 1/2 squads set up? Message-ID: <20060321142244.36204.qmail@web52105.mail.yahoo.com> HI,Can GER 8-3-8,6-5-8 set up as 1/2 squads? Or Finn 8-3-8 ,6-4-8? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 21 03:00:09 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:00:09 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > >Yes, it only *attacks* units that are within the FL counter and > within the Normal Range. So what? That doesn't limit the > *placement* of the counter. > > ?? And the point of placing the counter in a hex that it can't > attack (even if this were legal, which it clearly isn't) would be ...? > A couple of reasons. One is to place the counter 8 hexes away along an alternate hex grain when your MG has a range of 7. Another is the one in the A9.221 example where the 4th hex is out of LOS, but placing it there will allow attacks in the 3rd hex. > Before you start arguing for something, I think you should make > sure that there's some point to it. > There is - see above. And you should read the full rule *and* the example. The example shows that the FL counter *is* placed in a hex it can't attack - so your statement that it's clearly legal is obviously not correct :-) > >Please quote any rule which tells me I cannot *place* the FL > >counter in a hex I cannot attack. > > COWTRA, baby. Please quote the rule that says you *can*. I have already, but may well do so again since you overlooked it: A9.22: "If he does declare a Fire Lane, he must ... also place a Fire Lane Residual FP counter in one hex along a Hex Grain; that Hex Grain must include the MG's hex and its First Fire target hex, but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex " It says: "In or beyond the latter" hex. Additionally, the A9.221 example shows that the FL counter is indeed placed in a hex it cannot attack, in other words that there is no such restrictions on the placement of the counter. Could you *now* quote any rule which restricts the above rule about the *placement* of the counter? > I'm not going to waste my time in a fruitless search for rules that prohibit what > isn't allowed in the first place. > So you're saying that the A9.221 example is incorrect, and that the rule for *placement* of the FL counter has additional restrictions because it clearly is so, but you will not bother to quote those additional restrictions. Now that's a good argument :-) From aslbunker at yahoo.com Tue Mar 21 07:56:33 2006 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 07:56:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker #22 has Shipped Message-ID: <20060321155633.77316.qmail@web32614.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Greetings from the Bunker and hello to all at the Main ASL Mailing List. Dispatches from the Bunker #22 has shipped out today via the Postal Service after making its publishing debut at the Nor'Easter Tournament. I want to Thank everyone who worked on it for the fine job they did in helping me put together our Amateur ASL Newsletter. We have, as usual, 3 new scenarios: Dash for Mt Croce - Joe Gochinski's latest in the 45th Thunderbird Division series is a quick-play tourney style action with a company of 1st line GIs trying to pierce the thin line of elite 6th Paratroop Division Fallschirmjagers and exit half the force off the opposite side of Board 12 in 1943 Italy. Jungle Rats - Another one from our designer extraordinaire Steve Johns, this sees a counterattacking combined arms force from the 1st Burma Division and 2nd RTR (from the Desert Rats 7th Armored Brigade) trying to smash a Japanese blocking force holding up the retreat north in Burma. A company of 4-4-7 2nd liners is supported by Stuart 1s and 80 OBA while the Japanese have 1st line troops aided by a 37L AT Gun and air support in the form of a 42 FB. Nasty PTO fun on board 42. Hamburg on the Lovat - Andy Clarke has come up with another nice Eastern Front scenario with a company of Russian sub-machine gunners assisted by a couple T-34s (one of which is that nasty OT-34) assaulting the cut-off elements of the 83rd Infantry Division at Velikiye Luki. The Russians have numbers on their side whereas the German has the range advantage along with some fortifications to helpin the defense on Boards 20 and 23. HIP Tank Hunter teams spice up the action as the Soviets grind forward toward building 20Z4. We also will have another fine analysis from Jim Torkelson, this time Jim writes about those popular Gurkha scenarios from Schwerpunkt. I take a look back at both the 2005 Bunker Bash and the ' 05 NY State ASL Championship and preview Nor'Easter X. As always we have Carl Nogueira's informative Tactical Tips for both Novices and Veterans alike and a peek ahead to Issue #23 (it will be devoted in large part to the upcoming Valor of the Guards HASL being published sometime this year by MMP). 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 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. (Prices at the Webdex will be updated in the near future, prices listed below are current). IF this sounds like snake eyes from your Flamethrower on your enemies Fire-base, Subscriptions and ALL Back-Issues are still available and here is how to get yours (all prices include S & H, please make all checks/money orders out to Vic Provost, NOT Dispatches from the Bunker): 4 Issue Subscription (Starting with current Issue 22): In the USA: $13.00 (Check/Money Order/Cash) Outside the States: $15.00 (International Postal Money Order or USA Currency 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' Payment Update: I now accept PayPal as a payment method. So either domestic or foreign orders may be paid to me by sending your remittance in USA Funds via PayPal to: PinkFloydFan1954 at aol.com All PayPal payments must add $1.00 per every $20.00 (FRU) spent to cover PayPal Fees. (EX: a $15.00 overseas subscription adds $1.00, a $68.00 Works Order adds $4.00) 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: Issue #01 is our FREE Preview Issue available with any New Subscription or upon request with a #10 SASE. All other Back-Issues (#02 - #21) are $3.50 Each in the USA or $4.00 Each outside the States. All 22 Issues in print (No subscription): $53.00 in the USA, $58.00 outside the states. The Works: All 22 Issues plus a 4 Issue Subscription, starting with current Issue #22 (25 Issues in total) $63.00 in the USA, $68.00 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]' __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 10:01:36 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 05:01:36 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:00:09 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >I have already, but may well do so again since you overlooked it: That rule says nothing about placement in hexes that cannot be attacked. >Additionally, the A9.221 example ... which is clearly in error, as demonstrated previously. >Could you *now* quote any rule which restricts the above rule about the *placement* of the counter? I'm still waiting for the rule that says you can place it in a hex that it can't attack. >So you're saying that the A9.221 example is incorrect, and that the rule for *placement* of the FL counter has additional restrictions because it clearly is so, but you will not bother to quote those additional restrictions. I've already quoted them. You're the one who's ignoring them, and quoting an obvious error to support your position. When you get near an actual argument, please be sure to let us know. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 10:04:17 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 05:04:17 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:28:16 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >I was going to state that you should stop acting like a fool, because it doesn't suit you, but I actually think it suits you rather well. Ah well. Insults in place of rules quotes. Very convincing. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From vicca at v21.me.uk Tue Mar 21 10:28:05 2006 From: vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:28:05 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] 1/2 squads set up? In-Reply-To: <20060321142244.36204.qmail@web52105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Subject to normal deployment limits yes.(10% of OB or as determined by SSR) -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of David Vicks Sent: 21 March 2006 14:23 To: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] 1/2 squads set up? HI,Can GER 8-3-8,6-5-8 set up as 1/2 squads? Or Finn 8-3-8 ,6-4-8? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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 bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Mar 21 11:55:14 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:55:14 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Man, I can't keep up with you guys! Nevertheless, I feel compelled to respond to some of Ole's replies to my post... > >To sum it up: >1) A9.22 first tells us where the FL counter can be placed: >“that Hex Grain must include the MG's hex and its First Fire target hex, >but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex” > >Note that there is *no* LOS or range requirement here. > Agreed. The only requirement here is that it be in a hex grain that also includes the original attack. >2) A9.22 then tells us that those hexes along this hexgrain that is within >LOS and normal range is attacked. > >Or in other words: The LOS and range restrictions are not used when placing >the FL counter, but when performing the actual attacks. > Well, you are correct. They do pertain to the Residual FP attacks themselves. >...”that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning >Infantry “ You must read the complete sentence. > It surely would not surprise you to learn that I have read the complete sentence? It is precisely because of this phrase that I believe the counter itself must be placed in Normal Range and LOS. I even referred to it, but evidently you missed the context. (Easy to do once the thread takes a life of its own.) >No. It only has *effect* in LOS and within normal range. I quoted the rule >for where you can place it, and there are no LOS/range restrictions there. > >The restriction is on where it has effect, but that is a different thing. > For ease of reference, here is the complete statement: "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location, and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG, that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center dot)." First, I see the first phrase as a *requirement* of the FP counter itself; namely, that it exerts Residual FP in its Location. There is no EXC mentioned at this point. In other words, *placement* of the counter de facto means that *there is Residual FP* in that Location. The state of placing the counter makes it so. Thus, it "exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location", *always*. If the counter is there, the Residual FP is there. One cannot argue otherwise, because there is no other rule or statement that denies this phrase. [EXC: the EX. I assert the EX makes its point with regard to Alternate Hex Grain, but commits an error in placing the counter out of LOS. Perhaps an Alternate Hex Grain is the EXC for placing the counter out of LOS?] Next, other hexes also have Residual FP, as outlined in the second phrase. These first two phrase are connected by an "and'. In other words, Residual FP is exerted in its Location and in these other Locations. Finally, the requirement: within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS. In other words, this final phrase is a conditional for the application of exerting Residual FP. In order for Residual FP attack to occur, it must be within Normal Range and LOS. Since Residual FP must be exerted, always, in the Location containing the Fire Lane Residual FP counter, this conditional instructs that the Fire Lane Residual FP counter itself must also be within Normal Range and LOS. I need proceed no further, because the point is made. Above you said, "It only has *effect* in LOS and within normal range." And we have come full circle, though I don't think you see it that way. I assert that the placement of the counter means that there *is* Residual FP *effect* in that counter's Location. There is no option about this, because there is no exception given. If it your assertion (as I believe it is) that there is an allowance made in the rules for one to not resolve the Residual FP in the counter's Location, please point it out. I am aware of the EX. If the EX is the only argument to be made, then we may as well stop here. If it comes down to that EX only, I may actively petition for the clarification of this EX, because I think it violates the counter's Residual FP requirement. Well, those are my points. Surely Probst will pop in and say, "Didn't I just say that?" Which he undoubtedly did, in his way. You'll notice that he and I agree on this point. [On balance, I seem to feel that we agree on most points, believe it or not.] If you have made your pertinent counterpoints in another post, please forgive me. The threads become convoluted pretty quickly, and its difficult to stay with one particular argument's points. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 21 13:33:11 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 22:33:11 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Bakken wrote; > Man, I can't keep up with you guys! > Nah, slow day at work... After a couple of hours work, I thought that I should try to get the FL discussion back on the right track, trying to discuss the actual rule, and trying to avoid personal matters, so first thing I¡¯ll apologize to Bruce P. for the ¡°fool¡± parts in my previous post. That was unnessecary regardless of what I thought of Bruce¡¯s example. I get home and see that Bruce Bakken had written a loong argument, keeping to the point - unlike my quarrel with Bruce Probst. I appreciate that, even though I of course would like it better if he agreed with me about the rule. Anyway, I will try to give my reasoning first, and then answer some of Bruce Bakken's post. I think the reason for the disagreement is the part of A9.22 saying: ¡°A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location, and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG, that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry¡° Where especially the phrase ¡°, that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry¡± is under disagreement. Bruce Probst and Bruce Bakken have¡¯t stated so explicitely (or I¡¯ve overlooked it), but I think they both believe that phrase applies to ¡°every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG¡± only, and not also to the first part of the sentence. I believe it applies to the first part of the sentence as well, i.e. that the FL counter itself exerts RFP only if it is in LOS/Normal Range of the manned MG. I believe it does for several reasons. 1) Punctation: The above sentence has a comma before ¡°that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry¡°. In the ASLRB, such a comma generally means that what follows apply to the entire sentence, and not only to the last part just before the comma. 2) If a FL counter could not be placed outside normal range, then no hex between it and the MG could be outside normal range either. And yet, the sentence in question tells us that only hexes between it and the MG that is within normal range is attacked. If there never can be such hexes, then that part of the sentence is meaningless. 3) If this restriction really should apply to the placement of the counter, then it's in the wrong place - it should have been in the first para, in the sentence saying "...but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex", by changing it to something like "...but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex, within LOS and Normal Range of the MG". The restriction isn't here though, but with the rule telling us where the FL has effect. 4) Finally, the example shows us that placing a FL counter outside LOS/Normal Range is legal, and that there is no RFP in hexes outside LOS/Normal Range. In other words, that the last phrase of the sentence above applies to the FL counter¡¯s hex, and doesn't restricts its placement. I see that the sentence itself is not too clear, but the example is very clear, and shows that the FL counter may be placed outside LOS, but only exerts RFP if it is in LOS. The same should be true for Normal Range since the two are similarily restricted in the rule. What I'm saying is that both the rule *and* the example are correct and say the same thing. Then onto Bruce Bakken's post: I wrote: > >Or in other words: The LOS and range restrictions are not used > >when placing > >the FL counter, but when performing the actual attacks. > > > and Bruce answered: > Well, you are correct. They do pertain to the Residual FP attacks > themselves. > > > >...”that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its > > manning Infantry “ You must read the complete sentence. > > > > It surely would not surprise you to learn that I have read the > complete sentence? > No. I'm sorry for the rude remark, which was uncalled for. But I was a bit surprised that you seemed to leave the last part out when discussing the fist, since it (IMHO) is so important for the understanding of the rule. You take for granted without any discussion that the third phrase only restricts the second and not the first phrase of that sentence. I believe it restricts both, and therefore think it is wrong to quite the first phrase without the restricting third case. > For ease of reference, here is the complete statement: > > "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its > Location, and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain > between that counter and the MG, that is within the MG's Normal Range and in > the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center > dot)." > > First, I see the first phrase as a *requirement* of the FP counter > itself; namely, that it exerts Residual FP in its Location. There is no > EXC mentioned at this point. In other words, *placement* of the > counter de facto means that *there is Residual FP* in that Location. > Again, that's where I disagree. I believe as said above that the rule tell you that it leaves RFP only in those Locations that are within Normal Range and LOS, because I think the " that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS" phrase limits the FL counter's Location, and not only the Location inbetween. In other words "there is Residual FP in that Location if ... within the MG's Normal Range and in LOS" If you have said it, then I have missed it, but I haven't noticed you discussing this possible interpretation. If I'm right, then the last phrase *is* an exception for the first (and to the second part of course) of the rule. > Thus, it "exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location", *always*. > If the counter is there, the Residual FP is there. One cannot argue > otherwise, because there is no other rule or statement that denies > this phrase. > I will continue to argue that this is only true if it fulfills the requirements of the last phrase. At least tell me *why* you disagree with this, don't just take it as a fact. I won't quote or argue against the rest of your post. It contained good argumentation, but it all rest (if I understood it correctly) on the assumption that "that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS" is *not* a restriction of the FL counter's Location. If this assumption is correct, then I agree with the rest of your logic, but as you know by now, I disagree with this base assumption - I believe this phrase applies to the FL counter's Location, and my interpretation has the bonus that it is consistent with the example as well. I know how you loathe examples that say something other than the rule, but I suggest an understanding of the rule that is consistent with the example. So if you still don't agree with me, then I hope you can tell me *why* my points 1-3 above is obviously wrong, or at least why they're so wrong that not even the example can convince you that they're correct. From hofors at lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 21 13:36:07 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 21 Mar 2006 22:36:07 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "Bruce Bakken" writes: > > No. It only has *effect* in LOS and within normal range. I quoted > > the rule for where you can place it, and there are no LOS/range > > restrictions there. > > > >The restriction is on where it has effect, but that is a different thing. > > > > For ease of reference, here is the complete statement: > > "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP > in its Location, and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire > Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG, that is within the > MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing > their LOS to the hex center dot)." > > First, I see the first phrase as a *requirement* of the FP counter > itself; namely, that it exerts Residual FP in its Location. There is > no EXC mentioned at this point. In other words, *placement* of the > counter de facto means that *there is Residual FP* in that Location. > The state of placing the counter makes it so. > > Thus, it "exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location", > *always*. If the counter is there, the Residual FP is there. One > cannot argue otherwise, because there is no other rule or statement > that denies this phrase. > Am I right if I say that the first comma in the quoted rules section is what makes the difference between the joint Bruces and Ole B?e's interpretation? Regards, Mattias From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Tue Mar 21 14:33:14 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:33:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <25734.65.222.202.26.1142980394.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > Am I right if I say that the first comma in the quoted rules section > is what makes the difference between the joint Bruces and Ole B?e's > interpretation? In part, I think it does, and one problem is that the commas have no grammatical place in that sentence. You cannot write that sentence correctly in English and put those commas in there. The first comma violates the rule that no comma is placed between clauses or phrases joined by a conjunction UNLESS it is being used to replace missing words. The second comma is illegally used to divide a restrictive clause form the rest of the sentence. ("That" introduces a restrictive clause or phrase, one that can be omitted and the meaning of the sentence stays the same. I think we can all agree that the phrase "that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry" is essential to the meaning of the sentence. :-) The correct sentence must be either A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry. In which case Ole is correct. Or it should be (with [bracketed text] indicating what is implied) A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location, and [it exerts the same RFP] in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry. The latter version requires the least correction, and it also makes the most sense (IMO), given that a RFP marker represents Residual Firepower, and it is illogical to place one in a hex if no Firepower could actually be placed there. From rln22 at yahoo.com Tue Mar 21 14:58:17 2006 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:58:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Wounded in Bypass In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060321225817.32840.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> A leader jumps a hedge and skirts a forest in bypass, for an expenditure of 2mf. DFF, wounds him. No 1mf OG HEX anywhere. Is he suspended in the OG section of the woods hex (although not pinned or broken) until the end of the Mph? Or is he forced into the woods section, with a pin marker? This has made me ask the same question re: an SG placing sqd, in bypass, rolling a 6....? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From davevicks at yahoo.com Tue Mar 21 18:46:35 2006 From: davevicks at yahoo.com (David Vicks) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:46:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] HOW TO convert a squad into a 1/2 squad? Message-ID: <20060322024635.17689.qmail@web52111.mail.yahoo.com> HOW would I convert a 6-6-7, 7-4-7 USA, or 6-4-8 UK into a 1/2 squad? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From malm at gol.com Tue Mar 21 19:22:04 2006 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:22:04 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] HOW TO convert a squad into a 1/2 squad? In-Reply-To: <20060322024635.17689.qmail@web52111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060322024635.17689.qmail@web52111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060322122129.026749f8@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 11:46 a.m. 22/03/2006, David Vicks wrote: >HOW would I convert a 6-6-7, 7-4-7 USA, or 6-4-8 UK > > into a 1/2 squad? K/ usually works for me. >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.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 wendel.litchfield at adelaide.edu.au Tue Mar 21 22:15:04 2006 From: wendel.litchfield at adelaide.edu.au (Wendel Litchfield) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:45:04 +1030 Subject: [Aslml] HOW TO convert a squad into a 1/2 squad? In-Reply-To: <20060322024635.17689.qmail@web52111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060322024635.17689.qmail@web52111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1143008104.4420eb68e7598@webmail.adelaide.edu.au> Quoting David Vicks : > HOW would I convert a 6-6-7, 7-4-7 USA, or 6-4-8 UK > > into a 1/2 squad? Right - listen up: 1st step = Read chapter A of the rulebook! 2nd step = in the rally phase have the squad(s)to deploy in the same location as a leader, have that leader make a NTC....pass = 2 half squads Wendel From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 22:18:40 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:18:40 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:55:14 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Well, those are my points. Surely Probst will pop in and say, "Didn't I >just say that?" Didn't I ... aw, man. (You did articulate it better than I did, however.) >[On balance, I seem to feel that we agree on most points, believe it or not.] Shh ... I believe in some areas that can get you tarred and feathered. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 21 22:33:04 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:33:04 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Wounded in Bypass In-Reply-To: <20060321225817.32840.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060321225817.32840.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:58:17 -0800 (PST), Robert Nelson wrote: >A leader jumps a hedge and skirts a forest in bypass, >for an expenditure of 2mf. DFF, wounds him. No 1mf OG >HEX anywhere. Is he suspended in the OG section of the >woods hex (although not pinned or broken) until the >end of the Mph? Or is he forced into the woods >section, with a pin marker? There's no reason to place a Pin marker on the leader; there's nothing that he has done to earn one. There's no specific rule to describe what happens here, but we can take our cue from your follow-up question .... >This has made me ask the same question re: an SG >placing sqd, in bypass, rolling a 6....? ... which is actually specifically answered in A4.33. (Note the direct reference to A24.1.) I would suggest that it would be appropriate to treat your wounded SMC in exactly the same fashion as described in this rule. "Involuntarily stranded" is surely as good a term as any to describe the SMC's situation. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 22 00:39:06 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:39:06 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <1066b4002cd2.44211b3a@broadpark.no> Hi, > Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > > > Am I right if I say that the first comma in the quoted rules section > > is what makes the difference between the joint Bruces and Ole B?e's > > interpretation? > I think so... Jan Spoor followed up: > In part, I think it does, and one problem is that the commas have no > grammatical place in that sentence. You cannot write that sentence > correctly in English and put those commas in there. > I agree that the sentence is problematic. But IMHO, you overlook a special use of commas in the ASLRB that is not grammatic. In the ASLRB, a three-part sentence can have comma before the last part, not for grammatical reasons, but to separate the last part from the second part. The *meaning* of this is to give the information that the last part belongs not only to the second part, but to the first part as well. I don?t have the time to dig up other examples now, but can probably do so later. Anyway, my view is that the last comma in the rule we?re discussing is like this. It?s not there for grammatical reasons, but to separate the LOS/NR restrictions from the second part, and thereby give the information that the restrictions apply to all parts before it, including the FL counter?s Location. > The latter version requires the least correction, and it also makes the > most sense (IMO), given that a RFP marker represents Residual > Firepower,and it is illogical to place one in a hex if no Firepower could actually > be placed there. > I cut off most of your post, which I generally agreed with. I think there?s one important aspect you?re overlooking in your conclusion though. The first (my interpetation) is the only interpretation that agrees with the example, and is therefore the one that requires least correction. If you choose the latter version, then you must rewrite the entire example, and change the illustration. As for the logical part, remember that placing the FL counter one hex beyond LOS/Normal Range, is the only way of getting the FL to cover the last hex in LOS/Normal Range in situations like the one in the example. I think the *effect* of being able to place the FL counter one hex beyond LOS/NR is very logical, where the effect is that the MG gets to have a FL as far out as its Normal Range/LOS, and not one hex shorter. From vicca at v21.me.uk Wed Mar 22 01:30:56 2006 From: vicca at v21.me.uk (Martin Vicca) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:30:56 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Wounded in Bypass In-Reply-To: <20060321225817.32840.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: If infantry end their movement in by-passthen they automatically occupy ther obstacle being by-passed./ Of course when this is a Fortified building location al sorts of fun ensues. Now whether the ldr is pinned is another question. I believe he is not since he is wounded prior to spendiing 3 mps. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Robert Nelson Sent: 21 March 2006 22:58 To: bprobst at netspace.net.au; aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Wounded in Bypass A leader jumps a hedge and skirts a forest in bypass, for an expenditure of 2mf. DFF, wounds him. No 1mf OG HEX anywhere. Is he suspended in the OG section of the woods hex (although not pinned or broken) until the end of the Mph? Or is he forced into the woods section, with a pin marker? This has made me ask the same question re: an SG placing sqd, in bypass, rolling a 6....? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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 indiabooks at optusnet.com.au Wed Mar 22 02:26:17 2006 From: indiabooks at optusnet.com.au (Indian Ink (South Asia Books)) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:26:17 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl References: Message-ID: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Does anyone know what are the coordinates for overlay 4 when placed on board 34 on Vasl 5 I can't seem to be able to match the hexes.. Thank you in advance Joe From ianp70 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 02:51:04 2006 From: ianp70 at hotmail.com (Ian Percy) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 10:51:04 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Overlays Needed Message-ID: Guys In the process of moving house last year, all my nicely laminated and filed overlays have gone missing (well, not all of them, I have the big PTO hut one and the big paddy field, plus the desert ones and an uncut sheet of hedge/bocage overlays). Anyone out there got a spare set for sale or trade? Cheers Ian From ianp70 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 02:51:04 2006 From: ianp70 at hotmail.com (Ian Percy) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 10:51:04 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Overlays Needed Message-ID: Guys In the process of moving house last year, all my nicely laminated and filed overlays have gone missing (well, not all of them, I have the big PTO hut one and the big paddy field, plus the desert ones and an uncut sheet of hedge/bocage overlays). Anyone out there got a spare set for sale or trade? Cheers Ian From highspeedohio at yahoo.com Wed Mar 22 04:00:45 2006 From: highspeedohio at yahoo.com (Jeff Bennett) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 04:00:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] test Message-ID: <20060322120045.58423.qmail@web33102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> test __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 22 09:59:00 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 04:59:00 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl In-Reply-To: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> References: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:26:17 +1100, "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" wrote: >Does anyone know what are the coordinates for overlay 4 when placed on board >34 on Vasl 5 U1-U2 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 13:16:04 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:16:04 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Ole reasons and I reply... >Again, that's where I disagree. I believe as said above that the rule tell >you that it leaves RFP only in those Locations that are within Normal Range >and LOS, because I think the " that is within the MG's Normal Range and in >the LOS" phrase limits the FL counter's Location, and not only the Location >inbetween. > If I understand what you have just stated here, then I would agree. It does limit the counter's Location. And the Locations in between. >In other words "there is Residual FP in that Location if ... within the >MG's Normal Range and in LOS" > Here I would point out that you have added the word "if" to the quote. By saying "if", you imply that there is a "not if". It is the "not if" that allows one to place the counter outside Normal Range and LOS. But I don't see the Normal Range and LOS requirement as an "if" condition. Rather it is a definitive condition: "that is", a formula introducing an explanation or further clarification. >If you have said it, then I have missed it, but I haven't noticed you >discussing this possible interpretation. If I'm right, then the last phrase >*is* an exception for the first (and to the second part of course) of the >rule. > The last phrase is a relative clause. In that sense, it is not an exception to the preceding phrases, but rather is a clarification. An explanation. A condition. >I will continue to argue that this is only true if it fulfills the >requirements of the last phrase. At least tell me *why* you disagree with >this, don't just take it as a fact. > Shall I point out that everything expressed in this public debate forum is strictly opinion? Does it need to be stated? In that context, statements are expressed as if facts, when it should be understood that it is only a conclusion based on opinion. As to "why" I disagree with you, I truly thought I expressed it as well as I could in the post you presently replied to. It appears that others have understood my arguments. I hope that my comments above have added clarification. >I won't quote or argue against the rest of your post. It contained good >argumentation, but it all rest (if I understood it correctly) on the >assumption that "that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS" is >*not* a restriction of the FL counter's Location. If this assumption is >correct, then I agree with the rest of your logic, but as you know by now, >I disagree with this base assumption - I believe this phrase applies to >the FL counter's Location, and my interpretation has the bonus that it is >consistent with the example as well. > Ole, this is very important. I will extract part of what you just stated: "...but it all rest (if I understood it correctly) on the assumption that 'that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS' is *not* a restriction on the FL counter's Location." I am a bit frustrated by this conclusion, because the nasty phrase in question ("that is...etc") is very much and precisely a restriction on the counter's Location. I thought that is what I have been arguing. And further, it is not an "if" condition at all, but is rather the definition of what and where a Fire Lane is resolved. >I know how you loathe examples that say something other than the rule, but >I suggest an understanding of the rule that is consistent with the example. >So if you still don't agree with me, then I hope you can tell me *why* my >points 1-3 above is obviously wrong, or at least why they're so wrong that >not even the example can convince you that they're correct. > What I have been doing is giving you my interpretation. The basic foundational reason I believe you are wrong is because of what I perceive as a misunderstanding of English grammar. I was going to deconstruct the sentence, but Jan somewhat beat me to it. Nevetheless, I should like to point out some things, and ask that you specifically address these assertions. You are fully on record regarding your interpretation. What I am interested in is your explanation for the following. 1. The first phrase of the sentence is actually a complete sentence itself. "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location." You could stop right there and be complete. It doesn't say much for the rest of the Fire Lane, but you know where you stand on the counter's Location. I think that is significant. It tells me that the Fire Lane must contain the counter, and that the counter must exert Residual FP because there is no EXC given. 2. The second phrase cannot stand alone, it is not a complete sentence in itself. Therefore the use of the (", and") is not appropriate. The (", and") is called a coordinating conjunction, which means that it joins two phrases that can stand alone as complete sentences. In other words, using (", and") is the same as using a period. However, in this case the coordinating conjunction is misused, because *this* phrase is not a complete sentence: "And in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG." However, *this* is a complete (and correct) compound sentence: "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location and in every same-level (B.5) Location between that counter and the MG." 3. Finally, the last phrase. Let us suppose that this phrase did not exist. In that case, please tell me your answer to this question: Where are the actual Locations of the Fire Lane actually defined? 4. Now, let me assert that the answer to that question is this: the last phrase: "that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center dot)." Note that this phrase is not a complete sentence. In fact, it is called a relative clause, as indicated by the word "that is". You can achieve economy by omitting the words "that is", and still not lose meaning. Furthermore, this relative clause applies to the compound sentence that precedes it. 5. The entire sentence, correcting its coordinating conjuction and using economy for the relative clause: "A Fire Land Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its own Location and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG, within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry." This sentence is grammatically correct. The relative clause is also definitive, though clumsy. But notice that I have not rewritten anything, I have just corrected the bad grammar. The end result is a complex sentence. (Actually, a complex sentence should only use one indepentent clause -- the stand alone part -- but this sentence combines a compound sentence with a dependent clause to create a compound-complex sentence.) I apologize for the Grammar 101, Ole, but damn it (!), that's what it comes down to. No assertion about "well the ASLRB does it this way", or "it really means this" changes the rules of grammar. This verdammt sentence we're bashing over would receive bad scores on an English grammar exam for its misuse of a coordinating conjunction (", and"), and probably for also using a clumsy relative clause. These are grammatical facts that can be easily verified, so I put it forth to anyone wishing to dispute me on this. I can't help it that the original writers of the ASLRB used bad grammar. I suggest that the current sentence as written (which I have demonstrated uses poor grammar) *can* and *does* lead to an erroneous conclusion, i.e. the conclusion that you have stated. I also suggest that the person writing the EX arrived at the same erroneous conclusion; therefore it is no surprise that your understanding matches the EX, since you both share identical erroneous conclusions. I further submit that the simple grammatical *corrections* that I propose leads to a more precise and understandable statement, and is actually more accurate. It renders the EX inaccurate, which I submit was created the way it was due to the faulty grammar in the first place. There. Have I clearly stated my position now? :-) Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Wed Mar 22 13:58:01 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:58:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <15965.65.222.202.26.1143064681.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Bruce Bakken wrote: > There. Have I clearly stated my position now? You have, but I fear I take issue with your statement that "The (", and") is called a coordinating conjunction, which means that it joins two phrases that can stand alone as complete sentences." Coordinating conjunctions can join a lot more than just two independent clauses; corrdinating conjunctions can join *any* "words, phrases, or clauses of equal weight" (as the NYPL Writer's Guide puts it). In this case, IMO, it is joining two prepositional phrases ("in its own Location" and "in every same-level (B.5) Location...") that are defining *where* the "Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP" As regards your first point, "1. The first phrase of the sentence is actually a complete sentence itself." That *could* be true, but it is not. The final phrase in the sentence, despite the excerable and wholly inappropriate comma placed before it, is not a nonrestrictive clause; therefore one cannot simply ignore it and assert that the portion "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location." tells one that "that the counter must exert Residual FP because there is no EXC given". That's like saying that one take the sentence "The team will win the game if they score the most points," remove the phrase "if they score the most points" and say that the team will win the game. "I can't help it that the original writers of the ASLRB used bad grammar." I agree, but we have to work with the fact that they did. "I also suggest that the person writing the EX arrived at the same erroneous conclusion; therefore it is no surprise that your understanding matches the EX, since you both share identical erroneous conclusions." I would disagree that one can assume that the person who wrote the example and the person who wrote the rule were separate and unconnected entities. I think that, absent evidence to the contrary, we have to assume they are the same author and that the EX--which very explicitly acknowledges that RFP cannot exist in the location marked by the FL counter--is meant to demonstrate the rule as written and therefore should be used to understand what the poorly phrased and incorrectly punctuated sentence means. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 14:24:04 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:24:04 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <15965.65.222.202.26.1143064681.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: > >You have, but I fear I take issue with your statement that "The (", >and") is called a coordinating conjunction, which means that it joins two >phrases that can stand alone as complete sentences." Let me clarify. When a coordinating conjunction is used to join two independent clauses, a comma is placed before the conjunction. I did not mean to imply that *only* (", and") is called a coordinating conjunction. Placing a comma before "and", such as in (", and") suggests that it is joining two independent clauses, but in this case it is not. It is joining one independent clause with one dependent clause. Therefore the use of the comma is incorrect. You only use the comma when two independent clauses are involved. Therefore, it is made correct by removing the comma. I didn't learn it here, but here is a quick reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinating_conjunction >Coordinating >conjunctions can join a lot more than just two independent clauses; >corrdinating conjunctions can join *any* "words, phrases, or clauses of >equal weight" (as the NYPL Writer's Guide puts it). In this case, IMO, it >is joining two prepositional phrases ("in its own Location" and "in every >same-level (B.5) Location...") that are defining *where* the "Fire Lane >Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP" > You are correct, which is why the comma is inappropriate. The comma is only placed when two independent clauses are joined. I had removed the comma in my example to make a complete and correct compound sentence using a correct coordinating conjunction. Joining two phrases as you suggest. >As regards your first point, "1. The first phrase of the sentence is >actually a complete sentence itself." That *could* be true, but it is not. Well, it is in fact a complete sentence. You could stop right there and know that you must resolve Residual FP in the counter's Location. What you don't know is where that counter must be placed relative to the MG. Well, we do know. It is given to us in the restrictive clause, see below. >The final phrase in the sentence, despite the excerable and wholly >inappropriate comma placed before it, is not a nonrestrictive clause; >therefore one cannot simply ignore it and assert that the portion "A Fire >Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its >Location." tells one that "that the counter must exert Residual FP because >there is no EXC given". That's like saying that one take the sentence "The >team will win the game if they score the most points," remove the phrase >"if they score the most points" and say that the team will win the game. > By the way, the comma is correctly placed before this restrictive clause. A comma is only incorrectly placed before the coordinating conjunction. You are correct, and like I stated, it is a restrictive clause. But what it *is* restricting is where the counter can be placed. It can only be placed in a Location in Normal Range and LOS, etc. Your analogy is correct as far as it goes. It is the restrictive clause that tells us where the counter can be placed. But please note: it is not an "if" conditional. Like Ole, you have inexplicably added the word "if" into your meaning. It is stated as "that is", which is a transitional phrase leading to the restrictive clause. >"I can't help it that the original writers of the ASLRB used bad grammar." >I agree, but we have to work with the fact that they did. > But how can we know the true intent if we accept the bad grammar? Communication mostly depends upon correct grammar. "Working with it" means "correcting it", IMO. >"I also suggest that the person writing the EX arrived at the same >erroneous conclusion; therefore it is no surprise that your understanding >matches the EX, since you both share identical erroneous conclusions." > >I would disagree that one can assume that the person who wrote the example >and the person who wrote the rule were separate and unconnected entities. >I think that, absent evidence to the contrary, we have to assume they are >the same author and that the EX--which very explicitly acknowledges that >RFP cannot exist in the location marked by the FL counter--is meant to >demonstrate the rule as written and therefore should be used to understand >what the poorly phrased and incorrectly punctuated sentence means. > Fair point. But again, maybe not. I'm not sure we can assume either way about who wrote what, nor should we be required to make that assumption absent evidence to the contrary. Thank you for your input. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 22 14:57:02 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:57:02 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> Hi, Bruce Bakken wrote another long post. I will answer most of it... > The last phrase is a relative clause. In that sense, it is not an exception > to the preceding phrases, but rather is a clarification. An explanation. A > condition. > Yes, it is a condition to the preceeding phrases. I believe it is a condition of the form: A is true, and B is true, but only if C is true - where C is the restriction that applies to *both* A and B. In our case, A is the FL counter's Location, B are all the hexes between it and the MG and C is the LOS/Normal Range restriction. > Ole, this is very important. I will extract part of what you just > stated: > "...but it all rest (if I understood it correctly) on the assumption that > 'that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS' is *not* a > restriction on the FL counter's Location." > > I am a bit frustrated by this conclusion, because the nasty phrase > in question ("that is...etc") is very much and precisely a restriction > on the counter's Location. > I see I was ambigious with my wording there. What I meant was that your conclution rests on the assumption that 'that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS' us *not* a restriction on the Residual Fire Power in the FL counter's Location. I firmly believe that the phrase restricts the Residual FP in the FL counter's Location and not the FL counter's Location in itself. After all, the sentence we're discussing tells us where the FL exerts Residual FP, so I don't see the restriction restrict more than that. > I thought that is what I have been arguing. And further, it is not > an "if" condition at all, but is rather the definition of what and where a > Fire Lane is resolved. > I agree. It is a definition of where a Fire Lane exerts RFP - but I disagree that it is a definition of where the FL counter can be placed. The definition of where it can be placed is in the first para of A9.22 and has no such restrictions. > What I have been doing is giving you my interpretation. > And I appreciate the way you're doing that. > Nevetheless, I should like to point out some things, and ask that you > specifically address these assertions. You are fully on record regarding > your interpretation. What I am interested in is your explanation > for the following. > > 1. The first phrase of the sentence is actually a complete sentence > itself. > "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual > FP in its Location." You could stop right there and be complete. It doesn't > say much for the rest of the Fire Lane, but you know where you stand on the > counter's Location. I think that is significant. It tells me that the Fire > Lane must contain the counter, and that the counter must exert Residual FP > because there is no EXC given. > I think you're doing an illegal (in the ASL rule sense) short circuit here. The first phrase *could* be a complete sentence, but it isn't. It is ended with a condition that restricts it. You cannot just cut out the rest . A4.1's first part is "During his MPh, the ATTACKER may move all, some, or none of his Infantry units". That's also a complete sentence in itself, but the part that follows still restricts it: "...provided they did not fire during the PFPh and are neither broken, TI, designated to use Opportunity Fire, nor held in Melee." > 2. The second phrase cannot stand alone, it is not a complete > sentence in itself. Therefore the use of the (", and") is not appropriate. > The (", and") is called a coordinating conjunction, which means that it > joins two phrases that can stand alone as complete sentences. In other > words, using (", and") is the same as using a period. However, in this case the > coordinating conjunction is misused, because *this* phrase is not a > complete sentence: "And in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane > Hex Grain between that counter and the MG." However, *this* is a complete > (and correct) compound sentence: "A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts > a unique form of Residual FP in its Location and in every same-level (B.5) > Location between that counter and the MG." > This seems correct to me. I also notice that the first two phrases combined, forms a complete sentence, so anything you said in point 1 could just as well be said here. > 3. Finally, the last phrase. Let us suppose that this phrase did > not exist. > In that case, please tell me your answer to this question: Where > are the actual Locations of the Fire Lane actually defined? > In the two above phrases. If the sentence had ended here, any Location between (inclusive) the FL counter and the MG would exert RFP as per the two above phrases, without any regard to LOS and Normal Range. So hexes out of LOS and/or Normal range would be attacked by the FL. We both know this, I think. > 4. Now, let me assert that the answer to that question is this: the last > phrase: "that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its > manning Infantry (when tracing their LOS to the hex center dot)." Note > that this phrase is not a complete sentence. In fact, it is called a > relative clause, as indicated by the word "that is". You can achieve economy by > omitting the words "that is", and still not lose meaning. Furthermore, this > relative clause applies to the compound sentence that precedes it. > Yes, it applies to both parts (as discussed in 1 and 2). That's what I think, and that's what you say now if I understand you correctly. But in point 1, you said that then counter *must* exert FP since there is no EXC given, and now you say that the relative clause applies to the first phrase. This relative clause is a condition, which tells us that phrase 1 is true only when the condition is true, and that phrase 2 is true only when the condition is true. Agreed? > 5. The entire sentence, correcting its coordinating conjuction and > using economy for the relative clause: "A Fire Land Residual FP counter > exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its own Location and in every same- > level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the > MG, within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry." > This sentence is grammatically correct. The relative clause is also > definitive, though clumsy. But notice that I have not rewritten anything, I > have just corrected the bad grammar. The end result is a complex sentence. > (Actually, a complex sentence should only use one indepentent > clause -- the stand alone part -- but this sentence combines a compound sentence > with a dependent clause to create a compound-complex sentence.) > This seems fine to me. > I apologize for the Grammar 101, Ole, but damn it (!), that's what > it comes down to. No assertion about "well the ASLRB does it this way", or > "it really means this" changes the rules of grammar. This verdammt > sentence we're bashing over would receive bad scores on an English grammar > exam for its misuse of a coordinating conjunction (", and"), and probably > for also using a clumsy relative clause. These are grammatical facts that > can be easily verified, so I put it forth to anyone wishing to dispute me > on this. I won't. What I still dispute is the logical conclution you draw from all of this. Here's my points, please comment them: 1) A9.22's first para says: "If he does declare a Fire Lane, he must place a First Fire counter on the MG and, after resolving that First Fire attack in the normal manner, must also place a Fire Lane Residual FP counter in one hex along a Hex Grain; that Hex Grain must include the MG's hex and its First Fire target hex, but he may place the Fire Lane counter in or beyond the latter hex" This is the only sentence that directly says where the FL counter can be placed. If there are no more restrictions, then placing it out of LOS or beyond Normal Range is legal. 2) The first two phrases of the second para (leaving out the third phrase's restriction for now), tells us what's special with the counter's Location and all Locations between it and the MG (the FL Locations) - they exert RFP. If the sentence ended here, they would all exert RFP regardless of LOS or Normal Range. 3) The third phrase tells us that only some of those FL Locations exert RFP - only those that are within Normal Range and LOS. Read 3 again. It says that the FL counter (and other FL Locations) only exert RFP when a condition is true. It does *not* say that the FL counter must exert RFP at all times, thereby restricting where the FL counter can legally be placed. It only says that some times, the FL Locations are out of LOS/Normal Range, and when this happens (i.e. thee condition is not true), the FL counter (and other FL Locations) does *not* exert RFP. I wan't to stress this point again, because it is here I think your logic is somewhat flawed. You say that the FL counter *must* always exert RFP, but the rule doesn't say that. It says that the FL counter exerts RFP, but only if its Location is in LOS/Normal Range. 4) Assume (a pretty unlikely, I know) situation, where the FL counter is placed in LOS and within Normal Range. During the same DFF, a building is rubbled and falling rubble blocks the LOS between the MG and the FL counter. What now? According to me, this is fine, because the condition now says that since the FL counter is not in LOS, it doesn't exert RFP any longer either. According to you, what then? > I can't help it that the original writers of the ASLRB used bad grammar. > I suggest that the current sentence as written (which I have demonstrated > uses poor grammar) *can* and *does* lead to an erroneous conclusion, i.e. > the conclusion that you have stated. I also suggest that the person writing > the EX arrived at the same erroneous conclusion; therefore it is no > surprise that your understanding matches the EX, since you both share > identical erroneous conclusions. > If anything, this shows that Bob MacNamara (who was responsible for the EX that was completely rewritten for the replacement pages that came with CdG) used the example to make it crystal clear which of the two conclusions he considered correct. From hofors at lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 22 14:58:34 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 22 Mar 2006 23:58:34 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <15965.65.222.202.26.1143064681.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> References: <15965.65.222.202.26.1143064681.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: "Jan W. S. Spoor" writes: > "I also suggest that the person writing the EX arrived at the same > erroneous conclusion; therefore it is no surprise that your understanding > matches the EX, since you both share identical erroneous conclusions." > > I would disagree that one can assume that the person who wrote the example > and the person who wrote the rule were separate and unconnected entities. > I think that, absent evidence to the contrary, we have to assume they are > the same author and that the EX--which very explicitly acknowledges that > RFP cannot exist in the location marked by the FL counter--is meant to > demonstrate the rule as written and therefore should be used to understand > what the poorly phrased and incorrectly punctuated sentence means. > The original ASL rules were much more explicit on this subject: "It [the MG] may place a Fire Lan Residual FP counter in one hex which is in its LOS, Normal Range and in its Hex Grain on the same level or along a Continuous Slope." (A9.22, 1st edition, 1985). One exception was allowed (making the rules match the EX): "A Fire Lane may also be declared along a hexspine of the MG hex to the hex containing the Fire Lane Residual FP counter or in the case of a Fire Lane which ends along a hexside on an Alternate Hex Grain, in the very next hex even though the Fire Lane does not affect that hex." (A9.221, 1st edition, 1985). As far as I can tell, the consistency (or at least the unambiguity) of this particular aspect of the FL rules was broken either in the 1987 or the 1992 update of the A17 and A18 pages. Regards, Mattias From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Wed Mar 22 15:10:03 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:10:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Bruce Bakken wrote: > Let me clarify. When a coordinating conjunction is used to join two independent clauses, a comma is placed before the conjunction. Agreed. > I did not > mean to imply that *only* (", and") is called a coordinating conjunction. Well ", and" is not a coordinating conjunction at all. :-) "and" is a coordinating conjunction, and here it appears with a comma, perhaps signalling its intended use (though in this case not, as the comma should not be there.) > Placing a comma before "and", such as in (", and") suggests that it is joining two independent clauses, but in this case it is not. Agreed. > It is joining one independent clause with one dependent clause. No, it is not. It is joining two dependent, prepositional phrases. > Therefore the use of the comma is incorrect. I certainly agree there. > You only use the comma when two independent clauses > are involved. Not entirely correct. It is also used when using a serial comma, though that is not the case here. >Therefore, it is made correct by removing the comma. Agreed wholeheartedly. The first comma should not be there. > Well, it is in fact a complete sentence. Again, it *could* be, but in this case it is not, and your treating it as if it were, I submit, causes you to misread the sentence. > You could stop right there and > know that you must resolve Residual FP in the counter's Location. Just like that. By omitting the remainder of the sentence, including its restricive phrase, you change the meaning of the sentence. > By the way, the comma is correctly placed before this restrictive clause. No, it is not. Such a comma is only legtimate if it sets off a nonrestrictive clause. That is basic punctuation. See Strunk and White, p.4.; Gregg Ref. Manual, section 122; or the NYPL Writer's Guide, p.254. > But what it *is* restricting is where the counter can be placed. It can only be placed in a Location in Normal Range and LOS, etc. No, that is not (IMO) correct. It is not restricting where the counter can be placed. It is limiting where the RFP is applied; there's a big difference. >>"I can't help it that the original writers of the ASLRB used bad >> grammar." >>I agree, but we have to work with the fact that they did. > But how can we know the true intent if we accept the bad grammar? Like Talmudic rabbis or CSI detectives :-) we have to divinie it from the remaining evidence. We're not *accepting* the bad grammar; we're accepting that they _used_ bad grammar. That *is* a fact--I do not beleive anyone is disputing it. And we can't just ignore it. > Communication mostly depends upon correct grammar. Yes, but in this case, communication failed, somewhat. We can either throw up our hands and say "We have *NO* idea what they meant" or we can try to figure out. :-) The first option, while certainly tempting :-) will not allow us to play the game. > "Working with it" means "correcting it", IMO. Well, to me it means "trying to understand it and hoping that one day MMP will reissue the page without the effing commas." > I'm not sure we can assume either way about who > wrote what, nor should we be required to make that assumption absent evidence to the contrary. Well, your statement assumed that the writer of the EX was *not* the writer of the rule and was instead someone who, like us, had to read the rule and make sense of it without being the author. I feel that the default in reading wargame rules is to assume--absent evidence to the contrary--that the author of the rules (whether an individual or a group) understood the rules and wrote them consistently. Even when I took a contrary position on the meaning of the rule, I felt very uncomfortable trying to assert that an entire EX, clearly cognisant of the issue at hand, could be said to be in error and in contradiction of the rule itself only a few inches away on the page. I have no reason to believe that the EX was inserted later by someone other than the original author, therefore I have to try to use the EX to understand the rule as written. That, after all, is the point of EXs. :-) cheers, Jan From indiabooks at optusnet.com.au Wed Mar 22 15:11:51 2006 From: indiabooks at optusnet.com.au (Indian Ink (South Asia Books)) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:11:51 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl References: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Message-ID: <001601c64e06$01280c90$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Hi Bruce..tried that..it doesn' t work..it put the overlay upside down with most of outside the board. After two hours of trail and error, the only co-ordinated i could come up that made it work are T0 T-1..(strange but is seems to work) Regards Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" Cc: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:59 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl > On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:26:17 +1100, "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" > wrote: > >>Does anyone know what are the coordinates for overlay 4 when placed on >>board >>34 on Vasl 5 > > U1-U2 > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > > From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Wed Mar 22 15:12:06 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:12:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <15965.65.222.202.26.1143064681.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <32087.198.81.129.193.1143069126.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Well, how unfortunate that someone chose to change that prior rule. It seems much clearer. Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > The original ASL rules were much more explicit on this subject: > > "It [the MG] may place a Fire Lan Residual FP counter in one hex which > is in its LOS, Normal Range and in its Hex Grain on the same level or > along a Continuous Slope." (A9.22, 1st edition, 1985). > > One exception was allowed (making the rules match the EX): "A Fire > Lane may also be declared along a hexspine of the MG hex to the hex > containing the Fire Lane Residual FP counter or in the case of a Fire > Lane which ends along a hexside on an Alternate Hex Grain, in the very > next hex even though the Fire Lane does not affect that hex." (A9.221, > 1st edition, 1985). > > As far as I can tell, the consistency (or at least the unambiguity) > of this particular aspect of the FL rules was broken either in the > 1987 or the 1992 update of the A17 and A18 pages. > > Regards, > Mattias > > From indiabooks at optusnet.com.au Wed Mar 22 15:23:02 2006 From: indiabooks at optusnet.com.au (Indian Ink (South Asia Books)) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:23:02 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl References: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Message-ID: <002301c64e07$90ce3ad0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> For the record the only co-ordinates that seem to work for overlay 4 on board 34 are T0 T-1 (strange but works). It only took me two hours of trial and error to get it to work !!! Also when you modify the terrain and turn the boards into dense jungle the roads on the overlay disappears completely instead of turning into path..that is something for the VASL guru's to work on.. Thanks Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Probst" To: "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" Cc: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:59 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl > On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:26:17 +1100, "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" > wrote: > >>Does anyone know what are the coordinates for overlay 4 when placed on >>board >>34 on Vasl 5 > > U1-U2 > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > > From hofors at lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 22 15:23:41 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 23 Mar 2006 00:23:41 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> References: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: "Jan W. S. Spoor" writes: > I have no reason to believe that the EX was inserted later by > someone other than the original author, therefore I have to try to > use the EX to understand the rule as written. That, after all, is > the point of EXs. :-) > The EX is older (1985) than the current version of the rule (1987 or 1992). My guess would be that this change (assuming you accept the Bruces arguments, and consider it a change) was unintentional. If not, why not update the EX? Regards, Mattias From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Wed Mar 22 15:24:52 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan W. S. Spoor) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:24:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <32661.198.81.129.193.1143069892.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > The EX is older (1985) than the current version of the rule (1987 or > 1992). My guess would be that this change (assuming you accept the > Bruces arguments, and consider it a change) was unintentional. If not, > why not update the EX? Agreed. Jan From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 22 15:34:47 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:34:47 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <15965.65.222.202.26.1143064681.squirrel@webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <015f01c64e09$38bb29a0$7779de18@klis.com> Hello, gentlemen. > Bruce Bakken wrote: > > > There. Have I clearly stated my position now? Yes, you have, Bruce. However, I'm going to suggest an alternative solution to our conundrum below. Jan wrote: > You have and went on to make another logical argument. Might I suggest, everyone, that you are looking at the wrong rule for an answer? A9.22 is the rule for the normal type of hex grain Fire Lane. It shows the type of counter used to mark hex grain Fire Lanes (HGFL). However, A9.221 is the rule for alternate hex grain Fire Lanes. It shows another type of counter used to mark alternate hex grain Fire Lanes (AHGFL). HGFL and AHGFL counters are related, but not identical, counter types. I don't think we can assume that the rules in A9.22 on the placement of HGFL counters must necessarily also apply to the placement of AHGFL counters, which is covered in A9.221. The geometry of the hexgrid is such that, yes, HGFL Residual FP must always affect the Location in which the HGFL counter is placed. However, the same does not necessarily apply to a AHGFL counter which is, after all, a different counter type. And, due to the geometry of the hexgrid it is quite possible that a AHGFL counter may be placed in a Location that is not affected by the FP of that Fire Lane, as shown in the example. I'm not saying that you're comparing apples and oranges, but I am suggesting that you might be comparing Macintoshes and Granny Smiths. :-) Also, I think my suggestion for a resolution of this question is at least as reasonable as those based on the logical but hair-splitting grammatical arguments presented so far. David "hairs to ya" Olie From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 17:35:14 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:35:14 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <015f01c64e09$38bb29a0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: > >Might I suggest, everyone, that you are looking at the wrong rule for an >answer? A9.22 is the rule for the normal type of hex grain Fire Lane. It >shows the type of counter used to mark hex grain Fire Lanes (HGFL). > >However, A9.221 is the rule for alternate hex grain Fire Lanes. It shows >another type of counter used to mark alternate hex grain Fire Lanes >(AHGFL). > >HGFL and AHGFL counters are related, but not identical, counter types. I >don't think we can assume that the rules in A9.22 on the placement of HGFL >counters must necessarily also apply to the placement of AHGFL counters, >which is covered in A9.221. > A reasonable possibility. At one point, I think I obliquely suggested that perhaps the EX was valid for Alternate Hex Grain, if not for Fire Lanes generally. I didn't state it quite so succinctly, however. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 17:41:50 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:41:50 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: > > I did not > > mean to imply that *only* (", and") is called a coordinating >conjunction. > > > It is joining one independent clause with one dependent clause. > >No, it is not. It is joining two dependent, prepositional phrases. > Conceded. > > > You only use the comma when two independent clauses > > are involved. > >Not entirely correct. It is also used when using a serial comma, though >that is not the case here. > Conceded. > > > Well, it is in fact a complete sentence. > >Again, it *could* be, but in this case it is not, and your treating it as >if it were, I submit, causes you to misread the sentence. > I was only attempting to make a point about the phrase itself, and how the conjunction was being used. Perhaps it was a clumsy effort on my part. > > You could stop right there and > > know that you must resolve Residual FP in the counter's Location. > >Just like that. By omitting the remainder of the sentence, including its >restricive phrase, you change the meaning of the sentence. > Again, I was trying to make a point, though perhaps not using the best method. > > By the way, the comma is correctly placed before this restrictive >clause. > >No, it is not. Such a comma is only legtimate if it sets off a >nonrestrictive clause. That is basic punctuation. See Strunk and White, >p.4.; Gregg Ref. Manual, section 122; or the NYPL Writer's Guide, p.254. > > > But what it *is* restricting is where the counter can be placed. It can >only be placed in a Location in Normal Range and LOS, etc. > >No, that is not (IMO) correct. It is not restricting where the counter can >be placed. It is limiting where the RFP is applied; there's a big >difference. > Here I disagree. There is no other wording that defines where the Residual FP is applied; and I still assert that we are required to resolve Residual FP in the Location containing the counter itself. I have snipped your remaining points as conceded. They are interesting, if not directly helpful in resolving the current issue. I appreciate your input. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 17:43:54 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:43:54 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The TRUMP CARD. > >The original ASL rules were much more explicit on this subject: > >"It [the MG] may place a Fire Lan Residual FP counter in one hex which >is in its LOS, Normal Range and in its Hex Grain on the same level or >along a Continuous Slope." (A9.22, 1st edition, 1985). > >One exception was allowed (making the rules match the EX): "A Fire >Lane may also be declared along a hexspine of the MG hex to the hex >containing the Fire Lane Residual FP counter or in the case of a Fire >Lane which ends along a hexside on an Alternate Hex Grain, in the very >next hex even though the Fire Lane does not affect that hex." (A9.221, >1st edition, 1985). > >As far as I can tell, the consistency (or at least the unambiguity) >of this particular aspect of the FL rules was broken either in the >1987 or the 1992 update of the A17 and A18 pages. > A great find, Mattias. I am so glad you found this. (I should perhaps pull my First Edition out of mothballs.) I just knew that I have never played it that the Fire Lane counter could be placed out of Normal Range and LOS, and now I know why. Thanks again, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 22 17:45:02 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:45:02 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <32087.198.81.129.193.1143069126.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: > >Well, how unfortunate that someone chose to change that prior rule. It >seems much clearer. > Indeed. This provides real fodder to the "anti-revisionist" faction. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From jmmcleod at mts.net Wed Mar 22 18:01:55 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:01:55 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <005201c64e1e$0c170b20$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Bruce, Bruce, Ole and Jan ... This is one hell of thread! I mean, my brain is screaming for mercy after ploughing through all ... all ... all that you've all written ... I've a simple request to make at this point in the discussion. Just what is it that you are going on about? I realize that it has to do with Fire Lanes, but after that, the mist rolls in. Would it be possible for one of you gentlemen to post, in three or less well written and punctuated sentences, just what the gist of this debate is? Further, when a final correct answer has been arrived at, please post that answer to the List for our perusal. Now, rock on men, and please excuse my "comma placement". :) =Jim= From kevinkenneally at isot.com Wed Mar 22 18:00:51 2006 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:00:51 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <005201c64e1e$0c170b20$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> <005201c64e1e$0c170b20$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <1185.4.253.44.43.1143079251.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> No "Fire Lanes" allowed in Texas yet.... Grounds too dry and the grasslands are very suspect to a lighted match..... Am I talking about the "right" fire lane? Kevin"No BBQ since lasst year, can't you tell?" > > Bruce, Bruce, Ole and Jan ... > > This is one hell of thread! > > I mean, my brain is screaming for mercy after ploughing through all ... > all > ... all that you've all written ... > > I've a simple request to make at this point in the discussion. > > Just what is it that you are going on about? > > I realize that it has to do with Fire Lanes, but after that, the mist > rolls > in. > > Would it be possible for one of you gentlemen to post, in three or less > well > written and punctuated sentences, just what the gist of this debate is? > > Further, when a final correct answer has been arrived at, please post that > answer to > the List for our perusal. > > Now, rock on men, and please excuse my "comma placement". > > :) > > > > > > =Jim= > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 22 18:02:58 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:02:58 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: Message-ID: <01c801c64e20$08da92e0$7779de18@klis.com> Bruce wrote: > A reasonable possibility. Thank you. :-) > At one point, I think I obliquely suggested that > perhaps the EX was valid for Alternate Hex Grain, if not for Fire Lanes > generally. I didn't state it quite so succinctly, however. Yes, I remember that you did, and that's one of the things that got me thinking. David "the sweet light of reason" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 22 18:18:04 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:18:04 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: Message-ID: <01c901c64e20$08fc24a0$7779de18@klis.com> Mattias wrote: > >As far as I can tell, the consistency (or at least the unambiguity) > >of this particular aspect of the FL rules was broken either in the > >1987 or the 1992 update of the A17 and A18 pages. and Bruce replied: > A great find, Mattias. I am so glad you found this. (I should perhaps pull > my First Edition out of mothballs.) I just did. A true ASLer never throws anything away. :-) > I just knew that I have never played it that the Fire Lane counter could be > placed out of Normal Range and LOS, and now I know why. Ah, but in the original EX to A9.221, it starts by saying: "This Fire Lane does not actually reach 21J5 because the LOS is prevented from leaving hex K6 by the wall hexside which is crossed at K6-J6-K7." So all the way back in 1985 we have an example showing a FL counter being placed in a Location that is out of LOS from the firing MG, in the case of an alternate hex grain Fire Lane. I would hypothesize that the new alternate hex grain Fire Lane counters were provided along with the revised rules in CdG to help resolve the ambiguity in the rules between the two types of FL. However, the writers (Mac, probably) didn't make it very clear. But this is just a hypothesis. David "hand me that hypo" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 22 18:20:02 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:20:02 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: Message-ID: <01cf01c64e20$50aef0c0$7779de18@klis.com> Bruce wrote: > Indeed. This provides real fodder to the "anti-revisionist" faction. Can you have a faction with only one member who lives in Lebanon, MO? :-) David "Ron-baiter" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 22 18:41:07 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:41:07 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> <005201c64e1e$0c170b20$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <01ea01c64e23$4802c200$7779de18@klis.com> Jimbo wrote: > This is one hell of thread! I'm into it. Well, maybe not the "how many rules can dance on the point of a comma" bit. :-) > I mean, my brain is screaming for mercy after ploughing through all ... all > ... all that you've all written ... > > I've a simple request to make at this point in the discussion. > > Just what is it that you are going on about? > > I realize that it has to do with Fire Lanes, but after that, the mist rolls > in. To recap: Dave Gillies posted the following question on Sunday: "I want to place an alternate hex grain fire lane so that it covers enemy exit hexes. To do so, would require me to place the fire lane marker in a fictitious hex offboard. Can I still do this? In my particular situation it appears some of the fire may travel partly offboard before reaching the second exit hex (see below). Is that still ok?" "Situation: Playing ASL 21. Board configuration is: "21 20" "MMC w/HMG in 21E2 (with WA) wants to declare alternate hex grain FL that covers both 20GG5 and 20GG6 (plus everything else along the way). Is this doable?" and I replied: "Yes, I see no reason why you can't do this. There's nothing in the rules that says you can't. Basically, FL counters (unlike Resid. counters) are not used to mark any specific hex/Location of the playing area but instead to define the limits of the FL of the playing area." "Yes, this looks perfectly doable to me, and diabolically clever, if I might add. :-)" This led to objections as to the placement of FL counters, especially in regard to alternate hex grain FLs. The matter of placing such a counter slightly off-board (in the case of an alternate hex grain FL) is unresolved, because the discussion has moved to whether it's ever possible to place a FL counter out of LOS of the firing unit (taking into consideration that 6+ Hindrances do not apply to LOS restrictions as per A9.22). > Would it be possible for one of you gentlemen to post, in three or less well > written and punctuated sentences, just what the gist of this debate is? See above. I'm sure my esteemed colleagues will chime in if they feel the gist is otherwise. :-) > Further, when a final correct answer has been arrived at, please post that > answer to > the List for our perusal. I was planning to send a "Perry sez", but this discussion is too good to bring to a premature end. "Why stop now, just when I'm hating it." - Marvin > Now, rock on men, and please excuse my "comma placement". David "comma, comma, comma, come on / Yeah, yeah, yeah" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 22 20:25:23 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 00:25:23 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> <005201c64e1e$0c170b20$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <01ea01c64e23$4802c200$7779de18@klis.com> <2b8228f00603221918v7e86c63ehf8d9f7b7f7fdb178@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <022001c64e31$dcd8d640$7779de18@klis.com> Michael wrote: >I have only three words on this topic: >OH - MY - GOD! In my opinion, there is no reason to invoke the "God" hypothesis when there is a good cadre of ASLers to attempt to find a rational answer to the question. :-) >Michael "in the camp of the FL counter can be outside the FL" Rodgers >Montreal Excellent. The plans for world conquest via the ASLRB may proceed. David "I love the smell of a good ASLRB discussion. It smells like victory" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 22 21:00:00 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:00:00 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl In-Reply-To: <001601c64e06$01280c90$6992eddc@INDIANINK> References: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> <001601c64e06$01280c90$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:11:51 +1100, "Indian Ink (South Asia Books)" wrote: >Hi Bruce..tried that..it doesn' t work..it put the overlay upside down with >most of outside the board. >After two hours of trail and error, the only co-ordinated i could come up >that made it work are T0 T-1..(strange but is seems to work) It worked perfectly first time for me. Maybe our versions of the overlay and/or board file are different? I'm pretty sure I'm using the most up-to-date versions, you might want to try downloading it (them) again and see if it makes a difference. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 22 21:20:44 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:20:44 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> References: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:57:02 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >4) Assume (a pretty unlikely, I know) situation, where the FL counter is placed in LOS and within Normal Range. During the same DFF, a building is rubbled and falling rubble blocks the LOS between the MG and the FL counter. What now? >According to me, this is fine, because the condition now says that since the FL counter is not in LOS, it doesn't exert RFP any longer either. According to you, what then? Why is it "fine" according to you? It seems to me that this situation is simply undefined, as the rule does not specify when the LOS requirement kicks in. You appear to be *assuming* that it kicks in when the FL attack is about to occur, but the rule does not state as much. Of course, it doesn't state that it only applies at the time the FL is laid, either. (I would agree that your assumption does match what most people *expect*, and similarly applies in the somewhat-more-likely situation of SMOKE being placed in a FL hex after the FL has been declared. I'm merely pointing out that there doesn't seem to be an explicit rule supporting that expectation. This is probably another minor example of the "assumptions" built into the rules -- e.g., refer back to the old discussion about the fact that nowhere in the rules does it actually say that movement occurs between *adjacent* hexes.) >If anything, this shows that Bob MacNamara (who was responsible for the EX that was completely rewritten for the replacement pages that came with CdG) used the example to make it crystal clear which of the two conclusions he considered correct. If he *had* made it "crystal clear", I'd be inclined to agree with you. Unfortunately, that's obviously not the case. None of the above, regardless of how you interpret it, answers the original question: what rule permits the placement of a FL counter in an offboard hex? As far as I can tell the answer remains "none", so the answer to the original question remains "no". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 22 21:24:58 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:24:58 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <01ea01c64e23$4802c200$7779de18@klis.com> References: <4d1ddf0b6709.4421e44e@broadpark.no> <005201c64e1e$0c170b20$6327c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> <01ea01c64e23$4802c200$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:41:07 -0400, David Olie wrote: >The matter of placing such a counter slightly off-board I'm quite confident that "slightly off-board" is not a condition recognised by any ASL rule, and it doesn't clarify anything to bandy it about as if it were. A counter *is* or *is not* off-board, and the rules are quite specific about what counters get exceptions to the general "nothing leaves the board, ever" rule; FL counters are not one of those exceptions. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 22 21:35:57 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:35:57 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> References: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> Message-ID: <6ec422hedf8cjcfddpet23njrt0cd9tbg5@4ax.com> On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:10:03 -0500 (EST), "Jan W. S. Spoor" wrote: >I feel that the default in reading wargame rules is to assume--absent >evidence to the contrary--that the author of the rules (whether an >individual or a group) understood the rules and wrote them consistently. Agreed, as a general principle. >Even when I took a contrary position on the meaning of the rule, I felt >very uncomfortable trying to assert that an entire EX, clearly cognisant >of the issue at hand, could be said to be in error and in contradiction of >the rule itself only a few inches away on the page. Unfortunately for the general principle, it *has* happened in the past with other rules, which opens up the (otherwise unreasonable) possibility that it has happened here also. By the way, allow me to state that I *have* found this discussion illuminating, and specifically I now understand Ole's argument. I still don't *agree* with it, because I agree with Bruce B.'s grammatical analysis -- which in turn makes the EX wrong. By taking the reverse position, that the EX is correct and that therefore the rule must match it, requires that we must then accept that the rule itself is using not just *poor* grammar, but no grammar at all. I'm afraid that I'm not prepared to go that far. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From hofors at lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 22 23:59:36 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 23 Mar 2006 08:59:36 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "Bruce Bakken" writes: > The TRUMP CARD. > > > > > >The original ASL rules were much more explicit on this subject: > > > >"It [the MG] may place a Fire Lan Residual FP counter in one hex which > >is in its LOS, Normal Range and in its Hex Grain on the same level or > >along a Continuous Slope." (A9.22, 1st edition, 1985). > > > >One exception was allowed (making the rules match the EX): "A Fire > >Lane may also be declared along a hexspine of the MG hex to the hex > >containing the Fire Lane Residual FP counter or in the case of a Fire > >Lane which ends along a hexside on an Alternate Hex Grain, in the very > >next hex even though the Fire Lane does not affect that hex." (A9.221, > >1st edition, 1985). > > > >As far as I can tell, the consistency (or at least the unambiguity) > >of this particular aspect of the FL rules was broken either in the > >1987 or the 1992 update of the A17 and A18 pages. > > > > A great find, Mattias. I am so glad you found this. (I should > perhaps pull my First Edition out of mothballs.) > > I just knew that I have never played it that the Fire Lane counter > could be placed out of Normal Range and LOS, and now I know why. > Well, the 1985 rules did permit placing the Fire Lane counter outside the LOS and/or Normal Range if the actual FL ended on an Alternate Hexgrain hex. Which addresses the anomalies which would result otherwise (ie not being able to "reach" some hexes in some cases, such as the EX and the original question on this thread). >From an effect perspective, the 1985 rules are equivalent to the ignore-the-comma-the-EX-is-correct interpretation of the current rules. Regards, Mattias From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Mar 23 03:18:49 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:18:49 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >Well, the 1985 rules did permit placing the Fire Lane counter outside >the LOS and/or Normal Range if the actual FL ended on an Alternate >Hexgrain hex. Which addresses the anomalies which would result >otherwise (ie not being able to "reach" some hexes in some cases, such >as the EX and the original question on this thread). > >From an effect perspective, the 1985 rules are equivalent to the >ignore-the-comma-the-EX-is-correct interpretation of the current >rules. > But only and specifically for Alternate Hex Grain. But decidedly not as a general rule that Ole seems to believe applies to any and all Fire Lanes. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From jmmcleod at mts.net Thu Mar 23 04:25:30 2006 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:25:30 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: Message-ID: <003c01c64e74$e12885e0$5227c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Open question for all commabatants ... What would we like the rule to actually do for us in this case of the FL? =Jim= From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 23 06:24:33 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:24:33 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <7560da995cff.4422bdb1@broadpark.no> Hi, Jim wrote: > What would we like the rule to actually do for us in this case of > the FL? > I cannot speak for anyone else, but I'm *almost* perfectly happy with my understanding of what the rule actually does now. Not everyone agree with my view about what it does, but I’ll try to summarize my view anyway. 1) First part of A9.22 allows us to place a FL counter in any hex that is beyond the initial attack, and along an (alternate) Hex Grain. There are no LOS or Range restrictions here, which is important and very good, because there are two reasons for placing an Alternate Hex Grain FL outside LOS and/or Normal Range. 2) Second part of A9.22 tells us that if the FL counter’s Location and the other FL Locations are in LOS and Normal Range, then they exert RFP, but those that are outside Normal Range and/or out of LOS do not. Combined, those two parts of A9.22 let us place the FL counter as in the example, and it exerts RFP in those Locations that are in LOS/Normal Range only. This is something I’m completely happy with, as it allows RFP in J6 in the example, and it would do the same if J5 were out of Normal Range, but J6 within. The only thing I’m not prefectly happy with, is the original question – I would like to be able to place the FL counter just outside the mapboard to allow the FL to exert RFP to the end of the map. From snow at lasp.colorado.edu Thu Mar 23 07:28:49 2006 From: snow at lasp.colorado.edu (Marty Snow) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:28:49 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <6ec422hedf8cjcfddpet23njrt0cd9tbg5@4ax.com> References: <32037.198.81.129.193.1143069003.squirrel@www.webmail.wybesse.net> <6ec422hedf8cjcfddpet23njrt0cd9tbg5@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Bruce Probst wrote: > accept that the rule itself is using not just *poor* grammar, but no grammar > at all. I'm afraid that I'm not prepared to go that far. No grammar at all? Just a random assemblage of phonemes? I'm sure that we're all relieved that you're not prepared to go that far. Once you cross the event horizon of the void grammar, you could never come back unchanged. And none of us would want that, would we? Marty Marty Snow marty.snow at lasp.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/home.html From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Mar 23 07:34:51 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:34:51 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <7560da995cff.4422bdb1@broadpark.no> Message-ID: >I cannot speak for anyone else, but I'm *almost* perfectly happy with my >understanding of what the rule actually does now. Not everyone agree with >my view about what it does, but I’ll try to summarize my view anyway. > I find it interesting, Ole, that you have remained silent about the original wording of the 1985 text. I would think that someone as above-board as yourself would at least concede the possibility that the rule was never intended to be actually *changed*. If you feel that it was *supposed* to be changed, perhaps you could regale us with your reasons. >1) First part of A9.22 allows us to place a FL counter in any hex that is >beyond the initial attack, and along an (alternate) Hex Grain. There are no >LOS or Range restrictions here, which is important and very good, because >there are two reasons for placing an Alternate Hex Grain FL outside LOS >and/or Normal Range. > I'll grant you the Alternate Hex Grain part. That was also allowed in 1st Edition. >2) Second part of A9.22 tells us that if the FL counter’s Location and the >other FL Locations are in LOS and Normal Range, then they exert RFP, but >those that are outside Normal Range and/or out of LOS do not. > Here you are extending far more meaning than it actually states. To me, what it states is that the Fire Lane is within Normal Range and LOS. You cannot demonstrate to me that this is carte blanche to place the FL where-ever the hell you damn well please as long as it is a Hex Grain. >Combined, those two parts of A9.22 let us place the FL counter as in the >example, and it exerts RFP in those Locations that are in LOS/Normal Range >only. > Remember, the EX exists from 1st Edition, when such a case was clearly stated and allowed. And it *only* applied to Alternate Hex Grain. And really, *only* in the immediate next hex outside Normal Range. >This is something I’m completely happy with, as it allows RFP in J6 in the >example, and it would do the same if J5 were out of Normal Range, but J6 >within. > So much for Alternate Hex Grain. Up until this time, I've been pretty much on board with revising rules when such lends clarity. I had believed there were a few that still don't do a great job. But this situation has opened my eyes. Here we have a clear case of a straightforward and directly stated rule that has become convoluted Was there a good reason to change the rule? Was the intent really to change the rule, or was that just an unfortunate after-effect caused by someone reading the rule incorrectly and now arguing an incorrect interpretation? I contend that the rule is still supposed to be interpreted the way it originally was, but it got botched up during a rewrite. It gives me pause about future revisions, frankly. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Mar 23 09:39:28 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 9:39:28 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <32100026.1143135568080.JavaMail.root@fepweb03> ---- Bruce Bakken wrote: > > > > >Well, the 1985 rules did permit placing the Fire Lane counter outside > >the LOS and/or Normal Range if the actual FL ended on an Alternate > >Hexgrain hex. Which addresses the anomalies which would result > >otherwise (ie not being able to "reach" some hexes in some cases, such > >as the EX and the original question on this thread). > > > >From an effect perspective, the 1985 rules are equivalent to the > >ignore-the-comma-the-EX-is-correct interpretation of the current > >rules. > > > > But only and specifically for Alternate Hex Grain. But decidedly not as a > general rule that Ole seems to believe applies to any and all Fire Lanes. But fear not! Ole will now contact MMP/Perry with a complete rewrite of a rule that has plagued no one. In addition any rules involving the placement of any counter will also have to be changed. There will probably be the addition of a "Counter Placement" general rule so that everyone will understand where/when/how each specific counter is to be placed. But, Perry will insist that the new rules not include any commas or the word "and". From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 23 10:08:06 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 05:08:06 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <7560da995cff.4422bdb1@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:34:51 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >Was there a good reason to change the rule? Was the intent really to change >the rule, or was that just an unfortunate after-effect caused by someone >reading the rule incorrectly and now arguing an incorrect interpretation? We can't answer that, and I think that's an unfair question. TAHGC didn't issue replacement pages on a whim any more than MMP does, so obviously Mac & Co. believed that there was a good reason. However, we don't know what that reason was -- so far as I'm aware, no explanation was ever given for the existence of the new FL rules when they were included in CdG. >I contend that the rule is still supposed to be interpreted the way it >originally was, but it got botched up during a rewrite. Possibly, but I suggest an alternative: the original rules weren't giving the desired results, so they were rewritten to provide those desired results. The issues with alternate hexgrain FL etc. were probably an oversight, but that doesn't mean that they were deemed perfect in their original form -- otherwise no effort would have been made to rewrite them! >It gives me pause about future revisions, frankly. That is a cheap shot. Have you suddenly joined Mosher's "any change is bad, so we should put up with bad rules" camp? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Mar 23 10:20:27 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:20:27 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > >Was there a good reason to change the rule? Was the intent really to >change > >the rule, or was that just an unfortunate after-effect caused by someone > >reading the rule incorrectly and now arguing an incorrect interpretation? > >We can't answer that, and I think that's an unfair question. TAHGC didn't >issue replacement pages on a whim any more than MMP does, so obviously Mac >& >Co. believed that there was a good reason. However, we don't know what >that >reason was -- so far as I'm aware, no explanation was ever given for the >existence of the new FL rules when they were included in CdG. > I think it is a perfectly valid question, precisely because we do not know the reason. And because the current version is decidedly unclear. Some seem to think the current version is clear and somehow resolves something, when actually the latest version is far less clear. To me, it smacks of an attempt at word economy so that columns and pages could be kept intact in the ASLRB. And a poor word economy, at that. > >I contend that the rule is still supposed to be interpreted the way it > >originally was, but it got botched up during a rewrite. > >Possibly, but I suggest an alternative: the original rules weren't giving >the >desired results, so they were rewritten to provide those desired results. >The >issues with alternate hexgrain FL etc. were probably an oversight, but that >doesn't mean that they were deemed perfect in their original form -- >otherwise >no effort would have been made to rewrite them! > I find it difficult to see how the original wording was not giving the desired results, seeing as how clear they were. > >It gives me pause about future revisions, frankly. > >That is a cheap shot. Have you suddenly joined Mosher's "any change is >bad, >so we should put up with bad rules" camp? It is not a cheap shot. I arrived at this feeling over time, having seen for myself how some of these revisions have gone. I deliberately omitted from my statement those rules sections that I feel have not necessarily been clarified during a re-write. To have commented on those rules sections would have been a cheap shot, since they were not the subject of this current discussion. Are you sensitive about this issue for some reason? You can place me in the "bad rules should be corrected, not rewritten, and should undergo a more careful scrutiny for clarity" camp. What we appear to have here -- if Ole's interpretation is to be believed -- is not a mere correction. It would fall under the category of *rule change*. I contend the rule was never broken in the first place. So why the change? I think it is a perfectly valid question. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 23 12:45:43 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 21:45:43 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <9031a0a3464.44231707@broadpark.no> Hi, Bruce Bakken wrote: > I find it interesting, Ole, that you have remained silent about the original > wording of the 1985 text. I would think that someone as above- board as > yourself would at least concede the possibility that the rule was never > intended to be actually *changed*. If you feel that it was *supposed* to be > changed, perhaps you could regale us with your reasons. > I didn't comment on it because I don’t own the old rule. I started playing ASL in 1992 and threw away the old rule when I got CdG. I have argued all the time that the new rule allows the FL counter to be placed where it cannot exert RFP, which is exactly what the old rule allowed in a more specific way, so I certainly don’t feel that it was supposed to be changed, except in a few minor details. Remember, it is you who argue that the new rule doesn’t allow what the old allowed, and thereby argue that the rule was changed – not me. > >1) First part of A9.22 allows us to place a FL counter in any hex that is > >beyond the initial attack, and along an (alternate) Hex Grain. > >There are no LOS or Range restrictions here, which is important and very good, > >because there are two reasons for placing an Alternate Hex Grain FL > >outside LOS and/or Normal Range. > > > > I'll grant you the Alternate Hex Grain part. That was also allowed > in 1st Edition. > The rule doesn't differ between Hex Grain and Alternate Hex Grain, but there is never any reason to place the (non-alternate) Hex Grain FL counter outside LOS or Normal Range, so whether or not we agree about the latter is unimportant. > >2) Second part of A9.22 tells us that if the FL counter’s Location and the > >other FL Locations are in LOS and Normal Range, then they exert RFP, but > >those that are outside Normal Range and/or out of LOS do not. > > > > Here you are extending far more meaning than it actually states. > To me, what it states is that the Fire Lane is within Normal Range and LOS. > > You cannot demonstrate to me that this is carte blanche to place > the FL where-ever the hell you damn well please as long as it is a Hex Grain. > The carte blanche was the first part of A9.22 - you already told me you agreed to that above. I finally think I've really understood why you and I drew so different conclutions from the same text. You will surely correct me if I've misunderstood, but I'll try to show why I think your thinking is incorrect and leads to a conclution that is inconsistent with the example. First, I quote again the difficult part of A9.22, now dividing it in its three parts: 1) A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its Location 2) , and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain between that counter and the MG 3), that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning Infantry Bruce wrote about the 1st phrase: > Well, it is in fact a complete sentence. You could stop right there and > know that you must resolve Residual FP in the counter's Location. > That's where Bruce is wrong (IMHO) of course. When a sentence has a condition (in this case the third phrase), you must apply the condition before you can draw any conclutions about its meaning. Assume the sentence: Men are thieves, if they have stolen money. You cannot draw a conclution after "Men are thieves" and know that all men *must* be thieves, just as you cannot draw a conclution after A9.22's first phrase and know that all FL counter Location must exert RFP. You must read the phrase *with* its restrictional phrase before drawing any conclution. Jan Spoor said it better than me: >>The final phrase in the sentence, despite the excerable and wholly >>inappropriate comma placed before it, is not a nonrestrictive clause; >>therefore one cannot simply ignore it and assert that the portion "A Fire >>Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in its >>Location." tells one that "that the counter must exert Residual FP because >>there is no EXC given". That's like saying that one take the sentence "The >>team will win the game if they score the most points," remove the phrase >>"if they score the most points" and say that the team will win the game. > If I use Bruce’s logic on Jan’s team sentence, we get (notice that I paraphrased Bruce’s stament about the rule from above): > Well, it is in fact a complete sentence. You could stop right there and > know that the team *must* win. This logic is obviously not correct regarding the team. It is not true that the team *must* win, because it is not correct to stop before the whole sentence is completed, and the team may not score the most points. And similarily, it is incorrect logic regarding the rule: It is not true that the FL counter *must* exert RFP, because the FL counter may be out of LOS/Normal Range. > Remember, the EX exists from 1st Edition, when such a case was > clearly stated and allowed. And it *only* applied to Alternate Hex Grain. > And really, *only* in the immediate next hex outside Normal Range. > To say that the EX exists from 1st Edition is a truth with some modification, as both the illutration and the text was changed quite a bit. But it is true that what remains from the 1st edition EX is that the FL counter is placed one hex beyond LOS. > >This is something I’m completely happy with, as it allows RFP in J6 in the > >example, and it would do the same if J5 were out of Normal Range, but J6 > >within. > > Then we at least (mostly) agree on how we wish the rule to work. That’s a good thing. The new rule also allows one additional situation where placement out of LOS can be useful: Look at the example and assume that the J5 building was instead OG. In this case, there is LOS along the alternate hex grain to hexes I5, H3 etc. so it makes sense (at least to me) that the FL can affect those hexes that are both in LOS, within Normal Range and along the chosen Alternate Hex Grain. And yet, the old rule allowed the FL counter to be placed no further back than J5, thereby not allowing the FL to affect those other hexes. With the new rules, the FL counter can be placed in H2, thereby exerting RFP in I5 and H3 – but not in H2, I4 and J5 which are all along the Alternate Hex Grain, but not in LOS. This is IMHO a desired result. Not so important that I would rewrite the entire rule for it, but maybe Mac thought that was desireable since he was going to issue replacement pages anyway. But the bottom line is, that my interpretation is consistent with the example (although is not depending on it), and allows the exceptions from 1st ed that you agree with, while your interpretation is inconsitent with the example and removes the exceptions from 1st ed that we all agree should still be there. From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 23 12:51:26 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 21:51:26 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <90f400c73dde.4423185e@broadpark.no> Hi, Tate Rogers chime in, in his normal constructive manner: > Ole will now contact MMP/Perry with a complete rewrite of a rule > that has plagued no one. > In addition any rules involving the > placement of any counter will also have to be changed. There will > probably be the addition of a "Counter Placement" general rule so > that everyone will understand where/when/how each specific counter > is to be placed. But, Perry will insist that the new rules not > include any commas or the word "and". > Why should I do this? My entire effort in this thread has been to explain that the written rule is fine, and consistent with the example. I understand that it is unfortunately ambigious since people like the joint Bruces interprete it differently. But fortunately, there is an example which shows us which of the two interpretations that are the correct one. There are many examples in the book that clarifies otherwise ambigious rules, and I have no intention of changing any of them since they are clarified by their examples. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Thu Mar 23 13:57:51 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:57:51 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <9031a0a3464.44231707@broadpark.no> Message-ID: > >Remember, it is you who argue that the new rule doesn’t allow what the old >allowed, and thereby argue that the rule was changed – not me. > The old rule clearly stated that the counter had to be placed in a Location both in Normal Range and LOS, with the exception of an Alternate Hex Grain, in which case it could be placed in the next (out of range) Location. Insofar as it is argued that one can place a normal FL counter outside of Normal Range and LOS under the new rule (here I am not talking about Alternate Hex Grain), then the rule would have to have changed. Because the old rule explicitly required it. The new rule (according to you) does not require it. > > >The rule doesn't differ between Hex Grain and Alternate Hex Grain, but >there is never any reason to place the (non-alternate) Hex Grain FL counter >outside LOS or Normal Range, so whether or not we agree about the latter is >unimportant. > In your opinion, the current rule does not distinguish between Hex Grain and Alternate Hex Grain. In the old rule, there was a clear distinction made. An obvious and unarguable distinction. > >First, I quote again the difficult part of A9.22, now dividing it in its >three parts: > >1) A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of Residual FP in >its Location >2) , and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex Grain >between that counter and the MG >3), that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its manning >Infantry > >Bruce wrote about the 1st phrase: > > > Well, it is in fact a complete sentence. You could stop right there >and > > know that you must resolve Residual FP in the counter's Location. > > >That's where Bruce is wrong (IMHO) of course. When a sentence has a >condition (in this case the third phrase), you must apply the condition >before you can draw any conclutions about its meaning. > Listen dude, it is a complete sentence. It stands alone. I was demonstrating a grammatical point, and to continue arguing on this point is fruitless. With regard to the condition you mention, in the original rule it was clearly stated. In the current rule it is not so clearly stated; it is so poorly stated in fact that it has drawn you to conclude that it is an "if" condition. In my interpretation, I have applied the condition by concluding that the counter *must* be placed in Normal Range and LOS. You have applied the conditon by concluding that it is resolved *if* in Normal Range and LOS. Those are two very different distinctions. Grammatically speaking, I'm not at all sure how you can reach the conclusion that you have. >Assume the sentence: Men are thieves, if they have stolen money. You cannot >draw a conclution after "Men are thieves" and know that all men *must* be >thieves, just as you cannot draw a conclution after A9.22's first phrase >and know that all FL counter Location must exert RFP. > >You must read the phrase *with* its restrictional phrase before drawing any >conclution. > I was just trying to make a grammatical point! Not a rules argument! My rules argument comes with my conclusion with the restrictive phrase. We conclude differently. You are wrong. I am right. :-) > >This logic is obviously not correct regarding the team. It is not true that >the team *must* win, because it is not correct to stop before the whole >sentence is completed, and the team may not score the most points. And >similarily, it is incorrect logic regarding the rule: It is not true that >the FL counter *must* exert RFP, because the FL counter may be out of >LOS/Normal Range. > It may not be out of Normal Range and LOS, because the restrictive clause requires it to be in Normal Range and LOS. Do you understand that we are only reaching different conclusions based on the restrictive phrase? I am not ignoring the restriction. I am merely concluding differently. My attempt at grammatical deconstruction was evidently clumsy. >To say that the EX exists from 1st Edition is a truth with some >modification, as both the illutration and the text was changed quite a bit. How do you know that it was changed quite a bit if you no longer own the 1st Edition? Perhaps I shall dig it out and see if that is true. Perhaps someone who has it handy can make a comparison and summarize how the EX was made different in the 2nd Edition. But it is true that what remains from the 1st edition EX is that the FL counter is placed one hex beyond LOS. > Yes. For an Alternate Grain Hex. The 1st Edition explicitly allowed that. The 2nd Edition still shows the EX, but inexplicably removed the very clear textual description of its application. Now we have text that means something and still shows the same example. The clear description is gone. > > >This is something I’m completely happy with, as it allows RFP in J6 in >the > > >example, and it would do the same if J5 were out of Normal Range, but >J6 > > >within. > > > >Then we at least (mostly) agree on how we wish the rule to work. That’s a >good thing. You are commenting here on Jan's reply, I believe, and not mine. > >This is IMHO a desired result. Not so important that I would rewrite the >entire rule for it, but maybe Mac thought that was desireable since he was >going to issue replacement pages anyway. > > I really do wish you would avoid speculation on what Mac had in mind. >But the bottom line is, that my interpretation is consistent with the >example (although is not depending on it), and allows the exceptions from >1st ed that you agree with, while your interpretation is inconsitent with >the example and removes the exceptions from 1st ed that we all agree should >still be there. > You interpretation extends what was originally a very specific and explicit example. In 1st Edition we had the case where you could only place the counter in an Alternate Hex Grain Location that is one hex beyond the Normal Range/LOS. Now we have a situation whereby you feel we can extend that allowance to each and every Fire Lane of every kind. Originally that was not the case. My interpretation is consistent with the 1st Edition of the rule. The 2nd Edition is far less clear, although I still (if left to my own devices) would have interpreted it the same way. The only concession I will make on this issue is that I can see that Alternate Hex Grains should allow for the counter to be placed beyond Normal Range/LOS. This is so the mechanism can actually work, based on the hexspine requirement and that some MG have odd number ranges. This was allowed in 1st Edition, and should be allowed in 2nd Edition. But I cannot extend this to a normal Fire Lane. It was not that way to begin with, I believe it was not intended to be that way now, and I believe that in the process or revision a strange possibility was created owing entirely to poor writing. That's as far as we're going to get on this, Ole. I really can't elaborate any further without recycling some variation of something I've already said. I believe you are making a huge error in extending the ability of Fire Lane counters to all cases, when it really should (and was only intended originally) to apply to Alternate Hex Grain. And if the rule was *supposed* to be changed (something we can never know), I have to wonder why. And I have to retch over the way in which it was handled. Regards, Bruce Bakken > > _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 23 20:33:06 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 15:33:06 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <9031a0a3464.44231707@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:57:51 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >I really do wish you would avoid speculation on what Mac had in mind. Now come on! That's hardly fair, since you were just asking "why did they do it?" Ole offers a possible explanation and you diss him for it! You may or may not agree with his explanation but you did *request* one. >My interpretation is consistent with the 1st Edition of the rule. Again, to be fair, that's hardly relevant to anything. Frankly, I don't care what the old rules said, or how clear they may or may not have been. There is only one set of rules, the ones under our noses right now, and it is those that we must deal with. >The 2nd Edition is far less clear This remains true. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 23 21:17:36 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:17:36 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:20:27 -0500, "Bruce Bakken" wrote: >I find it difficult to see how the original wording was not giving the >desired results, seeing as how clear they were. Since we don't actually know what those "desired results" were, the fact that the rule seemed "clear" is irrelevant. A rule can easily be perfectly clear and yet yield unintended results -- and that's particularly unsurprising in the case of the v1.0 rules, which although they had been playtested for some period of time (I don't know how long, or by how many people) had not been *stress-tested* by several years of active play by thousands of players trying many hundreds (at least) of different scenarios, many of whom had to come to the rules "cold" without prior experience or any grognards to assist them. (Frankly, it's a wonder that the v1.0 rules had *any* rules that didn't need errata!) >It is not a cheap shot. Obviously I disagree. >Are you sensitive about this issue for some reason? You think? I can't imagine why. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Mar 24 04:06:52 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 13:06:52 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Bakken and I continue the discussion... I wrote: > >Remember, it is you who argue that the new rule doesn?t allow > >what the old > >allowed, and thereby argue that the rule was changed - not me. > > > > The old rule clearly stated that the counter had to be placed in a > Location both in Normal Range and LOS, with the exception of an Alternate > Hex Grain, in which case it could be placed in the next (out of range) Location. > Agree, and I my understanding is that the new rule is a generalization of this, that has *almost* the same effect. > Insofar as it is argued that one can place a normal FL counter outside of > Normal Range and LOS under the new rule (here I am not talking about > Alternate Hex Grain), then the rule would have to have changed. > Because the old rule explicitly required it. The new rule (according to you) > does not require it. > You?re right, in the sense that the old rule prohibited it along a Hex Grain while the new allows it. However the gameplay *effect* is exactly the same, as the new rule tells us that the Locations that are out of LOS/Normal Range don?t exert RFP. > In your opinion, the current rule does not distinguish between Hex > Grain and Alternate Hex Grain. > That?s right, and I?m not aware that anyone have pointed to such a distinction in the rule either. > In the old rule, there was a clear distinction made. An obvious > and unarguable distinction. > Agreed. > >First, I quote again the difficult part of A9.22, now dividing it > >in its three parts: > > > >1) A Fire Lane Residual FP counter exerts a unique form of > >Residual FP in its Location > >2) , and in every same-level (B.5) Location of the Fire Lane Hex > >Grain between that counter and the MG > >3), that is within the MG's Normal Range and in the LOS of its > >manning Infantry > > ... > >That's where Bruce is wrong (IMHO) of course. When a sentence has > > condition (in this case the third phrase), you must apply the > >condition before you can draw any conclutions about its meaning. > > > > Listen dude, it is a complete sentence. It stands alone. > Nope, that?s where you are wrong. Complete sentences end with a period. This one doesn?t, because there is a conditional phrase that modifies it. *If* you were right here that it is a complete sentence that stands alone, then it would have ended with a period, and the phrase 3 restriction would not apply to it at all. It seems to me like you?re arguing that the first phrase is a complete sentence that stands alone, *and* a phrase that is restricted by the phrase 3 condition - at the same time. That?s like arguing that a glass is half full and full at the same time - it?s a logical impossibility. > With regard to the condition you mention, in the original rule it > was clearly stated. > > In the current rule it is not so clearly stated; it is so poorly stated in > fact that it has drawn you to conclude that it is an "if" > condition. In my interpretation, I have applied the condition by concluding that > the counter *must* be placed in Normal Range and LOS. You have applied the > conditon by concluding that it is resolved *if* in Normal Range and LOS. > Those are two very different distinctions. > Agreed, but fortunately, the example tells us which one that is correct :-) > Grammatically speaking, I'm not at all sure how you can reach the > conclusion that you have. > And logically speaking, I?m just as unsure how you can reach your conclusion... > >Assume the sentence: Men are thieves, if they have stolen money. > >You cannot draw a conclution after "Men are thieves" and know that all men > >*must* be thieves, just as you cannot draw a conclution after A9.22's first > >phrase and know that all FL counter Location must exert RFP. > > > >You must read the phrase *with* its restrictional phrase before > >drawing any conclution. > > I was just trying to make a grammatical point! Not a rules argument! > I must admit that I?m not too interested in the grammatical point, I?m interested in the rules argument, and the logic used to understand the rule. I believe you use the same logic in the rule as one who stops after "Men are thieves" and draws a conclution then. > Do you understand that we are only reaching different conclusions based on > the restrictive phrase? I am not ignoring the restriction. I am merely > concluding differently. > Yes, I understand that. And I also believe your conlusions is incorrect because it uses the same logic as the one that would conclude that the team would always have to score the most points or conclude that all men must steal money. I wish you would answer to my comparision of the logic you use with the faulty logic in those two cases, as I believe they?re mostly the same. > >To say that the EX exists from 1st Edition is a truth with some > >modification, as both the illutration and the text was changed > >quite a bit. > > How do you know that it was changed quite a bit if you no longer > own the 1st Edition? > Because I remember what the main reason for the replacement page was. It was to change the FL along an alternate Hex Grain so that the RFP was placed in one of the two hexes along a hexspine instead of being divided evenly between the two. The old example must have shown 1 FP each in J6 and K6 instead of 2 FP in one of them. > Perhaps I shall dig it out and see if that is true. Perhaps > someone who has it handy can make a comparison and summarize how > the EX was made different in the 2nd Edition. > My guess from how I understand the old rule worked, is that the old example would show 2 FP each in K8/L7 and 1 FP each in J6/K7 all with the same color, but otherwise be the same. The example text would be changed similarily and of course not have anything about choosing either hex grain. > In 1st Edition we had the case where you could only place the counter in an > Alternate Hex Grain Location that is one hex beyond the Normal Range/LOS. > Now we have a situation whereby you feel we can extend that allowance to > each and every Fire Lane of every kind. Originally that was not > the case. > I agree. > My interpretation is consistent with the 1st Edition of the rule. > Not for Alternate Hex Grains, since you argue that the FL counter *must* be in LOS and Normal Range... > The 2nd Edition is far less clear, although I still (if left to my own > devices) would have interpreted it the same way. > Now I don?t understand anything. Are you now admitting that the 2nd ed rules can be interpreted to allow the FL counter outside LOS/Normal Range? If so, then I am quite happy. If that's not what you're saying, then how can your interpretation of the 2nd ed be interpreted according to the 1st edition that explicitely allowed this (in some specific cases)? > The only concession I will make on this issue is that I can see that > Alternate Hex Grains should allow for the counter to be placed beyond Normal > Range/LOS. This is so the mechanism can actually work, based on the > hexspine requirement and that some MG have odd number ranges. This was > allowed in 1st Edition, and should be allowed in 2nd Edition. > Good. We agree about that then. > But I cannot extend this to a normal Fire Lane. It was not that way to > begin with, I believe it was not intended to be that way now, and > I believe that in the process or revision a strange possibility was created > owing entirely to poor writing. > That?s possible, but anyway, I have tried to make it completely clear that although I believe the current rules allow this, there is absolutely no game play effect of doing this, and therefor a hypothetical issue that has noe use. It really doesn?t matter to me whether my opponent can or does place his FL counter along a Hex Grain one hex beyond Normal Range, since that FL has effect only inside NL. If it is better to place it one hex back due to counter density, then good, but we must both be aware that the last hex is outside Normal Range and therefore has no effect, so normally he will place it in its most intuitive spot: In the last hex it has effect. > That's as far as we're going to get on this, Ole. I really can't > elaborate any further without recycling some variation of something I've > already said. That may be true. I still wish you could elaborate about the similarities between the logic you used to arrive at your conclusion, and the faulty logic that was used to conclude that the team must always score the most points as in Jan Spoor?s example. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Fri Mar 24 05:36:19 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:36:19 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Speaking for myself, I'm a little burned out by this subject... So for that reason, I'm not going to carry on the discussion. Not that I haven't enjoyed it, mind you. In a perverse sort of way... :-) Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From keith.dalton at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 12:29:55 2006 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 15:29:55 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Odds and Ends from Brian Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00603241229v3c910cc2n828b66667c8fe58e@mail.gmail.com> >From Brian on Consim, an update on things ASL: ***** PARATROOPER We feel that with the release of the ASL Starter Kits the reason for Paratrooper is gone. So we have decided not to reprint Paratrooper once it is out of print, which is essentially now. Board 24 will be made available in the new Starter Kit style in Mark Pitcavage's scenario pack (due on P# sometime soon). We are not sure what to do with the scenarios at this time, but will keep you informed once a decision has been made. PARTISAN Armies of Oblivion has made Partisan obsolete. There are still some fine elements in the module -- mounted maps 10 and 32, some scenarios, and a sheet of Axis Minor 1/2" counters (you can never have too many!). We will not be reprinting Partisan. The maps will be made available in Starter Kit format in some other future product. See above for scenario decisions. Until this module is gone, we have one pallet remaining, it will be $15. You can ORDER PARTISAN HERE: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/modules.php ASL Starter Kit #1 ASL Starter Kit #1 is OUT OF PRINT yet again! We will be reprinting it along with ASL Starter Kit #3, so expect it to be available again by/around June of 2006. Until then, ASL Starter Kit #2 is available with plenty of new scenarios to keep you busy until #1 (and #3) are available again. ASL 20th Anniversary T-shirts XL ASL 20th Anniversary Tee-Shirts BACK! We had some more made up, they're back due to the demand. Check out our XL ASL Tee Shirts here: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/ASL/prodasltee.php We'll have a picture of them early next week. MOUNTED BOARD SALE ASL Mounted Mapboard Close Outs. Y'all know we're not doing mounted ASL mapboards anymore, and something has to happen with them before we just dump the remaining stock in the landfill. So, as we bring back cases from the warehouse, we'll add them to our MOUNTED MAP CLOSE OUT SALE PAGE at http://www.multimanpublishing.com/sale/aslboards.php. These are first come, first served, as is, all sales final, once gone they're gone, never to be reprinted on mounted boards again, and no we don't know how many of each we have and won't be posting a daily countdown. Sorry. ***** An aside: I must be rubbing off on Brian, because he used "y'all" in a sentence. ;-) Have a good weekend everyone. Keith MMP From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Fri Mar 24 14:44:14 2006 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 23:44:14 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Selling Critical Hit ASL Ninety-Six pack Message-ID: <15880863.1143240254460.JavaMail.root@webmail03> Hello guys I?m selling this scenarios pack. It contains ten scenarios designed and playtested by Paddington Bear?s guys. Make your offer. Contact me at jdargaiz at yahoo.es Jesus From jdargaiz at reterioja.net Fri Mar 24 14:46:11 2006 From: jdargaiz at reterioja.net (Jesus D. Argaiz) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 23:46:11 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Selling Critical Hit ASL Ninety-Six pack Message-ID: <22659075.1143240371008.JavaMail.root@webmail03> Hello guys I?m selling this scenarios pack. It contains ten scenarios designed and playtested by Paddington Bear?s guys. Make your offer. Contact me at jdargaiz at yahoo.es Jesus From rjmosher at direcway.com Fri Mar 24 15:00:04 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 17:00:04 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060324165859.01c397d0@direcway.com> At 12:20 PM 3/23/2006, Bruce Bakken wrote: >You can place me in the "bad rules should be corrected, not >rewritten, and should undergo a more careful scrutiny for clarity" camp. Chuckle, not good enuf for these characters......all change is good and the more changes the better gang. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From gr27134 at charter.net Sat Mar 25 09:41:42 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:41:42 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Bruce Bakken > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:45 PM > To: jan.spoor at wybesse.net; hofors at lysator.liu.se > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question > > > > > > >Well, how unfortunate that someone chose to change that prior rule. It > >seems much clearer. > > > > Indeed. This provides real fodder to the "anti-revisionist" faction. My thoughts exactly...and how many years (since the FL rules were changed) did it take to find this little conundrum? How many years do we go before we discover that the new and "improved" PM rules maybe aren't just Ooooo so "improved"? Probably several since PM rules just aren't used that much. Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From frango1000 at sbcglobal.net Sun Mar 26 07:07:16 2006 From: frango1000 at sbcglobal.net (David Goldman) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 09:07:16 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Last Call for the ASL OPEN Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20060326090025.03b36860@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> It's a great year for the OPEN. 50 pre-paid, 8 more reserved a spot. A bunch of regulars haven't responded yet. Anyone know if any of the following are coming: Jim Cmelak Kurt Kurtz Jack Murphy Bill Sanders Jim Serafin Don Torrenga Mike Zeimentz See you all Friday. David Goldman From hofors at lysator.liu.se Sun Mar 26 07:32:48 2006 From: hofors at lysator.liu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mattias_R=F6nnblom?=) Date: 26 Mar 2006 17:32:48 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "Tate Rogers" writes: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net > > [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of Bruce Bakken > > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:45 PM > > To: jan.spoor at wybesse.net; hofors at lysator.liu.se > > Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net > > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question > > > > > > > > > > > >Well, how unfortunate that someone chose to change that prior rule. It > > >seems much clearer. > > > > > > > Indeed. This provides real fodder to the "anti-revisionist" faction. > > My thoughts exactly...and how many years (since the FL rules were changed) > did it take to find this little conundrum? How many years do we go before we > discover that the new and "improved" PM rules maybe aren't just Ooooo so > "improved"? Probably several since PM rules just aren't used that much. > To be fair, you should consider the fire lane rules as a whole, and not only the aspect discussed in this thread. Would you rather play with the 1985 version of the FL rules? Or even the whole rule book? Regards, Mattias From tompygo at comcast.net Sun Mar 26 07:39:52 2006 From: tompygo at comcast.net (Jeff Thompson) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 09:39:52 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Last Call for the ASL OPEN In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060326090025.03b36860@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20060326090025.03b36860@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200603260939.52361.tompygo@comcast.net> David, Sorry for not responding. My home network was off for a week. I can meet any day next week. Give me a call at the office 312 985 2464 and we can set up a time. Thanks, Jeff On Sunday 26 March 2006 09:07 am, David Goldman wrote: > It's a great year for the OPEN. > > 50 pre-paid, 8 more reserved a spot. > > A bunch of regulars haven't responded yet. Anyone know if any of the > following are coming: > > Jim Cmelak > > Kurt Kurtz > > Jack Murphy > > Bill Sanders > > Jim Serafin > > Don Torrenga > > Mike Zeimentz > > > See you all Friday. > > David Goldman > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 gr27134 at charter.net Mon Mar 27 06:27:30 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 6:27:30 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <7728686.1143469650613.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> ---- "Mattias R?nnblom" wrote: > > To be fair... What? Hey, if you want "to be fair" go to the "wushies are us forum". This is the ASLML..."fair" has absolutely nothing to do with it. ;-) > ...you should consider the fire lane rules as a whole, and > not only the aspect discussed in this thread. Would you rather play > with the 1985 version of the FL rules? Or even the whole rule book? Doesn't matter...this still shines as an example of "unintended consequences" of change. It also shines as an example of change without regard to original intent. IOW, changing the ASLRB to match what we "think" it ought to be many years later. Also, seeing as the new PM/Impulse rules have had LIMITED playtest there is no way that anyone can claim that there might not be worse situational/specific conundrums for those rules down the road. Only time will tell (EX: again, how many years did it take for this FL counter question to show up). Bottom line, changing the rules for PM didn't make them better...just different. The "better" being a wholly subjective view. From kwakelee at myeastern.com Mon Mar 27 11:04:19 2006 From: kwakelee at myeastern.com (Kieth Wakelee) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:04:19 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Overlay 4 on Vasl In-Reply-To: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> References: <01b201c64d9b$0e41a2d0$6992eddc@INDIANINK> Message-ID: <44283733.8030805@myeastern.com> I just tried this with VASL 5.2 and the coordinates that work for me were U1-V1. I did not get either the T0-T1 nor the U1-U2 Kieth Indian Ink (South Asia Books) wrote: >Does anyone know what are the coordinates for overlay 4 when placed on board >34 on Vasl 5 > >I can't seem to be able to match the hexes.. > >Thank you in advance >Joe > > > >_______________________________________________ >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 daveolie at eastlink.ca Mon Mar 27 20:31:41 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: Message-ID: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> Bruce wrote: > Speaking for myself, I'm a little burned out by this subject... Fair enough. It's been a bit of a ride. > So for that reason, I'm not going to carry on the discussion. Not that I > haven't enjoyed it, mind you. In a perverse sort of way... But we still haven't answered the question asked by David Gillies in the first place. I believe we mostly agree at this point that an alternate hex grain Fire Lane (AHGFL) can be placed in such a way that the counter is placed in a Location that is out of the LOS of the firing MG. I think we also agree that everything "offboard" is out of LOS from the playing area, as per A2.51. But Dave's question remains. Is it possible to create an AHGFL in such a way that the AGHFL counter would have to be placed (by strict accordance with the rules) in a Location that is one hex offboard? Specifically, as per his example, a AHGFL from 21E2 that would affect both 20GG5 *and* GG6 (as per the board configuration for ASL 21)? I say yes. Comments? David "the weekend was much too quiet" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Mar 27 22:18:37 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:18:37 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> References: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:31:41 -0400, David Olie wrote: >But we still haven't answered the question asked by David Gillies in the >first place. We haven't? This makes the third time *I've* answered it, by my count. I'm pretty sure that Bruce B. and Ole answered it too. >I believe we mostly agree at this point that an alternate hex grain Fire >Lane (AHGFL) can be placed in such a way that the counter is placed in a >Location that is out of the LOS of the firing MG. Perhaps, but irrelevant. >I think we also agree that everything "offboard" is out of LOS from the >playing area, as per A2.51. Never under dispute. >But Dave's question remains. Is it possible to create an AHGFL in such a >way that the AGHFL counter would have to be placed (by strict accordance >with the rules) in a Location that is one hex offboard? Specifically, as >per his example, a AHGFL from 21E2 that would affect both 20GG5 *and* GG6 >(as per the board configuration for ASL 21)? No. Again. >I say yes. Comments? COWTRA. For the answer to be "yes", you need to find a rule that says you can place a FL counter in an offboard hex. (Quite aside from the issue of whether you can place a FL counter in a hex that it can't attack, which under the current language of the rule is clearly "no" also, but that's actually not important in this instance.) The only counters that may be placed in offboard hexes are those specifically permitted by the rules: reinforcements on their turn of entry, wandering Snipers, etc. You can *wish* that such a rule existed. I daresay that nobody would strenuously object if such a rule were to be added. But it doesn't exist at this point in time, so the answer can only be "no". ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From cjsloki at comcast.net Tue Mar 28 00:10:54 2006 From: cjsloki at comcast.net (cjs) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:10:54 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASL 117 Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c6523f$23a9ddb0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> Hi, I was looking over this one and noticed that the setup for the 2 tigers just says "on board:" Is there a specific setup or do we choose where they setup? Thanks, Charles From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Tue Mar 28 03:50:09 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan Spoor) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 06:50:09 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> References: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <442922F1.6080901@wybesse.net> David Olie wrote: > I believe we mostly agree at this point that an alternate hex grain Fire > Lane (AHGFL) can be placed in such a way that the counter is placed in a > Location that is out of the LOS of the firing MG. > > I think we also agree that everything "offboard" is out of LOS from the > playing area, as per A2.51. > > But Dave's question remains. Is it possible to create an AHGFL in such a > way that the AGHFL counter would have to be placed (by strict accordance > with the rules) in a Location that is one hex offboard? Specifically, as > per his example, a AHGFL from 21E2 that would affect both 20GG5 *and* GG6 > (as per the board configuration for ASL 21)? > > I say yes. Comments? I would agree. From pbelfordacm at yahoo.com Tue Mar 28 08:36:55 2006 From: pbelfordacm at yahoo.com (Pete Belford) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 08:36:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] KE British rare vehicles pack Message-ID: <20060328163655.95953.qmail@web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hey anyone have this? What scenarios is this module supposed to contain? All I have is BRV1b and BRV1c __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dreenstra at comcast.net Tue Mar 28 08:39:16 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 16:39:16 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <032820061639.25917.442966B400026C310000653D22073007930E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> David writes: > > But Dave's question remains. Is it possible to create an AHGFL in such a > way that the AGHFL counter would have to be placed (by strict accordance > with the rules) in a Location that is one hex offboard? Specifically, as > per his example, a AHGFL from 21E2 that would affect both 20GG5 *and* GG6 > (as per the board configuration for ASL 21)? > > I say yes. Comments? I agree, I would allow it if I was sitting across the table from Dave G (and that's my best rule of thumb when faced with such rule conundrums). To expect the FL rules to specifically address the issue is asking a bit much, IMHO. To not allow it simply because the hex for the FL counter to be placed in lies offboard seems a little too gamey to me. HtH, Dave Reenstra > > David "the weekend was much too quiet" Olie > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Mar 28 08:41:22 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:41:22 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <442922F1.6080901@wybesse.net> References: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> <442922F1.6080901@wybesse.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060328104041.01c389b8@direcway.com> At 05:50 AM 3/28/2006, Jan Spoor wrote: > > I say yes. Comments? > >I would agree. Also, agree...seems to be the intent of the rule..... For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 28 09:56:15 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 04:56:15 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL 117 Question In-Reply-To: <000001c6523f$23a9ddb0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> References: <000001c6523f$23a9ddb0$0b00a8c0@DC1R2241> Message-ID: <85ui229auhqb4bkp5qj6qohjp6f1tcbeic@4ax.com> On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:10:54 -0800, "cjs" wrote: >I was looking over this one and noticed that the setup for the 2 tigers just >says "on board:" Is there a specific setup or do we choose where they setup? You can set them up anywhere. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 28 10:51:14 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:51:14 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060328104041.01c389b8@direcway.com> Message-ID: Hi, Ron Mosher wrote: > Also, agree...seems to be the intent of the rule..... > I just *had* to quite Ron's post, just to for once try out how it feels to say "I agree" to one of his posts, so here it goes: I agree too :-) To me, it seems pretty clear that the actual FL counter's hex is nothing more than a targeting hex (at least for Alternate Hex Grains), so there's not much reason to not allow the off-board placement. There's no reason that the bullets should stop one hex short of the board edge and well inside Normal Range just because there was no on-board hex that included this last hex. As for actual rules, I tend to agree with Bruce B and P that A2 severly limits the possibility by saying that offboard hexes only exists for offboard movement. But the ASLRB doesn't shows that this is not really true, by later using the offboard hexes for Snipers, OBA (SR can land offboard), Paratroops, Gliders and surely a lot of other rules, so A2 is just not as limiting as it may seem at first glance. So I would allow it if my opponent wanted to place such a FL, but I would also respect an opponent who wanted to read A2 literally and thereby not allow it - of course assuming that this is his normal way of reading the rules... From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Mar 28 11:08:16 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?utf-8?Q?Ole_B=C3=B8e?=) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:08:16 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <7728686.1143469650613.JavaMail.root@fepweb13> Message-ID: Hi, Mattias R?nnblom wrote: > > ...you should consider the fire lane rules as a whole, and > > not only the aspect discussed in this thread. Would you rather play > > with the 1985 version of the FL rules? Or even the whole rule book? > and Tate Rogers answered: > Doesn't matter...this still shines as an example of "unintended > consequences" of change. > More ambigiouty (is that the English spelling?) is of course an unintended consequence, but the example is clear and good, so I don't see much unitended consequences except the long discussion here :-) > It also shines as an example of change > without regard to original intent. > How do you know? Do you know Don's original intent and how much Mac regarded this when he made the change? I don't, but I'd be curious to hear what you know about this. For me that know nothing about Don and Mac's thoughts, it looks like Mac changed this specific part of the FL rules, to generalize Don's limited special rule. That seems to me to be in sync with the original intent. But I'm sure you can explain... > IOW, changing the ASLRB to > match what we "think" it ought to be many years later. > I'm happy about the '87, '89 and '92 errata pages. I think they all improved the ASLRB. But that's of course only a subjective opinion, just like your opinion that the rules should never be changed. > Also, seeing as the new PM/Impulse rules have had LIMITED > playtest there is no way that anyone can claim that there might > not be worse situational/specific conundrums for those rules down > the road. Only time will tell (EX: again, how many years did it > take for this FL counter question to show up). > I don't think you have any idea about the playtest or analysis that were behind the new Impulse Movement rules. But you're of course correct that it's impossible to prove that there are no loopholes in the new rules. It is quite plain that there are less in the new than in the old though - unless you actually liked PM teleportation. From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Mar 28 15:02:58 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:02:58 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <001201c65220$876aeac0$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: > >I think we also agree that everything "offboard" is out of LOS from the >playing area, as per A2.51. > Not only that. It is, as you state yourself, "out of the playing area". Specific provisions for playing outside of the mapboard configuration are specifically mentioned. There is no provision anywhere that I am aware for allowing a Fire Lane counter to be placed off-board. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Tue Mar 28 15:06:18 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:06:18 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >So I would allow it if my opponent wanted to place such a FL, but I would >also respect an opponent who wanted to read A2 literally and thereby not >allow it - of course assuming that this is his normal way of reading the >rules... > By "normal way of reading the rules...", do you mean "literally"? At any rate, I try to take the rules literally. With regard to this question, it is beyond even A2. There simply is no provision for playing outside of the mapboard configuration, besides those that are specifically mentioned. If an offboard hex is playable for any means, it is mentioned when required. I see no provision anywhere that allows a Fire Lane counter to be placed offboard. It's as simple as that. Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Mar 28 15:34:45 2006 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:34:45 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20060328173033.01c80aa8@direcway.com> At 05:06 PM 3/28/2006, Bruce Bakken wrote: >I see no provision anywhere that allows a Fire Lane counter to be >placed offboard. It's as simple as that. The intent from the rules are: 1. to allow FLs 2. To allow them along hex rows, and along hexspines 3. To allow them out to normal range, unless blocked. Your tortured reading(albeit, probably, technically correct) defeats these intents. The FL markers are just that markers...not be alls, end alls in their own right. For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From the.colonel at clara.co.uk Tue Mar 28 16:00:30 2006 From: the.colonel at clara.co.uk (The Colonel) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:00:30 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060328173033.01c80aa8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <009c01c652c3$cd4884a0$0200a8c0@homepc> ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Bruce Bakken" ; ; Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 12:34 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question > At 05:06 PM 3/28/2006, Bruce Bakken wrote: >>I see no provision anywhere that allows a Fire Lane counter to be >>placed offboard. It's as simple as that. > > The intent from the rules are: > > 1. to allow FLs > > 2. To allow them along hex rows, and along hexspines > > 3. To allow them out to normal range, unless blocked. > > Your tortured reading(albeit, probably, technically correct) defeats > these intents. > > The FL markers are just that markers...not be alls, end alls in their > own right. I agree with you on this one Ron. Having the bullets stop 40m from the board edge makes no sense at all to me. The rules can never cover every single eventuality and at times you have to rely on common sense. Also Ron you now agree with Ole Boe! In England we always agree with what Ole says... You Americans are slow learners but to give you some credit, you get there in the end ;-) Still no sign of AoO reaching our shores :-( Regards, the colonel > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > 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 krynndm at speakeasy.net Tue Mar 28 16:28:06 2006 From: krynndm at speakeasy.net (Tom Mueller) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:28:06 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] KE British rare vehicles pack In-Reply-To: <20060328163655.95953.qmail@web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060328163655.95953.qmail@web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20060328182321.026fff70@speakeasy.net> At 10:36 AM 3/28/2006, Pete Belford wrote: >Hey anyone have this? What scenarios is this module >supposed to contain? > >All I have is BRV1b and BRV1c Hi Pete, What you have the total of what KE produced for the British Rare Vehicle "pack" - although I suppose they might have distributed scenario BRV1a, or BRV2[version letter here] - just a set of counters, vehicle notes (in B&W), and 2 or 3 playtest scenarios. Honestly, I'm not sure I even have my materials anymore; my understanding was that all work on BRV had terminated, and what was distributed was all there was ever going to be of it. Shortly thereafter KE ceased to exist (and I ceased attending the KC tourney). Tom Mueller Ah, DSL! And Athlon 1900+! "Slugger - found dead with Coors party ball lodged in throat." - Crow T. Robot, 'Hellcats' From dmgillies at comcast.net Tue Mar 28 18:52:47 2006 From: dmgillies at comcast.net (David Gillies) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:52:47 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <009c01c652c3$cd4884a0$0200a8c0@homepc> Message-ID: <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> OK, gentlemen, I personally will play this situation as a fire lane *may* be placed. Thank you all for your very informed insights...although I was not expecting an analysis of comma placement :-) Now, at this point, as the originator of the tread, I hereby declare all debate on this subject closed :-) Dave -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of The Colonel Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 4:01 PM To: ron mosher; Bruce Bakken; oleboe at broadpark.no; aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question ----- Original Message ----- From: "ron mosher" To: "Bruce Bakken" ; ; Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 12:34 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question > At 05:06 PM 3/28/2006, Bruce Bakken wrote: >>I see no provision anywhere that allows a Fire Lane counter to be >>placed offboard. It's as simple as that. > > The intent from the rules are: > > 1. to allow FLs > > 2. To allow them along hex rows, and along hexspines > > 3. To allow them out to normal range, unless blocked. > > Your tortured reading(albeit, probably, technically correct) defeats > these intents. > > The FL markers are just that markers...not be alls, end alls in their > own right. I agree with you on this one Ron. Having the bullets stop 40m from the board edge makes no sense at all to me. The rules can never cover every single eventuality and at times you have to rely on common sense. Also Ron you now agree with Ole Boe! In England we always agree with what Ole says... You Americans are slow learners but to give you some credit, you get there in the end ;-) Still no sign of AoO reaching our shores :-( Regards, the colonel > > > For the nonce, > ron > acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL > > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 28 21:24:05 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:24:05 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060328104041.01c389b8@direcway.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:51:14 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: >So I would allow it if my opponent wanted to place such a FL, but I would >also respect an opponent who wanted to read A2 literally and thereby not >allow it - of course assuming that this is his normal way of reading the >rules... So let's just make this perfectly clear: You're content to play by the way you *want* the rule to work, even though the actual printed rule says otherwise? It's OK to ignore the printed rule when it gets inconvenient to answering a question? And, therefore, it would be hypocritical to chastise someone else who answers a question based on the way they *want* the rule to work, rather than the actual printed rule? I just want to be sure that we all understand your position on this matter correctly. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Mar 28 21:25:28 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:25:28 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> References: <009c01c652c3$cd4884a0$0200a8c0@homepc> <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:52:47 -0800, "David Gillies" wrote: >OK, gentlemen, I personally will play this situation as a fire lane *may* be >placed. Why ask the question if you weren't going to pay attention to the answer? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From dmgillies at comcast.net Tue Mar 28 21:32:51 2006 From: dmgillies at comcast.net (David Gillies) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:32:51 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060329053329.3F6EE1BBAB@che.dreamhost.com> Ha ha! Thanks, but I think I'm just not paying attention to your answer :-) It looks like several people thought this was ok. -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Probst [mailto:bprobst at netspace.net.au] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 9:25 PM To: David Gillies Cc: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: Re: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:52:47 -0800, "David Gillies" wrote: >OK, gentlemen, I personally will play this situation as a fire lane >*may* be placed. Why ask the question if you weren't going to pay attention to the answer? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From jan.spoor at wybesse.net Tue Mar 28 21:35:05 2006 From: jan.spoor at wybesse.net (Jan Spoor) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:35:05 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: References: <009c01c652c3$cd4884a0$0200a8c0@homepc> <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <442A1C89.5050608@wybesse.net> Bruce Probst wrote: > On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:52:47 -0800, "David Gillies" > wrote: > > >> OK, gentlemen, I personally will play this situation as a fire lane *may* be >> placed. >> > > Why ask the question if you weren't going to pay attention to the answer? > You seem to be assuming that there is one answer and only that answer is right. I have seen two different answers supplied during the course of this discussion and argued passionately. I rather imagine that Mr Gillies wanted to see what other people thought the answer was. I think he's heard that. The fact that you may disagree with one of the answers supplied does not mean it is the only correct answer. :-) cheers, Jan From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 29 01:13:51 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:13:51 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <442A1C89.5050608@wybesse.net> References: <009c01c652c3$cd4884a0$0200a8c0@homepc> <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> <442A1C89.5050608@wybesse.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:35:05 -0500, Jan Spoor wrote: >You seem to be assuming that there is one answer and only that answer is >right. That's because there is, and it is. >I have seen two different answers supplied during the course of >this discussion and argued passionately. No. There was one answer ("no, you cannot place a FL counter off board") that was argued ("it's not specifically allowed, and COWTRA says if it's not specifically allowed it's not legal"). The other answer ("yes, sure, why not?") was not *argued*, it was merely noted as a house rule that many people would be agreeable with. Now, house rules are fine in their place, but their very existence indicates that they are not an *actual* rule, and the original question was about whether it was legal under the rules. >The fact that you may disagree with one of the answers >supplied does not mean it is the only correct answer. :-) No, the fact that there's no support *in the rules* for that answer means that it cannot be a "correct" answer. This should not be a difficult concept for anyone to grasp. Hence my comment -- David asked what the rule was, and when told he indicated that he would ignore it; thus the original question became pointless, since he clearly knew in advance what he was going to do regardless. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 29 01:22:01 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:22:01 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <20060329053304.E8A3F59D8DC@mail-in.netspace.net.au> References: <20060329053304.E8A3F59D8DC@mail-in.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:32:51 -0800, "David Gillies" wrote: >It looks like several people thought this was ok. ... and not a single one of them cited an actual rule to support their opinion, because there *is* no actual rule that supports their opinion -- and thus the COWTRA principle makes it clear that it's *not* OK. Which part of that is difficult to understand? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 29 02:05:11 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:05:11 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > >So I would allow it if my opponent wanted to place such a FL, but > >I would also respect an opponent who wanted to read A2 literally and > >thereby not allow it - of course assuming that this is his normal way of > >reading the rules... > > and Bruce Bakken > By "normal way of reading the rules...", do you mean "literally"? > Yes. > At any rate, I try to take the rules literally. > And I respect that, as long as you don't switch to "common sense" interpretations when it favours you. Not that I have met many players who would do such a thing, but I've played one or two, and wouldn't be surprised if some existed in other ASL communities as well. Just to make sure, from what I've seen of you Bruce B, I trust your integrity, so the statement was absolutely not pointed at you. > With regard to this question, it is beyond even A2. There simply > is no provision for playing outside of the mapboard configuration, > besides those that are specifically mentioned. If an offboard hex is playable > for any means, it is mentioned when required. > You are correct, but yet it feels wrong (to me and some others - I actually thought Ron's reasoning was pretty good!!) in this specific case. The FL counter doesn't mean that one is playing outside the mapboard, but rather that it is placed outside the map to be able to use the entire playing area. To me, that makes sense, but I'm also aware that I'm on thin ice when letting (my view of) common sense apply over the literal rule, and I will of course respect an opponent who prefer the literal reading you argue for. From oleboe at broadpark.no Wed Mar 29 02:42:51 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:42:51 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: Hi, Bruce Probst also answered me... I wrote: > >So I would allow it if my opponent wanted to place such a FL, but > >I would also respect an opponent who wanted to read A2 literally and > >thereby not allow it - of course assuming that this is his normal way of > reading the rules... > > So let's just make this perfectly clear: > > You're content to play by the way you *want* the rule to work, > even though the actual printed rule says otherwise? > Yes, in some cases I think common sense may supersede the printed rule. A clear example is B25.1 saying: "A hex such as 13P4 containing a thin meandering blue line enclosed in a layered white, brown, and dark green background which extends through two hexsides of the hex is a stream hex.". This rule requires the stream artwork to extend through *two* hexsides for it to be a stream hex, and yet, there are several hexes where the artwork extends through three or more hexsides. So I play this rule as I *want* the rule to work even though the actual printed rule says otherwise. I also assume that you and every other ASL player do the same with regard to B20.1. I fully understand that you don't want to do it with regard to A9.22, but it shouldn't come as a too big surprise that I (and others) may want to do it here. > It's OK to ignore the printed rule when it gets inconvenient to > answering a question? > No, it's not OK to ignore the printed rule. In the FL case, I've made sure to say what in the rules (much of A2) that goes against placing the FL counter offboard, then pointed to the fact that the ASLRB uses offboard hexes in many different situation, contrary to what A2 says. I wrote that a literal reading of the rules would conclude with a "no". But I can choose to interprete a rule according to what I think its intent is, without completely ignoring the rule. > And, therefore, it would be hypocritical to chastise someone else > who answers a question based on the way they *want* the rule to work, rather > than the actual printed rule? > It depends on how this "someone else" actually answers the question. If he answers it as if the rule actually says what he wants, and silently ignores what it actually says, then I will point out that this is incorrect, and also explain why. But if he writes that his interpretation is not the literal reading but rather how he wants it to work, then I may agree to the suggested alternative interpretation, or I may argue for why I think the printed rule works better than this someone's suggested rule. > I just want to be sure that we all understand your position on > this matter correctly. > Happy to help clarifying this for you :-) From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Mar 29 09:02:53 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:02:53 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <032920061702.6586.442ABDBD00002F13000019BA22007507840E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> He did pay attention to the answer. He paid attention to the *reasonable* answer. It's his right. Dave -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Bruce Probst > On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:52:47 -0800, "David Gillies" > wrote: > > >OK, gentlemen, I personally will play this situation as a fire lane *may* be > >placed. > > Why ask the question if you weren't going to pay attention to the answer? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." > ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 29 10:07:32 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 05:07:32 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <032920061702.6586.442ABDBD00002F13000019BA22007507840E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <032920061702.6586.442ABDBD00002F13000019BA22007507840E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <7iil22pr8f74vo7u9bhckce0gq7g241kbg@4ax.com> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:02:53 +0000, dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: >He did pay attention to the answer. He paid attention to the *reasonable* answer. It's his right. I guess some folks have as much trouble with rhetorical questions as they do with the actual printed rules. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From homercles11 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 29 11:01:41 2006 From: homercles11 at hotmail.com (Paul Kenny) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:01:41 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] New Product Announcement Message-ID: FANATIC ENTERPRISES is pleased to announce the release of Fanatic Pack #4; another fine scenario pack covering a variety of unique actions for the Advanced Squad Leader system. The scenario pack includes 6 scenarios and 2 campaign games covering a variety of actions, many of which incorporate some third party maps, boards and rules. Specifically, there are 2 campaign games that utilize the Platoon Leader Campaign Gaming system, one of which is for use with Critical Hit’s Guerra Civil module. One scenario uses the Dzerhzinsky Tractor Works Map, a couple use the Higher Ground Boards from Heat of Battle. By producing these packs I am hoping you also support these companies publishing efforts. In addition, the scenario cards themselves have continued to evolve. I have enlisted the help of a graphic artist to put counter artwork on the scenario cards to further improve their appearance. This counter artwork is not copyright infringement as they are significantly different from official counter artwork. They do however let you know which counters you need to use and hopefully they will make the cards more attractive. A summary of the scenarios follows: FE CG1: No Pasaran!: This is a Platoon Leader Campaign Game featuring the Guerra Civil rules. Set in Madrid early in the civil war and utilizing boards 49, 40 and 6, this CG features a Nationalist force attacking a defending Republican force. Each side gets a nice selection of armor and ordinance plus a nice selection of infantry types. This CG is moderately sized at 8 dates and should be a lot of fun for fans of GC. FE 128 Carnage at Keren: This is a desert scenario set on boards 29, 31 and HOB I and HOB II (the Higher Ground boards). The scenario features a pair of defending Italian groups holding off a moderately sized force of Indian infantry, tanks and OBA. FE 129 Colonel Saeki’s Raid: Here is another of those Fanatic Enterprises specialties, a unique and rare action. This one features Japanese cavalry attacking an ambushing British force. The Japanese get some elite troops mounted on horses and a couple of tankettes against a smallish British force supported by a couple of carriers. This scenario is set on board 38 and 47. A smallish tourney sized scenario. FE 130 Desperate Straights: This scenario is set on boards 9 and 15 and features a dug in British force overlooking the valley with a Japanese infantry force must break through this line. A smallish tourney sized scenario. FE CG2 Desert Crucible: This is another Platoon Leader Campaign Game. This is a mid war desert battle set on boards 28, 29 and 30. The British defend a depression in the desert against a large Italian and German combined arms force. This 5 date CG plays very fast with short numbers of dates, quick action and lots of dead troops! Bloody. FE 131 Take That Damn Factory: This is a scenario set on a part of the Dzerhzinsky Tractor Works map. More Stalingrad action! This is a meaty scenario reminiscent of the best Red Barricades scenarios for this under appreciated map. FE 132 Land of Malaria and Pain: This is a nasty jungle fight between the British and Japanese set on boards 36 and 39. The Japanese get to purchase fortifications and are in the element on defense. The Brits get some Valentine tanks in support so this should be classic PTO action with lots of replay value! FE 133 Handed on a Silver Platter: What would an ASL pack be without a Tiger scenario?! This one features the HOB Higher Ground boards with a combined arms German force including Tigers attacking a smaller, yet dug in Russian force. Got to the following link to access the CH Platoon Leader CG Rules. http://www.criticalhit.com/pl25.html Again, I sincerely ask you to support the other Third Party ASL Publishers. They each produce excellent stuff that I have enjoyed for many hours of quality ASL play! Fanatic Enterprises continues to enlist the assistance of several ASL'ers as Playtesters and Proofreaders and wish to express my gratitude and thanks. Fanatic Pack #4 can be purchased for $12/pack. The Blitzkrieg Pack can be purchased for $18/pack, the Luzon Pack, The Oblivion Pack, Fanatic Pack # 3, Fanatic Pack #2 and Fanatic Pack #1 can each be purchased for $12/pack and the 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 Fanatic Enterprises: Publishers of great ASL scenario packs and products http://fanaticenterprises.tripod.com From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 29 12:15:39 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:15:39 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > >I wrote that a literal reading of the rules would conclude with a "no". Okay. This is good. And yet... >But I can choose to interprete a rule according to what I think its intent >is, without completely ignoring the rule. > ... you admit to interpret it differently than a literal meaning. I cannot agree with this self-contradictory approach to interpreting rules. In order for a body of rules to be universally applicable, it must be able to be objectively demonstrated. In other words, only a literal interpretation can suffice for solid, objective understanding among players who may never meet. Insofar as the rules accomplish this, debates inevitably follow. We know it is not the most clear document ever conceived. For my part, I tend to get involved in these little debates when my grasp of the literal interpretation varies with someone else's. I certainly try to avoid "common sense" arguments, though admittedly not with complete success. However, if you want to know where I'm coming from in most cases, think "literal". (Whether or not my arguments achieve that level is perhaps another question...) When you choose to interpret a rule "according to what you think the intent is", *despite* admitting that a literal interpretation leads to a different conclusion... well, then, my opinion is that you are not in fact "following the rule". I do not wish to repeat Probst's reasoning -- which I completely agree with on this issue -- but I can perhaps summarize: If you agree about the literal meaning of the rule, but instead choose to play it differently, then you are actually *not* playing *by the rule*, but are rather playing by a *house rule*, that is to say, by a rule that you have agreed to use contrary to the rule book. You argue quite eloquently at times, but it has been my observation that your arguments tend towards "intent", and rarely towards "literalness". Therein lies the greatest difference between our approaches to the rule book. And often, we disagree even on "intent". Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From bakken_80 at hotmail.com Wed Mar 29 12:16:23 2006 From: bakken_80 at hotmail.com (Bruce Bakken) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:16:23 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: > >Now, at this point, as the originator of the tread, I hereby declare all >debate on this subject closed :-) > Bloody fat chance of that happening... Regards, Bruce Bakken _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 29 18:18:51 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:18:51 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question References: <20060329025252.524DC1BB8D@che.dreamhost.com> Message-ID: <00a601c653a0$4ca089a0$7779de18@klis.com> Dave wrote: > Now, at this point, as the originator of the tread, I hereby declare all > debate on this subject closed :-) Geez, Dave, if it wasn't for you (and me) this List would have been as dead as a doornail for the past 10 days. You have a fine talent, my son. Use it only for good. David "where's my pointed stick?" Olie From daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Mar 29 19:04:29 2006 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:04:29 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane - Perry sez requested Message-ID: <00b901c653a8$ba08fc40$7779de18@klis.com> Hey, all. Well, I finally broke down and done it. I sent a question to Perry: ----------------------------------- Re. A9.221 As per the example to this rule, it is possible (indeed, necessary in some circumstances) to place the counter for an Alternate Hex Grain Fire Lane in a Location that is not in the LOS/LOF of the firing MG and its manning Infantry. 1. Assuming the presence of a MG possessed by GO manning infantry in 20EE2, is it possible to place an Alternate Hex Grain Fire Lane that would affect EE3, FF3, FF4, GG5 *and* GG6? 2. If yes, would the Alternate Hex Grain Fire Lane counter be placed offboard between GG5 and GG6 to indicate the Fire Lane? 3. Is there a need to amend A2 so as to explicitly permit the placement of Alternate Hex Grain Fire Lane counters slightly offboard to allow for such Fire Lanes? ----------------------------------- I think this wording of the question shall be acceptable to all. We shall await His Ruling. David "Hey, Moses, I got an eleventh one for ya" Olie From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Mar 29 21:26:12 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 16:26:12 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane - Perry sez requested In-Reply-To: <00b901c653a8$ba08fc40$7779de18@klis.com> References: <00b901c653a8$ba08fc40$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:04:29 -0400, David Olie wrote: >I think this wording of the question shall be acceptable to all. Not when you use vague and undefined terms, it won't: >slightly offboard I wonder if Perry will be confused by this as I am. You used this term once before and refused to explain what it means. Perhaps a more direct approach is required: What the hell does "slightly offboard" mean? How is it different from being entirely offboard? How is it different from being entirely onboard? If the questions aren't phrased well to begin with, it increases the likelihood that the answers will only cause confusion. Believe me, I know! (In any case, why would you amend *A2* to permit an offboard marker? If A9 is the rule that requires offboard markers, then A9 is the rule that needs to be modified. A2 remains as the general rule that is only modified by specific exceptions as required.) I give it a B-. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah, Mr. Claus -- you have a nasty habit of surviving." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Mar 30 00:30:58 2006 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?us-ascii?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:30:58 +0200 Subject: [Aslml] IFT-ers and IIFT-ers unite In-Reply-To: <00b901c653a8$ba08fc40$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: ...at least now they can all use my (M)QRDC :-) I have finally made an IFT(M)RDC in addition to the IIFT(M)QRDC. Both are version 3.6, where the main change from 3.5 is the addition of AoO specific things, like TK numbers, HoB rules and ATMM rules. I have also messed a bit with the coloring, trying to highlight the 7 DRM row a bit more, and also the standard FP columns on the IIFT. The IFT(M)QRDC also have a couple of additional tables, but you have to search for them yourself to find out which (pun intended) For you who haven't looked at the (M)QRDC before: It is a compilation of the most-used ASL tables, that fit onto a double-sided paper. All the tables are fully uptaded with all rules and errata, and have many additional details/clarifications that are found in the ASLRB but not in the official tables. The pages can be found at my ASL site: http://home.no.net/oboe/ From belisarius at dsl.pipex.com Thu Mar 30 00:39:57 2006 From: belisarius at dsl.pipex.com (Andy McMaster) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 09:39:57 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] IFT-ers and IIFT-ers unite In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1143707998.10787.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> At last! :-) Thanks Ole. Your efforts are much appreciated. Andy On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 10:30 +0200, Ole Boe wrote: > ...at least now they can all use my (M)QRDC :-) > > I have finally made an IFT(M)RDC in addition to the IIFT(M)QRDC. Both are > version 3.6, where the main change from 3.5 is the addition of AoO specific > things, like TK numbers, HoB rules and ATMM rules. I have also messed a bit > with the coloring, trying to highlight the 7 DRM row a bit more, and also > the standard FP columns on the IIFT. > > The IFT(M)QRDC also have a couple of additional tables, but you have to > search for them yourself to find out which (pun intended) > > > For you who haven't looked at the (M)QRDC before: It is a compilation of the > most-used ASL tables, that fit onto a double-sided paper. All the tables are > fully uptaded with all rules and errata, and have many additional > details/clarifications that are found in the ASLRB but not in the official > tables. > > > The pages can be found at my ASL site: http://home.no.net/oboe/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Andy McMaster Newcastle upon Tyne, UK "Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon" From gr27134 at charter.net Thu Mar 30 06:22:42 2006 From: gr27134 at charter.net (Tate Rogers) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 6:22:42 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question Message-ID: <9683054.1143728562700.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> ---- Bruce Bakken wrote: I don't have a dog in this FL hunt. However... Doesn't the preamble to the ASLRB say something about using "common sense" in solving rules disputes? I don't have my ASLRB handy so the following is based on the aforementioned assumption regarding "common sense" in the preamble. If I am incorrect in my memory please ignore... > In order for a body of rules to be universally applicable, it must be able > to be objectively demonstrated. In other words, only a literal > interpretation can suffice for solid, objective understanding among players > who may never meet. Since the designers specifically mention the use of "common sense" in rules interpretation any "literal" interpretation would/could be contrary to the intent of the ASLRB and thus, by design, wrong. > Insofar as the rules accomplish this, debates inevitably follow. We know it > is not the most clear document ever conceived. Which is probably why the original design was intended to incorporate the human ability to reason (i.e., "common sense") as opposed to operating merely by 100% literal direction. > For my part, I tend to get involved in these little debates when my grasp of > the literal interpretation varies with someone else's. I certainly try to > avoid "common sense" arguments, though admittedly not with complete success. And yet the designers specifically want players to incorporate "common sense". > However, if you want to know where I'm coming from in most cases, think > "literal". (Whether or not my arguments achieve that level is perhaps > another question...) IOW...contrary to how the designers wanted the ASLRB read/used. > When you choose to interpret a rule "according to what you think the intent > is", *despite* admitting that a literal interpretation leads to a different > conclusion... well, then, my opinion is that you are not in fact "following > the rule". No, actually, according to the designers 100% exclusively "literal" readings/interpretations of rules would be incorrect...particularly as regards disputes. > I do not wish to repeat Probst's reasoning -- which I completely agree with > on this issue -- but I can perhaps summarize: If you agree about the literal > meaning of the rule, but instead choose to play it differently, then you are > actually *not* playing *by the rule*, but are rather playing by a *house > rule*, that is to say, by a rule that you have agreed to use contrary to the > rule book. Probst is the classic example of a guy who reads the ASLRB "literal" and/or "loosely" as the mood suits him (or as gaming needs require). In various rules discussions he has gone from literal, to loose, to making things up...hanging your hat on anything he has to say doesn't help your argument. > You argue quite eloquently at times, but it has been my observation that > your arguments tend towards "intent", and rarely towards "literalness". > Therein lies the greatest difference between our approaches to the rule > book. And often, we disagree even on "intent". Yet, Ole's method agrees with how the designers wanted the ASLRB to be read. -- Later- Tater (One Mean Spud!) From belisarius at dsl.pipex.com Thu Mar 30 06:56:20 2006 From: belisarius at dsl.pipex.com (Andy McMaster) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 15:56:20 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <9683054.1143728562700.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> References: <9683054.1143728562700.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Message-ID: <1143730581.16633.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Not sure if the 'common sense' bit is in there or not, but it really should be. There's occasionally little of it present in some of the rule debates here. I agree with Bruce B's comments. Andy On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 06:22 -0800, Tate Rogers wrote: > ---- Bruce Bakken wrote: > > I don't have a dog in this FL hunt. However... > > Doesn't the preamble to the ASLRB say something about using "common sense" in solving rules disputes? -- Andy McMaster Newcastle upon Tyne, UK "Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon" From belisarius at dsl.pipex.com Thu Mar 30 08:51:51 2006 From: belisarius at dsl.pipex.com (Andy McMaster) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:51:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Fire Lane Question In-Reply-To: <1143730581.16633.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <9683054.1143728562700.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> <1143730581.16633.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1143737511.18992.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> OK. Make that 'I agree with Tate Rogers comments' :-) It's been a long day! Andy On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 15:56 +0100, Andy McMaster wrote: > Not sure if the 'common sense' bit is in there or not, but it really > should be. There's occasionally little of it present in some of the rule > debates here. > > I agree with Bruce B's comments. > > Andy > > > > On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 06:22 -0800, Tate Rogers wrote: > > ---- Bruce Bakken wrote: > > > > I don't have a dog in this FL hunt. However... > > > > Doesn't the preamble to the ASLRB say something about using "common sense" in solving rules disputes? > > -- Andy McMaster Newcastle upon Tyne, UK "Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon" From dreenstra at comcast.net Thu Mar 30 09:06:04 2006 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:06:04 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] IFT-ers and IIFT-ers unite Message-ID: <033020061706.22549.442C0FFB000E12640000581522007601800E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Let me add my thanks here too, Ole. I've been using your version of the QRDC for years, though I have had to switch from the old "mini" to the full-page version to accomodate my declining eyesight. Dave "even the young bucks get old" Reenstra -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Ole Boe > ...at least now they can all use my (M)QRDC :-) > > I have finally made an IFT(M)RDC in addition to the IIFT(M)QRDC. Both are > version 3.6, where the main change from 3.5 is the addition of AoO specific > things, like TK numbers, HoB rules and ATMM rules. I have also messed a bit > with the coloring, trying to highlight the 7 DRM row a bit more, and also > the standard FP columns on the IIFT. > > The IFT(M)QRDC also have a couple of additional tables, but you have to > search for them yourself to find out which (pun intended) > > > For you who haven't looked at the (M)QRDC before: It is a compilation of the > most-used ASL tables, that fit onto a double-sided paper. All the tables are > fully uptaded with all rules and errata, and have many additional > details/clarifications that are found in the ASLRB but not in the official > tables. > > > The pages can be found at my ASL site: http://home.no.net/oboe/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 snow at lasp.colorado.edu Thu Mar 30 09:42:21 2006 From: snow at lasp.colorado.edu (Marty Snow) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:42:21 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Aslml] IFT-ers and IIFT-ers unite In-Reply-To: <033020061706.22549.442C0FFB000E12640000581522007601800E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> References: <033020061706.22549.442C0FFB000E12640000581522007601800E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 dreenstra at comcast.net wrote: > Let me add my thanks here too, Ole. I've been using your version of the > QRDC for years, though I have had to switch from the old "mini" to the > full-page version to accomodate my declining eyesight. That's nothing! I printed the IIFT(m)QRDC on 42"x60" poster paper and hung it on the wall of my game room. Now the whole gang can squint at the numbers together! It may not be any easier to read from across the room, but I don't have to worry about losing it in the piles of counter trays and various other junk. Thanks to Ole for putting the whole thing together. It's the best player aid around. Marty Marty Snow marty.snow at lasp.colorado.edu http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~snowm/home.html From dgour.asl at gmail.com Thu Mar 30 10:57:28 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:57:28 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] IFT-ers and IIFT-ers unite In-Reply-To: References: <00b901c653a8$ba08fc40$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <764636a60603301057g13156825k6ed24ff1a6717a40@mail.gmail.com> Thanks Ole. Great work and just in time for ASL Open! -- Darren On 3/30/06, Ole Boe wrote: > ...at least now they can all use my (M)QRDC :-) > > I have finally made an IFT(M)RDC in addition to the IIFT(M)QRDC. Both are > version 3.6, where the main change from 3.5 is the addition of AoO specific > things, like TK numbers, HoB rules and ATMM rules. I have also messed a bit > with the coloring, trying to highlight the 7 DRM row a bit more, and also > the standard FP columns on the IIFT. > > The IFT(M)QRDC also have a couple of additional tables, but you have to > search for them yourself to find out which (pun intended) > > > For you who haven't looked at the (M)QRDC before: It is a compilation of the > most-used ASL tables, that fit onto a double-sided paper. All the tables are > fully uptaded with all rules and errata, and have many additional > details/clarifications that are found in the ASLRB but not in the official > tables. > > > The pages can be found at my ASL site: http://home.no.net/oboe/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 dgour.asl at gmail.com Thu Mar 30 17:16:49 2006 From: dgour.asl at gmail.com (Darren Gour) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:16:49 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Q: WP from Baz Message-ID: <764636a60603301716k4870615amd53fe29ecdd05d83@mail.gmail.com> Some friends were telling me this weekend that they thought there had been a discussion recently about only being able to fire WP from a baz at units behind a wall or in a building per the C8.31 HEAT HE equivalency rules. There feeling was that all baz rounds are categorized as HEAT and so restricted. I would have to say I don't get the same impression from C8.31. I'd say there is language about the explosive effects of HEAT rounds but WP rounds don't seem to be under similar restrictions as far as I can see. Thoughts. -- Darren From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Mar 30 22:33:09 2006 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 17:33:09 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Q: WP from Baz In-Reply-To: <764636a60603301716k4870615amd53fe29ecdd05d83@mail.gmail.com> References: <764636a60603301716k4870615amd53fe29ecdd05d83@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5sip22hm217rj7q34gdk9smn04gp9j894p@4ax.com> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:16:49 -0600, "Darren Gour" wrote: >Some friends were telling me this weekend that they thought there had >been a discussion recently about only being able to fire WP from a baz >at units behind a wall or in a building per the C8.31 HEAT HE >equivalency rules. I'm not aware of any such discussion (not that that means anything, of course). WP is not restricted in the same way as HEAT, for the very good and excellent reason that WP is not HEAT (in rules *and* reality). >There feeling was that all baz rounds are categorized as HEAT and so >restricted. Two minutes reading the rules would set them straight. >I would have to say I don't get the same impression from >C8.31. I'd say there is language about the explosive effects of HEAT >rounds but WP rounds don't seem to be under similar restrictions as >far as I can see. You don't get that impression because it's not there to get. WP is one type of ammo, HEAT is a different type of ammo. Different rules apply to each. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Trumpy, you can do stupid things!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ