From rln22 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 1 05:57:42 2005 From: rln22 at yahoo.com (Robert Nelson) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 05:57:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Has anyone FINISHED ABTF!??!?! In-Reply-To: <200511301427.AA287572084@mail.sdccu.net> Message-ID: <20051201135742.92548.qmail@web52610.mail.yahoo.com> Fred, it terms of 'fun factor', despite getting pounded, did the brits seem to enjoy aspects of the last half, I would think mainly for the historical aspect it attempts to mirror? (revelling in the desperation?) --- Fred wrote: > > Yes, I have played to almost the end (there was only > 1-2 dates at > the end that I think we skipped over.) At that point > over half of > block H was burned to rubble and the British > resigned since we > (the Germans) controlled all but 1 of the other > blocks. > > Fred > > ---------- Original Message > ---------------------------------- > From: Robert Nelson > Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:54:52 -0800 (PST) > > >Noticing that of every AAR i've ever found on abtf, > >it's never gone past the halfway point. > > > >yes, I understand why. same scen over and over, > pound > >the brits. > > > >I imagine the few Brit wins posted at ROAR are > Germans > >giving up early due to complete Brit control of the > >map. > > > >Anyone heard of anyone playing this to the end > since > >it was playtested? (and was it as repetitive as > many > >believe it must be) > > > >Rob > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________ > >Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > >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 > > > > __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ From scottgreenman at comcast.net Fri Dec 2 11:51:04 2005 From: scottgreenman at comcast.net (Scott Greenman) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:51:04 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Announcing new OBA Flowchart extension for VASL 5 References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E0BB71B19@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: <007c01c5f779$bcd004e0$6600a8c0@PARENTS> I've put a new extension for VASL 5 that walks you through the OBA flowchart out on the yahoo vaslmapcabal group site. You can download it from the following URL: http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/vaslmapcabal/files/ The filename is OBAFlowchart.mdx. If you download this and put it into your VASL extensions directory (configurable through the File->Edit Preferences window, on the Extensions tab), you'll get a new button on the VASL toolbar called "OBA Flowchart". Give it a whirl and let me know what you think. I would love to get some feedback on how I can make it more useful. I planned to make it write text into the chat window, so your opponent can follow you as you go through the flowchart. If anyone has any other flowcharts they'd like to do a similar thing with, it would be very easy to do. If you provide me the flowchart, I can produce the extension. Scott "stranded in the North American ASL desert" Greenman Kaysville, UT, USA From scottgreenman at comcast.net Fri Dec 2 15:03:04 2005 From: scottgreenman at comcast.net (Scott Greenman) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 16:03:04 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] VASL OBA Flowchart Extension References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E0BB71B19@nymail.adl.org> Message-ID: <013201c5f794$8e028f00$6600a8c0@PARENTS> Someone pointed out that you can't download the extension from the link I provided unless you join the group, so I stuck it out at the following URL anyone should be able to download from: http://home.comcast.net/~scottgreenman/OBA_Flowchart.mdx. Scott From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Dec 3 16:24:38 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:24:38 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] AAR J92 "Your Turn Now" Message-ID: Last night Joe Moro and I played this scenario, from Journal 6. This is a fun and different scenario! It's almost a classic "Meet the Feebles", with an almost-all-Green Philippine force defending against almost-all-second line Japanese attack force. The uniqueness is that the Japanese have to periodically stop their efforts to punch through with a quick charge (that thing that all Japanese are good at) to disarm some Set DC (with ticking timers, no less!) that the good guys have left lying around (something 2nd-line Japanese units *aren't* terribly good at). Joe set up a pretty decent Filipino defence, with the aim of disrupting my rapid advance and to provide covering fire over the Set DC hexes. Unfortunately this didn't work all that well for him as he had some pretty ordinary dice rolls. My dice weren't all that spectacular either, but they didn't need to be (the Japanese are so forgiving). I was in position to start clearing the first Set DC while putting so much pressure on the Filipinos that they had to fall back. A well-timed clearance DR of "2" and I was off and running for the next. Joe's luck started to improve, as I was unable to clear the second DC in time; the flanking force I had given the job to proved unable to stand up to the unexpectedly-spirited defence. However he had the bulk of his units clustered together blocking the bulk of my units trying to force their way down the northern edge. What do you do when you have a bunch of Japanese in adjacent hexes looking at some enemies in your path? That's right, time for a banzai! This was very successful, although a tad expensive (the 10-1 succumbed to a wound, and an infantry crew rolled a "12" MC), shattering the core of the Filipino defence. The roads were open and now it was just a matter of timing. Well, not quite. The defence of the second DC, as mentioned above, wasn't giving easily, and I ran the risk of having some Filipino units running around in my rear area (never a pleasant thought). Joe then proceeded to shoot himself in the foot -- he unexpectedly achieved a clear CC victory in the DC hex, but had over-committed -- and was still *in* the hex when that DC went off. Oops. Suddenly all I had to do was mop up the prisoners. (It's early in the PTO, nobody knew yet that surrendering to the Japanese would be a bad idea, so the Japanese were taking a *lot* of prisoners.) After that it was all a matter of manoeuvre. I was unable to clear the third DC before it blew, but at this stage Joe's Good Order forces consisted of one squad. Even Japanese 2nd-line squads can muster enough FP to take care of something like that, and by turn 6 I had mopped up every Filipino unit -- the only thing he had left on the board was his sniper! Yet with one DC left to go, the game still had to go on! Fortunately the clearance was a snap and the Japanese could relax in their victory. Interestingly up until the final turns the CVP tally was running neck-and-neck. The final score was, I think, something like Japanese 42 to Filipino 26 -- so if I'd failed to clear those two DC, it would have been a Japanese loss. Lots of fun. Check it out! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "It says I may already be a winner!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From Kyle.Curle at aia.com Sun Dec 4 08:25:30 2005 From: Kyle.Curle at aia.com (Kyle Curle) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 10:25:30 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] VASL PBEM wanted Last Bid or CG 1 Message-ID: <39A9B5BB-0BA3-42BB-90ED-E81E30FCC5EF@aia.com> Have room in my schedule for another game. I'd like to play Red Barricades CG1 or Last Bid. It would mostly be email, altho I can occasionally play online VASL if our schedules work out. I'd like to play fast, at least 4 mailings a week to keep the game moving. I am not a real stickler on things, so consider this a relaxed, for fun game. I'd like to play the russians in these as well. Kyle From robertthepastor at juno.com Sun Dec 4 14:24:37 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 14:24:37 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Tunnels Message-ID: <20051204.142441.4604.11.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Howdy! A few questions which have been digging at me. 1. I have a Tunnel entrance in Jungle. Shellholes were created in the hex thus removing the jungle and leaving Shellholes. QUESTION: Is the Tunnel eliminated? 2. I have another Tunnel entrance in the ground level of a building. The building has been rubbled. QUESTION: Is the Tunnel eliminated? 3. I have a Tunnel Entrance in a 1S Foxhole. After the 150mm Rocket OBA, the 1S Foxhole was removed. QUESTION: Is the Tunnel eliminated? 4. A Tunnel may have an entrance in an OB-given entrenchment (B8.6). However, one of the entrenchment is in Open Ground, the other entrenchment is in Grain. QUESTION: May a Tunnel entrance lead to one of these entrenchments in Open Ground / Grain? Thanks and take care, Robert "always digging up trouble" Hammond From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Dec 5 05:09:19 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 00:09:19 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Tunnels In-Reply-To: <20051204.142441.4604.11.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20051204.142441.4604.11.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 14:24:37 -0800, Robert M Hammond wrote: >1. I have a Tunnel entrance in Jungle. Shellholes were created in the >hex thus removing the jungle and leaving Shellholes. > >QUESTION: Is the Tunnel eliminated? B8.63 does not list placement of shellholes as a method of destroying a Tunnel. B2.1 does not say that shellhole creation causes Tunnel destruction either. So, no. However, it should be noted that B8.6 mentions that a Tunnel entrance can lead into an OB-given entrenchment, and shellhole placement *does* eliminate entrenchments. Does elimination of the entrenchment eliminate any Tunnel entrance into that entrenchment? The answer to that question is not defined in the rules. >2. I have another Tunnel entrance in the ground level of a building. >The building has been rubbled. > >QUESTION: Is the Tunnel eliminated? B8.63 does not list placement of rubble as a method of destroying a Tunnel. Neither B24.11 nor B24.121 says that (falling) rubble placement causes Tunnel destruction either. So, no. (Note that Tunnels are *not* a type of Fortification, per the Index.) [Yes, Rubble in a Sewer Location prevents Sewer entrance/exit (B8.5). So what? Tunnels are not Sewers, and nowhere in B8.6 is it suggested that any Sewer rules apply to Tunnels (other than the use of Sewer counters to show that units are in a Tunnel).] Just because B8.6 does not list Rubble as a terrain type where Tunnel entrances may be initially placed does not automatically mean that transformation of a Location into Rubble will eliminate any existing Tunnel entrances. Since no rule says that they are eliminated, they are not. >3. I have a Tunnel Entrance in a 1S Foxhole. After the 150mm Rocket >OBA, the 1S Foxhole was removed. > >QUESTION: Is the Tunnel eliminated? See the answer to Q1 above. >4. A Tunnel may have an entrance in an OB-given entrenchment (B8.6). >However, one of the entrenchment is in Open Ground, the other >entrenchment is in Grain. > >QUESTION: May a Tunnel entrance lead to one of these entrenchments in >Open Ground / Grain? No. Placement of an entrenchment in a Location does not transform the Location into a different terrain type. Open Ground and Grain, with or without entrenchments, are not valid terrain types for the placement of Tunnels (B8.6). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - you're STUCK HERE!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From big_d_314 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 6 02:30:26 2005 From: big_d_314 at hotmail.com (David A. Pearson) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 04:30:26 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Announcing new OBA Flowchart extension for VASL 5 References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E0BB71B19@nymail.adl.org> <007c01c5f779$bcd004e0$6600a8c0@PARENTS> Message-ID: How do I join the VASL map cabal yahoo group? Thanks, Dave P StL MO USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Greenman" To: Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:51 PM Subject: [Aslml] Announcing new OBA Flowchart extension for VASL 5 > I've put a new extension for VASL 5 that walks you through the OBA > flowchart > out on the yahoo vaslmapcabal group site. You can download it from the > following URL: > > http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/vaslmapcabal/files/ > > The filename is OBAFlowchart.mdx. If you download this and put it into > your VASL extensions directory (configurable through the File->Edit > Preferences window, on the Extensions tab), you'll get a new button on the > VASL toolbar called "OBA Flowchart". > > Give it a whirl and let me know what you think. I would love to get some > feedback on how I can make it more useful. I planned to make it write text > into the chat window, so your opponent can follow you as you go through > the > flowchart. > > If anyone has any other flowcharts they'd like to do a similar thing with, > it would be very easy to do. If you provide me the flowchart, I can > produce > the extension. > > Scott "stranded in the North American ASL desert" Greenman > Kaysville, UT, USA > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From phil.draper at tiscali.co.uk Tue Dec 6 07:24:21 2005 From: phil.draper at tiscali.co.uk (Phil Draper) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 15:24:21 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E0BB71B19@nymail.adl.org><007c01c5f779$bcd004e0$6600a8c0@PARENTS> Message-ID: <000e01c5fa79$221e11f0$69346e58@backroom> Hi all, I'm after some help with WP versus out of LOS units. Here is the situation; a concealed enemy squad is IN a trench behind bocage. I want to place WP in the location containing the trench. Do I add the +2 TH DRM for concealment even though I have no LOS to the entrenched unit? If I hit and place the WP marker must the unit in the trench take a WP NMC per A24.31? This rule says that units in the location must take the NMC when a marker is placed in the location or when hit on the area target type by WP. The trench rules say that the unit IN the trench is treated as being in the same location as units outside the trench for all purposes except weapon recovery and TEM, suggesting that they must take the check. This seems counter intuitive to all the rules requiring a LOS to a target to achieve an effect save for OBA and Area target type hits from Mortars (which must have a LOS to at least one unit in the target hex). Any advice gratefully received. Cheers Phil From partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net Tue Dec 6 09:01:48 2005 From: partisan_8-0 at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:01:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Aslml] Tunnel Exiting Message-ID: <21170323.1133888508928.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Now that President Bush has finished his visit to my home town of Kernersville, North Carolina I can concentrate on more important matters like ASL :) Last presidential visit to our town was also made by a Geoge, Washington that is. Stopped at the now long gone Dobson's tavern. The present president's daughters would have enjoyed that! Question: (Dave Reenstra confirmed this live at my place recently) The defender will know where a Japanese unit (actually any unit) using a tunnel in the movement phase will exit in the advance phase, correct? Therefore, a unit in danger of ambush after the Japanese unit exits can possibly break and avoid possible elimination providing he meets the normal requirements of voluntary rout. It feels wrong but seems that is the way the rule works. Would like some other opinions of our reading of the ASLRB. Ray [locus operandi Kernersville] From gd891 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 6 10:04:24 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd891) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:04:24 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Announcing new OBA Flowchart extension for VASL 5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Looks cool Scott. I started on a similar project two years ago, but, alas, real-life interrupted. 1. Writing it to the chat window would be the next best thing to add. That way, even though its walking me through the process, my opponent can see where I'm answering wrong. 2. If you could save the current state somehow (how does Rodney do the red/black cards that have been drawn?) would be cool so I don't have to answer the same questions each time. Of course, you'd need some sort of Collection since I may have several OBAs and so may my opponent. In that case, I'd also need to choose between them to pick up where I left off on the correct one. 3. Once the state can be saved, then you can integrate automatic die rolling and chit draws so, instead of asking me if I have battery contact, it could figure it out and tell me. In order for this to work, you'd not only need to save current state, you'd also need to allow me to setup my OBA module with "plentiful/scarce" ammo, and other parameters at the outset so it can correctly do chit draws, figure battery contact (different for radio vs phone vs offboard, different for Battalion, different for Russians depending upon year, etc). Now THAT would be cool enough for one of those Repetti Buzz-Lightyear-Style-Point awards. I have some old Java code around here if you want me to send it to you. It was written as a stand alone app because the whole module extension thing didn't exist back when ASL players were REAL men who used REAL dice..... Greg Writing requirements is a helluva lot easier than coding them. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Greenman" To: Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:51 PM Subject: [Aslml] Announcing new OBA Flowchart extension for VASL 5 > I've put a new extension for VASL 5 that walks you through the OBA > flowchart > out on the yahoo vaslmapcabal group site. You can download it from the > following URL: > > http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/vaslmapcabal/files/ > > The filename is OBAFlowchart.mdx. If you download this and put it into > your VASL extensions directory (configurable through the File->Edit > Preferences window, on the Extensions tab), you'll get a new button on the > VASL toolbar called "OBA Flowchart". > > Give it a whirl and let me know what you think. I would love to get some > feedback on how I can make it more useful. I planned to make it write text > into the chat window, so your opponent can follow you as you go through > the > flowchart. > > If anyone has any other flowcharts they'd like to do a similar thing with, > it would be very easy to do. If you provide me the flowchart, I can > produce > the extension. > > Scott "stranded in the North American ASL desert" Greenman > Kaysville, UT, USA > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Dec 6 12:26:51 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 07:26:51 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Tunnel Exiting In-Reply-To: <21170323.1133888508928.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <21170323.1133888508928.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <97sbp1p3vf4hgr3jklr0l9a12dabdfp2g7@4ax.com> On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:01:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00), Raymond Woloszyn wrote: > Question: (Dave Reenstra confirmed this live at my place recently) Is he on tour? Or was this a charity gig? >The defender will know where a Japanese unit (actually any unit) using a tunnel in the movement phase will exit in the advance phase, correct? Yes. >Therefore, a unit in danger of ambush after the Japanese unit exits can possibly break and avoid possible elimination providing he meets the normal requirements of voluntary rout. Sure. >It feels wrong but seems that is the way the rule works. How is it any more wrong than a reinforcing tank knowing exactly where an enemy tank is and how best to drive around so as to not expose itself unduly? How is it any more wrong than a leader on the left-hand side of the board suddenly knowing that a bunch of units on the right-hand side of the board are broken and need his help? You could go on indefinitely. I mean, how would you "fix" it? Change the rule so that you can only voluntary break if there's no pressing reason to do so? How would that help? How would you even define it? What if my unit not only has a tunnel guy heading his way, but is also about to be swarmed by (mostly) concealed enemy units at ground level? Do you need third-party approval to execute a non-gamey voluntary break? As soon as you put counters on the board, you're playing a game, and sacrifices of "reality" are made. This absence of FOW will happen all the time, unless somebody rewrites ASL so that it can only be played double-blind with a referee. While that can be fun, it's a different game to the one you've already paid money for. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - you're STUCK HERE!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From malm at gol.com Tue Dec 6 18:48:54 2005 From: malm at gol.com (Malcolm Rutledge) Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 11:48:54 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Tunnel Exiting In-Reply-To: <97sbp1p3vf4hgr3jklr0l9a12dabdfp2g7@4ax.com> References: <21170323.1133888508928.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <97sbp1p3vf4hgr3jklr0l9a12dabdfp2g7@4ax.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051207114628.02705048@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 05:26 a.m. 7/12/2005, Bruce Probst wrote: >On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:01:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00), Raymond Woloszyn > > >The defender will know where a Japanese unit (actually any unit) > using a tunnel in the movement phase will exit in the advance phase, correct? > >Yes. > > >Therefore, a unit in danger of ambush after the Japanese unit > exits can possibly break and avoid possible elimination providing > he meets the normal requirements of voluntary rout. > >Sure. > > >It feels wrong but seems that is the way the rule works. > >I mean, how would you "fix" it? I think that the easy solution here is to have the unit in the tunnel treated as though it were HIP. Remove it from the board until the advance phase. From rdg21 at charter.net Wed Dec 7 08:21:36 2005 From: rdg21 at charter.net (R Gregory) Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 11:21:36 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] (aslml) ASLSK#1 PBEM Opponents Message-ID: <43970C10.5010908@charter.net> ASL newbie seeks opponents for VASL pbem. I have experience with pb/pl and squad leader. Email to rdg21 at charter.net if interested. Thanks Richard From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Dec 7 10:43:11 2005 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (David Reenstra) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 13:43:11 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Tunnel Exiting In-Reply-To: <97sbp1p3vf4hgr3jklr0l9a12dabdfp2g7@4ax.com> Message-ID: <20051207184300.37FE21BA9B@che.dreamhost.com> Hello all, Bruce writes: > > On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:01:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00), Raymond Woloszyn > wrote: > > > Question: (Dave Reenstra confirmed this live at my place > recently) > > Is he on tour? Or was this a charity gig? > > >The defender will know where a Japanese unit (actually any unit) using a > tunnel in the movement phase will exit in the advance phase, correct? > > Yes. > > >Therefore, a unit in danger of ambush after the Japanese unit exits can > possibly break and avoid possible elimination providing he meets the > normal requirements of voluntary rout. > > Sure. > > >It feels wrong but seems that is the way the rule works. > > How is it any more wrong than a reinforcing tank knowing exactly where an > enemy tank is and how best to drive around so as to not expose itself > unduly? > How is it any more wrong than a leader on the left-hand side of the board > suddenly knowing that a bunch of units on the right-hand side of the board > are > broken and need his help? You could go on indefinitely. You could, but rather than just saying there's lots of problems with FoW in ASL, how about we concentrate on fixing this one little one? > > I mean, how would you "fix" it? Change the rule so that you can only > voluntary break if there's no pressing reason to do so? How would that > help? > How would you even define it? What if my unit not only has a tunnel guy > heading his way, but is also about to be swarmed by (mostly) concealed > enemy > units at ground level? Do you need third-party approval to execute a > non-gamey voluntary break? I think I'd just allow the unit using the tunnel to remain off-board until it actually exits the tunnel in the APh, rather than being placed under a Sewer counter during the MPh in the exit hex. That would pretty much keep the actual exit hex unknown, wouldn't it? > > As soon as you put counters on the board, you're playing a game, and > sacrifices of "reality" are made. This absence of FOW will happen all the > time, unless somebody rewrites ASL so that it can only be played double- > blind > with a referee. While that can be fun, it's a different game to the one > you've already paid money for. I don't think you need to turn ASL into a totally new game to fix this particular problem. Dave Reenstra > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - you're STUCK HERE!" > 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 charleeh at earthlink.net Wed Dec 7 11:52:25 2005 From: charleeh at earthlink.net (Charlie Hamilton) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 14:52:25 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] NorEaster X Scenario Lists Message-ID: <080401c5fb67$bf7471d0$0201000a@COMMUNISA07QK9> Hi gang, Here are the scenario lists for NorEaster X - New England's ASL tournament - held March 17-19, 2006. Included are the main tourney list, Sat mini, and Sat Starter Kit mini. See http://asl.yankeegamers.org for more information and to register on-line. Main Tournament Fri Afternoon: A72 Italian Brothers SP74 The Last Tiger J90 Time of Humiliations FrF2 Maczek Fire Brigade *ASLXX10 Come Seven Come Eleven Fri Night: 83 Uncommon Occurrence Tac40 Scottish Nightmare A109 Scouts Out SP118 Seizing the Sittang J83 Bloody Nose Sat Morning: 6 Red Packets DB49 Wetlet A Guards Counterattack TOT32 Denouement HP4 French Toast Sat Afternoon: J48 Blood Enemies PBP7 Piece of Cake *J74 Priests on the Line J95 Typical German Response SP128 Rupee Reward Sat Night: SP127 Bleed Gurkha Bleed CH167 Warlord's Estate AP7 Directive Number 3 I Bucholz Station J22 Oh Joy! Sunday: SP103 For Whom the Bell Tolls J35 Siam Sambal G44 Abandon Ship J63 Silesian Interlude DB40 Riding the Coattails * - Asterisked scenarios will be replaced with a Module of Oblivion scenario if MoO ships prior to NorEaster X. Sat Mini: Round 1 SP117 Stranded Cats J94 Kempf at Melikhovo CH34 The Lighthouse Round 2 SP53 Thorne in your Side SP100 Attu Climb WCW4 Cat Becomes Mouse Round 3 KGP4 Chapelle St Anne A34 Lash Out W1 Traverse Right...Fire! Sat Starter Kit Mini: Round 1 S1 Retaking Vierville S2 War of the Rats S16 Legio Patria Nostra Round 2: S9 Ambitious Assault S3 Simple Equation S15 Hammer to the Teeth Round 3: S5 Clearing Colleville S10 Paper Army S13 Priority Target From bprobst at netspace.net.au Wed Dec 7 12:14:47 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 07:14:47 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Tunnel Exiting In-Reply-To: <20051207184303.AB3871A3FE3@mail-in.netspace.net.au> References: <97sbp1p3vf4hgr3jklr0l9a12dabdfp2g7@4ax.com> <20051207184303.AB3871A3FE3@mail-in.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 13:43:11 -0500, "David Reenstra" wrote: >I don't think you need to turn ASL into a totally new game to fix this >particular problem. ?? What problem is that? Why stop at tunnels? Why not just remove all units from the board as soon as they leave the LOS of enemy units? That *is* what you're asking for, isn't it? Take a step back and look at what happened: the presence of a tunnel caused the enemy to break and run. Nett result: a broken enemy unit no longer participating in the attack, and a concealed stack has suddenly appeared somewhere where the enemy didn't want them to be. And you didn't even have to roll any dice. It seems to *me* that the tunnel just paid for itself .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From kankoviak at comcast.net Wed Dec 7 20:59:59 2005 From: kankoviak at comcast.net (Kevin Ankoviak) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 20:59:59 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK vTourney this weekend... Message-ID: <010895bc93895077b380967bf2e7b9d0@comcast.net> A fairly recent Yahoo Group, Virtual Wargamers Club is having a virtual con this weekend. As the name implies, this is intended to be a virtual wargaming club. In other words, a place for wargamers like you and me to find opponents who are online right now looking to play the wargames we like. This weekend VWC is having its first vCon. I was hoping to get a vTourney of ASLSK going. If you are interested send me an email and I will put together a bracket. We will be using VASSAL to run this tourney, and I hope to get everyone playing "live", that is using the VASSAL server to play Computer to Computer... I was hoping to get as much interest as possible, thus the ASLSK scenarios. Please email me by 8 pm UT Friday, so I can setup brackets... Thanks Kevin From skallan at att.com Thu Dec 8 11:42:11 2005 From: skallan at att.com (Allan, Scott K, CFSMD) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 13:42:11 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Question regarding Concealment stripping Message-ID: Gents, Can a stack of dummies strip concealment from an enemy unit moving in the OG during its (eg. the enemy's MPh) ---- assuming LOS and Range?? If I look at the Concealment Loss Table, it refers to "LOS RANGE FROM NEAREST GOOD ORDER OR UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND UNIT"..........which I guess, begs the question, Is a stack of dummies considered to be in "GO" or an "UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND UNIT"?? Thanks! Scott Allan AT&T Inc. 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 Kevin Ankoviak Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:00 AM To: aslml at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK vTourney this weekend... A fairly recent Yahoo Group, Virtual Wargamers Club is having a virtual con this weekend. As the name implies, this is intended to be a virtual wargaming club. In other words, a place for wargamers like you and me to find opponents who are online right now looking to play the wargames we like. This weekend VWC is having its first vCon. I was hoping to get a vTourney of ASLSK going. If you are interested send me an email and I will put together a bracket. We will be using VASSAL to run this tourney, and I hope to get everyone playing "live", that is using the VASSAL server to play Computer to Computer... I was hoping to get as much interest as possible, thus the ASLSK scenarios. Please email me by 8 pm UT Friday, so I can setup brackets... Thanks Kevin _______________________________________________ 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 styson at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 11:51:43 2005 From: styson at gmail.com (Sam Tyson) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 13:51:43 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Question regarding Concealment stripping In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No, dummies are not Good Order units. >From A12.14.... If the only Good Order enemy ground unit in LOS is itself concealed when a concealed friendly unit makes a concealment-loss action (other than breaking or being Reduced/Wounded), that enemy unit must forfeit its "?" momentarily (to prove that it is not a Dummy) if it opts to force the friendly unit to lose his; the viewing unit's momentary forfeiture of concealment is instantly regained. Sam On 12/8/05, Allan, Scott K, CFSMD wrote: > Gents, > Can a stack of dummies strip concealment from an enemy unit > moving in the OG during its (eg. the enemy's MPh) ---- assuming LOS and > Range?? > > If I look at the Concealment Loss Table, it refers to "LOS RANGE FROM > NEAREST GOOD ORDER OR UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND UNIT"..........which I > guess, begs the question, Is a stack of dummies considered to be in "GO" > or an "UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND UNIT"?? > > > Thanks! > > > Scott Allan > AT&T Inc. > 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 Kevin Ankoviak > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:00 AM > To: aslml at lists.aslml.net > Subject: [Aslml] ASLSK vTourney this weekend... > > > A fairly recent Yahoo Group, > > Virtual Wargamers Club > > is having a virtual con this weekend. As the name implies, this is > intended to be a virtual wargaming club. In other words, a place for > wargamers like you and me to find opponents who are online right now > looking to play the wargames we like. > > This weekend VWC is having its first vCon. I was hoping to get a > vTourney of ASLSK going. If you are interested send me an email and I > will put together a bracket. We will be using VASSAL to run this > tourney, and I hope to get everyone playing "live", that is using the > VASSAL server to play Computer to Computer... > > I was hoping to get as much interest as possible, thus the ASLSK > scenarios. Please email me by 8 pm UT Friday, so I can setup > brackets... > > Thanks > > Kevin > > _______________________________________________ > 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 asl_scottj at hotmail.com Thu Dec 8 16:51:36 2005 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:51:36 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: <000e01c5fa79$221e11f0$69346e58@backroom> Message-ID: >I'm after some help with WP versus out of LOS units. Here is the situation; >a concealed enemy squad is IN a trench behind bocage. I want to place WP in >the location containing the trench. Do I add the +2 TH DRM for concealment >even though I have no LOS to the entrenched unit? If I hit and place the WP >marker must the unit in the trench take a WP NMC per A24.31? This rule says >that units in the location must take the NMC when a marker is placed in the >location or when hit on the area target type by WP. The trench rules say >that the unit IN the trench is treated as being in the same location as >units outside the trench for all purposes except weapon recovery and TEM, >suggesting that they must take the check. This seems counter intuitive to >all the rules requiring a LOS to a target to achieve an effect save for OBA >and Area target type hits from Mortars (which must have a LOS to at least >one unit in the target hex). Any advice gratefully received. Since you are talking about TH, I'm assuming you are not using Smoke Grenades. Based on Q&A I would wager that you will not be able to hit that Entrenched unit except with someone who has LOS to it...not even a MTR could hit it since there is *no* non-Hidden enemy unit in LOS to hit first. You are probably confused by the use of 'placed' in A24.31. Notice that there are 2 cases there -- the first case uses 'placed' while the second case uses 'hit'. The 'place' part refers to Smoke Grenade placement, not the actual 'placing' of a SMOKE counter. So you have to use the second part since you are firing at the target hex. Since you can't hit the Entrenched unit, then the WP can't affect it either. Q&A: A24.31 & C3.33 Does a unit in an upper level building Location that is hit by WP take the A24.31 MC even though the WP counter is placed in the ground level Location of that hex? Would a unit out of the firer's LOS? A. Yes. Only if hit by a mortar. [An97; Mw] Scott Jackson aka Stonewall From arobin at scccinternet.com Thu Dec 8 19:53:36 2005 From: arobin at scccinternet.com (Andrew R Robin) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 03:53:36 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Aslml] What happens when Water freezes....In ASL Message-ID: I have long wondered what is intended level-wise by the B21.6 Rule, which states, "When frozen, Water obstacle hexes are treated as Open ground for all purposes." Since B21.2 states that "All Water Obstacles are one level beneeath the surrounding terrain (usually level-1)..." I would assume ice would make Water obstacles open ground at -1 level. For example, 7Q10 is at level 0, so if the river on board 7 was frozen then 7Q9 would be at level -1 and the river would be a small valley. is this corect or does B21.6 mean water obstacles are open ground at level 0? PS If you missed the NYS ASL Championship, you missed a first class tournment. :) Many Thanks Andrew Robin From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Dec 8 22:23:20 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 17:23:20 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] What happens when Water freezes....In ASL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4j8ip19enmmf3kb8u8nn1fk29fdajdaouo@4ax.com> On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 03:53:36 +0000 (UTC), Andrew R Robin wrote: >I have long wondered what is intended level-wise by the B21.6 Rule, which >states, "When frozen, Water obstacle hexes are treated as Open ground for all >purposes." Since B21.2 states that "All Water Obstacles are one level beneeath >the surrounding terrain (usually level-1)..." I would assume ice would make >Water obstacles open ground at -1 level. Correct, unless they're flooded as well as frozen. >For example, 7Q10 is at level 0, so if >the river on board 7 was frozen then 7Q9 would be at level -1 and the river >would be a small valley. is this corect or does B21.6 mean water obstacles are >open ground at level 0? You are correct, the river remains at L-1. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Thu Dec 8 22:45:51 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 17:45:51 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: <000e01c5fa79$221e11f0$69346e58@backroom> References: <52168D0FD8A1DE4992D964CAB485576E0BB71B19@nymail.adl.org><007c01c5f779$bcd004e0$6600a8c0@PARENTS> <000e01c5fa79$221e11f0$69346e58@backroom> Message-ID: <5o8ip15c5cdk7cveahi2k9idq420ecj4o6@4ax.com> On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 15:24:21 -0000, "Phil Draper" wrote: >I'm after some help with WP versus out of LOS units. Here is the situation; >a concealed enemy squad is IN a trench behind bocage. I want to place WP in >the location containing the trench. Do I add the +2 TH DRM for concealment >even though I have no LOS to the entrenched unit? Yes, because you are using the Area Target Type and the hex contains a non-Hidden enemy unit that is not Known to the firer (C6.2). (EXC: If you were firing WP from a BAZ45, you would not be using the Area Target Type and thus you only pay Case K for concealed units that *are* in your LOS.) >If I hit and place the WP marker must the unit in the trench take a WP NMC per A24.31? No, it is immune per C3.4, because C3.33 says that a unit *out* of LOS can only be affected if the hardest-to-hit unit that *is* in LOS is actually hit (assuming that the firing weapon is a MTR; if it isn't a MTR, units not in LOS can't be hit regardless). Since there are *no* units in LOS, it isn't possible to hit any *unit* at all. (This doesn't stop you from firing SMOKE at the Location, though.) Objectively this may seem a little unfair; you have to pay the +2 concealment penalty for a unit that you can't even affect. Still, that's the penalty you pay for dropping fire onto a hex containing something that *you* know about, but your guys on the ground don't. >This rule says that units in the location must take the NMC when a marker is placed in the >location or when hit on the area target type by WP. Yes, but the *unit* hasn't been (can't be) "hit" by the WP, so there's no contradiction here. (It would be nice, though, if A24.31 contained an additional EXC referring to C3.4.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Dec 9 01:29:16 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:29:16 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches Message-ID: Hi, > wrote: > > >I'm after some help with WP versus out of LOS units. Here is the situation; > >a concealed enemy squad is IN a trench behind bocage. I want to place WP in > >the location containing the trench. Do I add the +2 TH DRM for concealment > >even though I have no LOS to the entrenched unit? > and Bruce Probst answered: > Yes, because you are using the Area Target Type and the hex contains a > non-Hidden enemy unit that is not Known to the firer (C6.2). (EXC: If you > were firing WP from a BAZ45, you would not be using the Area Target Type and > thus you only pay Case K for concealed units that *are* in your LOS.) > I agree to this... > >If I hit and place the WP marker must the unit in the trench take > a WP NMC per A24.31? > > No, it is immune per C3.4, because C3.33 says that a unit *out* of > LOS can only be affected if the hardest-to-hit unit that *is* in LOS is > actually hit (assuming that the firing weapon is a MTR; if it isn't a MTR, > units not in LOS can't be hit regardless). Since there are *no* units in LOS, it isn't > possible to hit any *unit* at all. (This doesn't stop you from > firing SMOKE at the Location, though.) > I disagree here. I agree that the unit is not *HIT* due to C3.33. The rule doesn't speak about *affecting* units, but about *hitting* them: "a mortar also hits all target-hex units that are out of its firer's ... LOS if that shot hit the non-hidden enemy target that currently was the hardest for it to hit " So you didn't hit the unit, but A24.31 says: "All units ... in a Location with a WP counter must take a NMC when the WP is placed ... in that Location ... or when hit by WP on the Area Target Type " Note, the unit must take a NMC when WP is placed in the Location, or when hit by WP. In this case, the unit is not hit by WP (due to C3.33), but WP is placed in its Location, which means that it has to take the NMC. Another ex is a WP shot vs a building with LOS only to level 2, but with enemy units in level 0 and 1. If hitting the hex with WP, a WP counter is placed in the ground level Location. Neither the level 0 or level 1 units are hit, but WP is placed at level 0, thus forcing the level 0 unit to take a NMC, while the level 1 unit gets away without an NMC. > >This rule says that units in the location must take the NMC when > >a marker is placed in the > >location or when hit on the area target type by WP. > > Yes, but the *unit* hasn't been (can't be) "hit" by the WP, so > there's no contradiction here. (It would be nice, though, if A24.31 > contained an additional EXC referring to C3.4.) As said above, I agree that the unit hasn't been (and cannot be) hit, but it *is* in a Location where a WP counter is placed, which is one of the two things that requires a WP NMC. From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Dec 9 01:45:14 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:45:14 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Question regarding Concealment stripping Message-ID: > On 12/8/05, Allan, Scott K, CFSMD wrote: > > If I look at the Concealment Loss Table, it refers to "LOS RANGE > >FROM> NEAREST GOOD ORDER OR UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND > >UNIT"..........which I > > guess, begs the question, Is a stack of dummies considered to be in "GO" > > or an "UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND UNIT"?? > > and Sam Tyson answered: > No, dummies are not Good Order units. > This is correct. I just wanted to explain a bit more since Scott Allan seems to be a bit confused by the Concealment Gain/Loss Table. It says "LOS RANGE FROM NEAREST GOOD ORDER OR UNBROKEN ENEMY GROUND UNIT", but with "GOOD ORDER" in Red, and this is extremely important. If you the look at the top of the left column, you see that its says "?" IS GAINED in black, and "?"/HIP IS LOST in RED. The coloring means that LOS from "GOOD ORDER" units are used to determine "?"-loss, and LOS from "UNBROKEN" units are used to determine "?"-gain. A dummy stack is not "Good Order", so it doesn't make you lose "?", but it is unbroken, so it will prevent "?"-gain. The same is true for berserks or Melee units. You can run around in OG and fire in LOS of those without losing concealment, but you will never gain concealment in their LOS (at least not within 16 hexes range). From kevinkenneally at isot.com Fri Dec 9 06:08:51 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 08:08:51 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Test message Message-ID: <31467.155.215.21.2.1134137331.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> How did this work? ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From david at stanaway.net Fri Dec 9 08:48:28 2005 From: david at stanaway.net (David Stanaway) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:48:28 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Test message In-Reply-To: <31467.155.215.21.2.1134137331.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> References: <31467.155.215.21.2.1134137331.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Message-ID: <1134146908.25661.6.camel@dmxnocws13.dialmex.net> On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 08:08 -0600, kevinkenneally at isot.com wrote: > How did this work? It made my computer start making funny noises. I think its a brew up, what did you put in the breech? APCR? From pferraro at greenepa.net Fri Dec 9 09:15:16 2005 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 12:15:16 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [Aslml] Test message In-Reply-To: <1134146908.25661.6.camel@dmxnocws13.dialmex.net> Message-ID: > It made my computer start making funny noises. I think its a brew up, > what did you put in the breech? APCR? Your PC must have crappy armor. You need a nice manly PC with a 26 F/S/R. From rbk at capdm.com Fri Dec 9 09:29:17 2005 From: rbk at capdm.com (Richard Kirby) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 17:29:17 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] RB campaign and fires Message-ID: <4399BEED.1030906@capdm.com> Hi, If the Russian player sets blazes in buildings in an RB campaign game, the hexes ablaze become automatically controlled by the German player on that campaign day. Does this mean, that they could be included in the perimeter determination process? Also, if they are determined to be isolated, and obviously empty of German units, and therefore of type A, and happen to be surrounded by Russian controlled hexes, do they revert to Russian control for the next campaign day? How about when they are adjacent to a map edge that is about to open up as eligable for German entry in the next day? Thanks Richard. From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Dec 9 11:20:16 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?US-ASCII?Q?Ole_Boe?=) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:20:16 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] RB campaign and fires In-Reply-To: <4399BEED.1030906@capdm.com> Message-ID: Hi, Richard Kirby wrote: > If the Russian player sets blazes in buildings in an RB campaign game, > the hexes ablaze become automatically controlled by the German player on > that campaign day. Does this mean, that they could be included in the > perimeter determination process? Yep. They're German controlled just as good as any Location that German MMC have actaully entered. > Also, if they are determined to be > isolated, and obviously empty of German units, and therefore of type A, > and happen to be surrounded by Russian controlled hexes, do they revert > to Russian control for the next campaign day? Yes, so it's a nice trick for the Russian player to do this while the buildings are still well inside their own perimeter. > How about when they are > adjacent to a map edge that is about to open up as eligable for German > entry in the next day? > CG9 makes it clear that the hexes don't change control due to allowed German entrance, and such a pocket is still a pecket where all ADJACENT locations are Russian-controlled, giving the control back to the Russian player - unless there's something I've forgot, since there's some years since my last RB CG. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Dec 9 17:09:05 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 12:09:05 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0a4kp1lpiu56qk0q6e1d4htnrh4bfa1b74@4ax.com> On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:29:16 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >Note, the unit must take a NMC when WP is placed in the Location, or when hit by WP. In this case, the unit is not hit by WP (due to C3.33), but WP is placed in its Location, which means that it has to take the NMC. No, I disagree. The unit is immune to all effects of the attack. I agree with Scott J. when he pointed out that the "placed" in this sentence is referring to SMOKE grenade placement. Correctly considered in context, the word "placed" in A24.31 is matching the phrase "placement of WP grenades" in A24.3, *not* the generic use of the word "placed" in the sense of "putting something there" (the "something", in this case, being a counter). A24.3 is merely pointing out that there are two ways of getting original (i.e., non-drifting) WP into a hex: placement by WP grenades, or WP ammo (requiring that something be "hit") fired by Ordnance. (The third way, OBA, is covered in the next sentence directing you to C1.71.) The alternative -- that the rules state that a unit is immune, but it gets affected any way -- is rather ridiculous, wouldn't you agree? >Another ex is a WP shot vs a building with LOS only to level 2, but with enemy units in level 0 and 1. If hitting the hex with WP, a WP counter is placed in the ground level Location. Neither the level 0 or level 1 units are hit, but WP is placed at level 0, thus forcing the level 0 unit to take a NMC, while the level 1 unit gets away without an NMC. No, both the units are immune. I accept that A24.31 could be worded better, but I had already pointed that out, hadn't I? Actually, what really bothers me about A24.31 is that: (i) it appears to say that WP grenades *never* cause a MC on anyone other than the throwing unit (and any units moving in a stack with it), because of the EXC that reads (after errata) "[EXC: non-moving units in First Fire]". Since only a currently-moving unit can place WP grenades, all other units are non-moving, except when moving as a stack, right? But that's not what it *means*; it's referring to WP *created by* First Fire. It's also incorrectly located in the sentence (it should not be coming after the "placed", but rather after the "hit by WP"). (As a side issue, A24.31 also appears to indicate that WP fired by a BAZ45 never causes casualties, because it isn't a grenade and doesn't use the Area Target Type.) and (ii) it doesn't really make it clear that WP can only cause casualties in the specific Location containing the WP counter; other Locations within the same hex are not affected unless they have also been "hit" on the Area Target Type (so long as the WP counter can reach that elevation). Note that C1.71 states that the NMC in every Location caused by WP OBA is an EXC to A24.31, although it's really only an EXC to the non-ATT bit. Basically, the entire second sentence needs a thorough rewording/replacement, because in its current form it's too terse for what it's trying to accomplish. I would prefer to see something like: "All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV in a Location where a WP grenade is placed, or where one or more units are hit by WP fired by Ordnance, must take a NMC [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that Location (24.4); if a SMOKE counter cannot be placed into that Location (24.1, E3.53, E3.734)]. Units in other Locations within the same hex that the WP rises to (24.4) must similarly take a NMC, but only if hit on the Area Target Type per C3.33 [EXC: PB (B30.34); units immune per C3.4]. WP fired by Ordnance as First Fire (C8.6) cannot affect non-moving units. Units entering a Location containing an existing WP counter do not take casualties from that WP counter. Drifting WP (24.61) does not cause casualties." (The rest of A24.31 is fine as written; the above is *only* intended to replace the second sentence, not the whole paragraph.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Dec 9 18:16:44 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 13:16:44 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: <0a4kp1lpiu56qk0q6e1d4htnrh4bfa1b74@4ax.com> References: <0a4kp1lpiu56qk0q6e1d4htnrh4bfa1b74@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 12:09:05 +1100, Bruce Probst wrote: >Basically, the entire second sentence needs a thorough rewording/replacement, >because in its current form it's too terse for what it's trying to accomplish. >I would prefer to see something like: > >"All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV in a Location >where a WP grenade is placed, or where one or more units are hit by WP fired >by Ordnance, must take a NMC [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that Location >(24.4); if a SMOKE counter cannot be placed into that Location (24.1, E3.53, >E3.734)]. Units in other Locations within the same hex that the WP rises to >(24.4) must similarly take a NMC, but only if hit on the Area Target Type per >C3.33 [EXC: PB (B30.34); units immune per C3.4]. WP fired by Ordnance as >First Fire (C8.6) cannot affect non-moving units. Units entering a Location >containing an existing WP counter do not take casualties from that WP counter. >Drifting WP (24.61) does not cause casualties." Grr. On re-reading I see that this version still doesn't address the original question. Either insert "non-immune (C3.4)" between "All" and "units" in the first line, or insert "units immune per C3.4" in the first EXC (3rd line). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Kids come a-runnin' for the great taste of raw goat." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From rbk at capdm.com Sat Dec 10 01:54:33 2005 From: rbk at capdm.com (Richard Kirby) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 09:54:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Aslml] aslml Digest, Vol 484, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Ole, I thought this was the case, but the reason I asked was due to the last part of the last sentences of O11.6094 and O11.6095, which say: ..."those formerly Isolated rubble hexes become Controlled by the opponent." This is to do with extinguishing blazes, which happens after any perimeter readjustments due to type A or type B isolation, and for buildings and factories, turns them into rubble. So, the buildings become rubble, and then since they were formerly Isolated, does this mean they do indeed come back to German control? This would obviously impact Russian setup considerations, as well as having to think harder about when to fire buildings. What do you think? Cheers Richard > > Hi, > Richard Kirby wrote: > > > If the Russian player sets blazes in buildings in an RB campaign game, > > the hexes ablaze become automatically controlled by the German player on > > that campaign day. Does this mean, that they could be included in the > > perimeter determination process? > Yep. They're German controlled just as good as any Location that German MMC > have actaully entered. > > > Also, if they are determined to be > > isolated, and obviously empty of German units, and therefore of type A, > > and happen to be surrounded by Russian controlled hexes, do they revert > > to Russian control for the next campaign day? > Yes, so it's a nice trick for the Russian player to do this while the > buildings are still well inside their own perimeter. > > > How about when they are > > adjacent to a map edge that is about to open up as eligable for German > > entry in the next day? > > > CG9 makes it clear that the hexes don't change control due to allowed German > entrance, and such a pocket is still a pecket where all ADJACENT locations > are Russian-controlled, giving the control back to the Russian player - > unless there's something I've forgot, since there's some years since my last > RB CG. > --------------------------------------- > If you cut off my head, what do I say? > Me and my body, or me and my head? > > Ole Boe > From oleboe at broadpark.no Sat Dec 10 02:57:25 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 11:57:25 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] RB campaign and fires In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Richard Kirby wrote: > > > Also, if they are determined to be > > > isolated, and obviously empty of German units, and therefore > > > of type A, > > > and happen to be surrounded by Russian controlled hexes, do > > > they revert > > > to Russian control for the next campaign day? I answered: > > Yes, so it's a nice trick for the Russian player to do this while the > > buildings are still well inside their own perimeter. Richard again: > I thought this was the case, but the reason I asked was due to the last > part of the last sentences of O11.6094 and O11.6095, which say: > > ..."those formerly Isolated rubble hexes become Controlled by the > opponent." > > This is to do with extinguishing blazes, which happens after any perimeter > readjustments due to type A or type B isolation, and for buildings and > factories, turns them into rubble. > Oops, you're right. I guess that I didn't really answer exactly the question you asked. I assumed that the blazes were already estinguished in my answer. The blaze counter effectively counts as a German control marker, so the control can *never* revert back to Russian control as long as the blaze counter remains (at least almost never, there's one rare exception). It's not until *after* the blazes have become rubble that the Russian can regain control by O11.6062. So the sequence is that the blazes are extinguished per 11.609 at the end of a CG date, and may then revert back to Russian control during the next CG date - either by Russian MMC or per O11.6062 as in my previous answer. --------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say? Me and my body, or me and my head? Ole Boe From robertthepastor at juno.com Sat Dec 10 22:44:30 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:44:30 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? Message-ID: <20051210.224431.5844.5.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Listers, Howdy! My Pz4 is in the building at 41V7 (CA=V8/W8), at the base level of the building which is level 1. My Pz4 uses Reverse movement to create a Breach through the Rowhouse black-bar across the 41V7/V6 hexside. All buildings are wooden. There is a Known Russian 447 at 41V6 *and* 41V6h1. (I noticed an AFV may use Reverse movement to Breach a Rowhouse black-bar but may not use Reverse movement to Breach a Factory Interior Wall, and that seems a bit strange.) I announced an OVR with the MP expenditure to Reverse through the black bar. Before the OVR, I passed my Bog Check DR with a 3 (cdr = 2). The Breach has been created. QUESTION #1: What two Locations does the Breach "connect" to? IOW, the Breach is at level **one** in V7 (which is the base level of the building and where I started) but it would seem that the Breach is also at level **one** in V6 (which is NOT the base level of the building and where I entered). QUESTION #2: If the answer to question #1 is, the Breach is at level one for both hexes, does this mean my Pz4 entered hex V6 at the level ONE Location of the building, even if temporarily? QUESTION #3: If my Pz4 entered the level one Location of the building at V6, even if temporarily, and subsequently found itself at the ground level of V6, exactly which 447 (or both??) got to experience the OVR? Thanks and take care, Robert "Look! Up in the Sky! It's ... " Hammond From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Dec 11 01:00:57 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:00:57 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? In-Reply-To: <20051210.224431.5844.5.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20051210.224431.5844.5.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:44:30 -0800, Robert M Hammond wrote: >Howdy! My Pz4 is in the building at 41V7 (CA=V8/W8), at the base level >of the building which is level 1. My Pz4 uses Reverse movement to create >a Breach through the Rowhouse black-bar across the 41V7/V6 hexside. All >buildings are wooden. There is a Known Russian 447 at 41V6 *and* 41V6h1. OK. > (I noticed an AFV may use Reverse movement to Breach a Rowhouse >black-bar but may not use Reverse movement to Breach a Factory Interior >Wall, and that seems a bit strange.) Why? I don't know about your town, but every wooden terrace house *I've* ever seen -- or even the brick ones -- are not built like they were Stalingrad factories. I doubt that European terrace houses are any different. A rowhouse interior wall is a normal building wall without any doors or windows in it, not a major architectural strongpoint designed to support hundreds of tons of concrete overhead. It would, instead, be extraordinarily strange if the two rules were the same. [Admittedly it *is* odd that the Stalingrad builders didn't construct their interior walls out of Wallanium (tm), the indestructible material used to make regular ASL walls. There doesn't seem to have been any local shortage of it, as there are many walls on the Stalingrad maps. Perhaps there's just some technical reason for it known only to bricklayers and stonemasons.] >I announced an OVR with the MP >expenditure to Reverse through the black bar. Before the OVR, I passed >my Bog Check DR with a 3 (cdr = 2). The Breach has been created. And which OVR would that be, then? D7.13: "An OVR may not be made using Reverse Movement." In fact, of course, there's no movement at all, at least not as you describe it. You occupy a split level building, of the type described at B23.721. "Movement within the building from the higher hex to the lower hex must be made from a building level one lower than the building level moved into ...", i.e., L0 of the higher hex connects to L1 of the lower hex. B23.4 tells us "A vehicle ... may never occupy an upper building level." Therefore, no such movement is allowed. To move from ground level to ground level of a split level rowhouse requires movement "in a manner similar to Rowhouse Bypass movement" which is only an option for Infantry. Vehicles must employ regular VBM, not possible from within the building obstacle itself! The only legal reverse moves available to the vehicle are: it can reverse move into 41U7 (cost of 4 MP), or use reverse VBM to occupy 41V6, bypassing along the U7/V6 hexside (cost 8 MP, no Bog, no OVR, no Breach). The Breach has *not* been created. [Note that the above rules mean that it's equally illegal for a vehicle to use normal forward movement to move directly from the ground level of the 41V7 building to the ground level of the 41V6 building; the vehicle may only move from one hex to the other via VBM in one (or both) of the hexes.] >QUESTION #1: What two Locations does the Breach "connect" to? IOW, the >Breach is at level **one** in V7 (which is the base level of the building >and where I started) but it would seem that the Breach is also at level >**one** in V6 (which is NOT the base level of the building and where I >entered). What on earth would make you think that the vehicle has entered L0 & L1 of the building at the same time? That's flat-out illegal: B23.42 "No unit may occupy more than one level at once." It's a moot point, of course, since the move is illegal (even with forward movement), and there is no Breach. >QUESTION #2: If the answer to question #1 is, the Breach is at level one >for both hexes, does this mean my Pz4 entered hex V6 at the level ONE >Location of the building, even if temporarily? NA. The move is illegal (even with forward movement), and there is no Breach. >QUESTION #3: If my Pz4 entered the level one Location of the building at >V6, even if temporarily, and subsequently found itself at the ground >level of V6, exactly which 447 (or both??) got to experience the OVR? NA. The move is illegal (even with forward movement), and there is no Breach, and no OVR. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know you want me, baby!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From robertthepastor at juno.com Sun Dec 11 18:02:49 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 18:02:49 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? Message-ID: <20051211.180322.25340.0.RobertThePastor@juno.com> On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:00:57 +1100 Bruce Probst writes: > On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:44:30 -0800, Robert M Hammond > wrote: > > >Howdy! My Pz4 is in the building at 41V7 (CA=V8/W8), at the base level > >of the building which is level 1. My Pz4 uses Reverse movement to create > >a Breach through the Rowhouse black-bar across the 41V7/V6 hexside. All > >buildings are wooden. There is a Known Russian 447 at 41V6 *and* 41V6h1. > > OK. > > > (I noticed an AFV may use Reverse movement to Breach a Rowhouse > >black-bar but may not use Reverse movement to Breach a Factory Interior > >Wall, and that seems a bit strange.) > > Why? I don't know about your town, but every wooden terrace house *I've* ever > seen -- or even the brick ones -- are not built like they were Stalingrad > factories. I doubt that European terrace houses are any different. A > rowhouse interior wall is a normal building wall without any doors or windows > in it, not a major architectural strongpoint designed to support hundreds of > tons of concrete overhead. It would, instead, be extraordinarily strange if > the two rules were the same. Bruce, first off, a Factory Interior Wall is adding support to a metal roof which normally does NOT have the inherent strength to support itself. The FIW is only a base. Also, there is NO concrete overhead. Metal beams, sure. But "hundreds of tons"!??! Dude, you are now talking about the German sub pins they built in France! As for Reverse movement through a FIW, sure. The *only* draw back would be the _possible_ damaging of the engine compartment which could easily be part of the Bog Check. Why do *I* disagree with you? I used to be a Marine tank (M60A1) hull mech for 4.5 months before I trtransferredo the 3rd MAW. I can guarantee you that most of the tank's weight was in the *rear* of the vehicle. The engine *I* had to pull just for an oil change weighed about 2.7 tons. So, yeah, *I* don't see a problem with a tank Reversing through a FIW. What _IS_ weird (and I know you already have mentioned this to me before) that a tank with a L or LL Gun does *not* have to change its TCA when crashing through buildings/FIW. > > [Admittedly it *is* odd that the Stalingrad builders didn't construct their > interior walls out of Wallanium (tm), the indestructible material used to make > regular ASL walls. There doesn't seem to have been any local shortage of it, > as there are many walls on the Stalingrad maps. Perhaps there's just some > technical reason for it known only to bricklayers and stonemasons.] Bruce, I have tried to tell you .... the Masons are really a cult and have "cut" a deal with the devil! :) I think a tank which goes through a wall or hedge should create a Breach. But, I digress. > > >I announced an OVR with the MP > >expenditure to Reverse through the black bar. Before the OVR, I passed > >my Bog Check DR with a 3 (cdr = 2). The Breach has been created. > > And which OVR would that be, then? D7.13: "An OVR may not be made using > Reverse Movement." Oops! Details, details. Okay, so I did NOT do an OVR. But, I really thought about it! > > In fact, of course, there's no movement at all, at least not as you describe > it. You occupy a split level building, of the type described at B23.721. > "Movement within the building from the higher hex to the lower hex must be > made from a building level one lower than the building level moved into ...", > i.e., L0 of the higher hex connects to L1 of the lower hex. B23.4 tells us "A > vehicle ... may never occupy an upper building level." Therefore, no such > movement is allowed. To move from ground level to ground level of a split > level rowhouse requires movement "in a manner similar to Rowhouse Bypass > movement" which is only an option for Infantry. Vehicles must employ regular > VBM, not possible from within the building obstacle itself! The only legal > reverse moves available to the vehicle are: it can reverse move into 41U7 > (cost of 4 MP), or use reverse VBM to occupy 41V6, bypassing along the U7/V6 > hexside (cost 8 MP, no Bog, no OVR, no Breach). Hmm, well, when you correctly point out the rules that I just ignored. Again, details, details .... > > The Breach has *not* been created. I agree. > > [Note that the above rules mean that it's equally illegal for a vehicle to use > normal forward movement to move directly from the ground level of the 41V7 > building to the ground level of the 41V6 building; the vehicle may only move > from one hex to the other via VBM in one (or both) of the hexes.] Nuts! That is what I was going to try to do. :) > > >QUESTION #1: What two Locations does the Breach "connect" to? IOW, the > >Breach is at level **one** in V7 (which is the base level of the building > >and where I started) but it would seem that the Breach is also at level > >**one** in V6 (which is NOT the base level of the building and where I > >entered). > > What on earth would make you think that the vehicle has entered L0 & L1 of the > building at the same time? That's flat-out illegal: B23.42 "No unit may > occupy more than one level at once." Okay, Bruce. Relax, take a breath, and step away from the keyboard. I *never* said my tank was at two different Locations at the same time. Please, go back and re-read what I wrote. If you still feel that way, write me off-list and share it with me. No hard feelings. Take care, Robert "Reversing my position" Hammond From danielzucker at comcast.net Sun Dec 11 22:24:02 2005 From: danielzucker at comcast.net (daniel zucker) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:24:02 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? References: <20051211.180322.25340.0.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: <001e01c5fee4$acc2bfd0$6401a8c0@danielmpnlmqxq> Robert or may I call you Bob I read both your messages and I am glad that you realized once it was pointed out that you move you claimed to make was not allowed by the rules. But I feel I must say that with no disrespect to your service in the Marine Corp (many of us are also former or current service personal) your experience in real life even if it were only as a weekend back yard mechanic or a quantum mechanic has no bearing on the world of ASL. There are many strange and wonderful things that happen in this game and none of it really has any relationship to real life TM. Daniel From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Dec 12 04:30:51 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:30:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches Message-ID: <218cfdd311d0.439d7b8b@broadpark.no> Hi, I wrote: > >Note, the unit must take a NMC when WP is placed in the Location, > or when hit by WP. In this case, the unit is not hit by WP (due to > C3.33), but WP is placed in its Location, which means that it has > to take the NMC. > and Bruce Probst answered: > No, I disagree. The unit is immune to all effects of the attack. It's certainly not immune to the Hindrance for firing out of smoke, but that may not be part of what you consider an effect of the attack... > I agree with Scott J. when he pointed out that the "placed" in this > sentence is referring to SMOKE grenade placement. > > Correctly considered in context, the word "placed" in A24.31 is > matching the phrase "placement of WP grenades" in A24.3, *not* the generic use > of the word "placed" in the sense of "putting something there" (the > "something", in this> case, being a counter). A24.3 is merely pointing out that there > are two ways of getting original (i.e., non-drifting) WP into a hex: placement > by WP grenades, or WP ammo (requiring that something be "hit") fired by > Ordnance.(The third way, OBA, is covered in the next sentence > directing you to C1.71.) > I can live with this interpretation, but I don't think it's clear from the context, especially not when you consider C1.71, saying: "EXC: during the PFPh and DFPh, a WP FFE subjects all vulnerable units/PRC in every Blast Area hex—not just those in Locations where WP counters are placed—to an A24.31 NMC" C1.71 is not talking about infantry usage, but still uses the word "placed". Also, the "[EXC: non-moving units in First Fire]" that is an exception to WP being placed in the Location, has absolutely no meaning unless "placed" includes ordnance WP - since ordnance WP is the only WP that can be "placed" during First Fire. So if the "placed" confused me, then it certainly confused Perry as well... Anyway, I can live with the interpretation that "placed" in A24.31 means "placed (per A24.1)", but think this needs errata to clarify it. > The alternative -- that the rules state that a unit is immune, but > it gets affected any way -- is rather ridiculous, wouldn't you agree? No. The rules says that the unit is immune to being "Hit", not that it is immune to any effects. I don't think it's ridiculous that a unit suffers an NMC when WP is placed in its Location regardless of whether the unit is hit or not. The chemical agents still bother you if you're inside the entrenchment, and the firer get the +2 DRM due to the unit being out of LOS, to counter the omniscient player syndrome. > Actually, what really bothers me about A24.31 is that: > > (i) it appears to say that WP grenades *never* cause a MC on > anyone other than the throwing unit (and any units moving in a stack with it), > because of the EXC that reads (after errata) "[EXC: non-moving units in First > Fire]". I totally disagree with this logic. > Since only a currently-moving unit can place WP grenades, all other > units are non-moving, except when moving as a stack, right? Right. > But that's not what it *means*; it's referring to WP *created by* First Fire. That's what it says as well IMHO. "First Fire" is the portion of defensive fire that occurs in the enemy MPh, so the exception cannot mean smoke placed by Infantry during its MPh as you imply. > It's also incorrectly located in the sentence (it should not be coming after > the "placed", but rather after the "hit by WP"). > But A8.1(and C3.4 already makes clear that only the moving unit can be "hit" during First Fire, so there's no need at all for an exception after the "hit by WP" part. The only reason I can think of for the exception is if "placed" includes WP ordnance, to clarify that "placed in the Location" only affects the moving unit during First Fire. But then you say that "placed" doesn't mean this. I'm tempted to agree with you, but if you're right, then this exception is meaningless! I think I'll ask Perry about this... > (As a side issue, A24.31 also appears to indicate that WP fired by > a BAZ45 never causes casualties, because it isn't a grenade and doesn't > use the Area Target Type.) > But WP is "placed" in the Location being hit. One more argument for "placed" not only referring to A24.1. > and (ii) it doesn't really make it clear that WP can only cause > casualties in the specific Location containing the WP counter; other Locations > within the same hex are not affected unless they have also been "hit" on the > Area Target Type (so long as the WP counter can reach that elevation). I disagree. I think this part is clear, since an upper level unit out of LOS, are not "hit", and does not get a WP counter placed in its Location, so there's simply nothing in A24.31 implying that it should take the NMC. > Basically, the entire second sentence needs a thorough > rewording/replacement,because in its current form it's too terse > for what it's trying to accomplish. > I would prefer to see something like: > I think you write it 3 times longer than it needs to be. Let's *assume* that "placed" refers to A24.1 only (as you think), and look at your suggestion: > "All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV in a > Locationwhere a WP grenade is placed, or where one or more units > are hit by WP fired by Ordnance, must take a NMC [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that > Location(24.4); if a SMOKE counter cannot be placed into that > Location (24.1, E3.53, E3.734)]. The additional exceptions are either uneccessary or errata. There's no reason to point to 24.1, because if a counter cannot be placed, it is obviously not placed and therefore this rule doesn't apply in the first case :-) As for the E3 exceptions, I see nothing in those rules that tell me that the WP NMC is NA. A24.1 requires the unit to be "hit by WP", not also that a WP counter is placed. E3.53 and E3.734 only says that the WP counter cannot be placed, but mentions nothing about making it illegal to fire and hit with the WP. Whether it makes sense or not from a realistic view that you can fire WP, hit a unit so that it must take an NMC, but not get any SMOKE due to the Mud - is something I don't know. But adding this exception looks like a realism based errata to me. > Units in other Locations within the same hex that the > WP rises to (24.4) must similarly take a NMC, but only if hit on the Area > Target Type per C3.33 [EXC: PB (B30.34); units immune per C3.4]. You have already stated that the units must be "hit by WP", and already mentioned the height restriction, so this part seems totally redundant, and should not be added. > WP fired by > Ordnance as First Fire (C8.6) cannot affect non-moving units. A unit cannot be "hit" by anything during First Fire unless it is moving (C3.4 & A8.1), so this is redundant as well. > Units entering > a Location containing an existing WP counter do not take casualties from that > WP counter. Drifting WP (24.61) does not cause casualties." I don't see the need for giving those more space than in the original rule. > Grr. On re-reading I see that this version still doesn't address the original > question. Either insert "non-immune (C3.4)" between "All" and "units" in the > first line, or insert "units immune per C3.4" in the first EXC (3rd line). This is not necessary if "placed" really means "placed per A24.1", since the unit in the original question wasn't "hit by WP". Here's my suggestion for the same sentence (still assuming that "placed" means per A24.1 only): All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV must take a NMC when a WP counter is placed (per 24.1) in that Location (not when it drifts or they move into it) or when hit by Ordnance WP [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that elevation (24.4)]. I think that covers everything, and even fits nicely into the space in the ASLRB. Now, if "placed" includes ordnance counters, the rule is actually correct as it's written. In this case, it could benefit from a clarification that "placed" includes counters placed due to ordnance hits as well though. This could be: All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV must take a NMC when a WP counter is placed (24.1, C8.6) [EXC: non-moving units in First Fire] in that Location (not when it drifts or they move into it) or when hit by WP on the Area Target Type [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that elevation (24.4)]. From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Dec 12 05:14:10 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:14:10 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches Message-ID: <2580c09d6cfb.439d85b2@broadpark.no> Hi, Scott Jackson wrote: > Since you are talking about TH, I'm assuming you are not using > Smoke Grenades. > > Based on Q&A I would wager that you will not be able to hit that > Entrenched unit except with someone who has LOS to it...not even a MTR could > hit it since there is *no* non-Hidden enemy unit in LOS to hit first. > > You are probably confused by the use of 'placed' in A24.31. > Notice that there are 2 cases there -- the first case uses 'placed' while the > second case uses 'hit'. The 'place' part refers to Smoke Grenade > placement, not the actual 'placing' of a SMOKE counter. So you have to use the > second part since you are firing at the target hex. Since you can't hit the > Entrenched unit, then the WP can't affect it either. > I wrote in my previous post why I think this answer is problematic, and why I believe "placed" includes placment of an ordnance WP counter, but can summarize it here: 1) It makes the "[EXC: non-moving units in First Fire]" errata superflous and incorrectly-placed. 2) It makes units immune to WP counters placed by BAZ. 3) C1.71 says "...not just those in Locations where WP counters are placed..." where it is obvious that it doesn't mean Smoke Grenade placement, but rather 5/8" WP counter placement. > Q&A: > > A24.31 & C3.33 Does a unit in an upper level building Location > that is hit by WP take the A24.31 MC even though the WP counter is placed in > the ground level Location of that hex? Would a unit out of the firer's LOS? > A. Yes. Only if hit by a mortar. [An97; Mw] > At first glance, this Q&A seemed to say that the unit out of LOS due to being behind a wall, beneath a Trench is immune. But when looking closer, I see that this Q&A addresses a different situation, and is fully compliant with my interpretation (that "placed" includes 5/8" WP counters). If you read the Q&A, you see that the unit in question is "in an *upper* level building Location". Since any WP counter is placed on ground level, there will never be placed a WP counter in its Location. The WP counter is placed at ground level, and I believe that if a similar question had been asked about a unit out of LOS at ground level, the second answer would be "Yes". The reasoning is of course that the unit must either 1) be in a Location where a WP counter is placed, or 2) be hit by ATT WP The upper level unit out of LOS is does not fulfill either requirement , except if hit by a mortar per C3.33 - thus the answer in the Q&A. A ground level unit out of LOS though, does fulfill the first requirement, and will therefore take the NMC. From keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 10:54:15 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:54:15 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] BV Removed From Preorder Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512121054n4f71a20bjab9deed9d561fdba@mail.gmail.com> Hello gentlemen: Beyond Valor has now been removed from preorder, which means we have begun collating the game for shipment. Thought everyone would like to know, Keith MMP From craig.p.walters at monsanto.com Mon Dec 12 11:35:02 2005 From: craig.p.walters at monsanto.com (WALTERS, CRAIG P [AG/1000]) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:35:02 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] AoA for Christmas? Message-ID: There we were told at a tournament in July that AoA would be available by Christmas. Apparently that is not going to happen. Any updates? Craig -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of keith dalton Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 12:54 PM To: ASL Mailing List Subject: [Aslml] BV Removed From Preorder Hello gentlemen: Beyond Valor has now been removed from preorder, which means we have begun collating the game for shipment. Thought everyone would like to know, Keith MMP _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 kevinkenneally at isot.com Mon Dec 12 11:50:55 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:50:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] AoA for Christmas? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64610.155.215.21.2.1134417055.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Craig, I know AoA(Axis of Allies)WILL be available for Chisrtmas. But I suspect AoO will be available by February for Winter Offensive in Bowie MD. Kevin > There we were told at a tournament in July that AoA would be available by > Christmas. Apparently that is not going to happen. Any updates? > > Craig > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of keith dalton > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 12:54 PM > To: ASL Mailing List > Subject: [Aslml] BV Removed From Preorder > > Hello gentlemen: > > Beyond Valor has now been removed from preorder, which means we have > begun collating the game for shipment. > > Thought everyone would like to know, > > Keith > MMP > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > 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 keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 12:06:32 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:06:32 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] AoA for Christmas? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512121206x39c16937jb8669c4a0da2fc32@mail.gmail.com> All the "takes a long time to print parts" are at the printers, with counters having been approved week before last. We have a few more bits and pieces to send off, but none take as long as counters, Chapter H, box, etc. Most likely we're looking at Winter Offensive in mid-January with the holidays approaching. On 12/12/05, WALTERS, CRAIG P [AG/1000] wrote: > There we were told at a tournament in July that AoA would be available by > Christmas. Apparently that is not going to happen. Any updates? > > Craig > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of keith dalton > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 12:54 PM > To: ASL Mailing List > Subject: [Aslml] BV Removed From Preorder > > Hello gentlemen: > > Beyond Valor has now been removed from preorder, which means we have > begun collating the game for shipment. > > Thought everyone would like to know, > > Keith > MMP > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > 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 keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 12:21:18 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:21:18 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Winter Offensive (WAS: AoA for Christmas?) Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512121221o363b01d6t1cdb71cf43488bb6@mail.gmail.com> While I am at it, let me remind everyone about MMP's 15th Annual Winter Offensive Tournament, featuring ASL for ALS! WHEN? JANUARY 12 - JANUARY 15 2006 Thursday 1700 Hours - Sunday 2000 Hours WHERE? COMFORT INN U.S. 50 & U.S. 301 @ MD 3 Bowie, MD 20718 301-464-0089 WEEKEND REGISTRATION $20 ($30 AFTER 01/01/06) ONE DAY REGISTRATION $10 ($12 AFTER 01/01/06) Room Rates (tax not incl): $95.40 (don't forget to mention WINTER OFFENSIVE to get the special room rate which (while also being $15/day less than last year) now includes a hot breakfast buffet!) THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART! Registration fees and tee-shirt profits are donated to the fight against amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or Lou Gehrig's disease. Over the past two years, ASL for ALS has collected and donated almost ten thousand dollars ($10,000) to this very worthy cause. Please come out and help us increase that total while having a great time playing some great games. Go here to register and pick up a T-shirt: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/wo.php From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Dec 12 12:22:57 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 07:22:57 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: <2580c09d6cfb.439d85b2@broadpark.no> References: <2580c09d6cfb.439d85b2@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:14:10 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >3) C1.71 says "...not just those in Locations where WP counters are placed..." where it is obvious that it doesn't mean Smoke Grenade placement, but rather 5/8" WP counter placement. Yes, because that's the explicit context that C1.71 is using. "WP counters are placed." This observation doesn't really make the argument that you think it's making; all you've noticed is that C1.71 says what it says. It doesn't say anything about what A24.31 says, or how it says it. >> Q&A: >> >> A24.31 & C3.33 Does a unit in an upper level building Location >> that is hit by WP take the A24.31 MC even though the WP counter is placed in >> the ground level Location of that hex? Would a unit out of the firer's LOS? >> A. Yes. Only if hit by a mortar. [An97; Mw] >If you read the Q&A, you see that the unit in question is "in an *upper* level building Location". Since any WP counter is placed on ground level, there will never be placed a WP counter in its Location. Never? Not even a WP grenade? It's fascinating that we can both read the same Q&A and get two different answers from it. I read the above and see nothing that disagrees with my original statements. A unit out of the firer's LOS is immune to the NMC effects of WP, unless "hit" by a MTR, which is perfectly consistent with C3.33; if the unit were immune per C3.4, a MTR would be unable to "hit" it even if firing HE. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know you want me, baby!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From fingram at powercom.net Mon Dec 12 12:35:02 2005 From: fingram at powercom.net (Fred Ingram) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:35:02 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Factory walls Message-ID: From: Robert M Hammond Subject: Re: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? To: bprobst at netspace.net.au Cc: Aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Message-ID: <20051211.180322.25340.0.RobertThePastor at juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Bruce, first off, a Factory Interior Wall is adding support to a metal roof which normally does NOT have the inherent strength to support itself. The FIW is only a base. Also, there is NO concrete overhead. Metal beams, sure. But "hundreds of tons"!??! Dude, you are now talking about the German sub pins they built in France! Robert - have YOU ever been inside a modern manufacturing facility that produces or manipulates large objects (I have a machine tool background). I am thinkling about factories that would produce tanks or other vehicldes that have to be lifted as a complete assembly or in its major componenets such as a large casting, forging, or weldment. In these types of facilities, the "interior factory wall" may be a bearing wall separating the different bays. In these cases, there is usually an overhead crane straddling the bay (which traverses up and down as well as acrross), and thus you are supporintg he weight of the crane, as well as it's object that is being handled - NOT just a light metal roof. The cranes would also be used to move, reposition large machines such as lathes, mills, planers, etc These walls are not like your apartment building ========================================================= Fred B. Ingram: Project Manager - Universal Technical Systems Visit the UTS Website: http://www.uts.com Corporate Headquarters Rockford Trust Building 202 West State Street, Suite 700 Rockford, IL 61101 USA Business Phone (Primary): 815-963-2220 Business Phone (Secondary): 920-929-4065 Business FAX: 815-963-8884 Business E-mail: FredI at uts.com or fingram at powercom.net From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Dec 12 12:52:47 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 07:52:47 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: <218cfdd311d0.439d7b8b@broadpark.no> References: <218cfdd311d0.439d7b8b@broadpark.no> Message-ID: On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:30:51 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >> No, I disagree. The unit is immune to all effects of the attack. >It's certainly not immune to the Hindrance for firing out of smoke, but that may not be part of what you consider an effect of the attack... Of course not; a Hindrance is not an "attack". >I can live with this interpretation, but I don't think it's clear from the context, especially not when you consider C1.71, saying: "EXC: during the PFPh and DFPh, a WP FFE subjects all vulnerable units/PRC in every Blast Area hex?not just those in Locations where WP counters are placed?to an A24.31 NMC" > >C1.71 is not talking about infantry usage, but still uses the word "placed". To be precise, it uses the phrase "WP counters are placed". Remember to keep context in mind. So what you're saying is that C1.71 says ... what it says. I don't recall arguing otherwise. >Also, the "[EXC: non-moving units in First Fire]" that is an exception to WP being placed in the Location, has absolutely no meaning unless "placed" includes ordnance WP - since ordnance WP is the only WP that can be "placed" during First Fire. So if the "placed" confused me, then it certainly confused Perry as well... What's your point? I've already stated that the EXC is incorrectly located in the sentence. >> The alternative -- that the rules state that a unit is immune, but >> it gets affected any way -- is rather ridiculous, wouldn't you agree? >No. Well, there you go. When you're prepared to believe ridiculous things, I guess that makes your rules arguments very flexible. >> But that's not what it *means*; it's referring to WP *created by* First Fire. >That's what it says as well IMHO. No it doesn't. "In First Fire" means during that period of time in which First Fire is (or possibly "might be") taking place -- i.e., the MPh. But it's the MPh when a unit will be throwing SMOKE grenades. The EXC is nullifying the entire purpose of the activity. If a WP grenade can't cause casualties, you may as well just use a Smoke grenade -- you get more cover and are more likely to succeed. >> It's also incorrectly located in the sentence (it should not be coming after >> the "placed", but rather after the "hit by WP"). >> >But A8.1(and C3.4 already makes clear that only the moving unit can be "hit" during First Fire, so there's no need at all for an exception after the "hit by WP" part. Well, it's interesting that you think it's "clear". IMO it's A24.31 that's obligated to make this clear -- and it doesn't, in its current form. >> (As a side issue, A24.31 also appears to indicate that WP fired by >> a BAZ45 never causes casualties, because it isn't a grenade and doesn't >> use the Area Target Type.) >> >But WP is "placed" in the Location being hit. One more argument for "placed" not only referring to A24.1. No, it's another argument that A24.31 is poorly worded. >> and (ii) it doesn't really make it clear that WP can only cause >> casualties in the specific Location containing the WP counter; other Locations >> within the same hex are not affected unless they have also been "hit" on the >> Area Target Type (so long as the WP counter can reach that elevation). >I disagree. I think this part is clear, since an upper level unit out of LOS, are not "hit", and does not get a WP counter placed in its Location, so there's simply nothing in A24.31 implying that it should take the NMC. Please read what I wrote. I didn't say that there was anything in A24.31 implying it, I said that A24.31 doesn't make it clear that it doesn't happen -- i.e., it's vague about the topic. It should not be. >I think you write it 3 times longer than it needs to be. I was as concise as possible, given what needs to be stated. >> "All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV in a >> Locationwhere a WP grenade is placed, or where one or more units >> are hit by WP fired by Ordnance, must take a NMC [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that >> Location(24.4); if a SMOKE counter cannot be placed into that >> Location (24.1, E3.53, E3.734)]. >The additional exceptions are either uneccessary or errata. There's no reason to point to 24.1, because if a counter cannot be placed, it is obviously not placed and therefore this rule doesn't apply in the first case :-) Yes, we all know the horrors caused by rules cross-referencing each other. (That was sarcasm, just to be clear ....) >As for the E3 exceptions, I see nothing in those rules that tell me that the WP NMC is NA. A24.1 requires the unit to be "hit by WP", not also that a WP counter is placed. E3.53 and E3.734 only says that the WP counter cannot be placed, but mentions nothing about making it illegal to fire and hit with the WP. Would you seriously argue that in a game? If not, why would you argue it here? If you would, remind me never to play you! >Whether it makes sense or not from a realistic view that you can fire WP, hit a unit so that it must take an NMC, but not get any SMOKE due to the Mud - is something I don't know. But adding this exception looks like a realism based errata to me. I thought that there had been a Perry sez making this actually true, but I can't locate it. Oh well, guilty as charged. The argument has come up on the ASLML before, and my opinion remains as it always has: if you can't place it, it should not cause casualties. If it needs to be put into print to cull the sharks, then let it so be done. >> Units in other Locations within the same hex that the >> WP rises to (24.4) must similarly take a NMC, but only if hit on the Area >> Target Type per C3.33 [EXC: PB (B30.34); units immune per C3.4]. >You have already stated that the units must be "hit by WP", and already mentioned the height restriction, so this part seems totally redundant, and should not be added. That's not what I've "already stated" at all. The first part was talking about the unit(s) actually being shot at. This part is talking about the other units present in other Locations. >> WP fired by >> Ordnance as First Fire (C8.6) cannot affect non-moving units. >A unit cannot be "hit" by anything during First Fire unless it is moving (C3.4 & A8.1), so this is redundant as well. The question has been raised in the past so it's obviously not clear to everyone. You are in favour of clear rules, right? >> Units entering >> a Location containing an existing WP counter do not take casualties from that >> WP counter. Drifting WP (24.61) does not cause casualties." >I don't see the need for giving those more space than in the original rule. See above. >Here's my suggestion for the same sentence (still assuming that "placed" means per A24.1 only): > >All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV must take a NMC when a WP counter is placed (per 24.1) in that Location (not when it drifts or they move into it) or when hit by Ordnance WP [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that elevation (24.4)]. > >I think that covers everything, and even fits nicely into the space in the ASLRB. Simple comparison with what I wrote indicates that it covers very little at all, which is why it "fits so nicely": the current rule covers just as little. Congratulations, you've replaced one vague, only partially-accurate statement with another. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know you want me, baby!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Mon Dec 12 12:58:47 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 21:58:47 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I wrote: > > >3) C1.71 says "...not just those in Locations where WP counters > are placed..." where it is obvious that it doesn't mean Smoke > Grenade placement, but rather 5/8" WP counter placement. > and Bruce Probst answered: > Yes, because that's the explicit context that C1.71 is using. > "WP counters are placed." This observation doesn't really make the argument > that you think it's making; all you've noticed is that C1.71 says what it says. > It doesn't say anything about what A24.31 says, or how it says it. ...and it was the least important argument of the three. I notice you don't comment the two important arguments ;-) And even though the C1.71 use of placement isn't very important, note that the full wording of the relevant exception is: "[EXC: during the PFPh and DFPh, a WP FFE subjects all vulnerable units/PRC in every Blast Area hex?not just those in Locations where WP counters are placed?to an A24.31 NMC]" To me, this seems to say that: "Unlike A24.31, not only the Location where the WP counter is placed, but all Locations of the hex are affected", i.e. the "WP counters are placed" part refers directly back to the "WP is placed" part of A24.31. And I don't see why it is clear from the context that "placed" means two different things in those two rules. I rather think it means exactly the same. Especially since this means that the rest of A24.31 is correct, and not have two glaring errors as it has if your interpretation of "placed" is correct. > > >> Q&A: > >> > >> A24.31 & C3.33 Does a unit in an upper level building Location > >> that is hit by WP take the A24.31 MC even though the WP > counter is placed in > >> the ground level Location of that hex? Would a unit out of the > firer's LOS? > >> A. Yes. Only if hit by a mortar. [An97; Mw] > > >If you read the Q&A, you see that the unit in question is "in an > *upper* level building Location". Since any WP counter is placed > on ground level, there will never be placed a WP counter in its Location. > > Never? Not even a WP grenade? > Yes to a WP Infantry grenade, but the Q&A (and therefore I too) talked about WP hits - thus ordnance. > It's fascinating that we can both read the same Q&A and get two different > answers from it. I think we got the same answer. But I choose to take the Q&A literally, and not apply it to a different situation... > I read the above and see nothing that disagrees with my original statements. Of course not. We all agree that a unit that is *not* hit by WP, and *not* in the Location where the WP counter is placed - does *not* take the WP NMC. That is all the second part of the Q&A says. In addition, you *chooses* to let it apply to a unit in the Location where the WP counter is placed, and *chooses* to take for granted that this different situation would give the exact same answer. I simply say that the Q&A is non-applicable to units at ground level (which is the Location where the WP counter is placed), since the Q&A specifically mentions an upper-level unit. So of course you will not find anything in the Q&A that disagrees with your view about ground-level units, just like you will not find anything in the Q&A that disagrees with *my* view. The Q&A simply doesn't touches the subject we're discussing. From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Dec 12 13:42:38 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:42:38 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] AoA for Christmas? In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512121206x39c16937jb8669c4a0da2fc32@mail.gmail.co m> References: <4e2cf5e00512121206x39c16937jb8669c4a0da2fc32@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20051212154203.019dc360@direcway.com> At 02:06 PM 12/12/2005, keith dalton wrote: >Most likely we're looking at Winter Offensive in mid-January with the >holidays approaching. Again he doesn't mention what year!! Clever, clever.... :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From robertthepastor at juno.com Mon Dec 12 13:54:55 2005 From: robertthepastor at juno.com (Robert M Hammond) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:54:55 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? Message-ID: <20051212.143113.17616.0.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Daniel (or may I call you Dan?), :-) I try to be the first to admit when I'm wrong. And, boy howdy, was I wrong. Thanks for the kind words about serving. I'm glad I did. You are correct, many things happen in reality that doesn't happen in ASL, and vice versa. Yes, I understand that ASL has taken real war and made it a simulation. A very good simulation, but still just a simulation. And I think most players have at least one thing in the game that disturbs them. I'm just disturbed more than most! :) So, on occasion, I speak out on such things, as have others. Take care, Robert "who prefers his friends call him Rob, and not Bob for personal reasons" Hammond On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:24:02 -0500 "daniel zucker" writes: > Robert or may I call you Bob > I read both your messages and I am glad that you realized once it was > pointed out that you move you claimed to make was not allowed by the rules. > > But I feel I must say that with no disrespect to your service in the Marine > Corp (many of us are also former or current service personal) your experience > in real life even if it were only as a weekend back yard mechanic or a > quantum mechanic has no bearing on the world of ASL. There are many > strange and wonderful things that happen in this game and none of it > really has any relationship to real life TM. > > Daniel > > > > From kevinkenneally at isot.com Mon Dec 12 16:41:09 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 18:41:09 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Okay, now what?? In-Reply-To: <20051212.143113.17616.0.RobertThePastor@juno.com> References: <20051212.143113.17616.0.RobertThePastor@juno.com> Message-ID: <1154.4.156.255.6.1134434469.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Hi Rob, Do you think we ought to start the idea that Marine MMCs need to be broken into 3 HSs during scenarios for 1945 and later? Kevin"Prefer to call you friend instead of opponent" > Daniel (or may I call you Dan?), :-) > > I try to be the first to admit when I'm wrong. And, boy howdy, was I > wrong. > > Thanks for the kind words about serving. I'm glad I did. > > You are correct, many things happen in reality that doesn't happen in > ASL, and vice versa. Yes, I understand that ASL has taken real war and > made it a simulation. A very good simulation, but still just a > simulation. And I think most players have at least one thing in the game > that disturbs them. I'm just disturbed more than most! :) So, on > occasion, I speak out on such things, as have others. > > Take care, > Robert "who prefers his friends call him Rob, and not Bob for personal > reasons" Hammond > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:24:02 -0500 "daniel zucker" > writes: >> Robert or may I call you Bob >> I read both your messages and I am glad that you realized once it > was >> pointed out that you move you claimed to make was not allowed by the > rules. >> >> But I feel I must say that with no disrespect to your service in the > Marine >> Corp (many of us are also former or current service personal) your > experience >> in real life even if it were only as a weekend back yard mechanic or a >> quantum mechanic has no bearing on the world of ASL. There are many >> strange and wonderful things that happen in this game and none of it >> really has any relationship to real life TM. >> >> Daniel >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Dec 12 22:32:43 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:32:43 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Gamer in British Columbia Message-ID: John originally contacted me because he thought I lived in Victoria, B.C., not Victoria, Australia . If anyone from that part of the world (B.C., that is) can get in touch with John I'm sure he'd appreciate it. john.havenaar at gmail.com wrote: im new to victoria and im having a hard time finding gamers. im 33 years old and have been gamin for 20 years.i play axis and allies minatures but would like something more challenging. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know you want me, baby!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Dec 13 00:17:57 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 19:17:57 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 21:58:47 +0100, Ole B?e wrote: >...and it was the least important argument of the three. I notice you don't >comment the two important arguments ;-) That's because I had already addressed them in my original comments. What would be the point in repeating myself? >And I don't see why it is clear from the context that >"placed" means two different things in those two rules. I rather think it >means exactly the same. Well, you've demonstrated before that you have a poor grasp of context, so I can't say that I'm overly surprised, unfortunately. >I think we got the same answer. But I choose to take the Q&A literally, and >not apply it to a different situation... Well, you've lost me completely I'm afraid. *I* thought we were discussing units immune to hits per C3.4. The Q&A clearly states that a unit must be *hit* to take the NMC (assuming that you read it literally, of course). If it is immune, that (by definition) means that it can't be hit. How you see that as supporting your argument that it doesn't need to be hit to suffer the NMC mystifies me. >just like you will not find anything in the Q&A that disagrees with *my* view. Hardly. See above. >The Q&A simply doesn't touches the subject we're discussing. The second part of the Q&A doesn't say anything about upper level units or ground level units; it's only referring to units out of the firer's LOS. The answer similarly makes no distinction as to the level of the unit. Thus it directly addresses the issue; you just don't like the answer. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "You know you want me, baby!" ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Tue Dec 13 01:00:54 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:00:54 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches Message-ID: <5a6a342b36af.439e9bd6@broadpark.no> Hi, Bruce and I continue the discussion. Here's what I wrote: > >Also, the "[EXC: non-moving units in First Fire]" that is an > >exception to WP being placed in the Location, has absolutely no > >meaning unless "placed" includes ordnance WP - since ordnance WP > >is the only WP that can be "placed" during First Fire. So if the > >"placed" confused me, then it certainly confused Perry as well... > and Bruce replied: > What's your point? I've already stated that the EXC is > incorrectly located in the sentence. > And I state that it is perfectly located if "placed" includes placement of 5/8" WP counters. It is only incorrectly located with your interpretation of "WP is placed". In other words: Only my interpretation makes sense together with this EXC. > >> The alternative -- that the rules state that a unit is immune, but > >> it gets affected any way -- is rather ridiculous, wouldn't you agree? > > >No. > > Well, there you go. When you're prepared to believe ridiculous things, I > guess that makes your rules arguments very flexible. > How elegant of you to only quote my "No", and delete my argumentation. You really made me look stupid there ;-) It's of course much more flexible to label your opponent's view as ridiculous, and cut his argumentation, instead of arguing against it... Is it really necessary to go down this part for the nth time? Why can't we just discuss the rule in question without labelling the other's opinion as ridiculous or whatever? We're both pretty good at understanding the rules, so when we disagree, it is quite likely that there's more than one possible interpretation in the rules, and less likely that one of us is plain stupid. I think this is an interesting discussion in itself, there's no reason to make it a personal contest. > >> But that's not what it *means*; it's referring to WP > *created by* First Fire. > > >That's what it says as well IMHO. > > No it doesn't. "In First Fire" means during that period of time in which > First Fire is (or possibly "might be") taking place -- i.e., the MPh. Does it? The definition is "FF: also known as Defensive First Fire". DFF is the action of firing, not the period the firing is legal. > But it's the MPh when a unit will be throwing SMOKE grenades. The EXC is > nullifying the entire purpose of the activity. If a WP grenade > can't cause casualties, you may as well just use a Smoke grenade -- you get > more cover and are more likely to succeed. > And again, that's not what the EXC says: It says that during Defensive First Fire, only moving units are vulnerable to WP placed in its Location. Read A8.1 again, and you see that (Defensive) First Fire is the action of the DEFENDER making an attack - not the phase when the attacks can be made (which is called the MPh). The EXC says nothing about WP placed by ATTACKER as part of the movement - simply because this is not (Defensive) First Fire. > >> It's also incorrectly located in the sentence (it should not be > >> coming after the "placed", but rather after the "hit by WP"). > >> > >But A8.1(and C3.4 already makes clear that only the moving unit > >can be "hit" during First Fire, so there's no need at all for an > >exception after the "hit by WP" part. > > Well, it's interesting that you think it's "clear". IMO it's > A24.31 that's obligated to make this clear -- and it doesn't, in its current form. > What's not clear about only moving units being hit-able during DFF? A8.1 says: "The portion occurring during the enemy MPh is called Defensive First Fire and can be used only vs a moving unit(s)". That's a general rule. I don't have a *problem* with specific rules repeating the general one to make sure that everyone remember the general rule. I just don't think it's necessary here, because the general rule is clear enough. > >> (As a side issue, A24.31 also appears to indicate that WP fired by > >> a BAZ45 never causes casualties, because it isn't a grenade > >> and doesn't use the Area Target Type.) > >> > >But WP is "placed" in the Location being hit. One more argument > >for "placed" not only referring to A24.1. > > No, it's another argument that A24.31 is poorly worded. > Yep, there's of course two possibilities: that you are correct about "placed" and that A24.31 is wrong in a couple of places, or that I'm correct, and that the rest of A24.31 is good. You know, when one out of two possible interpretations break two other parts of the same sentence, some would take that as a sign that it's not the correct interpretation ;-) > >> and (ii) it doesn't really make it clear that WP can only cause > >> casualties in the specific Location containing the WP counter; > >> other Locations within the same hex are not affected unless they have also > >> been "hit" on the Area Target Type (so long as the WP counter can reach that elevation). > > >I disagree. I think this part is clear, since an upper level > >unit out of LOS, are not "hit", and does not get a WP counter > >placed in its Location, so there's simply nothing in A24.31 > >implying that it should take the NMC. > > Please read what I wrote. I didn't say that there was anything in A24.31 > implying it, I said that A24.31 doesn't make it clear that it > doesn't happen -- i.e., it's vague about the topic. It should not be. > And I don't think those part of the ordnance rules need to be repeated here, since C3 (especially C3.33) defines when a unit can be hit or not. > >As for the E3 exceptions, I see nothing in those rules that tell > >me that the WP NMC is NA. A24.1 requires the unit to be "hit by > >WP", not also that a WP counter is placed. E3.53 and E3.734 only > >says that the WP counter cannot be placed, but mentions nothing > >about making it illegal to fire and hit with the WP. > > Would you seriously argue that in a game? If not, why would you argue it > here? If you would, remind me never to play you! > Do you really need to make such a big issue of this? You agree yourself that this restriction is not in the rules, only something you think makes sense. I don't necessarily disagree, but it *will* be an errata. > >> Units in other Locations within the same hex that the > >> WP rises to (24.4) must similarly take a NMC, but only if hit > >> on the Area Target Type per C3.33 [EXC: PB (B30.34); units immune per C3.4]. > > >You have already stated that the units must be "hit by WP", and > >already mentioned the height restriction, so this part seems > >totally redundant, and should not be added. > > That's not what I've "already stated" at all. The first part was talking > about the unit(s) actually being shot at. This part is talking about the > other units present in other Locations. > But C3.33 defines which units that are being hit by ATT, and A24.31 uses the word "hit". I don't see why you must repeat parts of C3 when they apply as normal... > >> WP fired by > >> Ordnance as First Fire (C8.6) cannot affect non-moving units. > > >A unit cannot be "hit" by anything during First Fire unless it >> is moving (C3.4 & A8.1), so this is redundant as well. > > The question has been raised in the past so it's obviously not clear to > everyone. The reason (IMHO) that this has been raised in the past, is that A24.31 says that the units must take an NMC when WP is placed in its Location. If one chooses to say that "placed" only means Infantry Smoke Grenades, everyone understands that "placed" doesn't include ordnance WP. I don't believe many people think that ordnance can "hit" non-moving units in First Fire, because we have the general A8.1/C3.4 which covers that part. So if Perry chooses to issue an errata saying that "placed" means Infantry Smoke Grenades only, this part becomes clear for everyone who knows the general rules about Defensive First Fire. > You are in favour of clear rules, right? Yes, so I think the unclear part (whether "placed" only means Infantry usage, or all WP counters) should be clarified. If it's not clear whether a non-moving unit can be hit in First Fire, then A8.1 and/or C3.4 needs clarification. I'm not in favour of bloated rules that repeats the general rules though. > >Here's my suggestion for the same sentence (still assuming that > >"placed" means per A24.1 only): > > > >All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV must > >take a NMC when a WP counter is placed (per 24.1) in that > >Location (not when it drifts or they move into it) or when hit by > >Ordnance WP [EXC: if the WP does not rise to that elevation (24.4)]. > > > >I think that covers everything, and even fits nicely into the > >space in the ASLRB. > > Simple comparison with what I wrote indicates that it covers very > little at all, which is why it "fits so nicely": the current rule covers > just as little. Congratulations, you've replaced one vague, only > partially-accurate statement > with another. What's vague with my suggestion? Do you really think the suggestion is vague just because it doesn't repeat parts of A8.1 and C3? From kevinkenneally at isot.com Tue Dec 13 07:49:07 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 09:49:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Gamer in British Columbia In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <36998.155.215.21.2.1134488947.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Bruce, LoneCanuck Enterprises (George Kelln) is out that way. He move to BC in 2004. Kevin > John originally contacted me because he thought I lived in Victoria, B.C., > not > Victoria, Australia . > > If anyone from that part of the world (B.C., that is) can get in touch > with > John I'm sure he'd appreciate it. > > > john.havenaar at gmail.com wrote: > > im new to victoria and im having a hard time finding gamers. im 33 years > old and have been gamin for 20 years.i play axis and allies minatures > but would like something more challenging. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au > Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 > "You know you want me, baby!" > 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 > ************************************** Computer problems? ................... ..............http://www.multibyte.net From rjmosher at direcway.com Tue Dec 13 11:04:14 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 13:04:14 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Gamer in British Columbia In-Reply-To: <36998.155.215.21.2.1134488947.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> References: <36998.155.215.21.2.1134488947.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20051213130327.019d8ad0@direcway.com> At 09:49 AM 12/13/2005, kevinkenneally at isot.com wrote: >LoneCanuck Enterprises (George Kelln) is out that way. > >He move to BC in 2004. Also, check this out: http://www.frappr.com/advancedsquadleader Takes forever to load tho!! :( ron from Lebanon, Mo; turn right at the "Pavement Ends" sign. From jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Dec 13 15:48:18 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:48:18 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches References: <5a6a342b36af.439e9bd6@broadpark.no> Message-ID: <000801c6003f$b2691a90$6627c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Ole wrote, > > Is it really necessary to go down this part for the nth time? Why can't we > just discuss the rule in question without labelling the other's opinion as > ridiculous or whatever? We're both pretty good at understanding the rules, > so when we disagree, it is quite likely that there's more than one > possible interpretation in the rules, and less likely that one of us is > plain stupid. > > I think this is an interesting discussion in itself, there's no reason to > make it a personal contest. > I agree. When the discussion is civil I do follow the discussion. Whent he tone gets nasty, I do not. At worst, agree to disagree and send a Q&A to Perry. I am currently experiencing a similar situation at SZO. I posted some tournament rules that we use for purposes of discussion and debate and those that disagree immediately go into rave mode. If you disagree with them, fine. We shall agree to disagree but lets debate the points in a civil manner. Unfortunately, I am known to get my hands dirty when mud is tossed my way but sometimes lies just can;t be ignored. =Jim= From e4spm at hotmail.com Wed Dec 14 16:07:52 2005 From: e4spm at hotmail.com (David Marvanek) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:37:52 +1030 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP Message-ID: How many PP does a squad have stacked with a leader when the stack declares double time? _________________________________________________________________ Win over $10,000 in Dell prizes this Christmas http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=151&referral=Hotmailtagline&URL=http://shoppingau.ninemsn.com.au/compintro.aspx?compid=174 From dreenstra at comcast.net Wed Dec 14 16:35:02 2005 From: dreenstra at comcast.net (dreenstra@comcast.net) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 00:35:02 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP Message-ID: <121520050035.755.43A0BA340009BEFB000002F322007358340E9D9B9C020A0A9D0B@comcast.net> That would depend on what they are carrying. PP is "portage points", typically a quality of a SW (but, IIRC, a wounded SMC can be carried by an MMC at 5PP cost). If you mean, what is their combined IPC (Inherent Portage Capacity), the answer would be 2. A MMC normally has an IPC of 3 and a SMC an IPC of 1. Declaring DT lowers the IPC for each unit to 2 and 0 respectively. If you are asking, what is their MF allotment in such a case, the answer would be 8, normally. Again, it depends on what they are carrying. If, for example, each unit is carrying as much as 1PP less than its IPC, this would hold true. If each is carrying equal to or more than their IPC, then declaring Double-Time would decrease each unit's IPC by one and adversely affect their available MFs. For example, 1 squad + 1 leader together have an IPC of 3 + 1 = 4. So the squad could carry up to 2PP and the leader 0PP and be able to declare DT to get 8MFs. But if the squad is carrying 3PP and the leader another 1PP, then when the stack declares DT the squad's IPC is decreased to 2PP and the leader's to 0PP, so each unit is now exceeding its IPC by 1PP, reducing available MF allotment to 7. Further, if the squad is carrying 4PP and is accompanied by a leader who is adding his 1PP IPC to that of the squad, the stack would have 6MF moving normally. If they declare DT at the start of the MPh, they would still only have 6MF as each unit's IPC is decreased and they then only have a combined IPC of 2. If they declare DT during the MPh, they would only have 5MF since the gain from declaring DT is only 1MF, but the IPC still decreases by 2, costing them 2MF. Typically, if a unit is carrying PP equal to or greater than its IPC, it only makes sense to declare DT at the start of the MPh, not during as the 1MF gained is lost by the decreased IPC. HtH, Dave Reenstra -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "David Marvanek" > How many PP does a squad have stacked with a leader when the stack declares > double time? > > _________________________________________________________________ > Win over $10,000 in Dell prizes this Christmas > http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=151&referral=H > otmailtagline&URL=http://shoppingau.ninemsn.com.au/compintro.aspx?compid=174 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Dec 15 02:10:55 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 11:10:55 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP Message-ID: Dave Reenstra's answer was good, but I'd wanted to correct one detail. > Further, if the squad is carrying 4PP and is accompanied by a > leader who is adding his 1PP IPC to that of the squad, the stack > would have 6MF moving normally. If they declare DT at the start > of the MPh, they would still only have 6MF as each unit's IPC is > decreased and they then only have a combined IPC of 2. In this example, it is correct that the squad has only 6 MF (if moving with the leader). However, the leader has 8 MF, since he is not carrying anything. So they're able to move 6 MF as a stack, and then the leader may move two more MF. From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Dec 15 04:34:55 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 06:34:55 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20051215063400.019dead8@direcway.com> At 04:10 AM 12/15/2005, Ole B?e wrote: >So they're able to move 6 MF as a stack, and >then the leader may move two more MF. If going to benefit from leader's movement benefits don't they have to begin and end movement together? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From oleboe at broadpark.no Thu Dec 15 04:42:28 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_B=F8e?=) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:42:28 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP Message-ID: Hi. Ron Mosher wrote: > If going to benefit from leader's movement > benefits don't they have to begin and end movement together? > They have to begine *the* MPh together, and the Squad must end *its* MPh stacked with the leader. After 6 MF, the Squad can end *its* MPh while still stacked with the leader, before the leader continues for two more MF. The same is true in a couple of involuntary situation. Ex: A squad and a leader has moved 5MF before the squad pins or breaks due to DFF, or rolls 6 on a Smoke dr. The Squad must immediately end its MPh, but the leader (and any other squads in the stack) may move one more MF (two if they CX). From rjmosher at direcway.com Thu Dec 15 11:44:11 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:44:11 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20051215134327.019cf480@direcway.com> At 06:42 AM 12/15/2005, Ole B?e wrote: >They have to begine *the* MPh together, and the >Squad must end *its* MPh stacked with the leader. Chuckle..someone snuck that into J6's errata!!! :) For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From asl_scottj at hotmail.com Thu Dec 15 17:34:22 2005 From: asl_scottj at hotmail.com (Scott Jackson) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 17:34:22 -0800 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: <2580c09d6cfb.439d85b2@broadpark.no> Message-ID: >From: Ole Bøe >I wrote in my previous post why I think this answer is problematic, and why >I believe "placed" includes placment of an ordnance WP counter, but can >summarize it here: > >1) It makes the "[EXC: non-moving units in First Fire]" errata superflous >and incorrectly-placed. >2) It makes units immune to WP counters placed by BAZ. >3) C1.71 says "...not just those in Locations where WP counters are >placed..." where it is obvious that it doesn't mean Smoke Grenade >placement, but rather 5/8" WP counter placement. I haven't seen your previous post yet...but I did peruse your debate with Bruce. You raise some interesting points above, but I still think the rule is worded incorrectly -- that Q&A probably *is* incorrectly placed (and worded, IMHO). I *believe* the ATT part of the A24.31 rule should simply be deleted. When it was written they didn't consider BAZ...or even CAVES (where SMOKE can be fired using ITT...if I recall correctly--no time to look it up now). So what has Perry said about this? Anything?? Scott Jackson aka Stonewall From bprobst at netspace.net.au Fri Dec 16 01:01:14 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:01:14 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Q: Leader CX & PP In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20051215134327.019cf480@direcway.com> References: <7.0.0.16.0.20051215134327.019cf480@direcway.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:44:11 -0600, ron mosher wrote: >Chuckle..someone snuck that into J6's errata!!! :) Yes, after the prior public discussion of it on the ASLML (where pretty much everyone who participated agreed that the wording of the existing rule had some problems, and the only real discussion was what would be the best way of fixing it), and then being printed in b&w for all to see. (Actually there's an intermediate stage where Perry circulates the proposed changes and asks for comments prior to committing anything to print.) Very sneaky. *How* does he get away with it? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "This movie can be used to induce vomiting." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From oleboe at broadpark.no Fri Dec 16 03:29:05 2005 From: oleboe at broadpark.no (Ole Boe) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 12:29:05 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Scott Jackson wrote: > I haven't seen your previous post yet...but I did peruse your debate with > Bruce. You raise some interesting points above, but I still > think the rule is worded incorrectly -- that Q&A probably *is* incorrectly placed (and > worded, IMHO). You mean the [EXC: non-moving units in First Fire] part? It was obviously inccorectly worded before the J5 errata, when it said "[EXC: non-moving units in MPh]". That would exclude any Infantry usage, which was not the intention of this exception that was added in the ASLRB 2nd. intention. The intention of the EXC is to exclude non-moving units that is in a Location where moving units are hit with WP as First Fire - i.e. ordnance WP. I think that's what the corrected EXC says as well (and I didn't even participate in the writing of, or errata for, this EXC ;-). To understand the rule better, we should probably go back to the 1st edition wording of this rule. It was shorter, and simply said: "All units (including friendly ones) except a non-CE, CT AFV in a Location with a WP counter must take a NMC when the WP is placed in that Location (not when it drifts)." As you see, the EXC was not there, and not the part about ATT hits, only the part about WP placed in that Location. If (as you and Bruce have argued), it is correct that "WP is placed" only means Infantry usage, then it means that ordnance WP couldn't force an NMC at all! I'm pretty sure that none of you actually means this, so "WP is placed" must include placement due to ordnance as well. I have a private email from Perry, saying: "IIRC, the rule has _always_ said to take a NMC when the WP is placed in your Location, and in the 2nd ed. we were trying to clarify that the WP would _also_ affect units actually hit by the ATT shot." (I'm sure Perry will tell me if it was unappropriate to post it here...). So in the 2nd. ed, we have the first part saying that you must take an NMC when WP is placed (by *any* means) in the *Location*, and then *also* take it when hit by (ATT) WP (even if the WP is not placed in your Location). Whether the first part was meant to exclude units immune to a hit is possible, but I've never seen such an EXC. FWIW, to me, the rule makes perfect sense as well. You must take a WP NMC when the WP shells hits you directly ("hit by WP"), or when they fall down and land where you are ("WP is placed in that Location"). It doesn't matter whether you are actually hit or not when WP shells lands around you. > I *believe* the ATT part of the A24.31 rule > should simply be deleted. When it was written they didn't consider BAZ...or even CAVES > (where SMOKE can be fired using ITT...if I recall correctly--no > time to look it up now). > You are right about the BAZ (which Bruce and I have already discussed), and also about the CAVES part. I don't agree that the part should be deleted, as that would make all non-base level units totally immune to WP NMC, it should rather be changed to "or when hit by ordnance WP" (ordnance is actually superfluous since only ordnance can hit anything, but it doesn't hurt to have it there). > So what has Perry said about this? Anything?? > He has said quite a bit: First, I sent a Q, and got his A: >> Q1: Does "WP is placed" in A24.31 refer to: >> a) Infantry usage placement (per A24.1) only?, or >> b) Infantry usage placment (A24.1) and/or WP counters placed due to ATT hits >> (C8.6)? > > b) is correct. (Thus, ordnance WP can affect out-of-LOS units when the WP is > placed at the base level of a hex that has been hit via the ATT.) > >....Perry He then sent me, you and Bruce (as you know), an email with some doubt, but after that, told me to feel free to post the Q&A here, so I've done it now :-) From andreas at aslsweden.com Fri Dec 16 12:38:20 2005 From: andreas at aslsweden.com (Andreas Carlsson) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 21:38:20 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for Xavier Vitry Message-ID: <11980C39-A4AB-4E58-8E76-565257FD01E8@aslsweden.com> *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* Guys, I'm looking for Xavier Vitry. My mails keep bouncing, anyone that knows an email address that is usable? Thanks, /andreas ********************************************** ASL Sweden - Everything you need for your ASL'ish lifestyle! http://www.aslsweden.com ********************************************** From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Dec 17 01:49:27 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 20:49:27 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] WP vs Trenches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 12:29:05 +0100, Ole Boe wrote: > I have a private email from Perry, saying: "IIRC, the rule has _always_ said > to take a NMC when the WP is placed in your Location, and in the 2nd ed. we > were trying to clarify that the WP would _also_ affect units actually hit by > the ATT shot." Well there you are. It was apparently *not* MMP's intention to make WP affect units *not* hit by an ATT shot. > Whether the first part was meant to exclude units immune to a hit is > possible, but I've never seen such an EXC. The immunity *is* the EXC. What you're suggesting is that a rule is required that says "by the way, immune units are immune" before you'll believe it. I thought you were opposed to needless repetition? >>> Q1: Does "WP is placed" in A24.31 refer to: >>> a) Infantry usage placement (per A24.1) only?, or >>> b) Infantry usage placment (A24.1) and/or WP counters placed due to ATT hits >>> (C8.6)? >> >> b) is correct. (Thus, ordnance WP can affect out-of-LOS units when the WP is >> placed at the base level of a hex that has been hit via the ATT.) >> >>....Perry I only have two real issues with this Perry Sez: one is that it doesn't really reflect what the rule currently says, as I've argued recently. Of course, since the current rule is so brief that it effectively says very little, and what it *does* say is so poorly worded, that in a sense this is almost inevitable. More seriously, it endorses the view that a unit immune to any quantity of FP may not be immune to the NMC effects of WP. Since this is clearly nonsensical (not to mention contrary to the text of C3.4), I have trouble taking this Perry Sez seriously. When Perry can generate an answer that doesn't imply that immune units aren't, I'll give it due consideration. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "This movie can be used to induce vomiting." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From e.desanois at histofig.com Sat Dec 17 07:42:35 2005 From: e.desanois at histofig.com (Emmanuel Desanois) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 16:42:35 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Looking for Xavier Vitry In-Reply-To: <11980C39-A4AB-4E58-8E76-565257FD01E8@aslsweden.com> Message-ID: <0IRN00H4JFLPG610@sp604001mt.gpm.neuf.ld> Hi Andreas, Xavier's email is : xavier658 at wanadoo.fr I'm using it regularly without any problem. Best regards, Emmanuel. -------------------------------------------------- Histofig.Com - Emmanuel Desanois 422, Chemin de Valdegour 30900 NIMES - FRANCE Phone : +33 (0)870.44.77.44 / (0)609.46.20.50 Histofig.Com - www.histofig.com ASL Histofig.Com - asl.histofig.com Shop Histofig.Com - www.shophistofig.com -----Message d'origine----- De : aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] De la part de Andreas Carlsson Envoy? : vendredi 16 d?cembre 2005 21:38 ? : ASL List Objet : [Aslml] Looking for Xavier Vitry *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* Guys, I'm looking for Xavier Vitry. My mails keep bouncing, anyone that knows an email address that is usable? Thanks, /andreas ********************************************** ASL Sweden - Everything you need for your ASL'ish lifestyle! http://www.aslsweden.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 aslbrad at hotmail.com Sun Dec 18 21:12:01 2005 From: aslbrad at hotmail.com (Brad K.) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 01:12:01 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] broken melee ? Message-ID: Hey Guys, Cant seem to find an answer to this one. 2 units locked in mellee become broken and DM from outside fire. Whats happens? Are they no longer locked and rout in the RtPh or have to withdraw from CC or what? Thanks Brad From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Dec 18 21:53:39 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:53:39 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] broken melee ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 01:12:01 -0400, "Brad K." wrote: >Cant seem to find an answer to this one. 2 units locked in mellee become >broken and DM from outside fire. Whats happens? Are they no longer locked >and rout in the RtPh or have to withdraw from CC or what? They remain locked in Melee until the next CCPh. Then, each will attempt to Withdraw. If something prevents either or both from doing so successfully (e.g, being surrounded by known enemy units), whichever fails to Withdraw will be eliminated for Failure to Rout (A11.16). (There is an EXC for broken guards, who are not eliminated if they fail to Withdraw from Melee, but that's a different situation to the one you describe above.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "This movie can be used to induce vomiting." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 07:24:13 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 10:24:13 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512190724h2276dd0ala8fef49d96d94262@mail.gmail.com> Per Brian: MMP Holiday Office Schedule Our offices closed for the holidays on Friday, December 16th. You may notice some activity on our end (ie., receive an email, get a package, billing a charge card, etc.) but please do not expect it. We are sure to be quite busy when we return on Jan 3rd finishing up Beyond Valor preorder shipments, catching up on emails and phone calls, and getting ready for what will undoubtedly be our busiest Winter Offensive to date! We'd like to thank you in advance for your patience, and please accept our sincere wishes of Happy Holidays to you and your family. AOO Update Since you're dying to know... All remaining components for AOO are turned in to the printers today. We've already received the boxes and ASLSK-style maps. We've approved the final color-proofs of the countersheets (last week). The overlays are being delivered this week. Now all we can do is wait for the printers... From gd891 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 19 09:04:21 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd891) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 11:04:21 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512190724h2276dd0ala8fef49d96d94262@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, waiting for the next football game, watching the news, when they'll show a large industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... Greg -----Original Message----- AOO Update Since you're dying to know... All remaining components for AOO are turned in to the printers today. We've already received the boxes and ASLSK-style maps. We've approved the final color-proofs of the countersheets (last week). The overlays are being delivered this week. Now all we can do is wait for the printers... From pferraro at greenepa.net Mon Dec 19 09:46:26 2005 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 12:46:26 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, waiting for > the next football game, watching the news, when they'll show a large > industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... I'm betting the mortgage money on an earthquake. :-) From keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 10:41:49 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:41:49 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512191041y2a0dd65bhd6e618b717dbce2b@mail.gmail.com> Since the release of AOO has been joked about as the beginning of the Apocolypse, I'm betting undead zombie plague. I'm boarding up the house and stacking magazines. "When He opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature saying, 'Come and see.' So I looked, and behold, a pale horse. And the name of him who sat on it was Death, and Hades followed with him." 8^) From gd891 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 19 10:57:28 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd891) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 12:57:28 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status In-Reply-To: Message-ID: As cursed as AOO is, I doubt that Maryland and parts of New York are gonna slide into the ocean. My money is still on a construction crew hitting a gas main outside the MMP warehouse. Serves ya right for making those poor union guys work New Years day. Greg Nostradamus predicted AOO would be out years ago, the dumb bastard. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Ferraro Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 11:46 AM To: ASLML Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status > I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, waiting > for the next football game, watching the news, when they'll show a > large industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... I'm betting the mortgage money on an earthquake. :-) From borelalain at yahoo.fr Mon Dec 19 11:26:42 2005 From: borelalain at yahoo.fr (Alain Borel) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 20:26:42 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43A70972.80201@yahoo.fr> gd891 wrote: >As cursed as AOO is, I doubt that Maryland and parts of New York are gonna >slide into the ocean. My money is still on a construction crew hitting a >gas main outside the MMP warehouse. Serves ya right for making those poor >union guys work New Years day. > > Well, I saw a BBC documentary recently where they discussed 4 (or was it 5?) possible events that would lead to the End of the World as We Know It... I have to admit none of them had anyting to do with AoO, but a giant tidal wave caused by the collapse of one huge volcano in the Canary Islands looks like a very effective way to clean up New Jersey (not to mention a large part of the US East coast). Alain Borel CH-1022 Chavannes, Switzerland ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From keith.dalton at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 12:04:36 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 15:04:36 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Winter Offensive Reminder Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512191204o46bd34d0j29b23add2076359a@mail.gmail.com> Hi everyone: Just wanted to remind you that MMP's annual Winter Offensive Tournament is coming January 12-15, 2006 at the Comfort Inn in Bowie, MD. The room opens at 5 p.m. January 12, and ASL mini-tournaments kick into gear at 7 p.m. The tournament registration fee is $20 for the whole weekend and $10 for a one-day registration (rates go up after January 1, so sign up now!) Register here: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/wo.php ASL MINI TOURNAMENTS START THURSDAY NIGHT, Jan 12th, 7PM. Here's the mini-tournament lineup: Armies of Oblivion Normandy Action Pack Few Returned Scenario Pack Budapest HASL Journal 7 (if needed) ASL STARTER KIT MINI-TOURNAMENT starts FRIDAY, Jan 13th, at 8AM. We do brackets of 8, so first come first served to fill the bracket. Sign up sheet WILL BE OUT ON THURSDAY NIGHT! FIRE IN THE SKY TOURNAMENT starts Saturday, Jan 14th, at 9AM. Plenty of people let me know they were attending and wanted to play in this so make sure you inquire when you check in so you get on the list! MONTY'S GAMBLE: MARKET GARDEN TOURNAMENT starts Saturday, Jan 14th, at 9AM. The guys who signed up last year had a good time playing a game perfectly suited to a single day tournament. THE ASL MAIN EVENT Starts Friday morning. Can you knock 2005 champion Chad Cummins from his top spot? Mini's and games played Thursday night don't count towards the main event so come early and get in some last minute practice! Have a great holiday! Keith MMP From belisarius at dsl.pipex.com Mon Dec 19 13:24:10 2005 From: belisarius at dsl.pipex.com (Andy McMaster) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:24:10 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Subscribe/unsubscribe Message-ID: <1135027451.28188.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, Can someone post the link for the mailing list admin web page please as I need to change my email and unsubscribe/resubscribe. Cheers Andy From asl at thuring.com Mon Dec 19 13:32:38 2005 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:32:38 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Subscribe/unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <1135027451.28188.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1135027451.28188.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43A726F6.3060309@thuring.com> Andy McMaster wrote: > Hi, > > Can someone post the link for the mailing list admin web page please as > I need to change my email and unsubscribe/resubscribe. Check the bottom of every email from this mailinglist! ;-) cheers, Lars > Cheers > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 belisarius at dsl.pipex.com Mon Dec 19 13:44:41 2005 From: belisarius at dsl.pipex.com (Andy McMaster) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:44:41 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Subscribe/unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <43A726F6.3060309@thuring.com> References: <1135027451.28188.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43A726F6.3060309@thuring.com> Message-ID: <1135028682.7404.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> oops... very tired at the moment - new baby - really must pay attention! Never usually read that far down anyway :-) On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 22:32 +0100, lars thuring wrote: > Andy McMaster wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Can someone post the link for the mailing list admin web page please as > > I need to change my email and unsubscribe/resubscribe. > > Check the bottom of every email from this mailinglist! ;-) > > cheers, > Lars > > > Cheers > > > > Andy > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > From asl at thuring.com Mon Dec 19 16:36:14 2005 From: asl at thuring.com (lars thuring) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:36:14 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Subscribe/unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <1135028682.7404.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1135027451.28188.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43A726F6.3060309@thuring.com> <1135028682.7404.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43A751FE.2080903@thuring.com> Andy McMaster wrote: > oops... very tired at the moment - new baby - really must pay attention! Hey Andy, congrats!! But this is exactly the wrong moment to unsubscribe! You will face long hard nights without sleep and what better to keep you occupied than reading the ASLML? You're gonna regret all you've missed in 10 - 20 years the kids are old. Also now you have a reason to keep up to date on ASLSK as well! Lars "practice long term planning" From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Dec 19 16:56:39 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:56:39 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status References: Message-ID: <000a01c60500$3d252060$3b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Greg wrote regarding the final sign of the imminent arrival of the apocolypse (the release of AoO for the believers), >> I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, waiting >> for >> the next football game, watching the news, when they'll show a large >> industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... Paul predicts, > I'm betting the mortgage money on an earthquake. > > :-) Naw, industrial fire and an earthquake are not sure things as far as erasing AoO is concerned. My money is on a meteor impact. Nothing too big, just football field size-ish. What components are not vapourized on impact will be buried by debris or sunk underwater when the Atlantic Ocean infills the crater. All said, it ain't gonna' be pretty. The next question becomes, how long will it take MMP to recreate all the bits and pieces and when will AoO II be ready for publishing? ;) =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Mon Dec 19 16:57:50 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:57:50 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status References: <4e2cf5e00512191041y2a0dd65bhd6e618b717dbce2b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000f01c60500$67f535a0$3b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Kieth writes, > "When He opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth > living creature saying, 'Come and see.' So I looked, and behold, a > pale horse. And the name of him who sat on it was Death, and Hades > followed with him." But did the bugger have AoO with him?! =Jim= From aslbunker at yahoo.com Mon Dec 19 18:09:02 2005 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:09:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Dispatches from the Bunker #22 December Update Message-ID: <20051220020902.10649.qmail@web32608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Greetings from the Bunker and Happy Holidays to all at the ASL Mailing List. I am please to say that work on Dispatches from the Bunker #22 is continuing on pace for a Mid March debut at the Nor'Easter Tournament. In house playtesting is pretty much wrapping up, I passed out playtest copies at the Albany Tournament earlier this month and will look for some confirmation testing 'volunteers' after the Holidays. Those 3 new scenarios are: 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 extraodinaire 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 help in 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, a look back at both the 2005 Bunker Bash and the NY State ASL Championship (a week from the Friday in Albany) and a preview of the 2006 Nor'Easter along with Carl Nogueira's always excellent Tactical Tip for both Novices and Veterans. As for Issue #21, that labor of love contains the usual 3 scenarios, 2 of which are excellent Steve Johns designs: Erstwhile Allies, set in 1942 Algeria portraying some of the initial fighting by the Big Red 1 Infantry Division as it tries to wrest control of Board 22 buildings from some tough French Legionnaires. Wetlet, a nasty '45 fight between die hard Japanese and Commonwealth Indian units at Wetlet in Burma. Steve makes great use of overlays on board 49 giving it a different feel and showing how one can change the complexion of a board without going completely overboard with them. Our 3rd scenario is the 2nd in our Fabulous Thunderbirds series and first design by Bunker Crewman Joe Gochinski. It is a meaty action set in Sicily as the 45th 'Thunderbirds' Infantry Division assault the airfield at Biscari. What makes for extra excitement and intrigue with this one is the variable OB additions that BOTH sides choose to augment their at start OBs. This makes for initial Fog of War and added replayability for what should develop over time into a real Dispatches Classic. This one gave us results all over the map in playtesting. Also we have another fine Jim Torkelson article, this one looking at Melee Pack IIs Vulcan Forge and Carl Nogueira's tactical Tips. This 12 page Amateur Newsletter 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. IF this sounds like a CH by your NOBA on that Japanese HMG Pillbox, Subscriptions and ALL Back-Issues are still available, and here is how to get yours (all prices include S & H, make all checks/money orders out to Vic Provost, Please, NOT Dispatches from the Bunker): 4 Issue Subscription (Starting with current Issue #21): 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: After listening quite attentively to the pleading of my foreign subscribers I have broken down and opened a PayPal account. So either domestic or foreign orders may now 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 $60.00 Works Order adds $3.00) 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 - #20) are $3.50 Each in the USA or $4.00 Each outside the States. All 21 Issues in print (No subscription): $50.00 in the USA, $55.00 outside the states. The Works: All 21 Issues plus a 4 Issue Subscription, starting with current Issue #21 (24 Issues in total) $60.00 in the USA, $65.00 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 amymikeb at adelphia.net Mon Dec 19 19:32:37 2005 From: amymikeb at adelphia.net (Mike & Amy Brown) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:32:37 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Glider (Vehicle) Hindrance Message-ID: <003601c60516$06258760$58614544@BrainofPooh> Listvolk: Recently playing Tavronitis Bridge to re-learn glider stuff, and something I thought I knew tripped me up when I started really looking at the different rules: (1) Does the hindrance created by an undamaged landed glider cancel FFMO for Infantry moving in the SAME hex with the glider (not behind it)? (2) If so, does the glider hindrance cancel FFMO for moving Infantry in the same hex with the Glider when being fired upon by a non-same level firer? (3) How is this different from the way any other (non-wreck) vehicle hindrance is treated? I appreciate your collective thoughts. Mike Brown From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Dec 19 20:30:11 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:30:11 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Glider (Vehicle) Hindrance In-Reply-To: <003601c60516$06258760$58614544@BrainofPooh> References: <003601c60516$06258760$58614544@BrainofPooh> Message-ID: On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:32:37 -0500, "Mike & Amy Brown" wrote: >(1) Does the hindrance created by an undamaged landed glider cancel FFMO for >Infantry moving in the SAME hex with the glider (not behind it)? No, no hindrance [EXC: SMOKE; FFE] does (A6.7). >(2) If so, does the glider hindrance cancel FFMO for moving Infantry in the >same hex with the Glider when being fired upon by a non-same level firer? No, it doesn't (by itself) cancel FFMO in its own Location from *any* direction. A6.7, again. >(3) How is this different from the way any other (non-wreck) vehicle >hindrance is treated? Other unarmoured vehicles don't have any hindrance effect at all ... but I guess a typical glider is a lot bigger than a typical truck. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst at netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "This movie can be used to induce vomiting." ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ From phil.draper at tiscali.co.uk Tue Dec 20 02:09:07 2005 From: phil.draper at tiscali.co.uk (Phil Draper) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 10:09:07 -0000 Subject: [Aslml] Glider (Vehicle) Hindrance References: <003601c60516$06258760$58614544@BrainofPooh> Message-ID: <001a01c6054d$6a7dfc60$bbbd6e58@backroom> Hi all, > On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:32:37 -0500, "Mike & Amy Brown" > > wrote: > >>(1) Does the hindrance created by an undamaged landed glider cancel FFMO >>for >>Infantry moving in the SAME hex with the glider (not behind it)? Bruce Probst replied: > No, no hindrance [EXC: SMOKE; FFE] does (A6.7). I respectfully disagree with this. A6.7 makes it clear that a LOS must pass through (not just into or out of) a hindrance hex to incur a +1 DRM. It then states that "The presence of such a hindrance always negates Interdiction and FFMO." While ambiguous I believe this statement refers to any case where a hindrance exists in a hex not just the case where a LOS passes through it. This interpretation is backed up by the A10.531 Open Ground EX which states "A grain, brush, or orchard hex is not open ground becuse the -1 FFMO DRM does not apply." The only reason that I can see that FFMO does not apply to these hexes is because they are hindrances (they have no TEM). So I believe the glider hindrace negates FFMO for units moving within its location while providing zero TEM. > >>(2) If so, does the glider hindrance cancel FFMO for moving Infantry in >>the >>same hex with the Glider when being fired upon by a non-same level firer? > > No, it doesn't (by itself) cancel FFMO in its own Location from *any* > direction. A6.7, again. For reasons stated above I believe it does cancel FFMO. The relative elevation of the firer to target makes no difference, a similar case is that of a unit routing through grain which is immune to interdiction from higher level units not just those at the same level. It is the presence of the hindrance within the hex that negates the open ground modifier. > >>(3) How is this different from the way any other (non-wreck) vehicle >>hindrance is treated? > > Other unarmoured vehicles don't have any hindrance effect at all ... but I > guess a typical glider is a lot bigger than a typical truck. As Bruce states non AFV vehicles are not hindrances until turned into wrecks. But for AFV and wrecks the effect is identical providing the hindrance DRM is currently in effect (armoured assault, not subject to To Hit Case J, etc). See D9.4 Regards Phil. From gd891 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 20 05:24:00 2005 From: gd891 at hotmail.com (gd891) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 07:24:00 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status In-Reply-To: <000f01c60500$67f535a0$3b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: Keith writes: > "When He opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth > living creature saying, 'Come and see.' So I looked, and behold, a > pale horse. And the name of him who sat on it was Death, and Hades > followed with him." I do not like this new style of writing for chapter H. No siree. Not one little bit. Greg You KNOW that's going to start a rumor over on Consim World. From geb3 at inter.net Tue Dec 20 06:28:00 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 23:28:00 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] Asteroids Over the Orioles? In-Reply-To: <000a01c60500$3d252060$3b27c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001501c60571$9a041540$3901170a@joho.com> That's the ticket! An interplanetary body in rogue orbit is on a collision course with Baltimore. Maryland governor sees this as a redistricting and redevelopment windfall. CIA says identity of perpetrators as previously unknown "Al Qaeda on Venus" is a "slam dunk," so Bush Administration promptly asks Congress for a declaration of war on Uranus. MMP activates its sleeper cell in Sheboygan to implement its business continuity plan. Life goes back to normal. George Bates Yokohama, Japan Gaming by the Bay the 1st Sunday of every month. C'mon over. We'll leave the light on for ya. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of mcleods Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:57 AM To: ASLML; Paul Ferraro Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status Listerz, Greg wrote regarding the final sign of the imminent arrival of the apocolypse (the release of AoO for the believers), >> I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, >> waiting >> for >> the next football game, watching the news, when they'll show a large >> industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... Paul predicts, > I'm betting the mortgage money on an earthquake. > > :-) Naw, industrial fire and an earthquake are not sure things as far as erasing AoO is concerned. My money is on a meteor impact. Nothing too big, just football field size-ish. What components are not vapourized on impact will be buried by debris or sunk underwater when the Atlantic Ocean infills the crater. All said, it ain't gonna' be pretty. The next question becomes, how long will it take MMP to recreate all the bits and pieces and when will AoO II be ready for publishing? ;) =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 john at winhaven.net Tue Dec 20 07:14:44 2005 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 09:14:44 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Asteroids Over the Orioles? In-Reply-To: <001501c60571$9a041540$3901170a@joho.com> Message-ID: <009001c60578$1be5d7a0$6a01a8c0@ScuzzPaq> MMP has a sleeper cell in Sheboygan? Cool. How do I find it so I can join in on Youse house days? -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of George Bates Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:28 AM To: 'mcleods'; 'ASLML'; 'Paul Ferraro' Subject: [Aslml] Asteroids Over the Orioles? That's the ticket! An interplanetary body in rogue orbit is on a collision course with Baltimore. Maryland governor sees this as a redistricting and redevelopment windfall. CIA says identity of perpetrators as previously unknown "Al Qaeda on Venus" is a "slam dunk," so Bush Administration promptly asks Congress for a declaration of war on Uranus. MMP activates its sleeper cell in Sheboygan to implement its business continuity plan. Life goes back to normal. George Bates Yokohama, Japan Gaming by the Bay the 1st Sunday of every month. C'mon over. We'll leave the light on for ya. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of mcleods Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:57 AM To: ASLML; Paul Ferraro Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status Listerz, Greg wrote regarding the final sign of the imminent arrival of the apocolypse (the release of AoO for the believers), >> I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, >> waiting for the next football game, watching the news, when they'll >> show a large industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... Paul predicts, > I'm betting the mortgage money on an earthquake. > > :-) Naw, industrial fire and an earthquake are not sure things as far as erasing AoO is concerned. My money is on a meteor impact. Nothing too big, just football field size-ish. What components are not vapourized on impact will be buried by debris or sunk underwater when the Atlantic Ocean infills the crater. All said, it ain't gonna' be pretty. The next question becomes, how long will it take MMP to recreate all the bits and pieces and when will AoO II be ready for publishing? ;) =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 _______________________________________________ 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 g3omi at nc.rr.com Tue Dec 20 08:40:44 2005 From: g3omi at nc.rr.com (Gomi) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:40:44 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion References: <001501c60571$9a041540$3901170a@joho.com> Message-ID: <000c01c60584$1fc23100$6401a8c0@Kaiju> I have been watching this thread with smug amusement. You will notice that the announcements from MMP detail the progress of module development through design, proofing, printing, etc. There has never been any mention of distribution. This is because I purchased the entire first printing of this module a long time ago. I'll be seeing you on e-bay. Kaijusan aka Boxcar Bob Cary, Equatorial Carolina, USA, Earth ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Bates" To: "'mcleods'" ; "'ASLML'" ; "'Paul Ferraro'" Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:28 AM Subject: [Aslml] Asteroids Over the Orioles? > That's the ticket! An interplanetary body in rogue orbit is on a > collision > course with Baltimore. > Maryland governor sees this as a redistricting and redevelopment windfall. > CIA says identity of perpetrators as previously unknown "Al Qaeda on > Venus" > is a "slam dunk," so Bush Administration promptly asks Congress for a > declaration of war on Uranus. > MMP activates its sleeper cell in Sheboygan to implement its business > continuity plan. Life goes back to normal. > > George Bates > Yokohama, Japan > Gaming by the Bay the 1st Sunday of every month. C'mon over. We'll leave > the light on for ya. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of mcleods > Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:57 AM > To: ASLML; Paul Ferraro > Subject: Re: [Aslml] MMP Holiday Schedule and AOO Status > > > Listerz, > > Greg wrote regarding the final sign of the imminent arrival of the > apocolypse (the release of AoO for the believers), > >>> I just know I'll be sitting around, after a big turkey dinner, >>> waiting >>> for >>> the next football game, watching the news, when they'll show a large >>> industrial fire at a printing facility out East..... > > Paul predicts, > >> I'm betting the mortgage money on an earthquake. >> >> :-) > > Naw, industrial fire and an earthquake are not sure things as far as > erasing > > AoO is concerned. > > My money is on a meteor impact. Nothing too big, just football field > size-ish. > > What components are not vapourized on impact will be buried by debris or > sunk underwater when the Atlantic Ocean infills the crater. > > All said, it ain't gonna' be pretty. > > The next question becomes, how long will it take MMP to recreate all the > bits and pieces and when will AoO II be ready for publishing? > > ;) > > > > > > =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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 pferraro at greenepa.net Tue Dec 20 09:28:21 2005 From: pferraro at greenepa.net (Paul Ferraro) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 12:28:21 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion In-Reply-To: <000c01c60584$1fc23100$6401a8c0@Kaiju> Message-ID: > I have been watching this thread with smug amusement. You will notice that > the announcements from MMP detail the progress of module development through > design, proofing, printing, etc. There has never been any mention of > distribution. This is because I purchased the entire first printing of this > module a long time ago. I'll be seeing you on e-bay. There is, evidently, a new Evil in the world. A Koal Hit Squad will be dispatched shortly to deal with this threat, as they are the closest hit squad available... From john at winhaven.net Tue Dec 20 09:45:24 2005 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:45:24 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00b701c6058d$28392880$6a01a8c0@ScuzzPaq> I'm guessing by the time AOO actually is a reality Credit Cards will be a thing of the past - we'll all have credits chips under our scalp. So my preorder will be non-valid. I'll have to mail in my head to pay for it. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Ferraro Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 11:28 AM To: ASLML Subject: Re: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion > I have been watching this thread with smug amusement. You will notice > that the announcements from MMP detail the progress of module > development through design, proofing, printing, etc. There has never > been any mention of distribution. This is because I purchased the > entire first printing of this module a long time ago. I'll be seeing you on e-bay. There is, evidently, a new Evil in the world. A Koal Hit Squad will be dispatched shortly to deal with this threat, as they are the closest hit squad available... From john at winhaven.net Tue Dec 20 09:45:24 2005 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:45:24 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion In-Reply-To: <000c01c60584$1fc23100$6401a8c0@Kaiju> Message-ID: <00b801c6058d$2887bdb0$6a01a8c0@ScuzzPaq> LOL! It wouldn't surprise me. eBay has been hopping with ASL related goodies for the last few months! Too rich for my blood, which AOO on eBay would probably require, that or a kidney ;-) -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of Gomi Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:41 AM To: aslml-aslml.net at lists.aslml.net Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion I have been watching this thread with smug amusement. You will notice that the announcements from MMP detail the progress of module development through design, proofing, printing, etc. There has never been any mention of distribution. This is because I purchased the entire first printing of this module a long time ago. I'll be seeing you on e-bay. Kaijusan aka Boxcar Bob Cary, Equatorial Carolina, USA, Earth From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Dec 20 12:18:57 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 07:18:57 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] Glider (Vehicle) Hindrance In-Reply-To: <001a01c6054d$6a7dfc60$bbbd6e58@backroom> References: <003601c60516$06258760$58614544@BrainofPooh> <001a01c6054d$6a7dfc60$bbbd6e58@backroom> Message-ID: On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 10:09:07 -0000, "Phil Draper" wrote: >I respectfully disagree with this. A6.7 makes it clear that a LOS must pass >through (not just into or out of) a hindrance hex to incur a +1 DRM. Yes. >It then >states that "The presence of such a hindrance always negates Interdiction >and FFMO." Actually, Hindrance is capitalised, and is referring to the +1. If there isn't at least a +1, it isn't a Hindrance. It then goes on to say "Being in a LOS Hindrance hex ... does not hinder the LOS of a firing or target unit; it is only the presence of a LOS Hindrance between the same-level firing and target units ... that forms a LOS Hindrance ...." Which is to say, if the Hindrance isn't *between* firer and target, it has *no effect*. > While ambiguous I believe this statement refers to any case where >a hindrance exists in a hex not just the case where a LOS passes through it. I don't think it's particularly ambiguous at all, and I'm afraid that you are mistaken. >This interpretation is backed up by the A10.531 Open Ground EX which states >"A grain, brush, or orchard hex is not open ground becuse the -1 FFMO DRM >does not apply." The only reason that I can see that FFMO does not apply to >these hexes is because they are hindrances (they have no TEM). No, FFMO doesn't apply because they are not Open Ground hexes! >So I believe the glider hindrace negates FFMO for units moving within its location while >providing zero TEM. No. >For reasons stated above I believe it does cancel FFMO. The relative >elevation of the firer to target makes no difference, a similar case is that >of a unit routing through grain which is immune to interdiction from higher >level units not just those at the same level. It is the presence of the >hindrance within the hex that negates the open ground modifier. No, it is the presence of the *grain* (meaning that the hex is not OG) that negates the FFMO modifier. >As Bruce states non AFV vehicles are not hindrances until turned into >wrecks. But for AFV and wrecks the effect is identical providing the >hindrance DRM is currently in effect (armoured assault, not subject to To >Hit Case J, etc). See D9.4 That's because AFV and Wrecks provide *TEM*, and in the case of Armoured Assault, that TEM is mobile. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 jmmcleod at mts.net Tue Dec 20 16:07:22 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 18:07:22 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Armies of Oblivion References: Message-ID: <001c01c605c2$ec957550$7827c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz. B-B wrote, >> I have been watching this thread with smug amusement. You will notice >> that >> the announcements from MMP detail the progress of module development >> through >> design, proofing, printing, etc. There has never been any mention of >> distribution. This is because I purchased the entire first printing of >> this >> module a long time ago. I'll be seeing you on e-bay. Paul comments with, > There is, evidently, a new Evil in the world. A Koal Hit Squad will be > dispatched shortly to deal with this threat, as they are the closest hit > squad available... A mighty force nudges the asteroid ever so slightly to a new course and heading ... If you live near or within a fair distance of, "Cary, Equatorial Carolina, USA, Earth", I would relocate to far distant higher ground with all haste. Having said that, the Baltimore area will probably still be within the peripheral "owwie!" zone. =Jim= From keith.dalton at gmail.com Tue Dec 20 19:42:50 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 22:42:50 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Valor of the Guards is now up for preorder Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512201942o16295fd7m41600b499fcae997@mail.gmail.com> Gentlemen: Valor of the Guards, Tom Morin's Central Stalingrad module, is now up for preorder. The regular cost is $65; preorder cost is $48.75 plus shipping. It's playable with just the ASL Rulebook and Beyond Valor, so even relative newbies can get in on the action! You get: * Two 22"x32" full-color mapsheets * Three countersheets * One ASL Rules Chapter with all the rules required for both scenario and campaign games * Up to four Campaign Games * 10 Scenario Cards with 17 scenarios * Three 8" x 11" Player Aid/Roster cards Preorder it here: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/preorder/viewGame.php?id=28 Thanks, Keith MMP From keith.dalton at gmail.com Tue Dec 20 21:04:17 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 00:04:17 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Valor of the Guards is now up for preorder In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512201942o16295fd7m41600b499fcae997@mail.gmail.com> References: <4e2cf5e00512201942o16295fd7m41600b499fcae997@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512202104j642ceb71qbabe00d874e0064f@mail.gmail.com> PS: We are investigating the possibility of reprinting Red Barricades at the same time. Is this is feasible it will be placed up for preorder as well. Keith MMP From kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk Tue Dec 20 22:25:40 2005 From: kenneth.knudsen at mail.tele.dk (Kenneth Knudsen) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 07:25:40 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Valor of the Guards is now up for preorder References: <4e2cf5e00512201942o16295fd7m41600b499fcae997@mail.gmail.com> <4e2cf5e00512202104j642ceb71qbabe00d874e0064f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000c01c605f7$5e507530$0200000a@kennethk> Best news this year so far. Hooray Kenneth Knudsen ----- Original Message ----- From: "keith dalton" To: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:04 AM Subject: Re: [Aslml] Valor of the Guards is now up for preorder > PS: We are investigating the possibility of reprinting Red Barricades > at the same time. Is this is feasible it will be placed up for > preorder as well. > > Keith > MMP > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > From rockgheba at gmail.com Wed Dec 21 01:46:51 2005 From: rockgheba at gmail.com (Mario Nadalini) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:46:51 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Valor of the Guards is now up for preorder In-Reply-To: <000c01c605f7$5e507530$0200000a@kennethk> References: <4e2cf5e00512201942o16295fd7m41600b499fcae997@mail.gmail.com> <4e2cf5e00512202104j642ceb71qbabe00d874e0064f@mail.gmail.com> <000c01c605f7$5e507530$0200000a@kennethk> Message-ID: <63bc1b0f0512210146j702c9501u9e2157cc0544ec67@mail.gmail.com> Sure, best ASL news this year. I needed something like this today! Keep on the good job guys, and lower that "preorders needed to 1", which of course is my own copy of the game... Mario "I'd subscript to every MMP ASL product if I could" Nadalini On 12/21/05, Kenneth Knudsen wrote: > Best news this year so far. > Hooray > > Kenneth Knudsen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "keith dalton" > To: "ASL Mailing List" > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:04 AM > Subject: Re: [Aslml] Valor of the Guards is now up for preorder > > > > PS: We are investigating the possibility of reprinting Red Barricades > > at the same time. Is this is feasible it will be placed up for > > preorder as well. > > > > Keith > > MMP > > _______________________________________________ > > aslml mailing list > > aslml at lists.aslml.net > > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > -- Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it. Richard P. Feynman -- From keith.dalton at gmail.com Wed Dec 21 06:58:49 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:58:49 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] VOTG Playtester Quotes Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512210658m12977273t413bc4d8b4ec21b3@mail.gmail.com> Hi guys: Here's some information about Valor of the Guards from four of the playtesters who garaciously answered the call to help spread the word about this project. Charlie Hamilton: The terrain types added for this module give a much different feel than Red Barricades The gutted buildings, railway cars, and partially collapsed buildings, as well as the large number of open city squares give Stalingrad a new feel." "The scenarios in this module offer Tom Morin's usual combination of balance, chrome, re-playability, and creative ways of simulating well-researched small unit actions. Jim Torkelson: What makes VOTG special? First of all, the map. It is beautiful. I'm thinking about framing mine..." "Central Stalingrad ranges from blocks of large multistory buildings to the rail yard to the riverbank. The large open squares are a particular tactical problem; they are easy to defend when covered by fire, but when the defenders are smoked or suppressed, they are a highway to the heart of the defense." "The scenarios are cool. They range from the initial German entry into central Stalingrad against the NKVD, through the battles for the Central Railway Station, and then to the duel with the Guards along the Volga riverbank. Mike Allexenberg: Wish to fight the battles for Pavlov's House? Wish to fight around the infamous crocodile fountain featured on covers of older editions of "Enemy at the Gates"? Wish to fight out Von Paulus' surrender in the Univermag? It's all in Valor of the Guards! Valor of the Guards has far fewer factories than Red Barricades; instead, you have to fight your away across the board in tightly packed stone buildings. Some of these blocks are separated by large city squares which are treated as wide boulevards. VOTG contains fortified strongpoint rules to better reflect protracted Russian stands in places like Pavlov's House, and after the very early stage of the battle, the Russian defenders consist of 458s and 628s, complete with the heavy weapons you'd expect with elite forces. Rob Wolkey: Why do I like VOTG? The new terrain. The burnt out stone buildings that are harder to move through, +1 MP to go up levels, but allow you to shoot Mortars from the top level. There are partially collapsed buildings which are Rubble hexes with one story walls that block LOS. The Plazas (see Runways) that stretch across key areas are a bloody mess to try and attack across. The new terrain gives VOTG a feeling all unto itself. You will find yourself nodding in appreciation of the design of these features and hope that some day these will be made into overlays, so future scenarios can share use of them. The scenarios. I strictly kept to playtesting the scenarios and did not play any of the campaigns. I have playtested many an ASL scenario and I would stack the set of VOTG scenarios against any group out there. They are diverse, unique, difficult, brilliant and flat-out fun to play. I won't give too much more away but the VOTG scenarios give a little something to everyone: smaller quicker scenarios, good tourney-sized scenarios and large slugfests. Oh yeah, one more thing, when you've got to charge across that damn four hex wide Plaza at -3 TEM listen carefully for the evil cackle of Tom Morin. Thanks to these guys for the feedback. Keith MMP From keith.dalton at gmail.com Wed Dec 21 20:51:18 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:51:18 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512212051x651ac30dw49178c17eb9694b7@mail.gmail.com> Anyone out there? From john at winhaven.net Wed Dec 21 21:03:25 2005 From: john at winhaven.net (John Bartow) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:03:25 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Test In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512212051x651ac30dw49178c17eb9694b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004501c606b5$0a72c9e0$6f01a8c0@ScuzzPaq> Probably all in que for preordering VoG :o) I couldn't believe it - when your message came through I immediatley went and preordered it and I was 131. Hot item. -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of keith dalton Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:51 PM To: ASL Mailing List Subject: [Aslml] Test Anyone out there? _______________________________________________ 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 keith.dalton at gmail.com Wed Dec 21 21:06:23 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 00:06:23 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Test In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512212105t3e878b1j2d8159df7e520b54@mail.gmail.com> References: <4e2cf5e00512212051x651ac30dw49178c17eb9694b7@mail.gmail.com> <004501c606b5$0a72c9e0$6f01a8c0@ScuzzPaq> <4e2cf5e00512212105t3e878b1j2d8159df7e520b54@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512212106k7e412d6bo1c868f57a6c19b23@mail.gmail.com> It's got 530 right now. On 12/22/05, John Bartow wrote: > Probably all in que for preordering VoG :o) > > I couldn't believe it - when your message came through I immediatley went > and preordered it and I was 131. Hot item. > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of keith dalton > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:51 PM > To: ASL Mailing List > Subject: [Aslml] Test > > Anyone out there? > _______________________________________________ > aslml mailing list > aslml at lists.aslml.net > http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net > To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net > > From janusz.maxe at unf.se Thu Dec 22 01:35:09 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:35:09 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] Test References: <4e2cf5e00512212051x651ac30dw49178c17eb9694b7@mail.gmail.com><004501c606b5$0a72c9e0$6f01a8c0@ScuzzPaq><4e2cf5e00512212105t3e878b1j2d8159df7e520b54@mail.gmail.com> <4e2cf5e00512212106k7e412d6bo1c868f57a6c19b23@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: And still most shops probably haven't gotten around to ordering yet. Janusz ________________________________ Fr?n: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net genom keith dalton Skickat: to 2005-12-22 06:06 Till: ASL Mailing List ?mne: Re: [Aslml] Test It's got 530 right now. On 12/22/05, John Bartow wrote: > Probably all in que for preordering VoG :o) > > I couldn't believe it - when your message came through I immediatley went > and preordered it and I was 131. Hot item. > > -----Original Message----- > From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] > On Behalf Of keith dalton > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:51 PM > To: ASL Mailing List > Subject: [Aslml] Test > > Anyone out there? > _______________________________________________ > 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 andy at belisarius.org.uk Thu Dec 22 12:39:04 2005 From: andy at belisarius.org.uk (Andy McMaster) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:39:04 +0000 Subject: [Aslml] Test Message-ID: <1135283944.8995.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Oh well. Having finally got a confirmation email through I'd thought I'd best check all was now working. Can't think what to post as I'm not playing much at the moment (20 day old baby taking up most of life!) so thought I'd posy the latest VotG pre-order total: 615 as at 20:38 GMT on 22nd Dec REALLY looking forward to this one and it's great to see such a rapid response in orders from the community. Cheers Andy From tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 22 18:50:00 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:50:00 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Test References: <1135283944.8995.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <004001c6076b$923a0990$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> newbie test Regards, Pat Last Played: Mighty Endeavor, Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle From tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Fri Dec 23 15:05:03 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 17:05:03 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 Message-ID: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> Well, embarassasing as it is, I need to report the hopeless" Us position turned into an easy US win. I had not realized how difficult it is to rally units without leaders. Both sides lost leaders to close combat, but the Germans lost more, and being on the attack, that hurt them the most. The other thing I had not realized was how important the relative strength of the units were. In CC the Germans usually lost a unit to defensive fire moving in. So the attack went in at 1:1 or less odds. Not good in this system. I know I made numerous mistakes. Worst was putting a mortar where I really couldn't use it due to LOS and minimum range. It's not clear to me if a mortar can fire from a building hex or not. Like others systems I've played (TCS, Landships) moving in on units in good shape is difficult. I guess you need to use prep fire (and smoke, I didn't use that at all) to move closer. A lot of fun, in any event. I do need to make a "cheat sheet" on when to remove the various markers, though. Regards, Pat Last Played: Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle, ASL Sk#2, S11 From david at stanaway.net Fri Dec 23 17:44:08 2005 From: david at stanaway.net (David Stanaway) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:44:08 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 In-Reply-To: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> Message-ID: <1135388648.29248.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 17:05 -0600, Pat Collins wrote: > I guess you need to use prep fire (and smoke, I > didn't use that at all) to move closer. Yes, that helps. Use of Assault move in to cover, smoke and advancing fire (Especially if you have underlined firepower [Assualt Fire capability]). Close combat can be quite risky, and you need to know when to do it. Especially when you are running low on good order leaders. Your next game should be a little better if you analyze some of the things that went wrong for you in this scenario, learning the tactics is part of the fun of the game. From tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 24 12:32:42 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:32:42 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <1135388648.29248.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <001e01c608c9$310e0950$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> > Your next game should be a little better if you analyze some of the > things that went wrong for you in this scenario, learning the tactics is > part of the fun of the game. I'll likely play "over open sights" next. Some nice, direct fire weapons, looks as a good situation. Between the two SK's and the ones in Operations, I have some 11/12 scenarios to play already! Regards, Pat Last Played: Mighty Endeavor, Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sat Dec 24 22:25:34 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 17:25:34 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up Message-ID: Best wishes of the season to all of you out there in ASL-land! Since Repetti went in to retirement, some of our regular discussions went to bed with him. One of these was the "best of the year" vote. Well, I can't be bothered setting up a website to take a formal vote, but we can still talk about the stuff that came out this year that we really liked (or really didn't like). First, though, we need to know what it is we're talking about. So we need a list of ASL stuff released in calendar year 2005. First, and let's get it out of the way, VASL had a new version this year. VASL deserves a prize every year for what it's done for ASL. Go VASL! But I'm really only planning on talking about actual printed items that you had to pay money to own. I'm pretty sure that this is *not* a complete list, so corrections and additions are welcome: MMP: ASL Journal #6 ASL Starter Kit #2 ASLRB reprint Beyond Valor v3 Schwerpunkt #11 HOB: Firefights #2 ASLOK XX Scenario Pack (not sure what the "official" name of this pack is, I haven't seen a copy yet) Dispatches From The Bunker: #20, #21 Friendly Fire Pack 1 Critical Hit: Dunno Fanatic Enterprises: Dunno Lone Canuck: Dunno Other publishers not listed above: Dunno I don't *think* that Le Franc Tireur published anything this year; IIRC, #8 and the "From The Cellar" scenario pack debuted late last year. I may be mistaken, though. Compared to previous years, it's not a terrifically long list, unfortunately. Still, we've seen worse years ... *much* worse years. And next year is shaping up to be even better (knock on wood). This year was a pretty good year if you were just starting out in ASL. The Starter Kits seem to be doing a pretty good job of getting non-ASL players interested, and while many seem content to stay at the SK level, others have been well and truly hooked. For those people, the return to availability of the ASLRB and BV are going to be a big deal. For the rest of us, though, I'd have to say that there wasn't really a lot to make you stand up and shout for joy. What we have is a whole bunch of scenario packs, basically, and while they're always welcome, they're rarely a standout item in their own right. (Yes, I know there are exceptions, but I don't think we saw any of those exceptions this year.) So I'd have to give the nod to Journal 6 as the best *new* product of the year not aimed at newbies: a decent collection of scenarios, some interesting reading, and a new HASL CG makes for a pretty good package. Not *amazing* ... just pretty good. A close runner-up would be the Friendly Fire Pack, which comes very close to being one of those "standout" scenario packs I refer to above. It's always good to see new approaches to scenario design, and these scenarios contain some clever ideas IMO. Schwerpunkt keeps on keeping on, doing what they do. If you buy an issue of SP, you know exactly what you're going to get. As long as you like it, that's a good thing of course! I don't *personally* think that SP scenarios are quite as well-designed as they keep telling us they are, and the SP attitude to errata is frankly appalling ("if we published errata for our products, we wouldn't be able to claim that they're errata-free!"), but their *overall* level of quality is to be admired, and I've never considered my money wasted buying SP. And their scenario titles are the best in the business. In conclusion I once again remind you all that if you don't maintain a subscription to "Dispatches from the Bunker", you're a loony. Three new scenarios every few months, a couple of interesting articles written by people who clearly love their ASL, and all for a pittance. You just can't lose with a deal like that. For the love of God, subscribe! Those are *my* opinions. What are *yours*? ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 reamees at earthlink.net Sun Dec 25 04:27:15 2005 From: reamees at earthlink.net (Raymond Woloszyn) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 07:27:15 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Aslml] Merry Christmas one and all... Message-ID: <7936176.1135513635732.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Here's hoping for a kinder, gentler list in 2006! Although I am registered in all the other forums, I think the old guard from GEnie days like myself can't wean ourselves off this list. Lurking reminds me of my good old days at the Puzzle Palace in Ft. Meade listening in on conversations employing for the most part cryptic references or strange acronyms. All the best in your personal and professional lives in 2006. May you have some SPARE time for ASL. Please note new "ASL" address for 2006 to keep one ahead on spammers. reamees(means private in Estonian)@earthlink.net Raymond Woloszyn Kernersville North Carolina From keith.dalton at gmail.com Sun Dec 25 04:07:35 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 07:07:35 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512250407m721ce555pcf937da12836698c@mail.gmail.com> Hi all: Gregory Schmittgens pointed out a rather huge error in BV3. Seems when we put out BV2 we moved a few informational counters from BV sheets to Red Barricades sheets, so some important markers are missing from BV3. Neither Perry nor Brian recalled this move, so a reprint of the BV2 sheets left some of those markers out in the cold. Starting now, we will stop shipping BV3 and have a countersheet of the missing counters made up ASAP. Once we receive the new countersheet we'll ship it out to those who we've shipped BV3 to already, and then continue on with collation and shipping. Hopefully this won't cost us too much time in the scheme of things. Sorry for the problem with the module, and as usual we'll keep you updated. Merry Christmas, Keith MMP From geb3 at inter.net Sun Dec 25 08:31:24 2005 From: geb3 at inter.net (George Bates) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 01:31:24 +0900 Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512250407m721ce555pcf937da12836698c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000001c60970$a827b700$3901170a@joho.com> Doh! There goes MMP's black cat, running across the field of 2006! - G -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net] On Behalf Of keith dalton Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 9:08 PM To: ASL Mailing List Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents Hi all: Gregory Schmittgens pointed out a rather huge error in BV3. Seems when we put out BV2 we moved a few informational counters from BV sheets to Red Barricades sheets, so some important markers are missing from BV3. Neither Perry nor Brian recalled this move, so a reprint of the BV2 sheets left some of those markers out in the cold. Starting now, we will stop shipping BV3 and have a countersheet of the missing counters made up ASAP. Once we receive the new countersheet we'll ship it out to those who we've shipped BV3 to already, and then continue on with collation and shipping. Hopefully this won't cost us too much time in the scheme of things. Sorry for the problem with the module, and as usual we'll keep you updated. Merry Christmas, Keith MMP _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From willette at gmpexpress.net Sun Dec 25 09:02:45 2005 From: willette at gmpexpress.net (Joe Willette) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 12:02:45 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512250407m721ce555pcf937da12836698c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks for jumping on this quickly. I thought the marker count seemed low... Merry Christmas! Joe -----Original Message----- From: aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net [mailto:aslml-bounces at lists.aslml.net]On Behalf Of keith dalton Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 7:08 AM To: ASL Mailing List Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents Hi all: Gregory Schmittgens pointed out a rather huge error in BV3. Seems when we put out BV2 we moved a few informational counters from BV sheets to Red Barricades sheets, so some important markers are missing from BV3. Neither Perry nor Brian recalled this move, so a reprint of the BV2 sheets left some of those markers out in the cold. Starting now, we will stop shipping BV3 and have a countersheet of the missing counters made up ASAP. Once we receive the new countersheet we'll ship it out to those who we've shipped BV3 to already, and then continue on with collation and shipping. Hopefully this won't cost us too much time in the scheme of things. Sorry for the problem with the module, and as usual we'll keep you updated. Merry Christmas, Keith MMP _______________________________________________ aslml mailing list aslml at lists.aslml.net http://lists.aslml.net/listinfo.cgi/aslml-aslml.net To unsubscribe, visit the above website, or email webmaster at aslml.net From aslwynn at rogers.com Sun Dec 25 07:28:06 2005 From: aslwynn at rogers.com (Wynn) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 10:28:06 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up References: Message-ID: <001c01c60967$ce185360$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> > > In conclusion I once again remind you all that if you don't maintain a > subscription to "Dispatches from the Bunker", you're a loony. Three new > scenarios every few months, a couple of interesting articles written by > people > who clearly love their ASL, and all for a pittance. You just can't lose > with > a deal like that. For the love of God, subscribe! > > Those are *my* opinions. What are *yours*? Bruce et al; I couldn't agree more wrt "Dispatches from the Bunker;" it's a great deal and, more importantly IMO, every issue shows the love of and loyalty to the hobby that keeps this great game what it is. Of course, and perhaps not just incidentally, one of its contributors is also the creator of Valor of the Guards, just announced by MMP as being up for pre-order. Anyone who likes ASL and does NOT subscribe to Dispatches is a damn fool. Wynn From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Dec 25 09:41:37 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 11:41:37 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] Merry Christmas one and all... References: <7936176.1135513635732.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000a01c6097a$77553210$a127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Listerz, Merry Christmas and compliments of the season to all! Have a safe and healthy New Year. =Jim= From jmmcleod at mts.net Sun Dec 25 09:43:56 2005 From: jmmcleod at mts.net (mcleods) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 11:43:56 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents References: <4e2cf5e00512250407m721ce555pcf937da12836698c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000d01c6097a$c86c5200$a127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Hello Keith, In a similar vein, apparently there was supposed to be an IFT table in SK2. Mine was without. Which channel must be followed in order to secure the missing item? Thanks =Jim= From bignoodle at earthlink.net Sun Dec 25 10:25:34 2005 From: bignoodle at earthlink.net (donald holland) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 13:25:34 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents Message-ID: <380-2200512025182534234@earthlink.net> Which channel must be followed in order to secure the > missing item? Have you ever seen the African Queen? Don "Big Noodle" Holland bignoodle at earthlink.net VASL V5 ROCKS!!! From bprobst at netspace.net.au Sun Dec 25 14:01:56 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 09:01:56 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up In-Reply-To: <001701c60954$6cebbf90$6401a8c0@danielmpnlmqxq> References: <001701c60954$6cebbf90$6401a8c0@danielmpnlmqxq> Message-ID: On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 08:09:18 -0500, "daniel zucker" wrote: >'Beyond the Beachhead' by HoB. >Two new hard board mounted maps, with two 3/4 of a map sized overlays. Special SSR for 'Light Bocage' that can be in use with regular Bocage, 6 scenarios with two larger scenarios. >The action is the fighting in the bocage from June through August 44. I've played 4 of the scenarios and would play them all again. If you would play something again and do, then that is a good game. BtB (like RbF 2) was not a 2005 product ... it was released in 2004 (before RbF 2, in fact). Which is not to say that I disagree with it being a good product, but I can't claim it to be one of 2005's best products . ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 keith.dalton at gmail.com Sun Dec 25 18:17:17 2005 From: keith.dalton at gmail.com (keith dalton) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 21:17:17 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] Favorite Scenario Message-ID: <4e2cf5e00512251817l5d7cf757sbd93d60ba7357c1a@mail.gmail.com> Okay guys, Here's a discussion starter. Favorite scenario. Re-playable, fun for reither side. From ldmmisselbrook at shaw.ca Sun Dec 25 18:32:22 2005 From: ldmmisselbrook at shaw.ca (Lee) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 19:32:22 -0700 Subject: [Aslml] Favorite Scenario References: <4e2cf5e00512251817l5d7cf757sbd93d60ba7357c1a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001e01c609c4$9a2d2e10$fd719644@p3> ----- Original Message ----- From: "keith dalton" To: "ASL Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 7:17 PM Subject: [Aslml] Favorite Scenario > Okay guys, > > Here's a discussion starter. Favorite scenario. Re-playable, fun for > reither side. > For me, Hube's Pocket. Must have played it 30 times. A blast for either side and can have any tactic for and against. Next is Hill 621. Love the counters for either side and can be played very quickly if you take ricks. :) Lee in Edmonton From tom_jaz at yahoo.com Sun Dec 25 18:28:55 2005 From: tom_jaz at yahoo.com (Jazz) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 18:28:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] Favorite Scenario In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512251817l5d7cf757sbd93d60ba7357c1a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051226022855.54433.qmail@web30003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> First thing that jumps up in my mind is ye olde tried and true Urban Apes.....not overly large, but enough meat to be fun (shall we call it a non-petit filet?) and not dicey, the funky street toughs popping up at odd moments in odd places, just where do you put that 88L(?), multiple ways to approach the cathedral and the german has to play a balancing act between delaying in front of the cathedral, delaying even longer in the cathedral and pulling guys back over the river to hold the final victory buildings. Not sure if this was Pete's first effort, but it was the first one of his scenarios that I knew was his...and I think it cemented his place in the scenario designer hall of fame. I'm sure that others will pop up, White Tigers being the next thing that comes to mind. Jazz --- keith dalton wrote: > Okay guys, > > Here's a discussion starter. Favorite scenario. Re-playable, fun for > reither side. > _______________________________________________ > 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 tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 26 09:15:38 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 11:15:38 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] BV 3 Contents References: <4e2cf5e00512250407m721ce555pcf937da12836698c@mail.gmail.com> <000d01c6097a$c86c5200$a127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <001d01c60a3f$fe5e05f0$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> > In a similar vein, apparently there was supposed to be an IFT table in > SK2. Yes, mine had one. Regards, Pat Last Played: Mighty Endeavor, Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle From tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 26 09:17:23 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 11:17:23 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up References: Message-ID: <002301c60a40$3cf17680$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> > This year was a pretty good year if you were just starting out in ASL. > The > Starter Kits seem to be doing a pretty good job of getting non-ASL players In my case, that is certainly true. > For those people, the return to availability of > the ASLRB and BV are going to be a big deal. A bad deal for my wallet, I think! Regards, Pat Last Played: Mighty Endeavor, Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle From payne-asl2 at nc.rr.com Mon Dec 26 10:46:29 2005 From: payne-asl2 at nc.rr.com (Chuck Payne) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:46:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Aslml] VASL Log Crashes Message-ID: Hi, Has anyone else had problems with getting repeated (but not repeatable) untrapped errors in one VASL game and not any in others? Any idea of how to clear up the underlying issue? I am running VASL version 5.1.3 and VASSAL engine 2.3.2. Thanks, Chuck Payne From swfancher at mindspring.com Mon Dec 26 11:11:58 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 14:11:58 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up, and a late Xmas present Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226140141.01d86460@mindspring.com> I am a little late to the party, having just received SP11 and FF2 for Christmas. Both look quite enjoyable - I look forward to playing several of the Firefight's scenarios fairly quickly. Of course, until the VASL maps come out, that means I'll have to find some time to play FTF. :-) Based on what I have seen though, I have to agree with Bruce P on J6 as the product of the year, in terms of content and also the amount of discussion generated, as well as in terms of the amount of play I have seen/heard about. Hey, just to get 2005 off to a proper finish, and 2006 of to a great start.... VotG has been on pre-order now for two whole weeks and is at only 849 of the 1000 needed. Wouldn't it be nice if MMP came back from their two week holiday and found it past the P#? Come on...let's get 1000 P's in 2005! Then there will be something for everyone in 2006 - Green Meanies for those so inclined, and another classic for the Stalingrad fanatics. Hope everyone had a good holiday!!!! From rjmosher at direcway.com Mon Dec 26 13:00:51 2005 From: rjmosher at direcway.com (ron mosher) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 15:00:51 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up, and a late Xmas present In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226140141.01d86460@mindspring.com> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226140141.01d86460@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20051226150012.0198b0a8@direcway.com> At 01:11 PM 12/26/2005, Seth W Fancher wrote: >VotG has been on pre-order now for two whole weeks and is at only 849 >of the 1000 needed. Hmmm...didn't it go up on 12-19 or 12-20? just short of one week? For the nonce, ron acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From swfancher at mindspring.com Mon Dec 26 13:07:40 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 16:07:40 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up, and a late Xmas present In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20051226150012.0198b0a8@direcway.com> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226140141.01d86460@mindspring.com> <7.0.0.16.0.20051226150012.0198b0a8@direcway.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226160300.01d97900@mindspring.com> You're right...12/22 according to the news on MMP's website. So 4 days. I had been looking at an old email and the date was formatted in the English style (DD/MM) so when I saw the 12, I assumed it was December 12 and never made it to the next section. Proving once again what happens when you "assume." The good news is that we are now up to 859 pre-orders, so in approximately two more days, we should be all done!!! Regards, Seth At 04:00 PM 12/26/2005, ron mosher wrote: >At 01:11 PM 12/26/2005, Seth W Fancher wrote: >>VotG has been on pre-order now for two whole weeks and is at only 849 >>of the 1000 needed. > >Hmmm...didn't it go up on 12-19 or 12-20? just short of one week? > > >For the nonce, >ron >acerbic curmudgeon and lowly priest in the High Holy Church of ASL From david at stanaway.net Mon Dec 26 13:33:13 2005 From: david at stanaway.net (David Stanaway) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 15:33:13 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up, and a late Xmas present In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226160300.01d97900@mindspring.com> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051226140141.01d86460@mindspring.com> <7.0.0.16.0.20051226150012.0198b0a8@direcway.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051226160300.01d97900@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <1135632794.26070.1.camel@dmxnocws13.dialmex.net> On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 16:07 -0500, Seth W Fancher wrote: > You're right...12/22 according to the news on MMP's website. So 4 > days. I had been looking at an old email and the date was formatted > in the English style (DD/MM) so when I saw the 12, I assumed it was > December 12 and never made it to the next section. Proving once > again what happens when you "assume." > > The good news is that we are now up to 859 pre-orders, so in > approximately two more days, we should be all done!!! It still won't be considered a 2005 release. Some time 2006 would be great though :) It slowed off a bit from its first cracking pace, the last 150 will prob take as long as the first 850. From bprobst at netspace.net.au Mon Dec 26 14:16:44 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:16:44 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] (fwd) Re: End of year wrap-up Message-ID: <6tq0r15p01au9l5vctmr0r3mil77k23bde@4ax.com> Forwarded to the ASLML at Daniel's request: On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 08:09:18 -0500, "daniel zucker" wrote: >Those are *my* opinions. What are *yours*? Hi there I have to agree that not the 'best of year' that Tom did was very nice it was a chance to review what I did know about that was out there with stuff that I had no idea about. It was a good way to help decide that I was going to try to get to round out my ASL collection. I know that not everyone who reads this list is also a member of ACG-SZO but Scott H did start a thread with a poll for voting. He too did not list every thing just for lack of the deeper knowledge and preparations that Tom put into it when he was more active than he is now ( I did see a message form him on another list that I 'troll'). Like Bruce I think that VASL gets a special prize each year because of the incredible things that are being done with it. say'ths Bruce: So I'd have to give the nod to Journal 6 as the best *new* product of the year not aimed at newbies: a decent collection of scenarios, some interesting reading, and a new HASL CG makes for a pretty good package. Not *amazing* ... just pretty good. and I concur, with the caveat J6 best of year in the category of magazine. I can't add any thing else that would rise the praise. HoB's 'Recon by Fire 2' would be my second but I think it was a '04 release and my favorite 'Le Franc Tireur' did not produce this year which can only mean that next year will be there year! Now on to the big prize the #1 product of the year, 'Beyond the Beachhead' by HoB. Two new hard board mounted maps, with two 3/4 of a map sized overlays. Special SSR for 'Light Bocage' that can be in use with regular Bocage, 6 scenarios with two larger scenarios. The action is the fighting in the bocage from June through August 44. I've played 4 of the scenarios and would play them all again. If you would play something again and do, then that is a good game. Well there it is my short list I have some of the other things but they did not measure up but I would not say that any of them are bad. have a happy and merry to all Daniel ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 kevinkenneally at isot.com Mon Dec 26 16:51:17 2005 From: kevinkenneally at isot.com (kevinkenneally@isot.com) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:51:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Merry Christmas one and all... In-Reply-To: <000a01c6097a$77553210$a127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> References: <7936176.1135513635732.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <000a01c6097a$77553210$a127c8cd@jims3ge2hz6irc> Message-ID: <1062.4.253.46.244.1135644677.squirrel@wmail.isot.com> What's so Merry about this Christmas? I just found the receipts from the charge cards the wife has been hiding..... Anyone have a spare $25K to "give" me? and he says to have a "healthy New Year".... Just might have to sell a kidney to pay off all the debts.... Happy holidays to all. Kevin > Listerz, > > Merry Christmas and compliments of the season to all! > > Have a safe and healthy New Year. > > > > > > =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 Mon Dec 26 17:15:58 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:15:58 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> Message-ID: <004101c60a84$0b43ee80$7779de18@klis.com> Pat wrote: > The other thing I had not realized was how important > the relative strength of the units were. In CC the > Germans usually lost a unit to defensive fire moving > in. So the attack went in at 1:1 or less odds. Not > good in this system. Knowing the odds really helps. I make a lot of decisions based on the odds. I even wrote an article in the Annual mostly based on trying to figure out the odds of Ambush in CC. > I know I made numerous mistakes. Worst was putting a > mortar where I really couldn't use it due to LOS and > minimum range. It's not clear to me if a mortar can > fire from a building hex or not. No. No can do. (B23.423) I've written another article for the Annual (not yet published) on the subject of where things can be set up and not set up. There's a lot of things that experienced players get wrong. It's a bit complicated. > Like others systems I've played (TCS, Landships) > moving in on units in good shape is difficult. As it should be. > I guess you need to use prep fire (and smoke, I > didn't use that at all) to move closer. SMOKE is a big equalizer in this system. > A lot of fun, in any event. I do need to make a > "cheat sheet" on when to remove the various markers, > though. As a hint, they are colour-coded, so if you can remember the colour-code of each phase (which is easier than it sounds) you will quickly get in the habit of removing them when the colour of that phase is ended. David "my girlfriend sez: 'Remove everything red after Close Combat'" Olie From janusz.maxe at unf.se Mon Dec 26 23:31:30 2005 From: janusz.maxe at unf.se (Janusz Maxe) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:31:30 +0100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <004101c60a84$0b43ee80$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: >No. No can do. (B23.423) I've written another article for the Annual (not >yet published) on the subject of where things can be set up and not set up. >There's a lot of things that experienced players get wrong. It's a bit >complicated. I think a heavy mortar can set up in a building, even be emplaced, but cannot fire from it. Thus you can use the HIP ability to keep controll of a "captured" building, or let that crew use it's 'faust on something big and heavy. Janusz From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Dec 27 00:16:43 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:16:43 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 In-Reply-To: References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <004101c60a84$0b43ee80$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:31:30 +0100, "Janusz Maxe" wrote: >I think a heavy mortar can set up in a building Only if it's a Small Target (not all MTR are -- e.g., the Russian 160mm). But yes, you are correct that there's a difference between "being allowed to set up (or be) in a Location" and "being allowed to fire from a Location". ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 johnmeyers at verizon.net Tue Dec 27 06:25:45 2005 From: johnmeyers at verizon.net (John C. Meyers) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:25:45 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Aslml] Interview with Ortona Survivor Message-ID: <30170440.1135693545364.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> Vatican Radio had an interview with a Canadian who faught at Ortona. As you might imagine, it's not exactly focused on the battle details, but it's still interesting. Here's the blurb: >>>> War And Peace It was the Stalingrad of Italy - one of the most brutal battles fought in World War II. During Christmas week 1943, the quaint little Italian hill town of Ortona overlooking the Adriatic Sea became the bloody battlefield for German and Canadian troops - hundreds were never to go home. Ted Griffith was one of the few Canadian soldiers to live to tell the story. <<<< The streaming link (Real) is: or you can download an MP3 here: But please note that these links may not work for more than the next few days. (It was from last Friday and I think they drop off after about a week.) If you don't get to it in time I can send you a copy of the MP3 file, but since it's about 12MB, you'll need to make sure your ISP will allow a file that large. John From aslbunker at yahoo.com Tue Dec 27 16:28:35 2005 From: aslbunker at yahoo.com (Vic Provost) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 16:28:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up In-Reply-To: <001c01c60967$ce185360$3fc3c445@D56LBC31> Message-ID: <20051228002835.67987.qmail@web32611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thanks so much for the kind words Bruce and Wynn, we hope that our love for the hobby and our hard work making this newsletter worth the price you pay is evident as soon as you open up an Issue. Yes, indeed, my right hand man and long-time friend (30+ years and counting) Tom Morin IS the driving force behind VotG, no one has put more into an ASL Product than Tom over the last 12 years. Thanks again to everyone for their continued interest and support, your ASL Comrade, Vic. --- Wynn wrote: > > > > In conclusion I once again remind you all that if > you don't maintain a > > subscription to "Dispatches from the Bunker", > you're a loony. Three new > > scenarios every few months, a couple of > interesting articles written by > > people > > who clearly love their ASL, and all for a > pittance. You just can't lose > > with > > a deal like that. For the love of God, subscribe! > > > > Those are *my* opinions. What are *yours*? > > Bruce et al; > > I couldn't agree more wrt "Dispatches from the > Bunker;" it's a great deal > and, more importantly IMO, every issue shows the > love of and loyalty to the > hobby that keeps this great game what it is. > > Of course, and perhaps not just incidentally, one of > its contributors is > also the creator of Valor of the Guards, just > announced by MMP as being up > for pre-order. > > Anyone who likes ASL and does NOT subscribe to > Dispatches is a damn fool. > > Wynn > > > _______________________________________________ > 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! for Good - Make a difference this year. http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/ From tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 27 18:36:19 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 20:36:19 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <004101c60a84$0b43ee80$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <001601c60b57$7c65e270$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> >> I know I made numerous mistakes. Worst was putting a >> mortar where I really couldn't use it due to LOS and > There's a lot of things that experienced players get wrong. It's a bit > complicated. Well, the scenario didn't help either. The Germans can set up in building very close to the US positions. So close that it's hard to have BOTH LOS and the range to use a mortar. What I'll do next time is set it up BEHIND a building, so it can shoot at any units that get past the defenders, and try to exit the map (that is their goal). I still would rather have a MG or AT gun, though! > As a hint, they are colour-coded, so if you can remember the colour-code > of > each phase (which is easier than it sounds) you will quickly get in the > habit of removing them when the colour of that phase is ended. I hadn't noticed that! Thanks. > David "my girlfriend sez: 'Remove everything red after Close Combat'" Olie Wow, your GF plays. Bet she can't understand why you treat her so well! Regards, Pat Last Played: Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle, ASL SK#2 From bprobst at netspace.net.au Tue Dec 27 22:54:12 2005 From: bprobst at netspace.net.au (Bruce Probst) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:54:12 +1100 Subject: [Aslml] End of year wrap-up In-Reply-To: <2b8228f00512271031o36e18364v99fe5db87dd17bc@mail.gmail.com> References: <2b8228f00512271031o36e18364v99fe5db87dd17bc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 13:31:16 -0500, M Rodgers wrote: >Starter Kit 2 was a disappointment for me because I bought it only to get >more information counters. Not the maps? I buy them for the maps, myself. Can't have too many maps! ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 daveolie at eastlink.ca Wed Dec 28 21:00:54 2005 From: daveolie at eastlink.ca (David Olie) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 01:00:54 -0400 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <004101c60a84$0b43ee80$7779de18@klis.com> <001601c60b57$7c65e270$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> Message-ID: <003f01c60c36$9a7eb400$7779de18@klis.com> Pat wrote: > Well, the scenario didn't help either. The Germans can set up in building > very close to the US positions. As a starter, I don't have ASLSK #2, so I was answering off the top of my head, based on standard ASL rules. > So close that it's hard to have BOTH LOS and the range to use a mortar. What > I'll do next time is set > it up BEHIND a building, so it can shoot at any units that get past the > defenders, and try to exit the > map (that is their goal). That seems like a good idea. I don't know what ASLSK #2 says about Spotters, but they can be great fun. > I still would rather have a MG or AT gun, though! Never, never underestimate the power of the light mortar. Once in a while, they will get a Critical Hit. And they are very nasty against units in Woods. I lost a scenario recently due to the power of the light mortar. > I hadn't noticed that! Thanks. S'basebah. > > David "my girlfriend sez: 'Remove everything red after Close Combat'" Olie > > Wow, your GF plays. Bet she can't understand why you treat her so well! Umm, after my girlfriend and I have "Close Combat", everything is kinda red. David "do I have to spell it out?" Olie From tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 29 12:54:07 2005 From: tippecanoe8 at sbcglobal.net (Pat Collins) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:54:07 -0600 Subject: [Aslml] ASL SK#2 References: <001c01c60815$4f9fb580$0400a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <004101c60a84$0b43ee80$7779de18@klis.com> <001601c60b57$7c65e270$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> <003f01c60c36$9a7eb400$7779de18@klis.com> Message-ID: <000f01c60cba$03568510$0300a8c0@yourg4lzvxou0c> .>> it up BEHIND a building, so it can shoot at any units that get past the >> defenders, and try to exit the >> map (that is their goal). > That seems like a good idea. I don't know what ASLSK #2 says about > Spotters, but they can be great fun. No Spotters. The unit using the mortar has to see it's target. I sort of forgot that, and stuck it like I would as if any unit could spot for it. Regards, Pat Last Played: Lock n' Load, This Sceptered Isle, ASL SK#2 From swfancher at mindspring.com Thu Dec 29 15:30:29 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:30:29 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] VotG Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051229182826.01d8d040@mindspring.com> For those interested, VotG passed the P# around noon EST today...one week after being put up for pre-order. Hopefully MMP will take the speed with which it hit 1000 as an indication of where production should fall in their priorities of work. My thanks to Tom Morin, the Bunker Crew and all the other guys who busted their humps to get this project ready for MMP. Here's to 2006!!!!! Be well. And a Happy New Year to all! Seth From swfancher at mindspring.com Thu Dec 29 19:11:12 2005 From: swfancher at mindspring.com (Seth W Fancher) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 22:11:12 -0500 Subject: [Aslml] VotG In-Reply-To: <4e2cf5e00512291854p7762cdaej2bd59288815db399@mail.gmail.co m> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051229182826.01d8d040@mindspring.com> <4e2cf5e00512291854p7762cdaej2bd59288815db399@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051229221051.01d91890@mindspring.com> Woo hoo! Thanks for the update Keith!!! At 09:54 PM 12/29/2005, keith dalton wrote: >Seth: > >I sent an e-mail to the list but apparently it never made it re: this. > >Per Brian, some of the layout is already done and we're hoping to >start printing some of VOTG in January with a couple of other titles >in the queue ... Afrika and Shifting Sands. > >Keith >MMP > > >On 12/29/05, Seth W Fancher ><swfancher at mindspring.com> wrote: >For those interested, VotG passed the P# around noon EST today...one >week after being put up for pre-order. Hopefully MMP will take the >speed with which it hit 1000 as an indication of where production >should fall in their priorities of work. > >My thanks to Tom Morin, the Bunker Crew and all the other guys who >busted their humps to get this project ready for MMP. Here's to 2006!!!!! > > >Be well. And a Happy New Year to all! > >Seth > > >_______________________________________________ >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 >