From: p.cocke@genie.geis.com Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 03:33:00 UTC Subject: Ego busting >Oh yeah, well take this ASL trivia(l) question, bucko: >Who's the only person with leader counters for his first name AND last >name?? Does Col. Rexikoff count? How about Cpt. Sakana? ....Perry ----- From: GORD.REID@olimitsbbs.com (GORD REID) Subject: ASL Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 13:09:00 GMT Greetings all ASL fans: Wow, finally after many years of ASL drought it looks like I've been lead to the trough. How are you all doing? There are some names on the list that I recognize and even a couple that I have met, hello to you all. First off, I'd like to get a PBEM game going. I have room for 3 more games. I haven't gunned in longer than I'd like to admit so go easy on me. I'd like a low density infantry game just to get my feet wet. I own all the modules except the 2nd historical module. I also have '89 - '93 Annuals and the scenarios from the General A-M, O, P, G1-G4, G11 - G13, T1 - T6 and Historical A. I would also (I know I'm getting picky here) NOT like to play any Russian scenarios for a while. Hope to here from someone soon. good gunning gord gord.reid@olimitsbbs.com FidoNET 1:246/91.1 The Outer Limits BBS - 313-692-4174 - USA Today - BoardWatch Mag. 250,000 Files - 15.6 Gigs - Internet - 15 Lines - Adult - Fido ----- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 23:52:41 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rosner Subject: Re: Regiment vs. Brigade actually, as far as the Soviets go, (on paper at least) a platoon was 2 vehicles; a company was 2 Platoons plus a Comp Commander vehicle (5 Total); The Soviets used 4 Companies to a Battalion (+1 Batt Commander Tank) (21 Total); and finally the Regiment (3 Battalions, plus Regimental Commander, and Deputy Regimental Commander's Tanks) for a total of 65 Vehicles. drosner@netcom.com ----- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 94 08:50:37 EST From: "Cocke, Perry" Subject: Hi Gord Before the ASL Mailing List, before the GEnie Roundtable, before ASL News, before Tactiques, I knew they were playing ASL in countries where French was spoken because Gord Reid would come south for ASL Oktoberfest. Missed ya, Gord! ...Perry ----- From: Neal Smith Subject: Surrendering Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 9:48:07 EDT Hi all, Our development system's been hosed all morning, so I started perusing the Q&A file and came across what I think is an inconsistency, but would like to put it to the rest of you. I'm not sure what the actual rule says. Here are the two entries in the Q&A file: A20.21 When a stack of several broken units is forced to surrender by the RtPh method, do the units in the stack surrender one at a time or do all the units surrender simultaneously? A. One at a time. Note that a stack of broken units cannot rout _as_a_stack_ (A10.5). {RM} ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A20.21 When a stack of units must surrender during the RtPh, do they do so simultaneously or one unit at a time? A. Simultaneously, and they must be accepted or rejected as a stack. {93b} Is there a contradiction here? Is the Q&A file like the rules, in that a "higher numbered" Q&A takes precedence over a "lower numbered" one? ;-) Thanks, Neal Smith sasrns@unx.sas.com ----- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 16:00:47 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: Surrendering Neal Smith writes: > Our development system's been hosed all morning, so I started > perusing the Q&A file and came across what I think is an > inconsistency, but would like to put it to the rest of you. I'm not > sure what the actual rule says. The answers AH gives to questions are not always consistent. This has happened several times. If (as in this case) one of the answers has been published, that one is the official one. If there are two contradicting answers to two different people, you have a problem. Bas. ----- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 94 08:27:27 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: DM from ADJACENT > > > Yeah, but it goes right back on for having an Adjacent Known enemy unit. > > Net result is that it stays on. > > > > Which brings us to the comment "becomes Adjacent" as opposed to "is > Adjacent". Maybe when an enemy unit becomes Adjacent you gain the DM but > you are supposed to loose it at the end of the next RPh. Makes sense to me. > Not to me. Units undergo Desperation Morale because the enemy is too close for comfort. Doesn't matter if the enemy unit just arrived or has been there for 10 minutes; they're STILL too close for comfort, and the broken unit should be just as nervous (ie, just as DM). Tom The Original Recipe ----- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 10:24:42 -0600 (MDT) From: "Tim S. Hundsdorfer" Subject: Scenario Reports: Ken Burns' Strayer's Strays A few notes on everybody's new favorite scenario (WARNING: MOST RATIONAL PEOPLE WOULD CLASSIFY THIS AS NOISE. IF THIS OFFENDS YOU HIT "D" NOW!) Prelude Shelby Foote, Noted Historian: In 1944, just after D-Day, Allied paratroopers were strung out all behind the lines. As they gathered together, they tried to make their way back to the beaches. They had no idea if they were winning or losing in Normandy. They often didn't know the men of their platoon, much less company. On such case was Strayer's Strays, a ragtag bunch of paratroopers looking to get back to the beach... Garrison Keeler: "I can't say I like the German army, mom, but the food is better than in the prison camp. I never thought I'd get to see France, but here I am, camped out by this big old chateau...They say the Americans are coming, and we've been practicing hiding and breaking mostly..." Pvt. Pavel Igdonovich, Minsk, Byeloruss Picket's Charge II Foote: The Americans eventually came to Chateau du Board Sexte, where General von Keats was laying in wait. Cut off from communications and the real battle, von Keats decided to make the lives of the paratroopers a hell... Hundsdorfer, not-Noted Historian: The action took place here, in the obscure region known only as Hexrows v-aa. The Americans staged a reinactement of Picket's charge, rushing onto the board in a vain attempt to get behind the German troops. It didn't work any better than at Gettysburg. Keeler: "This charge was a testiment to the stupidity of the commander, who is unfit to drive a bread truck, much less lead a company of men." Dwight Eisenhower, Salina, Kansas Foote: The Germans laid down a vicious fire, in a desperate attempt to keep the americans out of the cover of the orchard. The American commander pushed on, aggressively, disregarding rout lanes in a desperate attempt to make the orchard. Aftermath Keeler: "We didn't want to give up ma, but there was no place to go. Anyway, we were taken in by some piddly-ass second line Germans who gave us some kuchen in return for some cigarettes (thanks for the luckys!) and I am now safely situated in Stalag 13. Col. Hogan seems like a nice guy..." PFC Joe Carmichael, Pigsnuckle, Arkansas. Foote: After the German fire died down, the Americans gathered what was left and made a run for the border. Again the German conscripts opened up, leaving little but scattered remnants running for the exit area. But it was not to be, surrounded, droves of demoralized American paratroopers surrendered to von Keats, ending any hope that the paratroopers would take part in the action at D-Day. Keeler: "I regret that I have but one company to try to make the exit. Next time, try the board-edge-run strategy..." Suicide note of Lt. Strayer. ----- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 11:25:44 CDT From: moleary@math.nwu.edu (Michael O'Leary) Subject: Solitaire ASL I have been a solitaire player of ASL for some years now, as FTF opponents have been difficult to find. In my solitaire games I have always played both sides as if I had that side in a FTF match. The difficulty with this sort of solitaire play is that all of the "fog of war" is lost. How can a side use HIP when one is playing both sides? Over time I have developed a "system" for solitaire games that allow the use of dummy stacks, minefields, HIP units and the like that force both sides to use tactics similar to those employed in a FTF match. Recently I attended my first ASL tournament during which I mentioned the existence of this "system". Someone there suggested that I write this system down, and after the requisiste procrastination I have done so. I am posting this message in an attempt to solicit reviewers, playtesters, and comments. If you are interested, please send me email, and I will send you a copy of what I have written. The document is 10 pages long in a postscript format. I hope to have a plain text version very soon. Once the article has been reviewed, provided there is sufficient interest, I will either post it to the list or forward it to the archive sites. Mike O'Leary moleary@math.nwu.edu ----- Subject: Re: DM from ADJACENT From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 13:00:00 -0640 Howdy, tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) writes: > > Which brings us to the comment "becomes Adjacent" as opposed > > to "is Adjacent". Maybe when an enemy unit becomes Adjacent > > you gain the DM but you are supposed to loose it at the end > > of the next RPh. Makes sense to me. > > Not to me. Units undergo Desperation Morale because the > enemy is too close for comfort. Doesn't matter if the enemy > unit just arrived or has been there for 10 minutes; they're > STILL too close for comfort, and the broken unit should be > just as nervous (ie, just as DM). The traditional "being/becomes" debate. As usual, one can make up a story for the other side: the broken guys become frantic again only when they see an enemy unit closing in for the kill. If the enemy is just hanging out and not making any agressive moves, there's no reason to be quite as upset. This is just about as plausible as the "too close for comfort theory." I happen to think that the most likely intention is that DM should be placed when a enemy unit is or becomes adjacent (or ADJACENT if that is correct), but the rule is vague and I couldn't say beyond a reasonable doubt that one or the other is true. The "becomes (only)" interpretation (as opposed to the "is/becomes" interpretation) raises a couple more questions: if a unit is broken but not DM while adjacent and the enemy unit moves from one adjacent hex to another, is the broken unit DM? Did the enemy unit "become adjacent" if it already was? This kind of subtlety that the "becomes (only)" interpretation forces one to consider makes me tend to believe that the rule was not written with the most meticulous care to stand up to ASL rules lawyers. Anyway, the next step should probably be a letter to TAHGC. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 1994 14:09:40 -0500 (EST) From: SMITDV@UCBEH.SAN.UC.EDU Subject: suggestions for 3 player scenarios? Hi. I usually play ASL with four people, but one of them is leaving for the summer and so the little group is down to three. Does anyone have any suggestions for good three player scenarios? We are fairly advanced (have played KGP, RB campaign games {though haven't finished KGP}, Gavutu-Tanambogo, etc.). We need to find the one's where one side has enough to keep two people happy, without overly burdening the one playing alone. Thanks for any suggestions Davidb ----- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 94 15:30:11 EST From: "Cocke, Perry" Subject: DM busting As usual, JR makes a reasoned analysis of the "being/becoming" issue. He comes to the not surprising conclusion, given the vagueness of Chapter A, that even though "the most likely intention is that DM should be placed when a enemy unit is or becomes adjacent," he "couldn't say beyond a reasonable doubt that one or the other is true," so "the next step should probably be a letter to TAHGC." All very reasoned and balanced and befitting of JR's status as resident rules guru. Luckily, I do not enjoy such status and so do not need to bear the yoke of respectability. I can therefore say that, IMHO, the certain(!) intention [of the rule] is that DM should be placed when a enemy unit is or becomes adjacent. Granting all involved both good intentions and the level of intelligence required to play ASL, it therefore must be a failure on my part (perhaps of imagination, perhaps of insight) that causes me to be unable to see how anyone might think otherwise. I offer this confession in light of my reflection upon Matt Shostak's dissatisfaction with the possible explanation I presented WRT why DC may be Placed from above a cave but SMOKE grenades may not. I offered that possible explanation from a gameplayer's point of view, but Matt appeared to want either a more simulation-based explanation (as was provided in the footnote identified by JR) or a >better< play-based one. Well, I happen to think that the explanation I gave was an adequate play- based design reason, but I can certainly understand how it might not be a satisfying reason, just as I can understand how Matt might want as well the simulation-based design intent. The beauty of ASL is how the simulation interacts so well with the game. For many of us, it is almost enough, when presented with a perhaps counter-intuitive situation, to say in explanation "Because that's the way the rule reads". Recourse to that becomes impossible when the rule is ambiguous. Indeed, with an ambiguous rule, one is tempted to explicate it via recourse to simulation. As better minds than mine have pointed out, however, those are dangerous waters to sail in, given our inability to fathom the intent of the designer. Yet, sail we must. Matt, attacking caves is not easy. It requires massive firepower plus goodies like SMOKE, FT, and DC. Casualties may be high. Semper Fi! ...Perry ----- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 15:14:16 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) Subject: Posting to ftp sites Hi, Some time back, I tried to post a Macintosh program that created ASL scenarios, following the tried-and-true method defined by Charlie Kibler some years back in the General. In both the carlo.phys.uva.nl site and the ftp.lysator.liu.sc site, I could only post a new binary in the New Arrivals subdirectory. I checked recently, and found my files are no longer there. Nor have they joined the hallowed halls of other files that have been posted. Have I done something wrong? Is there some way I'm supposed to ask permission to post a binary? Was my program THAT bad? Did anybody else ever see it there? Bummed in Colorado, Tom Huntington ----- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 1994 10:06:03 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: Cowering Brethren- Here's one fer ya: A squad with a lt. MTR plans on attacking first with its inherent FP, and then firing the MTR. It cowers on the IFT attack with its inherent FP, gaining an instant PREP counter (see A7.9). Can it still fire its MTR? If it had been firing a SW and rolled eyes, keeping ROF, it would have lost ROF, but I'm not sure in this situation. Have a look at A7.9 and let me know what you think. -Grant. ... Call waiting, great if you have two friends. -== IceIQle v2.0 ==- ----- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 1994 17:04:34 -0400 (EDT) From: MSAMUELS@VAXC.STEVENS-TECH.EDU Subject: Three Player Scenarios This is just an observation. Delux ASL Scenario A "To the Last Man" is a great three player game. The two Russian waves crash into the hapless SS from both the east and west. It is a true bloodbath in classic Delux ASL style. It is my experience that the Germans get crushed. With IS-2s crawling around, 120mm OBA and the usual *horde* of infantry (well equiped this time) the kraut tooth and nails it supposedly down to the last man. Usualy my opponent loses heart and gives up. SS or no, it's not good for the defenders. Some advice for prospective 30th Rifle Division commanders, keep your supporting heavy tanks the *hell* away from the german PFs. Only put them on line if you have tons of infantry in support. Press your attack relentlessly. Don't let up at all, not for an instant. I know the above is standard for any Russian, but if you *realy* take it to heart in this one you can pay back those SS hun dip-dunks for all the other scenarios where the SS romp all over Ivan. ----- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 18:17:25 -0400 From: Stewart R King Subject: Re: armored regiments and brigades Brigades are usually made up of battalions -- they are another name for the intermediate step between battalion and division. The only exception in WWII was the Australian and New Zealand units, which had (I believe) two brigades made up of three regiments each plus a Headquarters and Support Brigade. The ANZAC divisions were something like twice as big as other British Commonwealth divisions. In the British army, regiments were administrative organizations. That is, the first battalion of the Seaforth Highlanders might be in a brigade of the 51st Highland Division in France while the second was with the Indian Army and the Third in garrison duty in Jamaica. When the army geared up for war with lots of recruits, the Seaforth Highlanders might have had six or seven battalions, all in different brigades in different theatres of war. The regiment's responsibility was to train new recruits and send them out to the battalions in the field, oversee hospitals and troops on leave in Britain, and provide one and all with a proud tradition and esprit de corps. In the U.S. Army, Armored Divisions were broken up into "Combat Commands" which were supposed to be flexible organizations. Each would have a varying number of battalions of infantry and armor according to its mission of the moment. Battalions belonged to regiments in airborne and infantry formations, but not, I believe, in Armored. The U.S. traditional institution was the division -- men would wear the divisional patch on their sleeves and were taught to be proud of their division. Often divisions would be raised from the National Guard troops of a particular state. Infantry often fought in what are referred to as "REgimental Combat Teams" which were organized around a regiment of infantry, with armored and artillery assets attached to make the unit capable of operating alone. The Germans organized "kampfgruppe" which were brigade-equivalent formations but were (supposedly) even more flexible than the U.S. army's Combat Commands. The basic difference between a regiment and a brigade is that a brigade is supposed to be able to operate by itself -- that is, it has artillery, engineers, logistical tail, air assets (in the U.S. army), hospital, etc. and can go off by itself without further support from division. A regiment does not have this capability. Hope this helps, Stewart King ----- From: joq@austin.ibm.com (Jack O'Quin) Subject: Re: Regiment vs. Brigade Date: Fri, 01 Jul 94 18:37:45 -0600 There seems to be a lot of confusion about the use of these terms in the Second World War. Mostly this is because there were at least three meanings for the English word "regiment" in common use at the time. Not only were there differences between British and American usage, but the British gave the term more than one meaning. For mostly good reasons the military has always emphasized tradition. Often, armies prefer to adapt traditional terms to new situations rather than invent new ones. This sometimes muddies the meanings, especially when different armies adapt the same word to different organizational structures. So, it seems worthwhile to review the history of these terms. Like nearly every other English military term, "regiment" is derived from French. It traditionally described a unit commanded by a Colonel and drawn from a single branch of the service (e.g. infantry, artillery, cavalry, armor). It was the largest, permanent, non-combined arms formation in general use. By contrast, a "brigade" was generally the smallest combined arms unit. Normally commanded by a Brigadier (called a "Brigadier General" in the US), it was usually built around one or more infantry regiments, but included organic artillery, and often other units such as cavalry or engineers. In WW-II, most armies had some formation of this sort. The British and Commonwealth armies actually called them "brigades", but the US army generally did not. Instead they were called "regimental combat teams" (in infantry divisions) or "combat commands" (in armored divisions). The basic concept was the same. The German army also had brigades, but more often they would form a temporary or semi-permanent combined arms unit called a "kampfgruppe" (usually translated "battle group"). Peiper's command in the Ardennes was one of these brigade-like units. For centuries, the regiment has been the fundamental unit of the British army. Soldiers typically spent their entire career in a single regiment. Each regiment was responsible for training and deploying its own replacements. Regimental tradition was an important factor in fostering morale and unit loyalty. Infantry regiments consisted of several battalions, the number varying from one to another. Some might be training battalions stationed at home, others might be sent overseas for years at a time. Generally, these combat battalions would be attached to some brigade for an extended period. Brigades were normally made up of three or four battalions, each from a different regiment. British cavalry regiments functioned similarly to the infantry, but their tradition also included a different set of names for all the subordinate units: infantry cavalry -------- ------- platoon troop company squadron battalion regiment Here is where much of the confusion creeps in. Since most British armoured units were drawn from the cavalry, this terminology was carried over. So, as Shawn Kenny explained, British and Commonwealth armoured brigades were made up of three "regiments", each containing three squadrons of four troops each. This terminology made the unit names very confusing. For example, "4 F&FY" was the 4th regiment of the Fife and Forfar Yeomanry. The F&FY was a pre-war cavalry regiment that made the conversion to armour. Similarly, "4 RTR" was the 4th regiment of the Royal Tank Regiment. The RTR contained the remains of the original pre-war armoured force. Because this terminology is so obsure, many authors speak of 4 RTR as the "4th Royal Tank Regiment". Strictly speaking, there was only one Royal Tank Regiment, which had many battalion-sized components. Other authors refer to the "4th battalion of the Royal Tank Regiment". This is sort of a translation from British English into American English. To us colonials, it seems clearer. :-) Having less tradition, the US army organization was somewhat simpler. Nothing like the British "regimental system" existed. Each infantry division had three infantry regiments, which in turn were divided into battalions, companies and platoons. Normally, the divisional artillery and some attached tank units were apportioned to each infantry regiment, forming a regimental combat team (RCT) under the regimental commander. American armored divisions were somewhat more complex because of their inherent combined arms structure. The standard organization included three combat commands each containing armor, infantry and artillery assets. This was intended to be very flexible, with units attached and detached as needed, like a kampfgruppe. In practice, infantry and armor battalions were usually paired on a relatively permanent basis. That way, they became used to working together. In effect, an American combat command functioned like a British brigade, although the subordinate unit names (battalion, company and platoon) were the same as for the infantry. In summary, when comparing British armoured and American armored units, the following names roughly correspond: British American ------- -------- brigade combat command regiment battalion squadron company troop platoon I hope this helps... Jack O'Quin (and now, back to ASL) ----- From: Tim Reade Subject: Access to Archives Date: Sat, 2 Jul 94 11:44:38 EST Thanks to those who answered my query on the use of the ASL ftp archive! However I seem to be having trouble, when I type: "ftp carlo.phys.uva.nl" the *&^%*^& machine says "ftp: connect: No route to host" Is there anyone that has any idea how this problem should be overcome, or what strategy should be used to get ftp working? I have access to technical support so don't be scared of giving "jargon" responses! I have also tried to use "gopher" to locate the archive in the USA, "Internet Gopher Information Client v1.11", but had no luck. Is either archive accessible via this method? HELP!!! Thanks in advance to all respondees! -- Tim Reade Tel: +61 3 243 2264 Team Leader - Supply Applications Recpn: +61 3 243 2211 Fax: +61 3 243 2233 Operating Control Systems Email: timi@ocs.cpsg.com.au CP Software Group 1st Floor 493 St Kilda Road Melbourne VIC 3004 ACN: 060 612 106 -- ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 1994 07:34:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Tartaglia Subject: Re: DM from ADJACENT On Thu, 30 Jun 1994, Carl D. Fago wrote: > As I said in my original remarks about this question, I've always seen it > played that the guy retains the DM counter. Whether that's right or not, I > don't know. It makes sense to me to keep the DM on (a broken US unit with > an SS squad ADJACENT loses DM in the RPh but then a lone 6+1 comes ADJACENT > and the DM goes on solely to one wandering goofball?) > > It might be appropriate for a letter to the Hill. > > Alternately, I might try to remember to ask Mac if I see him at DonCon. > A vicious circle isn't it. :) I've always played it the same as you. It is one of those sections of the rules that I just gave a cursory glance to thinking, "I know that from my SL days." Now I'm not so sure. A10.62 is very clear about that DM coming off at the end of the RPh. Please, if anybody is sending a letter to the Hill or sees Mac somewhere, do ask about this. ==Daniel T. ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 1994 07:55:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Tartaglia Subject: Re: Surrendering On Fri, 1 Jul 1994, Neal Smith wrote: > Our development system's been hosed all morning, so I started perusing > the Q&A file and came across what I think is an inconsistency, but would > like to put it to the rest of you. I'm not sure what the actual rule says. In the case sighted, I would go with the published Q&A and not the personal one. In other cases, where both questions are personal/published then there would be a problem and I would go with the most recent one asked. Of course, I have no way of knowing which is the most recent. :< Maybe we need to start dating these questions in the Q&A file? ==Daniel T. ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 1994 08:01:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Tartaglia Subject: Re: DM from ADJACENT On Fri, 1 Jul 1994, Tom Repetti wrote: > Not to me. Units undergo Desperation Morale because the enemy is too close for > comfort. Doesn't matter if the enemy unit just arrived or has been there for 10 > minutes; they're STILL too close for comfort, and the broken unit should be just > as nervous (ie, just as DM). > > Tom > The Original Recipe > Nice argument, but it has nothing to do with what the rules say. :) When the enemy first becomes Adjacent, the broken guys would be "nervous" because they wouldn't know what to expect from the enemy. But, after the bad guy had been just sitting for a while, the broken guys would become less "nervous" and the DM should come off. Much like the literal wording of the rule :) ==Daniel T. ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 1994 08:17:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Tartaglia Subject: Re: Strayer's Strays This is one of my favorites as well. Odd, around here we've played it at least 5 times and the Americans won only once. (The first game) In all but the last game, the Americans went through the grain (or along the board edge beside the grain. In the last game, I was the US and the German player a unit in every other hex of the grain. I went down the other side instead. I wanted to go down the middle, just to prove it could be done, but I couldn't see any way to do it :) ==Daniel T. ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 1994 09:34:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Tartaglia Subject: Re: Strayer's Strays On Sat, 2 Jul 1994, I wrote: > This is one of my favorites as well. Odd, around here we've played it at > least 5 times and the Americans won only once. (The first game) Sorry, I meant that the Americans LOST only once. ==Daniel T. ----- From: j.farris4@genie.geis.com Date: Sat, 2 Jul 94 13:32:00 UTC Subject: results of the probe-comment Jean-Luc wrote: >Hi folks. >I sent a probe for a english language Tactiques a week ago. >Here are the results. >I got 36 answers saying "Yes I want it" Not a bad response from the 200+ folks on the list. I would hope that this is more like a sample than a vote where a sample might indicate that the majority would be buyers. >among those answers : >3 guys has already subscribed to the French Tactiques These folks probably read the French language.... >4 are ready to subscribe even in French Please subscribe now so the Editors know there is money to be had to cover the expenses of the zine....which needs to be in English and your sub for the French language will make the Tactiques Editors more interested in expanding to the other language. >3 peoples said "Stay in French" Maybe these votes are the same as the three votes noted above? Should only French speakers have the enjoyment of a good zine? ;-) >The net result is : 29 Where are all the other votes on this issue? Maybe all the other Internet folks are still in Normandy and haven't had a chance to ready Jean-Luc's request. >That's far from enough. So Tactiques will probably stay in French.* Well! What would be enough? If there are 5-10K ASLers worldwide, and most speak English, then there should be a market....the key is how to tap that market. >maybe we will make a 'best of' issues 1-4 in english. That is a good idea... I remember suggesting that and hope others did also. >Thanks for all these kindly answers Jean-Luc, you are very welcome. We probably have a lot more answers and suggestions if you have some more questions.... let 'em rip. There is bound to be a way to determine if there is a market for your baby. >Talk to you soon. We hope with some good news! ;-) >*M. Toubon, our "Ministre de la Culture" would be happy. I was not certain what M. Toubon would be happy about..... we are not getting any French culture outside France if we can't read your zine.... just maybe, the Minister has a grant for magazine owners who want to publish in other languages (at least English) so as to influence the rest of the non-frank world.... can't hurt to ask. +---------------------------+--------------------------------+ : Wheel or John : Incoming fire has the right : : j.farris4@genie.geis.com : of way. : : GEnie - J.FARRIS4 : : : John H. Farris : Murphy's Military Laws : : P O Box 547, Norman,OK 73070 USA : +---------------------------+--------------------------------+ =END= ----- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 1994 10:47:33 -0400 (EDT) From: David Elder Subject: Re: Cowering Hi all, :-) , sitting at home and actually having my rule book handy :-) On Fri, 1 Jul 1994, Grant Linneberg wrote: > Brethren- > > Here's one fer ya: > > A squad with a lt. MTR plans on attacking first with its inherent FP, and > then firing the MTR. It cowers on the IFT attack with its inherent FP, > gaining an instant PREP counter (see A7.9). Can it still fire its MTR? No, A7.9 says that all of the SW of the unit are also marked with a Prep/Final fire counter. (Since a SW is any weapon depicted on a 1/2" counter, the Lt. Mtr. is marked with a prep fire counter.) > If > it had been firing a SW and rolled eyes, keeping ROF, it would have lost > ROF, but I'm not sure in this situation. Have a look at A7.9 and let me > know what you think. > Hmmm ... if it had fired the Lt. Mtr first, the mortar is not affected by cowering since it counts as ordnance (any weapon that must score a hit on a To Hit Table before rolling again on the IFT or To Kill Table to resolve that hit). But done the way described above ... the mortar deosn't get a chance to fire. > -Grant. > Hope that helps ... but it's just my interpretation :-) Cheers, David ----- Subject: COWERING From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 94 12:39:00 -0640 Howdy, N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) writes: > A squad with a lt. MTR plans on attacking first with its > inherent FP, and then firing the MTR. It cowers on the IFT > attack with its inherent FP, gaining an instant PREP > counter (see A7.9). Can it still fire its MTR? If it had > been firing a SW and rolled eyes, keeping ROF, it would have > lost ROF, but I'm not sure in this situation. Have a look > at A7.9 and let me know what you think. A7.9 ('87): "any unit that cowers (as well as all if [sic] its SW) is automatically marked with a Final or Prep Fire counter as appropriate" The lt. MTR is a SW, so it is marked. It doesn't say the SW had to be involved in the attack. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- From: w.smith93@genie.geis.com Date: Sun, 3 Jul 94 14:54:00 UTC Subject: Up Front! newsletter Hi guys, I hope you will forgive the temporary topic drift. I figure that a bunch of you play Up Front! as well as ASL. For those who do, a new newsletter is being started to support Up Front. The following message was posted on GEnie and I thought you some would be interested in this. Those who are are encouraged to contact the publisher whose inet address is contained in the message. Warren ------------------------------------------------------------ Games RoundTable Category 21, Topic 43 Message 3 Fri Jun 24, 1994 M.NAGEL [The Nageler] at 19:27 EDT *** ATTENTION ALL UP FRONT PLAYERS !! *** Announcing: Relative Range, the Up Front Newsletter Given the concern expressed by many Up Front players in regards to the fate of their favorite column in the General, I have decided to put together a newsletter dedicated to OUR favorite game. No longer will we be a the whim and mercy of an editor who has better things to do that dedicate 64 pages of scenarios and analysis to a single title. And you KNOW that we wouldn't be happy any other way! This is an attempt to resurrect the newsletter started by Don Hawthorne after the publication of Desert War, which only lasted one issue. Unfortunately, I'm faced with the same problems that he had, which was primarily, a lot of drive but a limited imagination. Therefore, Relative Range will be a newsletter driven by its readership. If the submissions keep coming in, it will last. Otherwise... The format for the 'zine is a 5.5x8.5" booklet which (including cover) is 24 pages in length. There are actually 21 pages of copy. It will be published on a quarterly schedule, provided that I get enough submissions to fill the space provided. Otherwise, it will be printed as soon as feasible. As I mentioned to an avid Up Fronter, I don't see increasing the size or publication schedule -- even if I get bombarded with submissions. This is to, hopefully, ensure that the well does not dry up too quickly! The premier issue contains two variant articles on the French and Italians by Don Hawthorne, a guide to published Up Front material, an article on scenario design, and five -- count 'em -- five scenarios (ranging from the historical to the bizarre). There is also an editorial by yours truly on what I hope to achieve with the project and how to send submissions. Hopefully, by now, you're all chomping at the bit and wondering how much it will cost. Well...if you can't attend AvalonCon, where I hope to hand out free samples of the first issue, the 'zine will run you two first-class postage stamps (that's 58 cents to those of you who've given up on snail-mail altogether)! You might also want to include a 6x9" envelope for added protection during mailing, even though the newsletter already comes equiped with a sturdy index-stock cover. If you're interested drop me a note at my InterNet E-Mail address, so that I can give you the proper mailing information. m.nagel@genie.geis.com I hope to hear from all you card-tossers soon. Let's try to elevate Up Front to the level that it deserves! Thanks, -- Mike ------------ ----- Date: Sun, 3 Jul 1994 12:10:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Pollock Subject: Re: Posting to ftp sites Tom: I downloaded the second version soon after it was posted. I liked it but my machine gagged on it occassionally. I think this was due to me not having HyperText 2.0...or something... Anyhow, it looked good and I appreciate the effort you put into it. Share & Enjoy! Brent Pollock > > Hi, > > Some time back, I tried to post a Macintosh program that created ASL > scenarios, following the tried-and-true method defined by Charlie Kibler > some years back in the General. In both the carlo.phys.uva.nl site and the > ftp.lysator.liu.sc site, I could only post a new binary in the New Arrivals > subdirectory. I checked recently, and found my files are no longer there. > Nor have they joined the hallowed halls of other files that have been posted. > > Have I done something wrong? Is there some way I'm supposed to ask > permission to post a binary? Was my program THAT bad? Did anybody else > ever see it there? > > Bummed in Colorado, > > Tom Huntington > ----- From: p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com Date: Tue, 5 Jul 94 03:13:00 UTC Subject: AvalonCon Here are the scenarios for Avalon Con To be considered for the championship, you must play in either track A or track C, until you have taken one loss. You only get on C by mutual consent There is a round X; for day two; if 8 rounds are needed. Rounds 1 and 2 have only 3 scenarios, and only one track Thursday Rd I Taking of Takrouna (51) am Bridge to Nowhere (54) Italian Brothers (Rout Report O2) Rd II Bread Factory #2 (RB3) pm To The Rescue (RB4) Turned Away (RB6) Friday Rd IIIA Liberation of Tulle (27) am L'Ecole Normal (DASL A1) A New Kind of Foe (34) B Sylvan Death (30) Paole Zion (A62) Bone of Contention (G15) C Panzers Marsch! (Tactiques, TT3) Rd IV A Le Herisson (77) pm Birds of Prey (46) The Professionals (A28) B End of the Ninth (76) Strangers in a Strange Land (75) Fighting Withdrawal (1) C One Step Forward (ASLUG 6) Rd X A Pouppeville Exit (T5) extra Chapelle St Anne (KGP4) Under the Noel Trees (23) B Silence That Gun (14) Devil's Hill (T10) Strayer's Strays (T16) C Chateau Cherry (ASLUG 2.1) Saturday Rd V A Khamsin (37) am Red Star, Red Sun (65) And Here We Damn Well Stay (A50) B Hill 253.5 (T7) Counterattack on the Vistula (21) Paw of the Tiger (F) C Acts of Defiance (Rout Report X13) Rd VI A On the Kokoda Trail (60) pm The Eastern Gate (63) Commando Hunt (A42) B Cibik's Ridge (67) Munda Mash (A58) Totsugeki! (A60) C One Log Bridge (ASLUG 12) Sunday Rd VIIA Rocket's Red Glare (G6) Guryev's HQ (DASL 1) Guards Counterattack (A) B Death at Carentan (A59) Hitdorf on the Rhine (L) Among the Ruins (21) C Bloody Red Beach (75) Russ will be mailing this to everyone who has been in the ASL tourney at ACon within the past 3 years. Phil ----- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 07:24:43 -0600 (CST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: AvalonCon In message Tue, 5 Jul 94 03:13:00 UTC, p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com writes: > Here are the scenarios for Avalon Con Thanks, Phil. And this is why I like the Winter Offensive / Summer Wars / ASLOK style of scenario selection. *-=Carl=-* ----- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 07:54:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: ARRRRG! Sorry about the line spaces and the faulty word wrap. GRRRR.... I had the opportunity to play Crux of Calais (90 annual) last night. Well,= at least the first four turns. This is a neat scenario, but one that may be hard foe the Germ= ans to win. I played the Brits and had strung my forces out to cover all the bridges. Pl= acement of the AT guns was critical I thought - one went into 23G3, and the pther into 23M= 8 level 0 (a=20 stone building - that was legal wasn=92t it?). The Mtr went on the roof oa= t 23Y6. That building also heal d the heavy & medium MGs, as well as a squad with an ATR= . The other bridges were covered by infantry (3-4 squads each), with the center b= eing beefed up by the light tank/scout car MGs. Well, the Germans set up all on the west flank and tried to dislodge the Br= its from the=20 23Y7 building. It didn=92t work. The germans did managed to clear out the = Mtr by turn=20 three, but had lost 2 MkIII to ATR (!) and 2 MkIII to the AT in 23M8. One = beserk=20 German did manage to make it all the way into 23Y7, but got caught in CC an= d was later=20 munched by a beserk British stack. You see the Germans had hit the MG nest= (then a=20 hmg.247/mmg/457/9-1) pretty hard and ended up maikg the 9-1 a heroic 9-2 vi= a HOB! =20 That leader later went beserk and took the rest of the squads with him as h= e went off to=20 kill the German beserker. Also by turn three, the Brits had begun to move infantry close enough to su= pport the west=20 flank. with 5-6 squads in and around 23Y7, all 3 AFVs covering bridge 23X3= with MGs,=20 and 5 squads holding the center (3 of those had crossed over to the south s= ide of the=20 canal), the Germans resigned. Well, they didn=92t _say_ they resigned, the= said =93Uh, gee,=20 it=92s 10:30, and I have to work tommorow!=94. This one looks like fun, but I think the Germans _need_ the play balance???= ? I dunno. If=20 anyone has played this one, let me know. About the only BIG mistake the Ge= rmans made=20 was not using the AFV to fire smoke. Those 37L MkIII don=92t seem to be mu= ch good for=20 anything else! ***************************** Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ***************************** ----- Date: Tue, 05 Jul 94 08:46:46 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Hube's Pocket As any right-thinking person knows, Hube's Pocket is the best, most exciting scenario out there. But (moan and groan mode ON) why, oh WHY is it so long? 14 or 15 turns? Oh, the misery of it all. It's only got 3 boards and none of them are urban. And both the Germans and the Russians have a reasonably mobile combined arms force. I sure wish this one were 9 turns or so; I think more people would play it and appreciate it. Makes me think that the 15 turn game has some plot twists and turns that I'm missing, and I'd be glad to hear about them. A 9 or 10-turn version would surely be different, but just as exciting and would get played more often. Tom Leaving moan and groan mode ON, just in case I need it later ----- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 09:18:34 -0600 From: thh@cccc.cc.colorado.edu (Tom Huntington) Hi, I posted a query about the Mac scenario generator program I posted to carlo and lysator, and got a few replies back. I want to respond to those replies to tell what happened: I looked on carlo, under asl/pcprogs, and sure enough my program ScenarioGen.MAC.bin was there where it should be. Okay, so how was it that I didn't look here before? Call it snobbery, call it ignorance, but when I saw "pcprogs" I assumed that was for IBM PC and their clones, of which the Mac ain't. I've run into this bias before -- someone asked if I had a PC, I said "No, I have a Mac." They thought it was funny, and it took me a while to realize that to some people PC means a computer that belongs to you, and doesn't belong at work. Aha. So now I see I am still narrowminded and blind to the buzz words of the Home Computer market. I should have looked further before asking the world at large -- would have kept me from looking so foolish. Thanks to all that offered advice about what I did or needed to do, thanks to those that asked to see the program. My ego is gradually rebuilding. Tom Huntington ----- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 13:56:08 -0400 (EDT) From: James D Shetler Subject: Re: Hube's Pocket Yep, I agree. Hube's Pocket is one of the best scenarios out there. 15 turns is a bit much, but from my experience the issue is settled by turn 8 or 9 at the latest. Why? Well, if the SS expect the convoy to survive they must take the fight to Ivan, and not wait to see what happens. Otherwise, one or two well placed Soviet tanks will end the scenario quickly. So, if you are playing the SS, go for the throat. And at least have a few shots of potato vodka during/after the scenario. You'll need it. Thirsty in Pittsburgh, Jim Shetler ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 4 Jul 94 05:15:46 EDT Subject: AFTER ACTION REPORT: Stonne Hey y'all! I'm back from a 2 week vacation to Maine and New York. Did you miss my little crab? :-) I finally got to play the French in "Counterstroke at Stonne." I've played the Deutschies 3 times now and really wanted a go at the Frogs. My analysis rambles so if you're not in the mood, hit the D key now! My opponent set up with 3 squads, 2 lmg and the 9-1 in the chateau; 2 squads, the hmg, and the 9-2 in the 3rd level hex on board 3. The remaining squads were spread out in the woods near the chateau. The 37L ATG was hidden in a building on the French right deep on bd 6. The 75* INF was hidden in some woods on "the grounds of the chateau property." I split my massive force into a large attack group (22 squads, 8 tanks) to invest the chateau from my right, and a small diversionary group (6 squads, 2 tanks, 4 lg. trucks) to drive up the road on my left. Turn 1 saw mostly movement, but I did get a lucky roll that fried an opposing 2-4-8. My tanks were moved up as close to the German infantry as possible. Turn 2 saw some heat. A lucky sniper roll and my best leader (9-1) was history. I rushed the woods on the right and had some broken squads to fix up, but I did get a bunch of guys into close combat that locked up the right and eventually saw me successful after 1.5 game turns. Meanwhile, one of my heavy tanks got lucky and blasted a StuG into flames in a location that hindered the HMG from pressing heavily on my right flank. Another heavy tank was engaged in a gun duel with a StuG that lasted for 3 GAME turns. The StuG finally attempted to withdraw but mistakenly forgot about my 75* HE shot on his side armor. The StuG lost. By turn 4 I had pressed my tanks deeply into the right flank where I was surprised by the hidden ATG (butt shot on the Char1-bis in a bore-sighted hex!). I was looking at a sure problem when my opponent rolled BOXCARS and malfed the gun! I didn't need a second invitation. I destroyed the 37L ATG, 37L HT, and another 37L ATG on the hilltop. By now my opponent had only 1 37L ATG and one 37L HT left. He still had some firepower and had the intact HMG and chateau. Turn 6 comes in with a roar, I blow away the units (they broke) in the chateau with 2 heavy tanks and the third unit is locked in melee with a measly 1-2-7 tank crew. My other heavies blast away at the HMG and break the 9-2 leader (and effectively improve my movement situation). I move into the chateau and my opponent resigns. ANALYSIS: Am I right in thinking that the chateau is the focal point for the scenario? Another opponent once felt that skirting the chateau would win the game. The building is worth 7 of the 16 VP. Every time I've played it as the Germans I've put at least 4 squads, 2 lmg, 9-1, AND the 75* INF therein. This is probably the minimum number to be in the building! The woods (especially on the French right) are just too difficult to defend against a strong French player. The woods are also difficult to launch an attack from if the HMG is active. As the French, has anyone attacked up the road on the left? Depending on the setup, this seems to have many possibilities. The trucks can transport many squads to good locations on the left. As a diversion it worked well as the 2 tanks prevented use of the road to the Germans and the squads supported the tanks from lurking infantry. In retrospect, I might have been able to get to better cover had I launched the entire attack up the left, but the HMG is quite dangerous in this scenario. USELESS GRIPES: Why don't the Char1-bis have SMOKE? Bloody things could use it in this scenario. Had to rely on burning trucks and enemy halftracks to provide cover! ;-) What's this about the StuG having to roll for AP! Bloody things could use it in this scenario, too! Cheers (and now you have crabs too!) Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: AFTER ACTION REPORT: Stonne Date: Tue, 5 Jul 94 16:37:22 PDT Jeff Shields writes: [Action report deleted.] > ANALYSIS: Am I right in thinking that the chateau is the focal point for > the scenario? Another opponent once felt that skirting the chateau would > win the game. The building is worth 7 of the 16 VP. Every time I've > played it as the Germans I've put at least 4 squads, 2 lmg, 9-1, AND the > 75* INF therein. This is probably the minimum number to be in the > building! The woods (especially on the French right) are just too > difficult to defend against a strong French player. The woods are also > difficult to launch an attack from if the HMG is active. The chateau is important, but the French DO have to get past it. It's quite vulnerable, too, once the B1-bises get parked two hexes away and start blasting. I did this about a week ago as the French and they forced the Germans to keep retreating (within the building, of course) until I finally tied them up in melee in the last hex of the chateau. > As the French, has anyone attacked up the road on the left? Depending on > the setup, this seems to have many possibilities. The trucks can transport > many squads to good locations on the left. As a diversion it worked well > as the 2 tanks prevented use of the road to the Germans and the squads > supported the tanks from lurking infantry. In retrospect, I might have > been able to get to better cover had I launched the entire attack up the > left, but the HMG is quite dangerous in this scenario. I sent about 8 squads up that road (and the woods along both sides, for the infantry), plus three B1-bises and a Hotchkiss. In fact, I consider this the key to my win. Once that flank crumbles (and it will under the weight of three B1-bis tanks!), the Germans are up a creek, especially if it's only turn 6 when your last ordnance on that side stops functioning... my opponent surrendered at that point, with good reason, since there was nothing stopping me from rolling the tanks up behind the rest of his troops and easily capturing half of the board 3 village. I used the trucks to transport my green squads (two each), since over open ground the first-liners can move just as fast, and they'd be less tempting targets to boot. I think that side of the board is a great place to use the trucks. > USELESS GRIPES: Why don't the Char1-bis have SMOKE? Bloody things could > use it in this scenario. Had to rely on burning trucks and enemy > halftracks to provide cover! ;-) What's this about the StuG having to roll > for AP! Bloody things could use it in this scenario, too! Smoke would be nice, but then I think this would be a walkover for the French. IMHO, the StuGs should RARELY fire AP in this scenario. My opponent tried duelling a B1-bis with one, and it just didn't work. Although he DID get a lucky Shock result at one point by area firing at my B1-bis, the B1-bis recovered... all it did was tie up the StuG and accomplished little else. Since the StuGs have a couple armor leaders which will probably be in them, they should be off killing all that Frog infantry (which is the REAL key for the Germans, IMHO). On the other hand, if you have an opportunity for a point blank side shot, the AP isn't so bad. At one point, my opponent charged a couple B1-bises which were facing the wrong way with one of his StuGs, and I had to Intensive Fire to score the kill or risk the loss of a B1-bis to a point blank AP shot. Luckily I got it. -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- From: p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 00:02:00 UTC Subject: Stonne The only problem I see with running trucks up the road on the French Left is that the HMG gets a 2-2 shot out to 32 hexes and a 6-2 shot within 16 hexes. You can lose Passengers very easily that way. I would only put a half squad with the 9-2,HMG. For a several turns, no one will be in range of the 468s. the 9-2 is going to draw fire, and you can have a concealed HS one floor down to pick up the HMG if the 248 breaks. I'm playing the scenario now. As the german, I lost the 9-1 to a sniper (I had a CH on a building with 2 437s in it) and the 9-2 berserked on an NMC that the 248 CRed on. One Bis recalled when hit CE by a StuG HE shot and two H39s are immobed. I didn't put as much in the chateau, figuring I'd lose it anyway and that I wouldn't get anyone out of there. The tanks are almost impossible to stop, but the ATGs and StuGs make good anti-Inf weapons. The ATGs do have an excellent ROF, and with acq can nail Inf in the open. The French tanks can't take buildings, so maybe it is best to use the ATGs to take out infantry unless you get a good shot at a H39. Phil ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Retribution: can the Americans win? Date: Tue, 5 Jul 94 17:32:11 PDT I just got finished with the game of Retribution, and my Italians had a field day with the Americans. I'm not really sure how valid by observations are, since I managed to get the critical low rolls on shots that were VERY important (my opponent finally quit when, after FPF'ing a squad + lmg at a charging berserker, I rolled eyes and MY squad went berserk... since my berserker's target of choice would have been the 9-1 mentioned below, now with only two of the MMG/666 combinations, and both broken, this was quite a disaster for him). I notice in the record it's listed as 4-3 in favor of the Americans... could someone out there tell me how they have won as the Americans? Anyway, here's my take on it. First of all, the graveyard is a wonderful avenue of approach for the Americans. The gully is about the only place they can find that is out of sight of virtually everything, and the graveyard not only gives them +1 TEM above what they'll find elsewhere on the approach, but it gets better at longer range! Second, IMHO, the Americans need to avoid stacking like the plague, except with the 10-2. I managed to inflict a 1MC on a stack of 9-1, 3x(MMG/666) and broke ALL THREE squads with one lucky shot. That put a major dent in the American firepower being put out (it's ~20% of his force!). I'd guess that a winning American strategy involves charging 6 or so MMC, possibly even more, across the open ground in the direct route to the village (dilute the Italian firepower and it can only do so much damage), while a sizable force slogs through the gully, the 10-2 sets up in 4X1 with the HMGs to deny upper level locations to the Italians (the Americans will have much more freedom of movement if the Italians have to fire through hindrances), and whatever is left heads around to try to get into the village from the general area of 4Q1. I'm not so sure about the last part; it might be more fruitful to add whatever is left to the direct charge. So, does this look at all like what anyone out there has seen the Americans do successfully in this one? -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- From: ANACONDA@aol.com Date: Tue, 05 Jul 94 20:38:06 EDT Subject: test test message. ----- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 94 20:06:17 CDT From: carrington rhydderch ward Subject: Stonne One of the nasty tricks the French can play, (ironically) on the german infantry is to drive into the hex with it in bypass, thus preventing it from defensive firing. The H39s are just about expendable enough for this sort of task, especially as German squads (w/o leader) need to pass a paatc and then a CC roll of >4 to kill a tank if it remains in motion. Meanwhile, French infantry has advanced adjacent... Especially given the weakness of the German anti-armor capabilities, it is hard to see what the response should be. (Choose set-ups with good rout routes?). What's the French for Panzerblitz? Carrington Ward ----- Date: Tue, 05 Jul 1994 23:48:08 -0400 (EDT) From: MSAMUELS@VAXC.STEVENS-TECH.EDU Subject: Soviet Tank Formations actually, as far as the Soviets go, (on paper at least) a platoon was 2 vehicles; a company was 2 Platoons plus a Comp Commander vehicle (5 Total); The Soviets used 4 Companies to a Battalion (+1 Batt Commander Tank) (21 Total); and finally the Regiment (3 Battalions, plus Regimental Commander, and Deputy Regimental Commander's Tanks) for a total of 65 Vehicles. >>>>> Hmm, let me break out my Ruskie stuff Medium tank company 3 - 3 tank platoons + 1 command vehicle 10AFV battalion 2 companys + 1 command vehicle 21AFV brigade 3 battalions + 2 command vehicles 65AFV Heavy tank company 2 - 2 tank platoons + 1 command vehicle 5AFV battalion 2 companys + 1 command vehicle 11AFV regiment 2 battalions + 2 command vehicles 24AFV brigade 3 battalions + 2 command vehicles 35AFV >>>>> Most/all of the early soviet tank formations mixed in light and heavy tanks in units directly assigned to infantry formations. The early KV-1 units and the later JS and SU series vehicles were formed using the Heavy TO&E. Most were placed in regiment size formations and assigned to tank corps, while others were put in independent brigades and assigned at the army level. The tank corp had 2 heavy tank regiments and 3 medium tank brigades. When barbarosa opened in 1941 Russia was just starting to form pure tank units. Most were still assigned to infantry formations, and there the vast majority died. Fortunately the best T-34 units were stationed out east in '41 and survived to open the spring/summer '42 counter offensive. The tanks that did the most dieing in '41 were the horde of light tanks that were based on the light US cavalry tanks, and the few home grown heavy tanks that were mixed in with them. Almost all of these tanks were destroyed. Many, many thousands of them. The best models seemed to survive long enough to see reorganization into the "new" style units. I have the following questions: 1. In '41 what size tank units were assigned to what sized infantry units? 2. What was the composition of a tank army vice an regualar soviet army? 3. How many of the KV-1 tanks did Russia have available in '41? 4. How about that KV-2 monster? Any and all information about that one would be appreciated. ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 00:35:35 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rosner Subject: Re: Hube's Pocket Tom, funny you should mention Hube's Pocket, as I am currently playing it, (spread out over two days) and we are about to start the 4th turn. I am the Russians, and my opponent is Robert Stai (internet challenged) through the first 3 turns, I have managed to kill 2 of 3 Pz4H's, and Shock his Panther (the first check for OK or UK is coming in next RPh) Robert, on the other hand, has killed 2 of 3 T-34/85's and Immobilized 1 of the T-34/43's... unfortunately, the crew failed it's TC and abandoned, passed the MC he inflicted, but sadly fell to his sniper a turn later. I will post more after we finish (7/6/94) drosner@netcom.com On Tue, 5 Jul 1994, Tom Repetti wrote: > > As any right-thinking person knows, Hube's Pocket is the best, most exciting > scenario out there. But (moan and groan mode ON) why, oh WHY is it so long? 14 > or 15 turns? Oh, the misery of it all. It's only got 3 boards and none of them > are urban. And both the Germans and the Russians have a reasonably mobile > combined arms force. I sure wish this one were 9 turns or so; I think more > people would play it and appreciate it. > > Makes me think that the 15 turn game has some plot twists and turns that I'm > missing, and I'd be glad to hear about them. A 9 or 10-turn version would surely > be different, but just as exciting and would get played more often. > > Tom > Leaving moan and groan mode ON, just in case I need it later > ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 00:45:38 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rosner Subject: Re: Retribution: can the Americans win? Speaking as the victim of Doug Gibson's Italians (and the only reason I played this was because I am on a "Mission From God" to win this damn thing as the Americans), I really believe the Americans cannot win this scenario. drosner@netcom.com On Tue, 5 Jul 1994, Doug Gibson wrote: > > I just got finished with the game of Retribution, and my Italians had a field > day with the Americans. I'm not really sure how valid by observations are, > since I managed to get the critical low rolls on shots that were VERY > important (my opponent finally quit when, after FPF'ing a squad + lmg at a > charging berserker, I rolled eyes and MY squad went berserk... since my > berserker's target of choice would have been the 9-1 mentioned below, now with > only two of the MMG/666 combinations, and both broken, this was quite a > disaster for him). I notice in the record it's listed as 4-3 in favor of the > Americans... could someone out there tell me how they have won as the > Americans? > > Second, IMHO, the Americans need to avoid stacking like the plague, except > with the 10-2. I managed to inflict a 1MC on a stack of 9-1, 3x(MMG/666) > and broke ALL THREE squads with one lucky shot. That put a major dent in the > American firepower being put out (it's ~20% of his force!). > > So, does this look at all like what anyone out there has seen the Americans do > successfully in this one? > > -- > > -Doug Gibson > dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu > ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 00:51:33 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rosner Subject: Re: Soviet Tank Formations regarding the KV-2, it was used as a "bunker-buster", and first saw action as a prototype in February, 1940 in Finland. drosner@netcom.com ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 07:41:05 -0400 (EDT) From: James D Shetler Subject: Soviet AFV reference Howdy everybody, Just read the postings of questions about Soviet AFV's so I thought I'd throw out the following. An excellent reference is: Russian tanks : 1900-1970, the complete illustrated history of Soviet armoured theory and design. Milsom, John. I used this for a paper years ago, and was impressed. Up till then I had never seen a text that was this detailed. Also, if any of you have access to an OPAC (on-line library catalog) do an author search on Steven Zaloga. He has probably written the most in the west (oops, keep forgetting the cold war is over) on Soviet WWII AFVs. He wrote the Squadron/Signal book "T-34 in action" which is also a great find. I don't know if this company has given the KV series similar treatment but, if they did, it would be worth looking at. Well, that's all for now. Jim Shetler P.S. Any sightings of the General out there? ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 08:49:13 -0400 From: Chuck Powers Subject: Re: AvalonCon With the posting of the Avaloncon scenarios, I expected to see lots of opinions on the DL by now. Well, lets get it started: > Thursday > > Rd I Taking of Takrouna (51) > am Bridge to Nowhere (54) > Italian Brothers (Rout Report O2) Round one starts us off with the Italians. The first 2 scenarios are OK, and are even pretty well balanced. Anyone know anything about Italian Brothers? > Rd II Bread Factory #2 (RB3) > pm To The Rescue (RB4) > Turned Away (RB6) Round two takes us to Stalingrad. All short scenarios. I'd play Bread Factory or Turned Away. Should leave lots of time to play a few friendly games on Thursday night. :) > Friday > > Rd IIIA Liberation of Tulle (27) > am L'Ecole Normal (DASL A1) > A New Kind of Foe (34) It's time for the Partisans. Personally these scenarios don't excite me and the record shows them not to be well balanced. I'm not choosing this group. > B Sylvan Death (30) > Paole Zion (A62) > Bone of Contention (G15) This group doesn't look too bad, even though I've heard mix reviews about Bone of Contention. More short scenarios. > C Panzers Marsch! (Tactiques, TT3) This is an excellent scenario, IMO. I'd choose this scenario first, followed by group B. > Rd IV A Le Herisson (77) > pm Birds of Prey (46) > The Professionals (A28) Not a bad looking group of scenarios. I've played and enjoyed the first one several times. Haven't played the others, but they looking like fun scenarios. > B End of the Ninth (76) > Strangers in a Strange Land (75) > Fighting Withdrawal (1) I don't think I'll select this group. End of the Ninth isn't real balanced and I don't want to play Fighting Withdrawal again. > C One Step Forward (ASLUG 6) Anyone know about this scenario? The record indicates that it may not be balanced. I keep mentioning balance bacause a feel the National Championship (I think that's what this is) should have well balanced scenarios. > Rd X A Pouppeville Exit (T5) > extra Chapelle St Anne (KGP4) > Under the Noel Trees (23) What's the ruling on round X? Is it optional, or will it possibly be required to advance in the tourny? This is the only group I would choose. Pouppeville is OK, as is Chapelle. No Noel Trees for me ... a little too dicey. Should be a short round though. > B Silence That Gun (14) > Devil's Hill (T10) > Strayer's Strays (T16) No way! > C Chateau Cherry (ASLUG 2.1) What about this one? The record has this one as really unbalanced. > Saturday > Rd V A Khamsin (37) > am Red Star, Red Sun (65) > And Here We Damn Well Stay (A50) Finally some meat! I'll take Red Star followed by Khamsin. > B Hill 253.5 (T7) > Counterattack on the Vistula (21) > Paw of the Tiger (F) Not bad either. Give me the Hill or Vistula. > C Acts of Defiance (Rout Report X13) Anyone know about this one? > Rd VI A On the Kokoda Trail (60) > pm The Eastern Gate (63) > Commando Hunt (A42) Alright, we're turning Japanese (and British). I love PTO scenarios, but this group doesn't do it for me. Maybe because I don't like the British too much. I haven't figured them out yet. > B Cibik's Ridge (67) > Munda Mash (A58) > Totsugeki! (A60) We're getting better. Give me Totsugeki (except against Brian) or Munda Mash. More short scenarios so I can play Wrasslin all night. > C One Log Bridge (ASLUG 12) Again, anyone know about this one? The record doesn't show it to be balanced. > Sunday > Rd VIIA Rocket's Red Glare (G6) > Guryev's HQ (DASL 1) > Guards Counterattack (A) No way! This is the FINAL round. > B Death at Carentan (A59) > Hitdorf on the Rhine (L) > Among the Ruins (21) Getting better for the championship round. Give me the last 2. > C Bloody Red Beach (75) Now we're talking. This one's for all the marbles. Well, those are my first thoughts. In general I like these better that past Avaloncons, but I'm not still really satisfied. It could be that I'm biased against the Avaloncon format and may never be satisfied. I still prefer the WO or Atlanticon format better. Later, Chuck ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:43:30 EDT From: brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov (Brian Youse) Subject: Avaloncon - my opinion Well, it is once again time for my comments on this year's Avaloncon offering. To steal from Carl, I am once again reminded of how much I prefer ASLOK style tournaments... Phil posts this year's offering... (BTW, Thanks Phil) >Here are the scenarios for Avalon Con > >To be considered for the championship, you must play in either track A or > track C, until you have taken one loss. > >You only get on C by mutual consent OK, I'll probably only comment on the "A" and "C" scenarios since I hope I don't have to use the "B" scenarios! 8) > >There is a round X; for day two; if 8 rounds are needed. Yikes, better not play any of the notoriously slow players if three rounds will be necessary on Friday. > >Rounds 1 and 2 have only 3 scenarios, and only one track Guess Russ ran out of choices. 8) > >Thursday > >Rd I Taking of Takrouna (51) > am Bridge to Nowhere (54) > Italian Brothers (Rout Report O2) Taking of Takrouna. Played it a few times, probably wouldn't pick it again except as an alternate since I don't want to play Italian Brothers. I sure like the Brits, since they can take it slow with that fg from hell and just pound on the Its. Bridge to Nowhere. I've only played this once, and will certainly be playing it again (well, if I can get my opponent to see the light). I had the Italians, and nailed the tankette with a mtr. I think the Russians need to keep that afv back a ways to try to keep it alive. I enjoyed this scenario a lot, as I like bridge securing scenarios. Italian Brothers. Never played it, probably never will. I like a lot of RR scenarios, as they are fun, but I often question their balance a bit and would like to have a fair shot of winning a scenario. Having never played it, and with Backblast taking up all my free time, I'll not have a chance, so I don't have a clue about its balance. ROUND RANKING: B- One Good, One OK, One Unknown. > >Rd II Bread Factory #2 (RB3) > pm To The Rescue (RB4) > Turned Away (RB6) What is that animal I hear barking in the background? Arf! Arf! Yep, we get the "Red Barricades" Round, playing the same three scenarios over and over again. Why not pick some others/mix in (gag) KGP for a HASL round? Anything is better than these same three scenarios over and over again. Oh well, they are not bad scenarios, I'm just SICK OF 'EM! Bread Factory #2. Decent scenario, even if I had'nt played it some 10+ times by now. DON'T STACK THE LEADER/DC WITH A SQUAD, WHY LOSE TWO UNITS! Just hope he gets lucky (he won't most likely) to do some damage. Don't forget that you can move from cellar to trench and vice versa, making that trench a damn appealing unit. It may get you out of a jam or two. To The Rescue. The most boring of the three, don't set up the trapped Germans too close or they'll get beat up. I've won this scenario twice as the Russians by just this method, the German player having a bad setup. YOU GOTTA HAVE ROUT PATHS. Honest. Turned Away. I can't see myself playing this again, as I have played this at every major tournament I've been to. Don't forget the Q/A that allows the Germans to set up ? in gullies to make those ? counters have some value. I like the building by the rubble/gully hex as the HQ, but the Germans always seem to head their first. Most people just pick the stone building. ROUND RANKING: A- for Scenarios, D for "Brian's Enjoyment" as I just can't play these again. > >Friday > >Rd IIIA Liberation of Tulle (27) > am L'Ecole Normal (DASL A1) > A New Kind of Foe (34) > > B Sylvan Death (30) > Paole Zion (A62) > Bone of Contention (G15) > > C Panzers Marsch! (Tactiques, TT3) God, what a kick in the balls as Russ takes the one scenario I've wanted to play for some time (Sylvan Death) and puts it in the B round! Why, Russ, Why? Liberation of Dulle. Oops, I meant Tulle. If this isn't the "easy, beginners" type scenario which seems DESTINED to be in the B group, what is? Too long, Too Dull, Too Blech for my tastes. Of course, what are my choices... L'ECOLE NORMAL? You've gotta be kidding me! This is the deluxe version of liberation of Dulle! Surely Russ is punishing people who don't have a loss in to playing these barkers. That leaves me only once choice... A New Kind of Foe. Good, I've been wanting to play this one. Wait a minute, this is a bit long for a (possibly) three scenario day. Isn't 10-14 turns or so? Crap, I'll be playing this all day! Wait, there is light at the end of the tunnel... Panzers Marsch! Ahh, clearly Russ is a crafty old bird having picked two of the lowlights of the ASL system while nearly forcing everyone to play PM! by choosing Foe as the third choice! I can see it now, twenty games of PM being played. Oh well, I guess we'll get a decent sample size for balance of this scenario. I've never played it, and will probably "force" my opponent into playing Foe or Normal (at least it is short, maybe I can catch a game of Wrasslin' or something...) ROUND RANKING: C- Foe brightens me up a bit, but I'd better buy some jolt for the second and third games on Friday. The first two are clearly barkers and I have to hope I don't run up against someone who feels Tulle is the "high point of the ASL system!" 8). > >Rd IV A Le Herisson (77) > pm Birds of Prey (46) > The Professionals (A28) Ahh, early war stuff. Good, my personal favorite (along with PTO). Maybe it is time for some fun finally... Le Herisson. Wait, wasn't this in the first round last year? Why, with 6 of the 8 CdG scenarios being decent sized, are we playing the same ones over and over? Why? WHY? Perhaps I'm over-reacting as this is one of my "favorites" in the system. BUT, if the Germans don't roll well for SMOKE, the French can't lose. Birds of Prey. Another "great" scenario. Probably my first choice, as I fondly remember my "FPFing" 8-3-8 in a game vs. Perry Cocke. Those ten guys were incredible, and pretty much broke the Belgians themselves. The Professionals. Ever since Bob Mc. fucked up the Molotov Coctail rules I refuse to play this one in the slight chance I may end up with the Yugos. They cannot win without the ability to sff/fpf the mols vs. the tanks. Shame, another cool river crossing which was obviously playtested with one set of rules and ruined by an errata page. I think this is the only example of that occuring that I can think of. The C pick, One Step Forward, is one of the truely skewed ASLUG scenarios. Perhaps I've gone off on ASLUG too harsh in the past, but this scenario is damn tough on the Germans as they don't have decent retreat paths. I'd not play it in a tournament. > B End of the Ninth (76) > Strangers in a Strange Land (75) > Fighting Withdrawal (1) Funny how the B scenarios are so much more appealing than the A scenarios. I guess that the winner of the ASL tournament is going to have to suffer through the A column while the losers have the fun? 8) > >Rd X A Pouppeville Exit (T5) > extra Chapelle St Anne (KGP4) > Under the Noel Trees (23) Yikes, this scares me. I find myself hoping that under 128 people show up so we don't NEED a second round! Pouppeville Exit? I like the Germans but the US can win. It is just your basic bread/butter scenario, though, and one would think that by the fifth round of an ASL tournament you should be tackling a few tougher topics. Chapelle St. Anne? What, best 4 of 7? Oh well, might need some sleep after the first two games. Just how many mgs do come from that german halftrack? Dice the Noel Trees? Hope I'm hot by now or this is a quick scenario. > > B Silence That Gun (14) > Devil's Hill (T10) > Strayer's Strays (T16) > Fortunately, Russ has made track B much less attractive than the A course. Strayer Strays? Silence that Gun? Russ must have stock in Purina to be serving up barkers like these. > C Chateau Cherry (ASLUG 2.1) Again, not too bash, but Chateau Cherry, while visually stunning and a "fun" scenario, isn't one of the most balanced of ASLUG's offerings. BTW, Gary, will we be seeing the "monster" issue of ASLUG (the "death's issue?") by Avaloncon? ROUND RANKING: F I just hope 128 people show up for ASL. This round sucks the big one. > >Saturday > Rd V A Khamsin (37) > am Red Star, Red Sun (65) > And Here We Damn Well Stay (A50) Ahh, I'm pitching a tent over this round. Good size, fun, different. I LOVE this round. I'll shoot for Khamsin then RS/RS, but all three are "cool". I've got nothing to say on these except that I'd take either side. Oh yeah, remember that the Japs in RS/RS have MOL as I forgot the last time I played. Still won, though, but it was tough. A waycool scenario IMNSHO. ROUND RANKING: A. Solid, as all three are winners. > >Rd VI A On the Kokoda Trail (60) > pm The Eastern Gate (63) > Commando Hunt (A42) > > B Cibik's Ridge (67) > Munda Mash (A58) > Totsugeki! (A60) > > C One Log Bridge (ASLUG 12) NEARLY the perfect round, if one could mix/match between the columns. Still, the A side is a far cry from the B side. Again. On the Kokoda Trail? Give me the Japs. Any day. I'll give the British the balance right now, without knowing what it is, and play anyone for money. It is fun, the Japanese just cannot lose. Commando Hunt? Bark. Chess like in it's boredom, I find that this is a PTO version of Meeting of Patrols and equally as boring. I've played it once, an that was one time too many. THE EASTERN GATE! Yeah, an AWESOME scenario if played "historically" and not against some cheese-dick British player who tries to dart across the VC line and then run and hide. BTW, I don't think this is a guarenteed win for the British, as the Japanese can ID this tactic, then throw themselves at the Brits looking for those 12 CVP for the win. Still, British play along these lines RUINS what is a classic slug fest on a densely wooded hill. You've gotta love the "looks" of this one, several columns of each nation trying to get to the hill first, then fighting for it once they both arrive. Again, Russ has dicked the good players by picking yet another non-balanced (by Gary's own admission) ASLUG scenario. WHY can't the A players choose Totsugeki! (as close to 50/50 as a scenario is likely too see) or Munda Mash? (An OUTSTANDING PTO scenario, play it some time!) IF the A column was Totsugeki!, Munda Mash, and Eastern Gate, this column would be damn near better than 99% of things in life, that's for sure! Finally, down the stretch, we get to the finals... > >Sunday > Rd VIIA Rocket's Red Glare (G6) > Guryev's HQ (DASL 1) > Guards Counterattack (A) > > B Death at Carentan (A59) > Hitdorf on the Rhine (L) > Among the Ruins (21) > > C Bloody Red Beach (75) Owch. Oh well, I probably won't be in it so I wouldn't feel forced to choose BRB to see what Russ does when the finals take 18 hours to play. 8) I'm stunned that the finalists, certainly x-0 in a field this large, may be forced to play such scenarios. Let 'em pick, Russ, Let 'em pick! Guards Counterattack? You mean Shoot and my Sniper will Ruin your Day? Haven't we all played this enough? At LEAST add the other two parts for the complete board one slugfest! Guryev's HQ. I like this scenario as the Russians with both sides as getting their balance. Flat out, the Germans are favored. Give the Russians the balance, and the Russians are pretty heavily favored. Give each the balance and it helps, but I still like the Russians 'bout 55-45 depending on reinforcement drs. Rocket's Red Glare. Again. Time to bury this puppy as overplayed and (IMO) overhyped as a "good" scenario. The B side offers some good scenarios, with Carenten a cool, balanced scenario and Ruins as seemingly well balanced slugfest. Take the US in Hitdorf, as it is tough to lose with all the leaders they get, although this is one of my all-time favorite remakes of the original system. Just prey the German 10-2 doesn't battle harden (as has happened vs. me) so that all those nice buildings are suddenly -1 TEM! Oh well, these are my thoughts on this year's scenario list. I'll be gunning for the top-ten, although recent history has me regressing. I just gotta remember to stay away from the sharks this year... 8) See you at the con, Brian ----- From: Jean-Luc.Bechennec@lri.fr Subject: Re: AvalonCon Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 15:44:35 +0200 (MET DST) Chuck Powers writes: > > > C Chateau Cherry (ASLUG 2.1) > > What about this one? The record has this one as really unbalanced. > I played this one once as the Germans and it was a piece of cake (oops! did not report the result to the record) I think the US players has definitly not enough men to guard a one board front line. In my game everything was finished 2 turns before the end. The German lost only the FlakPz and 1 squad. All the US units was destroyed or captured. It is so easy to encircled and smoke the US defender in the castle. -- ========================================================================== Jean-Luc Bechennec / / Equipe Architecture des Ordinateurs et ( ( Conception des Circuits Integres \ \ LRI, bat 490 \ \ Tel 33 (1) 69-41-70-91 Universite Paris-Sud ) ) Fax 33 (1) 69-41-65-86 F-91405 ORSAY Cedex / / email jlb@lri.lri.fr ========================================================================== ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 11:39:11 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Chateau Cherry Jean-Luc said: >Chuck Powers writes: >> > C Chateau Cherry (ASLUG 2.1) >> What about this one? The record has this one as really unbalanced. >I played this one once as the Germans and it was a piece of cake >(oops! did not report the result to the record) >I think the US players has definitly not enough men to guard a one >board front line. >In my game everything was finished 2 turns before the end. The German >lost only the FlakPz and 1 squad. All the US units was destroyed or >captured. >It is so easy to encircled and smoke the US defender in the castle. I lost this one as the US, but I don't think it's that unbalanced. If the Yanks set up at the far end of the victory road (Easy Eight Sherman behind a roadblock, infantry with various stripped MG there and in the surrounding woods) then the Germans have to bust two strongpoints in the alotted time. Doable, but not simple. The key is not to defend a whole board. I think if the Americans put too much in the chateau then they're doomed, as it's pretty easy to approach and surround. Dave Ripton ----- From: ABillsASL@aol.com Date: Wed, 06 Jul 94 15:01:58 EDT Subject: RE: Avaloncon attendees I agree with Brian and Carl about the scenario choices, all the more reason to show up early (Wednesday) and play some of the ladder folks in a scenario of your (both) choice! Oh yes, here is the latest list of attendees: Sorry if this was posted two days ago, I didn't receive it back from the mailing lsit and assume it was lost. AVALONCON Attendees List Arrival Date Alan Bills abillsasl@aol.com Wednesday Brian Youse brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov Wednesday Robert Feinstein+3 robert@chem.UCSD.EDU ? Carl Fago cdf1@psu.edu Wednesday Phil Pomerantz p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com ? Other Genie (via Phil Pomerantz) Bob O'Conner R.Oconnor6@genie.geis.com ? Dan Dolan D.Dolan6@genie.geis.com ? Brian Sielski, Dirk Heinz, Rob Wolkey, Steve Pleva, Russ Gifford (of course), Ray Woloszyn, Jeff Coyle, Darryl Lundy, Brad Miller, Jeff Paull Stewart King stumo@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu ? JR Tracy jr_tracy@il.us.swissbank.com Wednesday Paul Ferraro pferraro+@pitt.edu Thursday Rusty Shields shields@ssims.nci.nih.gov ? Bob Lyman blyman@mailstorm.dot.gov ?? Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ? Chuck Powers cpowers@ceramics.gsfc.nasa.gov Thursday Bill Archer barcher@aol.com Thursday morning Bill Edwards edwardsw@delphi.com Wednesday w.edwards12@genie.geis.com Alan ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:08:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Has anybody seen... Has anyone heard from Patrick Manlig? His address changed and I don't know if he is receiving my moves for Chance. ***************************** Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ***************************** ----- From: ANACONDA@aol.com Date: Wed, 06 Jul 94 17:22:13 EDT Subject: Re: PBEM Game Hey Doug Da Sophist, Yes, I would be interested in a PBEM ASL Game but I'll need your internet address instead of communicating via the mailing list. I'll go into greater detail later. Cheers, Jeff Peters (Anaconda@aol.com) ----- From: ABillsASL@aol.com Date: Mon, 04 Jul 94 07:59:03 EDT Subject: Avaloncon Attendee List Here is the latest update on Avaloncon Attendees. It looks like a few games will be found. Continue to send them in. AVALONCON Attendees List Arrival Date Alan Bills abillsasl@aol.com Wednesday Brian Youse brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov Wednesday Robert Feinstein+3 robert@chem.UCSD.EDU ? Carl Fago cdf1@psu.edu Wednesday Phil Pomerantz p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com ? Other Genie (via Phil Pomerantz) Bob O'Conner R.Oconnor6@genie.geis.com ? Dan Dolan D.Dolan6@genie.geis.com ? Brian Sielski, Dirk Heinz, Rob Wolkey, Steve Pleva, Russ Gifford (of course), Ray Woloszyn, Jeff Coyle, Darryl Lundy, Brad Miller, Jeff Paull Stewart King stumo@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu ? JR Tracy jr_tracy@il.us.swissbank.com Wednesday Paul Ferraro pferraro+@pitt.edu Thursday Rusty Shields shields@ssims.nci.nih.gov ? Bob Lyman blyman@mailstorm.dot.gov ?? Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ? Chuck Powers cpowers@ceramics.gsfc.nasa.gov Thursday Bill Archer barcher@aol.com Thursday morning Bill Edwards edwardsw@delphi.com Wednesday w.edwards12@genie.geis.com Alan ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 15:22:34 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: LMG's vs AFV's Got a quick question for anyone with the answer.... Can LMG's use the TH/TK tables against AFV's? Both my opponent and I are under the impression that you can't, but can't find any rule to back that up. All the references in the ASLRB we have found allow MG's to fire, but don't specifically exclude LMG's. Have we just learned a new use for these beauties? Dave ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 15:33:45 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's All SW MG's can be used on the TH/TK tables. All use exactly the same numbers except the .50cal which uses the 12.7 column instead of the MG column. Fred > > Got a quick question for anyone with the answer.... > > Can LMG's use the TH/TK tables against AFV's? > > Both my opponent and I are under the impression that you can't, but > can't find any rule to back that up. All the references in the ASLRB > we have found allow MG's to fire, but don't specifically exclude LMG's. > Have we just learned a new use for these beauties? > > Dave > ----- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 16:56:50 MDT From: markg@laplace.idec.sdl.usu.edu (Mark Greenman) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's Capt. David Van Kan writes... > Got a quick question for anyone with the answer.... > > Can LMG's use the TH/TK tables against AFV's? > > Both my opponent and I are under the impression that you can't, but > can't find any rule to back that up. All the references in the ASLRB > we have found allow MG's to fire, but don't specifically exclude LMG's. > Have we just learned a new use for these beauties? > > Dave > I also searched from Lmg prohibition from AFV attacks, but came to the conclusion that my prejiduce against them must have been a SL hang-on. Regards, Mark ----- Subject: LMG's vs AFV's From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 18:55:00 -0640 Howdy, vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) writes: >Can LMG's use the TH/TK tables against AFV's? Apparently yes. A vehicular MG can't [D3.54]. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 10:02:19 +1000 From: lesk@LNA03.lna.oz.au (Les KRAMER) Subject: email problems This is directed to Grant Linneberg, so anyone else can skip to the next message. I can't seem to get through to either you or Darren, so I think my mailer has a problem. It seems to randomly choose addresses to ignore and your's is one of them. Anyway, I'll try to get this looked at from here and hopefully it will be fixed in the next few weeks. Regards, Les Kramer ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 08:49:54 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's Capt David Van Kan writes: > Got a quick question for anyone with the answer.... > Can LMG's use the TH/TK tables against AFV's? Sure. As you said, there's no rule to exclude them. Bas. ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 09:29:01 +0100 From: Caj.Zell@sm.luth.se (Caj Zell) Subject: Paw Of The Tiger I saw that you're going to play "Paw Of The Tiger" at Avaloncon. The thing that comes to my mind is that when a friend and I played it we couldn't see how the Germans were supposed to win at all. We thought that the Russians could win easily by just charging forward and exit the required no. of AFV:s. Even if the German fire Intensive all the time he cannot possibly kill the no. of AFV's that he should. In the SL Victory Conditions the Russians should also amass CVP:s or something that changed the situation. (Years since I looked at the scenario and don't have it here.) Of course, I realize that I'm probably wrong since you fanatics out there are still playing it and this is a pretty obvious tactic to consider. Can you tell me what the Germans should do? Caj Zell Division of Automatic Control Dept. of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Lulea University of Technology S-971 87 Lulea SWEDEN Telephone: Int.+46-92091985 "Faster than a laser bullet"- Telefax: Int.+46-92098894 -Rob Halford (Judas Priest) E-mail: caj@sm.luth.se ----- From: Bruno NITROSSO Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 9:59:03 METDST It once happened to me too to believe real hard LMG couldn t do TH/TK and after thourough look up at the rules I discovered I was actually remembering NO BORE SIGHT FOR LMGs. At that time I tried to see what other exceptions were for LMGs and found none. -Bruno ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 08:02:48 -0700 (PDT) From: "P. Gowdy" Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's This is wierd. Just the other day I was also looking for the rule that I thought existed and read "only MMGs and HMGs can attack an AFV." I could not find the rule either. But since it has been about 10 years since my last SL game I doubt I am having SL flashbacks. I would swear such a rule existed somewhere. But alas... Pete ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 10:18:09 CDT From: seningen@ross.com (Mike Seningen) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's What amazed me even further was that you also go ROF!!! That seemed a bit much to me! mike ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 12:54:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Mustafa Unlu Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's seningen@ross.com (Mike Seningen) writes: > What amazed me even further was that you also go ROF!!! > That seemed a bit much to me! Yes, but notice that MGs can't score CH. > > mike M. ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 12:53:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Mustafa Unlu Subject: Re: Paw Of The Tiger Caj.Zell@sm.luth.se (Caj Zell) writes: > Of course, I realize that I'm probably wrong since you > fanatics out there are still playing it and this is a pretty > obvious tactic to consider. Can you tell me what the > Germans should do? Ummm.. retain ROF? possibly many times? M. ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 10:26:02 PDT Mike Seningen writes: > What amazed me even further was that you also go ROF!!! > That seemed a bit much to me! Note, though, that this does effectively give an LMG less chance to kill than an MMG or HMG. -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- From: kinney@ra.cgd.ucar.EDU (Rodney Kinney) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 11:49:01 MDT >This is wierd. Just the other day I was also looking for >the rule that I thought existed and read "only MMGs and >HMGs can attack an AFV." I could not find the rule either. Seems just about everybody has had to overcome this perception at some time. I sure did. I believe in the SL flashback explanation, but only because the rule excluding LMG seems so plausible; they seem such insignificant weapons. If you've got a recent memory of text-on-a-page (do other people store memories of rules as low-resolution neural GIF's of ASLRB pages?) perhaps it's the rule that only HMG may fire at aircraft. rk ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 14:01:25 EDT From: earle@cmc.ca (Adrian Earle) Subject: dice roll server found!! Good News for those of us who play by email. There is an internet dice roll server!! I was reading Rec.games.board and some guy posted a note about an email dice server in germany. This means no more feeling guilty about hot die rolling. It can even send you and your opponent the rolls. Outstanding!!! Maybe someone out there who is a sysadmin might want to contact the dice roll administrator and set this up in North America so this guy isn't flooded by ASL dice requests. Here's the scoop: Send mail to "dice@danpost4.uni-c.dk" with the body of the message having the following format: #P #S #D #R #L #C #T Here is what I sent as a test file: #P earle@cmc.ca #P adrian@cmc.ca #S 6 #D 1 #R 20 #L 2 #C Test of dice server 2 Literally a few minutes later I got the following file: Dice rolls requested by: earle@cmc.ca # Test of dice server 2 No. of sides on every die: 6 No. of dice for every roll: 1 No. of dice rolls requested: 20 No. of rolls pr. line: 2 3 3 3 4 1 6 1 2 3 5 5 6 5 5 6 2 2 2 5 2 Average of dice rolls: 3.55 NOTE: Don't REPLY to this message from the dice roller. Replies end up in the administrators mailbox. Great stuff!!!!!!!! Adrian ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 11:25:38 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Tournament gear So, if you were going to your first ASL tournament, what would you bring? Almost all my stuff can be transported nicely on a small suitcase dolly, but what do you really need to have? I'm driving, so I don't have to worry about the airline mangling my KGP maps or anything like that. What do you old hands bring? I've heard that some guys don't show up with anything but their dice. :-) Dave ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 15:03:43 -0400 (EDT) From: HILDEBRANB@iccgcc.cs.hh.ab.com Subject: RE: Tournament gear Capt David Van Kan "vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil" writes: >So, if you were going to your first ASL tournament, what would you bring? >Almost all my stuff can be transported nicely on a small suitcase dolly, >but what do you really need to have? I'm driving, so I don't have to worry >about the airline mangling my KGP maps or anything like that. What do you >old hands bring? I've heard that some guys don't show up with anything >but their dice. :-) If you're talking AvalonCon, I'd go through and figure out which scenarios you're likely to play and bring what you'll need to play 'em. If you don't plan on playing any KGP scenarios don't bother bringing the boards - no partisans? Why bring 'em...That way you bring just enough to play the designated scenarios so you're covered in case you run into a guy with just his dice. I think last AvalonCon I fit what was needed into 1 legal size file folder box... For another tourney where you might be playing anything, I typically bring as much as I can squeeze into 2 boxes which maxes out my IPC. If I have to cut corners, out go the Axis Minors or Partisans or whatever I doubt I'll be playing much of that tourney...Same with the boards - if my deluxe boards can't quite squeeze in they stay at home...Odds are your opponents will have some stuff and if you really want to play something you'll be able to borrow boards from somebody... Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 02:58:16 EDT Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's >All SW MG's can be used on the TH/TK tables. All use exactly >the same numbers except the .50cal which uses the 12.7 column >instead of the MG column. If you read "The Forgotten Soldier" by F? Sajer, he mentions anti-tank machineguns mounted on halftracks. I've read other accounts wherein machinegun bullets were used to knockout tanks. In several of the early war scenarios the CMG of light tanks are the only mounted weapons (EXC to D4.3 was it?) capable of stopping the opponent's tanks. My question is do LMG, MMG, and HMG get penetration for close range? If so, then the MGs get +2 at point blank range and +1 out to 6 hexes, and could turn a halftrack into a burning wreck, especially from above! Cheers, Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 14:29:51 CDT From: carrington rhydderch ward Subject: ["Mail Delivery Subsystem" : Returned mail: Host unknown] ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 14:29:08 CDT From: "Mail Delivery Subsystem" Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 550 ... Host unknown ----- Unsent message follows ----- ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 14:28:18 CDT From: carrington rhydderch ward Subject: LMGs vs. Tanks I was surprised to hear that LMGs could take on tanks, too, but in some ways it makes sense -- At least for the Germans the LMG was the same caliber as their Medium and Heavy Machineguns, simply differentiated by bipod instead of tripod, different magazines, and fewer barrels -- Even for the others, with the exception of .50 cal the "heavy" designation had more to do with water cooling and other paraphernalia than bullet caliber. As such, the ASL rules seem eminently sane. Carrington Ward ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 03:21:15 EDT Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's On Thu, 7 Jul 94 15:08:02 EDT, Brian Youse wrote: >Jeff, > Yes, they get penetration. > > I'm not sure what your reference is from above, unless you mean >airplane mgs. I think it's an SL holdover. I thought that MG got -1 vs OT To Kill from above (i.e., 2 levels and "adjacent"). Do ATR get penetration as well? Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 12:36:13 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's > From: "Jeff Shields" > My question is do LMG, MMG, and HMG get penetration for close range? If > so, then the MGs get +2 at point blank range and +1 out to 6 hexes, and > could turn a halftrack into a burning wreck, especially from above! Yes, they do, because they are firing AP ammo. I wonder what 7.62mm HE rounds would do to troops in the open? :-) Dave ----- Date: Thu, 07 Jul 94 13:46:17 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: LMG's vs AFV's > > Seems just about everybody has had to overcome this perception > at some time. I sure did. I believe in the SL flashback explanation, > but only because the rule excluding LMG seems so plausible; they seem > such insignificant weapons. Makes me wonder whether the inherent LMG in a German squad should allow 467's to make To Hit/To Kill attempts as part of their Small Arms fire (!) Tom ----- Subject: TRIVIA PHASE From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:31:00 -0640 Howdy, Somewhere in the ASLRB a specific issue of the General is mentioned. Which issue? So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Thu, 07 Jul 94 15:33:10 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Re: TRIVIA PHASE > > Somewhere in the ASLRB a specific issue of the General is > mentioned. Which issue? > Scrambling to be the first to answer this, but coming up short. Still, looking at the blurb for the General on page A44 gives me a chuckle. Among other dubious statements and half-truths, we find: "...our bi-monthly gaming journal..." - more like once every 6 weeks, eh? " The fastest way to find an opponent for this game... is in the pages of The General." - unless you use email. "Many issues contain a SERIES REPLAY in which an actual move-by-move game by master players... is printed." - So how did Brian get to do one of these? :-) And the best one of all: "Since its inception in 1964, the GENERAL has stood the test of time. It remains the oldest and most-respected periodical devoted to simulation gaming on the market. And its subscription rates remain the best value." - This'll get somebody a few years in Purgatory for sure. Tom Seeker and Destroyer of Straw Men ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 15:42:51 -0600 (MDT) From: Darren James Gour Subject: Re: dice roll server found!! On Thu, 7 Jul 1994, Adrian Earle wrote: > > Good News for those of us who play by email. There is an internet > dice roll server!! I was reading Rec.games.board and some guy posted > a note about an email dice server in germany. This means no more > feeling guilty about hot die rolling. It can even send you and your opponent > the rolls. Outstanding!!! > Ain't that the truth!! I for one worry far more about my opponent getting the idea he is being cheated than worrying about any possible malfeasance on my opponents part. It would be interesting to do a test of a couple hundred rolls with two dice and see what kind of spread results. Darren Gour ----- From: bconab@fir.pwcm.com (Bob Conabee) Subject: Ladder Game Wanted Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 18:39:24 -0400 (EDT) Greetings, One of my PBEM opponents went on a brief vacation, and I was wondering whether anyone was interested in a ladder game of scenario B or if your ambitious scenario C (A+B+AFV's). I realize everyone's probably played these scenarios at one time or another but I always kind of liked 'em. Bob Conabee bobc@panix.com ----- Date: Thu, 07 Jul 1994 13:52:47 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: Cherry Yo! Jean-Luc.Bechennec@lri.fr! I hear ya! J> I played this one once as the Germans and it was a piece of J> cake (oops! did not report the result to the record) J> I think the US players has definitly not enough men to J> guard a one board front line. J> In my game everything was finished 2 turns before the end. J> The German lost only the FlakPz and 1 squad. All the US J> units was destroyed or captured. J> It is so easy to encircled and smoke the US defender in the J> castle. J> Only I totally disagree. I think this one heavily favours the US player. With the clarifications in the last Annual about what can be torn off a halftrack, the US player ends up with a plethora of 50cals as well as some MMGs. There is also a nifty place to set up the Easy 8 which makes it difficult for the German armour to enter without risking bog in the woods. With all that MG firepower concentrated in the Chateau, and the Easy 8 taking care of the German armour, the yanks have a tough time getting close. -Grant. ... "Politically Correct" is a contradiction in terms. -== IceIQle v2.0 ==- ----- From: w.smith93@genie.geis.com Date: Fri, 8 Jul 94 00:45:00 UTC Subject: Dice Roll Server Adrian and All, The dice roll server sounds like a really helpful thing. I was just wondering how best to utilize it, though. Sending a message for each attack might be a bit of a pain as you have to wait for the results of each before your proceed. However, doing 20 rolls ahead of time doesn't sound like a good idea, either. I wouldn't want to give up the ability to designate attacks depending on what happens in previous ones. What do you think? Warren ----- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 21:36:26 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Warren said: >The dice roll server sounds like a really helpful thing. I was just >wondering how best to utilize it, though. Sending a message for each attack >might be a bit of a pain as you have to wait for the results of each before >your proceed. However, doing 20 rolls ahead of time doesn't sound like a >good idea, either. I wouldn't want to give up the ability to designate >attacks depending on what happens in previous ones. Call me a traditionalist, but I don't see any benefit from the dice server for PBEM ASL. For PBEM Titan, or some other game where players traditionally don't trust each other, it sounds grand. But there are just too many dice to roll in ASL, and too many phases. Stuff like "board order" to determine the order of rolls is just a pain. A DR thingee for MUD/IRC ASL is fine, but for email it's just another thing to make turns take longer. As far as I'm concerned, anybody with at least one ladder loss is obviously an honest guy. And anybody undefeated is welcome to prove his honesty by losing to me. :-> (Though that's been shown to be difficult at times, I recommend taking the Americans in The Bushmasters as a good start.) Dave Ripton ----- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 1994 09:27:12 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Dave Ripton writes: > Call me a traditionalist, but I don't see any benefit from the dice > server for PBEM ASL. For PBEM Titan, or some other game where > players traditionally don't trust each other, it sounds grand. But > there are just too many dice to roll in ASL, and too many phases. Agreed. Also think of the delay when you have to designate your attack, wait for the dice rolls, then (if you hit) send for more dice rolls for the MC/TK rolls, then perhaps more for HOB/crew-survival/SAN, etc. As to the cheating part, having impartial dice will not eliminate it. What if your HIP unit is exactly in the way of your opponents line of attack which he thought would be completely unexpected? You'd feel guilty, too. Bas. ----- Date: Fri, 08 Jul 1994 01:10:29 Subject: ASL starter recommendations From: mjsilva@ted.win.net (Michael Silva) Hi, all, I'm a one-time SL player who's been sidetracked the last dozen or so years (life does get in the way!). If I wanted to give ASL a try, what should I get? What are the ASL Annuals, and should I get them? Is there an ASL FAQ? BTW, I have my old SL boards (1-15), but nothing else. Thanks for any info, Mike ----- From: Neal Smith Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Date: Fri, 8 Jul 1994 07:02:06 -0400 (EDT) > > > Adrian and All, > > The dice roll server sounds like a really helpful thing. I was just > wondering how best to utilize it, though. Sending a message for each attack > might be a bit of a pain as you have to wait for the results of each before > your proceed. However, doing 20 rolls ahead of time doesn't sound like a > good idea, either. I wouldn't want to give up the ability to designate > attacks depending on what happens in previous ones. > Actually, the dice roller has been around for awhile (>= 1 year). I have documentation at least that old and probably earlier. I agree it is more difficult to do in ASL and may not be desirable, but I've seen some people just roll say 100 d6's and have it sent to their opponent. When a dr or DR is needed, then both can look up the results on their lists of d6 rolls. Of course you shouldn't look ahead! ;-) -- Neal Smith sasrns@unx.sas.com "... If she weighs the same as a duck. ..." ----- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 1994 13:31:27 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Neal Smith writes: > I agree it is more difficult to do in ASL and may not be > desirable, but I've seen some people just roll say 100 d6's and have > it sent to their opponent. When a dr or DR is needed, then both can > look up the results on their lists of d6 rolls. Of course you > shouldn't look ahead! ;-) I thought the idea of the die roll server was to make cheating harder. If you get a list before you need the rolls, this will not change. So, what's the use then? Bas. ----- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 94 09:53:13 -0400 From: raines@sgllinas.chem.cmu.edu (Jim Raines) Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov (Brian Youse) writes: [stuff deleted] > Why not just roll the dice yourself instead of keeping around a file of DR/drs? > > It is the same "honor system" at work, just a different application. Personally, I like the excitement of rolling the dice. That is part of the fun of board games! > > > "... If she weighs the same as a duck. ..." > > Then she's a witch, right? > Right! So, if she is a witch she should float on water, if she isn't she should sink (making breathing difficult). What a justice system. :-). Jim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jim Raines, Doctoral Student in Chemistry/Biophysics Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Disclaimer: I'm in graduate school, what do you expect? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- From: Neal Smith Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Date: Fri, 8 Jul 1994 10:05:02 -0400 (EDT) > > > Why not just roll the dice yourself instead of keeping around a file of DR/drs? > > It is the same "honor system" at work, just a different application. > > Brian > > > "... If she weighs the same as a duck. ..." > > Then she's a witch, right? I'm going to repost this back to the list, since I've gotten two private mails on this. I must not have been all that clear on it! ;-) Both of the players get a copy of the rolls. That way they can, independently, verify the rolls. I agree that it doesn't buy you much, but someone just asked how it could be used... BTW, yes she is a witch! ;-) Later, Neal ----- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 94 09:21:17 EDT From: brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov (Brian Youse) Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Neal writes... > Actually, the dice roller has been around for awhile (>= 1 year). I >have documentation at least that old and probably earlier. > > I agree it is more difficult to do in ASL and may not be desirable, but >I've seen some people just roll say 100 d6's and have it sent to their >opponent. When a dr or DR is needed, then both can look up the results >on their lists of d6 rolls. Of course you shouldn't look ahead! ;-) Why not just roll the dice yourself instead of keeping around a file of DR/drs? It is the same "honor system" at work, just a different application. Brian > "... If she weighs the same as a duck. ..." Then she's a witch, right? ----- Date: Fri, 08 Jul 94 09:36:46 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Dave vK's Origins report As you may know, Dave van Kan is AT THIS MOMENT having the time of his life at Origins, his first tournament. He was so excited to share his experiences that he called me and dictated this message for y'all. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Thursday 12:00 am - Midnight. It's 200 miles to Origins, I have a full tank of gas, a 2-pound bag of Nacho Cheese Doritos, and I'm wearing sunglasses. Hit it. Friday 2:30 am - Stumble around town, find the hotel, check in for a few hours sleep. In my dreams, I'm flipping through the rulebook endlessly trying to find where LMG's aren't allowed to Hit or Kill AFV's. I wake up screaming "JR! JR! There's no place like home!" Gad, what a nightmare. Friday 6:00 am - Roll out of bed, do my Marine Early Morning Routine (bow 3 times in the direction of Quantico, take a cold shower, eat a power bar, go on a 20 mile run, take another cold shower.) Friday 8:00 am - Head on down to the convention center. Find the ASL tourney. People turn and gasp, and why not - I'm wearing my full dress uniform. Including my super-buzz haircut and newly-polished sword. Gonna play up the Marine Major van Kan angle for all it's worth. Friday 8:30 am - My first game! I'm so excited I have to pee. My opponent looks sufficiently intimidated by my appearance, especially when I casually put my sword on the table "In case I lose." He fails his Personal MC and resigns after turn 1. I'm 1-0 already! Friday 9:00 am - My second game! I'm so excited I have to hit my head against the wall a few times. My opponent is less intimidated than the first one. I find it hard to play the game by the strict interpretation of the rules - no free LOS checks, no peeking under enemy concealment counters. The final straw comes when I roll a 6 on a smoke placement attempt and my opponent refuses to let me re-roll. What a jerk. I sweep the boards and counters off the table and stalk out of the gaming room. Guess I'm 1-1 now. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And there we have it. Will our intrepid hero regain his composure and return to the tournament? Or will he sink deeper into depression and head off to Big Sur for a wild weekend of partying with Surfin' Beach Bimbos? Stay tuned! Tom ----- From: kinney@isis.cgd.ucar.EDU (Rodney Kinney) Subject: Re: Dice Roll Server Date: Fri, 8 Jul 94 9:59:14 MDT > I agree it is more difficult to do in ASL and may not be desirable, but >I've seen some people just roll say 100 d6's and have it sent to their >opponent. When a dr or DR is needed, then both can look up the results >on their lists of d6 rolls. Of course you shouldn't look ahead! ;-) Surely one can come up with a more creative use of the server than this. Something like 447,LMG in U3 attacks 8-0,467a,467b in V5: 6FP +1 server comment field: "U3 attacks V5" DR (in order, if applicable) are: IFT DR 8-0 MC/PTC 467a MC/PTC 467b MC/PTC is simple enough and catches the majority of cases. Depending on how obsessed you are with treating all contingencies, you can then send a string of dr for Sniper, Random Selection, or more DR for Heat o' Battle, LLTC, or whatever. If the use of each roll is specified beforehand (and possibly ignored), then lookahead isn't a problem. Even if you still made some rolls by hand for speed, having the server give you the most common important rolls (TH, TK, IFT, MC) would do a lot for people's consciences/suspicions (well, those that have such problems anyway). rk ----- From: Neal Smith Subject: Re: Dave vK's Origins report Date: Fri, 8 Jul 1994 12:48:38 -0400 (EDT) > > Friday 8:30 am - My first game! I'm so excited I have to pee. My opponent looks > sufficiently intimidated by my appearance, especially when I casually put my > sword on the table "In case I lose." He fails his Personal MC and resigns after > turn 1. I'm 1-0 already! > > Friday 9:00 am - My second game! I'm so excited I have to hit my head against > the wall a few times. My opponent is less intimidated than the first one. I find > it hard to play the game by the strict interpretation of the rules - no free LOS > checks, no peeking under enemy concealment counters. The final straw comes when > I roll a 6 on a smoke placement attempt and my opponent refuses to let me > re-roll. What a jerk. I sweep the boards and counters off the table and stalk > out of the gaming room. Guess I'm 1-1 now. Ahhhh, there must be someone else that can intimidate well too! He found another opponent rather quickly didn't he? ;-) (I've never played a tourny so I don't know if people are just hanging around waiting to play!) > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > And there we have it. Will our intrepid hero regain his composure and return to > the tournament? Or will he sink deeper into depression and head off to Big Sur > for a wild weekend of partying with Surfin' Beach Bimbos? Stay tuned! I vote fot the Surfin' Beach Bimbos. Can you take pictures... video? ;-) Later, Neal Smith sasrns@unx.sas.com ----- Date: Sat, 09 Jul 94 13:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Scenario Search-Operation Marston From: Joseph_Pawlowski@mindlink.bc.ca (Joseph Pawlowski) Does anybody know if the old squad leader scenario Operation Marston has been redone with ASL rules, the new boards, and with RB or KGP rules? Or maybe the upper ups are turning it into a campaign game with a whole new map....anyways, if it is in ASL format, could somebody tell me where I can find it? Thanks... Joey. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Sun, 10 Jul 94 22:02:00 EDT Subject: Unarmored targets In my last note I made a mistake. There is a line at the bottom of the TK table that shows improved numbers to kill unarmored targets. Unarmored targets become at least as dangerous as halftracks against ATGs. Cheers Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 09:00:20 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Dave vK's Origins report Thanks, Tom. I was hoping to keep my attendance a secret. Now I'm forced to fill y'all in. Whew. What a weekend. I'll send more as I unscramble my brain. All I want to pass on now is that AH had the new General at Origins. I didn't get to examine it closely, but it looked like it had two ASL scenarios in it. Dave ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 14:11:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Three questions... (1) If an AFV has acquisition on a hex that is not its own and is involved in CCV where it attempts to kill an infantry unit, does the AFV still have an acquired target marker on the other hex? (2) If a AFV has an acquired target on a hex (infantry), and that infantry breaks and routs away, then _another_ infantry unit moves into that same hex, does the AFV has acquisition on that new unit? (3) If a 467/hmg wants do fire on a squad 3 hexes away, and wants to use both the inherent FP and the HMG on the squad, may the the two be fired separately (as two separate attacks on the same unit(s) in the same hex) or must they be firegrouped? Thanks! ***************************** Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ***************************** ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 15:12:35 -0400 (EDT) From: HILDEBRANB@iccgcc.cs.hh.ab.com Subject: RE: Three questions... Paul F Ferraro writes: >(1) If an AFV has acquisition on a hex that is not its own and is >involved in CCV where it attempts to kill an infantry unit, does the AFV >still have an acquired target marker on the other hex? Don't know. Good question. >(2) If a AFV has an acquired target on a hex (infantry), and that infantry >breaks and routs away, then _another_ infantry unit moves into that same >hex, does the AFV has acquisition on that new unit? When the infantry squad routs away the tank will have the option of leaving the acquisition in that hex or tracking the broken unit as it routs until the unit stops or moves out of the tank's LOS in which case the acquisition is placed in the last visible hex. If a new unit moves into the hex with the acquisition, he's acquired - so YES the AFV has acquisition on the new unit. >(3) If a 467/hmg wants do fire on a squad 3 hexes away, and wants to use >both the inherent FP and the HMG on the squad, may the the two be fired >separately (as two separate attacks on the same unit(s) in the same hex) >or must they be firegrouped? They must be firegrouped because of the mandatory firegroup rules. The only way to avoid it is if it was the movement phase and the target squad was moving and moved into a woods hex, for example, which cost 2 MFs, you could fire the Heavy at the squad on the first MF and if that didn't have the desired effect the 467 could fire its inherent on the 2nd MF - I think that's the only way around mandatory firegroup and that's solely because it's a special case. Sorry I can't cite specific rules... Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 15:18:55 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: RE: Three questions... In message Mon, 11 Jul 1994 14:11:49 -0400 (EDT), Paul F Ferraro writes: > (1) If an AFV has acquisition on a hex that is not its own and is > involved in CCV where it attempts to kill an infantry unit, does the AFV > still have an acquired target marker on the other hex? I would think it would lose the acquisition. {Flip, flip} The book says... Acquisition is lost if "...the Gun (or its CMG) attacks (or interdicts) a different target..." So, if the CMG was used in the CC attack against the infantry, it would lose the acquisition (and since only AAMG and CMG can be used to attack infantry in CC, it most likely will lose the acquisition.) > (2) If a AFV has an acquired target on a hex (infantry), and that infantry > breaks and routs away, then _another_ infantry unit moves into that same > hex, does the AFV has acquisition on that new unit? If the AFV had a 1/2-inch acquisition counter on the routing infantry, and the AFV does not track the routing infantry, the acquistion can be transferred (and used) to the new target. This is called bracketing (D6.52). I note that one of my favorite tactics is not valid. If I have a Gun firing at a concealed target, often I will use the Area target type so as to gain acquisition. Then, at some future time, I'll "bracket" and switch to the infantry target type with the -2 acquisition negating the +2 for firing at a concealed target. This is illegal according to D6.52. One cannot switch target types from Area Acquisition and used vs a concealed unit.. > (3) If a 467/hmg wants do fire on a squad 3 hexes away, and wants to use > both the inherent FP and the HMG on the squad, may the the two be fired > separately (as two separate attacks on the same unit(s) in the same hex) > or must they be firegrouped? Firegrouped. This falls under A7.55, Mandatory FG. ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 13:36:05 -0600 (MDT) From: Darren James Gour Subject: Favorites I would like to inquire with everyone on the list, what are your five favorite scenarios?? Please E-mail me personally, they can be AH, any of the zines, or whatever. No order is required, that would be too hard for most of us! Just your five favorites, in any order. I will repost the final tabulated results when submissions die down. Thanks, Darren Gour ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 14:00:47 +0700 From: markg@laplace.idec.sdl.usu.edu (Mark Greenman) Subject: RE: Three questions... Bret Hildebran responds to Paul F Ferraro : > > >(3) If a 467/hmg wants do fire on a squad 3 hexes away, and wants to use > >both the inherent FP and the HMG on the squad, may the the two be fired > >separately (as two separate attacks on the same unit(s) in the same hex) > >or must they be firegrouped? > > They must be firegrouped because of the mandatory firegroup rules. The only > way to avoid it is if it was the movement phase and the target squad was > moving and moved into a woods hex, for example, which cost 2 MFs, you could > fire the Heavy at the squad on the first MF and if that didn't have the > desired effect the 467 could fire its inherent on the 2nd MF - I think > that's the only way around mandatory firegroup and that's solely because > it's a special case. > Hmmm, I thought the Mandatory FG rule restricted a firegroup based upon a particular target in a particular location. If the target expends MF within a location, then everyone who's gonna be firing at that location from a attacker's location has to do so together. I must have missed the special case which allows you to ignore this based upon the MF expended? (not an unlikely occurrence) :) . In the same vein, it is not clear to me that terrain entrance MF expenditures can be 'split', to enable seperate shots, with the first shot against the first MF, the second shot against the second MF (as opposed to getting 2 shots for 2MF expended, period). The question this raises to me is whether all attackers which are gonna attack you on your "1st MF" have to attack, followed by all the attackers which attack you on your "2nd MF", etc... > Sorry I can't cite specific rules... Nor can I, but will try some research tonight. Mark Greenman markg@sdl.usu.edu ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 04:51:16 EDT Subject: Chapter XL I mailed out Chapter XL on Saturday. Has anyone received it or did my mailer fail?? I also mailed a foolish statement about unarmored vehicles that I corrected this morning. FYI, I put Chapter XL on the /incoming directory of both ftp sites. I intended to mail it to everyone so I wouldn't have to answer requests (this summer is getting extremely busy!). Cheers Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 16:17:34 -0500 (EST) From: "Carl D. Fago" Subject: ESB and Tracked Vehicles For some reason I had thought only fully tracked vehicles could attempt ESB. Upon rereading D2.5 I can find no such restriction. It only talks of ESB for "tracked" vehicles. So, can halftracked vehicles ESB? ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 13:18:50 PDT From: erimli@systems.caltech.edu (Bahadir Erimli) Subject: RE: Three questions... > >(2) If a AFV has an acquired target on a hex (infantry), and that infantry > >breaks and routs away, then _another_ infantry unit moves into that same > >hex, does the AFV has acquisition on that new unit? > < When the infantry squad routs away the tank will have the option of leaving > the acquisition in that hex or tracking the broken unit as it routs until > the unit stops or moves out of the tank's LOS in which case the acquisition > is placed in the last visible hex. If a new unit moves into the hex with > the acquisition, he's acquired - so YES the AFV has acquisition on the new > unit. Is the second part possible with Infantry Target Type ? I thought to be able to do that, one had to change the acq. to Area type acq and then fire at Area Target Type. (standard "no-ASLRB w/me" disclaimer :-)) take care, bahadir ----- Subject: TRIVIA PHASE From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 13:42:00 -0640 Howdy, jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) writes: >Somewhere in the ASLRB a specific issue of the General is >mentioned. Which issue? Finally stumped the band :-) At the end of chapter E before the footnotes we read: "Additional ASL historical scenarios for YANKS can be obtained by ordering Volume 24, Number 2 of the GENERAL available approximately January, 1988 which will feature articles on the YANKS module. Other ASL scenarios appear in that magazine on a farily regular basis. An updated Index for the ASL system will be made available in a later module." Does V24 N2 really have the articles? Does everyone have the updated Index? :-> So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 14:55:34 PDT From: mad@guest.apple.com (Michael Derry) Subject: Re: Dave vK's Origins report vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) wrote: Friday 8:30 am - My first game! I'm so excited I have to pee. My opponent looks sufficiently intimidated by my appearance, especially when I casually put my sword on the table "In case I lose." He fails his Personal MC and resigns after turn 1. I'm 1-0 already! ------------ Just in case any of you were worried about those marines, Captain Van did use the facilities; he did not just relieve himself on the spot. I did not play against David, but I made sure to come over and interrupt his game by chatting with him about how I played the same scenario (The Fugitives), since that usually will get my goat when I play. :^) I had a lot of fun at the convention, and although I am not an opponentless geek, the $25 was worth the cost. I did expect to see the ASL Players dominate the convention or at least a large area, and that was not the case. :^( Since ASL is not my only free time activity (I can hear the gasping now), I enjoyed wandering around and seeing the other games. I was amazed that the gaming area did close at night, they actually expected us to go sleep. Oh well I had better do some work, since I blew off last week. Still tied, Michael Derry ----- Subject: CLEARANCE QUESTIONS From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 13:42:00 -0640 Howdy, There seem to be discrepancies in the Clearance rules that may or may not be intentional, I can't tell. First, most of the Clearance attempts can take place either in the MPh or in the DFPh, but Rubble Clearance and Minefield Clearance seem to be allowed only in the Friendly Player Turn and not during the DFPh. Next, the chart of Clearance DRM has "-1 for each additional HS/crew (-2 for each squad) beyond the one required MMC." I can't find any general rule that says a MMC is required, however. Some of the specific rules, Rubble and roadblock, say that a MMC is required, but some, Fire, Wire, Minefield, and Set DC just say "Infantry," which includes SMC. So, can all Clearance attempts be made during both the MPh and the DFPh, or only some of them? Is a MMC required for Clearance or can some Clearance tasks be performed by SMCs? Must a MMC participate with a Bulldozer or can a Bulldozer perform Clearance by itself? So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 15:36:40 PDT From: mad@guest.apple.com (Michael Derry) Subject: Re: Dave vK's Origins report vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) wrote: Friday 8:30 am - My first game! I'm so excited I have to pee. My opponent looks sufficiently intimidated by my appearance, especially when I casually put my sword on the table "In case I lose." He fails his Personal MC and resigns after turn 1. I'm 1-0 already! ------------ Just in case any of you were worried about those marines, Captain Van did use the facilities; he did not just relieve himself on the spot. I did not play against David, but I made sure to come over and interrupt his game by chatting with him about how I played the same scenario (The Fugitives), since that usually will get my goat when I play. :^) I had a lot of fun at the convention, and although I am not an opponentless geek, the $25 was worth the cost. I did expect to see the ASL Players dominate the convention or at least a large area, and that was not the case. :^( Since ASL is not my only free time activity (I can hear the gasping now), I enjoyed wandering around and seeing the other games. I was amazed that the gaming area did close at midnight; they actually expected us to go sleep. Oh well, I had better do some work since I blew last week off. Still tired, Michael Derry ----- From: p.pomerantz1@genie.geis.com Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 04:31:00 UTC Subject: AvalonCon I just spoke to Russ Gifford. He wanted me to let everyone know that undefeated people CAN play on track B at AvalonCon if both players consent (as with track C), although in round V, he would prefer to see people playing the Desert Scenarios. Phil ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 16:30:39 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Dave vK's Origins report (Long Post) Tom the Spudmeister says: > As you may know, Dave van Kan is AT THIS MOMENT having the time of his life Tom's knack for overstatement has not diminished. :-) If it were not for the reports of people who have gone to other tournaments, I might not ever go to another convention again. :-( But more on that later. While the convention and the tournament were, in general, disappointing, I thought the actual play was excellent. I can't wait for ASLOK. I got in 4 games, and all came down to a single DR. > Friday 2:30 am - Stumble around town, find the hotel, check in for a few hours > sleep. In my dreams, I'm flipping through the rulebook endlessly trying to find > where LMG's aren't allowed to Hit or Kill AFV's. I wake up screaming "JR! JR! > There's no place like home!" Gad, what a nightmare. Strange, but this actually came up, in at least two games. Seems I'm not the only one to have missed this. > Friday 8:00 am - Head on down to the convention center. Find the ASL tourney. > People turn and gasp, and why not - I'm wearing my full dress uniform. Including > my super-buzz haircut and newly-polished sword. Gonna play up the Marine Major > van Kan angle for all it's worth. Heheh. I did get a haircut before I went. Worked, too. There were a couple of people on the Internet and Genie who saw the high-and-tight and made the connection. Too bad my play didn't make much of an impression. And, BTW, I'm still a Captain, Best rank! Please don't promote me too fast, Tom, I'm not ready for my frontal lobotomy yet!! > Friday 8:30 am - My first game! I'm so excited I have to pee. My opponent looks > sufficiently intimidated by my appearance, especially when I casually put my > sword on the table "In case I lose." He fails his Personal MC and resigns after > turn 1. I'm 1-0 already! Hardly. First game was Zon with the Wind. I had the Germans, and managed to malfunction BOTH 88's the first time they fired, then repair them, then have BOTH malfunction again. Never did repair one, and the other's crew got whacked right after they repaired theirs. Still, it turned out to be a close game. It all came down to the last US MPh as his last squad ran through 2(-2) RFP. They passed their MC and exited, and I was down 0-1. My caffeine consumption was still rather low at this point, but I do think a head-call was in order. > Friday 9:00 am - My second game! I'm so excited I have to hit my head against > the wall a few times. My opponent is less intimidated than the first one. I find I have played only 3 ftf games in the past 4 years, so the presence of so many people wanting to play ASL was exhilirating. Gave me a full-body erection--sort of like firing a machinegun FPF at night until the barrel begins to glow. > out of the gaming room. Guess I'm 1-1 now. Oui, I was. Played Le Herrison as the French. Won by using HIP and concealed half squads to slip into the German rear to recapture buildings from him. It didn't work as well as I'd expected, though, because my opponent captured and interrogated one of my guys. Cowardly pig-dog revealed almost everything! Also toasted one of the sIGs with a rear shot from an LMG. Glad I learned that rule, and just days before the tournament. They only scheduled two rounds for the first day, so I was free. Got into a pickup game of The Fugitives as the Germans. Things were going really good. I had made a feint at crossing a bridge at one end of the board, then drove all my trucks and halftracks (completely loaded, of course) off the bridge at the other end, after my opponent's infantry moved to close off my feint. I still had a sizeable amount of infantry to get off, but we didn't get to finish because Security kicked us out of the room at 00:15. We were disappointed. They said we could continue to play if we moved to a special room set aside for after-hours gaming in one of the adjacent hotels. Riigghht! Like I'm gonna tear all this stuff down, carry it two blocks, and set it all up again. We called this one a tie, but the way I was rolling I think his DF would have broke enough of my exiting infantry to keep me from winning. Drove home, got 3 hours sleep, then drove back to San Jose. I was in a fine state of mind to start the third round. The tournament format was double elimination, and there were only four 2-0 players left. Looked like just about anybody still had a chance. That's when the hammer fell. For the first 2 rounds, there was a list of recommended scenarios, which included such gems as Soldiers of Destruction and Toujours L'Audace. However, players were free to play whatever they wanted. Rounds 3 - 5 had specified scenarios, with NO deviation permitted. They were, in order, ASLUG9 Sword Play, ASLUG23.1 Patton's Prayers, and ASLUG1.1 Beyond the PAK fronts. Well, I was bummed. Sword Play pits Japanese against the British in Burma, and I'd never played either PTO rules or the Japanese before. Still, if I wanted to continue in the tournament, I had to play it. I paid $35 for this? My opponent had played the Japanese before, and I convinced my opponent to take them, arguing that itd be a walkover otherwise. He was one of the 2-0 guys, and didn't seem too concerned. As it turned out, the scenario is a gem. Very exciting. Not all PTO terrain is in effect, and each side has less than 15 units. I started off by sending the Carrier across the chaung, and it promptly Bogged. Low Ground Pressure, indeed! I also sent the mortar and a hs over, to find a position to shoot Smoke across my front as I advanced. A fateful decision. The rest of the infantry advanced using the Lee's as cover. His DFPh was ineffective, and it looked like I was doing really well. I even had an 8-0 take out a whole Jap squad in H-t-h combat! Then his 47L opened up on my Lee's and Stunned two of them. Luckily, the ATG was only two hexes away from my HS with the mortar, and they ran over and took out the crew in CC. Great! Then I discovered just how nasty T-H Heroes really are, as the three he created took out two of my three tanks. He would have got the third, too, but a well placed 24(-4) shot turned that Hero into so much sushi. As it was, I captured two plantations, but lost on CVP as he wasted my last tank in his last CCPh. So I was officially 1-2 and out. The experience of playing ftf in a tournament environment was great, although it didn't appear that much planning was done for this tournament. I think the second day's scenario selections were made the night before. There were only about 20 people in the tournament, and only 2 or 3 rated themselves as "advanced". I think that ASLUG scenarios were written to bring out the detail and intricacies of the rules, and probably were not appropriate for a tournament of this size and experience level. The second thing that bugged me was the fact that they put no time limits on the games. My game of Sword Play, which is only 4.5 turns long, took over 6 hours. And it wasn't because I had to stop and look up a rule every 5 minutes. 6 hours! I wish somebody had stepped in and called the game after 3 or 4. As it was, I was too frazzled to play another. I just wandered around the exhibit area with 1000-yard stare. I must have looked really bad, because every few minutes somebody came up to me and asked if I wanted to trade for some "rare Magic cards, only used once!" You'd think the shaved-head and tatoo would have given them a clue. It took all my will-power not to run them through with my mameluke. "Let's see how much mana it takes to fix that, scum-bag!" No offense meant, M:tG players, but it did seem to dominate the convention. And it didn't help by giving free packs of cards to everyone that registered. I did stop by the AH booth, and if appearances mean anything, AH is on the ropes. Maybe they just don't think Origins is important, or maybe it was too far from Baltimore this year, but they couldn't compete with all the RPG, Sci-Fi, Fantasy, and miniatures' companies. I think even some of the other companies which do traditional board wargaems, such as The Gamer's, had better looking merchandise and friendlier representatives. Gawd, I can't believe I've rambled on for so long. I even have a question, but I'll svae that for another post. I know the only person who's made it this far through is Tom, and that's because he hangs on every word I say. :-) It's nice to be worshiped. :-) :-) Dave ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 16:38:30 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Dave vK's Origins report > vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) wrote: I did not!! The spudmeister's putting word's in my mouth again!! :-) > Just in case any of you were worried about those marines, Captain Van did > use the facilities; he did not just relieve himself on the spot. You didn't see the carafe under the table. No way I'm gonna get up in the middle of the game. I did that against my brother once, and found half my T-34/85's had "accidently" slipped under the boards. > play against David, but I made sure to come over and interrupt his game by > chatting with him about how I played the same scenario (The Fugitives), > since that usually will get my goat when I play. :^) Thanks. Now I have someone to blame! :-) I enjoyed meeting all the names I've been seeing on e-mail over the past two years. It's funny how some people are exactly like you picture them, while others surprise you. You know, there's a REASON Tom Repetti lives in Idaho, and it's not because he likes potatoes. Heheheh. Dave ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 22:58:57 -0600 (MDT) From: Darren James Gour Subject: Re: TRIVIA PHASE >=20 > Does V24 N2 really have the articles? Does everyone have the > updated Index? :-> >=20 > So long, >=20 > JR > --- > =FE 1st 1.11 #2895 =FE Foo >=20 >=20 This issue does have three articles, First Impressions (OBA), Series=20 Replay Part 1, Guryev's Headquarters, and SL Clinic (1987 ASL Tournament). Scenarios are Gavin Take, Puma Prowls, Ranger Stronghold, and Shklov's=20 Labors Lost. I think all four were in this issue, I'm not sure as I've=20 since pulled them out. Darren Gour ----- Subject: Re: CLEARANCE QUESTIONS Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:40:40 -0600 From: joq@ks.austin.ibm.com > JR writes: > > There seem to be discrepancies in the Clearance rules that > may or may not be intentional, I can't tell. First, most of > the Clearance attempts can take place either in the MPh or > in the DFPh, but Rubble Clearance and Minefield Clearance > seem to be allowed only in the Friendly Player Turn and not > during the DFPh. > > [snip] > > So, can all Clearance attempts be made during both the MPh > and the DFPh, or only some of them? I think section B24.7 allows some Clearance attempts during both, but limits Rubble and Minefield Clearance to the Friendly Player Turn. The way I read it, there are a few common principles that apply to all Clearance attempts, but mostly they are treated individually on a case-by-case basis in the subordinate sections, B24.71-.76 > JR also asks: > > Next, the chart of Clearance DRM has "-1 for each additional > HS/crew (-2 for each squad) beyond the one required MMC." I > can't find any general rule that says a MMC is required, > however. Some of the specific rules, Rubble and roadblock, > say that a MMC is required, but some, Fire, Wire, > Minefield, and Set DC just say "Infantry," which includes > SMC. > > Is a MMC required for Clearance or can some Clearance tasks be > performed by SMCs? Must a MMC participate with a Bulldozer or can a > Bulldozer perform Clearance by itself? Since B24.71 (rubble) and B24.76 (roadblock) both specify "Good Order Infantry MMC/Bulldozer", I think that in these cases a Bulldozer can act alone. This seems to be another example of individual treatement for different types of clearance attempts. I'm very glad you brought up these questions, because I've been confused ever since a Very Experienced Player (VEP) told me that roadblock clearance could only be attempted during one's own Player Turn. Now, my ASLRB says: B24.76 ROADBLOCK: Unpinned, Good Order Infantry MMC/Bulldozer which has not moved or fired during that Player Turn (as evidenced by placement of a TI counter and the declaration of their removal attempt during their MPh/DFPh) in a hex containing a roadblock hexside may remove that roadblock as Hazardous Movement with a successful Clearance DR at the end of the CCPh (see also 29.5). Surely, "their DFPh" means the Defensive Fire Phase during the _opponent's_ Player Turn. I believe my VEP friend was interpreting MPh/DFPh as a single phase in the sense of A.15. This seems wrong, but I've been somewhat intimidated by his vastly superior knowledge of the game. :-) Perhaps, I misunderstood him. When removing wire or roadblocks, it makes a big difference whether attempts can be made once or twice per Game Turn. I'd like to know how other people on the list play it. Jack O'Quin ----- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:36:14 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: TRIVIA PHASE V24 N2 does NOT have any articles about YANKS. What it has: First Impressions: ASL Offboard Artillery Series Replay: Street of Fire (Part 2) 1987 ASL Tournament Scenarios (Gavin Take, Puma Prowls, Ranger Stronghold, and Shklov's Labors Lost). Dave PS Also some QA in the Question Box ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 8:08:45 -0400 (EDT) From: HILDEBRANB@iccgcc.cs.hh.ab.com Subject: RE: Three questions... Mark Greenman "markg@laplace.idec.sdl.usu.edu" writes: >Bret Hildebran responds to Paul F Ferraro : > >> >(3) If a 467/hmg wants do fire on a squad 3 hexes away, and wants to use >> >both the inherent FP and the HMG on the squad, may the the two be fired >> >separately (as two separate attacks on the same unit(s) in the same hex) >> >or must they be firegrouped? > >> They must be firegrouped because of the mandatory firegroup rules. The only >> way to avoid it is if it was the movement phase and the target squad was >> moving and moved into a woods hex, for example, which cost 2 MFs, you could >> fire the Heavy at the squad on the first MF and if that didn't have the >> desired effect the 467 could fire its inherent on the 2nd MF - I think >> that's the only way around mandatory firegroup and that's solely because >> it's a special case. > >Hmmm, I thought the Mandatory FG rule restricted a firegroup based upon >a particular target in a particular location. Mark is deadon with his followup - thanks for catching that, Mark. After reading his response, I figured I'd gacked my reply and upon checking the ASL bible, uh rulebook, I found I had erred. I should have answered the nice short, no, Mandatory FG rules and gone on, but no... My apologies for the confusion particularly if I misled anyone. I think I was looking for a sneaky exception and remembered the multiple ROF rules with mandatory FG's so I made one up... So the bottom line is no, the HMG and 467 can't split their fire and hit the same target seperately in the same location... Bret Hildebran hildebranb@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 20:40:35 EDT Subject: Test Since Saturday I have sent the following 5 messages to asl@...: 1. Chapter XL (PBM rules) - sent twice 2. A note on Chapter XL - saying it's at ftp sites 3. A question if anyone received Chapter XL 4. A comment on Unarmored vehicles as targets 5. An addendum on Unarmored vehicles as targets I know that one of these got through (#3), did any of the others? Cheers, Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 09:40:36 EDT From: krv@eng.tridom.com (Kevin Valerien) Subject: RE: Three questions... Greetings, > >(3) If a 467/hmg wants do fire on a squad 3 hexes away, and wants to use > >both the inherent FP and the HMG on the squad, may the the two be fired > >separately (as two separate attacks on the same unit(s) in the same hex) > >or must they be firegrouped? > > They must be firegrouped because of the mandatory firegroup rules. The only > way to avoid it is ... Hmmm. The mandatory firegroup rules are applicable to good order units/weapons. If the 467 is berserk or the hmg under ammo shortage, then I believe it is within the rules to fire the two separately. Kevin --- Kevin Valerien krv@eng.tridom.com ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:06:08 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (Part 1) Since long messages seem to get axed by the mailer, I've broken Chapter XL (PBM rules) into 10 parts. Let me know if this works. =========================snip, snip========================= XL. EXPERIMENTAL PBM RULES - PLAYTEST VERSION 0.32 ORDER OF PRESENTATION: 1. Hidden Records 6. Hidden Events 2. PBM Scenario Record Sheet 7. Variable MPh 3 . PBM Initial Set Up 8. PBM Night Rules 4. PBM Sequence of Play 9. PBEM 5. The Event Sheet XL.1 THE HONOR SYSTEM: Unlike traditional PBM systems that depend upon stock reports or random number tables to resolve DR/dr, Chapter XL uses the honor system. Under the Honor System, the mailing player makes all the DR/drs necessary to complete the current mailing. (Note 1) For example, when a player makes an attack on the IFT he will roll the dice to resolve that attack as he would normally do in a FTF game. In addition, he will also make DR/dr for all MCs, PTCs and Sniper attacks generated by that attack. Players are on their _honor_ to predesignate their fire attacks before making LOS checks (A6.11), to draw OBA chits fairly (C1.211) and to avoid examining hidden information until it is made known (XL1.21, 1.3, 6.2, 6.3). XL.2 UNIT RECORDING AND IDENTIFICATION: To save time and space, it is not necessary to include the dashes between factors on MMCs and Heroes in scenario records and correspondence. However, the "+" or "-" sign on leader counters must always be included. It is also not necessary to record the names of leader and hero counters; though players are free to do so if they so desire. On the other hand, players must always record the ID letters of MMCs and SWs. To distinguish indigenous SWs from captured SWs, the abbreviations of indigenous SWs are recorded in upper case letters, and their IDs in lower case letters, while the abbreviations for captured SWs are in lower case and their IDs in upper case letters. Japanese Half Strength units are distinguished from Full Strength units by placing an "*" before the FP number as is done in the Japanese Capabilities Chart (G1). For purposes of record keeping in PBM games only, concealment is divided into three broad categories: Inherent Concealment, Cloaked Concealment, and Gained Concealment. Each of the three categories is recorded in a different way, as is explained below. In each case, 1/2" concealment counters are distinguished from 5/8" concealment counters by using lower case ID letters for 1/2" counters and upper case ID letters for 5/8" counters. EX: German squad 4-6-7a, is recorded as 467a. Ther German leader, Sgt. Pilsi, is recorded as 8-1. LMGa is referred to as LMGa, and captured Russian LMGh is recorded as lmgH. [Ed. note: another convention for captured use could be to assign the nationality of the captured SW in lower case before the SW, i.e., rLMGh.] XL.2A INHERENT CONCEALMENT: Inherently Concealed stacks are those that set up concealed. The contents of the stacks are unknown to one's opponent (A12.12). In PBM games, Inherently Concealed stacks are represented by Inherent Concealment counters. An Inherent Concealment counter is the top "?" counter of each stack and functions in the same manner as a Cloaking counter [EXC: Inherent Concealment counters do not receive the MF and SW benefits of Cloaking counters (E1.1.42). and the number of counters they are hiding is always known.] As with Cloaking counters, Inherent Concealment counters are used in place of actual units. Therefore, more than one inherent Councealment counter can be stacked in the same hex. However, normal Overstacking penalties apply if the units they represent exceed normal stacking limits. Players must abide by the Honor System not to exceed the MF capability of any unit represented by an Inherent Concealment counter (A12.16) and to apply Overstacking penalties as they occur. In PBM records and correspondence, Inherent Concealment counters are recorded in the following manner: "?" + ID letter + number of counters hidden. (Note 2) EX: A concealed stack consists of four counters covered by concealment counter "a" and sets up inherently concealed. In the scenario records and correspondence, it would be referred to as "?a4." XL.2B CLOAKED CONCEALMENT: Cloaking counters (E1.4) are distinguished from Inherent Concealment counters by giving no indication as to the total number of counters hidden. Any unit/s that split away from a Cloaked counter immediately lose the benefits of E1.42 and are represented thereafter by an Inherent Concealment counter (E1.422). EX: If the stack in the previous example was cloaked, rather than inherently concealed, it would be referred to as "?a." XL.2C GAINED CONCEALMENT: In PBM games there is little point in trying to hide the identities of units that gain concealment (A12.121) because written records exist of their identities. Therefore, when a unit gains concealment, simply write a "?" in the status column of the Final Disposition Table (2.4). (Note 3) XL.3 HEX, CA & VERTEX IDENTIFICATION: To simplify hex, CA and vertex identification, Chapter XL will follow the code first devised for the Series Replay found in ASL Annual '90, p. 32. The code takes the format: Hex/VCA/TCA (CE and Motion status are recorded under the Status colum of the Final Disposition Table as per 2.4). Each vertex is given an ID number; with the grid coordinate being twelve o'clock, the first vertex in a clockwise direction is assigned the number 1, the second the number 2, etc. The following diagram illustrates: 6 1 /--------\ / J6 \ 5 / \ 2 \ / \ / \--------/ 4 3 EX: Please turn to page D6 of your ASLRB. Using this code, the T-34 in the top illustration would have a VCA of 4 and a TCA of 3. Its location and CAs are recorded as follows: F5/4/3. XL.4 SIDE AND DIRECTION IDENTIFICATION: By common practice, random direction counters, such as Sniper and OBA counters, are placed so that the side numbered "1" matches the hexside containing the grid coordinates. When such a counter is not being used in a particular hex, sides and directions are determined as if such counter did exist in that hex. XL.5 STACKS: When recording the contents of a stack of counters in any correspondence or record sheet, the contents are listed in the order thehy occur in the stack, with the top counter listed first. A unit and any SW, Gun, horse, boat, skis, motorcycle or bike it may possess or ride are to be separated from other units in that stack by a slash. (Note 4) Each stack is also given a stack ID, which is represented by an uppercase letter. Stack IDs can serve as a type of shorthand, freeing players from having to write the identity of all the units in a stack. Stack ID letters are also necessary when one or more of the players are using transparency overlays (XL.6). When more than one nationality has units in a hex, each stack is listed separately, with its own stack ID. EX: A Finnish player has a stack of two Sissi and one first line Finnish squad. The top unit is squad 838a and it is wearing skis. The second unit in the stack is squad 648d and it is without skis. The third unit is the second Sissi squad, 838c which is carrying skis. The stack would be recorded as follows: A: 838a, skis/648d/skis, 838c. *XL.6 TRANSPARENCY OVERLAYS: Few players desire to set up their PBM games anew every time they send or receive a mailing. In addition, many players do not have a safe place to leave games set up for long periods of time. For such players, the use of transparency overlays may be the best solution. The only extra materials needed are enough transparency overlays to cover your boards; water-based transparency markers, and a non-permanent adhesive to secure the transparencies to the mapboards. With a black marker, write a description of all terrain and fortification counters in each hex they occur. The black marker can also be used to record notes and other miscellaneous information on the board. Using a blue marker for the Axis and a green marker for the Allies, write each stack's ID letter in the hex they are located. A red marker can be used to record the location of all temporary informational counters currently in use. It can also be used to signify each stack containing unit/s whose status is not normal by placing a red circle around the stack ID letter. Between mailings, store the transparencies in a safe place. XL.7 ERRORS: When a player realizes that his opponent has made an error, he must correct that error and notify his opponent in the immediately subsequent mailing. If he fails to correct the error, play is considered to have progressed past the point of commission (A.2) Errors are corrected according to whether they are incorrect or illegal actions. XL.7A INCORRECT ACTIONS: An incorrect action is an action that is legal, but improperly implemented. For example, a fire attack that was resolved with the wrong DRM or a movement order that incorrectly calculated PP or MF/MP Entrance Costs. When such errors are found, the outcome is corrected to conform as closely to the opponent's original intent as possible. EX: Please turn to page A18 of your ASLRB. Assume the squad in hex Y6 while carrying the HMG, was given movement orders to move to Z5, AA6, BB5 by your opponent. Noting that a MMC has an IPC of 3 and the HMG has 4PP, you discover the squad is 1 MF short of being able to enter into the woods hex BB5. You consider having the squad declare Double Time as he moves. This would still, however, not allow him to enter BB5, becasue CX lowers IPC by 1, once again leaving the squad one MF short. Therefore, the only way to correct this error is to end the squad's movement in AA6 (the last hex he had sufficient MF to enter). XL.7B ILLEGAL ACTIONS: An illegal action is one that is explicitly not allowed by the rules. When such errors occur, the outcome of that action is cancelled. If such an error occurs as a result of a fire attack, the units that were to have made the attack are still considered to have fired for all purposes as per LOS errors (A6.11). EX: An American player fires a BAZ as HEAT at a German stack in a woods hex. This attack is illegal; C8.31 explicitely states that "HEAT may only be fired at a vehicle or Gun or at Infantry/Cavalry behind a wall or in a building/rubble/pillbox." If the German player catches the error, his units in the woods hex will not be affected. However, the American's DR could still evoke an adverse effect on his own units, such as Sniper attack, B# or Backblast. XL.8 BERSERK CHARGES: In FTF games the ATTACKER chooses which hex a berserk unit will charge when it is equidistant from two or more known enemy stacks (A15.43). To allow the ATTACKER this choice in a PBM game would require an additional mailing or phone call. To avoid this delay the following procedure is used to determine which hex is charged. First, examine the berserk unit's complete movement orders to learn if its ordered path of movement takes it closer to one of the hexes than the others. If it does, the berserk unit charges that hex. If it is still equidistant, random selection (A.9) is used to determine which hex is charged. EX: Please turn to page A16 of your ASLRB. Assume the Russian 527 in the top illustration is given movement orders to move first to hex S8 and then to hex S9. As it moves into hex S8, it is fired upon by one of the German squads and goes berserk. In its present location in S8 it is equidistant from both R6 and T9. AS a result there is a question as to which hex the 527 will charge. The German player examines the rest of the 527's movement orders and discovers that it is ordered to move into hex S9. Hex S9 is closer to hex T9 than to hex R6, there fore the 527 charges hex T9. If the 527 had movement orders to move only to hex S8, random selection would have been used to determine which hex would have been charged. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:07:06 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part2) *1. HIDDEN RECORDS 1.1 HIDDEN RECORD SHEET: ASL requires the hiding of a substantial amount of information: the contents of concealed stacks, HIP units, fortifications, armored leaders, bore sighted hexes, etc. In FTF games this presents little problem, but in PBM games it is a significant challenge. The problem created by PBM is this: How can players learn of or confirm this hidden information without having to resort to a phone call or waiting for the net mailing to proceed with play? In response to this problem, the Hidden Record Sheet was created. (See Appendix.) 1.11 PREPARATION FOR USE: The Hidden Record Sheet is not ready for use as is; it must first be prepared for use. Since the Hidden Record Sheet is smaller than the 8.5 X 11 inch size that is created by a copier, players must cut around the outside edge to remove excess margin. Having done this, fold the right side of the sheet over so that the column labeled "Contents" is covered, but the column labeled "ID" is still visible. Now open the sheet up again and cut along each horizontal line on the right hand side of the sheet to the fold that was just produced. This will produce flaps that will cover and hide the information that will be recorded in the "Contents" column. Once the desired information is recorded in the "Contents" column, each individual flap is folded over that information and held in place by a removable adhesive. (Note 5) This method hides the information from the opponent, but still allows him easy access. The Hidden Record Sheet is prepared and filled out during the intial set up and sent to one's opponent to be kept by him throughout the game. This means that a side record of all the information placed on this sheet, including IDs, should be made for one's own records before it is sent. 1.2 CONCEALMENT: During initial set up, players record under the "ID" column of the Hidden Record Sheet the ID letter of each of his Inherent Concealment (XL.2A) and Cloaked (XL.2B) counters. (In the unlikely event that a side has both Inherent Concealment and Cloaked counters in play at the same time, players should take care that no two "?" counters with the same ID are used.) In the "Contents" column each player records the identity of _one_ of the units represented by that counter. This counter will be used for purposes of verification (A12.11) and detection (A12.15). (In PBM games, random selection is not used to determine the unit revealed for detection purposes.) On the very next line, record the contents of the whole stack following the conventions of XL.5. If the counter represents a dummy stack, then both lines under the "Contents" column are left blank. [Ed. Dummies could also be denoted as "Dummies" in the "Contents" column to reduce confusion.] 1.21 CONCEALMENT LOSS: When an action results in the removal or detection of an Inherent Concealment or Cloaking counter, the first cover of that stack on the Hidden Record Sheet is opened. If the first cover contains a unit counter, the stack is not a dummy and the second cover may be opened if the action called for concealment loss in that hex. (If the action calls only for verification (A12.11) or detection (A12.15), the second cover is left closed.) When there is no unit recorded under the first cover, the counter is a dummy and players can ignore the second cover because it will be blank as well. 1.22 CLOAKING BOX USE: In FTF games units using boats (E5.123), gliders (E8.1) and parachutes (E9.1) have their identities hidden by the cloaking box. In PBM games, write the counter's ID letter in the ID columns of a Hidden Record Sheet and record the counters it is hiding in the "Contents" column. When it is time for your opponent to learn the identities of these units, he simply opens the cover flap. 1.3 HIP: The locations and contents of HIP counters along with all hidden scenario information is recorded on the Hidden Record Sheet during initial set up. Each HIP stack of units is assigned a concealment counter, whose ID letter will be used to identify that HIP stack. In addition, by assigning each HIP stack a "?" during initial set up, the need to update the Hidden Record Sheet is avoided when HIP loss results in the stack being placed with a "?" (A11.19, A12.15, .152, .153, 12.32, .34). Whenever a HIP stack is placed on board under a "?," use the "?" assigned to it during initial set up. Record the "?" location and number of counters it is hiding on the Final Disposition Table. Fortifications, armor leaders, and bore-sighted hexes are not unit stacks, as a result they are not assigned a "?" counter. Rather, they are assigned ID numbers. (Note 6) Both types of IDs are recorded in the "ID" column of the Hidden Record Sheet and the information to be hidden is recorded in the "Contents" column. When a player is forced to reveal HIP information, he always refers to the "?" ID or ID number. By so doing, his opponent can confirm the information given him by opening the appropriate flap on the Hidden Record Sheet. EX: Please turn to page A17 of your ASLRB and look at the illustration in the right hand column. Assume that the German leader is a 8-1, that the Russian units are HIP and that the MMG has bore-sighted hex H6. Also assume that the Russian HIP stack has been assigned "?o" (giving it an ID of C) and the boresighted hex the ID of 1. When the Russian player records his attack on the Event Sheet (XL5.0), the "Action" column of the Event Sheet should read: MMG in J5 (ID C) defensive first fires on 8-1, 467, in H6 (Bore-sighted hex: ID 1). 1.4 UPDATES: Normally the only updating that is needed is when one or more of the units, represented by an Inherent Concealment counter, split off from the mother counter to form a new Inherent Concealment counter. When this occurs, players are to send the new contents of both the original "?" and the newly created "?" to their opponents on folded self-stick removable notes. Players should purchase one blue and one yellow pad. On the back side of a blue note he records the identity of the one unit he desires to be used for verification (A12.11) and detection (A12.15) purposes. He folds the blue note over so that the information is hidden and the note's adhesive seals it shut. Finally, he writes the counter's ID on the outside. He then does the same to the yellow note, but records the identities of all the units represented by the "?" on the back side of that note. He mails these to his opponent who places them in a safe place until they are needed. (Note 7). ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:08:21 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part 3) *2. PBM SCENARIO RECORD SHEET 2.1 The PBM Scenario Record Sheet is a playing aid designed to aid players in the recording of important information pertaining to their current game. It is designed to be updated frequently, so all information should be recorded in pencil. The current Scenario Record Sheet is to be included in each mailing. After several turns of use, it may need to be replaced by a fresh sheet. When beginning a fresh sheet, the information from the old sheet should be transferred. The Scenario Record Sheet is divided into three main sections. Each section is described in detail below. 2.2 SCENARIO INFORMATION: The top half of the first page provides an area for recording much the same information that is found on the Scenario Aid Card of Chapter J's divider. In the area for recording information pertaining to the environment, always include the wind direction, even if there is presently no wind (one never knows when the wind force will increase). If one of the environmental conditions does not apply to the present scenario, (for example, NVR during a day scenario) write NA in the blank. In the area for recording information pertaining to OBA, radio contact and battery access are indicated by placing an "X" under their respective headings. The absence of an "X" under both headings indicates the that neither radio contact or battery access has been obtained. Under "Type" indicate the type of OBA that is being used by writing "FFE" followed by the type: blank for normal FFE, "SM" for smoke, "H" for harassing fire, "B" for barrage, or "CB" for creeping barrage. EX: FFE(H)=Harassing Fire, FFE(SM-H)=Dispersed Smoke. 2.3 TERRAIN, FORTIFICATION & INFORMATIONAL COUNTERS: ASL makes use of large numbers of terrain, fortification and informational counters which players need to record. The bottom half of the PBM Scenario Record Sheet provides an area for this. Informational counters that describe the status of units are not to be recorded in this area. Status counters are to be recorded on the Final Disposition Table (XL2.4). When one of these counters is removed from the board, players can either erase its record and so use the line again, or simply draw a line through it. When recording the presence of a Trail Break or Breach counter, be sure to include the side/s of the hex it pertains to as per XL.4. 2.4 FINAL DISPOSITIONS: In the Final Dispositions Table, the left side is used to record the location and status of Axis units and the right side those of the Allied units. One line is used for each unit, with the top unit of each stack recorded first. The recording of hex locations and their contents follow the conventions of A2.2, XL.2, XL.3, XL.5. Normally, fortification counters are recorded only on the Informational Counters Table. However, when a fortification counter occurs in the same hex as a stack of units, it must also be recorded in the Final Disposition Table. Doing so indicates which units are IN the fortification in question. Status counters are recorded under the Status & Notes column. As the contents, order, and status of stacks changes during play, it is necessary to erase old information and replace it with new. Therefore, all information on the Final Disposition Table should be recorded in pencil. (Note 8) 2.41 INHERENT CONCEALMENT: During initial set up, the presence of inherently concealed stacks is noted by recording their stack ID, their location, and by writing a "?" followed by the counter's ID and the number of units hidden (XL.2A). 2.42 CLOAKED CONCEALMENT: During initial set up, the presence of cloaked stacks is noted by recording their stack ID in the "ID" column, their location, and by writing a "?" followed by the cloaking counter's ID (XL.2B). 2.43 GAINED CONCEALMENT: As units gain concealment during play, concealment status is recorded in the "Status" column (XL.2C). *2.4 DUPLICATE RECORDS: Mailings occasionally do get lost or destroyed in the mail. Therefore it is a good precaution to maintain a duplicate PBM Scenario Record Sheet, which is kept in a safe place. It is best for each player to reproduce a "personal" copy on colored paper and a "game" copy on white paper to help differentiate the two. Each "personal" copy is updated along with the "game" copy whenever a mailing is sent or received. ________________________________________________________________ _ID_|_Hex & CA_|__Unit__|__Status & Notes_______________________ ____|__________|________|_______________________________________ _A__|_2M1______|_?s3____|_______________________________________ ____|__________|________|_______________________________________ _C__|_2J1______|_8-0/___|__?____________________________________ ____|__________|_467g/__|__?____________________________________ ____|__________|_LMGa___|_______________________________________ ____|__________|_467d___|__?____________________________________ ____|__________|________|_______________________________________ _D__|_2O5______|_Fox2S__|_______________________________________ ____|__________|_9-2/___|_______________________________________ ____|_-/6______|_HMGa___|_______________________________________ ____|__________|_467e/__|__Brkn,_DM_____________________________ ____|__________|_467c___|_______________________________________ EX: In the above table, ID "A" represents a stack containing one Inherent Concealment hiding 3 units (XL2.41). ID "C" represents a stack that has "gained" concealment since the game began (XL2.43). ID "D" represents a stack IN a foxhole in the third level hill hex 2O5. Note the CA HMGa (XL.3) and the broken/DM status of squad "e" in stack D. Note the use of slashes throughout to indicate possession (XL.5) *3. PBM INITIAL SET UP 3.1 Initial set ups in ASL fit into three categories: On Board/Off Board, Dual On or Off Board, and Simultaneous. The method by which each is handled is described below. 3.11 ON BOARD/OFF BOARD SET UP: When the scenario calls for one player to set up on board and the other to set up off board, the following procedure is used. The player who is to set up first, takes a Scenario Record Sheet (XL2.0), records pertinent scenario information in the first section of that sheet (XL2.2) and his initial set up in the Final Disposition (XL2.4). Next, he records all his hidden information and units on as many Hidden Record Sheets as necessary. Players should be sure to make a personal copy of all information they place in these Hidden Record Sheets. At this point, he mails both the Scenario Record Sheet and Hidden Record Sheet to his opponent. Upon receiving the first players initial set up, the second player stores the Hidden Record Sheet sent to him in a safe place. Then he completes his half of the Scenario Record Sheet and his own Hidden Record Sheet. The second player then checks the scenario card to seee if he or his opponent moves first. If he moves first, he completes his first RPh, PFPh and MPh as per XL4.11. If the first player moves first, the second player completes only his first RPh. The second player now sends the Scenario Record Sheet, his Hidden Record Sheet/s and his first actions for the initial player turn. Play now continues according to the PBM Standard Sequence of Play (XL4.1). 3.12 DUAL ON OR OFF BOARD SET UP: When both players set up off board, the initial set up procedure is the same as described in XL3.11. However, if both players set up on board the initial set up procedures are more complicated and must follow the procedure described here. The player who sets up first completes the Scenario Record and Hidden Record Sheets as in XL3.11. [EXC: For this first initial set up mailing only, all fortifications are recorded as HIP.] His opponent, upon receiving this mailing does the same. However, only his units that are out of the LOS of KNOWN enemy units gain concealment. In addition, only those fortifications greater than 16 hexes from the nearest Good Order enemy unit are "placed" on board as HIP (EXC: E1.16, G.2). The second player now sends this information to the first player. Upon receiving this mailing, the first player checks LOS and gains concealment on all his stacks that are out of the LOS of Good Order enemy units. (For purposes of initial set up only, the second player's units that just gained concealment are considered KNOWN.) He also reveals to his opponent any fortifications that lose their HIP by virtue of being within 16 hexes of an enemy unit (EXC: E1.16, G.2). Finally, he sends this information back to the second player, who determines whether he moves first or not. If he moves first, he sends his first mailing (XL4.11). If he moves second, he sends only his RPh for the first player turn. Play now continues according to the PBM Standard Sequence of Play (XL4.1). 3.13 SIMULTANEOUS: When the scenario calls for both sides to set up simultaneously, detemine which of the above procedures best fit the scenario and agree upon a common mailing date. Both players then complete their first mailing as "player one" in above procedures. If both sides set up on board, the player to move SECOND gives concealment status on any of his eligible units, reveals the location and identities of any HIP fortification that lose their HIP status and mails his RPh for the first player turn. Upon receiving this mailing, the player to move FIRST gains concealment and reveals HIP fortifications and mails his RPh, PFPh and MPh for the first player turn. Play now continues according to the PBM Standard Sequence of Play (XL4.1). 3.14 REINFORCEMENTS: When a player receives reinforcements, his first Event of that mailing (after rolling for provisional reinforcements) is to set up his off board forces entering play that turn (A2.51). The player assigns the set up an Event Number and writes "Off board set up of stack ___ in hex ___ " in the "Action" column of the Event Sheet (XL5.1, XL5.4). He also records the stack ID, hex location, and contents of each off board stack on the Final Disposition Table (XL2.4). Because reinforcements enter play concealed (A12.12), their identities are recorded as per XL1.2. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:09:41 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part 4) *4. PBM SEQUENCE OF PLAY 4.1 STANDARD SEQUENCE OF PLAY: Unlike in FTF games, a Player Turn of a PBM game is divided into mailings, rather than phases. Phases become subdivisions of mailings, with each mailing containing one or more phases. The Standard Sequence of Play for a Player Turn consists of three mailings, each explained below. Because mistakes are so disruptive and time consuming in PBM games, players are urged to refer to the Advanced Sequence of Play Chart found on the back of Chapter D's divider as they complete their mailings. 4.11 MAILING ONE: Mailing one is made by the ATTACKER and consists of: 1. His RtPh from previous Player Turn 2. His CCPh from previous Player Turn 3. The RPh 4. The PFPh 5. The MPh 4.12 MAILING TWO: Mailing two is made by the DEFENDER and consists of: 1. The MPh (Defensive First Fire) 2. The DFPh 3. Rout Prevention (XL6.31) 4.13 MAILING THREE: Mailing three is made by the ATTACKER and consists of: 1. The AFPh 2. His RtPh 3. His APh 4. His CCPh 5. His RPh for the next Player Turn *5. THE EVENT SHEET 5.1 Every action by a unit and/or player that takes place in a game is called an Event. Generally, an Event is said to have occurred whenever a player moves, places or removes a counter, rolls a die, or makes a declaration. Use the PBM Event Sheet to maintain complete records of these events. The Event Sheet is made up of nine columns on which information can be recorded. Not every Event will require the use of all nine columns. In such a case the unneeded columns are left blank. A description of the use of each column follows: 5.2 EVENT COMPLETION CHECK MARK: An Event is not considered completed until it is resolved on both players' boards. To signify this, the player who receives a mailing places a check mark in the far left column. It is important that players get in the habit of doing this. Events are not always recorded in the order they are resolved (XL6.31) and the resolution of other Events can be delayed for several mailings (XL7.12) 5.3 PHASE: In this column, the player identifies the current Phase. This is done by writing the abbreviation of the phase in question followed by the current turn number and a lower case "a" or "b" (with the "a" corresponding to the first Player Turn of each Turn and "b" to the last Player Turn). EX: If it is the MPh of the second Player Turn of Turn 5, the following would be written: MPh5b. 5.4 EVENT NUMBER: To aid in the identification of different Events, each Event is given an Event Number. Events are to be numbered in the order they are recorded, not in the order they are resolved (XL6.31). 5.5 ACTION: In this column, a brief description of each Event is recorded. It is important that players include a description and the location of the units taking part in or being recipients of a particular action. [EXC: If stack IDs (XL.5) are being used as a shorthand, players are free to substitute the ID letter for a detailed description of each unit as long as all units in that hex take part in or are recipients of the actions.] EX: A German stack consisting of LMGa and 467a in 1D3 fires at a moving Russian stack consisting of 447x in 1D4. This action would be recorded as follows: "LMGa, 467a in 1D3 fires on 447x in 1D4." If stack IDs were being used as a shorthand, and the German stack's ID was A and the Russian's was G, then the following could be used instead: "A in 1D3 fires on G in 1D4." 5.6 OTHER: Under the "Range" column record the range, under the "FP/Ammo" column record the total FP or the type of Ammo being used if the Event was a TH attempt. Under the "DRM" column record the _total_ DRM and under the "DR/dr" column record the die roll. When making DR/dr in PBM games, it works best if players roll only the number of dice requested for each Event, rather than rolling three dice as suggested in A.1. In addition, when listing a DR for any Event other than random selection, record the dr of the colored die _first._ To follow the conventions of A.9 as closely as possible, random selection DRs are to be listed in the order of darkness of their color. Finally, record the results, if any, of that action. When the results of an action require subsequent DR/dr, players are reminded that each DR/dr constitues a separate action and is thus a separate Event with its own line on the Event Sheet. EX: A fire attack results in a NMC against a stack of three squads, there will be three additional Events recorded on the Event Sheet as each of the three squads takes a NMC. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:10:50 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part 5) *6. HIDDEN EVENTS 6.1 To recreate the feel of FTF games as closely as possible it is necessary to hide some or all of the information contained in four types of Events (movement, APh movement, rout prevention, and CC) _until_ that information is needed for the resolution of the Event. There are two methods by which Events can be hidden: (1) Movement Order Sheets, and (2) Hidden Event Notes. Each method is detailed below. 6.2 MOVEMENT ORDER SHEET: To recreate the sequential, hex by hex, movement found in a FTF game, a Movement Order Sheet has been provided. When a player desires to hide his movement, rather than writing his movement orders in the Action column of the Event Sheet, he writes: "See Movement Sheet #__." (Each Movement Sheet must be numbered because more than one sheet may be required to complete a game.) He then records his movement orders on the Movement Order Sheet. The Movement Order Sheet consists of three vertical tables on which the moving player records his Movement Orders. Each table consists of three columns. The Event Number is recorded in the first column, the actual movement order is written in the second column, and the MP/MF expenditure to that point is recorded in the third column. When recording movement orders, first write the identity of the moving unit/s, any special type of movement being used (Assault, Double Time, etc.) and the starting hex. On the very next line write the identity of the first hex movedd into and the total MF or MP used to that point. A separate line is used for each hex entered or action taken. Continue moving down, line by line, until that unit/stack's movement is completed. If bypass movement is being used, be sure to note this fact as well as the sides of the hex it is using as per A2.2. CAs should be noted on the first line, any time there is a change, and again on the last line. When ordering a Bounding First Fire Attack, write down all the pertinent information that would normally occur on the Event Sheet when a fire attack is resolved. Because the ordering and resolution of a Bounding First Fire Attack requires so much information, more than one line will probably have to be used. To indicate that there is another line in use, write "..." at the end of a line. (Note 9) EX: Please turn to page B27 in your ASLRB. Assume that the squad in the example is not broken and that it is going to use double time movement to move INTO the foxhole in D7, then exit that foxhole and move INTO the foxhole in D8. The squad's movement orders would be recorded as follows: E#____Movement Orders___________________________________MP/MF__ 1 467 in D6 Double Times INTO foxhole in D7 2 INTO foxhole in D8 5 _______________________________________________________________ 6.21 SEARCHES: When the moving player desires a unit to Search (A12.152), he writes "Search" followed by the hexes he desires searched in the order of their priority on the Movement Orders Sheet. The search dr is _not_ resolved at this time (note 10). When the DEFENDER reads a search order on his opponent's Movement Orders Sheet, he assigns the search attempt an Event Number, records a description of the search in the "Action" column, calculates and records all drms, and makes the dr. He then records the results of that search in the "Results" column of the Event Sheet in the order of priority the ATTACKER gave. The DEFENDER is also to resolve any Search Casualty dr's (A12.154) that may have resulted as separate Events. EX: As his last movement order a Russian 447 in 2U9 was given the order to search hexes 2T8 and 2V8. Upon seeing this order, the German player resolves the search attempt. Rolling a 6, the German player records that the Russian unit successfully searched hex 2T8 (6 - 1 for one HS > one HS = 5 hexes not successfully searched). If a 5 or less had been rolled, both hexes would have been successfully searched. 6.22 MOVEMENT ORDERS RESOLUTION: Once all movement orders have been recorded, the ATTACKER folds the Movement Order Sheet so that Table 3 covers Table 2 and 2 covers 1. Upon receiving the ATTACKER'S mailing, the DEFENDER carefully opens the first fold of the Movement Orders Sheet and covers Table 1 with a sheet of paper so that all Movement Orders are covered. He then slides the sheet of paper down to reveal the first order. After resolving that order, he slides the sheet down again to reveal the next order. He continues to do this until all the Movement Orders of the Mailing are resolved or Movement Order Delay is invoked (7.12). As he resolves each order, the DEFENDER should place a check mark in the E# column to signify that order has been resolved. By doing this, one copy of the Movement Orders Sheet can be used in several mailings by both players. To resolve the first Event of a mailing, players simply move their cover sheet down until they come to the first unchecked Event Number. 6.221 GUN DUELS: When the DEFENDER makes a First Fire attack against an enemy AFV with one of his own Guns or AFVs, and that attack hits _and_ adversely affects that AFV, a Gun Duel check is made. To make a Gun Duel check, the DEFENDER reveals the very next line on the Movement Order Sheet and reads if the ATTACKER'S AFV had been given Bounding First Fire (D3.3) orders. If it had such orders and the target of that Bounding First Fire attack was a unit that had fired on the AFV during this current MP expenditure, a Gun Duel (C2.2401) had taken place between the ATTACKER'S AFV and the DEFENDER'S unit that had both fired at and been fired upon by that AFV. Comparing his unit's first TH# and DR with the AFV's, the DEFENDER determines which unit fired first. If his opponent's AFV fired first, that attack is now resolved and recorded on the Event Sheet. If the AFV's target was the unit whose attack caused the Gun Duel check and the AFV's attack was suck that it destroyed or otherwise prevented that unit from hitting the AFV in the first place, then the attack that caused the Gun Duel check is canceled and the ATTACKER'S AFV is unharmed. EX: A German Pz IV expends one MP to enter into a hex and the Russian player decides to attack. His first T-34 fires and misses, but his second T-34 hits and destroys the Pz IV. Because he hit and adversely affected the German AFV, the Russian player checks if a Gun Duel had taken place. He discovers that the Pz IV had been given Bounding First Fire orders, firing at the Russian T-34 that had fired first. As a result, a Gun Duel had taken place between that first T-34 and the Pz IV. Comparing the TH# and DR the Russian player finds he had lost that Gun Duel and that the German player's AFV had destroyed his first T-34. Even though the first T-34 was destroyed, the Pz IV is not spared from its fate because the shot that had destroyed it came from the second T-34. However, if the Pz IV's target had been the second T-34, it might have avoided destruction had it won that Gun Duel and prevented that T-34 from hitting it. If the German AFV had been given orders to fire on a third Russian unit, no Gun Duel takes place because the third Russian unit had not fired on the Pz IV during the current MP expenditure. 6.23 APh MOVEMENT: In certain situations it is desirable to hide from your opponent the hexes you will advance into until after he has completed his RtPh. This can be easily done by writing the advancement orders for those units on the Movement Orders Sheet. 6.3 HIDDEN EVENT NOTES: To hide the information of non-movement Events, self-stick removable notes are used. Players record the information needing to be hidden on the back side of such notes. (Players are urged to use a note that is not blue or yellow to distinguish it from those being used for Hidden Record updates.) Then the note is folded over so that its adhesive seals it shit. Finally, the corresponding Event Number is written on the outside. 6.31 ROUT PREVENTION: In PBM games, unlike FTF games, the DEFENDER is unable to drop his concealment as the ATTACKER moves his units in the RtPh (A10.533). Therefore if the DEFENDER wants to prevent the ATTACKER from choosing a particular rout path or to prevent him from routing altogether, he must anticipate the ATTACKER'S rout paths and predesignate which of his units will drop their concealment. Rout Prevention is predesignated in the same mailing as that for the DFPh. After the last DFPh action (see Sequence of Play Chart 4.12), the DEFENDER writes "RPh" in the "Phase" column of the Event Sheet, assigns an Event Number to each order, and writes "Concealment Dropped" in the "Action" column. The identities of the units and their hexes are to be hidden by recording that information on folded self-stick removable notes. The ATTACKER is not to view the identities or locations until the beginning of his RtPh. (This means that Events are not necessarily numbered and recorded on the Event Sheet in the order they will be resolved. As a result, players must always examine past mailings to see if there are any unchecked and therefore unresolved Events.) This is the only RtPh action that can be ordered in this mailing. 6.32 CC: To resolve CC, the ATTACKER predesignates all his attacks, filling in all the needed information on the Event Sheet except the DR and result, these he records on folded self-stick removable notes. Upon receiving the ATTACKER'S mailing, the DEFENDER predesignates and resolves his attacks on the Event Sheet. He then opens the appropriate note to see the results of the attacks against his units. 6.31 SEQUENTIAL CC: By necessity, the ATTACKER in PBM games must always predesignate his CC attacks. This means certain changes must be made to the procedures of 6.32 when sequential CC occurs. In situations where the ATTACKER has the first attack in sequential CC, he both orders (not predesignates) and resolves each of his attacks one at a time on the Event Sheet. When the DEFENDER is able to make the first attack in sequential CC, the ATTACKER predesignates his attacks on the Event Sheet and records his DRs on folded self-stick removable notes. However, he is to leave the results unrecorded, to be filled in by the DEFENDER. This is done because the results might be nullified or changed by the DEFENDER'S actions. 6.322 vs. VEHICLE: In PBM games, CC attacks vs. vehicles must be predesignated as per XL6.32, but the results take effect sequentially, alternating between sides as in FTF games. 6.323 AMBUSH: In situations in which an Ambush can occur, the ATTACKER makes Ambush dr's for each side. If he wins, he follows the procedures of XL6.321; if he loses, he follows the procedures of XL6.32. 6.324 PRISONERS: If the ATTACKER has prisoners attempting to eliminate their captor, he orders (not predesignates) and resolves their attacks on the Event Sheet. The CC orders of prisoners are issued before any other attacks in that location as per XL6.32. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:21:11 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part 6) *7 VARIABLE MPh 7.1 VARIABLE MPh: To allow the moving player the opportunity to search for concealed and HIP units before having to commit the bulk of his force to movement, and to react to unforeseen dangers that may arise during a MPh, a Variable MPh is offered. The same three basic mailings are retained. However, the number of mailings in which movement orders can be issued and resolved varies from turn to turn. No longer do all movement orders have to be issued and resolved in one mailing. The two Events which result in a Variable MPh are as follows: (1) When the ATTACKER uses the option of declaring a Scouting Mission (7.11) in his first Movement Mailing, (each mailing in which movement orders are issued is referred to as a Movement Mailing in these rules), and (2) when Movement Order Delay (7.12) takes place. (Note 11) 7.11 SCOUTING MISSION: As his first action of the MPh, the ATTACKER has the option of declaring a Scouting Mission. Scouting Missions can only be declared in the first Movement Mailing of each Player Turn. All units that move in a Movement Mailing in which a Scouting Mission has been declared are considered to be on a Scouting Mission. The declaration of a Scouting Mission has two effects. (1) The ATTACKER is allowed to issue Movement Orders to only a portion of his eligible units in the Movement Mailing. His remaining units are held in reserve pending the outcome of the Scouting Mission. The remaining units _must_ be issued Movement Orders in the next movement Mailing. If they are not issued Movement Orders at that time, they forfeit all movement for that turn [EXC: Movement Order Delay 7.12]. (2) Units on a Scouting Mission are less prone to Movement Order Delay (7.12). Whenever HIP units/minefields/fortifications are discovered or attack during any Movement Mailing in which a Scouting Mission has been declared, the movement orders of subsequent moving units are not delayed. (Note 12) 7.12 MOVEMENT ORDER DELAY: To prevent the unrealistic occurrence of units blindly moving into harm's way (as often will happen when the Standard PBM Sequence of Play is being used), all or part of a unit's movement orders can be delayed and a new Movement Mailing added to the Player Turn. If an Event takes place that causes a Movement Order Delay, the currently moving unit freezes in its current location after undergoing all First Fire Attacks [EXC: Units that take part in a Berserk, Human Wave, Cavalry, or Banzai charge do not freeze in their current location; rather, they continue to move to the completion of their charge.] In addition, during any non-Scouting Mission mailing (7.11), when a HIP unit/minefield/fortification is discovered or attacks (see cases 1 & 2 below), the movement orders of all subsequent units will be delayed and left unexamined/unresolved as well. Whenever Movement Order Delay occurs, the DEFENDER is not to examine nor check as completed the remaining delayed movement orders; rather he is to make a notation on the Event Sheet that a delay has occurred and sends the mailing back to the ATTACKER. Upon receiving his delayed orders, the ATTACKER is free to modify or cancel those orders as he desires. He can even issue new movement orders to eligible units who had not been issued movement orders yet. Because Movement Orders can be modified, they should be written in pencil. Movement Order Delay occurs during any Movement Mailing when one of the following Events takes place. (1) The currently moving unit/s is attacked by a HIP unit/minefield. (2) The currently moving unit/s discovers a HIP unit/fortification. (3) The currently moving unit/s is ordered to move into a hex containing a Minefield, RF, Fire Lane, FFE, or Starshell/IR counter that had been placed on board previously during the _current_ Movement Mailing. The moving unit/s are not moved into such a hex, but rather freeze in their current location. EX: A Scouting Mission has been declared and one of the ATTACKER'S units moves into a HIP minefield. The unit survives the minefield attack unhurt, but rather than blindly continuing with its written Movement Orders, Movement Order Delay occurs (case 1) and the unit freezes on top of the minefield. If the current Movement Mailing had not been a Scouting Mission, the mailing would have ended and been returned to the ATTACKER. The ATTACKER would then have the option to revise his unused movement orders as he saw fit. However, because a Scouting Mission had been declared, the Movement Orders of subsequent units are not delayed and the mailing continues. One of those subsequent units is ordered to move into the same minefield hex as the previous unit. Rather than moving into that hex and suffering a minefield attack, it freezes in its current location (case 3). 7.13 MPh Completion: The MPh is completed at the end of any Movement Mailing in which neither a Scouting Mission nor Movement Order Delay occurred. The DFPh now begins and play continues as it does in the Standard PBM Sequence of Play. 7.2 ACCELERATED PLAY: There are a number of scenarios in which combat normally does not occur for the first few Player Turns. The result is a string of mailings by the DEFENDER that read "DFPh: No Action Taken," wasting both time and postage. The Variable MPh rules offer a solution to this problem. Players must first agree beforehand that Accelerated Play will be used in their upcoming game. If they so agree, the ATTACKER has the option of declaring "Accelerated Play" as his first Event of his mailing during any Player Turn he anticipates his opponent will be unable to make any Defensive Fire attacks. This declaration informs the DEFENDER that the DFPh will be skipped over, and the ATTACKER will be recording his COMPLETE Player Turn in one mailing. (The DEFENDER records his DFPh actions as his first actions of the next mailing.) Accelerated Play ends when the DEFENDER makes any Defensive Fire attack. If it is a Defensive First Fire attack ending Accelerated Play, Movement Order Delay occurs at the completion of all First Fire attacks against the currently moving unit/s. Play now continues using the normal sequence for mailings. Remaining MPh, AFPh, RtPh, CCPh, and RPh orders are not to be resolved or examined by the DEFENDER and the ATTACKER is free to reissue new orders during the appropriate mailing. If it is an attack made during the DFPh that ends Accelerated Play, the DEFENDER completes all his other DFPh attacks and sends the mailing back to the ATTACKER without examining his AFPh, RtPh, CCPh, and RPh orders. The ATTACKER is now free to reissue new orders for each of these Phases. *8 PBM NIGHT RULES 8.1 If players choose to PBM a night scenario, they must use the Variable MPh (XL7.0). 8.2 STARSHELLS: In PBM games, the DEFENDER'S units that must fire their starshells at the beginning of the enemy MPh (E1.1921) do so by predesignating those attempts in the last mailing of the previous Player Turn. To prevent his opponent from knowing until the beginning of the MPh which of his units attempted and possibly fired starshells, the only information to be recorded on the Event Sheet is the Event Number, Phase, and the word "Starshell" in the "Action" column. All other information is to be recorded on a Hidden Event Note (XL6.3). The ATTACKER is to resolve these orders before he orders any actions in the MPh. If the firing unit is no longer in Good Order at the beginning of the MPh, the orders are voided. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:25:34 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part 8) ***************************************************************** ================================================================= APPENDICES (examples of layouts) ================================================================= HIDDEN RECORD SHEET _________________________________________________________________ ID__|_____CONTENTS______________|_____COVER FLAPS________________ ____|___________________________|________________________________ ____|___________________________|________________________________ ================================================================= ================================================================= FINAL DISPOSITIONS AXIS ALLIES ID_Hex & CA_Unit_Status & Notes ID_Hex & CA_Unit_Status & Notes __|________|____|_____________| |__|________|____|_____________| __|________|____|_____________| |__|________|____|_____________| ================================================================= ================================================================= MOVEMENT ORDERS SHEET _________________________________________________________________ E#_|_Movement Orders_|_MP/MF_| |E#_| Movement Orders_|_MP/MF_| ___|_________________|_______| |___|_________________|_______| ___|_________________|_______| |___|_________________|_______| ================================================================= ================================================================= PBM SCENARIO RECORD SHEET Scenario___________ Axis Player___________ Allied Player_________ Optional Rules in Use__________ Seasonal Terrain in Effect______ ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION Weather________ EC______ EC DRM/drm__________ WF_____ WD_____ Time of Day_____ Cloud Cover/Moon_____ Water Depth____ Current___ LV Hindrance in Effect__________ Visibility Range______ LV DRM___ FORCE INFORMATION |Integrity |Casualty| |SAN_|_ELR_|_PF use__|___Base___|__BPV___|_Base Lose|_VP_| Axis |____|_____|_________|__________|________|__________|____| Allied |____|_____|_________|__________|________|__________|____| OBA Nationality__Battery ID__Contact__Access__OBA Type__Hex(or Grain) ___________|___________|________|_______|_________|_____________| ___________|___________|________|_______|_________|_____________| ___________|___________|________|_______|_________|_____________| ___________|___________|________|_______|_________|_____________| TERRAIN, FORTIFICATION & TEMPORARY INFORMATIONAL COUNTERS _Hex_|___Description__________| | Hex |____Description_________| _____|________________________| |_____|________________________| _____|________________________| |_____|________________________| ================================================================= ================================================================= PBM EVENT SHEET Scenario:_________ Allied Player:__________ Axis Player:_______ |!|_Phase_|_E#_|_Action_____|_Range_|_FP_|_DRM_|_DR/dr_|_Result_| |_|_______|____|____________|_______|____|_____|_______|________| |_|_______|____|____________|_______|____|_____|_______|________| ================================================================= ***************************************************************** ================================================================= ASL BY E-MAIL: ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE (by Mike Stachowski) The ASL PBEM system will be presented as an outline of actions that are to be completed for each of the 3 mailings per player turn. These will be keyed to the Advanced Sequence of Play as found on the Chapter D divider. In all cases, the Advanced Sequence of Play will still provide the framework for the resolution of the turn's phases. This outline will point out additional steps or modifications to the sequence to facilitate PBEM play. You may find it helpful to place a red dot on the Sequence of Play card next to the steps that have special instructions for PBEM play. Within the outline the leading numbers correspond to those found on the Sequence of Play. Not all phases are modified by this outline and an unlisted phase is assumed to be completed as needed within the outline sequence. A lower case letter in brackets, [a], will refer to a detailed explanation of that step's procedure found at the end of the outline. Wheneve a sequence of events are to be completed that are not already sequenced (routs, rallies, etc.) the order they are to be resolved in is based on the unit(s) location as follows: 1 - Lowest Numbered Board to Highest 2 - Lowest Alphabetic Hex ID to Highest (A to GG) 3 - Lowest Numeric Hex ID to Highest (1 to 10) 4 - Lowest Hex Level to Highest (-1 to 4) <> This ordering sequence will be referred to as BOARD ORDER. ================================================================= MAILING SEQUENCE AND INSTRUCTIONS ================================================================= I. First Mailing of Player Turn (Performed by Moving Player) End of Previous Turns Events (if applicable) 6.21 Conduct opponent's RtPh as listed and perform and record your own RtPh. [b] 6.22 Resolve Interdiction(s) as they occur for both sides. [a] [c] 7.21 Conduct opponent's APh as listed. Resolve PAATCs, FFEs, and minefield attacks as needed. [b] 8.1 Resolve CCPh. [b] [d] 8.34 Place and Record "?" on qualifying units. Beginning of Current Turns Events 1.11 Resolve provisional reinforcement roll(s). [e] 1.12 Check for Wind Change. 1.22 Repair own, then opponent's SWs as needed in Board Order. 1.25 Self Rally 1st qualifying MMC in Board Order. 1.26 Rally own, then opponent's units in Board Order. 2.13 List Radio Contact attempt and perform Battery Access draw as in normal FTF play. [g] 2.14 List placement/correction/cancellation of AR/SR/FFE. This will be resolved by your opponent in the next mailing. 2.16 Resolve existing FFEs in Board Order. 2.21 List and resolve Prep Fire attacks in Board Order. [h] 3.21 Record movement of own units. Infantry using Smoke Grenades use next available dr off the IRCK sheet to determine success. Vehicles attempting Bounding Fire attacks using DR/drs as needed in IRCK order. [i] [List Starting IRCK choices for DRs and drs. [j]] IF USING "ON MY HONOR" FOR DIE ROLLS THERE IS NO NEED FOR IRCK. <<>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- II. Second Mailing of Player Turn (performed by Non-Moving Player Update your Board(s) based on information from the 1st mailing. 2.13 Resolve opponent's Radio Contact Attempt and AR/SR placement. [a] 2.14 Resolve correction of opponent's SR/FFE. 3.22 Perform opponent's move and resolve any FF/SFF/FPF as it occurs. [i] 4.12 List Radio Contact attempt and AR/SR hex choice. Perform Battery Access draw. [g] 4.13 List correction/cancellation of SR/FFE. 4.15 Resolve existing FFEs. 4.21 List Final Fire(s) and resolve their outcome. [List Starting IRCK choices for DRs and drs. [j] Not needed if using "Honor" system.] <<>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- III. THIRD MAILING OF PLAYER TURN performed by Moving Player. Update your Board(s) based on information from the 2nd mailing. 4.12 Resolve opponent's Radio Contact attempt and AR/SR placement. [a] [g] 4.13 Resolve opponent's correction of SR/FFE. 5.21 Resolve Advancing Fire attacks in Board Order. 5.3 Resolve Flame and Blaze Events in Board Order. 6.21 List Rout of own units. 7.21 List Advance of own units. 8.1 Record instructions for possible Close Combat(s). [List Starting IRCK choices for DRs and drs. [j] Not needed if using "Honor" system.] <<>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- <<>> Restart at 1st Mailing Events. NOTES [a] Starting at the first listed Event, if any, resolve the Event using IRCK DR/drs as needed in sequence. If Sniper attacks, Heat of Battle, or other random events occur they are also resolved immediately as called for in the ASL Rules. If a stack of units is required to take MCs or PTCs, or Random Selection is needed, apply the die rolls to the units in top-down order. [b] Resolve in Board Order unless listed in opponent's instructions from the last mailing. [c] Resolve your Interdiction of opponent's routing units as they occur in the order given. The Rout of your own units must be performed in Board Order and Interdiction attacks resolved as they occur. Since you will know the upcoming sequence of die rolls (if using IRCK), the requirement to follow Board Order prevents arrangement of your Rout to meet certain die rolls. [d] If specific instructions are not given for opponent's units, the CC of his units is resolved as one big attack that can achieve the highest odds. [e] Die roll sequencing continues on from the previous turn event resolutions. [g] The Radio Contact attempt DR cannot be resolved immediately as the next DR in sequence will be known and Radio breakdown can occur on this roll. The Battery Access chit draw is handled as per C1.21-1.211 using the Honor System. [h] The necessity to list attacks in Board Order is due to the available knowledge of upcoming DR/dr off the IRCK sheets. While losing some of the tactical considerations of FTF play, this is probably a little closer to actual combat. If desired both players can agree to use the Honor System and allow FTF sequencing of attacks and use self-control and a sheet of paper to block the sight of upcoming DRs/drs. [i] The necessity to allow use of the next available IRCKs for smoke grenades and Bounding Fire are required to maintain the tactical considerations these weapons allow. Again, self-control and a sheet of paper can be used to prevent knowledge of upcoming rolls on the ICRK sheets. The problem of seeing the entire enemy move before making DR decisions is one of the toughest of PBEM play. While the effect can be minimized by falling back on the Honor System of not looking ahead, this does not provide a true answer to the problem. Fortunately the speed with which mailings can be turned around in PBEM play offers the answer. If the moving player lists only those moves out of enemy LOS and desired "scouting/draw fire" moves first, he can send this on to his opponent for the latter's First Fire/SFF/FPF choices to that point. The non-moving player then resolves these attacks and returns the results to the moving player. The rest of the move can then be sent, or broken up further if desired, and the sequence repeated till all of the moves are done. While this will increase the time required to play, the effect is not as great as it may sound. Most scenarios involve extensive maneuvering by only one side and even then not every turn. With judicious use of this option, FTF compatibility in PBEM play can be maintained and time spent kept to a minimum. [j] Failure to list a starting IRCK choice for DRs/drs requires the resolving player to follow the AHIKS procedures for IRCK selection. See Members Handbook for specifics. NB: When in tight situations, take your time and make more mailings. Some people use an impulse-style move, i.e., move all units 2 MP, mail, then another 2 MP, etc. ***************************************************************** ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:22:19 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (part 7) 9. PBEM 9.1 With the advent of affordable Personal Computers and on-line services, Play by Electronic Mail has become a reality. The biggest advantage E-mail has over ground mail is speed. Rather than taking months, E-mail games can be completed in weeks! To PBEM, a player needs a computer, modem, and membership to an on- line service. (Note 13) When typing your mailing, ALWAYS save your mailing in ASCII (text file) format. The few changes that must be made to the ground mail system are detailed below: 9.2 HIDDEN RECORDS: Hidden Records (XL1.0) can be handled in one of two ways. (1) Send your Hidden Records and Initial Set Up by ground mail. (2) Send them by E-mail, with a header clearly marked, "HIDDEN RECORDS." The listings should be placed in the alpha-numeric order of their stack or HIP ID (HIP ID numbers listed first) with at least two spaces between each listing. (To create blank lines, most on-line services require the user to type at least two spaces on the line before they press RETURN.) If this method is used, players must be careful to cover the contents of each stack as they search for the proper ID. To avoid inadvertently seeing the contents of another stack, some players ask a third party, such as a roommate or spouse, to reveal the needed information. 9.3 SCENARIO RECORDS: With word processors, scenario record keeping is greatly simplified. Players simply make a template containing spaces for recording the same information found on the Scenario Record Sheet and update it as needed. A copy of the updated template is pasted to the end of each mailing. For Final Dispositions, record the contents of each stack in horizontal rows rather than in vertical columns. The stack ID is listed first, then the hex/CA's and finally the contents; with a tab space between each. Each listing should be ended by pressing the RETURN or ENTER key. In addition, a blank line should be placed between each listing. Doing so will make reading of the information easier. The status (and CA/VCA/TCA if it differs from the CA's of the largest caliber weapon of the stack) of each unit is recorded in parentheses after its identity. EX: The Final Dispositions of the stacks found in the example of 2.0 would be recorded as follows in a PBEM game: A 2M1 ?s3 C 2J1 8-0 (?)/467g/LMGa,467d(?) D 2O5/6 Fox2S/9-2/HMGa/467e(Brkn,DM)/467c 9.4 EVENTS: Rather than using the Event Sheet, in PBEM games players simply list each Event in order on their word processor. First, record the Phase, then the Event number, and a description of the Action, Range, FP/Ammo, DRM, DR/dr as applicable, and finally the results. Leave a tab space between each entry and press RETURN at the end of each Event. It is also helpful to leave a blank line between Events. 9.41 MOVEMENT: Rather than using the Movement Orders Sheet, players list movement orders in vertical columns, with one hex listed per line. Again, press RETURN at the end of each line and leave a blank line between entries. Upon receiving his opponent's mailing, the DEFENDER covers the printout of the mailing and reveals one line at a time. 9.42 OTHER HIDDEN EVENTS: Rather than using Hidden Event Note (XL6.3), players record the information that they would normally place on a Hidden Event Note at the end of their mailing, right after the Scenario Record Template (XL9.3). Record the Event Number that corresponds to the entry in the standard Event entry area, followed by a tab space and the Hidden Information. When this information is called for, the opponent moves to the end of that mailing and carefully reveals the correct Event number. *CHAPTER XL CREDITS DESIGN: P. Keith Larson PLAYTESTING: Dave Connell, Russ Gifford, Dean Halley, Dan Reed, Rob Zeller MVP: Dave Connell CHAPTER XL - Version 0.32 is (C) 1991 P. Keith Larson. Individual players may freely copy this playtest version to pass on to friends and opponents. No charge beyond the cost of reproduction may be charged. Publications that desire to print these rules may do so only with the permission of the author. QUESTIONS & PLAYTESTING I will be happy to answer any questions you may have on the use of this system. Because I have a regular job, my replies may not be as quick as you would get from AH; please be patient. I also ask that you send a business size SASE. Chapter XL is still in the playtesting stage; if you would like to join the playetesting team, drop me a line. My ground mail address is: Keith Larson 10465 Frog Pond Rd. Erie, IL 61250 My email addresses are: CompuServe - 74040,2306 GEnie - P.Larson9 *FOOTNOTES CHAPTER XL FOOTNOTES (1) XL.1 THE HONOR SYSTEM: The traditional PBM DR/dr resolution method of using stock reports was rejected as unsuitable for ASL. This was because it would force players to predesignate all their attacks before they knew the results of those attacks. Most ASL players depend heavily on the results of a previous attack before they decide their next. As a result the stock market system has little appeal. In addition, the stock report system makes the combining of Phases impractical, resulting in a total of 16 mailings to resolve one Game Turn. Using the stock report method, an eight-turn ASL scenario would take 128 mailings to complete! By resolving DR/dr as they occur under the Honor System, a number of Phases can be combined into one mailing. As a result, a Game Turn can be resolved in as few mailings as six. Random number tables suffer one fatal flaw: They are a lot of work for little or no benefit. Moreover, random number tables do not prevent cheating. If anything they can make it easier by the fact that players can learn the results of the next DR/dr before it is even made! The issue of cheating has been the major argument against the use of the Honor System. However, cheating has rarely been a problem for those who have used it to play ASL by mail for the last 4.5 years. If you suspect a player of cheating there is one simple solution: Never play with that player again. (2) XL.2A INHERENT CONCEALMENT: The addition of Inherent Concealment counters to the ASL system has two positive effects for PBM games. (1) Record keeping is greatly simplified; without Inherent Concealment counters extensive updating to PBM record was necessary whenever two or more concealed stacks entered the same hex. Now very little is required. (2) Using just one counter to represent a whole stack of counters conserves concealment counters (helpful when a player is using the same nationality in more than one game) and mapboard clutter is reduced (not a small consideration when a game is set up for weeks, if not months). Inherent Concealment makes the implementation of footnote A18 very easy; simply leave out all references to the number of counters hidden by the Inherent Concealment counter. If footnote A18 is implemented, players should be aware that scenario play balance can be adversely affected. (3) XL.2C GAINED CONCEALMENT: Because written records of the status of each unit must be kept in PBM games, the placement of status counters such as Hero, Berserk, Wounded, and "?" on board is unnecessary. By not using "?" counters on board, record keeping is simplified and board clutter reduced. Some players may still want to use such counters on the board as a visual reminder of the status of units. If they do so they must remember that the order of the stack for random selection purposes is the order recorded on the Final Disposition table, _not_ the order on board. (4) XL.5 STACKS: The use of slashes was made necessary by the addition of ski counters to the ASL system. Without a back slash it is impossible to determine whether a ski counter between two units is being worn by the top unit or carried by the bottom unit. The use of back slashes also makes Possession (A4.43) even easier to determine. (5) 1.11 PREPARATION FOR USE: Most ASL players are familiar with PLAS-TIC, which the ASLRB recommends for securing overlays. There are, however, other removable adhesives on the market that work even better for the Hidden Record Sheet; namely: Dennison's - Tack a Note and 3M's - Removable Magic Tape. (6) 1.2 HIP: PBM offers players a number of options that would be burdensome to implement in FTF. In PBM games, it takes little effort to gain the added realism of hiding all infantry leaders and SW's, as is currently done for armor leaders. This is done by assigning each leader and SW and ID number and recording their presence on the Hidden Records Sheet. Their presence is not revealed until they are used or are in an enemy-occupied hex. Such SW's are assigned a squad and must remain with that squad as long as they remain hidden; if they are ever transferred or dropped they immediately lose their HIP status. (7) 1.4 UPDATES: Self-stick removable notes are found under a number of brand names, the most notable being: Post-It Notes. Some players find it more convenient to forego the use of the Hidden Record Sheet altogether and use self-stick removable notes from the start. Doing this does make one's initial setup faster (no preparation is required), but the convenience of having all hidden information on one or two sheets is lost to one's opponent. (8) 2.4 FINAL DISPOSITION SHEET: It is suggested that players leave a blank line between stacks. This allows for the addition of other units or counters to the stack and makes distinguishing one stack from another easier. (9) 6.2 MOVEMENT ORDER SHEET: Occasionally, the moving player has little or no reason to hide his movement orders from his opponent. Because the reproduction of the Movement Order Sheet represents a certain amount of expense, it is suggested that in such cases movement orders be recorded on the Event Sheet directly. (10) 6.21 SEARCHES: This in one of the more important changes to be found in Chapter XL. It was discovered that the ATTACKER gained too great an advantage from being allowed to make his own search dr. What was happening was that the ATTACKER was learning the contents of concealed stacks before the DEFENDER had an opportunity to prevent the search by making defensive first fire attacks. (11) 7.1 VARIABLE MPh: The initial playtest results have been quite encouraging. The initial fear concerning this rule was that it would add too many additional mailings to a game; that is why it was made an optional rule. Surprisingly, far fewer additional mailings have resulted than feared. Once past the first few Player Turns, the need for additional movement mailings is uncommon. With this said, some players may still be uncomfortable with the Movement Order Delay (7.12). For such players, the use of Scouting Missions (7.11) only is suggested. (12) 7.11 SCOUTING MISSION: The use of a Scouting Mission automatically adds two mailings to a Player Turn; therefore players are urged to use it sparingly. (13) PBEM: The two most popular on-line services and the two which have the most active ASL communities are CompuServe and GEnie. [Ed. note: There is also an active Internet discussion group at asl@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov. ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 22:28:11 EDT Subject: Chapter XL (NO PARTS 9 or 10) There were 8 mailings of Chapter XL not 10. For those of you who already had Chapter XL my apologies at the wasted bandwidth but I'm swamped and have little time to mail to individuals. Thanks again to Dave Ripton for typing in half of the Chapter and to Dave Van Kan for mailing it to me. ----- From: dade_cariaga@rainbow.mentorg.com (Dade Cariaga) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 07:50:46 -0700 Subject: Re: CLEARANCE QUESTIONS Hidee hi, ya'll. > SNIP > When removing wire or roadblocks, it makes a big difference whether > attempts can be made once or twice per Game Turn. I'd like to know > how other people on the list play it. > > Jack O'Quin I think you're doing it right, Jack. At least, that's the way I've been playing it. Another thing about Clearance: its one time when overstacking a hex can be beneficial. Overstacking penalties don't apply to Clearance rolls, and you get an extra -2 for each squad in the hex. (Of course, if you're going to do that, you'd better be sure your opponent can't get an LOS on you. -2 for Hazardous Movement, -X for Overstacking, could make even a 1FP attack devastating.) Dade ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 09:05:16 From: tqr@inel.gov (Tom Repetti) Subject: Chapter XL comment No offense to Jeff and cohorts for their time and effort in sending out the Chapter XL rules, but there are some things in there that, well, just don't really apply to play by email, since email turnaround time can be pretty darn fast. When your opponent can get back to you in a few minutes or hours or days, there's no reason why pbem has to be significantly different than FTF - I don't think you need a different kind of turn sequence or Search Mission rules or anything like that to speed the game up. For those who haven't done pbem, I think you're better off just jumping into the water and not forcing yourself to conform to all of that Chapter XL stuff. Self-Defense Phase - While still a Captain at this point, Dave most certainly has been cleared for promotion to Major, effective sometime next year, and don't let him deny it. SOMEbody thinks he's brain-dead enough to handle a battalion. Or is that Regiment, except in 1941 Russia? Aw geez... Tom ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 10:10:09 CDT From: carrington rhydderch ward Subject: Back to AT LMGs Do MGs get range effects on penetration? I spent a while trying to figure that one out, but it seems that there is a gap in the rules between ATRs (that do) and airplane MGs (that don't). Anybody got a rules quote? Carrington Ward ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 08:08:35 -0700 (MST) From: N431532374@amuc.mtroyal.ab.ca (Grant Linneberg) Subject: CASL AAR A modest turnout of four graced our second meeting in June. Pity it wasn't more, as this was our first chance to start playtesting some of the new Backblast scenarios. None of us have ever been playtesters before, and we have no idea if we'll be able to get enough playings in to be of any use to the backblast team (Hi Steve!), but we're giving it a shot. First up was a playtest of a new scen to be published in Backblast sometime soon. Darren Gour's Finns defending against Peter Salekin's Russkies. It takes place on boards 18 and 19, with the Finns dug in well (5 pillboxes, 4 foxholes, 12 trenches, 42 minefield factors, and 4 roadblocks) across the joint between the two boards. The Russians get a ton of 447s and 5 tanks (BT-5s and T-28Es) with which to clear out the pillboxes and exit VP off the other edge. To me, this looks like an almost impossible task for the Russians, and Peter must have felt the same way, staring at the Mannerheim line. Peter tried valiantly to soften up the line before punching his way through, but had no luck. As such, his attack stalled somewhat because he was reluctant to attack the line without first suppressing some of it. A tough one, I think. The estimable Mr. Gour naturally thinks he has a plan for the Russkies, and I'm sure one of us will find out what it is. The other scenario may be familiar to internetters as an early form of it was posted there. LAYING DOWN THE GAUNTLET is a Night action, with Canadian paratroopers trying to wrestle control of a strongpoint west of Varaville, France, in the early hours before D-Day. There was a typo on this scenario relating to the VC, but John Burns and I took a guess as to what they should have said (later confirmed by Steve Peterson as correct) and set out to play; John with the attacking paras and me with the Geman 447s and 436s. This one was a lot of fun, as I find night scenarios usually are. That element of not knowing where anything is really adds to the excitment level. The Night rules may look daunting at first, but they're not that tough. I recommend them. Anyway, the VC here was for John to make it over to my board and capture most of the buildings. However, there was also and instant victory possible for the Germans if they could sneak 6 squads off through the Canadian lines. I think this second VC screwed up our game a bit as it made John overly cautious in his attack, and time ran out on him. I don't think the German has much of a chance of fulfilling this VC as he only has 9 squads to begin with and those No Move counters keep him in place pretty good. I think next time John and I play this one, the Canadian will be able to attack a little more freely. RULES PHASE: Apparently Tom and Garth couldn't find where in the ASLRB it says you can't fire a mortar from inside a building. They should have looked at B23.423. They also couldn't find where it said Hand-to-hand combat is only usable in Deluxe ASL (and in Red Barricades and the PTO). This is a stupid one, but the answer lies in G1.64. Why you can use it on Deluxe boards, but not regular boards is anybody's guess. -Grant. ... "Nietzsche is dead," God. -== IceIQle v2.0 ==- ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 09:54:29 +0700 From: markg@laplace.idec.sdl.usu.edu (Mark Greenman) Subject: AFV's in Hex Boy Howdee y'all, My brilliant (PBEM) opponent has once again taken advantage of my ineptitude, so I thought I would cry on your collective shoulders a little... We are playing Strangers In A Strange Land, he being the dashing daring Legionaire Commandant, and myself the local supply depot head cheese and brownie den mother German. [... much heartbreak deleted ...] and so he advances his 9-1 with 2x248 HS into the victory building with my encircled 468... a) Does my encircled 468 suffer a +1 modifier to it's Ambush dr for being encircled? He rolls for ambush for us, taking advantage of his stealth and Leader, but rolls a 6 for the French, 1 for the Germies... Germans ambush! I decide to try and eliminate a 248 with a single round of CC, and then withdraw, leaving only French elite poodle tamers in the encirclement... b) Did I interpret the ambush withdrawal possibility correctly, in that the ambusher may elect to stay for a single round of CC, and even if units of the non-ambusher survive, the ambusher may withdraw? c) If withdrawing (in this case from an Encirclement) and >= 4 MF would be the cost of the hex entered, does the withdrawer go CX? The French, as the attacker, roll first. They of course roll C1W1 (what else...). This "suspends" silmultaneaty of our CC, totally thrashes my 468, and gives them Infiltration. d) I interpret the Infiltration result to allow the 9-1, 2x248 to withdraw after the death of my 468, or stay and suffer the results of my 468's attack. Is this correct? Even if they stay, are they exempt from my 468's attack due to the "suspension" of silmultanaeity? Sniff..., I think I resolved this right, but condolences and opinions are appreciated. Mark ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 09:57:57 +0700 From: markg@laplace.idec.sdl.usu.edu (Mark Greenman) Subject: Not AFV's in Hex... CC Resolution Whoops..., My last post had a misleading Subject Line. "AFV's in Hex" is my next sob story... Sorry, Mark ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 13:14:59 -0400 (EDT) From: John Appel Subject: Re: Soon-to-be-Major van Kan On Tue, 12 Jul 1994, Tom Repetti wrote: > > Self-Defense Phase - While still a Captain at this point, Dave most certainly > has been cleared for promotion to Major, effective sometime next year, and don't > let him deny it. SOMEbody thinks he's brain-dead enough to handle a battalion. > Or is that Regiment, except in 1941 Russia? Aw geez... > > Tom So Dave will get to yell "Assault the Beach!" to a still larger group of jarheads! Congratualtions. It's ok Dave, a Major in the Airborne only needs to know how to fall out the door of the airplane. John "21 jumps - of course I have brain damage" Appel ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 10:59:16 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: AFV's in Hex [cut] > a) Does my encircled 468 suffer a +1 modifier to it's Ambush dr > for being encircled? No. Being encircled has no effect on ambush. > > He rolls for ambush for us, taking advantage of his > stealth and Leader, but rolls a 6 for the French, > 1 for the Germies... Germans ambush! > > I decide to try and eliminate a 248 with a single > round of CC, and then withdraw, leaving only French elite poodle > tamers in the encirclement... > > b) Did I interpret the ambush withdrawal possibility correctly, > in that the ambusher may elect to stay for a single round > of CC, and even if units of the non-ambusher survive, the > ambusher may withdraw? Yes > c) If withdrawing (in this case from an Encirclement) and >= 4 MF > would be the cost of the hex entered, does the withdrawer go CX? Yes, the normal Advance rules/restrictions apply except that the unit would die if it withdraws onto an emeny unit. > > The French, as the attacker, roll first. They of course roll C1W1 > (what else...). This "suspends" silmultaneaty of our CC, totally > thrashes my 468, and gives them Infiltration. Wrong, the ambusher always rolls first if there is an ambush. > > d) I interpret the Infiltration result to allow the 9-1, 2x248 to > withdraw after the death of my 468, or stay and suffer the results > of my 468's attack. Is this correct? Even if they stay, are they > exempt from my 468's attack due to the "suspension" of silmultanaeity? This would be correct if you had not ambushed them. Fred > > Sniff..., > I think I resolved this right, but condolences and opinions are > appreciated. > > Mark > ----- Subject: Back to AT LMGs From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 13:47:00 -0640 Howdy, carrington rhydderch ward writes: > Do MGs get range effects on penetration? I spent a while > trying to figure that one out, but it seems that there is a > gap in the rules between ATRs (that do) and airplane MGs > (that don't). C7.24 "CASE D; RANGE EFFECTS vs AFV: The penetration capability of an AP/APCR/APDS shell decreases as the range increases. The Basic TK# of any non-aerial hit vs an armored Target Facing on the AP or APCR/APDS To Kill Tables is modified according to the range charts on those tables. Range has no effect on the Basic TK# of a HEAT or HE hit, nor vs an unarmored target." Note that the rule says that anything that uses the AP TK Tables is modified by range effects, which includes MGs. > Anybody got a rules quote? I gotta million of 'em. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 12:53:56 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: Soon-to-be-Major van Kan On Tue, 12 Jul 1994, Tom Repetti wrote: > Self-Defense Phase - While still a Captain at this point, Dave most certainly > has been cleared for promotion to Major, effective sometime next year, and don't > let him deny it. SOMEbody thinks he's brain-dead enough to handle a battalion. > Or is that Regiment, except in 1941 Russia? Aw geez... Well, "sometime next year" is likely to be "sometime VERY LATE next year", the way we do things. And, interestingly, there are no billets for Intelligent, er, I mean Intelligence (damned editor!!), Majors at the Battalion level. I'll never see one of those again! :-( :-( Lowest I can go now is a Regiment, and I've already had one of those, so looks like I'm doomed to be a terminal higher-level staff wienie. :-( Even worse, for the next three years I'll be a very-high-level geek statistician. Gawd, can you believe it? How many of those guys at Tarawa were carrying Normal tables in their packs? "Major, I want you to take your t-statistic and clear that trench line." "Aye, aye, sir. Sir, any word on how many degrees of freedom we'll have?" "No! Those rear-area pogues are gobbling them all up. Just do the best with what you've got!" "Yes, Sir!" I'm sooo ashamed. Dave ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 13:04:34 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > I think the key is that you are looking at the IFT * vehicle line. You are > allowed to do that, of course, but I think if you made a To Hit roll, then > you should use the To Kill table, and refer to unarmored targets there. > Since I don't have it in front of me, I don't know if this would produce > more intuitive results, but it strikes me as something to check out. > > > Cheers, > > Matt Yeah, you are supposed to do that, but the unarmored target line on the AP TK Table says "IFE/MG-15mm: * Vehicle line on IFT", so I'm right back to where I started from. They are strange results, but unless I missed some modifiers, they seem to be accurate. Dave ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 14:04:39 -0600 (MDT) From: Darren James Gour Subject: Favorites Well, here are the results of the favorites poll after the first day. If you have not sent in your top five yet, what's taking you?? Get those faves in so we can make this the most complete list of favorites we can get. E-mail me personally with subject favorites. These are the people who have responded thus far: Bas de Bakker J.R. Tracy Bret Hildebran Jeff Shields Brian Youse M. Samuels Bruno Nitrosso MJ Black Carl Fago Martin Snow Dade Cariaga Matt Shostak David Hauth Mike Clay Grant Linneberg Here are the tops thus far, make your votes today: # Votes Scenario ------- -------- 4 ASL 4 Commissar's House 3 ASL 37 Khamsin 3 E Hill 621 2 A 25 Cold Crocodiles A 60 Totsugeki! ASL 60 On The Kokoda Trail ASL 66 Bushmasters ASL 71 Jungle Citadel ASL 8 The Fugitives C The Streets Of Stalingrad Deluxe 8 The Schoolhouse G Hube's Pocket RB 3 Bread Factory #2 1 ? Cushman's Pocket ? One More Hour RB CG III A 28 The Professionals A 39 Showdown At Tug Argan Pass A 41 OP Hill A 44 Blocking Action At Lipki A 52 Swan Song A 55 The Cat Has Jumped A 58 Munda Mash A 66 Counterstroke At Stonne A 8 Agony At Doom ASL 25 Gavin's Gamble ASL 39 Turning The Tables ASL 46 Birds Of Prey ASL 54 Bridge To Nowhere ASL 55 A High Price To Pay ASL 63 The Eastern Gate ASL 77 Le Herisson ASL 79 Bridge Of The Seven Planets ASL 82 For Honor Alone ASLUG 14 Morgan's Stand Deluxe 10 The Final Battle Deluxe 13 Bogged Down Deluxe 15 Barkmann's Corner Deluxe 7 With Flame And Shell Deluxe 9 Preparing The Way Deluxe A To The Last Man Deluxe A6 Breakout F Paw Of The Tiger G 14 Tiger, Tiger G 6 Rocket's Red Glare G 8 Recon In Force KGP 3 Panthers In The Mist M First Crisis At AG North News 32 Death And Ruins O 50.2 Dora II P The Road To Wiltz Q Land Leviathans RB 4 To The Rescue RB 6 Turned Away T 6 Dead Of Winter T 7 Hill 253.5 TT 1 Take The Chance TT 3 Panzers Marsch! Well those are the favorites at the moment, make sure you send in your pics. Darren Gour ----- Subject: AFV's in Hex From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 14:54:00 -0640 Howdy, markg@laplace.idec.sdl.usu.edu (Mark Greenman) writes: >a) Does my encircled 468 suffer a +1 modifier to it's Ambush dr > for being encircled? This is not an effect of being encircled. Besides, the ATTACKER becomes encircled immediately when it enters the hex. >b) Did I interpret the ambush withdrawal possibility correctly, > in that the ambusher may elect to stay for a single round > of CC, and even if units of the non-ambusher survive, the > ambusher may withdraw? A11.41 "AMBUSH WITHDRAWAL: A force which has qualified for Ambush has the option to decline CC altogether, prior to CC resolution, by immediate withdrawal into an Accessible hex (unless pinned). Any non-pinned unit qualifying for Ambush may also withdraw from CC automaticallly after resolving all CC attacks by and against it, but only before Melee occurs." Sounds right. >c) If withdrawing (in this case from an Encirclement) and >= 4 MF > would be the cost of the hex entered, does the withdrawer go CX? Yes, see A11.21 >The French, as the attacker, roll first. Here, this is wrong. Ambush suspends simultaneous CC: A11.32 "AMBUSH: Whenever one side ambushes another, the ambushing side resolves all of its CC attacks in that Location first, until a Melee develops in the next Player Turn." The Germans should have attacked first. >d) I interpret the Infiltration result to allow the 9-1, 2x248 to > withdraw after the death of my 468, or stay and suffer the results > of my 468's attack. Is this correct? Even if they stay, are they > exempt from my 468's attack due to the "suspension" of silmultanaeity? If the ambush hadn't happened, this would have been correct. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 12:41:08 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: More MGs at AFVs This happened to me recently, but I'm not sure I got it right. I'd appreciate anyone pointing out what I've done wrong: An LMG is firing at a sIG at a range of two hexes, and gets a turret hit. The AF for the sIG's turret are Front 0, Side 0, Rear *. By facing, what TK DR will kill the sIG, barring Critical Hits? Front: TK 4, +1 Range = 5, -0 AF = 5. Side: TK 4, +1 Range = 5, -0 AF = 5. Rear: TK 4 (IFT * line) = 4. Note that TH Cases A (Rear facing) and D (Range) only apply to armored targets. Your bullets have a better chance of penetrating the armor and killing the vehicle than they do if you fire at the unarmored portion? This is one vehicle that I'm going to back into combat!! Is this a quirk associated with the LMG, or have I done something wrong? Of course, this doesn't consider the possibility that the LMG will kill the crew outright when they fire. I know that sometimes unarmored vehicles are harder to kill than armored vehicles, but this is a case where shooting at the "more vulnerable" aspect of the armored target actually decreases your probability of killing it. Also note that this changes if you use an MMG or an HMG: MMG HMG Front: 5 5 Side: 5 5 Rear: 5 6 or if the range is 1 or 3: Range 1 Range 3 MMG HMG MMG HMG Front: 6 6 4 4 Side: 6 6 4 4 Rear: 7 8 5 6 Dave ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 05:40:20 EDT Subject: Re: Chapter XL > I received Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and "NO PARTS 9 or 10". Let me know if such is the case tomorrow. I received all of them. Van Kan a geek statistician, heh? I use to call it sadistics so I guess your a sadistician! I do a lot of linear aggressions; they're a new form of frontal attack! I saw on the net that we had some algeboor over the LOS formula. Was that algebore? A new form of bore-sighting? Also used to call Phycology, FuckAlgae. Seemed appropriate at the time. Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 05:44:17 EDT Subject: Trucks I've been thinking about unarmored vehicles and their capabilities. It seems that a truck has a better chance of surviving an attack from an ATG than does an armored halftrack. Say a 37L ATG fires on a truck. It rolls on the 8 column of the IFT and needs a 7 to immobilize, 6 to kill. The same attack on a halftrack requires an 8 to immobilize, 7 to kill, even better if the halftrack is within 1 - 2 hexes. Collateral attacks could even up the difference but I'd take the truck in this attack any day! While the truck is susceptible to infantry attacks, it seems that truck blitzes might be successful, especially against a spread out defense. Am I missing something here? Yeah, sure, any old infantry can _potentially_ nuke a truck but a 4 attack requiring a 5 for a result is a whole heck of a lot better than say a 4 attack at -2 on the poor bloody infantry. Again, am I missing something? Cheers, Jeff (trying hard to be annoying) Shields ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 18:04:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Mustafa Unlu Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) writes: > > Yeah, you are supposed to do that, but the unarmored target line on the AP TK > Table says > > "IFE/MG-15mm: * Vehicle line on IFT", > > so I'm right back to where I started from. They are strange results, but > unless I missed some modifiers, they seem to be accurate. > > Dave Umm, sans rulebook, but, don't you get to attack the crew on the IFT if you hit through the unarmoured facing? Is this a fiction of my imagination? Assuming it is not, is it in addition to the TK roll? Or is it, Oh no, the dreaded colateral attacks rule!? M. ----- From: Doug Gibson Subject: Re: Trucks Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 15:39:27 PDT Jeff Shields writes: > While the truck is susceptible to infantry attacks, it seems that truck > blitzes might be successful, especially against a spread out defense. Am > I missing something here? Yeah, sure, any old infantry can _potentially_ > nuke a truck but a 4 attack requiring a 5 for a result is a whole heck of > a lot better than say a 4 attack at -2 on the poor bloody infantry. > Again, am I missing something? Well, the truck is going to be slower over open ground. It takes a couple turns to cross board 4 with most trucks if you don't use the roads, so the enemy will in many cases get more shots at the truck. Each truck also generally carries more than one squad, making each attack more effective that way. Your advancing fire potential is also limited, since truck passengers are halved for Mounted Fire while halftrack passengers aren't. Finally, most situations will give many more squads than ATGs to the defenders, so again the trucks will take more shots. Note also that the truck doesn't get to try to pass an MC to negate a kill. -- -Doug Gibson dag@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 13:30:57 -1000 From: pjonke@mano.soest.hawaii.edu (Patrick Jonke) Subject: Re: Trucks >I've been thinking about unarmored vehicles and their capabilities. It >seems that a truck has a better chance of surviving an attack from an ATG >than does an armored halftrack. Say a 37L ATG fires on a truck. It rolls >on the 8 column of the IFT and needs a 7 to immobilize, 6 to kill. The >same attack on a halftrack requires an 8 to immobilize, 7 to kill, even >better if the halftrack is within 1 - 2 hexes. Collateral attacks could >even up the difference but I'd take the truck in this attack any day! If the 37L ATG attacks the truck directly, rather than attacking the Location, it has an HE TK# of 8 at all ranges. A halftrack's armor is designed to withstand shell fragments and small arms bullets, not armor piercing shells. If the shell overmatches the armor, the armor steel may well fragment and spray lethal debris around. On the other hand, a shell might pass right through the fabric cover of a truck without exploding or even noticing. Therefore, the TK probabilities seem about right to me. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Patrick Jonke School of Ocean and Earth Science & Technology Department of Marine Geology & Geophysics University of Hawaii at Manoa +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 09:54:17 +1000 From: lesk@LNA03.lna.oz.au (Les KRAMER) Subject: AVALONCON request Hi, Being in Australia, I have not followed the messages about AvalonCon very closely. I now found that I should be in the US around the end July to mid August. So I might be able to make it along. So could anyone send me some information on the when, where and how of AvalonCon. Thanks in advance, Les Kramer ----- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 10:40:06 PDT From: Frederick.Timm@Eng.Sun.COM (Fred Timm) Subject: Re: CLEARANCE QUESTIONS > > Hidee hi, ya'll. > > > SNIP > > When removing wire or roadblocks, it makes a big difference whether > > attempts can be made once or twice per Game Turn. I'd like to know > > how other people on the list play it. > > > > Jack O'Quin > > I think you're doing it right, Jack. At least, that's the way I've been > playing it. Another thing about Clearance: its one time when overstacking a > hex can be beneficial. Overstacking penalties don't apply to Clearance rolls, > and you get an extra -2 for each squad in the hex. (Of course, if you're going > to do that, you'd better be sure your opponent can't get an LOS on you. -2 for > Hazardous Movement, -X for Overstacking, could make even a 1FP attack > devastating.) This works wonders in KP 167. In one game with time for only one clearance attempt I advanced about 6 squads onto the last roadblock. Fortunately there were no Japanese left. > > Dade > > > > ----- From: s.petersen3@genie.geis.com Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 03:17:00 UTC Subject: Re: RE: CASL AAR Howdy, cf> As Brian and I found out this weekend on a different scenario (The cf> Gifu), the thing to do with the pillboxes is to belly up to them with cf> the tanks and blast away with AP. In short order you'll start seeing cf> the critical hits mount up as the pillbox DRM doesn't apply to the AP cf> shot. With those critical hits comes the esteemed 4 -3 or even 4 -5 cf> shot. I think anyone would love to have those. Makes those pillboxes cf> much less intimidating. I guess anyone would love to have these, mainly because they can't. Geez, I hope you're the only two of our playtesters screwin' up the rules. Accordin' to C3.71, a CH reverses the DRM of any TEM that would normally apply to the TH. So, what _is_ the reverse of 0? Play it again guys. Steve ----- From: "Jeff Shields" Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 19:24:52 EDT Subject: Re: Trucks On Tue, 12 Jul 94 15:39:27 PDT, Doug Gibson wrote: >Well, the truck is going to be slower over open ground. It takes a couple >turns to cross board 4 with most trucks if you don't use the roads, so the >enemy will in many cases get more shots at the truck. Each truck also >generally carries more than one squad, making each attack more effective that >way. Your advancing fire potential is also limited, since truck passengers >are halved for Mounted Fire while halftrack passengers aren't. Finally, most >situations will give many more squads than ATGs to the defenders, so again the >trucks will take more shots. Note also that the truck doesn't get to try to >pass an MC to negate a kill. True, trucks will be slower over open ground, but their road movement rate is so high that any road movement will more than make up for off road movement. My idea of the truck blitz would be to have the trucks pull up one or two hexes away from isolated squads and offload their passengers. You're right trucks don't get to pass an MC; they survive, immobilize or die. Passengers do, however, get a CS roll (unless of course the truck is burning), and, in some few cases, the CS roll is relatively high. I'd say in a scenario with lots of squads and some trucks (e.g., some Russian scenarios), the truck blitz should have a reasonable chance of success. Cheers, Dr. Jeffrey Shields CBNERRVA, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, VA 23062 jeff@back.vims.edu ( ) ( ) (^ ^) (^ ^) (^) . . (^) \\ 0 | | 0 // \\__\\|}{|//__// \^ ^^ ^/ <====\^ ( ) ^/====> <====\^ ^/====> <====\ /====> ()===(____)===() ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 12:27:41 +0200 From: oleboe@idt.unit.no Subject: CC (was Re: AFV's in Hex) Mark Greenman writes: > He rolls for ambush for us, taking advantage of his > stealth and Leader, but rolls a 6 for the French, > 1 for the Germies... Germans ambush! > [stuff deleted] > > The French, as the attacker, roll first. They of course roll C1W1 > (what else...). This "suspends" silmultaneaty of our CC, totally > thrashes my 468, and gives them Infiltration. > > d) I interpret the Infiltration result to allow the 9-1, 2x248 to > withdraw after the death of my 468, or stay and suffer the results > of my 468's attack. Is this correct? Even if they stay, are they > exempt from my 468's attack due to the "suspension" of silmultanaeity? > > Sniff..., > I think I resolved this right, but condolences and opinions are > appreciated. > > Mark > The snakeeye DR should actually have been the German CC DR, so the French HS should been eliminated instead. Ambush makes the CC sequential, with the Ambusher attacking first. if the French is eliminated, they can't attack back at all. If there hadn't been an Ambush, d) is almost correct, but the French would have been exempt from the 468's attack. When CC is/becomes sequential, an already eliminated unit does not attack. Note that if there is a simultaneos attack, and the Attacker first eliminates the Defender, and then the defender rolls double 1, then the Defender is still eliminated even though the CC becomes sequential, because the CC becomes sequential after the Attackers CC attack. (This has one exemption though: If the following Leader Creation dr creates a leader that changes the odds so that the Attackers attack would have failed if the leader had been present, the former successful attack is failed, and the already eliminated Defender did just act dead, and surprises everyone as they stand up as the winner of the struggle. This actually happened me in Stalingrad recently). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you cut off my head, what do I say: Ole Boe Me and my head or oleboe@idt.unit.no Me and my body? ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 06:37:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Kyle Curle - Athletes in Action Subject: Looking for D. Williamson Sorry to bother everyone with this, but I just moved and lost Doug Williamson's e-mail address in the change of systems. Doug, drop me a note and we'll try to finish our game. Kyle ----- From: wuj@fuwutai.att.com Date: 13 Jul 94 14:33:00 GMT Subject: EPGS Meeting this Saturday Eastern Pennsylvania Gamers Society (EPGS) meets this Saturday. Plenty of ASL for everyone. See you there! City: Plymouth Meeting, PA (Northwest of Phila.) Contact: Jim Brackin or Pat Dowde Phone: (215) 443-5315 (215) 948-3118 Other Info: Meets the third Saturday of each month 8:00 AM to Late Inn at Plymouth Meeting Walt Ulicki, Jr. wuj@fuwutai.att.com (Please note new Email address) ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 11:24:13 EDT From: ut00894@volvo.com (Doug Maston) Subject: PAW (Piedmont Area Wargamers) Hello, I have been trying to get this info to EDANGLETON@delphi.com for some time, but cannot seem to get through to this e-mail address. So I will put it out for all: PIEDMONT AREA WARGAMERS (PAW) Sponsor of the annual "Winds of War" ASL Tourney. Coming in the Spring of 1995, "1945 - Victory at Last!" Meets at members homes as games are arranged. Guests and fellow ASL players traveling through the area always welcome! Contacts: Doug Maston Ray Wolsczyn 4 Three Meadows Ct. 7162 Mantlewood Lane Greensboro, NC 27402-1728 Kernersville, NC 27284 (910) 282-0552 (R) (910) 996-5677 (R) (910) 279-2676 (B) (910) 855-2218 (B) Come see us. We'd love to play some ftf. Doug Maston ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 09:09:14 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > From: David Elder > I just happened to look this up last night and in the machine gun rules > (Unless I am really putting my foot in it :-) ... it says that when > firing at the * facing of an AFV ... no TH dice roll is required and > you roll on the * vehicle line of the IFT to kill the vehicle. This > may be stated in the rule immediately preceding the AFV one. I'm > not sure. OK, but what do you do if only part of the facing is unarmored? Does the MG IFT roll also determine hit location? And if it does, and it determines that the hit was against the armored Hull, does the MG have any effect at all, since it didn't actually make a TH roll? Does anyone have an answer about hit/kill determination against AFVs which have both armored and unarmored aspects within the same facing? Dave ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 11:17:30 -0600 (MDT) From: David Hauth Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > > OK, but what do you do if only part of the facing is unarmored? Does > the MG IFT roll also determine hit location? And if it does, and it > determines that the hit was against the armored Hull, does the MG have > any effect at all, since it didn't actually make a TH roll? > > Does anyone have an answer about hit/kill determination against AFVs > which have both armored and unarmored aspects within the same facing? > > Dave > It would seem to me that this is a logical way to handle it (but maybe not the right one): 1. Make a TH roll; if the result indicates a hit simply apply the results normally i.e. a turret hit against '*' uses unarmored IFT, an armored hull hit used TK #. 2. If the TH roll indicates a miss, then no effect if the dice indicate a hull hit, but use '*' line on IFT for turret hit? After typing this, it doesn't look so good after all but I'll send it anyway. A different Dave. ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 13:13:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul F Ferraro Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs Another fly in the ointment (no doubt flogging a dead horse stuck in the same said ointment): How about you have a squad with its trusty MG...it sees a truck, MOVING, and wants to kill it...the concensus is that you roll on the IFT. Well, what about the moving target modifier? To you subtract itmfrom the to kill #? How about if it is just the inherent FP of the squad? How about if you have a hero firing same said MG, this time against a STATIONARY soft vehicle. Do you subtract -1 from the to kill? Maybe there _is_ supposed to be a to hit roll in there someplace.... ***************************** Paul F. Ferraro Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ***************************** ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 11:39:20 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > From: Paul F Ferraro > How about you have a squad with its trusty MG...it sees a truck, MOVING, > and wants to kill it...the concensus is that you roll on the IFT. Well, > what about the moving target modifier? To you subtract itmfrom the to > kill #? How about if it is just the inherent FP of the squad? > > How about if you have a hero firing same said MG, this time against a > STATIONARY soft vehicle. Do you subtract -1 from the to kill? > > Maybe there _is_ supposed to be a to hit roll in there someplace.... Hmmm, if the target is completely unarmored, I don't think there is a TH roll, so there are no movement modifiers which apply. The vehicle is killed if the appropriate result is rolled on the IFT, and the passengers also take any IFT results. If you kill the vehicle, then the passengers get killed if they fail their CS DR. Dave ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 11:44:47 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > From: David Hauth > It would seem to me that this is a logical way to handle it (but maybe > not the right one): > > 1. Make a TH roll; if the result indicates a hit simply apply the results > normally i.e. a turret hit against '*' uses unarmored IFT, an armored > hull hit used TK #. > > 2. If the TH roll indicates a miss, then no effect if the dice indicate > a hull hit, but use '*' line on IFT for turret hit? I think the IFT attack against the crew occurs regardless of whether or not you get a hit with the MG, unless a hull hit means you don't effect the crew at all. But you still can't kill the vehicle unless you score the hit. > A different Dave. That's funny. At the Origins ASL tournament, there were only about 20 players, and 5 of them were named David. Dave ----- Subject: More MGs at AFVs From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 13:12:00 -0640 Howdy, vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) writes: [LMG vs sIG] >By facing, what TK DR will kill the sIG, barring Critical Hits? No CH for MGs. > Front: TK 4, +1 Range = 5, -0 AF = 5. > Side: TK 4, +1 Range = 5, -0 AF = 5. > Rear: TK 4 (IFT * line) = 4. Just a note: a hit on the rear turret will also cause a Specific Collateral Attack. Since the hit was on an unarmored aspect, there would be no CE DRM, so a final 5 DR will be an NMC on the crew and a 6 DR will be a PTC. A slight improvement. Hits on the other aspects will also cause specific collaterals, but since the DR used for the collateral & the TK are the same any result that causes an effective collateral will also kill the tank. With regard to the question, remember that the armor on a zero AF aspect is < 1 cm, which pretty closely approximates sheet metal. It may be an anomoly that for the LMG that it is more vulnerable on the armored aspect, but it isn't much different. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 08:58:07 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > From: Mustafa Unlu > Umm, sans rulebook, but, don't you get to attack the crew on the IFT > if you hit through the unarmoured facing? Is this a fiction of my > imagination? Assuming it is not, is it in addition to the TK roll? > Or is it, Oh no, the dreaded colateral attacks rule!? Yes, you do also hit the crew. And if you have fired using the TH table, I think it is the infamous collateral attack! Dave ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 08:56:06 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs > From david@starfire.utias.utoronto.ca Tue Jul 12 13:58:23 1994 > One thing to consider though ... does the MG need a TH roll when > firing at the vehicle through a * armored facing? If the MG was > firing at an unarmored truck ... doesn't it just roll straight on > the * vehicle line of the IFT? > > If a TH roll is not required then you'd have to factor > TH probabilities into the total chances to kill the vehicle. If I want to kill the AFV, I think the TH roll must be made. On the sIG, only the turret rear facing is unarmored. The only way a kill is possible on the IFT is if you hit the turret rear. If I just wanted to effect the crew, no TH DR would be necessary, but then I don't think there's a chance to kill the vehicle. I just don't understand why it is easier to kill it by hitting the armored front than it is by hitting unarmored rear. Dave ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 11:05:12 -0600 (MDT) From: David Hauth Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs This is my first attempt at rendering my 2 cents worth, but if you are firing at the '*' facing of a sIG you are firing at an unarmored vehicle. Under this circumstance, is it not indistinguishable from firing at (e.g.) a truck? Therefore, you would need *no* TH roll. And, you could use squad IFP as well to help you kill it... If this is so, then it is *not* easier to kill the sIG by firing through an armored facing. Flaws in my reasoning? David Hauth ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 11:35:31 PDT From: vankan@sun10or.or.nps.navy.mil (Capt David Van Kan) Subject: RE: More MGs at AFVs > From: "Tim S. Hundsdorfer" > Now we get to the REAL meat of the issue. > > Any army guy would shoot up the crew and climb inside every infantryman's > dream--their very own Sig! > > But a marine, even a captain-soon-to-be-major, regards this as > unmanly--"Armor, we don' need no stinking armor!" > > Take the collateral attack. Kill the crew. Climb aboard. Oh, yes. Certainly a good deal. But then I'd have to read the rules about infantry driving captured AFVs. Heheheh, wouldn't the German be shocked to recieve 150mm fire from his own guns? Dave ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 15:00:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "P. Gowdy" Subject: TRW Wargamer's group A while ago I saw an email saying there is a TRW wargamer's group in Hermosa Beach at Paul Freiler's Hobby shop. I called that shop and they had no idea what I was talking about. Would someone who knows give me the correct information? Also, are games other than ASL (I know, blasphemy) played there? How about an address and phone number? Basically, I am interested in meeting people face to face who like to play war games on a regular basis. Pete ----- Subject: Re: More MGs at AFVs From: jonathan.vanmechelen@dscmail.com (Jonathan Vanmechelen) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 18:58:00 -0640 Howdy, David Hauth writes: >> OK, but what do you do if only part of the facing is unarmored? Does >> the MG IFT roll also determine hit location? And if it does, and it >> determines that the hit was against the armored Hull, does the MG have >> any effect at all, since it didn't actually make a TH roll? >> >> Does anyone have an answer about hit/kill determination against AFVs >> which have both armored and unarmored aspects within the same facing? > It would seem to me that this is a logical way to handle it > (but maybe not the right one): > > 1. Make a TH roll; if the result indicates a hit simply > apply the results normally i.e. a turret hit against '*' > uses unarmored IFT, an armored hull hit used TK #. > > 2. If the TH roll indicates a miss, then no effect if the > dice indicate a hull hit, but use '*' line on IFT for > turret hit? >From the Q&A: D5.311 "If the turret/upper superstructure of an AFV's rear Target Facing is unarmored, but the hull of the rear Target Facing is armored, then in applying this rule is an attack versus the AFV's rear Target Facing treated as against an unarmored Target facing so that the crew is vulnerable? A. Yes. {24-1}" That is, the vehicle is vulnerable to Small Arms and MG attacks, and such attacks are treated as against a soft vehicle, i.e. no TH/TK. It is not clear whether an MG can attack a partially armored vehicle using the Vehicle Target Type on the TH & TK tables at the MG's option. So long, JR --- ~ 1st 1.11 #2895 ~ Foo ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 16:22 PDT From: john@data.microtekintl.com (John Mantey) Subject: More MGs at AFVs JR writes: >D5.311 "If the turret/upper superstructure of an AFV's rear >Target Facing is unarmored, but the hull of the rear Target >Facing is armored, then in applying this rule is an attack >versus the AFV's rear Target Facing treated as against an >unarmored Target facing so that the crew is vulnerable? >A. Yes. {24-1}" > >That is, the vehicle is vulnerable to Small Arms and MG >attacks, and such attacks are treated as against a soft >vehicle, i.e. no TH/TK. It is not clear whether an MG can >attack a partially armored vehicle using the Vehicle Target >Type on the TH & TK tables at the MG's option. > Extrapolating this just a little more, it also seems to state that you could use vehicular MG's (non-MA) to knock out our nice friendly Sig. Not like you'd ever be able to sneak another AFV into the Sigs rear facing. Funny thought just occurred to me. If you the TK DR == TK # on the unarmored facing of a Sig you'll immobilize it by the unarmored vehicle rules. Just what exactly did you shoot in this instance to get that result??? Trucks at least have vulnerable wheels, engines, drive trains. >So long, > >JR >--- John Mantey john@microtekintl.com Microtek International ...!uunet!data!john 3300 NW 211th Terrace Those who know what's best for us, Hillsboro, OR 97124 Must rise and save us from ourselves. - "Witch Hunt" - RUSH ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 17:07:34 MST From: hancock@ono.geg.mot.com (Don Hancock x2712) Subject: Re: TRW Wargamer's group > > A while ago I saw an email saying there is a TRW wargamer's group > in Hermosa Beach at Paul Freiler's Hobby shop. I called that shop > and they had no idea what I was talking about. Would someone who > knows give me the correct information? Also, are games other than > ASL (I know, blasphemy) played there? How about an address and > phone number? Basically, I am interested in meeting people face > to face who like to play war games on a regular basis. > > Pete > It might have been me. Here's the info I know. Usually every two weeks between 15 and 40 people get together at the TRW off of Redondo Beach Blvd. I believe the address is One Space Park Drive, in the cafeteria. To find out the dates that they play, the TRW group puts out a flier that is usually available at Paul Freiler's Hobby shop. Depending on who you talked to there, they might not know what you're talking about. Ask the guy to look through the fliers by the cash register for it, or ask to talk to somebody else. They play all types of games there. I played my very first FTF asl game there (Tavronitis Bridge) against a guy named Cloyd something. It was fun. I also remember playing various other games too. I hope this info is still current. It's probably been 2 or 3 years since I last went and I only was able to go twice. Don Hancock ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 22:08:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Jeff Shields Subject: Re: AGWAV Is there an AGWAV in progress? If so, who do I contact to be put on the list? Jeff ----- Date: 13 Jul 94 22:46:53 EDT From: Bruce Probst <100033.3661@compuserve.com> Subject: More MGs at AFVs John Mantey writes: >> Funny thought just occurred to me. If you the TK DR == TK # on the >> unarmored facing of a Sig you'll immobilize it by the unarmored >> vehicle rules. Just what exactly did you shoot in this instance to >> get that result??? Trucks at least have vulnerable wheels, engines, >> drive trains. Umm ... the driver? Bruce (Melbourne, Australia) ----- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 22:57:03 EDT From: ripton@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com (Dave Ripton) Subject: Re: AGWAV Hi guys, Jeff asked if there's an AGWAV going on. There is, and Patrik's Germans are just about to finish my Russians off, barring a minor miracle. In any case, I think Carl's mods to The Agony of Doom have resulted in a pretty close game so far, so I like 'em. (For those not around way back when, more the first reinforcement group for the Germans to turn 2, and the second group to turn 5.) As with all administrative requests, the on/off address is asl-request@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov. That way you can annoy Brian to your heart's content and leave the rest of us in peace. Dave "The rest of 'em can change their names now" Ripton ----- From: r.mosher2@genie.geis.com Date: Thu, 14 Jul 94 02:03:00 UTC Subject: Re: TRW Wargamer's group ======= From: ron ======= Sub: Re: TRW Wargamer's group >> A while ago I saw an email saying there is a TRW wargamer's group >> in Hermosa Beach at Paul Freiler's Hobby shop. I called that shop > > It might have been me. Here's the info I know. Usually every two > weeks between 15 and 40 people get together at the TRW off of Redondo > Beach Blvd. I believe the address is One Space Park Drive, in the Ahem! ;) from the latest Strategicon flier---tada- "The Random Wargamers(TRW) meets every other weekend at the TRW complex, building S - Dining Room, in Redondo Beach. For more information contact Mark at 310-323-4437." > They play all types of games there. I played my very first FTF asl game > there (Tavronitis Bridge) against a guy named Cloyd something. It was > fun. I also remember playing various other games too. Yep -shudder all types --and that wasn't just Cloyd --it was CLOYDE ANGELL -- he be the premier west coast player --his help for the new, the innocent, the many in our favorite game is legendary out here. in last year's labor day ASL tourneys he placed 3rd and second --one sat. and one sun. See you at the next Startegicon tournys on the labor day weekend? ron ----- From: c.fago1@genie.geis.com Date: Thu, 14 Jul 94 02:00:00 UTC Subject: KGP Question From: B.SIELSKI1 Brian M. Sielski 4) I have a question that I'm hoping you can post on the INTERNET for me, and then get some of the responses back to me. P8.51 gives the U.S. setup area as ... "within three hexes of any __building__ hex(es) with a coordinate of >=19 but <=34." Therefore, P8.51 means that the Sanatorium, plus a myriad of other buildings are ##NOT## controlled by the U.S. player, since it is not in his setup area. (Most of those buildings <=19) Looking at P8.2, the definition of Strategic Location is ... "Each building/blah,blah,blah... Location." Ergo, according to this, each and every building in KGP is a Strategic Location, including the Sanatorium, but the Sanatorium is Uncontrolled (i.e., not in the U.S. setup area). Looking at P8.6053, we see that ..."A Strategic Location can never be Uncontrolled Territory." So, here is the problem. It's the end of the game and you're doing SETUP AREA DETERMINATION. The game starts and you, the U.S. player does not control the Sanatorium. The game ends, and you and theJGerman player do not control any hex in the Sanatorium. JTry to do SETUP AREA DETERMINATION, and you find you will violate P8.6053. What is one do do? This rule is "clearly unclear." Brian =END= +----------------------------------+---------------------------+ | *-=Carl=-* cdf1@psu.edu | "If I can't picture it, I | | GEnie - C.FAGO1 | can't understand it." | | Carl Fago State College, PA | - Einstein | +----------------------------------+---------------------------+ ----- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 10:50:58 +0200 From: bas@phys.uva.nl (Bas de Bakker) Subject: Re: KGP Question c fago1 writes: [KGP question deleted] Perhaps this unofficial (i.e. unpublished) Q&A helps: P8.6053 Which player initially Controls Strategic Locations which are in neither player's initial setup area? A. Neither player. Delete the second sentence of P8.6053. {KN} Bas. ----- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 94 09:03:50 EDT From: brian@tpocc.gsfc.nasa.gov (Brian Youse) Subject: Help Wanted Guys, I need someone to draft a mini-faq or something which welcomes people to our little slice of cyberspace and gives them details on where the archive sites are, how to contact the ladder, the record, how to get email games, how to post to the list,... Just the basics. Problem is, I'm swamped, and getting more and more "Tell me more..." type of mail every day. I guess that's good, but I don't have the time to keep it up, and a new-user brief would fill this bill quite nicely. Thanks, I could use the help, Brian ----- From: "Alain Chabot" Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 10:34:05 AST Subject: Q/A Compendium Hello I was wondering, has anyone thought of putting ALL of the accumulated questions and answers put to Avalon Hill re SL/ASL in a file downloadable from somewhere? Parts of It? If no such things exists, I wouldn't mind putting some of my time towards creating one. Also, I used to subscribe to On All Front, I hear they are still alive. Do they still have the same address??? Thanks Alain Chabot Universite Sainte-Anne Spiders are special animals. Let them live. ----- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 10:17:03 EDT From: mikeclay@maple.circa.ufl.edu Subject: Scenario discussion: Dead of Winter, First Crisis at AG North Hello ASL Grognards, I am wondering if anyone is interested in discussing tactics and setups for either or both of these two scenarios. If there is an audience, I will post my thoughts on playing the Germans on these two scenarios. I have some favorite setups and tactics that I will reveal if there is an audience. If you are interested, write me an e-mail directly to my address, and I will post my thoughts. The two scenarios are GEN-T6 and GEN-M, incidentally. Mike Clay email: mikeclay@ufcc.ufl.edu