When a unit must rout, how is its rout destination selected and what limits apply to the rout path? Specifically: (1) Must it pick the nearest woods/building hex it can see? (2) Can it take a longer route to avoid interdiction instead of the shortest-MF path? (3) When may it enter a shellhole/entrenchment/pillbox (TEM) to avoid Interdiction even if that prevents reaching the rout destination?
EXPECTED
Per A10.51 the rout destination is the nearest building or woods hex measured in MF from the unit's starting hex at the start of the RtPh (visibility to the destination is irrelevant). That destination may be ignored if the route is through/into a known minefield or FFE or is otherwise not traversable, and a hex may also be ignored if it is no farther from a known enemy unit than the starting hex. Once the destination is determined, the routing unit need not follow the absolute shortest route so long as it reaches that hex during the same RtPh. However, the special allowance to enter a shellhole/entrenchment/pillbox to avoid Interdiction (which uses optional extra MF) applies only when the unit is following the shortest path in MF otherwise; if it does not follow the shortest path it cannot spend those optional extra MF to enter those TEMs.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** (1) No — the destination is the nearest building/woods hex **in MF** (not necessarily visible), with several allowed exceptions. (2) Yes — the routing unit need not use the shortest-MF path; it may take a longer route specifically to avoid Interdiction, even if that means it can no longer reach its declared destination in that RtPh. (3) Always — the owning player may **optionally** pay the extra MF to enter a shellhole/entrenchment/pillbox within a hex, which makes that hex not Open Ground for Interdiction purposes; the cost of entering such fortifications is **not** counted when determining the nearest building/woods hex, so it never forces a change of destination.
---
### (1) Destination Selection
The routing unit must move to the **nearest building or woods hex** (in MF, calculated at the start of its RtPh) unless no such hex can be legally reached within 6 MF (A10.51). "Nearest" is determined by the number of MF required to reach it, **not** by LOS or visibility. However, several hexes may be **ignored** when selecting the destination:
- A hex of the **same building** the unit began its RtPh in (A10.5 EXC).
- A building/woods hex that is **no farther from a Known enemy unit** than the unit's starting hex (A10.5 EXC).
- If **no** non-ignorable building/woods Location can be reached within 6 MF, the unit may rout to **any** terrain hex consistent with the other restrictions and need not rout toward the nearest woods/building (A10.5).
The destination is declared at the start of the RtPh and must be attempted; if a newly-Known enemy unit prevents reaching it, a new destination is re-figured from that point (A10.51).
### (2) Longer Route to Avoid Interdiction
**Yes.** A10.51 explicitly states: *"As long as it reaches that hex during a single RtPh, it need not use the shortest route, but as it follows the shortest path in MF otherwise, it may enter a hex to avoid Interdiction even if it can no longer reach that woods/building hex in a single RtPh."*
This means the unit can deviate from the shortest-MF path to avoid Open Ground hexes that would trigger Interdiction, even if that deviation makes it impossible to reach the declared destination in that RtPh. The unit simply ends its RtPh wherever it can, subject to the normal restrictions (not ADJACENT to a Known armed enemy, etc.).
### (3) Entering Shellholes/Entrenchments/Pillboxes to Avoid Interdiction
Per A10.531, a routing unit may pay **combined entry costs** to enter an Open Ground hex that contains a shellhole, entrenchment, or pillbox. If the unit pays only the minimum COT to enter the hex, the hex remains Open Ground for Interdiction purposes. But if it pays the **extra MF** to actually enter the fortification (e.g., +1 MF for a foxhole per B27.41), the hex is **not** Open Ground, and Interdiction cannot be claimed.
Crucially, A10.531 states: *"The cost to enter/exit Fortifications within a hex are not part of the total MF cost used when calculating the nearest building/woods hex. Whether a broken unit pays such MF costs during its RtPh is up to the owning player and the speed with which he wishes to enter such terrain; he does not have to ignore the safer and higher MF cost option in order to reach cover in the same RtPh, although this is his option."*
Thus the owning player may **always** choose to pay the extra MF to enter a shellhole/entrenchment/pillbox to gain TEM and avoid Interdiction, without affecting the destination calculation. This is a voluntary option available in any hex containing such fortifications.
References:
- (A10.5) Routing — general requirements and exceptions for ignoring building/woods hexes
- (A10.51) Direction — destination is nearest building/woods in MF; may take longer route to avoid Interdiction
- (A10.531) Open Ground — fortification entry costs are optional and not counted for nearest-cover calculation; paying them negates Open Ground status
- (A10.53) Interdiction — conditions for Interdiction in Open Ground
- (B27.41) Foxhole/Entrenchment — MF cost to enter
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Destination selection (nearest building/woods in MF, ignorable hexes) matches, but the model inverts the two path limits: it allows leaving the shortest-MF path to avoid Interdiction even when the destination can no longer be reached, and makes the TEM-entry allowance unconditional, whereas A10.51 permits a non-shortest route only if the destination is still reached and ties the extra-MF TEM entry to otherwise following the shortest path.
During the Movement Phase, a Stuka makes a point attack against a hex that contains both friendly and enemy ground units (the enemy and friendly are under a CC counter but not yet locked in melee). Does the attack affect both friendly and enemy units or only enemy units? Does the answer change depending on A) whether it's a bomb or MG attack, B) whether the attack occurs in the MPh or the DFPh, or C) whether the attack uses ATT?
EXPECTED
Non-ATT (Area Target Type) air attacks (e.g., bomb delivery methods that are not ATT, and MG strafes / Vehicle Target Type [VTT] & Infantry Target Type[ITT]) affect only enemy units in the target hex (per A7.4). Phase does not change that. An ATT (the air-to-ground ATT) is different: if an ATT hits, it affects all in-LOS ground units in the target hex, including friendly units (per E7.422 and C3.33). ATT also applies to non-moving units in the hex (i.e., aircraft attacks can affect non-moving units), so friendly units can be hit by ATT regardless of phase.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The Stuka's point attack affects **only the enemy units** in the hex, not the friendly units. The units are under a CC counter but are **not yet locked in Melee**, so the "Melee" exception in A7.4 does not apply, and A7.4 prohibits purposely attacking friendly units unless a specific rule allows it. None of the three variants (A, B, or C) change this result for a Stuka point attack.
---
**Why only enemy units are affected:**
- **A7.4 (Target Determination)** states that fire affects "all those **enemy (or Melee)** units in the target Location." A unit/weapon may purposely attack friendly units only when specifically allowed (e.g., Melee, Prisoners, OBA, Area Target Type).
- **A11.141 Q&A** confirms that units merely under a CC counter are **not** "Melee units" — only units locked in Melee (with a Melee counter) qualify for the exception that forces all units in the Location to be attacked. Since the question specifies "under a CC counter but not yet locked in melee," the friendly units are not Melee units and are therefore not affected by the attack.
**Sub-questions:**
- **A) Bomb vs MG attack:** No difference. Both are aircraft attacks resolved under E7.4, and A7.4's target determination applies equally regardless of weapon type.
- **B) MPh vs DFPh:** No difference. Aircraft may attack during the opponent's MPh or the plane's DFPh (E7.4). A7.4 applies in both phases (the "except Defensive First Fire" clause in A7.4 refers to the defender's Defensive First Fire sub-phase, not to aircraft attacks).
- **C) Using ATT (Area Target Type):** If the attack *were* using Area Target Type, C3.33 states it "hits all (including friendly) non-Aerial units in the target hex." However, a Stuka point attack does **not** use ATT — it uses its own MG and bomb resolution rules (E7.403). So this variant does not apply to the Stuka's attack.
**References:**
- (A7.4) Target Determination — fire affects only enemy or Melee units; friendly units may not be purposely attacked unless a specific rule allows
- (A11.15) Melee — only units locked in Melee force all units in the Location to be attacked
- (A11.141 Q&A) Units under a CC counter are not Melee units and are not immune to LLMC/LLTC, confirming they are not treated as Melee for target determination
- (E7.4) Ground Support — aircraft attack rules
- (C3.33) Area Target Type — hits all units including friendly, but not used by Stuka point attacks
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Enemy-only for non-ATT attacks and phase irrelevance match A7.4. The model states the ATT rule correctly (C3.33 hits all incl. friendly) but then dismisses it as inapplicable and headlines that none of the variants change the answer, contradicting the expected answer that ATT does change it.
HUMAN NOTES
The model's claim is wrong: "Point Attack" names how the aircraft approaches its target, not which Target Type its bomb uses. So the Area Target Type (ATT) can be used in a Stuka Point Attack.
If a unit expends 1 MF/MP and is attacked, may it be attacked on that same MF/MP by a different weapon or by its inherent firepower? For example, a squad fails an initial PIAT/PF check and sacrifices its inherent FP to attempt a second PF check; if the second PF check succeeds, may that PF fire at the same target on that same 1 MP expenditure?
EXPECTED
Yes. Per the A8.14 Q&A, a unit that expends 1 MF/MP may be attacked on that same MF/MP by a different weapon or by its inherent FP. Likewise, a squad possessing two weapons not subject to Mandatory Firegroup may fire both on the same one-point MF/MP expenditure (i.e., two PFs are allowed).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes. A squad may fire two different weapons (or two PFs) at the same target on the same 1 MF/MP expenditure, provided Mandatory Firegroup does not apply. In your example, the first failed PF check counts as one SW usage; the squad may then attempt a second PF check (sacrificing its inherent FP per A7.351), and if that second check succeeds, the PF may fire at the same target on that same 1 MP expenditure.
---
The key authority is the official Q&A to **A8.14**:
> *"If a unit expends 1 MF/MP and is attacked by a unit, may it be attacked on that same MF/MP by a different weapon/its inherent FP if Mandatory Firegroup does not apply? … May a squad possessing two weapons not requiring Mandatory Firegroup fire both on the same one point MF/MP expenditure, e.g. fire two PFs?"*
> **Answer: Yes to both.** [K33]
This directly covers firing two PFs (or a SW then inherent FP, or vice versa) on the same single MF/MP expenditure.
**Regarding the specific PF/PIAT scenario:**
- **C13.31** states: *"Provided a squad has not yet fired its inherent FP, it can attempt to fire a second PF in the same phase even if its first attempt did not yield a shot, but that would constitute use of two SW and cause the squad to lose its inherent FP for that phase (A7.351)."*
- **A7.35** confirms: *"Even if a unit's PF Check dr fails to result in a shot, that PF Check constitutes use of a SW."*
- **A7.351** allows a squad to fire up to two SW in the same fire phase; using two SW causes loss of inherent FP until the CCPh, but does not prevent the second SW from firing.
Thus the sequence is legal: first PF check (SW #1, fails) → second PF check (SW #2, succeeds) → the successful PF fires at the same target on the same 1 MP expenditure. The only restriction is that Mandatory Firegroup (**A7.55**) does not apply to PF vs PF (they are not weapons that must combine), so separate attacks are permitted.
References:
- **(A8.14 Q&A)** Follow-up attacks on same MF/MP — "Yes to both" for multiple SW/inherent FP
- **(C13.31)** Second PF attempt allowed if inherent FP not yet fired; counts as two SW
- **(A7.35)** PF Check (even if failed) constitutes SW usage
- **(A7.351)** Squad may fire up to two SW per phase; loses inherent FP but second SW still fires
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes per the A8.14 Q&A: same MF/MP may draw a second attack from another weapon or inherent FP, and two PFs may fire on one expenditure. Exact, with C13.31/A7.351 detail.
If a multi-hex FG cowers, is Random Selection applied across all individual units (and their side weapons) to determine which unit(s) are marked with a Prep or Final Fire counter, or are hex(es) randomly selected first and then units within those hexes chosen?
EXPECTED
Random Selection is used to determine the unit(s) (and their SW) that become marked with a Prep or Final Fire counter — units are selected directly; hexes are irrelevant (A7.9).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Random Selection is applied across all individual units (and their SW) in the FG, regardless of which hex they occupy. There is no hex-level selection step.
---
The rule at (A7.9) states: *"If a FG cowers, Random Selection is used to determine the unit(s) (and its SW) that becomes marked with a Prep or Final Fire counter."* The text refers to "unit(s)" directly — not to hexes first, then units within them. The Q&A confirms this: in the example of Squad A (with LMG) and Squad B firing as a FG, Random Selection designated Squad B as the one marked with Final Fire, with no mention of any hex-level intermediate step (A7.9 & A9.22 Q&A, [K34]).
References:
- (A7.9) Cowering — Random Selection determines which unit(s) and their SW are marked
- (A7.9 Q&A, K34) Squad A + Squad B FG cowers; Random Selection picks Squad B directly
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Random Selection picks units (and SW) directly; hexes irrelevant (A7.9). Exact.
During the enemy MPh, a squad fires the ATR it possesses at a moving AFV and misses. Has the squad's inherent firepower fired, and what gets marked with a First Fire counter?
EXPECTED
Only the ATR. A8.1 places First Fire counters on the units/weapons that have fired and exhausted ROF, so the ATR is marked and the squad's inherent FP has not fired: it remains available for later Defensive First Fire that MPh and for CC Reaction Fire. Note for CC Reaction Fire that D7.213 treats a unit as marked if its SW carries a First/Final Fire counter, so the ATR's counter does reduce the squad's CCV by one.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The squad's inherent firepower has **not** fired. Only the **ATR** is marked with a First Fire counter; the squad itself is not marked.
---
Per **A7.351**, a squad may fire any one SW/Gun without losing its inherent FP. When the squad fires only the ATR (one SW), its inherent FP remains available and has not yet been used. Therefore the squad's inherent FP is not considered to have "fired."
Per **A8.1**, the DEFENDER must place a First Fire counter above each unit/weapon that has fired and exhausted its ROF. The ATR has fired and, being a single-shot ordnance SW with no ROF, has exhausted its ability to fire during this phase. So the ATR receives a First Fire counter. The squad itself, having used only its SW (not its inherent FP), is not marked.
References:
- **(A7.351)** A squad may fire any one SW/Gun without the squad losing its inherent FP; this inherent FP can be used for a separate attack in the same fire phase.
- **(A8.1)** The DEFENDER must place "First Fire" counters above all units/weapons that have fired and exhausted their ROF.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Only the ATR is marked (A8.1); inherent FP has not fired. Matches. The D7.213 note that the SW's counter still reduces CCV for CC Reaction Fire is not addressed.
An AFV enters the Location of an unbroken, unpinned squad and conducts an overrun that has no effect on it. Must the squad attempt CC Reaction Fire against the AFV, and therefore take a PAATC?
EXPECTED
No. CC Reaction Fire is optional: D7.21 says an eligible DEFENDER 'may attempt' it, and a squad that declines takes no PAATC. The one mandatory case is FPF CC Reaction Fire (D7.212): a unit already marked with a Final Fire counter that is overrun by other than an unarmored vehicle with no PRC must attempt the CC attack (or FPF Non-CC Reaction Fire where allowed), even if pinned.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No — the squad is not required to attempt CC Reaction Fire. The rule says a qualifying unit **may** attempt CC Reaction Fire, meaning it is optional, not mandatory. Therefore it does not have to take a PAATC.
---
The key rule is **D7.21 / 7.21 CC REACTION FIRE** (from the retrieved excerpts):
> "Each Infantry/Cavalry DEFENDER unit that is unbroken, unpinned and neither Unarmed (A20.5) nor in Melee **may** attempt CC Reaction Fire"
The word "may" establishes permissive, not obligatory, action. The squad can choose to attempt CC Reaction Fire (and thus take a PAATC if the vehicle is an AFV) or decline to do so. If it declines, no PAATC is required.
References:
- (D7.21 / 7.21) CC Reaction Fire — "may attempt" (permissive, not mandatory)
- (D7.21) PAATC requirement — a PAATC is required only if the unit chooses to attempt CC Reaction Fire against an AFV (unless exempt per A11.6 or A12.41)
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; CC Reaction Fire is 'may attempt' (D7.21), no PAATC if declined. Matches. The FPF CC Reaction Fire mandatory case (D7.212) is not mentioned.
A squad elects CC Reaction Fire against an overrunning AFV and fails its PAATC. What happens, may it still make the attack, and is its Pin removed if the AFV is later destroyed? If a second AFV then enters the Location, does the squad need another PAATC?
EXPECTED
It is pinned and may make neither that CC Reaction Fire attack nor a Non-CC Reaction Fire attack instead (D7.21). D7.213 confirms no pinned unit, however it became pinned, may make CC Reaction Fire; the only exception is FPF CC Reaction Fire (D7.212), where a unit already marked Final Fire must attack even while pinned. The Pin lasts for the rest of the Player Turn (A7.8); destroying the AFV does not remove it. A PAATC covers only the same vehicle (D7.21), so an attempt against a second AFV needs its own PAATC, which the squad can only take if it is unpinned (or FPF applies).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The squad becomes pinned and cannot make any Reaction Fire attack (CC or non-CC) against that AFV. The Pin is **not** removed if the AFV is later destroyed — it lasts until the end of the Player Turn (or the unit breaks/berserks/Battle-Hardens/becomes-heroic). If a second AFV then enters the Location, the squad is pinned and thus **ineligible** to attempt CC Reaction Fire at all; even if it were unpinned, a new PAATC would be required because it is a different vehicle.
---
**What happens on a failed PAATC:** Per D7.21, the DEFENDER "becomes pinned and can neither make that CC Reaction Fire attack nor opt to make a Non-CC Reaction Fire attack instead." The squad is done for that vehicle.
**Pin removal:** Per A7.8, Pin counters are removed only at the end of the current Player Turn or if the unit subsequently breaks, goes berserk, Battle-Hardens, or becomes heroic. Destruction of the AFV that caused the pin is not a removal condition.
**Second AFV entering:** D7.21 requires the DEFENDER to be "unbroken, unpinned" to attempt CC Reaction Fire. Since the squad is pinned, it is not eligible. The "need not pass more than one PAATC to attack the **same** vehicle" exception (D7.21) applies only to the same vehicle — a second AFV is a different vehicle. Even if the squad were unpinned, it would need a new PAATC for the new AFV.
References:
- (D7.21) CC Reaction Fire — failure to pass PAATC causes pin and prohibits any Reaction Fire attack
- (A7.8) Pin — removal only at end of Player Turn or via break/berserk/BH/heroic
- (D7.21) "A DEFENDER need not pass more than one PAATC to attack the **same** vehicle" — different vehicle requires new PAATC
- (D7.21) Eligibility requires "unbroken, unpinned" — pinned units cannot attempt CC Reaction Fire [EXC: FPF CC Reaction Fire (D7.212), which requires being marked with a Final Fire counter when OVR, not applicable here]
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Pinned, no CC or Non-CC Reaction Fire; Pin lasts the Player Turn (A7.8); a second AFV needs its own PAATC, only possible if unpinned. Exact, FPF exception noted.
An AFV conducts an overrun during its MPh. May it fire in the following AFPh?
EXPECTED
No. An OVR is a form of Bounding First Fire (D7.1), so the vehicle is marked with a Bounding First Fire counter (D3.3) and, having fired in its MPh, may not fire again in the AFPh. It may still conduct further overruns in the same MPh if it has the MP (D7.14).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. An overrun is a form of Bounding First Fire (D7.1), so the vehicle is marked with a Bounding Fire counter and cannot fire during its AFPh (D3.3). Even if the vehicle retained Multiple ROF, the Q&A explicitly prohibits using the MA in the AFPh after an OVR.
---
**Reasoning:**
1. **D7.1** states: "An OVR is a form of Bounding First Fire."
2. **D3.3** states: "Any vehicle that fires during its MPh is using Bounding First Fire and is marked with a Bounding Fire counter [EXC: if the only weapon fired did not exhaust its Multiple ROF]. A vehicle (including its PRC) with either a Prep Fire or Bounding Fire counter cannot fire during its AFPh."
3. The OVR attack is resolved on the IFT using the vehicle's FP (including PRC) — it is not a weapon with a ROF, so the "did not exhaust its Multiple ROF" exception does not apply to the OVR itself.
4. **D3.32** allows a vehicle that retained Multiple ROF and fired no other weapons to fire that weapon once in the AFPh, but the Q&A for **D3.3, D3.32 & D7.1** explicitly answers:
> "May a vehicle that voluntarily uses its MA only during an OVR and rolls ≤ its ROF on the OVR attack, use its MA in a non-OVR attack during the MPh or AFPh? **A. No.**"
Therefore, the vehicle is prohibited from firing in the AFPh after conducting an overrun.
References:
- (D7.1) Overrun is a form of Bounding First Fire
- (D3.3) Bounding Fire counter prevents AFPh fire
- (D3.32) Final Fire exception — overridden by Q&A for OVR
- (D7.13) OVR restrictions — vehicle marked with Bounding Fire counter cannot OVR [EXC: Multiple OVR]
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No: OVR is Bounding First Fire (D7.1), Bounding Fire counter bars AFPh fire (D3.3). Exact, plus the D3.32/D7.1 Q&A. Further OVRs in the same MPh not addressed.
A pinned squad whose ATR is marked with a First Fire counter makes FPF CC Reaction Fire against a non-stopped AFV. What is its CCV, what DRM applies to the CC DR, and what results eliminate or immobilize the AFV?
EXPECTED
CCV 3, with a +2 DRM; in practice only an Original 2 can succeed.
- Base squad CCV 5 (A11.5).
- -1 for being pinned (A11.5: a CCV subject to any FP-halving penalty, such as pinning per A7.8, is reduced by one per penalty) = 4.
- -1 because CC Reaction Fire by a unit marked with a First/Final Fire counter, including its SW, has its CCV reduced by one (D7.213) = 3.
- The CC DR takes +2 for a Motion/non-stopped vehicle (A11.51); that is a DRM, not a CCV change.
- A11.5 thresholds: eliminated on a Final CC DR < 3 (burning wreck if <= half the CCV), immobilized on a Final CC DR = 3. With a +2 DRM the lowest Final DR is 4, so no ordinary result can eliminate or immobilize the AFV.
- Unlikely Kill (A11.501): an Original 2 CC DR always gives a chance; roll a third die: 1 = burning wreck, 2 = eliminated, 3 = immobilized, 4-6 = no effect.
(A pinned unit can only be attacking at all under FPF, D7.212, and that attack DR also serves as its NMC.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The squad's CCV is 3 (5 base, −1 pinned, −1 for being marked with a First Fire counter). The CC DR has a +2 DRM because the AFV is non‑stopped. With a CCV of 3 and a +2 DRM, the only way to affect the AFV is an Original 2 DR, which triggers an Unlikely Kill: roll a third die — dr 1 = burning wreck, dr 2 = eliminated, dr 3 = immobilized, otherwise no effect.
---
**Step 1 — CCV calculation (A11.5, D7.213):**
Base squad CCV = 5.
Pinned = −1 (A11.5: "A CCV subject to any form of halving FP penalty… is reduced by one for each such penalty").
Unit (or its SW) marked with a First Fire counter = −1 (D7.213: "CC Reaction Fire conducted by a unit marked with a First/Final Fire counter… has its CCV reduced by one").
Calculation: 5 − 1 − 1 = **3 CCV**.
**Step 2 — DRM (A11.51):**
Attack vs a Motion/non‑stopped vehicle: **+2 DRM**.
**Step 3 — Results (A11.5, A11.501):**
With CCV = 3 and +2 DRM, the Final DR is always ≥ 4 (Original DR 2 → Final 4, which is > CCV 3), so no normal elimination or immobilization is possible.
However, an **Original 2 DR** invokes the **Unlikely Kill** procedure (A11.501): roll a third die.
- dr 1 → burning wreck
- dr 2 → eliminated
- dr 3 → immobilized
- dr ≥ 4 → no effect
No other Original DR can harm the AFV.
**References:**
- (A11.5) CC vs Vehicle — CCV values and pinned penalty
- (A11.501) Unlikely Kill — Original 2 DR triggers third‑die result
- (A11.51) CC DRM — +2 for Motion/non‑stopped vehicle
- (D7.213) CC Reaction Fire differences — CCV reduced by one if unit/SW marked with First/Final Fire counter
- (D7.212) FPF CC Reaction Fire — pinned unit must still attack
JUDGE REASONING
[Calculation] CCV 3 (5 -1 pinned -1 First Fire SW), +2 DRM for non-stopped, only Original 2 via Unlikely Kill with the third-die table. Exact.
A T-34 moves into a building and declares an overrun (no cellar fall or rubble) but bogs. Before the overrun resolves, an enemy StuG hits the T-34 with AP, fails to destroy it, and the crew abandons the vehicle. Does the overrun still occur, and if so is the overrun firepower halved (1/2 FP) because the vehicle is now uncrewed/immobile?
EXPECTED
Yes, the overrun still resolves, at half of its declared FP.
- Sequence (D7.1): the OVR is declared as one combined MP expenditure with entry of the hex. The Bog DR and any defensive fire prompted by that expenditure resolve before the OVR does, so the bog and the StuG's shot both come first; the declared OVR then goes ahead.
- Halving (D7.11, D8.2): a bogged vehicle is Immobile, and D7.11 halves the total OVR FP of a vehicle that becomes Immobile (or is even destroyed) before it can resolve its OVR. The bog alone triggers this.
- Crew loss (D7.11 Q&A [J1]): a crew that is eliminated or breaks after the OVR is declared makes the vehicle Immobile and the OVR FP is halved; abandonment is treated the same way. It is one halving, not two, and the base FP is not recomputed as if an uncrewed vehicle had declared the attack.
- How the crew left (D5.5): a bogged vehicle hit by direct-fire ordnance that fails to destroy it, but would have on an Original DR of 5, forces an Immobilization TC; failure places the crew beneath the vehicle under an Abandoned counter. Voluntary abandonment (D5.41) is not available to a vehicle that has moved this turn.
Result: the OVR FP as declared (base plus manned MG/IFE additions per D7.11) × 1/2, then TEM (D7.15) and any concealment halving (A12.13) as normal.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the overrun still occurs, and its FP is halved (1/2 FP). The T-34 bogged in the target hex (not outside it), so it is in the correct Location to resolve the OVR. Because the vehicle is Immobile (bogged, and later abandoned/uncrewed), D7.11 requires the OVR FP to be halved.
---
**Why the OVR still occurs:** Per D7.1, the OVR is resolved after the Bog DR and Defensive First Fire are resolved. The T-34 bogged *in* the building hex it was entering (the target hex), unlike the hedge-crossing case where the vehicle bogged in the hex it was *leaving* and never entered the OVR hex (Q&A D7.1/B9.4 — "Does the OVR still occur? A. No"). Since the T-34 is in the same Location as the target, the OVR proceeds.
**Why the FP is halved:** D7.11 states: *"The total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR."* A bogged vehicle is Immobile (D8.2). The official Q&A for D7.11 confirms: *"If a vehicle's crew is eliminated or breaks after it has declared an overrun attack... the overrun FP is halved."* The crew abandoning the vehicle (making it uncrewed/Immobile) does not change this — the FP was already halved due to the bog, and remains halved.
**What FP is used:** With the crew gone, the MA and MGs are no longer manned and contribute nothing. The base OVR FP is 2 (for an AFV with no manned usable weapons; D7.11), then halved for Immobility = **1 FP** (plus any applicable halving for a concealed target per A12.13).
References:
- (D7.1) OVR resolution order — Bog DR and Defensive First Fire resolved first, then OVR
- (D7.11) OVR FP halved if vehicle becomes Immobile/destroyed before resolution
- (D8.2) Bogged vehicle is Immobile
- (D5.4) Abandonment — vehicle becomes uncrewed; per (A11.61) an abandoned AFV is treated as CE and Immobile
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes, the OVR resolves at half FP after the Bog DR and DFF, and the model correctly cites the D7.11 crew-loss Q&A. But it then recomputes the base FP as an uncrewed vehicle's 2 FP (halved to 1), which contradicts the expected answer's explicit point that the declared FP is halved once and not recomputed as if uncrewed. Forced abandonment via D5.5 not addressed.
Can a glider land in a hex that contains enemy units which are unknown to the attacker?
EXPECTED
Yes. Enemy units in the hex, known or unknown, do not prevent a glider from landing there.
- No landing restriction exists: E8.2 lets the attacker choose any Intended Landing Hex, and E8.22 (Landing DR overshoot/short) and E8.211 (Evasive Action) can put a glider on enemy units involuntarily anyway.
- E8.232: the landing of a glider has no effect on other units, terrain, or Fortifications in that hex.
- Unknown units are not revealed by the landing. A12.15 (reveal and force back) covers infantry/cavalry moving into the Location; A12.41 covers a vehicle expending MP to enter. A placed, landing glider is neither.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a glider can land in a hex that contains enemy units unknown to the attacker. The landing has no effect on those units, and the glider/its contents do not cause them to lose concealment.
---
The relevant rules are:
- **E8.232** states: *"The landing of a glider has no effect on other units/terrain/Fortifications in that hex."* This means the presence of enemy units — whether known, concealed, or hidden — does not prevent the glider from landing in that hex, and the landing does not disturb or affect those units in any way.
- **Official Q&A (E8.21, E8.3, E9.3 & E9.43)**: *"Neither Glider/Parachute counters nor their contents can cause enemy units to lose concealment."* So even if the hex contains concealed or hidden enemy units unknown to the attacker, the glider's landing does not force them to lose concealment or reveal themselves.
- **E8.2**: Gliders are placed in their Intended Landing Hex (ILH) at the start of the MPh while still Aerial. **E8.22** resolves the landing DR. **E8.4** then places the glider's contents onboard during the AFPh. At no point in this sequence is there a prohibition against landing in a hex containing enemy units.
Thus, a glider may freely land in a hex occupied by enemy units unknown to the attacker, and those units remain unaffected and concealed (if they were concealed) until the glider's passengers debark in the AFPh.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; E8.232 landing has no effect on units in the hex, no restriction on the ILH, and unknown units are not revealed (Q&A). Matches.
A11.8 requires a vehicle to be on a road and adjacent to building hexes on both sides to be subject to CC Reaction fire and street fighting. If one of those adjacent building hexes is rubble (B24.1 says a rubble location is no longer a building location), does that rubble hex still meet the requirement for street fighting?
EXPECTED
Under the standard ASL rules, rubble is not a building location/hex (B24.1) and therefore does not satisfy A11.8's requirement that the vehicle be adjacent to building hexes on both sides for CC Reaction fire/street fighting. Some Special Scenario Rules (SSRs) explicitly state that rubble still counts as a building hex for street-fighting purposes (e.g., RF8), in which case the rubble would count, but only when an SSR says so.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. A rubble hex does not meet the requirement for Street Fighting under A11.8. A11.8 requires the vehicle to be ADJACENT to a **building** hex on both sides of the road, and B24.1 explicitly states that a rubbled Location is no longer a building Location.
---
The rule A11.8 states: "Any vehicle in a road hex and ADJACENT to a **building hex** on both sides of that road is especially vulnerable to CC in that hex." The term "building hex" is the key qualifier.
B24.1 is unambiguous: "A rubbled Location is no longer a building Location." Therefore, a hex that has been rubbled cannot satisfy the "building hex" requirement of A11.8, regardless of whether the original structure was a building before being rubbled.
This interpretation is confirmed by an official Q&A (K33) addressing the Red Barricades map, where a special SSR (RB8) makes rubble eligible for Street Fighting "like a building." Even under that SSR, the answer was **No** — a unit in a rubble hex could not use Street Fighting Ambush against an AFV in an adjacent road hex. Under standard (non-SSR) rules, the answer is even more clearly no.
References:
- (A11.8) Street Fighting — requires adjacency to a "building hex" on both sides of the road
- (B24.1) Rubble — "A rubbled Location is no longer a building Location"
- (A11.8 Q&A, K33) "In the image (RB map) wherein Rubble is eligible for Street-Fighting Ambush like a building. Would a unit in G7 be eligible for Street-Fighting Ambush against an AFV in G8? ... A. No to both."
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No: rubble is not a building Location (B24.1), so A11.8 is not met; SSR can change that. Matches; the model reads the K33 Q&A as still 'No' under RB8, but does acknowledge the SSR making rubble eligible.
A Comet tank was previously stunned and its stunned counter is flipped to the +1 (Recovered‑Stun) side. When firing a smoke mortar (making a smoke dispenser usage attempt), does the +1 DRM from the Recovered‑Stun apply to that roll?
EXPECTED
No. The +1 DRM from Recovered‑Stun does NOT apply to smoke dispenser usage attempts. D5.34 specifies the actions the Recovered‑Stun +1 applies to, and smoke dispenser usage (per D13.x) is not one of them, so the +1 is not added to that die roll.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, the +1 DRM from the Recovered-Stun counter does **not** apply to a smoke dispenser usage attempt. D5.34 lists the specific DR types that receive the +1 penalty (TH, MG/IFE/FT IFT, CC, TC/MC, Crew Survival, or OVR DR), and a smoke dispenser usage DR is not among them.
---
The Recovered-Stun (+1) counter's effects are defined exclusively in **D5.34**:
> *"This indicates that the AFV is no longer Stunned but must add one to any **TH, MG/IFE/FT IFT, CC, TC/MC, Crew Survival, or OVR DR** it makes."*
A smoke dispenser usage attempt (per **D13.3**) is a separate type of DR — it is not a To Hit roll, not an IFT roll, not a CC/TC/MC/Crew Survival/OVR roll. The +1 penalty is limited to the enumerated categories and does not extend to smoke dispenser usage.
Additionally, **D13.2** only prohibits a smoke dispenser attempt while the AFV is currently **Stunned** (i.e., the Stun counter is still on its "Stun" side). Once the counter is flipped to the "+1" side, the AFV is no longer Stunned and is eligible to attempt smoke dispenser usage — with no +1 penalty from the recovered-stun state.
References:
- **(D5.34)** STUN — lists the specific DR types affected by the +1 penalty
- **(D13.2)** USAGE — prohibits usage only while the AFV is Stunned (not while it has the +1 counter)
- **(D13.3)** FIRING — lists the DRMs that apply to smoke dispenser usage (BU +1, Case A TH DRM, Non-Stopped +2, hindrance); no mention of a Stun-recovery DRM
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; D5.34 enumerates the DR types and smoke dispenser usage is not among them. Exact.
During Defensive First Fire, can a stopped vehicle, as the result of a successful Motion Status Attempt, be declared to be in Reverse Motion?
EXPECTED
Yes. The official Q&A on D2.24 and D2.401 asks exactly this — can a stopped vehicle, during Defensive First Fire, declare itself in reverse Motion after a successful Motion Status Attempt — and answers Yes [K34].
- Motion Status Attempt (D2.401): during an enemy unit's MPh a DEFENDING Mobile vehicle may make one Motion attempt dr, ≤ the MF/MP that unit has expended in its LOS, provided the unit was not in the vehicle's LOS earlier that Player Turn and the vehicle is not already marked with a First/Final/Intensive Fire counter. Success places a Motion counter and allows a free VCA/TCA change (Bog Check if required).
- Reverse Motion (D2.24): a Reverse Motion counter lets a vehicle be in Motion while using Reverse Movement, and all Motion rules apply unchanged apart from the direction of travel, so the Motion gained by the attempt may be declared as Reverse Motion (NA only if the vehicle is prohibited from using Reverse Movement).
- Consequences are the normal Motion ones: Case J +2 To Hit DRM against it (D2.41); its own ordnance fires with the Motion DRM (Case C4) and other FP is halved as Motion Fire (D2.42); a red-MP AFV must make the Mechanical Reliability DR (D2.51), and an Immobilization result cancels the Motion and VCA change (D2.401).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a stopped vehicle can declare Reverse Motion after a successful Motion Status Attempt during its Defensive First Fire.
---
The Q&A for D2.24 & D2.401 directly confirms this: "Can a Stopped vehicle, during its DFF, declare to be in reverse Motion after a successful Motion Status Attempt? A. Yes."
References:
- (D2.24 & D2.401 Q&A) — A stopped vehicle may, during its DFF, declare Reverse Motion after a successful Motion Status Attempt. [K34]
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes, citing the D2.24/D2.401 Q&A verbatim. The Motion Status Attempt mechanics and Motion consequences in the expected answer are not addressed, but the question is answered exactly.
Does the Searching rule (A12.152) apply to HIP units, since 12.3 states that HIP is a form of concealment?
EXPECTED
Yes. Searching applies to HIP units because HIP is a form of concealment; the last line of A12.152 states that all enemy concealed units revealed lose their “?” (or if hidden are placed on the board with a “?”), so HIP units can be found by Searching.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the Searching rule (A12.152) applies to HIP units. The rule explicitly states that hidden (HIP) units are "placed on board with a '?'" when revealed by a Search, and A12.3 confirms that HIP is a form of concealment.
---
A12.152 states that a Search reveals "concealed enemy units" and that "all enemy concealed units revealed lose their '?' **(or if hidden are placed on board with a '?')**." The parenthetical "if hidden" directly addresses HIP units — they are not simply stripped of concealment; they are placed on the board with a concealment counter.
A12.3 confirms that "HIP is a form of concealment" and that "Hidden Status is considered the equal of concealment except as otherwise specified." No exception exempts HIP units from Search.
Additionally, A12.33 (Fortifications) notes that minefields can be discovered by a successful Search, and the official Q&A for A12.152, E1.16 & E2 confirms that even HIP fortifications are revealed by Searching — they do not get an exemption.
References:
- (A12.152) Searching — "All enemy concealed units revealed lose their '?' (or if hidden are placed on board with a '?')"
- (A12.3) Hidden Initial Placement — "HIP is a form of concealment... Hidden Status is considered the equal of concealment except as otherwise specified."
- (A12.33) Fortifications — notes minefields can be discovered by Search
- (A12.152, E1.16 & E2 Q&A) — "Is a fortification not revealed by searching [A12.152] if E1.16 is in effect? A. No... they would be revealed."
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; A12.152's 'if hidden are placed on board with ?' and A12.3 HIP as concealment. Exact.
Is there a capacity limit to the number of units that can be in a shellhole hex after creating the shellhole (expending 2 MF)?
EXPECTED
There is no special capacity limit imposed by a shellhole hex. A shellhole hex represents an area pockmarked by many craters, not a single confined pit, so any number of units may be in the hex subject only to the normal stacking limits that apply to that hex (see B2.0/B2.1).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, shellholes have no separate capacity limit. The normal stacking limits of the hex (per A5.1) apply, and the only restriction is that there can be at most one shellhole counter per hex (B2.1).
---
Shellholes are terrain features, not entrenchments. Unlike foxholes (which have explicit capacity limits per B27.12 — e.g., a foxhole 1S counter holds one squad-equivalent), the shellhole rules in B2 contain no capacity or stacking restriction beyond the normal hex stacking limits. The only limit stated is "a maximum of one per hex" for the shellhole counter itself (B2.1). Units that expend 2 MF to enter a shellhole hex (or start their phase there) are considered "in a shellhole" and gain the +1 conditional TEM (B2.3–B2.4), but they remain in the same Location as any other units in the hex for stacking purposes.
References:
- (B2.1) Shellholes — maximum of one per hex
- (B2.3) Shellhole TEM — +1 conditional, not cumulative
- (B2.4) MF cost to enter a shellhole hex
- (B27.12) Foxhole capacity — contrast: explicit squad-equivalent limit
- (A5.1) Normal stacking limits
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No special capacity; normal stacking limits apply. Matches (cites A5.1 for stacking rather than B2.0/B2.1).
For pontoon bridges, are they at the level of the stream they cross or one level above that level? Do pontoon bridges provide any TEM?
EXPECTED
Pontoon bridges are pontoon bridges per B6.44 and, under B6.41, are at water level (i.e., the same level as the stream; in some gully crossings it may make sense to treat them as level 0). They do not provide any TEM.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Pontoon bridges are at water level (the level of the stream/water they cross), not one level above. They provide no TEM to units on them — Direct Fire against units on a pontoon bridge is resolved as Open Ground regardless of LOF, and the bridge itself has no TEM that applies to the units riding it.
---
**Level:** Per (B6.41), pontoon bridges are "always at water level." This means they sit at the surface of the water obstacle they cross, not elevated above it.
**TEM for units on the bridge:**
- **Direct Fire:** (B6.3) states that Direct Fire against a target on "any pontoon bridge, regardless of LOF" is considered to take place in **Open Ground**. No bridge TEM applies to the target.
- **Indirect Fire:** (B6.32) grants a +1 TEM for Indirect Fire against a *non-pontoon* bridge/targets. Since this explicitly excludes pontoon bridges, no special TEM applies to units on a pontoon bridge from indirect fire either.
**TEM for the bridge structure itself (destruction only):**
- (B6.33) When resolving whether an HE attack destroys the bridge itself, a pontoon bridge has a **+1 TEM** (+2 if underwater). However, this TEM "is applicable only to the bridge itself—not to the units on it."
References:
- (B6.41) Pontoon bridges are always at water level
- (B6.3) Direct Fire vs any pontoon bridge is considered Open Ground
- (B6.31) +1 TEM for non-pontoon bridges only (entering other than via road depiction)
- (B6.32) +1 TEM for Indirect Fire vs non-pontoon bridge/targets only
- (B6.33) Bridge destruction TEM: +1 pontoon (+2 underwater), applicable only to the bridge, not units
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Water level (B6.41); no TEM for units on it. Exact, with B6.3/B6.33 detail.
How are Booby Trap (BT) capability purchase costs applied on geoboards? Specifically: (1) Is the cost (e.g. 10 MF for Level C) charged per board or does paying once apply to all boards? (2) Is there a discount for a half board? (3) Can I have different BT levels on different boards?
EXPECTED
Per B28.9, BT capability costs are charged per board (inclusive of its half-hexes). So paying 10 MF purchases Level C for that specific board only (it does not apply to other boards). There is no separate discount for a half board (half-hexes are included in the board cost), and you may purchase different BT levels on different boards.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** (1) The cost is charged **per board** — paying once covers only that one board. (2) No discount for a half board; the cost is "inclusive of its half-hexes." (3) Yes, you may have different Booby Trap levels on different boards, since each board's capability is purchased independently.
---
**Supporting Detail:**
**B28.9** states: *"Prior to setup, a player may spend some or all of his minefield factors for a Booby Trap capability on a particular board(s)."* It then clarifies: *"Booby Trap capability costs are per board (inclusive of its half-hexes)."*
This means:
1. **Per-board cost** — If you want Booby Traps on two boards, you must pay the cost twice (once for each board). A single payment does not cover all boards.
2. **Half-hexes included** — The phrase "inclusive of its half-hexes" means the cost for a board already accounts for any half-hex portions of that board. There is no discount or reduced cost for a board that is only partially present (e.g., a half-board overlay).
3. **Different levels per board** — Since the purchase is made "on a particular board(s)" and costs are "per board," you can independently choose Level C (10 points), Level B (20 points), or Level A (30 points) for each board you wish to booby-trap.
The DYO Fortification BPV list (Chapter H, §1.6) confirms the costs: **Booby Traps 10/20/30** (Level C/B/A respectively, per footnote 8 referencing B28.9).
References:
- (B28.9) Booby Traps — costs per board, inclusive of half-hexes
- (H1.6) Fortification BPV — Booby Traps 10/20/30 for Levels C/B/A
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Per board inclusive of half-hexes (B28.9); no half-board discount; different levels per board. Exact.
Can a unit that is on top of a Wire counter control that hex or Location for Victory Conditions?
EXPECTED
Yes. Being on top of a Wire counter does not by itself prevent a unit from controlling the hex or Location for VC purposes. B26.32 treats units on and under a Wire counter as being in the same Location, and nothing in A26.11 or A26.13 prohibits control merely because the unit is on the wire.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a unit on top of a Wire counter can gain and retain Control of that Location/hex, because being on top of Wire does not prevent it from being an armed Good Order Infantry MMC occupying the Location.
---
The key rules are:
- **Control (26.11):** A side gains Control of a Location/hex/building during play by occupying it with an *armed Good Order Infantry MMC* without the presence of an armed enemy ground unit in that same Location/hex/building. There is no requirement that the unit be "beneath" the Wire.
- **Wire (26.4):** A unit on top of a Wire counter and one beneath a Wire counter in the same hex are in the *same Location* [EXC: Wire on and beneath a pillbox]. So both are in the same Location for Control purposes.
- **Wire effects (26.4):** Being on top of Wire imposes certain restrictions (cannot Search, cannot Recover SW beneath the Wire, +1 to attacks, etc.), but none of these restrictions remove the unit's status as an armed Good Order Infantry MMC occupying the Location.
Therefore, a unit on top of Wire is still an armed Good Order Infantry MMC in that Location, and can gain/retain Control of that Location/hex under normal Victory Condition rules.
References:
- (26.11) Gaining Control — requires armed Good Order Infantry MMC occupying the Location
- (26.4) Wire Location — units above and beneath Wire are in the same Location
- (26.4) Wire restrictions — list of limitations (Search, Recover, etc.) does not include preventing Control
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; on/under Wire is the same Location and A26.11 has no bar. Exact.
For a French R35 with BPV 25, is the vehicle victory point value (DPV) calculated as 10% of BPV = 2.5 rounded up to 3, and if the entire AFV exits the board do you score 3 VP for the vehicle plus 2 VP for the crew (5 total)? Does the MA (mechanical advantage/malfunction) status affect this calculation?
EXPECTED
Yes. Per F.3, DPV is 10% of the vehicle's BPV (FRU) rounded up. For BPV 25 that yields 2.5 → 3 DPV. If the whole AFV exits you score that 3 VP for the vehicle plus the crew's 2 VP, for 5 total. The MA/malfunction status does not change the DPV calculation.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, your calculation is correct: the French R35's DVP is 3 (10% of BPV 25, FRU = 3), and if the entire AFV exits you score 3 VP for the vehicle plus 2 VP for its inherent crew, for 5 total. MA malfunction/disablement does **not** affect the DVP value — the rule explicitly states the DVP is calculated from the printed BPV "even if its MA is malfunctioned/disabled."
---
**Step 1 — DVP for the vehicle (F.3):**
A vehicle's DVP value equals 10% (FRU) of its printed BPV, even if its MA is malfunctioned/disabled [EXC: F.3A for certain vehicles with removable/unloadable MA, which does not apply to the R35].
Calculation: 10% × 25 = 2.5 → FRU (Fractional Remainder Up) = **3 DVP**.
**Step 2 — Crew VP (F.3, Example):**
The DVP value does not include the PRC (personnel) the vehicle contains at scenario start. Any Inherent crew eliminated/exited with a vehicle is worth another **2 VP** (the standard crew VP value per A26.2).
**Step 3 — Exit VP total (A26.23):**
When the vehicle exits the board per the Victory Conditions, the player receives Exit VP equal to the current VP value of the units exited.
Calculation: 3 (vehicle DVP) + 2 (crew) = **5 VP total**.
**Step 4 — MA malfunction effect:**
The DVP rule (F.3) explicitly states the vehicle's DVP is calculated from its printed BPV "even if its MA is malfunctioned/disabled." Unlike standard VP (where a vehicle is worth 1 VP base + 1 VP for a functioning MA), DVP is a flat percentage of the printed BPV regardless of MA status. MA malfunction does **not** reduce the DVP value.
References:
- (F.3) Desert VP — vehicle DVP = 10% (FRU) of printed BPV, even if MA malfunctioned/disabled
- (F.3 Example) Inherent crew eliminated/exited with a vehicle is worth another two points
- (A26.23) Exit VP — player receives Exit VP equal to current VP value for units exited
- (A26.21) VP value may change due to MA malfunction, but DVP is explicitly calculated from printed BPV regardless
JUDGE REASONING
[Calculation] DVP 3 (10% of 25 FRU), 3 + 2 crew = 5, MA status irrelevant. Exact.
If my OP tank is in Motion and its Observer is inside that moving tank, can the Observer attempt to gain/maintain Radio Contact (and thereby call for an AR or adjust an SR) a) during my Preparation Fire Phase (PFPh) and b) during the opponent's Defensive Fire Phase (DFPh)?
EXPECTED
a) No. A tank that is in Motion may not Prep Fire, so the Observer cannot attempt radio contact or call for artillery during the PFPh. b) Yes. During the opponent's DFPh you may conduct DFPh business while in Motion, so the Observer (if still part of the tank) may roll to gain/maintain Radio Contact and call for an AR or adjust an SR. (Observer must be part of the tank—if the Observer is out of the tank different rules apply.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the Observer can attempt Radio Contact in both phases, but with a critical restriction in the PFPh: if he uses the radio in the PFPh, the OP tank may not move in the following MPh — meaning a Motion tank must forfeit its movement that turn. In the DFPh there is no such movement restriction.
---
**a) PFPh:** The Observer may attempt Radio Contact at the start of his PFPh (C1.2). However, C1.6 states that an Observer who uses a radio "may attempt no actions other than OBA direction during that PFPh **(and may not move in the following MPh)**." The official Q&A confirms this applies to an OP tank's inherent Observer as well: "May an Observer use a radio during the PFPh and then during the MPh be moved by the vehicle he occupies? May this be done if he is Inherent in an OP tank? **A. No to both.**" (C1.6 Q&A). Therefore, if the OP tank is in Motion and the Observer uses the radio in the PFPh, the tank cannot expend any MP in the following MPh — it must effectively stop.
**b) DFPh:** The Observer may also attempt Radio Contact at the start of his DFPh (C1.2). The C1.6 restriction for DFPh only limits the Observer to OBA-direction actions during that DFPh; there is no prohibition on the tank moving in a subsequent phase. The OP tank's Motion status does not itself prevent the Observer from using the radio.
References:
- (C1.2) Radio Contact Attempt — may be made at start of PFPh/DFPh as Observer's sole action
- (C1.6) Observer — restricts movement in the following MPh after PFPh radio use; applies to OP tanks per Q&A
- (H1.461) OP Tank Usage — "All other rules dealing with OBA/Observers remain in effect unchanged unless specified otherwise"
- (C1.6 Q&A) — Observer cannot use radio in PFPh and then be moved by his vehicle in the MPh; same for OP tank
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Part (b) matches: the Observer may attempt Radio Contact in the opponent's DFPh while in Motion. Part (a) contradicts: the expected answer is No because a Motion tank cannot Prep Fire, while the model says Yes with a no-move-next-MPh consequence.
HUMAN NOTES
Override note: Says an in-Motion OP tank may attempt radio contact in the PFPh. The H1.461 Q&A says "Not during PFPh", and D2.4 bars Prep Fire and forces MP expenditure.
If a vehicle enters a Woods hex that contains Wire, does it have to make two separate Bog Checks (one for the Woods and one for the Wire) or only one combined Bog Check?
EXPECTED
Generally only one Bog Check is made; multiple causes of bog in the same hex are resolved with a single Bog DR with the applicable DRMs combined (per D8.2 Q&A). However, there are specific exceptions where two Bog checks occur (notably barbed wire per O7.3 and leaving a stream per B20.46).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Only one combined Bog Check is required, with the DRM for both the Woods (+3) and the Wire (+2) applied cumulatively to that single check.
---
The general rule is that when a vehicle enters a hex containing multiple terrain features that each would require a Bog Check, only one Bog Check is made, with all applicable DRM from the Bog Check table applied cumulatively. The Q&A at D8.2 confirms this principle: *"If one has to pass three Bog checks in one hex, each with no DRM, does one take one combined Bog check with no DRM or does one take three separate checks? A. One Bog Check, no DRM (assuming Low Ground Pressure)."*
The Bog Check DRM table (D8.21) lists:
- **+3** for *Entry of woods, graveyard, wooden-building or rubble, at half MP allotment*
- **+2** for *Moving into (changing VCA in) Wire*
Both DRM apply to the single Bog Check when entering a Woods hex containing Wire.
The only exceptions that require *separate* Bog Checks are Mud/Deep-Snow, Walls, and Hedges (B32.33). Woods and Wire are not among those exceptions.
References:
- (D8.2) Bog — one Bog DR per hex entry/exit/VCA change
- (D8.21) Bog Check DRM table — +3 for woods entry, +2 for moving into Wire
- (B32.33) ElRR Bog — only Mud/Deep-Snow/Walls/Hedges require separate Bog Checks; otherwise one combined check with cumulative DRM
- (B26.44) Wire — VBM requires a Bog Check, penalties apply once per hex
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] One combined Bog Check with cumulative DRM (D8.2 Q&A) matches. The expected answer's specific two-check exceptions (barbed wire O7.3, leaving a stream B20.46) are not given; the model lists different ElRR exceptions instead.
If a defender (not marked with a First/Final Fire marker) is being overrun by an AFV, can it make multiple close-combat Reaction Fire (CC-RF) attacks during the overrun?
EXPECTED
Yes. Per D7.2, a defender may use Reaction Fire as often as it is able to use the various forms of First/Final Fire. In practice the maximum number of CC-RF attacks is limited by the movement points spent (and other CC-RF restrictions) — typically the first CC-RF is a normal Reaction Fire attack, the second corresponds to Subsequent First Fire (SFF), and the third and any further attacks are treated as Final Protective Fire (FPF) CC-RF. Note also that if a unit is marked with a Final Fire marker it may be obliged to fire in situations where an unmarked unit may choose not to.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No — a defender not marked with a First/Final Fire marker can make at most **one** CC Reaction Fire attack during a given overrun. After that attack the defender is marked with a First or Final Fire counter (and a CC counter if the vehicle survives), and must await further movement expenditure by that vehicle before it can conduct another Reaction Fire attack — but the overrun is resolved immediately and provides no such further expenditure.
---
**Why only one attack per overrun:**
1. **Reaction Fire frequency** — The introductory text to D7 states: *"Except as otherwise stated, a DEFENDER may use Reaction Fire as often as it is entitled to use the various forms of First/Final Fire."* A unit not yet marked with a First/Final Fire counter is entitled to Defensive First Fire (one shot). After it fires, it is marked with a First Fire (or Final Fire) counter.
2. **Post-attack marking** — D7.21: *"After completing its attack, that DEFENDER and all of its possessed SW (including those Inherent) and Guns are marked with a CC counter, if the vehicle has survived, to prohibit non-CC Reaction Fire attacks, and also with a First or Final Fire counter as appropriate for that attack."* So after one CC-RF attack, the defender is marked.
3. **Must await further movement** — The introductory text also says: *"After making its Reaction attack(s), that DEFENDER must await further movement expenditure by that vehicle (or by its Personnel Escort; A11.51) before conducting other Reaction Fire vs that unit."* During an overrun, the vehicle enters the target hex, the OVR is resolved, and then Reaction Fire is resolved immediately after the OVR. The vehicle does not expend additional MP in that hex after the OVR resolution — it must exit the hex as part of the same overrun declaration. Therefore, no "further movement expenditure" occurs to trigger a second Reaction Fire opportunity.
4. **PAATC note** — D7.21 also states: *"A DEFENDER need not pass more than one PAATC to attack the same vehicle more than once during the same (A.15) phase."* This confirms that multiple attacks on the same vehicle *are* possible in principle across different movement expenditures, but the timing constraint in point 3 prevents it within a single overrun.
**Conclusion:** The defender gets exactly one CC-RF attack per overrun. After that, it is marked with a First/Final Fire counter and must wait for the vehicle to spend more MP (e.g., a Start MP in a later turn, or a subsequent movement action) before it can attempt another Reaction Fire attack.
References:
- (D7) Reaction Fire introductory text — frequency and "await further movement" rule
- (D7.21) CC Reaction Fire — post-attack marking with CC and First/Final Fire counters; PAATC re-use
- (D7.213) CC Reaction Fire differences — CCV reduction for units already marked with First/Final Fire
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Expected: Yes, multiple CC-RF attacks per D7.2, limited by MP spent (normal, then SFF, then FPF). The model answers No, at most one CC-RF per overrun, contradicting the central point.
When a Sniper activation indicates Target Selection and the chosen Location contains more than one eligible target, who performs the Random Selection (who rolls/decides) — the sniper's owner or the owner of the targeted units?
EXPECTED
The owner of the targeted units rolls the Random Selection; the Sniper player makes the choices around it.
- Sniper player's decisions (A14.2): makes the Random Location DR for the target hex; if that hex has more than one Location with eligible targets, chooses which Location to attack; before Random Selection may instead pick, if present, the enemy Sniper counter, a Vulnerable Inherent Crew, or an unarmored vehicle; and if Random Selection yields several targets, chooses which one takes the original Sniper dr (the others each get a new Sniper dr).
- The roll itself (A14.23): when the target is a concealed stack, the Sniper player's opponent must declare the number of eligible targets in it and, if two or more, "the player rolls for Random Selection" — that opponent, the stack's owner, being the only one who knows its contents. This is the rulebook's only explicit statement of who rolls sniper Random Selection, and nothing in A14.2 gives the roll to the Sniper player, so the same allocation applies to an unconcealed Location: the units' owner rolls, the Sniper player chooses.
- Ties are the Sniper player's choice (A14.2), not a re-roll.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The owner of the targeted units (the sniper player's opponent) performs the Random Selection — they roll the dice to determine which eligible unit(s) in the Location are affected by the sniper attack.
---
The rule at **A14.2** states that when the target Location contains more than one eligible target, "use Random Selection to determine the target(s) in that Location." It does not explicitly name who rolls, but the companion rule for concealed targets at **A14.23** clarifies the procedure: "the sniper player's opponent must declare the number... If it contains two or more, **the player** rolls for Random Selection accordingly." Here "the player" refers to the sniper player's opponent — i.e., the owner of the targeted units. This same principle applies to the general (non-concealed) case under **A14.2**: the owner of the targeted units performs the Random Selection.
The general Random Selection rule (**A.9**) describes the method (a dr for each unit; highest dr is affected) but does not specify who rolls; the convention established by **A14.23** fills that gap for sniper attacks.
References:
- **(A14.2)** Sniper Target Selection — "use Random Selection to determine the target(s) in that Location"
- **(A14.23)** Concealed Targets — "the sniper player's opponent must declare the number... the player rolls for Random Selection accordingly"
- **(A.9)** Random Selection procedure
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] The owner of the targeted units rolls, per A14.23 extended to A14.2. Matches; the Sniper player's surrounding choices are not enumerated.
Does the Vehicle Dust rule (11.74: "Whenever Light Dust can exist...") also apply when the scenario has Moderate, Heavy, Very Heavy, or Extremely Heavy Dust, or only when Light Dust is in effect?
EXPECTED
Yes. The descriptions of Moderate, Heavy and Very Heavy Dust explicitly reference that Light Dust is in effect (e.g. "Moderate Dust is treated exactly the same as Light Dust"; Heavy Dust: "In addition, Light Dust is in effect"; Very Heavy = same as Heavy; Extremely Heavy refers to Moderate), so the Vehicle Dust provisions that apply "whenever Light Dust can exist" also apply under those higher dust severities. Wind/gust can change the severity up or down, affecting which level (and thus Light Dust effects) are in effect.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes — Vehicle Dust can occur whenever the *conditions* for Light Dust exist (Dry/Very Dry EC + ≥1 Desert Board), regardless of whether Light, Moderate, Heavy, Very Heavy, or Extremely Heavy Dust is currently in effect. The rule keys on the environmental conditions that *permit* Light Dust, not on whether Light Dust itself is active.
---
The key text from (F11.74) reads: **"Whenever Light Dust can exist (as per the conditions given in 11.71), Vehicle Dust can also occur."** This means the trigger is the *underlying conditions* (EC Dry or Very Dry, scenario uses ≥1 Desert Board) — not the current Dust level. Light, Moderate, Heavy, Very Heavy, and Extremely Heavy Dust are all separate states that may or may not be in effect on a given turn, but Vehicle Dust is an independent phenomenon that can arise whenever those base conditions are met.
This is confirmed by the official Q&A:
> **{F11.71|F11.74}** Is light dust automatically in effect if vehicle dust is in effect?
> **A.** No. [VFTT 2 Feb 1998]
If Light Dust were the *only* state that allowed Vehicle Dust, the Q&A would be unnecessary — the answer would be trivially "yes." Instead, the Q&A confirms they are independent: Vehicle Dust can occur without Light Dust being active, and vice versa.
References:
- (F11.74) Vehicle Dust — "Whenever Light Dust can exist (as per the conditions given in 11.71), Vehicle Dust can also occur."
- (F11.71) Light Dust conditions — EC Dry or Very Dry, scenario uses ≥1 Desert Board [EXC: Very Dry only if Steppe Terrain in effect].
- (F11.1) Arid Climate Summary — lists Light/Moderate Dust, Heavy/Very Heavy/Extremely Heavy Dust, and Vehicle Dust as separate entries with separate condition columns.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes, Vehicle Dust applies under the heavier Dust levels. Same conclusion; the model reasons from F11.71's underlying conditions rather than from the higher levels incorporating Light Dust, and wind/gust severity changes are not addressed.
A beached raft contains a half-squad. That half-squad advanced out during its turn. On the opponent's turn an overrun into the hex caused an IFT result that would give the infantry an MC (breaking them) but did not sink the raft. Can a broken infantry unit re-enter the beached raft (or otherwise use it to escape)?
EXPECTED
No. E5.54 states that a boat Passenger never takes an MC/TC for any reason, and a broken unit may not enter a boat. Therefore you cannot have a broken unit end up in a boat: a unit already on a boat cannot be broken by MC/TC results, and a unit that is already broken may not enter a boat to escape. (Related: attacks vs beached boats are handled by E5.51/E5.53, and if a boat is sunk different rules apply to survivors.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. A broken infantry unit may not enter a boat (including a raft) under any circumstances, so it cannot re-enter the beached raft.
---
The rule is explicit:
- **(5.54) BROKEN/BERSERK UNITS:** "A broken/berserk unit may not enter a boat."
This prohibition is absolute — it does not contain any exception for re-entering a boat the unit previously occupied, nor for beached boats. Once the half-squad advanced out of the raft and became broken, it cannot re-enter that raft (or any other boat) to escape.
Additionally, even if the unit were unbroken, the raft's status as "beached" does not change this restriction — the rule applies to all boats regardless of beached/un-beached status.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; E5.54 bars a broken unit from entering a boat. Matches; the passenger never-takes-MC clause is not addressed but is not needed for this case.
Can an AFV that starts the Movement Phase buttoned (BU) voluntarily go CE, move (travel), and then voluntarily go BU again during the same Movement Phase?
EXPECTED
No. Per D5.33, vehicle CE counters may be placed or removed (except due to combat results) only during the owner's MPh/APh, but they may not be both placed and voluntarily removed (or vice-versa) during the same phase. In other words you get one voluntary CE/BU change in the MPh (and you may change again in the APh). Changing CE/BU is separate from MP expenditures (it doesn’t itself cost MPs). The only way to have both CE and BU in the same phase is if one of those changes is forced by combat results.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. D5.33 explicitly states that a CE counter may not be both placed and voluntarily removed (or vice‑versa) during the same phase, so an AFV that starts BU cannot voluntarily go CE and then voluntarily go BU again in the same Movement Phase.
---
**Step 1:** D5.33 governs voluntary CE/BU changes. It says: *"Vehicle CE counters may be placed or removed (except due to combat results) only during the owner's MPh/APh, but may not be both placed and voluntarily removed (or vice‑versa) during the same phase."*
**Step 2:** Starting BU means the AFV has no CE counter. Voluntarily going CE = *placing* a CE counter. Voluntarily going BU again = *removing* that CE counter. Doing both in the same MPh is exactly what the rule forbids ("may not be both placed and voluntarily removed ... during the same phase").
**Step 3:** The restriction is symmetrical — an AFV that starts CE also cannot voluntarily go BU and then voluntarily go CE again in the same MPh.
**Step 4:** The Q&A for D5.33 confirms that a BU/CE change can be declared simultaneously with an MP expenditure, but that does not override the prohibition against both actions in the same phase.
References:
- (D5.33) CE MOVEMENT — CE counters may be placed or removed only during the owner's MPh/APh, but may not be both placed and voluntarily removed (or vice‑versa) during the same phase.
- (D5.33 Q&A) May a player announce a BU/CE change simultaneously with an MP expenditure? Yes. — This does not lift the one‑change‑per‑phase limit.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; D5.33 forbids placing and voluntarily removing in the same phase. Exact.
If a vehicle declares an Overrun (OVR) but becomes Immobile or is destroyed (for example, by falling into a cellar) before the OVR can resolve, how much FP does the OVR fire? Is it cancelled, halved, or still full?
EXPECTED
Per D7.1, the total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR. Falling into a cellar destroys the vehicle, so once the OVR is declared it is completed at full or half FP as appropriate (with any additional halvings applying, e.g. concealed targets), regardless of what happens to the vehicle afterward.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The OVR is **not cancelled** — it still resolves, but its FP is **halved**. This applies whether the vehicle is destroyed, immobilized, shocked, stunned, or its crew is broken/KIA before the OVR resolves.
---
The rule is explicit in D7.11 and the OVR flowchart:
> *"The total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR (in addition to any halving vs a concealed target; A12.13), but combat results vs Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP."*
And the OVR flowchart (Chunk 4) states:
> *"Vehicle Elim or Immob (including Shock, Stun, and crew K/KIA/Break) does not prevent an already-announced OVR but does halve its FP."*
A Q&A entry (D7.1/D7.11/D7.15) confirms the same principle with a destroyed-vehicle example:
> *"An AFV announces an Overrun... The AFV is destroyed by Defensive First Fire prior to the OVR resolution, becoming a burning wreck. As per D7.11, although the vehicle is destroyed, the OVR will still be resolved but with half FP."*
So even if the vehicle falls into a cellar (which would immobilize/destroy it), the OVR is still resolved — at **half FP**.
References:
- (D7.11) OVR FP halved if vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before resolution
- (D7.1) OVR MP expenditure and resolution order
- (D7.15) OVR DRMs (TEM, SMOKE, Open Ground, etc.)
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Not cancelled, resolved at half FP (D7.11), with the destroyed-vehicle Q&A. Exact.
If a Level-1 squad firing down a stairwell at an enemy squad that is in the same hex on the ground floor is entitled to TPBF (double FP), while the squad firing up is only entitled to PBF, is that correct?
EXPECTED
No. TPBF (Triple Point Blank Fire, tripled small-arms FP) only applies when the attacker is attacking a target in the same Location (e.g., both in the same stairwell) or in the specific case of attacking a vulnerable PRC on an AFV from a higher elevation. If units are in the same hex but in different Locations (one on Level 1, the other on the ground floor in a different Location), fire is PBF, not TPBF. See A7.21 (doubling applies when adjacent or adjacent and within one level of or higher than the target).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, that is not correct. Units on different levels of the same building hex are in **different Locations** (each level is a separate Location). Since they are not in the same Location, TPBF (triple FP) does not apply. Both the Level-1 squad firing down and the ground-floor squad firing up are **adjacent** via the stairwell and within one level of each other, so **both qualify for PBF (double FP)** — not TPBF for one and PBF for the other.
---
**Why TPBF does not apply:**
A7.21 states that TPBF (triple FP) applies only "when fire attacks are allowed vs units in the **same Location** as the attacker." Each level of a building hex is a separate Location, so a Level-1 unit and a ground-floor unit in the same hex are in different Locations. Therefore TPBF does not apply to either direction of fire.
**Why both qualify for PBF:**
A7.21 says PBF (double FP) applies when the firer is "ADJACENT to its target or adjacent to and either within one level of or higher than its target." Per B23.25, units on different levels of the same building hex that are vertically connected by a stairwell are **ADJACENT** to each other. Since the elevation difference is only one level (Level 1 ↔ ground), both firers satisfy the "within one level" condition regardless of which is higher. The commentary in A7.21 confirms this: a unit "two or more levels beneath" does not qualify for PBF, implying that being only **one** level beneath does qualify.
**Summary:**
- Level 1 firing **down** at ground floor → **PBF** (double FP), not TPBF
- Ground floor firing **up** at Level 1 → **PBF** (double FP), not TPBF
Both get the same PBF multiplier; neither gets TPBF.
References:
- (A7.21) PBF/TPBF definitions — TPBF only for same-Location attacks
- (B23.25) Adjacent building levels via stairwell
- (A7.21 commentary) "two or more levels beneath" does not qualify for PBF
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No: different Locations, so PBF both ways, TPBF only same Location (A7.21). Exact.
If a unit is already pinned, is it immune to being targeted by a Sniper attack dr of 2, since a pinned unit cannot be pinned again?
EXPECTED
No. Being pinned does not make a unit an ineligible Sniper target: A14.22 lists the exceptions (AFV with no Vulnerable PRC, subterranean/Interior-Building Locations, prisoners, hidden/friendly/Aerial units) and pinned units are not among them, so the pinned unit can still be selected by Random Selection (A14.2). A dr 2 result 'pins MMC not immune to Pin results' (A14.3), so against an already-pinned MMC it simply has no further effect on that unit. The attack still happens: the Sniper counter still relocates to the target hex, all broken enemy units in the attack Location still receive DM (A14.3), and any other targets selected are still affected. Note a dr 2 vs an already broken MMC makes it DM (A14.3 Q&A).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, an already-pinned MMC is not immune to being *targeted* by a Sniper attack dr of 2 — it can still be selected as a target via Random Selection. However, the "pins" effect has no additional consequence because Pin effects are not cumulative; the unit simply remains pinned.
---
The Sniper attack resolution (A14.3) states that a dr of 2 "pins MMC not immune to Pin results." The phrase "not immune to Pin results" refers to units that are inherently immune to pinning — Cavalry, vehicles, units in Water Obstacles, berserk, Heroic, Aerial, or Climbing units (A7.8). An already-pinned MMC is not in that immune category; it is still a valid target for the Sniper attack.
However, A7.8 explicitly says: **"Pin effects are not cumulative; a unit suffering multiple Pin results has its FP halved only once, so an already-pinned unit does not take a NTC due to a 'PTC' result on the IFT."** By the same principle, a Sniper dr of 2 that would "pin" an already-pinned MMC has no additional game effect — the unit stays pinned, its FP remains halved (already applied), and no NTC is triggered.
The Sniper attack is still fully resolved (the unit is attacked, and if broken it would become DM per the "always inflicts DM on all broken enemy units" clause of A14.3), but the pinning component is redundant.
References:
- (A14.3) Sniper attack resolution — dr 2 pins MMC not immune to Pin results
- (A7.8) Pin effects are not cumulative; already-pinned unit does not take NTC from a PTC result
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No, still an eligible target; dr 2 has no further pin effect; attack still resolves, DM on broken units. Matches; Sniper relocation and other selected targets not addressed.
In the MPh a moving 7-0 leader enters a hex containing a 9-1 leader and two squads. A fire attack on the 7-0 causes a MC, it rolls Heat of Battle and goes berserk. The 9-1 then takes its Berserk TC, passes, and goes berserk too. Do the two squads take two Berserk TCs (one per berserk leader)? Is their check at -1?
EXPECTED
No: each squad takes one Berserk TC, and yes, it is at -1.
- A15.41: a leader who goes berserk must attempt to convert every other friendly unit in the Location; each takes a NTC modified by the berserk leader's leadership DRM. Leaders check before other units (A10.2), so the 9-1 checks first, using the 7-0's DRM (0).
- The A15.41 Q&A (a 9-2, 8-1 and squad; the 8-1 goes berserk) gives the procedure: the other leader takes its NTC with the newly berserk leader's DRM; if that leader also goes berserk, the squad then takes its NTC using the better berserk leader's DRM; if not, the squad takes its NTC with the first berserk leader's DRM only. Either way each unit takes a single NTC.
- Here the 9-1 became berserk, so each squad takes one NTC with the 9-1's -1 DRM. Had the 9-1 stayed normal, the squads would check once with the 7-0's 0 DRM.
- After the Berserk TCs the berserk leader forfeits his leadership DRM until he returns to normal (A15.41).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, the two squads take only one Berserk TC (not two), and their check is at –1 (the 9-1's leadership DRM).
---
The process is sequential, not cumulative. Per **A15.41**, when a leader goes berserk he must attempt to change every other friendly unit in his Location to berserk status. The Q&A for A15.41 (Gen25.2; An95w; An96) gives the exact procedure:
> *"A 9-2, 8-1 and 4-6-7 are in the same Location, and the 8-1 becomes berserk. What happens to the other units?*
> *A. The 9-2 must take his NTC next, using the berserk leader's –1 DRM (but not his own –2 DRM; A10.7). If the 9-2 becomes berserk, the squad then takes its NTC using his –2 DRM. If he does not become berserk, the squad still takes its NTC but is subject to the DRM of the 8-1 only."*
Applied here:
1. The **7-0** (leadership DRM = 0) goes berserk. He must attempt to change the other units. The **9-1** (higher morale) takes its NTC first, using the 7-0's DRM of **0**.
2. The 9-1 passes its NTC and goes berserk.
3. Now the **two squads** take their single NTC. Because the 9-1 is now berserk in the same Location, they use the **9-1's leadership DRM of –1** (per A10.7, leadership modifiers are not cumulative — only the best available applies).
The squads do **not** take a second TC from the 7-0's earlier attempt; the 7-0's attempt is fully resolved once the 9-1's NTC is resolved and the squads' NTC is taken using the best DRM among the berserk leaders present.
References:
- **(A15.41)** Leader Consequences — a berserk leader must attempt to change other friendly units in his Location; each takes a NTC subject to the berserk leader's modification.
- **(A10.7)** Leadership modifiers are not cumulative; only one leader's DRM applies.
- **(A15.41 Q&A)** Sequential resolution: higher-morale leader resolves first, then the squad takes its single NTC using the DRM of whichever leader ends up berserk.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] One Berserk TC per squad at -1, with the A15.41 Q&A procedure. Exact.
A squad throws a DC at an adjacent AFV as Defensive First Fire. How much Residual FP does the Thrown DC leave, where is it left, and does the +2/+3/+4 Thrown-DC DRM reduce it? Does it matter whether the AFV is destroyed or whether there are Vulnerable PRC?
EXPECTED
Residual FP is left in the target Location and also in the thrower's Location (if that Location can be attacked), and each is reduced by its own Thrown-DC DRM: normally 6 Residual FP in the target Location and 4 in the thrower's Location.
- Base: a Thrown DC resolves on the 30 FP column (A23.6); Residual FP is half the column used (A8.2), 15, capped at 12 after adjustment.
- A8.26: the Thrown-DC DRM counts as a condition outside the target Location, so it reduces the Residual FP one IFT column per +1 (A8.2/A8.26/A23.6 Q&A: reduced 'for the +2/+3/+4 DRM (as applicable)').
- Target Location: +2 DRM (A23.6), so 12 reduced two columns = 6 Residual FP; +3 if Thrown from a non-stopped/Motion vehicle or by Cavalry = 4. Vs an AFV the DRM applies to the DC Position DR (C7.346) but still reduces the Residual FP; the Q&A gives a maximum of 6 (maximum 2 on a Final Position DR of 12).
- Thrower's Location: it receives a +3 DRM (A23.6), so 12 reduced three columns = 4 Residual FP; +4 if Thrown from a non-stopped/Motion vehicle or by Cavalry = 2. The two Locations therefore normally hold different amounts. No Residual FP is left there if the Location cannot be so attacked (e.g., Thrown from two or more levels higher).
- A dud TK DR leaves no Residual FP (A8.2 EXC). Otherwise Residual FP is left whether or not the AFV is destroyed, and regardless of whether any Vulnerable PRC or other target is present (Q&A: 'Residual is also left if the AFV is targeted and destroyed'; a DC may be Thrown at the Location merely to leave Residual FP).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a Thrown DC always leaves Residual FP in **both** the target's Location and the thrower's Location. The +2/+3/+4 Thrown-DC DRM **does** reduce the amount of Residual FP (by one IFT column per +1 DRM). It does **not** matter whether the AFV is destroyed or whether there are Vulnerable PRC — Residual FP is left regardless.
---
**How much Residual FP and where:**
- The Thrown DC is resolved on the **30 FP column** (A23.6). Half of 30 is 15, capped at **12** per A8.2.
- Per A8.26, the amount is reduced by **one IFT column for each +1 DRM** caused by conditions outside the target hex.
**Target Location (vs an AFV):** The +2 Thrown-DC DRM applies (to the Position DR vs an AFV per C7.346, but still counts for Residual reduction per Q&A).
12 → 8 → **6 Residual FP** in the target hex.
**Thrower's Location:** The thrower's Location is attacked with a +3 DRM (+4 from a vehicle).
12 → 8 → 6 → **4 Residual FP** in the thrower's hex (or 12 → 8 → 6 → 4 → **2 Residual FP** if +4 from a vehicle).
**Does AFV destruction or Vulnerable PRC matter?** No.
- Q&A (A8.1, A8.2 & A23.6): *"If the vehicle is targeted and destroyed, does the DC leave Residual? A. Residual is also left if the AFV is targeted and destroyed."*
- Q&A: *"Can a DC be Thrown as Defensive First Fire at a Location containing a moving BU AFV merely to leave Residual FP? A. Yes, whether the AFV is predesignated or not."*
- Q&A: *"Can a squad throw the DC into a CE AFV's hex as a general attack, able to affect the vulnerable PRC and leave residual? A. Yes."*
So Residual FP is left in both Locations regardless of whether the AFV is destroyed, whether it has Vulnerable PRC, or whether the attack is a predesignated placement attempt or a general attack.
References:
- (A23.6) Thrown DC — resolved on 30 FP column; both target and thrower Locations attacked
- (A8.2) Residual FP = half the highest IFT FP column used, max 12
- (A8.26) Residual FP reduced by one column per +1 DRM from conditions outside the target hex
- (C7.346) DC Position DR — +2 Thrown DC DRM vs AFV
- (A8.1, A8.2 & A23.6 Q&A) Residual left even if AFV destroyed; can throw at BU AFV just for Residual; can throw at CE AFV for Residual
JUDGE REASONING
[Calculation] Re-judged 2026-09-17 after the golden answer was corrected. Target Location 6 (30 column, 12 cap, two columns for +2) and thrower's Location 4 (three columns for +3, 2 at +4) both match A23.6/A8.26 and the Q&A. Destruction/PRC irrelevance matches; dud not mentioned. The earlier 'partial' rested on a golden answer that wrongly gave both Locations the same amount.
Is a radio considered a Support Weapon (SW) in ASL, and how is it classified?
EXPECTED
Yes. C1.22 states that a radio is a 1PP SW. Consequences: it is portable at 1 PP, a leader must possess it to use it (C1.22), it breaks down on an Original Contact or Maintenance DR of 12 (or as printed on the counter) and is then subject to normal SW repair (A9.72), and it is subject to the general SW rules such as capture, transfer, and loss when its carrier is eliminated or a boat sinks (E5.53).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a radio is classified as a Support Weapon (SW) in ASL. It appears on the Support Weapons Chart, has a Portage Point (PP) cost, is subject to SW malfunction/repair rules, and is explicitly referred to as a "radio SW counter" in the rules. However, it has several special exceptions: it cannot be used by an enemy captor, is excluded from squad-equivalent calculations for SW purchase limits, and has unique OBA-related malfunction/repair rules (C1.24).
---
**Classification Details:**
- **Support Weapons Chart:** The chart lists "Radio" as a line item with a portage cost of "1" PP and notes including "G. German inherent SW; requires dr 1-3 for each use" (Support Weapons Chart, Chapter A).
- **Counter Depiction:** The counter key identifies "Radio (SW) C1.1" and "Field Phone (SW) C1.23" — both explicitly labeled as SW.
- **Rule References:**
- **(A4.4) Portage:** Radios have a PP cost and are portaged like any other SW.
- **(A4.43) Possession:** Radios are SW counters subject to possession rules.
- **(A9.7) SW Malfunction:** Radios have a B#/X# and malfunction/repair per standard SW rules (with special exceptions per C1.24).
- **(C1.1) OBA:** "Each radio in the OB represents one predesignated available OBA battery."
- **Special Exceptions:**
- **Captured Equipment:** "Any SW counter [EXC: radio] possessed by an enemy may be used by its new owner" — radios cannot be used by a captor (Chapter A, Equipment section).
- **DYO Purchase (1.83):** Radios/phones are excluded from the "squads' Equiv #" calculation for SW purchase limits: "(using squads' Equiv # [EXC: Radio/Phone])".
- **Malfunction/Repair (C1.24):** Radios and field phones have a Repair Number of "R2" and a Repair dr of 6 is treated as no change (deviating from standard A9.72).
- **No Firepower:** The SW chart shows "NA" for Radio operational capabilities — it cannot be used as a weapon.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes, a 1PP SW, with SW rules and exceptions. Matches; leader possession, breakdown on 12 and boat-sinking loss not addressed.
A squad begins its MPh beneath an AFV and moves with it using Armored Assault across open ground. After 4 MF the squad, staying in the current hex, declares late Double Time (CX) without moving further. Does that let the AFV move one more hex?
EXPECTED
Yes. D9.31: an AFV moving with Infantry in Armored Assault cannot move farther than it could have if accompanied by that Infantry throughout the move, even if the Infantry does not end its MPh with it. What matters is the MF the Infantry could have had. A4.5 lets Double Time be declared after MF have been expended, for one extra MF (with the same CX penalties), so the late declaration raises the squad's allotment to 5 MF and the AFV may continue one more hex (the D9.31 example: had the squad declared Double Time to gain one extra MF, the Tiger could continue on). The squad need not actually spend that MF, but it is CX with all of A4.51's penalties, and the declaration must be made while the squad is still moving with the AFV, not after it has stopped and another unit has moved (A4.2; A4.5 Q&A).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the AFV can move one more hex. The squad's late Double Time increases its MF allotment to 5 (4 used + 1 from late CX), and under D9.31 the AFV cannot move farther than if the squad had accompanied it throughout — but it can move that far. Since the squad now has 1 MF remaining, the AFV may use that capacity to move one more hex.
---
**Step 1 — Squad's MF allotment:** The squad began with 4 MF (no leader bonus, no initial CX). After moving 4 MF, it declares late Double Time per A4.5, gaining +1 MF for a total of 5 MF. It has used 4 MF, leaving 1 MF unused.
**Step 2 — Armored Assault limitation (D9.31):** "If Infantry move in a stack with the AFV, that AFV cannot move farther than if it were accompanied by that same Infantry throughout the move — even if that Infantry fails to end its MPh in the same hex with the AFV." This sets a *maximum* on the AFV's movement based on the infantry's MF capability, not a requirement that the infantry actually expend every MF.
**Step 3 — Application:** The squad's total MF is now 5. It used 4 MF moving with the AFV. The AFV may therefore move as far as if the squad had 5 MF and accompanied it — i.e., one hex beyond where they stopped together.
**Step 4 — Supporting example (D9.31):** "Similarly, had the squad declared Double Time upon entering the building to gain one extra MF, the Tiger could get to R1 but no farther." This directly confirms that declaring late Double Time (even after movement has begun) extends the AFV's reach by one hex.
**Step 5 — Q&A confirmation:** The Q&A at D9.31 states: "Assume a MMC with a leader and an AFV do armored assault for five MF/MPs. The Infantry ends their movement but the AFV moves one more hex. Can the infantry be fired on as Defensive First Fire without the protection of the AFV as the AFV moves into the new hex? A. No." This implies the AFV *can* move that extra hex after the infantry stops.
References:
- (D9.31) Armored Assault — AFV cannot move farther than if accompanied by the infantry throughout
- (A4.5) Double Time — late declaration grants +1 MF
- (D9.31 Q&A) AFV may move one more hex after infantry ends movement
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; D9.31 limit is what the Infantry could have had, late Double Time adds 1 MF (A4.5), D9.31 example. Matches; the CX penalties and 'declare while still moving with the AFV' timing not addressed.
In an Early Korean War scenario (10/50–3/51), a full-strength CPVA 3-3-7 squad rolls an Original 12 on an IFT attack with its inherent FP and suffers Ammunition Shortage. There is no lower-quality squad to replace it with. What happens to it?
EXPECTED
It breaks and is exchanged for its two broken HS.
- W7.11: Early KW CPVA are subject to Ammunition Shortage (A19.131).
- A19.131: an MMC that rolls an Original 12 on the IFT with its inherent FP suffers Unit Replacement after the attack resolves; an MMC that is subject to, but incapable of, further quality loss is instead broken after the attack (unless berserk).
- A CPVA squad that breaks from a cause not listed in W7.22 falls under W7.23, and W7.231 exchanges a Full-Strength squad for its two broken HS (a Reduced-Strength squad becomes one broken HS, W7.232). If the break exceeded its ELR, W7.233 also downgrades the resulting HS.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The squad simply becomes broken. Since there is no lower-quality squad to replace it with, it is "incapable of further quality loss" and per A19.131 it is broken after the attack is resolved (unless berserk).
---
**Reasoning:** A19.131 states that any MMC which rolls an Original 12 on the IFT while using its Inherent FP during Ammunition Shortage suffers Unit Replacement. It then explicitly adds: *"Any MMC subject to, but incapable of, further quality loss is broken after resolution of the attack, unless berserk."* A full-strength CPVA 3-3-7 is a 2nd Line squad (the lowest CPVA squad class); with no lower-quality squad available to replace it, it meets the "incapable of further quality loss" condition and is broken instead.
The CPVA-specific Step Reduction rules (7.22) do not apply here — those govern break results from failing a Morale Check, not the Ammunition Shortage Unit Replacement triggered by an Original 12 IFT DR.
References:
- (A19.131) Ammunition Shortages — Unit Replacement on Original 12 IFT DR with inherent FP; incapable-of-further-quality-loss MMC are broken instead
- (7.11) Early KW CPVA — Ammunition Shortage (A19.131) is in effect for 10/50–3/51
- (7.25) Unarmed CPVA re-armed → Full-Strength 2nd Line 3-3-7 squad, confirming 3-3-7 is the lowest CPVA squad class
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] The model correctly applies A19.131 (incapable of further quality loss -> broken) but stops there, and explicitly denies that the CPVA step-reduction rules apply. The expected answer continues: a CPVA squad broken by a cause not in W7.22 is exchanged for two broken HS under W7.231.
HUMAN NOTES
Stops at "broken" and denies that step reduction applies. A CPVA squad has no Broken side (W7.2), so W7.23/W7.231 exchanges it for two broken HS.
In a night scenario, a Scenario Defender unit under a No Move counter is attacked by something other than OBA or a Sniper. Is its No Move counter removed so it can move, and does it have to roll < its ELR to gain Freedom of Movement?
EXPECTED
Yes to the first, no to the second. E1.21: an onboard Scenario Defender unit may attempt to move/advance only if it has been attacked by the enemy (other than by OBA/sniper) or has seen a Known enemy unit at some time in the scenario. Being attacked therefore frees that unit: remove its No Move counter and it may attempt to move (it still faces the normal night movement procedures such as Straying, E1.53). The dr < ELR test is a separate route to Freedom of Movement: once the Scenario Attacker has resolved any attack other than a successful Ambush, the Defender's single best Good Order leader may make one Freedom of Movement dr per friendly MPh, needing < his ELR; a freed Good Order SMC also frees any units that begin the MPh stacked with it. An attacked unit does not need that dr.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No — the No Move counter is removed and the unit gains Freedom of Movement automatically upon being attacked (by something other than OBA/Sniper). It does **not** have to roll < its ELR; that roll is a separate mechanism used only by the Scenario Defender's single best leader to gain Freedom of Movement after an attack.
---
**Step 1 — Unit attacked by enemy (other than OBA/Sniper) gains Freedom of Movement automatically.**
E1.21 states: *"Each onboard unit of a Scenario Defender in a night scenario may attempt to move/advance only if it has either been attacked by the enemy, by other than OBA/sniper, or has seen a Known enemy unit at some time during that scenario."*
Being attacked (other than OBA/Sniper) is a qualifying condition that itself grants Freedom of Movement to that unit. The No Move counter is merely a memory aid (E1.21: *"As a memory aid, players should position all Scenario Defender units that are not yet free to move on a No Move counter"*); once the unit qualifies, the counter is removed and the unit may move.
**Step 2 — The ELR dr is a separate leader-only mechanism.**
E1.21 continues: *"Once the Scenario Attacker has resolved any attack other than a successful Ambush, the Scenario Defender's single best leader... can gain Freedom of Movement thereafter, if currently in Good Order, if the player makes a dr (∆) < his ELR."*
This leader dr is an **additional** way for the best leader (and any unit stacked with it at the start of its MPh) to gain Freedom of Movement after an attack — it is **not** required for a unit that was itself attacked. The unit that was attacked already qualifies directly under the first sentence.
References:
- (E1.21) Freedom of Movement — conditions for movement and leader dr mechanism
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Attacked unit is freed (E1.21), No Move counter removed, no dr < ELR needed; the leader dr is a separate route. Matches despite the 'No' headline answering the second part.
When Riders fire their inherent FP on the IFT, is that FP halved or quartered if the vehicle has moved or is in Motion? Any other penalties?
EXPECTED
Quartered. D6.22: Riders may not use SW and must use halved FP as Mounted Fire when firing their inherent FP on the IFT; that FP is quartered if the vehicle has moved or is in Motion, including OVR attacks. Riders also add one to their CC DR when attacking (A11.611, which also gives them a -1 CC DRM when defending). In CC as attackers their FP is halved for the conveyance being in Motion (A11.11 & D6.22 Q&A).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** When Riders fire their inherent FP on the IFT, it is **halved** if the vehicle is stationary/stopped, but **quartered** if the vehicle has moved or is in Motion (including Overrun attacks). Additionally, Riders may not use any SW, and they must add +1 to their Close Combat DR.
---
**References:**
- **(D6.22)** ATTACKS: Riders may not use SW, must use halved FP as Mounted Fire when firing their inherent FP on the IFT (quartered if the vehicle has moved or is in Motion, inclusive of OVR attacks), and must add one to their CC DR (A11.611).
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Quartered when moved/in Motion (halved otherwise), no SW, +1 CC DR (D6.22). Matches; the -1 defending CC DRM and Motion CC halving are not addressed.
Does the fixed Covered Arc restriction of A9.21 (a machine gun that fires from a woods/rubble/building hex and keeps ROF may only fire again within the CA of that first shot) apply to LMGs?
EXPECTED
No. A9.21 restricts a SW MMG/HMG only: if such a MG in a woods/rubble/building hex fires and is entitled to another shot, its later shots that phase must be within the CA of the prior shot (which includes its own Location), placing a CA counter as a reminder. An LMG is not a MMG/HMG, so it keeps the normal rule stated in the same section: a SW may fire in any direction with no detriment due to facing. (The fixed CA is a restriction, not a benefit.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. The fixed Covered Arc restriction of A9.21 applies only to SW MMG/HMG, plus INF, RCL, and 20L ATR types. An LMG is none of these, so it may fire in any direction on subsequent shots without a CA restriction.
---
The rule explicitly limits the restriction:
> "However, if a **SW MMG/HMG** in a woods/rubble/building hex fires and is entitled to another shot, it may continue to fire during that phase only inside the CA of the prior shot… The restricted-CA principles of 9.21 also apply to SW of the **INF, RCL and 20L ATR** types." (A9.21)
An LMG is a Light Machine Gun — it is not an MMG, HMG, INF (infantry howitzer), RCL (recoilless rifle), or 20L ATR (20mm anti-tank rifle). Therefore, the fixed-CA rule does not apply to it. An LMG retains its normal ability to fire in any direction regardless of terrain.
References:
- (A9.21) Field of Fire — restricted CA only for SW MMG/HMG in woods/rubble/building, plus INF/RCL/20L ATR types
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; A9.21 restricts SW MMG/HMG (and INF/RCL/20L ATR), not LMGs. Exact.
Both sides set up onboard. The German OB grants six '?' counters, and the German player covers each of three unit stacks with two '?' (one atop the other). Later the real units move away, leaving the extra '?' behind as apparent stacks. Is this legal, and does it violate A12.12?
EXPECTED
Yes, it is legal, and A12.12 is not violated.
- A12.11: '?' allocated by the scenario for setup may be placed atop each other to act as Dummies, giving the impression of a stack of real counters, though a single such '?' cannot be placed beneath unconcealed units. The A12.11/A12.12 Q&A confirms the defender may place two or more setup '?' beneath a real unit (that real unit then cannot also receive a non-OB '?').
- A12.12's restrictions (Concealment Terrain only for OB '?'; the out-of-LOS/16-hex condition and one-per-stack limit) govern where OB '?' may be placed and the later free non-OB '?' placement; stacking OB '?' as Dummies is what A12.11 provides for.
- When the real units leave, what remains is a Dummy stack. It may be moved as if real (even with leader/Double Time bonuses) but is removed if it moves without Assault Movement or into Open Ground in the LOS of a Good Order enemy (A12.11, A12.14), and it is treated like a Dummy stack for all concealment-loss purposes.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, this is legal. Placing two OB-designated "?" atop each other over a real unit stack is explicitly permitted by A12.11, and when the real units move away the leftover "?" remains as a valid Dummy stack. This does not violate A12.12, which governs placement of *non-OB-designated* "?" — not the OB-designated "?" used here.
---
**Why it's legal:**
1. **A12.11 explicitly allows stacking OB-designated "?" atop each other as Dummies.**
*"If a scenario allocates a number of '?' available for setup at the start of the scenario, those '?' can be placed atop each other to act as Dummies—thus giving the mistaken impression of a stack of real counters beneath a '?'."*
The German player's six OB-designated "?" are being used exactly as this rule describes: two per stack, one atop the other, with the real unit beneath.
2. **A12.12 does not restrict this.**
A12.12 governs the placement of *non-OB-designated* "?" (the ones placed after both sides have set up, based on LOS/range conditions). Its restriction — *"only one non-OB-designated '?' can be placed per stack of units and not on top of any previously placed '?'"* — applies only to those non-OB "?". The OB-designated "?" are placed during the first step of setup, before this restriction comes into play.
3. **When the real unit moves away, the leftover Dummy "?" is a valid Dummy stack.**
- A12.11 states: *"Dummy stacks can be created only during initial setup and among OB-designated '?' reinforcements during their initial turn of entry."* The Dummy "?" was created during initial setup, not later.
- A12.11 Q&A confirms: *"Can a Dummy stack composed of 3 '?' be split during play (MPh/APh) into two Dummy stacks composed of 2 '?' each? A. Yes."* [K33] — by extension, a single Dummy "?" left behind when the real unit departs is equally valid.
- The leftover Dummy "?" is now a standalone Dummy stack, subject to the normal rules for Dummy stacks (removal if it moves without Assault Movement or into Open Ground in LOS of a Good Order enemy, per A12.14).
**References:**
- (A12.11) KNOWN/DUMMY ENEMY UNIT — OB "?" can be placed atop each other as Dummies; Dummy stacks created only during initial setup
- (A12.12) PLACEMENT — restriction on non-OB "?" placement does not apply to OB-designated "?"
- (A12.14) REMOVAL — rules for when Dummy stacks are removed
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Legal under A12.11; A12.12 governs non-OB '?' placement; leftover is a Dummy stack subject to A12.14 removal. Exact.
In a May 1942 scenario the Russian OB contains a single leader, an 8-0. May the Russian player replace it with a 9-0 Commissar?
EXPECTED
No. A25.22 lets the Russian player, in a scenario set during or before 10/42, replace up to one 8-0 leader with a 9-0 Commissar (and/or one 8-1 with a 10-0 Commissar) without an SSR, but only provided the scenario is not begun with more Commissars than other leaders in the OB. Replacing the sole leader would start the scenario with one Commissar and no other leaders, so the substitution is not allowed. (Having several Commissars of the same rating is otherwise fine, per the A25.22 Q&A, as long as other leaders outnumber or equal them.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. The Russian player may not replace the sole 8-0 leader with a 9-0 Commissar, because doing so would leave the OB with 1 Commissar and 0 other leaders — more Commissars than other leaders — which violates the condition in A25.22.
---
**Reasoning:**
A25.22 states that the Russian player may replace up to one 8-0 leader with a 9-0 Political Commissar (and/or one 8-1 with a 10-0) **"provided the scenario is not begun with more Commissars than other leaders in the OB."**
- The scenario is May 1942, which is "during or prior to 10/42" ✓
- The OB contains exactly one leader, an 8-0 ✓ (eligible for replacement)
- If that 8-0 is replaced by a 9-0 Commissar, the final OB would contain **1 Commissar and 0 other leaders**
- 1 Commissar > 0 other leaders → the condition is violated ✗
Therefore the replacement is not permitted.
**Reference:**
- (A25.22) COMMISSAR — replacement allowed only if the scenario does not begin with more Commissars than other leaders in the OB.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; A25.22 proviso on Commissars vs other leaders. Exact.
Can a Dug-In (D9.54) non-turreted AFV change its Vehicle Covered Arc?
EXPECTED
No. D9.54 treats a Dug-In AFV as an Armored Cupola except where stated otherwise, and D9.5 makes an Armored Cupola the equivalent of an Immobile tank in every way except as modified there or by SSR. D8.1: an immobilized vehicle cannot change its VCA, though it may change its TCA if otherwise able. A non-turreted AFV's armament is in the hull, so its CA is its VCA and cannot be changed; a turreted Dug-In AFV could still rotate its TCA (its TCA counter defines its CA and any fire outside it takes the usual To Hit/IFT penalties, D9.5). An SSR can override this.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, a Dug-In (D9.54) non-turreted AFV cannot change its Vehicle Covered Arc (VCA). A Dug-In AFV is treated as an Armored Cupola (D9.54), which is considered the equivalent of an Immobile tank (D9.5), and an Immobile tank cannot change its VCA (D8.1). The Armored Cupola exception allowing TCA changes (D9.52) does not apply because a non-turreted AFV has no TCA.
---
**Reasoning:**
- **D9.54** states: "A Dug-In AFV is treated as an Armored Cupola except as stated otherwise." The listed exceptions (HD status, no Hindrance, vehicular crew, CE/CS#, wreck) do **not** include any exception to the Immobile-tank equivalence for VCA changes.
- **D9.5** states: "An Armored Cupola is considered the equivalent of an Immobile tank in every way except as modified below or by SSR."
- **D8.1** states: "An immobilized vehicle cannot expend a Start MP, leave its current Location nor change its VCA, but may change its TCA if otherwise able to."
- **D9.52** provides the only mobility-related exception for an Armored Cupola: "Although it cannot leave or be pushed out of its hex, it is free to change its TCA 360 degrees." This exception applies only to **TCA** changes. A non-turreted AFV has no TCA — it has only a VCA — so this exception cannot help it.
Since a Dug-In AFV is treated as an Immobile tank (via the Armored Cupola equivalence), and D8.1 explicitly prohibits an immobilized vehicle from changing its VCA, a Dug-In non-turreted AFV **cannot** change its VCA.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; Dug-In = Armored Cupola = Immobile tank; D8.1 bars VCA change; non-turreted has no TCA. Exact.
A squad and a leader combine in one Close Combat attack against an AFV. What is the attack's CCV?
EXPECTED
6. A11.5: the CCV of a squad is 5 (crew 4, HS 3, SMC 2), and a SMC combining with the main attacking unit in the same attack adds +1, so 5 + 1 = 6. (Other modifiers: +1 Assault Engineer, -1 Inexperienced, -1 per halving penalty such as pinning.) The AFV is eliminated on a CC DR < 6 and immobilized on a DR = 6.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The attack's CCV is 6 — the squad's base CCV of 5 plus a +1 modifier for the leader combining in the same attack.
---
Step 1: A squad has a base CCV of 5 (A11.5).
Step 2: A SMC (leader) combining with the main attacking unit in the same attack adds +1 to the CCV (A11.5).
Step 3: No more than two units may combine into a single CC attack vs a vehicle, and one must be a SMC who modifies the CCV of the other unit by +1 (A11.5).
Calculation: 5 (squad CCV) + 1 (SMC modifier) = 6 CCV.
References:
- (A11.5) Close Combat vs Vehicles — CCV values and modifiers: squad = 5, SMC = 2; +1 for a SMC combining with the main attacking unit in the same attack.
JUDGE REASONING
[Calculation] 6 = 5 + 1 for the SMC. Exact; elimination thresholds not addressed.
What is the MP cost for a fully-tracked vehicle to move from IN a gully hex (level -1) into an adjacent Open Ground hex at level 0?
EXPECTED
5 MP. B19.4: there is no cost for leaving a gully other than the doubling of MF (or the increase of four MP) for moving to a higher elevation. Entering Open Ground costs 1 MP, plus 4 MP for the elevation gain (B10.3), for 5 MP. The Abrupt Elevation Change exception (B10.5) does not apply to a simple gully-to-adjacent-level-0 move.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** 5 MP — 4 MP for the higher-elevation surcharge plus 1 MP for the Open Ground COT (Cost of Terrain).
---
Step 1: Leaving a gully to a higher elevation costs a vehicle an extra 4 MP (B19.4: "the increase of four MP when moving to a higher elevation"; B10.4: "vehicles must pay four MP & COT").
Step 2: The target hex is Open Ground. Per the Terrain Chart, a fully-tracked vehicle pays 1 MP to enter Open Ground (B. Terrain Chart, row 1: Fully Tracked = 1 MP).
Step 3: This is not an Abrupt Elevation Change (B10.5), because the vehicle is only ascending one level (from level -1 to level 0), not two or more levels.
Calculation: 4 MP (elevation surcharge) + 1 MP (Open Ground COT) = 5 MP.
References:
- (B19.4) Gully movement — "the increase of four MP when moving to a higher elevation"
- (B10.4) Crest Line into higher terrain — "vehicles must pay four MP & COT"
- (B. Terrain Chart, row 1) Open Ground — fully-tracked vehicle: 1 MP
- (B10.5) Abrupt Elevation Change — requires entering two or more levels at once
JUDGE REASONING
[Calculation] 5 MP = 1 Open Ground + 4 elevation gain; B10.5 NA. Exact.
Can a trench be placed in a hex that already contains a foxhole?
EXPECTED
No. B27.51: a trench (including an A-T Ditch) may not occupy the same Location as a foxhole. Trenches are also placed one per hex prior to play as per the scenario OB. A campaign game may separately allow a foxhole to be upgraded to (replaced by) a trench under its own fortification-purchase rules, but that removes the foxhole; the two never coexist.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. A trench (including an A-T Ditch) may not occupy the same Location as a foxhole.
---
References:
- (B27.51) Trench counters may only be placed one per hex prior to play as per scenario OB. A trench (including an A-T Ditch) may not occupy the same Location as a foxhole.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; B27.51. Exact; the campaign-game upgrade note is not addressed.
A Gun fired with the Area Target Type at a concealed squad and gained Area Acquisition on that hex. In the enemy MPh the squad loses concealment and moves out of the hex. Can the Gun convert (bracket) that acquisition to the Infantry Target Type and fire at the squad in its new hex with the acquisition DRM?
EXPECTED
No. C6.52: acquisition gained on one target/Target Type can be transferred to another target/Target Type when the firer announces a shot at the new target or with the new Target Type, but only if the target Location (the hex, for Area Target Type acquisition) remains the same during the transfer. Once the squad has left the acquired hex, the acquisition cannot follow it. Had the squad stayed in the hex after losing concealment, the transfer would be allowed (the C6.52 EXC that Area Acquisition cannot be transferred to another Target Type vs a concealed unit no longer applies once it is unconcealed; a mortar could not transfer at all).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. The Gun cannot convert (bracket) the Area Acquisition to the Infantry Target Type and fire at the squad in its new hex with the acquisition DRM. The squad moved to a different hex, so the target Location is no longer the same — a requirement for bracketing — and Area Acquisition cannot track a moving unit to a new hex in any case.
---
There are two independent reasons, each sufficient on its own:
**1. The target Location changed (C6.52).** Bracketing requires that "the target Location (or hex, if using the Area Target Type) remains the same during the transfer." The squad moved out of the acquired hex into a new hex, so the Location is no longer the same. The bracketing exception about concealed units (C6.57) is irrelevant here — the primary condition (same Location) is already violated.
**2. Area Acquisition cannot track a moving unit (C6.521).** "An Area Acquired counter cannot track a moving/routing/advancing/Withdrawing unit as per 6.51; the firer would have to re-acquire such a unit each time it enters a new hex." Even if the squad had remained in the same hex, the Area Acquired counter stays in the hex where it was placed and does not follow the squad to a new location.
The C6.57 example confirms this directly: when a squad that was acquired via Area Target Type moved from Level 2 of M2 into N2, "it would no longer be acquired, nor could the tank transfer its Area Acquired counter to a 1/2" Acquired counter to track that squad into N2."
References:
- (C6.521) Area Acquisition — cannot track moving units; must re-acquire each time it enters a new hex
- (C6.52) Bracketing — requires the target Location/hex to remain the same during the transfer
- (C6.57) Example — confirms that Area Acquisition cannot be transferred to track a squad that moves to a new hex
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; C6.52 transfer requires the same target Location. Exact, with C6.521.
A squad declares Assault Movement, moves one Location, and then spends additional MF in that Location to Place a DC in an adjacent hex. Is the DC placement still part of its Assault Movement?
EXPECTED
Yes. A4.61: Assault Movement requires moving no more than one Location without using all MF, and its EXC states that additional MF expenditure within a Location in addition to the change of Location does not prevent Assault Movement unless the unit thereby expends all its MF or requires CX status. A23.3 treats Placing a DC as movement expended in the Placement Hex (the unit's own Location), so it is such an in-Location expenditure. The unit therefore remains under Assault Movement (no FFNAM) provided it does not use its last MF or become CX, was not pinned before Placement, and did not fire in the PFPh (A23.3). Each MF expenditure, including the Placement, still offers Defensive First Fire, and Placing a DC is a concealment-loss action (A4.61 & A12.14 Q&A).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the DC placement is still part of its Assault Movement. Spending additional MF within a Location (such as to Place a DC) does not void Assault Movement unless doing so causes the unit to expend all its MF or gain CX status.
---
The rule at **A4.61** explicitly states that "additional MF expenditure within a Location (e.g., out of, or into, a Location, or Recovery) in addition to a change of Location, does not void Assault Movement unless, in so doing, a unit expends all its MF or gains CX status." Placing a DC is an additional MF expenditure within the Placement Hex (the Location the Placing unit occupies), not a change of Location itself. Therefore, as long as the squad does not use all its MF or become CX from the placement, it remains in Assault Movement.
This is also consistent with the Q&A in the retrieved content, which treats DC placement during Assault Movement as a normal activity (the only consequence being loss of concealment per A12.141, not a voiding of Assault Movement).
References:
- **(A4.61)** Assault Movement — additional MF expenditure within a Location does not void Assault Movement unless all MF are expended or CX status is gained.
- **(A23.3)** DC Placement — a DC is Placed by expending extra MF in the Placement Hex; the act is considered movement expended in that Location.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; A4.61 EXC on in-Location MF; DC Placement is in-Location expenditure (A23.3). Exact.
C4.4 says ordnance using the C3 To Hit Table to fire SMOKE at ≤ 12 hexes 'must add two to its Basic TH#'. Is that literal, so a Basic TH# of 7 becomes 9 and the firer benefits?
EXPECTED
Yes, literally. C4.4 raises the Basic TH# by two for a SMOKE shot at 12 hexes or less with the C3 To Hit Table, so a Basic TH# of 7 becomes a Modified TH# of 9 before DRM: an easier hit for the firer. It is a TH# bonus, not a DRM. The shot is still subject to the SMOKE Depletion Number check (a firer with a low depletion number often cannot fire smoke at all), which C8.2 raises by one for Elite forces.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, it is literal. "Add two to its Basic TH#" means the Basic TH# increases by 2 (e.g., 7 → 9). Since a hit requires a Final DR ≤ the Modified TH#, a higher TH# makes it easier to hit, so the firer benefits.
---
C4.4 states: *"Ordnance using the C3 To Hit Table to fire SMOKE at ≤ 12 hexes must add two to its Basic TH#."* This is a Gun & Ammo Type modification under C4. Per C4.5: *"All Gun & Ammo Type modifications are cumulative and transform the BASIC TH# to a MODIFIED TH#."* The C4 table confirms the SMOKE row shows **+2** in the 0–6 and 7–12 range columns.
The C3 To Hit Table gives Area Target Type (used for SMOKE) a Basic TH# of 7 at ranges 0–12. Adding +2 yields a Modified TH# of 9. Since the To Hit DR must be ≤ the Modified TH# (C3.3), a DR of 9 or less now hits instead of 7 or less — a clear benefit to the firer.
References:
- (C4.4) SMOKE modification — +2 to Basic TH# at ≤ 12 hexes
- (C4.5) Modified TH# — Gun & Ammo modifications transform the Basic TH# into the Modified TH#
- (C3.3) To Hit process — a Final DR ≤ Modified TH# results in a hit
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes, literal: Basic TH# 7 -> Modified 9, easier hit. Exact; Depletion Number caveat not addressed.
A squad spends 1 MF in its MPh to place SMOKE grenades in its own hex and succeeds. Is Defensive First Fire against that MF expenditure resolved before or after the SMOKE counter is placed — i.e., does the fire get the SMOKE Hindrance DRM?
EXPECTED
After. The official Q&A on A8 & A24.1 rules that the SMOKE Placement MF expenditure, the SMOKE placement dr and, if successful, the placement of the SMOKE counter are all completed before any Defensive First Fire. So Defensive First Fire prompted by that 1 MF is traced through the new SMOKE and takes its Hindrance DRM (+2 for grenade SMOKE, A24.2). It follows that pinning, breaking or eliminating the placing unit with that fire cannot prevent the placement. (A24.1: one attempt per MPh, the hex must be declared before the dr, an Original dr of 6 ends the unit's MPh; A24.11: grenade SMOKE is removed at the end of that MPh after all First Fire but before Defensive Final Fire.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The SMOKE counter is placed **before** any Defensive First Fire is resolved against that MF expenditure. So the DFF shot does get the SMOKE Hindrance DRM.
---
The official Q&A on this exact timing question states:
> **A8. & A24.1** Is the SMOKE counter placed immediately upon announcement of placement, or after the MF expenditure and resulting DFF is resolved? …
> **A.** The SMOKE Placement MF expenditure & the SMOKE placement dr (and if successful the actual placement of the SMOKE counter) are all done **before any Defensive First Fire**. [K33]
Thus the sequence is:
1. The squad expends 1 MF and announces the SMOKE placement attempt.
2. The placement dr is rolled; if successful, the SMOKE counter is placed in the hex immediately.
3. Only then does the DEFENDER get the opportunity to declare Defensive First Fire against that MF expenditure — and the SMOKE is already in place, providing its Hindrance DRM.
This is also consistent with A24.11, which says the ½" SMOKE counter is removed "after all opposing First Fire but before any Defensive Final Fire" — confirming it is present throughout the First Fire window.
References:
- (A8 & A24.1 Q&A) SMOKE placement and counter placement occur before any Defensive First Fire
- (A24.1) 1 MF to place SMOKE in own hex
- (A24.11) SMOKE counter removed after all opposing First Fire, before Defensive Final Fire
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Placement completes before DFF (A8 & A24.1 Q&A), so the fire takes the SMOKE Hindrance. Exact.
During the DFPh a tank inside a wooden building wants to change its VCA by one hexspine. Is a Bog Check required, which Bog DRM apply (does the +3 'entry at half MP allotment' apply), and what happens if the check fails?
EXPECTED
Yes, a Bog Check is required. D8.2: a vehicle must make a Bog Check for entering, exiting, or making any VCA change (one Bog DR per hexspine) in Bog terrain, and C5.11 confirms that a change of VCA in woods/building/rubble requires passing a Bog Check first. The DRM are those of the D8.21 table that describe the vehicle and ground (e.g. +1 Normal or +2 High Ground Pressure, +1 not fully-tracked, soft/mud/snow NA in a building); the +3 for entry of a wooden building at half MP allotment is an entry DRM and does not apply to an in-hex VCA change. If the Final DR is 12 or more the vehicle bogs: it is marked Bogged and Immobile, may not change its VCA until freed (D8.2), so the VCA change does not occur, and any shot it takes must use its existing CA (with Case A if outside it). A DFPh VCA change is a pivot, not movement, so the vehicle is not a moving target (C5.11).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a Bog Check is required for a VCA change in a wooden building during the DFPh. The +3 "entry at half MP allotment" DRM does **not** apply (it only applies when *entering* the building, not when changing VCA inside it). If the check fails, the vehicle bogs, becomes Immobile, and the VCA change does not occur.
---
**Bog Check Requirement:** D2.11 states that VCA changes (if not on a road) in difficult terrain require a Bog Check (D8.2). A building hex is difficult terrain, and the VCA change cost is 2 MP per hexspine when inside a building (D2.11). This Bog Check requirement applies to VCA changes made outside the MPh as well — D2.401 confirms that a vehicle gaining Motion status during the enemy MPh may freely change its VCA "provided it passes any required Bog Check DR as a result," and D2.11 lists VCA changes at the end of a fire phase (C3.22) or via Case A fire (C5.1) as valid methods.
**Which DRM Apply:** The D8.21 Bog Check DRM table lists the +3 DRM as "*Entry* of woods, graveyard, wooden building, or rubble at half MP allotment" — this modifier applies only when the vehicle is *entering* the building hex at half its MP allotment, not when it is already inside and merely changing VCA. For a VCA change within a building, only the general, non-entry-specific DRM apply:
- +1 Vehicle has Normal Ground Pressure (or +2 for High Ground Pressure)
- +1 Vehicle is not fully-tracked (if applicable)
- +1 Vehicle has Truck-type MP expenditure (if applicable)
- +1 Vehicle is towing ordnance or trailer (if applicable)
The "+1 Ground is specified as soft/mud/snow-covered" and "+1 Deep Snow" DRM are NA when in a building hex per D8.21 footnotes 2 and 3 (Q&A clarifies "in building" means the building hex itself, not just entering across an open-ground hexside).
**Consequences of Failure:** Per D8.21, if the Final Bog Check DR ≥ 12, the vehicle bogs. It is marked with a Bog counter. Per D8.2, a bogged vehicle "may not exit its current Location or change its VCA until freed, and therefore is Immobile." The VCA change attempt fails. The "must end its MPh immediately" clause (D8.21) is moot during the DFPh since the vehicle is not in its own MPh. The vehicle may still change its TCA if otherwise able to (D8.2).
References:
- (D2.11) VCA Changes — cost, Bog Check requirement for difficult terrain, and methods of changing VCA outside the MPh
- (D8.2) Bog — Bog Check required for VCA changes; effects of bogging
- (D8.21) Bog Check DRM Table — DRM list and footnotes 2/3 (NA in building)
- (D2.401) Motion Attempt — Bog Check required for VCA change outside MPh
- (C3.22) Changing CA Without Fire — at end of friendly fire phase
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Bog Check required, +3 entry DRM does not apply, vehicle/ground DRM do, bog = Immobile and no VCA change. Exact.
Can a halftrack or truck drive into a hex occupied by enemy Infantry during its MPh and unload its Passengers there? Does it matter whether the enemy Infantry are broken?
EXPECTED
Yes. A4.14 forbids Infantry from moving into a Location containing an unconcealed enemy unit during the MPh, but expressly allows PRC (D6.5, D7.211) to dismount in such a hex during the MPh. The vehicle must stop and unload normally (D6.5: one-fourth of its MP allotment per stack, only while stopped, not after more than three-fourths of its MP have been spent), and the dismounting Personnel are subject to Defensive First Fire on their MF expenditure and FFNAM (D5.43). Broken enemy Infantry cannot attack and will have to rout, so the risk is only fire from elsewhere; unbroken enemy Infantry in the hex may use CC Reaction Fire against the vehicle (D7.21) and the unloaded units will be in CC in the CCPh. (Concealed enemy units are a different case: A12.15 and A12.41 apply to entering their Location.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes — a halftrack or truck may drive into a hex occupied by enemy Infantry (broken or not) during its MPh, and its Passengers may unload there. The enemy's broken/unbroken status does not affect the legality of entry or unloading, though it affects what the enemy can do afterward (broken units cannot attack).
---
**Step 1 — Vehicle entry into an enemy-occupied hex:**
D2.1 explicitly states: *"A vehicle may enter one or more enemy-occupied hexes during the MPh—although at some risk, and perhaps at additional MP cost."* There is no requirement to declare an Overrun (D7.1 says the vehicle *can* attack via OVR, not *must*). The vehicle simply pays the normal COT to enter the hex and may stop there.
**Step 2 — Unloading Passengers in an enemy-occupied hex:**
D6.5 states: *"PRC may unload or Bail Out in an enemy-occupied hex with no special rules or consequences unless they do so from a vehicle in Bypass (A12.151); place a CC counter to show they are not held in Melee."* This is a blanket permission — the presence of enemy units in the hex does not block unloading.
**Step 3 — Does broken/unbroken status matter?**
A4.14 restricts *Infantry moving on foot* from entering an unconcealed enemy-occupied hex during the MPh (with exceptions), but this restriction does not apply to vehicles driving into the hex, nor to PRC dismounting there. The rule itself carves out: *"However, PRC (7.211, D6.5) and charging Cavalry (13.61) can dismount in such a hex during the MPh."* Broken enemy units are still "enemy units" for purposes of A4.14, but since the vehicle and PRC are exempt from that restriction anyway, the enemy's broken status is irrelevant to the legality of entry/unloading. It does matter for what happens next: broken enemy units cannot fire (A10.6), so they cannot use TPBF (A7.211) against the unloading PRC, whereas a Good Order enemy unit could.
References:
- (D2.1) Vehicular Movement — vehicles may enter enemy-occupied hexes
- (D6.5) Unloading — PRC may unload in an enemy-occupied hex with no special rules
- (A4.14) Enemy Units — Infantry movement restriction, with explicit exception for PRC dismounting
- (D7.1) Overrun — OVR is optional ("can attack"), not mandatory
- (A10.6) Broken Units — broken units cannot fire/attack
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; A4.14's PRC exception and D6.5 unloading in an enemy-occupied hex; broken status irrelevant to legality, matters only for what the enemy can do. Matches; unloading MP limits, DFF/FFNAM on dismount and CC Reaction Fire not addressed.
A CX unit Throws a DC. Does the +1 CX DRM apply to both the attack DR in the target Location and the second DR against the Thrower's own Location, or only to the target Location?
EXPECTED
Both. A23.4: if the Placing/Throwing unit is CX, the +1 DRM for a CX attack is applied to the Attack Resolution DR (or, vs an AFV, to the DC Position DR, which lists +1 CX in C7.346). A Thrown DC resolves in the target Location and also attacks the Thrower's Location with a separate DR (A23.6); both are attack resolution DRs made by the CX unit, so each takes the +1. The Thrown-DC +2/+3 DRM applies only in the target Location (A23.6). (A23.4 Q&A: a unit that declares Double Time after operably Placing a DC does not add the +1 to that DC's attack.)
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The +1 CX DRM applies to **both** the attack DR in the target Location and the separate attack DR against the Thrower's own Location.
---
**Reasoning:**
- **A23.4** states: *"If the Placing/Throwing unit is CX, the +1 DRM for a CX attack is applied to the Attack Resolution DR (or Position DR; C7.346)."* This rule does not limit the CX modifier to only one of the two attacks — it applies to "the Attack Resolution DR" generically.
- **A23.6** specifies that a Thrown DC immediately attacks **both** the target Location and the Thrower's Location, and that *"A separate DR is used to resolve the attack of a Thrown DC on each Location."* Each of these is an Attack Resolution DR.
- Since there are two separate Attack Resolution DRs for a Thrown DC, and A23.4 applies the CX +1 to "the Attack Resolution DR" without restricting it to only one Location, the +1 CX DRM applies to **both** the target-Location DR and the Thrower's-Location DR.
- This is consistent with how other Thrown-DC modifiers work: e.g., **A23.62** explicitly applies the AFPh +1 DRM *"vs both the target and the Throwing Locations"*, showing that when a modifier is meant to affect only one Location the rule would say so.
**References:**
- (A23.4) DETONATION — CX +1 DRM applies to the Attack Resolution DR
- (A23.6) THROWN DC — separate DR for each Location; both Locations attacked
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Both DRs take the +1 CX (A23.4 applied to each Attack Resolution DR of A23.6). Exact.
May a lone non-heroic leader (a single SMC) destroy a captured Gun?
EXPECTED
No. A9.73 allows a possessing unit to destroy or deliberately malfunction a SW/Gun only if the weapon and possessing unit would otherwise be allowed to fire it in that PFPh/DFPh, and only as many weapons as it could fire. A21.13: a lone SMC may fire a crew-served weapon only if heroic (two or more SMC may fire it as a non-qualified MMC), with the single exception of a mortar of 82mm or less fired as a light mortar (C9.2). A lone non-heroic leader therefore cannot fire, and so cannot destroy, a captured Gun; a lone Hero, two SMC together, or a MMC could.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. A lone non-heroic leader (a single SMC) cannot destroy a captured Gun, because he is not allowed to fire it in the first place — and A9.73's self-destruction option is only available to a unit that "would otherwise still be allowed to fire" the weapon.
---
**Why:**
- **A9.73 (SW Self-Destruction)** permits a unit to destroy a SW/Gun it possesses only during a PFPh/DFPh in which it "would otherwise still be allowed to fire it."
- **A21.13 (Non-Qualified Use)** states: *"Two or more SMC may fire a crew-served weapon as a non-qualified MMC; a lone SMC may fire a crew-served weapon only if heroic (15.23) [EXC: a lone SMC may fire a mortar ≤ 82mm as if it were a light mortar; C9.2]."*
- A Gun is a crew-served ordnance weapon. A lone non-heroic SMC (leader) is not allowed to fire it under any circumstances (the only exception is a mortar ≤ 82mm, which does not apply to a Gun).
- Since the leader cannot fire the Gun, he does not meet the precondition of A9.73 and therefore cannot use self-destruction on it.
**References:**
- (A9.73) SW Self-Destruction — requires the unit to otherwise be allowed to fire the weapon
- (A21.13) Non-Qualified Use — a lone SMC may fire a crew-served weapon only if heroic
- (A15.23) Hero Weapons Use — confirms only a Hero can fire a Gun alone as a SMC
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; A9.73 needs the ability to fire, A21.13 bars a lone non-heroic SMC. Exact.
An Infantry unit occupies a rubble hex that also has a wall hexside and claims Wall Advantage. Fire arrives from a direction whose LOS does not cross the wall. Does the unit still get the rubble TEM?
EXPECTED
No. The official Q&A on B9.3 & B24.3 answers exactly this: a unit in a rubble hex with a wall that claims WA and is fired on by a unit whose LOS does not cross the wall does not get the rubble TEM [K33-ARE]. Claiming WA (B9.32) commits the unit to the hexside; a wall's TEM is hexside TEM and is not cumulative with the in-hex terrain TEM (B9.321 example), so against fire that crosses the wall the unit gets the wall's +2 but not the rubble's, and against fire that does not cross the wall it gets neither. A unit that wants the rubble TEM against fire from the open side must not claim WA. Note WA is claimed for the whole hex, not per hexside, outside Deluxe ASL (B9.321).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No — a unit claiming Wall Advantage does not receive in-hex TEM (including rubble) even when the LOS does not cross the wall hexside.
---
The rule is explicit: "A target unit claiming WA (9.32) does not receive in-hex TEM [EXC: Runway (7.3); Air Bursts (9.34)]" (B9.31). Rubble is in-hex terrain, so it is denied. The Q&A on this exact situation confirms: "If a unit in a rubble (inherent terrain) hex, with a wall on one or more hexsides claims WA, and gets fired on by a unit whose LOS does not cross the wall, does the unit get the rubble (inherent) TEM? A. No." (B9.3 & B24.3 Q&A, K33-ARE).
References:
- (B9.31) Wall Advantage — a unit claiming WA does not receive in-hex TEM [EXC: Runway, Air Bursts]
- (B9.3 & B24.3 Q&A) K33-ARE — confirms no rubble TEM for a unit claiming WA even when LOS does not cross the wall
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; B9.3 & B24.3 Q&A quoted; WA denies in-hex TEM. Exact.
In a Gun Duel the total Gun Duel DRM decide who fires first. If the two totals are equal, how is the tie broken, and are target-based DRM used at that point?
EXPECTED
The Gun Duel DRM that decide the order are only the Firer-Based (C5) and Acquisition (C6.5) To Hit DRM, ignoring the Gyrostabilizer +1 and the Case C4 doubled-dr (C2.2401). If the ATTACKER's and DEFENDER's totals are equal, both make their shots and the lower Final To Hit DR (or non-ordnance IFT DR) fires first; a Final DR includes every applicable DRM, so target-based DRM now count. The shot that goes first, if effective, voids the opponent's return shot. Target DRM therefore never decide who fires first, but they do decide the tie-break, because the tie-break is the actual Final DR.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** When total Gun Duel DRM are equal, the lower **Final TH (or IFT) DR** fires first. If those Final DR are also equal, both shots resolve simultaneously. Target-based DRM *are* used at that point, because the tie is broken by the Final DR (which includes all TH/IFT DRM, not just the Firer-Based ones used for the Gun Duel DRM calculation).
---
**Step 1:** The Gun Duel DRM calculation uses only **Firer-Based TH DRM** (C5) plus **Acquisition** (C6.5) — target-based modifiers (e.g., Case J, Case P) are excluded from this total (C2.2401).
**Step 2:** If the two totals are equal, the rule states: *"the lower Final TH (or non-ordnance IFT) DR fires first — and voids the opponent's return shot by eliminating, breaking, stunning or shocking it. If those two Final DR are equal, both shots are resolved simultaneously."* (C2.2401)
**Step 3:** The "Final TH DR" includes all applicable TH DRM — both Firer-Based and **target-based** (e.g., Case J Moving Vehicle, Case P Target Size). So target-based DRM are indeed used at this tiebreaking stage.
**References:**
- (C2.2401) Gun Duels — tiebreaker procedure when Gun Duel DRM are equal
- (C5) Firer-Based TH DRM — the modifiers used in the Gun Duel DRM total
- (C6.5) Acquisition — also included in the Gun Duel DRM total
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Gun Duel DRM are firer-based + acquisition; equal totals -> lower Final DR fires first, so target DRM count then. Exact, plus the simultaneous case.
A vehicle in Bypass straddles a hexside. Is there one Covered Arc Focal Point or a front and a rear one, and can LOS be traced to a rear vertex to get a rear Target Facing?
EXPECTED
One. D2.32: the vehicle's VCA corner rests on the vertex of the traversed hexside in the direction it faces, and that vertex, the Covered Arc Focal Point, is the point where all fire to and from the vehicle is traced while it uses VBM or Stationary Bypass. There is no rear CAFP, and the D2.32 Q&A confirms LOS is drawn from the front CAFP in all cases, for fire from and to the vehicle, even in reverse Motion. Target Facing for a hit on a Bypass vehicle is based on the hex the shot originated from, not on the hexside crossed (D2.32); a rear hit needs a shot originating from a hex behind the vehicle, and a hit from within its own hex strikes the hull side (D2.32 & D3.2 Q&A).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** There is only one Covered Arc Focal Point (CAFP) — the front vertex — and LOS to/from a vehicle in Bypass is always traced to/from that single front CAFP, never to a rear vertex. A rear hit is determined by the hex the shot originated from (i.e., whether that hex lies in the vehicle's rear Target Facing), not by tracing LOS to a separate rear point.
---
**Step 1: One CAFP, not two.**
The rules state that when using VBM, the vehicle counter is placed straddling the hexside "with the VCA corner of the counter resting on the vertex of that hexside in the direction the vehicle is facing. This vertex is called the Covered Arc Focal Point (CAFP)." There is only one CAFP — the front vertex. The rear is described as "the reverse of the CAFP" (D2.321), but that is a reference point for TCA, not a second LOS point.
**Step 2: LOS is always traced to/from the front CAFP.**
The official Q&A (D2.32) confirms: "Is LOS drawn from the front CAFP in ALL cases for both fire from and to the vehicle in bypass? Even if the vehicle is in reverse motion? A. Yes. Yes." This means LOS is always traced to the single front CAFP, regardless of direction of travel or TCA orientation.
**Step 3: Rear Target Facing is determined by origin hex, not by tracing to a rear vertex.**
Per D2.32: "The Target Facing of a hit vs a vehicle in Bypass is based on the hex it originated from (not the target hexside crossed as per normal Target Facing; C.3.2); to score a rear hit the shot must have originated from a hex in the target's rear Target Facing." So you determine rear hits by checking whether the firing hex falls within the rear Target Facing area (defined by the reverse of the CAFP and the two side corners), not by tracing LOS to a separate rear point.
References:
- (D2.32) VCA & Target Facing — CAFP definition; LOS always traced to front CAFP
- (D2.32 Q&A) LOS drawn from front CAFP in ALL cases, even reverse motion
- (D2.321) Bypass TCA — four points: CAFP (Front), reverse of CAFP (Rear), two side hexes
- (D2.32) Target Facing of a hit vs vehicle in Bypass — based on origin hex, not hexside crossed
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] One CAFP at the front vertex; LOS always from it (D2.32 Q&A); Target Facing by origin hex. Exact.
A unit declares Assault Movement and attempts to enter a Location containing a concealed enemy unit, and is forced back under A12.15. Is it still using Assault Movement for any Defensive First Fire against it, and how are the MF it spent treated?
EXPECTED
It is still Assault Moving, and the MF are treated as spent in the Location it was returned to.
- A12.15: the DEFENDER must reveal at least one concealed unit and force the moving unit back to the last Location it occupied, where it loses its own concealment, ends its MPh (unless it goes berserk first), and is subject to possible Defensive First Fire. The MF expended in the attempt are still used but are considered expended in the returned-to Location, so any Residual FP there attacks it again on re-entry, as does any FFE or minefield.
- Nothing in A12.15 cancels Assault Movement, and the A4.61 conditions still hold: the unit moved no more than one Location and did not use all its MF (unless the attempt did), so it keeps the Assault Movement status for that fire (no FFNAM; FFMO still applies in Open Ground). Assault Movement is lost only by the A4.61 events: using all MF to go beneath Wire, breaking, or going berserk from Defensive First Fire.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the unit is still considered to be using Assault Movement for any Defensive First Fire against it in the returned-to Location (none of the A4.61 exceptions apply), so it is subject to the −1 FFMO DRM but NOT the −1 FFNAM DRM. The MF spent attempting to enter the concealed unit's Location are still used (counted against the unit's MF allowance), but are considered expended in the Location it was returned to.
---
**Step 1 — Assault Movement status (A4.61):** A unit using Assault Movement loses that status only if it (a) uses all its MF to move beneath Wire, (b) breaks due to Defensive First Fire, or (c) becomes berserk due to Defensive First Fire. Being forced back under A12.15 is not one of the listed exceptions. The rule states "otherwise, once declared, Assault Movement cannot be voluntarily voided." Therefore the unit retains its Assault Movement declaration for the Defensive First Fire that occurs after being forced back.
**Step 2 — Effect on Defensive First Fire DRMs (A4.6, A4.61):** Because the unit is still using Assault Movement, it is subject to the −1 FFMO DRM (if in Open Ground) but is NOT subject to the −1 FFNAM DRM. The −1 FFNAM is specifically excluded for Assault Movement.
**Step 3 — Treatment of MF spent (A12.15):** The rule states: "The MF expended in attempting to move into the concealed unit's Location are still used, but are considered expended in the Location it is returned to." So the MF are deducted from the unit's allowance as normal, but for purposes of any effects that depend on where MF are spent (e.g., Residual FP attacks in the returned-to Location), they are treated as having been spent in the returned-to Location, not in the concealed unit's Location.
**References:**
- (A12.15) Detection — forced-back procedure; MF treatment
- (A4.61) Assault Movement — exceptions for loss of status; FFNAM exclusion
- (A4.6) Movement Modifiers (FFMO/FFNAM) — general rules
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Still Assault Moving (no FFNAM, FFMO still); MF counted as spent in the returned-to Location. Exact.
A pillbox is a separate Location in its hex. Can a unit advance from an adjacent hex into the pillbox hex and enter the pillbox in the same APh?
EXPECTED
No. A4.7: a unit may not change both its Location within a hex and the hex it is in during the same APh. Entering a pillbox is a change of Location within the hex (B30.4: Infantry enter the pillbox Location in their hex at a cost of one MF, having first entered the hex), so the advance can only bring the unit into the pillbox hex, on top of the pillbox; entering the pillbox takes a later MPh (1 MF) or APh. The exception A4.7 names is entrenchment to entrenchment in an Accessible hex, and B30.8 adds bunkers: a pillbox in or Accessible to a trench hex is a bunker, and a unit may move/rout/advance between that trench and the bunker as if the bunker were a trench (the 30.42/30.44/30.6 entry restrictions still apply).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. A unit may advance from an adjacent hex into the pillbox hex **or** enter the pillbox Location from the pillbox hex in the same APh, but not both — the APh allows only one hex change *or* one Location change within the hex, not both.
---
**Step 1:** The APh permits a unit to move one hex horizontally **or** change Location within its current hex (e.g., enter a pillbox from the pillbox hex), but not both in the same phase (A4.7).
**Step 2:** A pillbox is a separate non-vertical-level Location inside its hex (B30.1). Moving from the pillbox hex (outside) into the pillbox is a change of Location within the same hex.
**Step 3:** A4.7 explicitly states: *"A unit may not change both its Location within a hex and also the hex it is in during the same APh."* Therefore, advancing from an adjacent hex into the pillbox hex (changing hex) and then entering the pillbox (changing Location within the hex) is prohibited in a single APh.
**Step 4:** This is consistent with the MPh example in B30.4, where entering the pillbox hex and then entering the pillbox requires two separate MF expenditures — a pattern the APh cannot replicate because it only allows one action.
References:
- (A4.7) Advance Phase — one hex or one Location change, not both
- (B30.1) Pillbox is a separate Location inside its hex
- (B30.4) MPh entry/exit costs for pillbox (two separate MF expenditures)
- (B30.33) MF for pillbox entry/exit is a separate action (MPh context)
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; A4.7 forbids changing hex and in-hex Location in one APh; entering the pillbox is a Location change (B30.4). Matches; the entrenchment/bunker (B30.8) exception is not addressed.
A berserk unit charges into an enemy-occupied hex during its MPh; the defender survives and both are under a CC counter. Does either side roll for Ambush in that Player Turn's CCPh, given the berserk unit did not advance into the hex in the APh?
EXPECTED
No, not on the berserk unit's account. A11.4: an Ambush can occur whenever Infantry advance into CC in a woods/building Location or with/against concealed units (or when a hidden unit is placed as per A11.19); a berserk unit enters during its MPh charge (A15.43) and never advances in the APh (A15.431), so its entry alone creates no Ambush dr. The +1 Ambush drm for berserk units applies when an Ambush dr does happen: the A11.4 & A15.432 Q&A confirms that if other friendly units advance into that Location in the same Player Turn (they are not reinforcing a Melee), an Ambush can occur, and the berserk unit's +1 (plus no leadership drm if any of the force is berserk) then counts.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, neither side rolls for Ambush in that CCPh based solely on the berserk unit's MPh charge. The berserk unit entered the hex during its MPh, not by advancing in the APh, so the condition for Ambush ("advance into CC") is not met by that entry. However, if other friendly units advance into that same hex in the APh, they could cause an Ambush to occur (since the berserk entry did not create a Melee).
---
**Reasoning:**
- **A11.4** states: *"Whenever Infantry advance into CC (unless reinforcing a Melee) in a woods/building Location or with/against a concealed unit(s) an Ambush can conceivably occur."* The term "advance" here refers to the Advance Phase (APh) — the berserk unit entered during its MPh via a charge, not via an APh advance, so this condition is not satisfied by the berserk's entry alone.
- **A15.432** clarifies: *"Survivors are not yet held in Melee, and the stack is marked with a CC counter to indicate this."* Because no Melee exists yet, the Location is not "reinforcing a Melee" — but the berserk's MPh entry still does not constitute an "advance" for Ambush purposes.
- **Official Q&A (A11.4 & A15.432):** *"If a Russian Berserk MMC enters into CC in an enemy-occupied building Location during its MPh, can Russian units who advance into the CC Location that same Player Turn cause an Ambush to possibly occur (since they are not reinforcing a Melee)? A. Yes."* This confirms that the berserk's MPh entry does not itself trigger an Ambush roll, but other units advancing into that hex in the APh *can* trigger one because no Melee has been established.
- **A11.4** also notes that berserk units are always Lax in CC (+1 drm to the Ambush Status dr) and that leadership modifiers are not used if any of the force is berserk — but these modifiers only apply if an Ambush roll is actually made (which requires an APh advance into the Location).
**References:**
- (A11.4) Ambush — condition requires "advance into CC" (APh)
- (A15.432) Berserk charge — survivors not yet in Melee; CC counter placed
- (A11.4 & A15.432 Q&A) — other units advancing in the APh can cause Ambush; berserk MPh entry alone does not
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No Ambush from the berserk charge itself; other units advancing that turn can trigger one (A11.4 & A15.432 Q&A), with the berserk +1 then applying. Exact.
Can a non-vehicular 88L AA Gun (a 5/8-inch counter) be set up in, or pushed into, a Factory?
EXPECTED
No, absent an SSR. B23.423: a non-vehicular weapon on a 5/8-inch counter may be set up or pushed into a building/rubble only if it is a small target (C2.271) or an AT/INF Gun that is not a large target; an 88L AA Gun is a large target and not an AT/INF Gun, so it is excluded. A Factory is a building (B23.74), and its vehicular-sized entrance provisions concern vehicle entry, not the Gun restriction. C10.1 separately forbids towing a Gun into a building/rubble. Only a scenario SSR can place the 88 inside.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No — a non-vehicular 88L AA Gun (a 5/8″ counter) cannot be set up in or pushed into a non-Fortified Factory, because it is an AA Gun (not AT/INF) and is a Large Target, neither of which qualifies for the building-occupancy exceptions. It could set up at ground level only if the Factory Location is Fortified (B23.93), but even then it could not be pushed into it during play.
---
**Why it fails the building-occupancy test**
The relevant rules are **B23.423** (Guns in buildings) and **C2.7** (Prohibited Hexes). Both say the same thing:
> *"Small-Target-Size Guns and AT/INF Guns that are not large targets are the only 5/8″ non-vehicular Gun counters that may ever occupy a building/rubble hex [EXC: Rooftop mortars (B23.85); Fortified Building (B23.93)]."* (C2.7)
A Factory is a type of building (B23.74), so these restrictions apply to it as well.
**Step 1 – Is the 88L AA Gun a Small Target?**
Per C2.271, a Gun's Target Size is shown by the color of its M#. The 8.8cm FlaK 18/36 has **M# 4 printed in red** on the actual counter, making it a **Large Target** (−1 To Hit DRM). It is *not* a Small Target.
**Step 2 – Is it an AT or INF Gun?**
No. The 8.8cm FlaK 18/36 is an **AA Gun** (Type "AA" in the Ordnance Listing). The exception for "AT/INF Guns that are not large targets" does not apply.
**Step 3 – Conclusion for a non-Fortified Factory**
Since the 88L AA Gun is neither a Small Target nor an AT/INF Gun, it fails both prongs of the exception. It **cannot** be set up in or pushed into a non-Fortified Factory.
**Step 4 – The Fortified Building exception**
B23.93 allows *any* type/target size of Gun to set up at the ground level of a **Fortified Building** (including a Fortified Factory). However, the same rule states: *"No 5/8″ weapon counter may be moved into a Fortified Building during play."* So it could be set up there initially, but never pushed in later.
References:
- (B23.423) Guns in buildings — only Small Target or AT/INF (non-large) may occupy
- (C2.7) Prohibited hexes — same restriction for building/rubble
- (C2.271) Gun Target Size — white M# = Small Target, red M# = Large Target
- (B23.74) Factory is a building
- (B23.93) Fortified Building exception — any Gun may set up at ground level, but cannot be moved in during play
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; B23.423/C2.7: large-target AA Gun excluded; Factory is a building. Matches, with a correct Fortified Building aside.
A Gun has a 1/2-inch Acquired counter on a Location because it fired at a unit there and broke it. The broken unit routs out of the hex, still in the Gun's LOS. May the Acquired counter stay in the hex to keep the Location acquired, or must it follow the unit?
EXPECTED
It must follow the unit. The C6.51 Q&A rules that a 1/2-inch Acquired counter cannot remain in a Location when all its target units move into a new Location still in the firer's LOS; it must follow one of the target units (the firer keeps only one such counter and may choose which target stays acquired, C6.51). The counter stays put only in the case C6.51 describes: an acquired target leaves the firer's LOS, in which event the counter remains in the last Location the target occupied in LOS and applies to any Known unit that later occupies it. To acquire a Location independent of any unit, use Area Acquisition (5/8-inch counter, Area Target Type).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The Acquired counter cannot remain in the hex — it must follow the broken unit to its new Location, because the unit is still in the Gun's LOS.
---
The rule at C6.51 states that a 1/2" Acquired counter remains in the last Location the target occupied *only* if the target leaves the firer's LOS when it moves. Since the broken unit is still in LOS after routing, that exception does not apply. The official Q&A for C6.51 confirms this directly: *"May a ½" Acquired counter be left in a location when all target unit(s) move into a new location (still in LOS of the firer), or must it follow one of the target units? A. It cannot remain and must follow one of the target units."*
References:
- (C6.51) Acquired counter remains in the last Location only if the target leaves the firer's LOS
- (C6.51 Q&A) Confirms the counter cannot remain and must follow the target unit when still in LOS
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Must follow the unit (C6.51 Q&A); stays only if the target leaves LOS. Exact.
Does Height Advantage prevent concealment loss when a concealed unit advances into an otherwise Open Ground hex on higher ground? Any exceptions?
EXPECTED
Yes, with one exception. A10.531 defines Open Ground for concealment loss as a hex where the enemy unit could apply the -1 FFMO DRM in a hypothetical Defensive First Fire; B10.31 gives a unit fired on from a lower elevation a +1 Height Advantage TEM and states that a unit eligible for it is not subject to FFMO by that attack. If every Good Order enemy within 16 hexes with LOS is lower, the hex is not Open Ground to them and the advancing unit keeps its '?' (A10.531 Q&A: a concealed unit advancing into an Open Ground hill hex seen only from below does not lose concealment; the mortar there is immaterial). The exception is B10.31's EXC: a moving unit is not eligible for Height Advantage against a firer whose LOS enters the target hex across the same Crest Line hexside the unit crosses, so a unit advancing up across a Crest Line in such a LOS is in Open Ground and loses concealment (B10.31 Q&A). Any other positive TEM or CE DRM also cancels Height Advantage eligibility.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, Height Advantage prevents concealment loss when a concealed unit advances into an otherwise Open Ground hex on higher ground, because the hex ceases to be "Open Ground" for concealment-loss purposes. The key exception is the Crest Line rule: if the unit crosses a Crest Line through the same hexside intersected by the firer's LOS while entering the hex, Height Advantage is denied and concealment is lost normally.
---
**Why Height Advantage negates concealment loss**
A concealed unit loses its "?" if it advances into an Open Ground hex while in LOS of a Good Order enemy ground unit within 16 hexes (A12.14). "Open Ground" is defined as any hex where the enemy could apply the -1 FFMO DRM during a hypothetical Defensive First Fire (A10.531). However, a unit eligible for the +1 Height Advantage TEM is **not** subject to FFMO/Interdiction by an attack to which that +1 TEM applies (B10.31). Therefore, if Height Advantage applies, the -1 FFMO cannot be applied, so the hex is **not** Open Ground for that unit, and concealment is retained.
**Official Q&A confirmations**
- **A10.531 Q&A**: "A concealed unit advances into an OG hill hex that is devoid of cover or SMOKE. The only opposing unit that can see that movement is at a lower location... Does the advancing unit lose concealment? **A. No.**" (K33)
- **A12.14 & B27.4 Q&A**: "Would a unit lose concealment by Advancing into an Open Ground foxhole... What if it had Height Advantage over all enemy units? **A. Yes. No; the foxhole would no longer be in 'Open Ground.'**" (VFTT #11)
**The Crest Line exception**
Per B10.31, a moving unit being fired on by Defensive First Fire is **not** eligible for Height Advantage if, in entering the target hex, it crosses a Crest Line through the same hexside intersected by the firer's LOS. In that case, the hex remains Open Ground and concealment is lost normally. The B10.31 example and its Q&A (VFTT #13) confirm this: a unit moving from AA2 to BB1 crossing a Crest Line along the LOS from Z1 is subject to FFMO and **does** lose concealment.
**Other limitations**
Height Advantage only applies when the firer is at a **lower** elevation than the target (B10.31). If the enemy unit is at the same or higher elevation, Height Advantage does not apply, the hex remains Open Ground, and concealment is lost normally.
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes via A10.531/B10.31 with the Crest Line EXC; both Q&As cited. Exact.
Can a vehicle be set up Abandoned at scenario start (its crew placed outside it), and can an Abandoned vehicle be concealed?
EXPECTED
Only an SSR can set a vehicle up Abandoned: a crew abandons only during its own MPh (D5.41), so at scenario start the crew is Inherent unless the scenario says otherwise. An Abandoned vehicle is not a wreck; it is marked with an Abandoned counter, may not move or fire, and may be entered by Infantry (D5.41-.42) or captured. Concealment: A12.2 applies the concealment rules to vehicles, and the A12.2 Q&A rules that a concealed vehicle that becomes Abandoned may retain its '?' if otherwise allowed, but once unconcealed it cannot regain a '?' while Abandoned. Vehicular concealment is lost immediately in the LOS of a Good Order enemy ground unit when not in Concealment Terrain (A12.2).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No to both — a vehicle cannot normally start a scenario Abandoned (except in certain Campaign Games), and an Abandoned vehicle cannot be concealed (it may retain an existing "?" only until it is first unconcealed, after which it can never regain concealment).
---
**1. Setting up Abandoned at scenario start**
The Q&A for D5.4 directly states:
> *D5.4 Can a vehicle start a scenario with its crew outside the AFV or with any of its weapons Scrounged/removed? Does it matter if that side is the Scenario Defender?*
> **A. Only in certain CG. No.** [VFTT #9]
Thus, absent a specific Campaign Game (CG) rule or SSR, a vehicle must set up with its Inherent crew inside it. It cannot be set up Abandoned with the crew on the board outside.
**2. Concealment of an Abandoned vehicle**
The Q&A for A12.2 states:
> *A12.2 If a concealed vehicle becomes abandoned, may it retain (or later regain) concealment?*
> **A. It may retain its "?" (if otherwise allowed to), but once unconcealed cannot regain a "?" while abandoned.** [An95w; An96]
So an Abandoned vehicle can *keep* a "?" it already has (e.g., if it was concealed when it became abandoned), but once that "?" is lost for any reason, it can never regain concealment while it remains Abandoned. A vehicle that starts Abandoned (if permitted by SSR/CG) would therefore be unable to set up with a "?" that could ever be regained after loss — and per the general rule, vehicles in Concealment Terrain at setup may receive OB-designated "?" (A12.2), but the Q&A makes clear that once unconcealed while Abandoned, no new "?" can be placed.
References:
- (D5.4) Abandonment — voluntary crew exit; Q&A confirms no start-of-scenario Abandoned setup except in certain CG
- (A12.2) Concealed ⅝" Counters — concealment rules for vehicles; Q&A confirms Abandoned vehicle cannot regain "?" once unconcealed
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Cannot start Abandoned except in certain CG (D5.4 Q&A); retains '?' but cannot regain it while Abandoned (A12.2 Q&A). Matches, though the 'No to both' headline overstates the concealment answer.
An Infantry squad is in Melee with an immobilized truck and an AFV that is in Motion. Can the squad leave the Location during its MPh?
EXPECTED
No. A11.15: Infantry locked in Melee may not leave the Location or act except in CC, and Infantry are held in Melee by enemy Cavalry, cyclists, and non-Abandoned, Stopped, 'unbroken' vehicles. The immobilized truck is a stopped, non-Abandoned vehicle, so it holds the squad; the Motion AFV does not, but that does not matter while the truck does. The squad's only way out is to announce Withdrawal from Melee at the start of the CCPh (A11.2), before CC attacks are declared, taking the -2 DRM on attacks against it (+1 per friendly unit not withdrawing). Had the truck been Abandoned, a wreck, or the only vehicle in Motion, the squad would not be held and could move normally.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, the squad cannot leave the Location during its MPh. The immobilized truck is a non-Abandoned, Stopped, "unbroken" vehicle that holds the squad in Melee, locking it in the Location.
---
The squad is held in Melee by the immobilized truck, not by the AFV in Motion.
**A11.15** states that Infantry are held in Melee by enemy "non-Abandoned, Stopped, 'unbroken' (12.1) vehicles." The immobilized truck meets all three criteria — it is non-Abandoned, Stopped (immobilized = stopped), and "unbroken" (not abandoned/destroyed). Therefore the squad is locked in Melee and "may not leave that Location or attack except as part of CC."
**A11.7** clarifies that a vehicle holds enemy Infantry in Melee "as long as it remains in the Location (unless in-Motion/Non-Stopped)." The AFV in Motion does **not** hold the squad in Melee, but the immobilized truck does. The official Q&A for A11.7 confirms that an armed but unarmored vehicle (such as a truck) does hold opposing Infantry in Melee.
Since the squad is locked in Melee, it cannot leave during its MPh. It could attempt to Withdraw from Melee (A11.2) during the CCPh, but that is a separate procedure from normal movement.
References:
- (A11.15) Melee — Infantry held by Stopped vehicles; may not leave Location
- (A11.7) Vehicle Withdrawal from CC — vehicle holds Infantry unless in-Motion/Non-Stopped
- (A11.7 Q&A) Unarmored vehicle holds opposing Infantry in Melee
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; the stopped non-Abandoned truck holds it, the Motion AFV does not; Withdrawal in the CCPh noted. Matches.
Is grain a half-level terrain feature, and does it therefore impose a +3 same-level LOS Hindrance?
EXPECTED
No. Grain is a LOS Hindrance, not a half-level obstacle, and it never imposes +3: B15.2 adds a +1 DRM for every grain hex through which a same-level LOS crosses the grain depiction (cumulative per hex, A6.7). The 'half-level Hindrance' label in F4.51 exists only for deir LOS purposes in the desert rules (brush, bridge, grain, marsh, crag and AFV/wrecks are half-level Hindrances there, affecting LOS only when viewer and viewed are at the same level and one is in a deir); it does not make grain a half-level obstacle or change its DRM. A hillock (F6.2) is a genuine Half-Level Obstacle, which is a different thing from grain.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. Grain is **not** a half-level terrain feature (except for special deir purposes), and it does **not** impose a +3 Hindrance. Grain is a **LOS Hindrance** that adds **+1 DRM per grain hex** the LOS crosses between same-level firer and target.
---
**Why grain is not a half-level obstacle:**
- **Half-level obstacles** (A6.21) — such as walls, hedges, rubble, and cactus patches — **block all same-level LOS** through them entirely. They are listed as "Half-Level" in the Terrain Chart's LOS Obstacle/Hindrance column.
- **Grain** is listed in the Terrain Chart (row 15) as **"Hindrance\*"** in that column, not "Half-Level". Per **B15.2**, grain is "considered a Hindrance to same-level LOS by adding a **+1 DRM for every grain hex** [EXC: see A6.7] through which that LOS crosses the grain depiction between the firer and target."
- Per **A6.7**, LOS Hindrances modify the IFT/To Hit DR by **+1 per hex** (subject to the maximum +5 rule per B.10), not by a flat +3.
**The only context where grain is called "half-level"** is in **B4.51** (deir rules), which states: "for deir LOS purposes, brush, bridge, grain, marsh, crag, and an AFV/wreck... are defined as 'half-level' Hindrances." This is a special exception applying only within deir terrain — it does not change grain's normal classification.
**Summary:** Grain is a **+1-per-hex Hindrance**, not a half-level obstacle. It never imposes a flat +3 Hindrance.
References:
- (B15.2) Grain — Hindrance, +1 per hex for same-level LOS
- (A6.7) LOS Hindrance — +1 DRM per hex, not a block
- (A6.21) Half-Level Obstacles — block same-level LOS entirely
- (B4.51) Deir exception — grain defined as "half-level" for deir purposes only
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No: Hindrance +1 per hex, not a half-level obstacle, never +3; deir label is special (cited as B4.51 rather than F4.51). Matches.
Do enemy squads that are broken and under DM still count as 'armed enemy ground units' that prevent me from gaining Control of a building under A26.11?
EXPECTED
Yes. A26.11 grants Control to an armed Good Order Infantry MMC occupying the Location/hex/building without the presence of an armed enemy ground unit (subterranean units excepted); it does not require the enemy unit to be Good Order. A broken or DM unit remains armed unless it is Unarmed (A20.5); A10.21 makes the same point for rout purposes, a broken leader with no SW is still 'armed'. So broken/DM enemy squads in the building prevent Control until they leave or are eliminated/captured.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes. Broken and DM enemy squads are still "armed enemy ground units" and therefore prevent you from gaining Control of a Location/hex/building under A26.11.
---
The key text of **A26.11** states that a side gains Control by occupying with an "armed Good Order Infantry MMC" **without the presence of an armed enemy ground unit** in that same Location/hex/building. The rule does **not** require the enemy unit to be unbroken or in Good Order — only that it be "armed."
The ASL Index defines "Armed" as: *any Personnel unit is Armed unless currently represented by an Unarmed counter (A20.54) not possessing a functioning Gun/SW*. A broken squad is still represented by its normal (inverted) counter and still possesses its inherent FP; it is not an Unarmed unit. Therefore it remains "armed."
This is confirmed by the **A26.11 Example** in the rulebook (the building 22U3 example):
> *"He does not gain Control of the building since the broken 4-4-7 is still an **armed enemy unit** and thus prevents the German player from gaining Control."*
The example explicitly treats a broken squad as an "armed enemy unit" that blocks Control. Being under DM (Desperation Morale) does not change this — DM is a morale/routing status, not an "unarmed" status.
Note the contrast with **A10.5** (Routing), which uses the phrase "both unbroken and armed" — that rule requires *both* conditions because routing restrictions are different. A26.11 only requires "armed," not "unbroken."
References:
- **(A26.11)** Gaining Control — requires no armed enemy ground unit present
- **(A26.11 Example)** Broken 4-4-7 explicitly called an "armed enemy unit" that prevents Control
- **(Index: "Armed")** Definition — any Personnel unit is Armed unless represented by an Unarmed counter
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes; A26.11 needs only 'armed', with the rulebook example of a broken 4-4-7 blocking Control. Exact.
An Infantry unit tries to enter a hex containing a hidden A-P minefield and a concealed enemy MMC, and is forced back under A12.15 without entering. Does the minefield in that hex attack it? Does the answer change if entry was refused because the hex is a Fortified Building Location?
EXPECTED
No, and no. B28.41 has a minefield attack a unit whenever it enters or leaves the minefield hex; a unit forced back by Detection (A12.15) never entered it, so that minefield does not attack. The MF it spent are treated as expended in the Location it was returned to (A12.15), where it ends its MPh and is subject to Defensive First Fire and to any Residual FP, FFE, or minefield in that returned-to Location. A refused Fortified Building entry works the same way (B23.922): the unit must stay in its present hex, the MF spent count as expended there for Residual FP, Defensive First Fire, Subsequent First Fire and FPF, and its MPh is over once that fire is done; it never entered the fortified hex, so its mines do not attack.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No, the minefield does not attack in either scenario. A unit forced back by A12.15 is explicitly not subject to minefield attack during its brief period in the target hex, and a unit denied entry to a Fortified Building Location never enters the hex at all.
---
**Scenario 1 — Concealed MMC forces the unit back (A12.15):**
A12.15 states: *"A unit forced back to its previous Location is not subject to attack (even by a minefield or FFE) during its brief period in the previously-concealed unit's Location."* The unit never completes entry into the hex — it is forced back to its last occupied Location before entering. Since it never "enters" the minefield hex for purposes of B28.41, and A12.15 explicitly exempts it from minefield attack during that brief period, no minefield attack occurs.
**Scenario 2 — Fortified Building Location refuses entry (B23.922):**
B23.922 says the unit *"must remain in its present hex during that phase"* — it never enters the target hex at all. The official Q&A (B23.922 & B28.41) directly confirms: *"If a unit is trying to enter a fortified building hex that has an AP minefield in the open ground portion of the hex is the unit attacked before it is denied entry of the hex due to its fortified status? A. No attack."*
References:
- (A12.15) Detection — unit forced back is not subject to minefield attack during its brief period in the target Location
- (B28.41) Minefield attack triggers on entry/exit — no entry occurs
- (B23.922) Fortified Building entry denial — unit never enters the hex
- (B23.922 & B28.41 Q&A) Official ruling: no minefield attack when entry is denied by Fortified Building status
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No and no; A12.15 text and the B23.922 & B28.41 Q&A. Exact.
How does a Flame become a Blaze, and what roll and modifiers are involved (including the chance it goes out instead)?
EXPECTED
B25.151: in the AFPh of every Player Turn after the one in which it first appeared, a non-Hampered Flame that has not already been extinguished or Hampered that Player Turn makes a DR. If the Final DR is greater than or equal to the Spread Number of the terrain in its Location, the Flame becomes a Blaze; if the Final DR is 2 or less, the Flame is extinguished; otherwise it stays a Flame. The DR is modified by the EC DRM unless the Flame is in a building, and takes a -1 DRM in a Fortified Building (B23.94). A newly placed Flame is marked with a PIN counter during its first Player Turn to show it cannot yet spread (B25.15). B25.6 governs Blazes spreading to adjacent Burnable Terrain, a separate DR on the Spreading Fire Table.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** In the AFPh of each Player Turn after the one in which it first appears, a non-Hampered Flame becomes a Blaze on a Final DR ≥ the terrain's Spread Number (e.g., 8 for a wooden building, 9 for stone). The DR is modified by the EC DRM unless the Flame is in a building, with an additional −1 if in a Fortified Building. If the Final DR is ≤ 2, the Flame is extinguished instead.
---
**Step 1 — Timing and eligibility:** A non-Hampered Flame may become a Blaze in the AFPh of every Player Turn *other* than the one in which it first appeared (B25.151). A Flame that is Hampered (B24.721) or already extinguished cannot attempt to become a Blaze that turn.
**Step 2 — The DR and target number:** Make a Final DR. If the result is ≥ the terrain's Spread Number, the Flame becomes a Blaze. The Spread Numbers are (B25.6 Spreading Fire Table):
| Terrain | Spread # |
|---|---|
| Stone Building / orchard | ≥ 9 |
| Wooden Building / woods-road | ≥ 8 |
| Woods | ≥ 7 |
| Grain / Brush | ≥ 6 |
**Step 3 — Modifiers to the DR (B25.151):**
- **EC DRM** — applies *unless* the Flame is in a building (B25.151).
- **−1 DRM** — if the Flame is in a Fortified Building (B23.94).
**Step 4 — Extinguishing:** If the Final DR is **≤ 2**, the Flame is extinguished instead of becoming a Blaze (B25.151).
**Step 5 — Hampering (B24.721):** If a player attempts to extinguish the Flame during their MPh/DFPh (B24.72) and rolls a Final Fire Clearance DR of 3–6, the Flame is Hampered (marked with a PIN counter) and cannot become a Blaze during that Player Turn.
**Summary of possible outcomes:**
- **Final DR ≤ 2** → Flame extinguished.
- **Final DR 3–6** (and no Hamper occurred earlier) → no change; Flame persists but does not become a Blaze.
- **Final DR ≥ Spread Number** → Flame becomes a Blaze (all Flame counters in the Location are removed and a Blaze counter is placed; B25.15).
- **Final DR between 7 and (Spread Number − 1)** → no change; Flame persists.
References:
- (B25.151) Blaze Creation / Flame Extinguishing — DR, modifiers, and extinguishing threshold
- (B25.6) Spreading Fire Table — Spread Numbers by terrain type
- (B24.721) Hamper — a Clearance DR of 3–6 prevents Blaze creation that turn
- (B24.72) Fire Clearance — how units attempt to extinguish a Flame
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] B25.151 timing, thresholds, EC DRM except in buildings, -1 Fortified; Spread Numbers accurate. Exact; PIN marker on a new Flame not addressed.
A taczanka (a horse-drawn wagon mounting a quad Maxim AAMG) fires the AAMG and rolls Original doubles on the IFT. Does the attack cower?
EXPECTED
Yes, it cowers (unless a leader directs the attack).
- A7.9 exempts from Cowering all fire from a SMC, berserk or Fanatic unit, Fire Lane, IFE, Canister, Aircraft, Sniper, ordnance, OBA, or any form of vehicular fire. D12.1 makes a Wagon vehicular in nature, which suggests the mounted AAMG is exempt vehicular fire.
- Allied Minor Vehicle Note 13 (Horse-Drawn "Taczanka") overrides that: the Taczanka has no Inherent crew; it starts each scenario with a 2-2-8 crew as a Passenger, and "the AAMG of a Taczanka is fired by a Good Order Passenger".
- The A7.9 Q&A rules that fire from Passengers/Riders is not considered vehicular fire for purposes of Cowering [K33]. The AAMG attack is Passenger fire, so the vehicular-fire exemption does not apply.
- The 2-2-8 crew is a MMC, so the SMC exemption does not apply either. On Original doubles the attack cowers one column (A7.9), unless directed by a leader or the firer is otherwise exempt (e.g., Fanatic).
- Contrast: the motorized 302T "Taczanka" (Allied Minor Vehicle Note 10) carries its AAMG as vehicular armament with an Inherent crew; that fire is vehicular and does not cower.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, the attack cowers. Fire from a Passenger/Rider is not considered vehicular fire for cowering purposes, so the AAMG attack by the 2-2-8 crew is subject to cowering on Original doubles (unless directed by a leader).
---
The taczanka's AAMG is fired by a Good Order Passenger (the 2-2-8 crew), and counts as use of a SW by that Passenger. Per the official Q&A for A7.9: *"Is passenger (PRC) fire from a halftrack considered a form of vehicular fire? A. Fire from Passengers/Riders is not considered vehicular fire for purposes of Cowering."* Since the attack is not vehicular fire, it does not qualify for the cowering exemption in A7.9 ("any form of vehicular fire"). The 2-2-8 crew is a MMC, not a SMC, so the SMC exemption also does not apply. Therefore, on an Original doubles IFT DR, the attack cowers (shifts one column left on the IFT) unless a leader directs the attack.
References:
- (A7.9) Cowering — lists exemptions including "any form of vehicular fire"
- (A7.9 Q&A) Passenger fire from a halftrack is not vehicular fire for cowering purposes
- (Allied Minor Vehicle Note 13) Taczanka AAMG is fired by a Good Order Passenger and counts as use of a SW
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Re-judged 2026-09-17 after the golden answer was corrected. Yes, it cowers: Vehicle Note 13 has the AAMG fired by a Good Order Passenger, the A7.9 Q&A excludes Passenger fire from the vehicular-fire exemption, and the 2-2-8 is a MMC; leader direction noted. Matches. Its added claim that this 'counts as use of a SW' is not in the note text but does not affect the answer.
A German 4-3-6 squad rolls an Original 2 in Close Combat at 1-4 odds. What is the final Leader Creation drm, and why does the CC odds column contribute -2?
EXPECTED
-2 in total. The A18.2 Leader Creation Table drm: -1 for American, British or German; -1 per odds column below 1-1 for a CC attack (or -1 for CC vs an AFV); -1 if the base unit's Morale Level is 8 or more; +1 if it is 6 or less; +1 if the base unit was broken; +1 for G.M.D., Russian or Italian. At 1-4 odds the attack is two columns below 1-1 (1-2, then 1-4), so that line gives -2. The German 4-3-6 therefore has -1 (German) -2 (1-4 odds) +1 (Morale Level 6) = -2, the worked example in A18.2 itself. The subsequent dr then reads the table: 7 or more none, 6 gives a 6+1, 4-5 a 7-0, 2-3 an 8-0, 1 or less an 8-1 (NA for Finns and Japanese).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** The final Leader Creation drm is **-2**. The CC odds column contributes **-2** because the attack is at 1-4 odds, which is two columns below the 1-1 column on the Close Combat Table, and the rule applies a -1 drm per odds column below 1-1.
---
**Step 1:** The German nationality gives a -1 drm (A18.2 Leader Creation Table: "-1 American, British, German").
**Step 2:** The CC odds of 1-4 are less than 1-1. The table entry "-1 CC vs AFV or Per odds column < 1-1" applies per odds column below 1-1. The 1-4 column is two steps below 1-1 (1-2 is one step, 1-4 is two steps), so the drm is -2.
**Step 3:** The 4-3-6 squad has a Morale Level of 6, which is ≤ 6, giving a +1 drm (table: "+1 Base unit has Morale Level ≤ 6").
**Calculation:** −1 (German) + (−2) (1-4 odds) + (+1) (ML 6) = **−2**
References:
- (A18.2) Leader Creation Table — drm causes and the worked example: "If a German 4-3-6 rolls an Original 2 DR in CC at odds of 1-4, the final Leader Creation drm is -2 (-1 for being German, -2 for CC attack at 1-4 odds, and +1 for having a Morale Level of 6)."
JUDGE REASONING
[Calculation] -2 = -1 German -2 (two columns below 1-1) +1 ML 6; the A18.2 example. Exact.
At night, a Starshell or IR illuminates a hex containing a hidden Wire counter and an enemy unit has LOS to that hex. Does the illumination alone reveal the Wire?
EXPECTED
No. E1.16: at night all Fortification counters set up hidden regardless of terrain and stay hidden until one of its listed events: their protective TEM is used, a non-Dummy enemy unit enters the Location (or a pillbox's hex), extra MF/MP are spent to enter or exit the Fortification in the LOS of a Good Order enemy unit, or its existence causes a non-Dummy unit's attempted entry to fail. Being Illuminated and in enemy LOS is not one of them, so the Wire stays hidden until, for example, a unit tries to enter its hex (Wire then reveals itself by the extra MF or the failed entry, E1.16 Q&A). Searching (A12.152) and Interrogation would also reveal it (A12.152/E1.16/E2 Q&A).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. Illumination alone does not reveal a hidden Wire counter at night. A hidden fortification at night is revealed only by the specific triggers listed in E1.16 — illumination is not one of them.
---
At night, E1.16 (Fortifications) supersedes the normal daytime rules for hidden fortifications. It states that all Fortification counters are set up hidden at night regardless of terrain, and **remain hidden until** one of these specific events occurs:
1. Its protective TEM is used (e.g., a unit claims the Wire's +2 TEM vs an attack).
2. A non-Dummy enemy unit enters the Location that contains it.
3. Extra MF/MP are used to enter/exit it in the LOS of a Good Order enemy unit.
4. Its existence causes the failure of a non-Dummy unit's attempted entry into the Location (e.g., insufficient MF to enter).
Mere illumination by a Starshell or IR — even with a clear LOS from an enemy unit — is **not** among these triggers. The Wire remains hidden until one of the above conditions is met.
This contrasts with the daytime rule (A12.33), where a fortification in non-Concealment Terrain would lose HIP status due to enemy LOS regardless of range. But at night, E1.16 explicitly overrides that: "All Fortification counters are set up hidden at night regardless of terrain, and remain hidden until..." the listed conditions.
References:
- (E1.16) Night Fortifications — lists the exclusive triggers for revealing hidden fortifications at night
- (A12.33) Fortifications — daytime HIP rules (overridden at night by E1.16)
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; E1.16's four triggers listed, illumination not among them. Exact; Search/Interrogation not addressed.
A Gun is marked with a First Fire counter at the start of the DFPh. Can it fire again in Final Fire at an adjacent unit, and is that Area Fire or Intensive Fire?
EXPECTED
Yes, as Intensive Fire, if the Gun is capable of it. A8.4 lets a First-Fired unit/weapon fire again in Final Fire only at units in an adjacent or same hex, but ordnance does not fire Area Fire that way: A8.41 says a weapon marked with a First Fire counter and capable of Intensive Fire (C5.6) or Sustained Fire (A9.3) may use such for one additional attack during Final Fire, only vs adjacent or same-hex targets, and the A8.41 & C13.2 Q&A confirms a First-Fired ordnance weapon that cannot use Intensive/Sustained Fire (an ATR without ROF) gets no Final Fire shot at all. So the Gun fires with all Intensive Fire consequences: the +2 Intensive Fire To Hit DRM, its B# lowered by two, and it is marked Intensive Fire afterwards (C5.6). A weapon that retained Multiple ROF is instead still entitled to its multiple attacks in Final Fire at any target (A8.41).
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** Yes, a Gun marked with a First Fire counter at the start of the DFPh can fire again in Final Fire, but it uses **Intensive Fire** (not the Area Fire option of A8.4), and the shot is limited to an adjacent (or same) hex target per A8.4.
---
The Gun cannot use the A8.4 Final Fire "flip to Final Fire side as Area Fire" option — that option is available only to units/weapons capable of Subsequent First Fire, and ordnance (including Guns) is not capable of Subsequent First Fire (A8.3). A Q&A under A8.4 confirms: *"If a SW is not capable of Subsequent First Fire (EX: ordnance SW), can it fire vs. an adjacent/same-hex unit as Final Fire during the DFPh if marked with First Fire? A. No."*
However, a Gun has its own mechanism: **Intensive Fire** (C5.6). Intensive Fire is available only to Guns (not SW), and can be used if the crew is not pinned, shocked, stunned, or marked with a Final/Intensive Fire counter. A Gun marked with a First Fire counter satisfies this condition. The Q&A under C5.6 directly addresses this scenario:
> *"A Gun Defensive First Fires in the opponent's MOVEMENT PHASE. It loses ROF and is marked with a First Fire Counter. In the DFPh may the Gun fire again using Intensive Fire? If yes, is the shot limited to an adjacent/same hex target as per A8.4? A. Yes. Yes."*
Thus the Gun fires using **Intensive Fire** (not Area Fire), but the target restriction from A8.4 (adjacent or same hex) applies to this Intensive Fire shot during the DFPh.
References:
- (A8.4) Final Fire — units/weapons marked with First Fire may fire again as Area Fire at adjacent/same hex
- (A8.4 Q&A) Ordnance SW not capable of Subsequent First Fire cannot use this option
- (C5.6) Intensive Fire — available only to Guns not marked with Final/Intensive Fire counter
- (C5.6 Q&A #2) Gun with First Fire counter may Intensive Fire in DFPh, limited to adjacent/same hex per A8.4
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] Yes, as Intensive Fire, adjacent/same hex only, with the C5.6 Q&A; ordnance gets no Area Fire shot. Matches; Intensive Fire penalties (+2 TH, B# -2) not spelled out.
Does a unit in Crest status get the +4 entrenchment TEM of B27.3, and does it get any entrenchment TEM against on-board mortar fire?
EXPECTED
No +4, and nothing against mortars. B27.3 gives a unit beneath a foxhole +4 TEM against OVR or OBA attacks and +2 against any other attack including on-board mortar fire (not CC or FT). B20.92 says the entrenchment benefits of Crest status do not apply to Indirect Fire or OVR, nor to Direct Fire from any position with a LOS INTO the Depression hex, nor to fire at the Crest target not traced through one of its protective Crest hexsides. Since the +4 exists only for OVR and OBA, which Crest status excludes, a Crest unit never gets it. It gets the +2 only against Direct Fire traced through a protective Crest hexside from a firer without LOS INTO the Depression. Mortar fire is Indirect Fire (C1.1, C9.1), so a Crest unit gets no entrenchment TEM against it, whereas a real foxhole would give +2.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No to both. A unit in Crest status does **not** get the +4 TEM of B27.3 — it gets only a **+2 TEM** (the entrenchment benefit), and that +2 does **not** apply against on-board mortar fire because mortar fire is treated as Indirect Fire, which is explicitly excluded by B20.92.
---
**Why not +4?**
B27.3 gives a foxhole *beneath a foxhole counter* a +4 TEM vs OVR/OBA and a +2 TEM vs all other attacks (including on-board mortar fire). Crest status is **not** the same as being beneath a foxhole counter. B20.92 says Crest status confers *"the entrenchment benefits (27.3)"*, but those benefits are limited to the +2 TEM portion — the +4 vs OVR/OBA is never relevant because Crest status already excludes OVR and Indirect Fire entirely (B20.92 first sentence).
**Why not vs on-board mortar fire?**
B20.92 states: *"The entrenchment benefits (27.3) of Crest status do not apply to **Indirect Fire** or OVR."*
On-board mortars, per C9.1, *"are treated as Indirect Fire weapons for fire resolution purposes"* — even though they make a To Hit DR, their fire is resolved using Indirect Fire principles. Therefore, the Crest +2 TEM does **not** apply against them.
**References:**
- **(B20.92)** TEM: The entrenchment benefits (27.3) of Crest status do not apply to Indirect Fire or OVR, or to Direct Fire from any position that has a LOS INTO the Depression hex…
- **(B27.3)** Any unit beneath a foxhole counter is entitled to a +4 TEM against any OVR or OBA attack, or a +2 TEM [EXC: CC, FT] to any other type of attack including on-board mortar fire.
- **(C9.1)** Mortars are Direct Fire ordnance but are treated as Indirect Fire weapons for fire resolution purposes…
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No +4, no TEM vs mortars (Indirect Fire, B20.92/C9.1). Exact.
A non-ordnance Direct Fire attack is made against an unarmored vehicle in a Location that also contains enemy Personnel. Are the Personnel resolved on the Vehicle line of the IFT?
EXPECTED
No. A7.308: non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles or horse counters are resolved on the Vehicle (star) line of the IFT, using the same IFT DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the same Location. The vehicle reads the Vehicle line (eliminated on a Final DR below the column's Kill Number, immobilized on equal, burning wreck at half or less); the Personnel read the normal IFT result for that column with the shared DR. Unless the attack is Defensive First Fire, such an attack affects all occupants of the target Location, Infantry and other vehicles/horses alike, subject to the cap on how many vehicle counters one DR can affect (by the column's highest KIA#) and the exclusion of a Bypass vehicle out of the firer's LOS.
MODEL RESPONSE
**Answer:** No. The unarmored vehicle is resolved on the ★ Vehicle line, but the Personnel in the same Location are resolved on the normal Personnel lines of the IFT using the same Final DR (with their own applicable TEM/DRM modifications).
---
The rule states that non-ordnance Direct Fire attacks vs unarmored vehicles are resolved on the ★ Vehicle line of the IFT, and that the *same IFT DR* (after any applicable modification) is used *for any Personnel target in the same Location* (A7.308). This means the Personnel are resolved on the normal IFT Personnel-result lines (KIA, MC, NMC, PTC, etc.) — not on the Vehicle line. The example in A7.308 confirms this: a truck in a shellhole is resolved on the ★ Vehicle line, while a squad in the same hex receives a NMC on the normal IFT lines (with the shellhole's +1 TEM applied to the squad's resolution).
References:
- (A7.308) vs UNARMORED VEHICLES — "resolved on the ★ Vehicle line of the IFT using the same IFT DR (after any applicable modification) for any Personnel target in the same Location."
JUDGE REASONING
[Explanation] No; vehicle on the star line, Personnel on the normal results with the same DR (A7.308 and its example). Exact; the vehicle-counter cap not addressed.
No items match the current filter.