Snipers and Overruns

[TerryB]

Hi guys,

Just came up with this situation...

An already shaken sniper was succesfully overrun. In the process the shaken sniper now gets wounded.

As the tank wants to stay in the overrun hex, does the sniper retreat? Even though he has no movement factor?

And does the shaken status get "overwritten" by the wounded status, or is this poor sniper now out in the open, shaken and wounded?

Thanks in advance

Terry

 

[Stéphane Tanguay]

What was the terrain in the overrun hex? Remember that a sniper must be put in a hex with a positive TM. Most, if not all of these, don't allow overrun.

That being said, your interpretation seems right. The sniper is moved in an adjacent hex, shaken and wounded.

 

[TerryB]

Hey Stéphane.

The hex in question is Hammada, from the North Africa module. That fulfilled the initial requirement for sniper placing.

From this other thread (link) it would seem that overruns are possible in this type of hex.

Thanks,
Terry

 

[Stéphane Tanguay]

Yes they are. See 15.3.1 in the Module-specific rules. That is why I asked you what terrain type it was. Most terrain with positive TM don't allow overrun but there are are exceptions

 

[TerryB]

Yes they are. See 15.3.1 in the Module-specific rules. That is why I asked you what terrain type it was. Most terrain with positive TM don't allow overrun but there are are exceptions

And as usual I found one So I'll go with my first assumption that the sniper now out in the open, shaken and wounded

Thanks!

 

[Jeff Lewis]

We are rare-case territory here. Sniper can't move or be in terrain w/o +TM, thus Sniper is eliminated.

What scenario is this from?

 

[Stéphane Tanguay]

As an aside, I had this situation happens recently in Heroes of Stalingrad (the PC game) and the sniper vas moved to an adjacent hex, in cover though. of course, this game is not a reference, rules wise

 

[TerryB]

We are rare-case territory here. Sniper can't move or be in terrain w/o +TM, thus Sniper is eliminated.

What scenario is this from?

Hey Jeff,

This is from the "Is there anyone out there" scenario. The AEO (I was playing solo) moved a tank that had already moved out of an emplacement towards the shaken sniper.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

As an aside, I had this situation happens recently in Heroes of Stalingrad (the PC game) and the sniper vas moved to an adjacent hex, in cover though. of course, this game is not a reference, rules wise

Well, the logic needs to follow the rules, despite not explicitly covering Snipers, which would, on the whole always be in a Building or other non-Overrun-eligible terrain. And just as Shaken WTs are eliminated if the Overruning vehicle remains in the hex, so should Shaken Snipers. Further, it would need to be able to retreat to an eligible hex, and if all adjacent had no TM, it would be eliminated as well. Again, this is all rare-case turf.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

Hey Jeff,

This is from the "Is there anyone out there" scenario. The AEO (I was playing solo) moved a tank that had already moved out of an emplacement towards the shaken sniper.

The AEO moved an Emplaced tank that's on the DEFENSIVE side to perform an overrun . . . on a Sniper. Just so I have that straight? Oh, brother. Non of that computes with me. We are indeed in beyond-rare-case turf here.

 

[TerryB]

The AEO moved an Emplaced tank that's on the DEFENSIVE side to perform an overrun . . . on a Sniper. Just so I have that straight? Oh, brother. Non of that computes with me. We are indeed in beyond-rare-case turf here.

I can't remember the exact card sequence. But the play sequence went something like this.

Sniper fired, and thus got spotted.
Sniper was shaken, from AEO fire

...

AEO emplaced tank (the only activatable AEO unit remaining), ordered to move towards closest PU.

I never said it was going to be an easy case to resolve, and I'm sure this will never come up again, ever.

 

[Jeff Lewis]

I'm not the solo guy, but I do recall that absurd AEO actions are supposed to be overruled, and this falls into that case. IMHO. An emplaced tank in a defensive role should not be doing what it did.

 

[TerryB]

I'm not the solo guy, but I do recall that absurd AEO actions are supposed to be overruled, and this falls into that case. IMHO. An emplaced tank in a defensive role should not be doing what it did.

Well you live and learn... I'm sure you're right, but that loose tank has been trashing the Brit troops