Unloading ground units into an Assault - Clarification

[Alexandre Leal]

Both rules 9.8.2 Unloading and 13.0 Assault Action stipulate that a ground unit unloading from a transportation can move into an adjacent hex occupied by an enemy unit by assaulting it. Meaning, unloading can be undertaken as a Move Action or an Assault Action (under the circumstances delineated) for the unloading unit.

What about the Transporting unit? Can the transport unit unload it's passengers as part of an Assault Action under the same limitations delineated in 9.8.2, meaning if the passengers unload into an adjacent hex containing an enemy ground unit before ANY MP is expended by the transport unit, which means that transport unit would be able to move up to half it's MP, can that movement be undertaken as an Assault move, joining the unloaded ground unit in it's Assault?

I can see that easily happen with transport units such as BMP-1, giving close support to infantry after delivering them to the enemy?

 

[Keith Tracton]

Hi Alexandre!

If I am reading your question correctly, I have to clarify one point: the passenger does not move to an adjacent hex after unloading, it unloads directly into the adjacent, enemy occupied hex. When it does, the Assault is immediately executed, per 13.0 Assault Action, before the transport subsequently moves. Once the Assault is fully executed, if the enemy is still in the target hex, then the transport may use its half-move to also move into the hex, performing its own, separate assault.

 

[Starman]

General advice for combination actions in WaW85 like move/fire or Move/unload, they are not seperate from movement until you commit to them , if moving that happens upto half a move when the unit fires, unloads or loads and after half a move when it doesn't. For assault the only requirement is enough movement to enter the hex being assaulted and that can be from unloading in an adjacent hex.

I have seen a few posts on declaring action before taking it that is not required in WaW85 and I would say not desirable.

 

[Alexandre Leal]

@Keith T

So the only difference between what you are saying and my interpretation is that the assault by the unloading unit (and I meant unloading into an adjacent hex like you say, though it came out erroneously) will take place immediately upon entering, not giving the chance for the transport to join it before being executed. That transport can then move up to half the MP and thus use that movement to Assault that same hex again.

But that possibility is not at all clear from a direct interpretation of the rules since Assault from the unloading unit seems to be an exception to the general rule that Assaults can only be executed upon an Assault Action and not a "Default" Movement Action. Needs, in my opinion to be clarified.

@ Keith and Starman

And Starman raises a very relevant issue that I don't think is at all clear. As in other games I interpreted the rules regarding Formation Impulse Steps, namely Actions Step, as requiring the player to declared the action to be undertaken by each unit prior to start executing it, and that there was no possibility to interchange Actions, and hence the need for a formal Move & Fire Action.

I understand what Starman´s saying but the fact remains that there are three distinct Actions that could take place involving movement. Movement Action, Move & Fire and Assault. It's true that Assault in itself doesn't seem to have any special restriction to movement that makes it stand apart from "regular" movement, but they are treated, at least seems so, as two different Actions.

And if Loading/unloading is an integral part of the Move Action (simply because it regulated under said mechanic), with the exception of the possibility of Assault by the unloading unit into an adjacent, enemy-occupied hex, BUT still you consider (like me) that the transport it-self can, within the limitation of only being able to spend half it's normal MP allowance, assault an hex after unloading a unit, then it should be made clear that either a) You can Load/Unload, using the same restrictions as in Move Action, during an Assault Action; or B) that in fact Assault Action is basically the same action as Movement but with added mechanics to regulate the assault segment in the end, and thus you can consider Assault to develop from the basic Movement Action (thus applying it's inherent rules).

Again, clarification would be welcomed.

 

[Starman]

The specific case of transport and its passengers assaulting a hex was raised previously (by me) the answer was if that is the intent they should unload into the transport units hex and assault in the next turn.

I don't think there is an option in WaW85 for multiple units in different hexes to assault together as a prepared assault, however that would cause stacking issues.

Unloading, Loading is a form of movement , which is why it is subject to opportunity fire even when not into an adjacent hex, like other movement combos it has the "half movement" restriction. Somebven when unloading from an adjacent hex into an assault it's not an exception.


The question on actions has also been answered and they are not declared, they weren't in its predecessor either , though there was no Action section in those rules.

I agree those new to the system and used to other games with pre action declarations there may be some confusion but that is because they are reading something into the rules that is not there, it would be useful to include it in the clarifcation though.

 

[Alexandre Leal]

(...)
The question on actions has also been answered and they are not declared, they weren't in its predecessor either , though there was no Action section in those rules.

I agree to those new to the system and used to other games with pre action declarations there may be some confusion but that is because they are reading something into the rules that is not there, it would be useful to include it in the clar8fiactikns though.

7.6 Action Step, states, and I quote "(...) units may each select one of the following five actions to perform." I would not say players are reading something into the rules that is not there.... If you have to select One of those, and you are playing against another opponent, you need to tell him exactly what action you are going to perform, hence declaring, PLUS when it states that you need to choose ONE it seems to indicate that you con´t be able to mix or change, you perform THE action you select, and that makes sense if you select PRIOR to starting to implement.

If indeed there is no such obligation (to declare prior to start acting), it would be very useful, like you say, to include that in the clarification. Personally I prefer that players declare their intent prior to start executing each action. Tends to avoid issues later.

 

[Starman]

I don't see anywhere where it states you have to declare it is not a step in the sequence of play and it clearly states may it does not state you have to select one of them or indeed when, in all rules system I have read or helped with may means optional.


It would ruin the flow of the game and serves no purpose apart from players would spend more time evaluating the options in advance, it is not needed and counter productive, it would also give the opponent a God like ability to know what is going to happen and therefore hold opportunity fire until the optimum point. It wouldn't work opportunity fire may disrupt one unit, are you saying the player has to continue into a suicidal assault withbthe other unit in a stack or even move until a units expends it's full movement allowance or even plot a units full action in advance , yes its misleading but the alternative is broken.

IMO that should be removed or reworded in 7.6 , in expanding the rules to give context they have not thought through all the repercussions , that section is like an introduction as the main rules for everything in 7.6 are expanded elsewhere, perhaps the whole,section should be placed under 8.0 under the heading Outline of actions.

 

[Alexandre Leal]

Starman, the wording "may" can have, in this context, two concurrent meanings. It's "may" and not something like "Have to" because the player can opt to do nothing (take on action) with each single unit in it's formation. Hence MAY. And in continuation it also means that if he chooses to take an action, he MAY only choose one, and choose one from the given list of 5.

My understanding is that IF a player opts to take an action with a certain unit of the active formation then said action can only be chosen from on of those 5 options, and choosing he will have to reveal what kind of action. If he chooses Movement, he doesn't have to tell his opponent, before hand, where his movement will end, and thus giving time and data for his opponent to react more efficiently with opportunity fires. He just needs to tell his opponent that Unit X will take a Movement action. He could end up just moving 1 hex and foil his opponent that was thinking he was going to move further (in his direction) and opts not to do an opportunity fire on it's first (and only)hex movement.

In any case we would need an Official interpretation on this subject to clear any doubts.

 

[Starman]

You might disagree and it might need clarifying but the official response has already been given and is you do not declare the action you take and the only time you are commited is when you take it or so not qualify due to movement expended. I know because I asked.

EDIT l just did a search and found my question buried in a question on Unloading into an assault hex.

Keith does imply you declare the action but can stop at any time , which obviously didn't sink in and for reasons given above I certainly won't expect anyone to do so and not seen it done to date in any videos or examples of play.

If this is the intention of the rules then it must be stated clearly.
It does mean if you have stack of units and declare an assault but one is disrupted and stops after less than half movement it can abandon the assault but cannot then fire at relevant penalty.

This will lead to a lot of player over thinking and IMO slow the game down.

Though Keith does state in that thread

"[Convert a Move to a Move and Fire Action? People do it all the time, I do not have a problem with it, but that is how I play, though technically it violates 1.5 above. Safer to adhere to the rule, though, unless you and your opponent agree.]"

https://forums.lnlpublishing.com/threads/loaded-infantry-assaulting.5333/#post-30198

 

[Alexandre Leal]

You might disagree and it might need clarifying but the official response has already been given and is you do not declare the action you take and the only time you are commited is when you take it(...)

Can you link the thread in which the question and answer was asked and given?

 

[Starman]

I did at the bottom of my last post! but see my EDIT which was 10 minutes before your request when I added it in.

 

[Alexandre Leal]

You might disagree and it might need clarifying but the official response has already been given and is you do not declare the action you take and the only time you are commited is when you take it or so not qualify due to movement expended. I know because I asked.
(...)

So, in effect, Keith actually has a very similar position to mine own. Given his interpretation and what he wrote here regarding Transported and Transporting units in Assault I would go with my option a) (given in a post above) as the interpretation applied in my tables "a) You can Load/Unload, using the same restrictions as in Move Action, during an Assault Action". You choose an Assault Action for Both transported AND Transport unit, which you can implement using the same restrictions given in the Movement Action, with interpretation given here By Keith, meaning you have to deal with assault executed by the unloaded unit first and prior to resolving the assault done subsequently by the transport.

I am happy with this situation.

 

[Starman]

Note in the latest Clarificationmon unloading into an assault.

"The Passenger’s act of unloading into an adjacent hex will trigger Opportunity Fire; it should be placed there now. However, in this specific case, it is considered to be in its Transport unit’s hex for purposes of resolving that Opportunity Fire. If the unit is not Disrupted or eliminated by any Opportunity Fire, it immediately executes its Assault attack."