I believe bocage terrain favors the attacker. I am not shy sharing this belief and some of you may have heard me say this personally. In a recent discussion with George Hiotis on a Strum Front video, George and I wandered into a Bocage discussion. Listening back, my discussion with George lacked focus. This article sums up that discussion, providing rule citations. I also hope this is a little more clear.
Rules Dive
I will explore B9.323 Mandatory Wall Advantage and B9.521 Hexside LOS in this article. Consider the situation on the left. The German 4-6-7 is Unconcealed and in an Open Ground hex. The 4-6-7 has Mandatory Wall Advantage (WA, B9.323).
Per B9.521, the Sherman and the American Squad can see not only the U6 hex but also the squad in the hex BECAUSE the German unit has WA.
Take a moment to consider this section of B9.521:
- A viewer not in a hex formed by the bocage hexside: can see through the bocage hexside, to the hex forming that hexside, but not beyond that hex. It cannot see units without WA nor their possessed equipment, but it can see everything else in that hex.
It is this what I want to focus on.
The Americans Move
The American units use Armored Assault to attack along the blue path. The German 4-6-7 fails its Panzerfaust dr and gets no effect on the American squad. Pictured at left is the situation at the end of the American MPh.
Let us take a moment to examine the LOS again. The German squad has WA and can see the American units in V6 but what about the MkIV? Refer again to the portion of B9.521 I excerpted earlier.
The MkIV is in a hex NOT formed by the bocage hexside. By rule, the MkIV can see through the bocage hexside to the hex forming that hexside. That is a lot of words to say the MkIV can see the V6 hex. But keep reading and you notice the MkIV cannot see units without WA in that hex. The MkIV could fire SMOKE into the Location since it can see the hex. But since it cannot see the units, it cannot fire HE at them. Even ATT will not score a hit against units out of LOS (C3.4).
The Americans Attack Back
In the Advancing Fire Phase, the Americans fire back. Either the Infantry or AFV machine guns break the German squad. Per B9.2, only unbroken units can claim WA. Per B9.322, units may claim WA whenever all enemy units lose WA over a shared hexside. V6 has no TEM so all units in V6 must claim Mandatory WA. Keep in mind AFV are not “in hex TEM” for Mandatory WA purposes.
Remember the MkIV had no LOS to the Sherman? That is no longer a problem for the Sherman. The Americans acquired LOS when WA transferred to the American side.
What Can The Germans Do Better
Sadly, the only practical thing the German player can do better is not get into this situation. Since the American units never entered the MkIV’s LOS, the MkIV can not make a Motion attempt. It could fire Area Target Type to place an Acquisition and use that in its upcoming PFPh. That will increase its odds some, but it will shoot at a Hull Down Sherman. To get to PFPh though, it will have to survive the American AFPh which is not a given.
The MkIV could fire SMOKE into V6 during Final Fire to improve its survivability, but the SMOKE is Dispersed and removed in the upcoming PFPh. And again, the MkIV is squaring off against a Hull Down Sherman. The MkIV can win this engagement, but it is going to lose it at more than a 2:1 ratio. As an American player, I would take those odds.
Conclusion
I am trying to think about other bocage related situations where I think the attacker comes off better. I am not sure bocage could be modeled any better in ASL. Still, if I am attacking into bocage terrain, I do not find myself overly worried about bocage. And to me, that makes bocage feel ahistorical. As always though, that is just my opinion. Yours may vary. Until next time. – jim
As usual, an interesting (though short – I was expecting more!) article. I had not thought of this, but of course you are right.
Still, the situation as played out could easily work out very differently. If the German squad manages to break the American squad as it closes up (that’s a 8FP flat shot, not something I like to be on the receiving end with 6ML troops, and better than the 6+2 shots the Americans get in AFPh), it is likely to remain unbroken and maintain WA; and then the Germans have the avantage, with possible Panzerfaust shots at a static target. Failing that, the PzIV can move unseen into a more favorable position (U8 looks nice, barring other threats from the side), get some ATT acquisition, and “discover” the Sherman when the squad either routs away or advances and gives the Mandatory Wall Advantage to the Sherman.
Another situation where Bocage favors the defense is when there are Bocage hexes where Mandatory Wall Advantage doesn’t apply. Then the defender has a free turn: fire in Prep Fire, drop WA and become invisible before Defensive Fire, and regain it before the opponent’s turn. The official MMP geomorphic maps don’t have too many of these positions, but the Bounding Fire maps do, and the Sainte-Mère HASL has more.
Admittedly, the example feels contrived but I have seen it play out both for and against me. The LOS dichotomy is one of the few things about bocage that doesn’t break both ways. There is no way for the Germans to Voluntarily Break and get a shot at the Sherman.
Steve Pleva pointed out the whole “shoot and drop WA where applicable” on Facebook too. It is true, but this is one of those advantages that cuts both ways.
Jim,
This is probably me being thick so please excuse what may be a dumb comment. But that German DM unit still has Wall Advantage?
Per B9.32 Broken or unarmed units may (MUST IF 9.323 APPLIES) claim WA, if other units in the same location claim WA.
9.232 is no TEM in the hex – which applies in this case. So the DM unit has WA?
Hope the move to the US went well,
Joe
There are no other units in the hex with the German unit. So the rule you point out does not apply.
Exactly.
Another interesting article Jim, and one that chimes very much with my own opinion and experience. I have had many discussions over the years about my opinion that the Bocage rules in ASL feel very ahistorical and favor the attacker.
Your example captures one area but I believe the fundamental interaction of infantry movement, concealment and def fire options often puts the defender in a difficult position. I will post something to that effect on FB and GS (I know you wont see it there!) with diagrams to support my argument.
Thanks for kicking off another great discussion.
Regards
Phil
If you would like to author it as an article here, let me know and I will happily post it.