At the recent Arnhem tournament there was a round-table discussion on Routing. One condition discussed was the effect of Wire on routing. I was not present at these discussions but I heard from one attendee about some remaining questions he had afterwards. I think they are very interesting and I had not considered the implications of these situations before. Let’s look at the situations, how we resolve them, and some broader implications of these questions.
Examples Considered In Arnhem
Squad C needs to rout because it is Adjacent to a Known Enemy Unit (KEU). Hex H10 is its non-ignorable, valid rout destination. Squad C must first make a Wire dr to determine how many MF it costs to get beneath the Wire. If it rolls ≤ 4 it can safely rout to H10. If it rolls a 5 or 6 however, it ends its RtPh Adjacent to a KEU and must Surrender unless No Quarter (NQ) were in effect. Eliminate the unit if NQ is in effect for Failure to Rout (B26.41). Some may think I10 a valid rout destination on a dr 5 but this is not the case (B26.41, A10.5).
Next Consider squad D. It is in Open Ground and Normal Range of a KEU. It must rout and has a non-ignorable, valid rout destination (K10/L10). If it rolls ≤ 4 on its Wire dr, it safely reaches either Location. Eliminate the unit for FTR if it rolls a 5 or 6 since it can no longer reach an allowable rout hex (B26.41). If there were a Fox Hole in K1, the unit could opt to move through the Foxhole and then into K10. If it rolls ≤ 5, it can safely enter the FH and remain broken in that Location even if it can no longer reach an allowable hex (B27.41). A roll of 6 eliminates the unit for being in the same Open Ground Location it began the RtPh in (A10.5).
Voluntary Rout
Consider squad D again, can the leader Voluntarily Rout with the unit? This question is less clear to me. Rule A10.711 says a non-berserk, non-pinned leader already stacked with a broken unit before it routs, may elect to rout with the broken unit even though he is unbroken.
The word “stack” is not defined in ASL. There are several precedents of units moving as a “stack” and spending separate MF totals when moving. Attacks against this Location affect each of the units with the same DR. If attacked in CC, they could combine to form one attack albeit with a significant disadvantage. All of this implies the units are “stacked”.
On the other side, units must share the same Wire status in order to benefit from a leader’s movement bonus (A4.12). Results for a Small Arms attack apply the Final DR on a DRM basis. These imply the units are not “stacked”.
In the end, no formal definition of what a “stack” is exists. “Stack” seems to apply on a case by case basis. What we definitively know is there is only one Location and leaders in the same Location may elect to Voluntarily rout with broken units in their Location. We also know there is no exception preventing this. While I am not sure this is the intent, I believe that as written, the leader CAN rout with the broken unit and would be subject to all the Interdiction rules.
Perry issued a Q&A on 18 September changing this whole section. 1 Units must now share the same status to be “stacked”. I am not sure if this results in errata. If so, keep an eye on the Debriefing article in upcoming Journals. The original Interdiction question remains.
Wire And Interdiction
Interdiction is another interesting case. The rule says Interdiction applies when a unit ENTERS an Open Ground hex with some exceptions (A10.53). A routing unit on Wire which rolls to get beneath the Wire is clearly not entering another Open Ground hex. However, I am not sure this was the intent.
Consider the case of foxhole (FH). A unit which pays one MF to exit a FH without combining this MF with the entrance cost of another Location is subject to Interdiction if applicable. This is distinctly different from A10.53’s “enters an Open Ground hex” verbiage. Now, this is explicitly called out in the FH rules so it is clear when applied to FH. It is also clear that the Wire exit dr MF expense cannot be combined with entrance costs for the next Location along the path. Taken as a whole, there is a contradiction here which is open for clarification.
Rules as written, I believe there is no Interdiction when rolling to get beneath a Wire obstacle. However, it wouldn’t surprise me to see this changed in the future. Doing so would make it consistent with FH and consistency is a good thing. If such a clarification happens, routing the leader with squad D becomes perilous. A failed Interdiction MC by the routing unit eliminates any leader routing with it. Given the broken unit here has a 6 morale, routing with that MMC would be a significant risk if clarified in this manner. As it is today, there is no risk to the leader in this example.
A Broader Implication
Refer to the image on the left. The broken German unit is in Open Ground and must rout. It has a non-ignorable, valid rout target (Z3/AA4). So what are its options? It could declare either Location as its rout destination and rout. First, it must make a Wire exit dr. If it rolls a 6, place the unit below the Wire and Eliminate it for FTR for ending its RtPh in the same Open Ground hex.
If it rolls a 3 through 5, place the unit beneath the Wire and continue to rout to its destination target. It would suffer Interdiction along the way.
Should the routing unit roll ≤ 2, it will reach the rout destination but it would be subject to Interdiction in those hexes it enters along the way. Keep your eyes open in case Q&A makes Interdiction possible on the exit dr.
The safest option here is to state the rout destination and declare Low Crawl. This avoids any Interdiction. Only a Wire exit dr of 6 will eliminate the unit for FTR.
A Moment Of Self Reflection
I have never considered the Implications of B26.41 before this. Proper application of this rule makes Wire more effective than I had previously thought. We have discussed Obstacles here before. I have a pretty in-depth article on Fortifications and Obstacles and B26.41’s implications still surprised me. The more I think about it, the more powerful Wire obstacles in Open Ground become. Breaking on the Wire is way more deadly than I had previously thought. This is definitely something I will have to consider in my future games.
Conclusion
I wish I was able to get to Arnhem. I miss my European friends and the good times I had attending various European tournaments. Still, I got to spend some time with my grandson so it is hard to be too jealous of those playing ASL. My grandson is awesome and he and I get on great together. Spending time with Charlie eases my disappointment but it is still there.
I hope the routing discussion makes it into broader distribution. I took part in some of the pre-scenario generation phase but I did not see the finished product. If there is no better option, I will host the documents here on my site if the owner wishes. In the meantime, I hope you all have a good week.
A:Yes to both.
Hey Jim, I have indeed been thinking of you recently and missing you in Arnhem too! Take care!
Nice article, Jim.
I admit I found this fact about wire and routing the hard way. I think the scenario was “Goodnight, Sweet Prince.”
Wire in OG is a bit of a deathtrap, particularly if the wire hex has fire
covering it. Even an ATR from 12 hexes away can eliminate folks for
FTR. Brutal!
The “voluntary rout” aspect is an interesting rules wrinkle. As the rules are currently written, my reading is that the wire creates a situation where the broken unit has to roll low enough to be allowed to to rout in the first place ie the “rout” doesn’t begin unless and until it enters a new location or foxhole. A leader beneath the wire does not therefore have to decide whether to rout with it until he “knows” that the broken unit will actually be going somewhere.
Good article Jim! We missed you in Arnhem.
Two things:
– We should stop saying “above” and “below” the Wire counter. In reality, they are at different places in the wire entanglement. With that in mind I think it’s easier to imagine what’s going on.
Anyways, the panel’s assumption is that a leader can voluntary rout with a broken unit, even though they don’t share the same Wire status.
– The question about routing from K2 is actually “Can the unit survive if he declares his rout to L10 via L1”? Then, if he rolls a 5 on the Wire dr he will not rout in OG from the German unit. Normally you may use another path to the target, and if the Wire dr was ≤3 then that path would work. The question may be: “Does the Wire dr takes precedence over what path you may choose?” (I guess not, since it clearly states that one should assume that the Wire cost 1 MF.
Cheers,
Andreas
The answer, as I understand it, lays in B26.41. If K2 rolls > 4, it will be eliminated for Failure to Rout. A routing unit must take the shortest path to its destination. It can opt for the longer path ONLY if it reaches its destination. The B26.41 says a unit is eliminated if it is unable to reach an allowable hex outside its starting hex. An allowable hex is one that is along its rout path as defined in A10.5. Once the wire exit dr > 4, it can no longer reach an allowable hex. — jim
Thanks for this. I will consider putting Wire in OG (and in range of friendies) more often!
Perry has spoken re whether a leader can voluntarily rout with a unit with a different wire (among other things) status in the same location.
http://gamesquad.com/forums/index.php?threads/a10-711-voluntary-rout.199857/
That didn’t take long!
Just noticed that the article has already been amended to reflect this. Feel free to delete!
I had already corrected this and added a footnote. Klas reached out as soon as he posted on GS. Thanks for letting me know. — jim
Why couldn’t Squad C go into I10 on a 5? He’d be subject to interdiction, but otherwise, this newbie isn’t seeing what in those two rules prevents it. Appreciate the clarification.
This is a subtle one. First, B26.41 says a unit is eliminated for FTR if it ends its RtPh in its own hex or if it fails to reach an “allowable route hex”. It refers to A10.5 for what is allowable.
A10.5–and all of the A10.5x rules–speak about how you route. It covers things like direction, ignorable hexes, and movement of units in RtPh. When distilled, a unit which is routing first picks its destination and then travels a path to that destination. It need not take the shortest rout but if it does not take the shortest rout, it MUST REACH its rout target (A10.51). If it uses a longer path, entering shellholes, foxhole/trenches, or a Pillbox to avoid Interdiction is allowable even if it can no longer reach its rout destination.
So the rout you offer does not abide by the rules. It is not the shortest and if it opts to rout that way, it cannot reach its destination. As such, it is not an “allowable rout hex”. I hope that makes sense. — jim