Concealed unit and vehicle entrance

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
17,481
Reaction score
3,429
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I have a concealed unit.
A vehicle enters my hex and I pass the TC to retain concealment.
The vehicle leaves and then reenters the hex. Does this cause a second TC or does the first one still apply?
Would your answer be different if another vehicle enters the hex?
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,418
Reaction score
5,203
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
I have a concealed unit.
A vehicle enters my hex and I pass the TC to retain concealment.
The vehicle leaves and then reenters the hex. Does this cause a second TC or does the first one still apply?
Would your answer be different if another vehicle enters the hex?
The task check is actually a PAATC. Rule D7.21 suggests you never need take a second PAATC against the same vehicle but as written, it implies the AFV doesn't leave the Location. If pressed, I would not force you to roll another PAATC but I am not 100% certain that has a basis in the rules. Unless @klasmalmstrom has more guidance, I humbly suggest this would take a Perry Sez. Just my .02. -- jim
 

Doug Leslie

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
1,663
Reaction score
1,604
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
As written, D7.21 seems to be saying that one passed PAATC is sufficient to allow the infantry unit to attack the AFV as often as it is allowed during the rest of the MPh. It says nothing about anything changing if the AFV leaves and re-enters the hex. To me, this implies that one vehicle cannot force more than one PAATC by the same unit. If the unit doesn't need to pass a second PAATC to attack twice, it seems illogical that it might need to pass a second PAATC to keep its head down. A second vehicle would however force a second PAATC.

7.21 CC REACTION FIRE: Each Infantry/Cavalry DEFENDER unit that is unbroken, unpinned and neither Unarmed (A20.5) nor in Melee may attempt CC Reaction Fire, using the CC-vs-vehicle rules (A11.5, etc.; see also 7.211-213) [EXC: Ambush is NA unless using Street Fighting; 7.211]. 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. To attempt CC Reaction Fire vs an AFV, the DEFENDER must first pass a PAATC unless it is exempt from PAATC (A11.6) or took one when the AFV entered its Location earlier in the MPh (A12.41). If it fails the Reaction Fire PAATC, it becomes pinned and can neither make that CC Reaction Fire attack (7.213) nor opt to make a Non-CC Reaction Fire attack (7.22) instead. A DEFENDER need not pass more than one PAATC to attack the same vehicle more than once during the same (A.15) phase.
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,418
Reaction score
5,203
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
As written, D7.21 seems to be saying that one passed PAATC is sufficient to allow the infantry unit to attack the AFV as often as it is allowed during the rest of the MPh. It says nothing about anything changing if the AFV leaves and re-enters the hex. To me, this implies that one vehicle cannot force more than one PAATC by the same unit. If the unit doesn't need to pass a second PAATC to attack twice, it seems illogical that it might need to pass a second PAATC to keep its head down. A second vehicle would however force a second PAATC.
As I said, I agree this seems logical, but a vehicle need not leave the Location to be attacked again by the PAATC-passing unit. I would play it as you suggest, but I am not 100% certain this is the intent. I could live with it either way. -- jim
 
Top