The Commander Series Forum

I know you have to buy assets for specialist artillery, even if calling it in with and FAO, but does this also apply to smoke?

Thanks

Yes

Thanks for the quick response

Hi Pete!

Your reply seems at odds with the rules! Please can you point me to where it says you need to buy assets to request smoke via an FAO from artillery support.

Puzzled

Hi Pete,

I am with Puzzled with this.

Smoke and Illumination are not 'Special munitions' according to my reading of p29.

It would be a bitter day if smoke was classed as a special munition. Limited stocks and having to pay points for it.

I would say that limits to the number of times on board mortars could fire should come before limiting smoke.

Steve

"Please can you point me to where it says you need to buy assets to request smoke via an FAO from artillery support."

Smoke as a required asset is covered in the army lists, as is Illumination.

Have a look here at basic load - smoke rounds are pretty limited [scroll down for the table]:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/art...

“Smoke as a required asset is covered in the army lists, as is illumination”

As is HE but that doesn’t make them special munitions as defined on p. 29 (and it's only special munitions that need to have assets bought to fire FAO requested missions). All the bit in the army list informs as far as smoke is concerned (or illumination for that matter) is, I think, the number of scheduled missions possible. As I read the rules there’s no need to buy assets to bring in smoke via a FAO as it’s not classed as a special munition and there’s nothing in the errata or FAQ to the contrary.

It seems from his comment above that Pete didn’t mean / no longer wants it to work like that and, as there’s a revised rule set in the offing, including smoke in the list of special munitions will be easy enough. In the meantime something probably needs to go in the errata.

Hi Nik

Thanks for the reply.

As stu_dew indicates we seem to be talking at cross-purposes - I asked if one needs to buy assets for requested (i.e. *non-scheduled*) smoke shoots and you pointed out where it tells you how many assets are allowed for *scheduled* shoots.

So the question still remains. The rules say that "All artillery units may fire smoke, either using scheduled or requested support", and there is no mention of needing assets for requested support (either HE or smoke). However Pete's answer above indicates that you have to buy assets if calling in smoke with an FAO (i.e. requested support). So is the answer a mistake or a rule change? Do you follow me?

Puzzled

Hello All,

It may be that the 'problem' is caused by a question about special munitions. Pete, if I remember correctly, stated that special munitions always had to be bought as 'assets', whether called in as scheduled or requested.

For some reason, Pete gave the answer that smoke has to be bought even if requested. Go down that route, then there is a case for requested HE to be bought.

HE and Smoke are already restricted by means of the CV of the FAO (and smoke has an additional penalty). Furthermore, artillery may only fire once per game turn (whereas onboard mortars and artillery may fire multiple times per turn).

If Pete is reading this, could he please consider the situation and give a full answer re Smoke. It would make our lives a lot easier.

Thanks,

Steve

How about we take Pete's answer as what he means?

You need to buy assets for smoke - requested or scheduled - although for requested you don't need to expend the assets.

The 'Requesting Artillery Support' Table on p. 26, last row:

'requesting smoke, illumination or special munitions (see Special Munitions Table on p.29)' suggests they can be grouped together as rounds outside the norm. (Also the Special Munitions list says the SM 'include' the list it does not say this list is exhaustive.)

Given the limited number of smoke and illum rounds carried (and the fact that some armies seem to have seldom if ever used them) it makes sense for them to have to be purchased as assets like special munitions- you can then use them as scheduled or requested as you choose. Perhaps a clarification in another edition would be useful but it makes sense to me as it is after Pete's answer.

As regards the HE Steve- that is the normal load, I don't think it would be logical to have to buy assets for requested HE fire - that's what they would have anyway.

"How about we take Pete's answer as what he means?"

Yeah, that’s fine by me. I'm quite agnostic as to whether or not smoke should need to have assets bought in order to perform requested fire missions.

However, as they stand the rules state (via an errata note) that only special munitions need to do this and the list of special munitions on p. 29 doesn't include smoke.

For those players not fortunate (mad?) enough to frequent this forum a retouching of the errata note might help.

Hi Gwydion

"How about we take Pete's answer as what he means? "

That's fine by me too, but if he's changing the rules (which that would be) then IMO there should be an errata about it. Either way there clearly needs to be an unequivocal clarification since there is considerable variation in interpretation.

Puzzled

BTW "... suggests they can be grouped together ..." - I don't follow that logic at all - that's saying because it's in the same sentence so it means the same thing. For me the bottom line is that the rules say assets are required for scheduled support and/or special munitions and, again according to the rules, requested smoke is neither of those things.

'but if he's changing the rules (which that would be)'
Not necessarily - he has clarified an ambiguity in some people's interpretation perhaps.

Stu- probably a good idea anyway I guess.

Puzzled- Logic: the -1 mod for smoke, illum & spec munitions suggests clearly that they are not normally available rounds- you have a lesser chance of success by requesting them. Therefore the limitations on their availability and use are of a piece and the asset rule applies -It's not because they are in the same sentence - its because they are treated together as a group of munitions not normally carried or carried in very small proportions. The use of the rule to all seems entirely logical to me.

As for an errata- Stu and Puzzled - I'm entirely agnostic myself. And I'm pleased to say it's not up to me

Hi Guy!

Obviously the thing that is being modelled here is availability - I'm 100% with you on that!

But there are two methods being used to model differences in availability - namely the cost of buying assets and the -1 modifier to the dieroll for bringing them in.

For some reason you seem to see the two methods are inextricably linked, but they not - either semantically in what is written nor theoretically in what is being modelled.

What is written concerning requested smoke and special munitions is unequivocal - the -1 counts for both (conceded), and it definitely says that purchasing assets is required for requested special munitions it definitely does not say that purchasing assets is required for requested smoke.

But the phrasing of the -1 modifier actually implies a difference between requested smoke and special munitions, not a similarity (other than the minus one of course).

If the same buying assets rule applied to requested smoke and special munitions there would be no need to list the two of them separately - smoke (and illumination for that matter) could simply be added to the special munitions list and the modifier could just mention special munitions, end of.

But the fact that they are not listed under special munitions and are listed separately under the modifier can only serve two purposes - either to indicate that there is a difference between them (i.e. in requiring assets or not) or perhaps simply in order to confuse the players. I certainly hope the latter is not the case.

So what the rule as written is giving is three (rather than two) levels of availability - normal for HE, -1 on the command roll for smoke, and -1 on the command roll plus the purchase of assets for special munitions.

I hope I've expressed that clearly, but maybe not!

Anyway, that three tier approach seems sensible to me - I agree that smoke was generally held in smaller quantities than HE (though I do know of an example where the standard mix of HE to smoke was 2:1). But I also think that smoke should be more plentiful than special munitions and this three tier approach satifies both criteria.

And anyway, if tactical circumstances merited it, for example for an offensive, additional ammunition of the appropriate type would be provided at the gun positions over and above the authorised levels - this was standard operational procedure.

And lastly, for tonight, there's another reason that means needing to buy assets for requested smoke doesn't make sense. The mix of ammunition varied widely according to period, army and weapon, but I think it would be rare to have no smoke available at all. But there are scenarios where that would be the case, because assets are not allowed.

... and then there's the issue of the availability of smoke ameliorating the overpowering effect of artilley ... but that's a whole subject in itself.

Thanks for debate and input.

All the best

Puzzled

Dear Mr Truth, or may I call you Naked?

'For some reason you seem to see the two methods are inextricably linked'
No. No Straw Men please. I said 'suggests they can be' - That does not mean 'inextricably linked'. It means you can read it that way - and by normal interpretation of english usage -or another, if you prefer.

'And anyway, if tactical circumstances merited it, for example for an offensive, additional ammunition of the appropriate type would be provided at the gun positions over and above the authorised levels - this was standard operational procedure'

Seems like a very good argument for making you pay for it- You've had to make special arrangements for the offensive, taxing your logistic chain etc.

Guy

Hi

I thought I`d add something else to this debate. In the line concerning special munitions, Due to their specialised nature they may only be requested if they are listed as an asset in the army list,even though they do not require an asset to be used for requested support.

So could someone please explain how an asset(special munitions which now miraculously includes smoke) needs to be purchased but doesn`t count as being used if requested.

I`m sorry but I don`t have a degree in law so can`t make head nor tail of assets, scheduled artillery and requested artillery any more. Even though for the past 4 years I thought I did until this topic started .

Jim (puzzeled as well)

Well one way or another you need to restrict smoke use, especially in the later periods where a TI equipped force gets such a huge advantage over a non-TI equipped one.

Surely being able to cover enemy positions with smoke and then carry on firing as normal whilst your opponent can't return fire has got to be unbalanced?

Adding a cost to smoke use allows it to be used but with a downside. You could restrict the amount used to the number of assets available in the army lists, but that would probably be too draconian, and would treat them as if they were as rare as true special munitions, whilst realistically they probably fall half way between HE and 'specials'

But then this is why I've asked for some clarification on this topic in the new edition.

Jim,
As long as you and the people you play with have been happy with how it has worked for the last four years - keep doing that! If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I have got a law degree, and I find the conversation taking some unusual turns I think you buy smoke assets to represent the unusual planning and requirement for batteries to have extra/any smoke for use during an action. It isn't much - after all you aren't 'charged' for use, so its only 20 points for having smoke available for requested fire.

I'm just going to play what I think works and if somebody doesn't like it we can put our respective points of view (very briefly!), if that doesn't alter our positions, we'll chuck a die - highest one gets to play it their way (that means I'll never play what I think).

the farrier and stu-dew - probably a good idea for a clarification for people who don't spend too much time wading through all this

Best wishes to everyone using smoke

Hello

Thing is will this spill over into BKC 2. I agree smoke has to be limited because in the past I`ve used it A LOT (in BKC). However when your FAO is only a 7 and requesting smoke is getting a -1 is that not enough to limit it`s use.

Jim

"so its only 20 points for having smoke available for requested fire"

20 points per use per battery - that is how I see it is working.

I could live with 20 points to have the ability to request smoke any amount of times, or at a push for each battery that may want to use it.

Steve

Steve - maybe this why clarification is needed after all

p.29 says re special munitions - 'even though they do not require an asset to be used for requested support' - and the errata for this says:
'All special munitions require assets, even if they are requested during the game. The request is still subject to the -1 command penalty for requesting special munitions.'

Now I had read this (including smoke, in the light of Pete's answer to the intial question) as meaning if you didn't buy them as scheduled assets you still had to buy them as assets for request, but I was still reading the bit about not having to 'use' an asset for requested support as meaning 'expend' - so you bought an asset and that did you for any requests - if you wanted scheduled you bought like a normal asset and expended one per unit per turn. Now I'm not so sure. If that were correct then does this sufficiently limit the availability? Hmmm.

I think I know what I'll do, but if people want certainty (life isn't really like that though is it?- unless we're talking Newtonian physics) I guess they may need a clarification.

Gwydion,

In my CWC rule book I have a pencil note against the Special Munitions para on p29 - 'Must be bought as assets even if requested'.

I would only have done this if Pete gave an answer to the question as to whether special munitions have to be bought in advance if they are going to be available for requesting.

A look at previous threads may give a bit more info - but I am terrible at finding things.

To me it would seem illogical that special munitions would be severely restricted as assets, yet much less restricted on request.

Steve

After a quick search, I can only really find an errata entry (the first one on the page).

Steve

Hey Pete, how about putting us out of collective misery by telling us whether one needs to buy assets in order to request artillery support to fire smoke, or not - the debate certainly seems to qualify it as a FAQ if it isn't an errata!

Puzzled