HE fire at buildings

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Post Reply
Martcart
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:30 pm

HE fire at buildings

Post by Martcart » Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:36 pm

Can anyone help by explaining their understanding of the rules governing firing at buildings. In our group we have some individuals who feel that empty buildings cannot/should not be targeted and others who feel that they should.

Any thoughts would be most welcome.

User avatar
Vis Bellica
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:59 am
Location: Buckinghamshire, UK
Contact:

Re: HE fire at buildings

Post by Vis Bellica » Fri Dec 21, 2018 11:28 am

Hi

I'm assuming you mean whether it is legitimate for a unit to fire at a building that they know is empty in order to achieve something...such as denying it to the enemy.

This isn't specifically covered by the rules, so I would just work out whether it seemed right that the player (which could be me!) be allowed to do so.

Let's look at an example. A US tanker is approaching a French village in 1944. He wants to knock a house down. He has consider that he is supposed to be liberating the village, not turning it into rubble. So no: he can't.

However, he now learns that unless he does, something really, really bad will happen elsewhere on the battlefield. So yes, he can.

On the other side of the field, a German tanker is wrestling with the same dilemma. Hardened by years on the Russian Front, he doesn't have the same sensibilities as his American counterpart, so I'd say he can just do it. That's unless he doesn't have much ammo, he's worried that the activity might draw the attention of jabos, he's actually been stationed in the village for four years and rather likes the jam that Mrs Dupont used to make etc.

Here's an example of something similar from a game played using the Lille scenario:

Meanwhile, another Char had advanced to the centre of the table right into the advance of the PzII's. One PzII was blown to bits, and the other three scattered into cover. It looked as if this Char was unstopable, especially as it had Lt Epinace on board, even if he was dressed as a nun! [I use one of PP's excellent French nuns as Big Man 4]

Then, however, the drone of Stuka's was heard and the German player nominated Lt Epinace's Char as their target. Deviation dice were rolled - a direct hit would have meant the end of Epinace! - no...a miss...deviation behind Epinace's Char by five inches. Phew! Safe!

Hang on! What's that building that the bombs have landed on? The one that Epinace's Char is using to protect its flank?

Yes, you guessed it: it's my new petrol station!

A quick check of the rules failed to discover effect of Stuka bombs on a petrol station ;) so the German player, Neil, claimed that the kriegspiel approach means that the station should blow up, taking the Char with it! I, however, pointed out that the French Fuel Shortage chip was in the pack, and so there obviously wasn't any fuel to blow up. Neil then pointed out that my Char's ran on diesel, so the station could be full of petrol. This was a fair gendarme, so we decided to compromise and have the Char brew up as the petrol station exploded, but with Epinace emerging from the smoke, untouched but with his Nun's costume blackened and in shreds!

Martcart
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: HE fire at buildings

Post by Martcart » Fri Dec 21, 2018 3:04 pm

Thanks for the prompt and detailed response.


The commentary provided is exactly what I needed to be able to convince a couple of non-believers!

Post Reply