I’m not sure I follow: so I’m the German and I fire at your mounted Carrier Platoon. If the results of my fire are nothing, it missed, then the Carrier Platoon stays mounted and is completely unaffected,
but if the results of my fire are that the Carrier Platoon takes casualties and/or a morale result (such as pinned or suppressed), then the Carrier Platoon ends up dismounted. BUT, there is also the “…there is a survival benefit to doing so…” in there; what do you mean by that? Are you talking immediate or long-term?
when I was thinking about this, it was deciding if this rule needs an IF clause: are there weapon systems which, if you were in an SSV receiving fire from them analagous to a suppressed/pin result, you would (in reality) prefer to stay in the vehicle. I couldn’t think of any off-hand, but there may be some. We aren’t talking about if moving in the vehicles has a better survival benefit – I am assuming the result of the fire stops that from happening.
It seems like you’re saying there’s an immediate effect, i.e., I roll up my shooting dice and it comes out that I knocked two Carriers and their mounted rifle teams, but then you can come back and say ‘well, the carriers are knocked out but the rifle teams are dismounted, so they’re not knocked out.’ Talk about eating your cake and having it, too! Just kidding man, I just want to make sure I’m understanding correctly.
No, I want the rifle teams to take the full effect of the aircraft (or artillery, cannon fire, or MG), and if they survive, then be forced to dismount.
“Troops in AFVs get “suppressed” (i.e. no move) results from air attack.” Do you mean troops, as in infantry mounted in a Bradley/Warrior/BMP, or do you mean tank crews (or both)? If what you’re saying is I have a platoon of tanks on the board and on your activation you say “we’ve got air support coming in, my Typhoons are rocketing your platoon of Panthers,” I can certainly understand the idea of the targeted platoon being suppressed as a matter of course, even if all the Typhoons’ shooting dice missed, due to the fact the Panthers ‘saw’ the Typhoons coming, pulled off the road, and the crews dove into ditches. Then I guess they just require a successful rally to re-mount their vehicles?
I mean both. If the attack is close enough to suppress, then everyone dismounts; if not, not. In all cases, but in particular this case, you would berallying to get them back in to the vehicles.
On a side note (and still just playing around), none of you Brits, Aussies, or Kiwis minded it when the Germans were stampeding through Poland and France, but now that we’re in Greece and it’s your folks getting beat up on I’m getting all kinds of grief!
Haha! Harsh man. I was feeling the pain every time the IJN was handing the USMC its ass above the Pacific…anyway, I am thinking that the main beneficiaries of this will be KG Klink when the tide turns and it is the other side which is throwing lots of Sturmoviks, Thunderbolts and Typhoons against it!
With that said, I still don’t like the idea of having non-morale induced automatic actions, as we are discussing. To me, you shuffle your cards and take your chances.
I guess this is the fundamental point of disagreement here. I think dismounting suppressed/pinned crew and passengers is effectively a morale-induced action (from not wanting to stay inside the bullet/bomb/rocket magnet). That’s why I noticed this one because it jars with my sense of the story. Why were the Carrier platoon guys still in the carriers after the air strike? Now, if they had dismounted, then been rallied, re-mounted and then the Panzers turn up….c’est la guerre: everyone has a bad day at work from time to time…