[ASLML] Mopping-Up

[Bruce Bakken]

Hi, Robert.

<snip>

I've followed through your argument and reasoning.  You make some 
interesting points about Control of buildings and Locations, which I shan't 
get into here.  I've decided to concentrate instead upon the questions 
below, pertaining specifically to minefields.

>
>So, here are my two questions:
>

A lot more than two questions here!  ;-)

>#1.  If a MMC uses Mopping-Up and there is a minefield in one of the
>building hexes, will the DEFENDER be allowed to make a Casualty dr as per
>A12.154?

I would say "yes".

First, remember that a Location is the entire hex, not just the obstacle 
within the hex.  This is reinforced by the Residual FP rules, which 
repeatedly refer to an entire Location (including Bypass).

Since *only* building Locations may be Mopped-Up, and since minefields may 
be placed in building hexes, the wording of A12.154 states that a Casualty 
dr may be made.  Even though a unit is not attacked by a minefield in a 
building hex if entering/exiting through a building hexside, remember that 
we are talking here about Mopping Up casualties, and not about minefield 
attacks, so... A12.154 must still apply.

BUT...

>What if the DEFENDER is *not* the player who placed the mines?
>What if the DEFENDER doesn't know about the mines?  Who makes the
>Casualty dr if the side conducting the Mopping-Up also placed the (Known)
>mines?
>

Well.  Strictly speaking, A12.154 makes no distinction about whose mines 
they are.  If they are the ATTACKER's mines, and they are not Known yet... 
how can the DEFENDER know to make the Casualty dr?  Only the DEFENDER can 
make a Casualty dr.

And don't forget, the Casualty dr is *only an option*.  The DEFENDER is *not 
required* to make the Casualty dr.  So, if the DEFENDER is unaware of any 
minefield... and therefore does not know it is eligible to make a Casualty 
dr... is the ATTACKER obligated to inform the DEFENDER of the presence of 
minefields in the building hex?

No, I do not believe the ATTACKER is obligated to reveal that a minefield is 
present, and therefore a DEFENDER would not (because of being unaware) make 
a Casualty dr due only to the presence of the ATTACKER's minefield.  I 
believe this to be true, because a Casualty dr is an *option*, and not an 
automatic rule mechanic that kicks in (e.g. when entering a minefield hex).

>#2.  Can Mopping-Up (A12.153) reveal A-P Mines?  What about A-T Mines?
>

No, there is no provision or requirement in either case.  If the DEFENDER 
does have a minefield *somewhere* in one of the building hexes, and chooses 
to make a Casualty dr, naturally you can deduce that the reason must be due 
to a minefield, if no other conditions apply.  But a minefield is not placed 
on board or otherwise revealed in any way due simply to Mopping Up, as far 
as I can see.

Also note: if the DEFENDER has an armed Good Order unit in one Mopped-Up 
hex, and a minefield in a different Mopped-Up hex, the DEFENDER can declare 
a Casualty dr and you would be none the wiser about the minefield... because 
I can find nothing to indicate that you must be informed about the presence 
of a minefield when Mopping Up.

This is how I interpret all this, having time to read the rule book and 
consider it carefully.

I would be interested to hear what others think.

Regards,
Bruce Bakken

>Thanks for your time.  Take care,
>Robert
>
>________________________________________________________________
>The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
>Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
>Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>

_________________________________________________________________
Rethink your business approach for the new year with the helpful tips here. 
http://special.msn.com/bcentral/prep04.armx