FaoF--Knightly Combat, Scenario 27 Hidden Units?

[cjsiam]

So, in reading the AAR for this-- wayne and tlangston mention "Hidden ATGun"....
I don't see a special scenario rule saying the defender can hide....did I miss it?
Is there some other rule that comes into play allowing units to be Hidden?  (cause as french that would be tre bon!)

[leonard]

Not than I know of…
If the French were allowed to dug in, then the optional rule « No Hidden Units Specified » (page 37, 4th Ed rules) could come into play but no…
Maybe some optional rules dating back from 3rd Edition…

[plloyd1010]

Long ago, when life was simpler and dinosaurs roamed across PG-HQ, someone had a standard house rule that stated AT guns setting up in limiting terrain could be hidden. I think that someone was Wayne or Vince. So a house rule is most likely in my mind.

[joe_oppenheimer]

4th Edition option rules suggest allowing AT guns to setup hidden.

[Hugmenot]

Vince, Wayne and I used to set up AT guns hidden. This was to prevent the opponent to just move a leader within spotting range and bombard the hex without the AT having fired a shot.

Your opponent can still move leaders up and try to spot the AT guns but there is no guarantee it will work.

[plloyd1010]

4th Edition option rules suggest allowing AT guns to setup hidden.

I don't see where that suggestion is. Where did you see it?

[cjsiam]

Vince, Wayne and I used to set up AT guns hidden. This was to prevent the opponent to just move a leader within spotting range and bombard the hex without the AT having fired a shot.

Your opponent can still move leaders up and try to spot the AT guns but there is no guarantee it will work.

I think it makes sense...at least for initial set up.....
Also, Peter's extensions/mods all All AT guns to be efficient...they have one job....
always felt it a bit odd that the light AT got one shot, but same gun in a tank
can get two...little of that makes sense (targeting ease, loading, aiming,etc...all would seem more constrained in a tank)...

[joe_oppenheimer]

4th Edition option rules suggest allowing AT guns to setup hidden.

I don't see where that suggestion is. Where did you see it?

I don't. Thinking I misremembered a suggestion for it as an optional rule.

[plloyd1010]

I think it makes sense...at least for initial set up.....
Also, Peter's extensions/mods all All AT guns to be efficient...they have one job....
always felt it a bit odd that the light AT got one shot, but same gun in a tank
can get two...little of that makes sense (targeting ease, loading, aiming,etc...all would seem more constrained in a tank)...

My rational for making AT guns efficient, and mentally changing the term from armor efficiency to gunnery efficiency, was that with an AT gun has 5+ guys with elbowroom working it, where as a vehicle gun has 2-3 guys working it in a tight space. I also made AA efficient because they send a lot of rounds down-range, and hitting is really a numbers game in the end. I'll also point out that I flattened the AT probabilities a little.

[waynebaumber]

Yes Vince and I used hidden A/T guns if in limiting terrain back in the day. This was a way to try and make them more effective and stop them being targeted by OBDA so easily.  Peter I like the idea of some A/T guns being efficient particularly the smaller calibres. Also very pleasing that some reads my AAR's though if looking for any tactical tips I suggest you read my opponents AAR's. 

PG could benefit from concealment rules I guess but as I am not Senor Jacome I have no huge wish to make the game more complex.