All you ever wanted to know about Bocage (B9.5) and Wall Advantage (B9.32)

There are some questions related to the two issues. These are, in no particular order:

1. Can you claim Wall Advantage after claiming in-hex TEM in a turn?
2. Can Wall Advantage be declared when there are no enemy units adjacent?
3. Can you claim in-hex TEM in Open Ground (or other 0-TEM terrain)?
4. Does Bocage act as concealment terrain for ?-growth purposes?

There has been a number of questions sent to Avalon Hill related to the above problems. These are the latest, and they seemingly answer all of the above questions:

• B9.31: If a unit claims the in-hex TEM as per B9.31 in his opponents PFPh when no enemy unit is adjacent, can that same unit then claim Wall Advantage in his opponents MPh if an enemy unit moves adjacent?
  A. No. {MMP}

• B9.31 & B9.521: Can an in-hex TEM of zero (e.g. Open Ground, Brush, etc.) be claimed as " applicable TEM to use against incoming fire" instead of the hexside TEM?
  A. No. {96}

• B9.32 & B9.521:
  a) Must there be an adjacent enemy unit to allow Wall Advantage [EXC: Bocage B9.521]?
  A. No.
  b) Can a unit voluntarily forfeit Wall Advantage when an enemy unit becomes/is ADJACENT?
  A. Yes.
  c) Is a unit without adjacent enemy units always considered to have Wall Advantage (even over a Bocage hexside), unless the unit has chosen in-hex TEM (B9.31) during that Player Turn?
  A. Yes.
  d) If the answer to c) is 'Yes', can the unit choose in-hex TEM and thus forfeit WA even if no enemy units can fire at it?
  A. Yes.
  e) If the answer to c) is 'Yes', does this mean that a unit at ground level behind a bocage hexside can only see (and be seen) to (and from) a hex not formed by that hexside, if it currently has Wall Advantage?
  A. Yes. {MMP}

• B9.55: Since Bocage is not listed as Concealment Terrain on the Chapter B divider, how does a unit in an Open Ground behind Bocage gain concealment?
  A. If all enemy LOS crosses (without benefit of Wall Advantage) Bocage hexsides of a unit's hex, that unit is considered out of LOS and in Concealment Terrain, thus automatically gaining concealment at the end of the CCPh (if in Good Order). {96}

Why do I say "seemingly"? Because two of the above Q&A are still only inofficial ones. They haven't made it into any AH publication yet. Also, there are certain profiles on the ASL Mailing List that have vowed not to play according to some of the above Q&A unless AH prints new replacement pages for their rulebooks. Hence, there will be a number of posts about how the interpretations of others, and now the interpretations in these Q&A, are wrong. Sadly, there is no cure I know of for that.

Even so, I believe that this doesn't have to be a problem. I agree with most of the above Q&A. I can live with the others since they give clear answers. In the most contested questions, the above Q&A have been answered in accordance with what the rules say, as I will try to show below. If everyone will accept that this is now the official way to play Bocage and Wall Advantage, there should be little problems.

A loose description of how these rules play (when playing according to the Q&A described above) is the following:

• At the start of every turn, all units will be assumed to have WA over any hexsides in their hex [EXC: if there are enemy units in an ADJACENT hex that are marked with a WA counter]. I recommend placing a WA counter on every unit that could possibly claim an in-hex TEM (i.e. that occupies a hex with an in-hex TEM different from zero) at this point. Also leave any WA counters placed during a previous turn in place.

• In a hex where there is a non-zero in-hex TEM, a WA counter now shows the status of any unit. If a unit is marked with a WA counter, it has WA over all wall/hedge/bocage hexsides of it's hex. If it is not so marked, it cannot claim WA in that hex unless it moves (see B9.32). The counter on any such unit can be dropped at any time, but can only be regained in its MPh (as per B9.32) or at the start of each new turn. Remember that only the voluntary loss as per B9.31 render you unable to claim Wall Advantage for the rest of the turn. Losing Wall Advantage by breaking or other involuntary means, does not incur this penalty. Only claiming in-hex TEM does.

• Additionally, whenever two units start are ADJACENT while sharing a wall/hedge/bocage hexside and one unit is marked with a WA counter; the unit not marked with a WA counter can "steal" that WA counter when the previous owner loses it, provided it has not previously claimed any non-zero in-hex TEM. {This last condition is my interpretation of things, and hasn't been treated in a discussion or by Q&A before to my knowledge.}

• Units not in a hex with non-zero in-hex TEM are always assumed to have Wall Advantage, even if not marked by a counter unless there is an ADJACENT enemy unit marked with WA. As an opposing unit is about to become ADJACENT to a unit that has Wall Advantage, place a WA counter to signify this. A unit in such a hex never loses the ability to "steal" a WA counter, and all the methods to gain a WA counter described in B9.32 applies at all times.

• The only use of Wall Advantage is to claim hexside TEM versus ADJACENT units; and in Bocage to see beyond ADJACENT hexes. Versus units that are not ADJACENT, hexside TEM can be claimed irrespective of Wall Advantage status (B9.3 & B9.31).

Believe it or not, this is all there's to it. Place Wall Advantage at the beginning of the turn. After that, you will sometimes lose it after claiming in-hex TEM or break, and the enemy might steal it. That's all there's likely to happen. There are of course more special cases in the rules, like not being able to claim WA if you're on a bridge or in an entrenchment and some other things. Still, this is the basics when it comes to Wall Advantage.

Bocage is a less contested area nowdays, and I think most people agree on how to handle it. Still, I've been wrong before.

• While behind Bocage, you must have Wall Advantage to see to a non-ADJACENT Locations when the LOS cross a Bocage hexside. Since you are assumed to have Wall Advantage unless something prevents it, there is generally only one case that needs to be considered: when you're able to voluntarily drop Wall Advantage because you're in a hex with a non-zero TEM. If you do, you will suddenly disappear out of sight.

• This allows you to claim Wall Advantage at the beginning of a turn, only to drop it when things get too hot. You can claim Wall Advantage, fire in the PFPh, and then drop it again before the enemy can return your fire in the DFPh. This gives you a tremendous defensive advantage in hexes where there is both Bocage and another in-hex TEM. A good idea is to park an AFV in a Bocage hex to get that in-hex TEM. Once you have that TEM, you can generally not be attacked during your own turns unless the enemy can get around the Bocage.

• In addition, you will always gain concealment at the end of your own turns unless the enemy have a LOS that does not cross a Bocage hexside.

• However, during the enemy's turn you are a little more vulnerable. If you want to be able to fire at the enemy during your DFPh, you must claim the Bocage TEM (and Wall Advantage) during the enemy's PFPh. Since you gained concealment during your previous turn, you will still be concealed, but you have to let the enemy fire at you if you want to fire at him. Of course, if you drop Wall Advantage you could still fire if he got ADJACENT (and probably got Wall Advantage, too) - but that's often not desireable.

• In all cases, you will be unable to see across a Bocage hexside to non-ADJACENT Locations once you lose Wall Advantage by any means (enemy unit ADJACENT and claiming Wall Advantage, being broken, etc.).

As long as there isn't a non-zero in-hex TEM, Bocage is pretty simple. LOS is only blocked when special things happen (like breaking and enemy units closing in). Hexes with non-zero in-hex TEM are a little more troublesome, but once you accept the fact that you can fire at the enemy without them firing back they should pose no great problems.

As far as I can see, this is the only matter than is still contested that can make a practical difference when playing. It is, however, tied into the next issue. Still, as long as there is agreement here it doesn't really matter.

The objection that has been raised in this matter pertains to the the last sentence of B9.31. It says:

"If he chooses the in-hex TEM, the unit automatically loses all Wall Advantage Status it had until at least the next Player Turn."

The crux of the matter is one small word; "had". It can be argued that it means a unit only loses Wall Advantage in this manner if it had already claimed Wall Advantage during a turn.

Obviously, if the unit is always supposed to have WA unless it specifically drops it, this is no problem. From correspondence with the designers, I believe that this was the intention behind the Wall Advantage rules. The reason it isn't spelled out clearly in the rules is that he thought "it didn't matter". Oh, how insignificant this turned out to be, indeed!

But even if we allow that Wall Advantage can only be claimed when enemy units are ADJACENT, there are questions. The rule has a pretty strange wording in my opinion if it really intends to say that you don't lose Wall Advantage if you didn't have it; what is really the meaning of "all Wall Advantage status" here?

If this includes the ability to claim Wall Advantage, you will lose that ability if you had it when you choose the in-hex TEM. Losing the ability to claim Wall Advantage would prevent you from getting Wall Advantage for the rest of the turn, and all would be fine. However, of course there are objections and interpretations that want to make us believe that the rule only talks about actual Wall Advantage.

In that case, that would also mean that while you lose the actual Wall advantage in accordance with this rule, you would not lose the ability to claim Wall Advantage since that ability wasn't included in "all Wall Advantage status". There you are. You may claim Wall Advantage, but you cannot actually get it. Or can you? This seems like a paradox to me.

Before going further, it might be a good idea to think of how this affects play. Assuming that we don't lose Wall Advantage unless we have already claimed it, what would that mean?

It would mean two things. One, units in a building would be able to claim the building TEM during the enemy PFPh and still deny any hexside TEM during the MPh when the enemy moves ADJACENT. They can both have the cake and eat it. This is not an insurmountable problem.

Two, units behind Bocage doesn't need to claim Wall Advantage during their opponent's PFPh to fire at enemy units in the MPh/DFPh. This would make units in a building behind Bocage totally invulnerable to enemy fire, with the exception of OBA and WP attacks.

Given all this, my conclusion has to be that the Q&A described previously captures the intent and the only reasonable interpretation of the rules. Perhaps I am biased because I admittedly thinks the total invulnerability of units in Bocage is just too much. Still, there's the matter of the MMP Q&A, the paradox described above, and the strange wording of the rule to compound this.

This issue has been the subject of the most heated debates, and is by contrast the most insignificant of the issues covered here. That is because the only difference in practise between the different interpretations presented is to support one argument in the previous issue. It is not even the only argument in that debate, and deciding this issue either way would not necessarily solve the previous issue.

For bookkeeping purposes, there is a difference. You will place WA counters a little more often if you allow Wall Advantage where there are no ADJACENT enemy units. You will perhaps have less trouble remembering who can (and who can't) claim Wall Advantage because of this. You will perhaps get into fewer discussions over B9.31 and whether it's too late to claim in-hex TEM or not. You will not be able get any special benefits because you can claim Wall Advantage more often. You will only make it clear who has Wall Advantage in the event that your enemy moves ADJACENT.

Now, what is the core of this issue? It lies in two statements:

B9.32: "A "Wall Advan" counter can be placed only on that side of a wall/hedge which is occupied by a Good Order armed unit without an opposing armed unit on either side of that hexside claiming Wall Advantage over that hexside, and should be placed as soon as an opposing unit becomes adjacent to it across that hexside."

B9.521: "[EXC: ... In neither case is an adjacent enemy unit required to allow Wall Advantage.]"

These two sentences seem to imply pretty strongly to most people that Wall Advantage can only be claimed when there are ADJACENT enemy units (normally, the B9.521 exception describes the case for Bocage).

As long as we agree on how to interpret B9.31, I don't think it matters at all. But, of course the mentioning of adjacent enemy units in B9.521 could be for the sake of redundancy. It could be taked to mean that adjacent enemy units doesn't have to give ut their Wall Advantage to allow you to claim it. Also, The quoted sentence from B9.32 could be read in two ways. Either, you could take it as one single requirement stating that there must be an ADJACENT unit to place a WA counter. Then, you could equally simply read it as two different conditions separated by the comma, that says when Wall Advantage can be claimed and when it must (should) be claimed.

That's the problem. There are two ways to read those rules. Neither is an irrefutable proof either way. At least not in my opinion. So, what else is there? I'll try to enumerate the passages that imply that Wall Advantage can be claimed when units are not ADJACENT.

• B9.32: "A concealed unit may gain Wall Advantage (if it qualifies otherwise), but if a Good Order enemy unit moves ADJACENT to it the concealed unit must prove that it is armed and in Good Order to retain that Wall Advantage; a hidden unit must first be placed onboard concealed before it can claim (or deny) Wall Advantage."

  I don't see how this could say anything except that a concealed unit may claim Wall Advantage without ADJACENT enemy units. How else could enemy units move ADJACENT to it when it already has Wall Advantage? Of course, this passage could be talking about Bocage.

• B9.3: "If a LOS crosses a wall/hedge hexside through a road depiction (such as 6Q9/Q10) the wall/hedge TEM/LOS obstacle applies only if the target is a non-moving unit that can claim Wall Advantage."

  Does this really mean that you cannot claim the TEM of some wall/hedge hexsides unless there is an ADJACENT enemy unit? This sentence allowes you to claim certain TEM only if you can claim Wall Advantage. Or it there another way to read it?

• B9.321: "... and forfeits Wall Advantage once an enemy unit is otherwise able to claim it."

  Again, the rule is phrased in a manner that makes you believe Wall Advantage is possible before enemy units move ADJACENT.

So, what does all of this mean? Well, that's up to you. In my mind, there is more than enough to support the MMP Q&A here. My choice is that I find claiming Wall Advantage at any time a much more convenient mechanism and prefer to use that.

I have said that several times now: claiming Wall Advantage at any time is simpler. Perhaps it is about time I explained why it is so. Let's start off with what we agree on, namely that there are two different states regarding Wall Advantage: you can either have it, or not.

Assuming you do not have Wall Advantage, there are two possibilities: you are still eligible to claim Wall Advantage (possibly only if an enemy unit moves ADJACENT), or you are not. This is something of a problem, in my opinion. We have two very different states that are marked in the same way. If a unit is not marked with a Wall Advantage counter when an enemy unit moves ADJACENT, it might be hard to remember if that unit can still claim Wall Advantage or if it has previously chosen the in-hex TEM of it's hex. Even more so since you are forced to make this decision before being fired upon, or even if not fired upon at all.

Now, how different is it to be able to claim Wall Advantage (possibly only if an enemy moves ADJACENT) when compared to actually claiming it? Well, what rules are affected by Wall Advantage? They are:

• B9.3 won't let you have the TEM of certain walls if you cannot claim Wall Advantage. Since I consider it obvious that a unit should be able to claim this TEM even when no enemy units are ADJACENT, I will assume for the purposes of argument that this can be explained, and that the TEM can be claimed in either state.

• B9.32 won't let you claim the TEM versus adjacent units unless you have Wall Advantage. This doesn't apply to the former state.

• B9.521: Bocage LOS can be affected, but in that case you already can claim Wall Advantage without consideration to enemy units. Moreover, if you can or do claim Wall Advantage matter little when determining LOS. The important thing is that you're not prohibited from claiming it.

In other words, there is no practical difference between being able to claim Wall Advantage and actually claiming it except that the're marked differently. In order to alleviate this problem, why not mark both of the above with a WA counter, and remove it only from those who cannot claim Wall Advantage at all? That seems to me to be the only useful distinction here. You are able to claim Wall Advantage from the beginning of each turn, so instead let each unit have Wall Advantage from then on. When they lose the ability to claim Wall Advantage, they also lose Wall Advantage and the counter can be removed. The gain is that you do not have to keep track of which units are still able to claim Wall Advantage. Instead, you know at once from the prescence of the WA counter whether the unit is eligible or not.

The question of why you cannot claim a TEM of 0 as in-hex TEM in accordance with B9.31 has not been heavily discussed. Still, it is worth a mentioning. It has been said a couple of times that it is strange that the addition of other featueres would affect a unit's ability to be protected by Bocage (by dropping out of LOS).

I, too, find this strange. B9.31 only mentions "other terrain in that hex" with no limitations on TEM of that terrain. However, B9.521 states:

"A unit at ground level behind a bocage hexside must be able to claim Wall Advantage to see (and be seen) through that hexside to (and from) any hex not formed by that hexside; morever, if that unit's in-hex terrain could provide a different TEM (as per 9.31), it must actually claim Wall Advantage to see (and be seen) thusly."

The problem here is that B9.521 speaks of "different" TEM. Since there is no mention of what "different" TEM is in B9.31 we have a problem. Different from what? Different from the wall/hedge TEM (+2/+1)?

The answer given by MMP lends from the formulation of various rules like B12.3 that says brush has no TEM. This doesn't agree with the chapter B divider that lists "0" as the TEM for brush. For Open Ground, FFMO is listed as a TEM (despite not being a TEM). It seems to be the case that the writer didn't understand the difference between "no TEM" and "0 TEM" (or TEM and FFMO for that matter). In that light, the Q& answer is understandable. It is still strange that driving an AFV into an Open Ground hex will enable you to hide from enemy units, but I guess I can live with that.

"... that unit is treated as being out of all enemy ground LOS for determining both its ability to gain "?" and its possible loss of "?" due to RPh activities and MF expenditures, and is treated as being in Concealment Terrain for all other "?" loss/gain purposes."

This sentence has caused problems for many people. If a unit is treated as being out of LOS for all concealment gain purposes, what are the "other" concealment gain purposes this rule speaks about?

This can be solved by insisting that the word "gain" in "loss/gain" is redundant. That's the way I used to play. Then, you could argue that the "other" purposes are for determining whether the unit has to roll for concealment gain or if it is automatic.

MMP has ruled that the hex does count as Concealment Terrain for concealment gain purposes. That's fine with me.