Mounted infantry, overruns, and ramming

[Ulzgoroth]

Per 5.11.3, infantry may not dismount from a vehicle the same turn as it embarks.

It's not specifically noted, but it seems to follow that that would include dismounting for an overrun per 8.06.1. Is this correct?

This led me to the question: what happens to infantry if their mount rams or is rammed?

Being rammed by a GEV is treated as an attack, so it would fall under the usual rules for attacking a vehicle with riders. But armor carrying infantry can also be rammed and instantly killed by Ogres, or suicidally ram Ogres. Infantry can also potentially ride on rule 13.07 superheavies or Ogres.

[GoatRider]

Depends on whether they're wearing their seatbelts.

Actually, I got nothing.

[Qthulhu]

I've got to wonder why you would climb into a vehicle when the driver intends to ram an Ogre?

[ColBosch]

Originally Posted by Qthulhu

I've got to wonder why you would climb into a vehicle when the driver intends to ram an Ogre?

That's a fair point. While Ogre lacks "morale" rules, it does mention at least one case where something is theoretically possible but nobody would do it except under extreme (read: scenario-specific) circumstances: infantry riding Ogres.

[Suboptimal00]

Originally Posted by Qthulhu

I've got to wonder why you would climb into a vehicle when the driver intends to ram an Ogre?

While that sounds like a terrible idea for an unarmed human, so is being on the map. Power-armored infantry, though, could potentially take a ride until very close and capitalize on the distraction of the Ogre's point defense.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Qthulhu

I've got to wonder why you would climb into a vehicle when the driver intends to ram an Ogre?

If you're initiating an overrun against an Ogre, you'll have to be lucky for the suicidal inclinations of your driver to matter!

[Qthulhu]

From my reading, in both situations it's hard luck for the infantry as the movement rules would take priority over the overrun rules.

You could justify basic self-preservation as an in-universe explanation for why your men could dismount despite mounting in the same turn, but you would still come back it being a way to fudge the rules to allow your troops to almost fly around the map.

If we assume that the in-universe reason they cannot dismount in the turn they mount is because they're securing themselves on the vehicle, then the in-universe explanation for why they cannot bail is because they've only just secured themselves when they notice the driver is ramming for the greater good. Too late to bail. SPLAT.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by Qthulhu

You could justify basic self-preservation as an in-universe explanation for why your men could dismount despite mounting in the same turn, but you would still come back it being a way to fudge the rules to allow your troops to almost fly around the map.

It would be hard to fudge this effectively, though. Once they dismount during an overrun, they can't re-mount and keep moving after the overrun is over. You are back to the "normal" restraint and the AUs would have to stick around to pick them up next turn or leave them behind. Using overruns to try and advance a couple squads of INF would leave you without any AUs to carry your INF in pretty short order.

If we assume that the in-universe reason they cannot dismount in the turn they mount is because they're securing themselves on the vehicle, then the in-universe explanation for why they cannot bail is because they've only just secured themselves when they notice the driver is ramming for the greater good. Too late to bail. SPLAT.

Not a bad assumption, but not necessarily true, either. Unfortunately, we don't know what the in-universe reasoning is. The in-game reasoning is probably because the rules were found to be unbalanced by not limiting the mount/dismount a bit. For comparison:

5.111 from GEV (year 2000)
To mount a tank, an infantry unit must begin its turn in the hex with that tank. The infantry unit may dismount any time thereafter, on that turn or a later one, but may not move "on its own" on the turn it dismounts. IT may fire normally on the turn it dismounts.

5.11.3 from ODE
To mount a vehicle, an infantry squad must spend its entire movement for the turn. The vehicle may either start in the infantry’s starting hex or pass through it. The vehicle moves normally on that turn.
The infantry may dismount in any hex of the vehicle’s movement on any turn thereafter, but may not move “on its own” on the turn it dismounts, or mount and dismount on the same turn.
Infantry may fire normally on the turns it mounts and dismounts.

Subtle differences... It used to be that INF had to start in the same hex, they no longer have to; but they did not have a restriction on mount/dismount in the same turn, and now they do. I'm not sure which one is "better" but the older rule would have avoided the current confusion. There's still the overall issue that INF riding rammed units is basically ignored in general (and really always has been).

[shadowjack]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Per 5.11.3, infantry may not dismount from a vehicle the same turn as it embarks.

It's not specifically noted, but it seems to follow that that would include dismounting for an overrun per 8.06.1. Is this correct?

Hmm.

As I see it, the point of the "no mounting and dismounting in the same turn" rule is to stop infantry from getting an instant six-hex strike distance via GEV catapult. It seems fair to apply this to overruns, too. So, I would say yes, the rule applies. If you want your infantry to be able to bail out properly, make sure you take a turn to form up before charging.

This led me to the question: what happens to infantry if their mount rams or is rammed?

8.05.3 says that rams in overrun have normal effects, and 6.07 says that infantry cannot be rammed. I would rule that riders jump clear at the last moment, and are not harmed by the collision with their mount; they are simply dismounted automatically, overriding rule 5.11.3. (I doubt this is unbalancing; who's going to base a strategy about wrecking their own armor units just to let their infantry dismount in overrun? Other than Launchpad McQuack, that is.) While passengers inside a truck are trapped, and are destroyed with the transporting vehicle; sucks to be ambushed.

[StormCrow42]

Originally Posted by shadowjack

As I see it, the point of the "no mounting and dismounting in the same turn" rule is to stop infantry from getting an instant six-hex strike distance via GEV catapult.

It was originally thought up (if I recall message board discussions right) as the way to prevent the "I unmount at the end of my turn and then mount up again" exploit that lets you never have mounted infantry on your opponent's turn when he can shoot at you.

But yes, I think the answer is that they continue to get attacked as if mounted. I'd say they're destroyed in a ram, if you take mounted infantry into an overrun with an Ogre, you deserve to have some of them squished.