can you invade with 1 corp and paradrop with 2 corps same hex?

[jjdenver]

Playing a game with 4.2.3.2 - I seem to be able to invade with one HQ and one div and paradrop with 2 PARA corp. Total seems overstack but game lets it go through. Is this a bug or is it ok?

capture-wif2.JPG (164.14 KiB) Viewed 551 times

[Courtenay]

This is a bug. I am not clear on when overstacking followed by unit destruction is allowed and when it is forbidden, but in any case, either this should not have been allowed, or one of the large units should have been destroyed before combat.

[Joseignacio]

Overstacking at invasion + paradrop is valid, however after appying results of the combat , the excess of units needs to be destroyed. IIRW in WIF.

So, just for allowing it would not be a bug.

[Orm]

Overstacking at invasion + paradrop is valid, however after appying results of the combat , the excess of units needs to be destroyed. IIRW in WIF.

So, just for allowing it would not be a bug.

No, that is not allowed. Voluntary overstacking is against the basic stacking rules. Note that Invasion, and Paradrops, are two separate steps. Thus stacking limits apply at the end of both those steps. Only exception when doing an invasion is that your invading units doesn't count towards the defending units. See below.

Thus, a bug

Cut from RAC:
2.3 Stacking
The number of units that can occupy each hex is limited. It is called the stacking limit of the hex.
2.3.1 Limits
Units that can’t co-operate (see 18.1) can’t stack together in the same hex. They can stack together in the
same sea-box. Stacking applies at the end of every step and after advance after combat (see 11.16.5). Stacking also affects how and if units retreat (see 11.16.5). You cannot voluntarily overstack, but if it happens (e.g., due to liberation), the owner of the hex must destroy enough of the overstacked units to comply with the stacking limits. You must destroy organized units before disorganized units.
[Clarifications. An HQ or ENG can vacate a hex, thereby causing air units to be overstacked. If another HQ or
ENG moves into the hex in the same step, it can be used to alleviate the overstacked condition - May 12, 2008.]
Land unit limits
Up to 2 land units can stack in a hex. AsA/MiF/PoliF options 2, 3 & 6: you can stack 3 land units in a hex if
the 3rd unit is a division, artillery or supply unit. [Deviation. Any and all hexsides of a land hex can be fortified, but
only one fortification per hexside.] Units invading (see 11.14) and paradropping (see 11.15) have a stacking limit in
addition to the defending units’ limit. This limit is applied to the combined number of invading and paradropping
units.

[Centuur]

This is a bug.

[Joseignacio]

Units invading (see 11.14) and paradropping (see 11.15) have a stacking limit in
addition to the defending units’ limit. This limit is applied to the combined number of invading and paradropping
units.

This is exactly what I was referring to. So, that stacking limit is the same as the units defending? It doesnt say so, but I guess it makes sense. However I have made and suffered invasions + paradrops with 3 corps (over a board).

[Orm]

Units invading (see 11.14) and paradropping (see 11.15) have a stacking limit in
addition to the defending units’ limit. This limit is applied to the combined number of invading and paradropping
units.

This is exactly what I was referring to. So, that stacking limit is the same as the units defending? It doesnt say so, but I guess it makes sense. However I have made and suffered invasions + paradrops with 3 corps (over a board).

The units defending, and the units invading has the same stacking limit. It is 2 corps + 1 div (normal stacking). The reason this is mentioned is so that no one would argue that if the defender has a fully stacked hex, then it can not be invaded because it violates stacking. Thus the rule specifies that both the defender and the invader have normal stacking apply in the invaded hex before combat is resolved.

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

[Courtenay]

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

Nonsense. We never make errors reading the rules. It is just that rules change after we have read them. That is my story, and I am sticking to it.

[Centuur]

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

Nonsense. We never make errors reading the rules. It is just that rules change after we have read them. That is my story, and I am sticking to it.

Sure...

[Joseignacio]

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

That is what I meant in my last post.

[Orm]

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

That is what I meant in my last post.

Just me misreading then.

[Orm]

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

Nonsense. We never make errors reading the rules. It is just that rules change after we have read them. That is my story, and I am sticking to it.

Of course it is. In this game it was standard operating procedure to change the rules after the players had finally leaned the rule.

[Joseignacio]

Edit: That you suffered three corps invasions over the board is just another player error in reading the rules. We all have had plenty of those.

That is what I meant in my last post.

Just me misreading then.

No, it wasnt straightforward. My bad not to be clear enough.