TCA change and Case A

[turlusiflu]

As per 3.51 MAINTAINING CA: Once a vehicle fires any turret-mounted weapon, any of its other turret-mounted weapons which fire within the current respective CA must pay the same CA Change penalty as the first weapon which fired. If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon (or the MA which has retained a Multiple ROF) wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (C5.12) but only if the preceding shot(s) were taken at a Known enemy unit; otherwise no further change in TCA is allowed during that phase.

What if a turret-mounted weapon wishes to fire at the SAME target outside the current TCA which has moved there from the previous position? Is this target considered "another target" for purpouses of this rule? Which would be the applicable Case A?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Yes it is. Case A DRM would be based on the latest TCA change.

 

[turlusiflu]

Thanks, Klas.

If, after firing, another turret-mounted weapon (or the MA which has retained a Multiple ROF) (*) wishes to fire at another target outside the current TCA, the Case A TH DRM would be applicable based only on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA ...

Should we include here (*) also a MA that makes IF, if otherwise able to make it?.

So might we roughly resume the rule like this?: any turreted weapon that fires outside the current TCA applies the Case A based on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (if able to make such a TCA change).

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Should we include here (*) also a MA that makes IF, if otherwise able to make it?.

That's certainly how I would play it, seen it played.

So might we roughly resume the rule like this?: any turreted weapon that fires outside the current TCA applies the Case A based on the move from the current TCA to the new TCA (if able to make such a TCA change).

That's what I think the intent is - the usage of "another" and "another target" in the rules text I think is a bit unfortunate.

Again, this is how I would play it and seen it played.

 

[EJ1]

Hi Turlusiflu,

I had the same/nearly-same question as you, submitted a question for Perry, and recently posted the reply in the Gamesquad Perry Sez Collection (May 2020).

The link is: http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/index.php?threads/d3-51-–-maintaining-ca-and-application-of-“another-target”.157525/

Hope it helps. Cheers

 

[turlusiflu]

Thank you EJ1, silly me, it was hard to find that the reply was... A ?