AFPh, inherent FP cowers, what about yet unused FT?

von Marwitz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
8,925
Likes
1,990
Points
163
Location
Kraut Corner
#1
Situation:
It is the AFPh. A squad fires its inherent FP and cowers. It possesses a FT which it has not yet used (but was of course planning to...).

Rules:
"A3.5 ADVANCING FIRE PHASE (AFPh): The ATTACKER's units which did not fire in the PFPh or attempt to perform a task requiring TI status may fire at half FP (see C.4 for ordnance/vehicular fire) [EXC: FT/MOL/DC (22-23) and Opportunity Firers (7.25) attack at full strength]. Remove all Prep Fire and Bounding Fire counters at the end of this phase."

"A7.24 AFPh FIRE: The Small-Arms/MG/ATR/IFE FP of an attacking unit is halved if the attack occurs in the AFPh—even if the firing unit did not move in that Player Turn—unless it is using Opportunity Fire. MOL, FT, and DC are not halved (see C.4 for Ordnance)."

"A7.9 COWERING: IFT attacks are adversely affected by any IFT resolution DR that results in Original "Doubles" unless a leader directs that attack. The penalty for rolling Doubles without leadership direction is that the attack is resolved on the next lower column of the IFT. An attack on the lowest column which cowers is reduced to no effect at all, although a malfunction result can still occur. In addition, any unit that cowers (as well as all of its SW regardless of whether it was using its inherent FP) is automatically marked with a Final or Prep Fire counter as appropriate. Cowering affects all fire except that from a SMC, berserk or Fanatic unit, Fire Lane, IFE, Canister, Aircraft, British Elite and First Line units, Finns, Sniper, ordnance, OBA, or any form of vehicular fire. Cowering FP penalties are doubled (i.e., resolved two columns lower on the IFT) for an attack by Inexperienced (19.33) Personnel (even in conjunction with other troops). Cowering does not affect CC or DC resolution (including Reaction Fire; D7.2). If a FG cowers, Random Selection is used to determine the unit(s) (and its SW) that becomes marked with a Prep or Final Fire counter."

"A22.1 FP MODIFICATION: A FT counter is an Infantry SW with a Normal Range of one hex and a FP factor of 24. A FT may attack at Long Range (two hexes) with 12 FP, but is never increased for PBF/TPBF. Long Range Fire for a FT (even vehicular FT) is always limited to one hex beyond its Normal Range. FT FP is affected by LOS Hindrances and is halved for all forms of Area Fire (but not for use in the AFPh) and is reduced by cowering (7.9), but is never increased for any reason. Some vehicular FT (D1.8) have a Normal Range of 2 (signified by the FP factor being underscored)."

Questions:
Can the squad still use its FT?
If yes, at what FP strength (as the shot which cowered was not using the FT)?


Thanks for your thoughts,
von Marwitz
 

Honosbinda

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
321
Likes
37
Points
28
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
#4
It will be once it cowers, read A7.9 also affects fire in any phase. I think once marked with prep all SW are so marked, but don't have time to look it up.

EDIT

found this in Q/A: A7.9 If a squad firing a MG only (not its inherent
FP) cowers, are both the squad and the MG
marked with the Prep Fire or Final Fire counter?
A. Yes. [Compil7]

So one can assume the inverse is also true, that once inherent FP cowers, the SW is also marked.
 
Last edited:

Mister T

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
3,489
Likes
673
Points
113
Location
Bruxelles
#5
Shot cowered = unit and its SWs marked with prep fire counter, no FT fire possible.

Better to fire the FT first
 

Philippe D.

Active Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,052
Likes
320
Points
83
Location
Bordeaux
#7
Sometimes your AFPh shot has a decent chance of doing the job, so firing the FT first means taking a chance at Xing it out "for nothing". Chances of losing the FT are the same (1/6) as those of cowering, but the loss is a big one in most situations.
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
15,758
Likes
1,310
Points
163
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Skype
tribureeve
Twitter
RobinMCReeve
#8
I would risk firing the FT first most of the time.
Bringing it in a position to fire already can be complicated.
But the target must still be juicy.
 

von Marwitz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
8,925
Likes
1,990
Points
163
Location
Kraut Corner
#9
I would risk firing the FT first most of the time.
Bringing it in a position to fire already can be complicated.
But the target must still be juicy.
Indeed. Target must be juicy.
In the given situation, the idea was to strip concealment first and then roast 'em at un-halved FP if juicy enough.

von Marwitz
 

von Marwitz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
8,925
Likes
1,990
Points
163
Location
Kraut Corner
#11
ASL is a fickle beast and your plan to strip and then burn yields to the cower and mark.
Yes. But under the given circumstances, I believe it was the right choice: Chances of the target being very valuable were more low than high. The FT shot would have been long range vs. Concealed unit, so only 6FP rather early in the game. Nothing to risk a FT for with a 16.7% chance to X out per shot.

If the target would have turned out to be valuable AND concealment lost, then a 12FP @ 0DRM *might* have been worth it.

von Marwitz
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
15,758
Likes
1,310
Points
163
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Skype
tribureeve
Twitter
RobinMCReeve
#12
Sometimes - more often than what one could think - you can judge that a move was good only after the dice were rolled.