Case A for turreted weapons

[jrv]

• if the MA fires to U8 (upon a new MP spent), then the DRM is 0, because the TCA does not move from its previous position.

I hope it is clear that if the CMG fires at T7 and the MA at U8, the CA change DRM for the MA is still +2. The last CA change DRM will apply until the weapon fires or until a new CA change is made. The CA change DRM is "remembered" (that is until someone produces the counters I proposed).

I will also add that at least part of the reason the rule is hard to grasp is because it goes against "common sense." If you had no knowledge of the rule you would probably expect CA change DRM to be cumulative, but they aren't.

JR

 

[turlusiflu]

I hope it is clear that if the CMG fires at T7 and the MA at U8, the CA change DRM for the MA is still +2. The last CA change DRM will apply until the weapon fires or until a new CA change is made. The CA change DRM is "remembered" (that is until someone produces the counters I proposed).

I will also add that at least part of the reason the rule is hard to grasp is because it goes against "common sense." If you had no knowledge of the rule you would probably expect CA change DRM to be cumulative, but they aren't.

JR

Yes that's right. What I stated in the example would be following my hypotesis of that every MP spent causes a new positional status. Just to fit those movements of CA into my "cartesian mind".

What would happen if the MA fires at T7, retains its ROF, and fires again at U8?. Or if it exhaustes its ROF and fires Intensive Fire at U8? Would both shots apply +2 DRM, or only the first?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

What would happen if the MA fires at T7, retains its ROF, and fires again at U8?. Or if it exhaustes its ROF and fires Intensive Fire at U8? Would both shots apply +2 DRM, or only the first?

Only the first.

 

[Cpl Uhl]

I will also add that at least part of the reason the rule is hard to grasp is because it goes against "common sense." If you had no knowledge of the rule you would probably expect CA change DRM to be cumulative, but they aren't.
JR

I'm glad someone else thought it goes against common sense! Seems a sleazy way to turn a VCA toward the threat, but I'll use it.