COWER

Juan SantaX

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
428
Reaction score
156
Location
Sevilla
Country
llSpain
Can somebody explain this rule and the Q&A to me please? I think I remember a discussion on this same topic, but I cannot find it now.

10.62 DESPERATION MORALE (DM): DM is a condition which afflicts any unit during the Player Turn it breaks (even if it breaks voluntarily) or any already broken unit which is subsequently attacked by CC/WP [errata included], or enough FP (taking the possibility of Cowering into account) to possibly inflict at least a NMC result on the target.

There are two Q&A

A10.62 If a unit capable of cowering takes a 1 +1 shot at a broken unit does the broken unit become DM?
A. Yes.

And this one:

A10.62 With respect to a unit becoming DM when fired at on the IFT – Does the actual dice roll or result on the IFT matter in determining whether or not the target unit is placed under DM? If a unit capable of Cowering fires a 1 +1 shot on the IFT , and actually rolls doubles, is this sufficient to DM the target unit? If the firing unit actually Cowers on the dice roll (rolls doubles) is the FP reduced by two columns to determine DM?
A. The actual DR does not matter.


We have been playing this rule the way that an 1fp attack never DM anything, because if it cowers, (...taking the possibility of Cowering into account...), there cannot be any effect.

Obviously wrong, but I dont understand why.... I know that if I roll a 3 on a 1+1 will be a NMC, but then, What´s the meaning of taking the possibility of Cowering into account?

TIA
 

WuWei

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
998
Reaction score
620
Location
Germany
First name
Tobias
Country
llGermany
The question is: Can any result that you roll result in a NMC? The 1,1 falls off the chart, but if 1,2 (or 2,1) is enough for a NMC (which is the case for a 1+1 attack), the broken target becomes DM again.
With a 1+2 shot, the 1,1 falls off the chart and the 1,2 isn't good enough for the NMC, so no DM, unless the attacker can't cower.
 

Juan SantaX

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
428
Reaction score
156
Location
Sevilla
Country
llSpain
I appreciate your fast answer, but then doesn’t matter the cowering, and don't understand why the rule mention it.
 

WuWei

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
998
Reaction score
620
Location
Germany
First name
Tobias
Country
llGermany
It's just another way of saying: "If the attack could cower, you have to check if a 3 would be enough for at least a NMC, if not, check if a 2 would be enough."
 

Juan SantaX

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
428
Reaction score
156
Location
Sevilla
Country
llSpain
Well, I will never learn this rules... or better, I will never understand properly the english wording of the rules.

Thx a lot
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
17,709
Reaction score
4,318
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I appreciate your fast answer, but then doesn’t matter the cowering, and don't understand why the rule mention it.
It does matter, if a DR of 1,1 is the only way to achieve a NMC and the unit(s) firing are subject to cowering - then not DM (nor does such an attack count for Encirclement either).

TIPS FROM THE TRENCHES,

ASL Journal 7, page 44.
A 1 FP attack with +1 DRM inflicts DM on a broken unit and is potentially eligible to inflict encirclement. Both rules (A10.62 and A7.7) require “enough FP (taking the possibility of Cowering into account) to possibly inflict at least a NMC.” On such an attack, an Original 3 DR could inflict a NMC. In contrast, a 2 FP attack with a +3 DRM could qualify only if the attacking unit were exempt from Cowering (e.g., Fanatic, Elite British, leader directed, etc.) since an Original 2 DR would Cower.
 

Juan SantaX

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
428
Reaction score
156
Location
Sevilla
Country
llSpain
That example was what I was looking for! Now I will never forget it and the next time I have an issue with that, I can explain it!

I will read that journal also.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,681
Reaction score
816
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
To be fair, this question is very often asked, and I've had to argue the point with many experienced players. I'd say the rule is not worded in the most effective and easy to understand way.
 

Juan SantaX

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
428
Reaction score
156
Location
Sevilla
Country
llSpain
Agree.

The end is: if you can get a NMC with a 3, you DM them; if you need a 2, then only if you don't cower.

In fact I was playing and applying it properly, because I knew about the Q&A, but my opponent asked me for the reason, and I didn’t have words...
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
10,420
Reaction score
3,718
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
Agree.

The end is: if you can get a NMC with a 3, you DM them; if you need a 2, then only if you don't cower.

In fact I was playing and applying it properly, because I knew about the Q&A, but my opponent asked me for the reason, and I didn’t have words...
Exactly. On a 1+1 shot, you can roll a 1,1 a 1,2 or a 2,1 to get an NMC on a final 4 result. If the shot is a 1+2, the only possible roll with an inflict an NMC is 1,1 so if the shot CAN cower, the shot is not enough to cause the DM you're looking for. Same reasoning applies for a 2+2 vs a 2+3. -- jim
 

nekengren2

Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
117
Reaction score
65
Location
Central Florida
First name
Neal
Country
llUnited States
(...taking the possibility of Cowering into account...),

ah ok. I have read these rules many times and I interpreted differently. So in this case my wording replace that (paren) with something more explicit..

Any possible Cowering DR must reference the lower IFT column to determine if a MC would be possible...

All it essentially does is rule out 1+2 shots, 2+3 shots, 4+4 shots, etc. and only for units which are subject to Cowering.
So shooting into TEM with possible Cowering at low FP becomes the problem.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
12,308
Reaction score
6,499
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
To be fair, this question is very often asked, and I've had to argue the point with many experienced players. I'd say the rule is not worded in the most effective and easy to understand way.
That's right.

I don't mind if it is kept being asked. It is one of those things which I finally remembered, so it makes me feel good if it comes up and I can say to myself: "Hey, I know that!" 🤣:geek:

von Marwitz
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
5,245
Reaction score
2,964
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
That's right.

I don't mind if it is kept being asked. It is one of those things which I finally remembered, so it makes me feel good if it comes up and I can say to myself: "Hey, I know that!" 🤣:geek:

von Marwitz
Well, at least you're that one up on me.:unsure:o_O🤕
 

76mm

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
169
Reaction score
48
Location
DC
Country
llUnited States
Whew, now I finally understand what that wording meant...it's something I've been meaning to ask about!
 
Top