Flame Throwers on Vehicles = Firing in advanced fire - It this right?

macrobo

King of Boxcars
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
1,266
Reaction score
622
Location
Geelong Melbourne
First name
Rob
Country
llAustralia
HI All

I always thought that the infantry flamethrower and vehicle were the same - so drive up to the enemy - blaze away with limited modifiers and drive off (people with wasps have done this too me so many times!)
but
My esteemed opponent Duncan quoted a +4 for such an attack by ASLRB section

3.6 FT: Vehicular-mounted FT are often more powerful than the Infantry SW variety

of A22 and may have more FP, range, and different X# as depicted on the counter, but

otherwise work the same [EXC: Motion Fire; 2.42]. Case A To Hit DRM apply as

IFT DRM unless using Bounding First Fire (C5.13).

Which establishes that DRM are applied to the IFT roll for Case A

Then there's Cases B&C:

We also now question whther BU also adds another +1?

Can someone affirm that is the intention of the rule (which thus I have played wrong with even people I consider rules guru's)
and tell me if BU also applies

cheers

Rob:)
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
5,070
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
See the C7.34 HE and FLAME TO KILL TABLE. Your opponent is wrong. All the mods are at the bottom of the table. Nothing else applies. Assuming normal range, your base TK number is 8. If the target is CE, your modified TK is a 9. If the target is OT, your modified TK is 10. There is no TH DR needed. Roll == to the modified TK#, the target is eliminated. Roll < the modified TK#, the target is eliminated as a burning wreck. Albany has specific rules which changes this outcome. FT's are pretty powerful AT weapons. -- jim
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
According to D3.31 titled "MG/CANISTER/FT FIRE" Any non-ordnance weapon [EXC: FT; Gyrostabilised CMG vs acquired target (11.13)] using Bounding (or Bounding First) Fire has its FP halved.

That is distinct from D3.3 which mentions the various case C TH modifiers.

So D3.31 covers FT (as it says on the tin) and the exception is to halving FP not to D3.31 covering FTs.

You don't use case C for CMG/BMG, you usually halve the FP. So I would read that as like MG no case C, etc modifiers but no halving of FP due to BF/BFF (just like a gyro CMG on an Acq target). Long range will halve that, but within normal range you use FULL FP whether moving or stationary.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
... you use FULL FP whether moving or stationary.
Doesn't seem to be completely accurate as D2.42 states,"All other types of FP from such a vehicle (including FT/canister) and/or its Passengers'/Riders' FP are halved as Motion Fire which is cumulative with any other FP modifications, such as AFPh Fire [EXC: Thrown DC use +3 DRM instead (A23.6; C7.346)] and Mounted Fire (6.22, 6.72)." Now however, since FT aren't halved for fire in the AFPh, they would obviously not be affected a second time but must be affected by Motion Fire if applicable. The same should be true if used as a TK# on the HE/Flame TK Table as the TK# is certainly its FP, but only those TK# modifiers noted in the footnotes (i.e. +1 for rear target facing, half at long range, +1 if target is CE and +2 if target is OT) for FT would apply.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
As best I understand FTs, the TK# for FTs against AFV is only affected by range. The FP for a collateral attack probably are affected by Motion Fire, etc., as would the FP for attacks vs. unarmored vehicles.

JR
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
As best I understand FTs, the TK# for FTs against AFV is only affected by range. The FP for a collateral attack probably are affected by Motion Fire, etc., as would the FP for attacks vs. unarmored vehicles.

JR
Is the Rule (D2.24) wrong or missing a notation it applies only to IFT FP or is the notation wrong and missing the Non-Stopped reference on the QRDC for a TK#? It seems as if your above is correct, it stands in direct contravention of the rule but is supported by the QRDC notation. Been looking for a clarification but have found none yet. Looking at other TK#s it seems as if they equate that to the FP of the ammunition utilized so therein lies my quandary.
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
17,426
Reaction score
3,364
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
As far as I am aware, no matter when you fire or what your motion status is, the To Kill of an FT is unaffected.
You also ignore smoke, motion status of the target, hull down status etc as all these affect the to hit roll which the FT does not make.
Additionally, the IFE of the FT is not affected by having moved in the advance fire phase but is halved for motion fire. The IFE is also have for bounding first fire so could be quartered if you do not stop and OFF while moving.
No other firer based modifiers (apart from stun?) Apply.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Doesn't seem to be completely accurate as D2.42 states,"All other types of FP from such a vehicle (including FT/canister) and/or its Passengers'/Riders' FP are halved as Motion Fire which is cumulative with any other FP modifications, such as AFPh Fire [EXC: Thrown DC use +3 DRM instead (A23.6; C7.346)] and Mounted Fire (6.22, 6.72)." Now however, since FT aren't halved for fire in the AFPh, they would obviously not be affected a second time but must be affected by Motion Fire if applicable. The same should be true if used as a TK# on the HE/Flame TK Table as the TK# is certainly its FP, but only those TK# modifiers noted in the footnotes (i.e. +1 for rear target facing, half at long range, +1 if target is CE and +2 if target is OT) for FT would apply.
D3.31 is higher than D2.42 and D3.31 excludes FT from halving for B(F)F. So you can move, stop, fire, start and move off again without any halving. It's only if you are non-stopped when firing a FT that you are halved.

For Infantry targets:
Move, fire, move gets halved (for non-stopped, NOT Motion Status). Motion Status only applies outside your Movement Phase, eg no stop at end of vehicle's MPh and fire in AFPh which is also halved.
Move, stop, fire (using Delay), start, move doesn't get halved. Move, stop and fire in AFPh is not halved either.

For vehicular targets there is no TH and the TK is unaffected by firer's non-stopped/Motion status.
 
Last edited:

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,776
Reaction score
7,200
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
...The IFE is also have for bounding first fire so could be quartered if you do not stop and OFF while moving....
FT FP is not halved for Bounding First Fire either...

D3.31:
"Any non-ordnance weapon [EXC: FT; Gyrostabilized CMG vs acquired target (11.13)] using Bounding (or Bounding First) Fire has its FP halved...."
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Motion/Non-Stopped FT fire (as per D2.42) only halves the FP if used on the IFT. There is no effect vs the TK#.
How did you arrive at this conclusion that "any" TK# is not considered its fire power and is only used on the IFT? It doesn't seemed to be delineated in C7.344, D 2.24 nor D3.31 to any degree of satisfaction. Not that I have not played it as using the FT's full TK# effect to resolve attacks, but in view of the statement of D2.24 I am starting to wonder if the chart has been wrong or at least is not supported by the rules. Perhaps I'm missing a reference here (not much of a stretch there-old geezer syndrom), but I don't see where firepower relates only to IFT results and does not include TK# strengths. It is after-all its firepower used to determine the effects against armor factors.
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
5,070
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
As I said, everything you need to know is on the C7.34 HE and FLAME TO KILL TABLE. FT's are pretty powerful AT weapons, so much so, there is a specific ruling on this for all Albany scenarios. -- jim
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
5,070
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
How did you arrive at this conclusion that "any" TK# is not considered its fire power and is only used on the IFT? It doesn't seemed to be delineated in C7.344, D 2.24 nor D3.31 to any degree of satisfaction. Not that I have not played it as using the FT's full TK# effect to resolve attacks, but in view of the statement of D2.24 I am starting to wonder if the chart has been wrong or at least is not supported by the rules. Perhaps I'm missing a reference here (not much of a stretch there-old geezer syndrom), but I don't see where firepower relates only to IFT results and does not include TK# strengths. It is after-all its firepower used to determine the effects against armor factors.
See the C7.34 HE and FLAME TO KILL TABLE. The Base TK# for an FT is 8. There is a small superscript 2 which shows all that applies. Looking at 2:
  • Half if Long Range
  • +1 if CE
  • +2 if OT
That's it. Nothing about 1/2 FP. Nothing about CASE A. Nothing about DRM's. Nothing about motion, etc. -- jim
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,593
Reaction score
5,556
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
How did you arrive at this conclusion that "any" TK# is not considered its fire power and is only used on the IFT? It doesn't seemed to be delineated in C7.344, D 2.24 nor D3.31 to any degree of satisfaction.
Because FP is a factor which only applies on the IFT.
A 24FP or 32FP FT works the same on the C7.34 HE and Flame TK Table, so FP are not to be linked to a TK#.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,593
Reaction score
5,556
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Nothing about 1/2 FP.
The only (misleading) link would be that a FT firing at Long Range on the IFT has its FP halved.
But the table indeed dissociates FP from TK, only evoking the Long Range TK DRM.
I would also presume that firing at a concealed vehicle, the FT TK# would not be modified...
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
While somewhat confusing and possibly counter to what we expect from other aspects of IFT and TK mechanisms, the current FT rules seem to me to be a better reflection of a FT than involving other weapons modifiers.

A FT projects a sticky flaming fluid. It is the ultimate spray and pray weapon. It does not rely on accurate aiming, (partly) hidden target or not it burns everything it can reach and is aimed at. In addition it has a psychological effect that other weapons don't. It is ASL's ultimate horror WMD, the ground version of Napalm. So to my mind very little should diminish it's effects, eg Long Range, currently in Motion or non-stopped..
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Because FP is a factor which only applies on the IFT.
A 24FP or 32FP FT works the same on the C7.34 HE and Flame TK Table, so FP are not to be linked to a TK#.
Is there a reference for this Robin? As I have said I may be missing something here -maybe too focused that I don't see the obvious-but even A1.21 doesn't seem to lay out that interpretation (FP=only IFT) clearly. It certainly wouldn't be the only time a notation on a chart has been viewed out of context or miss-printed. BTW, agreed "?" status would not modify the TK# (per C7.344 'Other factors (e.g., "?"/CX/SMOKE /Hindrance/TEM/AFPh-use') do not modify the Basic TK#.). I do play, and have done so, by the way expressed using only the HE/FLAME TK TABLE, but I do wonder if a further clarification should be necessary to dispel any doubts that a TK# is not considered a unit's firepower.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,593
Reaction score
5,556
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Perhaps taking the problem from the other side could help: Where can one find an identification between a FP and a TK#?
For an example, a 75* or 75L or 75LL all have the same FP (whether firing HE or AP), but their TK# are different - and not comparable with their FP.
Why would things be different for a FT's TK#?
 

Mister T

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,204
Reaction score
1,680
Location
Bruxelles
Country
llFrance
FT projects a sticky flaming fluid. It is the ultimate spray and pray weapon. It does not rely on accurate aiming, (partly) hidden target or not it burns everything it can reach and is aimed at.
Yes, it does rely on some aiming. To spray an entire hex would imply using considerable amount of jelly FT tanks did not have (hence the limited stowage implied by X10/X11 depletion numbers, exc:Crocs). The current rules are not satisfactory for vehicular FT attacks vs. vehicles, whereas they do it right for FT vs. Infantry. Penalties for ?/hindrances/ SMOKE/motion fire should apply, although possibly with reduced drm.
 
Top