Pin and ROF

commissarmatt

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
477
Reaction score
229
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
Suppose an MMC has a weapon with a Multiple ROF. It fires in DFF, retains rate, fires in DFF again, still retaining rate. Then it gets pinned. May it fire again or not? A7.81 says, "...cannot ... use Intensive Fire or a Multiple ROF ...". I've always played it that the unit gets one more shot, but now that I've looked at it more clearly I think it does not get to shoot again, because any shot it takes would be using Multiple ROF. Thoughts?
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,011
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
I have always played it your way (as you called it) one more shot. I think the reference to using ROF at A7.81 is to starting out as pinned (marker pinned already), not becoming pinned while firing using ROF...though* once pinned it has no more ROF but still has "a" shot.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Agreed! A pinned firer should always retain one more MG shot in this case, if only because there is no Fire marker yet placed on the MG. Otherwise, the onus is on players' memory which is (however obvious the situation) just poor game-mechanics. Since it is a fairly "basic" situation, it would probably be a good question to get officially clarified, though I believe game mechanics would favor the current opinion.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
But how to justify this within the rules? As I mentioned, the rules as written seem to indicate that they cannot fire again.
The problem is that it doesn't say a pinned unit "...cannot ... use Intensive Fire or continue to use a Multiple ROF ..." nor does it say it can't use a "Multiple ROF weapon."

Multiple ROF is an abstract way of measuring a weapons ROF across the time span of a single turn. If a MG maintains ROF, it simply means that it did it's damage early enough in the turn so that there is still more time for it to shoot at other stuff. So if a squad fires a couple shots across the first 10 seconds of a turn but then gets pinned, it is assumed to still have enough willpower to fire the MG, but not enough to fire consistently and effectively across the remaining time. At least that would explain our ruling... but do ask the question of Perry. It seems like something that should be made 100% clear in the RB.
 
Last edited:

commissarmatt

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
477
Reaction score
229
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
If a unit has fired a weapon, and retained rate, and fired again, it has used Multiple ROF. I don't see how there could be any other understanding of that. So if it were to fire again, it would again be using Multiple ROF. Again I don't see how that could be in dispute. Now, the rule says a pinned unit cannot use Multiple ROF. I understand the feeling, I understand the sentiment, and as I've said I've played it for a long time that a pinned unit gets to shoot once more, but that was without reading the rule carefully. Now that I've read it carefully I really don't think they get another shot. It seems unambiguous in the actual words of the rules themselves.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,777
Reaction score
7,201
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I don't think one "uses" a Multiple ROF per se - one can retain it. I think it is just a "not optimal" choice of words in A7.81.

Also, by allowing one more shot keeps to the "do not have to remember if the MG fired already and kept ROF" way that ASL usually works.

Drop MMP a Q&A.
 

commissarmatt

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
477
Reaction score
229
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
I don't think one "uses" a Multiple ROF per se - one can retain it. I think it is just a "not optimal" choice of words in A7.81.

Also, by allowing one more shot keeps to the "do not have to remember if the MG fired already and kept ROF" way that ASL usually works.

Drop MMP a Q&A.
Well yeah, at the very least, it's awkward. Though I agree with you about how ASL usually works w.r.t. marking things, there are other things we have to keep track of without a counter, such as whether a vehicle has made a motion attempt or a smoke dispenser attempt, so it's not completely unprecedented. It probably does need a Q&A.
 

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
If a weapon fires and retains RoF it is treated as having both fired and not fired. Fired as not allowing Movement, etc but regarded as not having fired with regard to taking another shot.

So a weapon fired and retained RoF. It may make subsequent shots and the possibility of retaining RoF. In theory it could retain RoF and shoot until the cows come home. Now it gets pinned. One of the results of pinning is no more RoF, effectively RoF goes to 0. It can then make 1 more shot, but no more RoF.

Another way to think of it is what happens when a weapon gets pinned before its 1st shot? It can still shoot, but will never have RoF for that turn/phase. Having once fired, retains RoF and then gets pinned is the exact same except it's one shot later.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Though I agree with you about how ASL usually works w.r.t. marking things, there are other things we have to keep track of without a counter, such as whether a vehicle has made a motion attempt or a smoke dispenser attempt, so it's not completely unprecedented.
There are counters in Red Factories (and Armies of Oblivion, so I am told) for motion attempt and sD attempt.

JR
 

semenza

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
961
Reaction score
432
Location
Poplar Ridge , NY
Country
llUnited States
Interesting.

I have always played no more non-SFF shots. IOW , no the MG does not get one more. I have played probably something like a couple hundred people over the years. Never had anyone try to take one more shot after pinning.

I think the fact that A7.81 goes on to say what they can do in direct relation to the "or a Multiple ROF (although it may use Subsequent First Fire / FPF)" supports that the MG does not get one more shot.

Seth
 

commissarmatt

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
477
Reaction score
229
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
If a weapon fires and retains RoF it is treated as having both fired and not fired. Fired as not allowing Movement, etc but regarded as not having fired with regard to taking another shot.

So a weapon fired and retained RoF. It may make subsequent shots and the possibility of retaining RoF. In theory it could retain RoF and shoot until the cows come home. Now it gets pinned. One of the results of pinning is no more RoF, effectively RoF goes to 0. It can then make 1 more shot, but no more RoF.

Another way to think of it is what happens when a weapon gets pinned before its 1st shot? It can still shoot, but will never have RoF for that turn/phase. Having once fired, retains RoF and then gets pinned is the exact same except it's one shot later.

That's a nice interpretation, but I don't see how it is supported by the rules themselves. Regarding your last paragraph, a unit that gets pinned before its first shot has not used Multiple ROF, and when it takes its first shot it is not using Multiple ROF either. So allowing one shot there is consistent with the rules as written.
 

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
RoF is an attribute or property of the weapon, it's not an action, per se. What that property means is that if the coloured die is less than the RoF, then the appropriate Prep, First or Final is not placed. It is akin to a Prep/First/Final shield. As long as that "shield" is in effect then every next shot is treated as its first shot. Whether that weapon has already fired 0 times or 6, the next shot is treated as its 1st, does not suffer halving for SFF or IF.

Pinning a weapon in effect changes that attribute from 1/2/3 to 0 from that point on. It does not apply retroactively to any previous shots. Let's take a simple case, 1 shot, retains RoF, is pinned. After the 1st shot no Prep/First/Final Fire is placed. It is then pinned. There still is no Fire Counter. To prevent a subsequent "clean" shot then the act of pinning should place a Fire counter, it doesn't.

The most important thing is that RoF is not a "thing" or "action" in itself. It's a property that can modify what befalls the weapon after firing (IE possibly no Fire counter).
Regarding your last paragraph, a unit that gets pinned before its first shot has not used Multiple ROF, and when it takes its first shot it is not using Multiple ROF either.
A unit that gets pinned before shooting has it's RoF set to 0/null/none. It cannot get the protection that RoF can provide. So that unit fires and has no chance of avoiding a Fire counter, it must be marked by the appropriate Fire counter.

The term Multiple RoF is set up in A9.2 and notes that retaining RoF is done when firing the current shot. It never looks back to previous shots, only to the possibility of future unpenalised shots. There are modifiers to RoF (eg IFE) and nullifiers, but neither the number or even the act of a previous shot modifies the RoF.
 

commissarmatt

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
477
Reaction score
229
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
RoF is an attribute or property of the weapon, it's not an action, per se. What that property means is that if the coloured die is less than the RoF, then the appropriate Prep, First or Final is not placed. It is akin to a Prep/First/Final shield. As long as that "shield" is in effect then every next shot is treated as its first shot. Whether that weapon has already fired 0 times or 6, the next shot is treated as its 1st, does not suffer halving for SFF or IF.

Pinning a weapon in effect changes that attribute from 1/2/3 to 0 from that point on. It does not apply retroactively to any previous shots. Let's take a simple case, 1 shot, retains RoF, is pinned. After the 1st shot no Prep/First/Final Fire is placed. It is then pinned. There still is no Fire Counter. To prevent a subsequent "clean" shot then the act of pinning should place a Fire counter, it doesn't.

The most important thing is that RoF is not a "thing" or "action" in itself. It's a property that can modify what befalls the weapon after firing (IE possibly no Fire counter).

A unit that gets pinned before shooting has it's RoF set to 0/null/none. It cannot get the protection that RoF can provide. So that unit fires and has no chance of avoiding a Fire counter, it must be marked by the appropriate Fire counter.

The term Multiple RoF is set up in A9.2 and notes that retaining RoF is done when firing the current shot. It never looks back to previous shots, only to the possibility of future unpenalised shots. There are modifiers to RoF (eg IFE) and nullifiers, but neither the number or even the act of a previous shot modifies the RoF.

I never said ROF was an action. I also never claimed anything should be applied retroactively. I was quoting the rulebook, which refers to pinned units not being allowed to "use Multiple ROF". I understand what you're trying to say, but it seems like an interpretation rather than a clear rules citation.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
RoF is an attribute or property of the weapon, it's not an action, per se. What that property means is that if the coloured die is less than the RoF, then the appropriate Prep, First or Final is not placed. It is akin to a Prep/First/Final shield. As long as that "shield" is in effect then every next shot is treated as its first shot. Whether that weapon has already fired 0 times or 6, the next shot is treated as its 1st, does not suffer halving for SFF or IF.

Pinning a weapon in effect changes that attribute from 1/2/3 to 0 from that point on. It does not apply retroactively to any previous shots. Let's take a simple case, 1 shot, retains RoF, is pinned. After the 1st shot no Prep/First/Final Fire is placed. It is then pinned. There still is no Fire Counter. To prevent a subsequent "clean" shot then the act of pinning should place a Fire counter, it doesn't.

The most important thing is that RoF is not a "thing" or "action" in itself. It's a property that can modify what befalls the weapon after firing (IE possibly no Fire counter).

A unit that gets pinned before shooting has it's RoF set to 0/null/none. It cannot get the protection that RoF can provide. So that unit fires and has no chance of avoiding a Fire counter, it must be marked by the appropriate Fire counter.

The term Multiple RoF is set up in A9.2 and notes that retaining RoF is done when firing the current shot. It never looks back to previous shots, only to the possibility of future unpenalised shots. There are modifiers to RoF (eg IFE) and nullifiers, but neither the number or even the act of a previous shot modifies the RoF.
Yes for most intents and purposes it's a fire and forget sequence [EXC: fixed CA, the inherent FP used (if any) of the possessing unit, etc.]. Once a weapon system has retained Rate Of Fire (ROF), its next shot is as if the weapon had never fired initially (again, in most cases). Having retained ROF, once the firer is Pinned, the situation changes as it no longer retains a ROF possibility but may fire once more albeit at 1/2FP and would be marked with a fire counter as noted.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
I never said ROF was an action. I also never claimed anything should be applied retroactively. I was quoting the rulebook, which refers to pinned units not being allowed to "use Multiple ROF". I understand what you're trying to say, but it seems like an interpretation rather than a clear rules citation.
Either way it's an interpretation... Yes. The rules state that a pinned unit cannot "use... a Multiple ROF." But the problem is that "using a Multiple ROF" is nowhere defined in the RB. I think Klas and Paul nailed it by clarifying that ROF is defined as something "retained" (or "lost"), not "used" (A9.2). "Using" a Multiple ROF is nowhere defined, and therein lies the problem - your understanding of its meaning is your interpretation. What the RB likely should say is that a pinned unit cannot "retain" a Multiple ROF which is done per DR and not applied retroactively.

What you are suggesting would require that a First/Prep Fire counter be placed on the MG, which - unlike when a unit cowers and is told to receive a Prep/Final Fire (A7.9) - the RB does not say to do. However, A9.2 states that "once a MG has lost its Multiple ROF, it is marked with an appropriate Prep, First or Final Fire counter." A pinned unit is not said "to have lost its Multiple ROF." So which is it? When the RB states that a pinned unit cannot "use... a Multiple ROF?" is it saying that a Pinned unit cannot "retain" ROF or that a pinned unit has "lost" ROF? A valid question, but "retain" seems the simpler answer. Without the counter, the weapon is still free to fire (as is the possessing unit), but a pinned unit is not free to further "retain" ROF (both unit and MG, btw, already penalized for now having halved FP).

And as I offered in my first post above, an assumption of fundamental game mechanics (the placing of Fire markers) is probably why the authors never noticed the undefined "use" in the text. But the RB definitely does not say a pinned unit cannot "continue to use ROF" nor does it say it cannot "use a Multiple ROF weapon" which is your interpretation of what A7.81 means to say.

Believe me, I completely understand your question - and applaud you for noting the poor wording here. You may be even be right about the intention, but I don't think so. So please don't simply harden your position: Query Perry!
 

semenza

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
961
Reaction score
432
Location
Poplar Ridge , NY
Country
llUnited States
Interesting.

I have always played no more non-SFF shots. IOW , no the MG does not get one more. I have played probably something like a couple hundred people over the years. Never had anyone try to take one more shot after pinning.

I think the fact that A7.81 goes on to say what they can do in direct relation to the "or a Multiple ROF (although it may use Subsequent First Fire / FPF)" supports that the MG does not get one more shot.

Seth

Just to clarify myself ............................... if the pin occurred before firing, then yes, a shot at half fire power, and no chance for ROF. If the pin occurred after having already fired, regardless of possibly having retained ROF, then no additional shot barring Subsequent FF or FPF. That's my take and that is what I meant in the first post.


Seth
 

commissarmatt

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
477
Reaction score
229
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
Either way it's an interpretation... Yes. The rules state that a pinned unit cannot "use... a Multiple ROF." But the problem is that "using a Multiple ROF" is nowhere defined in the RB. I think Klas and Paul nailed it by clarifying that ROF is defined as something "retained" (or "lost"), not "used" (A9.2). "Using" a Multiple ROF is nowhere defined, and therein lies the problem - your understanding of its meaning is your interpretation. What the RB likely should say is that a pinned unit cannot "retain" a Multiple ROF which is done per DR and not applied retroactively.

What you are suggesting would require that a First/Prep Fire counter be placed on the MG, which - unlike when a unit cowers and is told to receive a Prep/Final Fire (A7.9) - the RB does not say to do. However, A9.2 states that "once a MG has lost its Multiple ROF, it is marked with an appropriate Prep, First or Final Fire counter." A pinned unit is not said "to have lost its Multiple ROF." So which is it? When the RB states that a pinned unit cannot "use... a Multiple ROF?" is it saying that a Pinned unit cannot "retain" ROF or that a pinned unit has "lost" ROF? A valid question, but "retain" seems the simpler answer. Without the counter, the weapon is still free to fire (as is the possessing unit), but a pinned unit is not free to further "retain" ROF (both unit and MG, btw, already penalized for now having halved FP).

And as I offered in my first post above, an assumption of fundamental game mechanics (the placing of Fire markers) is probably why the authors never noticed the undefined "use" in the text. But the RB definitely does not say a pinned unit cannot "continue to use ROF" nor does it say it cannot "use a Multiple ROF weapon" which is your interpretation of what A7.81 means to say.

Believe me, I completely understand your question - and applaud you for noting the poor wording here. You may be even be right about the intention, but I don't think so. So please don't simply harden your position: Query Perry!

I agree, that would be a simpler answer. If they just change the wording to say cannot retain rate, that would solve the question.
 

Magpie

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
252
Reaction score
74
Country
llAustralia
Problem with that is, units don't gain or retain ROF, weapons do. Weapons also don't become pinned, units do.

It's always seemed pretty clear to me. If a unit is pinned it cannot use a multiple rate of fire, if it was to fire an MG that had previously retained rate of fire then it would be "using" a multiple rate of fire.

The MG still has a multiple rate of fire, it's just that a pinned unit can't use it.

Consider the situation where a pinned unit manning an MG that has retained ROF, Battle Hardens and can therefor fire the gun again.

Easy way to remember is to put the pin counter underneath the MG and don't mark it with a FF counter. (As per A8.1)
 
Last edited:
Top