Residual Firepower and DC placement

[cooljrunner]

Squad assault moves into open ground entering Residual Firepower from a firelane and survives the attack. Squad then attempts to place a DC from same hex expending 2MF. Is squad then attacked again by the RFP? If so, once or twice?

I said once, citing A8.2 "any unit entering (or expending MF/MP in) that same Location in the same Mph is attacked on the IFT..." with movement into the hex and DC placement considered non-simultaneous movement. Wily opponent differed arguing no additional RFP attack citing A8.22 "A unit can only be attacked once per Location".

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I don't think the Fire Lane attacks again, since the it has already attacked the unit in the Location.

 

[jrv]

Residual FP attacks once per location unless the defending unit becomes more vulnerable. The firelane rules do not change that.

JR

 

[Eagle4ty]

I think you're arguing the same point of view. You said only a single attack, your opponent said no additional attack, what did I miss here?

 

[Philippe D.]

I think A8.22 gives the exceptions to "may only be attacked once per location by Residual": if the residual firepower increases, or if the unit becomes more vulnerable to it.

(Would picking up a FT qualify?)

 

[klasmalmstrom]

(Would picking up a FT qualify?)

Yes.

 

[cooljrunner]

Thanks men, appreciate the quick response.

 

[clubby]

Residual FP attacks once per location unless the defending unit becomes more vulnerable. The firelane rules do not change that.

JR

Give me an example of what would constitute becoming more vulnerable. I understand picking up a FT because that would add an additional -1 to the attack. I'm assuming assault moving into the RFP and then trying for infantry Smoke would not? TIA

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Give me an example of what would constitute becoming more vulnerable...

E.g., you are beneath a Foxhole and try to recover a SW and the existing RFP attacks. Then you exit the Foxhole - RFP attacks again.

 

[jrv]

Give me an example of what would constitute becoming more vulnerable. I understand picking up a FT because that would add an additional -1 to the attack. I'm assuming assault moving into the RFP and then trying for infantry Smoke would not? TIA

Assault move in (take resid) then attempt Infantry SMOKE would not become more vulnerable. Assault move in (take resid), attempt to move under wire and roll high enough that all MF are used, voiding assault move [B26.4] and resulting in FFNAM, i.e. the unit would be more vulnerable and take the residual again. The ways that a unit can become more vulnerable so that it takes a residual twice are not very common. First the unit has to make two MF expenditures in the same location, which is itself not all that common.

JR

 

[jrv]

In a firelane at level zero, from IN a depression hex go into crest status at level zero, take firelane attack through crest hexside with +2 TEM, exit hex from firelane, take firelane attack with +0 TEM as if exiting an entrenchment with +0 TEM. What is odd about this particular case is that the unit could exit the hex directly without undergoing any attack in hex at all.

JR

 

[Mister T]

Give me an example of what would constitute becoming more vulnerable.

Riders are excellent candidates for eating several times RFP.

 

[jrv]

Riders are excellent candidates for eating several times RFP.

That is new to me. The riders would be attacked as riders, then if they have to bail out, they spend all their remaining MF (but at least one) subject to FFNAM.

JR

 

[Robin Reeve]

That is new to me. The riders would be attacked as riders, then if they have to bail out, they spend all their remaining MF (but at least one) subject to FFNAM.

JR

If they bail out, they eat the RF of the attack which they just were submitted to.
I remember a discussion here on that question which occurred some years ago.

 

[clubby]

So they're not actually eating the resid twice, they're taking an attack and then getting the resid when they bail out?

 

[jrv]

So they're not actually eating the resid twice, they're taking an attack and then getting the resid when they bail out?

If riders are forced to bail out by the residual they are attacked by it twice. They could also be attacked (by non-residual FP) and then attacked again immediately by the residual left by that attack. Both are possible.

JR

 

[jrv]

If they bail out, they eat the RF of the attack which they just were submitted to.
I remember a discussion here on that question which occurred some years ago.

That is true as well, but it different from what I had in mind. I had in mind that the riders were attacked by the residual and forced to bail out, then attacked again by the same residual.

JR

 

[klasmalmstrom]

If riders are forced to bail out by the residual they are attacked by it twice....

If they Bail Out from an AFV they will usually not take another Residual FP attack, since when attacked as Riders the DRM is 0, and since they would get the TEM of the AFV, the DRM as Infantry on the Bail Out MF would also be 0.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Give me an example of what would constitute becoming more vulnerable. I understand picking up a FT because that would add an additional -1 to the attack. I'm assuming assault moving into the RFP and then trying for infantry Smoke would not? TIA

A unit Assault Moves into a location containing RFP & is broken, it now is no longer using Assault Move and could be subject to FFNAM/FFMO penalties making it more vulnerable & would be attacked again by the Zid.

 

[jrv]

A unit Assault Moves into a location containing RFP & is broken, it now is no longer using Assault Move and could be subject to FFNAM/FFMO penalties making it more vulnerable & would be attacked again by the Zid.

No. It only made one MF expenditure so it would only be attacked by the residual once.

JR