Snapshot, spray fire and firelanes

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
15,930
Reaction score
1,768
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
> 1. May a MG that declares a snapshot lay a firelane. If so is the hex
> that must be part of the firelane the hex the enemy unit is entering
> or leaving.

Yes. Entering.


> 2. May a MG that us using spray fire lay a firelane. If so must both
> hexes being fired upon form part of the firelane or merely one of
> those hex form part of the firelane.

Yes, but the fire lane placement hex must contain a target unit.


....Perry

MMP
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,410
Reaction score
463
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Is it just me, or is the answer to the second question (second part) still a little ambiguous?

There are two target hexes for a spraying fire attack, and it sounds like only one of them needs to be within any resultingly maintained FL. That target hex also must have included a "target unit."

There is no requirement that both spraying fire target hexes lie within the eventual FL.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,863
Reaction score
2,403
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Is it just me, or is the answer to the second question (second part) still a little ambiguous?

There are two target hexes for a spraying fire attack, and it sounds like only one of them needs to be within any resultingly maintained FL. That target hex also must have included a "target unit."
Correct. Sans any type of Impulse Movement Spraying Fire as Defensive First Fire will only have "target units" in one of the Locations it is attacking, and that Location must be in the resulting Fire Lane.

There is no requirement that both spraying fire target hexes lie within the eventual FL.
Correct.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
9,581
Reaction score
2,734
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
Hm. I wonder about RFP when using Spraying Fire while placing a FL.

What would it look like, provided everything would be Open Ground?
Would the FL-RFP be halved?
Would there be "extra" RFP for a hex attacked that might be outside the FL-hexes?
Would the latter be possible at all?

von Marwitz
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
15,930
Reaction score
1,768
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
My take.
8 FP HMG spray fires adjacent hexes A and B. A has a unit and B does not. 8 FP in A 4 FP in B. The fireland MUST nbe placed to include A. 2 Residual is placed in B.
 

xenovin

Elder Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
1,773
Reaction score
767
Location
Skynet
First name
Vincent
Country
llUnited States
1. May a MG that declares a snapshot lay a firelane. If so is the hex
that must be part of the firelane the hex the enemy unit is entering
or leaving.
Yes. Entering.

....Perry

MMP
How does this square with A8.223 where a snap shot doesn’t leave Res?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,863
Reaction score
2,403
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
How does this square with A8.223 where a snap shot doesn’t leave Res?
I see it like in a Defensive First Fire attack with a Fire Lane declaration one does not "leave" Residual FP - it is more like the shooter chooses to place it.
 

xenovin

Elder Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
1,773
Reaction score
767
Location
Skynet
First name
Vincent
Country
llUnited States
I see it like in a Defensive First Fire attack with a Fire Lane declaration one does not "leave" Residual FP - it is more like the shooter chooses to place it.
Well A9.222 clearly identifies a FL as residual fire and A8.223 states none is left. That’s what is in the RB so contradictory (to me) to the OP.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
15,863
Reaction score
2,403
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Well A9.222 clearly identifies a FL as residual fire and A8.223 states none is left.
IMO, Fire Lane Residual FP is "placed" - normal is "left", so (again IMO) they are different in that way - "except as stated otherwise". As always, ymmv. :)
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,410
Reaction score
463
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Hm. I wonder about RFP when using Spraying Fire while placing a FL.

What would it look like, provided everything would be Open Ground?

Would the FL-RFP be halved?

Would there be "extra" RFP for a hex attacked that might be outside the FL-hexes?

Would the latter be possible at all?

von Marwitz
My take.
8 FP HMG spray fires adjacent hexes A and B. A has a unit and B does not. 8 FP in A 4 FP in B. The fireland MUST nbe placed to include A. 2 Residual is placed in B.
Regarding potential Residual left in the "second" hex of a spraying-fire FL (if the hex not actually within the eventual FL):

  • By rule, if a MG fires and maintains ROF, it cannot place any "regular (non-FL) zid" unless it forfeits later opportunities to to fire and/or establish a FL.
  • Likewise, when a MG establishes a FL, its original, non-FL, FP is not included in any "regular zid" left by its FG (if any).
  • A FL is established after resolving some initial attack (though declared before). The FL is not the byproduct of that attack. Rather, the attack is the catalyst for the MG-er to lay down a FL ...
  • And finally, A9.22: "A Fire Lane's Residual FP is equal to the FP column to the left of the FP column normally used by that MG's FP [EXC: PBF doubles the reduced FP in the ADJACENT hex; Fire Lane Residual FP TPBF is NA (9.223)] . No exceptions given for Area Fire.
  • From this and Perry's answer above, I would suggest that a FL which follows a Spraying Fire attack is established without being reduced for Area Fire, and that no "regular zid" is left behind in either Location.
 

Vinnie

See Dummies in the index
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
15,930
Reaction score
1,768
Location
Aberdeen , Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Regarding potential Residual left in the "second" hex of a spraying-fire FL (if the hex not actually within the eventual FL):

  • By rule, if a MG fires and maintains ROF, it cannot place any "regular (non-FL) zid" unless it forfeits later opportunities to to fire and/or establish a FL.
  • Likewise, when a MG establishes a FL, its original, non-FL, FP is not included in any "regular zid" left by its FG (if any).
  • A FL is established after resolving some initial attack (though declared before). The FL is not the byproduct of that attack. Rather, the attack is the catalyst for the MG-er to lay down a FL ...
  • And finally, A9.22: "A Fire Lane's Residual FP is equal to the FP column to the left of the FP column normally used by that MG's FP [EXC: PBF doubles the reduced FP in the ADJACENT hex; Fire Lane Residual FP TPBF is NA (9.223)] . No exceptions given for Area Fire.
  • From this and Perry's answer above, I would suggest that a FL which follows a Spraying Fire attack is established without being reduced for Area Fire, and that no "regular zid" is left behind in either Location.
I can live with that.
 
Top