HS SFF after having fired a SW

[Sparafucil3]

Hi all,

Situation: a HS possessing two SW defensive first fired a SW (in example below, it fired a PF).

I believe it could SFF vs a moving unit (in example, the 447) by using its IFP.

But could it fire another SW (such as the MMG in the example)?

View attachment 34693

If it fired a PF in First Fire, it has the option of Inherent FP or the MG as Sustained Fire in SFF. If it fired the MG/Inherent in First Fire, it cannot use a PF. Regardless of how it ends up marked Final Fire, if it uses FPF, it must fire the MG as long as the MG is not malfunctioned.

 

[zgrose]

If "SW" is used for a PF, a SW is not only a SW depicted by a physical counter. The Index definition should be refined.

It would be a bit redundant to refine the index to include SW to the definition of SW.

Dog: Animals with characteristics X, Y, Z as well as Dogs.

 

[Robin Reeve]

SW: Support Weapon; any weapon different from a unit's IFP depicted on a 1/2" counter or inherent (EX PF).

No redundancy.
No restriction to SW depicted by a 1/2" counter.

 

[Fort]

SUPPORT WEAPONS CHART​ ​ Operational Capabilities​ ​ ​ 3 IPC​ 3 IPC​ 1 IPC (2PP Max)​ SW​ Squad​ Crew/HS​ SMC​ NOTES:​ LMG​ 1A​ 1B​ ½ FP; C, D​ A. May fire two by forfeiting inherent FP B. May fire one SW but at cost of inherent FP C. Any two SMC may fire at full effect D. Hero fires by adding 1 to MG IFT DR (using full FP) or TH DR E. Use by other than elite is use of captured SW F. German inherent SW; requires dr 1-3 for each use drm: Aug—Sep ‘43: +1 (PFk; SSR only), ‘45: -1 Original dr 6: pinned (broken if already pinned) G. German inherent SW; requires dr 1-3 for each use Pinned: NA Original dr 6: pinned H. Inherent SW by SSR only; requires dr 1-3 for each use; Pinned NA J. Use by MMC other than crew is non-qualified use K. Use by one SMC is non-qualified use M. Two U.S. SMC are qualified to fire U.S. weapon; which U.S. Hero may fire by adding 1 to TH DR drm for Cases F, G, H: HS/crew: +1; SMC +2; CX +1; vs non-AFV: +1 Portage Costs: As per counter listing [EXC: Wounded: 5PP (A17.2)]​ MMG​ 1A​ 1B​ ½ FP; C, D​ HMG​ 1A​ 1B​ ½ FP; C, D​ ATR​ 1A​ 1B​ 1​ FT​ 1E​ 1B, E​ 1E​ DC​ 1E​ 1B, E​ 1E​ PIAT​ 1A​ 1B​ 1​ BAZ/PSK​ 1A​ 1B​ C, D​ Radio​ NA​ NA​ 1​ Lt. MTR​ 1A​ 1B​ 1C​ PF, PFk​ 1A, F​ 1B, F​ 1F​ ATMM​ 1G​ 1G​ 1G​ MOL​ 1H​ 1B, H​ 1H​ MOL-P​ 1A, J​ 1B, J​ C, D, K​ INF/RCL​ 1A, J​ 1B, J​ M​

Panzerfausts are SW....

 

[Sparafucil3]

If it fired a PF in First Fire, it has the option of Inherent FP or the MG as Sustained Fire in SFF. If it fired the MG/Inherent in First Fire, it cannot use a PF. Regardless of how it ends up marked Final Fire, if it uses FPF, it must fire the MG as long as the MG is not malfunctioned.

@Robin Reeve @klasmalmstrom has pointed out I am in error here. You may one fire one SW per player turn. If the HS opted to fire a PF, it could never use the MG until the next player turn. All of its SFF/FPF/FF options would remain as I otherwise stated. Mea Culpa.

 

[Bill Kohler]

Still trying to digest this winding thread.
The original question was: "a HS possessing two SW defensive first fired a SW . . . could it fire [a different] SW" as Subsequent First Fire/FPF?

Is Clubby's answer ("No") the correct answer?

Previous GS discussions also concluded no, "for firing a second SW of any type would be beyond the HS's 'normal operational capabilities' per A7.351, A7.352, and the SW Chart".

 

[Mongoose1]

If a half squad has possession of 2 MG's and first fires one of them ( not being capable of using its inherent or the other MG on the first fire)and it malfunctions, could it not then SFF with the other MG or it's inherent FP as sustained fire?

 

[Thumbtack]

If a half squad has possession of 2 MG's and first fires one of them ( not being capable of using its inherent or the other MG on the first fire)and it malfunctions, could it not then SFF with the other MG or it's inherent FP as sustained fire?

YES

 

[klasmalmstrom]

If a half squad has possession of 2 MG's and first fires one of them ( not being capable of using its inherent or the other MG on the first fire)and it malfunctions, could it not then SFF with the other MG or it's inherent FP as sustained fire?

Inherent FP, yes. A second MG, no (I believe a HS is limited to one SW).

 

[Bill Kohler]

Inherent FP, yes. A second MG, no (I believe a HS is limited to one SW).

Likewise for FPF?

 

[Mongoose1]

A half squad in possession of two SW can only fire one or it's inherent FP, but I don't see where in the rules it states that it couldn't fire a different MG as SFF.

 

[Sparafucil3]

A half squad in possession of two SW can only fire one or it's inherent FP, but I don't see where in the rules it states that it couldn't fire a different MG as SFF.

ASL is a game where you have to show the rule that allows it. A HS is limited to one SW or it's Inherent.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

While not as explicitly spelled out like it is for a squad - "A squad may never fire more than two SW/Gun in the same fire phase although it may fire two different types." - the SUPPORT WEAPONS CHART says one for a HS/crew.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Likewise for FPF?

Yes...

"...All usable MG/IFE possessed by that unit (up to the unit’s normal operation capabilities; 7.35-.353) must be fired (even if not previously marked with a Final Fire counter) and are subject to Sustained Fire penalties..."

 

[Thumbtack]

While not as explicitly spelled out like it is for a squad - "A squad may never fire more than two SW/Gun in the same fire phase although it may fire two different types." - the SUPPORT WEAPONS CHART says one for a HS/crew.

I don't see this restricting changing SW...

So, it could fire a PF then go to a MG?

 

[Bill Kohler]

Yes, a full squad can fire two SW, but never three during MPh/DFPh. If it fires two SW during Defensive First Fire, it cannot also fire its IFP as First Fire.

 

[Thumbtack]

A7.353...(regardless of how they were used during First Fire)... Which means they didn't needed to be fired.

This section overrides the restrictions of the SW USAGE guideline "However, two general rules apply to all SW"

 

[zgrose]

A7.353...(regardless of how they were used during First Fire)... Which means they didn't needed to be fired.

This section overrides the restrictions of the SW USAGE guideline "However, two general rules apply to all SW"

Trying to understand your assertion here.
A half-squad can fire SW X, and then fire SW Y because they can only fire 1 SW a turn. So they could fire SW Z?
What exactly are you claiming a HS could do? Specifically.

(edit) I can lay down a VASL map of a enemy unit crossing a HS's LOS if that would help solidify your assertion.

 

[clubby]

It seems like the argument has broken down to the difference between one and another number that's not one. It's one.

 

[Sparafucil3]

It seems like the argument has broken down to the difference between one and another number that's not one. It's one.

The difference in arguments:

One side contends 1 MF == 1 MP. If you wait to shoot on the 3rd MP @ the AFV, you have also let pass the only 2 chances you have on the Infantry. (Truth in advertising, this is my view.)
The other side contends you count shots. If you shoot at the AFV on the 3rd MP, you have only "shot once" so you have on more opportunity to shoot on the Infantry.

There is a third view that you do some sort of math to determine how many MF a MP equates to. I admit I haven't spent too much time trying to understand this point of view because I think that this is madness.