[ASLML] Re: The disappearing DRM caper

[Jim McLeod]

Listerz;

Bruce Probst wrote:

> when it should actually be read as:
> 
> - Subsequent First Fire
> - FPF
> - Final Fire vs adjacent units
> 
> See the difference?  

Indeed I had.  But if each case is specific to itself as presented, then
FPF can be used against which targets?  Adjacent or same hex?  Final
Fire uses the same fire restrictions therefore, using your logic, FPF
should have been included under that same umbrella.

A HS that DFF'd a MG and had no ROF could only FF at adjacent/same hex
units anyway.  Why is FF versus adj. units option mentioned as such
whilst FPF is not?

BTW, you still have not informed when IFP is forfeit through SW useage. 
Just when does that occur?

> Once you correct your erroneous interpretation of how
> the sentence is read, I think you'll find that it's all perfectly
> consistent.

IFP forfeiture, Bruce ... when does that happen?  Until you explain
that, the rule is anything but consistent.



			=Jim=