[ASLML] DC residual

[Bruce Probst]

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 08:49:01 -0400, "Bruce Bakken" <bebakken at hotmail.com>
wrote:

>>But how does it leave Residual FP when it is exerting no original IFT FP?
>>It's a TK DR.  TK DR only have "FP equivalency" for the sake of attacks vs.
>>Personnel and Collateral Attacks (C8.31).  This isn't an attack vs. 
>>Personnel,
>>and we all seem to be in agreement that Collateral Attacks don't leave
>>Residual.  So where is the FP that you would base your Residual on?

>This is your most compelling argument.  A8.2 only says "the highest IFT 
>column used for that attack."  Since A8.2 also says that for a To Kill DR, 
>"Residual FP is created in the same manner",  I would take that to mean to 
>use whatever FP column would have been used had the target been Personnel.  

I would take it to mean that, too, if only there were a rule that actually
said as much <g>.  (C8.31 is the closest thing to such a rule, yet it excludes
itself by indicating it applies to only particular types of attacks.)  A8.2
seems to be implying a principle without letting us know what the principle is
<g>.

>I also found this in A8.22: "A Collateral Attack never leaves Residual FP 
>but the attack that causes it may."  Except as found in A8.2, which excludes 
>AP, APDS, APCR, et al.

That's not conclusive one way or the other, however.  There are two types of
Collateral Attacks and they can be caused in many different ways; certainly
some of those ways can come from an attack that leaves Residual.  It doesn't
tell us that *all* those ways leave Residual <g>.

>And in A8.25: "An ordnance weapon must secure a hit in order to exert 
>Residual FP... Neither Intensive Fire (C5.6), AP-type ammo (see 8.2), nor 
>PF/PFk (C13.31) leaves Residual FP."  By default, that means that any other 
>Vehicle Target hit using non-AP-type ammo would also leave Residual FP.

Except that "ordnance weapons" can "secure a hit" without using the Vehicle
Target Type.  Granted, the rule is not *excluding* VTT, but it's not
specifically including it, either, and IMO the question of "where is the FP
that leaves the Residual?", as above, does so exclude them.  However, I
certainly agree that A8.2 is a major obstacle to my argument <g>.

The only thing I'm certain of right now is that I'm confused <g>.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst              bprobst at netspace.net.au
Melbourne, Australia      MSTie #72759
"Scientists believe 'that's amoré'."
ASL FAQ              http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ