[ASLML] Gun Duels

[Bruce Bakken]

Hello Listers.

In the last couple days I have not been receiving all of my email, so I have 
missed various replies to severalof my posts.  In light of that, I am 
starting this new thread.

First, I must admit that I totally pfaffed my first response to the Bounding 
Fire/Gun Duel question.  I have played it correctly in the past (re: C6.17), 
but my response was hasty and, well, lazy.  Sorry about that.  I handled it 
more like an Inexperienced Crew than like an Armor Leader.

Now that I am finally re-reading C6.17 <g>... I want to pose a question to 
the ASLML before asking Perry.

For your reference, here is the applicable part that interests me: "... all 
MF/MP thusly expended by the target in that Location before the firer takes 
his first shot may (*must*, if engaging in a Gun Duel; 2.2401) be used to 
minimize the application of Case J1/J2 DRM to that first shot, or (if not 
engaging in a Gun Duel) may be applied in increments to a series of shots at 
it."

Okay.

In the example given where the ATTACKER has expended 5 MP to enter a hex, 
only the ATTACKER may declare a Gun Duel.  Since by declaring a Gun Duel, 
the ATTACKER may not fire until the 4th MP (thus minimizing the Case J1/J2 
DRM), does this mean that:

a) the DEFENDER may declare Defensive First Fire at any of the 1st, 2nd or 
3rd MP increments expended in the hex and the ATTACKER has no option to fire 
back until these potential shots are completed; or

b) when the DEFENDER declares a Defensive First Fire attack, the ATTACKER 
can declare Bounding First Fire and thus initiate a Gun Duel, in which both 
firers are now engaged; i.e. by the ATTACKER declaring a Gun Duel, the 
DEFENDER is automatically dragged into it, and by the restrictions found in 
C6.17 the DEFENDER may then not fire until the 4th MP increment.

Note that C6.17 says "engaging in a Gun Duel", which can be interpreted to 
include the DEFENDER because the DEFENDER is automatically drawn into the 
Gun Duel when the ATTACKER declares it.  C6.17 also says that shots may be 
applied in increments "if not engaging in a Gun Duel".  Since a DEFENDER can 
not initiate a Gun Duel in this case, how can it be "engaging in a Gun Duel" 
unless the ATTACKER had declared one?

Further, C2.2401 says that a vehicle "may attempt to Bounding First Fire ... 
*first*, provided ...", and none of the conditions listed say anything about 
the restrictions in C6.17 or about which MP increment the DEFENDER used to 
attack with Defensive First Fire.

If a) is correct, then some wording should be clarified in C6.17 about 
*declaring* the Gun Duel, and the Case J1/J2 condition should be included in 
C2.2401.

If b) is correct, then the ATTACKER has a powerful tactic available to 
(possibly) pre-empt any Defensive First Fire.  Also, if b) is correct, and 
the Gun Duel is resolved (at the 4th MP increment), that would mean that any 
other potential Defensive First Firerw would not then be able to fire at 
increments 1-3, even if they were "not engaging in a Gun Duel".

Conclusion a) seems more correct to me, but I don't want to over-think it.  
What sayeth the denizens?

Regards,
Bruce Bakken

_________________________________________________________________
There are now three new levels of MSN Hotmail Extra Storage!  Learn more. 
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=hotmail/es2&ST=1