[ASLML] Bounding FIrst Fire/Gun Duel + COWTRA

[Bruce Bakken]

Hello, Kenneth.

Thanks for getting through this.  Hopefully now you can see why I've been 
balking at all the talk about "the Gun Duel must take place at the 4th MP", 
and "ATTACKER can't fire before the 4th MP", and so forth.

>
> > Consider the following:
> >
> > 1. ATTACKER expends 5 MP to enter a Location, in the process entering 
>the
> > DEFENDER's LOS for the first time in the phase.
>
>Ok.
>
> >
> > 2. DEFENDER declares Defensive First Fire at the 2nd MP expenditure.
>
>Ok. If I may interrupt you here. This is what the original question was 
>about way back. Can the ATTACKER now declare a BFF at the
>1st MP?
>I would say yes.
>

Oh, that!  The original question...

> >
> > 3. ATTACKER declares a Gun Duel, and each side compares Gun Duel DRM to
> > determine if one side fires first, or whether a Gun Duel must take 
>place.
> > [COWTRA, the ATTACKER applies whatever Case C/C1/C2 DRM applies at the 
>2nd
> > MP expenditure.]
>
>A Gun Duel is taking place already and so the question is only who will 
>fire first.
>

I understand your point.  The declaration of return Bounding First Fire *is* 
the Gun Duel, thus a Gun Duel is taking place.  [I might argue that the "Gun 
Duel" per se only occurs if both sides roll a TH DR simultaneously.  I'm not 
though, so no worries!]

> >
> > 3a. If ATTACKER Gun Duel DRM < DEFENDER Gun Duel DRM, then ATTACKER 
>fires
> > first at the 2nd MP expenditure.  [COWTRA.  This is allowed because the
> > ATTACKER has applied the appropriate Case C/C1/C2 DRM that entitled him 
>to
> > shoot first at the 2nd MP expenditure.]
>
>Yes
>
> >
> > 3b. If DEFENDER Gun Duel DRM < ATTACKER Gun Duel DRM, then DEFENDER 
>fires
> > first at the 2nd MP expenditure and no Gun Duel takes place.  [COWTRA.
> > Defensive First Fire was declared at the 2nd MP expenditure, and the
> > ATTACKER is not entitled to fire first.]
>
>Well, the DEFENDER wins the Gun Duel and may fire first.
>

Okay.

> >
> > 4. If Gun Duel DRM are equal, a Gun Duel takes place at the 2nd MP
> > expenditure and each side makes a TH DR.  [COWTRA.  The DEFENDER 
>declared
> > Defensive First Fire at the 2nd MP expenditure, and the ATTACKER's Gun 
>Duel
> > DRM are those that apply at the 2nd MP expenditure.]
>
>The Gun Duel has been taking place all along, but since the Gun Duel DRM 
>are equal, the TH DRM will determine who wins the Gun Duel.
>

Yes.

> >
> > 4a.  DEFENDER must apply whatever minimum Case J1/J2 DRM applies at the 
>2nd
> > MP expenditure to reach a Final TH DR.  [COWTRA.  C6.17 says that the
> > DEFENDER must attempt to minimize Case J1/J2 during the Gun Duel.  This
> > particular Gun Duel is taking place at the 2nd MP expenditure.  Thus,
> > DEFENDER must minimize the Case J1/J2 that applies at the 2nd MP
> > expenditure.]
>
>This is what the whole discussion has been about.

Well, it's been *trying* to be about this... :-)

>I'm inclined to agree with you after rereading the rule. Let's take it 
>here:
>"...all MP thusly expended by the target (the ATTACKER) in that Location 
>before the firer (the DEFENDER) takes his first shot..." In
>this case that would be 1 MP. In other words, the first MP "must be used to 
>minimize the application of Case J1/J2 DRM to that first
>shot..." In other words, the first MP must be used to avoid Case J2 and 
>nothing else.

Yes!  And it is not considered as a condition of having a Gun Duel in the 
first place.  It only comes into play when a Gun Duel is resolved.

>That's what I get out of C6.17 now.
>
>So in this case, he must add the Case J and J1 plus any other appropriate 
>Case on the C6 table.
>

Yes!  So we agree then.

> >
> > 4b. ATTACKER applies the appropriate Case C/C1/C2 that caused the Gun 
>Duel
> > DRM to be equal.
>
>Yes, plus any other DRM from the C6 table.
>
> >
> > 4c. Lowest Final TH DR shoots first (ties resolved simultaneously).
>
>Correct
>
> >
> > 5. If the DEFENDER survives all of this unscathed, the DEFENDER may now
> > declare another Defensive First Fire attack at the 3rd MP expenditure.  
>And
> > so on.
>
>If otherwise eligible, yes.
>

Poor Andrea.  Have we really answered his question?

We've got Gun Duels down now, sure.  BUT...

The mechanics of movement and First Fire get very convoluted here, in my 
opinion.  The ATTACKER is required to pause between the expenditure of MP to 
allow Defensive First Fire.  If it gets as far as the 2nd MP and Defensive 
First Fire has been declared at that point, then the ATTACKER has lost any 
right to use Bounding First Fire at the 1st MP.

To make it work properly, the ATTACKER must announce MP expenditure in this 
way: "1 <pause>, 2 <pause>, 3 <pause>, 4 <pause>, 5 <pause>".

I seriously doubt that anyone *really* does it that way.  In fact, if what 
we're saying is correct, then the ATTACKER is *required* to announce MP in 
this way, is he not?  [This issue also has been a concern of mine.]

If the ATTACKER announces the MP expenditure as the total to enter (which I 
believe is typically how it's done), then how do the two sides reconcile?

ATTACKER: "5 MP to enter hex G4."

DEFENDER: "I'll Defensive First Fire."

ATTACKER: "At what MP expenditure?"

DEFENDER: "Um.. at the 3rd MP."

ATTACKER: "Okay, in that case I'll fire at the 2nd MP."

Hmmm.... no, that doesn't seem right.  In my opinion, the whole issue 
reduces down to this mechanic.  COWTRA, the ATTACKER must wait for the 
DEFENDER to declare.  COWTRA, the situation I just re-enacted then seems 
possible.

Is it?  *That's* the real question.

Thanks for getting this far.

Regards,
Bruce Bakken

> >
> > COWTRA.
> >
> > And irrefutable, I believe.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Bakken
> >
>
>Cheers
>Kenneth
>

_________________________________________________________________
Click here for a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee. 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963