(Answered) Swarm LRMs and anti-missile systems

[A. Lurker]

I've been on a bit of a swarm LRM trip lately, haven't I? Though in my defense, they really are one of the more "complicated" ammo types, raising questions that those that only care about one target at a time generally just don't.

Anyway: the last bullet point on page 371 states that anti-missile systems function "normally" against Swarm and Swarm-I LRMs. Okay, so that first of all means they can engage them and inflict their cluster penalty...

...what does that say about any followup secondary attacks, though? Fluff-wise, the cluster penalty presumably reflects the AMS shooting down some incoming missiles, meaning that they really shouldn't be available for purposes of going after nearby targets of opportunity anymore either. But the stock AMS rules don't really make that sort of fine distinction on a mechanical level, they just turn more "hits" on the cluster table into "misses", which are then in turn exactly what Swarm/Swarm-I LRMs base their secondary attack volley sizes on...

So: what's considered "normal" here? If, for example, an LRM 15 launches a Swarm salvo at a target and an active AMS on the latter's side duly reduces the cluster roll from an 10 (twelve hits) to a 6 (only nine) -- how many missiles does that leave to make a secondary attack with? Fluff would seem to suggest three (the original ones that never found the target in the first place) while mechanics would indicate six (because after applying the penalty only nine did hit and 15 - 9 = 6, dangit, even if that means that the three notionally just shot down have to spontaneously reassemble themselves in mid-air)...

[Xotl]

⑤ Swarm/Swarm-I LRMs (Standard LRMs/MMLs) (p. 371)

1)   Under “Game Rules”, take the last sentence of the second bullet point (“If the attack succeeds, use the Cluster Hits column…”) and split it off into a new third bullet point as follows, with the following new material:
•   If the attack succeeds, use the Cluster Hits column based on the surviving missiles (in the case of the above example, this would mean the Attacker rolls on the 8 column for Cluster Hits). Attack direction is always traced from the original attacker.

2)   Under “Game Rules”, replace the last bullet point with the following:
•   If an Anti-Missile System engages a secondary Swarm or Swarm-I missile flight, do not follow the usual AMS procedure. Instead, subtract three from the remaining number of missiles.

[A. Lurker]

Hmmm...it's been a while since I last checked this board in earnest, so apologies for the late-ish reply.

The above changes don't seem to really address my original question. In my example, the AMS never actually engages (as I'd understand the term) the secondary flight itself at all; it engages the original attack, and the question was about how many missiles should be left over after that. So point 2) would, as I see it, only come into play if the secondary attack then struck a secondary target that also mounted an AMS covering its own relevant arc -- in which case that system would automatically shoot down three missiles, regardless of the actual incoming number, instead of applying the standard -4 cluster penalty -- and the question of how many the original AMS may have taken out remains unresolved.

Maybe I'm just confused by the wording, but that's the impression I'm getting so far.

[Xotl]

Can you try to clarify, maybe with an example?  I'm not having much luck following your issue.

[A. Lurker]

I suppose I could reuse my original example, but let me use another launcher this time to vary things up: this time, let's say our swarm salvo originates from an MML 7.

The attack hits the initial target, which happens to be sporting an AMS that ends up kicking in against this particular salvo. Since this clearly isn't a secondary attack yet, the AMS engages normally and reduces the cluster roll -- say, from an 8 (four missiles) to a 4 (only three). At this point, it's still not clear whether three or four missiles (the original seven minus either of those two results) or maybe even another number altogether should still be available to strike an adjacent secondary target; that's problem #1.

And problem #2, as I see it, is that if there is a secondary target that just so happens to also have a relevant AMS...it looks like suddenly a special-case rule kicks in and so this AMS, rather than applying a -4 to the secondary attack's cluster roll, simply shoots down a fixed number of three missiles Just Because. Adding to this, it's not clear from the text whether that number should be deducted before or after the cluster roll for the secondary attack is made.

Again, either this is all hopelessly convoluted in terms of the actual ruling or I'm similarly hopelessly confused by the current wording.

[Xotl]

Would the following wording work (replacing completely the second bullet point from my previous post):

•   If a target has an Anti-Missile System, determine the number of missiles that will actually attack that target versus those that will go after other targets as normal; do not apply the -4 AMS modifier. Then consult the Cluster Hits Table, using the column for the number of missiles actually attacking the target. Apply the “8” result from that column against the target.


I have an example for this, but I'd like to see if you can follow the wording without one.

I'd also welcome alternate suggestions.