Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

2 questions after games

 Post subject: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 2:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 12:44 am
Posts: 85
Templates always seem to cause troubles! :P I think part of the conceptual problem with the way the EA rules are written is what a blast template actually represents: in EA, for example (but not for direct blasts in WH40K 7E), the template actually tells you which units are hit by the barrage (quote: 'Roll to hit all units... under the template...').

With this paradigm in mind, it makes sense (rules-wise) that units out of range and line of fire would still be hit so long as the initial one unit is within range and LoF. I would also venture to say that the cover penalty is applied per unit because the hit allocation is on a per unit basis.

Of course, another way to think about barrage templates (and the way that I personally prefer) is to think of them as just a way to determine how many units are hit (representing area of affect).

This is what WH40K 7E does for direct blasts (but not indirect ones—the centre of the template determines the direction of fire for indirect blasts). If you did it this way, only units that are in range and LoF could be hit, and cover modifiers would be determined from the LoF rather than from the template position. You would then allocate hits and cover modifiers as per normal shooting. I prefer this option for direct blasts because it eliminates the 'blast sniping' effect (since hits are allocated as normal) and treads water with the conceptual issues of 'how does that blast go around corners?!/it's a massive explosion, why are the guys at the back not hit?!'. Also, I think it works better for those batteries that aren't really lobbing shells indirectly, and it works well with the 'hit as many units as possible' restriction.

Further, if you took that second way of doing things (which is not the EA way in the book), indirect blasts could be further differentiated, as in WH40K, by measuring LoF from the centre of the blast template (which is what you have to do anyway when targeting units out of range and LoF). This would make direct barrages and indirect barrages distinct and still different from other weapons.

Sorry for the digression, I just got excited about having a chance to properly think through the barrage rules :$

Back to the OP, I think there are only two ambiguities from the rules. (1) how LoF for Cover modifiers is calculated: since it's not mentioned in the rules or in the FAQs, I think it must be the same as for normal fire (i.e. if in cover from the direction of the firing unit). Cover modifiers would then be applied on an individual basis, as noted. (2) how hits are allocated: it seems like, as written, each unit needs to be rolled for separately, but the FAQ suggests a 'fast-rolling' method. I suppose if you did use that suggested way, you'd allocate from front to back based on LoF, as normal?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:24 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2152
Location: UK
So you play it with hull down modifiers for units that are out of line of sight? It's not clear from your post. I don't think the issue is whether cover modifiers are worked out per unit or not (they are) it's when a unit actually counts as qualifying for a cover modifier (which is different from being IN cover).

The other ambiguity then being the way the placement rule is written, i.e. you can read it that you can only place a template over units that are in line of fire.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 7:56 pm
Posts: 384
Location: Santa Fe, Argentina
I have always been extremely generous with cover. Kind of like the tie goes to the runner in baseball.

Also being a force on force player I tend to state my intent for my units as they move.

_________________
mattie
http://maashes.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 12:44 am
Posts: 85
Kyrt wrote:
So you play it with hull down modifiers for units that are out of line of sight? It's not clear from your post. I don't think the issue is whether cover modifiers are worked out per unit or not (they are) it's when a unit actually counts as qualifying for a cover modifier (which is different from being IN cover).

The other ambiguity then being the way the placement rule is written, i.e. you can read it that you can only place a template over units that are in line of fire.


From the FAQs in the tournament pack rulebook, there are no placement restrictions for the additional templates (the original one must be in LoF and range, of course). To me, that contradicts what the 'Extra Barrage Templates' explanation states: in that part, because there is no other mention of LoF or range restrictions, it seems that sentence must be talking about the most recently mentioned LoF and range rules (i.e. must place the first template with at least one unit in LoF and range, therefore additional templates would have followed the same rule).

My long-winded point before was that, conceptually, there are two different ideas at play—maximising the number of units hit conflicts a bit with resolving hits on the units actually under the templates (and was only put in there, apparently, to stop 'barrage snipers').

For cover, there's nothing there that says you need to do anything special for determining modifiers, so for direct barrages, cover is presumably worked out from LoF (which contradicts with being able to hit units you can't see... but the next best thing would be applying the cover modifier, I suppose). For indirect barrages, the FAQ says that any intervening cover is ignored (which I think is extending the sentence about LoF too far, but one could go either way).

I think the only real way to fix these problems is to remove the contradicting ideas driving the rules, which is why I would personally prefer that the templates are only used for determining number of units hit and not which units are hit. With that simple change, as far as I can see, all the other problems are solved without any contradictions (and for indirect barrages, simply let them continue to ignore intervening cover to represent the vertical aspect).

Anyways, they're just some thoughts on the matter. Maybe they can help others work out a satisfactory solution! :)

PS: I finally found the sentence that says you allocate hits from front to back (of those units under the template)! Not so relevant, but it was a small victory for me :P

PPS: I forgot one thing for my proposed rule: the silly situation where you could kill a very distant unit from a different formation from the first because how close units in that second formation are to the firer. To get rid of that kind of 'spooky action at a distance', you could just make the LoF for secondary formations under the barrage come from the primary target unit rather than the firer, for all shooting purposes.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 8:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 46
Pille wrote:
Hello All

- Does a broken formation get a blastmarker if they are within 15cm of an engagement lost by their side?
My take on it is that although they can't actually support, they are still in a potentiel position to do so.
The relevant rules text:
Quote:
Finally, any formations belonging to the losing side that were in a position to have lent support (i.e., they were within 15cms of an enemy unit in the assault) receive one Blast marker each, even if they did not actually lend support. These Blast markers represent the detrimental effect on morale of seeing friends defeated in an assault.


I have a follow-up question to this one. Would a formation that had no Line of Fire or Line of Sight to any of the formations involved in the engagement and is within 15cm still receive a blastmarker?

If I'm reading the quoted rules text right it would seem so, but I'm not 100% sure.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 1:47 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 7684
Location: Manalapan, FL
I thought that the caveat was that the have to be in a position to lend support, even if they didn't. No LoS and LoF means not able to lend support, yeah?

_________________
I mean think about it: He's a lawyer and a Super Villain. That's like a shark with a grenade launcher on its head!

-Marines Army Champion- Send your Marines related hate-o-grams to me
-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 2:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 46
jimmyzimms wrote:
I thought that the caveat was that the have to be in a position to lend support, even if they didn't. No LoS and LoF means not able to lend support, yeah?


Ah yes of course.
But wouldn't that then mean that a broken formation wouldn't actually be in a position to lend support? (as was my original question)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 6:47 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1002
Location: Devon, UK
A broken formation (or a formation with no Firefight value) is in the right position to lend support, even if they're not capable of rolling dice to support. So yes a broken formation will potentially take a Blast Marker and therefore lose another unit if not Fearless/Space Marines.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader - we buy and sell used GW.
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 8:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 46
Great.
I have had a few opponents that cast doubts on the matter, so just wanted to be sure :)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 questions after games
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 12:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5296
Location: London, UK
Spot on IJW. Being in position to provide support is key, irrespective of whether they are able to do so.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron

Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net