[/quote]
Would you also apply this to slow fire weapons that are out of ammo this turn?[/quote]

I see you point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

im so confused reading this and could be saying a stupid thing


but how does basilisks work for supression then when they are firing indirectly? but dont have LOS.

_________________
I have 4 laptops in this room and cannot play a pixel pushing tabletop simulator on any of them.

That doesn't sound like a stupid question at all!

Yep indeed Norto, that's why you can't simply say 'you always need LoS for suppression'. Clearly a basilisk should be suppressed when firing without LoS.

It would be easy to say that firing indirecting ignores LoS for all rules purposes, i.e. to include suppression, as there are no edge cases - you can only fire indirectly in your own action, in a sustain. The GMs situation is more complex because a) it is in effect all the time, and b) is paired with another special rule (markerlights) that kinda works in the opposite direction.

One way to think about GMs+MLs is that the LoS rule is effectively replaced by the markerlights. So if the target is markerlit, they count as being in LoS, and if they are not markerlit, they count as being out of LoS. This is simple and deterministic, which means you can then work out what should happen in every situation, but the more you dive down the rabbit hole the more oddities you see. Such as for example firefight. If you're fighting an assault against a markerlit target, you'd be able to firefight anything within 15, but they might not be able to firefight you back... Also the ML rule says you don't get the bonus for flakking markerlit aircraft, but doesn't say aircraft can't be markerlit for GM LoS/suppression purposes.

One way to address the issue is to state the above explicitly (i.e. 'is markerlit' replaces 'has LoS' for all rules purposes) but clarify that it only applies to the unit's own shooting action (i.e. sustain, advance, double, hold, marshal, overwatch) and that the rest of the time, either:
a) the GMs don't exist [this would stop them working in assaults or flak attacks]
b) the GMs use the normal LoS rules [this would stop them working in assaults but would make them work for suppression in flak attacks]

By the way the FAQ says slow firing and one shot weapons do count for suppression, which simplifies the issue a little, and makes it one of how the ML requirement affects whether the unit does or doesn't have line of sight for suppression purposes.

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

So, to be clear, even if "reloading" you CAN soak a BM with a one-shot/slow fire unit? eg. A Deathstrike formation which has shot one missile in a previous turn, can still fire the 2nd even with 1 BM in subsequent turns ?

So long as the one that shot is at the back, yes. It's analogous to Small Arms in that respect.

Which does remind me - that's the other issue with GMs for suppression - what counts as 'the back' when there is no line of sight?

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

Hi Kyrt, I think you may be over complicating things slightly.

- Suppression always works from the rear of the formation with respect to the target, for standard shooting, barrages and AA (which occurs after the enemy aircraft have finished their movement)

- Markerlight only works for shooting, and is specifically for use against ground targets not AA.

If a target is illuminated by a unit with Markerlight, then more units in a formation may be eligible to shoot, and hence become candidates for suppression (starting from the rear of the formation).

Added a Tau FAQ in the Tau development forum, covering this and another question that comes up quite often. If anyone has any other questions they would like to see answered or feel the language or answer in the FAQ is either confusing or just wrong let me know by starting another thread in the Tau forum.

Hi, could you note on the FAQ that Matkerlight may not be used in conjunction with AA, as specified in both NetEA and E-UK army lists.

I could - but it's fairly clearly stated in the Markerlight rule itself, so I am not sure it's required.

I think it would be good to make it absolutely unambiguous as well, and saves reading between two places

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

Glad to have the FAQ, think it settles it. The important point it covers is whether the 'must be markerlit' rule replaces the LoS requirement or is in addition to it (the answer being the latter).

On Ginger's request, the markerlight doesn't say they can't be markerlit, only that the +1 doesn't apply. With the FAQ I *think* this now irrelevant, because the FAQ is saying if it's within 90cm then the GMs always count for suppression anyway. Can't think of any other situations when an aircraft being markerlit makes any difference. However it can't hurt to add a simple 'Note that aircraft that have not landed can never be markerlit'.

Is it possible to have these FAQs in the TP FAQ? As I probably wouldn't think to look in this forum and it's an Approved list.

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

At some point I would hope so, although that is more up to Onyx or Dave.

I would want to leave it a little while though to stabilise and see if there are any other questions or problems with any language I use.

Good plan

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