Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=32922		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Deb [ Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:45 am ]
Post subject:  Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
In 2 practice games we had today- Dark Eldar V1.1 vs Knight Crusade list and Dark Eldar v 1.1 vs Feral Orks, 3 things came up.

1: In the first game, one of the players queried if his formation on over watch could shoot at an enemy formation that consolidate moved after winning an engagement. They decided - No as they thought it was not a normal move. We are still unsure a little.

2: In the second game, an Orkasaurus which was critted moved 3D6 in a random direction. This brought it towards the table edge, and past it. We could not find anything to say that the table edge was impassable terrain, so we took a vote, and decided it was impassable. I removed the Orkasaurus.

3: After removing the Orkasaurus, we were wondering if the units on board would make an emergency disembarkation. This did not effect the game so much, however we decided that since the Orkasaurus was not destroyed by either a MW or TK weapon directly, but by wandering into impassable terrain, then the units on board would take a save, and any survivors would dismount within 5cm of the point that the Orkasaurus left the table. This was into area terrain, and only 1 broken unit remained a Nobz unit that remained broken at the end of that turn - turn 4.

Did we decide correctly? should the Ork Units on the Orkasaurus have dismounted and made their saves, or should they have automatically been destroyed?

Should the Orkasaurus have stopped at the edge of the table, or been counted a destroyed as a formation that leaves the battlefield in 40K?

Is consolidation, and other types of out of turn moves counted as movement for the purposes of Over watch?
Author:  Deb [ Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
OK I had some time and looked up the digital copy of the FAQs I have on my PC. I found this in regards to the Overwatch rule and movement.

A formation carries out an action that involves a move but none
of the units physically move, is it still susceptible to overwatch?
Yes. Any action that includes one of more moves (advance,
engage, double, march and possibly marshal, hold and special
actions) is considered a move for the purposes of overwatch,
even if units moved 0cm.
Note that withdrawals and consolidation moves are optional
however, and that a player can choose not to move the
formation at all, thus avoiding overwatch.

I still can not find anything to say the table edge is impassable, however I believe it is impassable to all units (except flying aircraft that leave the table and return for their strafing runs).

I think a destroyed transport allows the formation to take a save/ cover save (unless MW or TK weapons destroyed the transport), and then they deploy as per normal for their unit type.
Author:  Dave [ Mon Jan 15, 2018 12:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
Nothing specific about moving off board, yet Planetfall mentions them as destroyed if they scatter. I'd go with that.

I'd say stuff transported would be gone as well.
Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Mon Jan 15, 2018 4:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
For Epic-UK tournaments we started with the direct rule of scatter off and you're dead, but have changed over the years to you stop at the edge with no further penalty.
Author:  Kyrt [ Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
I would just treat the orkeosaurus as having left the table, with it and everything in it counting as destroyed.

Tiny-Tim wrote:
For Epic-UK tournaments we started with the direct rule of scatter off and you're dead, but have changed over the years to you stop at the edge with no further penalty.

I was wondering this when someone mentioned it for the first time in a game at the events I've attended, and I was surprised. It didn't matter at the time so I forgot about it, but... why? It purely seems a way to boost marines, halving your potential scatter area and guaranteeing that you can land next to the blitz. It also is not in the rules pack, despite being in direct contravention to what is explicitly written in the rulebook. Isn't EpicUK supposed to only 'clarify' rules, not rewrite them?
Author:  Deb [ Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Some rule clarifications we were a little stumped with
Over on the Wargamer.au site this was discussed. We sort of agreed on the following based on a number of discussion back and forth, with different rules, and an old topic from this site back in 2011 being cited.

The Orkasaurus is removed as it enters impassable terrain off the table. Before it does, since the orkasaurus has not been killed off by MW or TK weapons directly (they removed its last DC), then the units mounted on it take either armour or cover saves, and if they survive, they dismount as if they were unloading normally. The 5cm is measured from the orkasaurus miniature just before it leaves the table edge.

Blast markers for each unit lost are added, and most likely as was the case for me, the formation will be broken.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/