Because it doesn't solve some of the issues. Under your proposal, a hamerhead can ram a monolith, and stop the flux arc working. That doesn't make sense.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

I'm not sure what you mean here. Letting the attacking skimmer dictate how an assault will be fought makes as much sense as any tactic that is currently employed where formations and units are manoeuvered to their best advantage while putting their opponent at some disadvantage. If the Monolith was the attacker, it would assault in such a way as to engage in FF rather than CC, and equally, if there is more than one Monolith in the formation, it is likely that each War Engine can use its FF capabilities on enemy skimmers that are not in B-B contact with it.

Perhaps it would be better if we re-worded the skimmer rule to say that in an assault, skimmers may lift off the ground, forcing ground troops to use their FF values, (thus preventing skimmers from being able to impose FF on other skimmers).

For what its worth, IMHO the game presents not two but three spheres of conflict; 'Ground', 'Skimming' and 'air'. While flight is the major differentiator and inhibitor between them, within each sphere the different units and races are pretty much even mechanically and thus should follow the core principles in the rules.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I like that solution.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Ginger, if you change the rule as you suggested, you are still left with the CC-skimmer imposing its CC attack on the FF-skimmer.  

Skimmer is obviously an advantage bestowed on certain units.  Allowing one side to use their CC and the other to use their FF is a very simple solution to allows both to maximize their potential, maximize their ability.

At this point it is moot, however.  Two of three members of the NetERC disagree that there is any change needed (to the rule or to the FAQ) and I can live with the decision without having to agree with it.  

It is a close 2nd place to troops on overwatch being counted as in cover.  

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

you didn't do any kind of army service, did you?

this is probably one of the more realistic rules in the whole Epic rule set.

cheers,

Got it in one Mosc . But this is exactly what happens in the normal game. So when Terminators assault some enemy formation, they 'impose' CC on the opposition by getting into B-B with them. However when the Terminators are assaulted by something else, the attackers will usually place their units in order to 'impose' an FF assault on the Termies, robbing them of their MW dice.

The 'Skimmer' rule was evidently written at a point when Skimmers were a rarity, and without thought to other possibilities. The obvious intention behind the RAW was to cover the situation of Skimmer Vs ground units allowing the game to represent vertical distance and emphasising the precise point just made about the advantage of 'Skimmer' over ground-huggers.

I am just suggesting that we ought to use to the 'standard' rules in all other circumstances both for simplicity and clarity, including Skimmer Vs Skimmer.

It is a close 2nd place to troops on overwatch being counted as in cover.  

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

mspaetauf, your comment is not only innaccurate but insulting.  I was a 13F Forward Observer and a 97B Counter-Intelligence Agent with our beloved US Army.  This is the second jab you've taken at me so I am going to be very blunt: back off.

My problem with the RAW for troops on overwatch is that it provides them cover regardless of where they are.  They could be at the top of a bald rocky hill or a sandy plain and still getting cover. Having been a FO I know exactly how much cover there is in such locations.... ZERO.  I have some other issues with the rule mechanically but that will have to wait for another day as this is already de-railing the topic.

Nevermind.  Go ahead and de-rail it.  I see no point in getting frustrated with the skimmer vs skimmer debate all over again.  Ginger, I understand where you are coming from - I simply disagree.  It matters not, however.  The current interpretation isn't going away and it isn't going to break my game.  I know what the rules are prior to going into an assault so I can adjust.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Hi Moscovian!

As i did not say anything outright insulting (like saying you're stupid or something), from my point of view it's your decision to take things personally or not. And if you do and thereby feel insulted, then, again from my point of view, it's your own fault. But to cool things down - i did not mean to insult you.

I just remember the days from my own army training, that is why i was wondering so much. Because when i was given my area to cover i was lying flat, and in a whole lot of cover. Remember cover also means that you're hard to spot - which in my opinion is very much the case with infantry lying down - especially nowadays with all kinds of diverse camoflage clothing.

So that's it from me, because frankly talking about cover is off-topic, and the topic itself, well i think we could spend endless hours talking about it without reaching any kind of sensible conlusion.

Have fun playing epic, and have a nice day!  

cheers,
Markus