Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 10 posts ] 

Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
scream
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:26 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:18 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: France
Hi,

On epic_fr, we have some questions about the way orders are lost when a stand/unit is engaged in Close Combat:

Page 16 from NE Gold rule book
3) Charge Orders
These units sacrifice firepower for speed and the ability to engage the enemy. Units on Charge Orders may move up to double their normal movement allowance in the Movement Phase, but may not make any sort of ranged attacks. Units that are pinned in Close Combat are automatically assumed to be on Charge Orders, but units that are in Close Combat but not pinned (such as a tank fighting infantry) must be given orders normally.


Page 30 from NE Gold rule Book:
3) Advance Fire Segment: Players alternate activating the rest of their units. Their only option is to make their normal ranged attacks, as everything else has been resolved. Units that were not given orders may be activated to fire now. If a model was charged and fought in Close Combat, it may not fire (however if other models in the same detachment were not engaged, they may fire).


A first sight, it looks quite contradictory. From page 16, should we read:

UnitsStands that are pinned in Close Combat are automatically assumed to be on Charge Orders[/b] ?

If a band of 20 ork boys with an advance order is engaged by a single rhino, it's quite abusive if it loses its advance order and is not able to fire in the advance order.
Could others stands from the detachement do their advance movement or do they lose their movement but can fire in the advance fire phase ?

Thanks for your help  :;):




_________________
Fair players live longer
Epic40k.fr Techpriest
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Warhead
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:23 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:51 am
Posts: 2785
Location: Nr Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
We always took Units to mean a Stand or model... but there have been that many re-writes it's hard to keep track of what the original meaning was. (I think the original books always called stands/models units, but I have been known to be wrong... no, really it does happen.

Our lot play it that if a STAND/UNIT in a formation is pinned it must fight close combat and may not fire while the rest of the formation are given orders as normal... they may not leave formation of the pinned stand but may engage units in close combat if they have charge orders. Unpinned STAND/UNITS may be given orders and act as normal, since they are unpinned.

Anything else is open to abuse (as you have shown scream) and doesn't work... IMO.

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
scream
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:33 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:18 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: France
I agree with you Warhead but sometimes, "unit" refers to detachement and sometimes to a stand or a model so it's not always easy to understand. If Zap or Primarch or any other person involved in original netepic rule creation could confirm, it would be great  :smile:

_________________
Fair players live longer
Epic40k.fr Techpriest
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
sanjuro
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:01 pm
Posts: 189
Location: Berlin, Germany
Huh?

Is Netepic Gold already available?  :wow:

cheers sanjuro
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
scream
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:18 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: France
Quote: (sanjuro @ 24 Mar. 2009, 13:26 )

Is Netepic Gold already available?  :wow:

Not yet, I use a beta version :)

_________________
Fair players live longer
Epic40k.fr Techpriest
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zap123
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:47 am
Posts: 3065
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Yes, the use of Unit and Stand is a bit loose at times.  Typically, you can interpret unit & stand as the same thing, a single vehicle+ or infantry stand.  Stand isn't the perfect word as you get the idiots who then say "it says stand, so it only applies to infantry".   :sigh:

Where the whole formation is affected the word Detachment should be used.

P16 clearly means each individual "thing", not the whole detachment.

_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Warhead
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 4:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:51 am
Posts: 2785
Location: Nr Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
I wish to pass the motion that Zap should change his Avatar to this...



...for truly he is Stupendous!.. Cheers, Zap...  :vD

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

Zap is correct.

It's a real pain to catch and change all the unit/stand/model uses for single models.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zap123
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:31 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:47 am
Posts: 3065
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Avatar changed as requested.

Perhaps I should add a Glossary of Common terms to the proposed Core Rules errata?

_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Warhead
 Post subject: Charge engagement & orders loss clarifications
PostPosted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:36 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:51 am
Posts: 2785
Location: Nr Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Haha, cheers, Zap.  :))

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 10 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 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:  


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