CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? |
|
asaura
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target?  Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:11 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481
|
Hmm. The Doubling Orks is a different situation. Double consists of three things: Move, Move, Shoot. You start by declaring Double. Then you move. Then you move. Then you shoot, starting by declaring your target. At this point, you have already rolled for the Double, and if you don't have a target, you simply don't shoot.
Change of verdict... Orks can Double even when there's no enemies on the board.
When we look at CF rules in 4.3.3, the only thing about target formation selection is that all CF formations must shoot at the same target. There's nothing about declaring the target before the first CF formation shoots. Thus, the CF works out just like a Doubling Ork would: the CF is passed, stating "Crisis I, Crisis II and Crisis III perform a CF, everyone doubles, in this order". Then, Crisis I doubles, starts to shoot, notices that there are no targets, and doesn't shoot. Ditto for Crisis II and III.
Hmm. I'm starting to lean back to "allow it"...  
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
asaura
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:13 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481
|
| Quote (Hena @ 13 Jan. 2006 (07:05)) | | Edit: Another point is that Tau could go to overwatch with all three units... |
Not with a single action, they can't. That's the whole point against a drop army. If you win the initiative, you want many Overwatches or many moves out of the way. With CF, you could get the moves. Retaining initiative is the only way to get more than one Overwatch.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
CyberShadow
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:49 pm |
|
| Swarm Tyrant |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9349
Location: Singapore
|
| Quote (Chroma @ 12 Jan. 2006 (23:35)) | Doubling three units up for support in some kind of clipping assault is the only "abuse" possbility that comes to mind.
In my game, it would've helped me get three units the heck out of the landing zone... would that have been abusive? |
I dont see any use/abuse of this ability as it is which would seem to be particularly 'un-Tau-y' (hey, I just invented a cool ner word!). I can see the kind of 'fire to focus' as fine, and the 'move to firing positions' as an extension of this. I am in favour of leaving the rules as it sounds unless subsequent playtesting reveals unpredicted problems._________________ https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond. https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:28 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
What is the worst way this could be abused |
My thought process.
1) Tau are intentionally weak against assaults
2) CF is meant for a coordinated _firing_ action
3) CF abuse is to use it as a movement bonus with no target
Therefore, somehow combining all three of these for some potential gain to the tau would in theory be the worst way this could be abused.
======= hypothetical scenerio to follow =========
Tau player already activated crisis and now they are alone in the field.
Tau player expecting an enemy air assault on the alone crisis+SC formation in the field.
In order to bolster the ranks vs. the coming air assault, Tau player retains the inititiative, and issues a CF - even though there are no valid targets in the area of the Crisis+SC formation.
Now, 2-3 other formations double to get up next to the crisis since his jet packs will be no use vs. the coming air assault and will thus insulate the formation from the coming air assault.
No target is fired upon at the CF destination location of the Crisis+SC
Thus, the CF is now used as a movement bonus of multiple units to counter a coming assault that the crisis would otherwise be alone for and unable to avoid.
Cheers,
_________________
Rob
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steele
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 5:09 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
|
| Quote (Tactica @ 13 Jan. 2006 (16:28)) | | What is the worst way this could be abused |
My thought process. 1) Tau are intentionally weak against assaults 2) CF is meant for a coordinated _firing_ action 3) CF abuse is to use it as a movement bonus with no target Therefore, somehow combining all three of these for some potential gain to the tau would in theory be the worst way this could be abused. ======= hypothetical scenerio to follow ========= Tau player already activated crisis and now they are alone in the field. Tau player expecting an enemy air assault on the alone crisis+SC formation in the field. In order to bolster the ranks vs. the coming air assault, Tau player retains the inititiative, and issues a CF - even though there are no valid targets in the area of the Crisis+SC formation. Now, 2-3 other formations double to get up next to the crisis since his jet packs will be no use vs. the coming air assault and will thus insulate the formation from the coming air assault. No target is fired upon at the CF destination location of the Crisis+SC Thus, the CF is now used as a movement bonus of multiple units to counter a coming assault that the crisis would otherwise be alone for and unable to avoid. Cheers, |
Sounds like a "normal" reinforcement tactic to me , that every General would do if time allows. I wouldn?t have any problem with it , if the other races could do similar maneuvers. To the present they can?t so it would be broken to others . I mean you would steal them the opportunity to catch a lone target that was left ( intentionally or not) alone in the field AND Juicy. Officially I would be against doing so, but this is my oppinion.
Cheers!
Steele
_________________
Quid pro Quo
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steele
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 5:18 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
|
|
@Asaura,
Orks may double even when there are no enemies. According to the Waagh Rule they receive the Bonus for Engage and Doubling.
Cheers!
Steele
_________________
Quid pro Quo
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:03 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
What it comes down to IMHO is whether the scenerio of movement for movement sake is intentionally part of the rule as part of CS's future direction.
If it is, we should work to clarify that in the rule.
If it is not, we should clearly prohibit it.
Steele and NH make valid points that the value the tactic delivers is relative and probably not imbalancing.
However, I think we can all probably agree that the tactic was not the initial intention of the rule either. Kudos to Chroma for stumbling upon this in one of his games from the plethora played last weekend. 
IMHO - to be 'fair and balanced', we should clarify one way or the other. By doing so, it will only avoid one FAQ entry later.
Cheers,
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Honda
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:54 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
|
|
In order to bolster the ranks vs. the coming air assault, Tau player retains the inititiative, and issues a CF - even though there are no valid targets in the area of the Crisis+SC formation.
|
My personal opinion is that this will end up throwing more good money after bad. Shame on the player for leaving his SC out in the middle of nowhere with his knickers down.
If it is not, we should clearly prohibit it.
|
If we decide to prohibit the "move only" option, and I'm not saying that we should, we might be able to add to the rule that one of the formations involved in the CF must shoot at an enemy unit.
However, I don't know that this is really a big deal or that abusive, because in the long view, a Tau player may have just locked up three formations that did not cause any damage for that turn. Obviously, this is situational, but I don't think it would be wise to plan on doing it all game long.
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: CF, Can it be used for movement if no target? Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:32 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
[quote="Honda,13 Jan. 2006 (11:54)"][/quote]
In order to bolster the ranks vs. the coming air assault, Tau player retains the inititiative, and issues a CF - even though there are no valid targets in the area of the Crisis+SC formation.
|
My personal opinion is that this will end up throwing more good money after bad. Shame on the player for leaving his SC out in the middle of nowhere with his knickers down.
|
In my hypothetical example, there was much haste made to get Mr Crisis to said location for a greater purpose.
The once concealed tatoo was expected to be very frightening to the Deathwatch and sisters of battle accompanying the marine's in the fast approaching Thunderhawk. I think there was even a comment about, "Sister Dialogus - interpret this!"
Such a show of, errr... 'force', would certainly yield a level of urgency by the dauntless sisters to rapidly air assault what was surely to be misinterpreted as a menace to society.
Unbeknownst to the nearby pathfinders, when the general revealed his, uhh... 'secret weapon, the troops felt obligated to make haste to barrier and err.. conceal their fearless leader from the obvious ramifications of his selfless act of misdirection - for the greater good of the Tau army.
BTW: there was no good or bad money traded in the exchange. Mr. Shas'o would never charge for his most generous of services to the Greater Good... hypothetically.
Yeah... that's what I was thinking... I think.
