I'm sure this is in the faq, but where?

Essentially planetfalling transport disgorges troops as part of the planetfall, can I overwatch them? Air assault prior to disembark no, but I though disembarking as part of a planetfall was fair game?

And as a side matter you can overwatch at the end of a transports move before troops disembark (into an assault say or to fire)?

And for good measure - if infantry have assaulted into your position (say they are in your bunker or ruins) and you overwatch them - are they now in cover? Likewise if they close combat your tanks can another units shoot at them in the clear, or now because they are touching an AFV (yours!) do they get -1 to hit?

Disembarking triggers OW. It's in the 2008 FAQ IIRC.


No, the troops move isn't an independent move, its an extension of the transports move IMO.

Yes to all of this having reviewed the rules as no mention of friendly is included in the rule. Bit odd really but ok by my reading of the rules.

What if the tanks were overwatching - if you shoot a unit in contact with your armoured skin you get -1 to hit?

By RAW yes. Adding the word "Friendly" to the cover rules re infantry touching AV's may be a future FAQ/Errata?

From the 2008 FAQ relating to Planetfalling


Previously in other threads (that I cannot readily find) Neal suggested that OW against Air formations only happened after disembarkation, while OW against Ground formations could also be applied after the move but before disembarkation, (which forms the FAQ on OW itself).

This sentence from 1.7.5 seems clear that I was wrong!



The war engine transport rule also has this sentence in it



So 1.7.5 applies to both and you overwatch before disembarkation! Makes Shadowsword's on overwatch even cooler!

Though bizzarly a formation like firewarriors can do nothing to a mech formation that assaults out of its vehicles - as their AP fire takes place before the infantry disembarks!

I too recall a thread where the consensus was that for ground based engagements the OWer could choose to fire before or after then enemy disembarks. For air assaults he can only fire afterwards, because an approach move does not count as movement for overwatch.

1.7.5 says "This happens after any overwatch shots" but that was interpreted as any overwatch shots at the vehicles. It's a timing thing rather than a limitation.

EDIT:

Here's the part from the netERC master FAQ thread:



and here's the part about not being able to OW aircraft before they unload:

I think everything has been covered, but to put it in one post so you don't have to sort through corrections...

This is correct. Planetfall does not trigger overwatch for the planetfalling unit. Any related disembark moves, however, DO trigger Overwatch.


Yes. Overwatch has the option to fire before a transport disembarks (while troops are still loaded) or after the troops dismount.


Yes. If you need a rationale, they closed too quickly for you to fire at them while they were in the open. It's similar to the fact that you cannot fire at a formation in the middle of a move. If they can hope from one piece of cover to another in a single move, they're just crossing your field of fire too quickly for you to gain a good fire opportunity.


Personally, we've never allowed cover for touching an enemy AV but with the RAW, I'd have to say yes.

And to preempt your next question TRC, a house rule will be in infect for Britcon that infantry units can only claim cover from friendly AV's. I'll inform everyone before their first game starts.

I quite like the idea of enemy infantry claiming cover from your AVs. It can represent lots of things; having to be more careful when shooting at enemies close to your vehicles; the difficulties of firing a tank at point blank range against an opponent attacking you etc.

Conversely hosing infantry with machine gun fire whilst they try to kill immobilised vehicles was a common WW2 tactic as they were hopefully immune to your shells.

You could use the FAQ 1.12.5 (2nd question) to cover this, although it really means CC and FF attacks not overwatch shooting.

Intruiging non-sequitor here Chris. 'Hosing down' your own tanks indicates that it was a necessary tactic, but does not indicate how usefull the 'cover' was to the attacking enemy.

Other comments notwithstanding, I quite like the concept of gaining cover from any AV irrespective of who owns it. If we accept that an enemy assaulting into ruins etc gains cover because he moved 'too quickly' for the defenders to shoot, why not apply the same logic here?

'cos my tanks aren't a static pile of bricks and other detritus! Sure they could stand still and let the enemy attach charges to them but personally I think I might just jink about a bit and crush the stupid mud feet myself!