Ginger wrote:
Hmm, in essence we are querying the relative timing of the allocation of MW hits and the resolution of the effects from earlier hits. I think we need to recognise that the same issue applies to assaults, so the FAQ needs to reflect this rather than only applying to shooting.
The key section of the rules is in 1.9.6
Quote:
If an attacking formation scores hits both with normal weapons and weapons with the macro-weapon ability, then the opposing player must allocate and make any saves for the normal hits first, and then allocate and make any saves for the macro-weapon hits. Hits from macro-weapons can only be applied to units that are in a position to be hit by a macro-weapon (Note: With the exception of War Engines (see 3.3.2), during an assault, all units up to 15cm away are valid targets for allocation, regardless of whether the hits are from CC or FF).
(My emphasis)
The 'separate' MW allocation round is all part of the same round of hit allocation so the argument is that MW hits should not apply to the transported infantry that have bailed out of the destroyed vehicle because they were not in a position to be hit by the MW (since they were inside their vehicle) - in effect, the vehicle armour saves them from the effects of the MW hit . . . . .
Doesn't that go against the principle of MW hits on vehicles, where transported troops use their own armour save against the MW hit (and most die as a result)? After all, if the vehicle had survived the AT hit both it
and the troops inside would have been incinerated by the MW hit!
With respect, I would suggest that the MW hit *
should* be applied to one of the surviving infantry. This simulates the vehicle being knocked out and the surviving infantry succumbing to the almost simultaneous MW attack.
(Note the question of the infantry bailing out 'into cover' is IMHO a "red herring"; it only applies to the firer shooting at a target, not to the effects of that shooting.)Yes indeed, as I wrote earlier, the side effect is that transporters that die to AT hits are "blocking" any MW hits that would have been allocated on them. You're right, what
should happen to be "realistic" is that both the AT and the MW hits should be allocated onto the vehicle, but unfortunately that can't happen due to the MW allocation rules.
The problems with allowing the MW to "carry over" to the bailing out infantry are that:
a) It can create an equally "unjust" opposite situation, where MW hits that should have been allocated onto transports carrying infantry get allocated to "only" infantry.
b) It seems to contravene
Hits from macro-weapons can only be applied to units that are in a position to be hit by a macro-weaponI see this situation as an example of an artefact of the rules that we just have to accept. Let's be honest, there are tons of them already regarding hit allocation where mixing different types of hits are concerned. First strike, ignore cover, disrupt etc.
