Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Aerospace rules questions

 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 3:12 pm
Posts: 830
Is there a WE AC that has a move stat of something other than bomber? Can they even pick an action that has a move part, other than marshal, and I'd say they can only shoot and rally if they did marshal.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5477
Location: London, UK
Hi Meph. I cannot think of any WE A/c with a movement < 0cm, but that is slightly tangential. All ground units can declare a single, double, march or engage without actually making any physical movement, and those with 0cm movement (including a/c) can also declare these actions without moving.

That said, for consistency I would agree with Dave; any formation that has activated should shoot their AA at -1 (which includes ground attacking a/c that have landed, but not planetfalling units until they have activated). By definition, all on-table formations will have activated by the end of the turn when a/c disengage,

If there is a question of deciding whether to disengage landed a/c or not, I believe that is done like everything else with the player who won the strategy roll going first. I also believe (though cannot quote so may be wrong) that it was decided that disengaging a/c cannot shoot, even if opposing a/c end up in arc as part of their disengagement move.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2511
Location: UK
The -1 is for moving though, not for activating. If you sustain or hold (regroup/shoot) you would not take the -1. Personally I would apply the -1 if an aircraft made an approach move in that turn, even though it doesn't count as a move for overwatch purposes, but its not defined in the rules so it's no more than an opinion.

When it comes to other actions in subsequent turns, landed aircraft count as ground units with a speed of 0 (i.e. not 'bomber') so can engage just fine, their move is just 0cm that's all (unless on a road of course.......)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:33 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5477
Location: London, UK
True. Good spot Kyrt. :)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:56 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 6:20 am
Posts: 70
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Since it's already defined that landing is not a move, e.g. for overwatch purposes, I would argue that applying -1 for moving this turn is a bit inconsistent. For this reason my vote would be on not applying the -1.

On the other hand I have not looked at the defensive AA capabilities of the air transports that can perform this move. E.g. a Thunderhawk that lands in the disengage path of several enemy air formations would shoot up to 4 5+ AA shots at each formation...

_________________
Army Champion - Scions of Iron & Iron Hands


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:26 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:41 pm
Posts: 390
Location: London
yeah that example is the reason why -1 makes sense


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1501
ffoley wrote:
yeah that example is the reason why -1 makes sense


Not really, it's surprisingly difficult to pull off as you'd need an empty thunderhawk or ork landa (both have multiple aa shots) which you're prepared to land once enemy aircraft are on the board. If you're using it for that then you're probably not recycling troops or launching an assault with it so most likely it's sub optimal or a clutch move. Where it is a more powerful move is against a really air heavy army which has put a lot of aircraft in one place but realistically you'll catch someone once with it and then they'll adapt.

I think -1 just intuitively makes sense because the aircraft has clearly moved in some way not because it can be powerful. If someone wants to pay 200 points to use a thunderhawk to provide moderate short range ground flak they're very welcome!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 10:25 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 1:41 pm
Posts: 390
Location: London
Yeah sorry I kind of meant more that it should be -1 because the optics on it don't look good, I mean a bomber chasing after a bunch of fighters, landing on the floor next to them and shooting up at them without penalty seems wrong. I assume the -1 on normal flak is to represent the difficulty of that kind of chasing and shooting aircraft.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2511
Location: UK
The reason I think it makes sense to apply the -1 is because of the explanation of the -1 in the rulebook, i.e. to discourage 'rushing over' to AA. I don't see a distinction between aircraft doing it and ground units. Sure, rushing an air unit is not necessarily the reason for moving in either case (e.g. if the flak unit moved first and then the target air unit moved), but the rule is applied to any unit that moves for the sake of simplicity.

But yeah, rules wise it is not defined. You can either treat an approach move as a move just like advance etc, or you can generalise the overwatch FAQ (which was created because of the 'deathstrike on overwatch' problem as I recall) to other aspects of the rules. To each their own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 10:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 7:25 pm
Posts: 307
Just for clarity (as there may be something that we are playing wrong...) does the disengage moves happen all at once or in order?

- the AA becomes an issue here, as we have seen landed thunder hawks shooting at exiting fighters who are disengaging before them.

E.g Thunderhawk carries out an air assault and so lands.
Opponents planes come in and shoot the Thunderhawk (being cowardly, the come in from the side and keep 30 cm away, so outwith the TH's 15cm right ARC), But in the end phase the space marine player, waits before disengaging his thunderhawk (lets say he has another squad of planes which he disengages first --- we are assuming that you disengage units in turn) this way the thunderhawk can shoot at the planes with AA( with -1) before it disengages. - or, does it only get to shoot if it chooses to stay on board and not disengage?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 1:42 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5477
Location: London, UK
I believe the answer is as follows:-
A landed air transport may choose to disengage, or stay landed and shoot as a ground unit. Put another way if the unit uses it's AA, then it may not disengage.

When in doubt, players take turns to disengage formations, starting with the winner of the strategy roll. So using the example,
  1. The Marine player disengages the other A/c,
  2. The opposing player disengages their A/c, flying through the arc of the landed THawk.
    The Marine player must choose whether to fire the AA (as a ground unit) and stay on the ground, or not shoot and disengage as an air unit.
  3. If the THawk did not shoot, the marine player can now disengage it.
  4. The opponent disengages the next formation etc

Note, since flying aircraft must disengage, I don't think they can shoot enemy aircraft that are disengaging though this possibly ought to be stated as a FAQ.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Aerospace rules questions
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 12:27 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2511
Location: UK
I thought there was already an FAQ that said disengagement happens simultaneously, which is partly why flying aircraft cannot AA each other. It still might be necessary to declare disengagements in order as ginger says where there are two or more landed aircraft (or declare in secret I suppose, depending on how you choose to do it)

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 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