| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| how would you play this WE firefight situation? http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=34394 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Dave [ Fri Dec 04, 2020 2:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | how would you play this WE firefight situation? |
A Baneblade is intermingled with Sentinels and assaulted. After counter-charge, the Baneblade is only within 15cm of one attacker, and the sentinels are within 15cm of the rest. The Baneblade scores 2 hits. Do both hits go on the single attacker within 15cm, or does 1 hit carry over into the attackers that the Sentinels are within 15cm of? Quote: 3.3.2 Close Combat and Firefight Attacks Instead of rolling a single hit dice for each war engine in an assault, roll a number of hit dice equal to the war engine’s starting damage capacity. You may choose to split these between close combat rolls and firefight rolls as you see fit, but close combat rolls will only hit enemy units in base contact, while firefight rolls will only hit units within 15cm that are not in base contact. If the above said "within 15cm of the war engine" I think it be ironclad. It doesn't though, hence why I'm asking how people play this rule. |
|
| Author: | Apocolocyntosis [ Mon Dec 07, 2020 12:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: how would you play this WE firefight situation? |
Agree it's ambiguous as it does not state 15 of WE. Personally I think I would allow it to carry over – the BB counts as part of the sentinel formation, it's within 15cm of the formation. Only decider for me otherwise would be if a lot of knights players weigh in and say they always and only split WE attacks from all-WE formations mini by mini for 15cm, not at formation level. |
|
| Author: | Kyrt [ Wed Dec 09, 2020 3:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: how would you play this WE firefight situation? |
I initially thought “hit carries over” as ‘normal’ and I agree the special 3.3.2 rule doesn’t explicitly say “within 15cm of the WE” but then I read it again and noticed that it also doesn’t say “in base contact with the WE”. IMO the CC component is meant to be read in that way and seems logical that so is the FF part of the same sentence. What would you do if you had 2 WEs, and all enemy units are in base contact with a WE. Imagine the WEs use their CC attacks - would you allow them to hit units that are in base contact only with the -other- WE? |
|
| Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Tue Dec 29, 2020 3:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: how would you play this WE firefight situation? |
Normally I would go with you can only hit what you are in range of. So two hits on the one stand in this case. The same goes back the other way as the Baneblade can only be hit by one attacking model. |
|
| Author: | Kyrt [ Sat Jan 02, 2021 2:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: how would you play this WE firefight situation? |
Tiny-Tim wrote: Normally I would go with you can only hit what you are in range of. So two hits on the one stand in this case. The same goes back the other way as the Baneblade can only be hit by one attacking model. Well the Baneblade could in fact be hit by all the attacking units; it'd depend what is closest. Even if the baneblade is only within 15cm of one attacker, it could still be the closest defending unit in which case the first 3 hits would be allocated against it no matter which units scored them. Seems to me that this isn't really relevant though; it's an intermingled assault so is resolved at a formation level. IMO what makes it different is only 3.3.2, which is not a bi-directional rule: you can still hit a WE with both CC and FF attacks regardless of which attacks the WE chooses to use. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|