YAY!!!
And no AP to-hit column for MW barrages against Armoured Vehicles and War Engines
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Official errata posted http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=12075 |
Page 1 of 6 |
| Author: | Dwarf Supreme [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
For those who haven't seen it yet, official '08 errata have been posted on the SG website. Take a look: '08 Errata I haven't had a chance to review them yet, but this is good news. I hope we won't have to wait long for the amendments to be incorporated into the living rulebook. |
|
| Author: | Mephiston [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
Saw this last night, I think many (not me) will think that it does not go far enough. |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
Hmmm... so torn... *laugh* I *do* like the fearless change, should help a lot there for anything except fearless scouts. Saddened that more of the Eldar changes didn't make it in as "official"; losing pulse and spirit stones is okay, but I prefer the new "organization" of Troupes... and the experimental lists still keep that. Note that only the Eldar "battle Titans" get leader, not Revenants. |
|
| Author: | Mephiston [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
Is it me or does the skimmer description not make sense? |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
YAY!!! And no AP to-hit column for MW barrages against Armoured Vehicles and War Engines |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
(Mephiston @ Mar. 20 2008,17:43) QUOTE Is it me or does the skimmer description not make sense? What part doesn't make sense to you, Mephiston? My quick reading of it seems to make sense of it. |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
Strange. In the Errata&FAQ section there is the 2008 Errata and a 2008 FAQ. Both links don't work. I downloaded the Errata from the Rulebok section. There it works. Wonder what new things will bein the 2008 FAQ. |
|
| Author: | semajnollissor [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
so, barrage MWs do not hit using the AP to-hit value? unless I missed it... |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
Correct, they use the to-hit value of whatever is under the template. |
|
| Author: | Mephiston [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
(Chroma @ Mar. 20 2008,17:47) QUOTE (Mephiston @ Mar. 20 2008,17:43) QUOTE Is it me or does the skimmer description not make sense? What part doesn't make sense to you, Mephiston? My quick reading of it seems to make sense of it. The wording is "If the skimmer is nearer to the intervening terrain, then the line of fire is not blocked. If the skimmer is further from the terrain, then work out the line of fire normally" I think there is something missing before the comma. Reading this in isolation I don't see a case were line of fire is blocked? |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
If the skimmer is further from the terrain, then work out the line of fire normally This would mean that if there's no LOS from the skimmer's actual position on the table (resting on the table, not physically lifted to represent "popping up") then there's no line of sight if they pop-up; if the skimmer's actual position allows an "in cover" shot, then they'd still be able to take a shot. |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
"than the target" is missing before the the comma. But it isn't nessesary to understand the paragraph. |
|
| Author: | Mephiston [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
Got it. Was this how the original description was posted cos I understood that! |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Official errata posted |
The lack of any demolisher change pretty much wraps up that debate as well. THANK GOD! We can now get back to the regularly powered Imperial lists. |
|
| Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|