Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Change to 0cm FAQ entry
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=21805		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Mephiston [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Change to 0cm FAQ entry
The 0cm move FAQ currently states this:-
Quote:
Q: Can a 0cm move unit on a road claim the +5cm move bonus?
A: Yes and no. There is no clear distinction in the rules between 0cm move and truly immobile units. We recommend that units that could potentially be moved in an emergency situation, like field artillery pieces, be considered to have a move of 0cm. Truly immobile units such as a bunker in a scenario that has a unit data sheet should be considered as immobile under any circumstances.

A 0cm move unit would possibly benefit from the road movement bonus, allowing it to move 5cm per move. However, it may obviously not leave the road as it would then lose its bonus movement. Also, unit with a speed designated as “immobile” may not move, even on a road.

As always, if you anticipate any issue with this rule, for example you are playing Baran Siegemasters with many 0cm move units, go over it with your opponent during the 5 minute warm-up.


Discussion in the Tyranids thread have lead to the conclusion that any unit with 0cm/immobile/NA speed should not be able to claim the bonus +5cm move if deployed on a road. So the FAQ would be changed to say No.

Thoughts?
Author:  zombocom [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
I have to agree; the idea that 0cm things can be dragged 15cm marching on a road always seemed weird to me, and definitely wasn't the original intent.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Quote:
This would also solve the question "can landed aircraft garrison?", 0cm WE can't garrison as they can move, "immobile" WE can garrison.

Rather ironically, the Garrison rule refers to 0cm WE's as being able to garrison.

As I noted in the thread where this question came up, I don't think this was ever intended, and an FAQ answer of "no" would probably solve some issues, for the cost of an extremely rarely used option.
Author:  zombocom [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Rug wrote:
I think it should be allowed (even though it wasn't the intent) and that it should be the distinction between 0cm move and "Immobile". You can drag/taxi/lift etc an artilery piece or aircraft but not a building. This would also solve the question "can landed aircraft garrison?", 0cm WE can't garrison as they can move, "immobile" WE can garrison.


That's the problem with the current interpretation; only 0cm units can garrison, not immobile ones. Hence currently your two options are "no road movement and no garrison" or "road movement and garrison". I need an option of "No road movement but garrisoning is allowed".
Author:  Mephiston [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
The AC question is covered in section 4, AC start the game off board.
Quote:
4.2 AIRCRAFT
Aircraft formations are not set-up with other units. They
are kept off table (where it can be imagined they are in
orbit or stationed at a nearby airbase) but can be set up
on the board when they take an action. Aircraft that are
capable of transporting other units may be set up with the
these units already on board. The aircraft (plus any units
they are transporting) may only enter play using the
following rules.


I am very much of the idea that a speed stat of > 0cm is required for a unit to gain a road move bonus.

6.1.5 Garrisons says
Quote:
• Any formations that include units with a speed of 0 (zero).
so without a speed you can't garrison.
Author:  Ulrik [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Mephiston wrote:
6.1.5 Garrisons says
Quote:
• Any formations that include units with a speed of 0 (zero).
so without a speed you can't garrison.


Wouldn't it be more intuitive to simply lose the distinction between 0cm and immobile?

Necron Tomb World Pylon Networks can't garrison if you need 0 speed to garrison, but that is an experimental list.
Author:  zombocom [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Yeah, I think the FAQ should say:

No, you don't get the road bonus for speed 0.
Immobile and N/A are the same as speed 0.

It gets rid of the weirdness once and for all.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Quote:
Wouldn't it be more intuitive to simply lose the distinction between 0cm and immobile?

I don't think any distinction was ever intended.
Author:  Signal [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Things like Baran siege pieces may have speed of 0, but should be able to claim the road bonus for movement. I feel there should definitely be a delineation between speed zero and speed immobile. Anything with speed: Immobile that is intended to be garrisoned should be annotated as such in the army list.
Author:  Angel_of_Caliban [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Since it has been FAQ'd already I think we should focus on adding to it to say "any unit with a speed of 0cm, immboile or n/a can garrison." Problem solved and keeps the original FAQ intact. I mean really I can see a giant Nid building smile across the boards on a march just as much as I can see IG dragging artillery. Yet immobile pylon wouldn't/couldn't march but I can see it garrison.
Author:  Jaggedtoothgrin [ Thu Nov 17, 2011 12:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
i think there should be a distinction betweem Immobile and 0cm move

Immobile units, (such as tyranid spore chimneys, necron pylons, buildings, and other truly static items) should never be able to move under any circumstances. they should still be allowed to garrisson

0cm move units, (such as artillery platforms that have lost their transporter) should be able to be dragged down roads by their crew, and thus, benefit from the "road move" rules. they should also be allowed to garrisson

as to if larger 0cm move things such as thunderfires/goliaths/hydra platforms should be 0cm or Immobile, thats a AC decision really (but i think they should be 0cm, as they have tracks and the like)
Author:  Spectrar Ghost [ Thu Nov 17, 2011 12:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
I've little opinion either way. I think any man portable artillery piece (like heavy mortars) is better with a low movement, like 10cm, than only the opportunity to road move, which makes little sense. Larger platforms are unable to be moved by their crew, and should be 0cm with no opportunity to road move. If there is a difference between Immobile and 0cm, it should be that Immobile units may never move for any reason, generally due to being anchored into the ground somehow. 0cm units should not be able to move on their own either (including road moves), but be able to be moved with appropriate transport. No opinion on what is allowed to garrison.
Author:  Mephiston [ Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
Angel_of_Caliban wrote:
Since it has been FAQ'd already I think we should focus on adding to it to say "any unit with a speed of 0cm, immboile or n/a can garrison." Problem solved and keeps the original FAQ intact. I mean really I can see a giant Nid building smile across the boards on a march just as much as I can see IG dragging artillery. Yet immobile pylon wouldn't/couldn't march but I can see it garrison.


This allows pylons and krieg death strike bunkers to start the game on overwatch....any one concerned about that.
Author:  Jaggedtoothgrin [ Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Change to 0cm FAQ entry
pylons still couldnt garrisson, thats a necron rule.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/