OK looking at Section "Transport(x) [Unit]" on Pg 44 the transport ability is very simplified from other systems in my reading of this.



My understanding is that units don't need to move to "bus" to use the additional speed provided there's enough transports to go around. Basically bus/debus is a free part of the action. Yes?

thanks

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

That is absolutely correct.

_________________
Tom Webb
Author Page: http://www.newtonwebb.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/thewebb
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/thenewtonwebb
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/thenewtonwebb

cool I'm pretty sure I've been playing this correct. We've generally done this to mean that the unit in question to bus/debus has to be in 5cm range of the unit with Transport(x) ability otherwise it seems prone to abuse (5cm taken as the debus move amount during Close Assault)

Imagine that we've got something like this set up where X represents a Soft unit w/o Transport and T represent a unit WITH it. <-> is 5cm for every - contained

X <-> X <-> X <-> T <-> T <-> T

as you can see, there's logically no way in hell that you can get everyone to the transports to gain the move bonus if it's assumed to be 5cm range. If instead it is a situation where the X Soft unit simply has to be in range of a T up the distance of their S range then the above example would make sense though it's still able to be "gamed" with longer strands of formations in the above manner.

In any case, way there's a wee bit of ambiguity in the intention of the above and perhaps that should be clarified in either the Transport(X) section or the Move section.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

I think that whilst you 'could' use long strands you'll find yourself vulnerable to assaults, vulnerable to having your formation split and unable to focus your firepower on a target.

We may need to clarify this else where but the idea is that locations are not 100% exact, just as the troops are likely to move around within the formation, the transports are expected to as well.

_________________
Tom Webb
Author Page: http://www.newtonwebb.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/thewebb
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/thenewtonwebb
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/thenewtonwebb

The ethos we've been working too is that if a simpler rule can be employed to get the same result then we will go with the simpler rule.

_________________
Tom Webb
Author Page: http://www.newtonwebb.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/thewebb
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/thenewtonwebb
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/thenewtonwebb

yeah feel you in general there. This is one of those thing where just stating it explicitly gets you in a better place.
The thing about simple is good until you become inconsistent. I mean distance DOES mean something in most of the important rules already (Shooting, Coherency, Supporting Fire, and Close Assault all being prime examples).

Personally I'd go for the 5cm thing as it's simple, already used in the free optional debus when assaulted, and already the most common style of rule we see in this level of game. The whole way EA handles transports is crap IMHO making them NOT actually work like the way transports work in Mech warfare.

I'll also point out that it has synergy with those bits I posted today on BaseCamp for discussion!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Also I should note that the RAW right now prevent any movement bonus once you drop below a certain amount of Transport(X) capacity for the formation, even though logically some number of units should be able to mount up, haul ass, and then debus somewhere else, provided they're in coherency of course. Switching this to a slightly more explicit Xcm range Bus/Debus bonus for the combined units would eliminate what I suspect is a hole that exists now from RAI, works like most other wargames and most scales, allows for more tactical depth and movement, and of course prevents gameiness/immersion breaking situations. Also as the movement is the transport, it adds another layer of tactics with overwatch as you get the opportunity to get a shot off at those mounted units.

The classic example where this would a situation where a Guild Aux company takes some A weapon hits and loses transport capacity. Seeing their vulnerability to being clipped later in the game, they chose to Bus up their farthest units to redeploy closer to the threat to be able to bring more of the units into the fight from the expected direction. The tactics being of course choosing between a slow retreat (15cm on foot, potentially away from objectives or cover), bring troops toward the front lines, or choosing to overwatch but of course vulnerable to clipping.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

I see your point... let me hunt down coffee and consider.

_________________
Tom Webb
Author Page: http://www.newtonwebb.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/thewebb
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/thenewtonwebb
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/thenewtonwebb