Radical re-think on Jetpacks |
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks  Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:39 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
Good point, Hena. I guess that against things that have infiltrate the skimmer rule is possibly better than the old jet pack rule. It also better against teleporting terminators and air assaulting assault SMs. Perhaps it does even out after all.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:46 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
| Quote (asaura @ 19 Dec. 2005 (20:28)) | | I have to say I keep getting surprised with the problems people seem to be having with the current rules. I think they are just fine, and that the "byzantine thing" may be just sour grapes from people whose assaults have been foiled. |
Check out the SG forums for a thread on the interactions with declaring formations intermingled and the interactions with ZoCs if a jetpack formation retreats within the ZoC of a non-intermingled formation.
It's bad.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:50 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
| Quote (Tactica @ 19 Dec. 2005 (18:39)) | | I do not agree in giving the Tau a CC stat bump here. I don't think its something we want to encourage in CC. |
I understand, but I rather doubt that small formations with CC5+ will encourage CC. I don't even think it would unduly encourage FF because ranged fire is still going to be better in most cases. In any case, it doesn't have to be a blanket bonus. If the unit didn't warrant it (like, say, drones), you would simply leave it as-is.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lion in the Stars
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 4:50 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
|
|
'Nids not getting into CC?
That typically happens in my 40k games. Deploy close, backpedal as needed, take the 'stealers charge on the Broadsides and Shas'el (with their INV save for the rending hits), and beat them down.
Sounds about right.
_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
GJLane
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 2:59 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:31 pm
Posts: 8
|
|
Sorry, Neal, I am unconvinced there is any real problem with the current wat Jet Packs work. ?I am concerned with any change which does not allow them to avoid an assault ... which is the whole point.
The questions related to intermingled are easy to resolve ... declare assault and intermingled ... ?Additional formations which end up within 5 cm of the jet pack units after the jet pack units 'jump back' can NOT be declared intermingled, since intermingled is declared when the assault is declared.
Beyond that, the same issues arise with scouts on a regular basis and those are easy enough to sort out.
I have strong feelings about this. ?Let's not change anything with Jet Packs ... they are one of the nicest fluff parts of the list.
Anyway, that is MHO.
_________________
Greg Lane
Epic Armageddon Rules Champion
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Honda
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:25 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
|
|
I have strong feelings about this. Let's not change anything with Jet Packs ... they are one of the nicest fluff parts of the list.
|
...jetpacks?
@GJLane: Welcome back!
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
|
| Top |
|
|
|
GJLane
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:42 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:31 pm
Posts: 8
|
|
Corey has been schooling me that the primary issue is the Tau can create a formation which cannot be assaulted except under special circumstances ... which include air assault. I understand the theoretical possibility and how the tactics work. I always seem to be facing air assualts and drop pods when I play Tau.
However, I don't have a problem with the Tau being able to have some limited units which are designed to help them avoid assaults. I have not seen abuse demonstrated with the current list. And, I think the intermingled situation can be clarified.
Having Jet Packs do the skimmer thing when assaulted seems like a special rule to use a special rule ... not very elegant.
Anbd, that plus the other improved FF suggestions goes against one of Jervis' design directions for the Tau Army List.
Except for the fact that my Tau frequently face air assaults, I do try to use the Stealth BS's scout and jet pack ability to help screen formations from CC in assaults.
My command formation with Crisis have only benefited by avoiding an assault on one occassion ... and the imprvement from 6+ to 5+ by getting FF is not that big a deal.
_________________
Greg Lane
Epic Armageddon Rules Champion
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
baronpiero
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 5:12 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm
Posts: 186
|
|
I find the current rule for jetpacks interesting enougth to warrant such complication. Especially, there is a built-in cooperative effect, as you can use the jetpacks to move into a position where friendly formations can lend FF support.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
