Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 117 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Rules question re: Barrages

 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:33 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 1077
Location: surrey uk
yes allocations for MW are made after allocations and saves for normal hits. Though you can still through the to-hit dice at the same time as your regular attacks.

as Morgan Vening says, the problem is allocations mixed attacks of normal weapons and normal barrage weapons. (or indeed mw weapons and mw barrages)

In some sense - if you use the exact method for barrages then it is debatable that 'allocations' are actually made. You roll-to-hit each unit under the template. The allocation is implicit. But is it actually an allocation? And therefore you can allocate non barrage hits to units that have already been hit by a barrage This seems like a nonsense, but is understandable in the context that barrages in the exact method seems to be such a different system to normal shooting.

Well anyway, to me, so far the best and fairest method seems to be as Ginger pointed out. Work out your barrage hits and allocations first (either by the exact method or general method) then allocate hits from normal shooting avoiding the units that already have allocations from the barrage (except where you can legitimately double up of course). once you allocations are made make your saves. Repeat the process for MW; First MW barrages then MW non barrages.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 11:30 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:01 pm
Posts: 112
Combination of normal attacks and MW barrages raises a question about timeing the placement of the barrage, as if you role to hit individually under a MW barrage as a separate step after normal hits and wounds have been taken then you may have a different number of targets under the template and therefore this works differently than normal MW shooting where hits are done before any wounds are allocated. It also raises the question about placement of the barrage template if it is done as a separate step as again normal wound may alter where you can place the template to get max under it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 11:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262
I'm beginning to wonder how the hell we have all been playing a game with such woolly rules all these years ;D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Mephiston wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder how the hell we have all been playing a game with such woolly rules all these years ;D

Oh god, I broke Epic. ::)

I take it all back! Everyone go back to playing the way they were! If we don't look at the crack in the universe, it doesn't exist! ;D

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:07 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:01 pm
Posts: 112
Probably because unlike some other GW games, epic seems to attract players who are happy to go with whatever works rather than gettin anal about RAW


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 1:49 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
The to-hit determination comes before allocation. I think if the barrage includes allocation when rolling to-hit, then that obviously comes before regular allocation regardless of whether they are MW or not. So, it would be - barrages of all kinds with allocation, regular to hit, regular allocation (skipping units already hit), normal resolution, MW allocation and resolution. Theoretically, you could have weirdness (like a single MW hit causes multiple "skips" in allocation) but I've never heard of anyone have trouble allocating MW barrages, which leads me to think that it's not a problem.

If you use the barrage as a "counting attacks" method, then you'll need to place barrages and count attacks before anything is resolved, regardless of whether it's MW or normal barrage. Assuming you have to allocate hits to units under the barrage, it could go: barrage allocation, normal allocation (skipping units already hit), resolve all normal hits, MW barrage allocation, MW allocation, resolve MW hits. That would mirror the basic normal/MW allocation pattern.

or it could go: barrage allocation (both normal and MW), normal allocation (skipping units already hit), resolve normal hits, MW allocation, resolve MW hits. This is functionally the same as above, as all barrage hits are allocated first in both methods.

This could also run into some theoretical weirdness either way (like in the first, normal fire might kill all units under barrages, leaving no targets for allocating MW barrage hits) but no one has ever reported problems with this, either.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:54 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK
I agree with you Neal - was just posting when you got in first - again :)

When applying mixed weapons fire under the normal rules we quite often get the situation where a unit survives a 'standard' hit, and then suffers a MW hit thus concentrating the casualties. Here we are effectively doing the same thing within the confines of the template.

So I would agree on placing the barrage template first before resolving all 'standard' hits front-to-back across the formation, including units unnder the template. Then you resolve the MW hits on any remaining units under the template - and you can still adopt either approach to do this.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:47 am
Posts: 1434
Location: State College
Evil and Chaos wrote:
Quote:
C'mon you can't leave it at that, what misapprehension !!!!!

Aircraft can only fire passive AA when an enemy aircraft stops inside their AA umbrella. A transit isn't good enough...

However, desperately struggling to think up a way to protect my soon-to-be-inbound Thunderhawk from being CAP'd by Andy H's Eldar fighters, I came up with the idea to move some fighters to stop in front of an enemy fighter squadron's entry point on the table in order to passively "CAP a CAP"***. If I ever knew that a transit isn't good enough to activate airborne AA I'd forgotten it, because as quickly pointed out by Dave, it was a nonsense of an idea. :-)



***Actually, I came up with the idea 5 minutes after I'd already activated the Thunderbolt squadron to do something else!


I'm pretty sure (and just read the rules again) that aircraft only get passive AA when they're being intercepted, so they don't project "AA bubbles" over the board. Otherwise you could flak rush with aircraft eg. ground attack a fm under a nightwing fm, but keep the nightwings within AA range of the thunderbolts. The thunderbolts would then get their AA attacks when the nightwings disengage. I know that other groups play that aircraft can project AA bubbles that protect other aircraft, but I'm sure that's a local thing, rather than a universal rule.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Hopefully someone will enlighten the both of us. I wouldn't be greatly surprised if I still had something wrong there.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:41 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262
As flying A/C can only flak if you end in their arc/range then the won't be flaking in the disengagement. I also seem to recall that the accepted convention is that all disengagement moves are considered simultaneous.

I've been looking for a ruling that matches what I've been told re defensive a/c flak (i.e. only shoots when an a/c ends it's move in arc/range) but I'm struggling. I've not done a search here but I'm sure this is where it has been clarified.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Quote:
I've been looking for a ruling that matches what I've been told re defensive a/c flak (i.e. only shoots when an a/c ends it's move in arc/range) but I'm struggling. I've not done a search here but I'm sure this is where it has been clarified.

The rules say that ground based AA can fire when an aircraft's flight path crosses its AA fire arc.

(Airborne) Aircraft are, by ommission, therefore not allowed to fire AA at aircraft that are just passing through their AA bubble.

Just went and read the rules, and it looks like the only situations where you can fire AA as an airborne aircraft is :
A- If you're making an interception or CAP (A type of interception)
B- If your aircraft is being directly intercepted.

So it seems just ending a move in an aircraft's AA arc isn't good enough, you also have to be directly intercepting that aircraft in order to trigger its AA?***

Quote:
I also seem to recall that the accepted convention is that all disengagement moves are considered simultaneous.

A side-effect of this interpretation (Which may be wrong), would be that order of disengagement (simulatious or not) is irrelevant in the end phase, because airborne flak can only be triggered by an Intercept or a CAP.


***Unless it's on the ground, when its flak works like a ground-based AA unit.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262
And as the disengagement rules make no mention of how to determine the order they should be moved in I think the fairest is to assume them to be simultaneous.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Aye, I guess it wouldn't affect flak, but it certainly might affect a player's decision about whether to leave their Thunderhawk on the ground or not.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:39 pm
Posts: 1974
Location: South Yorkshire
Mephiston wrote:
As flying A/C can only flak if you end in their arc/range then the won't be flaking in the disengagement. I also seem to recall that the accepted convention is that all disengagement moves are considered simultaneous.

I've been looking for a ruling that matches what I've been told re defensive a/c flak (i.e. only shoots when an a/c ends it's move in arc/range) but I'm struggling. I've not done a search here but I'm sure this is where it has been clarified.


It was clarified by Jervis a few years ago, but it was on one of the old forums IIRC.
It was around the time he tried to introduce the "immediate disengage rules" for aircraft to stop unrealistic AA pockets by stationary aircraft protecting ground formations, though a few disliked this due to their models not being on the table long enough.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rules question re: Barrages
PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:03 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
dptdexys wrote:
Mephiston wrote:
though a few disliked this due to their models not being on the table long enough.


Which I personally think is a silly reason to oppose a rule. Immediate disengagement makes a lot of sense to me.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 117 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net