Based on the recent spate of FAQs, I figure we can do another round, to include a suggested 5 minute warmup list.
====
1.7.5
Q: The transport rules state that a disembarking unit "may be placed
within 5cms of the transport vehicle." Does that mean 5cm distance, model edge to model edge, as when measuring range, or does that mean that the disembarking unit must be entirely within a 5cm distance from the vehicle?
A: The 5cm is intended to be measured as formation coherency (and range measurement), from model edge to model edge. While the word "within" might imply "entirely within" in some contexts it is used several places in the rules when referring to model-edge distance or other situations that involve only a portion of the model, e.g. "within range and line of sight" requires neither the entire model to be in range, nor the entire model to be visible. This should apply to other disembark moves as well, such as aircraft or drop pods.
1.8
Q: When is a unit in cover? A fraction of the model, more than half, fully?
A: For infantry, they can gain cover from simply touching an AV, so it makes sense that would be the standard for claiming other cover. As long as they touch the terrain, they can claim the benefits.
For vehicles, impassable terrain works based on the "hull down" rules and whether the terrain obscures the model. For dangerous terrain there is a relatively easily determined standard based on the dangerous terrain check. If the model at least touches the terrain
and is willing to take a dangerous terrain check, it can claim the cover benefits, i.e. no cover benefits without taking the terrain penalty. For terrain that has no effect on vehicles but might provide cover, it is best to remain consistent with infantry and dangerous terrain for vehicles and simply declare that a vehicle touching the cover can claim the benefit.
As always, though, terrain should be part of the 5 minute warmup. Players will have to work out, for example, whether touching the base of a piece of terrain counts as touching it, or if the model would need to butt up against the actual terrain feature itself rather than just the base. The answer might even be different from terrain piece to terrain piece. For example, the entire base of trees may count as being in the trees, but the base surrounding a building does not.
1.12.6
Q: In a recent game, my formation assaulted an enemy formation that had support fire from an adjacent formation. Only a few units were in range of the support formation and "directly involved" in the assault, as defined by 1.12.6. The assault tied and went to a second round, but the closest enemy units in the target formation had been killed. After the second round of countercharges, my attacking units no longer fit the definition of "directly involved" even though the support formation was still quite close. Can the support formation continue to fire based on the previous "directly involved" status, or does that reset in subsequent rounds?
A: The support formation cannot fire. Due to casualties and countercharge moves in the second round, the validity of targets can change dramatically, as units might end up out of range or out of line of sight. All determinations must be reevaluated in subsequent rounds of the assault after all moves are made. Note, this applies to "directly engaged," as defined in 1.12.5 and can have direct bearing on whether an attack stalls.
2.1.13
Q: The skimmer FAQ says units forcing firefight are still in base contact. The war engine rules say a war engine may only apply CC attacks to units in base contact. So, what happens if a war engine skimmer forces a firefight against units in base contact? Does it lose the ability to apply FF attacks because the units are still in base contact?
A: A war engine skimmer can apply FF hits to units which it has forced into a firefight. The basic WE rules don't take into account special abilities like Skimmer (or anything else). They do not make a technical distinction between Base Contact and CC because, in the absence of special rules, they are equivalent. This was an oversight, though, and not intended to negate the abilities of skimmer war engines.
2.2.4
Q: If a unit with CC First Strike kills the unit in base contact, can it still use CC for its regular attack?
A: No. The unit would use FF value. First Strike hits are resolved completely before any other attacks are made. If units in base contact are removed, there would be no CC targets when determining the remaining attacks.
3.3
Q: With ranged fire, attacks may be directed at war engine (3.2.1). Is it possible to single out WE in mixed formations in assault? It seems not, but many of the rules in section 3.2, such as critical hits, apply to damage in assaults as well. We want to be sure.
A: No, war engines may not be specially targeted in assaults. All hits are assigned closest to farthest as normal assault allocation.
4.2.4
Q: The rules state "Note that aircraft carrying out a ground attack mission that are armed
with AA weapons may shoot at enemy interceptors that fall within the AA weapon’s fire arc." This sounds as if only aircraft on ground attack missions may use their flak attacks. Also, it seems to imply that the ground attack formation can only fire at interceptors targeting that formation. Can aircraft on ground attack missions fire at interceptors other than those attacking it? For example, if Bomber Flight 1 ends in the AA arc of Bomber Flight 2 and is intercepted by enemy fighters, can Bomber Flight 2 fire, even though it is not the target of the interceptors? Can aircraft on missions other than ground attack make flak attacks at all?
A: Yes to all the questions. If aircraft end their approach move within range and fire arc of AA weapons, the enemy get flak attacks regardless of the missions of any of the aircraft.
The definitive statement of how flak attacks work is in the first sentence, "[flak attacks may] shoot immediately after an enemy aircraft formation makes an approach move but before it makes its attack." The sentence quoted is explanatory, intended to point out a particular situation that might not be immediately obvious (that's why it begins with "Note..."). It is not intended to create an additional restrictions on the basic flak attack mechanic.
As a side note, this has been a common point of contention. This is the NetEA answer and it is the ruling used by the Epic UK tournament organizers. Some groups house rule aircraft versus aircraft flak attacks differently.
6.1.3
Q: We keep running into little things that would easily be resolved if brought up in the 5 minute warm-up, so we are creating a checklist. Can you provide a list of items which have been brought up by other players or groups to help us out?
A: Sure. Keep in mind this is likely never going to be a complete list, but here's several issues we have encountered (and we'll add to it as we go):
Rules:Pre-measuring
Conventions for Lines of Sight and Lines Of Fire
Conventions for showing a formation is broken, in overwatch or has marched this turn.
Measurement to objectives
Have you both read the same FAQs? These can cover such a huge range of things that we can only list a few of the common differences we have encountered between groups.
- Disembarking - whole stand within 5cm or just one part of the model
- Requirements to claim cover (fraction, more than half, fully)
- Measurement from objectives
- Aircraft versus aircraft flak attacks
- Template use (what's in/out)
Optional and common house rules:Do you allow CAPing of CAP?
Do destroyed war engines stay on the board as cover?
House rules on intermingled formations (e.g. attacker has to be in range of all formations)?
Defining terrain:Effect on Lines of Sight and Lines Of Fire
What they count as on the terrain chart
Any changes to those Terrain Types? (For example, Craters not blocking LOS, even though the models are necessarily above the table surface, a muddy plowed field that is scrub but also dangerous terrain for vehicles, or perhaps certain terrain types not counting as cover against aircraft attacks.)
When a unit is counted as being "in" a specific terrain piece
Armies and army lists:"Counts as" units
Fire Arcs on units
Special rules and units
Strategic: (These are not necessarily things that are problematic for the rules, but things you will want to know to avoid "gotcha!" effects that can create a sense of unfairness.)
Any barrages?
Spacecraft
Teleports
Webways, portals and other unusual deployment options
6.1.4
Q: How should we measure from objectives? Edge? Center? Something else?
A: The most common convention in tournaments is to define the objectives as single points. Typically, this is the direct center of a "take and hold" objective and the middle of the objective's table edge for the "blitzkrieg" objective. Unless explicitly stated otherwise ahead of time, assume this is the case.
Objective measurement should be a topic for the 5 minute warmup. Some players measure to the edge. Some who use the "single point" convention above may incorporate a predetermined point on their objective markers (like a flag) to designate the point, rather than defaulting to the center of the model.
6.1.7
Q: How do spacecraft count for victory points in the case of a tiebreaker?
A: Spacecraft cannot be attacked or destroyed and therefore never count for tiebreaker points.
