Looking at the text, as:

"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"

And the text from Jinking says:

"Place a suitable marker on the aircraft as a reminder it can’t
shoot."

I'd assume that you can't shoot in any manner after jinking, whether that be active AA (Intercept) or passive AA (Intercepted) shooting.


Since breaking, and BM suppression, can remove AA flak attacks from ground units, I don't see why a rule that prevents aircraft from shooting wouldn't do the same for aircraft with an AA weapon.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yes, again we have to assume. And the jinking rule notes that you place the "can't shoot" marker on the Aircraft and not the Formation, even though you have to jink as a Formation and not a Unit.

Using that logic if a 2 plane formation is hit once and you elect to jink the other AC unit doesn't lose it's attack and could therefore both flak and ground attack, and that is not how I've ever seen it played. Good old loose GW wording again.

There's a good reason you haven't seen it played that way; From the rulebook that you just quoted:
"All of the aircraft in a formation must jink, or none at all."

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yes, so why place a marker on the AIRCRAFT to remember that IT can't shoot....should probably say FORMATION but doesn't.

It probably should, I guess, but it doesn't change the functionality of the rule, either you place a marker on the formation or each aircraft in a formation, either way the result is the same: None of the aircraft in the formation can shoot.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And I'd still let them flak defensively, and will rule in that manner should I be asked for a ruling during a game.

So Flak is special when it's on an aircraft (Can ignore rules that stop the aircraft shooting, like Jinking), but not special when it's on a ground unit (Can't ignore rules that stop it shooting, like supression or being broken) ?

I can't see why you say the aircraft should get special dispensation to ignore a rule that stops it shooting?


"Because aircraft don't get supressed by blast markers" seems to be your only offered opinion so far, but blast markers have nothing to do with the jinking special rule as far as I can see.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

The jinking rule states I loose my attack. It then goes on to say I should mark the formation to indicate this.

To me I read this as I loose my ground attack shooting, not the ability to shoot totally. You disagree and as ever the rules are not precise enough.

Of course immediate disengagement would fix this issue rather nicely

I disagree that the rules are not precise enough.

- Jinking says you can't shoot
- Flak is a type of shooting

Ergo, a jinking aircraft cannot shoot its flak, because flak is a type of shooting.

I could of course be wrong but that's what I read in the text of the rules.

Immediate disengagement is something I like too.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

No jinking says I loose my attack and I must mark the aircraft to indicate it can't shoot. That ambiguity alone causes questions.

You mark each aircraft that jinked to show that it can't shoot.***

There's no ambiguity in that particular part of the rule unless you're squinting at the wording kinda funny, IMO.

Now if you were talking about the wording of the jinking rule being written with reference to carrying out an order/action test, rather than firing AA, then I'd agree that there's possible wiggle room for a small amount of confusion there (Not enough to actually muddy the wording of the rules mind you, IMO). But focusing on the line about placing a marker, that's not a confusing line at all IMO.


***Actually, I've never seen anyone place a "jinked" marker ever.
People just say "I'm jinking", wave at their aircraft, and that's that.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Well your interpreting 'can't shoot' to mean 'can't shoot ever'.

I'm interpreting it to mean 'can't shot as part of a ground attack'.

Yup pretty much. That's what the words on the page seem to mean.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

1) Aircraft is plural as well as singular.

2) Of course you can intercept Aircraft on CAP. You have to use an Activation to put them on the table. You fail the activation the get a blast marker and stay off the table. They are activated, in essence they are on "aircraft ground assault overwatch". They are patrolling the skies, of course they could be intercepted. The interceptor navigates thru AA umbrellas to get to them just as they would any other target. If they jink, then no CAP for them.

_________________
~Laserwolf

Yes, we know, the game was intended to be played in the 2000-5000 points range...

When I look at the full wording of the rule I get the impression it is meant to be the aircraft lose their "actions shooting" rather than defensive AA that may come later.
Mainly because of the highlighted part, which for me is singular and should be plural if it's meant to mean attacks that can be used more than once (as in AA attacks).
Also if we interpret it as "lose all future attacks" then we have to disallow the aircraft from firing for the rest of the game as there is no time limit, written into the rule, as to when it stops. Although I doubt thats the intention either.




I'll play the rule as my opponents want to play it but would prefer to play it as I see it intended, just losing their actions shooting.