I think Neal deals with that in his earlier post

the "reasons unknown" refers to the fact that when you have a leaking drainpipe, you dont blame the clouds. and now the drainpipe in thes metaphor is fixed anyway, so there is no reason to continue to mis-rule regarding the clouds.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

This is how we have played it and will continue to play it here in Western Australia.
Planes are complicated things...

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Personally I think this interpretation is a massive change from what is played and I strongly disagree - as with disrupt hits causing BMs on holofields. If I'm reading it correctly then you are saying that a scout screen cannot be used at all.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I don't think that is what he is saying. Consider these examples.

In the first diagram, the scouts and target cannot be considered intermingled. However, because they are far enough apart so as not to be intermingled, that means it is possible for the attacker to enter the ZoC of the target without entering the scout ZoC first, by going round to the left. The FAQ says that if the attacker does this, he must try to get into base contact with the target, not the scout. Even if he has to enter the scout ZoC in between. The FAQ therefore solves a problem with the rules where the attacker can enter the ZoC of the target but is prevented from getting into base contact due to the ZoC of the scout. Otherwise it would actually be possible to make it so the attacker cannot get into base contact with either formation.

In the second diagram, the scout's ZoC extends entirely over the target's ZoC such that it is impossible to enter the target's ZoC without first entering the scout's ZoC. This means that the attacker is not allowed to get into contact with the target because he must contact the scout first. However, because the scout is close enough to the target for this to be the case, the attacker can treat them as intermingled if he wishes. Thus the defender has been able to screen the target, but cannot do so without risking the target entirely.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Of course, what I would now like to know neal is, what happens with an air assault in this example:

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Not to mention that the same thing could be done with a single, broken, scout unit, if the target formation is in a table corner.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Fire fight them.....

Find out whose birthday is closest?

Edit: I'm not following how you are reading it.

A scout screen has to be interposed to be effective. Using a scout screen against aircraft is practically impossible because of the mobility of the aircraft allow it to approach in a way where the scouts are not interposed. Against anything else it works just fine.

Is that what you meant?

Your problem example is a formation of 1 unit being air assaulted out of the center of a scout formation? That's beyond theoretical, but in any case, that's the exact situation covered by the "screen from behind" FAQ - a screening formation that cannot be intermingled projects its ZoC over the intended target. If the screening formation cannot be intermingled, then the target formation can be approached despite the screening formation's ZoC.

I'd handle it in one of two ways:

1) The AC/WE barges the lone stand, everything disembarks and charges the closest Scouts from where it disembarks but stops just shy of base-to-base or at it's full disembark move (whatever happens first). Since the Scouts weren't intermingled you can't BtB them.

2) The AC/WE lands and the first stand to disembark charges and BtBs the lone stand, the rest of the stands charge the Scouts as above.

If you find yourself in ZoC and assault you have to charge (or counter-charge for that matter) the closest enemy stand not in CC regardless of what formation it belongs to. Whether or not you can actually BtB it though is determined by the formation it belongs to or intermingling.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I believe that at least part of the answer is implied in Kyrt's diagrams and description. However, I would like to see the "troublesome" FAQ replaced with something like this, to answer the various questions being posed.

I'm not sure that it does Neal; people are erroneously confusing the "screen from behind" FAQ with the situation where the THawk lands between the scout and target and both enemy are more than 5cm apart. (This actually applies to any two enemy formations that are close but not intermingled). The issue being that some are arguing that this FAQ allows the air-transport to be placed in multiple ZoC for an assault.

Wow. I had typed out a really long response and then I realized that you are sometimes using "move over" to mean establishing base contact rather than just in the sense of "positioned on top of."

It's clear aircraft can be positioned over enemy units. That's not base contact, just flying overhead, ignoring everything on the ground. 4.2.1:

If an air transport ends its approach move directly over an enemy unit and lands, that converts the aircraft to a ground unit, which is now in base contact with and on top of the enemy unit. They don't have to "move over" an enemy unit after landing because they are already on top of it before they change to a ground unit.

Your last assertion above seems to be that the aircraft has to "move over" (make base contact with) the enemy only after it becomes a ground unit because that is how the 3.3.1 barging rules apply ground-move WEs. However, the air assault rules provide the landing process in place of on-the-ground movement. They refer to the aircraft landing "as if it were charging."

If it lands on top of an enemy unit, then "as if it were charging" would include barging effects.

This inclusion of barging effects as part of the "as if it were charging" idea in addition to the explicit ZoC entry is the only extrapolation in the FAQ. That contradicts no rules or other FAQs.


I agree that the regular barging rules don't have any "only when they stop on top" limitation. That restriction applies to aircraft because it's part of the aircraft rules, not the barging rules.

I also agree it's not explicitly stated as a limitation in the aircraft rules. It's the result of applying the aircraft movement and landing rules. The aircraft does not become a ground unit until after the end of the approach move, when all movement has stopped. The result is that with no remaining move, only units the aircraft land on top of can be subject to barging effects.


This is what made me realize you are conflating "moving over" as an aircraft with "moving over" as a ground WE. "Moving over" as an aircraft obviously has no base contact and no barging.

===

We can beat on the OW/aircraft rules elsewhere, but whether the FAQ is OW-specific or because it shouldn't exist at all, we both agree it is not relevant to the barging rules.