Sort of this, but with a few caveats, mostly because this is a bizarre theoretical situation that makes for all kinds of weirdness.

First, a charge move does not require "move towards the closest enemy." Only countercharges require that. The dismounting troops could theoretically move any way they wanted.

Second, the target stand would have no ZoC because it was in base contact and be fully engaged because it is in contact with 2 or more units (WE DC = # of units). Any dismounting troops would have no target ZoC driving their movement, nor targets they could reach in base contact.

Third, the scouts' ZoC is in effect, and as they are not intermingled, cannot be attacked in any way, or even approached except to reach the "otherwise impossible to base contact" target unit (which, as noted, is already off-limits due to base contact restrictions).


Personally, I'd probably say any dismounting troops had to do their best to avoid (move out of) the Scout ZoC while maintaining formation coherency (coherency for the aircraft would be under the WE rules, so 10+cm). That would still leave them in FF range, which is all they'd get anyway.

After the assault, the troops would become a separate formation and could consolidate on their own. That would mean electing to stay in place or moving out of enemy ZoC (if they weren't already). Consolidating back onto the aircraft would not be an option because that would require them re-entering or going deeper into enemy ZoC.

Also, I suppose the troops could take their chances and stay mounted through the assault, then dismount during the consolidation move, assuming they won. If they did that, the dismount would have to do its best to move out of the Scout ZoC.

OK, so no charging the closest then. They'd disembark and stay put as moving in any direction would not take them out of ZoC.

Even beyond the ZoC stuff they wouldn't be able to consolidate back into the AC because they air assaulted out of it.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

You can re-embark the AC, it just means it can't disengage in the end phase. Now I agree you may not want to but if you chose to move that would be the shortest path out of the scouts ZOC when consolidating.

Depends where the aircraft is I guess?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

That usually goes hand-in-hand with "wouldn't be able to" when I dwell on this stuff. Kind of like running AVs through a forest or putting stealers on overwatch.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

True, but for most cargo's they can only get out 5cm so will be in range of the AC to remount...if not you've been a bit elastic with your tape measure

Always start with my stealers on OW...for the puzzled faces of opponents if nothing else

Neal, this seems to be predicated upon the AC/WE landing in the ZoCs of *both* the scouts and the target WE, which is contrary to the rules on ZoC and assault. To assault the WE alone, the AC/WE must land clear of the ZoC of *all* other enemy formations (including the scouts) and the troops must avoid other enemy ZoC when disembarking. This includes when landing 'on top of' the target formation.

This is how we play in the UK tournaments (Steve and Meph please confirm).

Note

• If the AC/WE can land inside the ZoC of the target WE but outside that of the scouts (or other enemy formations), then we are back in familiar territory; even if the scouts ZoC actually covers the target WE as they cannot "screen from behind".
• Under the "screening from behind" scenario, the attackers will be able to consolidate back out of the scout's ZoC.

Infantry in OW has a 5+ cover save I believe so if you're going to garrison then might as well put them in OW.

_________________

The "screen from behind" FAQ is clear that given the conditions described (scout farther away than target and not intermingled) a ground-unit attacker actually can enter the ZoCs of both the target and the scouts.

The point of dispute is whether an aircraft can use that exception as well. If aircraft can claim the FAQ exception, then they would be able to move to base contact like a ground unit can, as long as the conditions of the FAQ are met.

I expect the crux of that dispute comes down to the maneuverability of aircraft. In other words, is it fair to allow aircraft that same exception when they can nearly always ensure that the Scout is farther away than the target, i.e. "screening from behind"?

Apparently, the UK answer is that aircraft cannot use the FAQ exception. I'm not decided but I lean towards allowing it.


In any case, as the ERC member with domain over rules and FAQs, it's Meph's call at this point as far as I'm concerned.

No, it is a question of timing. A ground unit assaulting under these conditions enters the ZoC of the target unit / formation *before* entering that of the scouts, whereas the AC/WE is entering both *simultaneously*.

1.7.3 (and indeed the principles behind the rules) is worded in the singular; units entering the ZoC of a (singular) enemy unit; a formation assaulting a target formation. It is *after* this condition is met that the assaulting unit may pass through multiple ZoCs to reach the relevant target enemy unit under 1.12.3.

Note, passing through multiple ZoCs is usually interpreted as passing through the ZoCs of other enemy units in the same formation, though it can be read as permitting the passage of ZoCs of units from *other* formations (the "screening from behind" FAQ) and indeed not just scouts - - - - This is because the prohibition in 1.12.3 can be interpreted as refering to 1.7.3, thus limiting the ZoC first entered to those of Units in the target formation.

But either way it *must* prevent the AC/WE from landing in the ZoC of an enemy unit that is not part of the target formation.

Ssshhhhsss.....don't want everyone to know

I'm definitely in favour of this.
We've been playing this way for years and the sky hasn't fallen on our heads (is that a pun ) or broken the game.

Anything else is giving way too much power to scouts (gotta love a broken Sentinel formation scout screen stopping a Thunderhawk full of Terminators from doing their thing).

*Edit - Yup - I've been starting both my EpicUK Genestealer formations on Overwatch. The cover save is gold and the Infiltrator 40cm charge is enough to really impact the opponents early movements - win! ).

_________________
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.

Onyx, if we allow this, where do we stop?

Although I have every sympathy with the thought that a couple of cringing scouts hiding in a shell hole are not going to stop the rufty-tufty marines from 'doing their thing', changing the rules in this way would also make it true for a broken guard company hiding 20 metres away or a broken (but Fearless) warlord towering over the whole scene.
(And before everyone else jumps in, "broken" in E:A is usually interpreted as being 'out of communication' - but that is beside the point)

The point is that E:A contains rules about Zones of Control, and like it or not, they apply equally to weak or 'broken' formations as to strong ones. Permitting formations to *enter* the ZoC of more than one enemy formation effectively re-writes a key part of the rules as it allows a single formation to assault multiple enemy formations that are not intermingled.

Now that may not be a bad thing, and it is certainly more realistic, but it is not what the rules say.

*twitch*I more meant that if the aircraft was left in a hostile ZoC and the infantry were not.

Anyways Dave's opinion is clear (I've read a short essay he wrote on the subject a while back on the Flame On Epic board - he thinks scouts should prevent air assaults) so I guess it's settled really.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter