Hi Neal,

I want to start by saying I completely agree with you, but then I'm going to disagree. Here goes.

A Scout squad further away can't IMO block a charge, especially of a larger force or a WE., but that said where exactly do you draw the line?
here?


with scouts further but not actually behind?

or here?

with scouts closer but the target warlord still in charge range?

You can't completely ignore their ZoCs, but they are only 2 units, how much of a warhorde could they realistically slow down? (I use horde because they couldn't slow a warlord titan at all) but they could get in the way and become a nuisance to both. With an interception move the number and quality of the scouts actually comes into effect. A group of storm troopers would provide significantly better protection than 2 broken sentinels for example. So it becomes a Points Balanced solution and no one feels robbed.

Btw, if posting the images is a problem just say and I'll stop.(they are only wee)

Bim

Bim: There's no way to make it 100% clear cut. However, in both of your examples, I'm fine with the scouts stopping the chaos titan. The line between the scout units passes in front of the would-be target. To me, that's indicative that it the scouts form a legitimate skirmish line and it should work.

The current situation with ZoC actually includes the idea of an interception move. The Scout ZoC is supposed to represent all sorts of on-the-ground effects in an abstract manner. Scout ability includes camouflage, setting up of hasty ambushes, widely dispersed squads, rapid response ability, deception tactics, booby traps and so on. The units aren't even necessarily where the units on the board are. We have to use a unit position as a specific point for the rules to work, but they only really represent a general location. On the board it may look like two piddly sentinels standing there saying "you shall not pass" but the "reality" (for lack of a better word) it is supposed to represent is much more complicated than that.

So in answer to your question of "how much of a horde could they really stop," there's no way to know. If there are 2 Sentinels who make enough noise and dust and electronic counter-warfare signature that the enemy thinks there are 20 Sentinels, I'd say a pretty big force would slow way down as they prepared to take on 20 Sentinels.


I don't object to the concept of the interception move, but I think it would be problematic to try to implement something like that. What if the scouts are FF/firepower units? If they have to move to contact to intercept, then they are stuck with ignroing CC units or charging them suicidally. Do you allow the scouts snap fire instead? It opens up a cascade of potential situations that require clarifications and additional rules. My guess is that, in the end, it won't be any cleaner than the current situation. However, if you want to houserule it and try it out, I'd love to hear the results.

Ok,
the line as I put it is actually a line between the two, and yeah I hadn't considered units with really good firepower scores being just as problematic and there's more to it than that.

thanks
Bim

And see the discussion on the FAQ here

You know, maybe the "line between screening units" could be added as an expansion/clarification on the FAQ, as a suggested method for determining if the scout screen is legitimate. That method is used for Crossfire and seems to be very intuitive for most people. Something like...

"If you can trace a line between two screening units that passes in front of the intended target, the screen should be functional. If the line goes over or behind the target, it is probably a 'screening from behind' situation and the attacker should be allowed to proceed to base contact with the target."

I think this is a case where a diagram/photo would help many. Anyone remember the tangles we all got when pop ups went away from being god like!

That's more clear cut.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Apply the same to an A/C making its approach move and I think most of the oddness is resolved......nice idea.

Meph, I really like that extrapolation!
It puts the air-assault into the ground context and provides a neat way of merging the transition between flying over stuff (and ignoring any of the 'ground based' effects), and landing where you are obviously on the ground with full effects in force.

Playing devil's advocate here; this does seem to contradict the following - 4.2.1

So how would this be explained?

There in lies the problem, people say you can't air assault because you can't simultaneous enter both ZOC's at the point it lands...so in effect it is affected as it approaches...Probably should be as drop pods and planetfall is and they are both more balistic in nature!

Well Drop pods and Planetfall cannot land in ZoC. So quite apart from contradicting parts of 4.2.5, it would also mean that scouts could only be fought B-B by jump-pack equipped units who could disembark into contact; most could not cross the 10cm scout ZoC.

=================
Back to your excellent suggestion, I think part of the answer lies in 4.2.5 in an oblique reference back through 1.12.3 to 1.7.3
The rules on charging are specific and require the assaulting unit to move into B-B, or stay clear of enemy ZoC. Furthermore the concept of "nearness" that we are now considering is measured during the charge move and relates to rule mechanics, not to how the aircraft behave relative to ZoCs.

So I think it *can* be argued that aircraft have to observer the same rules as other ground units when 'charging'; that "nearness" is measured during the aircraft approach ('charge') move; and consequently that screening ZoCs can be handled in exactly the same way.

ie, AC/WE can pass over intervening ZoCs into the ZoC of a target formation, and may only ignore screening ZoCs that apply "from behind" relative to the direction of the approach move.

While I understand this from a background perspective, the difference in the rules is that aircraft are using an action and taking an assault move. Planetfall units (and Teleport, for that matter) are not using up either of those options.


This would make it possible for Scouts to screen from air assault under certain conditions. Basically, if the Scouts could cover the entire target with ZoC and use a combination of units and/or impassable terrain (board edge for aircraft) to surround the protected unit, they would be interposed from any approach move.

Indeed.

Effectively, we are saying that while Air Transports ignore ZoC during the approach move, they must observe them when landing not least because a landed air-transport is treated as a ground unit in all respects, and it should not be allowed to contravene the rules whilst turning into a ground unit.

Did someone ask for images?



one is successfully screened the other not. as far as I interpret the majority of the posts.
Also from Air assaults?

Does this mean that for the OP the swooping hawks could not have shielded the vauls? since they were positioned to one side.
Bim

This is getting needlessly complicated and confusing.
I'm not in favour of drawing lines between Scout units or of allowing Scout formations to be able to stop/effect air assaults.

If a WE transport lands in base contact with it's intended target (if in a non intermingled Scout formations ZoC) then there is nothing the Scout formation can do about it (except add fire support) and rightly so.

It's not the same as teleporting or drop pods and they shouldn't be brought into this as Neal has mentioned.

There is the often quoted rule:
Which of course lead to the situation of giving Scout units way too much influence.

We now have the FAQ which makes the situation playable:
The rule for moving into base contact takes precedence over the rule for not entering another unit's ZoC.

It's not rocket surgery...
It really is that simple.

Anything else is turning this situation into a rules lawyer's biggest fantasy...

*Edit - just realised this is probably not the right thread for this comment...
I'll leave it here for now though.

_________________
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.