Main
Registration
Login
Welcome Guest

RSS
 
[ New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
Page 1 of 11
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Rules, inHouse Rules & FAQs » AT-43 FB Rule Query - AFV's @ Tarmac Spaceport (Can AFV's land on the first floor?)
AT-43 FB Rule Query - AFV's @ Tarmac Spaceport
BalrogDate: Friday, 11-Nov-2011, 4:03 PM | Message # 1
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Guys ... Dumb question for the day ... Can AFV's land on the first floor of the Spaceport?

My question revolves round disembarking troopers from the Red Blok BTR5 transport vehicle onto the first floor, my thinking being that they simple "park" up beside the first floor and the troops jump out. Apparently, that's not the case. NO AFV can "hover" that height, but needs to use the "Rocket Jump" ability to land on the floor to allow troops to get of. Please see this thread ...

>>> http://at-43.understairs.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=858

From what I understand things, the way to show the two heights that AFV's can "hover" at is by the Karman "pins" that come with their models. This also fixes where the model can see and be seen from. AND even at it's highest point, an AFV can be engaged in close combat!

Here's a couple of extracts from the Karman Armybook as a general guide ...
    Page 46: Their vehicles don’t need any roads but hover just above the ground under the foliage.

    WHAT ALTITUDE?
    Karman vehicles are flying machines that can hover at different heights. To represent this they come with a
    transparent pin so that the vehicles can be placed at two different heights: with or without the pin. The pin
    can be added or removed before or after any movement.

    Changing altitude is considered as movement; so it can trigger “Overwatch!” fire.

    In the higher position, the vehicle has a better field of view but is also more exposed. In the lower position, it
    can benefit from cover more easily, but this makes shooting harder.

Has this always been the case? AFV's are allowed on the first floor??

As a final idea ... I suppose all models need bases to see if they can fit in the odd spaces around the control room? ... Walts
 
zellakDate: Friday, 11-Nov-2011, 8:32 PM | Message # 2
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1526
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Please be aware i have reported this Thread to the Moderator.

DEMON : " When next we meet, i shall tear you limb from limb...there will be no escape. "

Hero: " You bring balloon animals and i'll hire a clown..... we can make it a regular party. "
 
pavlovDate: Friday, 11-Nov-2011, 10:13 PM | Message # 3
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
GRASS

biggrin

Added (11-Nov-2011, 10:13 PM)
---------------------------------------------
Hi

Apparently, that's not the case. NO AFV can "hover" that height

Can you point us to the page for this.

Has this always been the case? AFV's are allowed on the first floor

No the only afv's that can get up the stairs are karman trikes, since they are like bikes (but with an extra wheel), this was discussed during the first game when Ian B parked one on overwatch at the top of the stairs (top move) so I dont think this is open for discussion at all, been done and rubber stamped on the day.

Alan
Message edited by pavlov - Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 8:20 AM

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
zellakDate: Friday, 11-Nov-2011, 10:38 PM | Message # 4
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1526
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (pavlov)
No the only afv's that can get up the stairs are karman trikes, since they are like bikes (but with an extra wheel), this was discussed during the first game when Ian B parked one on overwatch at the top of the stairs (top move) so I dont think this is open for discussion at all, been done and rubber stamped on the day.


I want to grass him in as well....Thanks Mr. Moderator. smile

DEMON : " When next we meet, i shall tear you limb from limb...there will be no escape. "

Hero: " You bring balloon animals and i'll hire a clown..... we can make it a regular party. "
 
pavlovDate: Friday, 11-Nov-2011, 11:25 PM | Message # 5
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
You great big sook

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 6:31 AM | Message # 6
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (zellak)
Please be aware i have reported this Thread to the Moderator.

@Moderator: There is no rule in place at the moment. That's what the Sunday meetings about. The fact that two of the four players who have supposedly agreed to the said rule about posting questions on AT-43 issues have both posted here proves that. AND, decisions are NOT made by small groups anymore. ALL players NOW have a say on AT-43 issues, with the first meeting this Sunday.

@Pav: Soz, my wording wasn't very clear about what I thought I could do and what I can actually do. As you've said, no AFV can hover alongside the first floor, it must have it's base ON the floor for troopers to disembark, showing that AFV's can land on the first floor.

Quote (pavlov)
No the only afv's that can get up the stairs are karman trikes, since they are like bikes (but with an extra wheel), this was discussed during the first game when Ian B parked one on overwatch at the top of the stairs (top move) so I dont think this is open for discussion at all, been done and rubber stamped on the day.

Once again, I think all rules made in the past need to be addressed. My reason for this rule is that trikes are listed as AFV's, but only infantry "fighters" can go up & down the "stairs". From the FB Rulebook, page 118 ...
    The control tower: The control tower is composed of a ground level and one upper floor. The latter is represented by
    a tile placed above the one representing the ground level. The first floor tile is propped up on four containers standing vertically
    (see map).
    Infantry fighters may change floor at the beginning or end of their movement. The change of floor is part
    of the movement. If at least one member of a unit is on the stairway on ground level, his unit can be placed on the stairway
    zone on the upper floor, and vice-versa. This movement is part of the unit’s movement. Fighters on the upper floor can
    shoot and be shot at using the normal rules. Line of sight and range are checked using the miniatures actual position. It is
    possible to reach the upper floor using the “Rocket Jump” ability, but it cannot be used to cross the walls of the control
    tower on ground level or upper floor level. The control tower is secured: it cannot be sabotaged.

Obviously, the trikes have the "Rocket Jump" ability, so they can use this to get up to the first floor, but only by accessing the first floor by one of the open sides. Can u point out anything I might have missed about AFV's using the "stairs" as it's waaaaaayyyyyy to early to be reading rules!

I'm off too bed ... Walts
 
pavlovDate: Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 8:35 AM | Message # 7
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Morning

I'm just up

my wording wasn't very clear about what I thought I could do and what I can actually do. As you've said, no AFV can hover alongside the first floor, it must have it's base ON the floor for troopers to disembark, showing that AFV's can land on the first floor.


Can you cut and paste or point us to the rules for this as I can't find them.

Once again, I think all rules made in the past need to be addressed. My reason for this rule is that trikes are listed as AFV's, but only infantry "fighters" can go up & down the "stairs". From the FB Rulebook, page 118 ...

Once again Walter this was discussed and decided upon at the first tarmac spaceport game when all players were present and that included you.

Obviously, the trikes have the "Rocket Jump" ability, so they can use this to get up to the first floor, but only by accessing the first floor by one of the open sides. Can u point out anything I might have missed about AFV's using the "stairs"[color=red]

The Karman trikes are classed a bikes and can move up stairs due to there size, again disdussed and decided on sorted on the day.

Whats the point of discussing and deciding of the rules x amount of weeks ago when there going to, be dragged up again , every player that was in the campagne at that point was at the table that day you can't get a better representation than that.
The constant bollocks over rules is detracting from the campagne and from the game.

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 12:41 PM | Message # 8
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
@Pav: Here's the ref about transports ... Frostbitbite Rulebook, Page 12 & 13. Of course, until I see a transport base on the first floor, I might be talking bolloks! ... now there's a surprise I hear u say!!! wink ... They might be too big to land? Does anyone know what the base sizes for transport AFV's should be anyway, so I can attach one to the model I eventually get?

Quote (pavlov)
The Karman trikes are classed a bikes and can move up stairs due to there size, again discussed and decided on sorted on the day.


See, this is exactly the major problem I have with the old rule tweaks. Not getting at you, but rule tweaks of any kind should not benefit any army or faction directly, which this does solely for the Karman's. AND, the rule requires no clarity, as it clearly states that only "infantry fighters" can use the "stairs" to move up and down the levels. Which shows that players sitting round the table once again didn't bother to read the rules to check, creating another biased rule.

Let's be honest, when I was involved with that meeting, I had ZERO knowledge of the AT-43 rules, and most likely said nothing or if I did say anything, it was totaly wrong! It's only been before the battle of the Tarmac Spaceport that I actually sat and read the rules thoroughly, including armybooks and forums elsewhere to really learn the game, and I think this is where a lot of players fall down. Dealing with new rules should never take place during OR after a battle. A note should be taken by the players and EVERYONE involved in AT-43 notified about an issue or possible rule query ... via the fourms wink surprised wink ... so time can be given to finding out the right answer to the problem, or at least get some clarity on why such rules exist or need tweaking.

That way, players can go away and read the rules again. Time & time again, players have shown that they do not know the rules 100%, INCLUDING ME! That's why time needs to be taken away from the gaming table (say a week max to sort problems?) and discussions via the forums to guage the pro's & con's of a new rule tweak, before sitting down and discussing things face-2-face, with a more informed decision being made then, when players will actually know ALL the rules surrounding the problem.

Soz for ranting on, I'm wide awake now! ... Walts
 
pavlovDate: Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 2:10 PM | Message # 9
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Hi

See, this is exactly the major problem I have with the old rule tweaks

Whats the problem we discussed we decided we did it done, if we keep going back rehashing stuff thats fixed where do we stop.This was not a tweek it fixed what was seen as problem during the game everyone present agreed to this and the game played on to it's conclusion. Since then the Karman army have not used trikes in any games at all so it's not as if it's become a game breaker.

Not getting at you, but rule tweaks of any kind should not benefit any army or faction directly, which this does solely for the Karman's

Be a Karman then you get the benefit in fact it's becoming bit tedious all the stuff about Karman imbalance and Karman being overpowered if there that good get a Karman army.Suck it up. It's hardly a benefit going up one set of stairs in one scenario.

Let's be honest, when I was involved with that meeting, I had ZERO knowledge of the AT-43 rules

Snap there were several players around the table that day in the same position but your the only person trying to change what was already been agreed upon it's not as if the concept of trikes going up stairs is nuclear physics and the base does fit at the top of the stairs. The trike just hovers up the stairs.

Dealing with new rules should never take place during OR after a battle

Then are we suggesting that games should be stopped an re-fought if the rules have to be "tweaked" due to issues with translation etc.

A note should be taken by the players and EVERYONE involved in AT-43 notified about an issue or possible rule query ... via the fourms

Thats whats been happening and look where we are now trying to change a rule that was agreed upon months ago.

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 6:48 PM | Message # 10
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hey Pav ... Now that I've got rid of my friends, I can get on my voice box again! surprised

IMHO, I think we need to revise ALL inHouse Rules to rectify wrong decisions made in the past. I'm guessing you've seen the proposed agenda for this Sunday? It has the "Result Stands!" rule in it ... one of the first rules created by the original players. So, if it's in the proposed agenda, why not the Karman "bike" tweak? As I've been (rightly!) told before ... it's not for me to decide, but I do intend to bring it up as a point of interest.

The biggest problem with Sunday is that EVERYTHING'S coming under scrutiny in the one day, rather than odd issues popping up every odd week. I'm hoping we'll be able to get some FINAL, informed, voting done on Sunday to clear the slate of what's in the proposed agenda, and anything else players bring up, that way we can get back to playing ... I know ... I'm a dreamer! closedeyes blink closedeyes

Players knowledge on the rules is 100 times better now than when the decision to allow an AFV to go up the Spaceport "stairs" was created, based on my dumb levels! I want to look at all inHouse Rules now because I've a much better understanding of the rules, as everyone else now has. ERROR's that where made in the past should be addressed, at any time of the day or year.

The lack of procedures for declaring a possible inHouse Rule, rule clarification and anything else to do with the AT-43 game should all have been done at the beginning of the Frostbite Campaign. AND, the fact that it's me that's banging the drums about this is the biggest joke of all. More experienced players should have stood up to the plate and had something written down for newbie's like myself to follow for anything I would want brought to the attention of ALL the AT-43 players.
    The Philosophy of inHouse Rules ... IMHO!
    1] No rule decision should be considered on the day an issue arises ...
    ... This allows ALL AT-43 players a say in the said issue, and players time to gain a better understanding of the implications surrounding the creation of a new rule.

    2] No rule should benefit any one army or faction.

    3] Any player may raise an issue at any time he/she thinks there is an issue.
    ... A weeks lie-time will give players enough time to read the rules, search the forums and have a much better idea how to resolve the said issue.

    4] Any & all rules, including inHouse Rules made in the past, can be questioned at any time.
    ... This could lead to rules being dropped as players gain a better knowledge of the game and AT-43 rules in general.
Soz for going on a bit, again, but we need something written down so everyone knows where they stand. I'm personally becoming frustrated with players pulling rule tweaks from their pants whever they feel like it! ... surprised oh, errr misses! surprised

Walts ... Officially now a 1st Grade Ranter!
 
gerrywithaGDate: Saturday, 12-Nov-2011, 11:42 PM | Message # 11
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation: 19
Status: Offline
Well Gents,

This is finally putting the tin lid on everything for me. Never had a rule system that I've enjoyed playing being so systematically pulled apart and argued over like a bunch of kids. I hope somebody brings their lawyer with them on Sunday because we're as well having Phil Barker write the rules and amendments and house rules, and even then you'd best have a law degree to understand it

Leaving a week between querying a rule in the game and getting a decision is an absolute joke. There should be absolutely NO QUERYING OF RULES ON OUTSIDE FORUMS. ANY INHOUSE RULES SHOULD BE JUST THAT. INHOUSE!!!!

Walter, you may want to look at all the House rules again but, no offence, that doesn't mean that everybody else does

Gwag

And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
 
BalrogDate: Sunday, 13-Nov-2011, 9:40 AM | Message # 12
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Gerry ... Some responses to ur previous post ... hopefully I won't offend & major soz if I do ...
Quote (gerrywithaG)
Never had a rule system that I've enjoyed playing being so systematically pulled apart and argued over like a bunch of kids.

What u consider arguing I consider "banter", "healthy discussion" and hopefully "clarification" on anything to do with the AT-43 rules.

Quote (gerrywithaG)
Leaving a week between querying a rule in the game and getting a decision is an absolute joke. There should be absolutely NO QUERYING OF RULES ON OUTSIDE FORUMS. ANY INHOUSE RULES SHOULD BE JUST THAT. INHOUSE!!!!

Players need time to read the rules surrounding an issue or problem that's brought up on a gamesday. Deciding things there & then is why so many inHouse Rules are wrong and floating about, due to a lack of understanding and players voting "in the heat of the moment", rather than taking a timeout ... a week - Sunday to Sunday ... read the rules, faq's, etc, again ... visit & post questions in other forums, etc, for some informed opinions .... then have a face-2-face vote the following Sunday. That way, only inHouse players get to vote ... with a much better idea about the implications of adding a new rule.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, if I hadn't went elsewhere to another forum where players have far more experiance than any of us, I would never have been able to question what went on at the Tarmac Spaceport.

Let's not put ourselves on a pedestal and think we know the rules better than everyone else. There's ALWAYS someone more knowledgeable about rules elsewhere, especially within the AT-43 game.


Quote (gerrywithaG)
Walter, you may want to look at all the House rules again but, no offence, that doesn't mean that everybody else does ... Gwag

To be honest, I'm hoping that the players round the table will see that we need to scrap the majority of the inHouse Rules, as they where made without really consulting the various avenues open to them. As you've mentioned elsewhere ... "Play the rules as they are written and not open them up to various interpretations" ... that's what I really want, and the majority of our inHouse Rules could be easily scraped. That's why I want ALL inHouse Rules to be addressed .... for scrapping! ... Walts
 
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Rules, inHouse Rules & FAQs » AT-43 FB Rule Query - AFV's @ Tarmac Spaceport (Can AFV's land on the first floor?)
Page 1 of 11
Search:

Copyright MyCorp © 2017