Main
Registration
Login
Welcome Guest

RSS
 
[ New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
Page 4 of 5«12345»
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Rules, inHouse Rules & FAQs » AT-43 Q's, FAQ's & Rules (Questions, FAQ's & Rule Querys For AT-43!)
AT-43 Q's, FAQ's & Rules
BalrogDate: Thursday, 08-Sep-2011, 11:16 PM | Message # 61
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Guys ... I fancy using a MedTec unit this upcoming Sunday, but can't find any stats for the container. Various external AT-43 forums say the walls & container are indestructable ... would u agree? ... Thanks, Walts

Here's one such ref to the old Rackham website ...

Quote ("Aftermath")
Quote ("Marwan")
Quick follow up question, are the MedTec containers and walls destructable?

They are never destructable terrain, not even in missions that allow terrain destruction.

Quote ("Marwan")
Can someone point me to the reference that says they are or not.

It was clarified by Rackham on the old Rackham AT-43 forum, and can be found in the FAQ OB compiled:
Quote ("Section L (Frostbite) Q10")
Q10.Just to be sure, in missions where terrain is destroyable by normal means (firing, melee, etc) can you also destroy medtech containers and the associated high walls, or are they ALWAYS indestructible?
A9. MedTech container and high walls are made of topnotch materials. They are always undestructibles.


... Here's the link ... http://at-43.understairs.nl/forum....c#p1245 ... Walts
Message edited by Balrog - Friday, 09-Sep-2011, 1:06 AM
 
zellakDate: Friday, 09-Sep-2011, 9:53 AM | Message # 62
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
They are not destructible.

But they can be destroyed by "sabotage" (see field /combat engineers ability).

Destructible terrain elements are those that can be destroyed by gunfire.

Added (09-Sep-2011, 9:53 Am)
---------------------------------------------

Quote (Balrog)
or do we need to have one company per faction, as u mentioned before??


as i said before.

We decided that each armies Companies should all be different factions , so that they could not combine.

As we did not have enough models to field such large armies.

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. "
 
BalrogDate: Friday, 09-Sep-2011, 2:22 PM | Message # 63
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Thanks Z ... I'm a terrible one for rule clarity! ... Walts
 
BalrogDate: Saturday, 10-Sep-2011, 10:33 AM | Message # 64
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hey Z ... Just realised that the Medics of the MedTec team are Type II inf, and only three in the unit, so will need to roll a morale check each round?!

But, having read the MedTec notes, it can use it's medics to heal fighters of a unit it is in contact (2.5cm's) with, so it should be given the bonus of the units numbers, so doesn't need a morale roll? If on their own and with no contact with a friendly unit, they will need to roll for morale? Or just make them Type III's??

Any thoughts, pointers? ... Thanks, Walts
 
zellakDate: Saturday, 10-Sep-2011, 1:02 PM | Message # 65
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Stricktly speaking a MedTech unit is a 3 man type 2 infantry unit...so should test morale every turn.

But there are 3 man type 2 units in the Frostbite book, who dont test every turn. (heavy weapon teams)

As they are called support units , i would say MedTechs are also support units.......what else would they be ? happy

Another house rule maybe ????

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. "
 
BalrogDate: Saturday, 10-Sep-2011, 2:58 PM | Message # 66
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (zellak)
Stricktly speaking a MedTech unit is a 3 man type 2 infantry unit...so should test morale every turn.

But there are 3 man type 2 units in the Frostbite book, who dont test every turn. (heavy weapon teams)

As they are called support units , i would say MedTechs are also support units.......what else would they be ?

Another house rule maybe ????

Yeah ... MedTec's as an FB "Support Unit" ... morale check when reduced too one ... yeah, that's more in tune with the FB rules.

I think that's what confused me a bit about morale in general that when I asked about beefing up my troops u mentioned the support groups, who are all Type I or II units, but benefit from the FB "SU" morale check, so I assumed the MedTec where the same. Just as well I asked! We can ask on Sunday if there's no more feedback.

If push comes to shove, I'll just have to use up 2 LPs to get them moving if they fail ... OUCH! Walts
 
CheDate: Saturday, 10-Sep-2011, 8:36 PM | Message # 67
Lieutenant general
Group: Member
Messages: 528
Reputation: 61
Status: Offline
Anyone elase allowed to join in? (Just joshing, not caring biggrin ) You might have guessed that I'm durnk sa I pyte tish. Potato Vodka rules cool

Wargamers like to paint their privates!!
 
pavlovDate: Tuesday, 13-Sep-2011, 4:48 PM | Message # 68
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Hi

There nurses in white uniforms not hairy a%$*d vets with more combat under there belt than you could shake a stick at thats why there type 2, suck it up spend those points or buy a civvy engineer. biggrin

Alan

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Wednesday, 14-Sep-2011, 10:40 AM | Message # 69
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (pavlov)
Hi ... There nurses in white uniforms not hairy a%$*d vets with more combat under there belt than you could shake a stick at thats why there type 2, suck it up spend those points or buy a civvy engineer. ... Alan

Hey Alan ... u know what, ur probably right! It's not a major headache to just spend the LP's should they fail their morale check, and one of the other forums suggested that I use the ARC faction of the Red Blok to gain the faction advantage of an extra fighter ...
    Red Blok: ARC Faction Advantage: the maximum number of fighters in ARC infantry
    units is increased by one (this additional fighter is not free: his cost in A.P. is added as usual to that of the unit; this rule only
    applies to units with an extra fighter cost in their ”Cost of a unit” table).
... so I could have four medics if I wanted to get away from the 3 Type II fighters morale die rolls. OR, as the other forum suggested, just allocate a hero to the medics, giving them four fighters! There's lots of options, I'm just being lazy, or maybe I have a terrible habit of always wanting to tweak things .... mmm, no we won't need a poll on my antics, thank you!!!

Yeah, lets just leave the medic's as they are!!! ... Walts
 
zellakDate: Sunday, 18-Sep-2011, 8:47 PM | Message # 70
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
just thought of another rule we dont play. In fact most people on the old AT-43 forum disagreed with it to.

The wording of activation was changed a couple of years into the game...so that the game designer could claim that the game could be played "right out of the box." sad

ie. in answer to a post put on the forum a Rackham official's answer claimed that whenever a card was turned over...any of the same type of units depicted with that card could be activated. This was a knee jerk reaction to a post...and caused a lot of confusion.

The idea being that a player did not need to mark the cards as specific to each unit....so straight out the box.

This would cause a number of problems...so was poo poo d by all the players with enough experience of the game.

Problem 1) the game is less tactical as players choose which ever unit suits his purpose from turn to turn. Phase to phase. Less tactical ability needed. angry

Problem 2) if you have 4 or 5 units the same, and they are not designated/colour coded which ones have went and what ones have still to go.

Problem 3) Casualties....the player could change which units to activate, in an order which reacts to casualties sustained in the same turn.
Message edited by zellak - Sunday, 18-Sep-2011, 10:13 PM

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. "
 
CheDate: Monday, 19-Sep-2011, 8:53 PM | Message # 71
Lieutenant general
Group: Member
Messages: 528
Reputation: 61
Status: Offline
I remember you brought this up pre Frostbite and it was agreed not to play this way (admittedly only by you, me and possibly Gerry). I think you may have opened a Pandora's box. Hope no one wants to argue over this.

Wargamers like to paint their privates!!
 
BalrogDate: Monday, 19-Sep-2011, 11:46 PM | Message # 72
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Yeah ... tech term "poo-poo'd" is the right thought to ignore this major-wonky-rule, along with players not declaring what troops are in their AFV as discussed week-last Sunday and anything else that crops up that spoils the "spirit of the game" in general.

I'm happy to wink "ponder" wink thoughts on game tweaks, updates, ignore rules, etcetera, but some of the original rules lose contact with fair gameplay and basic gamesmanship, but as long as we keep using common sense for rule queries and tweaks, I don't think we can go wrong?

Walts
 
pavlovDate: Tuesday, 20-Sep-2011, 4:51 PM | Message # 73
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Hi

I have all of my UNA units colour code which helps me more than anything else, if it stops issues during play then I'm all for that, as for the declaration of afv/transport contents can we use coloured card protectors for units in transit, it would indicate to your opponent which units were in the "box" but not give away one of the advatages of using transport.

Alan

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 20-Sep-2011, 11:58 PM | Message # 74
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Alan ... That sounds like an idea for the AFVs.

Where would we get coloured card protectors? I'm actually looking for clear sleeves for my Tau game cards, once I get them sorted and printed!

As another suggestion, u could ether place the troops card facedown under the AFV card OR a dummy card (say another AFV or Strider card?) if there are no troops in the AFV? That way no-one knows if there are troops in the AFV or not ... Walts
 
zellakDate: Wednesday, 12-Oct-2011, 5:14 PM | Message # 75
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (pavlov)
can we use coloured card protectors for units in transit, it would indicate to your opponent which units were in the "box" but not give away one of the advatages of using transport.


Good idea, the unit is hidden and yet is still designated.
cool

Added (12-Oct-2011, 5:14 PM)
---------------------------------------------
The "NAWC in-house" rules page has an error.

Field/combat engineers destroy minefields at range 2.5 cm not range 1 (20 cm)


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: Wednesday, 12-Oct-2011, 9:33 PM | Message # 76
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Evning All

Just to throw some petrol on the already huge bonfire having read some of the Faq I under no circumstances will be using this load of old toss when running UNA.

Q5. Does Captain H. Newton's "Repair" ability stack with the M.Ind "Repair" ability?
That is, can Capt. Newton repair two SP of damage per turn?

A5. No, sorry.

Rubbish of course it's stackable why bother taking her if she's only making the grub and hoovering the inside of fire toads. biggrin

Alan

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Wednesday, 12-Oct-2011, 10:41 PM | Message # 77
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
@Alan: Told u the Rackham FAQ's would be an interesting read!

Now, having read the UNA M.Ind faction pro's & con's, I can see why they say it isn't "stackable" ... basically, she already has the ability, so doesn't get any bonus from the M.Ind advantage. So, what to do? Reading Newton's details, she can captain an inf unit, so if she was in the M.Ind faction, she could support Striders/AFV in battle from that inf unit, thus giving the double bonus u mentioned! Clever those game designers!

AT-43 is full of these minor tactics in the game. Sometimes it's not a good idea to place certain hero's within factions where they don't benefit, so place them in another one ... does that make sense? ... Walts
 
BalrogDate: Wednesday, 12-Oct-2011, 11:00 PM | Message # 78
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (zellak)
Added (12-Oct-2011, 5:14 PM)
---------------------------------------------
The "NAWC in-house" rules page has an error.

Field/combat engineers destroy minefields at range 2.5 cm not range 1 (20 cm)

@zellak: Thanks for that. Glad to see someone's reading the rules! I've updated the inHouse rules, with the addition ... "at the beginning or end of their movement." ... as well ... Walts
 
BalrogDate: Thursday, 13-Oct-2011, 7:22 AM | Message # 79
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Guys ... Thanks for the PM's with ur opinions, but u need to air ur thoughts in public, ie this forum!, for all too see.

From what I've received, it seems I'm not the first player to feel aggrieved by another players mistakes, so we need to set down some guidelines that ALL players who have an issue with a specific battle, rule or army to be able to air those views without worry of ridicule. We're ALL still learning the game & rules, so lets give players some clarity and iron out these bugs & problems so we don't scare away players who start blaming the rules as being rubbish ... before we're down to no-one wanting to play this brilliant game!

Some of the PM's I've received from other forums have sided with zellak's opinion about creating a major headache, but they've also said that each case must be assessed on a game-by-game bases/discussion, with all players being open to suggestions and, hopefully, a final resolution everyone can live with. If I have the majority speak against me, I'll except that judgement ... as one player said ... "I should have known the rules at the time as well, so I'm as much too blame for losing my units as the Therian players mis-understanding of the rules!"

For me, the key with my issue that the winning player who was in error gained VP, MP's, etc, and I lost a load of points is my grip. At the mo', the consensuses seems to be to reset the Therian & Red Blok armies back to what they where before the battle, leaving the UNA with what they won and the Therians defending the Spaceport in Week 5.

Please air ur thoughts online for all too see ... we're all big boys now and open discussions should be the order of the day for all grievances. "Sticks & stones & grenades will break my bones, but words will never hurt me!" Please be as blunt as possible!!! ... Walts
 
pavlovDate: Thursday, 13-Oct-2011, 4:48 PM | Message # 80
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Hi

Clever those game designers....................... NOT why would you take Newton as a hero without number one pointless and not thought out well by Rackham also Newton is the best hero every other UNA hero is as much use as a motorbike ashtray

It has been said at least three times to my knowledge during games in the club "results stand" we can't go back and play every wrong turn.

Stuff happens during games when were not all 100% with the rules. smile

Alan

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Rules, inHouse Rules & FAQs » AT-43 Q's, FAQ's & Rules (Questions, FAQ's & Rule Querys For AT-43!)
Page 4 of 5«12345»
Search:

Copyright MyCorp © 2017