|
Karman - vanilla list - support units
| |
| Banksi | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 19:06:19 | Message # 1 |
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation:
33
Status: Offline
|
Hi all,
I've had an e-mail from Zellak about the Karman core(Vanilla) army list not being able to take support units.
Having done a bit of research: I found
1. 3 sites or programs that list all the Karmans as all having infantry not soldiers (This allows support units) - Headless, AT-43 Forum and the open community AT-43 army builder
2. 1 errata the mentions the translation error in the English karman book.
3. 1 Errata that says the translation error isn't an error.
I suppose this all adds the confusion,
Headless have made mistakes in other lists e.g. the Therian bomb bots with the new rules.
The AT-43 forum might be just someones opinion on the list
The Open army builder might be the same.
I suppose the same could be said for both the erratas.
For my part, I say that not updating the Karman core list in this manner doesn't make sense, It pushes people away from using the core army.
I for one wouldn't use the core list without support units.
Since Rackham is dead we probably will never know, it would be interesting to look at the French version of the books to see the text but that might need an errata too.
|
Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 19:53:43 | Message # 2 |
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Kind of lost me here. Can somebody specify where it says that Karmans may not take Support units for the vanilla company?.
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Banksi | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 19:58:28 | Message # 3 |
|
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation:
33
Status: Offline
|
Quote (gerrywithaG) Kind of lost me here. Can somebody specify where it says that Karmans may not take Support units for the vanilla company?.
The Karman army book : The Core list quotes soldiers in the first 3 and 5th slots, all the other factions quote infantry.
Remembering that this was written before the Frostbite rules introduced Support units.
|
Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 20:20:00 | Message # 4 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
This is an absolute red herring and I cannot believe that this has been suggested.
Might I refer all concerned parties to the main rule book page 47 and I quote
"INFANTRY
SOLDIERS and SUPPORT UNITS make up the infantry. Therefore all the rules concerning infantry apply to them.
SOLDIERS constitute the majority of the troops fighting on the battlefield. BAttlesuits are also part of this category. Their type indicates their role in the army."
Beginning to find mistakes where there are none I feel
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 20:20:20 | Message # 5 |
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
|
| |
| |
| Banksi | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 20:39:40 | Message # 6 |
|
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation:
33
Status: Offline
|
It's quite simple... If that's the rule then Core Karman armies wont be seen on the table, It doesn't make any sense.
Lets think... I'm Rackham... I've created a new unit for the Karman... Yeahhhh!!
It's cheap and allows for flexibility... Yeahhhh!!!
But sorry the Core army we started with cant use it... Booooooo!!!
Sorry guys I'm Rackham and my Stupidity out ranks yours... Either that or my Translator fell asleep at the switch!!!!
(Sorry for my sarcasm!!)Added (11-May-2012, 8:39 PM)
---------------------------------------------
OMG!!!!
I just realised why Rackham Died... Because they were Stupid!!!!
|
|
Message edited by Banksi - Friday, 11-May-2012, 20:37:30
Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 20:56:45 | Message # 7 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Didn't realise that we were trusting the errata again!!!
Oops!!!!
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:17:30 | Message # 8 |
|
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
Hi Banksi ... Just had a nosey at some of the other army books and it's not only the Karman who suffer the lack of "Support Units" in a faction.
I'm afraid I would have to agree with z. I'm guessing he put this too you because of the Errata ... http://www.northayrshirewargamesclub.co.uk/load....#ent856 ... that's floating about, which states ...
Q.KA-18 Should the generic Karman (vanilla) platoon pattern say Infantry where it says Soldier, thus allowing
support units like the rest of the factions (aside from Libra)?
If they are unable to take support units, then that is two full platoon patterns that are unable to take support units
(the other being Libra). Do the Karmans really need to continue being restricted this badly?
A.KA-18 There isn’t any mistake: the generic Karman platoon pattern doesn’t use support
units. If a Sage wants to use some, he will need to support a Karman faction. So, the generic platoon can't have Support Units as stated by Rackham in it's early days, soz. This means the Open R-Tool army builder is wrong  Being human, I guess we can all make mistakes, even the designer of the Open R-Tool ... Walts
PS: Of course, my problem is that players pick & choose which of these Errata rules they want to follow. If going by the Errata as a bible, which I always have, ALL players should follow ALL the Errata rules that Rackham have commented on.
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:26:43 | Message # 9 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Walts, we don't know whether the question has been answered by the game designer or as stated, an employee of Rackham who as an extreme example could be the tea boy for all we know. This has been my gripe with the errata from day one.
As such we already don't use the errata as written and if we did then proxy units could not be used and that then puts the Kybosh on your Tau or any other figures we use to represent a unit in the game
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Banksi | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:32:47 | Message # 10 |
|
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation:
33
Status: Offline
|
Quote (Balrog) So, the generic platoon can't have Support Units as stated by Rackham in it's early days, soz. This means the Open R-Tool army builder is wrong surprised Being human, I guess we can all make mistakes, even the designer of the Open R-Tool ... Walts
Walts,
Did you read my first statement/ post, I've done the research, I've read all the errata I could find even the one you quoted.
My point is everyone seems to ignore it because it is so obviously wrong.
Headless, AT-43 & confrontation Forum and Open-R tools all ignore it.
This is from the AT-43 & Confrontation Forum
THE KARMAN CORE ARMY (Often referred to as "Vanilla".)
Platoon Pattern:
Infantry unit (*)!
Infantry unit (***)
Infantry unit (* / ** / ***)
Armored Fighting Vehicle unit (*)
Armored Fighting Vehicle unit (* / ** / ***) or Infantry unit (***)
The vanilla list is my second favorite pattern to play. This standard non-faction Karman list makes a very balanced list. In fact, it rather forces you to be balanced since you MUST have an infantry type 1, infantry type 3, and an AFV type 1 in each platoon. This really only leaves you with 2 slots which give you any choices at all for unit type; one lets you bring in any other infantry unit and the other lets you pick between any afv unit or a k-unit infantry. You are limited to 2 support teams options per category and if you fill them up, then you will not have standard soldier infantry of types 1 and 2. This platoon does tend to skew heavily towards elite type 3 infantry. Due to the required type 3 infantry slot (Min 375 A.P.), if you are trying for a second platoon (such as to include ONI allies) then you will have a hard time getting there in low A.P. games.
It has no advantages or disadvantages as it is not a faction, but the core karman army.
|
Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:43:27 | Message # 11 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Walts, we're not talking about factions that can't have support units. We're talking about the basic organisation of a company.
Which basic company can't have support units?
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:43:43 | Message # 12 |
|
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
Quote (Banksi) My point is everyone seems to ignore it because it is so obviously wrong.
Yeah, you could be right. confused.com or what!!!?!?!?
It's possible that Rackham upgraded the Karman army list, but what about other armies who suffer the same disadvantage, it's not just a Karman "problem". So, if the Karman are upgraded, then all the other armies ... Red Blok, UNA, etc ... will have the Soldier -> Infantry upgrade as well?
Obviously, you could create an inHouse Rule to hit it on the head!  ... Walts
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:45:54 | Message # 13 |
|
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
Quote (gerrywithaG) Which basic company can't have support units?
The Red Blok army book, for one ... Page 16 ... Walts
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:46:36 | Message # 14 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Where are you getting that it is an upgrade?... 
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:52:33 | Message # 15 |
|
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
Hi Gerry ... The Open R-Tool is wrong with it's Karman composition. From the Karman armybook (P16) ...
Soldier unit (★) !
• Soldier unit (★★★)
• Soldier unit (★ / ★★ / ★★★)
• Armored fighting vehicle unit (★)
• Armored fighting vehicle unit (★ / ★★ / ★★★) or soldier unit (★★★)
! Priority slot. It must always be picked first.
From the Open R-Tool app ...
Platoon template:
- Infantry (x) !
- Infantry (xxx)
- Infantry (all)
- Armored (x)
- Armored (all), Infantry (xxx)
... Their different, yes? The books are right, as far as I know .... Walts
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 21:58:28 | Message # 16 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Sorry Walts.
Red Blok is the only one I hadn't checked. All the other ones have it.
Now there's a surprise.....no mention in the errata about the red block not being able to use support units yet they have the same set up as the Karmans.......who'd a guessed!!!!!
Any takers?????????
Cheers
GerryAdded (11-May-2012, 9:58 PM)
---------------------------------------------
Yes they're different. Why are you classing it as an upgrade??
Are we ignoring the page 47 of the main rules then?????
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 22:00:42 | Message # 17 |
|
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
The UNA suffer a bit as well, with just one "Support Unit" choice in their main faction ...
U.N. platoon pattern:
• Unit of soldiers (★/★★) !
• Unit of soldiers (★★/★★★)
• Unit of soldiers (★★) or support unit (★/★★)
• Unit of soldiers (★★★) or combat strider unit (★) or a vehicle unit (★)
• Strider unit (★/★★/★★★) or a vehicle unit (★/★★/★★★)
! : Priority slot. It must always be picked first.
.... so their limited as well. So the Red Blok and UNA are correct in the Open R-Tool, but the Karman isn't?! Def an oddity!! ... Walts
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| Balrog | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 22:12:44 | Message # 18 |
|
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
|
Hi Gerry ... From what I understand things, "Soldiers" and "Support Units" are two different categories. "Infantry" encompasses them, so can be ether ... Core Rulebook: Page 47 ... above your extract.
So a unit of "Soldiers" can't have the benefits of being classed as a "Support Unit" ... but a unit of "Infantry" can be ether "Soldiers" OR "Support Units" ... Hope that make sense? ... Walts
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| Banksi | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 22:45:52 | Message # 19 |
|
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation:
33
Status: Offline
|
Can we please stop asking questions on other forums about questions we are discussing here, WE don't need others opinions especially when everyone else seems to have different opinions about this.
Added (11-May-2012, 10:45 PM)
---------------------------------------------
If we decide that the Karmans Core army cant take support then fine, I can live with that.
I simply wont play Core Karman platoons, the others are just as good. Just don't ask me to use Core platoons.
As long as the decision is made and we stick to it with every other army, as per the Books!!! Army book and Frostbite.
Unless of course you have the official AT-43 cards to support a newer unit
|
|
Message edited by Banksi - Friday, 11-May-2012, 22:48:02
Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
|
|
| |
| |
| gerrywithaG | Date: Friday, 11-May-2012, 23:15:02 | Message # 20 |
|
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation:
19
Status: Offline
|
Have just downloaded a French copy of the main rule book.
There is certainly a distinction between infantry and soldiers in that so would have to say that unless it says infantry or support units then they cannot be fielded.
That therefore restricts the UNA and Therians to one per platoon, the Karmans and Red Blok to zero, the ONI and COGS to zero as they have no support units at all.
Cheers
Gerry
|
And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
| |
|
