Main
Registration
Login
Welcome Guest

RSS
 
[ New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
Page 1 of 212»
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Frostbite Sectors » Ice Floe Indy: Black Fortress battlefront
Ice Floe Indy: Black Fortress battlefront
zellakDate: Monday, 02-Apr-2012, 6:18 PM | Message # 1
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1528
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Played this one today with Nemesis.

Notes....Dont attempt this scenario without "jump system" (cost 250 MP)

Even then its a bitch. tongue

At the end of the phase two game. Both players poured a concrete slab, in this case the player who has the most fighters on the deployment zone is the winner.

One to remember.

A couple of minor details things came up during the game.....will post later.

Added (02-Apr-2012, 5:18 PM)
---------------------------------------------
i would like to ramble on a bit about yesterdays game. The main points are covered in my last post.

As soon as we started it was apparent that Nemesis had taken it that his Hecat Golgoths could jump the gap between his access zone and the next ice floe.

If i understood Da Umpire right , then that aint so.

Infantry can jump the gaps but AFV must have "Jump Systems " to do so.

So we agreed that both sides had "Jump Systems" for playtesting purposes....it would not have been much of a game otherwise. tongue
( As he had 1000 AP of AFV ,of his 2000 AP total, and most had only close combat weapons.)

The Therian faction was Warrior, this factions disadvantage is that if its troops with close assault weapons move, and are in range to do so, then they must engage the enemy in close combat. This however at one point would mean moving into close combat , with not enough ice floe to stand on.
Which would have resulted in instant death for the Therians.

We decided that if there was no safe way to attack, then the Therians would not engage.
Any thoughts on this ? did we play it right ?

Also , at one point two Hecats jumped on a squad of Red Blok infantry, the infantry had water on three sides (instant death) and a container on the other.
They were all taken to be casualties, as my opponent decided they could not climb the container to escape the overrun.
( i did not contest this as we had run out of time anyway.)

Did we play that right.???

Stuff always happens when playing wargames, which no one has seen before, and it will always be the case.
Message edited by zellak - Monday, 02-Apr-2012, 6:20 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. "
 
BalrogDate: Monday, 02-Apr-2012, 10:33 PM | Message # 2
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi z ... Some of my thoughts ...

The Frostbite Campaign book does say fighters can "jump" half their movement? Is an AFV a fighter? But AFV of any type ... mmmm ... tough one! Wheeled AFV's could maybe do it, but "walking" AFV's ... nah! Can't remember what's current at the mo as times slipping by and no single PDF to ref what is current.

The Therian faction "Warriors" are hell-bent on Hand2Hand combat, but not at the expense of their lives before they get an attack in. I would also give thought to them not attacking units they can't harm as well, i.e. they wouldn't attack an AFV who's armour is impossible to penetrate! ... otherwise it defeats the purpose of them getting kills, which is their ultimate goal.

As too the inf being crushed by the AFV, or drowned, if they can't move 2.5cm away, then their dead. A containers 6cm high, so it would be too difficult to reach the top ... aaaalthoughhhhh, doesn't having the "rocket jump" neglect that? Probably does ... so anyone near the container could "jump" up as long as the horizontal distance was 2.5cm.

Walts
 
NemesisDate: Tuesday, 03-Apr-2012, 3:32 PM | Message # 3
Lieutenant
Group: Member
Messages: 53
Reputation: 2
Status: Offline
Looking back at the game I would have to say that if the unit has a jump pack --- UNA wing troopers for example or a paid for company jump system (250 MP) --- I would say give them a saving throw --- can we say for example --- on a 5+ for a bought company system and a 3+ for troops which have jump packs --- this to differentiate between trained units (Wing Troops) and bog standard units who have just been given a jet pack and told "enjoy". These rolls to be made by the defender after the "overrun" rule where AFVs rush infantry

Close combat troops may like getting "Up Close and Personal" as it were but NOT at the cost of their own lives before they can strike a blow --- I would argue that even fanatics aren't that stupid

I know that this is a case of bolting the stable door after the horse has done a runner but maybe we should start taking notes so that we can raise these issues with Da Umpire and maybe updating the "in-house rules"

We seem to be stuck on this term "FIGHTER" -- I, for one, would like like to propose a vote on this with a view to clarifying this term

In MY view --- a FIGHTER is ANY unit -- including AFVs -- if it's on the field and will engage in combat -- it is fighting therefore -- regardless of type -- it is a FIGHTER. The argument that unless it specifically says "fighter" on the card or in an army book or where-ever is the only way of determining whether the unit is a fighter or not should be discounted --- REMEMBER the rules have been translated from that god forsaken language by we do not know who --- they may have made a mistake in the god forsaken translation. How many other points have been argued over because of a "loose" interpretation of the rules --- end of rant angry (Trying not to swear online)

Mark Alpha-O biggrin
 
pavlovDate: Tuesday, 03-Apr-2012, 4:38 PM | Message # 4
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Hi

I would like to point out that none other than John Bey stated on the now defunct Rackham forum that a fighter describes an infantry unit not a an afv.

So from reading the above you want all the advantages of the warrior faction and none of the disadvantages , and you want to have another advantage added i.e. a saving throw.

Alan

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 03-Apr-2012, 6:42 PM | Message # 5
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
I had a vague memory that's what we decided a while ago as well ... "fighters" are only inf units. Obviously, what's written in the core Rulebook ...

    Fighter: Any miniature or model, infantry and armored fighting vehicles alike.
... was where I got confused, again, but is inf "fighters" still valid for the new campaign? ... One for Da'Umpire me thinks! Walts
 
zellakDate: Tuesday, 03-Apr-2012, 8:29 PM | Message # 6
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1528
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (Balrog)
Fighter: Any miniature or model, infantry and armored fighting vehicles alike.
... was where I got confused, again, but is inf "fighters" still valid for the new campaign? ... One for Da'Umpire me thinks! Walts


You are right, the rules as written state Fighter: Any miniature or model, infantry and armored fighting vehicles alike.

(I don't remember JB saying anything to the contrary.)

Gerry has not changed this.

From my previous post..."Infantry can jump the gaps but AFV must have "Jump Systems " to do so. "

That is how Gerry wanted the rule to work, so that is the way we playtested it.

NOTE: That is not what the original rule says....so Gerry has changed it.

Striders and vehicles CANNOT jump gaps .

They must pay 250MP for "Jump Systems" to now do this !
Message edited by zellak - Tuesday, 03-Apr-2012, 8:30 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. "
 
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 03-Apr-2012, 8:40 PM | Message # 7
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (zellak)
Striders and vehicles CANNOT jump gaps .

They must pay 250MP for "Jump Systems" to now do this !

Yeah, that seems pretty sensible, and effects everyone the same ... Another addition to the inHouse Rules! ... Walts
 
NemesisDate: Wednesday, 04-Apr-2012, 5:47 AM | Message # 8
Lieutenant
Group: Member
Messages: 53
Reputation: 2
Status: Offline
From the Operation Frostbite book page 14

QUOTE " A fighter can jump over water. His movement is then halved." UNQUOTE
While this is a part of the whole paragraph nowhere in said paragraph does it differentiate between miniatures

If the rule says
Quote (zellak)
Fighter: Any miniature or model, infantry and armored fighting vehicles alike.

then surely AFVs -- off ALL types -- can cross water with only the loss of half it's movement --- as stated above
If it finishes it's move on water -- bye, bye AFV

I for one don't see any problem applying these two rules without having to buy jump packs for the whole company. One little mistake like " Oh I forgot to buy them" and your army is fish food.

As for giving them a SAVING THROW --- this would APPLY TO EVERYONE, not just me. With the situation involved, the units would not be getting a saving throw -- FULL STOP. Dead unit because there was nowhere to go. movement up the side of the container is 6cm which is outside the 2.5cm allowed in the rules. giving the units near a container a saving throw of 3+/5+ would give at least some of them a chance to survive. This small change --- if agreed on --- would give at least some small chance to infantry who are hard pressed to stay on their feet without jet-packs!!

End of 2nd rant --- A-O

Sorry to sound like a pain in the A** but why are we arguing over what appears to be (for once) a perfectly clear rule :
no jump pack = 1/2 move over water for ALL
 
zellakDate: Wednesday, 04-Apr-2012, 4:26 PM | Message # 9
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1528
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (Nemesis)
but why are we arguing over what appears to be (for once) a perfectly clear rule


Who is arguing ? ..Gerry has decided that AFV need "Jump System" to jump gaps.

End of story. cool

On the overrun thing, . Tha AFV gets a die roll to kill every soldier under it at the end of the move.

It kills them on a 5+ ,if it fails to kill, the infantry are moved 2.5 cm away.

i can see Walters point about the top of the container being 6cm away.

But OTOH if you measure movement for jump pack guys then you would not measure the height of the container, just the lateral distance.

Hmmmm ??????

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. "
 
gerrywithaGDate: Saturday, 07-Apr-2012, 0:58 AM | Message # 10
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation: 19
Status: Offline
Hi Gents,

THE CURRENT INHOUSE RULES ARE NOT UP TO DATE. THEY NEED TO BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RULINGS I HAVE MADE

Much as I'd like to spend all my time on things wargaming related, unfortunately I also have a fulltime occupation that takes up somewhat more than a standard 38 hour week, and as such I have posted my rulings on the rules queries that I have managed to get to up to now. I will get them pulled into one document prior to the campaign starting once we have everybodies questions / queries in. I simply don't have the time to be doing a new document every time I get a single rule query.

To remind people, If there is a query about a rule or a situation, I asked to be PM'd about it . I will not get into a debate or discussion on the forum. Please follow the format I asked for otherwise I will ignore it.

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST PLEASE READ THE RULINGS I HAVE MADE PROPERLY BEFORE SENDING ME THE SAME QUERY AGAIN.

Cheers

Da'Umpire

Added (06-Apr-2012, 11:58 PM)
---------------------------------------------

Quote (zellak)
As soon as we started it was apparent that Nemesis had taken it that his Hecat Golgoths could jump the gap between his access zone and the next ice floe.

If i understood Da Umpire right , then that aint so.
CORRECTLY UNDERSTOOD

Quote (zellak)
We decided that if there was no safe way to attack, then the Therians would not engage.
Any thoughts on this ? did we play it right ?
I'M HAPPY WITH THIS INTERPRETATION

Quote (zellak)
Also , at one point two Hecats jumped on a squad of Red Blok infantry, the infantry had water on three sides (instant death) and a container on the other.
They were all taken to be casualties, as my opponent decided they could not climb the container to escape the overrun.
( i did not contest this as we had run out of time anyway.)

Did we play that right.???
IN MY OPINION, NO YOU DID NOT. SELF PRESERVATION WILL ALWAYS KICK IN. THE MOVE SHOULD BE 2.5CM IGNORING TERRAIN LIMITATIONS. IF THE THERIANS WOULD NOT CHARGE ACROSS TO SOMEWHERE THAT THEY WOULD DIE THEN THE SAME LOGIC APPLIES TO AVOIDING BEING OVERRUN

Cheers

Da'Umpire

And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
 
BalrogDate: Saturday, 07-Apr-2012, 10:47 AM | Message # 11
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (gerrywithaG)
IN MY OPINION, NO YOU DID NOT. SELF PRESERVATION WILL ALWAYS KICK IN. THE MOVE SHOULD BE 2.5CM IGNORING TERRAIN LIMITATIONS. IF THE THERIANS WOULD NOT CHARGE ACROSS TO SOMEWHERE THAT THEY WOULD DIE THEN THE SAME LOGIC APPLIES TO AVOIDING BEING OVERRUN

Hi Gerry ... Do u mean they could have escaped because they had the "jump system" on? Walts
 
zellakDate: Saturday, 07-Apr-2012, 10:51 PM | Message # 12
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1528
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (Balrog)
Do u mean they could have escaped because they had the "jump system" on? Walts


No, he does not....read it again.

Quote (gerrywithaG)
THE MOVE SHOULD BE 2.5CM IGNORING TERRAIN LIMITATIONS


The key words here are "IGNORING TERRAIN LIMITATIONS".

This means the miniatures can move 2.5cm away from the overrunning AFV, while ignoring terrain limitations.

Remember the men overrun can move in any direction in order to escape, nowhere does it say the escaping miniatures must move the shortest distance.

Hope this helps. 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. "
 
BalrogDate: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 7:37 AM | Message # 13
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Z ... Soz, I'm still confused!?!??

I've read ALL the ref's to being overrun and NOWHERE does it mention "ignoring terrain limitations" anywhere? The rules are clear on rush attacks ... inf move 2.5cm away from the attacking AFV, else their dead. The 2.5cm is set because they have to be out of contact with the attacking AFV. Their given a chance to jump out the way.

If your now saying we can ignore terrain limitations, then here's a scenario for you ... Two striders and three support inf in one of the hangers ....



... the two striders rush the inf ...



... Now, my interpretation of this rush attack is that the two support inf at the back are automatically dead as they can't get away from the strider in the front as the 2.5cm moves them on top of the second strider, and their surrounded by (terrain!) walls. The inf at the door suffers two rush attacks, and can move away if he saves on both attacks.

BUT, from what you guys are saying ... "ignoring terrain limitations" ... the two trapped inf at the back of the room can now pass through walls to save their skins, as walls are terrain, which is now ignored!!!???

My apologies if I've missed something in your statements, and have completely misinterpreted your statements. Can you explain how things would pan out in your eyes based on the two images above? Keep it simple, u know how I struggle with rules! ... Thanks, Walts
 
zellakDate: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 9:40 AM | Message # 14
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1528
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (Balrog)
Now, my interpretation of this rush attack is that the two support inf at the back are automatically dead as they can't get away from the strider in the front as the 2.5cm moves them on top of the second strider


The escaping infantry can move more than 2.5 cm to escape.

If not , then anyone overrun by Type 3 (13 cm template), and with the Type 3 centred on a particular soldier.
It would be impossible for him to escape. Would it not !
The escaping soldier is moved out of danger and within 2.5 cm.

So in the scenario above they could all escape outside the room.
You get a die roll to kill them, if you miss, then they escape.

Also.

Gerry was talking about movement limitations.

Not breaking all the rules for terrain limitations.

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: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 10:31 AM | Message # 15
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Soz Z ... I just don't see how u & Gerry come to that conclusion! HERE's the rule from the RULEBOOK ...
    If the armoured fighting vehicle finishes its movement on soldiers or gunners, the survivors are moved to the sides and 2.5 cm away from
    any opponent
    by the player controlling them. If a fighter cannot be repositioned in this way the fighter is eliminated.
WHERE does it mention MORE THAN ... TYPE 3's, or MOVEMENT LIMITATIONS???

Quote (zellak)
Gerry was talking about movement limitations

Not breaking all the rules for terrain limitations.

What does that mean? Do we need to now categories what terrain inf can escape through? Double Containers (K-101 SPACEPORT) ... are they alright? Shipwreck Access A & B (MOUNT ELYSÉE) ... can inf run up to the top levels if trapped and that's their only route??

How ridiculous are you planning on making things that we need to look at every sector for "escape routes" because there's now a "movement limitations" rule???

Do u guys enjoy making up rules for the sake of it? The CORE RULEBOOK is clear & precise, both u & Gerry are complicating things and making up rules for no reason ... WHY!?!?! I'm all for inHouse Rules when there's some confusion, u guys are just adding too it! ... Walts
 
zellakDate: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 10:34 AM | Message # 16
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1528
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
If you are going to rant.

Then to hell with that !

I'm outta here. sad

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: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 10:45 AM | Message # 17
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Soz Z ... Ranting seems to be the only way to get peoples attention!

Ranting aside, can u answer my questions on how u managed to take the core rulebook description on rush attacks and make it complicated, with these new phrases ... more than, Type 3's & terrain and/or movement limitations? ... Walts
 
gerrywithaGDate: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 11:09 AM | Message # 18
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation: 19
Status: Offline
Soz Z ... I just don't see how u & Gerry come to that conclusion! HERE's the rule from the RULEBOOK ...

Who said that I have come to that conclusion. I'm getting fed up with people assuming they know what I'm thinking.

GET A GRIP HERE PEOPLE! START APPLYING A BIT OF COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC HERE!

Right I'll draw it in pictures for people.

In the original question troopers had a container at their back and water on other three sides. They get rushed/ overrun /charged/sat on call it whatever you like, their only potential to escape is onto the containers, which is a lateral move of 2.5 cm ignoring the height of the container.

I NEVER SAID THAT GUYS CAN MAGIC THROUGH WALLS/ APPEAR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CHARGING UNIT OR ANY OTHER SUCH NONSENSE.

ANY MORE OF THIS STUPIDITY AND I'M OUTTA HERE

ANGRILY angry angry angry

Da'Umpire

Added (08-Apr-2012, 10:09 AM)
---------------------------------------------
Quote (gerrywithaG)
IN MY OPINION, NO YOU DID NOT. SELF PRESERVATION WILL ALWAYS KICK IN. THE MOVE SHOULD BE 2.5CM IGNORING TERRAIN LIMITATIONS. IF THE THERIANS WOULD NOT CHARGE ACROSS TO SOMEWHERE THAT THEY WOULD DIE THEN THE SAME LOGIC APPLIES TO AVOIDING BEING OVERRUN

Hi Gerry ... Do u mean they could have escaped because they had the "jump system" on? Walts

No it doesn't!!!

cheers

Da'Umpire


And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
 
BalrogDate: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 11:11 AM | Message # 19
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Soz Gerry .... (I seem to be apologising a lot!) ... To get some clarity on what's been written ...

IF troopers have the "jump system", vertical distance/movement is ignored? That's fine & dandy! I would be 100% happy about that as JS troopers ignore vertical heights when moving. But, if they didn't have the "jump system" they would be dead, as a container is 6cm high.

Is that ur interpretation on this ruling? ... Walts
 
BalrogDate: Sunday, 08-Apr-2012, 11:28 AM | Message # 20
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Gerry ... So ur saying that even if the troopers didn't have the "jump system" they could climb 6cm to the top of the container? Right?? ... Walts (One confused Easter Bunny!)
 
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Frostbite Sectors » Ice Floe Indy: Black Fortress battlefront
Page 1 of 212»
Search:

Copyright MyCorp © 2017