|
|
Post by timsnoddy on Mar 31, 2012 2:24:51 GMT -5
Two questions from a game last night.
My opponent disembarked a Gruntz squad from an APC. I had a unit in overwatch which fired causing two waxed models. Using the new morale rules he rolled and passed the test. So using his second action the squad fired. How many models should it have been? Do you count the waxed models because it is the same turn or not because overwatch kind of happens out of turn sequence.
In a similar vein my opponent caused some casualties from a single source on one of my squads but not enough to cause a condition brown test. The next turn before my unit could activate he fired his same unit at my same unit again taking the total casualties to enough for a condition brown test. Would this apply? Fire was from the same source but split over two turns. I can see arguments on both sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by pancake on Mar 31, 2012 4:08:38 GMT -5
Q 1 overwatch. I play it has if a quad of six is shot at by another squad on overwatch and it takes 2 waxed gruntz. Then return fire would be with only four gruntz. If you were to fire back with the full six gruntz after taking two waxed hits, the benefit of overwatch becomes less affective. When shooting in overwatch the squad is at -1 shoot, so letting waxed gruntz to shoot after would be imo unfair. Afterall you have got the drop on the unit with suprise fire, dead men cant shoot.
Q 2 condition brown. Yes if the gruntz squad has gone to half rounded up it must take a condition brown test. The shooting was in diffetent turns so applys.
This is how read and play the rules Robin may see it diffetent cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by dabob on Apr 16, 2012 23:04:59 GMT -5
First, can we just call it Rout?  A situation came up today in our weekly game at the GuardTower. A unit failed a CB test after it had already activated. Does it really have to run full speed for three turns until it can rally and rejoin the fight? Basically, How does CB work? Thanks, Bob |
|
|
|
Post by comstar on Apr 17, 2012 0:29:02 GMT -5
When it fails condition brown it immediately does a double move directly away from the unit causing the CB roll (this is usually towards it's own base line) then it enters CB. on it's next activation it looses both it's actions and then it leaves condition brown.
The commander in my games can use his ability to remove suppression condition to try and remove CB. This is normally automatic but he needs to make a mental check to remove the condition brown condition in this way!
|
|
|
|
Post by inrepose on Apr 17, 2012 2:46:36 GMT -5
Three turns  Thats an interesting idea. But it is only a double move away and on the next activation they remove condition brown. |
|
|
|
Post by baldlea on May 2, 2012 8:01:14 GMT -5
My opponent disembarked a Gruntz squad from an APC. I had a unit in overwatch which fired causing two waxed models. Using the new morale rules he rolled and passed the test. So using his second action the squad fired. Please could someone point me in the direction of this new rule? If it's what it sounds like then it might go some way to selling Gruntz as a ruleset to my group. We are used to playing a reaction based system but this looks like it would do the trick. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by comstar on May 2, 2012 9:58:15 GMT -5
My opponent disembarked a Gruntz squad from an APC. I had a unit in overwatch which fired causing two waxed models. Using the new morale rules he rolled and passed the test. So using his second action the squad fired. Please could someone point me in the direction of this new rule? If it's what it sounds like then it might go some way to selling Gruntz as a ruleset to my group. We are used to playing a reaction based system but this looks like it would do the trick. Cheers. Well overwatch is in the current rules (don't have the rulebook to hand as on Iphone so no page number  sorry) but the mental roll to stop suppression is a new one that was a house rule of mine that I was using and Robin liked it so is adding it to the base rules I also posted above about another house rule that I use for Condition Brown that a commander can use his 'feel the pain' action to try and remove a condition brown suppression marker (like he can with a normal suppression marker) by making his mental check to remove it (this is not automatic like normal suppression !) Hope that all helps |
|
|
|
Post by inrepose on May 2, 2012 10:56:17 GMT -5
Condition brown is removed automatically when the squad is activated. Currently the rules allow a Commander to remove it as with normal suppression when he is activated.
|
|
|
|
Post by baldlea on May 2, 2012 13:36:54 GMT -5
Ah. Not what I thought, then.
Problem is that we are not fans of the ugo-igo situation of someone walking around a corner and gunning you down. We will definitely use alternating unit activation and overwatch (though I'm intrigued why the rules suggest they are not needed together).
Even then, if a unit has not yet activated and is not on overwatch it still seems odd that an enemy can appear and shoot at you with no comeback. Has anyone tried to house rule that a unit (not on OW) take a morale test when the enemy come into LOS; if they pass, they get to shoot first perhaps with reduced firepower (and that's then their activation for the turn)? I suppose it would be like the new assault rules but used more generally.
Any other ideas?
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
Post by papabees on May 2, 2012 14:39:42 GMT -5
Ah. Not what I thought, then. Even then, if a unit has not yet activated and is not on overwatch it still seems odd that an enemy can appear and shoot at you with no comeback. Has anyone tried to house rule that a unit (not on OW) take a morale test when the enemy come into LOS; if they pass, they get to shoot first perhaps with reduced firepower (and that's then their activation for the turn)? I suppose it would be like the new assault rules but used more generally. Any other ideas? Thanks again. I like this idea. Reaction fire but with ranged combat. Pass a mental check and fire away. It could be at -1 shoot and maybe lose the -1 for overwatch. |
|
|
|
Post by gypsycomet on May 7, 2012 21:08:36 GMT -5
Ah. Not what I thought, then. Problem is that we are not fans of the ugo-igo situation of someone walking around a corner and gunning you down. We will definitely use alternating unit activation and overwatch (though I'm intrigued why the rules suggest they are not needed together). Even then, if a unit has not yet activated and is not on overwatch it still seems odd that an enemy can appear and shoot at you with no comeback. Has anyone tried to house rule that a unit (not on OW) take a morale test when the enemy come into LOS; if they pass, they get to shoot first perhaps with reduced firepower (and that's then their activation for the turn)? I suppose it would be like the new assault rules but used more generally. Any other ideas? Thanks again. Overwatch is one of those tools designed to minimize the downsides of IGOUGO. As such it is not *needed* once you go to alternating activation. That said, we use the two together with the Epic Armageddon limitation (not in the Gruntz rules) that states that you cannot draw an overwatch reaction until you have finished a Move action. It keeps the old 40k2e problem of "half an inch at a time" at bay, allows a unit to avoid overwatch if they can use cover properly, and doesn't slow things down particularly. The other thing we've been considering, from our Battlefield Evolution experience, is everyone getting a Reaction as well as their two Actions. This definitely doesn't mix as well with Alternating activations simply due to the recordkeeping, but could be done. Basically a unit gets one Reaction each Round outside of its own activation. A Reaction is only triggered if an enemy unit comes within 6" and is within LOS, or if the unit is fired on. The version of BFE we were playing (the WWII version) only allowed Shooting as a reaction, but we added "Dive for cover/prone". Vehicles don't get a Reaction under that system just to illustrate the different reaction times of infantry vs armor, but I could see a Modz to add a Reaction. |
|
|
|
Post by inrepose on May 8, 2012 4:14:02 GMT -5
gypsycomet. I like the sound of that limitation on the overwatch rule. I will do some testing with it over the next week.
|
|
|
|
Post by baldlea on May 8, 2012 6:42:14 GMT -5
Thanks for the response gypsycomet I recall the old 40k overwatch situation now you mention it Could it not be mitigated by players stating the whole path of their movement in advance where OW may come into play? The OW player then chooses a point along that line to shoot? Interesting idea about a reaction in addition to the normal two actions. My suggestion was based on the idea that, in the time represented by a turn, a unit is: being cautious and ready to react (on overwatch) thus losing any other actions Or ready to carry out other orders (awaiting their reaction, not on overwatch) and so less effective if knee-jerk reacting to a new opportunity I really like your "dive for cover" reaction. Cheers |
|
Thats an interesting idea. But it is only a double move away and on the next activation they remove condition brown. 
sorry) but the mental roll to stop suppression is a new one that was a house rule of mine that I was using and Robin liked it so is adding it to the base rules 
