Excelsior Entertainment Forums
Warzone => Game Questions => Topic started by: micmellon on January 27, 2009, 03:57:10 AM
-
How I have to handle the following Situation:
A group of Mourning Wolves attacks for example a RAMS Air Cavalry (Sounds weird but it can happen :-\). The rule book says: "If Flyers wishes to Break Away from Close Combat, it does not to roll anything, even if an enemy model wishes to prevent it."
It is the same with vehicles. The rules states they don’t have to test to break away but the tangle chain prohibited the break away (“may not break away”) in general. Does it mean that the entangled flyers and vehicles have to stay at place? At least I understand it like this if I take the rules literal.
Flyers and vehicles don’t have to test to do a break away and the tangle chain does not allow choosing the action “break away”. The outcome of this is the enemy of the Mourning Wolves have to stay in CC until the Mourning Wolves are dead or they get released by there opponents.
-
Oh wow.... I'm not sure on that one... though if the RAC pilot was in CC range of the ladies, he gets what he deserves.
-
The Rams Air is not a vehicle and cannot auto breakaway from CC. This is the current ruling on this model.
-
The RAM was just an example. Anyway it is offtopic but on page 42 in UWZ rulebook is writen: "If Flyers wishes to Break Away from Close Combat, it does not to roll anything, even if an enemy model wishes to prevent it."
And a RAM can fly as far I know. And (http://forum54.oli.us/index.php?topic=1027.0) says the rule is correct so why do you want an exception just for the RAM?
But anyway my question works with all other flying units, too.
-
I always approach my game from a common sense POV . While the rules may seem contradictory, here is the moment to use one's logic.
E.g. If a human-sized, mortal, with a chain, wraps it around the wing of an aircraft or a man with a rocket pack, what would Phyics say? To me the girl would likely be whipped up into the air or maybe have her arm torn off.
And yes, while I realize UWZ is a Sci-Fi game, it's not an Anime cartoon where normal people can flip 50' through the air, it is, more or less, based on the rules of a real world. So models are only so strong, so fast, so tough, etc.
Anyway, that's my 10 cents worth. Go to town! :o ;D ;D
Best,
D
-
Good question.
-
Auto Break away is, well, just that. A vehicle may Auto-break from CC, no matter the circumstance. Tangle Chains, Chains of Illian, etc. have the effect of negating the attempt to break away. With vehicles, there is no attempt, they merely drive (fly, roll, hop, walk) away.
Does that clear it up? (I ask this in case I have not answered the question fully or clearly - not to sound like an arrogant windbag. It is difficult to sound empathetic through text.)
-
E.g. If a human-sized, mortal, with a chain, wraps it around the wing of an aircraft or a man with a rocket pack, what would Phyics say? To me the girl would likely be whipped up into the air or maybe have her arm torn off.
Anyway, that's my 10 cents worth. Go to town! :o ;D ;D
Best,
D
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say the let go of the chain. ;)
-
Put the chains down and noone gets hurt!
-
well, its the same question for the wailing banshees.. which are not a vehicle, but can fly... do they get to auto break??
-
Warzone Humor--
Q: What did the exhausted Wailing Banshee say to his nagging wife the Mourning Wolf?
A: Will you give me an auto-break already?
-
As with the Rams Air, the Banshees can't auto-break away. ;)
-
The sentence of the rule book: “If Flyers wishes to Break Away from Close Combat, it does not to roll anything, even if an enemy model wishes to prevent it." is in this case obsolete because it only works for vehicles and this is already stated below on the same page.
dmcgee1 : “Auto Break away is, well, just that. A vehicle may Auto-break from CC, no matter the circumstance. Tangle Chains, Chains of Illian, etc. have the effect of negating the attempt to break away. With vehicles, there is no attempt, they merely drive (fly, roll, hop, walk) away.”
OK, but how does it work if the vehicle is surrounded by enemies. There are no rules to knock over people like in the editions before and the rule book says in general you need a gap of 4”. You never get out of this CC with or without the chains. Is this correct?
The chains works against the Praetorian Behemoth and the Mercurian Maculator, too. Why shouldn't it work against vehicles, too?
-
well, its the same question for the wailing banshees.. which are not a vehicle, but can fly... do they get to auto break??
No.
A.) They must land at the end of their movement, and cannot get airborne if in CC.
B.) They ar not vehicles, and must roll to Break from CC.
-
Warzone Humor--
Q: What did the exhausted Wailing Banshee say to his nagging wife the Mourning Wolf?
A: Will you give me an auto-break already?
That is F'ing hilarious! L - (http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:FbD5sMN0x3npDM:http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MCG/FW912~Mao-1972-Posters.jpg)
-
OK, but how does it work if the vehicle is surrounded by enemies. There are no rules to knock over people like in the editions before and the rule book says in general you need a gap of 4”. You never get out of this CC with or without the chains. Is this correct?
Common Sense this one; move the vehicle, and move the affected models as if they had just made their Dive for Cover rolls.
The chains works against the Praetorian Behemoth and the Mercurian Maculator, too. Why shouldn't it work against vehicles, too?
See exactly how long it takes for the Merc Mac or Behemoth to make their roll to Break (assuming they'd want to - simpler to stay in CC with Secondary Attack and massive damage) - just my opinion, meant more for humor and not for sarcasm.
-
As with the Rams Air, the Banshees can't auto-break away. ;)
Actually, Phil, this may be up for debate. The Rams Air Cav is not a vehicle, yet it is a Flying Model (unlike Banshees, which must land at the end of their movement). P. 42 states that Flyers may Break from CC by spending an Action to Break Away, then move normally.
Thanks to jjdodger for pointing this out.
-
Dave I believe Thom already stated that the Rams Air can not auto-break. Trust me I personally believe it should be a Vehicle as it was in the 1st two editions but have excepted Thoms answer to this.
-
It doesnt have to do with if its a flyer or not, the book states that any flyer may break from CC. The exact quote is:
If a Flyer wishes to Break Away from Close Combat, it
does not need to roll anything, even if an enemy model wishes
to prevent it. The Flyer needs only to expend one Action to Break
Away and can then Move freely.
the important part is, "even if an enemy model wishes to prevent it"
My question is, what is, and is not, a flyer? Strike skimmer, and dragon bike, no. rams air cav, yes. wailing banshee and jaeger commando? open for interpretation... i say yes, but thats my opinion.
-
It's my understanding that the Storm trenchers, 13th Division Banshee's, Wailing banshee's and the Rams
Air are all Jump unit's not Flyers.
-
I think we need to revisit the vehicle rules...but of course you all know I think this already. ;D ;D ;D
-
If there was no change of the units Storm Trenchers are Para deploy and no jumpers or flyers. I would be happy if they would be like the banshees!
The RAm is a pure flyer.
The Banshees are jumpers no flyers.
-
My bad on the Storm Trenchers, assuming without reading. Dave I agree with you on the RAC can breakaway by spending an action as the rules state. Also to count as a flyer a model must have an altitude score. ;) ;) ;)
-
Also to count as a flyer a model must have an altitude score.
I can agree with that, in general. But, what abotu the Jaeger Commando? He doesnt have an altitude stat, but doesnt need to land...
-
I believe we are loosing the main object. How strong is the tangle chain? It can keep a Behemoth at the spot even it will be a short heroic moment. But can it keep flyers (jumpers), flying vehicles, and normal vehicles in CC? I would say it can keep non vehicle flyers and jumpers at the spot for sure. But the vehicles are a difficult choice…. If vehicles would have strength I would say both rules will cancel each other and the vehicles have to do a break away.
Just imagine you are riding a Pegasus bike and you have a chain around you neck, you can try to move but it will hurt you at least as much as the Mourning Wolf’s arm will be hurt.
But as long the vehicles have no data about there strength I would stay with my first interpretation and the chain rules the vehicles. It is in any way a small chance for the Wolves to get in CC with any vehicle.
-
Also to count as a flyer a model must have an altitude score.
I can agree with that, in general. But, what abotu the Jaeger Commando? He doesnt have an altitude stat, but doesnt need to land...
They do have an altitude. Page 146 Vulture Anti-Gravity Harness says it has a altitude of 5. So it is a mortal flyer like the RAM Air Cav
-
I would say he's a skimmer just hovering above to ground. The rules clearly mention flying models having an altitude stat.
-
There are only two possibilities. There is a mistake in the studs of the guy or there is a mistake in the discription of his equipment. His Vulture Harness can fly up to the altitude of 5 but he has to stay a couple inch over the ground :).
And to show you there a mistakes possibles with the jaeger commando take alook on page 344. There you can find the guy just for fun, too. ;D
I think they missed to mention the altitude in studs. but it can be just the other way around, too. Maybe time for a 3.5 Edition.... ;)
-
Due to some recent dissagreements on the game board I would like to take this one up again.
I did use the imperial Tangel chains to keep an Orca from flaming out my entire army. Since the orca is only size 3 and not a flyer I beleve they shuld be able to hold it (since the rules do not state otherwise, and the chain say "can not break away").
Mayby a skimmer or a Walker would be a little much, but for the RAMS while standing on the ground, or the battlesuits, I say no question there is a way the chains can be used to stop them. Even if it dose not involve tangeling per say.
The ruses state that a machine may break away even if the enemy tries to prevent it, but this i unrelated to the chains. Trying to prevent break away is something any model can do and it is a separet ruel from the chain rule. Ther chains somply keeps the enemy from breake away, and it dose not require you to "prevent it" otherwise.
I agree with the last post on this subject, if the dark legion giants can be held, so can the smaler machines.
*** Sorry for the bad spelling, second lague you know ::) ***
Chears!
-
There was never a final answer about this question. In my opionion it is clear as long it is no vehicle. It has to stay in CC and can not leave.
I think you can keep vehicles in CC, too. But a lot of people think it is not possible. A final solution of the FAQ Team would clearify it for the future.
-
Agree.
Maby a rule related to the size of the enemy would be the best soulution. Anyting up to 1 size bigger then the model holding the chain can be held, the rest can not.
Flyers in the air can never be held, they need to be on the ground. Dose this sound fare? I kind of like it.
Anyhow, I hope there is an awnser to this one soon, many fights will depend on it in the future for me.
Chears!
-
It is clear. Vehicles may auto-break from CC. There are no other stipulations. It matters not whether tangle chains are being used.
Until new rules come out that supersede and/or clarify this, please, play it this way.
Due to some recent dissagreements on the game board I would like to take this one up again.
I did use the imperial Tangel chains to keep an Orca from flaming out my entire army. Since the orca is only size 3 and not a flyer I beleve they shuld be able to hold it (since the rules do not state otherwise, and the chain say "can not break away").
Logic, alone, says that this is just not so. Size is not the issue. Do you think that an ordinary mortal (or tangle chain-equipped Nepharite) could hold onto an Orca? While this is a game based upon science fiction and other-wordly beings, even the rulebook, itself, says to use common sense where issues such as this arise. An Orca is Size 3 based not only on it's physical height, but mass and girth, as well. A Vulkan is Size 3, too; however, it is not a vehicle and is subject to the chains. A Behemoth is not a vehicle, is the largest Size possible, and is, actually, subject to the chains, by the current rules. Granted, it doesn't make much sense that a Behemoth should be subject to the chains, but, I have, also, lost my Behemoth to Brass-knuckle-equipped Free Marines, too!
If it is the official ruling you seek, it is in the first line(s) of this post, and it is in the rulebook, also.
Game on! ;D
-
As they say in Italian... OY!
D
-
It is clear. Vehicles may auto-break from CC. There are no other stipulations. It matters not whether tangle chains are being used.
Until new rules come out that supersede and/or clarify this, please, play it this way.
Due to some recent dissagreements on the game board I would like to take this one up again.
I did use the imperial Tangel chains to keep an Orca from flaming out my entire army. Since the orca is only size 3 and not a flyer I beleve they shuld be able to hold it (since the rules do not state otherwise, and the chain say "can not break away").
Logic, alone, says that this is just not so. Size is not the issue. Do you think that an ordinary mortal (or tangle chain-equipped Nepharite) could hold onto an Orca? While this is a game based upon science fiction and other-wordly beings, even the rulebook, itself, says to use common sense where issues such as this arise. An Orca is Size 3 based not only on it's physical height, but mass and girth, as well. A Vulkan is Size 3, too; however, it is not a vehicle and is subject to the chains. A Behemoth is not a vehicle, is the largest Size possible, and is, actually, subject to the chains, by the current rules. Granted, it doesn't make much sense that a Behemoth should be subject to the chains, but, I have, also, lost my Behemoth to Brass-knuckle-equipped Free Marines, too!
If it is the official ruling you seek, it is in the first line(s) of this post, and it is in the rulebook, also.
Game on! ;D
That was an epic battle. Good guys bad guys and explosions as far as the eye can see. The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny.
-
I like your version BTG more than the offical but I suspected it that the offical ruling has to life with a lack of common sense. That happens often in games.
I would maybe add to the unofficial maybe you can hold one more size with each additional Tangle Chain in CC.
But it is of course not correct but as long the rest of the table agrees. Just do it your way ;D
Never mind dmcgee1. You make like always a good job.
-
It is clear. Vehicles may auto-break from CC. There are no other stipulations. It matters not whether tangle chains are being used.
Until new rules come out that supersede and/or clarify this, please, play it this way.
Due to some recent dissagreements on the game board I would like to take this one up again.
I did use the imperial Tangel chains to keep an Orca from flaming out my entire army. Since the orca is only size 3 and not a flyer I beleve they shuld be able to hold it (since the rules do not state otherwise, and the chain say "can not break away").
Logic, alone, says that this is just not so. Size is not the issue. Do you think that an ordinary mortal (or tangle chain-equipped Nepharite) could hold onto an Orca? While this is a game based upon science fiction and other-wordly beings, even the rulebook, itself, says to use common sense where issues such as this arise. An Orca is Size 3 based not only on it's physical height, but mass and girth, as well. A Vulkan is Size 3, too; however, it is not a vehicle and is subject to the chains. A Behemoth is not a vehicle, is the largest Size possible, and is, actually, subject to the chains, by the current rules. Granted, it doesn't make much sense that a Behemoth should be subject to the chains, but, I have, also, lost my Behemoth to Brass-knuckle-equipped Free Marines, too!
If it is the official ruling you seek, it is in the first line(s) of this post, and it is in the rulebook, also.
Game on! ;D
I feel the line on this was drawn at vehicles versus non-vehicles. IMHO non-vehicles should be subject to the chains as written. The chains grab/cut etc. the flesh/cloths equipment of the object it ensnares. Try backing out of a barb wire fence once it gets a hold of you. That is why the lowly private gets to lay on it when the rest of his squad/platoon runs over him/fence. The vehicle itself may have chains all up in it/around it. All you have to do is put it in reverse and break free of the chains. I have respect for the person who would bring chains to a fight when others have live ammunition, but I don't think even if the whole squad was holding on to the chain they would be able to hold back an Orca. It would be harder (even for the big guy - Behemoth) to break free of the chains. Especially if they are around his feet or ensnared on his body. This is solely due to balance not size.
The Vulkan , on the other hand IMHO although not a vehicle should also be able to break free of the chains. Not due to size but to the mechanical nature of the Vulkan itself. One can argue that some balance is need to walk while wearing the Vulkan suit/armor also.
The rules could be clarified/expanded to include a size stipulation for the chains for non-vehicles. This could fix the issues above (minus vehicles). Not sure if we want to keep tweeking them or just go the way they are. Only time can tell if the vehicle update will address this issue.
-
Making the chains only affect organic matter would be a work on from the above point. A unit without any flesh/soft tissue to cut into are immune. I'd suppose that would include it all? Making the chains work to only affect humanoids or animals would be another wording I suppose?
-
Making the chains only affect organic matter would be a work on from the above point. A unit without any flesh/soft tissue to cut into are immune. I'd suppose that would include it all? Making the chains work to only affect humanoids or animals would be another wording I suppose?
This might work. To expand on this, size clarification that can be caught in the chains would also be needed to help clear up how this works. I can also see the point where size comes into play.
-
To get an end to this topic and to keep it simple I will take the interpretation dmcgee1. The chains don't work against vehicles but against all others.
Otherwise we will need a whole rulebook about the chains. ;D
My hope was to use the Mourning Wolves against vehicles but I will find some other solution ;)
-
To get an end to this topic and to keep it simple I will take the interpretation dmcgee1. The chains don't work against vehicles but against all others.
Otherwise we will need a whole rulebook about the chains. ;D
My hope was to use the Mourning Wolves against vehicles but I will find some other solution ;)
It still is great to talk about/discuss. Who knows what will happen with the rules. Good discussion BTW.
-
Without discussion this whole place would be pretty senseless, or? ;D ;D ;)
-
Basing it on size seems to make more sense to me. It's IMO both most simple and realistic, as I imagine it would be easier to tangle a small vehicle than a huge giant. As well, size is more clearly defined than what's a vehicle or not. (I can think of some grey areas at least.) But it is what it is... ;D
Anyway, had a question. If vehicles are immune to tangle chains since they can break from CC automatically, what about mounted hussars? They can also break CC automatically, so are they immune to tangle chains as well?
-
Without discussion this whole place would be pretty senseless, or? ;D ;D ;)
Too true, my friend.
-
Basing it on size seems to make more sense to me. It's IMO both most simple and realistic, as I imagine it would be easier to tangle a small vehicle than a huge giant. As well, size is more clearly defined than what's a vehicle or not. (I can think of some grey areas at least.) But it is what it is... ;D
Anyway, had a question. If vehicles are immune to tangle chains since they can break from CC automatically, what about mounted hussars? They can also break CC automatically, so are they immune to tangle chains as well?
Currently (and simply), yes.
-
Anyway, had a question. If vehicles are immune to tangle chains since they can break from CC automatically, what about mounted hussars? They can also break CC automatically, so are they immune to tangle chains as well?
Currently (and simply), yes.
Didn´t want to throw that in, but that´s exactly what I wanted to hear... ;D
-
Hey you are really want to make sure Mourning Wolves are as weak as possible or? ;)
Ok, the chains will not work against vehicles and Mounted Hussars. :'(
How is it with non-vehicle flyers? Because the flyer rule says:
"If a Flyer wishes to Break Away from Close Combat, it
does not need to roll anything, even if an enemy model wishes
to prevent it. The Flyer needs only to expend one Action to Break
Away and can then Move freely"
and the rule for the Tangle Chains says:
"Once entangled by the chains (i.e. engaged in CC),
opponent(s) may not break away."
I have to say I thought always that the idea of the Tangle Chains were to keep enemies in CC who could leave normally without problems but it looks like they just designed to keep units in CC who have to do a break away anyway :(
-
As I see it, what you can´t keep in CC are:
Vehicles
Mounted Troops
Flyers
They all have sort of an auto-break-away-ability, or not to confuse let´s call it another term: leave-any-CC-ability per rules.
All other models can be kept in CC.
Try it with the Vulkans or Viktors next time we play and I field ´em ;-)
BTW: honextly I think you wouldn´t want to keep the mounted troops in CC.... Better stay away from the Dragonriders and Hachiman. OK the mounted Hussars are way better in a charge than in single-handed combat, but with the mounts attack and the Saber it´s no picnic.....
And the only flyer not a vehicle is, as far as I saw it, your own RAMS Airguy. So no point in tangling him.
And we already discussed the vehicle lockdown without a chain ;-), as you can surely remember.
There are only few vehicles which would be good targets because they lack a possibility of CC-countermeasures...
Orcas would be fine targets though.....
Quote:
I have to say I thought always that the idea of the Tangle Chains were to keep enemies in CC who could leave normally without problems but it looks like they just designed to keep units in CC who have to do a break away anyway
Yeah you counter the possible massive benefit of superior strengh. You can keep a biogiant at bay with a single mourning wolf... assumed she survives the devastating hit of his spiked fist....
But that would cost him at least 2 actions... ;-)
-
The rules on the chain says "when antagled by the chain enemy(s) may not break away", and in the rule for machines it says they auto-breakaway. I dont buy any of this "common sense" bull ****, not if the GIANTS can be held. But I accept it for now, if it keeps the game going ::) (and I know it will make U happy Pax ;D).
But now on to the Mounted hussars! :o :o :o
Why do the Mounted hussars special rule of auto-breakaway rule over the chain special rules? There is nothing in the rulebook to indicate that any auto-brakaway rule is superior to any other special rules. This is why a size based rule would be more fair, it would remove any such conflicts.
The Mounted hussars are superior any enemy in close combat if they are totaly imune to any "keep the bastards from charging me all the time" abilitys.
Peace ya all!
-
I understand your point. THe FAQ team can post the official answer, but I am sure the auto-break ability works against the chains.
-
A priority list would be great anyway to avoid and solve all upcoming and existing issues.
Something like
Generall rules
Special abilities
Weapon abilities
etc.
Because what confused me is that the generell rules for vehicles and flyers have a higher prority than special rules for weapons. Normally the special rules are changing the generell rules.
-
I agree that this issue needs more clarity. Please, accept my explanations as "official" in the sense that if you were to play, and a concensus could not be made, then the official rule is the last word. In tournaments, and such, the rules are as they are stated, and as clarified in the FAQ and the forums by FAQ Team members.
I can say, with confidence, that the issue is being reviewed and tested, and will be made more playable in the future. As I stated, earlier, Currently (and simply)
...it is what it is, for now.
-
I will accept it for now :)