Tangle Chain vs Flyers and Vehicles

[micmellon]

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 

[Lopis]

As I see it, what you canīt keep in CC are:

Vehicles
Mounted Troops
Flyers

They all have sort of an auto-break-away-ability, or not to confuse letīs 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 īem ;-)

BTW: honextly I think you wouldnīt 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 itīs 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... ;-)

[Btg]

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 ).

 But now on to the Mounted hussars! 

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!

[luckyone]

I understand your point. THe FAQ team can post the official answer, but I am sure the auto-break ability works against the chains.

[micmellon]

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.

[dmcgee1]

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.

[micmellon]

I will accept it for now