PDA

View Full Version : FAQ - post your questions here



mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 08:28
I had my first real read through the rule book yesterday and picked up on a couple of things. I'll add each as a reply to this thread. Please post your rule questions as replies and we can discuss and then compile an FAQ we can get stickied. I don't think it will be huge but there are a few things which need covering.

Spacker
30-01-2007, 08:54
Well here's one I've already handled with FW. My question:



I was wondering if the rules on transport units can be clarified. Do all the transported units get unloaded in a single turn? Can the unloading be split up (eg if a scenario had 2 landing zones, and a transport has 4 units, can 2 be unloaded at one zone and 2 at the other, or do all 4 have to unload in the same zone)? Can Jump Troops be unloaded when landed? Could some transported Jump Troops units be dropped, and the rest landed?

The rules as they stand are a bit unclear, although common sense tells me that all can be unloaded in one turn, or can be split up.


And here's the answer from Warwick:



Your common sense has not let you down, you can split the troops over drop zones, jump troops can get out on the ground as well as jumping. It is assumed that once an aircraft has landed all the troops immediately get out. The time scale doesn't really require the detail of how long, just assume they can get out.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 09:00
Q: How does extra damage work? The rule and the example work differently regarding the number you have to roll.

A: The rule should say "...if the dice roll is equal to or higher than this number..."*


*Unofficial answer at the minute

Q: The Eldar aircraft have Special Rules: Eldar Field. This "gives it a 5+ save against all damage it receives". What is a save? It is not defined in the rulebook anywhere. When do I roll it? Per point of damage I take or once against all damaging hits? Is it per turn or per aircraft shooting the Eldar one?

A: TBC


So what are people’s thoughts on this? A Save, and when to make it needs to be defined.

Q: How long does it take to drop troops off? Can I simply land in one turn and take off in the next?

A: Yes you can. Unless a scenario or special rule dictates otherwise, you simply have to land. You can tkae off again from the next turn onwards.*


*Unofficial answer at the minute

SurgeMaster
30-01-2007, 09:10
Q: The Eldar aircraft have Special Rules: Eldar Field. This "gives it a 5+ save against all damage it receives". What is a save? It is not defined in the rulebook anywhere. When do I roll it? Per point of damage I take or once against all damaging hits? Is it per turn or per aircraft shooting the Eldar one?

A: TBC


So what are people’s thoughts on this? A Save, and when to make it needs to be defined.

I would personally say it would be like 40k, in which you have to roll a save for each point of damage. After all each shot is not going to be in the same place, some may accidently hit the Eldar aircraft.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 09:14
Q: My ground target is on a hillside which is at height level 3. How does this affect the height I need to be at to strafe or bomb it?

A: To make a strafing run, you must be one level above the target. Any higher and the target cannot be attacked.
To make a bombing run, adjust the chart as follows:
You can only perform a bombing run if you are at least 3 levels above the target.
To hit with bombs at 3 or 4 levels above the target requires a 4+
To hit with bombs at 5 or 6 levels above the target...etc
Remember height level 8 is the maximum you can be to make a bombing run.*


*Unofficial answer at the minute.


I would personally say it would be like 40k, in which you have to roll a save for each point of damage. After all each shot is not going to be in the same place, some may accidently hit the Eldar aircraft.I guess it's down to how you interpret a save against all damage... There is a good case for saying you roll once and ignore everything. If that were the case I think it should be against the fire from a single enemy aircraft.

SurgeMaster
30-01-2007, 09:47
I guess it's down to how you interpret a save against all damage... There is a good case for saying you roll once and ignore everything. If that were the case I think it should be against the fire from a single enemy aircraft.

But surely if this were true then Eldar flyers would be almost impossible to shoot down!

Couldn't a save against all damage mean all types of damage?

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 09:55
Of course it could. I'm saying it can mean more than one thing :) We need to decide what we think it really means. I'm with you on the roll to save every point of damage though.

However, that raises an interesting question too. Let's say we are rolling a save against each weapon hit causing damage. What happens when a weapon does extra damage? Do you make one roll to negate both points or two rolls?

SurgeMaster
30-01-2007, 10:17
Of course it could. I'm saying it can mean more than one thing :) We need to decide what we think it really means. I'm with you on the roll to save every point of damage though.

However, that raises an interesting question too. Let's say we are rolling a save against each weapon hit causing damage. What happens when a weapon does extra damage? Do you make one roll to negate both points or two rolls?

umm yes this could be a problem. Personally I would say you only get one save roll since holofields are about making shots miss and after all it is the same "shot" and it has hit the Eldar flyer.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 10:22
I think that makes sense. It does mean that such weapons should be rolled differently then or using a different coloured dice. Standard for such situations.

Wolflord Havoc
30-01-2007, 10:27
Of course it could. I'm saying it can mean more than one thing :) We need to decide what we think it really means. I'm with you on the roll to save every point of damage though.

However, that raises an interesting question too. Let's say we are rolling a save against each weapon hit causing damage. What happens when a weapon does extra damage? Do you make one roll to negate both points or two rolls?

Given the nature of the save I would say that it saves against each 'hit' and in the case of an unsaved hit causing 'extra damage' the save does not apply - after all the las cannon/missile/pulse laser etc has already impacted the craft. So an Eldar nightwing is hit and damaged by a weapon that causes extra damage the nightwing player then attempts to save against the hit - basically avoiding damage in the first place and therefore not having to suffer the potential extra damage - however if the save is failed then the extra damage is rolled for and if successful applied - in this instance destroying the fighter.

This was another question by the way - is it the original damage dice roll that determines if a hit causes extra damage or do you roll an extra dice? - I am assuming that you roll an extra dice for now.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 10:33
I think it works thus:

1. Roll to hit
2. Roll to damage. Weapon requires say a 2+ to damage. It also has the extra damage 6+ rule
2a. If the roll to damage comes up a 1 you fail to cause damage
2b. If the roll to damage comes up 2, 3 ,4 or 5 you score 1 point of damage
2c. If the roll to damage comes up a 6 you score 2 points of damage


Then in our case with the Eldar Fields, the Eldar player would take one save against a damaging hit, whether it would cause 1 or 2 points of damage; with all damage ignored if the save was a success.

Wolflord Havoc
30-01-2007, 10:44
I think it works thus:

1. Roll to hit
2. Roll to damage. Weapon requires say a 2+ to damage. It also has the extra damage 6+ rule
2a. If the roll to damage comes up a 1 you fail to cause damage
2b. If the roll to damage comes up 2, 3 ,4 or 5 you score 1 point of damage
2c. If the roll to damage comes up a 6 you score 2 points of damage


Then in our case with the Eldar Fields, the Eldar player would take one save against a damaging hit, whether it would cause 1 or 2 points of damage; with all damage ignored if the save was a success.

I personnally would prefer this method - with the need for less dice being rolled etc.

dr vompire
30-01-2007, 11:13
another question

when using ammo rules, if i shoot at a target at long range and some of my weapons have 0 firepower at long range do i have the option of not firing them, if so do i have to declare which weapon systems are firing before measuring the shot to avoid sneaky ammo preserving ranging shots?

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 11:28
Q:
When using ammo rules, if i shoot at a target at long range and some of my weapons have 0 firepower at long range do i have the option of not firing them, if so do i have to declare which weapon systems are firing before measuring the shot to avoid sneaky ammo preserving ranging shots?

A: Yes, you can chose not to shoot weapons which you believe are out of range (or that you simply don't want to use). However, declare which weapons are firing before you measure ranges and expend any ammo for all declared weapons even if they are found to be out range after measuring.*


*Unofficial answer at the minute.

mageboltrat
30-01-2007, 13:12
Continuation of a ground target on hill strafing question

Q. Can you strafe from the same height as a ground target or does the ground target have to be 1 lower.

Q. Can AA shoot an aircraft that is at the same height as it.

mageboltrat
30-01-2007, 13:26
Q. If a thunderbolt gets shot with extra damage. Does the thuderbolt get a save against the last point of damage, the whole lot or none at all? It says when it takes it's second hit.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 13:26
Q. Can you strafe from the same height as a ground target or does the ground target have to be 1 lower.
Hmmm good question. How about:
A: You may attack ground targets using the same restrictions as air targets (on the same level or within one level only). Aircraft at level 0 may not attack however.

I guess this is to cover the scenario where your target is on a hill side (say at level 2)? Does that answer work? I guess it answers the straffing questions in general so should be a differnt answer to the bombing run question. I think this supercedes my previous answer. What do you think?


Q. Can AA shoot an aircraft that is at the same height as it.Yes.

In the same situation (the AA gun is on a hillside at level 2) would you say the normal targeting restrictions apply (same level or within one level)? If yes, that means the AA gun can fire at incoming aircraft flying at levels 1, 2 or 3 in our example.

mageboltrat
30-01-2007, 13:29
In the same situation (the AA gun is on a hillside at level 2) would you say the normal targeting restrictions apply (same level or within one level)? If yes, that means the AA gun can fire at incoming aircraft flying at levels 1, 2 or 3 in our example.

Actually I would say no here. An AA can shoot at the same height or 1 higher. It couldn't shoot one lower because the breast of the hill would get in the way. The same would be true of the Aircraft firing back.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 13:32
Q. If a thunderbolt gets shot with extra damage. Does the thuderbolt get a save against the last point of damage, the whole lot or none at all? It says when it takes it's second hit.There are a few ways this could play out:
1. Two damage points is too much and the roll cannot be taken - the TBolt is removed
2. The TBolt can roll to avoid each point of damage separately. It would require 2 6's to avoid taking any damage
3. Like the suggestion for the Eldar Fields. one roll is made and if successfully, both damage points are ignored.

I'm leaning toward number 2. The wording of the Eldar Fields says "all damage" is ignored. The TBolt should get some kind of chance to avoid such massive damage but not a great one. I'm fully prepared have my mind changed though :)


Actually I would say no here. An AA can shoot at the same height or 1 higher. It couldn't shoot one lower because the breast of the hill would get in the way. The same would be true of the Aircraft firing back.Depends on how steep you think the hill is or how far away from the hill the aircraft is surely?

mageboltrat
30-01-2007, 13:37
There are a few ways this could play out:
1. Two damage points is too much and the roll cannot be taken - the TBolt is removed
2. The TBolt can roll to avoid each point of damage separately. It would require 2 6's to avoid taking any damage
3. Like the suggestion for the Eldar Fields. one roll is made and if successfully, both damage points are ignored.

I'm leaning toward number 2. The wording of the Eldar Fields says "all damage" is ignored. The TBolt should get some kind of chance to avoid such massive damage but not a great one. I'm fully prepared have my mind changed though :)

I would go for option 4 acually.

4. make one dice roll whenever a hit would drop the thunderbolt to 0 or less hits. If you make the 6+ roll the thunderbolt remains on 1 hit.

mageboltrat
30-01-2007, 13:38
Depends on how steep you think the hill is or how far away from the hill the aircraft is surely?

This is how we have been dealing with this problem.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a116/mageboltrat/misc/attackrun.jpg

Target 1. Hive wall, my guess is you need to be any height up to +1 of the top of the wall, so if the wall is height 4 you have to be 1,2,3,4 or 5. If you were coming from the other direction only 5 would do.

Target 2. Target on the top of a wall or on a cliff edge. you would have to be the same height, 1 higher or 1 less.

Target 3. a target which is on a hill or mesa, This is the most common situation, there is no way to deal with LOS between a plane and a target as altitude is just dealt with by the dial, I also feel that the difference in height between 2 levels is a lot. Therefore I would say it is impossible to shoot at the target from below as the mesa gets in the way. In this case I would say from the same height or one higher.

Target 4. A blimp tethered to the ground. This one is easy, deal with is the same way as a plane, 1 higher or lower allowed.

AA firing back? can AA get the depression to fire level or lower. My general feeling is that if a plane can fire on the AA it should be able to fire back, I know this is not always true in real life, but seeing as they have not given negative values on the AA it keeps things simple.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 13:39
I would go for option 4 acually.

4. make one dice roll whenever a hit would drop the thunderbolt to 0 or less hits. If you make the 6+ roll the thunderbolt remains on 1 hit.
That's the same as option 3 isn't it?

mageboltrat
30-01-2007, 13:43
That's the same as option 3 isn't it?

Nope. what 3 says is if a Thunderbolt with 2 hit points gets shot by a weapon that does extra damage you take one roll and if successful both point of damage from the weapon are ignored leaving it on it's original 2 HP. Option 4 says it just holds together and is reduced to 1 HP left, the minimum it could have without falling out of the air.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 13:45
OK - lets go with straffing runs being permitted for same level or one lower for aircraft and same level or up to the maximum for ground targets shooting at air targets.

Aircraft may not shoot up any levels and AA guns may not shoot down any levels? Keeps it simple I think.


Nope. what 3 says is if a Thunderbolt with 2 hit points gets shot by a weapon that does extra damage you take one roll and if successful both point of damage from the weapon are ignored leaving it on it's original 2 HP. Option 4 says it just holds together and is reduced to 1 HP left, the minimum it could have without falling out of the air.OK - that's not how I wrote or read option three but there you go. I read it the same as your option 4 :)

[EDIT] - I think we are talking about different things here. You are assuming the TBolt is undamaged. I am assuming it has already been hit and taken one point of damage.

[EDIT 2] The pricipal for option 4 works fine for both cases anyway I think so let's go with that unless anyone has any better ideas...

Wolflord Havoc
30-01-2007, 18:08
OK - that's not how I wrote or read option three but there you go. I read it the same as your option 4 :)

[EDIT] - I think we are talking about different things here. You are assuming the TBolt is undamaged. I am assuming it has already been hit and taken one point of damage.

[EDIT 2] The pricipal for option 4 works fine for both cases anyway I think so let's go with that unless anyone has any better ideas...

The Tbolt only gets the 6+save vs the 2nd hit (which would normally destroy the aircraft).

In the instance of a weapon causing both damage and extra damage on a T-bolt with only its 2nd hit remaining I would think that the T-bolt player would have to roll 2 dice requiring a pair of 6s to survive.

After all the 'Durable' rule is to represent the T-bolts ability to absorb punishment not to avoid damage in the first instance (unlike for example the 5+ holofield save of the Eldar craft which represents the damaging hit never actually striking the craft in the first place).

In the case of damage that also causes Extra damage this represents a devestating hit that most 'fighter' aircraft are unlikely to survive.

mattjgilbert
30-01-2007, 19:12
The Tbolt only gets the 6+save vs the 2nd hit (which would normally destroy the aircraft).

In the instance of a weapon causing both damage and extra damage on a T-bolt with only its 2nd hit remaining I would think that the T-bolt player would have to roll 2 dice requiring a pair of 6s to survive.

After all the 'Durable' rule is to represent the T-bolts ability to absorb punishment not to avoid damage in the first instance (unlike for example the 5+ holofield save of the Eldar craft which represents the damaging hit never actually striking the craft in the first place).

In the case of damage that also causes Extra damage this represents a devestating hit that most 'fighter' aircraft are unlikely to survive.I think I now favour rolling against the hit, whether it causes 1 or two point of damage. So the question/answer is now:

Q. If a thunderbolt gets shot with extra damage. Does the thuderbolt get a save against the last point of damage, the whole lot or none at all? It says when it takes it's second hit.

A: Make one dice roll whenever a hit would reduce the Thunderbolt to 0 or less hits. If you make the 6+ roll, the thunderbolt remains on 1 hit.

I'll wait to see if we have any more Q and A's and then compile a first draft tomorrow.

mattjgilbert
31-01-2007, 10:13
OK here is the round up so far. All answers are unofficial unless marked A*



Q: I was wondering if the rules on transport units can be clarified. Do all the transported units get unloaded in a single turn? Can the unloading be split up (eg if a scenario had 2 landing zones, and a transport has 4 units, can 2 be unloaded at one zone and 2 at the other, or do all 4 have to unload in the same zone)? Can Jump Troops be unloaded when landed? Could some transported Jump Troops units be dropped, and the rest landed?

A*: Yes you can split the troops over drop zones. Jump troops can get out on the ground as well as jumping.
---

Q: What score do I need on the dice roll to get extra damage? The rule and the example work differently regarding the number you have to roll.

A: The rule should say "...if the dice roll is equal to or higher than this number..."*
---

Q: The Eldar aircraft have Special Rules: Eldar Field. This "gives it a 5+ save against all damage it receives". What is a save? It is not defined in the rulebook anywhere. When do I roll it? Per point of damage I take or once against all damaging hits? Is it per turn or per aircraft shooting the Eldar one?

A: Roll one dice for each damaging hit the Eldar craft takes. So if an Eldar Nightwing is hit by a weapon causing 1 point of damage (e.g. a turret) and also a weapon causing extra damage (2 points total, e.g. a lascannon), you should roll one dice to save against each (2 dice). The Eldar player makes a save against the lascannon and rolls a 5, enough to avoid all damage from that hit. He rolls to save against the turret and rolls a 2, failing the save and taking the one point of damage.
---

Q: How long does it take to drop troops off? Can I simply land in one turn and take off in the next?

A*: Yes you can. Unless a scenario or special rule dictates otherwise, it is assumed that once an aircraft has landed all the troops (that wish to) immediately get out. The time scale doesn't really require the detail of how long.
---

Q: My ground target is on a hillside which is at height level 3. How does this affect the height I need to be at to bomb it?

A: To make a bombing run in such circumstances, adjust the rules in the book as follows as follows:

You can only perform a bombing run if you are at least 3 levels above the target.
To hit with bombs at 3 or 4 levels above the target requires a 4+
To hit with bombs at 5 or 6 levels above the target...etc
Remember height level 8 is still the maximum you can be to make a bombing run.
---

Q: How does extra damage work? Do I roll an additional dice after my first damage roll?

A: You roll one damage dice for each hit. For example:

1. Roll to hit
2. Roll to damage. Weapon requires say a 2+ to damage. It also has the extra damage 6+ rule
2a. If the roll to damage comes up a 1 you fail to cause damage
2b. If the roll to damage comes up 2, 3 ,4 or 5 you score 1 point of damage
2c. If the roll to damage comes up a 6 you score 2 points of damage
---

Q: When using ammo rules, if I shoot at a target at long range and some of my weapons have 0 firepower at long range do I have the option of not firing them? If so do I have to declare which weapon systems are firing before measuring the shot to avoid sneaky ammo preserving ranging shots?

A: Yes, you can chose not to shoot weapons which you believe are out of range (or that you simply don't want to use). However, declare which weapons are firing before you measure ranges and expend any ammo for all declared weapons even if they are found to be out range after measuring.
---

Q: Can you strafe from the same height as a ground target or does the ground target have to be 1 lower?

A: An aircraft must be at level 1 or higher to make a straffing run and the target must be as the same level as the aircraft or one level lower.
---

Q: Can AA shoot an aircraft that is at the same height as it?

A: Yes. AA guns can shoot at aircraft targets on the same level as them or higher. They may not fire lower or at level 0.
---

Q: If a Thunderbolt gets shot with extra damage. Does the Thunderbolt get a save against the last point of damage, the whole lot or none at all? It says when it takes it's second hit.

A: Make one dice roll whenever a damaging hit would reduce the Thunderbolt to 0 or less hits. If you make the 6+ roll, the thunderbolt remains on 1 hit.

Christine
31-01-2007, 16:56
Grot bombs - do I still have to make my 5+ to hit roll with a grot bomb to attack ground targets? Surely I should just be able to steer the bomb into the target?

Spacker
31-01-2007, 17:10
Grot bombs - do I still have to make my 5+ to hit roll with a grot bomb to attack ground targets? Surely I should just be able to steer the bomb into the target?


I'd say yes - the 5+ representing the chance that the Grot will miss :P

What's unclear is whether Grot Bombs count as "bombs" for the purposes of a bombing run (ideally FW should have given bombs a "bomb" flag next to the "ground attack" flag so it would be clearer), I'd say no as they don't have the "ground attack" rule that all other "bombs" have.

mattjgilbert
31-01-2007, 18:33
They cannot attack ground targets would be my guess. They do no have the ground attack special rule. They move like planes and can only attack something at the same altitude at the start of the firing phase. That means that they would have to be traveling at minumum speed and at altitude one, declaring a landing move in order to reach targets at level 0 (on the ground). Sounds a bit weird to me.

So right now, as written, I'd say they can only target airbourne targets.

[EDIT] I like the image of Grots flying into ground targets though :D Let's hope the rules are adjusted to allow it :)

mageboltrat
31-01-2007, 22:18
Here's one for you.

Q: Can you do Bombing Runs with Wing Bombs

A: I personally think it's all in the wording, Wing Bombs are not the same as Bombs, so no.

grave digger
01-02-2007, 03:50
Here's one for you.

Q: Can you do Bombing Runs with Wing Bombs

A: I personally think it's all in the wording, Wing Bombs are not the same as Bombs, so no.

My feeling is that if the plane is a "bomber" than you can do bombing runs with any bomb on the plane. Page 14 says, "The only weapons that can be used in bombing runs are bombs". The Marauder has a "Bomb Bay" and can take "Wing Bombs". The Wing and Bay parts are only saying where the bombs are located. Man, the Marauder can really destroy a target if it wants to.


Grot bombs - do I still have to make my 5+ to hit roll with a grot bomb to attack ground targets? Surely I should just be able to steer the bomb into the target?

I've been wondering about this as well. The fact that they do not have the Ground Attack rule makes no difference to me since Fighta Rokkits do not have this ability nor do they have the Aerial Attack rule. So they should be good for both.

The thing that does make it more specific is the phrase in the rules where it says, "a Grot bomb within 3" of an enemy aircraft" (second paragraph). This states that it has to be against aircraft only since it makes no mention of ground targets anywhere else.

I find this sad because they really should be able to hit a ground target. Just like the ones in IA.

Diggs

Spacker
01-02-2007, 07:01
They cannot attack ground targets would be my guess. They do no have the ground attack special rule. They move like planes and can only attack something at the same altitude at the start of the firing phase. That means that they would have to be traveling at minumum speed and at altitude one, declaring a landing move in order to reach targets at level 0 (on the ground). Sounds a bit weird to me.

So right now, as written, I'd say they can only target airbourne targets.

[EDIT] I like the image of Grots flying into ground targets though :D Let's hope the rules are adjusted to allow it :)

Not having "ground attack" does not mean that weapons can't be used to attack targets on the ground.

The only weapons that can't attack ground targets have the "aerial attack" note. Weapons with "ground attack" can only be used to attack ground targets. Weapons with neither rule can be used to attack both air and ground targets, but weapons that are not bombs can only be used against ground targets in a strafing run.

The Grot Bomb is the odd weapon - it's not a "bomb" in the true sense because it doesn't have "ground attack" like all the other "bombs", but it's also not an air only weapon because it doesn't have "aerial attack". But it also has specific rules for how to use it that only includes hitting aircraft.

mattjgilbert
01-02-2007, 12:02
Not having "ground attack" does not mean that weapons can't be used to attack targets on the ground.

The only weapons that can't attack ground targets have the "aerial attack" note. Weapons with "ground attack" can only be used to attack ground targets. Weapons with neither rule can be used to attack both air and ground targets, but weapons that are not bombs can only be used against ground targets in a strafing run.

The Grot Bomb is the odd weapon - it's not a "bomb" in the true sense because it doesn't have "ground attack" like all the other "bombs", but it's also not an air only weapon because it doesn't have "aerial attack". But it also has specific rules for how to use it that only includes hitting aircraft.Oh I know that (ground attack) I was just stating the facts we knew about the grot bomb. It doesn't have weapons as such because it IS the weapon. The thing that complicates attacking ground targets is the requirement to be at the same level.

[EDIT] How about this... to attack a ground target, the grot bomb must start the firing phase 1 level above the target and within 3" of it. This is then similar to a straffing run but the grot pilot attempts to dive into the target at the last minute. Hits on a 5+ as normal.

CaptainSenioris
01-02-2007, 12:39
I've got one that's not been mentioned.

Under the Space marine chapter options in the squadron lists, there is an option to buy a Hyperius AA platform/Tank but no rules for it in any shape or form in the book.

Spacker
01-02-2007, 12:42
I've got one that's not been mentioned.

Under the Space marine chapter options in the squadron lists, there is an option to buy a Hyperius AA platform/Tank but no rules for it in any shape or form in the book.

Check the bottom of page 15, it's in the AA Weapons table along with all the other ground defences.

CaptainSenioris
01-02-2007, 12:55
Check the bottom of page 15, it's in the AA Weapons table along with all the other ground defences.

Ooops, cheers for that, I thought I had seen it somewhere but expected it to have a picture like the hydra and heavy flak gun, and be in the space marine section at the very least.

Spacker
01-02-2007, 13:24
The Skyray is missing too, might have been intentional to keep races to whole pages (the ones that are included being just space fillers). In order to have included the Hyperios and the Skyray FW would have had to make the existing sheets smaller, or add 4 more pages to the book.

grave digger
01-02-2007, 14:35
How about this... to attack a ground target, the grot bomb must start the firing phase 1 level above the target and within 3" of it. This is then similar to a straffing run but the grot pilot attempts to dive into the target at the last minute. Hits on a 5+ as normal.

As much as I like what you wrote (and it's the same I was thinking) Grot Bombs are very specificaly stated as attacking only aircraft. I hope FW does an FAQ to make this different but I'm not holding out any hope.

Of course in a game group setting you can come up with any rule you like as long as your friends agree.

Spacker,

Is the Hyperios suppose to look like a Wirlwind? Not sure I've seen the figure before.

Diggs

mattjgilbert
01-02-2007, 14:47
As much as I like what you wrote (and it's the same I was thinking) Grot Bombs are very specificaly stated as attacking only aircraft.Yeah, that was the gist of my first reply.

I was wondering... Spacker, you had a question officially answered. Are FW amenable to us asking questions in this way? If we compiled our FAQ (and anticipated answers) and asked them to OK/correct them, would they go for it?

Spacker
01-02-2007, 15:00
Yeah, that was the gist of my first reply.

I was wondering... Spacker, you had a question officially answered. Are FW amenable to us asking questions in this way? If we compiled our FAQ (and anticipated answers) and asked them to OK/correct them, would they go for it?

Pretty sure they would - Warwick Kinrade has responded to every email I've ever sent to ImperialArmour@games-workshop.co.uk , although sometimes it takes a couple of weeks. :)

grave digger
01-02-2007, 15:55
Yeah, that was the gist of my first reply.

I was wondering... Spacker, you had a question officially answered. Are FW amenable to us asking questions in this way? If we compiled our FAQ (and anticipated answers) and asked them to OK/correct them, would they go for it?

mattjgilbert,

I figured you were looking for house rules but I felt I needed to clarify. If this is to be a FAQ page than we really need to stick to actual answers (my feeling at least) and not house rules/rules development. Don't want to confuse anyone, most of all me:p

I like you idea about sending a big list to FW. Would be great if they responded with real answers. Any way this thread could get a sticky if that occurs?

Diggs

mattjgilbert
01-02-2007, 16:14
Pretty sure they would - Warwick Kinrade has responded to every email I've ever sent to ImperialArmour@games-workshop.co.uk , although sometimes it takes a couple of weeks. :)Cool - we should draw the line somewhere soon and post them off then.


mattjgilbert,

I figured you were looking for house rules but I felt I needed to clarify. If this is to be a FAQ page than we really need to stick to actual answers (my feeling at least) and not house rules/rules development. Don't want to confuse anyone, most of all me:p

I like you idea about sending a big list to FW. Would be great if they responded with real answers. Any way this thread could get a sticky if that occurs?

DiggsTurning our list into a sticky was the general idea :)

Oneofmany
01-02-2007, 21:38
Hallo,

WoW! first post om warseers!! they let me in! :D

This is a question about the manoeuvre cards
Is it so that there are no cards where you can stay on
the same altitude and airspeed?
Or do the cards have a third option that is not stated
on them or in the card explanation in the rule book.

Like the card nr: 1 CLIMB or DIVE .
Or is it card nr: 1 CLIMB,DIVE or STRAIGHT ON no climb
ore dive.


Thanks One:cool:

CENOBITE
01-02-2007, 22:07
The cards actually state whether an aircraft "May" or "Must" change it's altitude and or speed. So with a "Straight - Low" you could just fly straight ahead without chaning speed/altitude.

Brother_Bethor
02-02-2007, 08:26
Well, as my first dogfight is still ahead of me, I have a question. I know it is quite strange and maybe outright stupid but English isn't my native language.
So: is it a compulsory to use thrust every turn (to constantly change speed)? Is the change always done by thrust rating (ie. always by 2) or I can change speed by less than thrust rating?
Thank you in advance for all replies. :)

Spacker
02-02-2007, 08:51
My group and I have been playing it this way:

You don't have to change thrust every turn, you can remain at the speed indicated on the base.

You can change speed by up to the thrust rating - so if your thrust is 2, you can adjust speed up or down by 1 or 2.


But your question has got me wondering if this is right ...

Brother_Bethor
02-02-2007, 08:59
Thank you :) The book left me confused in that matter and I didn't got the answer from Mr. Kinrade yet.

I hope that you are right, because if not, then all planes with thrust rating 3 would be much more difficult to handle.

Greblord
02-02-2007, 11:48
Think about this logically. You're a pilot who has a thrust control and you're trying to get on your enemy's tail. You use it when you want to, you don't HAVE to use it. The rules are there to simulate your contols, not restrict you.

Brother_Bethor
02-02-2007, 11:57
I know that it should be in that way, but on the other hand I know that sometimes there isn't much common sense and logic in wargames.

mattjgilbert
02-02-2007, 12:37
To answer both the last two questions:

If a card says you MUST do something, you have to do it.
If a card says you MAY do something, you do not have to and can stay at the same altitude/speed.

And for the Thrust question: You do not have to use your thrust if you want to stay at the same speed. If you do use it, you can use as much or as little as you like up to the amount available. So at the start of the turn, a craft with Thrust 3 could reduce speed by 1, 2 or 3, stay at the same speed or increase speed by 1, 2 or 3.

I'll turn those into proper Q and A's later.

Brimstone
02-02-2007, 18:11
FW now have a FAQ up here. (http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/downloadsai.htm)

Brother_Bethor
02-02-2007, 18:22
Wow! That is a customer service. :D

Baaltharus
02-02-2007, 18:44
3 Thunderbolts take on 5 Hell blades, in the issuing dog fight the thunderbolts down three of the hell blades forcing them to break off. Understandably the Imp player gets the full points for his kills (3x12=36). The others hell blades have disengaged before they have used up the last of their ammo and have obviously gone undamaged (having only 1 hit point) does this mean that the Imp player gains 100% of the VP for the disengaged craft as they have broken off before the last turn?

If so its seems a bit unbalanced.

Al.

mageboltrat
02-02-2007, 19:42
Nope you get the points for them breaking off in the Disengage phase.

Spacker
02-02-2007, 20:02
FW now have a FAQ up here. (http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/downloadsai.htm)

WOW! GW really need to take a leaf out of FW's book ...

grave digger
02-02-2007, 23:51
That FAQ is grand:p

It answers all of my current questions and allows me to shoot Grot Bombs at ground targets:skull:

Too Cool! Thanx FW,

Diggs

Bravery exists
03-02-2007, 10:43
The best thing about the FAQ is that it says this!

"2. Phoenix is equipped withBrightlances, put the 40K model has a Pulse Laser? Yes, we intent to cover other variants of the aircraft in the future(my itallics) , when there will be various weapon fits for some aircraft –including a Phoenix with a Pulse Laser. For now use theBrightlances."

Baaltharus
03-02-2007, 13:28
Nope you get the points for them breaking off in the Disengage phase.

So as soon as 50%+ craft are destroyed it automatically becomes the last turn? I just find the wording unclear.

Al.

Spacker
03-02-2007, 15:08
So as soon as 50%+ craft are destroyed it automatically becomes the last turn? I just find the wording unclear.

Al.

It's more than half. So if you have only 2 aircraft, disengagement is turn 12. If you have 5 aircraft, when have lost 3 then you must disengage in the next turn, so the game ends in that turn.

Baaltharus
03-02-2007, 16:22
Sorry, I'm aware of that, it should have read 50+% or >50%. Its said that if an undamaged aircraft disengages in the LAST turn rather than the disengagement turn then you don't get points for it, this is what I was wanting clarified.

Al.

mattjgilbert
03-02-2007, 20:30
WOW! GW really need to take a leaf out of FW's book ...Wow indeed! Looks like they answered a lot of the ones we came up with.. and we got them right!

Let's round up the rest and send them off as it sounds like we get published answers with a great turn around. Great effort from FW! Well done :)

Spacker
04-02-2007, 10:41
Question: Landing requires that an aircraft be at minimum speed and play the Straight card, how does this work with aircraft that have a minimum speed of 0? The Hovering rules state that at speed 0 no card can be used - does this mean that an aircraft with min speed 0 can never land because it can never use the Straight card to perform a landing?

Oneofmany
04-02-2007, 20:19
I would say if you hover at speed 0 Apply 1 thrust at the begining of your movement, play the card and land.

Thanks One:cool:

mattjgilbert
04-02-2007, 20:50
Looks like we only have two questions left from our list!

Q: Can Jump Troops be unloaded when landed or do they have to jump? Could some transported Jump Troops units be dropped, and the rest landed?
A*: Jump troops can get out on the ground as well as jumping.

Q: When using ammo rules, if I shoot at a target at long range and some of my weapons have 0 firepower at long range do I have the option of not firing them? If so do I have to declare which weapon systems are firing before measuring the shot to avoid sneaky ammo preserving ranging shots?
A: Yes, you can chose not to shoot weapons which you believe are out of range (or that you simply don't want to use). However, declare which weapons are firing before you measure ranges and expend any ammo for all declared weapons even if they are found to be out range after measuring.


*Official answer... just not in the current FW FAQ

Hodge
04-02-2007, 21:51
Question: Landing requires that an aircraft be at minimum speed and play the Straight card, how does this work with aircraft that have a minimum speed of 0? The Hovering rules state that at speed 0 no card can be used - does this mean that an aircraft with min speed 0 can never land because it can never use the Straight card to perform a landing?


I would say if you hover at speed 0 Apply 1 thrust at the begining of your movement, play the card and land.

Thanks One:cool:

Thats one way of doing it, but surely an aircraft that can hover should be able to land (and take off) vertically :confused: . Maybe any aircraft with minimum speed 0 should not have to play the straight card when landing or taking off ?

Spacker
05-02-2007, 08:32
Thats one way of doing it, but surely an aircraft that can hover should be able to land (and take off) vertically :confused: . Maybe any aircraft with minimum speed 0 should not have to play the straight card when landing or taking off ?

It's a conflict in the rules - Hovering states you cannot play a card, Landing states you must be at min speed and play the Straight card. That's why the question was posed - we can all try and surmise how it might be done, but only FW can actually answer it.

Hodge
06-02-2007, 09:18
It's a conflict in the rules - Hovering states you cannot play a card, Landing states you must be at min speed and play the Straight card. That's why the question was posed - we can all try and surmise how it might be done, but only FW can actually answer it.

And I thought this was a forum for discussion and exchange of ideas...
:rolleyes:

dr vompire
06-02-2007, 12:00
heres another one, just looking through my copy of AI i can't find stats for the skyray or the hyperios, have i got a defective copy, or am i defective?

mageboltrat
06-02-2007, 12:07
Your defective.... or maybe FW has just put the rules in a silly place. check the big chart o stats on page 15. BTW they have 2 hit points a piece.

Spacker
06-02-2007, 12:28
And I thought this was a forum for discussion and exchange of ideas...
:rolleyes:

It is, but this thread is to get questions together to send to FW to have answered officially.

Izza
06-02-2007, 21:39
I got a question.

Line of Sight

Your trying to fire at an enemy aircraft at the same altitude level. Between you and the enemy is a friendly aircraft also at the same altitude.
Does the friendly block line of sight? Is there a chance you may hit the friendly? Same with 2 enemy aircraft and your wanting to shoot the one further away.

The way I play this atm is as if the friendly isnt there at all. My logic being that the sky is a big open place, and planes travel at high speed and that pilots are smart enough not to shoot their wingmen. :D

mageboltrat
06-02-2007, 22:51
You can ignore intervening aircraft.

OK one more

Q. Did they misprint the cost of the Vampire Hunter and Raider.

If you compare a Phoenix and a Vampire Hunter, the Hunter gets a better weapon load out and had double the hit points of the Phoenix and loses access to the 2 very high cards. My gut feeling is that it is quite a bit better than a Phoenix, but it is 8 points less. If you compare it to a Thunderbolt for 2 points more it is getting a far better load out, a higher top speed and almost twice the durability. My general feeling is they misprinted it and VHs should be 32 not 22 points and VRs should be 34 not 24. Is it possible to check with them?

grave digger
07-02-2007, 01:18
Not to sound cynical but we are talking about Eldar (Elves in space). Just my Dwarf like menatality but they always seem cheaper for what you get than any other race.

Just me on this one.

mageboltrat has it right. Just like in BFG the ship is represented on the stand but it does not interfere with line of sight.

Diggs

mageboltrat
07-02-2007, 02:04
We were playing against the silly smelly space elves tonight and the pheonix and nightwing felt like they were about the right amount of points, but even the space elf player thought they had made a cock up with the points of the Vampire. It's about 10 points to cheap which is quite a lot as it only costs 22 points to begin with, which is why I think it might have been a misprint. Have a look at the stat lines and tell me what you think..

If you want a bit of a laugh put a Vampire Raider against a Thunderbolt with an extra load, both 24 points. The Vampire has a similar amount of fire power but gains double the hit points, 1 extra max speed, 6 transport and a holofield.

grave digger
07-02-2007, 03:21
Well, I just checked. For two points more than a Thunderbolt you get +1 Thrust, 2 extra hits, holo field and one extra weapon system. True, the scatter laser is not as good as the quad auto cannons but the pulsar is better than than the Lascannons.

Yea, it should be a few points more or on par with the bomber.

That's Eldar for ya,

Diggs

ml2sjw
07-02-2007, 18:19
I got a question.

Line of Sight

The way I play this atm is as if the friendly isnt there at all. My logic being that the sky is a big open place, and planes travel at high speed and that pilots are smart enough not to shoot their wingmen. :D

My opinion is their is no such thing as blocking LOS in AI just seem silly to have it

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 18:44
You cannot block LOS with other aircraft. In the same way as they do not block movement. Terrain _may_ block both though.

I'll try and post our latest questions to FW tonight.

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 21:47
OK - I've sent our latest list of outstanding questions off. Let's see what we get back :D

cookiescrumble
08-02-2007, 08:56
Just a quick question,

Do Aircraft start at a fixed Altitude? I had a read through and this is th only thing that is really bugging me. Maybe i missed it in all the hype.

mageboltrat
08-02-2007, 09:10
You may chose your altitude and speed when you place the model on your board edge.

cookiescrumble
08-02-2007, 09:16
Cheers for that, all i need now is my fleet...

mattjgilbert
08-02-2007, 10:23
Just a quick question,

Do Aircraft start at a fixed Altitude? I had a read through and this is th only thing that is really bugging me. Maybe i missed it in all the hype.Your ones always start on the ground :p

OT: Sounds like will both be orcs. Maybe we should challenge the others at our next Battleday?

mageboltrat has it right - start at whatever altitude and speed you wish

mattjgilbert
09-02-2007, 22:28
OK - here are the answers to our questions from Warwick. His replies or where he agrees with our answer are in blue

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Hi

Answers below. Hope it helps



Warwick Kinrade
Imperial Armour Editor




On 8/2/07 7:26 am, "Matt" <mgilbert@ntlworld.com> wrote:


Hi,

We have a thread running on Warseer for people to post their AI questions. Most have now been answered by your FAQ (great job BTW and very speedy!) but we have a few more it would be great to get some answers on and post back to people (or even include in a revised FAQ?). Where I have answers they are our “proposed” solutions but would obviously like clarification :)


Q: Can Jump Troops be unloaded when landed or do they have to jump? Could some transported Jump Troops units be dropped, and the rest landed?
A: Jump troops can get out on the ground as well as jumping.

Yes

Q: When using ammo rules, if I shoot at a target at long range and some of my weapons have 0 firepower at long range do I have the option of not firing them? If so do I have to declare which weapon systems are firing before measuring the shot to avoid sneaky ammo preserving ranging shots?
A: Yes, you can chose not to shoot weapons which you believe are out of range (or that you simply don't want to use). However, declare which weapons are firing before you measure ranges and expend any ammo for all declared weapons even if they are found to be out range after measuring.

yes

Q: Landing requires that an aircraft be at minimum speed and play the Straight card, how does this work with aircraft that have a minimum speed of 0? The Hovering rules state that at speed 0 no card can be used - does this mean that an aircraft with min speed 0 can never land because it can never use the Straight card to perform a landing?

A: ???

A hovering aircraft can land without using the straight card, so from altitude 1 just place it at 0, and its on the ground.

Q. Did they misprint the cost of the Vampire Hunter and Raider?

If you compare a Phoenix and a Vampire Hunter, the Hunter gets a better weapon load out and had double the hit points of the Phoenix and loses access to the 2 very high cards. My gut feeling is that it is quite a bit better than a Phoenix, but it is 8 points less. If you compare it to a Thunderbolt for 2 points more it is getting a far better load out, a higher top speed and almost twice the durability. My general feeling is they misprinted it and VHs should be 32 not 22 points and VRs should be 34 not 24. Is it possible to check with them?

A: ???

All pts values are an abstraction, assigning a arbitrary value to something is never very presice. Players tend to put more importance on them that is really due. In the end it’s not a science, just a subjective opinion, and whilst 22 looks low to you, and might be a bit low, it won’t effect the game overly – bombers are generally less useful that fighters, because you don’t get to use them as often, so what’s the points value of that? Go with the printed pts, and beware Eldar in scenarios where they use bombers - I’d counter with aircraft with extra damage weapons to give me the best chance of doing the extra hits I’ll need.

Q: Can one aircraft block LOS to another?
A: You cannot block LOS with aircraft. In the same way as they do not block movement. Terrain _may_ block both though.

Yes

Thanks in advance and keep up the good work. Great game!

Matt :)

mageboltrat
09-02-2007, 22:59
bombers are generally less useful that fighters, because you don’t get to use them as often, so what’s the points value of that?

ER.. I don't get this. When you can't use them you don't pay the cost, and when you do get access to Bombers you pay too little by a lot. How is this a sensible reply? The points should be for when you can use them. If he was saying Bombers are good against some things and not against others then averaging it out would make sense. Or if you had to choose your force before deciding your mission and then couldn't use the bombers. But you choose your squadron after selecting your mission.

Also note the only mission both sides can't use bombers in is bomber intercept. So in every mission except for when Eldar is the attacker in a Bomber Intercept mission your boned.

If a Eldar player with 4 Vampire Hunters plays a Imperial Player with 4 Thunderbolts (2 with extra loads) and they are both as good players the Eldar will win every time, their planes are twice as durable*. There is no subjective opinion here, It's a statistical fact.

*along with being faster and having a better save

Spacker
10-02-2007, 08:23
Also note the only mission both sides can't use bombers in is bomber intercept. So in every mission except for when Eldar is the attacker in a Bomber Intercept mission your boned.

Check the allowed aircraft for each scenario and you soon see that Vampires don't get to be used too often if you use those rules.


Dogfight - Fighters only

Bandits over the Karsundi River: Fighters only

Behind Enemy Lines: Attacker fighters only

Straggler over Varestus Prime: Attacker fighters only

Clash of Aces: Fighters only

Air Raid, Supply Base Castor 242: Defender cannot take bombers


So that's 6 out of 13 scenarios where the Eldar cannot, or depending on if they are attacker or not may or may not, take Vampires.

I do agree though that the cost of the Vampire seems too low in comparison with the Eldar fighters. I've got a couple of Vampires on order already to use in my Eldar host because they are so cheap, and I know I can use them in at least half of the scenarios, or any campaign mission.

mageboltrat
10-02-2007, 08:27
Though I am very happy that we got a reply and the whole problem of speed 0 planes landing has been cleared up.

mageboltrat
10-02-2007, 08:31
I do agree though that the cost of the Vampire seems too low in comparison with the Eldar fighters. I've got a couple of Vampires on order already to use in my Eldar host because they are so cheap, and I know I can use them in at least half of the scenarios, or any campaign mission.

I was using the campaign missions. But even then shouldn't they be pointed on what they can do when taken? I think the reason this bugs me so much is that I feel the Nightwing and the Phoenix has been made obsolete as the Vampires are better Air Superiority fighters than the dedicated ones. You should have to make a choice between dog fighting and landing troops or attacking ground targets, this is not the case in Eldar, if you can take Vampires there is no down side to taking them.

(Also I want to have an Iyanden Squadron to go with my Epic army and I don't want them to be cheesy. I have had that problem with my Epic army.)

mattjgilbert
10-02-2007, 09:17
Yes I agree that the points something costs should represent it's ability and power compared to other units/models when it is in play. That said, Warwick obviously thought about this and pointed it accordingly so we live with it for now. Great customer service again in answering the questions :)

Spacker
10-02-2007, 16:04
The Phoenix and Nightwing still both have their place - they are both Very High maneouvre aircraft, and the Nightwing has a higher max speed and Thrust 3. Against most other fighters the Phoenix and Nightwing will have the advantage, whereas the Vampires will be on a par.

ml2sjw
11-02-2007, 15:32
Ok time to wade into the fray on this one.

Lets have a close look at the vampire hunter is it really an under priced wonder ship that some people seem to be setting it up as? Ok in this I'm going to start off looking at it in a dog fight i'll move on to ground attack later(i.e after the rugby has finished

OK

Type its a bomber so can't be taken in a lot of the dog fighting scenarios obviously severely limiting its utility in as the key component in a standard force.


hits With 4 and a holofield its very tough taking 6 damaging hits to take down on average that's 3 of most races fighters putting it on even terms with a thunderhawk gunship(i'll come back to this point later)

Manoeuvre Well its able to move turn accelerate and decelerate as well as a thunderbolt out matching in pure numbers terms the ork and tau fighters for a bomber this is very impressive, though for a fighter it really isn't that good

Weaponry Well i have to say in my book it ain't great

Scatter laser well the stats are frankly rubbish. Even at optimum range it only gets 2 hits on average but damaging on a 6+ its going to be pretty rare that it actually does any damage, once every three turns assuming ideal circumstances with only 6 shots even in ideal circumstances it will only average taking down a single fighter a game

To put this into perspective a thunderbolts quad autocannons will average twice that. So far nothing impressive

Now the Pulsars ok they are nasty at close range 3 shots so 1 hit a turn doing damage on a 2+ so pretty much 3 and a bit hits per game plus extra damage so probally 4-5 hits a game

This compares very well to the thunderbolts lascannons which should manage hit a game

So on pure damage dealing terms the vampire has the edge. But as people are fond of pointing out the thunderbolt gets an extra weapon load for the price which should buy the thunderbolt an extra hit putting them pretty much level on damage dealing(some one with more time can work out the exact figures rather than my rough and ready rounded calculations)

SO on damage dealing its not really that great certainly not the death dealer you'd think from peoples moaning.


Conclusions

Well from stats alone comparing separately I'm not impressed. True it is very tough with the equivalent of six hits but its fire power is nothing special even in ideal circumstances

Also something people are missing, is the importances of the combination of manoeuvrability and firepower. From my experience of the game the key has been to keep you opponent at the optimum range for your weapons whilst keeping you opponent out of his. The thunderbolt works best at medium range though a couple of turns long range fire is nasty when equipped with sky strike missiles. In contrast the hunter like all eldar craft is best at point blank range. However unlike the eldar fighters it lacks the speed and manoeuvrability to dictate combat if the hunter fails to get and stay in close range of a thunderbolt its effectiveness nose dives

Also important is that in missions where you can take the hunter often you are going to have to destroy ground targets, every shot you take at a ground target reduces your effectiveness in the air, as almost all a hunters kills will come from the pulsars

So in my book at least in air to air terms the hunter is priced about right taking a force solely made up of them in a dog fight would be asking for trouble, and in missions where you want to use it for ground attack the limited ammo of the pulsar means you need escorts for them as it can't dog fight its way to the target and then destroy the target ..

mageboltrat
11-02-2007, 16:00
Type its a bomber so can't be taken in a lot of the dog fighting scenarios obviously severely limiting its utility in as the key component in a standard force.

This is not a problem though as you only pay for it in the games when you use it. In Campaign games where you have to choose your fleet from the start there is practically no games you can't use them in. So I feel this point is a bit mute, The only disadvantage it has is a pure RL monetary one.



Manoeuvre Well its able to move turn accelerate and decelerate as well as a thunderbolt out matching in pure numbers terms the ork and tau fighters for a bomber this is very impressive, though for a fighter it really isn't that good


So you are saying that it is as maneuverable as the average fighter, OK it doesn't compete with the Nightwing or the Hellblade but these are at the bleeding edge range of the scale.



So on pure damage dealing terms the vampire has the edge. But as people are fond of pointing out the thunderbolt gets an extra weapon load for the price which should buy the thunderbolt an extra hit putting them pretty much level on damage dealing(some one with more time can work out the exact figures rather than my rough and ready rounded calculations)


Actually the thunderbolt is getting half an extra load, a full load would be 24 points.



SO on damage dealing its not really that great certainly not the death dealer you'd think from peoples moaning.

Actually it wasn't the damage dealing I was moaning about. I've always said this was comparable.



Also something people are missing, is the importances of the combination of manoeuvrability and firepower. From my experience of the game the key has been to keep you opponent at the optimum range for your weapons whilst keeping you opponent out of his. The thunderbolt works best at medium range though a couple of turns long range fire is nasty when equipped with sky strike missiles. In contrast the hunter like all eldar craft is best at point blank range. However unlike the eldar fighters it lacks the speed and manoeuvrability to dictate combat if the hunter fails to get and stay in close range of a thunderbolt its effectiveness nose dives


It has the maneuverability and firepower of a thunderbolt. It gets the durability for no real cost. The problem really is that Eldar's main failing which is lack of numbers is mitigated by it being able to take an reasonable underpointed fighter.



Also important is that in missions where you can take the hunter often you are going to have to destroy ground targets, every shot you take at a ground target reduces your effectiveness in the air, as almost all a hunters kills will come from the pulsars


Every army has this problem, the real differnce is that the eldar bomber is an effective dogfigter, every other army has to deal with the problem of guarding it's vulnerable ground attack unit in these missions.



So in my book at least in air to air terms the hunter is priced about right taking a force solely made up of them in a dog fight would be asking for trouble, and in missions where you want to use it for ground attack the limited ammo of the pulsar means you need escorts for them as it can't dog fight its way to the target and then destroy the target ..

However it's escort could be more Vampire Hunters, This would give you numeric advantages over Nightwings, every plane could do the job when they get to the strike zone, they are all durable and can hold there own in a fight with Medium level fighters (probably high level fighters due to their durability).

ml2sjw
11-02-2007, 16:20
Ok question 1. Have you played a game against a vampire hunter or is this all based off theory? My observations are based off a few proxied games, far from conclusive i'll admit as we are still learning how the game works but i just haven't seen the hunter be an "effective" dogfighter.

Problems it has.

1) As i said in optimum conditions it has the fire-power of a thunderbolt but in non optimum conditions it compares far less favourably with a very steep drop off in effectivenss and medium range and no long range firepower at all.

2)Short range in my experence is the hardest to reach and maintain when you opponent doesn't want you to reach it. Unless you have a)high speed and manouverability like the eldar fighters or b) numbers like orks.

3)the hunter has neither of these its far to easy to stay away from and engage at medium or long range where all although it has more hits it will still die after a while

But then i may just be a rubbish player

mageboltrat
11-02-2007, 16:35
It could be because I'm an Ork player and I know how easy it is for me to get into close range using the correct cards. I will play some more games against it.

ml2sjw
11-02-2007, 16:42
But as i said as orks you have a numbers advantage making this easier, if you are even or worse out numbered it becomes far harder to get into close range because their is far more sky for you opponent to run off into. Plus its even worse when you have to get to an objective to blow it up

mageboltrat
11-02-2007, 16:49
However I doubt you could argue that it's significantly better than phoenix bomber.

Pulsars which are 3-2-1 2+/4+ compared with brightlances 1-1-0 2+/6+ easily make up for the drop the scatter lasers get over the shuriken cannons. Losing the Very High cards (which from personal experience aren't that useful) does not make up for the 2 extra Hitpoints.

I don't think there is anyway you can justify them being 8 points cheaper than the Phoenix, Either the phoenix is overpointed or the Vampire Hunter is underpointed or a bit of both.

ml2sjw
11-02-2007, 17:17
The phoenix is a bit of an odd thing.

However one thing your missing is the ease that the high manoeuvre cards (specifically card 10) enable it to make attack runs turn after turn against the same target without gaining or losing height which would make it unable to attack(Card 7) or lose it crashing into the ground (card 8) This is an easy ability to miss but it does come part way to explaining the high cost.

I think the hgih cost represents its utility as a bomber rather than a fighter, even in the fighter stakes though it is equal to the tbolt but once you add in its high ground attack performance then the cost becomes about right.

Also i think this goes some way to explain why the basic phoenix doesn't have a pulsar it would be obscene(this coming from an eldar play by the way)

mageboltrat
11-02-2007, 17:37
Yeah I found this out my first ground attack games. My second game I took it into account. I found that was fairly easy to plan an attack run that didn't need a 180 turn. I don't know if it's as important as you think it is.

ml2sjw
11-02-2007, 17:43
Its important when speed is key, My phoenix get used as strike bombers in missions such as operation arc light, i.e when you need to take out AA defences before you get in amongst the main target in this role speed is key as if you hang around doing slow turns your in trouble real fast(even with 6 hits) Plus you need to make a whole before your real bombers turn up

Edit Same goes for landing troops in hot lz's

Morph
14-02-2007, 22:25
If you use sustained fire with a single shot weapon, do you get two shots?

Initially our thought was that you would round the 1.5 shots you get up to 2.

However this does mean that you use 2 bits of ammo to fire 2 shots. In other words you waste no ammo when you sustained fire with a single shot gun (which goes against the point of sustained fire).

It came up in the last game, and we decided not to sustained fire with a lascannon, as it seems a bit good. But what do people reckon? Or have we just missed some rule somewhere?

mageboltrat
15-02-2007, 00:08
Yep you get 2 shots if you sustain fire a bright lance. No real loss at all. Bright lance seem to be getting sustained more often than shiruken catapults in our games.

Eldar missile launchers are also a good example of sustained fire wierdness stat line is 4-3-0.. which changes to 6-5-0 if you sustain fire. This means if you are at medium range sustained fire becomes really attractive.

mattjgilbert
15-02-2007, 10:56
Yes I agree: 2 shots = 2 ammo for a single shot weapon firing sustained fire.

Morph
15-02-2007, 22:42
OK then. It seems sustained fire is a no brainer most of the time for single shot guns (assuming you're at 5+). I'd better get using it.

Imber
16-02-2007, 16:53
There are a few ways this could play out:
1. Two damage points is too much and the roll cannot be taken - the TBolt is removed
2. The TBolt can roll to avoid each point of damage separately. It would require 2 6's to avoid taking any damage
3. Like the suggestion for the Eldar Fields. one roll is made and if successfully, both damage points are ignored.

I'm leaning toward number 2. The wording of the Eldar Fields says "all damage" is ignored. The TBolt should get some kind of chance to avoid such massive damage but not a great one. I'm fully prepared have my mind changed though :)

Depends on how steep you think the hill is or how far away from the hill the aircraft is surely?

If you look at the wording of the special rule, it does actually cover this (though it is not clear). The rules state that if the role is successful, the the hit is ignored etc. etc., not just a point of damage. Therefore, as the hit is ignored, so are both points of damage.

mattjgilbert
16-02-2007, 23:37
If you look at the wording of the special rule, it does actually cover this (though it is not clear). The rules state that if the role is successful, the the hit is ignored etc. etc., not just a point of damage. Therefore, as the hit is ignored, so are both points of damage.The FW FAQ already answered this for us :)

tanker
17-02-2007, 03:39
Is it really the case that the winner of the initiative MUST move first? Seems like having the choice to do move first or second would be better?

mageboltrat
17-02-2007, 08:23
Moving second and firing first would be a hugh advantage. Moving first and firing first is still an advantage, but not nearly as great. So yes if you win initiative you have to move first.

tanker
18-02-2007, 20:09
Ah, good point.

mageboltrat
28-02-2007, 17:46
This one came up last night. Do Eldar planes on the ground get a holofield save, we played it that they didn't but?

mattjgilbert
28-02-2007, 18:42
Fluff-wise who knows? Maybe, maybe not*. Rules-wise yes they do (the planes get the special rule with no restrictions or limitations for its use).

*maybe the things are never powered down, always floating and ready to go...

Cry of the Wind
01-03-2007, 01:28
Rules-wise it clearly states the save may be taken against all damage received, so even if there was a distinction between air to air and air to ground fire (which there isn't, besides some weapons being unable to target ground/air targets) it would still apply. Now for example, if you're counting a Nightwing as a Ground Target (i.e. the Grounded Fighter with one hit listed on page 14) then I don't think it would apply since it is not really a Nightwing by description, it is rather a Ground Target that is a Grounded Fighter, much the same way a Grounded Thunderhawk would also still have only 2 hits since it's not really a Thunderhawk (i.e. can't takeoff and engage in battle). However as my fluff explains below, I see no reason not to make a house rule stating that grounded Eldar aircraft still get holo-field saves (or indeed any Eldar Ground Target since most Eldar stuff seems to have access to, if not integral, holo-field systems).

Fluff-wise I see no reason it wouldn't work. If your targeting scanner (or whatever) is telling you there are four Nightwings on the ground but in reality there is only one, how would you know which one to drop the bomb on? Since they always have their anti-grav on (no landing gear) it stands to reason the holo-field is still on too.

mageboltrat
01-03-2007, 02:50
Ah thanks Cry that answers my question. I missed the Grounded fighter on the page 14 chart, so we were just using the rules for the Phoenix.

Fellblade
04-03-2007, 01:44
Okay, here's a question I thought of last night:

Assuming you're using the advanced rules for Emergency Manoeuvers, can you play and illegal movement card for your aircraft in a risky attempt to rapidly drop altitude?

For example, you have a thunderbolt at alt7 being tailed by an enemy fighter. In the next turn you play card #9 or #10 (the ultra-high cards). Assuming the T-bolt survives the tailing fire, it would normally crash on its turn to move due to the illegal card. If you pass the Emergency Manoeuver roll, the T-bolt would drop from altitude 7 to 1 and continues on its way without having to worry about the enemy fighter for awhile.

I guess this would be something like putting your aircraft into a flat spin and praying you can recover from it in time.

mageboltrat
04-03-2007, 09:40
No. There are two cases stated for emergency manoeuvers going above your maximum altitude. in which case if you pass you remain at your max altitude. The second is hitting the ground, in which you remain at height 1 ( probably should read as 1 level above the ground, but this is a common mistake in the AI rulebook) Crashing into cliff faces and playing illegal cards don't allow EMs

Morph
04-03-2007, 12:19
I believe if you chose an illegal manoeuver the plane simply dies. As said, there is not chance to use the emergency manoeuver rules.

Fellblade
06-03-2007, 05:10
No. There are two cases stated for emergency manoeuvers going above your maximum altitude... The second is hitting the ground...
You missed stalling, which is a third case.

Illegal maneuver says the plane goes out of control and crashes. Keep in mind this is a result of player error due to accidently giving the wrong maneuver to an aircraft.

The three examples given all follow this same theme: Player issues an order that would result in destruction of the aircraft. Issuing a maneuver which would exceed maximum altitude, issuing a maneuver that would result in speed below minimum, and crashing into the ground.
Emergency manoeuvers permits a roll to keep the plane alive due to pilot skill overcoming player error.

Playing an invaid card has the same result. Due to player error the plane would be destroyed. Again, and the reason for the question for the FAQ, would "emergency manoeuvers" allow a plane to survive an incorrect card?

The other three cases could also be induced by a player in an attempt to exploit a situation. For example, an enemy fighter climbs higher than you'd normally be able to accend without stalling, so you push for the extra level of altitude and hope to avoid the stall with a emergency manoeuver roll. The most straight path to your target would mean flying though a hill, so the player flys directly towards it hoping they'll make their pilot roll and simply be moved above the terrain piece.

Tyra_Nid
06-03-2007, 08:39
the Very High cards (which from personal experience aren't that useful)

!!!

Are you insane!?

In my experience (:p), Spiral is one of the most handy cards in the game...allows a very quick spin, with the flexibility of staying same alt or going +/-1 alt. Using this, you dont need to predict (as much) what the other fighter will do, you can respond to end up on the same level based on what your target does first. A wingover or the other one means you must PRE CHOOSE whether you wish to go up or down, which means you can end up on the wrong alt (which happens far too often :() even if you end up in a brilliant position.

After using games with both Tbolts and Lightnings, my respect for the Lightning has increased exponentially, soley due to the fact it gets into a good firing position far more often (especially against tricksy Very High fighters like Eldar and Chaos) than the Bolts.



Two Lightnings in Bandits over Karsundi? 32 points.
Pulling two Spirals and taking out a Nightwing in the first turn? Priceless.
(He wont be making THAT mistake again!)

mageboltrat
06-03-2007, 11:26
!!!

Are you insane!?

In my experience (:p), Spiral is one of the most handy cards in the game...allows a very quick spin, with the flexibility of staying same alt or going +/-1 alt.

It's a handy card I would agree. More so in bombing and ground runs than in the air, but even there it is good. The question was is Spiral worth 10 pts. Vampire loses VH manoeuvers but gains a lot and is 8 pts less than the phoenix. I am going to find out soon enough, a friend is bringing 2 vampires to work today. I'll see how the Vampire compares to the Phoenix, on paper it is very er definite.

mageboltrat
06-03-2007, 11:30
Playing an invaid card has the same result. Due to player error the plane would be destroyed. Again, and the reason for the question for the FAQ, would "emergency manoeuvers" allow a plane to survive an incorrect card?


But the rules for that were put in to stop people cheating. They are not in the list for people performing EMs



most straight path to your target would mean flying though a hill, so the player flys directly towards it hoping they'll make their pilot roll and simply be moved above the terrain piece.

Flying into a hill also does not allow a EM.

the 3 situations that allow one are

1. Going below minimum speed.
2. Diving into the ground.
3. Climbing over max altitude

No other situations allow one.

CaptainSenioris
06-03-2007, 23:32
I kind of thought this had been spoken of already but apparently it has not. Under bombing run it says that bombs cannot be dropped from altitudes levels 1-2 above the target, it also says that bombing runs can only be performed by bomber class aircraft; this means that ork figthas and fighta bommers(both fighter clas) cannot actually use their bombs as in a strafing run you are at altitude 1 above the target.

Has anyone got an e-mail address so I can ask forge world abut this?

mattjgilbert
06-03-2007, 23:42
Not got the book handy to check but do they have bombs? Thought they had rokkits and grot bombs which work differently anyway.

ImperialArmour@games-workshop.co.uk to ask questions unless you get the answer here first (more than likely :) )

CaptainSenioris
06-03-2007, 23:54
Not got the book handy to check but do they have bombs? Thought they had rokkits and grot bombs which work differently anyway.

ImperialArmour@games-workshop.co.uk to ask questions unless you get the answer here first (more than likely :) )

Cheers for that.

Rokkits and guns are mentioned but ordinary bombs are not, except in the instances that I quoted them.

mageboltrat
07-03-2007, 00:26
I kind of thought this had been spoken of already but apparently it has not. Under bombing run it says that bombs cannot be dropped from altitudes levels 1-2 above the target, it also says that bombing runs can only be performed by bomber class aircraft; this means that ork figthas and fighta bommers(both fighter clas) cannot actually use their bombs as in a strafing run you are at altitude 1 above the target.

Has anyone got an e-mail address so I can ask forge world abut this?

You have to be a Bomber, be at height 3+ and have bombs to do a bombing run. When you do a bombing run you use the Bombing run table and you get the bonus of Bomb Creep. So it's much better than doing a Strafing run, more likely to hit, does more damage and you are less likely to get hit by ground flak.

If you have bombs you can also do a Strafing run. In this case you have to be at height 1 and you hit on 5+. NO Bomb creep but both Fighters and Bombers can do this.

Wolflord Havoc
07-03-2007, 09:48
I kind of thought this had been spoken of already but apparently it has not. Under bombing run it says that bombs cannot be dropped from altitudes levels 1-2 above the target, it also says that bombing runs can only be performed by bomber class aircraft; this means that ork figthas and fighta bommers(both fighter clas) cannot actually use their bombs as in a strafing run you are at altitude 1 above the target.

Has anyone got an e-mail address so I can ask forge world abut this?

This 'bombing from only 3+ levels above the target' only comes into effect if you are carrying out a bombing run.

Bombs can still be dropped as part of a 'Strafing run' hitting on a 5+.

mattjgilbert
07-03-2007, 10:47
I thought it was possible.... need to play more games to remember the rules better!

mageboltrat
18-04-2007, 19:26
If you pull in behind a plane that then lands, can you take a tailing shot in the following turn. You are still in a tailing position relative to it and are only 1 level above it. However does it change state to a Ground Target and therefore not a valid target.

Izza
20-04-2007, 00:05
Also on the landing issue...

Fighters on the ground are 1 htis, Bombers 2 hits.
What about the Heavy bombers? Thunderhawk, Vampire and Manta?
are they worth 2 hits, 1/2 the orginal hits or something else?

A Manta on the ground would be a juicy target!
:D

mageboltrat
20-04-2007, 01:27
Planes that land have the normal amount of hits. Planes that are Ground Targets have a set number of hits given by the scenario / generic HP list.

Izza
26-04-2007, 00:26
Couple of things that my game last night got me thinking about:

1) Ground defences - Are they worth their points in Victory Points or just 10pts for being a ground target?

2) Also do ground defenses count towards your 50% of forces for complusory disengagement? In the rule book it does say 50% of Aircraft, but just wanting to double check.

CaptainSenioris
26-04-2007, 08:38
I think the ground targets bought at a set points value are worth that many victory points, it's only fair as some are only 4 pts.
Seeing as ground targets can't actually disengage I'd say to go by the rulebook and only let aircraft count.

Cresistauead
30-04-2007, 09:23
I got few questions which should be pretty easy:

If an aircraft is flying its max speed and dives (increasing its speed even further), I know it isn't possible to gain more speed, but does it cause a crash?

If the aircraft has ground attack weapons in a mission where there are no ground attack targets, should those weapons be counted towards having ammunition left when calculating victory points?

Are all the manouver cards revealed when the initiative is rolled or are the manouvers revealed one at the time when the aircraft in question is activated?

Should this game advocate premeasurement or does it work better without it?



Anyways, it's a nice game if you don't care about the point values.

mageboltrat
30-04-2007, 19:01
I got few questions which should be pretty easy:

If an aircraft is flying its max speed and dives (increasing its speed even further), I know it isn't possible to gain more speed, but does it cause a crash?


No. just remains at maximum speed.



If the aircraft has ground attack weapons in a mission where there are no ground attack targets, should those weapons be counted towards having ammunition left when calculating victory points?


Technically Yes, but I would house rule it.



Are all the manouver cards revealed when the initiative is rolled or are the manouvers revealed one at the time when the aircraft in question is activated?


Revealed when the move is made not at the beginning of the phase.



Should this game advocate premeasurement or does it work better without it?


There is no official ruling on this. I generally play with a hybrid. No premeasuring but when I make the move I will place the card where I want to make my turn. Measure to it, then finish whatever is left of the move on the other side of the card.



Anyways, it's a nice game if you don't care about the point values.

I have some issues with the points values, but it hasn't stopped my enjoyment.

mattjgilbert
01-05-2007, 10:00
re: measuring - we play the same way as mageboltrat.

rev
02-05-2007, 23:20
what counts as a 'seriously damaged plane' for VP purposes. at the moment we're playing anything thats taken a hit is damaged - whats the real rule and page ref though?

can someone compile this thread into a one thread list? maybe i'll do it..

orangesm
03-05-2007, 00:25
My understanding was half of their total hits - there are aircraft with more than 2 hits.

mageboltrat
03-05-2007, 00:44
Page 6 "An aircraft that takes half hits in damage is considered to be seriously damaged when calculating victory points."

rev
11-05-2007, 09:14
when tailing:


Here's a situation from last nights game between eldar and imp navy.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o276/revmatt/tailingquestion.jpg

Basically, with my Tbolt, I had two targets in fire arc. (note the direction of the furhter Phoenix, its about to buzz me)
I wanted to shoot at the furthest one for two reasons, 1) that plane had a bead on another of my Tbolts and 2) Tbolts got more punch at mid range.

I also then claimed tailing fire on the nearest enemy Phoenix, as the rules seem to state the only stipulation to tailing is with the fire arcs NOT whether u shot at the plane or not in the firing phase.

The Question is:

Is it legal to shoot at one plane and then tail a different plane (which is within your tailing fire arc)?

rev

CaptainSenioris
11-05-2007, 10:31
Thats a bloody good question.

I think it may be an e-mail forge world one, they may take a month to get back to you, but Warwick seemed happy to answer my questions so far, no matter how trivial.

If you want an oppinion on how I think it should be played I'd say you could only tail fire the plane if you shot at it in the previous turn, the game is supposed to be fast paced and that kind of move just doesn't sit right with me.

fattdex
11-05-2007, 10:40
the only stipulation to tailing is with the fire arcs NOT whether u shot at the plane or not in the firing phase.

Therefore I'd say it was fine by me

mageboltrat
11-05-2007, 19:20
I had a chat with rev today we felt the rules allowed for firing at a plane you are tailing even if you didn't fire at it in the previous turn. I don't think remembering status between turns is really in the spirit of the game

this is another question that came up, if you are tailing 2 planes can you

a) ask to see both the opponents maneuver cards before you chose to make a pilot roll to change to another maneuver

b) fire at both planes.

I would say Yes to a, No to b

The other question I had was whether the plane exists while taking a maneuver card and if it does what altitude is it at a different points in the card? It's a wyrd question but does matter when collisions with buildings come up.

orangesm
11-05-2007, 19:39
B is covered in the rule that all weapons in a particular fire arc have to target the same aircraft if fired.

mageboltrat
11-05-2007, 20:14
Yeah good point what if one of the planes you were firing at a plane that was in your side arc as well as front? I know this is pushing it a bit :)

Myst
29-05-2007, 13:23
I had a question of my own:

In missions using transports for bonus VP, do the transports have to hang around after they deploy their troops? The rules state that if you disengage while they still have ammo they award VP to your opponent but that seems rather silly to me...

Guilliman
29-05-2007, 17:41
Is the Eldar bombers really supposed to cost less in points than the Eldar fighters?

CaptainSenioris
29-05-2007, 18:19
I had a question of my own:

In missions using transports for bonus VP, do the transports have to hang around after they deploy their troops? The rules state that if you disengage while they still have ammo they award VP to your opponent but that seems rather silly to me...

Unfortunately yes if they have ammo left they should try to use it, they just have the bonus of being able to score you victory points.


Is the Eldar bombers really supposed to cost less in points than the Eldar fighters?

Yes because it is ton's better at what it does, and can 'own' almost everything in the game.

orangesm
29-05-2007, 18:53
In missions using transports for bonus VP, do the transports have to hang around after they deploy their troops? The rules state that if you disengage while they still have ammo they award VP to your opponent but that seems rather silly to me...

There are a few options here.

Follow the letter of the rules - this matters most in big games where VP are still used and there are not Victory Conditions other than VP. This is also why Transports and Bombers which are fairly hardy compared to fighters appear to be 'cheap' it is assumed they will not use all their ammo.

Create a House Rule - Transports replace Ammo with Transport, so if a Transport disengages without disembarking its full cargo it is considered to have Disengaged w/ Ammo. For Bombers a similar house rule that replace Ammo with Ammo with the Ground Attack Trait has to be used or it is considered to have Disengaged w/ Ammo.

On the question of why bombers and transports cost less it is for the above reason. Transports and Bombers will not disgorge all their ammo and so if they disengage they provide VP more readily than fighters which will tend to stay on the table most of the game.

Tyra_Nid
30-05-2007, 01:11
On the question of why bombers and transports cost less

And in relation to Eldar specifically, its because Eldar fighters kick total ass. Although, their bombers can be pretty damned good too (Hunter, anyone?)

okri_the_blue
30-05-2007, 06:09
"Although, their bombers can be pretty damned good too (Hunter, anyone?)"

thats just because i've hit with every palsar shot i've ever made:D thats due to change soon i think

really though only tau and eldar bombers cost less, and that due to a lake of bombs the best weapon a bomber can get.