Lucky 13

[Achillius]

Hey Kevin, No problems. Been a while since we've had a decent discussion post.
Food for thought and some clarifications on situations and thought behind it.

1. Disrupter beacons, nothing much to add except, if we play to the letter of the law, according to the book anything entering from reserve within 48 inches is in fact in trouble. That includes flyers and your own table edge... Nasty but that's the way it's worded. Something consider in a few weeks.

2. Void Shields. Now when I asked around the store the consensus was that a round of shooting would happen at one time and that the void shield would either be up or down at the end of it. A bit like shooting a vehicle. the key is timing. If I fire a double shot weapon at a void shield I expect to roll against void shields. That's the simple way I expect this to play. Once they're down, all subsequent firing hits the vehicle.  Other wise with things like orbital Barrage, we're into picking which one does what, and who makes that call... no doesn't seem right... (of course the scenario may have needlessly complicated this).


3. Kevin I think the key missing here is the turn. You are absolutely right a flyer cannot enter as a flyer and then go into hover mode on the same turn. The Valk was on the table a full turn and was heading into Hover mode at the start of it's next move phase. At which point it takes the rules for a skimmer. Both good and bad. We diced this, he shot the other Valk (paid for)which then carried on it's mission, in an amused sort of way. Sorry but Fluff wise this works. Diving for cover and at risk of more shooting, or flying away.. You need to shoot incoming Valks the turn they fly onto the board or risk them diving to the deck. Of course forcing one to the deck over your army could be worth it too...



What I would have done in Bobs shoes.
1. Use the twin linked las cannons on my Land raider to drop the void shield turn one.
2.  Hit the flyer with ack ack the turn it arrived
3. Used the oblitorators and lascannons on my landraider to shoot the flying valk. It was easily within 36 inches.
4. Brought more reliable troops with ranged to the table instead of relying on deep strike in a game that has a disrupter beacon, and an Inquisitor with mystics (both should be standard fare to anyone playing Bobs Daemons).
5.  Some guns
6. Brought more guns.
7. Did I mention GUNS? seriously claws to a gun fight is silly, even nids shoot.
8. When  deep striking daemons, make them run in the shooting phase, seems like a no brainer to me but...


That's all for now.
Cheers,
A




More opinions are going to be wanted on this; it just needs to be clear.

[jesterofthedark]

lol, yes this disruptor beacoon problem is actually right up our ally come to think of it.  I totally see what your saying, via the letter of the law you are right.  I think we would have to try and locate a FAQ reguarding this situation.  That would seem like a situation that has to have come up a million times in apocalypse already.

As for the long range ack ack, from what I gather Bob tried to shoot an already in plan flyer with it?  If so then no he can not do that as the flyer according to the asset has to be entering, because the controling player has the option of diverting the flyer for another turn or trying to punch his way through and suffer the shots.  Now if its a question of normal shoot.  Well, we've all been over that.  As you said a hover mode flyer is a skimmer by all the rules governing it, it takes this mode before moving and moves as a skimmer for the entire turn.

As for bob's tactics, I will not comment.  Simply because I was not there, I think that pure cult deamon lists lack sometthing.  You need to diversify, even if its just between the CSM and the deamons.  Slannesh marines offers some nice shooting, not a ton of anti-tank with the noise marines but that is why greater deamons are good.

[blantyr]

I'm with Achillus on the Disruptor Beacon effecting folks coming out of reserve from their own board edge.  I'm with Jester on the need to resolve attacks against void shields one at a time.  I disagree with both on interpreting Long Range Ack Ack.  Mind you, Jester's interpretation on the board is quite similar to Achillus's position proposed during the game, close enough as no mind.

The problem is that said interpretation has nothing to do with the rule as written.  Long Range Ack Ack is resolved immediately at the start of the movement phase.  Interpreting this as 'after all flyers have moved' is not a good faith reading in either letter or spirit.  I had been vaguely aware that some players at BG have been declaring use of Ack Ack later than the rule allows.  I had not become aware that this had become so set in tradition that one is no longer allowed to play it as book if one wants too.

I am not convinced that one should be able to use Ack Ack on a flyer on the turn that it enters the board.

I think what happened is that I got hit by an unwritten house rule I was unaware of.  I personally don't like house rules.  One of the first stores I played at was dominated by a clique of rhino rush players.  They created variant rules and odd interpretations that favored rhino rushers.  If a new guy came into the store, he was apt to get schrod once or thrice by unexpected strange rules.  The clique would all come to each other's support.  This won the clique games, but the new players seldom returned to the store.  This was not a long term win for the hobby or anyone involved.

Thus, I like to encourage playing by book, writing down any house rules that are commonly in use, making them available before the game starts, and having book rules trump house rules if the local player didn't inform the new guy of the house rule at game start.

I haven't got my books with me.  I may revisit Ack Ack later when I can check out a few things.   I can play by house rules if that's what everyone wants to do, but I'd like things pinned down.

As for tactics, Achillus hit some of my problems.  Disruptor Beacon makes Demons less attractive in Apocalypse than in straight 40K.  Alan uses a lot of templates, which is problematic as demons drop in in clumps.  (One can run on the turn one deep strikes?  That will help.  I haven't played enough V5.)  I think the Lucky 13 scenarios are intended to be run on 12 x 4 tables.  Playing them on 6 x 4 means the Disruptor Beacon effects covers most of the board, which makes it harder on Demons than it might be.  Demon hunters also match up well against demons, for some unexplained reason.

But the Succubus Legion is also a theme army that came into existence by accident.  When Chaos Demons and Chaos Marines became two separate codices, I found myself with two half armies.  (Or third armies, as my Imperial Guard force started out as chaos cultists.)  I'm normally a guns guns guns player.  Thus, I tend to play Imperial / Order armies, and even my female marines played by chaos rules are painted as Imperial and tend to carry guns.  I would really prefer to play Eldar, Guard or Chaos marine forces on the Orderly side.  Last week I wanted to ally with Alan, but a lack of other orc side players had me pulling out the succubi again.  I like to put those models on the table every once in a while, but they are a fluff force rather than a serious attempt to be competitive.

If I end up trying to uphold the Orc side of Lucky 13s, it looks like I'm going to have to pull out my female chaos marines in large numbers, or play the Second Gomorrah guard as chaos guard, even if both forces are painted up as Imperial.  I've done this in moderation the last few games, trying to back up the succubi with lascannon.  If I'm to continue playing orc side, I'll likely give up on my fluff and bring the Ladies in wholesale.

I've even considered playing Eldar on the Orc side.  I've got a superheavy and some fighters in my Eldar force.  It's my only force really equipped for Apocalypse.  I'm just afraid that any chaos allies would turn on me to collect army points.  ;-D

Anyway, I'm having fun sort of with Lucky 13s, but not so much fun that I'm going to spend a lot of money to bring my bad guy armies up to Apocalypse standards.  Given the general lack of bad guy players available, it might be prudent for the orderly fellows to play to the level of the opponents available.  If the bad guys haven't got anti-aircraft capability, one might play valkyries as per Guard Codex rather than as Apocalypse flyers.  One might not put down more superheavies than the opposition.  Otherwise, we'll likely see the lopsided victories continue.

I would agree that the landing pad rules are a bit strange in this month's scenario.  Alan proposed that the landing pad was indestructible, yet protected by a void shield.  This is a bit strange.  If the field was intended to protect people on the pad, there is an entirely different stratagem one ought to use. 

I personally suspect there was a marketing motive.  I think we were supposed to rush out to buy the new Skyshield Landing Pad terrain piece and the Planetstrike rules, which likely describes how the Skyshield works.

[Lykosan]

Void shields work as follows: They are either up or they are down when a Unit shoots them. Meaning If they are up with one Shield when one unit shoots it, the shields are up for ALL shots for that unit. All shots are rolled to hit then AFTER all hits have been determined all effects of hits are rolled for AT THE SAME TIME so the Void Shields do not go down in between any shots of that unit. The way to deal with Void Shields is either get inside of 12 inches of them or to shoot at them with things that drop Armor 12 reliably to then hit whatever is protected by them.

[blantyr]

Void shields work as follows: They are either up or they are down when a Unit shoots them. Meaning If they are up with one Shield when one unit shoots it, the shields are up for ALL shots for that unit. All shots are rolled to hit then AFTER all hits have been determined all effects of hits are rolled for AT THE SAME TIME so the Void Shields do not go down in between any shots of that unit. The way to deal with Void Shields is either get inside of 12 inches of them or to shoot at them with things that drop Armor 12 reliably to then hit whatever is protected by them.

Which just means you disagree with Jester.  Do either of you have a book and page number that supports your interpretation?  Do words to the effect of 'at the same time' or 'one at a time' appear anywhere in the rules?

I really don't know the answer to this one.  I had just never heard of the 'at the same time' interpretation until Alan proposed it Saturday. 

[jesterofthedark]

I can't agree with that interpetation of void sheilds steve.  Because of the situation described here, it just doesn't make sense.  I honestly think that the units on the landing pad are not able to claim to void shield because they are units.  And if your using the planet strike assets then the void shield one can only be given to a destructable building.  But, even the the shield is on the building no on the units.  The shield rules are this in the book:

Void shields Each hit scored against such a field from a distance of 12" or more will instead hit a power field ( void shields refer to the rules for power fields but void shields can be raised again. pg 96 of the apocalypse rules book) Close combat and ranged attacks from a distance of less than 12" come from inside the field and therefore are not stopped at all. Power fields are the equivalent of Armour 12.  Each glancing or penertrating hit schored against the fields causes one fields to collapse.  After all of the fields have collapse, further hits are resolved against the vehicle's real armour value as normal.

Once again this is just a bad bad bad situation, too much mixing of different rules.

as for long range ack ack this is the entry:

When Revealed: at the begining of one of the enemy movement phase.
Effect: Pick one enemy flyer.  The model must immediately disengage (or may not enter the table this turn if it is still in strategic reserve)

The affected flyer may choose to force its way through the ant-aircraft fire and ignore the effect described above, but ut will suffer three strength 8, AP 3 hits (on side armour, if applicable) as it flies through the flak.

It also states under the rules for hover mode that you decide to go into hover mode before you move the model.  

So I would say that going by the rules as written that the ack ack hits before the model can go into hover mode.  Since you declare the asset at the begining of the movement phase and you switch modes before move the model.

As for the hidden house rules, I have played at BG for a while now and have not noticed in any of my gaming that "we" have hidden house rules.  While I know that other stores you may have played at my have done that, I would tread lightly before you accuse us of having a cliche that gangs up on new players. While some interpetations may not play out the way you think they should the game has pot holes and it says in the rule book to go with what the players decide.  That usually means a majority descision, while it may not be what you think it should.  My opinion would be to plan out your reasons a little better before you say that we house rule something.

[the_trooper]

Axes work better than claws.

The landing pad is a weird building even in planetstrike itself.  But in the end it is a building so it can be destroyed as per the normal rules but that is something to be discussed prior to the game as per the rules.

As far as void shields?  I always played it as you fire at the vehicle and it is possible to strip the voidshields with one gun while then hammering it out with another.  Say if you have 5 shots from  a single gun and 2 shots were enough to hammer through the shield, you are now resolving against the armor.  When I get home later I'll check through my books and see.

[blantyr]

As for the hidden house rules, I have played at BG for a while now and have not noticed in any of my gaming that "we" have hidden house rules.  While I know that other stores you may have played at my have done that, I would tread lightly before you accuse us of having a cliche that gangs up on new players. While some interpetations may not play out the way you think they should the game has pot holes and it says in the rule book to go with what the players decide.  That usually means a majority descision, while it may not be what you think it should.  My opinion would be to plan out your reasons a little better before you say that we house rule something.

Agreed, BG is not dominated by a secret cabal of evil minds corrupted by chaos.  I was just providing background for why I feel that house rules ought to be written down and made available, or preferably avoided as much as possible.

If your above post holds, though, for this discussion at least, people are trying to find the best possible interpretation of the rules as written.  That's all I can ask.  The prior post that had Ack Ack firing after flyers finished movement had me concerned.

I had missed the "or may not enter the table this turn if it is still in strategic reserve".  This would allow one to target at a flyer that isn't on the board at the start of a turn.  Of course, if it wasn't going to come in that turn, it would be a wasted stratagem.

Does anyone know off hand the armor value of the Skyshield?  In the scenario, I hit it with scheduled bombardment on turns 2, 3 and 4.  I was just hoping to tag the Valkyrie, but would that sort of punishment have had a chance to take out the platform itself?

Just curious.  I thought the landing platform rules were strange when Alan declared them, but didn't object as I just wanted to get the game underway. 

[cryptoron]

Agreed, BG is not dominated by a secret cabal of evil minds corrupted by chaos.

Alas, not any more 

[the_trooper]

I think the AV of the skyshield is either 13 or 14.  Although I'm pretty sure it's something that has to be set pregame between players though.

[jesterofthedark]

man, GW should put a new rule in 6th edition.  Anything with more than 6 rules to use it is offically not allowed in games.

[Achillius]

Does anyone know off hand the armor value of the Skyshield?  In the scenario, I hit it with scheduled bombardment on turns 2, 3 and 4.  I was just hoping to tag the Valkyrie, but would that sort of punishment have had a chance to take out the platform itself?

Just curious.  I thought the landing platform rules were strange when Alan declared them, but didn't object as I just wanted to get the game underway. 

Excuse me a second, it was  discussed how we'd play the sky shield at the beginning of the game. The driving factors being a) no real model and b) no book or interest in getting one at that point. Why is it then that this is all about how I said we'd play the shield?

[blantyr]

Does anyone know off hand the armor value of the Skyshield?  In the scenario, I hit it with scheduled bombardment on turns 2, 3 and 4.  I was just hoping to tag the Valkyrie, but would that sort of punishment have had a chance to take out the platform itself?

Just curious.  I thought the landing platform rules were strange when Alan declared them, but didn't object as I just wanted to get the game underway. 

Excuse me a second, it was  discussed how we'd play the sky shield at the beginning of the game. The driving factors being a) no real model and b) no book or interest in getting one at that point. Why is it then that this is all about how I said we'd play the shield?

The month is young.  Somebody is apt to play the scenario again.  I was just wondering if using scheduled bombardment to pound the thing would be worth doing should I encounter a Skyshield again.

[jesterofthedark]

lol.


Well Alan, could you inform the rest of us on the why the players agreed to play the pad for that game.  Then we can see if we can come up with a majority consensus on what we should do if the situation arose again.  I personally would like to hammer out all the arguement s I can about units and void shields now prior to having to deal with it in a game of my own in the near future.

I assume you guys were treating the pad as the main objective?

[Moosifer]

Well I know that we had played this scenario before alan/doug/bob.

The landing pad was a rough thing, but things never came into issue because destroying the landing pad meant chaos lost the game since they could no longer claim the objective.

Also most of things things should have been discussed before the game(which I would bet happened, because Alan is thorough like that) and that should be the end of it.  I agree that the landing pad is a funny thing, but if you were that concerned about it why did you not flesh out its use mid game.

Also you fire 3 las cannons at a void shield and 3 hit with 2 breaking the void shields AV, first one destroys the void shield, the second one hits the armor.  Think of it like assigning wounds to different models in a unit and BAM you are set