Jump to content



Photo

Activated friendly units in a target area - can they fight?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 02 June 2010 - 03:08 PM

Say I have a few units in an activated area that also has enemy units. An adjacent area has just my units and is unactivated.

If I play an attack order naming the contested area as the target area and my friendly area as an origin, do the friendly units in the contested area participate in the battle if the contested area is activated?

My interpretation is 'yes they can' as the rule book says that it becomes an origin area automatically and that all units and heroes in the target area, attackers or defenders, become engaged automatically. There definately is room to argue otherwise, however.

What do people think?

Another one for the FAQ?



#2 Tim Kelly

Tim Kelly

    Member

  • Members
  • 281 posts

Posted 02 June 2010 - 11:55 PM

I agree with you, based on the "Joining Battle" section on page 24.  I also wish they had included one more example which showed this explicitly.

TK


"...I was born game, and I intend to go out that way." -- Rooster Cogburn


#3 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 03 June 2010 - 01:03 AM

If i have read the question correctly i would say no.

Rules clearly say :

Whenever an order is executed, it usually activates one
or more areas, and one of the current player’s activation
markers is placed in each such area, with its activation icon
faceup.

This is important because a player may not order
units in an area that already has one of his activation markers
in it. That is, units in an already-activated area may not
act (move, attack, etc.) due to the execution of a new order
until activation markers are removed from the board.


There is no exception in the rules. Rule say the target area is also origin area that does not count towards the number of origin areas(this breaks normal rules), but does not explicitly prevent the rule above, so the rule apply and you cant order those units to attack until  the activation marker is removed.

Units in target area does not automaticly engage in combat. If the target area didnt contain your activation marker, you can choose that units not to attack or attack with some of them.



#4 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 03 June 2010 - 02:26 AM

Rasiel said:

 

Units in target area does not automaticly engage in combat. If the target area didnt contain your activation marker, you can choose that units not to attack or attack with some of them.

 

 

Actually they do. Direct quote from p25  "All units and Heroes in the target area, whether belonging to the defender or attacker, become engaged automatically."

So you dont get a choice. No exceptions listed there either.

Rasiel said:


This is important because a player may not order
units in an area that already has one of his activation markers
in it. That is, units in an already-activated area may not
act (move, attack, etc.) due to the execution of a new order
until activation markers are removed from the board.

 

 

 

The main point is that it is not the units in the target area that are acting on the order. It is those in the adjacent area. They are acting on the order, which creates the combat, which draws in the activated units in the target area as the quote from p25 says.

At least that's how it seems to me.



#5 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 03 June 2010 - 07:55 PM

Three Headed Monkey said:

Actually they do. Direct quote from p25  "All units and Heroes in the target area, whether belonging to the defender or attacker, become engaged automatically."

So you dont get a choice. No exceptions listed there either.

 

Ok. I miss that, so you dont have a choice. But this rule still doesnt strictly override the rule about attacking. Order card instructs units to attack and those units cant attack because of activation marker present.

When you find some sentence listing "all units in target area must become engaged in combat regardless on activation markers present" i will believe you. For now, its only your house rule. Maybe it will be answered in faq.

Notice that this houserule significantly boosts traitor player, because when he summons new units, he must activate the area. With this rule, he can summon units into an area where he wants to go to boost his attack and attack with them in a single turn before initiative changes.



#6 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 04 June 2010 - 05:27 AM

Rasiel said:

 

Notice that this houserule significantly boosts traitor player, because when he summons new units, he must activate the area. With this rule, he can summon units into an area where he wants to go to boost his attack and attack with them in a single turn before initiative changes.

 

 

Seems like a valid tactic to me. They would fight in the change of initiative phase anyway. Sure they would make a huge difference if it was two previously even forces facing off, but keep in mind that the drop pod order does have to come along anyway. It isnt recyclable. So what if it's powerful? Its meant to be. The traitor's ability to strike anywhere is its main strength. Not to mention that thematcially I can imagine dropping reinforcements down on top of my opponents as I assault them.

Besides a Drop Pod order costs two. If the imperial player is careful it will usually lead to a change of iniative anyway. The traitor player really needs to set it up the turn before to get it to work. Most of the time, anyway. The imperial player does have a chance to disrupt it.

Ok. I miss that, so you dont have a choice. But this rule still doesnt strictly override the rule about attacking. Order card instructs units to attack and those units cant attack because of activation marker present.

When you find some sentence listing "all units in target area must become engaged in combat regardless on activation markers present" i will believe you. For now, its only your house rule. Maybe it will be answered in faq.


For me, it just saying 'all units and heroes' is enough. Is it a unit in the area? Yes? Then it becomes engaged. That step doesnt check any other criteria. Not to mention that it becomes an origin area regardless. "If the attacker has units in the target area, it becomes an origin area automatically."

Look at the Flying Transport rules. "A flying unit may not pick up units from an activated area." If the activated marker restriction is so prevalent, why do they need to specifically tell you that you cant move a unit from an activated area here? Why then, the ommision from the engaging units step?

As I said before, the activated units in the contested area are not executing the attack order. As soon as that combat exists you simply follow the rules from the combat section of the book. Once you get to the engaging units phase, the order has already been executed and the activation marker doesnt mean anything.

Activation markers are placed as soon as the order is executed (just check the examples). The units in the contested area will always have an activation marker in the area when the engaging units step comes around. So it makes sense that it would ignore the marker regardless. It doesnt need to say "regardless of activation markers present" because there will always be one there! So ignoring it is the default otherwise there wouldnt be any point to writing that rule.

I'm sure I wont convince you though. Just as I am not convinced of your arguements. We shall have to wait for a FAQ. If we somehow manage to play each other before then, we'll flip a coin!

There are people in my group I havent played yet. I'll be sure to make sure they take a look at the relevant sections and see what they say. The rules are seem simple but there are a bucket load of hidden interactions and exceptions.



#7 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 10 June 2010 - 09:50 PM

You are relying too much on "how everybody think it should work" not what rules say.

I played many games, but everytime some rule say "you do something" at the same time other rule say "you cant do something", the "you cant do something" always wins. Only chance how to avoid this is to specify that the "cant do" rule doesnt apply or that no other rules may prevent this rule from happening. This is not the case.

You cant correct rules because you think it should work this way. You have to play by the rules because otherwise (especially in FFG games - variable player powers) you are not guaranteed that the game will be balanced.

btw. You can execute pods from strategic map and than play attack order from your hand before initiative changes and coexistence battle occurs. Not hard to do this in almost every game...



#8 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 11 June 2010 - 02:58 AM

Rasiel said:

 

You are relying too much on "how everybody think it should work" not what rules say.

I played many games, but everytime some rule say "you do something" at the same time other rule say "you cant do something", the "you cant do something" always wins. Only chance how to avoid this is to specify that the "cant do" rule doesnt apply or that no other rules may prevent this rule from happening. This is not the case.

You cant correct rules because you think it should work this way. You have to play by the rules because otherwise (especially in FFG games - variable player powers) you are not guaranteed that the game will be balanced.

btw. You can execute pods from strategic map and than play attack order from your hand before initiative changes and coexistence battle occurs. Not hard to do this in almost every game...

 

 

I'm not playing it like this because I think this is how it should work. I'm playing it this way for the same reason you do. Because I think that this is the way the rules work. Have you been paying attention? When have I not referenced the rules when making my point.?

I know that can't takes precedence but there is nothing saying that activated units cannot become engaged in combat. It says that they cannot take an action from an order card, and as I have pointed out, they are not taking an action from an order card, the units in the other area are.

Its the same with the enemy units in that area. Your order makes them fight, even though the rule book specifically says that you cannot use orders to get enemy units to perfom actions. How? Because of the line of text that makes all units in the target area engaged in the battle.

And yes, it is easy to pull off, but not all that often as drop pod cards are not recylable. The Traitor player cannot rely on drawing them.

The Imperial player can pull it off as well. Remember that in a coexistance battles the imperial units stay in the contested area if they retreat because they are attacking and the contested area is considered an origin area. So the Imperial player can retreat in a coexistance battle next to unactivated friendly units, and then attack that area when he next has initiative. The Imperial units in the routed area would become engaged and fight.

Anyway, both sides can do things the other cannot. It doesnt make those things unbalanced. They may just be part of the give and take that, overall, balances the game.



#9 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 12 June 2010 - 06:49 PM

Rasiel said:

Notice that this houserule significantly boosts traitor player, because when he summons new units, he must activate the area. With this rule, he can summon units into an area where he wants to go to boost his attack and attack with them in a single turn before initiative changes.

Isnt making the above arguement and then saying this:

Rasiel said:

You are relying too much on "how everybody think it should work" not what rules say.

a little bit hypocritical? If all that matters is what the rules say then it doesnt matter if you think its unbalanced.

I dont think you can call my interpretation a house rule. It isnt a deliberate change to the main rules to make the game play differently, which is how I view the definition of a house rule. If you prove me wrong I will change the way I play this rule. Remember that my main point is that the units in the activated target area are not the units that are executing the order. If you can disprove that, then you've won.

For instance, take the firefight order. Only one area's worth of units can execute it, but once they do the combat rules bring any friendly units in the target area into the combat. It's still just the unit's in the one area that are executing the order, as per the text for firefight. However, as per the rules for combat the friendly units in the target area cause the target are to additionally become an origin area and are automatically engaged. They are being effected by the order, but are not executing it in the same way that your opponents units are effected by it but are not executing it.

Also, I'm sure I saw the cant vs. can thing but now when I look for it I cant find it. Page reference?

 



#10 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 07 July 2010 - 07:38 PM

Still no official answer or FAQ? :(

Okay what about absurdum proof:

Imagine you activate the area, but have no other units in adjacent areas to attack. Only those in target area. So, you are saying, because units are in target area, they are brought into battle, even there is an activation marker from previous order. But, no other unit is attacking the target area, so units in target area are not "brought into battle", they are the only units that are actually attacking the target area. So they are using order card to attack somewhere, which they cant.

 



#11 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 08 July 2010 - 05:22 AM

Rasiel said:

 

Still no official answer or FAQ? :(

Okay what about absurdum proof:

Imagine you activate the area, but have no other units in adjacent areas to attack. Only those in target area. So, you are saying, because units are in target area, they are brought into battle, even there is an activation marker from previous order. But, no other unit is attacking the target area, so units in target area are not "brought into battle", they are the only units that are actually attacking the target area. So they are using order card to attack somewhere, which they cant.

 

 

 

What? You could have been clearer in what you were saying.

Be careful of the terminology that you use. Remember that it is not a target area until the combat is started. Until then, it is just classified as a contested area.

Just to clarify; you think that I am making the arguement that units in an activated area that is also contested can act on an attack order targeting the area that they are in?

That is not what I am saying at all. You cant order the units in the contested area if there is an activation marker there. So you need friendly units in an unactivated adjacent area to attack the contested area and thus create the combat.

This is what happens. An attack order card is played in the region of the proposed target are which the units in the adjacent area act on. The target area is a contested area with a friendly activation marker in it. A marker is placed in the origin area, but not in the target area as there already is one. So the units in the adjacent are attack and combat starts. To resolve that combat, these are the steps that you go through:

  1. Joining battle
  2. Engaging units
  3. Preparing to fight
  4. Combat iterations
  5. End of battle

The rules for the second step, engaging units, states that "all units and Heroes in the target area, whether belonging to the defender or attacker, become engaged automatically." After that, no exceptions or further clarifications on the matter are listed.

So the units that are already in the target area become engaged. As stated before, the activation markers are placed as soon as the origin and target areas are identified so there will always be an activation marker in the target area when step 2 comes around.

Now, the only definition of the word 'all' that I know of usually meens everything. So if the rules say all units, without naming any exceptions, then I have the only conclusion I can draw is that every unit in the target area becomes engaged in the battle.

Really, I dont know what else I can say. That sentence page 24 just seems so clear to me.

Also compare the next line; "in a coexistence battle, all units and Heroes present in the area are automatically engaged." I cannot find anywhere in the rule book that specifically states an exception that allows units in an activated area to fight coexistence battle. They do, of course, but that is because of the rules in the 'engaging units' step. If units in an activated area can become engaged in a coexistence battle, then they can become engaged in a combat in the situation that I have described.

Note, that in all of that, I did not once say that the units in the activated, contested area are acting (attacking, moving, etc.) due to the execution of an order. They are not acting. They are not attacking. The units in the unactivated adjacent area are carrying out the attack order. They cause a combat, in which you then follow through the steps for resolving that combat. If you follow those steps, as they are witten, ALL of the units in the contested become engaged in the combat. Whether or not there is an activation marker in the target area before the combat is irrelevant in this situation.



#12 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 08 July 2010 - 06:00 PM

Logic tells you nothing i see.. if you cant attack with them on their own, you cant attack with them if other units are attacking also, because it would be violating the same rule about attacking.

Let me ask one last time: Imagine situation in a game with one rule: "first player cant draw cards". If in this game lets say event is resolved that says "all players draw a card", should the first player draw too ? of course not, and i bet you wont hesitate on this, becase forbidding rule have always precedence...

You are bind by 'They are in area the battle takes place so they have to participate in battle too'. But in this case ... participating is attacking.

 



#13 BrooklynMike

BrooklynMike

    Member

  • Members
  • 272 posts

Posted 09 July 2010 - 04:49 AM

Just a comment from an interested party: This debate is interesting and is starting to take on aspects of a legal brief. However, the situation described is extremely common, and I think we need FFG's direct response on this. Has anyone gone directly to them with this question?



#14 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 11 July 2010 - 10:50 PM

BrooklynMike said:

Just a comment from an interested party: This debate is interesting and is starting to take on aspects of a legal brief. However, the situation described is extremely common, and I think we need FFG's direct response on this. Has anyone gone directly to them with this question?

I have, so finally we have an official answer.

A: All units in the target must participate in the battle, even if
they have a normal activation or routed activation marker.



#15 Three Headed Monkey

Three Headed Monkey

    Member

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 12 July 2010 - 03:13 PM

Rasiel said:

BrooklynMike said:

 

Just a comment from an interested party: This debate is interesting and is starting to take on aspects of a legal brief. However, the situation described is extremely common, and I think we need FFG's direct response on this. Has anyone gone directly to them with this question?

 

 

I have, so finally we have an official answer.

A: All units in the target must participate in the battle, even if
they have a normal activation or routed activation marker.

An official response. Awesome. Thanks for taking the initiative Rasiel. I guess this means an end to the debate. It was fun though!

*sigh* I shall miss it.

*Replays highlights of debate in his head with soft music playing in the background.*



#16 Dam

Dam

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,285 posts

Posted 12 July 2010 - 08:34 PM

Three Headed Monkey said:

*Replays highlights of debate in his head with soft music playing in the background.*

Noise Marine! Kill it! Kill it!


"A dirty mind is its own reward."


#17 Rasiel

Rasiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 14 July 2010 - 01:26 AM

This question make it into the first FAQ on Horus Heresy :). It was about time they made FAQ...






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS