Jump to content



Photo

FAQ Issues


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#1 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 05:15 PM

 So, FFG finally released the FAQ!!

But does it solve all our problems? Use this place to duscuss any issues that the FAQ might have not made entirely clear.

 

Reading through, one thing I noticed is that they seem to have changed, or made a mistake, with the rules for squads providing corner cover for other squads.

The rulebook clearly said that squads do not provide corner cover for other squads. Page 14, right under the picture: "If X is a squad, Assault Rangers for instance, the Combat Rangers would not benefit from cover. The Grenadiers could shoot either of the two units and neither one would benefit
from cover since a squad does not provide cover for another squad. (A square occupied by a squad is not “without a dot.”)"

But the FAQ says otherwise. Page 2, at the beginning: "The BBQ Squad benefits from corner cover when attacked by the Kommandotrupp because squads block line of sight when attacked by other squads."

So, the two rulings are clearly contradicting each other. Should we just go with the FAQ, since it's the most recent ruling? (the whole "square without a dot" thing was always a mess...)



#2 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 05:33 PM

WOW! Artillery weapons ignore ALL kinds of cover!! Be it ammo crate, tank trap or corner cover! And it seems it's ANY artillery attack, whether direct or indirect. Wow, that's a big addition to the previous rules.... Artillery just got deadlier.

 

Range 2 Flamethrower weapons (the Hot Dog Napalm Thrower), always hit units on both the 1st and 2nd square, even if they are friendly units. But since the player can chose which path the blast takes, I think you would only hurt your own troops if you had units occupying both optional squares. I wonder if you HAVE to fire two squares away, or can control your burst to only touch the 1st square. Say, if you have an enemy adjacent to you, and two friends beyond it.

 

Why are Burst weapons being explained for the 1st time in the FAQ? Anyway, weird weapon. It does double damage against units that have not moved this round. Does that mean that now we have to keep tabs on what actions each unit takes every round?! That's nuts!



#3 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 08:16 PM

Also if the FAQ is correct, then any hits saved by the target should go onto the unit that got in the way as the bullets have hit them instead - I think the FAQ is probably wrong.



#4 Peacekeeper_b

Peacekeeper_b

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,483 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 11:47 PM

Major Mishap said:

Also if the FAQ is correct, then any hits saved by the target should go onto the unit that got in the way as the bullets have hit them instead - I think the FAQ is probably wrong.

I would say have the saved hits become "attack rolls" on the covering unit, not automatic wounds. Armour values may change. So if you are covered by the corner of another squad and you take 3 damage and you make one save, a single die of damage is rolled against the covering unit.

Alos, heroes should get cover. Sure, go for the whole they lead from the front and dont hide, but a wall is a wall regardless if you are hiding behind it intentionally or not. You could simply make it that heroes never benefit from cover greater then soft.



#5 Dcal12

Dcal12

    Member

  • Members
  • 410 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 01:08 AM

Peacekeeper_b said:

Major Mishap said:

 

Also if the FAQ is correct, then any hits saved by the target should go onto the unit that got in the way as the bullets have hit them instead - I think the FAQ is probably wrong.

 

 

I would say have the saved hits become "attack rolls" on the covering unit, not automatic wounds. Armour values may change. So if you are covered by the corner of another squad and you take 3 damage and you make one save, a single die of damage is rolled against the covering unit.

Alos, heroes should get cover. Sure, go for the whole they lead from the front and dont hide, but a wall is a wall regardless if you are hiding behind it intentionally or not. You could simply make it that heroes never benefit from cover greater then soft.

I think the Major is correct, it was a mistake in the FAQ.  And if it is not a mistake, no way are missed hits going to be applied to the unit providing cover.  Like you said with the armor changes and everything way to confusing.

Oh an Peace you think Heros should get cover? I had no idea.



#6 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 01:21 AM

Major Mishap said:

Also if the FAQ is correct, then any hits saved by the target should go onto the unit that got in the way as the bullets have hit them instead - I think the FAQ is probably wrong.

But by that logic, shouldn't you've been doing that same thing when squads get corner cover from a tank? After all, the attacks that miss the squad must be hitting the tank, and some of those could damage it. Either way I think it would be way to fiddly to reassign damage to the unit providing cover



#7 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 03:37 AM

Loophole Master said:

Major Mishap said:

Also if the FAQ is correct, then any hits saved by the target should go onto the unit that got in the way as the bullets have hit them instead - I think the FAQ is probably wrong.

 

But by that logic, shouldn't you've been doing that same thing when squads get corner cover from a tank? After all, the attacks that miss the squad must be hitting the tank, and some of those could damage it. Either way I think it would be way to fiddly to reassign damage to the unit providing cover

Not really as anti-personal weapons are not going to damage a tank and if a squad has AT weapons, they will be firing at the tank.  Either way it would add uneccessary complications which is why I think the FAQ is wrong.  Why was it in the FAQ anyway, I've not seen this asked once let alone frequently.



#8 arkangl

arkangl

    Member

  • Members
  • 418 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 05:49 AM

I like how there are still FAQ stuff I have on my FAQ not answered and I have a ton more info that they do. I think Burst weapons are going to be in the new revised core and I guess they are answering it early.



#9 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 05:55 PM

Major Mishap said:

Not really as anti-personal weapons are not going to damage a tank and if a squad has AT weapons, they will be firing at the tank.

Not necessarily, the squad could have AT weapons, but not have LOS to the tank that is offering soft cover to a squad. So they would certainly fire a bazooka at a squad under the corner cover, which would create the same sort of situation as squads offering corner cover to other squads. Anyway, any system that applies corner cover saved damage to the cover element would be needlessly complicated.



#10 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 07:48 PM

In case they are watching, a few unanswered questions.

1) You say squads gain no cover from an indirect artillery strike, I assume this then applies to units fully inside a building attacked indirectly from artillery outside?

2) In the 1st Seelow scenario, is the top right board correct, should it not be turned 180' so the Defender can actually get to the objective?  Anybody played this yet with the setup as is?



#11 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 07:59 PM

Major Mishap said:

1) You say squads gain no cover from an indirect artillery strike, I assume this then applies to units fully inside a building attacked indirectly from artillery outside?

Units inside buildings can't be attacked by artillery weapons. Remember that artillery weapons cannot be used inside buildings at all, according to Cyclone rules: "

And on another note, squads gain no cover from ALL artillery attacks, whether direct or indirect.

 

Major Mishap said:

2) In the 1st Seelow scenario, is the top right board correct, should it not be turned 180' so the Defender can actually get to the objective?  Anybody played this yet with the setup as is?

Yeah, I certainly expected some mention of this fumble. The top right tile clearly needs to be rotated 180' for the scenario to work. I actually expected a lot more info on the building rules, as the issue of how doorways affect LOS is still very iffy.



#12 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 30 July 2011 - 09:36 PM

You're not using an artillery unit inside a building though, its outside firing in, its also what artillery do - flatten buildings.

"Sir, we have enemy holed up inside the police station, we nee artillery to root them ous"

"Sorry, no can do, artillery has no effect on buildings"



#13 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 02:50 AM

Major Mishap said:

You're not using an artillery unit inside a building though, its outside firing in, its also what artillery do - flatten buildings.

But buildings in Dust are not destructible. And you would be using it inside the building, if your target was inside.

"Artillery weapons (range A) can never be used inside buildings! They would hit the ceiling before having the chance to reach an enemy!"

If Dust artillery could flatten buildings, that rule wouldn't exist, you could just blow the ceiling on top of your enemy. That's not the case, though. Buildings effectively block artillery fire in Dust.



#14 Major Mishap

Major Mishap

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,728 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 03:03 AM

But the rules do not say that, all they say is that artillery cannot be used INSIDE a building, they are outside - R.A.W.



#15 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 03:11 AM

 The walker is outside, but the artillery weapon is "being used inside it".

(man, it's tiring having this exact same discussion going on simultaneously in two threads... )



#16 Poyet

Poyet

    Member

  • Members
  • 176 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 03:32 AM

Loophole Master said:

 So, FFG finally released the FAQ!!

But does it solve all our problems? Use this place to duscuss any issues that the FAQ might have not made entirely clear.

 

Reading through, one thing I noticed is that they seem to have changed, or made a mistake, with the rules for squads providing corner cover for other squads.

The rulebook clearly said that squads do not provide corner cover for other squads. Page 14, right under the picture: "If X is a squad, Assault Rangers for instance, the Combat Rangers would not benefit from cover. The Grenadiers could shoot either of the two units and neither one would benefit
from cover since a squad does not provide cover for another squad. (A square occupied by a squad is not “without a dot.”)"

But the FAQ says otherwise. Page 2, at the beginning: "The BBQ Squad benefits from corner cover when attacked by the Kommandotrupp because squads block line of sight when attacked by other squads."

So, the two rulings are clearly contradicting each other. Should we just go with the FAQ, since it's the most recent ruling? (the whole "square without a dot" thing was always a mess...)

 I allredy said that we should stay away from examples in core. Its mistake in core or some kind of artifact from previous rules. 

Page 10 says that squads block line of sight for squads .



#17 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 03:36 AM

Poyet said:

Page 10 says that squads block line of sight for squads.

That's not being disupted anywhere. All rules agree that squads block LOS for other squads. The issue is whether that's enough to provide corner cover.



#18 Poyet

Poyet

    Member

  • Members
  • 176 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 09:30 AM

Loophole Master said:

Poyet said:

Page 10 says that squads block line of sight for squads.

 

That's not being disupted anywhere. All rules agree that squads block LOS for other squads. The issue is whether that's enough to provide corner cover.

Yo answered yourself . If it blocks LOS it gives Corner Cover....



#19 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 31 July 2011 - 04:08 PM

Poyet said:

Yo answered yourself . If it blocks LOS it gives Corner Cover....

I know that, but as I quoted on my first post, the original rulebook specifically points out an exception to the rule, that says squads DO NOT offer corner cover to other squads, even though they block LOS.



#20 Loophole Master

Loophole Master

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 12:34 PM

 THE NEW FAQ IS FINALLY UP!!  So what's new about it?

- Action Jackson card from Card Pack is admittedly incorrect.

- It's official now, artillery ignores all cover EXCEPT when firing at someone inside a building, next to the entrance. How LOS for artillery against units in buildings works has also been clarified (I was right ). Artillery cannot be fired from inside a structure.

- The errors in the 1st SeeLowe scenario and the 4th Victory Bridge scenario have been rectified.

- Long range flame weapons rules remain unchanged. When Fireball comes around, this will need to be clarified.

- Burst weapon was clarified a bit, by specifying that the attack is doubled if the target hasn't performed a MOVE action. I still think this is a terrible rule.

- Wiederblah Serum explanation is greatly improved! It can only be used to recover from wounds from a previous attack, meaning a whole other encounter. Totenmeisters attack dice must be rolled separately, to see how many hits she gets, to be able to recover from previous wounds.

- Wow, bringing back a single figure to a squad via the Medic fully replenishes that squad's limited ammo weapons! That makes no sense whatsoever. Did the surgeon find a hidden ammo cache tucked away inside the downed soldier's pancreas?

 

Anybody see anything else new?

 






© 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