Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Wombattangofoxtrot

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    , California, United States
  1. I'm sure that it is not specifically called out in the rules because it is not in the defender's best interest to knock the walls down. Scenarios also don't address other issues like what happens if you decide to shoot your partner's troops in a 4 player game. Do you get victory points for taking them out? They are troops that you've killed, so they should count... Before anyone takes me seriously, I don't think that you should get victory points for taking out your partner. =) If the defender wants to do 8 health against 5 vehicle armor, then they get a ruined wall, IMO.
  2. I just put another piece of card in the "short slot", rest the "short floor" on top of that card, and that supports the rest of the floor without a problem.
  3. Ah, and now we've got our dirty little mitts on a game night kit, so we'll be rolling those prizes out as appropriate. When we get enough interest, we'll prize out some of the premium figs. See you Friday!
  4. Under "Entering the Battlefield" on page 12 of Cerberus, it says: "Like any other unit, large vehicles must use a MOVE action to enter the battlefield. Unitl they are completely on the battlefield, large vehicles cannot perform any actions other than the MOVE action, and cannot be targeted by an attack. Because of their size, some large vehicles cannot fully enter the battlefield with a single move action. These units must perform a second MOVE action to enter the battlefield." By my interpretation, this seems to mean that the large unit may half-enter, and can "hang out" as long as it is blocked. I understand that "doing nothing" is an action, but if the unit is doing a MOVE action, but has no legal moves, I still believe that it is using a MOVE action. For rules balance, however, our group uses, "The large unit must move onto the board at the first opportunity, and cannot perform a FIRE action on the turn it enters." The second part is to prevent players from half-moving their unit onto the board on the first turn, (thus making it invulnerable.) just so that they can MOVE and FIRE on the second turn with no risk to the unit from enemy fire on the first turn. (Note the use of "our group". In no way am I saying that this is how the rules state that this situation must be handled. I'm just stating how our group handles this particular issue.)
  5. Major Mishap said: I think the Reactive Rules are pretty much spot on. It's used sparingly and only when needed. If it were any better then it will be used all the time which would spoil the gameplay. I play with someone who is 18 of 22 sucesses with reactive fire checks... During the reinforcement scenario, he used reactive fire to one-shot my Pounder with his Ludwig two turns in a row... On the third turn, he succeeded in his reactive fire check, but "only" did three points of damage to my Pounder. Needless to say, I didn't kill him with my shot back... I've passed on playing that scenario since then.
  6. Ulrike Meinhof said: I'm not sure as there is no clear way of knowing from the revised rules. I'd say "no, the opponent wouldn't be able to go for reactive fire". Reason could be that Reactive Fire is usually performed after the first MOVE action. The first MOVE action doesn't end until the miniatures land on the second square, due to their FAST ability. In the game world this can be described as them being too fast for the opponent to notice them and/or react, although such explanations are nice fluff they matter not to the logic of the rules. Revised Core, Pg 16, it says that, "Immediately after the Blackhawk's movement, the Axis player declares that he will attempt Reactive fire..." From this, it appears reactive fire checks (and decisions) come after a unit has completed a "Move" action... or at least that's how I play it.
  7. Gimp said: Loophole Master said: Just thought I'd run this by you guys. Last match, the axis player had the Loth charge a lone tank trap, moving twice then trying to destroy it. That's ok, right? I was a bit doubtful, as maybe Charge could only be used against an opponent, but by my reading of the rules, you could use it against a neutral obstacle like a tank trap, ammo crate or destructible wall. It's a target you can attack, so I see nothing to stop you from charging it, and it makes sense a unit would do that to try and take out an obstacle quickly. Agree. Friday I charged an infantry unit taking cover in a tank trap, There's no reason why I couldn't have just attacked the tank trap instead... except it is more fun to "pinch" some Allied infantry than to break cement. =)
  8. Loophole Master said: It's ridiculous because the rules don't mention anything to that effect, and it's something that wouldn't make any sense. "When the hero breaks off from the squad" is not the same as saying "the hero must be activated to break off from the squad", and even then it wouldn't mean it's ONLY the hero that must take the initiative of breaking off. If the squad decides to move and the hero stays put, he has effectively broken off from the squad, and yet it was done in the squad's activation. +1
  9. Major Mishap said: With the text "... MUSTperform a move action to enter" and the accompaning diagram, seems pretty straight forward to me, I'm just glad I don't play with rule lawyers :/ ...pretty ...straight ...forward.
  10. I've heard that the Otto figure also comes with SSU weapons, but I do not own one to verify that. The captured KV-47 named "Otto" is equipped with the same weapons that the Hans has.
  11. Otto is using the same weapons as the Axis "Hans" light walker http://www.dustgame.com/products_d.php?nid=12&id=111
  12. We will be playing Dust Tactics at Game Kastle on Friday evenings starting at 5. If we can get enough interest, I'd like to start a league. I hope to see you there! Info and directions at http://www.gamekastle.com/index.php
  13. Dcal12 said: You may also be confused with Charge, where you are allowed to attack with all range 1 or range C weapons after performing two move actions. ...and because of this, FFG will never allow a situation where an Allied armor 2 hero will be able to give the BBQ/Hellboys charge...
  14. Ulrike Meinhof said: Let's say that P1 has 3 units while P2 only has a single unit left. Is the following possible: P1 activates a unit. It's P2's turn. P2 passes, does not do anything at all with her unit. P2 activates his second unit, It's P2's turn, P2 passes again. P2 activates his last and third unit. It's P2:s turn, and now P2 chooses to activate her unit. Question is, in short: Can you pass on activation and then still be offered to activate the unit(s) you passed on, given it is during the same turn? I know it's possible to pass, but am not certain if the situation in the list above is legal (although I would prefer it is). When you activate a unit, you have the option to "pass", but "passing" still counts as that unit's activation. It is "pass" more in the "I choose not to do anything with this unit" sense, rather than the, "I pass on activating a unit".
  15. SamsDad said: Wombattangofoxtrot said: If you mean the "Quick start rules", then you're still good to go. It doesn't have all the rules (no arty, buildings, etc.), and doesn't have alot of the helpful diagrams, but it does give a pretty good overview of how things work. That is what I was referring to in my question. Thanks to everyone for the help with the questions. Just checking, all my DT stuff is mixed together, so I wanted to make sure that was the one that came in the (old) core box...
  • Create New...