Leap question--RC 2008

[shakhak]

@shakhak

 

Not that I am disagreeing with you (I had not thought of forcing the clearence of the ENTIRE BASE) but on what are you baseing this requirment?

In another thread, I think it was Vejlin, pointed out that the example given in the current rules is worded incorrectly.

 

The model has to leap completely over the model, including his base. If this wasn't the case, and the example was followed the model could actually spend fewer inches of movement by leaping over a model than by walking the same distance.

 

In your example about the model leaping over two models, He would have to give up 7" of movement just to leap over the figures. That only leaves 1" normal MOV, and his 4" charge. Not much to really do when he's done.

 

If you left an inch between your two models he would have to dig into his Charge speed and to do that he must end in base to base with a model and continue in his straight line.

[vejlin]

yeah the minimal horizontal distance needed to jump over a model is the sum of the two involved models' base widths.

[spiritual_exorcist]

SE, the one example you did not illustrate that I am curious to get your opinion on: the double move (double leap). In your opinoin would it be two separate leaps? One for each move, since they are separate actions, or would you be allowing, since it is a double move, one huge leap, in this case 4+4+2 = 10 inch leap and charge?

 

Keep in mind Stubbdog and I are talking strictly about an alternative version of Leap, not the current one.

 

At first I was thinking: No way, a double move would require 2 separate Leaps or it would be unbalanced.

 

But the more I think about it I don't have a real problem with a single Super-Leap.

 

Assuming Lupines are going to be some of the highest Movement models to ever see the ability we can assume the are a "worst case' scenario.

 

As you point out this means they would gain a 10 inch unobstructed movement in a straight line if they were able to charge (what happens if the charge falls short and they are over an obstruction? normally if a charge fall short you stop where the charge portion of the movement began, so allowing them to add the charge portion may not be possible without some sort of mechanic to take this into account).

 

10 inches (4+4+2) isn't really all that far considering you are giving up a huge amount of movement to do so, lets face it, the Lupine could double move + charge 20 by using the same amount of movement and possibly get himself there, or a lot further, anyway. Many flyers in the game can spend an activation to get airborne and still move or move+charge further than 10.

 

A double leap wouldn't be unbalancing, as it would most likely give the Lupines opponent an opportunity to react to it. The Lupine has jumped, and used up all of its actions, so it must wait until its next activation to act, possibly giving its opponent several activations to deal with the threat (given that the Lupines as a whole are expensive and will be working with an initiative deficit).

 

The advantage of making it this way is that you could put Leap on a Frogman model with Move 5 and he could still get a decent Jump out of it (rather than 2.5 inches for his single leap move he could double leap + charge 6: 2.5+2.5+1).

 

Of course this is all speculation, but it is what I would prefer as opposed to the current SA.

[Hellsgate]

As written: "The extra movement spent is twice the base size of the Model/Terrain being jumped

over."

- So it's only the size of the leaped models base that gets the x2, not the size of base & what ever it takes to get the leaper's base to clear (as the example shows).

 

"A Leaping Model must end its activation on the ground."

- If you don't have the remaining movement to clear it, then you can't do the leap. (also mean that leaving 1" between models so that the base can't fit would only count as 1" provided they still had the move to get to the second models other side)

 

"A Leap cannot be part of a Charge."

- And you can't leap during that last 2-4" bonus (something I missed before).

 

Honestly I fail to see what the problem is (other than mainly high point and hard hitting models currently have it). The rules a plainly written. And we have atleast 4 other abilities that allow you to bypass other models/terrain, none of which have the move penalty, two are also stronge defencive movments (1/2 range or no shooting/magic), and all of those 4 can be used with the charge bonus and zig-zag at whim.

 

Though I could exept it, my argument/resoning behind being able to zig-zag during the move (not while you're ontop of a model) is that once you land you can move in any direction. Don't believe me? jump forward then back wards, if you can do a 180^o direction change you should be able to do anything less.

[WolfLord]

I haven't had a chance to play with leap yet, but I would agree that the leap should only be in a straight line. As for leaping over multiple pieces, the SA states that you can only leap over models of equal size or smaller, so I guess you could leap frog, but you're going to lose movement due to the x2 cost.

[bluethunder]

you're not allowed to cross other Models' bases, so the jump has to take you completely over the model.

 

...Or multiple models?

 

Speaking as the guy who was playing those "bad ol' Koborlas" I've had a lot of fun beating up on those dwarves of wal enaluts, but I do think it would be a little more balanced if I was forced to land before leaping over a second model. In the last game we played the fact that I was leaping over several closely spaced models seemed to really bug him.

[spiritual_exorcist]

Honestly I fail to see what the problem is (other than mainly high point and hard hitting models currently have it). The rules a plainly written. And we have atleast 4 other abilities that allow you to bypass other models/terrain, none of which have the move penalty, two are also stronge defencive movments (1/2 range or no shooting/magic), and all of those 4 can be used with the charge bonus and zig-zag at whim.

 

 

Can I live the SA as is, probably , I doubt I'll ever see it used as Lupines don't strike me as a faction anyone I know will play.

 

Will this SA come back to bite the developers on the butt, I think it might when you combine it with Feral Rage. Leap as it stands allows the Korbolas to get into perfect position to activate Feral Rage on the following turn, thereby making the FA as devastating as possible, the Lupines high movement means that one turn 2 they might be well behind enemy lines smashing away.

 

You mention other movement abilities without actually stopping to think about the limitations on them first.

 

1) Non-Corporeal and Hover appear on a very select few Soldier models (Leap appears on every single powerful Lupine, including soldier models)

 

2) Flyers and Burrower are expensive and pay a movement cost in having to Invoke every time they take to the air (Lupines are getting Leap for free)

 

3) Non-Corporeal models cannot move through models.

 

Lupines have gotten the Leap ability free, if not close to free on the datacards, it is a dirt cheap SA for them. I find this strange, it was originally meant to be a FA but was changed to a SA without any real cost being attributed to it (funnily the same thing happened to the Onyx Phalanx and Sheild Lock). One might say, what does it matter, the model was getting the FA for free, I say true enough, but now Freelance models have the ability to use the model gain their original FA, and not have to pay any cost for it as well.

 

I'm aware that zig-zagging doesn't defy the laws of gravity, and I think it strange you felt the need to argue that point.

 

What Zig-Zagging does in terms of a Lupines movement, without putting a limit on how far each leap can travel, is increase the power of the model and make it extremely versatile allowing the model to always be in the right place at the right time.

 

As it stand, a Lupine player can make sure it is in BtB with the right models at the right time when it activates Feral Rage, ensuring it takes out its most important targets.

 

If we place some sort of limit on the lupine, forcing it to hit the ground between model, giving in a maximum width to its jump, or forcing it to use an entire non-combat action to make a single large leap you tone down the ability without ruining, and while keeping it useful.

 

Is Leap itself broken? Possibly not if it was found on a 30 point 3 track frogmen, but the Lupine+Leap combination (especially when factoring Feral Rage) becomes pretty sick.

 

All that aside I like the idea of Leap alot.

[vejlin]

As written: "The extra movement spent is twice the base size of the Model/Terrain being jumped

over."

- So it's only the size of the leaped models base that gets the x2, not the size of base & what ever it takes to get the leaper's base to clear (as the example shows).

The problem with this is that if a large model with leap leaps over a standard sized model then he actually gains a half inch of free movement. He is in effect moving about 2.5 inches horizontally but only paying 2 inches of movement to do so.

[Hellsgate]

no it doesn't: "A Leaping Model must end its activation on the ground."

So if you don't have the move to make that extra half inch to clear it, then you can't end your activation on the ground so you can't make the leap.

 

...I'm aware that zig-zagging doesn't defy the laws of gravity, and I think it strange you felt the need to argue that point...

I think at that point I was reading the whole argument for making leap a strait movement as that you physicly couldn't turn at any point when you used leap, rather than a a meathod to tone down leap. So my mistake there.

[spiritual_exorcist]

I have to say this is a major thing notion, not only do you have to jump far enough to clear the model with the front of your base, but also far enough that the back of your base clears the model.

Lupine jumping over a standard 1 inch model

 

Example 1) Lupine pays 2 inches to clear the standard model, and pays 1.5 inches of ground movement to make room for its base (this appears to be the way the rule is currently written) costing the model a total of 3.5 inches to move 2.5 inches forward and over a 1 inch model. I dislike it, it makes no sense. In this situation the Lupine has stopped paying for the jump before the back its base has even begun clearing the standard model.

 

Example 2) Lupine pays 2 inches to clear the standard model, and pays 3 inches to make room for its 1.5 inch base on the other side of the standard model for a total of 5 inches of movement cost to move 2.5 inches. This means the Lupine has to pay to entirely clear the model it is jumping (from the front of its base to the back).

 

If you need a more solid example, put two standard model next to each other, the minimum distance you need to move one from one side to the opposite side of the other is 2 inches horizontally, that should be the leap distance for such a situation, therefore costing you a total move of 4 inches for the leap due to the movement penalty.

 

Example 1 appears to be what the rules are saying is correct, but Example 2 is the one that makes sense, otherwise the Lupines feels like it is cheating, and given that the minimum such a model can pay under that example is 5 inches of its 8 inch movement I don't see a huge stretch to make the mechanic simpler and just make the entire movement action one big leap. It saves any sort of real math, all you have to do is halve the models movement and that is how far it can jump. If you wanted to get real simple you could make it like burrow or fly and it could have its own movement rating at the bottom of the datacard.

[shakhak]

...snip...

 

I don't see a huge stretch to make the mechanic simpler and just make the entire movement action one big leap. It saves any sort of real math, all you have to do is halve the models movement and that is how far it can jump.

 

...snip...

 

I really like this idea. It makes it clear cut, simple, and easy to play.

[vejlin]

I agree, that's about as simple and unambiguous as it can get. I like it.

[wal enalut]

I also agree. It is simple and leaves the SA to be Quite effective, but also puts a clear limit on it.

 

And I understand that doing this would permit a model to leap multiple models, but the drawback of losign 1/2 its movement seems to counter that.

[shakhak]

How does something like this read?

 

A Model with the Leap SA can use its movement action to ignore intervening Models and Terrain of equal or smaller base size. The model must move in a straight line using half it's Mov in the direction it is leaping. A Leaping Model must end its activation on the ground. Bonus movement from charging can be combined with a leap, but still must be in a straight line, and the leaping model must end in Base to Base contact.

Ex: A model with a Mov of 8, decides to leap over a model 1" away from him. The player announces the leap and moves the model 4" forward ignoring models and terrain in the way. The model lands successfully behind the model and can continue with the rest of his activations from there.

[wal enalut]

I think it is a good improvement, but 2 ambigious issues immedaitely arise when I read it:

 

1) Can the charge be part of the leap? Canthe model make a single leap of 5" (8 plus charge bonus of 2"), provided it ends in base to base contact?

 

2) After the leap, can the model then use its normal charge bonus of movement? If so:

a) Does that have to be in a straigth line from the original starting position? or

b) Can the straight line movement form the charge be in any direction measured from the end position of the leap?

 

I personally favor a No on #1 abd a Yes on #2a

 

I would slightly modify to read

 

"A Model with the Leap SA can use its movement action to ignore intervening Models and Terrain of equal or smaller base size. The model must move in a straight line using half it's Mov in the direction it is leaping. A Leaping Model must end its activation on the ground. A unit may use its bonus movement from charging once the model has sucessfuly landed from the leap action. The charge may be conducted as normal and the model must end in Base to Base contact."