Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chrome

RAGE Chronicles 2008

Recommended Posts

4) Close Combat feels about as right as I think it can be made. Though RC08 need to include a clarification on firing at models in B2B or models in B2B firing out. Specifically whether or not it's allowed. I'll take a look again, but don't think it is mentioned anywhere.

Pg 92 of the Rules PDF says: "Models in B2B and not involved in a Close Combat Action may conduct a Ranged Attack."

 

This will get clarified. Models performing a CC on their own Action will not be able to perform a Ranged Attack. Models acting as the Defender in anther Model's CC Attack may perform Ranged Attacks. Every other model, so long as they can trace LOS to a model, they can shoot at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that the game went well also, and I think that the changes worked out fine, all in all.

 

Smoke seems to be a bit much for me as well. The drift I thought was kind of fun, and the fact that it drifted so far didn't upset me too much (and not only because I benefited from it) because it seemed a little bit like a fluke. The precision of the old smoke always seemed funky, and so having an element of uncertainty worked well, I thought. I also like the idea of the variable length for the above reasons, but all in all the changes made using smoke kind of a pain. My two smokes worked fine for me tactically, but rolling for drift, then rolling the drift, then rolling the length, then arranging where is actually ended up, all for something that no longer blocks LOS all of the time? I'm just not sure that this isn't too much rolling and measuring for "realism" in a game that favors fastplay over detail in other circumstances. I wonder if the drift rule with a constant size would work?

 

Also a bit of an issue for me was deployment the depoyment area, which was a standard 6". In what follows, I am operating from my memory that this is the standard. If there is a rule that I am not thinking of, please disregard everything that comes next. I guess this is either something that might need to be rethought, or something that drastically affects the way I will plan armies. This was not a large game per se (4k), but I have an army that features lots of inexpensive and fragile troops. At 4K, I was really crowded into the deployment zone. The crowding was brought to my attention by the strikes that Sergeant Crunch landed, as I couldn't move too many folks out before his fast movers with FIST (Barracuda's I think) were calling in strikes on my dense formations.

 

I can find ways to think about the game and about setup to justify this small deployment zone, but I wanted to ask whether this was a design feature to cut down on force sizes, so that more unit cards = the chance that strikes will injure a great many of the models at the outset of the game. If this was not the case, maybe some kind of scaled deployment zone for the size of the army?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rulebook suggests a default Deployment Zone that's 6" deep and the width of your table, that's up to you and your opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just a note chrome....

 

when i have gone to print the document I wind up with 2 copies of page 21 (faction doctrines(adon, malvie and Rach) and the templar and terran doctrines dont print at all.

 

I am doing this in print even pages only (for preperation for 2 sided copies) mode

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Cruise Missiles and Atomic WMD Cruise Missiles. This may not be a new issue but I think clarification is needed.

 

It states that in later turns the missile is moved when the FIST model that called it in is activated...... what happens if that FIST model is killed? what happens if that FIST model's entire troop is destroyed?

 

I suggest that if the missile dies in these cases then that should be explicitely stated in the rules. If the intention is that the missile keep flying then how about simply stating that the missile joins the FIST model's troop as an additional model and activates along with that troop on later turns ? Remember it could potentially wind up being the last model in the troop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, i could see that as a possibility... however consider real life... missile team launches missile and then subsequently gets hosed.. missile does not auto explode at that time it will still go along last course.. or if laser guided may go a bit off course.. I am figuring that the cruise missiles are also smart enough that once they have their data programmed into them they will go on regardless of what happens to launching team.. that is what happens with missiles like the ALCM, Tomahawk etc..

 

they are programmed at launch point with data and then sent on thier merry way to cause havoc and destruction.. once launched they rely on the data that was programmed within them.. this was done so as to reduce the effectiveness of enemy jamming...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a good question for now i would consider the missile a member of that team and keep its card in the deck till the missile is gone. I'll make sure we get a more official answer but that processes there should get you through testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, i could see that as a possibility... however consider real life... missile team launches missile and then subsequently gets hosed.. missile does not auto explode at that time it will still go along last course.. or if laser guided may go a bit off course.. I am figuring that the cruise missiles are also smart enough that once they have their data programmed into them they will go on regardless of what happens to launching team.. that is what happens with missiles like the ALCM, Tomahawk etc..

 

they are programmed at launch point with data and then sent on thier merry way to cause havoc and destruction.. once launched they rely on the data that was programmed within them.. this was done so as to reduce the effectiveness of enemy jamming...

 

 

 

The Javelin is self-guiding once it "see's" the target. After launch it doesn't matter if the firer gets hosed or not, the Javelin has the target already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

both ways of handling it could be explained through fluff. What's important to me is that the rule text reflects the intent of the rule. As long as it is clear how the rule should be interpreted and it seems fun and balanced I'm happy.

 

More than any fluff I think the point cost and game worth of the units should decide what course to take. The Atomic WMD missiles are very expensive and it would truly suck to lose one if an infantry model is killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AA SA: You still need LOS for the Defensive Fire you receive against the Mclass Air model right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AA SA: You still need LOS for the Defensive Fire you receive against the Mclass Air model right?

 

I would assume so.

I agree. All AA systems are DA which require LoS. Maybe someday a IA system with AA ::):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to say that I vastly prefer the +2 to hit at point blank range rather than Blaster for the CotS doctrine. It really sucked to run'n'gun up and then not be able to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE

4) Flamer - It is not exempted anywhere that I can find, so then Flamers are effected normally by Jamming/ECM bubbles? What happens if only part of a Flamer's AoE is under the effect of a Jamming/ECM Action?

 

As it is currently written, yes, Flamer's gain a bonus from Target Lock and EST Bubbles. You can only TL individual Models now though, so the bonus would only be applied against that specific target.

 

This was not my intention though, I'd planned on changing Flamer so that TL did not effect it, it simply slipped my mind with all of the other things swimming around in my head.

 

I'm still curious about Flamers and ECM pods. Flamers are effected, normally, by ECM pods? Is the entire Flamer template effected when any part of it contacts an ECM bubble?

 

Other questions I had come up:

 

1) There had been some talk in another thread about Target Point Rolls and the common usage that they did not have to be on a model. Having gone through the rules text it's pretty vague either way. Will this be clarified?

 

2) Models in B2B lend their support for Close Combat. Do models riding in a transport count if their transport is in B2B? Does it only count if it is a ground transport, not an Air transport? If the transport has the Gunport SA do they get to lend support?

 

3)

MClass Air models may never be considered in B2B with another Model unless a special rule or situtation states otherwise.
Does this mean Jump Infantry cannot conduct Close Combat and/or be counted for support? Alternately, could Jump Infantry then CC a gunship? ::o:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...