February 12, 2020 at 9:01 am #174234
For vehicle that assault infantry, is there a condition that it has LOS on the target (as with infantry CQC)?
In the rulebook it is not clear, it is not mentioned in the paragraph relating to vehicles that assault infantry, but it could be that the condition of the previous chapter CQC remains in value.0February 12, 2020 at 9:10 am #174235
No LoS required… however the tanks (DV 8+ only) assault move is a run order that must move half move or more in a straight line…
What would stop LoS and not stop the Tanks move?2+February 12, 2020 at 12:09 pm #174244
What would stop LoS and not stop the Tanks move?
Simply that if the attacker does not see the target I thought he could not decide to assault him (as for the infantry).
Thanks for the clarification 👍
Attachments:0February 12, 2020 at 1:03 pm #174247HaskeerParticipant
“What would stop LoS and not stop the Tanks move?”
Smoke?1+February 12, 2020 at 1:33 pm #174248
Good point on the smoke… shows how often I’ve seen it used!…0February 12, 2020 at 5:18 pm #174258
I don’t understand. Smoke prevents the tank assault, why if LOS is not required?0February 12, 2020 at 7:01 pm #174261HaskeerParticipant
Steel Jackal – I was only saying that smoke blocks LoS but doesn’t prevent moving. I wasn’t saying it stops the assault.0February 13, 2020 at 7:37 am #174268Tim HaslamParticipant
BA is quite a simplistic game, and one I love playing.
Basic rule for any assault in the game is LOS
Add to that the extra rules for tank assault,
Must move in a straight line…
So I would say, the basic rule structure is your first point, los is needed.
After that, use the tank assault rules. Simples.
And smoke would appear to cover the infantry!
X0February 13, 2020 at 9:00 am #174269
@Tim Haslam – I disagree that tanks need LoS – they are not attacking the target unit.. they are driving forward at speed. The individulas in the target unit dont get singled out and struck – even other vehicles are rammed which is more of an ‘oh there you are’ kinda thing :p. On top of that you can go over multiple units if you have the speed.
So whilst they call it Tank Assault in the rules I’d argue that you could as easily just call it Tank Shock Move.0February 13, 2020 at 9:09 am #174270
Tim Haslam, this is what I think.
This is like in “SNAP TO ACTION AND VEHICLES” topic.
There is a basic rule, that is modified or supplemented by extra rule for vehicle.
The player declares that the unit is making an assault and indicates the enemy unit that will be attacked.
The unit making the assault must be able to see the target enemy unit…”
“unit” not “infantry”, so tank too?1+February 13, 2020 at 9:36 am #174271
Hrm…. fair point in the Declear target point of moving in to combat (ebook pg 183 – refs pg 74 for shooting, the same as Infantry assaults on pg 123 does)
So its looking like Smoke DOES block a vehicle assault by the Rules… However I’d allow it for Holywood cinematics feel – the tanks barrelling through the smoke to crush the unexpecting soldiers :p
Might insist on the -1 shooting for soft cover though!0February 13, 2020 at 11:50 am #174279Master ChiefParticipant
Yes, if the tank can’t see its target because of the smoke, it wouldn’t know where the target is to drive through.1+February 20, 2020 at 10:33 am #174473
I ask to Warlord Games rules team, and they send me this:
The team have got back to me – in short, you DO need line of sight to assault with a tank!
So, LOS is nedeed.0February 21, 2020 at 12:25 am #174503Stuart HarrisonParticipant
“There is a basic rule, that is modified or supplemented by extra rule for vehicle.”
I’d say this is where you hit on the truth.
You’ll note there are no detailed step by step procedures at the start of the vehicle shooting rules and assaulting rules. That is because the vehicle rules only tell you where vehicles diverge from the general rules (same with artillery rules). The parts of the general rule not mentioned are still in effect. The Declare Targets step in both procedures isn’t mentioned because it is unchanged from the general rules.0February 21, 2020 at 6:44 am #174506Tim HaslamParticipant
So I was correct!
There’s always a first time…1+
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.