It is currently Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:23 am


Tanks On A Building

Discuss tactics and general army concepts not specific to a faction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

wowskyguy

Hawk Talon

  • Posts: 437
  • Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:03 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostTue May 19, 2015 8:38 pm

In a 2000 point game I would drop a pair of Longbows on top a good vantage large building. Without any fear that the building might collapse. I believe that the building would last longer than the Longbows in plain sight of the enemy tanks.
Maybe a pair of Phobos.

If the unit has poor movement and the building will be a good vantage point for it (limiting enemy units for attacking it directly), I think it's valid. Other than that I can't fathom a tactical usefulness.

Cheers,
--
Andy

"Here's everything I know
about war: Somebody wins,
somebody loses, and
nothing is ever the same again."
Admiral Constanza Stark,
C.Y. 9784
Offline
User avatar

DropzoneCommenter

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:15 am
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostTue May 19, 2015 10:39 pm

Link-Hero-1 wrote:
Weidekuh wrote:You can't fly above 6" buildings.


What? Doesn't that only apply to Fast Movers?
Aircraft can fly higher than 6" over contours , so I thought that applies to buildings as well?

:?


I agree with you, Link - the Contours rule (which includes an example of a arena or interconnected building IIRC) seems to be expressly there to cover flying over anything higher than 6"; it just doesn't say buildings since there's other stuff like cliffs and hills which would also be subject to the same rules. I mean, if the armies can invent ships that can drop from orbit, certainly they can go *back* to orbit, yes? This would require flying higher than 100 ft in the air in scale... :)

Fast Movers are an exception because they fly so fast they can't go straight up the way a helicopter or anti-grav transport could. This also stands to reason since Dropzone's rules are written as exception-based (like GW's - the basic rules cover everything unless they state an explicit exception to the basic rules).

I'm going to play it the way we have (as above) until contradicted explicitly by Hawk, cause the logic seems flawed to me based on everything else we know. If someone has an errata or post directly from Dave or Simon stating no aircraft can go over a 6"+ building, however, I'll happily eat crow.
Check my biweekly blog on tactics, hobby, and fundamentals in DZC and DFC at dzcommenter.com!
Offline
User avatar

feindusmaximus

Hawk Talon

  • Posts: 1279
  • Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:37 am

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostWed May 20, 2015 12:44 am

Play incorrectly then. House rules are always best kept in house.
Look at the way the game plays with the 6" building restriction. It was designed that way ON purpose. Makes it more tactical in the urban environment. Yes HWG was nice enough to give use rules to use out side the cityscape.
Offline

Hexer

  • Posts: 339
  • Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 8:46 am

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostWed May 20, 2015 7:28 am

This has already been discussed in the rules section of the forum some time ago.

Buildings are not Contours.
And from a Fluff perspective: There is a hightech missile defence system in place. If flyers move too high over the battlefield without good cover, they will be wiped out imediately.

The rules for flying higher are there to cover terrain contours (like cliffs and hills) and in special cases huge, multi-piece buildings that are an example of what you could also do with you battlefield if you want something different.

also: in fact Scourge dropships can not go back into orbit by themselves for example. At least I seem to remember reading that in the fluff description.


EDIT: here is the link to the corresponding thread in the rules section:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=5842&hilit=over+6+inch
Yes, the original question is about fast movers but normal flyers are also discussed there. Read time wizards replies on the first page for the rules-references
Offline

Link-Hero-1

  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:37 am

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostThu May 21, 2015 11:06 am

Huh, I read that thread, but missed the part that it also applies to normal aircraft.

Thanks for the answers.
In your face from outer space!

Part of the successful Autumn 2015 PHR offensive!
Offline
User avatar

DropzoneCommenter

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:15 am
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostMon May 25, 2015 1:45 am

feindusmaximus wrote:Play incorrectly then. House rules are always best kept in house.
Look at the way the game plays with the 6" building restriction. It was designed that way ON purpose. Makes it more tactical in the urban environment. Yes HWG was nice enough to give use rules to use out side the cityscape.


No need for snark. I'm not trying to be a dick - this is actually unclear, esp. when one is not using the boards regularly. While I see this discussed all the time on the boards, I've never seen a citation. My friends with whom I play are adamant, they don't read the boards at all, and I get tired of the fight. :)

Hexer wrote:This has already been discussed in the rules section of the forum some time ago.

Buildings are not Contours.
And from a Fluff perspective: There is a hightech missile defence system in place. If flyers move too high over the battlefield without good cover, they will be wiped out imediately.

The rules for flying higher are there to cover terrain contours (like cliffs and hills) and in special cases huge, multi-piece buildings that are an example of what you could also do with you battlefield if you want something different.

also: in fact Scourge dropships can not go back into orbit by themselves for example. At least I seem to remember reading that in the fluff description.


EDIT: here is the link to the corresponding thread in the rules section:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=5842&hilit=over+6+inch
Yes, the original question is about fast movers but normal flyers are also discussed there. Read time wizards replies on the first page for the rules-references


Thanks for the link! Tremendously helpful - I could never find that friggin' thing. I do hope that when we eventually get the 1.2 rulebook, they explicitly clarify this in the rules. Fingers crossed...
Check my biweekly blog on tactics, hobby, and fundamentals in DZC and DFC at dzcommenter.com!
Offline
User avatar

Magnusaur

  • Posts: 578
  • Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 6:03 pm

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostTue May 26, 2015 12:33 pm

I would rate the the 6 inch building limit as one of one the top three misconceptions people make about the rules. I made it, my friends made, a lot of people make it. Having said that, it has become clear, through Hawk input and whatnot, that buildings do indeed not count as contours.
For the greater jellyfish!
Offline
User avatar

SwordOfJustice

Hawk Talon

  • Posts: 2612
  • Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:40 am

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostTue May 26, 2015 9:26 pm

It adds a tactical layer but it's quite artificial IMHO.

Nothing wrong in a house rule as long as you know it's a house rule. I'm wondering if I should go back to playing that you can fly over buildings like contours
We have evolved beyond mere flesh and bone. We are the Post Human Republic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBC9LIUpKeo
Offline
User avatar

DropzoneCommenter

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:15 am
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostWed May 27, 2015 1:08 am

SwordOfJustice wrote:It adds a tactical layer but it's quite artificial IMHO.

Nothing wrong in a house rule as long as you know it's a house rule. I'm wondering if I should go back to playing that you can fly over buildings like contours


Make no mistake, we're not trying to house-rule it; we literally didn't parse that structures were not included in the contours rule. IIRC, there's an example of some arena or other curved building roof that blurred the issue for me personally.

It's good to know what the makers intended - even if it seems rather artificial, esp considering the fluff of the armies deploying from orbit.
Check my biweekly blog on tactics, hobby, and fundamentals in DZC and DFC at dzcommenter.com!
Offline
User avatar

SwordOfJustice

Hawk Talon

  • Posts: 2612
  • Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:40 am

Re: Tanks On A Building

PostMon Jun 01, 2015 9:18 pm

Yeah, I read it the same way for a long time when I first started the game.
We have evolved beyond mere flesh and bone. We are the Post Human Republic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBC9LIUpKeo
Previous

Return to General Tactics and Army Building Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest