02-04-2019, 11:38 AM | #1 | |
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Geltendorf, Germany
|
LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
This is a continuation of a BGG thread where we can't reach a consensus:
https://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/2143983 To quote the top post of that thread: Quote:
|
|
02-04-2019, 11:51 AM | #2 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheltenham, PA
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
Quote:
I don't know if this is in agreement with whatever the official answer is, but it fits with KISS by using existing mechanics (LAD in vehicle = INF in vehicle) and doesn't require much (if any) suspension of disbelief to accept. :)
__________________
Joshua Megerman, SJGames MIB #5273 - Ogre AI Testing Division |
|
02-04-2019, 12:03 PM | #3 |
Ogre Line Editor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
As Stephen mentions, my argument is based primarily on how Spillover fire works; i.e., there are no auto-kills from spillover because all Xs become Ds.
As I've thought about it some more, having it be an auto-D can be used for in-game in the following way: A D essentially has no effect on a pallet, because it's just a box sitting there, but it is still disabled for purposes of additional fire. If a _second_ spillover attack hits it, that would be a second D, which would destroy it. While the rules talk about LAD pallets on vehicles, this is a similar situation for pallets on the ground that is also not clearly defined: what is the defense of a pallet on the ground? Is it D1, or D0? The fact the rules do not specify a distinct difference between a pallet and an active LAD on the ground suggests they are the same D1, but then why have an explicit D0 while loaded for a pallet? That implies all pallets are probably D0 because they have no active defensive capabilities (no ECM, etc) active while powered off. Maybe they have a D1 because they are hard to see/hit when packed? Arguments work both ways. As the rules are currently written, that's about the only way I can see it being interpreted. The issue of "a D is essentially a NE because of how pallets work" is just an unfortunate (or fortunate) side-effect of the gameplay structure.
__________________
GranitePenguin Ogre Line Editor |
02-04-2019, 12:08 PM | #4 |
Ogre Line Editor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
Which is actually a third discussion point not explicitly stated. What happens to LADs that are on transport when the transport is destroyed? Are the pallets also destroyed (similar to the mounted INF rules you mention) because it's the same die roll being applied to everything "on" the transport and now it's a direct-fire attack against a D0, which is explicitly defined with "it is destroyed by any attack."
__________________
GranitePenguin Ogre Line Editor |
02-04-2019, 03:20 PM | #5 | ||
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheltenham, PA
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
Hmm... It appears that my memory is faulty - I could have sworn that any attack on a D0 unit, be it direct or spillover, was an automatic X, yet I see nothing about that in the rules. Whether that's a past rule that got missed, a house rule I learned, or something else, I don't know. So that leads to this question:
1) How does spillover affect D0 units? As I see it, there's 2 possibilities: a) Automatic kill - D0 is flimsy enough that spillover fire kills it just as easily as direct fire.Although, something I just noticed in the description of trucks (3.03): Quote:
Quote:
But I'd also be willing to back up a hair and instead of making it an explicit kill while on trucks no matter what, I would make the LADs live and die with the trucks. If the truck survives, the pallets do to. The one question mark is what to do if the truck is disabled? I'd say that's simple: A disabled truck cannot deploy a LAD pallet by itself, but a squad of INF can manually remove the pallet from the truck to deploy it instead. Since a truck probably cannot "right" itself in any way, a disable result most likely means that the crew is stunned and/or the truck is stuck for a few minutes, and then they are able to go on their way. So if a squad of INF want to manually grab the LAD and haul it off the truck, why not? But the truck crew is too busy to help until they're no longer disabled. And to me that makes sense. After all, how can a pallet be "disabled"?
__________________
Joshua Megerman, SJGames MIB #5273 - Ogre AI Testing Division |
||
02-04-2019, 03:31 PM | #6 | |||
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Geltendorf, Germany
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As written, it can't (or it has no well-defined effect), which is why i'm currently leaning towards "a 'D' destroys a paletted LAD, no matter whether the palette is on a transport or on the ground, whether due to direct fire or spillover." It seems reasonable to assume that a paletted LAD is quite fragile - knock any one gear out of place and it cannot assemble itself. |
|||
02-04-2019, 03:45 PM | #7 | |
Ogre Line Editor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
Quote:
What it boils down to is rules clarification is needed. As written, we have to work with what's on paper; which is the general case of how spillover fire works. Trucks are a special case that's an exception to the spillover fire rule that, while potentially a good model, is not a direct analog.
__________________
GranitePenguin Ogre Line Editor |
|
02-04-2019, 04:33 PM | #8 |
Join Date: May 2007
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
Per the rules as written, a palletized LAD - on a truck or not - is automatically destroyed by spillover fire ("any attack" is any attack). The questions are therefore: 1) is this intended behavior; and 2) could the rules be rewritten to either be more clear or to correct an error?
|
02-05-2019, 05:27 AM | #9 |
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Geltendorf, Germany
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
i'm sidetracking here for a moment to convey a LOL moment...
My housemate came home last night, saw me on the laptop (responding in this thread), and she asked me, "whatcha doing?" i laughed, thought carefully about my response for a moment and said "nerd stuff" (that's her code phrase for anything related to my programming and tabletop gaming hobbies). She pressed the question, forcing me to think carefully about my answer for a moment longer, knowing she would neither understand nor care about a word of it: "we're debating the effects of spillover fire on a palletized LAD." Her: "Who's winning?" Me: LOL! "It's not a topic where anyone 'wins' - none of us gain any advantage for a specific interpretation, so there is no 'winning'. We're just trying to reach a consensus about the intention behind a strangely-worded passage in the rulebook. " Her: "So, kind of like biblical scholars?" Me: ... ... "yeah, kinda." |
02-05-2019, 08:46 AM | #10 |
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
|
Re: LAD pallet in spillover - wha?
My two cents. I've always interpreted LAD as being a fragile piece of tech, and the attacks of any kind destroy them, palleted or set-up.
|
|
|