Immobilized Contesting

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Rythem**

Hey,

So had a situation come up in a game today where a question was asked whether an immobilized vehicle could contest an object. Now for some reason I had it in my head that once a vehicle was immobilized it could no longer contest, but after going through the BRB a couple times and discussing with a couple other guys at the store who believed that it could contest i'm wondering where I got this idea from, if it was an earlier edition, or if I just can't find it in the BRB, or maybe I was told this sometime in the past and have continued to use it incorrectly.

Any help would be appreciated

Thanks.

**GreyHamster**

As it stands, only being dead stops a unit from contesting.

**kungfujew**

So does that mean that you can drop a drop pod on an objective to contest it.

**rigeld2**

Yes.

**Cheex**

Probably a holdover from 4th, where a damaged vehicle ceased to be scoring.

**Spetulhu**

Cheexsta wrote:Probably a holdover from 4th, where a damaged vehicle ceased to be scoring.

Seconded. Nothing prevents you from contesting in 5th, not even falling back (although you'll be removed before tallying objectives in standard missions).

**DarthSpader**

Anyone alive or active can contest, only troops claim

**Mannahnin**

In 3rd and 4th Immobilized vehicles couldn't claim.

**kronk**

kungfujew wrote:So does that mean that you can drop a drop pod on an objective to contest it.

Yes. I do this often.

**Cheex**

As do a lot of people - it's easy to ignore a drop pod, thinking that it would be an easy kill (and that other targets are more important), only to realise that it's the only thing contesting that objective and you don't quite have the firepower to kill it...

**Dayvuni**

I thought only troops could contest? If walking terminators can't contest an objective why can an immobilized rhino?

**Hückleberry**

Dayvuni wrote:I thought only troops could contest? If walking terminators can't contest an objective why can an immobilized rhino?

Terminators CAN contest though.

**Feldenglas**

Right, do not confuse contesting with scoring.

**Dayvuni**

Hückleberry wrote:
Dayvuni wrote:I thought only troops could contest? If walking terminators can't contest an objective why can an immobilized rhino?

Terminators CAN contest though.

Yes, my bad you are right. But why can they contest but not hold it for a point? I think that is wrong, but if it has to do with troops being the buff of the army the tactic people should use is use elites as meat shield for the troops.

**rigeld2**

If anything could claim no one would take more than the bare minimum troops.

**Dayvuni**

rigeld2 wrote:If anything could claim no one would take more than the bare minimum troops.

But troops CAN claim, so why don't people max troops now?

**Happyjew**

The rules actually provide fluff why non-vehicle Troops are scoring units, but nothing else. It's on the page where it tells you what can score.

**DeathReaper**

Dayvuni wrote:But troops CAN claim, so why don't people max troops now?

Because there is a balance between having too many troops, and having too few.

It also depends on the size of the game.

**azazel the cat**

Dayvuni wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:If anything could claim no one would take more than the bare minimum troops.

But troops CAN claim, so why don't people max troops now?

Because troops aren't as good at most things as other units (except for Space Wolves, and many people take close to max troops with them)

Armies need balance. Some troops, some murder machines.

**Dayvuni**

azazel the cat wrote:Armies need balance. Some troops, some murder machines.

That makes sence, thanks

**Rythem**

Thanks all for the clear up, it's frustrating that earlier editions still manage to weed there way into my games, can't wait for 6th edition so that i can then bring back 5th edition rules as well

.

**Dayvuni**

Rythem wrote:Thanks all for the clear up, it's frustrating that earlier editions still manage to weed there way into my games, can't wait for 6th edition so that i can then bring back 5th edition rules as well .

6ed builds on 5ed, its like building blocks, you still resort to 4ed when a rule is uncertain in 5ed. but yea :/

**Lordhat**

Dayvuni wrote:, you still resort to 4ed when a rule is uncertain in 5ed. but yea :/

No, you really don't.

**Lobokai**

Dayvuni wrote:
Rythem wrote:Thanks all for the clear up, it's frustrating that earlier editions still manage to weed there way into my games, can't wait for 6th edition so that i can then bring back 5th edition rules as well .

6ed builds on 5ed, its like building blocks, you still resort to 4ed when a rule is uncertain in 5ed. but yea :/

Not true at all, in fact, you would find yourself to often be very very wrong resorting to this