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.

Good point Flavius, thanks for that...I was very unaware of that.  /bow

If Holo Field and Spirit Stone could not be taken on the same vehicle at the same time, I'd be perfectly happy with leaving everything else as-is.  I just find the spray-and-pray tactic for dealing with Falcons...lame.

Very good catch. I did not realize that either; MOBILE being the key I glanced over.

Posted By Flavius Infernus on 12/19/2006 12:03 PM

"Any hits that beat the Armor Value of a mobile skimmer moving more than 6" in its last movement phase count as glancing instead of penetrating hits." (69)

An immobilized skimmer is not a "mobile skimmer moving more than 6"..." It is an immobile skimmer that moved more than 6" last turn; the rule does not apply. From the moment that the skimmer is immobilized, it can be penetrated.

This rule is tactically important to know.  Use your high-volume, medium strength firepower on skimmers first, in hopes of immobilizing them.  That way, if you get lucky and knock one down, you can use your low-volume, high-strength shots to get penetrating hits on them in that same shooting phase.

and if you tried that you would get laughed off the table, get tanked on sportsmanship scores ...or run out of oponants very fast. i have never seen anybody try to use the rule in that manner.

to play devils advocate-the immobilized result transfers to that players next turn IE the vehicle is now immobilized so he cannot move it in his movement phase. any shots in the previous turn would still only be glancing. rather you did them fist or second....not that it matters because

1.an immobilised result on a skimmer moving over 6=destroyed

2.with eldar vectored engines-next turn the skimmer becomes immobile for the entire game anyway

 

 

i was refering to using the hull down rule for area terrain

 

Actually, I'm the Eldar player, so it gets done to me--and I remind opponents if they forget because I'm a nice guy.

It's standard procedure at my club.

But let's take it over to the YMDC forum, since there seems to be some question.  I'll make a post right now.

I have already posted it.

The outcome in YMDC (for both threads, my bad Meph) seems to be that it's what the rules say.

In practice I haven't noticed this really being a problem for me as an Eldar player. Usually it takes so much firepower to knock down a grav tank that there's not much left over to penetrate it once it's immobilized. But the emergency disembarkation rule makes it more important than ever to have something (bikes, other skimmers) protecting the back hatches, using the 1" rule to prevent enemy troops from assaulting the rear of an immobilized grav tank and trapping the transported models inside.

Posted By mughi3 on 12/19/2006 8:25 PM

and if you tried that you would get laughed off the table, get tanked on sportsmanship scores ...or run out of oponants very fast. i have never seen anybody try to use the rule in that manner.

You act like it's a weird thing out of the blue...Anyone who would have a problem with following that rule is a bad sport to begin with.

well then call me a bad sport since glancing immobilized results-

1.can only be made mandatory on a skimmer moving over 6" to invoke the skimmer moving fast rule

2.skimmers moving over 6" that get a glancing 5 are destroyed

 

so the focus on the term "mobile" in the rule in question is irelevant when discussing glancing 5s on skimmers moving over 6" as skimmes moving under 6" can be penned as normal and moving over 6" are automatically destroyed.

It was never an issue before vectored engines, Mughi, since a skimmer moving fast was always destroyed instead of being immobilized on a glancing 5. That's why nobody noticed the word "mobile" in the rule before (the Dakka poster named Slyde actually pointed it out to me after immobilizing one of my falcons during a game).

But with vectored engines making it possible for a skimmer moving fast to be immobilized, but not destroyed, you can't just ingore the word "mobile" in the rule anymore.

well i don't run eldar tanks so it isn't going to be an issue for me lol

It is an issue if you're playing against them.

not really. i am probably just going to keep counting them as glances

if it becomes an issue i usually just let the opponant decide as long as we are having a fun game.

I'd say it makes a big difference if you can penetrate him or not. If he is merely immobilised the troops inside are fine, if you then penetrate, the troops are not fine.
The Emergency Disembarkation rules don't make a distinction between mobile or not, they merely say if the vehicle has moved more than 6" in the last move or not. And since they have, a penetrating hit instantly becomes devastating even if you don't destroy the tank. With the low armour save units like harlies, fire dragons and banshees can easily loose a good portion of the models AND they have to take a pinning check, if the vehicle is destroyed as well the result is horrific with a 75% chance to wound each model and a low armour save...

I dont bother with Vectored engines. Sure they are nice, but are expensive and if your opponent rolls a 5 as the lowest value on two dice you are very unlucky.

Holofields ans spirit stones are absolutely essential, but are fairly priced. The mistake people make is treating them like smoked rhinos with extra armour, and shooting accordingly. You dont have to fire at a Falcon until it stops moving. Just stop it shooting and move on. Once you have your first 'crew shaken' result. Move on to the next target. It will take a LOT of firepower to get a better result, firepower that is far better spent elsewhere. Remember just how vulnerable and expensive (not to mention deadly) most things Eldar are, shoot them instead and bother about shaken Falcons after the rest of the Eldar host has been dealt with.

Seems like I'm fated to disagree with you on everything today, Orlanth

On wave serpents, vectored engines cut the chances of destruction in half. Because the consequences of a destroyed transport are so extremely dire (as Meph describes), anything you can do to reduce those chances is worth it. 20 points to save a 150 point unit, and half the cost of the transport, sounds like a good value to me.

But more importantly, on both falcons and serpents, in that key turn when the troops are inside their transports fixing to assault next turn, vectored engines put the opponent in the position of having to come up with 6's on the glancing hit table in order to stop the assault. Just getting a 5 isn't going to do the job (at least not without further shooting). So far on the tabletop I've made assaults out of an immobilized transport in about 80% of my games. Without vectored engines, those troops would have been 58% dead, entangled, and taken out of the key assault. In three different games I had grounded transports that continued to shoot and have an effect for the remainder of the game. In another game I had a grounded falcon preventing enemy countercharge units from getting into contact with my assault troops for one very important turn (because they had to run around it or spend a turn assaulting the falcon, instead of just running through it as they would have if it had been destroyed). The delay allowed my banshees to finish off the unit they were fighting and charge the approaching countercharge unit first.

I'm talking again about mechanized assault lists here, where getting the assault through is the most important thing. In other types of lists, vectored engines may still not be worth it.

Hmm.

We are talking about a lot of points for a what if occuring over a single turns window. I do see the advantages of vectored engines, they are certainly not useless, however mechanised Eldar are very expensive and need to have the points load lightened wherever possible.

Secondly on the assault turn your transport tanks will disembark and shoot on the turn they get close. I dont see any mileage in holding back even Howling Banshees in the hull and disembark assaulting the next turn (and neither do you it seems) Therefore we are talking about saving your assault troops from the immobilisation of their vehicle from the turn before the assault move. Ok you save more assault aspects this is true, but they will be at least 12" out of position. As mechanised eldar armies will be small having critical units out of position is not much better than not having them at all.

If you are able to coordinate an assault of downed transport occupants and surviving transport occupants at 80% success rate something is very wrong indeed. I cant see why your opponents dont deal with your infantry peacemeal while they are divided. Are they trying to rush you at the same time?

On other turns when the vehicles are in 'pure tank mode' you can save some tanks, this is true. Let us say you pay 60pts on vectored engines and save one tank with them over the course of the game. That 60pts is equal to a well equipped Vyper. You may have to pay double that if you have lots of tanks. Personally I would rather have the extra Vyper(s) its a more guaranteed return.

Yeah, we must be talking about something different here, Orlanth. I never have units disembarking and transports shooting in the same turn, and unless something goes wrong, the assault units are in assault the same turn they disembark. The way my mechanized assault goes is like this:

Eldar turn A: transports drive up to within a few inches of what they want to assault (using star engines if necessary). The tanks don't shoot this turn because they are moving too fast and using star engines.
Opponent turn A: The opponent tries frantically to down as many tranports as possible with weapons fire in order to stop the assault.
Eldar turn B: assault units disembark, move, fleet (if applicable) & assault that turn. The tanks move off on their own, unless immobilized, but usually still don't shoot because they are all shaken from the pounding they took.

So it's that one key turn, when you're eating the whole opposing army's firepower, that the vectored engines make the difference.

It's not a hypothetical--with a transported assault army, that key turn happens every game. I was looking back over my battle notes and I discovered that so far it has actually been 100%. In every game, a transport (exactly one, in fact) gets immobilized. In every game so far, the unit inside has been able to then disembark unharmed from the immobilized transport the following turn and continue to do useful things. In all but one case (rolling a very unlikely "2" on three dice for a terrain test) when the immobilized transport was carrying an assault unit, the unit was able to join the assault the same turn after disembarking.

So the vectored engines make the difference between (1) having a unit reduced to half strength and entangled for a turn when they are needed or (2) joining the assault.

I see your point. We are talking about different things.

Your vectored engines are necessary because your Eldar list uses an 'all eggs in one basket' approach. So it pays to protect that basket!

My mechanised Eldar doesnt use a rush strategy and probably has a lot more jetbikes - which I always had a liking for.

My problem with your tactic is that your transports have to linger near the enemy while loaded. You dont go for the 12" move - disembark - dont assault method. What is to stop your opponent coming forward and attacking your transports if they can reach the Av10 rear and the exit ramp? After all you are only one infantry move away, yes you can fleet, but relying on the extra d6" to make the distance is risky IMHO.

For one example if something fast (like bikes) could be strung behind your wall of transports before they are shot at vectored engines will be little help if the tanks are immobilised, the ramps will be blocked and the passengers will be massacred as they try to bail.

You seem yo have your tactics covered, it still comes down to what your opponents are doing and I am not convinced they are using the right counters to your style of play. Or maybe I am missing something.

Geometry. A falcon is 6.5 inches long, and an enemy unit moving near it has to stay 1" away. So a unit moving on foot around a falcon by the shortest distance possible has to move along the arc of a circle 8.5 inches in diameter. The circumference of that circle is approximately 26.7 inches, and in order to move from the front arc of a falcon to the rear arc, a unit has to exceed one-fourth of that distance, or about 6.7 inches. That assumes that the unit circling the falcon is only one inch away and is right at the very edge of the front arc and barely makes it into the rear arc--in practice the distance is closer to 8 or 9 inches plus whatever distance it takes to get within an inch of the falcon. Wave serpents are 7" long (the forge world ones) so their circle is even bigger. So as long as it's a non-fleeting infantry unit, it's mathematically impossible for an infantry unit to circle from anywhere in the front arc to the rear arc of a falcon in a single move. If an opponent claims he has done it, I know he must have measured wrong.

At the same time, troops disembarking from the transport can easily reach their target, even without a fleet, because of the 2" disembark (which is actually closer to 3") and the fact that they can move along the shorter 5.1" arc within 1" of their own transport. Even if the transport didn't move away after the disembark, thus shortening the assault distance even further, the passengers are pretty much even with the front of the transport at the end of their move, only 2-3" away from the enemy. I typically use the fleet move just to tweak the positions of the models to within an inch of the target so that I don't have to count on a difficult terrain test or such to get into base contact.

The jetbikes park 1-2" away from the back hatches to protect them being blocked by speeders, flyers & fleeters, thus leaving enough room for the passengers to disembark if necessary but still preventing anybody from squeezing into the gap because of the 1" rule. At the top of the assault turn, the jetbikes fly away first to make extra room for the disembarking assault troops.

I think it might be more accurate to call it "all eggs divided equally among four to five armored and padded baskets."

Exactly. Tom, I bow before your summary. I use the exact same data in practice, and I knew the lengths of my vehicles, but I never worked out the math on exactly how much movement is needed to circumnavigate the tanks. Well done.

Orlanth, I use a similar approach to Flavius (though with fewer tanks, as I'm not all-mechanized). If I disembarked my troops from the tank on the previous turn the way you describe, they'd be meat for the enemy's guns and badly thinned-out before they ever got to assault. Expecially since it's no longer possible to Fortune them on the turn they disembark. I don't know how you get this to work, though I know how Flavius'/my approach works both from experience and his excellent descriptions.

Generally I dont transport rush. My mechanised Eldar consists of tanks and bikes, The infantry were just to keep the list legal (I made up my army under the old 3rd ed Swordwind rules). Therefore my model collection is running behind ther current ruleset. I have no complaints though my much loved bikes and spears are now far more cost efective (another reason my Swordwind list had little infantry - I hadnt the points). It was a gimic army anyway, not intended for tournament play in the least.

To answer your question though, my strategy is to provide mobile firepower concentrating the force against part of the enemy line, the basic principle is to use manoeuver to keep as many enemy units as possible unable to pick a target without moving. Other units are overexposed but they are hit with concetrated firepower.

A quiestion for you: What about jump infantry. Can they assault 'over' (or under) the Falcon and ignore the 1" rule?

No model is ever allowed to approach within 1" of an enemy model at any point during the movement phase.

If the gap between the bikes and the back hatches is any less than 3", then no enemy model can enter or land in that gap by any means during the movement phase.

Jump troops move as infantry in the assault phase, and nobody is allowed to move under a skimmer.

Another variation is that you can park two grav tanks with the back hatches angled toward each other with a less than 3" gap between them. No enemy model on foot can move between the transports, like for example to assault, but your own models can still move out through the gap next turn (and it shortens the distance they need to move in order to assault).

But it gives you rear shots at the one tank...Especially since skimmers don't block LoS.

The Tau Double Fish Of Fury is the prime example of how to use two skimmers as a wall to block assaults to your 24 Firewarriors who are busy shooting the living daylights out of some poor squad.
Can be done just as well with Eldar: two Serpents each with 10 Avengers. Thats 64 shots = roughly 11 dead marines if the unit is doomed.

It's the fish of fury--you "angle" them toward each other, not turn them all the way. Or depending on where enemy shooting is positioned, you can angle one and not the other, or whatever you want in order to shorten the assault distance while keeping the back armor safe.

Yep, you make a V shape with the front facing your target. The brilliance of this maneuver is that any terrain nearby can be used as well, as can other tanks, to make an impassable barrier.