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.

Please don't state your opinion and what you interpret me to be saying as facts.

You're also saying the unit has been nominated...a thorough "fact" you were attempting to disprove.

rigeld2 wrote:

After the unit has been nominated and target decided you follow the rules for a shooting attack. So either Overwatch cannot ever work (your position) or you can Intercept and Overwatch (what the rules say).

OR the third option (what the rules actually say) of you cant use both interceptor and overwatch in the same *player* turn because youre only allowed to make one shooting action per *player* turn... You skipped that option...

ductvader wrote:Please don't state your opinion and what you interpret me to be saying as facts.

You're also saying the unit has been nominated...a thorough "fact" you were attempting to disprove.

I apologize - I was taking your argument as what you said. You said,

Overwatch is an extension of shooting rules.

The shooting rules say,

During the Shooting phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks.

Since we aren't in the Shooting phase we can't nominate the unit - according to your argument. This means Overwatch can never work.
I'm stating that the rules say

As soon as a charge has been declared against one of your units, that unit can immediately fire Overwatch at the would-be attacker - it doesn't have to, but it's often a good idea.

Which means that the unit has been nominated. You can't choose not to nominate it meaning any restrictions that exist in the Shooting phase do not exist here.

Caboose wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

After the unit has been nominated and target decided you follow the rules for a shooting attack. So either Overwatch cannot ever work (your position) or you can Intercept and Overwatch (what the rules say).

OR the third option (what the rules actually say) of you cant use both interceptor and overwatch in the same *player* turn because youre only allowed to make one shooting action per *player* turn... You skipped that option...

Because that option leads to Overwatch not ever working, meaning it's really the first option.

Please stop taking phrases out of context and stop being the devil's advocate.

While overwatch follows the rules for shooting it itself has stated certain exclusions to those rules but has never stated that it forgoes the nomination process but merely shows how to go about it.

 ductvader wrote:
Please stop taking phrases out of context and stop being the devil's advocate.

Even in context my response applies.

While overwatch follows the rules for shooting it itself has stated certain exclusions to those rules but has never stated that it forgoes the nomination process but merely shows how to go about it.

Well, no - it must forgo the nomination process. One of the requirements (the one I quoted) for nomination is that you're in the Shooting Phase. If you must meet all requirements then Overwatch can never happen.

And Tada!

"An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase) and uses all the normal rules"

 ductvader wrote:
And Tada!

"An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase) and uses all the normal rules"

And that proves ... ?
Your assertion is that all nomination requirements be met. One of the nomination requirements is that you must be in the shooting phase. That sentence does not change that fact.
You can resolve the Overwatch fire trivially - it's not allowed to happen. Resolved!

 Caboose wrote:
First bullet point says this: "1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to, BUT HAS NOT YET, fire this turn."

In context that applies to the shooting phase as a unit can only make one attack in the shooting phase.

It does not restrict Overwatch at all.

I'm sorry tau players.

You should be as your argument is incorrect.

rigeld2 wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
And Tada!

"An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase) and uses all the normal rules"

And that proves ... ?
Your assertion is that all nomination requirements be met. One of the nomination requirements is that you must be in the shooting phase. That sentence does not change that fact.
You can resolve the Overwatch fire trivially - it's not allowed to happen. Resolved!

It is met, albeit in the enemy's assault phase.

 DeathReaper wrote:
In context that applies to the shooting phase as a unit can only make one attack in the shooting phase.

Actually it applies to the shooting sequence, which is how you resolve a shooting attack, which are the rules that overwatch follows...

And yes, I am sorry, because I knew a great deal of them would be sore about this new information and react as you and several other have. Denial is the first stage.

 ductvader wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
And Tada!

"An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase) and uses all the normal rules"

And that proves ... ?
Your assertion is that all nomination requirements be met. One of the nomination requirements is that you must be in the shooting phase. That sentence does not change that fact.
You can resolve the Overwatch fire trivially - it's not allowed to happen. Resolved!

It is met, albeit in the enemy's assault phase.

I wasn't aware that the enemy's assault phase was your shooting phase. Thanks for setting me straight!

...

In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm. Overwatch gives you permission to make a shooting attack when you normally wouldn't be able to. According to you we still need to meet all the requirements to nominate the unit (even though Overwatch nominates that unit for us, but we'll ignore that rule for now).
1). It must be the Shooting Phase. Not met ever in the assault phase.
2). Must be armed with ranged weapons. We'll assume this is true.
3). Must not have fired this turn. We'll assume they fired Interceptor.

Your argument is that, somehow, the phrase "albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase" somehow means you can ignore restriction number 1. Please explain how.

 Caboose wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
In context that applies to the shooting phase as a unit can only make one attack in the shooting phase.

Actually it applies to the shooting sequence, which is how you resolve a shooting attack, which are the rules that overwatch follows...

And yes, I am sorry, because I knew a great deal of them would be sore about this new information and react as you and several other have. Denial is the first stage.

Please do not ignore the context.

I could tell from the first post this was simply a case of "I think tau overwatch is OP, wait loophole through logic hoops!"

So yea, You can still overwatch if you intercept. Blame matt ward and GW, not tau players. Of course, you can always blame tau players that are playing meta lists too.

 Caboose wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
In context that applies to the shooting phase as a unit can only make one attack in the shooting phase.

Actually it applies to the shooting sequence, which is how you resolve a shooting attack, which are the rules that overwatch follows...

And yes, I am sorry, because I knew a great deal of them would be sore about this new information and react as you and several other have. Denial is the first stage.

Accusation of bias is seriously a bad idea. I'm 99% sure DR doesn't play Tau and I don't either. We discuss rules, not what we want rules to be.
I'm offended by your accusation as it has no basis and only serves to attempt to undermine my arguments by putting them in a bad light. Why not be polite and stick to the rules?

rigeld2 wrote:

Your argument is that, somehow, the phrase "albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase" somehow means you can ignore restriction number 1. Please explain how.

Have you ever used overwatch?

It really seems like you're the one trying to say that overwatch is impossible.

Follows the rules for shooting...but is in the assault phase.

I cannot simplify that further.

Does not need to be in my shooting phase because overwatch explicitly states...normal shooting rules...but in the assault phase.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
Why not be polite

Mind your own advice.

 ductvader wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Your argument is that, somehow, the phrase "albeit one resolved in the enemy's assault phase" somehow means you can ignore restriction number 1. Please explain how.

Have you ever used overwatch?

It really seems like you're the one trying to say that overwatch is impossible.

Follows the rules for shooting...but is in the assault phase.

I cannot simplify that further.

Does not need to be in my shooting phase because overwatch explicitly states...normal shooting rules...but in the assault phase.

And what are the normal shooting rules?
I'm using your argument to show you the consequences of your argument. The actual rules (and my argument) show that the nomination is done for us, so we move to the next step and do not have to satisfy other requirements.

rigeld2 wrote:
Why not be polite

Mind your own advice.

FYI, cutting a sentence in half is rude. Please use full quotes in the future.
And I am being polite. I haven't insulted you at all. I've been accused of bias in a thread I've shown none. That's not polite (although it wasn't you that did that).

Just because nomination is automatic doesn't mean that it doesn't follow the rules that have been stated that it needs to follow.

 ductvader wrote:
Just because nomination is automatic doesn't mean that it doesn't follow the rules that have been stated that it needs to follow.

...
No, that's exactly what it means. I'm Fearless - I don't have to roll to test Morale, I just automatically pass. According to you I'd roll and then disregard the roll and assume I passed.
Either the nomination being automatic skips requirements, or you have to show how - somehow - it's your shooting phase during the enemy's assault phase.

Isn't this all a mott point as the restriction from firing Interceptor does not go into effect until the next player turn?

"If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn..."

Since Overwatch is still the same turn as Interceptor was fired, there should be no restriction. Seems pretty clear.

Sure...it automatically follows the rules for fearless.

As overwatch automatically follows the rules for normal shooting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Samurai_Eduh wrote:
Isn't this all a mott point as the restriction from firing Interceptor does not go into effect until the next player turn?

"If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn..."

Since Overwatch is still the same turn as Interceptor was fired, there should be no restriction. Seems pretty clear.

That's not actually the question at hand.

The real question is if a unit is allowed to shoot twice in one player turn. Which is not explicitly stated in overwatch.

 ductvader wrote:
Sure...it automatically follows the rules for fearless.

As overwatch automatically follows the rules for normal shooting.

So you have no actual argument to prove that the shooting phase is your enemy's assault phase? Thought not. I've been waiting for one.
Since you can't provide one, do you agree that your argument means that Overwatch can never be attempted?

 Samurai_Eduh wrote:
Isn't this all a mott point as the restriction from firing Interceptor does not go into effect until the next player turn?

"If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn..."

Since Overwatch is still the same turn as Interceptor was fired, there should be no restriction. Seems pretty clear.

That is not the point I am challenging. I found a line in a rule in the shooting sequence that states that a unit cannot shoot if it has already shot this *player* turn. Since overwatch and interceptor happen in the same player turn, i believe the rules support that interceptor and overwatch are mutually exclusive.



To those whom I accused of being biased, I appologize. It was not my intention. I just figured this out and expected mostly Tau players looking break everything in their favor to jump down my throat. Thank you for being courteous. Other than that, I am enjoying this discussion.

rigeld2 wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
Sure...it automatically follows the rules for fearless.

As overwatch automatically follows the rules for normal shooting.

So you have no actual argument to prove that the shooting phase is your enemy's assault phase? Thought not. I've been waiting for one.
Since you can't provide one, do you agree that your argument means that Overwatch can never be attempted?

No, I don't believe either and you already know that. Please stop trying to change the argument to your own benefit.

I believe that you refuse to accept that overwatch uses the normal rules for shooting during your opponent's assault phase.

 ductvader wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
Sure...it automatically follows the rules for fearless.

As overwatch automatically follows the rules for normal shooting.

So you have no actual argument to prove that the shooting phase is your enemy's assault phase? Thought not. I've been waiting for one.
Since you can't provide one, do you agree that your argument means that Overwatch can never be attempted?

No, I don't believe either and you already know that. Please stop trying to change the argument to your own benefit.

So do you have a rules basis for ignoring one requirement for nomination but not ignoring another one? I'd love to see it - you've failed to provide one so far when I've asked.

I believe that you refuse to accept that overwatch uses the normal rules for shooting during your opponent's assault phase.

That'd be incorrect. Overwatch does use the normal rules for shooting - it just automatically decides the first two steps and starts you on step 3 (modifying by requiring Snap Shots).

 ductvader wrote:

The real question is if a unit is allowed to shoot twice in one player turn. Which is not explicitly stated in overwatch.

Except overwatch tells you you can make a shooting attack, this is more specific than the shooting phase rules and as such are allowed to shoot.

The restriction on page 12, taken in context, means that we are only allowed to nominate a unit to fire its weapons once in the shooting phase. This restriction does not affect overwatch.


P.S. Rig is correct, I do not play Tau. (I play several different Marines, and Orks).

I'd like to see where you think you can ignore the whole process.

The overwatch rule explicitly states that it uses the normal shooting rules...but for your opponent's assault phase.

And automatically decides...using the normal rules for shooting.

...which you're throwing out the window.



We're talking in circles.

At the very least can you see where this requires an FAQ?

No, I do not think this was intentionally written to be this way by GW. Yes, I think it's perfectly legal and befitting the game that a unit can only fire once per turn.

 ductvader wrote:
I'd like to see where you think you can ignore the whole process.

The overwatch rule explicitly states that it uses the normal shooting rules...but for your opponent's assault phase.

And automatically decides...using the normal rules for shooting.

...which you're throwing out the window.



We're talking in circles.

At the very least can you see where this requires an FAQ?

No, I do not think this was intentionally written to be this way by GW. Yes, I think it's perfectly legal and befitting the game that a unit can only fire once per turn.

No FAQ needed, the rules are clear if you do not ignore the context.

Thanks for backing up my point then.

Caboose,

As a Tau player and a Rule Lawyer I do not take any offense and accept your apology on behalf of the Greater Good. I understand fully well that there are 'those ******* guys' out there whom saw some of the interesting, and indeed broken, things we Tau could do and selected our faction for no other reason then to exploit this fact. To want to see these people brought down a few notches is only understandable, and I believe the primary reason for this web-site is to discuss the rules and find out just how to legally do that when it is justified. Bringing what you saw as a possible way to reduce the amount of damage the Tau can do during their enemy turn to this forums attention was the right thing to do.

I don't think you have a good case with this one though, but it was enjoying and fresh unlike the much rehashed topics we usually see here.

 ductvader wrote:
Thanks for backing up my point then.

Your point ignores the context, so that is explicitly not what I was doing...