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.

If a squadron gets rammed and suffers an hit (penetrate or glanicng doesn't matter) can you allocate that hit to a model in the squadron other than the one actually rammed?
What happens if the result is a destroyed result? The rammer would not be able continue moving if the rammed model was not removed
It sound pretty cheasy but I think it is possible RAW

Yes, as squadrons treat successful hits as a unit, and they can allocate however they wish.

Entirely possible to stop them this way.

Are you sure about that?

The only time shots are resolved like wounds with allocation is 'shooting' and 'assault'. Both of those have explicit exceptions on how to resolve damages as squadron as a whole.

Page 69 refers to the ramming action being done to each vehicle. Also, the ram action is dependent on the armor facing the ramming vehicle so it really is an action between two vehicles and not two units. There is not a single thing in the squadron vehicle rules that apply to ram damage and would lead me to believe it is resolved any differently than a 1-on-1 vehicle ram.

I think the model rammed has to be removed. It is hit on the armour value facing the attacker me thinks.

The armor value facing is irrelevant. Shooting is calculated in the same way, against the facing of the vehicle closest to the shooter but you still get to allocate the wound anywhere.
I think there is no rule that states it must be allocated to the rammed vehicle..
Interested in feedback though...

nkelsch - and the only place you know how to resolve damage is found in the shooting phase. So if you decide you cannot allocate hits as infantry units allocate wounds, you have no way of determinig any damage either.

Not entirely true... There is a way of determining damage... the core rules for vehicles.

Pg 64: "these follow the rules for normal units, with the following exceptions."

And they give us a total of 3 exceptions that apply to damage:
*Shooting exceptions
*Damage results exceptions
*Assault phase exceptions

Which means ramming which happens in the movement phase and ramming has rules on what happens when ONE vehicle rams ONE other vehicle. Nothing on page 64 overrules or negates those rules so they follow the rules as normal. Which is resolve the action on the vehicle rammed.

Which means if I line it up right I may ram multiple models in a row if I destroy the first one and my model keeps moving.

I am sure it would be nice to imply the shooting rules to ramming, but the rules do not say use these rules for resolving all damage on squadrons.

Edit: Also read the rules for ramming PG69.

"However, if the ramming tank comes into contact with AN ENEMY VEHICLE, the collision is resolved as follows.

Each VEHICLE immediately suffer a hit against the armor facing where the other vehicle has impacted."

Does not say UNIT. There is no exception in the squadron rules for this damage. I don't see how you can apply unrelated mechanics for shooting and assaulting to this action. Squadrons follow the regular rules except where noted. The regular rule is the vehicles involved in the ramming take the hit.

Except when assigning damage, when you can allocate penetrating and glancing hits to any model in the unit, same as with infantry.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except when assigning damage, when you can allocate penetrating and glancing hits to any model in the unit, same as with infantry.

For shooting and assault. It doesn't say to do that for all damage. Please show me where they say all damage.

If there is no exception for Ramming, then you use the regular rules, which is the vehicle in contact with the ramming tank takes the hit.

I have to say I agree with nkelsch on this one. In all honesty the rules are not perfectly clear, but as far as ramming goes, we have always done it on the vehicle that was contacted in the ram. Allocating wounds from shots makes sense as bullets/explosions go all over and are directed at the unit. Where as a ram is 1 on 1

Except there doesnt need to be an exception,


Pg 64: "these follow the rules for normal units, with the following exceptions."

So the rules for a normal unit are to allocate wounds.

Except for the part your quoting is talking about shooting. A ram is not a shooting attack. A ram is done on a single vehicle, not a single unit. Again the rules for this wasnt clearly wrote out, but thats how I look at it


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, upon reading the ramming rules again theres a few thigns that is talking about ramming a single vehicle.

"Ramming is a rather desperate maneuver and means that the tank must concentrate on moving at top speed towards ONE enemy vehicle "
note thats 1 vehicle not unit.

Also "However the ramming tank comes into contact with AN enemy vehicle"
Again, the word an is used to describe one enemy vehicle. I understand how the squadron wounds are used when being shot at, but again a ram isnt on a unit, its on a single vehicle.

My cheese sense is tingling.

If there are 2 vehicles behind an indestructible wall, and the third squadroned vehicle is at least partially visible, then the owner of the squadron can allocate the "wound" to whichever model he wants, even to the one furthest dug into cover, even if it makes no logical sense.
Squadrons work like units. If you can see at least one of them, you can hit every single last one of them.

Ramming is no exception. He can allocate the "wound" however he wishes, but all the models have to share if they take a lot of hits.

Deffrollas for Da win..

Frankly if my opponent was being enough of a bar-stool to try and allocate this way, i wouldn't play him. I realise the rules are poorly written, but people throwing logic out of the window on something like 'i hit this vehicle, so which vehicle got hit' torques me off. Its not like you flipped the vehicle over and it landed on the other vehicle, wrecking it, then teleported back to its original position unharmed..

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except there doesnt need to be an exception,


Pg 64: "these follow the rules for normal units, with the following exceptions."

So the rules for a normal unit are to allocate wounds.

There are no NORMAL rules for units of vehicles. Vehicles follow squadron rules, which only say allocate hits on vehicles like wounds when the target of a shooting or assault damage, all other situations you resolve them like normal units, which is the rules for individual vehicles.

This means vehicles are treated like regular vehicles, not a unit or squadron of vehicles when resolving damage except for shooting and assaulting. If your attack is a shooting or assault damage, apply like wounds all day long... Until the rules explicitly permit you to apply like wounds, there are no rules that apply to resolving damages against units of vehicles... So you cannot say 'the normal rules for units' apply because there are none for UNITS of vehicles, just vehicles as individual entities.

Ramming is neither shooting or assaulting and happens in neither the shooting phase or assault phase. No allocating wounds because the rules do not say to do it. You follow the rules for ramming to the letter with the only exception being the "damage results against squadrons" area which changes the shaken and immobilized results... not allowing you to re-allocate hits.

Ascalam wrote:Deffrollas for Da win..

Frankly if my opponent was being enough of a bar-stool to try and allocate this way, i wouldn't play him. I realise the rules are poorly written, but people throwing logic out of the window on something like 'i hit this vehicle, so which vehicle got hit' torques me off. Its not like you flipped the vehicle over and it landed on the other vehicle, wrecking it, then teleported back to its original position unharmed..

As they would say fourty-thousand years ago: dura lex sed lex

Anyway, bending this rule for logic is perfectly fine, and it's still nothing compared to how far players might modify rules in casual games. Just beware of the point-hungry power gamer that would burn you on a stake for this

And Im pretty sure the power gamer is still wrong. You have to read the RAMMING rules for this. A ram affects one single vehicle. It doesnt matter if its in a squadron or not, its the one vehicle being affected by the ramming vehicle, thats it. Not the entire unit. As stated above, ramming is not a shooting/assaulting attack, and it happens in neither phase of the game. Its a separate "attack" that happens in the movement phase.

KC has it.

"Once all of the armour penetration rolls have been made, the player controlling the squadron allocates the glancing and penetrating hits to squadron members as he would allocate wounds to members of a normal unit."
Rules for allocation with squadrons. (64)

"Each vehicle immediately suffers a hit against the armour facing where the other vehicle has impacted"

"Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied."
Ramming 69

As a result one can't allocate out a ram hit as this would result in not following the process described by the Ramming rules.

Chris - except you follow the first 2 steps, which are quotes 2 and 3 in yours, and you then follow the final step - which is to allocate glancing and penetrating hits.

So your're saying that allocating away the pen doesn't break the chain of rules which refer directly to the two individual vehicles involved and actually follows the command "against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied." because I'm reading that as roll against said vehicle - apply the effect, not roll agaist said vehicle, then follow the process for shooting and use that process to apply the reult elsewhere. Because that wqill result in not immediatly applying the effect agains the specific enemy vehicle, which will break the ramming rules not shooting. When our way breaks neither.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Chris - except you follow the first 2 steps, which are quotes 2 and 3 in yours, and you then follow the final step - which is to allocate glancing and penetrating hits.

Only for shooting attacks.

Hence the whole set of rules as allocation us under:

SHOOTING PHASE

"When a squadron of vehicles is fired at, roll to hit and for armor penetration against squadron's common Armor Value. If the vehicles in the squadron have different armor facings, use the armor value of the facing of the closest visible vehicle.

Once all of the armour penetration rolls have been made, the player controlling the squadron allocates the glancing and penetrating hits to squadron members as he would allocate wounds to members of a normal unit."

The allocation rules *ONLY* apply to shooting. Taking the rule out of context and applying it to all forms of damage is not what the rules say.

Assault says use the rules above. If your attack is not shooting or assault, the rules have no effect because they do not say they do.

Are people seriously incapable of reading the whole page on 64 and seeing how the rules are exceptions only lined up for shooting and assault? The rules are permissive and tell you what you can do. Apply the exception for vehicles to only shooting and assaults.

I like it when people assume others are 'incapable of understanding' when they disagree rather than 'they have a different interpretation.'

I do not think there is a conflict in the rules applying the ramming rules first to determine if a vehicle squadron suffers a glancing/penetrating hit and then allocating the glances/pens as per the squadron rules.

To use Yakface's argument for cover saves for vehicles. The process to allocate glances/pens is explained in the shooting rules but that does not mean it is applicable only to damage results that occur via shooting. That is just where they have chosen to explain it.

Heres the problem with that, yes your right, shooting and assault attacks are able to be passed around via wound allocation. Why? Because they are handled in the exact same way, except one is done in the shooting phase, and the other is done in the assault phase.

Now, tell me, which one of this is a RAM? Last I checked there isnt a RAMMING phase, and a RAM isnt either a shot, or an assault attack.

calypso2ts wrote:I like it when people assume others are 'incapable of understanding' when they disagree rather than 'they have a different interpretation.'

I do not think there is a conflict in the rules applying the ramming rules first to determine if a vehicle squadron suffers a glancing/penetrating hit and then allocating the glances/pens as per the squadron rules.

Allocating hits to squadrons only apply to shooting hits and assaults. Please show where it applies to all damages.

To use Yakface's argument for cover saves for vehicles. The process to allocate glances/pens is explained in the shooting rules but that does not mean it is applicable only to damage results that occur via shooting. That is just where they have chosen to explain it.

Yes, it actually does mean the results applied in the shooting rules are only applicable to shooting. The rules say it is only applicable to shooting attacks and that assault results also use the rules. If you are not performing one of the two types of damages, then the 'exceptions' for squadrons do not apply and the default rules for vehicles kick in... Which is the default rules for ramming.

Stop trying to snipe a vehicle in a squadron. I'm sorry there is no definitive answer and as such I see no reason to not allocate as normal.

When you tank shock a unit does it effect 1 guy or the whole squad? (im aware its diferent,however close enough)

If anything I'd defer a ram to a cc attack, and therefore still get to allocate ...

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:When you tank shock a unit does it effect 1 guy or the whole squad? (im aware its diferent,however close enough)

When you Death or Glory and fail, does it allow allocation? (im aware its diferent,however close enough)

/shrug

what if I don't DoG

/shrug back atya Oo

ntm that DoG is very specific in it's wording isnt it

unlike ramming

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:ntm that DoG is very specific in it's wording isnt it

Both specify a single target, and give no mention of allocation.

A ram's treated as a CC attack?

I'll guess yes as it's not a shooting.

if i had a squadron of 2 vehicles and they assaulted 1 am I to believe the second doesnt take hits? (unless the assault fails miserably)

i still get to allocate those as i see fit keeping even as possible of course.

why wouldnt it be so for a ram?

although this brings me to the does a deffrolla offer cover saves con of worms as that would make it a "shooting" ish attack eh

I find the definitive nature of your responses amusing since you started with this:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:I'm sorry there is no definitive answer

I am inclined to think allocation is allowed, but mostly to make squadrons have some use.
Regardless it seems there is a case for both sides, and is something I discuss with every opponent that uses squadrons.
Or I would if I played one. . .