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.

I'm curious about the order of events for multiple Interceptor units engaging multiple units entering from reserve.

For the sake of the discussion, let's say that 2 enemy units (A and B) enter play from reserves all within range and LoS of 3 of my units (1, 2, and 3) with Interceptor.

For each of my units 1, 2 and 3, I need to...
-Announce if I am using Interceptor
-If I am, Choose a target
-Resolve my Interceptor shots against the target

This is easy for a single interceptor unit VS a single incoming unit, or even multiple units, but I have several questions for above scenario.

Do I resolve above steps for 1, 2 & 3 separately? (1 announces, then targets, then resolves, then 2, then 3)
or do I resolve them in group steps? (1, 2 & 3 announce, then 1, 2 & 3 target, then 1, 2 & 3 resolve)

I'm leaning more towards the 1st interpretation, but that still leaves some weirdness. It all happens at the end of the enemy's movement phase, so does my opponent choose the order I resolve 1, 2 & 3 in?

If I use the second order of operations, what happens if I announce 1, 2 & 3 are firing Interceptor, but 1 & 2 shoot down A & B before 3 fires? Can 3 shoot as normal in the following turn?

Is there another reasonable order of operations I am overlooking?

The answer is the one you are leaning towards where you resolve each attack separately, as you declare your targets only when it comes to resolving the attack, but I want to clarify something first: Page 9 states, when things appear to be simultaneous, the player whose turn it is that decides in what order the events occur. As it still is your opponents turn, and shooting attacks are simultaneous, he gets final say in which order the events occur though can not make you announce your intentions before the attack is resolved.

Now onto my reasoning:

I do not see, in the interceptor rule, where it states you need to declare your intentions right after they move a unit onto the field. That is probably for a very good reason, as it could be used by your opponent to change his plans in situations where multiple units are coming out of reserves. In short, your opponent might bring out a cheap 'throw away' squad' first, and hope you declare your going to shoot at it. Then, based on what you say, your opponent may or may not move a more valuable unit into the range of your interceptor.

As the special rule states it is resolved at the end of the movement phase, let him move all his units out of reserve then declare you are going to use interceptor. While, at that point, your opponent does get to decide which interceptor fires first they does not have any fore-warning over what targets you are going to pick. Wait till it comes time to resolve the attack and then announce which target you are going to be shooting at, don't even give them a hint prior. So while your opponent could make you fire the weaker weapons first, by choosing which unit resolves first, they can't use fore-knowledge to position their units to avoid more serious losses ahead of time or even try to argue that you can't switch targets from what you declared before it came to resolving your attack.

That way you can always declare that you chose not to fire some of your interceptors, as firing no weapon on any individual model is always an option when you resolve shooting attacks.

Excellent question! My gut reaction is that GW did not anticipate this situation even in the BRB multiple FoC each with fortifications, let alone the debacle we have with the Tau! Per RAW, you would designate which of your interceptors will fire, which units they will fire at, and proceed through firing until all interceptors have fired at their targets or there are no more targets, with any unfired interceptors from the selected group unable to fire on their up coming turn. Sort of going 'all in' in poker.

Personally, I would have limited all units to no more than one target per player turn as a general rule, with units able to select more than one target per Shooting phase to be the only exception, but that's not how the rules are written.

SJ

I disagree Jeff.

No where in the interceptor rule does it state you need to declare which targets you are shooting at ahead of time. It only allows you to fire a weapon out of normal sequence of events. Without a stated limitation you follow the standard rules for that situation, in this case the sequence of events when it comes to resolving an attack. As you only declare a target when it comes to resolving the attack, you have the choice of changing which target you are shooting at as well decide if you are shooting at none of the targets during that period of time. Should you not shoot a weapon, then you have not invoked interceptor on said weapon, and it can be used like normal in the following shooting phase.

One could even go further to suggest that page 9 doesn't come into affect and I would accept that. The standard sequence of shooting does state you nominate a unit that is capable of taking the shot. I was being generous to 'the opponent' in this situation from my own interpretation of the rules and how they work with page 9. If we want to get even closer to RAW it can easily be argued that you don't even need to nominate which units are shooting until it comes to resolve that units individual attack. With this interpretation it would be the player firing said interceptors, by order of events, that decides the order in which each model shoots.

All you need to do is declare an intent to use interceptor at the end of the movement phase and then chose the first model firing, resolve every step in the standard shooting sequence, then chose the next model. Same rule of thumb, tell your opponent very little of your intentions till it comes to resolving your attack only you don't give them the choice in which the order the attacks are resolved. A little bit contradictory to page 9 but still very justified under the sequence you use to resolve shooting attacks. After all the first step is to nominate which unit is firing and you don't just stop at step one and move onto another unit, you go through all of them in order then move on to the next unit.

Still, even with my original interpretation, if you do not shoot a weapon then it stands to reason that you have not invoked the interceptor rule to be able to do so.

It would be very much rule lawyering for someone to argue that, just because you could have, you lose the weapons ability to fire in the next shooting round. If you find yourself playing against such a person in a friendly game, well, they are going to find every loophole they imagine can be exploited and such players are no fun to play with. You will spend far to much time arguing with them and not enough time enjoying the game. Simply walk away from the game, you can spend your time doing something far better then playing such a bad sportsmen.

If it is a tournament, call over the organizer and let them settle it. It is a good rule that people will bring up here a lot when there is gray areas, if your opponent or yourself refuses to move the game forward because of an argument over the rules then simply walk away from them and find someone who is actually interested in playing the game, not rule debate. That is why we have this forum, for those of us who debate rules far to much so we don't bog down games doing it on the table.

JinxDragon wrote:
All you need to do is declare an intent to use interceptor at the end of the movement phase and then chose the first model firing

The problem with this yields a 3rd possible order of operations. Since it is my opponent's turn, I do not choose the 1st unit to fire, my opponent does.

I'm going to modify my original favored interpretation option.

At the end of my opponent's movement phase, he chooses one of my units with Interceptor. I must then announce that unit's decision to use or not use the Interceptor rule, the target selection, and resolve the shooting attack. My opponent must then select another one of my units with Interceptor, etc, until all have been resolved.

I'm impartial to either way but it is clear to me that you do not have to inform the opponent which interceptor model is firing at which target until it comes time to resolve that individual attack. Not only does it stop them from altering their plans ahead of time, it also lets you decide if you even want to fire the weapon at all. Should the weapon not be fired, it is clear that interception was not invoked to fire said weapon. Therefore, you can use it in the following shooting phase.

Now I have very little experience with it on the field. My few encounters with interceptor have been one on one encounters, with nothing really fiddly about them. Of course, being a jinx, they have always ended badly for me. I can strongly recommend it is a very good way to get rid of terminator equivalent units that deep strike in, if you have 2+ weapons, before they even get to fire. Riptides, I am looking squarely at your over-powered metal arse....

JinxDragon wrote:
I'm impartial to either way but it is clear to me that you do not have to inform the opponent which interceptor model is firing at which target until it comes time to resolve that individual attack. Not only does it stop them from altering their plans ahead of time, it also lets you decide if you even want to fire the weapon at all.

I don't think there's any doubt that choices about whether or not to use Interceptor are made at the end of the Movement phase, well after all the opponents moves are done.

Agreed, but there is doubt over if you need to tell the opponent which unit is firing and declare which target ahead of time.

I will, surprising for me, try and keep this short: Your interpretation was correct, Model 1 goes first, resolves all shooting sequence steps, Then Model 2 goes next and resolves the shooting sequence steps. Model three then decides if he wants to join in or not. Just like any other shooting attack, you resolve all the steps in the sequence before moving onto the next model. Nothing indicates that you would go in some staggered 'all models by step 1, all models by step 2' pattern.

I'll concede the point.

SJ

Actually, to be even more precise, the Interceptor rule allows you to fire a WEAPON at the end of the phase...so theoretically if a model has multiple Interceptor weapons the player can choose to Intercept with one such weapon, then pick another then another, then another.

There isn't any limitation of having to fire all of a particular model's weapons at once, or even all of a unit's weapons at once (presuming they all have Interceptor).

In fact, the whole Interceptor rule is really a joke the way it is written. There doesn't seem to be any limitation as to how many weapons a single model can fire when making Interceptor attacks (presuming all his weapons have Interceptor).

And just a note about which player picks gets to pick the order things are resolved in...that rule (from pg 9 of the rulebook) only technically applies when BOTH PLAYERS have something that is supposed to be resolved at the same time.

So for example, if player A moved his Heldrake onto the table from reserve and performed a Vector Strike with that that Heldrake, then player A could choose to resolve the Vector Strike *before* any Interceptor attacks (because THAT is a case where both players have something that is supposed to be resolved at the same time).

But just resolving several Interceptor attacks, there's nothing to imply that the player using the Interceptor ability wouldn't choose in which order to resolve any such attacks he gets to make.

Agreed, which is why I revised my stance on the matter as a closer look at the situation informed me that it wasn't a simultaneous event in the flavor that I believed could fall under page 9.

The sequence of shooting events starts with number 1. Number 1 is the shooting player deciding which model they wish to fire. Given that information I decided I was wrong in considering it a simultaneous situation occurring in the opponents turn. While it could still be argued that it technically is, the order of operations clearly show it is the shooting player who decides in this situation regardless.

Nice catch on the fact interceptor only works on individual weapons and not a model as a whole. Seeing how easy it is to get a Tau commander carrying three weapons and a system that grants it, you could end up firing more weapons then even a battle suit is allowed in their normal shooting phase. Wouldn't advise spending all those points on a once in a blue moon situation, but it could be turned into a decent gimmick. Problem is, other battle suits can do it all better.

 yakface wrote:
And just a note about which player picks gets to pick the order things are resolved in...that rule (from pg 9 of the rulebook) only technically applies when BOTH PLAYERS have something that is supposed to be resolved at the same time.

Good insight.

Given that, I'm going to modify my modified favored-interpretation option.

At the end of my opponent's movement phase, I choose one of my weapons with Interceptor. I must then announce the decision to use or not use the Interceptor rule with that weapon, the target selection, and resolve the shooting attack. I must then select another one of my weapons with Interceptor, etc, until all have been resolved.

How does this sound Dakka?

That does seem to cover both the spirit and the letter of the RAW.

SJ