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.

Then until such a time as a FAQ addressing this issue is published, the most common sense approach would be:

Aircraft removes engagement so no state of engagement exists between it and any enemy mecha in B2B and any enemy mecha and it in B2B.

Specifically, my reasoning is so another mecha isn't locked into place with an aircraft, which makes zero sense to me.

 judgedoug wrote:
Aircraft removes engagement

That is a total re-write of the aircraft special rule.

 judgedoug wrote:
Specifically, my reasoning is so another mecha isn't locked into place with an aircraft, which makes zero sense to me.

Agreed. And again there is also the passive voice issue. The rules speak of mecha "being engaged" by enemy mecha rather than "engaging" enemy mecha in H2H combat. How does an aircraft engage anything in H2H combat? That is a ridiculous notion. Given what being engaged in H2H combat mechanically entails (cannot use or be targeted by weapons systems, costs Command Points to move out of B2B) however, I suppose this could simulate non-aircraft mecha "taking cover" (where "cover" is not meant as a game term) as enemy aircraft fly over/zoom past.

I honestly meant to use that as a placeholder while I went back to find the previously mentioned rewording to copy and paste, but then got distracted at work and the general cold sickness that is still occurring across my brain and body. The phrase previously mentioned either earlier in this thread of the original thread which I now cannot be bothered to find. But something along the lines of

An aircraft is never considered to be engaged and cannot be engaged with in hand to hand combat.

Something right around there. More dayquil awaits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Having read through the rules multiple times now, I'd honestly like the Flight special rule to somehow allow to engage Aircraft.
Specifically the scene in Macross Ai Oboete Imasu Ka where the three Nousjadeul Ger grapple and capture Hikaru and Minmay's VF-1D.
(although if we consider H2H's only requirement to be B2B and not require Engagement, this is possible)

You are really asking for the moon.

Aircraft would have to change dramatically. I wonder how that would effect game balance? As we kind of talked about earlier, Nousjadeul-Ger can out-H2H VF-1As. Switching to jet mode flips the script under RAW, allowing the Veritech to zoom away with no problems. So even assuming H2H attacks only require B2B contact (and not engagement) it would be difficult to simulate the capture scene from DYRL.

Wow, I cannot tell you how much this thread makes me wish I had a physical copy of the book ...

I'm not asking for the moon, I'm asking for Saturn's rings

On the Valkyrie's turn it could blast away, certainly, but one could activate three Nousjadeuls and move B2B and then have a scenario specific rule where a successful H2H Grapple allows the capture, haha.
Edit: by allowing mecha with Flight and Hands to be able to cancel an Aircraft's never-be-engaged ability, it could work using the Grab rules

Special Rule combos?

Flight + Hands beats Aircraft ...

How about an aircraft is never engaged in hand to hand combat and cannot be targetted with hand to hand attacks?

 Swabby wrote:
How about an aircraft is never engaged in hand to hand combat and cannot be targetted with hand to hand attacks?

Yeah, that pretty much solves the issue, eh?

So that goes into the other, separate issue of whether mecha can make H2H attacks on aircraft.

We're working out how to write that mecha B2B with enemy aircraft are not engaged in H2H combat.

As Doug pointed out, my first attempt went too far:

 Manchu wrote:
An aircraft and any mecha in base to base contact with it are never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat.

 judgedoug wrote:
Nononono, your errata would also cancel out every mecha's engagement.

My latest attempt is:

 Manchu wrote:
An aircraft is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat. A mecha in base to base contact with enemy aircraft and no other enemy mecha is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat.

 Manchu wrote:
Special Rule combos?

Flight + Hands beats Aircraft ...

Certainly for friendly games but would love to see that in an official expansion. Grabby Nousjadeul-Gers flinging Valkyries around!

Now I wanna bust out my massive collection of 7" Matchbox/Playmates Macross mecha and play at a much larger scale


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
An aircraft is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat. A mecha in base to base contact with enemy aircraft and no other enemy mecha is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat.

howsabout

An aircraft is never considered to be engaged, and cannot be engaged with, in hand to hand combat.


so a Gnerl and a Spartan touching, the Spartan cannot engage the Gnerl and the Gnerl isn't engaged either.

 judgedoug wrote:
Now I wanna bust out my massive collection of 7" Matchbox/Playmates Macross mecha and play at a much larger scale

Let's do this.

 judgedoug wrote:
howsabout

An aircraft is never considered to be engaged, and cannot be engaged with, in hand to hand combat.

Or

An aircraft is never considered to be enaged and cannot engage other mecha in hand to hand combat.

I am not sure I like either because I would prefer not to mix the passive language ("a mecha is engaged") already used by the rules with active language ("a mecha engages") but on the other hand passive language creates needless complication. For example, your "cannot be engaged with" phrasing doesn't quite do the job. The non-aircraft mecha is the one doing the engaging in that structure so you are effectively saying the aircraft cannot be engaged twice.

The "engaged with" bit would still need a FAQ declaring that you need to be engaged to make a HtH attack against mecha to begin with though.

I don't follow. Why are you saying being engaged needs to be a requirement for making a H2H attack?

Hey, thanks Manchu for the invite. I've read some of the posts. A lot of repeats from the other day.

Intention is to not allow any aircraft to be attacked or attack in Hand to Hand. So a Veritech in fighter mode, Gnerl, and whatever else cannot be punched, kicked, power punched, and all the other stupid thingys.

So if you want to come up, as you are, with a best way to write this, I have a conference call tomorrow and I will share this during the call just like the LOS correction and a few others that I'm making. Once you decide on HTH wording I'll throw another one at you that I think needs work. I have a few.

Thanks guys, this is all good work/discussion.

Manchu, I think I just misread this:

"An aircraft is never considered to be engaged, and cannot be engaged with, in hand to hand combat."

As intending to not allow HtH attacks against an aircraft.


Mike, who's intention is it to not allow any aircraft to be attacked in HtH?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, no offense mike, but you should ask for a better way for players to ask rules questions than to use you as a gobetween. Not everyone who plays the game and has questions is going to know that you have something of an inside line.

Mike1975 wrote:
Intention is to not allow any aircraft to be attacked or attack in Hand to Hand.

Honestly, that is what I prefer.

Maybe the FAQ should say:

A mecha must be engaged in hand to hand combat with an enemy mecha in order to make a hand to hand attack against that enemy mecha.

and/or

A mecha cannot make hand to hand attacks against enemy mecha that cannot be engaged in hand to hand combat.

I think the second sentence is probably the best one. The first sentence might be going too far.

Mike1975 wrote:
Once you decide on HTH wording I'll throw another one at you that I think needs work.

Please do! It can be pretty challenging and fun.

This one:

A mecha cannot make hand to hand attacks against enemy mecha that cannot be engaged in hand to hand combat.

IF that turns out to be their intent. But I think it is going to end up in some beardy interactions with mecha with the variable mode special ability if it is the intent.

Let me rephrase that sentence to work better with the existing rules language:

A mecha cannot make hand to hand attacks against an enemy mecha that cannot be considered engaged in hand to hand combat.

And to counter the beardy stuff (namely, aircraft forcing non-aircraft to suffer the penalties of being engaged in H2H), we go back to brainstorming a FAQ for the Aircraft Special Rule, such as:

A mecha is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat because of being in base to base contact with an aircraft.

The beardy stuff will be difficult to avoid though due to variable mode. If say an enemy mecha is midfield you could esentially have one guardian mode valk fly up, engage it then fly fighter mode valks into base to base using the engaged pair as cover, then just transform the guardian mode next turn and they all fly into the back ranks of the enemy at minimum risk with the midfield mecha only ever having the valk in guardian as a legal target and the rest of the enemy army having little to no chance to fire into the valks.

I could see hero tanking with a highly skilled character like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is an equally ridiculous situation where a convoy vehicle can engage enemy mecha in hth combat without actually being able to attack in hth combat. Not really related but still kind of dumb.

 Swabby wrote:
then fly fighter mode valks into base to base

Why would you do this? Even RAW, the figher VFs could be targeted by weapons systems even if B2B with an enemy mech. I mean, I get what you are saying about using an engaged pair of mecha as cover but you can't draw LOS through anything but mecha in the same squadron anyhow.

 Swabby wrote:
There is an equally ridiculous situation where a convoy vehicle can engage enemy mecha in hth combat without actually being able to attack in hth combat. Not really related but still kind of dumb.

It is also ridiculous that a convoy truck (or aircraft) would get to parry a H2H attack. I wouldn't mind convoy trucks being able to hold up mecha (by engaging them) if the mecha could just stomp them; i.e., using the same rules as inanimate objects (hit with H2H attack unless you roll a natural 1) or something similar .

I believe that the original intent was to no allow Aircraft to be attacked in Hand to Hand Combat, period. Now if you have a Veritech in Guardian Mode in Melee, he activates and transforms to Fighter mode, does he automatically leave melee OR does he need to pay a Command Point FIRST and then he can transform and move away or just move away?

Keep in mind that no previous game has transforming veritechs so this is something easily not taken into account.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Swabby, also keep in mind that at present there ARE NO vehicles, once they get added a Vehicle HTH rule will be needed where they cannot do anything except maybe body block/ram but can be attacked in HTH. So the concern of HTH vs vehicles is academic at this point until they are added to the game but it would be important to think of the rules for them now. Same thing with conventional infantry/cyclones.

Mike1975 wrote:
Now if you have a Veritech in Guardian Mode in Melee, he activates and transforms to Fighter mode, does he automatically leave melee OR does he need to pay a Command Point FIRST and then he can transform and move away or just move away?

IMO switching modes should never cost a Command Point. Moving from B2B with an enemy mecha while engaged is what triggers the Command Point spend requirement. Switching modes, which happens in the Activation Step, is not movement. Also, switching to Fighter mode may circumvent the Command Point toll but the ability to move away freely is not really 'free.' Switching to Fighter mode 'costs' the advantages of being in the other modes and commits the VF to moving per the Aircraft special rule. Plus the 'cost' of having the Variable Modes special rule should already be factored into the points value of a VF squadron. In view of that, imposing a Command Point toll seems like a double penalty.

Mike1975 wrote:
at present there ARE NO vehicles

What do you mean by "vehicle"? Even assuming you are not counting vehicles like Valkyries and Regults, what about aircraft? What about the convoy truck (p 80)?

So this line

A mecha cannot make hand to hand attacks against an enemy mecha that cannot be considered engaged in hand to hand combat.

should be added directly before the "When a mecha makes a hand to hand attack..." line on page 19.

And this line

A mecha is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat because of being in base to base contact with an aircraft.

should be added directly after the "An aircraft is never considered to be engaged in hand to hand combat." first sentence of paragraph two of the Aircraft special ability.

I think we all agree on that? If so, Mike can you pass that along?

-----

Mike, as for the Variable mode, I don't see anything in the description of the Variable Modes special rule that says the mecha changes mode as part of it's movement - if that was the case, I'd say that yes, it may require a CP to change to Fighter and zoom out of b2b contact. But as it stands, it seems like the Variable mecha may change modes during the activation; so yeah, an engaged Battloid begins it's turn and changes to Fighter (with Aircraft), and just flies away.
Honestly that makes a lot of sense to me, the pilot is like "aw hell" and just pulls that F lever and afterburns it the hell out of there.

And absolutely I would love to see other rules conundrums.

I'm just a little saddened by the fact that Palladium did not want to release these rules a long time ago so that the whole community could have picked over the wording to make it perfect before publication

 Manchu wrote:
Why would you do this? Even RAW, the figher VFs could be targeted by weapons systems even if B2B with an enemy mech. I mean, I get what you are saying about using an engaged pair of mecha as cover but you can't draw LOS through anything but mecha in the same squadron anyhow.

You would essentially be using you highly skilled variable fighter pilot as an evasion tank to use the enemy model as a makeshift body shield as you were moving up the board. The beardy part is that the engaged enemy cannot choose to target something it has a decent chance of damaging (like a normal valk) and the enemy can't shoot at the character in melee or the guys behind their own guy that is stuck in combat. Next turn they all just fly away with zero penalty.

Manchu wrote: It is also ridiculous that a convoy truck (or aircraft) would get to parry a H2H attack. I wouldn't mind convoy trucks being able to hold up mecha (by engaging them) if the mecha could just stomp them; i.e., using the same rules as inanimate objects (hit with H2H attack unless you roll a natural 1) or something similar .

I think a destroid should be able to kick a truck or step on a truck and that should be the extent of that interaction. This whole truck engagement thing comes about from the very odd choice to call vehicles mecha early on in the rulebook.

 Manchu wrote:

Mike1975 wrote:
Now if you have a Veritech in Guardian Mode in Melee, he activates and transforms to Fighter mode, does he automatically leave melee OR does he need to pay a Command Point FIRST and then he can transform and move away or just move away?

IMO switching modes should never cost a Command Point. Moving from B2B with an enemy mecha while engaged is what triggers the Command Point spend requirement. Switching modes, which happens in the Activation Step, is not movement. Also, switching to Fighter mode may circumvent the Command Point toll but the ability to move away freely is not really 'free.' Switching to Fighter mode 'costs' the advantages of being in the other modes and commits the VF to moving per the Aircraft special rule. Plus the 'cost' of having the Variable Modes special rule should already be factored into the points value of a VF squadron. In view of that, imposing a Command Point toll seems like a double penalty.

Mike1975 wrote:
at present there ARE NO vehicles

What do you mean by "vehicle"? Even assuming you are not counting vehicles like Valkyries and Regults, what about aircraft? What about the convoy truck (p 80)?

I agree transforming should not cost a command point, BUT since you pay a point to disengage from HTH, the question is can you transform to disengage without paying the command point? I agree with you that you should not need to but I wonder on if this needs to be clarified in the rules.

When I say vehicles I refer specifically to ground vehicles like trucks, tanks, troop transports. Those will not have the same limitations as Aircraft, but at present none of those exist in the game at all.

Mike1975 wrote:

I agree transforming should not cost a command point, BUT since you pay a point to disengage from HTH, the question is can you transform to disengage without paying the command point? I agree with you that you should not need to but I wonder on if this needs to be clarified in the rules.

I don't think it needs a clarification at all. Mecha pay a CP (or more if surrounded) to disengage from H2H during their Movement... Aircraft do not. Variable is a special skill that lets you change during your Activation, and change to a Fighter, which is not engaged, and can zoom away for free. It's a benefit of Variable/Fighter/Aircraft that's pretty apparent in the rules. Activation occurs before Movement.

Mike1975 wrote:

When I say vehicles I refer specifically to ground vehicles like trucks, tanks, troop transports. Those will not have the same limitations as Aircraft, but at present none of those exist in the game at all.

There are trucks, on page 80. But I see what you say, none are currently available that you can include in your army. However, they are classified as "mecha" explicitly on page 9.

 judgedoug wrote:

Mike1975 wrote:

I agree transforming should not cost a command point, BUT since you pay a point to disengage from HTH, the question is can you transform to disengage without paying the command point? I agree with you that you should not need to but I wonder on if this needs to be clarified in the rules.

I don't think it needs a clarification at all. Mecha pay a CP (or more if surrounded) to disengage from H2H during their Movement... Aircraft do not. Variable is a special skill that lets you change during your Activation, and change to a Fighter, which is not engaged, and can zoom away for free. It's a benefit of Variable/Fighter/Aircraft that's pretty apparent in the rules. Activation occurs before Movement.

Mike1975 wrote:

When I say vehicles I refer specifically to ground vehicles like trucks, tanks, troop transports. Those will not have the same limitations as Aircraft, but at present none of those exist in the game at all.

There are trucks, on page 80. But I see what you say, none are currently available that you can include in your army. However, they are classified as "mecha" explicitly on page 9.

I see your point of transforming, it just might need to be mentioned specifically since others may try to interpret things another way.

When Vehicles come into play they will need some specifics so you can ram a truck into an Invid.

 Swabby wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Why would you do this? Even RAW, the figher VFs could be targeted by weapons systems even if B2B with an enemy mech. I mean, I get what you are saying about using an engaged pair of mecha as cover but you can't draw LOS through anything but mecha in the same squadron anyhow.

You would essentially be using you highly skilled variable fighter pilot as an evasion tank to use the enemy model as a makeshift body shield as you were moving up the board. The beardy part is that the engaged enemy cannot choose to target something it has a decent chance of damaging (like a normal valk) and the enemy can't shoot at the character in melee or the guys behind their own guy that is stuck in combat. Next turn they all just fly away with zero penalty.

I'm not sure I understand your concerns. You can shoot at enemy models that are in base to base contact with friendly mecha. If a Valkyrie fighter zooms up into B2B with a Regult A, not only can Regult A shoot at the Valkyrie fighter (as they're not engaged, so can use weapon systems), but Regult B and C all the way through Regult 255 can shoot at the Valkyrie fighter (provided LOS exists)

 Swabby wrote:

Manchu wrote: It is also ridiculous that a convoy truck (or aircraft) would get to parry a H2H attack. I wouldn't mind convoy trucks being able to hold up mecha (by engaging them) if the mecha could just stomp them; i.e., using the same rules as inanimate objects (hit with H2H attack unless you roll a natural 1) or something similar .

I think a destroid should be able to kick a truck or step on a truck and that should be the extent of that interaction. This whole truck engagement thing comes about from the very odd choice to call vehicles mecha early on in the rulebook.

I think it's premature to worry about trucks/vehicles as they could easily have a "Vehicle" or "Ground Pounder" special rule that says they can't engage an enemy, etc. All we have is a scenario special Convoy truck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mike1975 wrote:

I see your point of transforming, it just might need to be mentioned specifically since others may try to interpret things another way.

They'd be interpreting it incorrectly I kinda see what you're saying, but I'm not sure a "rules clarification" is necessary - but it would make sense to make that into a "Robotech Tactica" appendix. One thing I like about the Warmachine/Hordes faction books is they give you little blurbs of tactical advice in the army list entries. Robotech could easily use that, so under the UEDF/RDF/UNSpacy section for Valkyries it would say something like "Veritech Valkyrie Tactics: The ability to change modes during Activation allows your Valkyrie pilots to jet out of a H2H engagement if things are looking grim or you need them to get to an objective fast! Since Activation occurs before Movement, switching from Battloid or Guardian into Fighter mode grants the mecha the Aircraft special rule - and as the Valkyrie is now not engaged, it doesn't pay CP to move away from B2B with enemies!"

 Swabby wrote:
The beardy part is that the engaged enemy cannot choose to target something it has a decent chance of damaging (like a normal valk)

I disagree. This is just a matter of tactics. Mecha with higher PS than GN want to get into H2H with models of lower PS especially when they have high GN. Is this kind of engagement beardy? Depending on the mecha at issue, the VF might be taking a risk by moving B2B with the enemy rather than using its weapon systems.

 Swabby wrote:
and the enemy can't shoot at the character in melee or the guys behind their own guy that is stuck in combat.

Let's work out a scenario:

A, B, and C = VF-1As in the same squadron
X, Y, and Z = Nousjadeul-Ger in the same squadron

The VF-1As (currently in Guardian mode) are all closer to the UEDF player's table edge. X is midfield but Y and Z are closer to the Zentraedi player's table edge. On the VF-1A's activation, B and C switch to Fighter mode while A moves B2B with X. A and X are now engaged in H2H combat. B and C then move so that X and A are between them and Y and Z. Do X and A (engaged mecha) grant B and C cover from Y and Z?

I think the answer is, maybe somewhat. An engaged mecha cannot be attacked by other models with weapon systems. Y and Z cannot attack A with their weapon systems but they should be able to attack B and C with their weapon systems as long as they can draw LOS on B and C. AFAIK it does not matter than X is engaged in H2H with A; X is still a friendly mecha in the same squadron as Y and Z -- therefore Y and Z can draw LOS to targets through X. So B and C only have cover to the extent that A blocks LOS to B and C, which would be the case regardless of the Aircraft special rule.

 Swabby wrote:
This whole truck engagement thing comes about from the very odd choice to call vehicles mecha early on in the rulebook.

Agreed but Mike1975 has told us the ship has sailed on that one.

 judgedoug wrote:

Mike1975 wrote:
I agree transforming should not cost a command point, BUT since you pay a point to disengage from HTH, the question is can you transform to disengage without paying the command point? I agree with you that you should not need to but I wonder on if this needs to be clarified in the rules.

I don't think it needs a clarification at all. Mecha pay a CP (or more if surrounded) to disengage from H2H during their Movement... Aircraft do not. Variable is a special skill that lets you change during your Activation, and change to a Fighter, which is not engaged, and can zoom away for free. It's a benefit of Variable/Fighter/Aircraft that's pretty apparent in the rules. Activation occurs before Movement.

Totally agree. The folks discussing the rules ITT and in the big thread never seemed to have any trouble understanding that Valkyries could switch mode to avoid the "disengage toll."

@Mike1975

Do you have any idea what the FAQ format will be. We keep talking ITT like it will be some kind of reprint of the core book but that seems extremely far-fetched. I am imagining a PDF document. Does that sound right?

 judgedoug wrote:
You can shoot at enemy models that are in base to base contact with friendly mecha.

Only if it is not engaged in hand to hand combat. The idea here is that you are essentially mitigating the firepower of whatever mecha is midfield and putting it into a situation where it really can't do anything while you use it for cover and a LOS blocker to the rest of the army. If someone pulled this off correctly it would be incredibly difficult for the opponent to counter, especially if the mecha that was tied up was something large like a Monster.

If a Valkyrie fighter zooms up into B2B with a Regult A, not only can Regult A shoot at the Valkyrie fighter (as they're not engaged, so can use weapon systems), but Regult B and C all the way through Regult 255 can shoot at the Valkyrie fighter (provided LOS exists)

The idea is that the first valkyrie that moves into btb does engage it because it is not in fighter mode. That same valkyrie will then go fighter on its next turn and proceed deep into the enemy ranks. The rest of the valks use the engaged models as cover and LOS blockage in what otherwise would have been open terrain.

I think it's premature to worry about trucks/vehicles as they could easily have a "Vehicle" or "Ground Pounder" special rule that says they can't engage an enemy, etc. All we have is a scenario special Convoy truck.

Yep the convoy vehicle is what I am worried about as it will come up very fast considering it is a standard scenario.