Actually, this is incorrect - there is *always* a "back" relative to the formation. The bit that people get confused over is just when this is determined.

For normal firing, the process is

1. declare activation
2. move (if appropriate)
3. determine suppression relative to the current position of both firer and target
4. resolve firing of unsuppressed units

RAW for AA firing, the process is very similar

1. A/c declares activation (or disengages)
2. A/c traces the aircraft movement, during which opponent determines which AA units and other units are in range (so eligible for Flak attacks and suppression)
3. After A/c movement, determine suppression relative to the current position of both firer and target
4. Declare and resolve firing of unsuppressed (AA) units

However, some people evidently resolve suppression and AA firing during the A/c movement, which produces very different results - effectively reducing or removing suppression altogether because the defender is choosing the optimal point.

Probably because 2 & 3 make no bleeping sense at all when combined.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

No, there is not always a "back" of a formation. There is only a "front" and "back" when the formation fires and checks suppression. Berkut asked if we couldn't just check suppression before the aircraft entered the board, which doesn't work.

Again, if we were playing Warmachine your interpretation would be the correct one. But we're not. Checking suppression at the same time as you're checking range (during the approach move) is a perfectly legitimate way to do it.

However, I do agree that the obvious and sensible way leads to suppression of flak being almost nonexistent.

+1

Sorry to say, but the idea of determining who is suppressed by measuring ranges and proximity at two different points makes zero sense to me. It sounds... bizarre, clunky, and pointless. I also don't see how the rules support it any more than the alternative (i.e. determining suppression direction at the same time as suppression range). You have to continuously monitor for "passed within range" anyway. Plus it creates weird results, like flying directly towards a formation and being immune to its flak by stopping just after it. Or flying past one flank of a formation, but calculating suppression based on the position of the aircraft at the end of the move when it is on the opposite flank and on the other side of the board.

Yes it's harder to suppress flak if you measure angles continuously, but I'm not sure why you would assume that making it easier to suppress flak is "better".

I suspect the wording as-is was a misguided attempt to simply make all the rolls at the same time, to avoid slowing down the game by stopping the AC's movement for each AA attack. In reality, it's usually pretty straightforward to judge whether it's possible to avoid the flak as you move past it. The units will have a "threat angle" that sounds complicated to describe but in practice is obvious to see. Certainly no slower than doing two separate checks.

I agree it would have been better to have unlimited 30cm moves and flak=overwatch, but oh well.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Kurt, it sounds like you Ben and I have long ago house ruled.the same thing

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Is the suggestion here that suppression is only measured at the end of the approach move and the disengagement move? whilst range is measured all through the movements.

Never seen it played like that

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I've never seen it played that way either...

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Me neither.

Really? Am slightly surprised.

Guys, most of the time A/c either avoid Flak umbrellas completely or the A/c ends up inside the Flak umbrella, both of which remove the confusion entirely - you simply measure suppression at the end of the move to the a/c as it is now positioned.

However, the question related to a/c that had moved through the AA arc of fire but were no longer in range of either the AA or other suppressible units. This is a much rarer case - I cannot remember seeing it played either Steve, Onyx, Glyn - but for completeness I have presented the "clunky" RAW that covers this particular case.

I find it a bit funny that the first rules comment that hte newly appointed rules guy (congrats btw) makes, is "i've never seen anyone actually play by the rules"

checking Suppression at the end of the movement is bizarre, but checking it "any other time" is clunky and overpowered.
the only other "fair" alternative would be to check it based on approach direction, like we do the aircraft shots themselves (but not, as it were, barging assault aircraft, who are quite capable of sniping supcoms and the like at will) but that still raises the question of formations includin units with less range than the AA unit itself

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

If you read it like that
So what you're saying is if I have a russ co with 1 hydra and 1 BM with the hydra in front an AC can fly directly over the formation and come to the end of its move out of range behind the tanks and then not be shot as the BM now suppresses that hydra.

In 7 years of playing every week and going to tournaments I've never seen that ruled, seems to lack common sense and be very gamey to me

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

If that's the way the rules are supposed to be played, I vote we change the rules.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I'd say the rules are unclear. Suppression isn't mentioned for flak attacks, we're extrapolating from other rules (never a safe thing with GW rules).