Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

The never-dying Razorback Question
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=12554		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed May 07, 2008 10:47 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
So, I rewrote the Razorback entry to remove the "swap" language and tweaked the SM Transport rule to try to gain clarity.  Apparently, that has had limited success, as indicated by this thread on the SG boards.

To sum up...

My intent was to take everything except Rhinos to a la carte purchasing, just like normal upgrades.  Rhinos would only be added at the very end if needed.  There is a drawback to this approach in that it allows all the armor upgrades to be purchased freely, which can result in considerable excess transport capacity.  For example, if you buy 4 Land Raiders (1-4 are allowed) and 4 Razorbacks (because there are 4 Devastators in a formation) for a Dev formation, that's 12 total transport capacity.

That's the most extreme example I could think of, but you get the picture.

I pointed this out when I floated the language and got little comment.  No one said they thought there was any sort of balance issue and I couldn't think of any way to abuse this.  Simplify the rule and add a bit of flexibility at the same time - what could be wrong with that?

However, it seems that people had interpreted this as simply a restatement of the old system with less-confusing language.  In other words, it was still a multi-tier, ordered system - Choose LRs first, then Razorbacks only for needed capacity, then Rhinos for needed capacity.

I'm soliciting opinions.

1)  Which interpretation of the revised language do you think is most accurate based on the strict text?

2)  Which interpretation do you think works best?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed May 07, 2008 11:04 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
What if Rhinos were moved to the army list Upgrades section, something like:


Upgrade: Rhino APC's

Cost : Free

Details : Take as many Rhinos as are needed to transport the infantry in the formation. yada yada.




Could the language be simplified enough to fit within the structure of the army list like that?
Author:  BlackLegion [ Wed May 07, 2008 11:25 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
Yep.
Rhinos as Upgrade, Cost: Free

Transport rule could be changed to:
"If purchasing any vehicles with a transport capacity as upgrade to a formation then you can purchase only the minimum needed to transport all transportable units in the formation. The type of vehicles with transport capacity can be mixed as long as you don't exeed the minimum number of transport spaces."

Because this rule only talks about transport vehicles as upgrade to a formation Thunderhawks, Landing Crafts etc are exempt of this rule.
Author:  CAL001 [ Thu May 08, 2008 12:40 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
I have never had any problem with the language, it is quite simple you can take enough vehicles to transport your troops, no spares allowed.

Ok, the Rhino is free to add as an upgrade, however I have paid for them anyway in the cost of my Infantry formation anyway. But what if I dont want any vehicles, I am paying for something I dont intend to use. Or why should I pay for the Rhino, if I intend to take Razorbacks or Land Raiders for the whole formation.

I think if you are going to change things, give the Rhino a costing, and reduce the cost of the Infantry formations to represent the change. It seems to work for Black Legion, Eldar and other aarmies where the transport is an upgrade choice.

Cheers
Aaron
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Thu May 08, 2008 12:41 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
Yes, should be a free upgrade. Hell Drop pods should be a free upgrade as well!

Plus then no special army list rule needed.

Shouldn't charge for it and make infantry cheaper as it affects the air assault overall cost.
Author:  CAL001 [ Thu May 08, 2008 12:44 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
Here here

Aaron
Author:  Ginger [ Thu May 08, 2008 1:54 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
To play "Devil's advocate" a second, perhaps we ought to rephrase the question :-

? ? ? ? ? ? ? Should the LandRaider be considered a pure upgrade or a "transport" upgrade?

Everyone's replies to date are centred upon the Razorback / Rhino issue and how to add them appropriately. I agree with the others that it makes a lot of sense to consider the Rhino as a "free" upgrade, and to change the upgrade notes accordingly on the relevant formations.

If we consider the LR a "Transport" upgrade, then the transport notes will say "If any transport is taken, there must be the minimum . . . yada yada"

However, if the LR is not considered to be Transport (eg buying 2x LR for your Terminators - not that anyone necessarily would :p ), the Rhino is still a "free" upgrade, but the transport rule specifies ?"If any Rhinos or Razorbacks are taken . . . . . Yada yada"
Author:  Soren [ Thu May 08, 2008 7:30 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
LR is NO Transport upgrade, else it would be included to the Transport Rule. Keep the rule as it is. Iz?s simple and if anybody wants to add 4 LR for 400 pts and you think it?s abuse.....think again. :;):

Note: Please don?t touch functionable rulse...PLEASE.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu May 08, 2008 11:15 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
The other option is to say:

"Two Razorbacks for 50 points, replaces one Rhino"

And forget the whole damn thing. :D
Author:  BlackLegion [ Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 am ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
Yes. E&C this was the first way i read the rules...then i read the faq in the ruelbook and thought WTF??? O.o :D
Author:  Ginger [ Thu May 08, 2008 1:48 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question

(Soren @ May 08 2008,07:30)
QUOTE
LR is NO Transport upgrade, else it would be included to the Transport Rule. Keep the rule as it is. Iz?s simple and if anybody wants to add 4 LR for 400 pts and you think it?s abuse.....think again. :;):

Note: Please don?t touch functionable rulse...PLEASE.

Umm, while we all have a "clear understanding" of the way the original rule was intended to function, it seems that there are still differences in people's "clear understandings" - which is why Neal tried to tidy up the wording etc. (See BL's note above for example)

It seems you (and the Devil's Advocate in me :p ) take a slightly different view to many; that the Landraider is not a transport upgrade. In this case, we just need to make that clear in the transport rule. For example:-

SPECIAL RULE
6.3.1 Space Marine Transports
The Space Marines are a highly mobile army. Because of this, the points cost of a detachment usually includes enough Rhino transport vehicles to transport it and any upgrades that have been taken. The number of Rhinos will always be the minimum needed to carry the formation after any Razorback upgrades have been considered, you can?t take extras along to cover any losses! (Landraiders are not considered transport for these calculations)
Author:  Soren [ Thu May 08, 2008 2:01 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
The differences come from situations where you WANT to misunderstand the rule
Author:  nealhunt [ Thu May 08, 2008 2:12 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
Okay, guys, I was apparently unclear.  I'm not asking about opinions about how to fix something.

We have an official revised text.  I need to generate an FAQ answer.  For that I need an interpretation of the text as it is.  I'm asking for opinions on the official mods.

No changes!

Razorbacks - ?Add any number of Razorbacks, up to the number required to transport the formation.?
SPECIAL RULE
6.3.1 Space Marine Transports
The Space Marines are a highly mobile army.
Because of this, the points cost of a detachment
usually includes enough Rhino transport
vehicles to transport it and any upgrades that
have been taken. The number of Rhinos will
always be the minimum needed to carry the
formation, you can?t take extras along to cover
any losses!
Note that many formations don?t receive
Rhinos, usually because they can?t fit into
them. Detachments that come with Rhinos will
be noted as having ?plus transport? in the units
section of the army list opposite.
Also note that you don?t have to take Rhinos if
you don?t want to. If you?d rather field the
formation on foot instead, so it can act as a
garrison for example, or be transported in a
Thunderhawk Gunship, then you may do so.
In addition, you may choose to replace a
detachment?s Rhinos with Drop Pods. If you do
this then the detachment will enter play in a
Drop Pod using the rules for planetfall (see
section 4.4). Note that if you choose to do this
you will also require at least one Space Marine
Strike Cruiser or Battle Barge to deploy the
drop pods from.
Land Raiders - "Add up to four Land Raiders"

How do you read these three items as interacting?
Author:  CAL001 [ Thu May 08, 2008 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
That all seems fine to me Neal. It is quite clear in the special rule on what you can and cannot do. You answer is fine as far as I am concerned.

Cheers
Aaron
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu May 08, 2008 11:51 pm ]
Post subject:  The never-dying Razorback Question
Wait, you've asked a question on this forum and not asked for a thousand methods in which we could change the rules? :D
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/