(loofnick @ Apr. 30 2007,02:39)

QUOTE

My teacups are perfectly calm. Can't we just leave the poor cups out of this? ? ? ? ?

Just seems to me that the vehicle having HQ makes it more consistant, and follows what many people would expect.

The rule also says ?"An HQ unit may not be fired at unless ?... or is more than 10 cm from things in their pinning class". ?So your infantry screen must be within 10cm as well to provide cover. ?That makes perfect sense of course. ?But the real danger is for foot troops, with the IG HQ targetable from anywhere unless you leave a 100+ point unit of bodyguards very close-by (might as well have them as standard, as they would always be needed). ?At least if vehicles are HQ, they can hide in them, put their feet-up and make a cup of tea like proper officers.

Of course the tech-marines standing next to tanks, makes him a bit pointless in most tank situations, and I wouldn't waste a tactical detachment to look after him. ?But you'd really have to do something more drastic to change that (might have something to do with teacups as well).

(primarch @ Apr. 29 2007,22:14)

QUOTE

Hi!

My understanding is that the vehicle that carries the HQ unit is also and HQ unit for the purposes of movement/orders and firing.

Primarch

(loofnick @ Apr. 30 2007,07:39)

QUOTE

It does seem to be new to v5, and I do like the 10cm rule..  Arty companys do usually get a bodyguard, and that's good as well.  Really, HQ's were too well protected before.  But I don't see why a Leman Russ HQ should get protection and not a infantry HQ in it's own vehicle.

The transport issue goes beyond IG CHQ's.  As it stands an IG CHQ or SHQ (or any HQ characters for that matter) is targetable from anywhere, if it gets in any transport what-so-ever (including it's own), under any circumstances.  Rendering the transports as almost useless.

This is probably a rule too far, but it might even be a solution to give the HQ ability to anything which transports a HQ unit, but only while it's transporting it.  Essentially it's a reversal of the Core rule about transports.  I think the 10cm rule makes this far more reasonable then the old rule would have, and not too annoying.  Just another possiblilty to annoy everyone with,    as my previous suggestion wouldn't be clear about which transport in a mechanised infantry unit would be HQ (for the section HQ to use).  Why shouldn't he get in any vehicle he wants?

(zap123 @ Apr. 30 2007,11:04)

QUOTE

I think it'd be easier just to drop the 10cm rule....we certainly never noticed it.

The transport for most IG companies' CHQ is redundant as they can keep up with the rest of the troops fine without it  I never load my guys up anymore....used to have to load up your Commissar to keep up with the Rough Riders, but he's on a horse too nowadays so the problem is solved.  As I said, the exception would be the Mechanised Companies.  For the Mechanised Section HQ...just make it the last one left alive in the detachment is always the SHQ.

(zap123 @ Apr. 30 2007,22:06)

QUOTE

Well, the 10cm thing is a biggish deal for Guard and PDF armies, particularly with things like Arty CHQs, and possibly the odd unit like Techmarines. ?In these sort of cases I think it could just be something the player has to deal with and counter with deployment.

The "are transports of HQs HQ too?" thing is a seperate issue that can be avoided, where necessary, by changing the description in the Army Card. ?So far I only see it as being significant for IG Mechanised companies. ?Personally, I dont think IG should have Mechanised Companies anyway, so I suggest leave it as is

(primarch @ May 01 2007,21:28)

QUOTE

Hi!

Agreed.

Primarch

(darkangel @ May 02 2007,05:53)

QUOTE

hi i have another qeastion:

do the damage table for super heavies also apply to knights? and what about creating a damage table for knights like titans or preatorians have? and by the way can a techmarine repair knights?