Hi All

There was a dissagreement last night. One of our gaming group maintains you get a blast marker for coming under assault in the same way you get a blast marker for being shot at.

Further, this blast marker for coming under assault would be applied to both sides... with the end result in the winner gets the number of blast markers for units killed + 1 for being in an assault. (This could go further and state that the looser breaks, and then takes a hit (no save) for their 'assault BM'.

I strongly disagree but could not argue my side stronly enough ( mule-headdedness :p ) lol.

So we agreed that we would put it to the forum. Could we please get some input from those in the know?

Cheers

No blast markers are placed for coming under assault.

Blast markers are only placed on the winning formation for losses they suffered, and any formations that were in a position to support the assault from the losing side.

Neither of the above are placed until the assault is fully resolved.

Cheers Mephiston. That was pretty much my understanding.

You don't get a blast marker for either assaulting or being assaulted; you only receive blast markers for units killed in the assault, and only after the assault is resolved. Obviously, the losing formation, being broken, doesn't receive blast markers for killed units.

If your group is so insistent about this, ask them to point you to where it says so in the rulebook.


Edit: if you want a bit more proof, then one of the assault modifiers (that's applied at the end of an assault) is for having no blast markers. I don't see how that would ever come up if all formations automatically got a blast marker at the start of each assault.

This is the section they were arguing...



I argued that yes - when they fight in assaults but the BMs are placed as described in assault resolution.

I do think opinion on this is conclusive. We did agree to have the forum resolve the disagreement.