Focus

Rules discussions and clarifications.
kimek
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Focus

Post by kimek » Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:12 am

Councillor wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:44 pm
Rocket Technicals now have a special rule allowing them to Focus their shots as a squad.

After allowing my Scourge opponent to Focus as a squad (ha ha, that was a Gharial within 12" of the middle of the table, so much fun we're having!), Focus should never work at the squad level. Takes the shine off Hazard Suits, though.
Ocelot also have a special rule on his main cannon that allow it to ignore passive countermeasures... which it already do, as it have E = 13.

I doubt we can use Army builder for Rule Clarification, especially when Rulebook already have a clear example when it defibetly states squad.

No one argue that Scoure infantry are fearsome, and this is one of reasons I feel that UCM need a buff. At least Resistance have Mehmeds/Thuderstorm that can bring down entire building on their heads.

User avatar
Lord Sick
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:07 am

Re: Focus

Post by Lord Sick » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:05 pm

if you think scourge infantry is fearsome look up a squadron of 4 scourge reavers with plasma hoses. and don't forget you can double it all with the overseer.

Councillor
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2019 9:53 pm

Re: Focus

Post by Councillor » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:49 pm

kimek wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:12 am
Ocelot also have a special rule on his main cannon that allow it to ignore passive countermeasures... which it already do, as it have E = 13.

I doubt we can use Army builder for Rule Clarification, especially when Rulebook already have a clear example when it defibetly states squad.

No one argue that Scoure infantry are fearsome, and this is one of reasons I feel that UCM need a buff. At least Resistance have Mehmeds/Thuderstorm that can bring down entire building on their heads.
The Ocelot rule is more than a redundancy, though. It ignores all countermeasures including Evasion and probably neutralizes Behemoth Passives, according to the wording. EDIT: No, Behemoths ignore special rules, so ignore that part about bypassing Behemoth Passives

Of course we can use the Army Builder. It is a TT production and changes to unit rules have in-game effects. The Hovercraft rule in the builder was changed to allow them to disembark units, which they cannot do by the rulebook. As for the rulebook, the rule for Focus and the example beneath it are in contradiction. It is my belief that in the attempt to streamline a system, they pruned and condensed rules down and created unforeseen interactions. Valkyries getting E13 reduced attacks, Warriors and OccVets and Reavers getting Ocelot-quality attacks, Praetorians using reduced on the CQ attack against Destroyers is more effective than their grenades, etc. Just, weird stuff that needs to be ironed out.

Why add a rule that specifically allows rocket technicals to Focus at the squad level if that's the intent?

kimek
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Focus

Post by kimek » Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:07 pm

Maybe they just forget to remove it? Just like they they do with "Escort" special rule from Dropfleet section...

And reducing Focus rule to base would just make it worse for poor Hazards. Overseer quickly would buff Scourge Warriors to have 10 shots per base anyway

Councillor
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2019 9:53 pm

Re: Focus

Post by Councillor » Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:35 pm

Forgetting to remove it... seems pretty thin. I can't say for certain you are wrong, but an error in printed material (does the editor not play the game?) sent to the printer months in advance is not the same caliber of error as a special rule in the army builder. If they wanted, they could remove it at any time. It's also a complete and clear rule on its own.

The Overseer is a different hill for a different battle.

Wep'tak
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:23 pm

Re: Focus

Post by Wep'tak » Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:01 pm

I play it by target. Regroup the hits against each target separately. It is my understanding of the rule, and the most logical I think.

Post Reply