Can I mount an E-web team on the back of an Occupier tank and drive around with the E-web firing from the back of the Occupier? Would be kind of cool.
Imperial technical - E-Web team on back of Occupier tank
18 minutes ago, Stormtrooper721 said:Can I mount an E-web team on the back of an Occupier tank and drive around with the E-web firing from the back of the Occupier? Would be kind of cool.
That's an unauthorized modification to a piece of Imperial equipment. Report to the ISB at once for reconditioning.
46 minutes ago, Stormtrooper721 said:Can I mount an E-web team on the back of an Occupier tank and drive around with the E-web firing from the back of the Occupier? Would be kind of cool.
But can we deploy a f1.4d laser canon on the x-34 landspeeder and call it a day?
50 minutes ago, Stormtrooper721 said:Can I mount an E-web team on the back of an Occupier tank and drive around with the E-web firing from the back of the Occupier? Would be kind of cool.
I believe that would work as the keyword doesn't limit the trooper type.
4 minutes ago, Ravncat said:But can we deploy a f1.4d laser canon on the x-34 landspeeder and call it a day?
unfortunately the F1.4d laser canon isn't on a small base and the x-34 limits it t small based and single unit troopers.
Can a unit embarked in a vehicle still perform actions, etc. I guess if you draw their token...etc. What line of sight would be given?
15 minutes ago, buckero0 said:Can a unit embarked in a vehicle still perform actions, etc. I guess if you draw their token...etc. What line of sight would be given?
Unknown at this time. Presumably we'll get an update that outlines how things in transports work.
Somehow I feel the answer to this question lives in whether the EWeb can fit on the tank without overhanging
4 hours ago, Gengis Jon said:Somehow I feel the answer to this question lives in whether the EWeb can fit on the tank without overhanging
I think it could.
10 hours ago, Stormtrooper721 said:Can I mount an E-web team on the back of an Occupier tank and drive around with the E-web firing from the back of the Occupier? Would be kind of cool.
We really don't know at this point. And we don't know what a mini has to do to mount or dismount a vehicle. We even don't know what a unit is allowed to do (or not to do) while mounted.
But I would think that the same rule will apply for Transport and Light Transport: Small base minis only.
That would be fun. I think that I would accept it as a house rule anyway
I would postulate that it is likely a unit will have to perform a "move" action to board or dismount a Transport. Whether or not you can start the game loaded is unknown, I could see FFG going either way with that.
Other than that, we have no idea what a unit inside an Open Transport is capable of, as the rules dealing with Transportation will be added to the RRG at some point between now and the release of the new vehicles. Hopefully alongside some other new keywords to give us clues as to even more new units.
5 hours ago, Triangular said:We really don't know at this point. And we don't know what a mini has to do to mount or dismount a vehicle. We even don't know what a unit is allowed to do (or not to do) while mounted.
But I would think that the same rule will apply for Transport and Light Transport: Small base minis only.
It doesnt appear to be the case as the description for Light Transport states small base troopers only and the description for Transport leaves it out.
1 minute ago, jcmonson said:It doesnt appear to be the case as the description for Light Transport states small base troopers only and the description for Transport leaves it out.
Remember that the words on the card are just reminder text, not the actual rules text. While that is likely, it is not certain.
4 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:Remember that the words on the card are just reminder text, not the actual rules text. While that is likely, it is not certain.
True that's why I used the word appear. I would think that they would include it in both descriptions or neither if that was the case but as you said I could be wrong and it also wouldn't be the first time they messed up on a card(Han Promo card).
1 hour ago, Caimheul1313 said:Remember that the words on the card are just reminder text, not the actual rules text. While that is likely, it is not certain.
just to be clear (I keep saving these) are the actual rules the ones printed on the insert that comes with the pack, or I guess however they print it in the RRG?
right
That foldout they gave away when the core set was released was so awesome in idea, but it was missing so many of the rules, that I finally got rid of mine because it never had the rules reference I was looking for. I wish some condensed keyword handout existed to help instead of trying to load and read the 60page RRG you download.
I like having the living rulebook, but desperately want something more user-friendly.
Edited by buckero02 minutes ago, buckero0 said:just to be clear (I keep saving these) are the actual rules the ones printed on the insert that comes with the pack, or I guess however they print it in the RRG?
right
As far as I'm aware, the RRG is the actual rules. The inserts and cards are just reminders, especially since any changes will be made on the RRG, not necessarily on any of the other materials.
RRG updates also usually become available well before the unit does. We've known what Noncombatant, Treat and Repair do for like a month even though the units with those keywords aren't out yet.
Can you really call an armored, purpose-built vehicle a technical? The speeder definitely is but the Occupier? Hardly...
3 minutes ago, GreatMazinkaiser said:Can you really call an armored, purpose-built vehicle a technical? The speeder definitely is but the Occupier? Hardly...
Well, the E-WEB in the flatbed does appear to be "non-standard"... but the TX-225 is definitely not improvised it is an actual combat vehicle.
….dragoons!.....mounted infantry....nice....
16 hours ago, GreatMazinkaiser said:Can you really call an armored, purpose-built vehicle a technical? The speeder definitely is but the Occupier? Hardly...
I'd say no. Mounting an E-Web in the back of an already armored and armed vehicle is no more than adding an MG to a tank. Or, in this case, it reminds me of adding a pintle mounted MG to a WWII British universal/Bren gun carrier.