Easy there, arkangl. The rulebook does say at one point that if the artillery has LOS, it makes a Direct Shot instead of an Indirect one. However, that means that in this case you go by the Direct Shot rules, which at no point refer to Artillery Strike activating it.
Artillary unit actions when used by the Artillery Strike ability
arkangl said:
Gian - "Now as I earlier wrote the rules for the “Artillery Strike” calls upon an “Indirect Shot” from the unit carrying the artillery weapon (which I don’t argue). But when reading the rules for Artillery –“Indirect Fire” it is written that if the artillery does have line of sight, it makes a “Direct Shot” instead, which inevitably steers you to follow the rules for Artillery – “Direct Fire”."
You are twisting it a little on the rules. Direct and Indirect never mention if you have LOS you make a Direct Shot but if you do not have LOS you make a Indirect Shot.
On page 3 under "To Sum Up" it says
- An artillery weapon can fire in two different ways: a “direct shot” or an “indirect shot.”
- If the artillery unit has a clear line of sight to the target, it makes a direct shot. The shot
succeeds if a is rolled and the unit can choose to make a sustained attack (SHOOT +
SHOOT actions). The unit can also uses its other weapons if it chooses to do so.
- If an “observer” unit has a clear line of sight to the target, the artillery unit makes an
indirect shot. The shot succeeds if a is rolled. An indirect shot costs the artillery unit
both of its actions, so it cannot make a sustained attack. Again, the unit can uses its other
weapons.
This is the only time it is mentions in the rulebook, under a section, what is an indirect and a direct fire at the same time. The rules under Direct Fire only mention direct fire it never mentions indirect fire and viceversa for the indirect fire. Never under Direct Fire does it say if you do not have LOS use the Indirect Rules and never under the Indirect Fire does it say if you have LOS use Direct Fire rules. This means they rules never cross definition. It only says Direct Fire is only this.. and Indirect Fire is only this...
If you can find where it says what you are saying scan rulebook and show us because 4 of us are saying the opposite of what you are saying and we have sited specific rules that back us up.
arkangl said:
Gian - "Now as I earlier wrote the rules for the “Artillery Strike” calls upon an “Indirect Shot” from the unit carrying the artillery weapon (which I don’t argue). But when reading the rules for Artillery –“Indirect Fire” it is written that if the artillery does have line of sight, it makes a “Direct Shot” instead, which inevitably steers you to follow the rules for Artillery – “Direct Fire”."
You are twisting it a little on the rules. Direct and Indirect never mention if you have LOS you make a Direct Shot but if you do not have LOS you make a Indirect Shot.
On page 3 under "To Sum Up" it says
- An artillery weapon can fire in two different ways: a “direct shot” or an “indirect shot.”
- If the artillery unit has a clear line of sight to the target, it makes a direct shot. The shot
succeeds if a is rolled and the unit can choose to make a sustained attack (SHOOT +
SHOOT actions). The unit can also uses its other weapons if it chooses to do so.
- If an “observer” unit has a clear line of sight to the target, the artillery unit makes an
indirect shot. The shot succeeds if a is rolled. An indirect shot costs the artillery unit
both of its actions, so it cannot make a sustained attack. Again, the unit can uses its other
weapons.
This is the only time it is mentions in the rulebook, under a section, what is an indirect and a direct fire at the same time. The rules under Direct Fire only mention direct fire it never mentions indirect fire and viceversa for the indirect fire. Never under Direct Fire does it say if you do not have LOS use the Indirect Rules and never under the Indirect Fire does it say if you have LOS use Direct Fire rules. This means they rules never cross definition. It only says Direct Fire is only this.. and Indirect Fire is only this...
If you can find where it says what you are saying scan rulebook and show us because 4 of us are saying the opposite of what you are saying and we have sited specific rules that back us up.
Thx arkangl for actually reading through my last post and not just repeat what has earlier been said.
You wrote the following:
"" Direct and Indirect never mention if you have LOS you make a Direct Shot but if you do not have LOS you make a Indirect Shot. ""
Yes it does.
"" The rules under Direct Fire only mention direct fire it never mentions indirect fire and viceversa for the indirect fire. ""
I very much agree with the first half but not with the last half because the direct shot is mentioned under the indirect rules direct after explaining who triggers the shot.
"" Never under Direct Fire does it say if you do not have LOS use the Indirect Rules and never under the Indirect Fire does it say if you have LOS use Direct Fire rules. ""
again i agree with first half and not the last half.
"" This means they rules never cross definition. It only says Direct Fire is only this.. and Indirect Fire is only this... ""
I agree they never cross definition, only the indirect rule does. And it does this because of that when one is only using the artillery carrying unit then there is no other option than to preform a direct shot if it has LOS.
Ofcourse all of my references to the rules (these ones and me previous ones) are from the rulebook just as yours, kinda pointless for me to argue about homerules.
Loophole Master: Right after the text that says that the Artillery Strike ability make the artillery unit preform an indirect shot, it also say that "See Artillery rules".
Where do i backtrack? Where does it say that "Artillery Strike" ability isnt allowed to be used if the artillery carrying unit has LOS?
I never said that Artillery Strike calls upon a direct shot, what i am saying is that when the indirect shot is called upon by the Artillery Strike ability the rule for the indirect shot tells you to switch to the direct rule if the artillery carrying unit has LOS.
Dcal12: Did you even read what i wrote? does come across as you did.
sorry for dubbel quote not intentionally
Loophole Master said:
Easy there, arkangl. The rulebook does say at one point that if the artillery has LOS, it makes a Direct Shot instead of an Indirect one. However, that means that in this case you go by the Direct Shot rules, which at no point refer to Artillery Strike activating it.
Does it need to say anything about Artillery Strike under the direct fire rule to be eligable to be activated by the the artillery strike ability? If so why?
It is clear that the Artillery Strike triggers an indirect shot, but the rule for the indirect fire is the one that steers the action to follow the direct fire rule if the artillery carrying unit happens to also have LOS.
Dcal12: i meant to write that it didnt come across as you had read it.
Seems one of the pictures is to big but you get it where i get my info from.
Gian said:
Where do i backtrack? Where does it say that "Artillery Strike" ability isnt allowed to be used if the artillery carrying unit has LOS?
I never said that Artillery Strike calls upon a direct shot, what i am saying is that when the indirect shot is called upon by the Artillery Strike ability the rule for the indirect shot tells you to switch to the direct rule if the artillery carrying unit has LOS.
That's where I'm saying you're backtracking. You claim you're not saying Artillery Strike calls upon a Direct Shot, but that it calls upon an Indirect Shot, which then becomes a Direct Shot cause the artillery has LOS. Excuse me, but that's the same thing. I call myself Loophole Master, but even I would say that this is a very convoluted interpretation of the rules.
The rules for Indirect Fire tell you to switch to the Direct Fire rules if you have LOS. Ok, then switch to the Direct Fire rules, ALL of the Direct Fire rules, including the fact that it is employed in the artillery's own activation, not as a result of an Observer's Artillery Strike ability.
Sorry if I'm coming off as getting mad I'm not, I'm just being straight forward.
Yea I overlooked that its saying "So, the observer unit must have a clear line of sight to the target (if the artillery does have line of sight, it makes a direct shot instead)." but, what it's saying is that the observer must have LOS of the target, period. Then in ( ) it's saying if the Artillery has LOS then use direct fire instead of the triggering of the indirect fire. This is referring to the artillery not using artillery strike because the setup for the "Trigger of Fire" is the cercumstances for using direct fire. This also seems dumb to me that you would do this. I mean even if you could why would you unless you activated the Observers on accident. You get no benefit for using artillery strike to call a direct shot it's actually worse b/c atleast you could reload that turn and fire if need to or sustain fire if you didnt call an artillery strike, and if it's for the game night that says specifically using indirect fire.
Also on a side note you saying "I never said that Artillery Strike calls upon a direct shot, what i am saying is that when the indirect shot is called upon by the Artillery Strike ability the rule for the indirect shot tells you to switch to the direct rule if the artillery carrying unit has LOS." is contradicting itself. Your saying it says that it can't but the rules says it does.
What you mean is Under Artillery Strike it says ... , but if you refer to Indirect it says ... the way you are wording it makes it sound wierd.
You'd get the benefit of acting twice in a row, which in some circumstances can be VERY advantageous. That's why the indirect fire rules penalize the artillery by preventing it from making a normal 2-action turn. If you remove this limitation, you effectively break the game.
The benefit would be that if the observer unit is within range you could preform a "SHOOT+Artillery Strike" action and therefore being able to make a reguler attack with the observer unit and a sustained attack (important target) or attack+move (attack and avoid getting shot) with the artillery unit. And i know this would be an overpowered action if it wouldnt be for the fact that it will very rarly occur, because of the multiple factors that need to be in place not to mention that if both the units where to have LOS they would be quite vulnerable.
But I would also argue this under the whole part Gian is trying to argue it says "The indirect shot takes place when the observer is activated, not during the activation of the artillery unit itself!". This means if it's not a indirect shot then the shot would happen when the artillery is activated b/c it is a direct shot. So you can call an artillery strike all you want when walker has clear LOS but the shot wouldnt happen until the walker was activated.