They're here ! In this handy one-page PDF .

Some issues:

- They say that aircraft can only target units inside a structure in a space that shows an exit. But I'd think it must also be an exit in the direction of the aircraft, as per the normal structure rules.

- It's a bit weird that aircraft can't stop at a space occupied by another unit, not even a hero. I guess this is just a matter of practicality, because you can't fit both the aircraft base and a walker or squad on the same square. Still, kinda problematic that you can position your troops in order to block an aircraft's movement.

- I like this constant movement rule, but I think it's meant for future planes and stuff. I'm betting the choppers will have this "Hover" skill that allows them to circumvent this rule.

- I wonder if in this mandatory Move you can just oscillate between two squares and end up where you were.

- They say that troops benefit from cover normally against an aircraft, but does corner cover still exist, if nothing blocks LOS for an aircraft?

Can't wait to see an aircraft stat card.

Loophole Master said:

A Thought that's what the rules say anyway.

B They could have used a tripod base to get over this.

CD I expect Hover will allow to stay in place but still uses a Move action to do so

E I would have thought that a unit adjacent to a building between them and a flyer would not have LOS

The point of oscillating your movement would be irrelevant, still a move and still can't sustain fire which is the point of the rule.

Major Mishap said:

A - Yes, the general rules, but not these aircraft rules.

CD - That wouldn't change anything. Moving back and forth, or staying in place but spending an action to do so is the same thing. That is why the issue is whether aircraft MUST move away from their initial square every turn.

E - Not according to the aircraft rules. The ONLY thing that block LOS to an aircraft is being inside a building and not at an entrance. For simplicity's sake, the aircraft seem to be considered to be as high as necessary to gain LOS (which makes it kinda funny that being on the second floor adds 1 to the range, but flying high up in the sky has the same range as being on the ground).

Diagram in these rules shows that SSU models will be primed khaki, as expected.

Loophole Master said:

We had a go with the aircraft rules last night (simply gave a Blackhawk the aircraft rules and kept replacing units to create situations and see how they play out. In no way a balanced situation but gave us an idea of how the rane limit and line of sight work.

When infantry were in a building we only targeted them with the aircraft if the exit was in the direction of the aircraft. Not because the rules said so but because that is how it normally works. Looking at the rules again, only now do I realise that it isn't clarified if that needs to be the case.
The wording implies that the exit can be on any side.

Oscillating moves (acceptable for copters and hovering vehicles, less so for aircrafts) and cover rules need to be clarified.

For some reason I can't wrap my head around the "range U weapons work as range 6 against aircrafts". It may be needed for balance purposes, but somehow it's too disconnected to make sense to me; it may be more reasonable the other way round, as being too close doesn't allow for aiming adjustements. Oh well.

FlorisH said:

The rules for shooting into/out of buildings ends with (as per usual rules), usual rules being the exit must be facing in the direction of the enemy. Do members really think that others would be pedantic enough to play otherwise?

golem101 said:

It's probably for play balance as all Axis AA have unlimited range and Allies limited to 6.

Major Mishap said:

I've seen too many examples of rules-bending not to ask for a clarification.

Major Mishap said:

Yes, and that's pretty much the only explanation that I came up with. Nonetheless, it keeps bugging me as "too much unrealistic" (in a game with walking tanks!) and it grates against common sense.

Good thing with that range limited to 6, otherwise allied air units wouldn't stand long:p

I hope they are doing this "preview" of the rules so that they read the forums and clean up the ambiguities before they actually print them.

Gothik said:

Very well spotted sir. I didn't make the connection that the primer colour had just been revealed.

I like the maximum range of 6 (the aircraft certainly won't have weapons with longer ranges than that, as that would be very unfair), it is a way to allow aircraft to stay out of harm's way if they want to, since they can't hide behind anything. They'll only be endangered if flying into the midst of the battle.

Am I the only one who is hoping that some of the weapons on aircraft will be able to target other aircraft. The game situation image that comes to mind is just awesome.

Oh, I'm sure one of the attack copter variations will excel at aircraft hunting.

FlorisH said:

They do imply that in the news article: " The Striker uses a mix of machine guns and cannons to halt the approach of enemy infantry, and it is quite capable of providing air superiority as well"

WOW. How good are the Grim Reapers, Wildfire, Lara and Luther looking right about now, anti-aircraft wise? The new aircraft rules teaser intimates that these SSU choppers are Level 2 aircraft, not the Level 1 many had assumed they would be from the Revised rules Vehicle levels explanation.

Ergo, (according to my math) a fresh Grim Reapers has TRIPLE the AA firepower of a Luther against SSU choppers, at the loss of only two spaces of range.

I'm taking a guess that the dedicated attack choppers would have higher hit points than either the walker or infantry carrier, though...

Not to mention the Heavy Flak Grenadiers! 18/1 against a chopper that hasn't moved yet. Bye-bye.

And the Wildfire has essentially lost nothing, but because of Superior Reactive Fire when a chopper zips by, has probably gained the "Absolute Beast to be Feared" rep amongst SSU chopper pilots!

I don't get why firing at a unit a level above you incures a -1 range penalty but firing at a helicopter flying waaaay above that doesn't.

I can see the range limit for some AA weapons to a degree, but when big AA guns were designed to attack aircraft tens of thousands of feet in the air, saying the Sturmkonig's 128mm's can only fire AA to range 6 is rather odd. Considering the flying elevations for use on the ground, however, even limiting the Heinrich's 20mm guns makes no sense. It certainly had better AA range than a .50 cal.

While close range AA fire is harder, that would apply to tracking a turret at range one far more than tracking at range six. I understand they want aircraft to have survivability, but aircraft in an area with active AA defenses should be worrying, because they always have had to in real world battles. As noted, it's also odd that elevations give a range modifier for tiring at a higher unit, but flying models don't. There should be consistency.

I also don't like the lack of dead zones for aircraft and buildings. Basic trig shows LOS would always be blocked to some degree, but the rules allow a chopper dropping troops at ground level can somehow see over a six story building with no problems. The dead zone rules for firing from elevated buildings make far more sense.

I'd rather see flying with elevation levels like the floors of buildings. It would allow choppers to hide behind buildings, give gorund troops the dead zones buildings create, make firing at elevated targets use the same rules, and keep things making better consistent sense.

Right now, the Heirich and Sturmkonig get shafted with a range limit against flying targets, while the Allies don't because it matches their current maximum AA range, yet there is nothing to adjust the costs of units when some now have been limited, but not all.

I expect Hover will eliminate the required movement for helecopters, but we'll have to see.

The limitation on flying transports using Advanced Deployment not allowing troops to disembark is rather odd when parachute scenarios let troops go from the air to full functionality on their first turn, so I don't see much reason for it. Chopper deplyment is easier than parachute deplyment.

If it is an attempt to keep some of the objective scenarios functional, it fails, because a flying unit would give an automatic turn one win simply with Avanced Deployment for those scenarios where a unit simply has to reach a point.

Unless they add additional rules for units in a destroyed flying unit, the destruction of the flying transport would still leave the flying transported unit with a first turn win for several scenarios. The six space range limit adds to that problem.

I'm with Gimp on the AA range issue.