Air Defense on VTOLs

[DarkJaguar]

"An airborne unit can only make indirect artillery attacks and only ground targets (units or Points of Interest) may be targeted."
A VTOL with any elevation above the ground is airborne.  It cannot target another airborne unit with artillery, including aerospace fighters, even with air-defense missiles.

Perfect, that's what I needed to know.  Thanks Nickels.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

It sounds like a great reason to not sit down for a game, if I'm going to be entirely honest.

Well... my thinking is this:

AS doesn't say how to modify range based on elevation, does it? IIRC it doesn't say to add distance + elevation for final range and doesn't say find the hypotenuse either..  in absence of this being addressed wouldn't you just ignore the elevation when it comes to measuring range?

The only time I remember elevation being addressed at all was the clarification for circular aoes is that in 3-D they're cylindrical rather than spherical (e.g. a VTOL just on the edge of the aoe and 2" up is still hit)

[Scotty]

Well... my thinking is this:

And my thinking is: if you're trying to devise a situation in which you get to play the game and I do not, I have no interest in taking the time to set up in the first place.

Wheaton's Law, and all tht.

[nckestrel]

Perfect, that's what I needed to know.  Thanks Nickels.

You're welcome.  I was getting worried there for a bit (that errata was needed). We still might need to put an elevation cap.

[DarkJaguar]

And my thinking is: if you're trying to devise a situation in which you get to play the game and I do not, I have no interest in taking the time to set up in the first place.

Wheaton's Law, and all tht.

I have a theory that games should be designed with an intent and tested/balanced at the extremes.  If something is possible and total BS/unfair it should be addressed and fixed.

[Xochi]

You're welcome.  I was getting worried there for a bit (that errata was needed). We still might need to put an elevation cap.

Thanks for your guidance with all our questions we come up with while looking at force building and counters. Its always nice to see contributing and valid conversations when tough edge rule interpretation is involved.

[DarkJaguar]

You're welcome.  I was getting worried there for a bit (that errata was needed). We still might need to put an elevation cap.

Elevation cap might not be a bad idea anyway.  A VTOL could hover 80" up drop arrow IV's down on the ground map and only be targetable by other VTOLs or aerospace conducting strike/strafe attacks.

[Weirdo]

Sez who? As I understand, elevation does not add to range(unless I'm getting AS and TW mixed up), so that 80" of elevation doesn't protect you one bit.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Sez who? As I understand, elevation does not add to range(unless I'm getting AS and TW mixed up), so that 80" of elevation doesn't protect you one bit.

For added hilarity: perform a physical attack on the VTOL trying to hide at 80" elevation.

[Xochi]

On Page 23 of Alpha Strike Companion it states in the strafing section:

Units returning fire on a strafing
or bombing VTOL from outside of the VTOL’s designated attack
area use the normal rules for attacking an airborne vehicle.
This includes targeting the unit at its final position and height
over the map at the end of the VTOL’s Movement Phase, and
applying the VTOL’s target movement modifier.

So this is referencing normal rules which means that there is a set of rules governing this. I am having trouble finding the exact location but there are multiple places it states this. It also is in the transporting units section that if you are in the central zone or ground map transporting units, you add the height with the attack.

[DarkJaguar]

Yeah, there's  ton of mentions of height being used for range in both directions on that page, but I'll be buggered if I can find anywhere else that it talks about it.  Ctrl+f has not been friendly.

[nckestrel]

The VTOL should be treated as it’s base being at its elevation, as with LoS, and the range is from edge of base to edge of base. Normally that’s not much of a difference, but at 80” elevation that’s obviously huge.

[Weirdo]

I'm with Scotty. The solution is to identify players willing to pull jerk tricks like that, and walk away from games with them. Gaming time is precious, it should never be wasted on people willing to suck the fun out of a game just for a cheap win. No game system is perfect, never will be, that shouldn't stop people from having fun.

[nckestrel]

He posted it here where everybody could comment (and fix it).  That’s helpful.

[Xochi]

He posted it here where everybody could comment (and fix it).  That’s helpful.

This is why I like you.


There are many sections including Anti-Mech that state you cannot attack an airborne unit unless it has landed. Yet you are in base to base contact with it even at an elevation. A Unit in base to base contact cannot fire its weapons at that unit. But elevation isn't accounted for in that.

Its not that we are looking at ways to cheese the game. Its noticing that this by the rules can be used and bringing it to a conversation to come to a good conclusion on what is meant and if an errata is needed.

I may want to use a 0 0 0 VTOL at 42" as a hard to hit spotter, but that kind seems silly some one can come up to it within 6" of the base and hit it as if it was short. However, there should be a way to counter this, hence why I noticed anti-air specialist seems very weak compared to sniper for the same formation build.