Air Defense on VTOLs

[DarkJaguar]

Since airborne units can not make direct fire artillery attacks, does that mean airborne VTOL ground units cannot make use of Air Defense Arrow IV missiles?

[RoundTop]

This was answered in the rules thread.

Any units on ground map are considered ground units.  VTOLs, WIGES, and landed Aerospace fighters are not considered Airborne/Aerospace units.

[DarkJaguar]

This was answered in the rules thread.

Any units on ground map are considered ground units.  VTOLs, WIGES, and landed Aerospace fighters are not considered Airborne/Aerospace units.

In the Errata 2.3.1 page 5

2) 2 Insert the following new paragraph:
Airborne: Any unit that is in the air, whether an aerospace unit or a ground unit such as a WiGE or VTOL, counts as airborne. Units that are hovering or jumping, have landed, or are taxiing/taking off are not considered airborne.

[Weirdo]

The intention is that airborne aero may not fire them, but any ground units can wether or not they are touching the ground at the time. Read it however is needed to achieve that result.

[DarkJaguar]

The intention is that airborne aero may not fire them, but any ground units can wether or not they are touching the ground at the time. Read it however is needed to achieve that result.

Okay, thanks.

As a related question.  How would an Aerospace engage a VTOL then?  With Air to Air Arrow IVs?

[Xochi]

They added a new eratta that lets them use the new air to air munition for Art-ac. However it works differently than air defense, so how do you define medium range or closer with a VTOL against an Aerospace target. Since you can do that from VTOL to VTOL but a air strike is abstract. I think the intent is that ads is for the main map and air to air is for radar map.

[Weirdo]

VTOLs are ground units. I recommend using guns. It would be resolved as an air-to-ground attack.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

As a related question.  How would an Aerospace engage a VTOL then?  With Air to Air Arrow IVs?

An aerospace unit would fire upon a VTOL in the same way as it would on any other ground unit.  Put the flight path near enough to the VTOL so it can be strafed or striked.  Or even bombed, if the VTOL is flying low enough to the ground.

[DarkJaguar]

An aerospace unit would fire upon a VTOL in the same way as it would on any other ground unit.  Put the flight path near enough to the VTOL so it can be strafed or striked.  Or even bombed, if the VTOL is flying low enough to the ground.

You can strafe flying VTOLs? 

[Weirdo]

They're ground units. Unless you see a specific exception that says you can't strafe them, you can just like any other ground unit.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Given the to hit penalties combining with what's likely to be a high TMM: no, you probably can't successfully strafe an airborne VTOL.  But you can absolutely make the attempt.

[Weirdo]

My definition of a successful strafing attack is where you stop yourself in time and make a strike instead. :)

[Xochi]

So what if it's 20 inches above a unit, does that unit also get strafed because it's within 1" of the flight lines position?

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Yep.

[Weirdo]

Correct.

[Xochi]

Like you said, it's not easy at all cause vtol usually have high tmm and +1 for being vtol, but going from a 0 AGL target to one at 80" AGL back down to a 0 AGL is just silly. You can do that but can't change your flight path once laid or set an engagement range lol.

[Weirdo]

It stems from the fact that no matter how high up a VTOL goes, it's still well below any airborne aero unit.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

The example may also be technically impossible.  I'm not sure if you're allowed to have a VTOL be positioned directly over another unit- that probably violates stacking rules (since stacking doesn't recognize altitude, iirc).  But yeah even if the VTOL's base is adjacent to another ground unit's base, they're both strafable no matter what the VTOL's altitude is.  Since infintity altitude is still not high enough to climb off the table and onto the radar map.

Edit: Thought withdrawn as I was in error :D

[nckestrel]

Stacking does not ignore elevation. A VTOL can be over another unit. Or a tank on a bridge over a naval vessel in the water, etc.

[Xochi]

So does that mean VTOL can't be targeted by ADA because they are a ground unit?



Edit: By the way thank you for being willing to discuss and clarify even things that may sound silly. Your time is appreciated.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

So does that mean VTOL can't be targeted by ADA because they are a ground unit?

VTOLs cannot be put on the radar map, and ADA attacks are against units on the radar map.

[DarkJaguar]

VTOLs cannot be put on the radar map, and ADA attacks are against units on the radar map.

That's what I figured.  Thanks for the response.

[Xochi]

Crazy little nuances make a big difference. Thank you again for taking the time to have a conversation.

[DarkJaguar]

Okay, a couple more questions, sorry.

2 Artillery (p. 74)
At the top of the page, before “Resolving Artillery Attacks”, insert the following new section:
Artillery Attacks while Airborne
An airborne unit can make artillery attacks, but only against ground targets (a unit or POI). In addition, only the ART-AIS or ART-AC special abilities may be used and the attack must be indirect. Other artillery attacks (other artillery types or direct-fire Arrow IV) can only be made while grounded. Airborne artillery attacks apply a +1 to-hit modifier.
If the attacking unit is on-board (including an aerospace unit with a flight path on the ground map), it follows the artillery rules as normal. A unit with a flight path may choose any point along the flight path to make the attack from.
If the attacking unit is on the abstract aerospace Radar Map, it may make the airborne artillery attack from the Inner Ring. This attack will have a flight time of 1 turn.

For the purposes of reading this rule, a VTOL is a ground target, and thus subject to any legal Arrow IV attacks an ART-A* equipped aerospace chooses to fire.  Would that be correct? 

Would the only legal way an Aerospace can shoot an airborne VTOL with an arrow IV then be a homing missile?

Does a VTOL add a +1 modifier to it's ART-A* attacks?

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Okay, a couple more questions, sorry.

For the purposes of reading this rule, a VTOL is a ground target, and thus subject to any legal Arrow IV attacks an ART-A* equipped aerospace chooses to fire.  Would that be correct? 

I *think* so.. pending an erratum or clarification being found that allows an ADA attack to be made on the battlefield instead of the radar map, then that too would be possible.

Would the only legal way an Aerospace can shoot an airborne VTOL with an arrow IV then be a homing missile?

Artillery uses its own to hit modifiers separate from regular attacks.  There's no penalties based on target status for artillery attacks.  In either artillery rules set (standard or advanced).  Now if you're doing a direct fire shot instead... yeah I think all standard modifiers apply in addition to the direct fire penalty.  Again, on something minxy like a VTOL, it'd probably be another low probability attack... DF shots really only work out well when you can shoot the ground under the target and that doesn't work so well if the VTOL is of sufficient altitude.

Does a VTOL add a +1 modifier to it's ART-A* attacks?

According to the erratum you linked, it would while it's airborne.

[Scotty]

The obvious solutions here are "don't fire Arrow IVs at VTOLs, it's not worth it."

You can solve a lot of rules issues by not forcing them to a logical conclusion.

[DarkJaguar]

Artillery uses its own to hit modifiers separate from regular attacks.  There's no penalties based on target status for artillery attacks.  In either artillery rules set (standard or advanced).  Now if you're doing a direct fire shot instead... yeah I think all standard modifiers apply in addition to the direct fire penalty.  Again, on something minxy like a VTOL, it'd probably be another low probability attack... DF shots really only work out well when you can shoot the ground under the target and that doesn't work so well if the VTOL is of sufficient altitude.

It was more a question of what's possible.

According to the erratum you linked, it would while it's airborne.

So to further clarify.  A VTOL that wishes to fire ADA -MUST- be on the ground when it fires it?

Other artillery attacks (other artillery types or direct-fire Arrow IV) can only be made while grounded.

The scenario I am envisioning right now is a lance of Yellow Jacket Arrow IVs.  These flying at say, 80" above the ground would be effectively immune to ground fire.
Each of them would then be able to make an ADA attack against any aerospace in the central or inner ring for a target of 3, 5, or 7.   That's up to 8 damage per turn with very little ability to counter it.
If an Aerospace were to make it past the inner ring to engage them, they would need a 9 to hit one with a strike attack, but would be subject to ground fire.
Does that sound correct to you?

[Scotty]

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

[DarkJaguar]

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

Should I interpret that as 'This is possible, but it's bullshit.'?

[nckestrel]

"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.

[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.