Legatus Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Okay great master of the English language, I'll let you lay it out for everyone. We have five bullet points and an "In addition" clause. Why is it written that way and what does it mean? Because the bullet points list the condituons for when a unit is NOT allowed to assault, while the addition explains that under one condition the unit can only assault one particular unit. "Units are not allowed to assault if: - They are already locked in combat. - They ran in the shooting phase (...). - They have gone to ground (...). - They shot rapid fire weapons or heavy weapons in the shooting phase (...). - They are falling back (...)." "In addition to the above, a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at - it cannot assault a different unit to the one it previously shot at." That's not the same thing, and it is not what the bullet points were listing. GW could not have listed a condition for "only being allowed to assault one unit" under the reasons for "when units are not allowed to assault". Or maybe they should have changed the description of the bullet point list to "Units are not allowed to assault, or may only assault certain units, if:", but then they would have had to clarify for each case whether that meant that the unit was not allowed to assault at all or was only allowed to assault a certain unit. As you can see, there is very good reason why the "when a unit can only assault a certain unit" case was not listed under the "when a unit cannot assault at all" cases. Just how does it make a unit not exist for assault purposes and then exist for assault purposes. Because when a unit is removed from the game then it cannot be targeted or assaulted. But it does not cease to be a shooting unit's previous target. "In addition to the above, a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at - it cannot assault a different unit to the one it previously shot at." Shooting unit A vs. Enemy units X and Y. Unit A shoots and completely wipes out unit X. Now it is the assault phase. Unit X is no more, so no assault can be declared against unit X. But that was the unit which unit A had fired at in the previous shooting phase. "a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at" Is unit Y that unit? No. "it cannot assault a different unit to the one it previously shot at." Is unit Y that unit now? No, still not the unit that was being shot at. Bummer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Wilhelm Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 So, yes.... considering I conceded and there isn't any harm in exploring rules... it does feel a little like I'm being kicked while I'm on the ground, MW. Sorry. That was not what I was wanting for you to feel :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Tyler Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 The question has been asked and answered, and the rules are crystal clear. All of the other flexing of semantics is wasting time and getting unnecessary heat up. If anyone feels a need to debate the semantics further, feel free to PM me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.