ACTA Dogfighting and supporting

[Grunvald]

Example:

If Fighter (a) is attacked by fighters (b) & (c) with (c) supporting (b)

Fighter (a) wins dogfight so fighter (b) is killed!!

Now the way we have been playing it that is it for this round of dogfighting, one round of firing from Fighter (a) and he killed something!

But at the recent Walsall tournament it came accross that after Fighter (b) was killed another round of dogfight was then rolled with (a) against (c) and the result was that (c) died!

Now the way this way is played it would seem that Fighter (a) could carry on and destroy every Fighter base in contact with it!! (With a lot of good rolls that is)

Now which way is correct?

One round of dogfight or lots of rolls in 1 round??

 

[Greg Smith]

Each player has a round of fighter attcks/dogfights.

So in one turn a single fighter could only kill two enemies in contact.

 

[Grunvald]

P.29 of the rule book 3rd paragraph up!

Wont quote the entire paragraph but Players will only dogfight once!

Unless a draw happens or against multiple flights!

Now it is the last part that gets me thinking, if you support a dogfight to give +1 or more to the result arn't you now participating in the dog fight?? (P.29 5th paragraph up)


So you both roll a d6 for the dogfight, add up totals (adding supporting fighters etc), remove ships as appropriate!

Please explain then how 2 ships can be killed from 1 fighter??

I am thinking that the mistake has occured in our game that my opponent forgot that a surporting fighter cant start a dogfight so should not have been shot at and killed!

Tell me if i'm wrong!

 

[lastbesthope]

Imagine a Nial flight is in base to base contact with 2 flights of Starfuries (Let's call them A and B)

The Minbari player wins initiaitive, declares a dogfight against Starfury flight B, wins and destroys it, however on the EA player's turn, he declares a dogfight with Starfury A against the Nial, which beats him, destroying Starfury A.

2 fighters dead from one fighter.

QED

LBH

 

[Greg Smith]

The rule in question:

In general, flights will only dogfight once each turn. However, it is possible for a flight to dogfight twice if a player nominates his fighters to attack and only gains a draw in a dogfight or is fighting against multiple flights. The flights will remain locked together until his opponent declares his fi ghters to attack, in which case another dogfi ght is fought imediately.

 

[Tank]

Actually I think the focus is more on fighters that are supporting a dogfight here, I could be mistaken but thats the way I've just read this post.

 

[Greg Smith]

It applies equally for any fighter that remains in contact, whether it because it survived the first round of dogfighting because of a draw, or because it was supporting a fighter that died.

In the example, fighter a is attacked by b&c.

In the first player's round of fighter attacks/dogfights, a wins and destoys b.

The second player's fighter attacks, a remains in contact with c (and therefore still in a dogfight) so the dogfight must be fought.

A fighter supporting another fighter is still part of the dogfight and remains part of the dogfight even if the primary fighter is destroyed.

Once you move into base contact with an enemy flight, you are considered to be dogfighting and so follow these rules. Fighters may only conduct dogfights against other flights, not ships. A dogfight starts automatically once two or more flights are in contact with one another and no flight involved may move until the enemy has been destroyed

(my emphasis).

 

[Tank]

My books are in my car currently and Im not going ot get them but:

fighter (a) is attacked by fighter (b) being supported by fighter (c)

if fighter (b) starts the dogfight and is destroyed by fighter (a) then fighter (a) can then engage fighter (c)

if fighter (a) starts the dogfight and destroys fighter (b) fighter (c) cannot initiate a dogfight back because it was supporting destroyed fighter (b) combat ends

or at least something along those lines

of course if Im mistaken then I shall have to have words with those damn voices!!!

 

[lastbesthope]

That seems right to me Tank.

LBH

 

[KennyBoy]

if fighter (a) starts the dogfight and destroys fighter (b) fighter (c) cannot initiate a dogfight back because it was supporting destroyed fighter (b) combat ends

That would be true as long as fighter A did not make base contact with both B and C in its initial move... otherwise the remaining fighters would still be considered to be dog-fighting and so the player controlling fighter C would have no option but to initiate a second dogfight against fighter A.

 

[Burger]

A Flight may support any number of dogfights in this manner but a flight supporting a dogfight may never initiate a dogfight itself.

Tank is correct if "never" means "this turn". Kenny is correct if it means "this player's dogfight activation phase"... badly worded much?

The first part confuses me, though. A flight may support any number of dogfights? So if A is dogfighting B and C is dogfighting D, and E is in contact with both of them, then E can support both dogfights? Here is what I mean:

In my dogfight phase I attack A with B, and C with D. According to what is written it would seem that E can give +1 to both dogfights. Thats not how we've been playing it all this time; we play it that E must choose which dogfight he shall support.

 

[lastbesthope]

No, each fighter can only initiate one dogfight per turn OR(Technically an Exclusive OR) support a dogfight made by a friendly fighter.

It can't initiate a dogfight and then support another dogfight.

LBH

 

[Ripple]

Dogfighting should never have been a two phase thing, just too confusing.

That said, if burger is not right, what is the purpose of the statement that a fighter may support any number of dogfights? I was under the impression that his graphic was correct.

 

[Na-Po]

But dear LBH in Burger's exemple the fighter is not doing both a dogfifht and a support it is just supporting twice which is not against what you said.
Indeed we play it that way (may support several times but cannot support and initiate dogfight).

Nonetheless this is a very rare case (when you can support twice in the same turn), but if I remember well the Dilgar can support at distance so it's easier for them to support several dogfights in the same turn.

 

[Burger]

I think LBH is referring to the first question, that is, can a fighter support when you dogfight me, but initiate when I dogfight you. As far as I can see the wording is vague, it uses the word "never" which clearly does not mean never. It either means this turn, or this dogfight phase. If it means this turn then Tank and LBH are correct, you may not initiate a dogfight with a fighter that supported you when I attacked. But if "never" only means in my dogfight phase (ie. the phrase is included to stop me dogfighting with B and supporting with E, and dogfighting with E and supporting with A), then Kenny is correct, you can initiate a dogfight in your dogfight phase, using a fighter that supported in my dogfight phase.

Rules as written are inconclusive. Depends on your definition of "never".

As for the second part, looks like we've been doing it wrong for 2 years. Ripple is right, a 2-phase dogfight makes it far too complicated!

 

[Humbaba]

Using Burger's example above - as I understood it, all five flights are locked in one dogfight at the start of the dogfight phase, so red cannot attack with both "A" and "C" but with either "A" or "C" getting a +1 dogfight score (for the other flight) and green getting a +2 to the dogfight score of the flight being attacked. If red killed "B" then on green's turn they would choose "E" or "D" as their attacking flight with the other in support (both sides getting the +1 for one supporting flight). The wierd part is if red selects and kills "E" on their phase, this would seperate the groups so that on green's turn they would attack with "B" vs. "A" and "D" vs "C" as one on one dog fights with no support in either case.

Thats how I read it anyway...

 

[mollari_uk]

Dogfighting is too complicated. I've tried on numerous occasions to understand exactly how supporting, initiating etc in large dogfights works but just can't get it. E.g. Who's needs to be in contact with who to support? Who's involved in the dog fight, all touching bases or all bases touching the target? I'm just totally confused. The example in the book is the most simple example ever and so doesn't clarify anything.

Luckily for me I play Shadows so don't have any need for them :wink: and even WHEN the shadow fighters become useful they'll be simple dogfights due to the small number of fighters.

Anyone care to try and re-write the rules so that non-genius' can understand them?

 

[Burger]

Using Burger's example above - as I understood it, all five flights are locked in one dogfight at the start of the dogfight phase, so red cannot attack with both "A" and "C" but with either "A" or "C" getting a +1 dogfight score (for the other flight) and green getting a +2 to the dogfight score of the flight being attacked.

That is definitely wrong. The player gets to choose which flights attack and which support, it is not just one big dogfight. But so far I have been discussing green's attack since they illustrate the issue in contention.

In red's attack phase, he has a few options. He could:
1) Attack E with A, and use C to support. In this case, green could then use B to support since it is in contact with the enemy, but not D because it is not in contact with A. So there would be 1 roll, and both would get +1.
2) Attack E with A and attack D with C. Green could then use B to support. There will be two dogfights, red has +0 in both, green has +1 in one and +0 in the other.
3) Same as (2) but C attacks E instead.
4) Attack B with A and attack D with C. Green could then use E to support in both. There will be two dogfights, red has +0 in both, green has +1 in both.

 

[Ripple]

That seems right as far as we've been playing it and could be the reason for the wording on 'the player may arrange his dogfights to his best advantage' or something like that from last edition.

Ripple

 

[Na-Po]

That's also how I see it but to answer to the "never" question I wouldn't allow
a fighter to dogfight AND support in the same turn.
(meaning my dogfight phase and your dogfight phase are subparts of THE dogfight phase of the turn in which you have to choose wheter to initiate dogfight or support)