New Jump Point Bomb rules

[Ripple]

We have tried the rule several times, and we saw lots of damage from it even against hull 5 ships. Maybe it has to do with the reality for us that there are very few average rolls, either going high or low.

The main objections I have seen to the rule are as follows.

One is the artillery affect. You AJP several points on one ship and the last one is the one you will actually come through. This just makes it a weapon you can use before you come on the table. If it was written on the ship sheet as 6 AD TD anywhere you want, folks would not be as happy.

Second is the ability to attack without putting yourself in harms way. You cannot position a scout/carrier anywhere in the game where the hyperspace team will not jump it, often without firing a shot if it is a patrol scout. IE you do not have to go out of position to destroy the ship, just bomb until gone and move on to another point.

Third is fluff. We just do not see this happening at anything other than what amounts to an ambush. When the whitestars jump in to support the drazi vs the centauri why did they not use this tactic. There were allied ships there to give them the best shot.

It is often not a game winner in and of itself but it is a potent weapon when used right.

On the comment about things like the torotha being better just coming through the point and firing. Not so much. The rules do still read you have to use the IJP special action that prevents you from firing. Matt has still not come on the threads and told me this is erratad/FAQ to allow a AJP ship to fire. There are two restrictions on the jumping in, one is using the sa, the other is using an jump point. Any ship using a jump point suffers limitations that AJP circumvents, but I did not see it circumvent the SAs restrictions...especially as those restrictions do seem to be in place for jumping out of game when using IJP, so why would they not be when jumping in.

Plus go see the posts about what generally happens to a Torotha at close enough range to attack. Victory points for you opponent. Or do we all not remember all the threads about manipulating the amount of victory points available to your opponent?

Ripple

 

[Greg Smith]

On the comment about things like the torotha being better just coming through the point and firing. Not so much. The rules do still read you have to use the IJP special action that prevents you from firing.

Apart from the rules saying:

"...a ship entering the battlefield from a jump point may not turn, fire any weapons, launch auxilliary craft or use any Special Actions in the same turn, unless they have the Advanced Jump Point trait."

and under the description of AJP:

"...and the ship will act normally on the turn it arrives."

 

[Voronesh]

Yer a Toroth is still better off to jumo through and start baslting, you only dont get CAF with it.

But a Torotha wolf pack, (lets assume three) can do two AJP bombs (n-1) and then use the third AJP for ship placement. Next turn you have 2 Torthas CAF'd and one coming through normally.
12 AD of TD is going to hurt most scouts heavily :S And then the wolf pack can actually attack something else with its 'actual' weaponry.

 

[Silvereye]

Weird thing is, I'd rather have my opponent guessing which of the three JPs my Torothas will enter from on the next turn and watch his fleet formation fall to pieces than try and AJP bomb something. If I catch anything as collatoral in a JP wash, thats just a bonus.

Panic and options are worth more than a few vanilla AD of Triple Damage.

 

[Voronesh]

Depends.

Why keep the enemy guessing, when you can take the enemy scout out of the equation before it even gets to roll for anything? The JPs hit first turn, during movement phase, before any of the real action starts. If i can disrupt a scout formation (Vree/Cent/Narn) thats just good.

 

[Ripple]

lets see...

pg 14 IJP - 'a ship initiating a jump point has its Speed score halved for this turn. In addition, it may not fire any weapons.' no exception is made for AJP.

pg 16 AJP - 'and the ship may act normally on the turn it arrives.' Not disagreeing that this could imply that the ships does not suffer the effects of the SA IJP. But it says nothing at all about using the SA and attempting to leave a field, implying that it is under the restrictions of the SA, at least in that situation.

pg 20 Jump Points - 'A ship initiating a jump point may only be moved between 0 and half its Speed. In addition, it may not fire any weapons.' This covers specifically the initiating part of jump points, and has no exception for AJP.

pg 21 still in Jump Points - 'a ship entering the battlefield from a jump point may not turn, fire any weapon, launch auxiliary craft or use any Special Action in the same turn, unless they have the Advanced Jump Point trait.' This covers the effects of moving through a jump point and does have the exemption for AJP. Note that the restrictions are different between using a jump point and initiating one. A ship initiating a jump point by the special action has its speed score halved but may still turn, and may use other special actions if it has the appropriate character on board. A ship moving through a jump point may not doe these things without AJP. Note that initiating halves movement but allows turns and moving through a jump point does not halve movement but prevents turns.

There is no exception for AJP when initiating, but there is for passing through a jump point. These are distinct in the rules. It may very well be the case that they are not supposed to be, but as it stands right now they are.

Initiating a Jump Point reduces the Speed score by half, and prevents fire. Jump point or Advanced jump point.

Passing through a Jump Point prevents turns, fire, launching aux craft or use of any SA (could be argued that it would prevent a ship from using IJP and moving through...but this way lies madness) unless you possess AJP trait.

Ripple

 

[Voronesh]

Well i guess everybody else on this forum, including heavy tourneygoers and so on are wrong then.........

Case of something fishy going on. But as far as i know, and as is being spread on this forum, AJP initiation makes an exception as well.

Dunno, maybe a heavy typo.....

 

[Calistan]

After reading through this thread, the AJP bomb should be used in ambush/trap scenarios. If you use the series or movie as an example, then the AJP bomb is a point blank attack and a 1 inch radius seems reasonable.

Quick question, can ships in hyperspace detect ships in real space or has it been shown that it is possible in the show?

 

[Voronesh]

Well in the show (just B5, not any of the movies) it seems impossible.

The Black Star had to use predetermined coordinates.

The only semi exlcusion is shadows, but even they send in a Scout, instead of doing a hyperspace flyby.

 

[lastbesthope]

On the comment about things like the torotha being better just coming through the point and firing. Not so much. The rules do still read you have to use the IJP special action that prevents you from firing.

Apart from the rules saying:

"...a ship entering the battlefield from a jump point may not turn, fire any weapons, launch auxilliary craft or use any Special Actions in the same turn, unless they have the Advanced Jump Point trait."

and under the description of AJP:

"...and the ship will act normally on the turn it arrives."

Greg has it right, and it's the way it's been in every Mongoose tourney.

LBH

 

[Ripple]

Which is why I do not understand when I put it up over at rulemasters Matt did not answer. If it is such an easy cut and dried answer where was the quick response from Mongoose over a pretty clear contradiction in there rules?

Much like the fighters on bases issue, this is one of those things where I do not believe the rules played at the Mongoose tourneys are the ones actually in the book. As I have said before that's fine, but I wish matt would respond so that those of us trying to play the rules as written so we can respond when it comes up in a competetive enviornment.

I can say 'well such and such on the net says its this way' anytime I want, but it is not the rules written in the book. When I was taught the game I was taught that if I was initiating jump I could not turn. Finally went through and read it and it turns out not only can I turn, I can turn faster because it is my Speed and not my movement that is halved. I was taught by a Mongoose sponsored demo guy who played at the tourneys. Did not help get the game right.

A good part of why I bring this up is that they are writing V2 and if this is supposed to say something else they need to be aware of it.

Again, if a Mongooser is reading this, please ask Matt to jump on and give a two line it works this way. I am a judge in a campaign and I have to go by the book to be fair, if the book is wrong, or my interpretation is wrong, please let me know. Otherwise, much like the back laser on the Drahk cruiser, we go with as written. And maybe that is not fair to the races that have AJP.

LBH and Greg, I respect both of you and have no doubt that your telling me exactly what has happened at the tourneys, but that does not change the text of the rules. Both of the quotes you point to fairly clearly point to the second part of the jump point rule, emerging from a jump point. There is no mention in either the SA or the first part of the jump point rules addressing AJP lifting any restrictions as applied to initiating a jump point.

This is like the supporting fighters, we play based on mythology of the game rather than rules. There is no rule for coming off support, there is no rule that a fighter on support cannot shoot if not engaged, there is no rule that a fighter loses its own movement if moved on support (or even that it would have its move,emt pro-rated for the move by the ship), there is no rule preventing flights from stacking in support but some folks say they cannot. If we are writing the rule ourselves why are we here?

This is the type of question that should be being addressed here, an ambiguity in the rules. I tried to get an answer in the rulesmasters but I have found that my threads there get little or no reponse from Mongoose. Maybe if LBH or Greg would put it up as a seperate thread Matt would take the time to answer.

Ripple

 

[Greg Smith]

Which is why I do not understand when I put it up over at rulemasters Matt did not answer. If it is such an easy cut and dried answer where was the quick response from Mongoose over a pretty clear contradiction in there rules?

I'm not exactly what you see as a contradiction. Is it that you think a think a shiip initiating a JP from hyperspace can't fire as it comes through it's own JP (even though it has AJP)?

Much like the fighters on bases issue, this is one of those things where I do not believe the rules played at the Mongoose tourneys are the ones actually in the book.

That was something that never really came up until Matt said you could. No-one thought they could.

A good part of why I bring this up is that they are writing V2 and if this is supposed to say something else they need to be aware of it.

The hyperspace rules in the playtest of v2 are a stated a lot more clearly.

LBH and Greg, I respect both of you and have no doubt that your telling me exactly what has happened at the tourneys, but that does not change the text of the rules. Both of the quotes you point to fairly clearly point to the second part of the jump point rule, emerging from a jump point. There is no mention in either the SA or the first part of the jump point rules addressing AJP lifting any restrictions as applied to initiating a jump point.

It is not so much in tourneys, as the way the rules read to us.

This is like the supporting fighters, we play based on mythology of the game rather than rules. There is no rule for coming off support, there is no rule that a fighter on support cannot shoot if not engaged, there is no rule that a fighter loses its own movement if moved on support (or even that it would have its move,emt pro-rated for the move by the ship), there is no rule preventing flights from stacking in support but some folks say they cannot.

I agree. There are some areas of the rules that should be cleared up.

 

[Ripple]

To answer Greg, (last one for me on this topic)

Yes, I believe according to the descriptor for initating a jump point, both in the SA and in the jump point rules, that a ship initiating its own jump point may not fire and has its Speed score reduced by half. The contradiction is that the AJP trait says it may act normally when it comes through (not mentioning going out), but the descriptor paragraph for initiating does not include the exception, while the transitioning paragraph does.

So the unanswered questions are...

If it IJPs heading from the battlefield to hyper, can it fire and is its Speed halved? I see not exception but I have been told both ways.

If it opens its own jump point from hyper to the battlefield is it under the restrictions of IJP as per the Jump point rules first paragraph? I would say yes as I see no exception in the more detailed rules under jump points. As evidence they make sure to note that it is not under the restrictions of transitioning a jump point but do not make an exception under the description of what initiating restricts.

I will stop posting on this one at this point, as I have had this discussion twice before without getting an official answer. LBH suggested last time that I try rulesmasters if I was unsatisfied with the answer of how the tourney had been run at Mongoose. I did but recieved no answer, it was the third or so thread I had asked that received no answer so I have given up on that angle. I had thought it might simply have been an oversight and could be clarified quite easily but it has become somewhat troublesome.

I try to point out anythign I see in the rules as being easily read another way because folks playing the home game may not have the advantage of asking the designer directly if the way it is written is correct. Everyone assumed that fighters could not stack on bases and that the support rule was an exception until Matt popped on and said it can be done. Same thing here could have been true here, folks just assumed it worked the way it looked and did not parse the rule carefully. Such as carefully enough to see that while aux craft follow all the movement rules that mention ships they do not follow the stacking rule that mentions ships.

I was taught as a minis gamer to read the rules with an eye for enabling rules (rather than restrictions). This usually helps aviod misunderstandings later and/or in competative play. The rulebook is the only common reference and if it does not state clearly that you can do something, then you cannot. Much easier than saying you can do anything that the rules prevent you from doing.

In this case I could find no enabling rule that could not be argued for allowing a ship initiating its own jump point to ignore the restrictions of the SA. If either the paragraph on initiating or the SA description had vioded that or the AJP had been specific about both sets of restrictions I would not have an issue. But I would normally thing the paragraph description would be taken as the more specific rather than one line trait description, especially given they did not miss the exceptions for just transitioning.

Ripple

 

[Vertexx69]

How about y'all just give the minbari a break already? in armageddon they already killed stealth inside 8" with scout and fighter : stealth is reduced to 2+ leaving the minbari a paper thin fleet, and lowered the number of nials per wing to 1 killing their dogfighting bonus and lowering the overall number of ships that can even be purchased. So since the minbari are the only race with more than a couple AJP capable ships how about we just leave em alone. I mean seriously look at the crap they got for an armageddon level =P

 

[Voronesh]

Well i have to agree with ripple.

The rules as written mean, ship initiating AJP still dont get the AJP benefit.

Its prolly just a bad case of paste and copy, but still, as written its totally different to how its played.

 

[Greg Smith]

So the unanswered questions are...

If it IJPs heading from the battlefield to hyper, can it fire and is its Speed halved? I see not exception but I have been told both ways.

I think whoever told you was in error. It cannot fire and either has its speed halved (description of SA) or must move between 0 and half speed (Jump point rules). I believe the latter to be correct. The only exception for AJP is being able to position the jump point in any arc.

If it opens its own jump point from hyper to the battlefield is it under the restrictions of IJP as per the Jump point rules first paragraph? I would say yes as I see no exception in the more detailed rules under jump points. As evidence they make sure to note that it is not under the restrictions of transitioning a jump point but do not make an exception under the description of what initiating restricts.

Now I see an implicit exception. The rules for AJP under Special Traits say:

"The ship is equipped with the most technoloically advanced jump engines in the galaxy and can make jumps into realspace with high precision. The jump point of the ship entering realspace will not deviate and the ship may act as normal on the turn it arrives."

Now, since the statements about JPs not deviating and acting noermally are in the same sentence, it leads me to beleive that they refer to the same thing, ie a ship with AJP may position its JP without deviation and act normally when moving through it.

 

[lastbesthope]

It seems to me that Ripple is only going to take an official Mongoose's word for it, and that's fine, Greg and I have the benefit of frequently getting official words from Matthew in person, Ripple has not had that benefit.

LBH

 

[Ripple]

I need an official answer at some point as it came up when we went through the rule as a group a couple of months ago, when this first came up, and we had agreed that it was worded as I have stated. If I was going to overturn the group I needed more than a couple of players input, I needed a ruleing.

Greg's comment is the first I have heard that actually addressed the implicit exception I was looking for by linking the placement and passage together. At least this is a foundation on which to build an interpretation, a very different thing than 'trust me on this' type statements. It addresses the specific issue of linking the ships own jump point and passing through.

And the reason for this post, I was not in any way attempting to thwart Minbar's ambitions, both the ISA and the Drahk are just as AJP dependant, I was trying to make sure that the rule, which is not clear, was noted as being something that needed to not be taken for granted as settled unless we had an official ruling. Our group thought it was just as clear the other way when we read through it as a group to make sure we did not argue the point during campaign.

Anyway, i did not want Vertexx thinking I was trying to torpedo the Minbari...I am not. I wanted Greg to know that I appreciated his look into it from the standpoint I was taking. His interpretation has a lot of merit. Still not sure why the jump point SA restrictions would only be ignored going one way but I could at least fluff that off somehow.

Ripple

 

[locarno24]

2 million 5 hundred thousand tons is not that much gravitationally (about 4*10^-16 Earth masses) speaking, and we see Minbari jump in fairly close to B5 ("right on top of us") when Delenn brings in a taskforce to save B5 from Clark.

Hmm....there really isn't much in the way of gravitational potential, is there? And everyone on board's 'weight' is just rotation....

I don't know why, but I just had this sudden image of a White star jumping in on the centreline inside a babylon-style station.....the central cavity is certainly big enough if you can get an accurate enough fix.

 

[animus]

This thread is all over the place. Let's just hope and pray that V2 is better written.

[Hey Matt - I have degrees in writing and would LOVE an opportunity to write clear descriptions of rules!]