Dismounting during impetuous order

This seems like an overly generous interpretation of impetuous. Extremely impetuous is not suicidal. Provided you don't deploy them in suicidal positions.

Pretty much this. The rules are unambiguous about getting closer to the enemy.

If your opponent is trying to argue that extremely impetuous can be controllable through rule interpretation and somehow not a disadvantage... remind them that it comes with a steep discount.

As a regular user of Ex. Imp models, I don't see any reason to give them even less downsides.

 

You were an active participant in the argument that came out with that interpretation. Unless you're unwilling to take @ijw's word on it?

I expect that from @Hecaton. He doesn't accept anything that isn't FAQ'd to the nth degree, but come on @Alphz we've been over this ground. You're making an absolutist argument to convince someone to vacate the opposite extreme, it's not going to work. I have accepted that the intent is that Extremely Impetuous troopers must suicide under certain circumstances, I try to get everyone onto that same page.

 

You'll find that if IJW takes a position, pretty much every community accepts it as if it may as well be an FAQ.
While there are vocal members of the community here that disagree with that (in itself not a problem) the wider community certainly does go with the concensus, attitudes against this are up to you, but its going to limit the interaction your community can have with the wider community as a whole

 

Are we on the same page? IJW posted in the one thread you linked that you must jump off buildings. But he has posted differently in other threads.

But your post earlier read like the "ruling" was if you were 1" away from the edge you could declare a 1" move, and then wait until next turn.

In a 3 turn game, being able to keep an extremely impetuous model from climbing down until turn 3 is an unacceptable result when we're left to interpret rules intent. Its not even outside of player agency. You don't have to deploy models on roofs and you can try make sure your impetuous model isn't on a roof before its next impetuous phase.

I can only really see one reason (outside of particularly unusual tables) that people would want to be able to move instead of jump and thats so they can game the impetuous movement phase to their advantage.

 

those are not his motives.

And the discussion continued after IJWs statement.

Problems dealing with impetuous models on rooves are resolvable by various other means

 

No we're literally not on the same page.

This is the post I'm referring to. I am not aware of @ijw vacating this position.

http://infinitytheforums.com/forum/...erently-than-you-think/?page=3#comment-963851

I've reiterated that position in several threads since that time, much as I have in this one.

As to my motivation. It's twofold: one is for Uberfalls to work as intended and to use Climbing Plus to get off rooves, the other - and more important one - is for a common interpretation of the rules that is acceptable to as broad a church as possible. The "you suicide if in B2B but otherwise are permitted to move less than the maximum distance, stopping when you hit B2B" is an interpretation I think can achieve that (in no large part because it's what @ijw has said is what he thinks the rules say).

Edit: the link isn't working for me, so have a screenshot as well.

 

Must be me misremembering. Edit: right, he changed position. And I interpreted that as reluctantly. Mostly in the face of some pretty extreme word interpretation.

Uberfalls only don't work on buildings taller than their first move skill?

Otherwise a move-move climb is likely to be faster than jumping.

 

Uberfalls have to jump on any building taller than 4" with your preferred interpretation. Jump (6") will get you further than a Move(6")+Move(4") in that case. Whereas with the interpretation I described they will Move down the wall and then continue Moving.

Because they have C+ the wall doesn't stop their Movement so you have to continue moving down it. The text this ruling turns on reads as follows:

"can move a distance shorter than the maximum only if he reaches base contact with an enemy, or if he enters an area of Special Terrain that impairs his Movement or forces him to declare Jump or Climb in order to keep moving."

This isn't true in the case of C+, so you have to Move the full distance.

 

The answer on the original question is they must dismount, but only if their path to the nearest enemy is blocked and cannot be reached by the bike S, but only if by dismounting they would actually reach the enemy, for example standing outside the objective rooms door and the enemy is behind the door.

I would agree we can improve the writing on some rules, for example, the Impetuous models are not suicidal, they would not jump to their death just to reach an enemy model.

 

We've already hashed that one out, it wouldnt matter where in the armoury they were, so long as they were in the armour, a 4-4 dismount is gonna be less orders than "We cant fit at all"

 

So the issue applies pretty much only when you're on the 2nd floor of most typical buildings. That seems awfully niche to be your main concern when considering the benefit it represents the plethora of other impetuous troops that it's just a flat benefit to.

 

I wanted to point out that the mounted model would not dismount if it could reach the nearest model with the mounted profile.

But I am open to debating it.

 

EDIT: Thats not really what you wrote though but bye the bye, as Toadchilc pointed this has been solved

 

I said it wasn't my main concern.

And by 'plethora' you really mean Kuang Shi. Particularly since on any reasonable table they stand up and become visible, where they can be executed in ARO. Even Mutts get very little out of the tactic, they're much better off actually moving into the midfield. When closed doors and the ability to deploy on vertical terrain on the rear of buildings are things, this is just a non-issue and not worth the "fuck off, Impetuous troops don't suicide" that is the almost universal response to this (even from people who should really know better).

In ITSX if you're not using your Kuang Shi / Warbands to cover vs AD then you're doing it wrong.

 

What was the answer here? The link is no longer working and I've failed to extrapolate from your replies :)

 

The old forums are gone, unfortunately, and I didn't have the presence of mind to quote it in this thread. But you can only dismount during the impetuous phase if doing so would reduce the number of orders to get to your target.

 

Can, but would you be forced to?