1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Combat Jump and rooftops

Discussion in 'Rules' started by WillJoeBeck, May 24, 2020.

  1. WillJoeBeck

    WillJoeBeck New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2019
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Is it still possible to use Combat Jump on the top of a roof?

    The new rules state the you cannot be in contact with a scenery element to get cover when you use combat jump.

    The cover rules state that you can get cover from being on top of a building even if you are not prone.

    Does this mean Combat Jump can no longer be used to land on top of a building, crate or anything else besides the ground of the battlefield?
     
    Florian Hanke likes this.
  2. toadchild

    toadchild Premeasure

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    5,726
    The definition of several of those terms are a bit ambiguous in the C1 rules. My reading is that you can deploy on any flat surface that could otherwise support your base.
     
    HellLois, inane.imp and Vanderbane like this.
  3. Vanderbane

    Vanderbane Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2018
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    565
    This. But it's based on N3, which as has been repeatedly discussed as a bad starting point for assumptions on the rules in C1.
     
    Florian Hanke and inane.imp like this.
  4. toadchild

    toadchild Premeasure

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    5,726
    Yeah, but there's some funny business in more than one game's ruleset when you start asking questions like "is the play area itself a piece of terrain?" and "are you in base contact with the ground?".
     
    chromedog and Mahtamori like this.
  5. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    When I initially read the new rule I read it as more permissive than the N3 rule. I'm not so sure anymore.

    I'd continue playing roofs as a valid option. Mostly because otherwise any table with multi-layered terrain becomes essentially impossible to play on with AD troopers.

    I think as a house rule saying that "troopers who perform Combat Jump may land on elevated terrain that supports their base; however, they never benefit from cover on the turn they land", would be the most in line with the intent of the rules. As it is, either you read (paraphrasing) "any surface that can support their base" as over-riding "not in base contact with terrain" or vice-versa.
     
    chromedog, Willen and prophet of doom like this.
  6. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    8,281
    Likes Received:
    10,358
    I think the big problem is that cover is situational and depends on enemy positions. Landing on a roof is fine as long as you're not being observed, strictly speaking.
     
    prophet of doom and inane.imp like this.
  7. CabalTrainee

    CabalTrainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    705
    For me it looks like they changed the wording especially to remove the N3 ambiguity for landing on roofs and simply forgot this new interaction.

    Right now i play with the house rule that you simply don't get cover in the order you land in as a compromise.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  8. prophet of doom

    prophet of doom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    325
    You can land on the rooftop, but you do not get cover in the order that you arrive in. You may not place the model that used combat jump in contact with the railing of the rooftop or any other cover providing terrain feature.

    You don't get cover from being higher because you moved into this position of cover via combat jump.
     
    Lady Numiria and inane.imp like this.
  9. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    I agree this should be how it's played... But it's not really what the rules say.
     
    Sabin76 likes this.
  10. prophet of doom

    prophet of doom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    325
    Ok, but that would then really mean that you cannot drop onto rooftops. I think it is problematic that CB dropped the need to place a template around the drop trooper, but once they have done that we should have the benefit of troopers being able to drop on rooftops. Just from writing 20x20, I can tell you how hard it is to think of everything that could possibly happen in Infinity and if you have found it, you have to cover the case with rules. Without writing paragraphs about every option. I believe CB just failed on this combat jump on rooftops a little bit. I am pretty confident that my idea is the intention of the rules.
     
  11. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    I agree that's probably the intent.

    I just think it's important to make a distinction between what the rules say and what we think the intent of the rules is unless the rule is absolutely unplayable as written.

    I do think that the opposite interpretation is plausible. That is that the permission that
    "The player may deploy the Trooper on any surface of the game table" overrides the prohibition against deploying "in Silhouette contact with a scenery element to get Cover". Or, to put it another way, you can't deploy in contact with a scenery element except for scenery elements that are a surface of the game table that may be deployed on.

    What then is a "surface of the game table"?

    "Surface" is used throughout the Code One rules frequently to refer to literally any surface (horizontal, vertical and diagonal). So I think "any surface of the game table" should be read as broadly as possible: that is, it literally refers to any surface on the game table.

    However, we know (from separate rules text) that you are not permitted to deploy on vertical surfaces (pp. 39):

    "Troopers cannot be deployed on a vertical surface, neither duringthe Deployment Phase nor during the game."

    So we're left with:

    "With Combat Jump, troopers are not allowed to deploy in Silhouette contact with a scenery element to gain Cover except that they may be deployed on any horizontal or diagonal surface that is equal or larger than their base."

    From a gameplay POV, that seems entirely playable albeit it does make AD relatively strong for exploiting a high-ground advantage.

    Until this is clarified, that's how I'd recommend playing it.

    As an example, this means for the OP Kaldstrom buildings it would be legal to AD onto the roof of the building and gain cover from a Trooper at a lower elevation, but not to deploy in SIL Contact with the parapet and gain cover from a Trooper on the same or higher elevation, provided that you understand that the roof and the parapet are 2 distinct Scenery Elements.*

    * It's note-worthy that in N3 this is the case: a Scenery Building is made up of several Scenery Items. So absent other guidance (which would be preferred), this is a reasonable interpretation.
     
    Vanderbane and SpectralOwl like this.
  12. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    8,281
    Likes Received:
    10,358
    Honestly, I don't think the intent of Combat Jump is for the unit to not have Cover, I think the intent is for the unit to not touch anything other than the ground they stand on. So, whether you get cover or not when you land on an elevated position should be determined with whether you're mechanically allowed to land there or not.

    (However, I'd actually like the elevated position giving Cover to be spelled out more clearly - I'm not 100% convinced that's intentional, more like 60% convinced it is. Preferably through an example set up similar to the Hacking example or the Flamethrower example where unit up high is standing on a building without a chest-high-wall)
     
  13. Jonas

    Jonas New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2020
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    1
    So you're saying that a trooper on the roof of a building with parapets would be in partial cover against lower positioned enemies, even if the trooper is not in Silhouette contact with a parapet? We never played Combat Jump onto a roof and/or C1 in general like that but I can follow your thinking if you trait the roof as scenery element that covers part of the target's Silhouette from below (if we would draw a invisible line through the wall of the building).

    In my view it's not consistent with the C1 rules if you would grant partial cover in this situation. But I think there is some wiggle room here.
     
  14. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    That's the C1 rules. There's no wiggle room. :)

    So the question is, is it legal to use Combat Jump to deploy into the position shown in the left hand diagram? If so does the Trooper get cover on the turn it lands?

    My recommendation was to answer yes to both questions as that answer is both consistent with the rules as written (see my logic above) and doesn't create a situation where the answer to the first question is "well it depends, can any trooper on a lower elevation draw LOF to you: if yes, then that position isn't legal, if no, then that position is legal".

    My preference is for CB to rewrite the rules so that it is explicitly permitted to Combat Jump in SIL contact with scenery elements that give you Cover BUT that the Trooper does not gain Cover on the order they deploy. This treats roofs and walls the same and ensures legal Combat Jump deployment locations do not change based on enemy LOF.
     
    Sabin76 likes this.
  15. Jonas

    Jonas New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2020
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    1
    Apparently I was wrong, sorry! With the help of a friend I could find the post (linked below) from the CB staff member with the picture you also quoted. Such a diagram should be added to the rulebook in N4. Thanks a lot for the clarification, so we can play it "correct" from now on :face_with_rolling_eyes:

    https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/cover-prone-and-elevated.37139/page-2#post-341142
     
  16. HellLois

    HellLois What the Hell...Lois?
    CB Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    2,464

    This is how it should work. @prophet of doom explained perfectly (better than us :P)
     
  17. Teslarod

    Teslarod Trebuchet Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,809
    Likes Received:
    3,767
    Any chance we can get started on an "answered by CB" section like in the N3 rules forum?
    There's going to be a lot of people asking the same questions you took the time to answer in a month or so. Might as well get ahead of it before the big rush.
    Especially since C1 rules appear to also be N4 rules, with N4 simply adding onto it and otherwise fully compatible.
     
    inane.imp and HellLois like this.
  18. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    1,909
    Or, better yet, update the pdf version of the rules with examples or rewording where appropriate ;).
     
    Lesh', wes-o-matic, inane.imp and 4 others like this.
  19. Lawson

    Lawson Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2020
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    37
    This is neither here nor there regarding the rules discussion, but I imagined that part of the point of not landing from a combat jump in contact with cover has to do with the idea that if you're parachuting into a combat zone, you'd be aiming for an 'open' area rather than the edge of something... a wall you could crash into, a fence you could smash your leg against, or otherwise. Thematically it makes sense to me that you want to land in the open, rather than dangerously close to obstacles. Feels logical that you could land on a roof, though, whether the rules actually make it clear what is and isn't terrain for the purposes of that or not.
     
  20. tox

    tox SorriBarai
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    2,048
    Material for future FAQs.