Super-Jump and CC interaction

its valid, falling is not part of the movement rules, the Super jumping unit is in B2B and therefore the CC is a vaild declaration.
its no different to chosing what point you shoot a model at with a BS attack

 

Falling immediately doesn’t make super-jump super-jump invalid. If a model with Super-jump wants to declare two short jump skills, it can do that. (Jump jump without falling is how it used to work in 2nd edition. The movement resolution rules changed A LOT between editions.)

That falling in the middle bit is why super-jump has bullet point #4:

• The user may declare the Jump Skill as an Entire Order to add up both his MOVvalues into one single mighty jump.

to allow a model to jump the same distance through the air that 2nd edition let it.

And, if you think the super-jump rules make it sound like falling doesn’t happen until resolution, I think you’re missing the various examples where the falling generates ARO’s:
“As before, enemies who see Tarik falling may declare AROs.”

The ARM rolls from falling happen during resolution, determining where the active model moves to happens right away as usual.

 

Thought super jump alters jump to a short movement skill

 

It does, but you can also declare it as an Entire Order skill. Please see the rest of Solkan's message for context.

 

I don't understand it, sry.
First the language barrier, second I don't know second edition rules.
What want he to tell us?

Edit: now I get it. Didn't get the rule with entire order in the wiki.

 

That there are a few different ways of using Super-Jump:

1. Short skill Jump (with fall) + other skill
   
2. Short skill Jump (with fall) + short skill Jump (with fall) -> Fall after each jump movements
   
3. Entire Order skill Jump (with one fall) -> Fall after the entire distance has been moved in the air.

 

I'm sorry, I think there's some ambiguity in this description. Do you mean that your Umbra SuperJumps 6" up to touch the guy on the roof, then falls to the ground, and somewhere between SJ and falling he wishes to declare CC Attack?

 

Well, I think that as written, rules do not restrict this, but I do not exclude the possibility of misunderstanding them (after all, English is nor mine, neither CB staff's mother tongue). Let's look at the CC Attack declaration rules.

For a troop to declare a CC Attack either in its Active Turn or Reactive Turn, it needs to:

• Be using a CC Weapon, or a Skill or piece of Equipment capable of a CC Attack.
• Be in base to base contact with an enemy.

The player must make sure to meet all Requirements before activating the troop and declaring the CC Attack.

It is crystal clear than you must be in BtB with the opponent in order to declare a CC Attack, but the part after that point confuses me. If read as written, it makes me think that you cannot declare CC Attack if your troop is not already in BtB with an enemy, meaning that you cannot declare CC Attack as the second Short skill. If we ignore that sentence, there's no indication in the rules that you must end your movement in BtB with an enemy in order to meet the CC Attack declaration requirements. Honestly, this looks too vague for me to make a judgement as both outcomes are theoretically possible.

I am leaning more towards the 'the CC Attack is cancelled' outcome, but I'd love to know the intended one from someone who knows the rules intention. @ijw ?

 

Because the last 2 bullet points of Jump state:
"Jumping movement must follow the General Movement rules as well as the Moving and measuring sidebar, both of which are explained in the Move Common Skill rules.
When Jumping, the landing point cannot be narrower than the base of the trooper."
General Movement Rules state:
"A trooper's Movement ends automatically whenever he enters base to base contact with an enemy, even if the movement route specified is cut short as a result."
This means that if you comply with the general movement rules, then you fail to comply with the Jump rules.
This means that you don't make the jump as it would be illegal and you IDLE instead.
At least that is how I understand the rules.
It seems to be the same as declaring a ZoC ARO or Attack without the enemy being in ZoC. i.e. the requirements are not met so you idle.
(I could easily be wrong about the Idle, it could be that you are simply not allowed to declare the skills as they have no way to be legal).

 

You fall. Hanging in space is never allowed. This will mean that you won't be in the Engaged state at Resolution.

If your movement ends while executing a jump and you're in open space you fall: I see no reason why stopping due to reaching B2B or due to reaching the limit of your movement would be handled differently. So the Jump to that position is certainly valid and easily resolved.

It's effectively the same as moving into B2B with an Objective and continuing your move out of B2B and then declaring CC Attack.

I'm ok with it. You were in B2B for the order so CC Attack would be a valid Declaration.

Do note however that it'll cause weird interactions with anything that requires you to be in the Engaged state not merely B2B.

 

I don't see why this would create weird interactions nor why it would be exempt from the All at Once principle.

 

Because Engaged isn't subject to the all at once principle: it's why you can Move into B2B, BS Attack. So the Umbra wouldn't be Engaged when it declared the CC Attack (however it would have been in B2B).

 

All At Once only dictates that everything happens at the same time, not that your states and positions replicates and are all true for all positions you moved during the order. In other words, for your second short skill you would simultaneously exist throughout your entire first short skill's movement, but there would be only a limited stretch of that existence where the conditions for Engaged state to be true.

I think it's unfortunate and unnecessary that Engaged is defined as a state.

 

Yes: but neither at the moment you declare CC Attack nor at Resolution will the Trooper be in the Engaged state and that's when it actually counts.

The ultimate answer is handwave it and count the Troopers as Engaged for the purposes of skills, equipment etc that would impact the CC Declaration. In much the same way as we do for CC Attacks against Structures.

But that's not strictly supported by the Rules. Which is why I say "it'll get weird".

 

You can. What I'm saying is that that's clear because of all at one time and because it only requires B2B not Engaged.

The issue is with things that require you to be in the Engaged state. This *should* be checked a declaration.

At the moment of Declaration you won't be in the Engaged state. You can argue that at the 'position' of Declaration you will be in the Engaged state (IE I Jump into B2B, fall and end here. You ARO. I declare CC Attack, I execute my CC Attack in this position at which time our Troopers were Engaged). This isn't the normal way this interaction goes: it's weird and IMO stretching things a little.

However, rule of cool is "if CC Attack is valid just apply all skills/equipment that needs you to be Engaged even if you're not technically Engaged" because it's simpler and cooler. So I'd do that. I'm not sure that's actually what the rules say; it just feels right to me. It also was the vibe that came out of the CC Attack vs Engage, MA vs Terrain and Fireteam CC vs terrain arguments.

Tl;dr You can certainly CC Attack, its probably RAI that you can Protheon.

 

Basically I think there needs to be an FAQ to this effect:

Q: In situations where a CC Attack (or an equivalent skill such as Assault) is a valid Declaration do the effects of CC Special Skills/Equipment and the bonuses from multiple Troopers in Close Combat apply even if the Troopers are not in the Engaged state at Declaration or Resolution?

Yes. Bonuses from additional Troopers in Close Combat are only applied if those Troopers where in base to base contact with the Target during the execution of the order.

@HellLois, @ijw, @tox

It would clear up the CC vs Terrain interactions and the CC when not actually Engaged interactions.

 

Thinking back to the various discussions about Engage, I don’t think it’s likely that a CC attack declared during a fall is going to benefit from the cancelled Engaged state.

There’s a surprising number of CC special skills that don’t care whether the user is Engaged. Even Martial Arts says “reach or be in base contact” rather than specifying being Engaged. When I was checking, it was only the ‘multiple troopers in close combat’ rule that specified base contact -and- Engaged.