Jump to content
Málaga

Leviathan CQB ruling thread

Recommended Posts

Hi everybody,

 

In other post where I use to ask some noobs questions from my games, appears one about Leviathan CQB that can be very interesting in order to add it into near future FAQ update. Question was: How Leviathan CQB really Works when models are B2B? Are different as any normal Squadron? Better one, worst one? And for a better explaining of this point I gave you a couple of examples:

 

 

1 = Relthoza light infantry base.

2 = Sedna Heavy Tank

3 = El Sami Aquan Leviathan

-> = 4" Distance

- = B2B Distance

Example 1:

1 ->

1 ->

1 - 2

1 -

1->

 

Example1

5 Relthoza light infantry base move close to a Sedna Heavy Tank, 2 of them gets B2B and rest of squadron remains at 4", Then Relthoza player rolls their CBQ, and Aquan player do the same, Relthoza gets, 5 hits so nothing happens, Aquand get 9 hits so 2 B2B relts die and one of 4" too.

Example 2:

1 ->

1 ->

1 ->

1 ->

1 - 3

1 ->

1 ->

1 ->

Example2

In this example 8 Relthoza infantry bases move and 1 of them reach B2B with and El Sami Aquan Leviathan, remaining 7 still at 4", so Relthoza can roll 8 x his CBQ Value, and Aquan will roll 6 AD dices, Relthoza gets, 23 hits, and Aquan score 8 hits, Relthoza only suffer 1 lose because Aquan only can allocate damage in 1 base and excess go to floating pool, and Relthoza do 3 damages to Leviathan.

So get Leviathan CBQ weapons is a disavantage in that way, so im asking if Leviathan player can use in this example both of his CBQ values, close combat for B2B and normal CBQ values for remaining 4" Bases

 

Then people was contributing with their knowledge:

 

I just used the search in the forum and came up with this thread:

http://community.spartangames.co.uk/index.php?/topic/16439-leviathan-cqb-situation/?hl=leviathan

No Child 9, Brimat is right. The Leviathan can choose if in base to base.

The main reason for the difference is; when you take into account multiple units of Leviathan CQB capable models, where some of the unit models are in base contact and others are not: Only those in contact may engage in Leviathan CQB. The remaining models are able to execute a second CQB Action in the normal way against the same target squadron but they may not target any enemy models engaged in Leviathan CQB, as they are too close to their squadron mates.

Maybe you misread my post, or maybe I don't really understand what you mean :unsure:

I just don't see where this is written in the rules... What I can read is:

"This additional statistic, known as Leviathan CQB, applies when Leviathans are in Base Contact with an enemy" (p36 digital version)

"The second number denotes the amount of Attack Dice their CQB attack will inflict on a single enemy in Base Contact – their Leviathan CQB Stat." (p96)

"The important thing to remember is that whilst a Leviathan Model is in Base Contact with the enemy, it may only ever direct its Leviathan CQB against a single Model with which they are in Base Contact" (p96)

I don't see any choice here. RAW, the leviathan seems obligated to uses its leviathan CQB value... But Derek clarified this so there is no problem :) The rule is just badly written and don't clearly offers the choice between the two CQB values.

Yey but come with me to take a look to all Leviathan CQB values:

· Relthoza;

- Varisei Kei 10/10

- Vaxiss 12/4

· Sorylian:

- Nor Bar Ro 8/8

· Dindrenzi:

- Hyperion 8/6

· Terran:

- Odin 12/5

· Directorate:

- Wraith 10/0

· Aquan:

- El-Shami 12/6

So, if you can choose between 1st or 2nd value, there are no only 1 case where you want to choose 2nd one value. This make me think 2 possible ways:

1st -> If you are B2B with any model you MUST use 2nd value for CQB, making Leviathan most easy to destroy unit in CQB in the game (easy to cheat, without a real response capabilty)

2nd -> You can use BOTH values if is possible, 2nd one only for B2B models, and 1st one as always, having an "extra punch" B2B in some situations roling Leviathan are lethal metal monstruosities, so in Wraith's case you only have his normal CBQ meaning is a skyfortress without combat capabilty, and in Verisei-Kei you can have a 20AD pool vs B2B models .

I'm actually hoping there will be a further clarification that if a model is being attacked by something using it's Leviathan CQB, it has to use it's own Leviathan CQB stat to defend. Would give a reason (and weakness) for things like Firepower Leviathans to have the two stats. Otherwise, as Malagamer points out, the non-Leviathan CQB stat will always get picked as it's better in every circumstance... <_<

Till then, it's possible for the Leviathans to always use their non-Leviathan CQB, even against say an Archangel that is wailing on it using it's own Leviathan CQB stat... :P

So at this point I think we need a clear ruling pointing in some direction and I think should be added in next FAQs doc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine wasn't really knowledge, so much as how I would like it to be... It makes sense that if something is using Leviathan CQB against you, you have to use your own Leviathan CQB to defend... At least in my head... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By no means a ruling, but my personal feeling of how it should be is this:

Models with a Leviathan CQB stat can choose to use it or their regular CQB stat as they wish. However, their regular CQB stat CANNOT affect any model that is base-to-base with it. Their Leviathan CQB stat can ONLY affect a SINGLE target that is base-to-base with it.

What this means is that, if you place 2 out of 5 light tanks in b2b with an Odin, for example, the Odin can choose to throw 5 dice at a single light tank, or 12 at the 3 thay arent in contact. This also means that if the entire squad was in base to base, the Odin must throw 5 dice against a single target, and nothing else.

Seems more fitting, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes no sense that an Odin wouldn't gun down something charging it. Even B2B the Odin choosing to use the 4" cqb value just represents the fact it fired on the enemy on the way in.

If an Archangel is about to perform a few minor 'adjustments' to the Odin you are currently piloting using it's rather sharp blade, you probably have significantly more pressing issues on your mind than attempting to throw some minor small arms fire at it for the miniscule amount of time it's between 4" and 0"... So it should be forced to use it's Leviathan CQB if whatever is attacking it is using Leviathan CQB. :P

On the stuff without a Leviathan CQB though, I think it would be fine to target that with normal CQB even if it's in base-to-base. Aside from ramming you, there isn't a whole lot it can do... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should be able to use either. The advantage of leviathan cqb being targeted attacks. So if some sorylian manages to get 3 unupgraded bases + his expensive warlord base into combat, you can either use your regular cqb and chew through the whole unit to get to the leader (as none is the 'closest'). Or, you can use leviathan cqb and just squash the warlord, seriously denting the units effectiveness.

Same if a damaged and healthy assault robot charges you, you can choose to target the damaged one for the kill, rather than blasting with regular cab and watching him put a token on the undamaged one to keep the unit fighting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice double standards. also good to know only one guy is driving an Odin.

So then explain to me what the purpose of Leviathan CQB on an Odin is? As in your version, it has zero use, as you would always chose non-Leviathan CQB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are advocating for Leviathans that have no Leviathan CQB...? And that unless the CQB Leviathans have a really high stat there, are actually just as good at CQB as the dedicated close-combat Leviathans...?

Yeh, no thanks. I'd like to see a weakness introduced to all Firepower Leviathans. Just make them awful at Leviathan CQB by forcing them to use their low LCQB stat if (and only if) they are being attacked by something also using it's LCQB stat. It simply represents the two giant robots grappling and dodging to try and do some damage. And the imagery is awesome. If something is in base-to-base but has no LCQB stat, it can still merrily shoot away with it's normal CQB. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I support slimeball version. If you want imagine movies... imagine a giant robot shooting beams, missiles, bullets and other short range weapons against all in their way meanwhile is fighting bravery with swords, axes , or technologichal weaponry like in battletech/mechwarrior saga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So as my very first post on the board, I'm going to be jumping into probably one of the more complex posts, :D

 

From going by how the rules are structured for most everything else, the way I figure it is that there are two separate CQB rounds.

 

In the above instances, what would happen would be the attacker initiates Leviathan CQB for anyone in base contact with the model, and then normal CQB for the rest.  2 separate CQB attacks 

 

Leviathan CQB round = Models that are in base contact, versus the Leviathan's secondary CQB rating.  Models not in base contact cannot participate. Leviathan cannot target a model not in Base contact.

Normal CQB round = Models that are not in base contact (as base models cannot initiate a second CQB attack) and within 4", versus the Leviathan's primary CQB. 

 

Remember, all squadrons may react to multiple CQB, but a squadron may only initiate once.  Say for some crazy reason, the Squad decides not to initiate any CQB.  In this case, the Leviathan either does their specialized CQB against models in base contact, or their primary CQB against -any- model in the squadron within 4".  One or the other.

 

That's my take.  

 

And hello everyone!! B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to expand on the above...

 

If the Base contact initiates CQB, but the others do not, the Leviathan can retaliate against the based unit, and should be able to initiate its own standard CQB (assuming it hasn't already done so) against the rest of the units, as they have moved into it's 4" range and part of the same squad.

 

In my opinion, of course.. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: Can model equiped with Leviathan CQW choose not to use it if it is attacke by model with leviathan CQW?

 

Question: If model i attacked by model with Leviathan CQW can other models from his unit help him with their CQB?

 

Question: What happens when one model from the unit uses Leviathan CQW and the rest of the unit uses normal CQB? Who can be killed and how do I roll the dice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Yes

 

2. Do you mean that if you attack 1 model in a unit with Lev CQB can the rest of the defending models assist? No.

 

3. As per the rules: All in range and line of sight. Removing the closest model first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm fairly new to the game, but have had a few matches. I've been reading the rules on CQB and it does indeed look like a leviathan must use its LCQB stat when a model in in btb. Here is why:

 

 

❯❯ The first number denotes its CQB capability when within 4"
and NOT in Base Contact with the enemy – essentially their
standard CQB Stat.
❯❯ The second number denotes the amount of Attack Dice their
CQB attack will inflict on a single enemy in Base Contact – their
Leviathan CQB Stat.

 Based on the rules of logic, they only get to use the first CQB number when NOT in base to base. I see no other way to interpret that statement. If enemy models are in btb, then the LCQB can only be used to damage one of them.

 

So yes, you should probably always throw one model into BTB vs a leviathan. You could either force it to use a lower stat, and/or limit it to inflicting a single casualty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Logically you are correct. However, Spartan Derek made a ruling a long while back (30/03/15) but I can't remember if it made it into the FAQ
http://community.spartangames.co.uk/index.php?/topic/13603-leviathan-cqb/page-2#entry246629

 

 

Awsomeshotdude

 

"If a Leviathan is in base contact with an enemy model, MUST the Leviathan use it’s Leviathan CQB against that model, or can it choose to use its normal CQB against other models in the enemy Squadron?"

 

Derek;

 

"The Leviathan can choose which of its stats to use. The Leviathan CQB stat is a focused attack of sorts as it can only affect the model in base contact (an so can be more powerful as a result). The General CQB stat is more....well..... general in its nature and so can affect the entire target squadron."

 

We are not interpreting the rules. That is what we have been told the rules are...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here is where the problem lies. When they make a ruling that contradicts the written text, then they need to change the written text. You can't expect people to search the forum to learn how to play. They are going to download the available book and trust that it is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here is where the problem lies. When they make a ruling that contradicts the written text, then they need to change the written text. You can't expect people to search the forum to learn how to play. They are going to download the available book and trust that it is correct.

 

True, the community has pointed out many rules flaws that really should have been complied in a FAQ by now. Some ORBATS also need to be corrected.

 

At this point it wouldn't be that much of a hassle for the SG team to correct those small errors.

 

I use a Leviathan quite often with my Dinz and I wasn't aware of this ruling and it's quite a big deal. There is no point in ever choosing the Leviathan CQB stat with the current Leviathans. Tarpiting a Leviathan is going to be much harder now that I know this ruling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As this has been stated by me before, Spartan has VERY few people that have experience in PDF document editing and creation. This isn't GW with their Black Library division that can pump out new documents weekly. Planetfall has 2.0 in the works, honestly that is the focus right now for PF followed by the allies. If a new Rulebook is coming out soon then an FAQ is redundant unless it's just a conversion guide. (Which as someone who has read all of 2.0 as it stands is also redundant with the number of small changes.) The resources would be wasted and other projects delayed if an FAQ were to be done. Now, looking at the relevant area in 2.0 this issue does appear addressed if that helps ease your concerns.

Also, I'd have to poke Derek to confirm this but I believe I know why the rules and ruling contradict. Originally there were 12 leviathans, a firepower and a support/close combat model. Post firepower release a delay was enacted on the second wave of leviathans. As a stopgap to keep the firepower levis relevant for gameplay they were allowed to use their normal CQB in b2b, allowing them some leeway to act defensively as close combat Leviathans in a pinch. Now with the assaults that role is no longer needed from them but still stands as an option. (Though I hope the Cronos is still on the horizon.)

Addendum:

I also have to comment again on the reason a 1.75 FAQ was likely sidelined before. 75%-90% of our playerbase I believe is represented on the forums. Either direct active members, passive readers, or Vanguards and store/club leads that act as representatives of their group form that number. Shortly after release we had the first FAQ then the 1.5 digital book, followed by the forum seeking further clarification on all the changes. We got clarification and it trickled down through the playerbase quickly. There was no need for an FAQ at the time as everyone knew the changes and they were at the top of the forums. All the rule questions that followed were unique situations. Then late 2015 we had a new influx of players... players who never saw the old posts and weren't members of the 1st wave groups. Things would be fine had post titles from the original conversations been clear and concise, not "12 questions from the new update." Us old dogs lived it and still can't hunt down the original threads for "proof" without alot of work. 99% of the 2nd wave players issues have been addressed in the previous threads, we have the strangest form of thread necromancy going on here I've ever seen. Pieces of older threads are being stitched together, raised, and unknowingly masked as entirely new conversations.

How do we stop the Franken-thread plague?

1. Clearly mark your thread for what it is! This thread is perfect for how to do it, there is no question that it is about Levi CQB and NOTHING ELSE.

2. One Question/Subject per rule thread! Once again, perfect thread here. The only tangent we've hit is the reasonings why there are no consolidated FAQs, which is still generally on the subject. Also, a rulebook/ORBAT update is NOT a subject. "Questions on the Relthozan ORBAT update" doesn't work when you have questions about skydropping, nexus designation, and drones that could currently or likely one day apply to other forces.

3. See #1

4. See #1 AGAIN!

5. If another question comes up, make a new thread. We've had several clarifications come up that brought up wording issues in another not directly related area. Ex. a rule that uses similar wording or mechanic to another that has come under question. We won't fault you for starting a new valid discussion, heck I'll applaud you.

6. If you do inadvertently play Frankenstein and someone links the older thread PLEASE go back and try to read the entire thing. Delay commenting further unless it is a quick clarification question. There is no need for further critiquing the ruling if your concerns were already addressed previously. This applies to anyone commenting on a Franken-thread. If your viewpoint was not brought up previously, and proves to change the ruling this will help cut down on the number of pages someone has to dig through for an answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.