anti-tank suicide bombers/close assault.

[Fred Brannan]

So, this came up in a game…A Japanese suicide bomber charged a transport with passengers. The army list book says the bomber moves into contact and assaults the vehicle. Passengers in a transport (one unit, owners choice) dismount to fight the close combat. However, the suicide bomber doesn’t have the ability to assault foot troops. Do you fight a close combat, withdraw the bomber, NOT dismount passengers, or what?

[Nat]

suicide bombers can fight in close combat*, they just cant declare a charge against the unit.

However in this case its the embarked unit thats effectively counter-charging the bomber.

*they dont have the ‘unarmed’ rule… now they IIRC they can chose to use the AT mine as their weapon – aka remove both models :p or ‘boot knife’

[Master Chief]

Armies of Imperial Japan page 26:

Kamikaze. If a suicide anti-tank team assaults an enemy vehicle and the model manages to move into contact with the target, remove it and immediately resolve a hit against the vehicle with a Penetration value of +8 (no other penetration modifiers apply)

The Kamikaze special rule should override the normal infantry assaulting transport rule, so the suicide bomber team does not fight close combat with the passengers. It should be removed immediately and the transport hit with Pen +8.

[Stuart Harrison]

“The Kamikaze special rule should override the normal infantry assaulting transport rule, so the suicide bomber team does not fight close combat with the passengers. It should be removed immediately and the transport hit with Pen +8.”

‘Should ‘does not equal ‘does’ – the Kamikaze rule is specifically vehicles.  Passengers from a loaded transport dismount and fight incoming assaults aimed at their transport, no exception is stated or suggested.

As I read it, the assaulting suicide bomber fights a close combat vs a unit of disembarking passengers.  As one man not held back by the ‘unarmed’ rule, he fights with the normal one attack, if he loses he is gone, if he wins, he can try again next turn.

Net result – loaded transports are a poor target choice for suicide bombers unless your aim is specifically to unload the transport.

[Nat]

@MasterCheif – two key words there IF & Manages.  The transport disembark in to combat means that you didnt get in to contact with the vehicle.

I disagree that the suicide AT rule should over ride the combat disembark rule, as that would mean the unit stays on board when every instict would be to jump out

[Mike]

I disagree. There is no assault on the vehicle. If the man makes contact then remove the dude and resolve the penetration. Contact with the vehicle is all that is required and generally the vehicle never knew the guy was coming to tell the guys inside to get out. If he was going to fight out an assault then sure the dismounts get to intervene but since its just contact and no actual assaulting I think the AT dudes rules over ride the normal assaulting a transport rules. It can go both ways though and would need a ruling from warlord and I am surprised it hasn’t been FAQ’d

[Nat]

@Mike,  how do you get in contact with the vehicle except by assault?  in game terms Assault is a type of Run Command that allows a model to by-pass the 1″ gap rule.  So (Rules here) you cant get in contact with the vehicle unless you declear an assault.

So you now follow the assault rules, which include passangers bailing out in the way of the charging bloke….. Now (of my head, not near my books), the suprise assault rule would still take affect, so if the Suicide AT guy was within 6″ then the passangers would stay in as the bailing out is a reaction. (isnt it?)

[Author]

Posts