Community

For the purposes of the rules, is a "Tank Commander" a "Commander"?

Techinically, the unit deisgination is "Vehicle - Tank Commander" VS "Soldier - Commander"

There are lots of references in the rule book to a "Commander" (stating things such as (pg 27):

"Commander Abilities and Disruption: A disrupted Commander’s commander abilities don’t function."

Seemingly by the letter of the rules we have two options right?

Option 1...

If they are considered commanders then:
1.  A dirstupted Tank Commander does not grant his Commander ability
AND
2.  A Tank Commander would grant a +1 to an M1 Garand or allow a Mosin to Move.

Option 2...

If they are NOT considered commanders then:
1.  They don't loose their abilities because they are not Commanders.
AND
2.  They grant no bonuses to the M1 Garand or Mosin.


I'm confused, and asking this question, becasue I've seen a mix of both.  If it IS a mix of both, I think we will need a redefinition of several spots in the rule book? 

(Obviously the other sets handled this by puuting new rules for things like Heroes and Obstacles on the flip side of the set checklist.  In the absense of such a document, we are all left with whats in the rulebook.  I know you dont have anyting to do with the missing check-list and new-rule clarifications, but I fear its absense is going to make more work for you!)

Thanks for any insight into this.

Mot

WotC_Huscarl wrote:

"Commander" and "Tank Commander" are two different subtypes. "Tank Commander" pieces don't affect those calling for a "Commander" to take effect.

Tank Commanders do, however, have Command Abilities labeled as such. Command Abilities don't function when the unit is disrupted.

Steve

Thanks

Cpt_John_Miller wrote:

A question in the same vein.

1. Does a damaged(but not disrupted) commander tank lose it's command abilities?

No, only face-up disruption causes a Commander unit to loose their Commander Abilities for the turn.