Community

I am compiling all the confirmed official answers to Angels 2O rules in this thread.  I will updade this first post as more information becomes available.   Any non-officialy confirmed answers will be noted.

From WOTC customer help
Rules FAQ

Question:  In the Bomber Escort scenatio on page 32, what is the starting altitude of the blue force?
Answer:  It should be the same as the force opposite:  altitude 4

Question:  Are bombers able to engage, with their machine guns, targets at higher and lower altitudes?
Answer:  No

Question:  Is an Ace pilot more effective when fireing against a bomber target than a poor pilot is?,
Answer:  (Yes)  Bombers should have average pilots 

Question:  What is the fire arc of the Bf-11O's range 4 attacks?
Answer:  It would actually be a blossom of 11 hexes in total:  the original 6 as shown on page 17 and then you would add the forward 5 hexes off of this.  So one hex is 4 forward with 2 to the left and 2 to the right.

Question:  Can climbing or diving aircraft attack targets at the same altitude?
Answer:  Yes

Updated 11 April 2O12

GW

No problem guys.  I know its been frustrating on here and the fans sites trying to come up with the best guess answer to some of these nagging question.

There are still some more situations that the rules are a bit ambiguous about.  So go ahead and post them here and we can add them to the list as "Pending".  Also some questions may be answered Directly from a rules book cite or semi-official comments posted else where. example: alot of people totaly missed the Diving Status entry to shoot co-alt on pg 27.  We also have other sources like Rich Baker or Mons Johnson who stated Climbing Status could engage co-alt in Angels 20 Opening Salvo Pt. 4  www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/aam/201...

I dont want to get into debate on the grey areas of House Ruling in this thread to much because, as we all know, it becomes a slippery slope when "Realism" and "What the rules say" becomes a matter of opinion.  Steve Winters used to body slam me on a regular basis on the old AH QA with his "Dont confuse Logic with the rules." lol

GW

Yes, the orginal explanation was an example based from the first hex as refference for the arc. That got lost in the simplified explanation. I reread this from your perspective and see how a brow would furrow with "that math dont add up." The orginal term coined was Blossom from the first hex (stem) and that lead to the differnt thoughts of what the range 4 firing arc would look like. Ie.. should it continue to "blossom" out from the central hex, extend forward from the blossom three hexs, or mantain the actual deflection set by first hex. The later is the case. Good catch, I guess most of us just added the 5 additional hexes and never gave it a second thought. GW

Thanks for posting that Entek.  A picture is worth a thousand words.