Living FAQ: Mars Attacks

Last update 6th August 2014

This page deals with all the rules questions that you might have about Mars Attacks. Please read the comments below to see if your query has already been answered. If not, please free to ask in the comments section at the bottom of the page.

If you have any questions on the game rules, or if you see a post on a forum somewhere that does, then please direct them here so that I can deal with them all in a single document. That way questions get answered consistently and everyone gets the benefit 🙂

line

To keep things tidy, comments and questions will be deleted from this page once they have been addressed in the FAQ.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in FAQ, Mars Attacks!. Bookmark the permalink.

129 Responses to Living FAQ: Mars Attacks

  1. Anthony says:

    How do you play support card? If I understood the rules, putting down a single Support Card (Heat Ray for example) counts as a single action in a Turn. You cannot play that card till the following Turn. If you place another support card of the same type (Another Heat Ray) into that Set, you cannot play that Set of cards until the following Turn.

    Can you shoot at Rattled models provided they’re visible. Do you gain a +1 dice to clear shooting if you do?

    Can you use Covering Fire if two squares are filled but one is empty? What about a square in the center of the two that’s empty?

    Expect many more.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Support cards: What you’ve said is correct. Page 12 seems pretty clear about how you play a support card:

      “To play a Support Card, place it face up on the table in front of you. Each can be the start of a new Set or can be added to an existing Set. Sets can include up to three cards of the same type. Support Cards that are on the table in front of a player are said to be “in play”

      Shooting doesn’t care what state the target model is in, only how much of it is visible and the range. Follow the normal rules to shoot Rattled models.

      Covering Fire says “Each square must contain at least one target that the model could shoot at normally.” So no empty squares.

      • Teskal says:

        – “You cannot play that card till the following Turn.”
        If the card affect a model, is it not played in the same turn? I think it is meant resolve and not play or not?
        – Do I see it correct that it is not possible to use Covering Fire on two squares if there is an empty square between it, because it would disturb the balance?
        – If I have no models left and use the “play 2 cards” option, can I put 2 identical cards in the same set? Putting one card in a set and resolving is not possible because resolving must be always in the next turn?

        • Quirkworthy says:

          The restriction on playing cards is only for Support cards (which aren’t played on models).

          Covering fire is very powerful, too powerful if it is very flexible. The restriction means that it forces the Martian player to either break up his attack a bit (therefore having an effect without even firing) or risk the shot. An early version of the rule allowed empty squares in the set of 3 and obliterated the Martians way too easily. Scenarios became all about hunting these models down, which wasn’t right. With the restriction it makes it more of a threat to force the Martian into positions he doesn’t really want to be in.

          You can play 2 identical Support cards in one turn with this option.

  2. amitloaf says:

    Most of my questions are about specific abilities:
    * Fixin’ Stuff – After revealing the counter and throwing the die – do you have to build the device or can you still claim that as a VP (If you get a Martian Communicator – it’s still alien tech that you can get VP from IMO).
    * Follow Me \ Natural Leader – The rules state: “As these additional activations are all triggered by the original model’s Heroic ability, only the original Hero model counts for purposes of working out what that player can do this turn”. What does that mean? All models are activated so what else can it affect?
    * Klutz – Does that model have to re-roll an 8? If not, why would that player ever want to reroll an 8?
    * Rapid Fire – It’s stated that “The model’s weapon has a high rate of fire and can hit several targets…”. According to the rest, it seems like it can only hit 2 targets. What is right?
    * Scared civilian: It’s stated that the human player may choose to move the civilian. Does he have to in a specific turn (ie. if all other models were already activated).
    * Scared civilian: How can a captured civilian count as Alien Secrets and as Critters at the same time? Each side can profit only from one type of counter. Also, what is the thematic explanation of why you can’t shoot a civilian directly?
    * Star-Crossed Lovers – “The limit of once per Turn on the second use of Heroics is lifted”. I can’t find any reference to such limit in the rules. What does it mean? How can you use the second time of heroics only one per turn?

    Thank you 🙂

  3. This is how I read the rules. I may be wrong though 🙂

    Fixin’ stuff. As far as I read it once you have made your roll or taken the VP’S your stuck with the result.
    Natural leader/follow me. When you have used the ability to activate another model/s, you can still play a card or move another model that turn.
    Klutz. Both of the re rolls are optional.
    Rapid fire. Does seem like only two. If you rattle or kill the first model you shoot, then you can attack a second model in the same square as part of the attack.
    Scared civilian. The rule states that If a model with this rule starts the HUMAN turn within two squares of a Martian, it may be moved instead of One of his/her other models. They count as an alien secret for the humans OR a critter for the Martians., not both. Shooting unarmed people is bad 😜
    Star crossed lovers. I can’t find the where it says there is a limit either 😦

    Hope that helps 😊

    • Teskal says:

      About Klutz
      Why should the additional rolls optional? If you roll normally an eight, you can with a new roll an additional success and even more rolls if you get eight.
      If you have Klutz, you can get rerolls also with 1. The 1 is still a failure, but with the reroll you can get an extra success.
      For example: With the 1 he hits also the cubboard, which fall on the martian and so the martian get more damage.
      ‘Klutz, but Lucky’ would have been a better name…

    • Teskal says:

      About Rapid Fire
      As I understand it, it is possible that you kill all in the square with this skill.
      ‘Roll the dice again as if this was the first shot of the model’s Turn’
      If you count it as if it is the first shot, you are at the beginning like in a repeating loop.
      I see no reason why it stops after the 2nd, because the 2nd is not the 2nd anymore, he is counted as the first one.

      • LavaJohn says:

        You can also spend a point of heroics to shoot again. It is unclear if you keep rolling after the 2nd rapid-fire shot from the wording, as written you seem to be correct.

    • Teskal says:

      *Scared Civilian
      – I see no reason why you can’t shoot the Civilian with the martian, on the cards and in the comics they do it all the time. I think the martians should even get VP for shooting civilians, it is their job to do it. I think the Scenario has the last word about it.
      – Humans want to help other humans in need (especially heroes want it) and martians need laboratory rats. So it is logical that a civilian can give VP to both sides, or not?
      – but civilians are no critters or alien secret, he comes with the cards into the game. If there is not a later scenario saying it otherwise.
      – I’m not sure if no humans are in reach of the civilian and every moved his models, if the Civilians moves also with scatter.
      – how get the points if the civilian is moving from the board

      * Star-Crossed Lovers
      Page 17, ‘you can spend up to one point of heroics to either:’

      • Teskal says:

        Ok, didn’t saw the text on the next page, I jumped while reading direct to the next skill. 🙂
        So no attacking scared civilians…

  4. Teskal says:

    About Fixin’ Stuff
    Is it possible to give the weapons from this skill to another model?

  5. Teskal says:

    Here are still question needing answers. 🙂
    About Deadzone rules for Mars Attacks, will there be still heroic points and heroic abilities?

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Not in the same way or to the same extent. DZ works very differently and also has a different, less comic book atmosphere. Part of placing the Martians and Humans in the DZ style universe is adapting them to that style.

  6. Barry Miller says:

    Hi, I absolutely love Mars Attacks! I find it a perfect and fun miniatures game for the board gamer! So I want to do my part in contributing to the community… I understand you’re working on a Living Rules, or at least plan to turn this FAQ into a document…
    Thusly I scoured the rulebook, trying to think of any question someone might possibly ask. I came up with several questions which are posted on the Mars Attacks page at the Board Game Geek website. Should I copy and paste them here? Or is it OK to keep them at BGG, where I’m sure many people will be looking once the game goes into full distribution?
    As some of the questions are relatively picky, I’m hesitant to clog your FAQ page, here, with them?

    • Teskal says:

      Most questions asked Barry asked are interesting. I would post them here.
      Direkt link to all the threads:
      http://boardgamegeek.com/forum/1440329/mars-attacks-miniatures-game/rules
      Another question is from Fixxxer76:
      “The hero Troy has “too many late nights ability”. Which allows him to move after a failed shoot attack. Heroes already get the ability to get more done and use a heroic point to move, shoot or fight for one point at the end or beginning of their turn. So if they can already move one square for one point why does troys ability exist?
      Whats the point of Troy’s ability??”

      • Quirkworthy says:

        Thanks teskal.

        @Barry – clog away. This is the main place I’ll check questions and answer things.

        • Barry Miller says:

          OK Jake, I’ll start putting them up here. But there are about 15 or so questions which have been posted over at BGG during the past month so it may take a while. In the meantime, of course you’re always invited to drop by the Mars Attacks forums at BGG! (Teskal provided the link to the Rules Forum, above). A lot of players are congregating there to share comments and questions… I’m sure your input would be very welcome!

  7. Teskal says:

    It is something what Nigel Robinson wrote at the Kickstarter, I think it is important enough to put it here online:

    “The attack from space scenarios appear flawed and their are typos/issues present:

    1. act 3 advises you to keep the models from act 1, should be act 2

    2. act 1 for the human player cant “win” the only viable tactic is put Buck in the firing line and get him shot thereby completing the requirement to save him with heroics and starting act 2, this requires co-operation from the martian player if he avoids shooting buck all game its just a matter of time and dice rolls until all the human soldiers are dead (from never ending spawning waves of martians)

    3. act 2 no way for human player to “win” again just a wait for one of the heros to be low on heroics. not as bad as act 1 but still nothing rewards the human player fro killing martians

    overall i like the idea of the linked ongoing scenarios, but i feel they need an option for the human player to aim for to force the next act say when 10 martians? are killed”

    • Teskal says:

      It is even possible for the human to make it impossible to end act 1.

      Get 5 soldiers in each red deployment zone, kill all martians and you cannot ever enter act 2.

      • Teskal says:

        Ok, while in bed after I wrote last comment, I thought that every red square counts alone to make it possible to enter new martian troops on the board.
        But there would be still the problem that the human player cannot do much to have any influence on the first 2 acts.

  8. Marcel Popik says:

    I have played 2nd game yesterday – and I drawed EVENT lost child. OK I put civilian as the first one on random square. I was checking and cheking the rule-bokk, but I didn’ manage to find something about the civilians there…. maybe I was tired, but really, I didn’t know what to do, whats the role of the civilian there.

  9. Barry Miller says:

    It sounds like you had trouble finding information on how to play Civilians. I agree with you that the Rulebook is lacking when it comes to covering Civilians. But the information is there, in two locations:
    1) How to play a Civilian is covered on page 20.
    2) Civilian Stats are listed on page 22.

    I think the confusion is that by placing the rules for Civilians on page 20, they become buried as page 20 is in the ‘ABILITIES’ chapter. So yes, it is counter-intuitive to have to look inside the ‘Abilities’ chapter in order to find the rules on playing Civilians! Perhaps the upcoming Living Rules could put a ‘Civilians’ paragraph in the first half of the book, prior to page 17.

    But that being the case, playing the event card, “Little Lost Child” is pretty straight-forward once you understand the “Scared Civilian” rule on page 20. The first paragraph of the card is clear enough… if Civilians are already on the board when the card is drawn, then move them!

    OK. But how? That’s where page 20 comes in… First, you have to infer that, as the rulebook reads, any civilian on the board is considered a SCARED CIVILIAN. Once that’s inferred, then using the Scared Civilian rule on page 20 makes sense. And that says: “A SCARED CIVILIAN always moves using the SCATTER (3) rule.” So to resolve the first paragraph of ‘Lost Child’, move any civilians already on the board using Scatter (3).

    Then it’s time to resolve the second paragraph, which is also straight-forward and self explanatory, as long as you know to turn to pages 13 and 14 in order to learn what it means to resolve a RANDOM square.

    I hope this helps answer your question.

    On a side note, overall, the Civilian rules leave several questions which I’ve posted over at BoardGameGeek. The link, if you’re interested, is: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1233979/civilians-questions

    While I look forward to Jake answering our questions here and continuing to share his insight on this website, it is none the less a personal blog. A VERY GOOD one, but a blog. So with BoardGameGeek being one of, if not the world’s, most prolific online community for board gamers, I decided to post my questions there with the reasonable expectation that most Mars Attacks players will go there to discuss and seek information about this fun game.

  10. Barry Miller says:

    This is a really good question! It’s also been asked here: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1233981/general-card-play-questions

    Let’s hope someone from Mantic, or Jake, answers them as the answer to your question is fundamental to game play. Intuitively, the answer seems obvious, but the way the rules are written in this case causes one to say, “Hmmm… maybe not.”

  11. Chris says:

    Regarding Brave and shooting.
    If two models are in the same square, one is in the open & the other other has cover. If the model in cover has Brave, can the opponent be forced to take the more difficult shot?
    Cheers

  12. Chris says:

    I just noticed that the Heat Ray on the flying saucer has the Anti-Tank ability but the Heat Ray on the Robot does not. Was Anti-Tank accidentally left off or was this intentional?

  13. Teskal says:

    I put most questions from Barry from BGG in my word document. I hope it is ok to post them:
    01.
    Civilians Entering a Scenario: Please confirm that the only way Civilians enter into the scenario is via the, “They’re Everywhere!” and “Little Lost Child” Event Cards? None of the core scenarios introduce civilians otherwise.

    02.
    Scared Civilian Rule:
    a) As Civilians normally can’t be moved without one of the aforementioned event cards, is the purpose of the ‘Scared Civilian’ rule to allow a human-side player to move a civilian [potentially] out of reach of a nearby Martian, when able? I say “potentially” as Civilians are always moved via SCATTER(3). So it could potentially be moved into the same square as, and be captured by the same Martian the human-side player is trying to avoid. That would be a major backfire. Considering that, I just want to make sure I understand this rule correctly.

    b) And when the rule says that, “…the human player may choose to move a civilian instead of one of his other models.”, please confirm that “instead of” counts as an activation for the other model (or at least one of its movement actions for its later turn)?

    c) This rule says that a Civilian is immediately captured upon moving into a square with only Martians. So can it thusly be assumed that the cardinal rule which says when a model enters a square with an enemy, it MUST FIGHT, is negated? Also, assuming so, then it should be OK for a Civilian to fight when it moves into a square with a Martian and a U.S. Trooper or a hero, correct?

    03.
    General Comment The whole “civilian thing” is somewhat confusing. First, civilians are neither soldiers nor heroes. And based on the description of what a model is (pgs 4-5), they’re not models either. Best I can tell, they’re considered “counters”, yet they have stats like the other models do and the ‘Scared Civilian’ rules on pg 20 refers to them as models. So they sort of “fall between the cracks,” hence my slight confusion.

    04.
    Playing Dice Bonus Cards: The rules (pg 6) say one of the options for a turn is to “Activate one model and play a card”. Is it meant that this rule also applies to cards which provide bonuses to SHOOT, FIGHT, and SURVIVE dice rolls (‘Human Ingenuity’, ‘We Come in Peace’, ‘Tough’, & ‘We Are Your Friends’)? In other words, is playing one of these cards considered an extension of a model’s SHOOT, FIGHT, or SURVIVE action? Or is playing one of these cards a separate action, thusly fulfilling the “play a card” option?

    The rules would suggest the latter, and if so, mean that a model which SHOOTS on its 2nd action cannot use one of these cards to modify its dice roll. Just checking if this is the intention.

    05.
    Hit the Deck: Is the “star” icon on ‘Hit The Deck’ a misprint? The card is obviously meant to be played out of turn. (The equivalent Martian card, ‘Tactical Withdrawal’ has an “alien skull” icon).

    06.
    Mind Control: Please clarify what the words, “You choose the target” mean, on the ‘Mind Control’ card. The answer seems intuitive, but what if the opponent’s Support Card specifies a RANDOM target? Does Mind Control override that? Just need a little clarification, is all.

    07.
    Card Draw Method: The rules (pg 6) clearly infer that when drawing cards at the end of the round, each player draws at once all the cards they need to restore their hand (while resolving Events when drawn). This is instead of the customary alternating draw method? For example, Player A needs three cards so draws all three at once. Then after Player A is finished drawing (and resolving Events as called for) Player B needs four cards and draws all four of his cards at once. Just want to confirm this is the intended method as inferred by the rules, instead of alternating draws starting with the first player?

    08.
    Covering Fire: Does CF work against Gen Tor? The rules are written that when Covering Fire is used, “… all the Soldier models that the SHOOTER can see … are immediately Rattled.” (bold italics are mine). As the rule specifically used the term, “soldier”, it would imply that CF only works on soldiers and not heroes. I.e., “Covering Fire” works only against the Martian Soldiers and NOT General Tor?

    09.
    Rapid Fire: The rules for Rapid Fire can be interpreted two ways…

    a) One interpretation is due to the specific phrase on pg 20, “…against a second enemy model”, which implies that RF can only be used against two enemies.

    b) The other interpretation is that Rapid Fire is effective as long as conditions are met… i.e., it’s possible to take out three or four enemy models in the same square with lucky dice rolls!
    Which is the correct interpretation? I’m leaning toward “b”.

    10.
    Star-Crossed Lovers: As all heroic abilities cost a Heroics Point, how do you spend the Heroics Point for Star-Crossed Lovers?

    11.
    Can Soldiers use Heroics in All Three Ways? “Heroic Abilities”, as a term used in the rules is a somewhat confusing. While the rule on pg 5 clearly distinguishes between “Soldiers” and “Heroes”, the concept of “Heroics” muddies those waters. For instance, pg 17 discusses “Heroic Abilities” to basically infer that Heroic Abilities are the domain of the Heroes. Yet the U.S. Sergeant and the Martian Grunt Commander, who also have Heroic Points, aren’t Heroes – they’re Soldiers.

    So the question is, despite being Soldiers, it’s assumed that they’re also able to spend their Heroics Points to avoid damage and get more done in a turn the same way that Heroes can? (The rules say that Heroics can be used in three ways (Avoid Damage / Get More Done / Heroic Ability). The wording for, “To get more done” on pg 17 is driving the question as it specifically states [only] a Hero can spend a point to Get More Done.

    12.
    Using all Three Ways in the Same Turn: Please confirm this reasonable assumption… Given that a Hero has the points available, can it use all three of the ways (mentioned above) in a single turn? It seems like this should not be a problem. I.e., can it spend a point to avoid damage, then spend a point to get more done, then another point to use a Heroic ability… all on the same turn? The only mention of a limit concerns being able to spend only one point on, “Get More Done”.

    13.
    Does either side claim Victory Points for opponent’s models killed by an Event Card effect? The question is asked because this situation is specifically covered in the rules on pg 12 for playing a Support Card, but is not mentioned in the rules for Event Cards.

    14.
    Walls Blocking Movement: The rules (pg 8) say that only a solid wall blocks movement to an adjacent square, then defines a solid wall as a, “3×3 section” (of which two each come with the core game). Then the following paragraph, which discusses moving diagonally , further states that doing so is legal when not blocked by a wall that is taller than the model itself. There are also two wall sections in the core game that are taller than the models yet don’t qualify as a “3×3” – the “broken window” wall sections.

    The question: Do the “broken window” wall sections, which are taller than the models (yet not “3×3”), block movement [diagonally] or can the model pass through a broken window? Why am I asking? I just found it curious that when the rules discuss blocking diagonal movement, they go to some length to call out wall sections that are taller than the models. Contrast this to blocking simple adjacent movement where the rules simply say that only a full-sized “3×3” section blocks movement. This is further muddied as a diagonal square is also adjacent.

    15.
    Moving into a Square with a Mutant Bug: Can a model (or a Civilian) move into a square with a Mutant Bug? It’s assumed, “Yes”, as the ‘Mutant Bug’ card doesn’t say you can’t (as does the ‘MOO!’ card). And if so, then I assume it must immediately fight the bug?

    16.
    Holes in Walls: Can a model shoot through the hole which is found in each of the full-height (3×3) walls?

    17.
    Sandbags: Do the sandbags which are molded as part of the U.S. LMG soldier offer cover? (i.e., this model will never be in the clear)?

    18.
    Defending a Fight With Friends? Please confirm that the defender in a FIGHT also gets to take advantage of the +1 additional die for having friends in the same square? The rules infer this to be the case, but just want to be clear.

    19.
    Counters Blocking LoS: It’s assumed the Burning Cow, Flying Car, and Mutant Bug counters block Line of Sight, correct? So when a player who’s resolving the event places the counter, it’s assumed he can place it in such a way that purposely blocks LoS for the opponent?

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Just a few for now…

      16. Ask yourself the LOS question on page 10 “if you can see any part of the model then you can SHOOT at it.”
      17. No. They are part of the model, not part of the scenery. Read the description under the LOS test mentioned above: the target model means all of it “including any base it is mounted on”.
      18. Yes he does.
      19. Blocking LOS. There are no specific rules needed for any individual item blocking LOS or not because you always apply exactly the same LOS rules. There is no vagueness or imagination required: “if you can see any part of the model then you can SHOOT at it.”. So, can you see it? The player that puts the counter on the board may place it in any legal position defined by the rules; usually anywhere within a specific square. He may indeed use this to deliberately block LOS if he chooses.

    • LavaJohn says:

      2 c) I don’t think the civilian counts either side as enemies. The fight stat is there in the event of a mutant bug card, letting them fight back. Maybe…

      5) Probably, but it does specify when you can play it so isn’t critical.

      6) If the effect has a random target you don’t make it more accurate by stealing it… If it is part random you get to pick part of it.

      12) It only specifies you can spend ‘up to one’ to use the ‘get stuff done’ options. Otherwise shooting a hero and wounding them twice would kill them.

      15) Yes, the only way to get rid of a mutant bug is to fight it.

      • Barry Miller says:

        @LavaJohn, Thanks for joining the conversation with some great input.
        About 2c) I would submit that civilians, being humans, would most definitely count the Martians as the enemy! The rules even make the point by saying that when a Civilian is in a square with only Martians, the Civilian is, “captured”; but if in a square with only Humans, it is, “rescued”. So one is left to assume the Civilian’s FIGHT stat is meant for encountering any enemy, to include a bug.
        About 5) Agreed. But it’d be nice for Jake to confirm.
        About 6) Yeah, your logic makes sense, except that ‘Mind Control’ uses the specific wording, “You Choose the Target”. To me, those words imply a targeted attack which is quite different than a random attack. Keep in mind that the Martians are not simply stealing the Human weapon, but rather they are controlling it with their mind, which fits the “You Choose the Target” wording. But still, as your reply attests, there’s lots of room here for interpretation. Hopefully Jake can clear it up.
        12) I was asking if it’s OK (and I assume it is) to use, all on the SAME TURN, a heroics point to “avoid damage”, use a heroics point to “get more done”, and use a heroics point to “use a Heroic ability”. The rules infer that spending three heroics points in this way during the same turn is OK, but it still begs for an official “approval”. I apologize if I misunderstood your reply.
        15) “Yes” is also my assumption as well. But the ‘Mutant Bug’ card could be interpreted that essentially, you [must] wait for a bug to come INTO your square before fighting it.

        • LavaJohn says:

          2c) Humans are panicky creatures and lash out when frightened. They may well punch a soldier in the face before realising they have been rescued! I tend to agree with you though.
          6) If the ‘you choose the target’ wording wasn’t there then the human player is forced to use their artillery but can still pick who gets hit, which isn’t a great option for the Martians. Intent is clearly that the Martian player has control of the card effect, up to the amount of control the card effect allows.
          12) Yep, you should be able to use each in a turn, again otherwise you could ‘follow me’ and get killed while you still have heroic points left. The limitation is just so you cant shoot 4 times with ‘get stuff done’ in a single turn, known as ‘getting a LOT done!’
          15) I’m making the assumption that the Mutant bug card is an enemy to everyone (currently out of Martian control) so you must fight it if you move into the square. It doesn’t take up the whole square so there must be space left over. As a consequence if it doesn’t kill anybody in a square it also forces them to fight it instead of acting normally too…

  14. Mike says:

    Rattled: If you are rattled (specifically as a Martian, from the Armored ability), and get Rattled again, is there a cumulative effect? In other words, does a second Rattled result kill the model, or does it just continue to be Rattled?

  15. Mike says:

    If a Hero first aims then shoots, then uses a heroics point to shoot again, do they get the aim bonus on the second shot?

    • Teskal says:

      For the second shot the hero had not time to aim, so I would say no.

      After the shot the blowback moves the weapon out of the aiming position and the hero must move the weapon back to a postition for a good shot. Also the moment of ‘ease of mind’ which you get with aiming is gone. Even the martian weapons could have a blowback.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Yes. The SHOOT rules say that the bonus applies “If you AIM first in the same turn”, which you will have done if you take an AIM and SHOOT action, then spend a point of heroics to SHOOT a second time.

      Whilst Teskal makes a fair point about aiming, blowback, etc, it is also true to say that steady, aimed fire can be maintained over several shots. Though necessarily abstracted in Mars Attacks, aimed shooting is as much about shooter’s mindset and willingness to take the time as it is about the mechanics of the weapon.

  16. Jon Finn says:

    If a robot has two Massive Claws, do the bonuses from the Huge Weapon and Anti-Tank abilities stack? +4 dice when Fighting and another +4 dice versus Vehicles?

    • Chris says:

      Oh, good point, the 2 weapon rule only applies to ranged weapons. What happens with 2 claws?

    • Teskal says:

      Are there enough arms available to have two massive claws?
      Personally I would say he could make 2 attacks, but would also like how to handle it.

      Sadly there is no option to throw cars, trees, creatures…

    • Matt says:

      The Huge Weapon bonus says it is in addition to other modifiers so yes it would stack with AT.

      • Teskal says:

        Anti-Tank + Huge Weapon would stack, but both giving a bonus of +2 (not +4), together +4.

        If it is possible to put 2 massive claws on one robot, I think he will have 2 attacks and every attack gets +4.

        Does anyone have already the robot and can tell if there are 2 clawed arms?

        Same Question as with the arms is also if we could have 2 shrink rays or 2 heat rays or 2 freeze ray or a mix of these weapons on one robot. And if it would get 2 attacks with it.

        • Chris L says:

          The robot rules on page 53 in WW says you can have of any weapon except the Shrink Ray which is only limited to one. The Vehicle with 2 weapons rule is on page 24 of that book and says you can fire 2 weapons if you don’t move. The 2 weapon rule only says ranged weapons, so does not seem to apply to claws (currently). So currently 2 claws on a robot is useless. It would be nice if this problem was fixed.

        • Matt says:

          You can only FIGHT once. So having 2 claws will give you +4 for 1 attack (FIGHT).

        • Matt says:

          bah, I can’t edit so ignore my +4 comment above… one FIGHT but it gets +2 twice for a Huge Weapon (+4) and Anti-Tank twice for a total of +8. The kit only comes with one arm though so someone would need to do some kit-bashing to do this.

        • Matt says:

          +8 is going to hurt. It’s very powerful but also very situational and limiting in other ways. You’ll only get it in a FIGHT against another Vehicle and it means the Robot has also given up any ranged weapons. It might get shot to bits with no retaliation before it gets a chance to rend something into little pieces (which it probably would!).

        • Teskal says:

          Wow, did forgot the big stompy robot in the movie.

  17. Chris L says:

    Why does a trooper with an LMG have a range of 1-12 but the vehicle mounted machine guns have a range of only 1-10? The vehicle mounted guns would be shooting heavier ammo and be more accurate and so I would think it would be the other way around. Just an oddness I noticed, not a big deal.

  18. Chris L says:

    It has been pointed out that there was a stretch goal for a Martian Unit Commander Pilot but this fellow doesn’t show up in the rules at all. It looks like this particular option was forgotten about entirely. See update #35:

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1744629938/mars-attacks-the-miniatures-game/posts/629548

  19. Jon Finn says:

    Can a Vehicle MOVE up to four squares and FIGHT any adjacent target as its action?

    • Teskal says:

      Personally I would say move 3 squares and with the 4th square you would be theoretically in the same field of enemy an attack him. Only difference would be that you stop before the 4th square, because you can’t enter it.

    • Matt says:

      Yes. Vehicles can Fight an enemy model in an adjacent square just as if they had entered the square and triggered the Fight.

  20. Blipvert says:

    If a model is killed by a random event (cows, mutant bugs, etc.), does it count as a VP for the opposing player? Speaking of cows, can more than one herd be on the board at the same time? If so, are they each resolved in the same manner? The cow card seems to imply that the first one comes in randomly and that if a second event card comes in, the existing cow moves randomly rather than adding a second herd.

    On a different topic, if a target model is out in the open, and LOS crosses an intervening piece of terrain, does the shooter still get the bonus? What if the intervening piece of terrain is the terrain piece the shooter is hiding behind? (In other words, the shooter is obscured from incoming fire, but outgoing fire is not.)

    • Barry Miller says:

      @Blipvert, I’ve got one guess and two “for sures”, to help answer your questions:
      Regarding your question about models being killed by a random event. That exact same question was asked at BGG, here: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1233974/event-card-effects-question
      It was also transcribed by Teskal from BGG and submitted above in this FAQ for Jake’s review (See Oct 13, question 13). The general consensus by the community (hence, its a guess) is, “No”, deaths caused by events do NOT count as VPs for the other side. They just happen without advancing score. And this makes sense, especially when you consider that one way victory is achieved is when all the models of one side are killed. So for this purpose, deaths caused by an event card sort of earn “indirect” VPs!

      For your other questions:
      Yes, more than one herd can be on the board at any given time. Each time the ‘Moo!’ card is drawn, a new herd enters play. Simple as that. If any herds happen to be on the board at the time the card is drawn, the existing herd(s) are moved via the SCATTER(4) rule prior to the new herd entering play. IN ADDITION, at the end of each round when there are herds on the board, each herd is moved according to SCATTER(4) rules. The only way for a herd to be taken off the board is when its own movement takes it off the board (which is very likely when using SCATTER(4).

      Regarding your LOS question, the rules for this game really do make it easy, easy. It doesn’t matter one bit if the target model is out in the open! Repeat that again. What matters is whether or not the shooter has a CLEAR SHOT. The target can be out in the wild open all day long, but if ANYTHING disturbs a clear shot for the shooter then the shooter does NOT get the “Clear Shot” bonus.
      In the situation you describe, it sounds like the “intervening piece of terrain” would make it impossible for the shooter to see ALL of the target model (including ALL of its base). If this is indeed the case, then it’s NOT a clear shot. Or, if the intervening piece of terrain is not in the way after all – i.e., it does NOT block viewing of ANY/ALL of the target, then it WOULD be a clear shot. But since you described it as “intervening”, I assume it must block viewing at least part of the model.
      And remember, when determining LOS, you’re bending down and looking from the POV of your SHOOTER’S HEAD at the target model. So even if the target is out in the open (let’s say 4 or 5 inches away from any terrain), if any terrain (which may be only an inch or less from the shooter) results in disturbing a 100% viewing of the target model, then it’s NOT a clear shot. I hope this helps answer your last question as well. I’m inferring all the above from page 10 of the rulebook, right-hand column. So if I got it wrong, hopefully Jake or someone else can correct me.

      • Barry Miller says:

        Please IGNORE my Burning Cattle paragraph above. Matt is correct, below. His reply forced me to re-read the card from a different perspective. He’s right. The word, “Otherwise” holds the key to the answer!

    • Matt says:

      Yes random events will score VPs. They have to or you could get into situations where the only models that can score a side VPs have been removed. Random events making a game up winnable is not fun. Random events winning you a game are 🙂 It’s part of the mayhem of the game.

      You can only have one herd of cattle on the board at one time. If they are already on the board, the card simply moves them. The card is clear on this because the wording is “otherwise”. Only one herd counter is provided because of this.

      For the LOS question, it’s very simple. Unless the firing model can see all the target model then it is not a clear shot. If the view is even the tiniest bit obscured, it’s not a clear shot, regardless of what or where the obscuring element is.

      • Barry Miller says:

        Matt, Thanks for correcting me regarding the Burning Cattle. After re-reading the card, of course you’re right. I don’t know why I stubbornly overlooked the significance of the word, “Otherwise”. Now I gotta go eat crow with someone else I told wrong!

        About the random events scoring VPs – I’m still not in total agreement on that one, only because I can see the “official answer” going either way. Your point concerning a situation where a random event could take out a model needed to score VPs, especially in the later scenarios, is valid. But I still can’t find any reference or inference in the rule book that a side EARNS VPs when a model is killed by a random event.
        The closest the rules come to supporting the argument for counting as VPs, is that the ‘Unfriendly Fire’ and ‘Mutant Bug’ events use SHOOT and FIGHT attacks, respectively. And some scenario’s award VPs for killing enemy models with SHOOTING or FIGHTING attacks. And in other scenarios, VPS are awarded simply for generically “killing” certain enemy models. Taken from this perspective alone, your point makes sense.
        But at the same time, the wording suggests that the SHOOTING, and FIGHTING, and killing is to be accomplished by one faction over the other. I.e., the killing is to be accomplished AT THE HANDS OF the Martians or Humans. Of course this is NOT the case when a model is killed by an event card. Hence the argument for the other side.
        Also, another argument for NOT counting as VPs, is that victory can always be had once all the models on a side are killed, regardless of how many VPS have been awarded (Pg 31, under, “Winning”, 2nd para).
        Bottom Line – I think there’s a solid argument for either way. Jake?

        This sounds like a great conversation for the forums over at BGG!

      • Matt says:

        good old auto-correct. “Up winnable” was supposed to be “unwinnable”.

  21. Bret says:

    Does a bug count as one model or more? In other words, can I have a bug, its handler, and four grunts all in the same square? Can a bug spawned from an event card enter a square with 6 models in it? Love the game, this is the only thing I haven’t been able to find in the rules.

    • Bret says:

      Doh! Please ignore the second half of the question, as the rule is on the event card, “…if (the square) is full, Scatter (the bug) until it fits.” Still would like to know about the first half, though…

  22. Matt says:

    A bug is one model as is the handler.

  23. Mike says:

    In the first rule book, is the scenario special rule “Night” supposed to be used in the Chaos scenario (#5) rather than Rebel Assault (#6)? Thematically and rule-wise, it seems like it would be a better fit.

  24. Chris L says:

    The Reinforcements Arrive card says to return a “Martian Soldier” to the board that was killed this game. Now, Martian Saucers are in the Martian Soldier chapter of the rulebook so they would seem to qualify (if one had been killed this game). This seems a bit overpowered so should this card be restricted to only infantry soldiers? When we played we decided not to allow this.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      It can be very powerful depending on the circumstances. Remember though that bringing something like a saucer back means that you are usually putting a lot more VPs on the table for the other side too. And if they killed it once they can kill it again…

  25. Dan says:

    Hi.
    When resolving an effect that affects a square with more than one model in it, what happens?
    For instance, if a 5 dice, 5+ blast rolls 2 successes, and one of the affected squares contains 2 Martian Grunts, what happens? Does each one have to Survive 2 successes, or did s&s each one take one each, or does one Grunt take 2 and the other one none?
    Thank you.

    • Barry Miller says:

      Dan,

      Using the below excerpts from the rulebook as justification, each of the two grunts in the affected square will need to survive two successes each. If you got it, then stop reading, cause I love to go into detail and that annoys plenty of people.
      If you’re still there, then… the rules for a single square attack are that every model in the square suffers the effect of the attack. As your example uses a BLAST attack, the rule for a BLAST is to simply EXTEND the effect from the target square to the eight squares around it. The point is that each of the nine squares in a blast attack is treated as a single target square for the purpose of invoking the “Single Square” rule. Then the final rule is that the survive roll for each of the target models is resolved as normal. I hope this helps answer your question!

      Pg 13, EVENT CARDS, CARD EFFECTS, AREA OF EFFECT (top right corner):
      “SINGLE SQUARE: The attack affects every model in the target square”.
      “Blast: The attack affects the target square, and the eight adjacent squares”
      Also,
      Pg 12, SUPPORT CARDS:
      “Unless a Support Card says otherwise, when an effect targets more than one square roll once for the effect and apply the same roll to each square.”
      Also,
      Pg 11, SHOOTING DICE, (top right corner):
      “Sometimes, cards and other effects will have an attack of their own…. The Survive roll for any target models is resolved as normal.”

  26. Dan says:

    Thats great, very helpful, thank you.

  27. lord_blackfang says:

    Hey Jake. Got my MA yesterday, really slick ruleset. Played scenarios 1-4 so far and it’s been great fun. Only wondering about Troy’s ability, it doesn’t seem to do anything that Heroes can’t do already by default.

  28. James Green says:

    Hi there, is the mutant bug card only meant to scatter 1 every round ? I only ask because in my few test games that felt awfully slow and easy to avoid.

    • Bret says:

      Welcome Mr. Green! The number in brackets after the word “Scatter” tells you how many squares to move the scattering thing. Bug card says (1), so yes, one square. The bug is a 9-square mobile danger zone slowly moving around the board. You can avoid it, but it spoils your plans.

  29. Bret says:

    KEEPING TIDY
    Looking here and on the other boards around the interwebs, there’s only three issues that I’d still like to see answered by Mr. Thornton or someone he trusts:

    1: Civilians —
    a) When do they use their fight stat? If they meet a Martian they are “immediately captured.” They can’t join the human force because they are “immediately rescued.” Is it for bugs? A square with both Soldiers and Martians?
    b) Do they serve a purpose in a scenario that doesn’t award victory points for counters?

    2: Passengers —
    When a model becomes a passenger, does it lose it’s identity as a Soldier or Hero and therefore its stats? Can a passenger shoot at range (with their own weapon)? Can a passenger use an ability?

    3: Get More Done —
    Does this apply only to Heroes or can a Soldier with Heroics Points use those points to Get More Done?

    The game is outstanding and the rules are tight, well thought out, and make this a ball to play. Fun in a box (a VERY big box, now). These three bits aren’t stopping me from playing. I’d just like make certain…

    Thank you in advance for your time and attention.

    • Matt says:

      1. Bugs and squares with both sides in as you say.
      2. Passengers can still do stuff like shoot and use abilities. The transport just means they get moved around faster.
      3. Yes soldiers with heroics can get more done.

  30. Teskal says:

    Why does it need so long to get answers? Where is Jake?
    There are already so many questions here I would like to be answered before I start to play.
    I thought I could start soon with playing the game, eventually this weekend, but without answers/explanations I’m not sure if I can.

  31. Barry Miller says:

    I agree, but also assume he’s got himself spread pretty thin. I would’ve thought though, that being aware of the release & distribution schedule for the game, he would’ve blocked some time to answer questions.
    I believe he’s working on a Mars Attacks FAQ document. In the meantime till that’s published (and I’ll sound like a broken record here), I also wish he’d visit the rules forums at BGG. Lots of people there would LOVE to hear from him! … at least to get answers from the designer himself, to quell the masses until the FAQ is released. Plus the thread format used in a forum structure is easier to organize questions and responses than via a blog format. His answers so far have been very helpful. I look forward to when he has the time to address the rest of them.

    On same subject… some of the questions posted on this page have been “overcome by events”. I.e., we as a community now realize that perhaps some of the questions are no longer good questions since we’ve had more time to learn the rules. Or that we’ve been able to figure out some of the answers on our own, etc. Hopefully in the next week or two I’ll have time to scrub through the more outstanding questions on BGG and copy them to here.

  32. Chris L says:

    Does use of the Pheromone Dispenser require a heroic point even though the ability doesn’t have the heroic icon? It says it counts as having Follow Me! which does require a point. For comparison, Lord of Battle also says it works like Follow Me! but it also has the heroic icon. The wording is also a little different between them, one says “counts as having” and the other says “works just like”.

    I’m leaning toward Pheromone Dispenser not needing to use a heroic point due to the lack of the icon and the wording difference.

    • Teskal says:

      Yepp, having no icon make it a non-heroic ability, as long there is no officially statement that it is an error that it has no icon.

  33. Phil says:

    I’m a bit unclear on the rattled rules. The parts I’m unclear on are:

    – what can a model do and not do while rattled?
    – how does a model stop being rattled?

    • Barry Miller says:

      Being RATTLED really isn’t THAT big of a deal. It just slows a model down a little. Here’s how RATTLED works and should answer your questions in boring detail:

      1) First let’s be clear on what a model CAN DO when it’s NOT RATTLED. It can be activated with a two-action combination, as described on pg 7 of the core rules. (i.e., move a square then move again; or, move a square then shoot; or, aim then shoot, etc, etc).
      2) Simply put, while a model is in a RATTLED state, it can’t: MOVE, SHOOT, AIM, or FIGHT.
      3) The only way a model can recover from being RATTLED is to STAND UP (pg 11).
      So…
      The most usual consequence to being RATTLED is to deny the model a two-action combo. Instead, a RATTLED model is left with only one action to take after it STANDS UP. IOW, a model that is RATTLED MUST use its first action to stand-up, then it can use its second action (of the two-action combo) to move, or shoot, or fight. (Note that it can’t AIM, as aiming is always a first action).
      5) Also, a RATTLED model must fight a non-rattled enemy in its same space (and when it does, it can only choose to SURVIVE for its defenses – it can’t FIGHT back). (pgs 7, 9, 11)

      In summary: A RATTLED model can’t move twice in one normal activation, it can’t aim, it can’t shoot then move, and it can’t move then shoot. And if it stands in the same space as an enemy, it MUST FIGHT.

      Also, check out the “Rules” forum over on the ‘Mars Attacks’ page at Board Game Geek if you have more questions! You’ll also find some player aids there in the files section, both in card, and page form.

  34. Chris Richardson says:

    There are a lot of cards and conditions in the game that say, “:The model becomes Rattled.” Does this always require a test, or do they go directly to the state? Is the test only for a model being in the same square with another model who is killed?

    • Barry Miller says:

      For such cards and conditions, yes, the card text applies literally and the model goes directly to the RATTLED state without any test involved. And as far as I interpret the rules, you’re last sentence is correct that the RATTLED TEST only applies when your model is in the same square as another that gets killed, and when there are no other effects that would direct otherwise.
      IOW, card effects are active one-time only – when the card is played; while the RATTLED test exists as a passive effect which remains in play for the entire game – hence the need for a test. Again, the above is simply my interpretation and I am but another humble player such as yourself.
      See above for what happens after a model becomes RATTTLED.

  35. Teskal says:

    I wonder if the points of the Word War Book are somehow calculated. It would be nice to make own characters. Like Tunga Kong, a giant version of Tunga or using more fleas from Henry’s Flea Circus.

    • Matt Gilbert says:

      Indeed they are. I have a magic spreadsheet 😉 Obviously any new abilities that are invented will need pointing up.

      • Jabbaa says:

        Could you point up the retro US forces from the compendium with your magic spreadsheet please?

      • Psychopomp says:

        Now that everything for Mars Attacks is out or close to out, is there any chance of the public getting their hands on that spreadsheet? It would be insanely useful for expanding the game ourselves and making custom heroes/scenarios…

  36. Ashes says:

    Hello,
    The Humanity Resists expansion includes one scenario where Joe can fly a crashes saucer. When he turns into the saucer what stats do I use for him, especially heroics…?
    Thanks for any help.

    • Matt Gilbert says:

      This section is missing from the printed version of the HR book:

      VEHICLE DAMAGE
      Vehicles are big things. To reflect their resilience they have a number of Heroics. These can be used as normal, including to avoid damage or to make extra moves, etc. If a Hero is driving/ piloting a VEHICLE then you may use the heroics from either model.

      When a VEHICLE is destroyed the wreck becomes a piece of scenery and no longer counts as filling up the square.

  37. Jorge Barreiros says:

    Hi,
    Just browsing through the book, I noticed the robot can equip any combination of claw/heat ray/frost ray, including duplicates (or also a single heat ray).
    Maybe I missed something, but how do these multiple weapons work?
    Can the robot:
    – Chose only one of the equipped weapons to attack with when activated? (then would be the point of duplicates)
    – OR Make two attacks, one with each weapon, when activated?
    – OR Do something else i’m not figuring out.

  38. darklinks says:

    What are the rules for following fire?( like what does it do)

    • Barry Miller says:

      I’m not sure what you mean by, “Following Fire”? I can assume you’re asking about “Covering Fire” instead. If that is your question, what part of the Covering Fire rule are you having trouble with?
      You asked, “what does it do”? The rules say that shooting while using Covering Fire rattles the target models – it doesn’t kill them. That’s what it does.
      If you’re having trouble grasping the rule, it says essentially instead of shooting normally at an eligible target, you can shoot at all eligible targets which are in up to three squares that adjoin each other. The targets become Rattled instead of being killed. You can not move in order to use Covering Fire.
      Hope this answers your question if it was about Covering Fire. But if you are indeed asking about “Following Fire”, please provide a rules reference so we can help you out!

    • Matt Gilbert says:

      That’s a Deadzone question I think rather than a Mars Attacks one?

  39. Patient Zero says:

    Is there a printable FAQ for Mars Attacks somewhere? Every time I click on the link it brings be back to the page with all the questions. I’d like a condensed version of all the “official” answers.

    • Matt Gilbert says:

      Not yet I don’t think

    • Barry Miller says:

      The designer, Jake, has been VERY active on his blog. He has been very engaged with his gaming community. Just not THIS community. He’s all over Deadzone like white on rice. I’m getting the feeling that Mars Attacks is the kid he never wanted.

      • Quirkworthy says:

        Not at all. The problem comes simply from the fact that I’ve got a limited amount of time, and answering detailed questions about a game I finished writing almost a year ago is tricky. I don’t want to give you the wrong answer, and that means I need to spend considerable time re-immersing myself in the details of this game, rather than the half dozen more recent projects I’ve been working on.

        • Teskal says:

          But it is it really a good idea to ignore all the fans of this game.
          Players who want only to play, but having so many unanswered questions and unclear rules that they need help?
          I think it is not a solution to say I have no time, so I ignore this FAQ.
          You should work something out with Mantic to help us. In the moment all the open questions here are sooo frustrating.

        • Quirkworthy says:

          I know Teskal, I’m frustrated about this too 😦

          I am looking into some alternatives. The idea of fan-based answers has been mooted, though my experience tells me that this isn’t a robust way of getting correct answers. I know that many players are less happy with this approach too. As a gamer, I’ve see so many wrong fan-based FAQs over the years that I usually just ignore them nowadays.

          I get zero income from MA, and so writing this FAQ has to take a back seat to things that pay my bills. It’s that simple. I wish I didn’t have to grub round for cash all the time as I’ve got dozens more interesting things I’d like to do, including many new game designs, novels, and other projects. However, the unpleasant reality is that I simply cannot afford to do them. Much as I hate it, it all comes down to cash 😦

        • Barry Miller says:

          Jake, I gotta say this is such an odd reply coming from a designer who was obviously passionate about designing what is an EXREMELY good game! You lost me on the not getting paid part. How does that prevent you from answering questions? I can understand if you simply hate the game and don’t care whether or not the fans receive the correct answers. But by your own words above, you DO care that players of your games get their questions answered properly.

          So why not jump on here during your free time (we all have SOME free time to prioritize) and at least confirm or correct those replies which have already been posted? That shouldn’t take long. Better yet, jump on BGG and give a thumbs-up or thumbs down to the many fan-based replies posted there. The fans of Mars Attacks would love to hear from you! And your involvement may revitalize the game.

          But I don’t understand not doing any of that because it doesn’t pay the bills??? Huh? Teskal and I don’t get paid for posting the replies to rules questions that we’ve posted. Producing the player’s aid with all the model stats and tables on one sheet of paper didn’t pay any of my bills. But I/we do it because we love the game and chose to prioritize our free time to be able to do it.

          Now we’ve reached the point in the game’s life where the questions have stopped flowing. That’s not typical for a game as young as it Mars Attacks. Given the caliber of a game that it is, the questions should still be coming! Perhaps us fans have finally figured out the answers on our own so there are no more to be asked. Or perhaps the interest in this game has died because the passion for it has died. I think it’s the latter. And that’s very sad indeed because this is such a great game.

          It’s obvious a tremendous amount of loving and enthusiasm went into creating and producing Mars Attacks! From the quality of the rulebooks, the components, the compendium, etc, etc – it all oozes HARD WORK and loving effort to produce. But where is that same passion and excitement now? From you? From Mantic? Mars Attacks had HUGE potential to be on BGG’s hotness list. I mean, HUGE. It’s a brilliant cross-over game that could’ve – if supported by the design/publishing team – made big waves in the board gaming community as a cross-over game. But it wallowed in the miniatures community instead and got sucked up by all the other miniatures games out there.

          I don’t know why you’re receiving zero income for Mars Attacks. But it’s STILL YOUR baby. The design is fantastic and you should be proud of it. I just don’t understand why it appears to all of us that since summer of 2014 you want nothing to do with it. Every time I see one of your random blog posts during the past year, I wonder why you couldn’t have taken a couple seconds of the time you spent writing that post to instead address a MA question posted here, or on BGG.

          I know this is coming across as preachy, especially since I admittedly don’t know what you face each day, what pressures you have, what your time constraints are, what your personal preferences are, etc. I don’t know any of that. And it’s none of my business. But through it all, the Mars Attacks fan base (those who have questions anyway) would love to see the designer of this great game help the players for whom he designed the game for, with just a few comments here and there. We’ve been looking forward to any involvement by you or Mantic for over a year. Sorry though, if you don’t get paid for it.

        • Quirkworthy says:

          Hey Barry. I don’t think you’re being preachy at all. It sounds like you’re a mixture of enthusiastic and frustrated, same as me.

          Without going into detail, the financial situation I am currently in is painfully simple: I cannot afford to do the work I want to, I have to do the work that pays now. If I did what I wanted to do (which includes these FAQs), then I’d end up living in a cardboard box by the canal before the end of the year. Now I’m obviously being a little melodramatic for effect there, but only a little.

          To fix this problem, something needs to change. I can see two realistic options.

          1) I abandon the idea of ever having the free time to answer the FAQs properly and dump them back on Mantic to sort out as they choose. I’m not sure this would be much faster, and you’ll probably get a different answer to the one I’d give. At least, that’s what many years of experience tells me.
          2) I find some way of paying for the time the FAQs require. Patreon has been suggested, though I’ve not looked into it enough to know if it’s appropriate. There may be other ideas.

          There is a third option, which is that I wait till one of the other projects I’m working on is sufficiently lucrative to buy me some free time to work on things like this. That’s entirely possible (all part of the somewhat stressful ebb and flow of being freelance), but I wouldn’t expect that in the next 6 months.

          Perhaps I should make this a separate post and see what other folk suggest.

        • Mike says:

          I’d be willing to pay into a Patreon pledge for FAQs, but I’d prefer a second MA KS with updated rules and FAQs, maybe a mini KS, to include some of the new characters from Mars Attacks: Occupation. I’d also love to see some Dinosaur Attacks AI rules and minis, and some of the other cross overs. I’ve mentioned it a few places, but I would drop big bucks for minis from the Ashley Wood’s Robots Vs. Zombies vs Mars Attacks cross over! Maybe some new facades modern day terrain, added decor pieces like Fire escapes, ladders, stair ways, maybe a mall theme?

  40. MarsEye says:

    Hi,

    I have another question concerning Rattled models:

    What’s happening when an active model stands in square where ALL enemy models are Rattled?

    The rule about activating models is somewhat confusing on this matter:

    “If a model starts its Turn in a square containing one or more enemy models that are not Rattled, then the only option is to FIGHT if they are already standing, or to STAND UP and FIGHT if they are Rattled.”

    The text doesn’t state what happens when all enemy models are Rattled, but implies that you have different options than the ones mentioned if all enemy models are Rattled.

    However, the next sentence says:

    « If a model MOVES into a square containing one or more enemy models then they must FIGHT as part of that movement and cannot MOVE any further afterwards. »

    From there I would assume that you must FIGHT when standing in a square containing enemy models, whether they are Rattled or not.

    • Barry Miller says:

      Well, if you read the very next paragraph, you find your answer. It says that a model cannot SHOOT if it is in the same square as any enemy models. So given that your choices when in a square with enemy models is to either move or attack, you have two options:
      1) MOVE
      2) Attack, which in this case must be a FIGHT

      The first paragraph you quoted essentially tells you that you DON’T HAVE A CHOICE if ANY of the enemy models in the same square as you are NOT rattled – you must stay and FIGHT.

      So if ALL of the enemy models in the same square as you ARE rattled, then that paragraph doesn’t apply. And since you’re not moving INTO the square, then the other paragraph you quoted doesn’t apply either, for your example.

      Thusly when you find yourself in a square with enemy models that are ALL rattled, the only paragraph which does apply is the same which I mentioned at the top of this post. And since there’s no rule preventing you from moving when among enemies which are ALL rattled, then it becomes clear that your choices, for the situation you ask about, are to either MOVE, or FIGHT.

  41. Torkijo says:

    Will this get put into a formal FAQ as last update is over a year ago?

  42. Rob Jedi says:

    Will there be a PDF version of the FAQ so we can print it out.

  43. Ciaran says:

    So where is the FAQ?

  44. Barry Miller says:

    I’m interested in his answer also. If you read his blog posts, he’s actively working on the FAQs for one or two of his other games, which have come out after Mars Attacks (I think). He attempts to explain in an entry above, why he hasn’t (or isn’t?) doing a Mars Attack FAQ. It sounds like because Mantic isn’t paying him for it? Am not sure really.
    Quite frankly, at this point, our call for a FAQ is something we should be directing to Mantic, not Jake,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s