|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 7:06 am
Lt. Brookman Going by the rules, when a single model unit or monstrous creature charges a unit, it can only charge that unit and only that unit can react to the charger, meaning only that unit can perform overwatch fire. Seeing as NO multiple combat is being triggered here (the monster might come into contact with the other squad, but it is not attacked), the other unit does NOT get to join in on the overwatch shooting and the charger will NOT lose the charge bonus. I've been there myself last week when my opponent thought his Great Unclean One could charge both my Ratlings and my Russ tank, but that wasn't the case. He had to pick one target, completely ignoring the other. The ignored target as such, was NOT locked in combat and did NOT get overwatch fire (if it were able to do so, mind).
would he even be able to beform an assault,
regardless of multible-combat assault or not?
The 1" restriction to enemy model vs assault rule would come in conflict with
each other,
since he can only move in base contact with the enemy unit he is assaulting but would have to abide the original rule of not being in 1" of another enemy unit. :-/
Then we would have to either assume he can beform multible-combat assault
or he is completly unable to beform an assault at all in this circumstances.
..............suddenly I foresee Tyranids becoming more broken then they already we´re..... sweatdrop
This is the root of my problem with the assault rules;
they do not support nor deny this.
It just is and for a person like me who has dislexia,
this is concerning that I would love to have a verification from GW on either
on the erratan or in the confines of the rulebook.DarkElf27 Huh, I am mistaken on that one. I was crossing the 1" enemy model restriction with the rules about independent characters being required to join squads if within coherency range.
I can see that possibly taking presence in this situation,
but then again, it involves an indepented character,
not a unit. :-/
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:50 am
He gave you a perfectly good answer yanno, one that made sense (to me at least!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:01 pm
Vikki Stardust He gave you a perfectly good answer yanno, one that made sense (to me at least!) The overwatch issue is resolved, yes. But the issue is, if the single mini is charging Unit X, but cannot get into base contact with a Unit X mini without being within 1" of a Unit Y mini, it cannot legally charge. It's a highly unlikely situation, but currently possible it seems, could be taken advantage of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:03 pm
Guess who's gonna start interlocking units of Boyz?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:08 pm
DarkElf27 Vikki Stardust He gave you a perfectly good answer yanno, one that made sense (to me at least!) The overwatch issue is resolved, yes. But the issue is, if the single mini is charging Unit X, but cannot get into base contact with a Unit X mini without being within 1" of a Unit Y mini, it cannot legally charge. It's a highly unlikely situation, but currently possible it seems, could be taken advantage of. Where does it say you can do this and where does it say you need to be 1" away from the enemy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:42 pm
@Stardust: Page 21, charging enemy models, the bolded out part.
I've put the question up on Dakka Dakka (Rest assured, not YMDC, you'd be torn to pieces there) and while you may think you're clever, there are two solutions to this so-called charge denial. While yes, you can be a massive t**t about it, abuse the system and put your minis like that, you can either be lenient about it and let the charge happen, but seeing as you put your models like that because you feel the need to break the system in order to win, we come to the second solution: ******** it, you want to play hard ball? Okay, the single model unit charges the corner of your clever formation, thus assuredly only hitting one squad and when the pile-in happens (Which MUST happen), pulls the formation apart as the charged unit moves towards the charger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:17 am
Also, shooting at one of the units would very quickly take apart the formation, since casualties would be taken from the front.
Though that also raises another question. Units that are concealed behind a unit get a cover save, right? MWouldn't meshing two units in this way would grant cover to all but the front row?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 4:23 am
Lt. Brookman @Stardust: Page 21, charging enemy models, the bolded out part. I've put the question up on Dakka Dakka (Rest assured, not YMDC, you'd be torn to pieces there) and while you may think you're clever, there are two solutions to this so-called charge denial. While yes, you can be a massive t**t about it, abuse the system and put your minis like that, you can either be lenient about it and let the charge happen, but seeing as you put your models like that because you feel the need to break the system in order to win, we come to the second solution: ******** it, you want to play hard ball? Okay, the single model unit charges the corner of your clever formation, thus assuredly only hitting one squad and when the pile-in happens (Which MUST happen), pulls the formation apart as the charged unit moves towards the charger.
And for the record, I don´t want to be the massive t**t that abuses the system,
I want to be opposite and fix the problem. emo
And thanks for asking about it in dakkadakka,
I doubt I´ll get an anwser again from GW and
my second attempt would have been in BoLS.
We know there are these kinds of people who would take advantage
on winning matches with loop-holes (ork-biker nobz in 5th Edition anyone?)
and with cheating (moving the model many times to gain a "hidden.inch"
or a player who can throw "6" on 100 D6 dices in a row).
I just want to make sure that this is not something they would be able to
use because I enjoy my matches being fair and square,
not filled with cheap loop holes and shenanigans.DarkElf27 Vikki Stardust He gave you a perfectly good answer yanno, one that made sense (to me at least!) The overwatch issue is resolved, yes. But the issue is, if the single mini is charging Unit X, but cannot get into base contact with a Unit X mini without being within 1" of a Unit Y mini, it cannot legally charge. It's a highly unlikely situation, but currently possible it seems, could be taken advantage of. DarkElf27 Also, shooting at one of the units would very quickly take apart the formation, since casualties would be taken from the front. Though that also raises another question. Units that are concealed behind a unit get a cover save, right? MWouldn't meshing two units in this way would grant cover to all but the front row?
but I have a feeling that it might not change much if your dice-god is not
with you or might make things worse,
depending on what kind of army your playing as and againts with,
specially if your unaware that there is this issue with the rules.
You would either fire normally (front row takes the hit and move onwards on
the rest of the models with cover saves on the target unit)
or choose to fire Focus Fire, unless it´s a blast or template weapon.
I think.... I´m going with the general Shooting rules, Intervening Models and Focus Fire. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:27 am
Some more replies to further drive home how pointless this all truly is: Quote: With the formation in the original post, he would only be coming in contact with multiple models if he was on a larger base, and all of the models involved were on square bases. With round bases, regardless of the sizes of them, it's just not an issue.Quote: Basic geometry shows that, in 99.99% of all cases, you can be in base to base contact with only one model (due to bases being circular). Quote: Isn't this just the rebirth of the old "unassaultable checkerboard?" Based on the posts, I'm guessing that was a 4th edition gem. I'm at work, but as noted the rules used to clealry suspend the "angry inch" for all assaults. As always, clever ideas that break a game a year after its release are almost never the proper way to play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:09 am
Lt. Brookman Some more replies to further drive home how pointless this all truly is: Quote: With the formation in the original post, he would only be coming in contact with multiple models if he was on a larger base, and all of the models involved were on square bases. With round bases, regardless of the sizes of them, it's just not an issue.Quote: Basic geometry shows that, in 99.99% of all cases, you can be in base to base contact with only one model (due to bases being circular). Quote: Isn't this just the rebirth of the old "unassaultable checkerboard?" Based on the posts, I'm guessing that was a 4th edition gem. I'm at work, but as noted the rules used to clealry suspend the "angry inch" for all assaults. As always, clever ideas that break a game a year after its release are almost never the proper way to play.
But yeah.... I´m starting to see things more clearly now and
my initial thought of the problem is unfounted.
Maybe I am getting more stupid at my older age. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:50 am
Asmondai Maybe I am getting more stupid at my older age. sweatdrop I'd leave it at that and walk away a wiser man. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:50 pm
what
I wrote earlier Guess who's gonna start interlocking units of Boyz? Probably one player I know, whose tried it before. I'm not, because even if I painted the edges of each base in a mob the same color, all the boyz would be so closely packed that any blast weapons would blow them apart. Besides, in close combat, Ork boyz tend to be a little less effective than conscripts (Nobz on the other hand...).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:05 am
notmuch_23 Besides, in close combat, Ork boyz tend to be a little less effective than conscripts (Nobz on the other hand...). Wut-wut, dunno about that. You're saying an ork boy with WS 4 and T4 is worse off than a WS 2, T 3 mini with Ld 5?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:13 pm
Vikki Stardust Wut-wut, dunno about that. You're saying an ork boy with WS 4 and T4 is worse off than a WS 2, T 3 mini with Ld 5? When I'M rolling the dice it is...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:44 am
I have a question on the rules.
Now i know in Warhammer 40k you cannot target and shoot at squads in close combat, i guess to prevent killing both your own men or an allies troops. That being said, in a 1 against 1 against 1 free for all match where one player went first, then my turn to go, then the 3rd player got his turn, is it legal to take advantage of the "no shooting troops in close combat" rule where player one would enter close combat with a unit from player 3's army, then came my turn i cant shoot at them, then player 3 would disengaging from combat simply move closer to the my own lines of infantry, then player ones next turn came where he move closer to my lines and reenter close combat again, and repeating this to negate me from having the chance to obliterate the two unites with long ranged fire such as a Basilisk, or a Leman Russ, and later snipers and heavy bolter teams just so they can get all the units into close combat where, as i have found out, the Guard has the disadvantage according to every one i have played against.
To me this sounds highly illegal and every time I have asked about it at Games Work-shop, they would rattle on about this or that while taking care to not give an answer, or change the subject all together. If I where to ask if it would be legal to shoot at the enemy troops doing this, seeing as to me, there all an enemy and need killing then it shouldn't mater that there in close combat, only for them to say its illegal to shoot at them but yet they never would answer the first question. Is it illegal to take advantage of the rules and set up to give an unfair and unbalanced advantage over another player like that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
