Do you have a problem with someone useing the Infantry cross?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Battle Brother Loken**

I was playing a tourney at a FLGS and i ran into a fellow who used a formation that i had never seen before, it was a cross formation with every model in unit coherency with the one behind or next to it and they formed a cross around the objective to avoid blast weapons and the like. Now i know this is legal but when i told my friend he used it in one of my games to capture two objectives

**Gwar!**

Yes, it is fair and legal, and units can capture as many objectives as they want.

**Sanchez01**

Sounds legal to me

**Iago**

It is very legal. But it is hard to pull off. Casualty removal... assaults, all this can pull people off of the other objectives.

**skullspliter888**

HHmm how big was the squads he was doing this with ?

**Kilkrazy**

Do you mean a unit spread out in a kind of X shaped formation?

**whitedragon**

I think he might mean the checkerboard so the two units grant each other mutual coversaves. The disadvantage comes when you get multicharged or flamered.

**Battle Brother Loken**

Kilkrazy wrote:Do you mean a unit spread out in a kind of X shaped formation?

Yes this is what i mean

**Lordhat**

Yes, any formation which does not break the rules for coherency be it 'x', 'm', 'y', 'z', etc. is legal and not a problem.

**Scott-S6**

30 orks could form a line 91" long!! You could claim/contest plenty of objectives with that but it's pretty unweildy.

The biggest problem with spread out units is that you can pull them out of position with assault. Also, you can assault just a couple of them, win combat by a mile then either break them or make them take fearless saves.

**slice of toast**

Not really...I don't have a BRB in front of me, but doesn't a unit have to move back into coherency if you put a couple of battlecannon shots into it and blow holes larger than 2" in the line?

It might almost be a disadvantage if that's still the case, you could blow holes in specific parts of the cross so as to force movement in a direction to maintain coherency, and possibly pull them off an objective completely.

**Gwar!**

slice of toast wrote:Not really...I don't have a BRB in front of me, but doesn't a unit have to move back into coherency if you put a couple of battlecannon shots into it and blow holes larger than 2" in the line?

It might almost be a disadvantage if that's still the case, you could blow holes in specific parts of the cross so as to force movement in a direction to maintain coherency, and possibly pull them off an objective completely.

Well, considering the owning player gets to pick where the casualties come from (bar the Vindicare and Tellion), this is not an issue.

**Commissar Molotov**

Gwar! wrote:
slice of toast wrote:Not really...I don't have a BRB in front of me, but doesn't a unit have to move back into coherency if you put a couple of battlecannon shots into it and blow holes larger than 2" in the line?

It might almost be a disadvantage if that's still the case, you could blow holes in specific parts of the cross so as to force movement in a direction to maintain coherency, and possibly pull them off an objective completely.
Well, considering the owning player gets to pick where the casualties come from (bar the Vindicare and Tellion), this is not an issue.

Wait, don't the casualties have to solely come from models that are within range of the firing models?

**Gwar!**

Commissar Molotov wrote:
Gwar! wrote:
slice of toast wrote:Not really...I don't have a BRB in front of me, but doesn't a unit have to move back into coherency if you put a couple of battlecannon shots into it and blow holes larger than 2" in the line?

It might almost be a disadvantage if that's still the case, you could blow holes in specific parts of the cross so as to force movement in a direction to maintain coherency, and possibly pull them off an objective completely.
Well, considering the owning player gets to pick where the casualties come from (bar the Vindicare and Tellion), this is not an issue.

Wait, don't the casualties have to solely come from models that are within range of the firing models?

No. Casualties may come from anywhere in the unit.

**s2ua7**

Gwar is right on this one with regards to who gets to pick which units are removed, but there is one other figure that can take away that right as well. That damn BigMek and the SAG.... lol.. Dont know how many times my opponent has rolled double 6s and I've had to remove figures under the template... lol...

**Gwar!**

Shhhh, the SAK is meant to be super sekret!

**Commissar Molotov**

Gwar! wrote:
Commissar Molotov wrote:
Gwar! wrote:
slice of toast wrote:Not really...I don't have a BRB in front of me, but doesn't a unit have to move back into coherency if you put a couple of battlecannon shots into it and blow holes larger than 2" in the line?

It might almost be a disadvantage if that's still the case, you could blow holes in specific parts of the cross so as to force movement in a direction to maintain coherency, and possibly pull them off an objective completely.
Well, considering the owning player gets to pick where the casualties come from (bar the Vindicare and Tellion), this is not an issue.

Wait, don't the casualties have to solely come from models that are within range of the firing models?
No. Casualties may come from anywhere in the unit.

Guh...I'm thinking of 4th edition again...

**Mannahnin**

Actually I'm pretty sure that was 3rd edition.

**Alerian**

I would love to see the infantry croos made up of 20-50 guys. I would just assault one tip of it, pull guys 6" closer (off of objectives), and still disallow most of that units CC attacks, because they won't be withing 2" to contribute...Sweeping Advance time!

**Gwar!**

Alerian wrote:I would love to see the infantry croos made up of 20-50 guys. I would just assault one tip of it, pull guys 6" closer (off of objectives), and still disallow most of that units CC attacks, because they won't be withing 2" to contribute...Sweeping Advance time!

I remember a interesting debate where we showed that a Lone Space Marine Chaplain surrounded by 28+22 Guardsmen (28 being the max that could successfully attack him) still having more chance to sweeping advance them than the Guard Killing him or something silly like that

NERF CLOSE COMBAT!

**Mannahnin**

It's already been nerfed.

It was nerfed going from 3rd to 4th, and again going from 4th to 5th.

**Gwar!**

Mannahnin wrote:It's already been nerfed. It was nerfed going from 3rd to 4th, and again going from 4th to 5th.

Aye, that is true, but it just makes Multiple assaults all the more deadly.

**RustyKnight**

Gwar! wrote:
Alerian wrote:I would love to see the infantry croos made up of 20-50 guys. I would just assault one tip of it, pull guys 6" closer (off of objectives), and still disallow most of that units CC attacks, because they won't be withing 2" to contribute...Sweeping Advance time!
I remember a interesting debate where we showed that a Lone Space Marine Chaplain surrounded by 28+22 Guardsmen (28 being the max that could successfully attack him) still having more chance to sweeping advance them than the Guard Killing him or something silly like that

NERF CLOSE COMBAT!

Chaplain (bog standard, charging)- 4 attacks, 2.66 hits, 1.77 wounds, 1.77 dead guardsmen
28 Guardsmen (not charging, let's say three of the sergeants make it there)- 34 attacks, 17 hits, 5.666 wounds, 1.88 failed saves-
That's a dead chaplain. Unless he's a chaplain from the greatest chapter in the game (unless SW also get a 3 wound chaplain, in that case a chaplain from the greatest chapter in the game or a furry chaplain).

**Gwar!**

How about if he just Charged 28 Guardsmen, so that those 2 who die before they can strike don't get to make their attacks?

**SeattleDV8**

Maths and Gwar for the win!

**Red_Lives**

Rusty your math fails.

looks like you forgot LOH.

with bumps the chances to hit from 2.66 to closer to 3.2 (ish) which means 2.112 (ish) dead guardsmen. Which means a charging chaplain kills a squad of 50 guardsmen

Chappy 2.1

Guard 1.8

**Gwar!**

I wonder how much more lopsided it gets when Cassius gets involved, what with 3 Wounds and T6 etc.

(p.s. yes I am too lazy to do my own math)

**Alerian**

I'd just send in the Avatar

**Red_Lives**

And lets not forget my Lemartes (only chaplain a BA player ever runs...ever)

5 attacks on the charge

4.15 hits

2.8 dead guardsmen

Lemmy has 3 wounds.

**Tri**

Cassius Vs 50 IG

IG get the charge
Cassius gets 3 Attacks 4 (odds 4/9) So 97% 1+ IG dies
IG gets 27 models with in 2", so 59 attacks (Sergeants get 2CCW) (odds 1/72) only 55% chance of causing 1 wound
only 32% chance of causing 2 wounds (winning CC and Killing him)

but if you add in 5 power weapons the odd of offing him get alot higher

IG 15 Power Weapon attacks(+1A 2CCW +1A Charge) (odds 1/12)
72% causing 1 wound
45% causing 2 wounds
... moral of this story is power weapons are a must if you want to stand a chance in hell.