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.

I can't see anything prohibiting it so I say yes

Yes, they could, although it would be difficult with objectives a minimum 12" away from each other.

go go gadget congoline.

Not hard at all, actually. Imagine a 30 man Ork mob on an objective in the middle of the table. Last turn, they 'explode' out in all directions, using move and run to spread out and get into range of other objectives.

Anyways. don't expect it to last. Rumor has it that this is on the 'hit list' for the main rules FAQ...............

Why wouldn't it be able to? It'd be silly for them to errata this. The opportunity for "abuse" with 30 guys stretching across a table is so minimal that it should be viewed as a happy bonus for playing an Ork army, not something that gets the whiners screaming.

Not to mention the way it becomes ridiculously easy to pull them off the objective by assaulting them.

Rules-wise, claim away!

Practically, it should be 1 objective per 1 unit, simply to further drive the Troops count up higher, and force more decisions on the player.

It appears legal, but does not spell out a unit can hold multiple objectives. Locally, we ruled a unit can only hold one objective.

First round I had a 30 strong mob of Boyz that were within 3 inches of 3 objectives. Put the objectives a bit centrally in the table in a triangle formation and then the Boyz walk into it. They weren't stretched at all. It would have greatly benefitted me if we had ruled they could claim multiple objectives.

My no vote comes from the RAI side of things. Plus, if your squad of four guys is right in the middle of the table with a guy in each quarter, you have to decide which table quarter you are going to claim. I assign the same logic to the objective markers. This is more of a common sense thing so don't ask me to point out where is says you can't claim more than one with a single unit. I just think you should not be able to.

Vaktathi wrote:Yes, they could, although it would be difficult with objectives a minimum 12" away from each other.

go go gadget congoline.

You can do it with 3 models, and nearly a full inch to spare.

(Obj)<-3"->(1" model)<-2"->(1" model)<-2"->(1" model)<-3"->(Obj)

If you've got a squad of 10, and 4 objectives in a "box" pattern, you can hold all of them fairly easily.

Vaktathi wrote:Yes, they could, although it would be difficult with objectives a minimum 12" away from each other.

go go gadget congoline.

1" base, 2" coherency. That means that every guy after the first adds 3" to the squad. 10 man squad = 28". Tack on the 3" range from the objectives themselves and you can have one squad hold 2 objectives that are actually ~34" appart.

Of course this all falls appart as soon as someone assaults the center of the line (and you have to pile in), but that's how you counter it I guess.

RAW, you can hold and contest as there is no specific rule saying that you can't. (So long as you're meeting the rules in the book, you can hold both).

I can also see this getting FAQed quite quickly; it's a blatant example of where the designers missed something in game testing.

Now, as game mechanics go, in the few last turns if you can get anything to assault the center of the line, you've got a good chance of pulling them off all the objectives when they go to pile in.

Part of this tactic is knowing (or hoping you know) when the game is to end. If you lose that gambit, the opponent can always move back to holding the objectives.

http://tsoalr.com/?p=118