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.

Had this come up tonight, a large mob of orks held two objectives (a long line of orks strung out in coherency).

I, for some reason, did not know a unit could hold two objectives But I can not find a rule stating that they cannot.

So, I assume they can?

Yup, it is legal in 5e, though relatively easy to negate (just assault the unit and it folds up again.)

Zoned

A good point.. too easy to nullify with about 2-5 wounds = 4-10'' worth of coherancy lost at either end. Still a good point...

Oh well, good to know.

Zoned wrote:Yup, it is legal in 5e, though relatively easy to negate (just assault the unit and it folds up again.)

Zoned

Umm... No, it's not.

If I had my BGB here, I'd quote pages for you.

A unit can hold one objective and, if it's within 3" of more than one you (IIRC) randomize which one it's holding at the end of the game (if it's still within 3" of two).


Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:

Zoned wrote:Yup, it is legal in 5e, though relatively easy to negate (just assault the unit and it folds up again.)

Zoned

Umm... No, it's not.

If I had my BGB here, I'd quote pages for you.

A unit can hold one objective and, if it's within 3" of more than one you (IIRC) randomize which one it's holding at the end of the game (if it's still within 3" of two).


Eric

please follow up on that Eric as i'd be interested in seeing it.
reading my book now it says
"at the end of the game you control an objective if there is at least one of your scoring units, and no enemy unit (any unit, whether scoring or not) within 3" of it.as different objectives vary in shape and size, it is important to agree at the beginning of the game exactly where this distance will be measured from."

so unless it is in another section then one unit holding two objectives sounds feasible.

Yeah, I looked myself in the book (pg 90 &91) and couldn't find anything that said a unit couldn't control more than 1 objective.

I played recently in an RTT and in 1 mission they made a point to tell us that unlike the rules in the book, a troop choice can only hold 1 objective.

im 95% sure you can hold 2 at the same time but theres still 5% missing so im not 100% sure.

MagickalMemories wrote:

Zoned wrote:Yup, it is legal in 5e, though relatively easy to negate (just assault the unit and it folds up again.)

Zoned

Umm... No, it's not.

If I had my BGB here, I'd quote pages for you.

A unit can hold one objective and, if it's within 3" of more than one you (IIRC) randomize which one it's holding at the end of the game (if it's still within 3" of two).

I fear you are adding in some tournament/previous edition language (e.g., where you randomized which quarter a unit was claiming). There is no such language about claiming objectives in the BGB.

I was able to grab three objectives with an arrowhead formation.

There's no mention of how many objectives a unit can control. Just the requirements, ie, must be within 3" and no enemy within 3"

Deathmachine wrote:im 95% sure you can hold 2 at the same time but theres still 5% missing so im not 100% sure.

man, we gotta be pushing 98 - 99 percent by now...

Does a unit have to be in coherency to be scoring?

Just wondering what would happen if you string out your unit in your last turn, getting the end guys within 3" of two objectives, take some shooting casualties in opponents last turn and choose to remove the middle guys. Then the game ends.

Ooh that's an argument I wouldn't want to have

If the game ends while you are not in coherency then they still are scoring. Pg 12 states if you are out of coherency, then in the next movement phase you must do whatever it takes to retain the coherency unless not aloud to because of pinning due to sniper fire, barrage, etc.

The only thing that prevents a unit from being scoring is:
if it's a vehicle, swarm special rule, or has a special rule saying it never counts as scoring.

Or falling back. Those units are removed and counted as destroyed.

Dangit MM, going and getting my hopes up like that

usernamesareannoying wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:

Zoned wrote:Yup, it is legal in 5e, though relatively easy to negate (just assault the unit and it folds up again.)

Zoned

Umm... No, it's not.

If I had my BGB here, I'd quote pages for you.

A unit can hold one objective and, if it's within 3" of more than one you (IIRC) randomize which one it's holding at the end of the game (if it's still within 3" of two).


Eric

please follow up on that Eric as i'd be interested in seeing it.
reading my book now it says
"at the end of the game you control an objective if there is at least one of your scoring units, and no enemy unit (any unit, whether scoring or not) within 3" of it.as different objectives vary in shape and size, it is important to agree at the beginning of the game exactly where this distance will be measured from."

so unless it is in another section then one unit holding two objectives sounds feasible.

actually in %th it just says a unit is considered to be controlling a objective if its within 3". In 4th they clarified it and said only one objective per unit, A bunch of us have pored over the book to try and find anything that says you can only hold one per unit but nada. Some people find it cheap but...thats the advantage of a large unit. Now if you can find something that says you can only hold one Id love to know where it is because in 4th it was an eratta not in the rule book and I know nothing of any 5th eratta.