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.

If you don't know for some reason, two units are intermixed when they are "checkerboarded" together, like this:

01010101
10101010
01010101
10101010

The rulebook makes it very clear that shooting through models in another unit or the gaps between the models grants a cover save.

What do you all say? Please note that we are only working with official material, but otherwise vote how you would play this rather than specifically what the rulebook says (which could be a certain way just because of the rulebook; it depends on your philosophy on gaming). You should have noticed that there are two "yes" choices and two "no" choices, so pick the one that more accurately represents why you think this way.

I guess I just remember the old rules from way back and play it that if a unit is in cover, it's getting a coversave, regardless of where the enemy is.

Most major tournaments use the INAT FAQ, they ruled in there that only 1 unit gets the save, not both. This is determined by which unit is closer to the firing squad. I suppose that if both units were completely equidistant (unlikely), then you'd have to make some sort of judgment, but I doubt that they'd say "both units are in cover"

Meh. I'd allow it... but I think the chances of it actually happening are extremely remote.

I think that they technically can give each other cover saves as per the rules, but I would not play somebody who did something like that a second time.

I generally don't rely on low-AP weaponry for my anti-infantry, so it doesn't matter too horribly much to me, and I think the rules support the fact that both units get a cover save.

I play as "Oh, god, it's this question again." Voodoo asked this question about a month after the release of 5th edition.

If someone tried this on me, I would probably allow it. But then I would make them measure every single distance to make sure the 2" was not violated. If they wanted to move the unit, I would be very adamant about making sure they do not break coherency or try to move through models from the other unit. I think I would make sure this tactic is too much of a headache (which it is) to be worthwhile.

Dracos wrote:If someone tried this on me, I would probably allow it. But then I would make them measure every single distance to make sure the 2" was not violated. If they wanted to move the unit, I would be very adamant about making sure they do not break coherency or try to move through models from the other unit. I think I would make sure this tactic is too much of a headache (which it is) to be worthwhile.

Wouldn't an offset checkerboard solve the movement problem?
Something like:
1-1-1-1-1
-0-0-0-0-0
1-1-1-1-1
-0-0-0-0-0
would allow them to advance or shift sideways without a huge headache, and if done correctly half the models could be covered for both squads.

Personally?
RAW? Yes
INAT? No, so you won't see it where it really matters and where the poll is asking
Dick move = Yes, I won't see it on the board more than once from any given player


Edit:
Heck, if the gap size isn't specified (Don't have my BRB on hand), you could be even worse with it.
1-----------------------------1
100000000000000001
1111111111111111

indeed, Dracos. While not the most sportsmanlike manuever, it's in response to cheesedick move in the first place.

Valhallan42nd wrote:indeed, Dracos. While not the most sportsmanlike manuever, it's in response to cheesedick move in the first place.

Why is expecting your opponent to follow the rules of the game not sportsmanlike?

He said "not the most sportsmanlike", not "not sportsmanlike"

There is a difference in meaning. The former denotes it is not in the category of unsportsmanlike, conversely that is exactly the denotations of the latter.

Basically what I'm saying is that I acknowledge the fact that there are more polite ways to handle it. I just don't care to employ them.

Screw all of you, I'm bringing a Hellhound.

Take two hellhounds, just to make sure.

Valhallan42nd wrote:Take two hellhounds, just to make sure.

Devildogs?

I wouldn't allow it in my tournament setting, but it is what the rules say. Assuming a lot of tournaments use the INAT FAQs, or know about cheese in its many delicious varieties, this won't be an issue.

I'm not going to vote.

The rules are clear.

It is cheesy and the INAT FAQ is fairer.

I doubt this situation arises much as people who do it are setting up a fire magnet for templates, flamethrowers and tankshocking.

If it did happen in a game, I wouldn't not play the guy again, but I would ensure his ploy resulted in annihilation of both the units, in order to discourage its repetition.

Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not going to vote.

The rules are clear.

It is cheesy and the INAT FAQ is fairer.

I doubt this situation arises much

Do you expect it to be allowed in tournaments?

Ridcully wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not going to vote.

The rules are clear.

It is cheesy and the INAT FAQ is fairer.

I doubt this situation arises much

Do you expect it to be allowed in tournaments?

Only in those that don't use the INAT FAQ

Then that's a "No, this is too cheesy"

Dracos wrote:If someone tried this on me, I would probably allow it. But then I would make them measure every single distance to make sure the 2" was not violated. If they wanted to move the unit, I would be very adamant about making sure they do not break coherency or try to move through models from the other unit. I think I would make sure this tactic is too much of a headache (which it is) to be worthwhile.

I have to agree with this. If someone is going to try to exploit a rule this way, then their opponent has every right to ensure that the player follows every other rule, specifically about movement distances and not moving through another model.

Of course, a canny opponent could merely demonstrate the legal way of moving it once and say "From now on assume all moves are done like this".

At a tournament, you would have to agree otherwise the TO will dock you for time wasting.

I am voting "Other" as I have yet to participate in a tourney that does not use the INAT FAQ - so it has nothing to do with power or cheese.

In fact, I think I know only one player who does not reference that FAQ for rules issues not covered by GW - and then it is simply because he likes to (ab)use DeffRollas hits on vehicles; and he follows the rest of INAT, iirc.

The problem is the unit can barely move. Depending on exactly how the models are placed and how things are set up would determine what kind of cover saves what things get. If you just come form the side angle there is no cover save for either unit using TLoS. Think 45 degree shooting angle from the from (make a diagonal line through and you see how the squads line up).

The unit would also give a cover save to anyone it was firing at because it is firing through another unit. I'll gladly take the 4+ cover save. Also, trying to do this will make it impossible to move the unit since you have to move around the other unit that is intermingled with the moving unit. Also make sure you're not moving through a model cause that is definitely a no no unless you have jump packs or jet packs (or wings).

When both units get a huge (edit)ordnance(edit) pie plate on them you won't benefit from cover either since cover is determined from the center of the blast.

Edit:
Clarified for specify ordnance pie plate

rogueeyes wrote:When both units get a huge pie plate on them you won't benefit from cover either since cover is determined from the center of the blast.

Wrong. Only Barrage is.

Oops my bad for not specifying.

rogueeyes wrote:Oops my bad for not specifying.

Still incorrect. Ordnance doesn't do that. Only Barrage or Ordnance Barrage do. Blast and Large Blast/Ordnance weapons determine cover as normal.

I still don't get why people think this is so cheesy. Does it use the rules to create a counter-intuitive situation (cover saves with no cover)? Yes, it does, but at the same time, on most battlefields it's rare not to have a cover save most of the time anyways.

Then add in the fact that there are many, many weapons in the game that actually make this tactic a very, very, very bad idea (heavy flamers anyone?) that I just don't get the uproar.

Hell, all you have to do is tank shock the units, then laugh as he spends the next couple of turns trying to untangle his units that effectively can't move.

Gwar! wrote:Of course, a canny opponent could merely demonstrate the legal way of moving it once and say "From now on assume all moves are done like this".

At a tournament, you would have to agree otherwise the TO will dock you for time wasting.

Not really. This type of maneuver requires precise measuring - and that is exactly what I would enforce. You want to move a guy from unit A between 2 guys from unit B? Okay, prove that there is a 1" space to move through. Now measure the distance the model moves at each different angle if there is no straight line. Rinse and repeat for every single model in the cluster****.

edit: And what do you mean "dock you"? As far as I was aware there is no score for speed of play (which by the way, I'm not the one slowing the game down by executing a very complicated, precision required tactic). Normally opponents mark sportsmanship. So exactly how is it the TO will dock me?

Gwar! wrote:Of course, a canny opponent could merely demonstrate the legal way of moving it once and say "From now on assume all moves are done like this".

At a tournament, you would have to agree otherwise the TO will dock you for time wasting.

Nope, I'd make him do it from scratch each time since there is no way that the exact same formation will exist from turn to turn. Casualties, moving a model .00001 inches less, etc etc, all will change the formation, hence changing the movement pattern.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dracos wrote:

edit: And what do you mean "dock you"? As far as I was aware there is no score for speed of play (which by the way, I'm not the one slowing the game down by executing a very complicated, precision required tactic). Normally opponents mark sportsmanship. So exactly how is it the TO will dock me?

Actually, some tournies now penalize a player if he is intentionally (or thought to be) playing slow. You know the deal, one more turn and I lose but if the game ends this turn it's a draw, let me just drag this out..........