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.

It's a well known fact that 2 units can't give each other cover saves, only one may count as being behind the other...

but what about 3 (or potentially MORE) giving each other cover saves?

Here is one such formation I thought of:

ihatehumans wrote:It's a well known fact that 2 units can't give each other cover saves, only one may count as being behind the other...

but what about 3 (or potentially MORE) giving each other cover saves?

Here is one such formation I thought of:

RaW = Yes. Good luck moving it RaW though, since you are NOT allowed to go through other bases.
RaPlayed via the INAT = No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ihatehumans wrote:It's a well known fact that 2 units can't give each other cover saves, only one may count as being behind the other...

And just to point out, that's not true, RaW they can give each other cover, it's the INAT that forbids it.

Oh my bad, you are indeed correct about RaW and INAT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S.

Who said anything about moving it

But I'm sure there would be some way to construct it that would enable it to move, although most likely not at full distance.

One artillery hit, and its all gone.

I might be totally off on my rules interpretation, but doesn't it only allow you to shoot through your own unit (meaning other pals in the same unit), effectively letting this well cover saved blob only allow six guys to shoot?

Also, this can be pulled off with only 2units

Fearspect wrote:I might be totally off on my rules interpretation, but doesn't it only allow you to shoot through your own unit (meaning other pals in the same unit), effectively letting this well cover saved blob only allow six guys to shoot?

You use true LoS to see whether each individual model can shoot, and in my experience most models can see at least part of the unit being targetted even if through a lot of other models.

On the other hand, the targetted unit will almost certainly get a cover save. Especially if you are not shooting at a vehicle or monstrous creature, because shooting "through the gaps" of other units will give them a cover save (excepting vehicles and MCs). But if you're shooting through the gaps it will still let you shoot as long as you can draw true LoS.

Plus, due to the "shooting through the gaps" rule, you can make the units even further from each other than in the picture and still give everyone cover saves. Of course you'll be giving nearly everyone you are shooting at cover saves, too, but more of your guys will have true LoS. You're right in saying that in this picture, some of the bunched up models will not be able to shoot due to TLOS issues, but usually even in this picture you'd be able to get more than 6.

I actually do this with nids, but a little differently. I put a gargoyle screen in front of my hive tyrant to cover 50% of him. that takes about 3 to 4 gargoyles. I then put at least half the gargoyle screen either in, or behind cover, giving them a 4+ cover save.

I supposed you could do this with a 3rd unit by having half of them hide behind the tryant.

this way, you could still move effectively and fire with at least half your units as you move up.

Lets be clear though, I believe that marching nids up the table is thinking in 4th edition terms and will probably get you annihilated for the most part.

Versus THAT SINGLE DIRECTION, sure. Any other angle of attack would result in much fewer cover saves.

So while technically true (Ive counted out all the little circles etc) it has Zero useful relevance. Sorry

What Gwar said. Good luck moving a unit like this...

Those 3 units also provide a 4+Cover save to anything they want to shoot at.

Ludovic wrote:
You use true LoS to see whether each individual model can shoot

Wrong. All the models can shoot. Enemy being fired at gets a 4+ cover save(intervening models) t represent the chance that firing unit was trying not to blow his buddies brains out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gannam wrote:screen in front of my hive tyrant to cover 50% of him

You dont need 50%. A model only has to be partially obscured for a cover save to come in. For example: A necron scarab partially obscures the the ankle area of a greater daemon when checking True line of sight from a group of warriors. The greater daemon now has a 4+ cover save.

IggyEssEmManlyMan wrote:Wrong. All the models can shoot. Enemy being fired at gets a 4+ cover save(intervening models) t represent the chance that firing unit was trying not to blow his buddies brains out.

No, YOURE wrong on this (again)

EVERY model that wants to fire must be able to see a model on the target unit. EVERY MDOEL, wiothout exception.

Before correcting people incorrectly reading the rules is a good idea...

IggyEssEmManlyMan wrote:You dont need 50%. A model only has to be partially obscured for a cover save to come in. For example: A necron scarab partially obscures the the ankle area of a greater daemon when checking True line of sight from a group of warriors. The greater daemon now has a 4+ cover save.

And wrong again. A hive tyrant is a Monstrous Creature, which DOES need to be 50% obscured.

Again, those darn rules....

nosferatu1001 wrote:

IggyEssEmManlyMan wrote:You dont need 50%. A model only has to be partially obscured for a cover save to come in. For example: A necron scarab partially obscures the the ankle area of a greater daemon when checking True line of sight from a group of warriors. The greater daemon now has a 4+ cover save.

And wrong again. A hive tyrant is a Monstrous Creature, which DOES need to be 50% obscured.

Again, those darn rules....

And to add another nail to the coffin, Swarms have a special rule saying they can NEVER EVER give cover saves to MC's or Vehicles

The reason Mutual cover would work is because you can see *between* models with ease, shooting between two models when you have unobstructed LOS gives you cover. Intervening models doesn't give you xray vision through meat that would allow them to shoot through a model. The only time you can 'see through' models is for units shooting through models in thier own unit.

If you can't see, you can't shoot. You don't get to see through models. If the wall of meat, friendly or enemy is so thick you can't draw TLOS you can't shoot.

Most places that use INAT will say Yellow gets no cover no matter what because they are closest to the red unit. But good luck moving around and being competitive with that formation... as well as being flamer bait and blast bait... AND protecting yourself from all angles as 6" to the right and red could shoot up yellow all day.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

IggyEssEmManlyMan wrote:Wrong. All the models can shoot. Enemy being fired at gets a 4+ cover save(intervening models) t represent the chance that firing unit was trying not to blow his buddies brains out.

No, YOURE wrong on this (again)

EVERY model that wants to fire must be able to see a model on the target unit. EVERY MDOEL, wiothout exception.

Before correcting people incorrectly reading the rules is a good idea...

Actually there is one exception sort of. Models in the the firing unit don't block LoS to other models in the same unit, which I think is where he was getting mixed up, confering that to ALL friendly models which is just wrong.

The INAT, which I generally play by, clearly covers this whole scenario. I just pulled one of those fail moments where I had rules/INAT mixed and consequently failed to accurately use either of them.

Not much more discussion to it imo