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.

Well, for one "exploit", there is the thread on here about Ork Meks using their tools to re-mobilise a building, because GW decided to classify Buildings as "immobile vehicles".

But I don't think it was a serious suggestion.

It's mobilized, but there's nothing in the rules that says how far it can move...

A Building does not have "Fast" or "Skimmer" special rule, so up to 6" is combat speed, 6"-12" is Cruising. Driving your house along a road will add 6".

@Harkainos - This sort of stuff is genuinely very rare amongst the community as a whole.

This is because the vast majority of gamers are sufficiently mature to appreciate that they are playing with plastic toy soldiers and doing it for fun. This means that people who pull this kind of crap get slapped in the face with a trout and don't play you again.

Unfortunately, there ARE a minority of gamers who love this kind of stuff, slather themselves in man-tan and shout about how great they are. These people are naturally attracted to tournaments so they can prove what great specimens of manhood they are.

People (again the vast majority) who go to tournaments want to play hard but fair, they want to win by being good, not cheesy. Sadly, they'll run into the cheese merchants with alarming regularity. Hence you'll hear lots of this stuff on dakka - as there's a lot of competetive players who post on here.

it's the difference between moving 0" and not moving. the result is the same thing (a model that is still in the same place) but one is considered to have moved 0" and the other is stationary..

See the difference?

A skimmer can move 12 inches in a circle and be unable to fire its weapons, and simultaneously be considered not to have moved at all for the purpose of being a target.

Rules exploitation is using verbage /interpretation of the rules to gain an advantage the game designers did not intend. Of course we will not know if it's true exploitation or not unless FAQ's and errata come out afterwards correcting the "broken rule"

So far in 5th ed i havent seen much of it, and before hand it was usually just about what units where in cover. I also hated area terrain

The 2 major ones i can remember was a guy at a tournament that argued his hive tyrant had 1+ save due to warpfield and extended carapace, he also had 4 units of 32 gaunst and was not adapt at moving them fast so he was not to popular..

the other was the old 3rd rules for shooting at IC, my mate used a chaplain side on to the enemy and put a tactical squad behind him to two columns, so they could not get shot at, like this:
[] being the chaplain
:::::::::::[]

TalosNB wrote:The 2 major ones i can remember was a guy at a tournament that argued his hive tyrant had 1+ save due to warpfield and extended carapace, he also had 4 units of 32 gaunst and was not adapt at moving them fast so he was not to popular..

The rule for Maximum Save on page 24 explicitly says no save can be made better than 2+. "Exploiting" a rule, if such a thing does exist, is very different from cheating. The former typically has grounding via a RAW reading whereas the latter does not.

holy threadromancy batman

two_heads_talking wrote:it's the difference between moving 0" and not moving. the result is the same thing (a model that is still in the same place) but one is considered to have moved 0" and the other is stationary..

See the difference?

I don't see the difference.
Moving 0" is not moving.
Going to the store 0 times is not going to the store.
Eating 0 pieces of pizza is not eating pizza.


::EDIT:: Also, yeah, 4 month old thread.

Here are the ones I have been whined at about. Exploits or not, they are rules as written:

- 4th edition Chaos Dread popping smoke while fire frenzing
- 4th edition Chaos Dread with dual CCW and Destroyer having only extra armor instead of demoinc possession in order to get 50/50 shot at raging forward.
- 4th edition Berzerkers moving towards the closest enemy, using their full movement to get on the backside of the unit and then charging a different unit within charge range. Rules stated I had to move towards the closest enemy unit during my movement phase if I raged. I then had the charge A unit during my assault phase if A unit was with range. 12" charge really pisses some people off when using these rules.
- 4th edition close combat where my Dread at I4 immobilizes a Monolith and my Aspiring Champion auto hits the immobilised target at I1 with a powerfist, causing the monolith to explode. I am still not sure about this one, but everyone at my LGS was consulted about the incident and everyone feels it was handled correctly.
- 6th edition fantasy, Chaos Knights retreating as a charge reaction from a Bloodthirster into trees, meaning the Bloodthirster stopped at the tree edge because it is a flyer. Not sure on this one either, but again everyone agreed.
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack in order to "lay it down" so you can shoot over it.
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack across an enemy character in order to knock them down. Standing the jack up in it's activation and auto hitting the character, thus killing it.
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack Devestator across infantry in order to slide it into the unit for an AOE attack.

Tell us who you are.

G

Danny Internets wrote:

TalosNB wrote:The 2 major ones i can remember was a guy at a tournament that argued his hive tyrant had 1+ save due to warpfield and extended carapace, he also had 4 units of 32 gaunst and was not adapt at moving them fast so he was not to popular..

The rule for Maximum Save on page 24 explicitly says no save can be made better than 2+. "Exploiting" a rule, if such a thing does exist, is very different from cheating. The former typically has grounding via a RAW reading whereas the latter does not.

Danny Internets wrote:

TalosNB wrote:The 2 major ones i can remember was a guy at a tournament that argued his hive tyrant had 1+ save due to warpfield and extended carapace, he also had 4 units of 32 gaunst and was not adapt at moving them fast so he was not to popular..

The rule for Maximum Save on page 24 explicitly says no save can be made better than 2+. "Exploiting" a rule, if such a thing does exist, is very different from cheating. The former typically has grounding via a RAW reading whereas the latter does not.

Both of these were done using the 3rd Ed rulebook not the edition as I had said I havent found any major problems with the 5th Ed rules

Techboss wrote:
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack in order to "lay it down" so you can shoot over it.
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack across an enemy character in order to knock them down. Standing the jack up in it's activation and auto hitting the character, thus killing it.
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack Devestator across infantry in order to slide it into the unit for an AOE attack.

People complain about this?

malfred wrote:People complain about this?

People complain about everything and especially those things they couldn't predict or haven't seen/thought of before that cause a drastic swing in the game.

malfred wrote:

Techboss wrote:
- Warmachine, slamming a friendly jack across an enemy character in order to knock them down. Standing the jack up in it's activation and auto hitting the character, thus killing it.

People complain about this?

I'd complain about this one as well, considering its illegal.

For the rest of 'em though, creative use of low DEF models to help you hit high DEF models is simply part of the game and has been since Prime.

Off topic but a word to players who face someone trying to intermix two units to give both units cover. Make them move by the rules very specifically. One unit at a tim and can't move through a gap smaller than your base. will eithr take tem for ever or at our flgc we had a play make a mistake ang get two 30 man boy squads stuck. lol funny trick to play on that strategy

blue loki wrote:I'd complain about this one as well, considering its illegal.

Forgot to mention I used Irusk a lot and the Jack would have superiority caste on it prior to executing this move. This means the model can't be knocked down. There are a myriad of other feats and abilities that allow models to stand up from being knocked down on the same turn. But, yes, as you stated, it would be illegal to stand a model up without one of those abilities the same turn you knocked the model down.