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.

insaniak wrote:
The problem is that still breaks a rule, since Reserves who pass their Reserves roll have to move on. There is simply no way to resolve this that doesn't break a rule.

The gameplay from that point breaks a rule. The placement of the guardsmen does not break a rule, although it does cause (in combination with the ork player's decision to move everything on normally from reserve) a rule to be broken.

To put it differently: 40K is a permissive ruleset that specifically allows you to line up your models in this way. Lining up your models in this way cannot (therefore) be a breach of the rules.

It's a dick move though.

Norbu the Destroyer wrote:I think its a viable tactic. If your army has no outflankers, no deepstrikers, nothing with wings or a jetbike to get over enemy lines, tough luck for you pal.

The only thing it's viable for is breaking the game. Yes, again, it's legal to do it. But you need a house rule to determine what to do afterwards.

So while it's legal, it's not viable unless its a situation you have discussed with your opponent pre-game to determine how it will play out.

ajfirecracker wrote:The gameplay from that point breaks a rule. The placement of the guardsmen does not break a rule, although it does cause (in combination with the ork player's decision to move everything on normally from reserve) a rule to be broken.

To put it differently: 40K is a permissive ruleset that specifically allows you to line up your models in this way. Lining up your models in this way cannot (therefore) be a breach of the rules.

I never said that putting the guardsmen there broke the rules. I said the exact opposite, in fact.

Hollismason wrote:It's a dick move though.

Not facing a dick nob biker army it isnt. One with nothing but bikes.

Also facing a stupid opponent who didn't work out that -2 to reserves and lots of tanks plus troops = blocked board edge. If you're stupid enough to let it happen to you then concede and mvoe on with good grace.

insaniak wrote:

The problem is that still breaks a rule, since Reserves who pass their Reserves roll have to move on. There is simply no way to resolve this that doesn't break a rule.

I do admit, however, that you have also said that the placement of the infantry does not break a rule.

insaniak wrote:"...It's legal, but it breaks the game, so should be either avoided or house ruled before the game begins as to what will happen in this situation..."

I don't see it as breaking the game - rather a counter to the Outflank tactic lists, and similar.

Wipeout ! "...regardless of the victory conditions, if at the end of any standard mission your enemy has no units left on the table, you win the game..."

It breaks the game, because there are no rules about what to do in this situation. You can't continue because you must place the models coming in from reserve, and yet you cannot place the models because of the opposing units blocking the reserves. There is simply no RAW way to proceed to 'the end of the game'.

ajfirecracker wrote:

insaniak wrote:The problem is that still breaks a rule, since Reserves who pass their Reserves roll have to move on. There is simply no way to resolve this that doesn't break a rule.

I do admit, however, that you have also said that the placement of the infantry does not break a rule.

You've lost me. The post that you have now quoted twice was in response to your suggestion that breaking no rule meant not moving on. So what you have quoted is pointing out that the Orks have to move on, not that the blocking models can't be placed there.

toxic_wisdom wrote:I don't see it as breaking the game - rather a counter to the Outflank tactic lists, and similar.

As Lordhat said, (and as I said earlier, for that matter) it breaks the game because it doesn't fit into the rules. You have to create a hosue rule to move past the first Movement phase in which Reserves are supposed to come on but can't.

I don't think we're really disagreeing, insaniak.

It was my understanding that your intent in the quoted post was to claim that it was illegal to block the table edge because of the not-covered-by-the-rules situation it could cause.

If you don't think it's illegal to place them there, then I don't think you and I disagree on any particular point.

ajfirecracker wrote:It was my understanding that your intent in the quoted post was to claim that it was illegal to block the table edge because of the not-covered-by-the-rules situation it could cause.

Ok. I have no idea how you got that from what I actually said, but it certainly explains your subsequent posts.

So no, we don't disagree. I don't think it's illegal, just that it shouldn't be done without first clearing up with your opponent what will happen if you do it.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo since this is YOU MAKE DA CALL...


...how the in the Emperor's Name do you all play it?

Myself? In our FLGS we've made a compromise. Tanks can shock on, but footsloggers are SOL.

I would plan on a bigger table, if possible.

Well actually in the case of the ork army it doesnt matter how one resolves it, as long as no rules are broken (ie no allowing assaults from a position off of the table, no moving within 1" of a model)


If the models are counted as destroyed since they cant enter or if the models are held allowed to wait for a section of the board edge to clear .... it doesnt matter to the orks since they are going to remain off the table until the game ends whichever way that you proceed. So for the orcs at least, they lose the game either way.

Now, it would make a difference to an army that could potentially open a portion of the map edge of course. So it will be necessary to come up with a house rule on how to deal with blocking a table edge cheese, especially if it becomes a more common answer to full reserve army cheese.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:If the models are counted as destroyed since they cant enter or if the models are held allowed to wait for a section of the board edge to clear .... it doesnt matter to the orks since they are going to remain off the table until the game ends whichever way that you proceed. So for the orcs at least, they lose the game either way.

Those aren't the only two possible resolutions to the problem, though.


You could also allow the Orks to move on from one of the adjacent board edges instead, allow them to Deep Strike (the Army's Mek says 'Hey, we need a way over dis lot' and promptly builds a tellyporta), allow them to move on in the assault phase... or do anything else that you and your opponent choose to agree to.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:It's a dick move though.

Not facing a dick nob biker army it isnt. One with nothing but bikes.

Also facing a stupid opponent who didn't work out that -2 to reserves and lots of tanks plus troops = blocked board edge. If you're stupid enough to let it happen to you then concede and mvoe on with good grace.

agreed. the ork player took a widely regarded as broken army (not unanimously so save your breath) and then makes a tactically stupid pregame decision. that's karma and darwin's theory at work together, people.

What did the TO say?

Why does the ork player automatically deserve to lose for taking bikers?

Why does an army deserve to not enter play at all after a successful reserve roll? (Note that emergency disembarkation mitigates the situations where passengers' exits are blocked, so it's pretty rare to have them be outright destroyed by being blocked, and is therefore not a good allegory to this situation.)

What kinda of conversation was going on between the two players while this was happening?

@ Insaniak But I did say without breaking the rules. Giving deepstrike to a unit without that ability, allwoing them to move onto the table in the assault phase, or allowing them one of the adjacent table edges would all be possible hosue rules changes, but are definitely breaking the rules.


Putting ones entire army into reserve in order to gain an advantage is certainly possible under the rules, however blocking a table adge to gain an advantage is also certainly possible under the rules as well.


Moral of the story: If you try and stretch the game hard in order to gain a decisive advantage (ie take a fast assault army that benefits tremendously from staying fully in reserve) then dont be surprised if occasionally something breaks and your army instead suffers a tremendous disadvantage.




Sliggoth

I thought that if something was still in reserves by the end of the game it counted as being destroyed.

Still saying its a dick move.

Yes it definitly is.

@not_u: If something is held in reserves at the end of the game it is counted as destroyed, but only per various special rules and deep-strike delayed mishaps.

Also, the game would never reach the ending under RaW because you would have to stop entirely when the units are unable to move onto the board. (This has been pointed out.)

I've played such that units are delayed, but be sure and reach agreement with your opponent/TO (This has been pointed out.) This works well if they are destroyed should they fail to come on by the end of the game.

I could see the case for this tactic in a tournament but in a friendly game why bother wasting both players' time? For a friendly game this is a classic TFG maneuver.

G

It's the 40K version of the 4 move checkmate. If I was at a tourney, and someone managed this on me... Well, I should have been looking out for it to happen. T

his is something that I'll share with new players, as I do the 4 move checkmate with new chess players. It may be a dickish tool, but there is nothing stopping it from a rules stand point.

Will I be using it in a game? No. I don't think I can field enough models to do it, and I don't want to be TFG. That doesn't mean that we should play as though this doesn't exist.

I think we need a list of dick moves and if you use them then you should be ashamed.

I belive that the Ork player looses, not because his army is destroyed, but because he automatically forfiets the game. The Imperial Guard player followed the rules and made a totally legal movement of his models. THe imperial Guard turn has now ended. It is now the total responsiblity of the Ork player to follow the rules in brining his reserves onto the board. The game can not proceed until he does this. If he can not complete this then the ORK PLAYER is the one holding up the game. He can either stand there for ever, or forfiet the game.

Yes, it is a rather rude tactic. It reminds me of checkers. It is technichally possible to win the game without taking all your opponent's pieces. Just leave him no room to move and he must forfiet.

As I believe has been mentioned by others, no one loses. The game ends in a "stalemate" to continue to chess analogy. The active player must move his models, but due to the specific board position there are no legal moves.

In chess a stalemate is a draw. Blocking a board edge is a tactic which may cause a stalemate if there is no resolution house ruled in advance.

edit: @ Armandloft: the 4 move mate you refer to is called scholar's mate. The actual reason no one plays it in tournaments is because it is a weak attack that is easily defended. New players simply find it difficult to find the accurate defense, thus the name.

I thought that is chess if you can't move legally you simply loose.

Only if your king is in check.

I think the rule here is "Don't keep your entire army in reserves when playing IG". The officer of the fleet tactic simply wrecks armies that rely on reserve rolls. One of the best 30 point buys in the game.

If your king cannot move, no other piece can move and the king is not in check, it is a stalemate and thus a draw.