How do you play it? Intermixed Units and Cover

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.

**Dracos**

If slow play was a concern why would I be taking any penalty? Its not me executing this maneuver which is exceedingly complicated and time consuming. Sorry, but the onus is on the moving player to accurately measure their movements. I have the right to enforce this.

edit: I don't see a TO giving a slow play penalty of any sort to the inactive player.

**kirsanth**

If your movement phase takes 10min+ in a 2 hour game, you are playing slowly.

/shrug

**Dracos**

If I am playing someone who is executing this maneuver, how is it happening in my movement phase? Are you saying if they are moving my models?

I think you missed the point on this one.

**kirsanth**

No, I missed your edit. Without that it was a bit vague.

It would not be the inactive player penalized - it would be the player taking 20minutes to move his models.

**Gwar!**

The reason I say YOU would be a fault is that the opponent has demonstrated that it is possible and it is legal and you are forcing him to waste time.

**kirsanth**

So long as you follow the rules and move one unit at a time.

/shrug

**don_mondo**

Gwar! wrote:The reason I say YOU would be a fault is that the opponent has demonstrated that it is possible and it is legal and you are forcing him to waste time.

Nope, cause they're not in the exact same formation the second time, so the first time cannot be applied.

**Gwar!**

don_mondo wrote:
Gwar! wrote:The reason I say YOU would be a fault is that the opponent has demonstrated that it is possible and it is legal and you are forcing him to waste time.
Nope, cause they're not in the exact same formation the second time, so the first time cannot be applied.

But what if they are?

**Dracos**

Gwar! wrote:But what if they are?

Then prove it by measuring. I don't have to take them at their word that they eyeball it as being the same.

**Ridcully**

I don't see why barrage would ignore the cover save anyway. Even from the centre of the blast, the units are in cover.

**Cannerus_The_Unbearable**

Bare in mind this applies to more than infantry. Necron Destroyers love this trick.

**don_mondo**

Ridcully wrote:I don't see why barrage would ignore the cover save anyway. Even from the centre of the blast, the units are in cover.

Because it's a Colossus.............................

**thebetter1**

I'm wondering why so many of you picked choice C. I threw it in to weed out people who don't know how to read the rules, but it is at a pretty high amount, and nobody has stated why they believe it is not supported by official material. Any explanations?

**Gorkamorka**

thebetter1 wrote:I'm wondering why so many of you picked choice C. I threw it in to weed out people who don't know how to read the rules, but it is at a pretty high amount, and nobody has stated why they believe it is not supported by official material. Any explanations?

Perhaps because the poll specifies a tournament setting, the majority of which use the INAT ruling? Not that I picked C.

**thebetter1**

This is making it really hard to invalidate an INAT ruling. People are voting based on what the INAT already says!

**ZacktheChaosChild**

Meh it makes sense

**Gorkamorka**

thebetter1 wrote:This is making it really hard to invalidate an INAT ruling. People are voting based on what the INAT already says!

Then make an actual 'how would you play it' poll, or actually question the raw vs INAT decision.

"In a tournament setting, would you expect two intermixed units to give each other cover saves?" is entirely the wrong question to ask if you want to question the actual validity of the ruling or tactic, and of course people are going to vote no if their tournaments use the faq ruling.

**Kilkrazy**

willydstyle wrote: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.

That's kind of the point I was trying to make.

(A) I think it's stupid.
(B) I don't think it should be allowed because of A.
(C) I think it is easily countered.
(D) I don't care if it's allowed because of C.