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.

In your example of doing your chores, you are doing them in no particular order - you're just doing whichever suits you. The order which you *did* them in is not the order which you chose to do them in prior to actually performing your chores.

It seems like this thread has become a mod dogpile though, so I'll let you guys brofist each other and play with your house rules while I follow what's actually written. It's not game-breaking, and it adds a fun element of risk, where if you don't declare enough overwatch, you're SOL.

uberjoras wrote:
In your example of doing your chores, you are doing them in no particular order - you're just doing whichever suits you. The order which you *did* them in is not the order which you chose to do them in prior to actually performing your chores.

It seems like this thread has become a mod dogpile though, so I'll let you guys brofist each other and play with your house rules while I follow what's actually written. It's not game-breaking, and it adds a fun element of risk, where if you don't declare enough overwatch, you're SOL.

Go read the rules, apparently you never done so. both the Support fire and the rules for overwatch.
You are the one making house rules here buddy.

uberjoras wrote:
In your example of doing your chores, you are doing them in no particular order - you're just doing whichever suits you. The order which you *did* them in is not the order which you chose to do them in prior to actually performing your chores.

And yet the rules DO NOT SAY that you have to choose an oder 'before performing them'. That's the part you keep inserting on your own.

Just as a side example (not related to overwatch), on a typical shooting phase, I get to choose the order I resolve my unit's shooting in. This is a true statement. Yet, I don't have to choose the order before firing any of my units. So as you can see from this example, it is entirely possible for someone to 'choose the order' of doing something by simply performing the actions in the order they desire. I have my choice of which order to resolve my unit's shooting, and I exercise that choice by performing the shooting in the order I want.

 yakface wrote:

literally.... literally.... literally....

Literally!

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

 yakface wrote:

literally.... literally.... literally....

Literally!

Sorry about that.

At least (I hope) I didn't use 'literally' when I was referring to something figuratively (as happens so much these days).

uberjoras wrote:
In your example of doing your chores, you are doing them in no particular order - you're just doing whichever suits you. The order which you *did* them in is not the order which you chose to do them in prior to actually performing your chores.

It seems like this thread has become a mod dogpile though, so I'll let you guys brofist each other and play with your house rules while I follow what's actually written. It's not game-breaking, and it adds a fun element of risk, where if you don't declare enough overwatch, you're SOL.

Yet you are literally making a rule up out of thin air, as no requirement to DECLARE exists in the rules

It isnt a "mod dogpile", it is mostly incredulity that you cannot see you are making a rule up.

They declare an assault, but nowhere does it say you must declare all units are fire overwatch, or any for that matter.
You can chose which and the order you do so in your own time.

If a unit of fire warriors get assaulted by a single termigant, im going to overwatch with the least effective unit i have 1st in the hope of ending it then and there.
My other available units are then free to overwatch another assault if needed.

Only real restriction is not being able to fire overwatch with a unit more than once (special rule for strike aside)

On a related note..

Can I overwatch, via Supporting Fire, at a unit charging an already engaged unit?

Cheers

Andrew

 AndrewC wrote:
On a related note..

Can I overwatch, via Supporting Fire, at a unit charging an already engaged unit?

Cheers

Andrew

If the unit using supporting fire is within 6" of the friendly (already engaged) unit getting charged, then yep. But remember, range and LOS is required as normal for overwatch shooting.

Good, no more feint charges to worry about.

Cheers

Andrew

But a unit engaged in close combat can not fire over watch, and over watch is required to trigger this new tau rule (im assusming? no codex.. you can spank me if im wrong)

SmackTalk wrote:
But a unit engaged in close combat can not fire over watch, and over watch is required to trigger this new tau rule (im assusming? no codex.. you can spank me if im wrong)

As soon as you get the codex, all will be clear to you.

Yes, units within 6" of a friendly unit getting charged can make an overwatch attack even if the target of the charge is already engaged an unable to overwatch themselves.

tidalwake wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:

I don't have the co9dex on me, but from what I remember and what was talked about in the other thread, supporting fire says you need to declare what units will provide supporting fire.

Sorry, but if you aren't familiar with the rule in question or have the codex to familiarize yourself with you don't need to be making statements about those rules that will lead others to have the wrong impression. Supporting fire says absolutely nothing about declaring your intentions. If says that a unit within 6" of a unit being charged can choose to fire overwatch as if it were the target of the charge. That's it. Literally nothing about declaring intentions. Left without other guidance we must take the rule for what it says, not inject what we wish it said. Yakface has the right of it in this case.

Nothing says I can't input my opinion on rules without have the codex in front of me. I own it and have read it more then you I guess. The bold section excludes the important part of the sentence conveniently. Please follow you own advice when quoting rules to someone, I bold face stated I didn't have my codex on me and inputted my opinion, you just attempted to correct me about using a codex and quoted a rule from the codex wrong. The irony is hilarious.

"When an enemy declares a charge, all friendly models with this special rule in units within 6" of the charging unit's target can choose to fire Overwatch as if they were also the targets of the charge."

This statement specifies a time period at which you can make this choice. It says when they declare a charge, you can choose fire overwatch with those units. So at this time period you have to make this choice. The rule book covers the rules on the order which you fire. (Which is of course your choice of order)

It's not like it's a limiting factor, and I don't know why everyone is arguing against it. Even if you choose to fire with every unit that meets this criteria, you 1) Get to choose the order of firing 2) Get to fire overwatch at a different target with any unit that doesn't actually fire it's weapons at the charging unit. just because you choose to fire doesn't mean you got to the point where you unit had the opportunity to fire, so you did not fire overwatch target and therefore get to fire at a separate target.

Coyote81 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
2) is entirely made up as a step. It does not exist in the rules

You determine the order, at no point do yuou have to declare the order in advance of anyone shooting

That is the step you are making up. It flat out does not exist.

I don't have the codex on me, but from what I remember and what was talked about in the other thread, supporting fire says you need to declare what units will provide supporting fire. This matters because if you don't have to declare at the beginning, technically darkstirders unit could overwatch, consolidate d6" back and put other units within 6" to provide support fire. but it doesn't work, since you have to declare at the beginning.

I know the rule book doesn't say you have to but codex>rulebook in this case. so step two is a solid step imo.

I'm staring straight at my codex. Supporting Fire does not say to declare anything.

A similar rule you can find when you do a multi-assault ( the one where a single unit charge two units ) They both can Overwatch, but you still can choose not to overwatch with the 2nd unit if the first one kills off enough from the assaulting unit.

This whole thread seems to me that is just someone that try to find a loophole to waste the entire Tau army overwatch so he can assault without being overwatched, or come out with more survivors because the first unit didnt kill enough and cant use another overwatch to this "made-up declaration"

^^^ I think that's it. If we say that we do need to declare, and declare a specific order, then it's only one step further to say 'you declared against X therefore you can't do overwatch against Y even though you didn't fire'.
Having an order is also frustrating due to markerlights: how many markerlights hit from one unit will seriously affect which squad shoots next.


As for the actual debate... the play style being inferred is so complicated that it would need 2 or 3 explicit paragraphs in the rulebook to explain in. The lack of such explanation is a clear indicator that such a complicated rule was not intended

Coyote81 wrote:

tidalwake wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:

I don't have the co9dex on me, but from what I remember and what was talked about in the other thread, supporting fire says you need to declare what units will provide supporting fire.

Sorry, but if you aren't familiar with the rule in question or have the codex to familiarize yourself with you don't need to be making statements about those rules that will lead others to have the wrong impression. Supporting fire says absolutely nothing about declaring your intentions. If says that a unit within 6" of a unit being charged can choose to fire overwatch as if it were the target of the charge. That's it. Literally nothing about declaring intentions. Left without other guidance we must take the rule for what it says, not inject what we wish it said. Yakface has the right of it in this case.

Nothing says I can't input my opinion on rules without have the codex in front of me. I own it and have read it more then you I guess. The bold section excludes the important part of the sentence conveniently. Please follow you own advice when quoting rules to someone, I bold face stated I didn't have my codex on me and inputted my opinion, you just attempted to correct me about using a codex and quoted a rule from the codex wrong. The irony is hilarious.

"When an enemy declares a charge, all friendly models with this special rule in units within 6" of the charging unit's target can choose to fire Overwatch as if they were also the targets of the charge."

This statement specifies a time period at which you can make this choice. It says when they declare a charge, you can choose fire overwatch with those units. So at this time period you have to make this choice. The rule book covers the rules on the order which you fire. (Which is of course your choice of order)

It's not like it's a limiting factor, and I don't know why everyone is arguing against it. Even if you choose to fire with every unit that meets this criteria, you 1) Get to choose the order of firing 2) Get to fire overwatch at a different target with any unit that doesn't actually fire it's weapons at the charging unit. just because you choose to fire doesn't mean you got to the point where you unit had the opportunity to fire, so you did not fire overwatch target and therefore get to fire at a separate target.

Of course I am aware of what the full rules state, I generally try not to post word for word parses of rule text unless critical to get my point across since I feel people should read their BRB/Codex on their own. Regardless, the part you think I conveniently omitted has nothing to do with the crux of the issue. The timing of an enemy declaring a charge isn't important. You always fire overwatch after the enemy declares a charge, so of course it's in the rule text. As I go through eligible units and decide if they are firing overwatch it is still after the enemy has declared a charge, nothing about that says I have to decide for all of my units at the same time immediately after the charge is declared. This is a perfect example of someone injecting what they want the rules to say into the debate. If an enemy declares a charge and I fire with one unit, then not happy with the results I fire with another unit am I still firing after the enemy has declared the charge?

Coyote - so, I can choose to fire - but because the rule does not require a declaration of this choice, you can never know that I was going to fire that unit before killing everything off with the previous one

Same end result as what the rules say, which is that you choose what will shoot, but you do so in order - you choose a unit to fire overwatch with, then fire with it, then choose the next.


This fulfils ALL rules that are written, and does not fulfil the rules you are making up -= which is fine.

I think in this case, they have the BS of the commander. Always!
Except when theres no commander.

 yakface wrote:

SmackTalk wrote:
But a unit engaged in close combat can not fire over watch, and over watch is required to trigger this new tau rule (im assusming? no codex.. you can spank me if im wrong)

As soon as you get the codex, all will be clear to you.

Yes, units within 6" of a friendly unit getting charged can make an overwatch attack even if the target of the charge is already engaged an unable to overwatch themselves.

Just to confirm, from what I'm looking at the codex tells me I can choose to fire overwatch. What happens when the Unit firing the Supporting Fire Overwatch is themselves engaged in CC? The BRB says, obviously, that you cannot fire while engaged but the Supporting Fire says I can choose to do so if I want. Wouldn't this be a case of Codex >Rulebook>?

uberjoras wrote:
Because 'technically' you never have to say which marines are coming in with their pod... except for the fact that you still actually do.

Um, yes you do. Pg 121 of BRB clearly states you MUST inform your opponent what units are embarked and where they are embarked.