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.

I recently played with someone who had his men not in cover, but when he put them to ground they were partially covered so he claimed he had a 3+ cover save. Theres no way thats right, please comment if im wrong.

If they are in the open (Not in cover of any sort) and go to ground, they get a 6+ cover save as going to ground gives you a +1 to your current cover save.

In the open (No cover save) + go to ground (+1 to cover save) = 6+ cover save.

He would have had to be sitting in 4+ cover terrain to get a 3+ by going to ground.

That scenario doesn't make any sense. how can be be not in cover and partially covered. Hes either one or the other. If 50% or more of his models have cover then hes 4+ (3+ going to ground). if they dont then hes no cover and 6+ going to ground.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is he moving his models into cover when hes going to ground? cause thats not allowed you cant move your models other than laying them down to denote going to ground

VoxDei wrote:That scenario doesn't make any sense. how can be be not in cover and partially covered. Hes either one or the other. If 50% or more of his models have cover then hes 4+ (3+ going to ground). if they dont then hes no cover and 6+ going to ground.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is he moving his models into cover when hes going to ground? cause thats not allowed you cant move your models other than laying them down to denote going to ground

When he lays them down they go into cover that they wouldnt have been in before, just a small terrain piece

That's wrong. You lay them down as a reminder that they have gone to ground. Alternatively you place a marker next to them or just remember.

No 3+ save, just a 6+.

I have a smoke marker that I use for tanks. I use it for infantry that have gone to ground as well.

technically, they stay in place, and don't [per game terms] go to ground in the literal sense.

If he was completely in the open, and went to ground he'd get a 6+ cover save.

However, it seems like he was behind light cover (5+ coversave?) in which case he'd have a 4+ save.

It sounds more like:

1) Before going to ground, no cover save
2) After going to ground, sudenly claims of "in 4+ cover"

This can only be because they laid their models down, and this reduced their height making them able to claim cover from low terrain.

Short answer is: the act of laying a model down is a marker to represent GtG. To then claim that marker has an ingame effect is wrong.

Ahhh, ok I misinterpreted the situation then.

Nos is correct in that any in game markers have 0 effect on the game. It's just like those who say that the fake smoke cloud they put on vehicles who have 'popped smoke' affects someon elses LOS

Nova nick wrote:I recently played with someone who had his men not in cover, but when he put them to ground they were partially covered so he claimed he had a 3+ cover save. Theres no way thats right, please comment if im wrong.

He pulled a fast one on ya and this is why:

Lukus83 wrote:That's wrong. You lay them down as a reminder that they have gone to ground. Alternatively you place a marker next to them or just remember.

No 3+ save, just a 6+.

ChrisWWII wrote:Nos is correct

as he is well known to be

I don't even see how laying them down can change what they're covered by. If the piece of terrain only comes up to their shins it still counts.

@MasterSlowPoke It's a contrived situation, but imagine if they are standing next to, but not in, some terrain. And you lay them down into the terrain, obviously leaving the bases out of the terrain. Some people might try to claim that they are now in the terrain and so will get the 3+ cover save for going to ground in terrain instead of a 6+ for going to ground in the open.

I suppose for a small enough squad that explains it.

IF his reasoning was tipping them over, you aren't supposed to do that. You only do that with one model, and to mark the squad as gone to ground.

He is either sorely mistaken or cheating.

yamgrenade wrote:IF his reasoning was tipping them over, you aren't supposed to do that. You only do that with one model, and to mark the squad as gone to ground.

That's not what the GtG rules say. You either place a marker on the unit or lay the models down.

Since you do not place the marker(Or lay the models down) until after the unit has been fired at, the cover they were granted when the attacker checked LoS is improved by one.

Laying them down does not affect their original cover save, it simply gives them a +1 modifier to whatever cover they had to begin with.

P.24 "After the enemy has rolled to hit and wound against any of your units, but before you take any saves or remove any models, you can declare that unit is going to ground. To represent this, place a suitable marker next to the unit (you may alternatively want to lay the models down)..."

DeathReaper wrote:Since you do not place the marker(Or lay the models down) until after the unit has been fired at, the cover they were granted when the attacker checked LoS is improved by one.

Laying them down does not affect their original cover save, it simply gives them a +1 modifier to whatever cover they had to begin with.

P.24 "After the enemy has rolled to hit and wound against any of your units, but before you take any saves or remove any models, you can declare that unit is going to ground. To represent this, place a suitable marker next to the unit (you may alternatively want to lay the models down)..."

Exactly. Otherwise, it's a huge disadvantage to players who use a marker, and in fact it would always be advantageous to lay down the models. Which we don't want.

Oh yeah, and if cover is improved by one, it means it's a -1 modifier.

Considering GtG says to use a marker or lay the models down to represent the G2G rule that is all it does, the laying down of models is only to represent the G2G status, or just use a marker

insaniak wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:IF his reasoning was tipping them over, you aren't supposed to do that. You only do that with one model, and to mark the squad as gone to ground.

That's not what the GtG rules say. You either place a marker on the unit or lay the models down.

I was saying the exact thing you are.

yamgrenade wrote:

insaniak wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:IF his reasoning was tipping them over, you aren't supposed to do that. You only do that with one model, and to mark the squad as gone to ground.

That's not what the GtG rules say. You either place a marker on the unit or lay the models down.

I was saying the exact thing you are.

You said that you only lay one model down. I pointed out that the rules don't actually say that. 'Models' does not mean 'one model'...

insaniak wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:

insaniak wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:IF his reasoning was tipping them over, you aren't supposed to do that. You only do that with one model, and to mark the squad as gone to ground.

That's not what the GtG rules say. You either place a marker on the unit or lay the models down.

I was saying the exact thing you are.

You said that you only lay one model down. I pointed out that the rules don't actually say that. 'Models' does not mean 'one model'...

The point is, its not like the models are affected by different cover because they are laying down. Its just to signify that they have GtG.

yamgrenade wrote:The point is, its not like the models are affected by different cover because they are laying down. Its just to signify that they have GtG.

WHile that's a popular convention, it's not actually backed up by the rules.

Models that are laying down will have a different profile for LOS purposes to identical models that are standing up. The LOS rules make no exceptions for models that are laying down to signify GtG status. They should, since as was pointed out earlier the current rules result in laying the models over having a different outcome to using a marker... but as the rules currently stand, LOS revolves entirely around the actual physical position of the model.

Except that they only allow you to lay the models down to represent their G2G status.

and all the G2G rule allows is a +1 to the cover save, it does not say you gain LoS advantages.

P.24 "To represent this, place a suitable marker next to the unit (you may alternatively want to lay the models down)..."

Also, there are no provisions to stand the models up anywhere, so once a unit goes to ground it has to stay that way for the rest of the game, this means that unit can not shoot very well, since LoS will be traced from their eyes, and looking straight up at the sky will not give you good LoS to much of anything.

But that is silly to think they can not stand up again, but it is RaW.

DeathReaper wrote:Except that they only allow you to lay the models down to represent their G2G status.

and all the G2G rule allows is a +1 to the cover save, it does not say you gain LoS advantages.

It doesn't need to say that you gain a LOS 'advantage'... that happens purely as a result of the model's LOS profile changing.

In order for it to not affect LOS, you would need a rule that tells you to ignore the actual position of the model in this particular situation.

Also, there are no provisions to stand the models up anywhere,

That would be covered by returning to normal. If laying them down is just to denote GtG status, then returning to normal would require you to stand them up... otherwise you're denoting a status that no longer exists and your models disappear in a poof of illogical smoke.

But the only reason you lay the models down, or put a marker there is to denote that the unit has gone to ground.

Also by the time you lay them down LoS has already been checked, so it can not allow you to gain a different cover save than one that was checked by LoS.

DeathReaper wrote:But the only reason you lay the models down, or put a marker there is to denote that the unit has gone to ground.

That doesn't automatically mean that it has no other effect on the game.

If the only reason I move my Land Raider 6" closer to your guys is to get a better LOS on your tank over yonder, that doesn't mean that we pretend that it's still 6" further away.

Also by the time you lay them down LoS has already been checked, so it can not allow you to gain a different cover save than one that was checked by LoS.

Not contesting that. I was more referring to what happens afterwards.

It is clear that by having the option to place a marker or alternatively to lay the models down, that you only do so to denote Gone to ground.

RaI is clear that it is not intended to change the models position or LoS, and this is how the rule works.

Anyone that plays that it does change LoS needs to play everything else strict RaW and we all know what that leads too.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/278461.page

DeathReaper wrote:It is clear that by having the option to place a marker or alternatively to lay the models down, that you only do so to denote Gone to ground.

RaI is clear that it is not intended to change the models position or LoS, and this is how the rule works.

The RAI is not clear at all.

I agree that it would be better to assume that placing a marker has exactly the same effect as laying the models down, (I said the last time this topic came up that I personally don't lay my models down, as I feel that using a marker is the better way to resolve the issue) but the RAW doesn't match that, nor do we have any way of determining the RAI i this case. You're assuming the RAI based on your own belief that it is the better way to play the game. It's just as possible that GW were aware that laying the models down has LOS implications and simply didn't think it was a bg enough deal to warrant doing anythign about it.

Anyone that plays that it does change LoS needs to play everything else strict RaW and we all know what that leads too.

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Everyone is free to play using whatever rules they choose, provided their opponent agrees. Choosing to play strict RAW on one particular rule doesn't mean that you have to play the whole game that way. Otherwise, you could just as easily argue that firing 2 shots with a rapid fire weapon forces you to likewise play the game by 'strict RAW'...

All I am saying is that the intent of the rule is clear, and that placing a marker or laying the models down should have the exact same effect on gameplay.

otherwise we have a rule that does one thing when you use a marker, and something vastly different when you lay models down.