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.

When deploying a unit, are you allowed to measure range between models in the unit? The purpose would be to check the coherency between models. This could be exploited to make sure all your models are exactly 2" away from each other, greatly reducing the effectiveness of blast weapons.

Yes you are, in fact you must; because you cannot deploy them out of coherency.

You can/must do the same while moving the unit in any phase as well because, again, you cannot move them out of coherency.

KK, not to sound stupid, but since this is also on debate in Tomb Spider rolling (or whatever it is), where does it say you need to deploy in coherency?

It doesn't.


Certain specific situations (Deploying from a vehicle, Deep Striking) give specific instruction on how the models must be deployed. Regular deployment, though, has no rules to cover it.

It's generally assumed that units should be deployed in coherency, but there is no rule that actually says that this must be the case.

Units are not allowed to willfully break coherency. "Remember that units have to stick together, otherwise individual models become scattered as the unit loses its cohesion as a fighting force." ~ BRB, p12

Deploying units out of coherency willfully breaks their coherency. You cannot do this.

That quote is fluff and does not pertain to any actual rules.

Happyjew wrote:KK, not to sound stupid, but since this is also on debate in Tomb Spider rolling (or whatever it is), where does it say you need to deploy in coherency?

There are quite a few things in GW games that aren't stated. Setting up with units in coherency isn't spelled out in runes of blazing fire, but is pretty much implied in the rules, and has always been an assumption of the game. What's happening is people running through the rulebook, and strenuously looking for ways to not play the game.

It's one of the reason why GW used to be much slower with FAQ's and has a bit of a disdain for people insisting they write rules tighter for tournaments. When they see arguements like this, they think "Really? Why would you purposefully set your units up out of coherency? Do we really have to say it better than we did?" To many of the designers, it's just not a question they expect anyone to ever ask.

I would like to point out I already agree to everything people have said. However, the same question was asked in another topic (Necron Tomb Spyders and rolling) and was never given an answer. Or at least if it was, I missed it. I figured, it was on topic here, and there might be an answer.

DeathReaper wrote:That quote is fluff and does not pertain to any actual rules.

That doesn't fly with GW -- their fluff is very much a part of their rules, and this can be seen in how they approached anti-Daemonic weaponry. You don't get to throw out half the rulebook just because you don't happen to agree with what it says.

Corollax wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:That quote is fluff and does not pertain to any actual rules.

That doesn't fly with GW -- their fluff is very much a part of their rules, and this can be seen in how they approached anti-Daemonic weaponry. You don't get to throw out half the rulebook just because you don't happen to agree with what it says.

No. Only sometimes does fluff=rules. In the case of daemons (for GK), and fire-based weapons (for the Avatar, and C'Tan powers) it specifically states that fluff=rules.

Corollax wrote:That doesn't fly with GW -- their fluff is very much a part of their rules, and this can be seen in how they approached anti-Daemonic weaponry. You don't get to throw out half the rulebook just because you don't happen to agree with what it says.

Fluff can sometimes give an indication of how things work where they are not fully spelt out, yes. It can give you generalities, like whether or not something is a Daemon, (or a Zoanthrope, to dredge up another once-debated fluff vs rules issue).

That doesn't mean that you can always just take a piece of fluff text and apply it as a rule, though, because the fluff is often going to us terminology not defined by the rules. The fluff just gives a setting for the rules to sit in.

After all, if we're going to use 'Units must stick together' as rules, should we be gluing all of the models together in a big huddle?


To be clear, the inference that units should be deployed in coherency is fairly obvious. But the rules stop short of actually requiring it... it's simply one of those things that most players take for granted without needing it to be explicitly stated.

You cannot willfully end a movement outside of coherency.

"So, once a unit has finished moving, the models in it must
form an imaginary chain where the distance between
one model and the next is no more than 2". We call
this 'unit coherency'."

It is generally accepted that this applies to deploying the unit as well.

insaniak wrote:After all, if we're going to use 'Units must stick together' as rules, should we be gluing all of the models together in a big huddle?

Considering that they define what they mean by that statement in the following sentence, I hardly think this is a concern. You know quite well what's meant by the statement I quoted, and pretending otherwise is sophistry. Ignoring context isn't going to earn you any points on this forum, nor should it.

I did not ignore context, but that quote is still fluff, and not actual rules.

The rules are "once a unit has finished moving..." and the context is about movement and not deployment.

Corollax wrote:You know quite well what's meant by the statement I quoted, and pretending otherwise is sophistry.

Indeed I do. Which is why I pointed out how it is generally accepted to work.

The point was simply that presenting fluff as rules leads to madness, particularly when that fluff isn't actually dealing with the situation at hand... and so needs to be done judiciously.

The rules just don't cover coherency at deployment. That's not generally an issue, because people prefer to pretend that they do.

Also, why the hell would you want to willfully deploy out of coherency?

It provides you with no benefits and a whole slew of penalties...

WanderingFox wrote:Also, why the hell would you want to willfully deploy out of coherency?

It provides you with no benefits and a whole slew of penalties...

I think it's silly to do it, and I wouldn't, but it would allow you to spread out units far enough to further protect them from blast weapons turn one, before you would need to move back into coherency.

WanderingFox wrote:Also, why the hell would you want to willfully deploy out of coherency?

It provides you with no benefits and a whole slew of penalties...

Just off the top of my head, if you take a nice cheap unit, deploy one half of it at as far forward as possible at one end of your deployment zone and the other half at the other end of your deployment zone, every other non-vehicle/MC unit in your deployment zone gains a cover save from enemy shooting that passes between the two halves.

Beardy as all get out... but would be fun to pull against the 'right' opponent



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also potentialy gives you more targets for units that can split fire, like Wolf Guard or Crisis suits.

Except if you're out of coherency, you can't shoot (you're forced to run) - so more targets won't do any good.

rigeld2 wrote:Except if you're out of coherency, you can't shoot (you're forced to run) - so more targets won't do any good.

This. There really are no rules, aside from the deployment scenario, that govern how you deploy your units. It's entirely permissible to take a 5 man unit and put 1 in the center of your deployment zone and each of the other models in a corner. You'd likely spend the entire game getting that unit into coherency, but the fact remains that the rules allow you to do it.

-Yad

rigeld2 wrote:Except if you're out of coherency, you can't shoot (you're forced to run) - so more targets won't do any good.

Being out of coherency only forces you to attempt to regain it in the movement phase. There is no requirement for the unit to run.

insaniak wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Except if you're out of coherency, you can't shoot (you're forced to run) - so more targets won't do any good.

Being out of coherency only forces you to attempt to regain it in the movement phase. There is no requirement for the unit to run.

Really? I thought that there was a line stating that a unit would need to Run if able to to get back into coherency? If not, then my mistake. It still doesn't appear add any significant benefit to the unit in the shooting phase if that's the case.

-Yad

insaniak wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Except if you're out of coherency, you can't shoot (you're forced to run) - so more targets won't do any good.

Being out of coherency only forces you to attempt to regain it in the movement phase. There is no requirement for the unit to run.

BRB FAQ, second page, first question.

Q: What happens if an out of coherency unit is able to move, but not able to restore unit coherency in a single movement phase?
A: They must attempt to restore unit coherency as soon as possible, including having to Run! in the shooting phase if able.

rigeld2 wrote:

insaniak wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Except if you're out of coherency, you can't shoot (you're forced to run) - so more targets won't do any good.

Being out of coherency only forces you to attempt to regain it in the movement phase. There is no requirement for the unit to run.

BRB FAQ, second page, first question.

Q: What happens if an out of coherency unit is able to move, but not able to restore unit coherency in a single movement phase?
A: They must attempt to restore unit coherency as soon as possible, including having to Run! in the shooting phase if able.

Thanks. I was near certain that was the case.

-Yad

Ah, there you go.

Still, the cover save scenario still works

insaniak wrote:Ah, there you go.

Still, the cover save scenario still works

... Annoyingly true.

It seems that some people are under the assumption that players (such as myself) who state that coherency is not a deployment rule are 'combing through the rules to find how to not play the game' as put forth by Mikhaila. I find this offensive, but perhaps it is because the position I put forward has been demonized without being explained.

To shed some light on my POV, consider the following. Your opponent is playing space wolves, and is packing lots of long fangs. You purchaced some plasma cannons on your tactical squad, and seeing this the spacewolf longfangs premeasure 2 inches exactly between every one of their models to ensure you can never hit more than 1 long fang with your plasma cannon.

The longfangs get this 2 inch spacing by claiming that 'of course you deploy in coherency, stop being TFG. I am just checking to see if I am in coherency... oh this guy was 2.5 inches let me put him closer... oh now this guy is only 1.5 inches let me move him further away.'

You point out that coherency, and the 2 inch requirement, is a movement phase rule, and to premeasure coherency in deployment is cheating, as you run no risk of the unit needing to move in its first movement phase while stretching the unit to its absolute limit without even first moving.

I know I cant be the only one to sigh when your expensive plasma cannon is defeated before turn 1 even starts thanks to an opponent premeasuring exactly 2 inches in the deployment phase, especially when the rules never mention measuring 2 inch coherency in the deployment phase. The counter argument "well you wouldnt want me to deploy all over the place" rings hollow because there are penalties for being out of coherency. There is no penalty to premeasuring exactly 2 inches before you get a movement phase.

@DevianID: So wait... you're saying that the BRB tells you that coherency is measure during the movement phase... and that it's illegal to "pre-measure" coherency during delopment... that I could "purposely" (or accidently) place my models > than 2" from one another?

I've yet to encounter anyone that had a problem me measuring my models in deployment to ensure that they're in coherency...

Riddle me this... say you're an IG player with lots of pie plates...

I'm an ork player with Bikers... I place my models 5" apart to minimize the pie-plate coverage if the IG player has first turn...

Then, in my first movement phase, I'd move my bikers into 2" coherence, which is easy to do since they can move 12"...

Isn't this a beardy tactic???

Seems dodgy...

DevianID wrote:I know I cant be the only one to sigh when your expensive plasma cannon is defeated before turn 1 even starts thanks to an opponent premeasuring exactly 2 inches in the deployment phase, especially when the rules never mention measuring 2 inch coherency in the deployment phase. The counter argument "well you wouldnt want me to deploy all over the place" rings hollow because there are penalties for being out of coherency. There is no penalty to premeasuring exactly 2 inches before you get a movement phase.

So turn it around. As Whembly suggested, if you don't assume that coherency is required on deployment, why would anyone ever deploy in coherency when spreading their models out plays even better into your 'immune to Blasts' scenario?


Why is it any different for them to be sitting exactly 2" apart in the first turn as opposed to any other turn? Keeping your models at maximum coherency is simply another tactic that some players like to use to minimise casualties. Rather than looking at it as an exploit, just accept that it's a part of the game and move on. Your arteries will thank you for it.

I think Corollax still had it right with this one.

Corollax wrote:Units are not allowed to willfully break coherency. "Remember that units have to stick together, otherwise individual models become scattered as the unit loses its cohesion as a fighting force." ~ BRB, p12

Deploying units out of coherency willfully breaks their coherency. You cannot do this.

The first part which I made nice and easy to see is part of the rules. You cannot willufully break coherency. Now when do you check to see if you are in coherency is another thing. If you start the game and have to check then no you cannot deploy out, however if you only check at the end of each movement phase then yes you can deploy out.