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.

Necros wrote:
If he tried to say each got a cover save from setting up like that, I'd measure down to the last millimeter for everything and purposely slow the game down checking my true distance that way, and make him measure the same way when it's his turn to shoot, just to piss him off.

Then I would probably forfeit 2 hours in after the 2nd turn or so and go play someone who isn't an jackass.

Because being a jackass yourself makes everything better.

There is nothing wrong with following the rules. I've had Tyranid players stomp their feet and throw a fit when I killed a MC within Synapse using a Force Weapon. I've seen players yell and throw things when the Lash was used to shape their squads into templates. The world is full of people who think the rules are bad when it is not in their favor.

How about we just play the game as written in the book and have a good time? If your opponents legal deployment of his units is enough to get you upset, perhaps you have deeper issues.

Sorry I wasn't trying to come off as a jackass while posting about jackass moves :p

Seriously though.. with this kind of method.. sure, the rules say it might work.. But seriously, just ask yourself if it's right. I mean, sit down and really think about it. The rule, IMO, is meant to help enforce the "shoot the closest unit" thing.. instead of the LD test to shoot something else, they give everything a cover save. Would you mix 2 squads together right now to force people to make LD tests for no reason?

Using guard as an example, I can see this representing the conscript meat shield out in front, making it tougher to zero in on what's behind them. Not mixing your conscripts in with another platoon so you just spray the area with bullets and don't hit anything.

It's just abusing the rules, and abusing the rules are the reason we have such screwed up rules to begin with. Almost every funky new rule we get is made to either sell new models, or make it tougher for little billy to bend the rules that sell more models. They have the same problem in online games... someone has to win at all costs so they use every exploit they can find to get them the win, then blame their lameness on poor game design.

Anyway, I was bored at work and needed to post something :p still an interesting read, just seems like a lame tactic in general to me.

I'm sure GW will issue a ruling or clarification as soon as they think they've sold enough ork boyz, gaunts and guard models. Or about the time they want to emphasize shooting over horde again. In the meantime I'll dust off my orks and put away my eldar and necrons. The solution is simple, just build all or most of the armies, and run what wins. Waiting for GW to write a good, comprehensive rule set is futile. Play it their way or get out, just like Jervis says...

Democratus wrote:

Necros wrote:
If he tried to say each got a cover save from setting up like that, I'd measure down to the last millimeter for everything and purposely slow the game down checking my true distance that way, and make him measure the same way when it's his turn to shoot, just to piss him off.

Then I would probably forfeit 2 hours in after the 2nd turn or so and go play someone who isn't an jackass.

Because being a jackass yourself makes everything better.

There is nothing wrong with following the rules. I've had Tyranid players stomp their feet and throw a fit when I killed a MC within Synapse using a Force Weapon. I've seen players yell and throw things when the Lash was used to shape their squads into templates. The world is full of people who think the rules are bad when it is not in their favor.

How about we just play the game as written in the book and have a good time? If your opponents legal deployment of his units is enough to get you upset, perhaps you have deeper issues.

This is a clear abuse of the rules. He may have gone a little far to do the nit-picky stuff but your opponent is already being a jackass. I find it highly unlikely that GW inteneded for units to constantly be lumped together in slow moving clumps that are surprisingly resiliant to machine gun fire and can't draw a bead on their targets because some other unit is moving around with yours.

TommyStriker wrote:
This is a clear abuse of the rules.
...
I find it highly unlikely that GW inteneded for units to constantly be lumped together in slow moving clumps that are surprisingly resiliant to machine gun fire and can't draw a bead on their targets because some other unit is moving around with yours.

One person's "clear abuse of the rules" is another person's smart play. The rules have no feelings, they are simply the rules. If you want to add extra unwritten meaning to them (good, bad, unintended, etc), that is entirely on you.

It is, in all likelyhood, true that they did not intend for the rule to be used this way. But, they wrote it that way. I would recommend that everyone play it like it is written and let them see what a joke it is to hire a language translator who is self-admittedly bad at math to be the main writer of their flagship game. Maybe at some point, they'll get the clue and hire someone competent to write the rules.

In other words - aim your ire at the correct place. It is not the fault of the player who plays by the rules, it is the fault of those who wrote the rules.

Redbeard wrote:

TommyStriker wrote:
This is a clear abuse of the rules.
...
I find it highly unlikely that GW inteneded for units to constantly be lumped together in slow moving clumps that are surprisingly resiliant to machine gun fire and can't draw a bead on their targets because some other unit is moving around with yours.

One person's "clear abuse of the rules" is another person's smart play. The rules have no feelings, they are simply the rules. If you want to add extra unwritten meaning to them (good, bad, unintended, etc), that is entirely on you.

It is, in all likelyhood, true that they did not intend for the rule to be used this way. But, they wrote it that way. I would recommend that everyone play it like it is written and let them see what a joke it is to hire a language translator who is self-admittedly bad at math to be the main writer of their flagship game. Maybe at some point, they'll get the clue and hire someone competent to write the rules.

In other words - aim your ire at the correct place. It is not the fault of the player who plays by the rules, it is the fault of those who wrote the rules.

GW gets enough crap sent it's way. They don't have the time or resources to play test their material, and it's up to the players most of the time (this site is proof of that) to deal with their mistakes.

Are you serious? So GW is never responsible for any rules they put out because they put out bad rules? Then GW should just charge everyone $72 and tell us to make up our own rules.

If devs don't have the time or resources to do the job they're being payed to do, what are they doing? Gav Thorpe impression contests?

The rules may be written one way or another, but anyone that's not a <expletive deleted> should be able to interpret said rules in a way that won't force other people to throw old metal dreadnoughts at them

should have know better than to get excited about playing 40k - didn't like 4th so stopped playing. I will now wait and see how people play before I finish my Tau army. If I see this being the constant tactic that people use then I won't be playing 5th either.

I don't know why it would be an issue with your Tau army. Markerlight hits solve this problem nicely.

Capt k

I really don't see this as being that big of an issue. Sure you can do it, but no units are going to survive long enough to continue gaining the benefit of a save. Flame template weapons go around this lame tactic with ease. Tank shocks will also break the formation as well. Just because some one is using this setup, doesn't make it work reliably in all situations.

Capt K

Necros wrote:The rules may be written one way or another, but anyone that's not a <expletive deleted> should be able to interpret said rules in a way that won't force other people to throw old metal dreadnoughts at them

Yes yes, the old throw the metal dreadnought at the guy playing by the rules argument... You're throwing it at the wrong guy. Take your metal dreadnought to your local Games Day and throw it at whichever developer is the guest there.

avantgarde wrote:Are you serious? So GW is never responsible for any rules they put out because they put out bad rules? Then GW should just charge everyone $72 and tell us to make up our own rules.

If devs don't have the time or resources to do the job they're being payed to do, what are they doing? Gav Thorpe impression contests?

I never said they weren't responsible, I am simply pointing out that I have never met anyone who honesty respects the job GW does with it's surprisingly popular minis games.

Seriously, this game system has more holes than any I have ever played in my life (excluding rpgs, which tend to have considerably more rules issues). The only reason it's still alive is because it is simple and fun, despite it's gaping flaws. And the minis look cool

On a seperate note though, I disagree with the idea that because there are ways to counter this tactic there's nothing wrong with it. It just makes playing a primarily visual game very irritating to look at.

This makes no sense to me. Don't you have to move 1 unit at a time? How would such a comically interspersed set of units move unless you illegally moved both squads at the same time. This is a lot of crying about nothing.

It's easy enough to move. Two inches between models leaves plenty of space for the units to move among each other. Try it at your desk with nickles if you don't have models handy.

yakface wrote:
It will be difficult to move two intermingled units like that as models are not allowed to move through friendly models or between gaps too small for their base to fit.

In fact, in is entirely possible to set your units up intermingled to the point where you wouldn't be allowed to really move either of your intermingled units at all!


As for close combat, the rules now allow you to come within 1" fo enemy models while charging, full stop. That means intermingled enemy units no longer stop charges.

Hmm while this will not be ideal for orks it will be a godsend for stationary shooty armies like the Tau and IG.

Im looking forward to getting my hands on the new rulebook an about a month...