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 was watching a battle report and the grey knights player had their entire army in reserve in the first turn. Is this possible? Even using the Nemesis Vanguard Formation? Thanks.

Yes, the only relevant Rule is that you Auto-loose if you have nothing on the board at the end of your Turn. What was / was not on the board before that is up to you.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Yes, the only relevant Rule is that you Auto-loose if you have nothing on the board at the end of your Turn.

If you have nothing on the board at the end of the game turn (p133, Sudden Death Victory. See also p17, Game Turns and Player Turns). If you went first, had one unit on the board at the end of your turn, but then that unit got killed during your opponent's first turn, you lose at the end of the first game turn.

 Quanar wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Yes, the only relevant Rule is that you Auto-loose if you have nothing on the board at the end of your Turn.

If you have nothing on the board at the end of the game turn (p133, Sudden Death Victory). If you went first, had one unit on the board at the end of your turn, but then that unit got killed during your opponent's first turn, you lose at the end of the first game turn.

By the same token, if you deployed one unit on the board, your opponent goes first and kills that unit... you still get to play out your first turn as the first game turn doesn't end until both players have a turn.

 Quanar wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Yes, the only relevant Rule is that you Auto-loose if you have nothing on the board at the end of your Turn.

If you have nothing on the board at the end of the game turn (p133, Sudden Death Victory. See also p17, Game Turns and Player Turns). If you went first, had one unit on the board at the end of your turn, but then that unit got killed during your opponent's first turn, you lose at the end of the first game turn.

I was not sure if it applied that way if you went first. Thanks for clarifying.

I've always found null deployment lists really interesting (sometimes fun, sometimes cheese)
We all have to remember the white scars player who went with a null deployment, only to have his tau opponent deploy with Infiltrate, blocking his entire deployment zone and winning before the scars player fielded a single unit.

 Squidmanlolz wrote:
I've always found null deployment lists really interesting (sometimes fun, sometimes cheese)
We all have to remember the white scars player who went with a null deployment, only to have his tau opponent deploy with Infiltrate, blocking his entire deployment zone and winning before the scars player fielded a single unit.

That picture is old as dirt. but never gets old


Its at the end of any game turn as some one posted

So you could put all things in reserves but without something coming in T1 you will auto lose by the end of it.

 Squidmanlolz wrote:
I've always found null deployment lists really interesting (sometimes fun, sometimes cheese)
We all have to remember the white scars player who went with a null deployment, only to have his tau opponent deploy with Infiltrate, blocking his entire deployment zone and winning before the scars player fielded a single unit.

And do not forget that the judge handed his tau opponent the win even though, at the time, there were no rules to that effect.

Would that even be a possible tactic for a WS bike spam in 7th since no bikers can arrive T1? It'd auto lose.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Would that even be a possible tactic for a WS bike spam in 7th since no bikers can arrive T1? It'd auto lose.

What white scars bikes would be able to roll reserves on T1?

If they are going in with drop pods and you magically kill them all while they dont disrupt your troll line then yeah its possible

I think it was a special deployment for the game edition. I remember their being one in 5th where you had to start everything but 2 troops and an hq in reserve, but you started rolling turn one.

 Desubot wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Would that even be a possible tactic for a WS bike spam in 7th since no bikers can arrive T1? It'd auto lose.

What white scars bikes would be able to roll reserves on T1?

If they are going in with drop pods and you magically kill them all while they dont disrupt your troll line then yeah its possible

That was my point. No WS bikes can roll reserves T1. So even without the kroot he would autolose in 7th if he reserved all his bikes.

Poly Ranger wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Would that even be a possible tactic for a WS bike spam in 7th since no bikers can arrive T1? It'd auto lose.

What white scars bikes would be able to roll reserves on T1?

If they are going in with drop pods and you magically kill them all while they dont disrupt your troll line then yeah its possible

That was my point. No WS bikes can roll reserves T1. So even without the kroot he would autolose in 7th if he reserved all his bikes.

but what does that have anything to do with this thread?

We know that WS cant do this anymore. the picture that people bring up is from a different edition where it was possible.

But we do have situations where things can come in T1 other than drop pods.

Yes, in 7th edition there are no rules restricting how many things you can put in reserves.

However, if you end the game turn with nothing on the table you automatically lose. Because of this, not many armies can null deploy and not auto lose. Grey Knights are one of the armies who can because Nemesis Strike Force detachments can roll for deep striking units on turn one to come in from reserves.

Drop Pods are another thing that lets you do this as half your Pods deep strike on turn 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Squidmanlolz wrote:
I've always found null deployment lists really interesting (sometimes fun, sometimes cheese)
We all have to remember the white scars player who went with a null deployment, only to have his tau opponent deploy with Infiltrate, blocking his entire deployment zone and winning before the scars player fielded a single unit.

And do not forget that the judge handed his tau opponent the win even though, at the time, there were no rules to that effect.

While there were no specific rules that he autoloses, because he could never deploy any of his units the Tau player could capture all objectives and just wait for the game to end by turn count. So effectively, he did automatically lose. Not because of a specific rule saying so, but because of multiple rules working in tandem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Poly Ranger wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Would that even be a possible tactic for a WS bike spam in 7th since no bikers can arrive T1? It'd auto lose.

What white scars bikes would be able to roll reserves on T1?

If they are going in with drop pods and you magically kill them all while they dont disrupt your troll line then yeah its possible

That was my point. No WS bikes can roll reserves T1. So even without the kroot he would autolose in 7th if he reserved all his bikes.

Yes, but he'd lose because he'd end turn 1 with nothing on the table. The kroot wall would be completely unnecessary.

 Grey Templar wrote:
While there were no specific rules that he autoloses, because he could never deploy any of his units the Tau player could capture all objectives and just wait for the game to end by turn count. So effectively, he did automatically lose. Not because of a specific rule saying so, but because of multiple rules working in tandem..

It wasn't quite that simple. At that point in time, there were no rules saying what to do if you needed to move Reserves on to the table but couldn't do so. There is no option to leave them off until next turn... you had to bring them on in the turn that they 'arrived'.

So this wouldn't have been a 'win when the game ends' situation, because you never get past the movement phase of the first turn in which reserves are supposed to move onto the table... The game breaks at that point.

Given that the game up to that point would have taken all of 5 minutes, the fairer option would have been for the judge to say 'Well done, you found a loophole. Start the game again'. Instead, he chose to hand the win to the Kroot player with a rule made up on the spot.

IIRC that happened in fifth edition. You can't move through enemy units, there was ongoing reserves of a sort via Apoc games, and it said in BRB that units in reserve at end of game were destroyed. Hardly a stretch to say the WS were destroyed.

WS own dumb fault. Khan was good in '09 and if taken would have allowed outflanking.

 Lobukia wrote:
IIRC that happened in fifth edition. You can't move through enemy units, there was ongoing reserves of a sort via Apoc games, and it said in BRB that units in reserve at end of game were destroyed. Hardly a stretch to say the WS were destroyed. .

It's the most logical ruling, certainly... but it's still a bad call to make during a tournament game, unless you're going to allow a re-start.

So how can an SM player pull off null deployment? How can you do it and not lose on turn 2 when reserve rolls fail?

darkcloak wrote:
So how can an SM player pull off null deployment? How can you do it and not lose on turn 2 when reserve rolls fail?

Drop pods allow you to. If they get first turn they don't have anything to shoot at and then half your pods rain in preventing the auto loss at the bottom of turn 1.

darkcloak wrote:
So how can an SM player pull off null deployment? How can you do it and not lose on turn 2 when reserve rolls fail?

Take Drop Pods. Drop Pod assault pulls half of them onto the board in turn one.

 Lobukia wrote:
IIRC that happened in fifth edition. You can't move through enemy units, there was ongoing reserves of a sort via Apoc games, and it said in BRB that units in reserve at end of game were destroyed. Hardly a stretch to say the WS were destroyed.

WS own dumb fault. Khan was good in '09 and if taken would have allowed outflanking.

No, there was no ruling in place before the tournament to cover that situation, unlike in 4th. So the game halts, and instead of making up an auto lose to one player ruling in a tournament, you simply restart. It was a BAD call to make given it hands a win, but did give a great (staged) photo to commemorate it.

It is illogical to say they would be destroyed at end of game, because you never got to the end of the game. The game halted at this point.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
IIRC that happened in fifth edition. You can't move through enemy units, there was ongoing reserves of a sort via Apoc games, and it said in BRB that units in reserve at end of game were destroyed. Hardly a stretch to say the WS were destroyed.

WS own dumb fault. Khan was good in '09 and if taken would have allowed outflanking.

No, there was no ruling in place before the tournament to cover that situation, unlike in 4th. So the game halts, and instead of making up an auto lose to one player ruling in a tournament, you simply restart. It was a BAD call to make given it hands a win, but did give a great (staged) photo to commemorate it.

It is illogical to say they would be destroyed at end of game, because you never got to the end of the game. The game halted at this point.

Agreed. IIRC the BRB in 5th only mentioned units being destroyed in reserve, was if they rolled a mishap on deep strike table on last game turn and was forced to arrive the next round. Since there was no next round, they would count as being destroyed. However, on every other unit in reserve, the BRB explicitly stated that the unit HAD to arrive no matter what, so the WS was army was sort of stuck in limbo.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
IIRC that happened in fifth edition. You can't move through enemy units, there was ongoing reserves of a sort via Apoc games, and it said in BRB that units in reserve at end of game were destroyed. Hardly a stretch to say the WS were destroyed.

WS own dumb fault. Khan was good in '09 and if taken would have allowed outflanking.

No, there was no ruling in place before the tournament to cover that situation, unlike in 4th. So the game halts, and instead of making up an auto lose to one player ruling in a tournament, you simply restart. It was a BAD call to make given it hands a win, but did give a great (staged) photo to commemorate it.

It is illogical to say they would be destroyed at end of game, because you never got to the end of the game. The game halted at this point.

I would agree with you in a friendly game. But in a tournament, there is more than one way to end the game: either you reach the turn limit or you reach the time limit. And in 5th ed, the Wipeout! rule stated that if your opponent has no models on the table at the end of the game, then you win.

The game ended due to the tournament rules defining a time limit. At the end of the game, one player had no models on the table, so the other player automatically won.

All the judge did was tell them not to bother waiting. Like it or not (and I certainly don't), it was RAW as far as the tournament goes.

The game timing out because you have hit a rules loophole isn't an acceptable solution either.

It's also not what happened in this case. The Scars player didn't lose because the judge called time. He lost because the judge declared that models unable to move on were destroyed.

As above; no time limit was reached, they just gave an autolose. In a tournament, to make a new rule up that ives one side an automatic loss is probably not a good rule, especially when a more equitable solution - a do over - would have been entirley possible, given how quickly the game halt situation was found out.

As a TO I would (nearly*) never come up with such a solution, as it isnt massively satisfactory to either player, from a gaming (as opposed to tournament standing) perspective

*I cant think *why* I would make such a one sided, game ending ruling, outside of the usual cheating issues, but igven 40k is so inherently flawed from a rules perspective, there may be scenarios where it would be appropriate, or at least more appropriate than the alternatives

nosferatu1001 wrote:
As above; no time limit was reached, they just gave an autolose. In a tournament, to make a new rule up that ives one side an automatic loss is probably not a good rule, especially when a more equitable solution - a do over - would have been entirley possible, given how quickly the game halt situation was found out.

As a TO I would (nearly*) never come up with such a solution, as it isnt massively satisfactory to either player, from a gaming (as opposed to tournament standing) perspective

*I cant think *why* I would make such a one sided, game ending ruling, outside of the usual cheating issues, but igven 40k is so inherently flawed from a rules perspective, there may be scenarios where it would be appropriate, or at least more appropriate than the alternatives

I get your point nos, I just think that in 5th, where you could reserve everything, assault out of reserve, and win off last turn objective grabs, to intentionally attempt to limit the game and then get caught, is just too novel a move to just cancel the move with a do over. It's basically allowing the WS player to see a clever deployment and then start the game again... that's not right either.

I see your point on actually playing a game to see who wins, but I don't like giving a player who sought to remove 1.5 turns from a game and give himself the final move two shots at a round. It's not like this was the first time someone used this tactic... I'd seen a lesser form used to push oncoming reserves into kill boxes before this happened (was this 2009 ETC?).

Poorly planned tactics and lists shouldn't get a second try. Again, Khan, and this never would have happened.

This wasnt poorly planned; a ruling they could have no knowledge of was made that resulted in an auto loss. Turn limiting was a well defined strategy in 5th, and encouraged by game mechanics. Declaring the game an auto loss was NOT a known result, and should have been a do over.

It isnt two bites of the cherry, it is the only equitable and game play satisfactory solution. Auto loss was a terrrible call.

The WS player chose to keep everything in reserve as his strategy, and the Tau player (through rules) came up with a strategy that beats it. They could have played the game out, but it would have looked like this (rather than the judge saving them time)

Turn 1:
WS: Can't deploy, "your turn."
Tau: Move all units except kroot randomly around board scoring points. Riptide sets up lemonade stand.

Turns 2-5:
Repeat turn 1 until Turn 5 / Time.

End of Game:
WS: 0 units on table = loss
Tau: Wins game due to holding everything

 insaniak wrote:
The game timing out because you have hit a rules loophole isn't an acceptable solution either.

It's also not what happened in this case. The Scars player didn't lose because the judge called time. He lost because the judge declared that models unable to move on were destroyed.

What other (tournament) RAW outcome could the judge come up with? Aside from using incorrect terminology (the units weren't 'dead'; they just had no opportunity to come on), there is really no other 'by the book' result that they could have reached.

 reenon wrote:
The WS player chose to keep everything in reserve as his strategy, and the Tau player (through rules) came up with a strategy that beats it. They could have played the game out, but it would have looked like this (rather than the judge saving them time)

Turn 1:
WS: Can't deploy, "your turn."
Tau: Move all units except kroot randomly around board scoring points. Riptide sets up lemonade stand.

Turns 2-5:
Repeat turn 1 until Turn 5 / Time.

End of Game:
WS: 0 units on table = loss
Tau: Wins game due to holding everything

Nope, that's not how the game looks. Once again, the game halts the moment a unit has to move on from reserve, but can't... because there is no way within the rules to resolve that situation.

The judge solved that by declaring units unable to move on as destroyed. Which is the resolution that was also eventually added to GW's FAQ, and is a sensible rule - provided it is one that is made clear to all players before any miniatures hit the table.

To make up a rule like that once a game is in progress, and as a result just hand the win to one of the players due to a rule that neither of them could have known about because it didn't even exist when the game started, is poor.

 Cheexsta wrote:

What other (tournament) RAW outcome could the judge come up with? Aside from using incorrect terminology (the units weren't 'dead'; they just had no opportunity to come on), there is really no other 'by the book' result that they could have reached.

I already mentioned what my preferred resolution would have been: Rule that units that are unable to move onto the board when they have to are destroyed, but then because neither player could have been aware of this rule prior to the game starting (because the rule hadn't been invented yet) and because the game up to that point would have taken all of 5 minutes, let them start again with that new rule in place.