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.

Simple question really. I haven't played 40k in a couple years because life just kind of got in the way. I'm hoping to get back into it after the pandemic, so I've been following the 9th edition discussion closely. People in the N&R thread keep mentioning the tactic of "tripointing" as a way to prevent Fallback, and I have no idea what it means. Can anyone explain it to me?

Normally when you engage a unit in melee, there's nothing stopping them from Falling Back in their own turn.

However, a model cannot move through enemy models in order to Fall Back, so if they're trapped, they're stuck in combat.

Tripointing is surrounding at least one enemy model with three of your own, so that there is no way for them to escape, and thus they are locked in combat and cannot Fall Back. You then may have to do some tricks to reduce your own lethality (like not using your specialist melee weapons) to avoid producing casualties that your opponent could take on the tripointed model(s).

It's basically a necessary tactic for melee to work in 8th, but some people find it exploitative/'gamey' and would prefer that limitations on Fall Back be baked directly into the rules.

Units cannot fall back if all models in the unit cannot fall back.

you cannot move through enemy models if you dont' have fly and try to make a fall back move.

Once you finish your charge, you get to pile in 3", and then consolidate 3" after you make your attacks. These moves must take your model closer to the closest enemy model.

"tripointing" is the practice of charging an enemy unit, then using your Pile in and Consolidate moves to move your models AROUND the closest model (you can start 1" in front of them, and end your move 0.75" behind them, and that is a legal move because you ended up closer). Once the enemy model has three of your models around him, he can't move through you and therefore that fall back move cannot be made.

It's called tripointing because you need at least 3 models around an enemy to stop them leaving. If you only have 2, they can always move away from you.

It might be going away REAL soon. Anyway, here it is:

1) Models can't cross through other models without fly keyword.
2) Consequently, an assault unit can prevent enemy fallback by surrounding a member of an enemy squads on three sides with our models. This makes it impossible for that unit to move, and therefore traps the enemy unit in combat, preventing fallback. Hence the term "tripoint" since we need three models to trap one enemy model.
3) This doesn't work if the enemy takes sufficient casualties such that they can remove the trapped model as a battleshock loss.
4) Consequently, we get absurd situations where we charge with say DC and only place one model within 1" as to MINIMIZE enemy casualties such that they can't remove tripointed models with battleshock.
Needless to say, I find the idea of DC or any BA really minimizing enemy damage on the charge to be ridiculous and gamey, yet necessary because of how insane the fall back rule is.
I really dislike how the BA play atm for this reason. We are essentially codex: tripoint.
Note that cheap models with fly, such as Tau drones, completely short circuit this scheme

When in combat with an enemy unit, you use your charge/consolidate/pilein moves to pick an enemy model and surround it with your models such that there is not room enough for it to legally move past them and their bases, and out of combat, generally achievable with at least 3 models in base contact spread equidistantly around a circular infantry base. It's really more an artefact of the ruleset than an intended mechanic (and GW typically doesn't knowingly design such fiddly mechanics in, they usually actively try to avoid them, largely similar to in older editions using Rhinos to block LoS to other targets so characters could be picked out, etc) so thus it tends to rub people the wrong way but is extensively used by melee armies as a crutch given that everything can just leave combat without real restriction.

 catbarf wrote:
Normally when you engage a unit in melee, there's nothing stopping them from Falling Back in their own turn.

However, a model cannot move through enemy models in order to Fall Back, so if they're trapped, they're stuck in combat.

Tripointing is surrounding at least one enemy model with three of your own, so that there is no way for them to escape, and thus they are locked in combat and cannot Fall Back. You then may have to do some tricks to reduce your own lethality (like not using your specialist melee weapons) to avoid producing casualties that your opponent could take on the tripointed model(s).

It's basically a necessary tactic for melee to work in 8th, but some people find it exploitative/'gamey' and would prefer that limitations on Fall Back be baked directly into the rules.

It is gamey and silly. But in 8th neccessary. Gw should fix both extremes. Locking stuff into melee with no way to escape leads to death of shooty armies especially when getting into melee is so easy. But falling back at will isn't good either unless melee gets other compensation to stand a chance.

Locking stuff into melee with no way to escape leads to death of shooty armies especially when getting into melee is so easy.

in 8th or in 9th???

Thanks for the explanations. I see why people are calling it "gamey" if you're intentionally minimizing damage to keep a model trapped.

It's "gamey" because it's an unintended consequence of GW's rules. And because it defies reason on so many levels. How does one tell DC to go over there, but only put one model in CC contact range?

You might be minimizing damage, but you become immune to all shooting.

Its "gamey" because its a skill which is clearly in 40k now, but a lot of people hate learning anything new.

Probably not totally happy - but it would be interesting if they got rid of it, but at the same time made it so fall back requires a stratagem.

Probably not that brave though.

Martel732 wrote:
It's "gamey" because it's an unintended consequence of GW's rules. And because it defies reason on so many levels. How does one tell DC to go over there, but only put one model in CC contact range?

You might be minimizing damage, but you become immune to all shooting.

This isn't the only way to achieve it. You can charge into one unit you want to blend and hit them full force, whilst positioning a couple of models to tripoint a model in a squad you didn't charge. Obviously if the opponent's squads are widely spaced this doesn't work, but it usually does because auras encourage clumping. The minimising damage approach is from my perspective a fall back of this other method is unavailable.

Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

It's totally gamey. It's borderline cheating; at least, that's how I feel every time I use it. There is no way it can be RAI.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

I actually like it. It rewards careful position play on the part of both players. It also makes sense fluff wise that trapped dudes can't teleport away.

Tyel wrote:
Its "gamey" because its a skill which is clearly in 40k now, but a lot of people hate learning anything new.

It's not a skill at all. That's what makes it gamey. Once you're aware of its existence there's no skill required to pull this off, it's just a (unintended) consequence of the way the rules work.

Yeah. The only skill with Tripointing is understanding that narrative has no meaning, and that it is better for your Bloodletters of Khorne and the Bloodthirster to only dink the enemy with their basic CC weapon than it is for them to actually kill anyone.

Drager wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

I actually like it. It rewards careful position play on the part of both players. It also makes sense fluff wise that trapped dudes can't teleport away.

IN the same game where a tank can shoot me through 5 windows from its antenna?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

I would strongly debate how "clear" it is, given that I've been physically threatened for doing it. Wasn't clear to that opponent.

Slipspace wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Its "gamey" because its a skill which is clearly in 40k now, but a lot of people hate learning anything new.

It's not a skill at all. That's what makes it gamey. Once you're aware of its existence there's no skill required to pull this off, it's just a (unintended) consequence of the way the rules work.

Disagree. Its like saying there is no skill to removing casualties to lengthen charge distances - or avoid taking shooting from other units because the unit is now out of LOS since those in LOS have been removed.

In the same way - once you are *aware you can do this* there is no skill - but being aware, and remembering to position in the right way, is a skill.

Martel732 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

It's totally gamey. It's borderline cheating; at least, that's how I feel every time I use it. There is no way it can be RAI.

Well i feel conga lining is gamey and cheating then, its the same principle of assumption. Just b.c you don't like it doesn't make it gamey or cheating. Its been there from literally day 1, its a part of 8th as much as conga line into auras and objectives are.

Martel732 wrote:

Drager wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

I actually like it. It rewards careful position play on the part of both players. It also makes sense fluff wise that trapped dudes can't teleport away.

IN the same game where a tank can shoot me through 5 windows from its antenna?

I can like one thing and not a different unrelated thing, yes.

Tyel wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Its "gamey" because its a skill which is clearly in 40k now, but a lot of people hate learning anything new.

It's not a skill at all. That's what makes it gamey. Once you're aware of its existence there's no skill required to pull this off, it's just a (unintended) consequence of the way the rules work.

Disagree. Its like saying there is no skill to removing casualties to lengthen charge distances - or avoid taking shooting from other units because the unit is now out of LOS since those in LOS have been removed.

In the same way - once you are *aware you can do this* there is no skill - but being aware, and remembering to position in the right way, is a skill.

This, it is a tactic, you can stop it with good positioning. Just like bubble wrapping and zoning out DS is a tactic.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

It's totally gamey. It's borderline cheating; at least, that's how I feel every time I use it. There is no way it can be RAI.

Well i feel conga lining is gamey and cheating then, its the same principle of assumption. Just b.c you don't like it doesn't make it gamey or cheating. Its been there from literally day 1, its a part of 8th as much as conga line into auras and objectives are.

I said borderline. I'm aware it's "legal".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Drager wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Drager wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

I actually like it. It rewards careful position play on the part of both players. It also makes sense fluff wise that trapped dudes can't teleport away.

IN the same game where a tank can shoot me through 5 windows from its antenna?

I can like one thing and not a different unrelated thing, yes.

I"m talking about how they super simplified most of the game, but I'm supposed to believe they intended assault to be the convoluted nightmare of half inches making a critical difference?

so, a thought experiment for a second.

Let's say we do ditch fall back, but we just add in being able to fire into melee.

Make your hit roll, and then after hits are rolled, 50-50 chance that you get to allocate them to enemy units involved in the melee, or that the opposing player gets to allocate them to your units.

Besides being something that would make the game even more lethal, I'm not sure I honestly dislike it conceptually. Even if there's no downside and you've got like ork boyz charging a tank and IG unload on them with lasguns, being in melee would always block the damage you're going to take by 1/2. It'd be like gaining an extra 4+ invulnerable that as a bonus might hurt your opponents models.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Tyel wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Its "gamey" because its a skill which is clearly in 40k now, but a lot of people hate learning anything new.

It's not a skill at all. That's what makes it gamey. Once you're aware of its existence there's no skill required to pull this off, it's just a (unintended) consequence of the way the rules work.

Disagree. Its like saying there is no skill to removing casualties to lengthen charge distances - or avoid taking shooting from other units because the unit is now out of LOS since those in LOS have been removed.

In the same way - once you are *aware you can do this* there is no skill - but being aware, and remembering to position in the right way, is a skill.

This, it is a tactic, you can stop it with good positioning. Just like bubble wrapping and zoning out DS is a tactic.

If you position your models in base to base with each other in a square then take casualties from the centre you will rarely get tripointed. You force the opponent to kill more than they'd like to make a big enough hole and you control where the hole sisters (assuming they kill enough to force casualties from the outer layer). You can still around the whole unit to stop fallback with enough models, but that's hard.

Spacing your units to avoid tripoint tagging or force the opponent's unit to spread a great distance to do it can also help.

That would be better than what we have by far.

Martel732 wrote:

I"m talking about how they super simplified most of the game, but I'm supposed to believe they intended assault to be the convoluted nightmare of half inches making a critical difference?

I didn't say it was intended. I said I like it.

If someone tripointed and had a bloodletters use their basic strength no AP close combat attack just so they could stay safe in melee in a game, the game would stop and we'd have a discussion about how we want different things from the game.

They want: to make the best decisions using the rules in order to win.

I want: units to do what they would in a fictional situation

It's like when you gamemaster RPGs like dungeons and dragons. You don't run the monsters as if they are aware of the minutia of the rules, you run them like characters in a movie or story and have them do what they would reasonably do.

There are probably expectations along a continuum between the two positions, but for anyone who is having trouble understanding why people might object to tripointing, it's all about he mindset with whichyou approach the game.

Martel732 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

It's totally gamey. It's borderline cheating; at least, that's how I feel every time I use it. There is no way it can be RAI.

Well i feel conga lining is gamey and cheating then, its the same principle of assumption. Just b.c you don't like it doesn't make it gamey or cheating. Its been there from literally day 1, its a part of 8th as much as conga line into auras and objectives are.

I said borderline. I'm aware it's "legal".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Drager wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Drager wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Its not gamy tho... literally from day one people saw it and was doing it. It was clear if you are surrounded you can not fallback. Its like that in AoS too.

I actually like it. It rewards careful position play on the part of both players. It also makes sense fluff wise that trapped dudes can't teleport away.

IN the same game where a tank can shoot me through 5 windows from its antenna?

I can like one thing and not a different unrelated thing, yes.

I"m talking about how they super simplified most of the game, but I'm supposed to believe they intended assault to be the convoluted nightmare of half inches making a critical difference?

Yes melee has always been like that, even more so in older editions. You used to want to have mix weapons b.c you could kill models you wanted if you were BTB with them, wanted that Sargent with a PF dead? Well your Sargent with a SW better be BTB with him, but you wanted your Plasma gun not to fight, keep him in back. Then there was positioning from being charged. Or if you wanted to Tie up a Ork unit you would charge a hard flank clipping 1 model to pull the rest in, but b.c only 3-4 could fight it would take 2-3 turns to slowly consolidate them into your ranks and kill you effectively wasting that Ork unit for the rest of the game (b.c everyone had to be 2" apart do to blasts/flamers)

Melee now at this point is so far little compare to what it was that Tripointing is baby in compassion.

Yes, I know all that. This seems much worse somehow.

Martel732 wrote:
Yes, I know all that. This seems much worse somehow.

So basically you hate melee tactics then?