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.

Inferno shells for Griffons are clearly broken,

I don't have the FW rules so forgive me if this is wrong, this was used against me.  Three griffons all with inferno shells, around a hundred points each.

If the large template fired touches any infantry model, no requirement to wound, that entire squad must make a fall back move. No fearless, no mob test, nothing!

In the first turn this hurts a lot as many units will run off the board.

The fluff apparently is that they produce an area of burning promethium which even the bravest will not stand in.  My point is why fall back?

Why not randomize the direction run, or even better run a straight line from the centre of the template.  That would add a bit of fun to the game but still give them thier use as a weapon to get people out of cover.

I found myself in the position that as the template landed on the rearmost model the entire squad ran through the burning promethium to get off the board.  Just broken!

I agree, and in our playing group this rule is banned. Neve seen anything thats more broken(x3) really.

"Neve seen anything thats more broken(x3) really."

Tigerious in a drop pod not played in your area?? Runs off screaming for cover!

Never seen this played. Frankly, I'm the only person I've ever seen with a Griffon, much less three and with the IA shell option. I thought the shell options were just that, optional?

Never seen this played. Frankly, I'm the only person I've ever seen with a Griffon, much less three and with the IA shell option. I thought the shell options were just that, optional?

Nope. The fact that IA rules are frequently not allowed in tournaments has led to the idea that the rules are somehow optional; an idea that isn't supported by the books themselves.

Let me rephrase Yakface. I thought the ordnance rule being used itself might have been noted as optional, not IA per se. If it doesn't state something like that in the IA itself on this issue then I would agree completely.

If the large template fired touches any infantry model, no requirement to wound, that entire squad must make a fall back move. No fearless, no mob test, nothing!

Are you trying to say that a fearless unit will fall back?? I think you are wrong there. Fearless units NEVER FALL BACK.

Fearless units will fall back if there is no LD test involved. Flamer version akin to Entanglement.

where does it state that?? I have posted this earliar and nobody could prove this was the case?? Feerless dont fall back and will automatically pass leadership. Ok so no leadeship chech is required. Ok I agree but feerless dont fall back. Trhe rules dont say feerless tropps dont fall back if a leadership check is due. It say they NEVER fall back. NEVER meens never. Irrespective of leadership or special rules unless the rules clearly state that they affect feerless units.

The rule was explained to me by my opponent, I think the specific rules for the shell have it.

We've then got a problem

All units fall back - versus - never fall back

The fluff is that people aren't scared of it they just get quickly annoyed being 3000 degrees celcius. Fix the dumb rule making the direction run randomised by scatter dice and I'm happy.

Yea, this thing is broken.

Somebody lobbed two at a Necron Army. Phase out turn one...

Deploy farther foward! I hate it when people tell me that when I complain about Tigerous!

yeah the rule for the shell is that opponents automatically fall back. the rule for feerless is never fall back even if its automatic. IG player at my store did this to a kid he played but when he played me it did not work on my DC. he tried to argue it but the big rules overide others. I said to him unless you can show it says that his shell affects feerless units aswell then I will accept it. he could not. Realistickly just think about it. A feerless model who is not even scared or death or greater demons or anything would run from a bit of fire?? i dont think so. they are feerless they dont fall back from anything

also you dont have a problem as if it said all unit take a leadership test and feerless units never take one then wher is the problem>?? its the same. if a unit never falls back and something makes things fall back the NEVER takes precedence

Quote from a red shirt:

"Unless their are execptions"

Quote from a red shirt:

"Unless their are execptions"

what do red shirts use. it should be outlawed to qoute them. they did not write the rules. If there are exceptions it should say that it affect geerless units. if it does not say that then it does not/

Quote from a red shirt. ha ha ha it must be correct then

Posted By foil7102 on 07/18/2006 10:16 AM
Deploy farther foward! I hate it when people tell me that when I complain about Tigerous!

Well, he had 2 units of 20 warriors and they were spread out because he was facing 10 or so Ordinance pumping tanks. Spreading them out to avoid losing too many with a 12" deployment zone meant they got within 8" of the edge. He was as far forward as he could have been. Turns out the guy was cheating anyway.

Posted By foil7102 on 07/18/2006 10:16 AM
Deploy farther foward! I hate it when people tell me that when I complain about Tigerous!

I wish I'd thought of that, you can just imagine my footslogging Ork army hiding at the back of the board.  Thats why I painted 105 slugga/ard/skar boyz.  I always like to start as far from the enemy as possible!

And in the real world I had a 12" deployment zone which was full of the 105 orks mentioned above.  To allow for spreading out to avoid the three dinner plates none of my units could get more than 6 or 7 inches away from the edge.  Less than the average roll on 2D6 which cheered me up.

Just to clear things up, Fearless units DO NOT automatically pass leadership tests. They pass moral tests. These two things are different.

This is true, cuda. Perils of the warp / psychic tests and all that. This is different though.

There are units that not even 3000 degree promethium would stop, like berserkers. Yeah, Im sure a little fire would stop a greater daemon as well.

I guess the one fix for this would be for us chaos players to whip out the ole' infiltrating doomfist or doomchainfist .

Posted By cuda1179 on 07/24/2006 12:09 PM
Just to clear things up, Fearless units DO NOT automatically pass leadership tests. They pass moral tests. These two things are different.

read the rules properly.  feerless units never fall back.  never meens never.  the second part say they automatically pass morale/leadership checks.  i know the griffon ignores the morale check part but it does not ignore the fact that they never fall back.  it does not say they never fall back when required to take a morale check.  there is a difference.  whats a bit of fire to them.  there is no way to make a feerless unit fall back unless a special rule overides it by saying that feerless units are affected as well.  which the rules for the griffon does not say.

Hmmm...so everyone whose units ran off the board from Infernus shells actually *CHOSE* to deploy all spread-out? In order to avoid all the other pie-plates, that is.

Well then, deploy forward and bunch up! Eat a few pie plates if you lose the first turn roll...surely that's better than running off the board?

Have you ever tried to deploy 150+ guard infantry in a 12" deployment zone, such that they can't be consolidated through easily by the first assault force to hit the lines? And still have LOS from their heavy weapons? And possibly a bit of cover so that they actually get a save? It's not easy, but you don't hear Guard players crying 'cheese' about Dark Eldar, Assault Marines, Marine Bikes, Daemonbombs etc. simply because they make the Guard deployment full of difficult choices.

Speaking of nasty Guard tricks, has anyone ever tried using a Callidus Assassin's "A Word In Your Ear" to move a valuable squad *back* towards the deployment edge, then force it off with an Infernus shell or three? Man, I've got to try that!

Too bad Callidus can't affect HQ squads though; that move would be particularly amusing vs the Death Company.

You miss the point I think.

Most of the guys on the forum could think off ways to get around this problem.  My point is why should we. Fix the rule!

For beef,

I think the fluffy reason the troops fall back is because to stand still would mean melting, not maybe melting.  I haven't got a problem with that.  My problem is that it has to be a fall back move   Why not just a move.  The nearest parallel is DA Stubborn, they are essentially fearless but not stupid.  Therefore can still be pinned if they feel the other option is certain death.

INterstingly thats how fall back works in EPIC. You don't have to retreat, just move away. 

I don't think you'll see any changes in these rules. Evidently they've taken the old hellhound rules and converted them to ordnance. I like the idea denoted by cabbage-if hit you have to move away from the spot-not necessarily back. Another option would be a landmine equivalent-move through the area and save against damage sort of thing.

TO the cabbage
i am not fussed which way the troops fall back. fluff wise fire would not scare a greater demon who are feerless. why would they be scared?/
As for feerless troops they cant be forced to fall back as they never fall back irrespective of whether the griffon makes units fall back. those unit that are not feerless will fall back. Honour gaurds, termies, librarians etc but not troops that are feerless. This is what my point is. Some gaurd player did this to a guys marines and they fell back. Fair play they were not feerless. he tried to do it to my Khorne beserkers who were feerless and i said No they do not fall back. Look at the rule book. His argument was that it made any unit fall back. So i said does it say it affects feerless unit?? No. what does the rulebook say about feerless units? Never fall back.
Somebody mentioned entanglement and feerless unitscan get entangled, yes but thats cos there rules say they dont fall back but entanglement has nothing to do with it. its not a flamer version akin to entanglement i think not as they are 2 seperate things.

The difficulty si that we don't ahve the exact rule to read. I do know that old hellhounds pushed back fearless units as well.

I think it would be reasonable for units to merely have to move outside the template by the shortest distance possible, and not call it a 'fall-back move' - that would solve a lot of confusion re fearless units etc.

Here: "Any model underneath the template must immediately make a special move, moving the minimum distance to put its base entirely outside the template while maintaining coherency. Any model that cannot move its base completely outside the template while keeping coherency (eg due to impassable terrain, board edges, or other units being in the way) is destroyed". There, no mention of fearless etc., it's just a 'special move'.

I still think the written rules work fine though, and everyone should just suck up the fall-back, and deploy forward and bunched up if they're that afraid of it. Griffons are heavy support - they go deploy early. The most you should lose this way is one unit, and that's only if the scatter dice are friendly.

When I play Guard, I have to suck up that:

a) Marines can use Whirlwinds to lay Castellan mines on themselves, that only hurt enemies and never their own troops. And can saturate an objective with multiple minefields. And can cause an enemy unit to move multiple times in the same turn (via assault) on top of the minefield, while the mines jump up the Guardsmen's butts and miraculously avoid scratching the Marines' carefully polished armour.

Dark Eldar and some Chaos can get first turn assaults, which can roll the lines unless great care is taken in deployment.

Tau and Eldar get almost-indestructible skimmer tanks which can put out ridiculous firepower while moving 12", making them way more resilient and effective than AV14 Russes and Land Raiders

Nids get the Trygon for nasty deep-strike assaults.

Why shouldn't Guard get something uber to fight back with? Are Guard armies dominating tournaments (those that allow IA rules, as few as they are)? I hadn't heard

Most of the guys on the forum could think off ways to get around this problem. My point is why should we. Fix the rule!

Damn right! How dare they make us use our brains! This is outrageous!

Posted By jfrazell on 07/25/2006 10:33 AM
The difficulty si that we don't ahve the exact rule to read. I do know that old hellhounds pushed back fearless units as well.

Emphasis being on OLD hellhound.

 

and we should not have to suck anything up when the big rule book clearly states something.  whats newer?  the rulebook or the imperial armour book with the infernus shell?