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.

Right. The Mawloc then becomes relegated to the shelf until the end of time because it sucks so hard.

Looks like the majority opinion is pretty easy to identify, which says nothing about RAW vs non-RAW, but moreso of what can you realistically expect to run into in a pickup game.

A 20% margin is too slim to make any meaningful observation.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:A 20% margin is too slim to make any meaningful observation.

G

but a 20% margin AND Majority (as opposed to just a plurality?)

In my opinion this poll was very poorly worded and should be done over. It should distinguish between units with special rules (Mawloc & lith) versus those that don't (e.g., terminators). To me there is no value whatsoever to be derived from the results of this thread.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:In my opinion this poll was very poorly worded and should be done over. It should distinguish between units with special rules (Mawloc & lith) versus those that don't (e.g., terminators). To me there is no value whatsoever to be derived from the results of this thread.

G

This doesn't hold up as neither of those units really have 'special' rules as currently printed that have anything to do with the poll.

Green Blow Fly wrote:In my opinion this poll was very poorly worded and should be done over. It should distinguish between units with special rules (Mawloc & lith) versus those that don't (e.g., terminators). To me there is no value whatsoever to be derived from the results of this thread.

G

The mawloc's special rules have no bearing on the deep strike rules, it only changes the results of a mishap. What you are suggesting is that we treat the deep striking for the Mawloc completely different from everything else even though it says it deep strikes as normal.

"The mawloc's special rules have no bearing on the deep strike rules, it only changes the results of a mishap."

Oxymoron IN PROGRESS!!! Everyone duck fast!



G

Green Blow Fly wrote:In my opinion this poll was very poorly worded and should be done over. It should distinguish between units with special rules (Mawloc & lith) versus those that don't (e.g., terminators). To me there is no value whatsoever to be derived from the results of this thread.

G

Disagree. The point of this poll was to focus on the underlying Deep Strike mechanic itself, irrespective of any 'special rules'. The application of which can then be applied to whichever unit you so wish. Obviously we all looked at this with the Mawloc in mind, but you should differentiate that from the actual wording of the poll itself.

Feel free to craft one up with what you want to focus on. Though I'm curious what the question will be and how you'll make it different from what this is getting at.

Oh, I'm solidly in the 'A' camp.

-Yad

I think the majority of people voting A will play Mawlocs or are sympathetic.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I think the majority of people voting A will play Mawlocs or are sympathetic.

G

That's just you projecting and showing your bias.

Green Blow Fly wrote:I think the majority of people voting A will play Mawlocs or are sympathetic.

G

I'm an Ork player, and I voted A. I don't play Tyranids and never intend to, I get my horde fix from Orks and my MC fix from an occasional CSM game. The rules are very clear; you can put the initial model anywhere you want. If you put it somewhere where it can't actually arrive and don't scatter, it mishaps, so you'd have to be an idiot to place a Termie squad or some such thing on an enemy unit, but the option always existed. Mawlocs simply gain an advantage from doing something that previously was not a good idea.

I voted A.

Your first model is representing where you are aiming to land. The rule states that you can place this anywhere on the table, so IMO you can place that initial model in impassable terrain/ or within one inch of enemy models ( maybe you have had bad luck with scatter and are counting on not being able to hit your mark, the model is not actually there. ) Now role for scatter, if you roll a hit, any models that land in impassable terrain are subject to the DS mishap rolls.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:I think the majority of people voting A will play Mawlocs or are sympathetic.

G

I'm an Ork player, and I voted A. I don't play Tyranids and never intend to, I get my horde fix from Orks and my MC fix from an occasional CSM game. The rules are very clear; you can put the initial model anywhere you want. If you put it somewhere where it can't actually arrive and don't scatter, it mishaps, so you'd have to be an idiot to place a Termie squad or some such thing on an enemy unit, but the option always existed. Mawlocs simply gain an advantage from doing something that previously was not a good idea.

Well dip me in honey and sugar coat me, ain't it just fine and dandy that you solved this whole discussion, what was we thinking? And it was simple the whole time....
I'f the rules we're very clear we wouldn't be having this boggle of discussion.

The B faction is constantly gaining ground. Please tell us more why you voted for A.

G

One thing missing from the poll system here is the ability to change one's vote.

I realize that the probability of someone changing their mind due to discussion on the internet approaches zero, but you never know.

Redbeard wrote:One thing missing from the poll system here is the ability to change one's vote.

I realize that the probability of someone changing their mind due to discussion on the internet approaches zero, but you never know.

Well I voted B on the basis of the original question, ie how do I play it.
However I have changed my mind at the A camp on the basis of this thread. I don't own nor have read the Nid codex, so I don't know the rules being disected. Looking through some of the posts though, if thats it's most effective method of assault, then I have no objection to a DS within one of my own units.

But I can't change my vote, so B -1 A +1

Cheers

Andrew

Bla_Ze wrote:

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:I think the majority of people voting A will play Mawlocs or are sympathetic.

G

I'm an Ork player, and I voted A. I don't play Tyranids and never intend to, I get my horde fix from Orks and my MC fix from an occasional CSM game. The rules are very clear; you can put the initial model anywhere you want. If you put it somewhere where it can't actually arrive and don't scatter, it mishaps, so you'd have to be an idiot to place a Termie squad or some such thing on an enemy unit, but the option always existed. Mawlocs simply gain an advantage from doing something that previously was not a good idea.

Well dip me in honey and sugar coat me, ain't it just fine and dandy that you solved this whole discussion, what was we thinking? And it was simple the whole time....
I'f the rules we're very clear we wouldn't be having this boggle of discussion.

The fact that there is discussion has no bearing on the clarity of the rules.

To some, the term "anywhere on the table" would be understood to mean "anywhere on the table." The confusion arises from people adding restrictions to this phrase for some reason.

I don't understand the point of this at all......It says the player can place the model ANYWHERE on the table.........Why someone would want to deepstrike in the middle of an enemy unit puzzles me though.....after the final position is determined, you still have to check if any of the criteria apply under the Deep Strike Mishaps at the top of the right hand column of page 95 of the 40K rulebook. Why would anyone want to risk dealing with the Deep Strike Mishap Table? The only exception to any of this would obviously be any units that actually say in their rules that they can land on top of an enemy unit on purpose....such as a Mawloc for example.

rules for impassable terrain state that "Models may not be placed in impassable terrain unless the models concerned have a special rule in their profile granting them an exception (like being able to fly above the terrain) or both players agree to it." That being said IMO Deep striking would fall under the catagory of a special rule granting exception for the model to be placed anywhere on the table, then procede to follow the deep strike rules after scatter (or hit result) via the mishap table.

On a side note, it seems to me that the B faction is a group of TFG's that would cut their nose off to spite their face. Do you always correct your opponents poor tactics? If they want to make a tactical move that increases their mishap chance by 33.3% let them!

You have hit the nail on the head. Why would someone want to intentionally place the marker on an enemy unit. This should have been part of the poll and I believe it is very misleading not to have done so.

G

Monster Rain wrote:

The fact that there is discussion has no bearing on the clarity of the rules.

To some, the term "anywhere on the table" would be understood to mean "anywhere on the table." The confusion arises from people adding restrictions to this phrase for some reason.

To some, the term "Place the model" would be understood to mean "Place the model." The confusion arises from people removing restrictions from the basic rules for some reason.

Bla_Ze wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

The fact that there is discussion has no bearing on the clarity of the rules.

To some, the term "anywhere on the table" would be understood to mean "anywhere on the table." The confusion arises from people adding restrictions to this phrase for some reason.

To some, the term "Place the model" would be understood to mean "Place the model." The confusion arises from people removing restrictions from the basic rules for some reason.

Complete the phrase. "Place the model where you would like the unit to arrive."

It's a marker. Or does the unit then do the Electric Slide to where the scatter dice indicate it moves?

I't doesn't say its a marker, and you can't assume it either.

Who's assuming? If it says you place a model where you would like the unit to arrive, and the unit isn't actually placed until after the scatter dice are rolled, wouldn't that be the very definition of a marker?

"...would like the unit to arrive" indicates that the unit is not, in fact, arriving at that time.

Green Blow Fly wrote:You have hit the nail on the head. Why would someone want to intentionally place the marker on an enemy unit. This should have been part of the poll and I believe it is very misleading not to have done so.

G

There is nothing in the rules saying you can't intentionally put your marker on an enemy unit. Why you would want to is irrelevant, that you can is all that matters.

I am glad to see someone finally called you on your BS MR. Straighten up son.

G


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RobPro wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:You have hit the nail on the head. Why would someone want to intentionally place the marker on an enemy unit. This should have been part of the poll and I believe it is very misleading not to have done so.

G

There is nothing in the rules saying you can't intentionally put your marker on an enemy unit. Why you would want to is irrelevant, that you can is all that matters.

No what the rule says is place the model on the table.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I am glad to see someone finally called you on your BS MR. Straighten up son.

G


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RobPro wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:You have hit the nail on the head. Why would someone want to intentionally place the marker on an enemy unit. This should have been part of the poll and I believe it is very misleading not to have done so.

G

There is nothing in the rules saying you can't intentionally put your marker on an enemy unit. Why you would want to is irrelevant, that you can is all that matters.

No what the rule says is place the model on the table.

G

"where you would like the unit to arrive." I love having my points called BS, with nothing but bare assertions to back up the other side of the argument.

D - Place the model as a marker (it's not actually there until after the scatter) so there's no confusion about whether or not the inquisitor mystics start measuring to shoot at you. Roll and measure deviation. Then place models, worry about Impassable terrain as necessary. Initial placement of the marker has to be a 'legal' position such that you could place the unit down without hitting impassable terrain. Exceptions are made on that for things like Mawloc or Monolith for what counts as impassable as appropriate (models under either aren't impassable for either on the deepstrike).

BRB pg 95 DEEP STRIKE "First place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position you would like the unit to arrive, and roll the scatter dice."


BRB pg 13 TERRAIN TYPES - Guidelines on categorising terrain
...."Remember that other models, friends and enemies, also count as impassible terrain"...

BRB pg 14 IMPASSIBLE TERRAIN
"Models may not be placed in impassible terrain unless the models concerned have a special rule....."¨

Now no rule that has been presented changes this.

Bla_Ze wrote:

BRB pg 14 IMPASSIBLE TERRAIN
"Models may not be placed in impassible terrain unless the models concerned have a special rule....."¨

Now no rule that has been presented changes this.

Deep Strike is a special rule, which overrides the prescription against placing a model in Impassible terrain, via it's wording, "anywhere on the table". Unless you are arguing that impassible terrain is not on the table?

This is, of course, ignoring the argument that the model isn't actually there yet, which has a great deal of validity but, by strict RAW, doesn't actually mean anything.