Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
pg.21 Of the rulebook says basically that if models from another unit are blocking part of the targetted unit then they get a 4+ cover save. Now would it be legal and/or cheesy to mix the two seperate units together to get the cover saves on all of them?

Like this:
Unit 1, unit 2

12121
21212

also as it says in the assault section fo the BRB that a unit may not assault a unit if they are in base to base contact with another unit so will this also stop the unit from being assaulted?

So cheesy if it works... tournament cheesy haha:grin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
In your example, >50% of unit 1 is in the front rank and thus half their unit does not have cover. No save for them.
<50% of unit 2 is in the front rank and would gain cover, thus cover save for them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,719 Posts
Two Manticores...... I WIN! :victory:

Seriously, moving this formation will kill your game as well as your opponents and you will NOT make any friends trying this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
For the Assualt part is it legal? You can never assault them? Anywho its nothing Flamers can handle. Or Blast Templates, or dakka them till they can remain in formation, or Lash. Or Tank Shock, oooh oooh or pinning one of the Units. It looks like its not all that awsome of a tatic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Oh I know it's a shit tactic that I would personally never use, just got to thinking about all these loopholes and counters to them. I guess it's such a scummy(?) thing to do that it wouldn't even be done in a tournament. Only half works anyway so not even worth it hahaha
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
RAW it works, but it's silly, and most people would not allow it. In fact, many tournaments do not allow it and have house-ruled that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
This was a fairly common tactic for ork boyz mobs a little while back, doing 2 interlocking U's

AAAAAA
ABBBBBB
AAAAAB
BBBBBBB

Thusly. That's why in the INAT FAQ it specifically prohibits gaining a covers ave from it.


In your example you would not have to multi assault both units either. You move one into base to base , then the others as best you can, you never required to make a multi assault. Yo can just get in as many of your guys as you can, then his unit will pile in away from the others.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Two Manticores...... I WIN! :victory:

Seriously, moving this formation will kill your game as well as your opponents and you will NOT make any friends trying this.
Since you can still get cover saves from barrage weapons if you have "intervening cover" between the point of impact and the unit, a proper threaded unit will get cover saves if set up thus:

YOYOYO
OYOYOY
YOYOYO
OYOYOY

So basically, the survivability versus Barrage weapons is the same as if the units had been "alone" in the open (as twice the number of models will be hit), and doubled versus other weapons. The Leman Russ Eradicator and Whirlwind incendiary missiles (etc) is FTW though. A player "crafty" enough to thread his units like this probably won't do so when facing those kinds of units.


That said, this is in my book an example of the worst RAW abuse from 5th edition. Being a primarily fantasy player since 6th edition WHFB, I'm coming over to the light side of the force again :biggrin:, since this is still much better than what 7th has become and what an exercise in yahtzee 8th looks to become.


To add to the topic, what do people think about something like this? It's almost as bad in my book, I have been a victim of this on tourney, although it didn't matter much then.


T= terrain
W = unit 1
O = unit 2

TWTWTW W W W W W W
TWTWTW O O O O O O O
TWTWTW O O O O O O O


Majority of W is in cover, gaining a cover save, and is shielding the majority of O. This won't help O versus barrage weapon (like proper threading will) but not every army can bring those in numbers.... Heelllooo my lil' new, shiny deathspinner :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
I’d never do it myself, but it is RAW possible. Here are some things to remember if you have someone pull this one.

1- A group of infantry does not count as area terrain. The distinction is quite important. If the firing unit can draw LOS on 50% +1 model, no save. Also, as it isn’t area terrain any unit that gets a cover save will also usually grant one if they return fire {the shooting out of cover rule is area terrain specific}. Obviously, the greater the spacing of the models the easier it is to draw such a line of sight, and the unit trying to get the cover save will want their units pretty well spread out.

Why?

2-Because they might want to move them. Remember that you must move one unit at a time, model by model and you cannot move through friendly units, so if the spacing is less than a bases width, the unit is immobile {and if they fail a morale check…}. All that threading and weaving should cut their movement to at least half and make unit cohesion a pain.

So while this mixed monster is granting you cover saves and moving forward two or three inches per turn, feel free to template and barrage it out of existence.

Because that’s RAW too.:victory:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,719 Posts
1- A group of infantry does not count as area terrain. The distinction is quite important. If the firing unit can draw LOS on 50% +1 model, no save. Also, as it isn’t area terrain any unit that gets a cover save will also usually grant one if they return fire {the shooting out of cover rule is area terrain specific}. Obviously, the greater the spacing of the models the easier it is to draw such a line of sight, and the unit trying to get the cover save will want their units pretty well spread out.
Drawing LOS between models in a unit grants a cover save regardless of TLOS.
 

·
blahblahblahblah
Joined
·
6,663 Posts
pg.21 Of the rulebook says basically that if models from another unit are blocking part of the targetted unit then they get a 4+ cover save. Now would it be legal and/or cheesy to mix the two seperate units together to get the cover saves on all of them?

Like this:
Unit 1, unit 2

12121
21212

also as it says in the assault section fo the BRB that a unit may not assault a unit if they are in base to base contact with another unit so will this also stop the unit from being assaulted?

So cheesy if it works... tournament cheesy haha
say hello to the leman russ eradicator, it loves targets like this, seeing orks do that is a guard commanders wet dream, there already unwashed boxers become so heavily laden with man juices that its enough to impregnate half of britain.............if they weren't already
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
pg.21 Of the rulebook says basically that if models from another unit are blocking part of the targetted unit then they get a 4+ cover save. Now would it be legal and/or cheesy to mix the two seperate units together to get the cover saves on all of them?

Like this:
Unit 1, unit 2

12121
21212

also as it says in the assault section fo the BRB that a unit may not assault a unit if they are in base to base contact with another unit so will this also stop the unit from being assaulted?

So cheesy if it works... tournament cheesy haha:grin:
People have been trying to pull this since 4th ed, back when it was billed as the unassaultable formation because you couldn't move within a inch of an enemy model you weren't assaulting. That's gone now, as long as you don't touch an enemy model you're not assaulting, you can come as close as you want. You don't even have to assault both units, so long as you only touch one of them, you're fine. So go for it.

1. Your movement will be severely degraded. Remember, you move one unit at a time, so the first unit you move will have to weave it's way through the gaps. Then the second unit will have to weave it's way through to restore your precious cover. I figure at a guesstimate you'll manage to move 4" forward for any 6" moved.

2. Don't know what army you're thinking of trying this with, but for any non-MEQ army, you're going to hate flamers (especially my Hellhounds). And for MEQ, I've still got the Colossus.

And nowhere that I can find does it say anything about not being able to assault because your models are in btb with each other. You're going to have to post a reference for that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,976 Posts
Must have missed that rule. Can you give me a page number?
P22, under Exceptions: firing through units or area terrain. Firing between the gaps gives a cover save, even if the unit is not obscuring LOS to the target at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
pg 34, second paragraph from the top of the page. checked tournament rulings and it's not allowed anyway so huzzah :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
in the rules all models that are not in the unit muse be atleast 1" away how would 10101010 thing work when the base would be in the middle and half of each side would be withn that 1" space??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
pg 34, second paragraph from the top of the page. checked tournament rulings and it's not allowed anyway so huzzah :)
Just saw this thanks to the threadomancy. If this is in response to me, nowhere there does it say that I cannot assault your models if they are in btb with your other unit. It says that MY model cannot come into btb contact with a model in a unit I'm not assaulting. So if I'm assaulting unit A and not attempting a multiple assault, then I cannot come into btb with unit B. I don't have to make btb with your unit B to reach btb with unit A, thanks to the geometry of round bases.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top