Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Two intwinded questions.
First, during setup traditionally a line is set across the table at the prescribed length and models may not be placed past it. However the wording in the book seems to indicate that models could be past it so long as part of their base is within 12" or 15" etc.
Personally I don't like that one bit expecially with assaulty transports but I'm wondering what RAW is.
Next question, assuming you can't have any part of your base over 15" from your board edge in a mission. If you're on a 4ft board and two units are opposite eachother at the maximum 15" range can you get a first turn charge from a jump type troop. Or can the bases not be exactly at 15" and so it would be assumed a few microns at the least would seperate the models?
There are lots of different tricks out there but the key is the distance between your forces as set out in the secanrio being played. This part takes precedence. If the mission states that your forces start at least 24" apart then that's what happens and anything that could say charge 24" will not be able to make it into combat on the first turn. Fact.
So where the gap is 24" a bolter will start the game out of range.
This is usually only important when less scrupulous players try to sneak an advantage by measuring a little short when deploying and measuring a little long when playing or messing around with base positioning etc. My answer is always the same. For example when recently playing a scenario where our forces started 18" apart the 18" charge of my opponents combat mosters was somehow easily able to make it to my forces. Clearly some shuffling had been taking place. As my opponent smiled and moved his troops in I pointed out that they would not make it into combat.
He pointed at the ruler which showed they were easily within range. At which point I opened the rule book. Who cares what the ruler says I said. We started at least 18" inches apart so you cannot possibly make it. Ah well. Guess I will have to rapid fire you next turn.
Worry not about the distances, rest easy in knowing that the scenario requirements must be met, so no amount of shuffling can defeat the rules.
Zarahemna is absolutely correct in this matter. To make it perfectly clear, I believe that the actual wording is 'more than' X inches apart. If the units were EXACTLY X" apart, something with a X inch assault could just barely make it into combat, but because it's X.000001 or whatever, there's no way it could make it.
Regarding the base stretching past the deployment zone... I'm pretty sure that this is NOT legal, and that the entire model has to be in the deployment zone, not just part of it. Unfortunately, I don't have my book with me, so I cannot provide a page number at this time, but maybe someone else will spring to the rescue with a reference.
Now, I'd like to point out two things.
1. When you look at the standard missions, you'll see that they're almost all different in the way they define the deployment distance separating the two armies. Some are very specific and positively define the distance (e.g. "all units must be deployed more than 18" from enemy units"), while some work the other way round, defining the deployment zone from the board edge. In that second case you can run into trouble for 3 reasons :
a) your table has a different width than standard;
b) measuring error when deploying, moving, etc. (I mean the scientific error on measurement problem, NOT the intentional "error" !)
c) that problem of the meaning "deploy within X inches from table edge".
I wish all missions would use the first method only, because that would avoid all these problems.
2. I play Nids as my second army. I've had opponents (not familiar with Nids) cry foul when my Hormagaunts assault on turn one, covering e.g. 21" in a game where deployment lines where 18" apart. The opponents were saying "the rule says 18" to prevent assaults, therefore you cannot assault due to some horrible Nids rule of your evil monsters... even if you can move up to 24", you cannot assault". Now I do not agree with that at all. (Aaaargh !!! this may launch again the whole debate of rule as intended vs rule as written !!!! DON'T ... ;? !!!!) To cut that debate IMMEDIATELY on this particular issue, RAI cannot be claimed to prevent assault because there is simply no indication whatsoever in the mission specs that the deployment distance is intended to prevent assault.
Children of Isha
Think of the deployment zone as a wall. You can't use fuzzy modeling logic to exploit the gap required by the rules. There is no overhang.
I get this with my Guard a lot, since I almost never move in the first turn, if my opponent somehow manages to get his harlies 18" through no man's land to attack me in CC I say. "Well, I haven't moved, and you went 18". Since we had to be at least 18" apart, there must have been a mistake in measuring somewhere. This move is impossible if the rules were followed..."
RecklessFable's Journey to Mediocrity (Painting an IG army)
I've been addicted to World of Tanks lately and neglecting my IG... But it is so... much... fun!
Heh, I hadn't thought about the board thing. For one thing how often are boards exactly 48 inches across. If you're playing a mission with 15" deployment zones on a 47" board there could be some very surprising results. And I doubt most players could eyeball that one inch difference. Similarly a 49" board would totally shut down the first turn jump charge.
So I guess on the table you could measure at the start. If people are going to push their units as far to the edge as possible it could matter weather the board is 47.95 or 48.05 inches across.
Still any idea what would happen in a digital game or something with a perfect 48" board (so it would seem on the "deploy 15 inches in" thing you would just be able to make 18" shots and charges.)
I wish they'd spelled out the bit about bases being restricted behind the line. Seems that's what everyone agrees on still though.
Also wish they'd required bases to be round to avoid possible "I turn my rectangular base sideways ftw" nonsense. Of course that's probably why sportsmanship is a tournament score.
Hehe can you imagine the insanity of someone playing those dreadnought sized scenic bases on his assaulty units? IIRC, it's legit to use a base that's bigger than it's original, but it's of course a blatant insult to the game to do it that way.
I never intended to make it sound as though there was a no assaults in the first turn rule. There is no such rule.
However. If a unit can assault X" and the armies must start at least X" apart then there inevitably can be no assaultin gon the first turn. If somehow your opponent is able to measure and find enough charge distance to get to you then at some point something illegal has occurred and he should be prevented from engaging in close combat.
If on the other hand his combat unit can move X+3" and you start X" apart then of course he can run over and smack your poor first line troops.