HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Ynneadwraith
Twisted
avatar

Posts : 1236
Join date : 2016-09-21

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 13:52

So you're right, if they're at 2" already.

Voidraven Bombers and a Raider full of Medusae spring to mind for making sure people keep spread out...

_________________
Check out may pan-Eldar projects Smile Exodites, Corsairs, Craftworld, True Kin, Croneworld (soon) and one Shadowseer!: http://www.thedarkcity.net/t14405-corsairs-exodites-craftworlders-and-hopefully-kabalites-soon
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 14:18

I have put together a small example what happens if you TS a line of models spaced 2''.
See here.

I think that you think that if unit is unable to maintain coherency, it is destroyed. But to quote the rule:
Quote :
During the course of a game, a unit can get broken up and lose unit coherency, usually because it has taken casualties from incoming enemy fire. If this happens, in their next Movement phase, the models in the unit must be moved in such a way that they restore unit coherency (or get as close as possible to having restored coherency). If the unit cannot move in its next turn, or is unable to restore unit coherency in a single turn, then the models must move to restore unit coherency as soon as they have the opportunity, including by Running if they have that option.
However with the Tank shock
So its OK for an unit to lose coherency. It just has to move to regain it in its turn.
Back to top Go down
CptMetal
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2923
Join date : 2015-03-03
Location : Ruhr Metropolian Area

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 14:31

I'm afraid destroying huge parts of the unit via tank shock is impossible or at least not meant to be by the game designers. But getting them out of cover is nice and remember that stupid... Um... Death or glory actions can still kill viable parts of the units.
Back to top Go down
Ynneadwraith
Twisted
avatar

Posts : 1236
Join date : 2016-09-21

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 14:33

@aurynn wrote:
I have put together a small example what happens if you TS a line of models spaced 2''.
See here.

I think that you think that if unit is unable to maintain coherency, it is destroyed. But to quote the rule:
Quote :
During the course of a game, a unit can get broken up and lose unit coherency, usually because it has taken casualties from incoming enemy fire. If this happens, in their next Movement phase, the models in the unit must be moved in such a way that they restore unit coherency (or get as close as possible to having restored coherency). If the unit cannot move in its next turn, or is unable to restore unit coherency in a single turn, then the models must move to restore unit coherency as soon as they have the opportunity, including by Running if they have that option.
However with the Tank shock
So its OK for an unit to lose coherency. It just has to move to regain it in its turn.

Yeah that makes sense. The unit wouldn't be destroyed by being tank shocked out of coherency, but as per the FAQ if any individual models are displaced by tank shock and cannot maintain coherency those models are removed from play.

That's the interesting bit Smile

Quote :
Pick up only those models actively displaced by the Tank Shock, and place them on the battlefield with all models within unit coherency, as close as possible to their starting location and with no models within 1" of an enemy unit. Any models that cannot be placed in this way will be removed as casualties.

However, is there a discussion about what constitutes 'unit coherency' in this respect.

What do the rules define as 'unit coherency'?

Also, what's the continuing sentence 'However, with tank shock...'? Is that the bit that the FAQ was addressing?

_________________
Check out may pan-Eldar projects Smile Exodites, Corsairs, Craftworld, True Kin, Croneworld (soon) and one Shadowseer!: http://www.thedarkcity.net/t14405-corsairs-exodites-craftworlders-and-hopefully-kabalites-soon
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 14:55

No, sorry that was my artefact mistakingly placed within the quote and forgotten. :-)

I meant that when tank-shocking an unit where you simply cannot return the models within the coherency of any part of the unit they are simply gone. You can destroy a large portion of a unit you have blocked out. But you have to leave at least one model "untouched" by the tank shock otherwise the shortest distance for the first model would be on the outside of the box you laid down to limit their movement as there will be no model to be coherent to within the box. Thus allowing to create a new unit coherency on the outside.

Unit Coherency:
Quote :
When you are moving a unit, its individual models can each move up to their maximum movement distance. However, units have to stick together, otherwise individual models become scattered and the unit loses its cohesion as a fighting force. So, once a unit has finished moving, the models in it must form an imaginary chain where the distance between one model and the next is no more than 2" horizontally and up to 6" vertically. We call this ‘unit coherency’.
Back to top Go down
fisheyes
Wych
avatar

Posts : 849
Join date : 2016-02-18

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 15:07

@aurynn, that is exactly what we have been saying (sorry for any miscommunication). Yes, you need to keep at least 2 models un "shocked" (one at each end of the conga line), otherwise the UNIT would be able to reposition within coherency. So you wouldent be able to kill whole squads, but you could pick out ICs or heavy weapons or such.

I will now be sure to keep my important guys on the wings of squads if I decide to do this! No more haemi hiding in the middle of squads, thats for sure!
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 15:20

I think I still dont understand what you mean. Its impossible to destroy large sections of conga line unless you can box it whole.
Back to top Go down
Ynneadwraith
Twisted
avatar

Posts : 1236
Join date : 2016-09-21

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 15:25

@aurynn wrote:
I think I still dont understand what you mean. Its impossible to destroy large sections of conga line unless you can box it whole.

You can remove as many models as can fit under the footprint of a Raider (plus 1").

It's a slight modification on this from Dakka:

Quote :


I'll use an arbitrary example of 5 grots on a wire, 2 inches from each other:

Code:

G1-G2-G3-G4-G5

Insert Chimera 1 into formation like so, assuming they pass their leadership.

Code:

G1\[ C1  ]/G-G
    G2-G3

Now insert Chimera 2 into the formation like so, again assuming they pass leadership
Code:

G1|[ C1  ]|G4-G5
G2|[ C2  ]|G3
by displacing Grot 2 and 3, the unit is no longer in coherency [FAQ pg2 col 2 para 4]. By this FAQ ruling, since they had to be removed from the table and cannot be placed back on the table in both coherency and more than 1 inch away from the tankshocker, Grots 2 and 3 are removed from play.

The modification is that if the models are already at max distance (2") there's no way they can maintain unit coherency with even the first tank shock.

Actually, could you use multiple tank shocks to wipe out a unit all bar two?

If you've got a long conga line, just leave the ends intact and shock everyone in the middle. Once the unit's split, there's no way any of the other models can retain coherency...

_________________
Check out may pan-Eldar projects Smile Exodites, Corsairs, Craftworld, True Kin, Croneworld (soon) and one Shadowseer!: http://www.thedarkcity.net/t14405-corsairs-exodites-craftworlders-and-hopefully-kabalites-soon
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 15:44

I think you are mixing up unit coherency and model coherency. Unit can be incoherent as per the rule. Removed models have to be placed within coherency with the remaining unit on board. Does not matter that the unit itself is incoherent. That is said in BRB. But when placing a model back on board "within coherency" it just has to be max 2'' from another model from the unit.
Back to top Go down
Ynneadwraith
Twisted
avatar

Posts : 1236
Join date : 2016-09-21

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 15:59

That would certainly be a more accurate way of representing Tank Shock, but it's not what the FAQ says. The FAQ states:
Quote :
Pick up only those models actively displaced by the Tank Shock, and place them on the battlefield with all models within unit coherency, as close as possible to their starting location and with no models within 1" of an enemy unit. Any models that cannot be placed in this way will be removed as casualties.

It definitely states 'unit coherency' as in the unit as a whole, not 'model coherency'.

It's separate from the BRB statement about losing unit coherency. The FAQ specifically states the if the unit cannot retain coherency as a consequence of the models being moved, those displaced models are removed from play. Nothing in the FAQ ruling about it being ok if the unit can regain coherency in their next movement phase.

It's almost definitely exploiting the rules, but that's hardly new ground...

_________________
Check out may pan-Eldar projects Smile Exodites, Corsairs, Craftworld, True Kin, Croneworld (soon) and one Shadowseer!: http://www.thedarkcity.net/t14405-corsairs-exodites-craftworlders-and-hopefully-kabalites-soon
Back to top Go down
fisheyes
Wych
avatar

Posts : 849
Join date : 2016-02-18

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 16:14

So Ynneadwraith and I are clearly on the same boat. Can we get a third party to comment to confirm our interpretation?

I fully agree that this is "Exploiting the rules". But we are the True Kin, and we need every advantage we can get!
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 16:15

NOTE: Stormsurge is Gargantuan Creature. It suffers D3 wounds instead being "removed from play". This "removes as casualty". Not sure if it is the same...

@Ynneadwraith - I see... so you think that they "cannot decide which way to run" and are crunched... Another badly written rule. The rule itself suggests that the "coherency check" happens before movement and after movement. However this forces a coherency requirement onto a model in its enemy phase so per RAW... I think you could be right...
Back to top Go down
Ynneadwraith
Twisted
avatar

Posts : 1236
Join date : 2016-09-21

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 16:43

Yeah, it would make a lot more sense if they said 'model coherency', from a realism perspective. Ah well, not long til 8th Wink

Describing the models as not sure which way to run and getting crunched is probably a good way to reconcile that...

As fisheyes says, we need every buff we can get Wink even if it is incredibly situational...

_________________
Check out may pan-Eldar projects Smile Exodites, Corsairs, Craftworld, True Kin, Croneworld (soon) and one Shadowseer!: http://www.thedarkcity.net/t14405-corsairs-exodites-craftworlders-and-hopefully-kabalites-soon
Back to top Go down
fisheyes
Wych
avatar

Posts : 849
Join date : 2016-02-18

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 16:47

@aurynn, the Stormsurge thing is based on the Tau draft FAQ. It has stabilizing clamps, which allow it to shoot twice a turn, but cant move (not a very heavy price tag TBH). In their FAQ, when they deploy the clamps, and if the thing is tank shocked (and somehow isnt destroyed as a result), the stormsurge is removed from play.

That is what we are saying. Not related to this latest Tank Shock FAQ
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1301
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 17:01

I introduced the stormsurge example and now i'm going to quash it: @fisheyes is absolutely correct, it has nothing to do with tank shock nor did I refer to tank shocking a stormsurge. I explicitly mentioned being able to ram a stormsurge, which I concede is not technically correct, specifically to differentiate that use from slicing through units, which can be accomplished with hooks for half the cost of a shock prow.

As for concensus I agree with @fisheyes, and @ynneadwraith 's interpretation, and will rule as such when I TO.
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 17:10

But thats Draft right? We are talking about RAW exploits here so it would be fair not to use any draft rules as they are irrelevant in RAW... :-) But yea. Tankshocking a stormsurge is possible. However as snapshotting passenggers in jinking vehicle didnt make it out to official FAQ due to everyone shouting "no fair" I expect this to be changed.
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1301
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 17:22

The stormsurge scenario is, correct. Just realize that if you stay on the tact your taking then you lose your DE shadowfield after an unsaved wound before FNP (persists until end of turn tho), but you wouldn't lose your corsair shadowfield. At present, ignoring drafts, that is RAW.
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 17:38

Quote :
Q: Does a wound negated by Feel No Pain count as saved or unsaved for the purposes of wargear that has an effect if a unit suffers an unsaved wound?
A: It counts as saved, unless specifically stated otherwise.
Thats from the new FAQ. ;-)
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1301
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 17:55

Quote :
Q: Is a shadow field lost if a model suffers an unsaved Wound
that is subsequently discounted due to a successful Feel No
Pain roll?
A: Yes

Sure. And this is from the December 2015 Dark Eldar FAQ which is still live and valid until the draft FAQ supplants it. Per the main rulebook: specific trumps general therefore DE FAQ > Rulebook FAQ. When the DE draft goes through this line is likely to be stricken. Try getting better at rules lawyering before you pick fights.


The FAQ
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/Errata/Warhammer_40000/Dark_Eldar_EN.pdf

It's location
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Rules-Errata
Back to top Go down
aurynn
Incubi


Posts : 1626
Join date : 2013-04-23

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 18:09

I wonder why you think I was picking a fight... :-D I was merely pointing out what I saw in the current FAQ and I simply forgot the DE FAQ. Hang me. :-D Its friday night and we discuss, not fight. Chill.
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1301
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 19:04

Do you not followup on your notifications? You've commented on topics that this has already been discussed in, and my opinion of you is heavily colored by your previous interpretations and stances a la Purge Cotorie with Court, but I sincerely apologize if I detected malice that isn't present.
Back to top Go down
fisheyes
Wych
avatar

Posts : 849
Join date : 2016-02-18

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 19:14

Well then, now that that lively discussion has been concluded, I believe we are all in agreement.

RAW states that I can remove models that are unable to "maintain UNIT coherency". Various ways of doing this exist, using various amounts of resources and tanks.

I guess we can end this discussion, and instead turn to designing our realspace raids to make the most of it Very Happy
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1301
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 19:53

I dunno if I'd go that far. I think that there is still productive discussion to have here such as what combination of things can we get to interact most clean from rules collision here, furthermore I think there is prudent discussion to be had about the list building ramifications over building a list intended to throw raiders like darts, and whether or not that changes the relative value of certain upgrades.
Back to top Go down
fisheyes
Wych
avatar

Posts : 849
Join date : 2016-02-18

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 20:33

@amorrowlyday, please expand on those thoughts and share!

I guess we can list off the units that we have to try to force the conga line:
-Medusae
-Razorwings
-Voidraven
-Chronos/ DA
-Blaster armed troops
-Wracks (cant recall the gun. Not very good IMO)

Certainly the whole 10pt investment for the prows are not too much to bear. I wont be putting them on my Grotesquery raiders, since they die turn 1 anyway (I dont think I would be able to get out after moving 12" to do a shock anyway).

I guess you would need about 4 shock-prows to make this worthwhile? 2-3 can easily die in a turn, but I doubt 4 could all be taken down with 3HP and a jink save.
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1301
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   Fri Nov 25 2016, 22:00

In my mind there are 3 factors to discuss: Units that can force spreading, units to act as space anvils and the TS unit itself. Certainly a shock prow is worth the 5 point premium over chains, but is it really better than a further 10 point total cost to take chains and nightshields instead? 10 pts for TS and an AV14 ram you'll hardly use or 20pts for TS and a 3+ jink?

Beyond the chassis there is the issue of its contents that you've already mentioned. You can't embark or disembark the turn you tank shock, so 'CC' units either need to be hearty enough to survive outside the vehicle after they deep strike turn 2, or chill inside the vehicle until it either goes down or there's a reprieve probably around turn 4, which is exactly when a haemonculus becomes fearless.

Now I'm going to blaspheme: main codex liquifier guns on grotesques are slightly overcosted, but the purview, which I have promoted, that the real cost is in the loss of having 2 ccw's, is emphatically no longer true.

If your going to be vehicle bound and in the middle of an enemy squad for 2 turns and likely still have less overall models and thus rampage when you do finally charge them diving board style I think trading 3 attacks, and 45 points overall to gain 3XSTR3APd6 hit's is not as bad a deal as it used to be and might even be viable.

This also seems like a good whip for a 9 man of wyches with a gunslinger haemonculus, or maybe a sump covens haemy, maybe give their raider splinter racks and shock prow because those 3 things should all synergize very well due to the ranges involved.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer   

Back to top Go down
 
New FAQ - Smashfacing the Smashfacer
Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
THE DARK CITY :: 

COMMORRAGH TACTICA

 :: Rules: Queries & Questions
-
Jump to: