Ulthuan

Ulthuan, Home of the Asur
It is currently Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:49 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 186 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 12:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 9:26 am
Posts: 100
Location: Australia
threewestwinds wrote:
Natio wrote:
Oh? Did you read the part where is specifies why the rule is there and what it is for? As far as I can tell it is to prevent the confusion of one model stopping next to another and looking like it is combat when it isn't. The rule even talks about how it is ok to be within 1 inch of another model when charging.


I did read the rule. "Whilst moving, a unit is not allowed to approach closer than 1" to another unit, friend or foe, or impassible terrain." "You'll notice that this rule does not apply to the charge moves discussed later."

Intentions don't override the rule itself. The rule is no moving within 1". What the designers intended the rule for is irrelevant. If they wanted an exception, they would have written it in. But they did - you can move within 1" while charging. Good. But it does not mention an exception for pivoting.

It's like moving an extra 1/2" - I normally don't care much (at all), and wouldn't call you on it even in a tournament. Except when I've very carefully positioned myself 1/2" outside your range - then I care very much that you're at 12.5" instead of 12". And when I'm blocking you from pivoting, I care very much that you can't come within 1".

I similarly find it frustrating that you want to change the rules of the game, and will hurt my score when I don't want you to.


I am not suggesting that we work with intentions, but to use the rule in its entirety. I interpret the rule as one that allows some leeway because it elaborates on why the rule is there and some of its exceptions, instead of simply stipulating that one cannot go within 1 inch, under any circumstances. If we met and you disagreed I would call upon the most important rule and I think this reasonable, even in a tournament.

EDIT: Would anyone know if in this situation which threewinds and I are discussing if a reform move would count as moving within 1 inch or just be a changing of facing?

_________________
Eldacar wrote:
It's more a "do unto others what needs to be done, and too bad for whoever gets in your way" sort of ideal.

Aryel wrote:
Yes, let's delete all Eldacar's post count. It makes my e-penis look tiny.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:45 pm
Posts: 334
Location: Mullingar Ireland
As units pivot around their centre when reforming which includes changing their facing as mentioned on P14 first paragraph under heading Reform in BRB I'd say that the prevention of a reform is a legal tactic.The only way a unit can aviod it is to wheel around its front corner on the side of the eagle but if the unit has to pivot at all then it would breach that rule unless its declaring a charge on something else in its front arc.

_________________
The Dark is generous, and it is patient and it always wins; but in the heart of its strength lies weakness: one lone candle is enough to hold it back.................


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 1:21 pm
Posts: 392
Units don't pivot around their centre when reforming.they keep the centre point of the unit the same and are arranged into a new formation with a chosen frontage.We often turn the movement tray around,hence the confusion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:34 am
Posts: 15
I have a question on the Great Eagles charging from behind the unit. How is that evne possible? You need t ohave LOS of the unit you are charging. Whenthe eagles aren't moving, aren't they considered to be landed for all purposes so they can be attacked by all ground units? If that is the case, wouldn't being behind a unit cause a lack of line of sight for the charge since the unit isn't flying until they move?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:56 pm
Posts: 2027
A standard GW eagle model should have no problem claiming LOS over rank n file. It is a sizable model intended to be placed on a flying base.

Remember, true line of sight is exactly what it says. Draw line of sight from the model's eyes to the enemy.

_________________
Quote:
Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Ptolemy wrote:
A standard GW eagle model should have no problem claiming LOS over rank n file. It is a sizable model intended to be placed on a flying base.

Remember, true line of sight is exactly what it says. Draw line of sight from the model's eyes to the enemy.


I don't buy that arguement, and haven't really found anything that endorses it in the rulebook either.

I can make a model and for aesthetic purposes mount it 2 feet in the air to look cool, does that mean I can see over a dragon with a great eagle? nope.

This is where common sense really needs to come to the game, can a monstorous beast see over regular infantry? yah probably. can it see over monstorous infantry? probably not.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 8:08 am 
Offline
Auctor Aeternitatum
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 pm
Posts: 7258
Location: The city of Spires
Awsten wrote:
Ptolemy wrote:
A standard GW eagle model should have no problem claiming LOS over rank n file. It is a sizable model intended to be placed on a flying base.

Remember, true line of sight is exactly what it says. Draw line of sight from the model's eyes to the enemy.


I don't buy that arguement, and haven't really found anything that endorses it in the rulebook either.

I can make a model and for aesthetic purposes mount it 2 feet in the air to look cool, does that mean I can see over a dragon with a great eagle? nope.

This is where common sense really needs to come to the game, can a monstorous beast see over regular infantry? yah probably. can it see over monstorous infantry? probably not.

Actually, RAW, you are wrong. It spells it out in the BRB that you get down to the table to take in the models eye view. If your model can see something based on where it's eyes are it can see it. The only exception to this is things like wings and swords and other 'extremities' which are left out to allow some room for conversions etc.

I do agree with you that it is silly and personally I go for a model can see over something smaller, but not over something the same size or bigger. So cavalry can see over infantry, but not other cavalry or monstrous cavalry etc. Unless my opponent wants to play by the rules ofcourse.

Rod

_________________
For Nagarythe: Come to the dark side.
PS: Bring cookies!

Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91

Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 10:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 622
Location: Greece
I agree. In my opinion true line of sight is amongst the things I don't like in this new edition. The reason is that it can lead to great arguments and can halve the conversions of players (especially those that take part in tournaments).

_________________
My Art Blog: Valleys of Eternity
Image
Mage Knight Guild


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
rdghuizing wrote:
Actually, RAW, you are wrong. It spells it out in the BRB that you get down to the table to take in the models eye view. If your model can see something based on where it's eyes are it can see it. The only exception to this is things like wings and swords and other 'extremities' which are left out to allow some room for conversions etc.

I do agree with you that it is silly and personally I go for a model can see over something smaller, but not over something the same size or bigger. So cavalry can see over infantry, but not other cavalry or monstrous cavalry etc. Unless my opponent wants to play by the rules ofcourse.

Rod

I think it might be a useable rule for common troops but for modeled characters and flyers it is un useable. Models are not to scale and niether is terrain. Trying to claim you can see a target in the woods because you have a direct line of sight with your eyes is ridiculous. There are reasonable expectations when you are modeling and understanding those trees represent woods is one of those expectations.

Again this is something you will have to work out with your opponent but me I will stick to troop type designations they are the most fair and clear cut and I have generally never had a problemw ith my opponents agreeing to it;

swarms<infantry<monstorous infantry=cavalry= monstorous beast<monstorous cavalry<monsters<ridden monsters...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:34 am
Posts: 15
Awsten wrote:
rdghuizing wrote:
Actually, RAW, you are wrong. It spells it out in the BRB that you get down to the table to take in the models eye view. If your model can see something based on where it's eyes are it can see it. The only exception to this is things like wings and swords and other 'extremities' which are left out to allow some room for conversions etc.

I do agree with you that it is silly and personally I go for a model can see over something smaller, but not over something the same size or bigger. So cavalry can see over infantry, but not other cavalry or monstrous cavalry etc. Unless my opponent wants to play by the rules ofcourse.

Rod

I think it might be a useable rule for common troops but for modeled characters and flyers it is un useable. Models are not to scale and niether is terrain. Trying to claim you can see a target in the woods because you have a direct line of sight with your eyes is ridiculous. There are reasonable expectations when you are modeling and understanding those trees represent woods is one of those expectations.

Again this is something you will have to work out with your opponent but me I will stick to troop type designations they are the most fair and clear cut and I have generally never had a problemw ith my opponents agreeing to it;

swarms<infantry<monstorous infantry=cavalry= monstorous beast<monstorous cavalry<monsters<ridden monsters...



According to the BRB, page 70 for flying, "Depending on the flying model's height and/or position, it will sometimes be able to draw a line of sight over intervening units to a more distant target and makea flying charge over the intervening unit."

So the BRB does state that you do use the models height. Now i would probably make the assumption that custom built models not use their height (some people make some ridiculously high models) and use the standard height. IE: I wouldn't allow a person that decided to put all of his infantry on stilts to use their new LOS to charge anybody, i'd treat them as normal infantry height.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Threather wrote:
According to the BRB, page 70 for flying, "Depending on the flying model's height and/or position, it will sometimes be able to draw a line of sight over intervening units to a more distant target and makea flying charge over the intervening unit."

So the BRB does state that you do use the models height. Now i would probably make the assumption that custom built models not use their height (some people make some ridiculously high models) and use the standard height. IE: I wouldn't allow a person that decided to put all of his infantry on stilts to use their new LOS to charge anybody, i'd treat them as normal infantry height.

This is an interpretation issue but I will argue that point with the following rebuttal;

To me that rule reads that if your flying unit can draw line of sight over an interveneing unit then it is legal to charge over them. Basically saying some flying models can draw line of sight over smaller unit types and charge over them.

It doesn't really do anything to clarify the TLOS aspect of literal modeling and bases.

My point is further asperated by the fact that flying models are clearly not on the ground (flying stands) but also are not hovering since the rule on flying strictly states flying models land on the ground in between their movements and marching is like taking a long "swoop". So if the model is technically on the ground while it sitting their waiting to move how is it legal to draw line of sight as if it were hovering above the ground 10 feet?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:37 am
Posts: 426
Awsten wrote:
Threather wrote:
According to the BRB, page 70 for flying, "Depending on the flying model's height and/or position, it will sometimes be able to draw a line of sight over intervening units to a more distant target and makea flying charge over the intervening unit."

So the BRB does state that you do use the models height. Now i would probably make the assumption that custom built models not use their height (some people make some ridiculously high models) and use the standard height. IE: I wouldn't allow a person that decided to put all of his infantry on stilts to use their new LOS to charge anybody, i'd treat them as normal infantry height.

This is an interpretation issue but I will argue that point with the following rebuttal;

To me that rule reads that if your flying unit can draw line of sight over an interveneing unit then it is legal to charge over them. Basically saying some flying models can draw line of sight over smaller unit types and charge over them.

It doesn't really do anything to clarify the TLOS aspect of literal modeling and bases.

My point is further asperated by the fact that flying models are clearly not on the ground (flying stands) but also are not hovering since the rule on flying strictly states flying models land on the ground in between their movements and marching is like taking a long "swoop". So if the model is technically on the ground while it sitting their waiting to move how is it legal to draw line of sight as if it were hovering above the ground 10 feet?


You're overthinking it. It's simple: can the models eyes see the target unit? If no - it cannot charge. If yes - it can.

Simples!

_________________
ETC Team Scotland 2013 - High Elves
ETC Team Scotland 2014 - High Elves

Twitter: @kingpash

If you're interested in getting involved in the Scottish Warhammer scene then check this out - http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=121047

Glory to the Asur!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Pash wrote:
You're overthinking it. It's simple: can the models eyes see the target unit? If no - it cannot charge. If yes - it can.

Simples!

So you will allow a custom modeled eagle to charge OVER a dragon just because the player posted the eagle higher than normal?

I won't and will gladly bow out of a game that someone is trying to do that in...

Its a perversion of the rules and spirit of the game...

Now IF they brought back high flying and whatnot then itd be a different discussion...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:45 pm
Posts: 334
Location: Mullingar Ireland
The easiest way for HE players to resolve this is take the IoB Griffon place it on the base standing. If it can see over the other unit then allow the charge. If you have a LOS marker use that to see if its able to see to declare charge.

_________________
The Dark is generous, and it is patient and it always wins; but in the heart of its strength lies weakness: one lone candle is enough to hold it back.................


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:37 am
Posts: 426
Awsten wrote:
Pash wrote:
You're overthinking it. It's simple: can the models eyes see the target unit? If no - it cannot charge. If yes - it can.

Simples!

So you will allow a custom modeled eagle to charge OVER a dragon just because the player posted the eagle higher than normal?

I won't and will gladly bow out of a game that someone is trying to do that in...

Its a perversion of the rules and spirit of the game...

Now IF they brought back high flying and whatnot then itd be a different discussion...


Yeah, sure I would. In fact, i'd be grateful even. Since if the Eagle is charging me, it means the Dragon isn't! Seriously, what can an Eagle really threaten in a HE army? I don't see it as a problem.

_________________
ETC Team Scotland 2013 - High Elves
ETC Team Scotland 2014 - High Elves

Twitter: @kingpash

If you're interested in getting involved in the Scottish Warhammer scene then check this out - http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=121047

Glory to the Asur!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Pash wrote:
Yeah, sure I would. In fact, i'd be grateful even. Since if the Eagle is charging me, it means the Dragon isn't! Seriously, what can an Eagle really threaten in a HE army? I don't see it as a problem.

BAH you're missing the point dude. Its not about the eagle per se...

Look at it this way. If you have an archmage and you position him behind a hill to cast Life spells on a nearby unit of swordmasters thinking he is out of LOS for your enemies flying units and shooters of whatevers, but then on your opponent turn he declares a charge against the mage because technically he modeled his flying whatevers in a custom fashion using a coat hanger that located them 2 feet above the table so they would look cool.

Although the models are located that high in real life, in the actual battlefield per the rules they are on the ground and obviously the hill should be blocking them.

Now you positioned your mage thinking the hill blocked his LOS, will you let him charge, or tell him "get real", his model isn't actually able to see your mage just because he decided to use a coat hanger to place it 2 feet above the table to look cool...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:49 pm 
Offline
Tactician

Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 3037
Location: USA
Awsten wrote:
So you will allow a custom modeled eagle to charge OVER a dragon just because the player posted the eagle higher than normal?
Absolutely. That is what the rules allow. True Line of Sight is an awful rule, but if you agree to play by the base Warhammer rules, that stupidity is currently part of it.

I would likely penalize that person's sportmanship score in a tournament, or not play them again casually, but once you have agreed to let them use the model, and agreed to play by the base rules, you are stuck with TLoS crap.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
dabber wrote:
Awsten wrote:
So you will allow a custom modeled eagle to charge OVER a dragon just because the player posted the eagle higher than normal?
Absolutely. That is what the rules allow. True Line of Sight is an awful rule, but if you agree to play by the base Warhammer rules, that stupidity is currently part of it.

I would likely penalize that person's sportmanship score in a tournament, or not play them again casually, but once you have agreed to let them use the model, and agreed to play by the base rules, you are stuck with TLoS crap.

Nah it is something I would address before the game started ensuring they know that is not how the game is going to be played. The beauty of this game is you never have to playa game of it and if they want to game the rules they can find another opponent who will put up with that nonsense...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 1:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:56 pm
Posts: 2027
I really doubt you would run into a great many issues with this. As a previous poster pointed out, the answer is to take a mini on a proper flying base and compare. Creative modeling is not supposed to net you any in game advantage or disadvantage.

_________________
Quote:
Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Ptolemy wrote:
I really doubt you would run into a great many issues with this. As a previous poster pointed out, the answer is to take a mini on a proper flying base and compare. Creative modeling is not supposed to net you any in game advantage or disadvantage.

Even the games workshop flying model isn't legit thought. It clearly moves the model above the ground when the rules state flyers start from the ground.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 7:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:25 pm
Posts: 252
You don't have to see over something to charge it with a flier. if you can draw LOS THROUGH a model (like a dragon) that is fine. An eagle, even not on its flying base, is still pretty big and can see over, or through, pretty much all infantry without a problem. This same rule benefits mages greatly ("gap between your models, I can see the guys behind them").

_________________
My army


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:34 am 
Offline
Auctor Aeternitatum
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 pm
Posts: 7258
Location: The city of Spires
Awsten wrote:
Ptolemy wrote:
I really doubt you would run into a great many issues with this. As a previous poster pointed out, the answer is to take a mini on a proper flying base and compare. Creative modeling is not supposed to net you any in game advantage or disadvantage.

Even the games workshop flying model isn't legit thought. It clearly moves the model above the ground when the rules state flyers start from the ground.

I'd say "this is 8th edition, how line of sight works is clearly spelled out in the BRB, live with it or play a different game". A model is modelled how it is modelled, draw line of sight from his eyes. If he can see over or under something he can see it (so a forest doesn't block LoS unless realy dense). Flying base or no. If you go for flying bases don't count are you then also going to argue that there is no way the HE dragon can hang from his cliff for a whole game like that but he actually gets of between turns to sit on the ground? And if he is mounted on a 2 feet high coat hanger, I'd get my archers and shoot the .... out of him and they'd actually make their points back for a game. (or applaud him for excelent conversion skills if it looks great and then shoot him).

Rod

_________________
For Nagarythe: Come to the dark side.
PS: Bring cookies!

Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91

Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
rdghuizing wrote:
I'd say "this is 8th edition, how line of sight works is clearly spelled out in the BRB, live with it or play a different game". A model is modelled how it is modelled, draw line of sight from his eyes. If he can see over or under something he can see it (so a forest doesn't block LoS unless realy dense). Flying base or no. If you go for flying bases don't count are you then also going to argue that there is no way the HE dragon can hang from his cliff for a whole game like that but he actually gets of between turns to sit on the ground? And if he is mounted on a 2 feet high coat hanger, I'd get my archers and shoot the .... out of him and they'd actually make their points back for a game. (or applaud him for excelent conversion skills if it looks great and then shoot him).

Rod

See my response above about not having to play a game...

Thanks,


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 8:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 622
Location: Greece
rdghuizing wrote:
I'd say "this is 8th edition, how line of sight works is clearly spelled out in the BRB, live with it or play a different game".


Or play in the etc format is what I'd say. :wink:

_________________
My Art Blog: Valleys of Eternity
Image
Mage Knight Guild


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 4:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 10:01 am
Posts: 1532
Awsten, seriously, welcome to 8th edition. True line of sight is the rule, and flying models do indeed open up a big can of worms. It's not the end of the world. At a recent tournament I managed to charge some Terradons that were behind a hill because the Terradons were actually on flying stands, with riders (90% of Terradons are usually bare flying lizards). If someone really wants to model their eagle on a 2' stand, then they're welcome to. If they're a giant douche about it though, then they're going to be a giant douche anyway.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Stormie wrote:
Awsten, seriously, welcome to 8th edition. True line of sight is the rule, and flying models do indeed open up a big can of worms. It's not the end of the world. At a recent tournament I managed to charge some Terradons that were behind a hill because the Terradons were actually on flying stands, with riders (90% of Terradons are usually bare flying lizards). If someone really wants to model their eagle on a 2' stand, then they're welcome to. If they're a giant douche about it though, then they're going to be a giant douche anyway.

See my response above about not having to play a game...

Thanks,


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:37 am
Posts: 426
Awsten wrote:
Stormie wrote:
Awsten, seriously, welcome to 8th edition. True line of sight is the rule, and flying models do indeed open up a big can of worms. It's not the end of the world. At a recent tournament I managed to charge some Terradons that were behind a hill because the Terradons were actually on flying stands, with riders (90% of Terradons are usually bare flying lizards). If someone really wants to model their eagle on a 2' stand, then they're welcome to. If they're a giant douche about it though, then they're going to be a giant douche anyway.

See my response above about not having to play a game...

Thanks,


If you're a garage gamer - fair enough. When you're playing competively - there's not much choice, you have to accept the rules as they are. Not everyone likes competitive gaming :/

_________________
ETC Team Scotland 2013 - High Elves
ETC Team Scotland 2014 - High Elves

Twitter: @kingpash

If you're interested in getting involved in the Scottish Warhammer scene then check this out - http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=121047

Glory to the Asur!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 8:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:39 pm
Posts: 150
Pash wrote:
If you're a garage gamer - fair enough. When you're playing competively - there's not much choice, you have to accept the rules as they are. Not everyone likes competitive gaming :/

Its always possible to review the rules before entering in a tournament... :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:48 am
Posts: 169
Hey everyone!!

It's me again, after an absence from this forum for a while. I was re-reading some of the chatter going on in this thread about Abomination control (seen the new model? pretty sweet!) and charging over units, and I'm hoping that bringing this thread back doesn't start that up again. Please realize that this game has so many rules that there are bound to be some loop holes that people will have disputes over, and because of this, it isn't really that important if someone who likely lives on the other side of the world from you has a different perspective on how some rules work. Take it up with your local gaming group and leave it at that.

Anyways, having another couple months of playing under my belt, I decided that I would add in the few more tips that I missed that were posted while I was gone, and throw in some more tricks that I have thought of since being here last.

New additions are in blue in the original post! They include Mithstar's "Impassible Terrain" as well as some of my own. If anyone else has any new tricks they would like to share, please do!!

(BTW, if thread resurrection goes against any forum rules, I apologize!)

_________________
Great Eagle Tips and Tricks
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:16 am
Posts: 701
Location: Vienna, Austria
As this has been mentioned before, but nobody really cared about it, I would try to bring to your attention the tactic of boxing.
As the rules say you must not come closer than one inch to any enemy model except when you charge, you can greatly reduce the manoeverability of an enemy unit.
Just move the eagle to the flank of an enemy unit, one inch away. Any movement that brings the unit closer than 1 inch to your eagle is now forbidden (unless its a charge).
Of course this tactic works best against units that have to pivote every turn and do not charge i.e. HPAs. (in theory, also doomwheels apply to this rule,but the doomwheel wil make skavenblight fried chicken out of any eagle that comes near).

Further uses of this tactic really depend on wheter you regard a reform as a pivote or not.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 186 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group