|
|
Post by Nick P on Oct 13, 2014 13:45:29 GMT -6
Ok so those of you where were over at my place on Saturday saw me depressingly attempt to deep strike my entire DE army against Dan's Tau/Knight army list. Obviously, this should only ever be attempted if: - Your opponent DOESN'T have ready access to interceptor
- Your opponent DOESN'T have ready access to "ignores cover"
- You're NOT playing "Hammer and Anvil" deployment
- You have rerolls of some kind to reserves/your opponent DOESN'T have the ability to modify your reserves
I still think the idea can be solid, if you can get the DE warlord trait that allows you to reroll reserve rolls, and your opponent isn't Tau (basically). Especially because, as was pointed out this weekend on several DE forums, there is a hitch in the BRB regarding Skimmers, Movement, and Deep Strike.
For deep strike, the BRB counts every model as having moved, and transports specifically count as having moved at "combat speed", and must act accordingly. Under the Skimmer entry, it explains that under no circumstances can a skimmer be made to move "over enemy units or impassable terrain", stating that "if any situation forces a skimmer to end its movement over impassable terrain or enemy units, reduce the distance by the minimum amount to avoid impassable terrain or enemy units".
So basically...deep striking a skimmer, can never mishap - the skimmer reduces the scatter distance by the minimum to avoid enemy units and impassable terrain. Yay Dark Eldar drop pods!
The only caveats are, of course, if the model goes off the board (mishap), or if it happens to land within 1" of an enemy, but not over an enemy (mishap). Otherwise, looks like we can be pretty cavalier with our DS units, even potentially using the tried and true drop pod method of "0 scatter" by virtue of placing them immediately next to or between enemy units. |
|
|
|
Post by Joelercoaster on Oct 13, 2014 20:15:59 GMT -6
Wow. Gracias for pointing that tidbit out. It's a dirty trick to be sure, but one I'll be more than happy to exploit, just to see the look on their face.
Granted, don't you still auto-lose if you don't have anything on the board at the end of the turn? Did you have any board presence turn 1?
I have a unit or two that will regularly plan to DS onto the board - obviously WWP equipped characters (although honestly I'm mainly looking at the Haemy for that one), and then Splinter Rack Raiders, who want to get up within 12" and then pump out a reliable... I think it's about 10 wounds? I'd have to re-math it.
Anyway. Interesting stuff.
|
|
mike
Butts
Posts: 628 
|
Post by mike on Oct 14, 2014 6:44:48 GMT -6
I'm not buying that skimmers can't mishap. Deep striking units count as having moved (in other phases) - but a deep strike is not actually a move action (it's a deployment), therefore the rule would not apply. If they wanted to spare us from mishap, they would have given us the special rule they gave drop pods. Basically, I'm siding with the interpretation Thor and shadowseer gave over at the Dark City. www.thedarkcity.net/t10291-vehicles-deepstriking-cannot-mishap-over-models |
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Oct 14, 2014 7:21:20 GMT -6
Mike, first off, sweet signature. Second, I admit its a bit of a stretch - but GW notoriously expects the players to extrapolate intended rules based on what is already written, and especially in the 6th and 7th ed codexes they have been very careful about only giving units special rules that are linked to in the BRB.
I liken this to the same rules interpretation that allows units inside transports to shoot at full BS even if the vehicle jinked, simply because the rule for jink only mentions the vehicle having to fire snap shots. "If they wanted the unit to shoot at full BS they would say so" would be just as valid here, and yet no one is arguing against the fact that a raider full of warriors can jink and then dish out 22 splinter shots at 12" and BS4...
Food for thought. I'd hope they FAQ that, especially if it starts popping up at tournies and the like.
And Joel - yes, I deployed 2 units of scourges iirc, and kept them out of line of sight like my life depended on it for 2 turns. All in all, it was funny (to me), but wasn't an especially good tactic frankly. It did give him an overload of targets to intercept, meaning that most came in unscathed, but I would have been better off deploying them and moving them up the board to get into the same positions I deep striked into.
|
|
mike
Butts
Posts: 628
|
Post by mike on Oct 14, 2014 10:12:36 GMT -6
Thanks I came up with it all by myself.
|
|
mike
Butts
Posts: 628
|
Post by mike on Oct 14, 2014 10:19:28 GMT -6
I wasn't particularly happy with the consensus on jink's effect on passengers either, but I think it's case is stronger than with deep strike. It would have been more consistent to have passengers take a morale check in the same way a crew shaken result affects them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2014 12:44:48 GMT -6
For deep strike, the BRB counts every model as having moved, and transports specifically count as having moved at "combat speed", and must act accordingly. Under the Skimmer entry, it explains that under no circumstances can a skimmer be made to move "over enemy units or impassable terrain", stating that "if any situation forces a skimmer to end its movement over impassable terrain or enemy units, reduce the distance by the minimum amount to avoid impassable terrain or enemy units". I can see that wording allowing skimmers to avoid impassable terrain, however I don't think it allows them to avoid the enemy's models. It says to place it the minimum amount away from the enemy unit, which would be as close as possible, placing it within 1" and causing a mishap. I also think that makes more sense narratively, a craft capable of space travel should certainly be able to avoid a mountain (impassable terrain) as it re-enters (deep strikes), however, moving targets such as the enemies models are harder to avoid, particularly if your trying to land close to them. I suppose it hinges upon what avoiding something means in the movement phase. |
|
|
|
Post by Russell on Oct 14, 2014 14:33:13 GMT -6
When in doubt, forge the narrative.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joelercoaster on Oct 14, 2014 18:02:58 GMT -6
I mean, it's a dirty interpretation at best. It smells of the typical sloppy rules that GW normally has issues (admittedly less so in recent editions) with.
Passengers vs Jinking... well... about every army that has a transport has the capability of firing out of it... so it's hard to "just miss" something as big as passengers firing from jinking skimmers.
Deep Striking though? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the ability to DS a skimmer is fairly limited.
I'm probably wrong, though. But it seems the sort of thing that GW designers would have come up once in a game and say "oh, we should be good about this and include a rule to say it doesn't happen! Great!" without even considering the interactions with DS, because they didn't think of it at the time.
I think Will has a good point, though... even following the letter of the law, moving "the minimum" to not be "on top of" the enemy does not keep you from being outside of the 1" death zone. So you could push for terrain (but really, impassible terrain? When's the last time you saw it?) but enemy models seem a moot point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Oct 15, 2014 9:10:10 GMT -6
Yeah, the more I look at it, the more I side with Mike that this is really not the intention of GW, and is more just something they missed. Plus, as Will and Joel pointed out, you still mishap within 1" of enemy units, so "avoiding them" just means you still mishap by being closer than allowed.
Probably moot, since its not likely we'll really be DSing anything that doesn't have a wwp attached!
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt W. on Oct 15, 2014 11:51:38 GMT -6
Reading the rules I see no reason why you would mishap so long as the skimmer landed entirely in impassible terrain. Enemy models are a still a thing however.
|
|
