'Slingshotting'

[Roland Durendal]

I think it works solely because of the original, unattached IC who acts as the "bridge"

 

By rights the Libby left the squad and was detached b/c he moved 10" (this is based off memory of the diagrams BTW, so if I have the movement distances or units wrong, apologies). The Squad moves up 6" and has no IC attached. Finally the Priest jumps 8" to "fill in" the 4" gap between squad and the Libby. In effect, the Priest is "joining" 2 different squads and in so doing, links them together. He's legally joining the Libby as a squad (since his movement phase ended him w/in coherency) and he's legally ending his phase in the Termy squad (again since he's in coherency). Therefore, by doing that, he in effect drags the Libby into the Termy squad again. So while it's true that it's illegal for the libby to say, jump 8", detach from the squad, and then have the squad move 6" and try to claim the Libby is attached (illegal twice b/c IC's cannot leave and rejoin the same unit in the same movement phase, and because the IC is considered attached after the IC moves into coherency, not the squad moving into coherency with the IC), the move Stellie proposes is 100% legal, all because of that unattached Priest acting as a bridge.

[dswanick]

I think it works solely because of the original, unattached IC who acts as the "bridge"

 

By rights the Libby left the squad and was detached b/c he moved 10" (this is based off memory of the diagrams BTW, so if I have the movement distances or units wrong, apologies). The Squad moves up 6" and has no IC attached. Finally the Priest jumps 8" to "fill in" the 4" gap between squad and the Libby. In effect, the Priest is "joining" 2 different squads and in so doing, links them together. He's legally joining the Libby as a squad (since his movement phase ended him w/in coherency) and he's legally ending his phase in the Termy squad (again since he's in coherency). Therefore, by doing that, he in effect drags the Libby into the Termy squad again. So while it's true that it's illegal for the libby to say, jump 8", detach from the squad, and then have the squad move 6" and try to claim the Libby is attached (illegal twice b/c IC's cannot leave and rejoin the same unit in the same movement phase, and because the IC is considered attached after the IC moves into coherency, not the squad moving into coherency with the IC), the move Stellie proposes is 100% legal, all because of that unattached Priest acting as a bridge.

Except your explanation of this fails on this section of the ICs rule : "If the character {which is currently moving} is within 2" of more than one unit at the end of its Movement phase, the player must declare which unit it is Joining." (BRB, Pg.48). So when you finish moving th Priest and it is within 2" of both the Termy squad and the Libby you must make a choice of which of the two units you are joining - you can't pick both.

[Legatus]

So when you finish moving th Priest and it is within 2" of both the Termy squad and the Libby you must make a choice of which of the two units you are joining - you can't pick both.

The thing is that once the Priest has decided to join the Terminator squad, that now means that the Librarian is within 2" of the Terminator squad, via the extension of the Priest, and thus now has to join that squad as well.

[greatcrusade08]

I think it works solely because of the original, unattached IC who acts as the "bridge"

 

if you look at the 'beginning' diagram, youll see all ICs begin the game attached.. and therefore the slingshot is illegal becuase they have to move at the slowest speed..

if the Ics started the game seperate of the termies, then yes it would be ok

[dswanick]

So when you finish moving th Priest and it is within 2" of both the Termy squad and the Libby you must make a choice of which of the two units you are joining - you can't pick both.

The thing is that once the Priest has decided to join the Terminator squad, that now means that the Librarian is within 2" of the Terminator squad, via the extension of the Priest, and thus now has to join that squad as well.

I don't think it can work that way. The steps are these:

1. The Libby leaves the Termy squad and jumps out front. He is now detached (legally), a seperate unit, and far away from any friendly unit. As such he has no unit he can declare he is attaching to at the end if his movement phase.

2. The Termy squad moves forward, but is more than 2" away from the Jumping Libby. No problems here.

3. The Priest moves as an Independant Character (can't remember if he started out attached to another squad or not, but it's irrelevant either way) and ends his movement out front of the Termy squad and within IC Joining range of both the Termy squad and the Independant Libby. This move is inherently illegal because of this :

If a character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase.

and

If the character is within 2" of more than one unit at the end of its Movement phase, the player must declare which unit it is Joining.

As the Priest can't declare he is joining both(it's one or the other), he must move such that he remains more than 2" away from the other unit.

Alternatively, if you moved the Priest and declared he is moving to join the Libby and then moved the squad within 2" of these two you still can't declare the two ICs are joining with the Termies because of this rule:

In order to join a unit an independent character simply has to move so that he is within the 2" coherency distance of a friendly unit at the end of their Movement phase.

There is no allowance for an IC to join a unit when the unit moves within 2" of the ICs.

[greatcrusade08]

dswanick the last two quotes are contradictory, one says he only has to be within 2" the other says he must move to within 2"..

tbh i think your reading too mcuh ino it, it doesnt matter who moves, the unit or the Ic, if they are within 2" at the end of movement they are joined..

 

although that has little bearing on the slingshot, as its an illegal move :D

[Grimtooth]

Stelek is a joke. His argument boils down to,

 

"I am so intellectually superior I thought of a new tactic that only I can fully comprehend and anyone else that has issue with it is a mindless mouth-drooling peasant that does not actually have a valid reply since they cannot grasp the depths of my intellect."

 

When someone pointed out to him that you need to choose which unit you will be a part of with the bridging IC, he said,

 

"LOL, guess why I am laughing at you."

 

Really? The best part is that come any valid tournament showing, the "peasant-like intellect" of a judge will be the deciding factor, not the "Brainiac-type" intellect of the masterful Stelek.

[Roland Durendal]

Actually it could work but the order of operations would have to be different, and would require the Libby and the priest initially being unattached:

 

Play field to begin - termy squad w/ no attached ICs, unattached Libby, unattached Priest -

 

1). Termies move 6" forward

2). Priest jumps 8" forward and declares being attached to Termies

3). Libby jumps 10" forward and declares being attached to the Priest/Termies

 

That would make all attachments legal and workable.

[Sgt. Tiberus Satio]

I thought the IC's have to move first to be closest to the combat? Or is that just in the assault phase?

[JamesI]

I thought the IC's have to move first to be closest to the combat? Or is that just in the assault phase?

that is only on a pile in move and reaction to being assaulted.

[dswanick]

dswanick the last two quotes are contradictory, one says he only has to be within 2" the other says he must move to within 2"..

tbh i think your reading too mcuh ino it, it doesnt matter who moves, the unit or the Ic, if they are within 2" at the end of movement they are joined..

 

although that has little bearing on the slingshot, as its an illegal move ;)

Generally I agree with the bit I highlighted white. That's how I play my games locally. And even if that's the correct way to play (although I know several people who argue that it's not RAW) then my fall-back argument is that a player would have to have a silver tongue to convince any reasonable person (especially a TO) that his Jump Libby started the movement phase attached to the Termi squad, ended the phase attached to that same Termi squad, but didn't "remain" with that Termi squad so wasn't limited to moving at the speed of the Termis.

[greatcrusade08]

my fall-back argument is that a player would have to have a silver tongue to convince any reasonable person (especially a TO) that his Jump Libby started the movement phase attached to the Termi squad, ended the phase attached to that same Termi squad, but didn't "remain" with that Termi squad so wasn't limited to moving at the speed of the Termis.

 

i completely agree, my argument all along is that his article clearly shows the unit starting the game attached to those ICs, therefore hes breaking a big aspect of the attached IC rules by leaving and rejoining a unit in the same turn

[angry man]

question:

 

can an IC be deployed within 2" of a unit and not be attatched to it?

 

i realise that you cant be within 2" at the end of movement without joining, but is there any restriction regarding deployment?

 

AM

[greatcrusade08]

can an IC be deployed within 2" of a unit and not be attatched to it?

 

BRB page 48

an independant character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherancy with them

If they start the game within 2" of a unit they are part of that unit

[angry man]

only to play devil's advocate, but that quote states that an IC may join a unit by deploying within 2".

 

it doesnt say, and im not even sure it intends to say, that an IC deployed within 2" of a unit is obliged to join.

certainly from a RAW standpoint, and maybe from a RAI one too, im not sure that it is sufficient

 

just a thought

 

AM

[greatcrusade08]

only to play devil's advocate, but that quote states that an IC may join a unit by deploying within 2".

 

it doesnt say, and im not even sure it intends to say, that an IC deployed within 2" of a unit is obliged to join.

certainly from a RAW standpoint, and maybe from a RAI one too, im not sure that it is sufficient

 

just a thought

 

AM

 

in terms of true interpreation it does indeed suggest that being deployed within 2" is starting attached.

heres the wording

an independant character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherancy with them

so they may begin the game attached.. but only by deploying within coherancy with them.. note they may choose not to join a unit at which point you deploy them out of coherancy.

the "may" part merely suggest they have the choice, the being deployed in coherancy is the mechanic by which the rule is manifested

[angry man]

but you see, to me, the BRB reads;

"if the IC wishes to join a unit, then he/she must deploy within 2" of said unit.

not:

an IC deployed within 2" of a unit is joined to that unit

 

which is, i suppose, where we differ in opinion

 

AM

[greatcrusade08]

its fine that we differ on the small interpretations, but you must be able to make a case that states you can deploy an IC within 2" of a unit and yet not be joined to that unit

[angry man]

the rules regarding ICs joining units when they are within 2" is only referred to when talking about the movement phase.

 

BRB page48 1st bullet, is very clear about the obligation of a character joining a unit he is within 2" of and even rules that if they cannot join such a unit then they must stay 2" away. this, as far as i can think, is the only instance of restricting friendly models from bein within any distance of each other.

 

BRB page48 2nd bullet, is the quote you posted a couple of posts back, which says that an IC can deploy with a unit he is within 2" of, but it doesnt say that if an IC is deployed in such a way that he must join. there is also no mention that if he cant/doesnt want to join said unit then he must stay 2" away.

 

BRB page92, is where deployin forces is discussed. the only restrictions put in place here are that units must be deployed within the appropriate deployment zone. there are no comments about friendly units, ICs or otherwise needing to remain any distance apart from each other.

 

 

i cant think of any more sections of the BRB that would be relevant to apply to the situation. from what IS said, there doesnt seem to be any RAW that prevents an IC deploying within 2" of a unit but not joining it.

 

AM

[greatcrusade08]

then we come back to this quote

an independant character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherancy with them

which no matter how you interpret it, does make a tangible connection to unit coherancy and the deployment phase.

 

we already know that to be part of a unit an Ic has to be within 2" so why state this sentence?

 

if unit coherancy is important during deployment then surely by deploying in cohernacy you must be joining..

tbh its the only logical conclusion we can make.. otherwise we are left wondering if an Ic can start within coherancy without being joined with no other statement made to support or reject it

 

edit.. the newest FAQ states this

Q: If an Independent Character is going to begin a

game joined to a unit when should this be done? (p48)

A: You should nominate which Independent Characters

are joining units at the start of deployment before you

place any units on the board. Note that this should be

done before you nominate which units are being held

in Reserve, Deep Strike or are Outflanking etc.

 

so you would need to nominate before actual deployment whether or not an Ic joins a unit.. given that Ic coherancy matters during deployment id say IMO that if an Ic starts seperate of units he should be deployed at least 2" away from other unit

[angry man]

an independant character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherancy with them

we already know that to be part of a unit an Ic has to be within 2" so why state this sentence?

because this gives us permission to deploy an IC as part of a unit. the other rules for joining an IC to a unit only mention either doing so at the end of the movement phase (where they must join if within 2" of keep away) or when arranging you reserves. this quote allows another option of starting the character on the board joined to a unit.

 

dont get me wrong, i agree that the quote is relevant/important to the deployment of characters with relation to other units. however, there is nothing about it that makes me believe deploying within 2" of a unit means that an IC must join it.

 

if unit coherancy is important during deployment then surely by deploying in cohernacy you must be joining..

tbh its the only logical conclusion we can make.. otherwise we are left wondering if an Ic can start within coherancy without being joined with no other statement made to support or reject it

haha, dont tell me youve never read a GW rule and been left wondering...

 

AM

[Brother Tual]

My 2c.

 

No where in the Rule Book does it state you cannot leave and rejoin the same unit in the same phase. There is no restriction on this other than coherency rules. It is a dog way of applying this rule but it is RAW.

 

The easiest way to comprehend 'sling shoting'

 

UNIT A + IC1 and IC2 (both IC's have the ability to move 12' independently) These can start the turn as one unit.

 

UNIT A moves 6" forward leaving IC1 and IC2 alone and otherwise free to utilise their full movement. IC1 and IC2 cannot be considered a unit because IC's cannot join together to form a unit by themselves even if they are next to each other. If I wanted to, I could move either IC their full movement in any direction or join any unit and no player would challenge this. To sling shot I get IC1 to jump over UNIT A and land 2" in front. IC1 is considered to be a part of UNIT A (again). IC2 jumps over UNIT A and attached IC1 landing 2" in front of IC1. IC2 is now considered part of UNIT A with attached IC (there is no restrictions on how many IC's are joined to a unit).

 

The result is effectively increasing my assault range by close to 6" (2" from coherency + 1" model base size) x 2. UNIT A will be brought into combat (locked or engaged status) by the enemy response (the enemy has to make combat with as many models as possible) With fleet and a good roll you could get this to extend effective assault range dramatically.

 

It is a dog application of the rules but RAW would allow it. The rules for IC's and joining/rejoining units are not written in detail and pretty much allow anything providing unit coherency is kept/met.

 

If someone intends to apply this tactic it is going to be painfully obvious. Having mixed movements within a unit at deployment is not common and would indicate this intent. Doing it mid game calls for risk (IC's to be solo) as they move from one unit to another and effectively 'drag' a slower unit into range. The other consideration is every IC capable of moving 12" is not able to embark on a transport (SR excepted?) and the slow unit will be somewhat exposed as it has to be foot slogging it

 

Dragging a unit can be done in the following circumstance. UNIT A moves forward intending to assault the enemy however is 7" or so from the target at the end of its movement phase, UNIT B nearby has mobility (appropriate transport, jump packs etc) with an attached IC and moves well within assault range. If this position allows the attached IC in UNIT B to leave UNIT B on dis-embarking/jump and move to within 2" of UNIT A and within 6" of the enemy the IC can effectively 'drag' UNIT A into the combat otherwise beyond its charge range. You dont have to worry if the IC is still within 2" of UNIT B when it joins UNIT A because it can choose which unit it attaches to.

[Dan VK]

IC1 and IC2 cannot be considered a unit because IC's cannot join together to form a unit by themselves even if they are next to each other.

"They can join other independent characters though, to form a powerful multi-character unit!" BRB page 47

[greatcrusade08]

the assumption that Ics can leave and rejoin in the same turn, totally destroys the "move at the slowest speed" rule.

ok so theres no set wording to say they cannot leave and join, but its the most 'common sense' interpretation

[ShinyRhino]

the assumption that Ics can leave and rejoin in the same turn, totally destroys the "move at the slowest speed" rule.

ok so theres no set wording to say they cannot leave and join, but its the most 'common sense' interpretation

 

Exactly. If you begin and end the phase in the same state as you started in, your state never changed for the purposes of movement. It's somewhat similar to the ruling that passengers cannot embark or disembark from a transport that moved or intends to move Flat Out in its movement phase. It's a hard restriction. If you intend to do X, you cannot do Y. The intent of the "slingshot" is to move three units that are joined. The rules for moving joined units is to move at the speed of the slowest model. IC1 and IC2 should then both be moving 6" if they start the turn attached to the unit. So, if you intend to move the unit with attached ICs and end the move as a single unit, you cannot move the ICs more than 6". A move like this requires plenty of forethought, so even a Slippery Pete player can't say "Oh, I never intended to have them all rejoin one another, but it happened so bonus for me!"

 

The whole maneuver smacks of gamesmanship and the intent to run an end-around on the ruleset. It's one of those things you pull if you don't want to have any friends at the end of the day.