Death Company and Rage

[Mezkh]

The congo line is not an attempt to avoid being templated. That is just a thinly veiled excuse for the owning player not wanting to move in the direction he is supposed to. The rule says that units must move toward the nearest enemy unit. It says unit, not 1 model in the unit, or some of the unit, it's the entire unit. What it does not say is that you have to bunch them up. Moving them towards the nearest unit doesn't necessarily mean they will bunch up, unless they are already very close to it, in which case just assault it. DC can take enough different kinds of weapons to deal with any foe.

 

I don't want to hear complaints about how expensive your unit is, because they come with the ability to take as many PW's as you want and have two of the best USR's there is(FNP, FC). Rage is there to be a handicap to a really powerful unit. Don't want your guys running in all the wrong directions? Put them in a vehicle until you need to assault something. To worried they might be templated or that they cost too much? Then don't take them. They aren't a mandatory unit.

 

Of course I don't want to move by models together so they can get templated, or move them so they can't assault valuable targets.

 

Holding the opinion the Death Company player is a jerk for not doing this is ridiculous.

 

Players need to get over the fact that the Rage rule does not force you to assault the unit closest to your Death Company at the start of the turn. If that was intended, it would be so easy for the rulebook author to write the rule that way! They didn't, so there is zero reason for anyone to trot out 'rule intent' 'thinly veiled excuse' 'WAAC' 'cheese' or whatever.

[Chengar Qordath]

It would be nice to think players could agree on some happy medium between requiring Rage units to bunch up in tight squads that scream "Template/Blast me!" and resorting to conga line of cheese. I don't think any reasonable player would object to the entire unit moving towards the closest enemy while maintaining a sane formation.

 

Did you just say Rage units should move in a sane formation....?

 

Either they are Raging, or they are not? :)

 

"Have to agree there, it might be RAW, but it's definitely not RAI or fluff-accurate, and has a bit of a cheesy odor.

 

Of course, this being OR, all that matters is how the rules are written, not how the game designers intended them to work. Taking advantage of a loophole created by GW's inability to write fully thought-out and tested rules is still legal."

 

Is it RAI accurate to have the Rage unit chase after something like a dog trying to bite a rolling wheel, but keep a tactical spacing too?

The bit you quoted about RAI and Fluff was in specific reference to the conga line tactic. I stand by the idea of the conga line being a cheesy exploitation of a loophole in the Rage rules.

 

Maintaining a bit of tactical spacing is easily justified from a fluff perspective. Berserkers getting too close to other berserkers tends to cause problems in the heat of battle, and Rage units are still sane enough to recognize which side they're on and try to avoid killing their own.

 

Hopefully whenever 6th edition comes out the Rage rule will get a substantial overhaul to make it a better-worded rule.

[Dan VK]

We are getting way :P with talk of what is or is not cheesy/beardy/unfair. It is inappropriate, and is, as always, one step away from name calling and the throwing of digital stones. I agree that this rule is a monster, but we should put the torches and pitchforks away before someone loses an eye. :)

 

 

Does anyone have an argument against the general consensus on how distances between units is measured?

[Blitzkrieg861]

Not really... but I know this is going to be a long conversation when I sit down with my buddy to discuss it. From what I gathered on a facebook message he is also of the train of thought that using the congo line is an exploitation of the rules for rage and doesn't seem to sit well. But this is important, and I really should've spoken with him before the game about how we would use the rule, as I cannot safely field the unit at this time without knowing exactly how it is they're going to operate.

 

I really feel there is no debate about whether or not you can congo line them. I don't know why people are making the assumption that all models must move when it specificly says unit and unit is described as a grouping of models. Further more, the book clearly defines when specific models of a unit must all do something. Falling back, says all models must fall back. Shooting, if one person shoots, the whole unit counts as shooting. Assault, if one model makes it in, the whole unit counts as assaulting. And one more for good measure... Pinning, even if you place one model from your unit on it's side and say it's pinned, the whole unit cannot shoot or move now because one model is pinned. I really just don't understand where the counter arguement is even coming from aside from "omg death company are so cheap, nerf bat them" It's a 0-1 unit, I cannot move them exactly where I want them, have to consolidate towards the closest enemy and run them there too. They also cannot score objectives. How many more downsides do they need?

 

Lastly, I also cannot see how people are saying that you have to move all models in the unit towards the closest enemy but that this wouldn't cause a bunch up. To say that they wouldn't bunch up is ignoring the rule you're trying to fight for. If every single model must move as fast as it can towards the closest enemy then they will end up clumped. If not at the first move then the second move. After that, as previously mentioned you look like you just deepstruck all game with your 400+pts unit. I would love if that's how it worked when I was playing against DC but it would take one simple move to draw them into the open and Vindie pie plate them out of existance. Is this a fair downside to a unit regardless of how strong they are? Why would anyone take a rage unit then?

 

Don't hate! (Death Company) Appreciate!

 

EDIT: I also agree, let's keep the words cheap, cheesy, beardy and honorable out of this. You won't be able to define what the words mean in context to this. In my experience, it changes from one person to another and also changes from one day to another. I've gone through this crap over and over when I played Street Fighter competatively. Cheap, cheesy, or whatever word you use, is a method of claiming a fault in a given strategy or tactic without having to figure out how to beat it. It's much easier to say throwing is cheap rather then to learn to tech the throw in a 1/6 of a second you have to do it during a match. It strikes me as carrying a complete lack of ownership for your own abilities and skills. Let's keep it civil gentlemen, I saw the other thread and it was a little sad at the end there.

[Jolemai]

For those who haven't read it, perhaps Morticon's diagrams on this thread will help.

[Mezkh]

Those diagrams are really good.

[Blitzkrieg861]

Yoink! I will use that diagram when I speak with my friend. It sucks that I even have to do this but this ought to visualize it well enough for anyone to see.

[Saiisil]

But if you follow the chain of thought that says each model needs to move towards the closest enemy then you will end up with the DC bunched up together because each model will be moving directly towards the same enemy model.

 

And where did you get that out of what I have said in my posts? no where and I mean no where did I ever say or imply that you move model to model, I have said that you move unit (as a whole) to unit (as a whole) as well as state that the conga line is a legal maneuver that can not be validated or invalidated by the rules with the implication that it can only be done so by a persons purpose for the formation and even then it isn't illegal. Only a WAAC player will insist that you will have to end up bunched up because it is in their advantage and will argue that you move model to model just as they will insist you have to charge the closest unit when in fact there is no compulsion to do so, in fact the only compulsion in the assault phase to to consolidate towards the closest visible enemy.

 

Believe me people have tried that one on me too when I do run my DC, I save them for larger games when I have a better chance to use them as a tactically positioned shock team as opposed to smaller games where I feel it is better to have full control over every unit but I know the ins and outs of rage because of my DC and I know how to make the most of them in the right circumstances. As I have said and as others have said you move the unit in that direction not the models and as I have said the maneuver is legal, it is legal because of loose wording within the rules, I can not say if that was intended or not because I do not know.

[Morollan]

But if you follow the chain of thought that says each model needs to move towards the closest enemy then you will end up with the DC bunched up together because each model will be moving directly towards the same enemy model.

 

And where did you get that out of what I have said in my posts? no where and I mean no where did I ever say or imply that you move model to model, I have said that you move unit (as a whole) to unit (as a whole) as well as state that the conga line is a legal maneuver that can not be validated or invalidated by the rules with the implication that it can only be done so by a persons purpose for the formation and even then it isn't illegal. Only a WAAC player will insist that you will have to end up bunched up because it is in their advantage and will argue that you move model to model just as they will insist you have to charge the closest unit when in fact there is no compulsion to do so, in fact the only compulsion in the assault phase to to consolidate towards the closest visible enemy.

 

Believe me people have tried that one on me too when I do run my DC, I save them for larger games when I have a better chance to use them as a tactically positioned shock team as opposed to smaller games where I feel it is better to have full control over every unit but I know the ins and outs of rage because of my DC and I know how to make the most of them in the right circumstances. As I have said and as others have said you move the unit in that direction not the models and as I have said the maneuver is legal, it is legal because of loose wording within the rules, I can not say if that was intended or not because I do not know.

 

So how do you determine this nebulous unit to unit movement? If it's not closest model to closest model as set out in the rules and it's not individual models then how is it measured?

[Saiisil]

Has the overall distance between units been reduced from that movement? if it has then the unit has moved closer to the other unit. That is how I determine it.

[Morollan]

Has the overall distance between units been reduced from that movement? if it has then the unit has moved closer to the other unit. That is how I determine it.

 

Well, if the closest raging model has moved closer to the closest enemy model then that meets your criteria because that is how you measure the distance between units. What the rest of the raging unit do is then up to them as long as they maintain coherency.

[Saiisil]

Which I haven't argued against, I just stated that I feel the conga line is better reserved for competition and not for friendly for fun games.

[Leonaides]

so how about a 'slightly elongated blob' formation?