6th problems and thoughts

[StrayCatt]

I was considering that example as well ... Though for it to work, at least the SS guy would have to be BTB ... If he failed to make BTB, but was engaged, he would only get the remaining saves ...

 

This opens up the option, IMO, for the use of something like a shield wall when dealing with low INIT weapons ... For instance, 6 man TDA squad, 3 lightning claw, 3 TH/SS ... THs are at INIT 1 ... Lead with the LCs, keeping the THs engaged but not in BTB, or even better, engage-able once thier INIT step hits, and you effectively guarantee they will be usable, even if the LCs die ...

[ShinyRhino]

I was considering that example as well ... Though for it to work, at least the SS guy would have to be BTB ... If he failed to make BTB, but was engaged, he would only get the remaining saves ...

 

This opens up the option, IMO, for the use of something like a shield wall when dealing with low INIT weapons ... For instance, 6 man TDA squad, 3 lightning claw, 3 TH/SS ... THs are at INIT 1 ... Lead with the LCs, keeping the THs engaged but not in BTB, or even better, engage-able once thier INIT step hits, and you effectively guarantee they will be usable, even if the LCs die ...

 

With the Pile In for oth sides at every Initiative Step, that will be tough to do, but perfectly legal should you manage it.

[Seahawk]

Armament no longer matters? Wooo! I thought I caught that but wasn't too sure. Well cheerio then, that's handy. All that matters is saves...

 

...like GKT swords vs others...d'oh...still, not as bad as before I guess.

 

 

StrayCatt's example would probably be pretty easy to do. Conga-line the LC terminators so that the enemy's 3" move only get them into BTB (not too hard). Ah, but I'm thinking on a set number for distance. That random charge distance could spoil one's plans quite nicely. Something for the Tactica to discuss!

[StrayCatt]

I was thinking more of an inverted T formation and accepting charges ... Closest to closet on charge, leaving the wide part of the T 2-4 inches from the combat ... The wide part then envelops on pile in ....

[thade]

I was thinking more of an inverted T formation and accepting charges ... Closest to closet on charge, leaving the wide part of the T 2-4 inches from the combat ... The wide part then envelops on pile in ....

This is a tactics discussion, but briefly: positioning and movement in 6th are huge for reasons like this. Except obvious formations like this to be flanked and broken with shooting and off-center charges.

[Acebaur]

Ok so it took me breaking out some dice to figure this out, but I think I got it. In CC a normal unit with no difference saves and one wound group it doesn't matter whether you batch roll them or not, if you only fail 1 save, only 1 guy dies. So moving on to more complicated units and AP values.

 

I have 5 Initiates(1with a PF) and 2 neophytes in CC. Everyone is in BTB

At the same In they take 2 AP3 weapon wounds and 5 AP -

I believe the attacker decides which wound group to go first because it doesn't say anywhere in the assault part that I do. BUT according to the 2 bullet points because there is more than 1 guy in btb I choose which models to put the wound on.

He wants to start with the AP3 so I kill 1 neophyte, can I then kill an initiate instead of the other neophyte? Even though they have different saves? If so see below.

Then we go with the regular saves. So because I choose which model to start with, I could either batch roll all five for the remaining 4 initiates, or I could start with the neophyte and roll them one at a time until he's dead and then move on to the initiates if there are any remaining wounds.

 

That sound right?

 

Edit: Yes this rule is very poorly worded, though in all honesty, the book as a whole is very well written. I didn't really find anything else that was confusing or vague. They even closed off loopholes where they saw them as I noticed several things that were also in 5th but kind of vague, here they were very clear

[thade]

We'll get there together, Acebaur. We did all through 5th. <3

 

I believe the attacker decides which wound group to go first because it doesn't say anywhere in the assault part that I do.

Pretty sure it does...one of the key differences between Shooting and Assault wound allocation is who chooses which wound group goes first. In Shooting it's the attacker; in Assault it's the defender.

 

BUT according to the 2 bullet points because there is more than 1 guy in btb I choose which models to put the wound on.

He wants to start with the AP3 so I kill 1 neophyte, can I then kill an initiate instead of the other neophyte? Even though they have different saves?

I don't thiiiiink so. Pretty sure that once you've allocated a wound group to an armor save group, that group takes ALL of the saves from that wound group until either 1. the wound group is exhausted or 2. the armor save group is wiped out. If #2, then the remaining wounds from that group go onto another armor save group. (Same player chooses, again, phase dependent.) If #1, if there are more wound groups to allocate, I believe that the same armor save group is still "on deck"...but maybe I'm wrong there. I'm headed home shortly and will dig through the rules with you. <3

 

EDIT: typo

[Venemox]

We'll get there together, Acebaur. We did all through 5th. <3

 

I believe the attacker decides which wound group to go first because it doesn't say anywhere in the assault part that I do.

Pretty sure it does...one of the key differences between Shooting and Assault wound allocation is who chooses which wound group goes first. In Shooting it's the attacker; in Assault it's the defender.

 

BUT according to the 2 bullet points because there is more than 1 guy in btb I choose which models to put the wound on.

He wants to start with the AP3 so I kill 1 neophyte, can I then kill an initiate instead of the other neophyte? Even though they have different saves?

I don't thiiiiink so. Pretty sure that once you've allocated a wound group to an armor save group, that group takes ALL of the saves from that wound group until either 1. the wound group is exhausted or 2. the armor save group is wiped out. If #2, then the remaining wounds from that group go onto another armor save group. (Same player chooses, again, phase dependent.) If #1, if there are more wound groups to allocate, I believe that the same armor save group is still "on deck"...but maybe I'm wrong there. I'm headed home shortly and will dig through the rules with you. <3

 

EDIT: typo

 

Under the 'Allocating Wounds' header on page 25, it talks specifically about Models, not Wound Groups. Unless it was a Precision Strike, the defending player assigns wounds to an eligible model until a) that model is removed as a casualty or ^_^ the wound pool is empty. The Wound Pool is all unsaved wounds after Toughness and before Armor Saves (page 16).

 

In shooting, the shooter decides the orders wounds allocated (Mixed Wounds sidebar, page 15). However, they are done in groups. E.G. If the shooter decides to do bolters before plasma, he must do all wounds in the bolter group before he can begin to assign plasma wounds.

[Cpt_Reaper]

Placing this here to save space...

 

With the assault phase, do units that make a Initiative Pile In lose the ability to attack this turn or do they get to attack as normal? It says that units who start the fight sub-phase not in base2base or within 2 inch of a friendly model in base2base may not attack.

 

edit: strange copy of what I typed O_O

[ShinyRhino]

IIRC, the Fight subphase occurs at every initiative step or something, right after the pile in.

I don't have my book with me at work, so I can't provide a quote.

[Seahawk]

With the assault phase, do units that make a Initiative Pile In lose the ability to attack this turn or do they get to attack as normal? It says that units who start the fight sub-phase not in base2base or within 2 inch of a friendly model in base2base may not attack.

Attack as normal. It doesn't say anything about "at the start"; page 23 has your answer.

[DarkGuard]

OK then, still related here. I'm trying to get my head around how models with different amounts of wounds work with shooting allocation. For example I have a Librarian leading 5 Sternguard, he's at the front. I take 5 bolter wounds. My friends at my LGS say I'd Fast Dice it, rolling 2 saves for the Librarian as he has two wounds, if he were to lose one wound I'd roll one die until he dies.

 

But I'm pretty sure that doesn't work, as Fast Dice is only for different save models, not different wound. My Libby and Sternguard have the same save.

 

Page 15 of the BGB (I am calling it that this edition :sweat:) says to take saves and then remove casualties. So surely in the above situation I roll 5 armour saves. Then if I fail 2 I put the two wounds on the Libby and he dies (we're ignoring Look Out, Sir at the moment). If I failed 3 wounds 2 go on the Libby and then 1 on the guy behind. So it's just a normal process, there's no need for Fast Dice? At least that's how it seems to be.

 

If we then factored in Look Out, Sir, I'd roll my saves, and fail three. I then roll a die for each one on him, relocating wounds on a 2+, until he dies. So then I might batch roll and roll 2 saves, and then the last one if he's still alive. Does that sound right?

 

Just trying to sort this out in my head and checking it's right.

[Jacinda]

Which ever way makes it easiest for you to get through the saves. I'm pretty sure you two spent more time discussing which way to roll than if you had just done one wound at a time. :sweat:

[Jacinda]

2. Problem: Shooting wound allocation is said as both the same and opposite of the assault phase. Shooting you roll saves then allocate. Assault it is wounds, then saves. So which way do we do it?

Going back for this one because I find the difference is odd. Why would they make these different? But here they are, written the same except for the parenthetical phrase for the shooting section "When a Wound (or unsaved Wound) is allocated"

 

And that part trips me up in its own way. When is an unsaved Wound allocated? We allocate wounds and then roll saves; that's how they become unsaved Wounds. Is it ever possible to have an unsaved wound in the pool that needs allocating? It seems like unsaved Wounds were allocated before you roll for saves. Once you roll a save, it is past allocation and past the point of rolling for Look Out, Sir.

 

I guess what I am getting at is that there has to be a reason "(or unsaved Wound)" is in that sentence for the shooting rules only. Even if it is just for fluff reasons I can buy that because they have said they want a more cinematic feel. OK. But why? What makes this more cinematic? I don't think the differences are due to a mistake because if there were no difference they would not have made the point to write it out twice. One sentence in the Assault Phase rules saying "see page 16" would have taken care of that.

 

So it is different for a reason. What reason would that be?

 

Maybe a better question would be, is there ever a way to have an unallocated unsaved wound?

[DarkGuard]

Well for when unsaved wounds are allocated, I believe that that happens in mixed armour save units. With Fast Dice you are effectively allocating wounds onto models and then rolling saves, as opposed to the other way around which seems to be the norm with shooting.

[Jacinda]

Well for when unsaved wounds are allocated, I believe that that happens in mixed armour save units. With Fast Dice you are effectively allocating wounds onto models and then rolling saves, as opposed to the other way around which seems to be the norm with shooting.

Thanks, DarkGuard.

Some of these make so much sense when they finally "pop" that I wounder why I was confused in the first place but ... I seem to be confused often while reading these rules :D

[DarkGuard]

Well for when unsaved wounds are allocated, I believe that that happens in mixed armour save units. With Fast Dice you are effectively allocating wounds onto models and then rolling saves, as opposed to the other way around which seems to be the norm with shooting.

Thanks, DarkGuard.

Some of these make so much sense when they finally "pop" that I wounder why I was confused in the first place but ... I seem to be confused often while reading these rules :)

 

Don't worry about. The rules are so badly written, confusing and contradictory that reading them is a pain. I could well be wrong with what I've said and missed an obscure reference on another page, that's the sort of rulebook this is turning out to be.