Tank shocks and terrain.

[Magpie]

 

Since that is settled, can we illustrate some scenarios where tank shock would kill?

 

Just about every scenario, now.

 

There is nearly no possible way to move the entire unit, keep it in coherency, and not move through your own minis...

 

Damn, Tank shock is deadly...

 

My 13 Chimera / 9 Razorback list looks deadly now...

 

There is every possible way, you have to move your models in such a way that they all get out of the way. "shortest distance" includes moving around things.

[Gentlemanloser]

If that's the case, then there's no possible way you can kill anything with a tank shock.

 

As you can all move back down the path the Tank came.

[Magpie]

Yeh probably, unless they'd have to move through the tank to do that, like down a corridor that the tank only just fits down or something like that.

[Gentlemanloser]

Doesn't matter if the Tank ends up on top of them.

 

I suppose if they were in a 'u' shape and the tank filled the open edge, and only covered half the minis in the unit, then the other half are dead (The covered half can move back past the Tank, those not under it couldn't, and one half is out of coherency...).

 

But that's a *very* specific situation that's likely to never happen.

[Raeven]

I did it in a game this weekend.

 

But we weren't working under the policy that the models could move behind the tank to get out of the way.

 

Thus, I feel tank shock should be more deadly than normally treated. Otherwise, why put it in that casualties can occur.

 

I'll draw up some more scenarios tonight.

[Magpie]

Yes , like I said earlier the chances of this happening are slim at best, it's not designed to kill.

[Raeven]

I disagree. It isn't designed to kill easily, but it is certainly designed with the possibility in mind.

[Magpie]

I disagree. It isn't designed to kill easily, but it is certainly designed with the possibility in mind.

 

That isn't the design it is simply a method of resolving a very rare situation that may occur. 

 

It is more likely that a scattering Deep Striking unit would have models destroyed from not being able to be deployed yet we can hardly describe the intent of Deep Strike is to kill models.

[Disruptor_fe404]

I've always played that the unit can move behind the tank. Is this factually wrong, or just a poor assumption based on nondescript rules?

[Magpie]

I've always played that the unit can move behind the tank. Is this factually wrong, or just a poor assumption based on nondescript rules?

 

I think it is a fair enough interpretation. If a shocking tank moves through a unit that doesn't fail it's morale check it just "drives past" so it's fair enough to assume that a unit that it halts on top of that also passes its morale check could move back along the path the vehicle took

[Disruptor_fe404]

That's how I always figured it.

 

Heh, 'shocking tank'...

[Magpie]

That's how I always figured it.

 

Heh, 'shocking tank'...

 

When you think about it which is the best way to flee from a tank? 

 

Run in the same direction or off to a side where it can easily turn to chase you and shoot you with it's MG's ?

 

Or

 

run towards it and behind where is has to turn 180 to chase you, turn it's turret so the weaker rear is facing the enemy and be close to the rear of the tank where the armour is weak and vision restricted. 

[Dam13n]

The way we've all played it down my way is to simply move the whole unit by the shortest distance in order to get it out of the way. This usually involves moving it to one side. (They've dived out of the way, in other words).

 

The way Raeven is describing it, the unit could effectively end up penalised for passing it's leadership test (while if it failed, the whole unit flees and nothing is killed unless the whole unit is completely surrounded, so cannot flee) which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

I admit, I missed the FAQ answer (silly me), but it doesn't change how I'd reslolve a Tank Shock (which is as above).

[Gentlemanloser]

 

The way Raeven is describing it, the unit could effectively end up penalised for passing it's leadership test (while if it failed, the whole unit flees and nothing is killed unless the whole unit is completely surrounded, so cannot flee) which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

Yup.

 

If you fall back, you run away from the tank.

 

If you're brave enough to stand and face it, you get squashed.

 

It's a wierd bit where the 'better' rules get penalised agian, like Fearless 'no retreat' wounds in 5th.

 

I'm still of the opinion that Movement (inlcuding Tank Shock) and Combat as a whole need desperately to be rewritten.  They are too sparse, leave too many gaps and are generally ill thought out.

[Raeven]

The way we've all played it down my way is to simply move the whole unit by the shortest distance in order to get it out of the way. This usually involves moving it to one side. (They've dived out of the way, in other words).

The way Raeven is describing it, the unit could effectively end up penalised for passing it's leadership test (while if it failed, the whole unit flees and nothing is killed unless the whole unit is completely surrounded, so cannot flee) which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I admit, I missed the FAQ answer (silly me), but it doesn't change how I'd reslolve a Tank Shock (which is as above).

And looking at it from that perspective, is enough to convince me that the idea of being that strict is wrong. But, even the rule recognizes that fall back has no bearing on the condition of being under the vehicle. Models being fearless and passing their check just makes it easier for the attacking Tank to exploit the position of the enemy.

So, to revisit the situation with 10 models boxed in.. This is what I think would be the result. As you can see, 5 models would have no room to move out of the way after the first 5 are place. There is no requirement on the order of how models are moved, so I maximized the possible move in both scenarios.

Remember, in the boxed in scenario, if the unit had fallen back, all models would have died because the unit would have been trapped. So being fearless or passing your check actually has the better result.

To revisit my original scenario. This is how I think it would result in light of everyone's argument.

[Gentlemanloser]

I think that looks about right.

 

And in that bottom example, next turn the shocked marine blow up the Rhino and it's occupants can't escape! ;)

[Dam13n]

I'd say that's a decent compromise. It also fits the wording of the RAW pretty well, whilst giving a balanced outcome when compared to effect of the unit fleeing.

 

Well, I'd say that marks a rather unusual event for this forum - a concensus...

 

(Checks the sky to see if it's falling... :P )