Yes

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Pylons can't garrison; necrons only allow two warrior phalanxes to begin the game on overwatch at the tomb complex.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

as to deathstrike silos, a formation of mossinian firestrikes can already begin the game on overwatch, and can for the most part do more damage when doing so

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

+1 Allowing that to garrison would be abusive.

I see no problem in altering the FAQ to prevent the 0cm movement.

I'm not certain on that; it's been a fairly rarely selected unit in the first place, in my view.

It could always pick up a note to say it may not start the game on overwatch, if it proves suddenly overpowered.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Immobile garrisons - All the Baran fortifications are immobile and are set up using the 0cm garrison rules, so I think that's settled by precedent. Immobile and 0cm would be the same in terms of whether they can garrison.

0cm = Immobile - The compromise was based on the idea that a crew could move certain units in extreme circumstances. As I recall, the discussion was based around withdrawal moves and whether it was possible for field artillery to possibly avoid the insta-kill of a lost assault, then moved into whether a desperation objective run was reasonable. At the time, the majority seemed to think it was reasonable.

There's also the issue of transported units. A transported unit can dismount 5cm, even if it has 0cm move. Presumably an aircraft picking up a unit can do so according to the loading rules, which could theoretically put 2 0cm move units 5cm apart, but still mount them. There's an implication that there is at least modest ability to move the equipment around.

Rather than rebooting the FAQ so they are identical, what if we added something like "when in doubt, count it as X" so there is a tiebreaker condition? It could also be clarified that immobile units (or immobilized, if there is some special effect) cannot be transported under any circumstances.

===

Deathstrikes (and variants) on OW - I don't think this is a problem. Since DS changed to Indirect Fire, they must have LoS to fire on OW. If they are deployed in garrison on OW, that happens early in deployment, allowing the opponent to take the DS LoS into account in their own deployment.

I think the current FAQ that Meph posted handles the road movement question clearly enough. The ruling's already there so I don't think we should be changing it:

If it's 0cm it can benefit from road moves.
It it's Immobile it can't.

All that leaves is "Can Immobile units garrison?" Given Neal's reasoning with the Baran fortifications I think we already have our answer: yes. All that's needed is a FAQ to clarify. Something to the effect of "Do Immobile units count as having a move of 0cm for the purposes of garrisoning?" should work.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Or even "Can Immobile units Garrison?"

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.