I have to say that I'm with tneva82 on this.

It hasn't really been an issue here but then we haven't had anyone trying to manipulate the assault rules like that either. I'd be mad if this happened multiple times in a game with an opponent that repeatedly manipulated the rules like this.

It just doesn't feel right.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

I like this particular feature of the rules. Pinning troops in place to prevent them from reinforcing a threatened sector is basic stuff for planning any attacks. It simulates a RL tactic. If people gain an advantage in the game by using RL tactics, it's a feature, not a bug.

In short, formations can support assaults in Epic by two ways:

1) by providing supporting fire;

2) by pinning defenders in place to prevent countercharges.

I don't like this rule because is silly and also if use premesuring is too easy to do with some armies(marines for example)  , while some other suffer too much from it(ig , ork , lost and damned).

It would be a feature if the pinned units could shoot at the enemy formation that is pinning them in place.

This is a bug because the pinned units can do nothing (not even shoot at the enemy that is pinning them in place). How RL is that...?  

Fix it with a house rule/rule for your tournaments that all counter charge moves are towards the engaging formation.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Looks like the only way to stop the manipulation of this rule.

_________________
www.tneva.net

It would help if you would stop your defeatist attitude, please.

Core roles have already changed in the past. It could happen again expecially with the issue you brought up.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Who organises the tournaments in your area?

Can't you just say to him : "I'm going to bring Tyranids. I don't care if you mark me down as a zero for victory points after each game, I want to bring my Epic Tyranids"?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Doesn't seem likely though since people seems to have no problems with abusing broken rules to make already powerful stunt to be ridiculously good.

And besides even if it was changed doesn't change the fact that tyranids aren't allowed so I won't be playing any tournaments(and therefore any epic games) anyway. So frankly I can't be bothered to fight for the change. a) it likely doesn't happen b) since I won't be playing any more epic games doesn't affect me either way so why waste time fighting for getting it fixed when it doesn't affect me anyway.

_________________
www.tneva.net

I offered to field only 50% of points allowed(ie tournament is played with 3000 pts armies, I'll bring 1500 pts worth of tyranids). No such luck that it would be allowed.

_________________
www.tneva.net

After fighting for a LONG time 1-2 years ago to have this rule changed I was left only one choice to prove my point: abuse it and get irritated players to join my cause to change assault rules.

Sorry that you had to be one of my victims for this little demonstration. Obviously neither asaura or Hena was impressed enough so most probably nothing will happen around here :/

And for real meat, i.e. proposition for the rule change:

"Counter charge is always performed toward the engaging formation."

(instead of closest foe)

- - - and this is why the 2008 errata changed the assault definitions. To prevent the kind of 'token' assault you are describing, the attackers must survive the defender's fire in order for supporting fire to take place.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

The average firepower of some random formation is not great; usually the real damage is caused by attack resolutions and then by those specialized heavy hitting troops.

For example, to fully neutralize that attacking Land Speeder formation and to stall the attack, you need like 30 IG stands in average (10 would hit, half of them would be saved)

Of course that 2008 errate change is great and removes worst cases. But in my opinion there is still work to be done here.

Which isn't that hard since they can limit number of defenders that are in range to begin with and the supporting unit will prevent whole bunch of units from being able to counter charge into range. Precicely problem here.

5 land speeders will have jolly good time of surviving when only 3-4 stands are in range with ~6 more being forced to stand outside of range or move AWAY from token unit that assaulted them.

That rule change didn't fix this.

Of course if you can think way how 3-4 IG stands can take out 5 stands feel free to explain. I'm missing solution to that puzzle however. Pure dice luck won't do it because there are more attackers than there are defenders. And then comes world of hurt from supporting units which can shoot with impunity laughing at troops that are forced to counter charge toward them despite being unable to shoot back.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Actually, depending on how far the "moving away" counter-charge takes the defenders, and note they don't have to move the full distance of 5cm, it might leave only a single attacking Land Speeder in attack range, so all the Guard attacks will be going to that single target giving a high likelihood of "stalling".

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?