No Escape!

Mcprowlington wrote:

colinsherlow wrote:

The odds of the wyches winning the no escape roll is better than 50/50 because your opponent has to beat your roll. I think it is more of a 65-66% chance to keep the enemy in combat.

I used to think this as well but then realized, as stated earlier in the thread, if you tie then you both have to reroll until there is a winner.

For the people running just a squad or two of wyches, what does the rest of your army generally look like?

You don´t have to keep rolling. The player wants to fall back and you two start a roll of:
You beat him: no escape.
He beats you: Escape.
Tie: No escape.

Remember that he has to beat you. You don´t have to beat him.

Not true I'm afraid; the rule book details how to resolve roll-off: ties are rerolled until there is a winner, and there's no indication the No Escape roll-off would be an exception.

CptMetal wrote:

Mcprowlington wrote:

colinsherlow wrote:

The odds of the wyches winning the no escape roll is better than 50/50 because your opponent has to beat your roll. I think it is more of a 65-66% chance to keep the enemy in combat.

I used to think this as well but then realized, as stated earlier in the thread, if you tie then you both have to reroll until there is a winner.

For the people running just a squad or two of wyches, what does the rest of your army generally look like?

You don´t have to keep rolling. The player wants to fall back and you two start a roll of:
You beat him: no escape.
He beats you: Escape.
Tie: No escape.

Remember that he has to beat you. You don´t have to beat him.

I thought the same thing as you but it's wrong per the core rule book pg. 178.

Quote :

In the case of a tie, both players re-roll their d6;

It's really frustrating to have rules state something only for that statement to be amended a sentence or two later. The open topped rule does this crap too.

Ah cool! Thanks for clearing that up. Glad I forgot about no escape the entire tournament! Haha

That is my opinion as well CptMetal.
The no escape is not saying that the wyches have to win the dice roll of. Only that the enemy unit can't escape unless they beat you.

But I don't feel like debating it now. I can see both sides of the argument

FrankyMcShanky wrote:

CptMetal wrote:

Mcprowlington wrote:

colinsherlow wrote:

The odds of the wyches winning the no escape roll is better than 50/50 because your opponent has to beat your roll. I think it is more of a 65-66% chance to keep the enemy in combat.

I used to think this as well but then realized, as stated earlier in the thread, if you tie then you both have to reroll until there is a winner.

For the people running just a squad or two of wyches, what does the rest of your army generally look like?

You don´t have to keep rolling. The player wants to fall back and you two start a roll of:
You beat him: no escape.
He beats you: Escape.
Tie: No escape.

Remember that he has to beat you. You don´t have to beat him.

I thought the same thing as you but it's wrong per the core rule book pg. 178.  

Quote :

In the case of a tie, both players re-roll their d6;

It's really frustrating to have rules state something only for that statement to be amended a sentence or two later.  The open topped rule does this crap too.  

What does the opened top rule do? I mean for weird wording

Cerve wrote:

Bibitybopitybacon wrote:

Mppqlmd wrote:

Seshiru wrote:

For me so far no one has wanted to escape from the wyches, they are so bad in close combat that most things just choose to stay and slaughter them while laughing.

Then you pick your targets wrong. They are meant to be an tarpit unit, attacking weak ennemies and slowly killing them while sticking to them. Things like Crisis Suits (wyches counter them hard), Eldar shooters, Marines Devastators. Of course, if you send them against Assault Marines, they will not try to fall back...
And if you send them against elite units that don't have a lot of attacks (not-assault termies, for example), their 4+ invulnerable gets really silly
As always : chop the shooty, and shoot the choppy !

Wyches are garbage. Pure garbage.They don't get their 4++ against pistols and that makes them worthless as tarpits IMO. Tac Marines murder them.

Yes...because Marines actually want to stay in combat for pistols. They don't care about their full shooting power (plasma? Bolters?) they will stay in combat because of pistols.

Imho I hope they will stay with my wytches :p

If they want to stay in combat or not is entirely pointless. Wyches have an ability to keep them there if they want to or not. If they stay they can just shoot them. Wyches can't tarpit tac marines. And in many metas that makes them worthless.

Why do you so desperately need to tarpit tacs? I've used mine to tarpit dreads and demon princes to great affect. 2 squads allow you to the them, then fall back and shoot everything else at them, then the them with the other unit. Tacs are not high I the list of things I need or even want to tarpit.

Exactly. I love when my wyches face 4 S8 AP-3 D3 attacks of the Daemon Prince. And he kills 1 wych...

Count Adhemar wrote:

Yep, seems pretty clear in the rules that you have to win the roll off, which means re-rolling until there is a winner.

On a related note, anyone else feel that falling back from combat should have involved a Leadership test rather than being automatic? This would also tie in nicely with DE as we have access to several Leadership debuffs.

I would think that, if it weren't for the fact that falling back has some rather huge disadvantages built in, like not being able to shoot or charge (unless you have an overriding ability). So, it would be like making a leadership check to do the 8th edition equivalent of 'going to ground'.

On the other hand, I think that ideally, a leadership check of some kind should be required if you're trying to make infantry fall back, and your opponent *wants* them to stay put, as it should be more difficult to fall back if the enemy is actively trying to keep you occupied.

Of course, I also think that wyche dodge saves should apply to attacks from any unit within 1", regardless of phase. I don't think that shooting a wyche should be any easier than hitting them with your fist, when they're on top of you/grappling with you/running circles around you.

I used wyches a few games ago to surround that fancy new big ultra Marines Big G. They surround him and charged. He could not escape combat as there was no room for him to run. Totally worth it. That stopped him from using that rapid fire heavy bolters thing and moving towards an objective

I'm not sure where people are getting that wyches get vaporized if the unit they are fighting falls back from them, you get a consolidate move after a unit falls back, and I'm pretty sure that means you can consolidate INTO the transport you used to get them there ... As it should have charged the unit with them to absorb overwatch, or if you assualted a gun line you could have charged in such a way the if the unit you assualted falls back you can consolidate into another unit on either side of the unit you charged effectively invalidating two units worth of shooting ... I did this a couple of times in the game I played with wyches (consolidate into another unit) granted I've played a total of 3 eighth edition games and only one has used wyches (the others were kabalites with Incubi and a pure coven list) so my experience is probably not going to tally with very many others.

No, you don't get a consolidate if they fall back...

consolidates happen after you fight with your units in the assault phase afaik

Although, can we consolidate into transports? the rules for embarking say you must end your move within 3. Does that imply movement phase only?

You must consolidate in a way to be nearer to the nearest enemy model. By embarking you are removed from the board, so definitely not.

Barrywise wrote:

Sorry for the slightly n00b question. How does multicharge work in this edition now? You declare that your unit will be multicharging but you need your models to move to the closest enemy model right?

CC is changed beyond recognition in this ed.
@Hellstrom linked this informative and easy to understand instructional video made by MWG Matt http://www.thedarkcity.net/t15906-advanced-close-combat

Basically you can go wherever you want to as long as you end up within 1" of at least one of the units you declared a charge against.

Edit:
Oh! And a draw is not a valid end result of a roll off in WH40K 8th Ed.

aurynn wrote:

You must consolidate in a way to be nearer to the nearest enemy model. By embarking you are removed from the board, so definitely not.

I'm actually not so sure.

Quote :

Embark: If all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport, they can embark within it. Remove the unit from the battlefield and place it to one side – it is now embarked inside the transport.

Quote :

6. Consolidate
You may move each model in the unit up to 3" – this move can be in any direction so long as the model ends the move closer to the nearest enemy model.

So both things require you to end your move in a certain position but Embarkation happens after the move. If you can manage to position your transport so that you can consolidate within 3" of it and also fulfill the requirement to end the move closer to the nearest enemy model then I don't see any reason why you couldn't embark. I would imagine it's quite tricky to do with a whole unit though.

This is really interesting. Since you don't have to consolidate all the distance, if the transport is already within 3" of every model in the unit you could just consolidate one model of 0.01", just to count as a move, then embark. And all models embark, even if only one model consolidates. This is definitly something i would use, thanks for pointing it out.

Mppqlmd wrote:

Seshiru wrote:

For me so far no one has wanted to escape from the wyches, they are so bad in close combat that most things just choose to stay and slaughter them while laughing.

Then you pick your targets wrong. They are meant to be an tarpit unit, attacking weak ennemies and slowly killing them while sticking to them. Things like Crisis Suits (wyches counter them hard), Eldar shooters, Marines Devastators. Of course, if you send them against Assault Marines, they will not try to fall back...
And if you send them against elite units that don't have a lot of attacks (not-assault termies, for example), their 4+ invulnerable gets really silly
As always : chop the shooty, and shoot the choppy !

Please keep in mind that No Escape only works on infantry. Crisis Suits are not infantry

I've used wyches to great success so far. Pure power wise, No Escape is probably best gained with just succubi because wyches as stated aren't super great still but they're not the turd sandwich they used to be and no escape is killer against certain targets (in my only game vs Tau so far wyches in raiders made my opponent rage hard. Eeeevery Cp reroll I used went towards keeping suits tied up.)

Also pile in and consolidate say that you MAY pile in. MAY meaning you don't have to pile in or consolidate. But if you do you must move close to the enemy

Count Adhemar wrote:

On a related note, anyone else feel that falling back from combat should have involved a Leadership test rather than being automatic? This would also tie in nicely with DE as we have access to several Leadership debuffs.

I think falling back should be automatic, but should involve an actual risk (e.g. roll a d6 for each model that fell back - for each roll of 6+ the unit suffers a mortal wound). You could perhaps have modifiers to this (e.g. if the unit falling back is outnumbered at least 2:1 it takes mortal wounds on a 5+), along with some units having abilities that increase the odds.

Just seems more logical that falling back would result in damage, rather than stopping the unit from shooting for some reason.

Too much realism hurts the game as it is based on MANY, VERY unrealistic rules.

aurynn wrote:

Too much realism hurts the game as it is based on MANY, VERY unrealistic rules.

But I'm not proposing 'realism', I'm proposing verisimilitude. The rules do not have to be 'realistic' but they should still make sense within the universe's own internal logic.

To give another example, a unit that forgoes shooting and assaulting and spends its entire turn just running somehow covers considerably less ground than a unit which first stops to shoot and then stops again to fight.

Then there's the idea that a trained soldier can pinpoint a Terminator Captain leading a unit of near-identical looking Terminators (and can target him and only him), yet apparently cannot see a huge Catacomb Command Barge floating just behind a Necron Warrior. Strangely, soldiers do not suffer this affliction when looking at Annhilation Barge (which is the same size as the CCB), and can freely shoot them even when they're mostly concealed by larger vehicles.

I don't ask that rules be "realistic" but I do ask they they at least make sense.

You mean like flyer cannot be in the air above any other models?
Or bikes cannot just stay out of reach of melee units even though they are flying racing machines?
We could go on...
We would need to change all such rules. Not pick a few and change those. Thats why I say, don't bother. Its a game. Its not supposed to be especially believable. Not mentioning that believeability does directly contradict balance.