Unit crumbling --> Overrun or not?

[VonDookie]

How can you say unbiased when it clearly benefits a player of unstable troops? One in my group (who I don't really care what his opinion is) accused me of seeking an unfair advantage through rules lawyering that would make VC armies 'crazy' powerful.

I don't think it would make VC crazy powerful but we can hardly be unbiased since it WOULD win more games for us.

I meant that I had read the rules with unbiased eyes - from the point of view of my ogre kingdoms playing friend - we removed ourselves from our armies and just looked at the rules as they are written.

I really don't think that this makes VC, or any other army that is unstable completely unbalanced or OP, either... and I don't think that my squares of zombies are going to win me games now either... it just means that there's another layer of strategic thinking in our wargaming.

 

[Yorga]

How can you say unbiased when it clearly benefits a player of unstable troops? One in my group (who I don't really care what his opinion is) accused me of seeking an unfair advantage through rules lawyering that would make VC armies 'crazy' powerful.

I don't think it would make VC crazy powerful but we can hardly be unbiased since it WOULD win more games for us.

I meant that I had read the rules with unbiased eyes - from the point of view of my ogre kingdoms playing friend - we removed ourselves from our armies and just looked at the rules as they are written.

I really don't think that this makes VC, or any other army that is unstable completely unbalanced or OP, either... and I don't think that my squares of zombies are going to win me games now either... it just means that there's another layer of strategic thinking in our wargaming.

Well the guy in our group who accused me of trying to gain an unfair advantage was so unnerved by the possibility, he went to the tournament organizers of the Quake City Rumble in San Francisco that will be held in late June. They draw in around a 140 players for the event annually. At east for that event, people have to play that you can overrun after crumbling. He got them to commit to an advanced ruling.

 

[Johnny-Crass]

I am going start making a list of tournaments with incompetent organizers.....:slapface:

 

[Tawg]

I am going start making a list of tournaments with incompetent organizers.....:slapface:

You mean all the ones run officially by GW?


*Da-dum-tish*


No but really, this game needs more structure than RAW, IMO, so having any ruling is a pretty good orginization standard, I mean really, the game has the golden rule to 'Roll off' when you can't agree.. because it allows for so much chance to disagree? That sounds like a damned soild set of rules you have there!

(BTW, just for reference, I'd like to state that since I have joined these forums, for my over 450 post, I have ONLY used the 'Thematic' emotes, revolving around undead, skulls or such.. But this is so important I will use the generic Eye-roll emote, until I am provided with a vampire rolling his/her eyes lol)

PS: Love ya Jonny, but you can not tell me GW writes rules well with a straight face.

 

[Johnny-Crass]

Their rules are ok. As a local tournament chess player I have to agree that they are not the most clear rules ever written but I will be damned if there is a better Table Top game that has clear rules.

 

[Gokamok]

Seems this topic has been debated on every Warhammer forum on the webz.
One reason that most people believe that overruns are allowed after crumbling, is that the 7th edition rulebook specifically stated that it was allowed, but the part about overrunning after crumble has been removed from the 8th edition BRB.
Basically many of us will tend to play rules "the way we always have" so it might be a matter of people still being in a 7th edition mindset.

In my eyes, there are some potentially game breaking problems such as ethereal units becoming ridiculously good roadblocks since the opponent can't overrun from static CR, congalines of Furies that are almost impossible to wipe out before instability, Skaven slaves get even better than they already are, and probably a million other things.

From what I've read in various debates on this subject, I'm in the camp that believes that RAW says you can't overrun, but I fear that it will give a too big advantage for Demons and potentially VC and Skaven as well.

 

[damian]

This seems suprisingly clear to me; you can only overrun if you kill off all members of the opposing unit in part one of the close combat phase 'fight a round of close combat' casualties inflicted through instability or similar are entirely irrelevant to overruns.

It seems hard for anyone to argue differently given that in bold type at the start of part two is specifically states that the 'round of close combat' has been concluded.....

D

 

[Fodderboy]

The question will burn down to 'When is Unstable applied?

If it is to be taken in lieu of a Break Test, then the WIPEOUT! rule does not apply. Otherwise the argument will be that crumbling happens immediately, and so overrun applies.

If this is ruled by GW that crumbled units cannot be overrun, swarm conga lines are going to be fatal.

 

[Smogg]

The question will burn down to 'When is Unstable applied?

You bring up an interesting point, because many of the arguments for overrun after unstable casualties assume that unstable casualties happens as early as at all possible. But it could be just as fair to assume that it happens in step 3 or 4. No where is this actually specified.

As I see it though, unstable casualties can at the earliest be applied once combat results are calculated. Combat Results are pre-requisite for knowing how many to remove as unstable casualties.
Even by that time you have moved beyond the end of that round of close combat, and into step 2, so overrun is not allowed.

So even if unstable casualties are applied at the earliest stage possible, no overrun is allowed.

However applying unstable casualties at later stages such as break test or in the flee and pursue step would just make it even harder to argue for an allowed overrun after unstable casualties.

 

[johntoraman]

Hi,
This is a RAI description which I deduct from the general sense of the close combat phase of 8th edition WHFB.

(if you find my way of telling 'offending', please accept my sincere apologies. That's just because I am an engineer and this is the way I look at the life)


Unit overruns and here is why:

t is the time. Although I use seconds as unit, it might be 'half of a minute' for the sake of the argument. (1 to 3 seconds may be 30 to 90 seconds)


case 1:
t=1 to 3 seconds.
Knights charge into footmen.
Footmen are obliterated by the fighting skills of the knights.
t=4
Knights continue their way with the impetus, cover more ground.

case 2:
t=1 to 3 seconds.
Knights charge into footmen. Footmen are terribly hit and few of them are left alive.
t=4
Footmen are not broken. They overcome their terror and hold the ground. Knights must stay and keep fighting.

case 3:
t=1 to 3 seconds.
Knights charge into footmen. Footmen are terribly hit and few of them are left alive.
t=4
Footmen break from combat. They begin running for their lives. Knights see the running men. They continue their way with the impetus, cover more ground.
t=5 to 6
Knights come to a point on the battlefield where they've destroyed or missed the fleeing units.

case 4:
t=1 to 3 seconds.
Knights charge into skeletons.
Skeletons are obliterated by the fighting skills of the knights.
t=4
Knights continue their way with the impetus, cover more ground.


case 5:
t=1 to 3 seconds.
Knights charge into skeletons. Skeletons are hit moderately and many of them are unhurt.
t=4
Skeletons' magical bonds are still strong, a few of them falls but they keep on fighting. Knights must stay and fight back.

case 6:
t=1 to 3 seconds.
Knights charge into skeleton. Skeletons are terribly hit and few of them are left.
t=4
Skeletons loose the magical bonds that holds them together. They crumble. Knights see this just at the same time they saw footmen obliterated or them running for their lives.
t=5
Knights let the impetus carry them and cover more ground on battlefield.


Rules-wise, breaking a unit means overpowering it so much that they flee from the combat. And this breaking happens after the damage is done and the receiver unit suffers enough.
This brings us to the fact that unstable creatures take damage / suffer from overpowering. A four rank charging knight unit with a banner and well output of damage overpowers the unstable unit so well that their force / their presence breaks the magical bonds just as they did break the morale.
...and just at the same time. We remove CR casualties after the regular sequence of overrun because that is the most logical time to collect them from the battlefield to avoid confusion. In fact, these casualties are virtually happening just at the same time with the fight or just maybe a second later where enemy units preserve the overrunning motion/impetus/rage.


As a loyal VC player I wish to be proven wrong by FAQ, but the truth sounds more like this to me.


Thanks.

 

[bigbadbat]

I don't know what any of that means, but I'd like to add that it is very frustrating having us (VC players) labeled rules lawyers and such. People can imagine all the scenarios in the world to justify their argument, until a faq/erratic is out "RAW" must be followed. I entertained this same discussion tonight against a very experienced, well mannered opponent. I could see his wheels turning for about 15 seconds after which he replied" That does make perfect sense." Its not cheating and its not lawyering- its the rules that have been provided for us.

 

[Johnny-Crass]

One quick thing.... I am a very proud rules lawyer and if I had a shirt I would wear it to tournaments. It seems slightly stupid that we should be demonized for knowing how to play the game we all love. Just my two cents:devil2:

 

[Fluffytemplar]

First off, +1 to all us rules lawyers out there!

Now, my gaming group plays that crumble does not allow over run, but this is NO WHERE NEAR as powerful as some people seem to think it is! And in the case of attempting to redirect frenzied troops it actually makes things WORSE for us as even frenzied units can just reform instead of running off at some obscure angle.

Every time this comes up I can't believe that it even needs a discussion. I don't want to just repeat what everyone else has already said, but clearly all the models were not wiped out in combat and crumble clearly happens in lieu of a break test. In the case of daemons it basically is a break test with an alternative result.

I don't understand how this even comes up so often when one side of the argument cites very clearly defined rules to the game and the ENTIRE opposing debate consists of "well GW are terrible at writing rules so that's probably not what they meant to say, I think it's supposed to be *insert arbitrary replacement rule*"

I hate the idea of TOs rewriting rules because they think they know what was intended by the game designers.

And what the hell, while I'm at it #%$& ETC comp too! I hate that crap.

And to anyone looking for a fluff reasoning as to why a unit can't over run from crumble that's easy. We don't run away! If we happen to lose 15 out of 20 models during the combat phase what do you think is happening to the other 5? Do they disappear simply because you killed the rest? The opponent has clearly won the combat, but has to take some extra time finishing off the rest of the unit. Knocking the heads off half a dozen zombies at this point is child's play but it still needs to get done.

 

[Chaos_Born]

I agree with Fluffy Templar that rather than magical bonds breaking inside the skeletons/zombies, it's in fact just representative of the fact that, while other armies' troops would be defending from the superior troops or fleeing, ours just press on and get killed by the superior enemy troops.

I don't have much reasoning behind that, just my two cents

 

[Count Lasombra]

RAW I agree with Smog,but RAI I'm glad that tournies are ruling that you can overrun.I think GW made a mistake in the way that the wrote the rules concening the interrelation of CC and instability.I hope the fix it.
IMHO it would screw up the game if unstable units were always perfect tarpits,allowing no extra movement.

 

[Yorga]

It should be noted that this discussion is happening in two threads simultaneously. A bit confusing. As I pointed out in my zombie thread, Warmachines, Daemons, Skaven Slaves and ANY swarm can be used to prevent overrun if you go by the interpretation that crumbling prevents it. Extending the rule to swarms, which you must do if you adopt it at all, allows almost every army in the game to get some benefit. Rats for skaven, lizards for Lizardmen, snotlings for the O&G player...heck, don't woodelves have some sort of swarm?