confirmation of rules - flanking has no advantage

[Jinchoung]

howdy,

so after getting the 40k rulebook, i was interested enough to look at other (older) war games rules and i'm finding that those dealing with older time periods give tremendous bonuses to attacking a unit at its flank or from behind.

but i can't seem to find anything (either confirmation or negation... just absence of mention) about this in 40k... so in that sense, is there no advantage?

the only thing seems to be vehicle armor facing where flank and rear attacks make a difference but there is no such rules for footsoldiers?

thanks.

jin

p.s. GREAT FORUM! finally, a place i can go to regularly where i can ask stupid questions like this!

[BuFFo]

If you are looking for a static modifier as a flank bonus, there are none.

But you can still flank as normal anyway by out maneuvering your opponent.

[N-Bomb]

the main reason that there is no bonus is because with all models having 360, everything skirmishing it would become more complicated finding it as opposed to something like fantasy where everything is in rectangles (mostly). They also wanted to keep the game quick and seemless, thus 1 vehicle penetration/glancing chart, no modifiers when shooting, combat resolution based ONLY on wounds, etc.

[daggitkiller]

Of course being able to assault when flanking is really a HUGE bonus. I've seen it turn many a game at the right time. Jump pack guys and land speeder storms can be brutal no matter which side they come on from.

[TheKingElessar]

the main reason that there is no bonus is because with all models having 360,

This is a common misconception. No model in 40k has a 360* arc.

@OP:
You can, of course, flank units in buildings, or immob'd vehicles.

Also, choosing which models get to fight in CC is huge.

[DevilUknow]

occationally you can also force an enemy unit to retreat into another one your squads (box them in with a transport against a building and cap it off with jump troups or something from behind).

If they can't find a way around (without coming within 1" of your squad) I'm pretty sure this means instant death for the retreating unit.

[Jwolf]

This is a common misconception. No model in 40k has a 360* arc.

@OP:
You can, of course, flank units in buildings, or immob'd vehicles.

Also, choosing which models get to fight in CC is huge.

Infantry, jump infantry, cavalry and beasts have, for all practical purposes (as they can pivot freely in the shooting phase (p.11), 360 arc of sight (this is crossing game terms and comparing 40K to Fantasy), and these models make up the majority of the models used in 40K. Yes, you actually should turn the models to face their targets, but that can be done freely, so I'm not clear what useful distinction you're trying to make. Or would you actually make an issue of players turning infantry models to face their target?

[Xai]

This is a common misconception. No model in 40k has a 360* arc.

@OP:
You can, of course, flank units in buildings, or immob'd vehicles.

Also, choosing which models get to fight in CC is huge.

I'm confused as well. Since an infantry's facing has no negative affect in the game, essentially they do have a 360 arc, because you can freely face them however you want with no penalty.

[Inquisitor Malak]

Outflank has huge advantages, because unlike Deepstrike, Scout or Infiltrate there are no real counters. People talk about blocking off board edges, but it's impossible to block either side entirely (and jump infantry/skimmers etc just fly over you laughing). Infiltrators can be pushed back by clever deployment and counter-Infiltration (I do this with my Kroot all the time, it's officially broken the 1st turn charge Shrike list in my area), Deepstrike can again be countered by screening units/deployment and by DH Mystics/Landspeeder Storms, and Scout by Infiltration screens and deployment.

In terms of general flanking, there are only benefits for the purposes of close-combat against non-vehicles, and shooting vehicles. With the former, you can use 'Defenders React' to drag enemy units off objectives by cleverly positioning the leading edge of your assault unit (I've had this done to me by Assault Marines, Genestealers, Banshees etc it never fails to annoy). The latter situation is due to the different AV facings on a vehicle, with the rear AV always being the weakest. In close-combat with vehicles, it makes no difference where you charge them (non-walkers are always hit on rear armour, walkers use front AV and can hit you back usually).

Refused flank however is a viable 40k strategy, as it screws gun-lines/horde armies by allowing you to concentrate your army on about 1/3rd-1/2 of his force with your entire army. Dark Eldar are the masters of this, with Eldar and Tau the close seconds. IG Air Cavalry can also do it, but they don't need to (they can do a much nastiest version with Outflanking+Astropath).

[StrikerFox]

personally flanking isnt used much in our games, because even on the rare occasion that they do use it, its not really helpful (due to random board choice).

as for in other games, yeah, it actually does realyl make a difference, since i saw my friends fantasy army get routed by a lucky flanking maneuver..

but in 40k sense, i would have to say units that come up from behind them are the most effective.. especially with a ork army and your opponent having to not only worry about the hordes of orks coming straight at him/her.. but the possibility of snikrot running thru your lines from behind.. space wolves scouts are really viable, even a 4 man squad.. its all about making your enemy think about it.. with the randomness of the new flank, i dont see it as being really reliable...

my 2 cents..

[Xas]

I think people are confusing two different terms in this deiscussion:

A) FLANKING; as in moving in to attack (mainly assoult) an enemy army/formation from on of it's sides or the rear. this has no dedicated rules/modifers in 40k. some of the benefits have been mentoned. one more from my personal experience with mechdar is that usually you deny a good portion of the enemy's close ranged (rapid fire) weapons an oportunity to fire while all your guns can be brought to bear.

B) OUTFLANKING; as in the special reserve rule that all the scouts & infiltrators get. some more ideas for you to chew on this, from nids: just using one medium sized brood of flanking stealers is usually enough to "force" an oponent into doubling his cassualties by means of your blast weapons because he has to stay 18,5" from each table edge if he wants to be completely secure. this means he has half the space to deploy his force :)

[N-Bomb]

First off, someone said covering a side of the feild is impoosible, regardless of practicallity, its stil possible, just put a thick line of orcs on the edge to stop outflanking genestealers (if they get that side). Highly impractical, but still possible.

Flanking itself has no affect on the game from a rules perspective (no bonus, extra attacks, anything) but there is situational bonusses, stopping the power klaw from getting into combat the first turn, stopping as many of their models from geting in combat, overall being on the side while maximized firepower is usually directly in front.

Outflanking also is seperate from flanking technically, and once again has advantages to it (and some disadvantages). It can suprise, usually you can get a rear or side armor on a vehicle when shooting, and it can help bolster a side maybe you left weak or something to that extent. It can suck if you need to get one side and get the other, or if the side you come in on is not exactly friendly (opponent controls that side well and won't have to dedicate much firepower to kill what you bring)

[Aldramelech]

Ok, I think this is a little off track now. What the original question is about is tactical flanking (1 unit hitting another in the side) not strategic flanking (units entering the game from a side board edge).

In an historical sense units of men fought in ranks and other deep formations that were very hard to maneuver, so hitting them in the flank always caused confusion and disruption, turning to face the attacking unit was near on impossible and most of the defenders could not bring their weapons to bear, so in most rule sets you get a huge modifier to reflect this. If however you look at skirmishers in historical rule sets you will notice that in most cases they do not suffer from this as they are in a very loose formation and can maneuver to face the enemy. In most cases skirmishers would flee or give ground to formed units rather then get steamrollered over and in some rules skirmishers that do get contacted are automatically removed.

In Sci Fi or modern period games all infantry are effectively skirmishers and so flanking them conferees no real advantage.

[Aldramelech]

I think people are confusing two different terms in this deiscussion:

A) FLANKING; as in moving in to attack (mainly assoult) an enemy army/formation from on of it's sides or the rear. this has no dedicated rules/modifers in 40k. some of the benefits have been mentoned. one more from my personal experience with mechdar is that usually you deny a good portion of the enemy's close ranged (rapid fire) weapons an oportunity to fire while all your guns can be brought to bear.

B) OUTFLANKING; as in the special reserve rule that all the scouts & infiltrators get. some more ideas for you to chew on this, from nids: just using one medium sized brood of flanking stealers is usually enough to "force" an oponent into doubling his cassualties by means of your blast weapons because he has to stay 18,5" from each table edge if he wants to be completely secure. this means he has half the space to deploy his force :)

You type faster then me! lol;)

[thecactusman17]

hard to say if you are talking about "outflank' or attacking from the side.

Yes and no to both.

If you mean attacking from the side, there is an advantage against larger units. After you have assaulted, the enemy has to move everything into a cluster around the invading models. This can potentially draw models into charge range of another unit. And attacking with a more powerful CC unit after getting the charge off with a less impressive one can force your opponent to split his attacks, making each one harder to harm.

Outflank the special rule has some advantages, if used correctly. In addition to being chosen at the start of your deployment, it also allows you to control the flow of your troops onto the board. While many armies can potentially be harmed by this strategy if they get some important units on the board at the wrong moment, others can benefit by waiting a turn or three, then rushing their important units in an attempt to get more kill points or capture objectives. Creed outflanking a Leman Russ squadron on turn two of a kill points match? Yes, please!

[Aldramelech]

I think we're talking about why there is no hard modifier for charging into the flank of a unit.

[Tynskel]

There are modifiers now! Hurray for 6th Edition!

[Dave Mcturk]

the obvious real life benefits of tactical outflanking,, ie suprise, hidden fire points, enfilading enemy troops are impossible to recreate accurately with the 40k rules

however the deployment advantages and occasionally close combat attacks into flanks can sometimes give advantage

the CRAZY rule that troops arriving 'from reserve' can no longer close assault goes a long way towards blocking most outflanking options [considering overwatch would be permitted first in any case]

[JMichael]

I often use flanking (not outflanking, but I love that too) to great advantage in 6th edition.
Since casualties must be removed closest first and often the opponent will put the 'meat-shield' guys in front, then shooting or assaulting from the flank can help you kill those special models that you want (special/heavy weapons, leaders, etc).

When I use my Sisters Seraphim (jump infantry) I carefully think about my maneuvering and placement to ensure I have a better chance of killing the high priortiy models in the unit. Especially if I plan on assaulting them too! My Sisters are rarely defeated in 6th edition.

Of course giving an enemy unit 2 threats coming from different directions is often a big advantage. Especially against vehicle squadrons, as they may have to turn and face one unit while exposing weaker armor to another.

This tactic is absolutely central to my game play in 6th edition and very often turns the tide of the battle in my favor.

[Eberk]

so after getting the 40k rulebook, i was interested enough to look at other (older) war games rules and i'm finding that those dealing with older time periods give tremendous bonuses to attacking a unit at its flank or from behind.

but i can't seem to find anything (either confirmation or negation... just absence of mention) about this in 40k... so in that sense, is there no advantage?
You answered your own question but didn't even realise it :D

In "older time periods" wars were fought in a totally different way. Think about the Greek Hoplites, they had a shield and long pikes that were pointed forward. Their front was their strong point, so when an enemy attacked from the side their entire structure colapsed (and they might even panick). There were also a couple of hundred/thousand hoplites in 1 units/phalanx.

Even during the Napoleontic wars the units of soldiers lost more time making sure they stayed in formation than attacking or shooting ;-)


So you can't compare those battles with skirmish battles where 10 guys walk around and are attacked by 10 other guys.

That's the difference between skirmish battles and pitched battles. There is probably no set of skirmish rules that has bonusses for attacking in the flank or rear of units.

Remember those rules also have bonusses/etc... depending on the 'formation' the unit is in (line/column/square/etc...) You don't find that in 40K either.

[WarlordEXE]

talk about thread necro'ing

[Eberk]

talk about thread necro'ing

Damn, I had no idea. Didn't notice that. :(