[Archive] Sneaky Gitz!

Hashut’s Blessing:

Actually, US-GT for that tournament only. ALL tournament rulings specify that it is the ruling for that tournament alone and is not an ammendment of the rules permanently, nor to be cited as the ruling for another tournament.

But the 6th edition lap-around rule (my 6th ed rulebook is at home), was something like: if they win combat, they may move models (starting from the rear rank) to fill the same frontage as the opposing unit, then around the sides and finally rear.

Something like that, with a limit to how many per turn, I think. It had the advantages of removing rank bonus from the opponent, generating a LOT of extra attacks, getting rear and flank charge bonuses. It’s downside was that you lost your own rank bonus.

I may be wrong on this though.

snowblizz:

Actually, US-GT for that tournament only. ALL tournament rulings specify that it is the ruling for that tournament alone and is not an ammendment of the rules permanently, nor to be cited as the ruling for another tournament.

But the 6th edition lap-around rule (my 6th ed rulebook is at home), was something like: if they win combat, they may move models (starting from the rear rank) to fill the same frontage as the opposing unit, then around the sides and finally rear.

Something like that, with a limit to how many per turn, I think. It had the advantages of removing rank bonus from the opponent, generating a LOT of extra attacks, getting rear and flank charge bonuses. It's downside was that you lost your own rank bonus.

I may be wrong on this though.

Hashut's Blessing
Yes. 2 models to each side each time you won. And you only lost your own rankbonus if your ranks were left incomplete. Large units could still have a rankbonus while lapping. sually the 1 rank you lost was well worth it though to the loss of all enemy ranks and flank bonus.
How long ago was 6th... I had entirely forgotten that it even *was* in the 6th ed rules.

dedwrekka:

Actually, US-GT for that tournament only. ALL tournament rulings specify that it is the ruling for that tournament alone and is not an ammendment of the rules permanently, nor to be cited as the ruling for another tournament.

But the 6th edition lap-around rule (my 6th ed rulebook is at home), was something like: if they win combat, they may move models (starting from the rear rank) to fill the same frontage as the opposing unit, then around the sides and finally rear.

Something like that, with a limit to how many per turn, I think. It had the advantages of removing rank bonus from the opponent, generating a LOT of extra attacks, getting rear and flank charge bonuses. It's downside was that you lost your own rank bonus.

I may be wrong on this though.

Hashut's Blessing
Yes. 2 models to each side each time you won. And you only lost your own rankbonus if your ranks were left incomplete. Large units could still have a rankbonus while lapping. sually the 1 rank you lost was well worth it though to the loss of all enemy ranks and flank bonus.
How long ago was 6th... I had entirely forgotten that it even *was* in the 6th ed rules.


snowblizz
I'd like to say it wasn't that long ago, but I know it was several years ago.

Lapping round has gone the way of the snake formation, sadly. It really was a good and realistic tactic.

Time of Madness:

I disagree, lapping was complicated to organize and hardly used. I disliked the rule.

Time of Madness

wallacer:

Lapping round was realistic, but it was also cumbersome and annoying in practice.

superfella:

i liked it, because it meant that if you won combat and your frontage was wider than your opponents, the models lapping round would then engage the enemy’s flank(s), which would then negate your opponents rank bonus and give you +1 CR (providing you were unit strength 5, which you pretty much always would be).

i think it is a shame that the rule got removed in the new book.

Willmark:

Lapping round was realistic, but it was also cumbersome and annoying in practice.

wallacer
Agreed. But lapping around existed waaaaay before hobgoblins in their current incarnation too.

Time of Madness:

Just a follow up question. For the people that use sneaky gits what unit sizes do you normally use?

Small flanking units of 12 hit fairly hard and are rather cheap. The only problem with takings lots of small units is you limit your other special choices.

Has anyone tried units of 24 or 30?

Time of Madness

Groznit Goregut:

It seems like Sneaky Gitz would be much cooler if they were skirmishing, scouts, and had poison bow attacks, as well.

tetnis:

Agreed, if they had a rule like gutter runners where they could show up anywhere it would be cool as well.

Ubertechie:

Just a follow up question. For the people that use sneaky gits what unit sizes do you normally use?

Small flanking units of 12 hit fairly hard and are rather cheap. The only problem with takings lots of small units is you limit your other special choices.

Has anyone tried units of 24 or 30?
Time of Madness

Time of Madness
I would up the size to 14 (7 * 2) as that gives you the maximum number of models that can engage against a normal 20 mm sized unit and gives you 14 poisoned attacks plus a rank for a cost of 90 points - you could go to 28 with full command and that is still only 210 points for a reasonably hitty unit - although it is prone to take heavy casualties from any shooting / magic missiles

Willmark:

25 full command here not a bad unit for the points. They still need a redo, skirmsh and throwing daggers please.

tetnis:

I guess they aren’t a bad unit per say, but they take a spot that could otherwise be filled by black orcs, bolt throwers and the like. I feel like these other things really edge them out.

BilboBaggins:

Just a follow up question. For the people that use sneaky gits what unit sizes do you normally use?

Small flanking units of 12 hit fairly hard and are rather cheap. The only problem with takings lots of small units is you limit your other special choices.

Has anyone tried units of 24 or 30?
Time of Madness

Time of Madness
I usually take a unit of 30. Use it to hit the flank when the Warriors have been hit (or are hitting) the front. 6 wide 5 deep and if they turn it's 5 wide 6 deep.

Gaz Taylor:

It seems like Sneaky Gitz would be much cooler if they were skirmishing, scouts, and had poison bow attacks, as well.

Groznit Goregut
Agreed. I've been having a good look at the list since deciding to have a go at converting a CD army and I can't see me getting a unit. Why would I pay for a Hobgoblin unit which is more expensive, takes up a special slot and isn't any better than a normal Hobgoblin apart from two poisoned attacks.

Willmark:

If ever there were a call for scouts gits would be it in the army list.

wallacer:

Considering that their entie economy relies on slaving expeditions it’s hard to see why they wouldn’t have scouts.

Swissdictator:

Skirmishing is something I would expect to be a change they’d receive, as well as the ability to scout. Though I suspect scout may be an upgrade. Not sure on that. Poisoned hand to hand, but I don’t see poisoned range… just to keep them separate from Skinks.