Wholly seems reasonable to me. I think that's how I've been playing it.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

When measuring movement, I always measure the distance travelled by the leading edge of the unit's base. Consequently, I would expect the unit to be wholly in (though the corners of the base may end up fractionally outside).

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I'd say so long as one model on the stand is within 5cm of the transport model you're good to go.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

This is a 5-minute warmup question.  As you can tell from the responses, everyone reads it differently.

Normally, the guys I play with measure 5cm distance just like you would for formation coherency.  That basically allows you to "stretch" the deployment by the length of the unit.

OTOH, the daemon summoning rules were specifically worded that the model is entirely within 5cm in order to avoid this question and stop the daemons from "stretching."

_________________
Neal

The word "within" is fairly self-sufficient.
"Keep within the dotted line.", mean just that, don't be outside.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

Yes, but a target is "within" range as long as one model on a stand is "within"...  That's the difference between "within" and "fully within"...

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

The problem with that is that "within" has multiple meanings and the sense most common in the rules refers to the distance between units, e.g. within range" or "within firing arc," rather than the sense of "fully interior to."

Just as an example, in the same paragraph that says "within 5cms of the transport" it says you cannot place them "within an enemy unit's zone of control." In that case, "within" clearly doesn't mean completely inside the enemy ZoC but instead means no part of the model closer than 5cm.

_________________
Neal

This came up in a game between Hena and I. I would - without thinking - just place the models so that only one figure on the stand was within 5cm, even after we agreed that we should place them wholly within 5cm.

I think the reason I do it so unconciously is that in 40K, when disembarking from a transport, the troops are placed 'within 2"', which is very clearly defined there as 'any part of the model's base being within 2"'.

Something I was thinking: very often things crop up and it will be noted that this is a "5 minute warmup issue". Well, obviously we forgot or it wouldn't be an issue and it's hard to be objective in-game! While I like the 5-minute warmup in principle (a very good idea for determining what terrain is what, for example), I find that there are many issues with the rules which are skirted by just saying "oh, just discuss it in the 5-min warmup". That list is getting quite long.

So I was thinking, what do people think about having a TacComs "5 min warmup" that's reasonably comprehensive without being overly lengthy? More importantly, it could also contain a "default" answer to each question (e.g. "when disembarking, how much of the base must be within 5cm" Answer: all of it), which is by no means binding, but should an issue crop up that hasn't been discussed, the "default" answer can be used as an impartial tie-breaker, as it were?

That way, rather than hashing out every single aspect of the 5-min warmup, one could say "happy with the TacCom default warmup?", "yeah, except for the disembarking one, I prefer if any part of the base need be within range", "fair enough". Off we go!

Really good idea Lord =I=

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Better to put it in the Handbook.
And as JJ is going to look at it, it's the closest to official we'll ever get (as long as reference to JJ is made as some sort of sanctioningbody).

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

Lord I:  I like that idea.  You're volunteering to head that up, right?  

Erik:  Jervis isn't reviewing anything new.  He's just going over an integrated rulebook with 2008 FAQ and Errata.

_________________
Neal

So it's still Handbook 2008 versus EA Rulebook, 2008 FAQ and Errata then?
(Yes, I find these various variants of Epic Armageddon a bit disturbing.)

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

The EA Rulebook, 2008 FAQ and Errata will become the 2009 Handbook.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

And will be sent to JJ for endorsement? Wasn't that what was said earlier?

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641