Opinions vary.  In fact, the debate came up just recently as an off-topic tangent in this barrage thread.

Some interpret "within" to mean "entirely within" while others interpret it as used in the coherency rules in 1.7.4 where "within" clearly means "edge-to-edge distance is within."  I think the majority of people use the edge-to-edge interpretation but that's just a gut feeling and supported by no hard facts.

If in doubt, it's something to discuss with your opponent in the "5-minute warmup" before playing.

_________________
Neal

I always place the entire base within 5cm, as placing any part of the base beyond 5cm is cheating, IMO.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Cheating is an awfully strong word.

Until it was brought up on the boards, it never occurred to me that it would be read as anything except edge-to-edge.  I never played any person in real life who even questioned edge-to-edge measurement for unloading, let alone objecting to it or considering it cheating.

_________________
Neal

I've always played it "edge-to-edge" as well, as all other measurements between units in the game is done this way: range, formation coherency.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

The wording says 'within' so I put the unit 'within 5cm'. If any part of the unit is not 'within' 5cm, you're, umm, not following what the rules say you should do, IMHO.  

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And that is the nub of the debate, because the rules themselves use different definitions in different parts. As the others say, check with your opponent if you feel this is a problem - either way the point is to have a consistent game with that person; hence the '5 min warmup' to iron out such points.

In practice I find it rare that the battle reduces to millimeters, but then I also tell my opponent what I am trying to do when moving something that could have an important impact on the game, so I would declare the intention to put it "in-range" or "out of range" etc.

Equally, this is another instance where pre-measuring is usefull. for example I always recommend that counter-charging units measure to the nearest enemy; if they are infantry within 20cm or fast vehicles within 25cm, then they are included in the combat irrespective of where the units actually end up.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Except in one very important situation. Deployment. I doubt most people interpret "within 15cm of the table edge" to mean "edge to edge".

It's one of those things that like Neal said earlier, comes across as 'anything but', but on closer examination is actually quite unclear.

Morgan Vening
- Advocate of edge to edge from disembarking, advocate of all within for deployment.

I said "measurements between units", which has nothing to do with deployment.

But that brings up yet another question: How do you measure the "within 15cm of an objective" for garrisons and control/contest?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

My bad. I was only referring to the use of the context of 'within' within the rules.

Looking at some online dictionaries, 'within' seems to cover both interpretations.

It really is a pickle. I still think "completely within" should be used if that's the interpretation intended. Any chance the ERC can get a ruling on this?

Morgan Vening

I think the way I play this has to do with the way 40K works - 2" coherency is edge-to-edge, 2" disembark is exit point-to-edge, 12" deployment is entirely within. Certainly I played 40K for a long time before I discovered Epic, and so it seems I've just applied the 40K conventions to the Epic rules.

In Epic, the only difference between the definition of within for deployment and disembark/coherency/objectives is that deployment requires the formation to be within 15cm, whereas the others talk about a unit. Again, that works either way; one could, potentially, take the extreme "edge-to-edge" viewpoint that a formation is within 15cm of the board edge if just one unit is edge-to-edge, 14.99 cm from the edge. Meaning that a nice big formation could be stretched across the entire board at deployment... Which is obviously incorrect.

It would certainly be good for tournament FAQs to include definitions for the various instances of "within" that occur in the rules, at the very least. As often happens with these things, different people are playing in a way that seems to them to be so obviously correct that to do otherwise is plain wrong, and it wouldn't occur to them to play it otherwise - always a problem when strangers are playing together.

Until it came up here, I wouldn't have thought to bring up this issue in a 5 minute warm up, because edge-to-edge is the only way it occurs to me to play it. Would've been a problem if I'd been playing vs. a fully within-ite (hopefully amicably resolved, but at the very least it would mean a bit of a delay to the first turn or so).

_________________
My Epic Ork Gallery

Sorry for opening this little flame up, and thanks for the answers
To change the topic: does anybody here use Army Builder for Epic?
I found some bases for AB2.2c, but that was rather old ones(at least, Tau one) - so I've already put some efforts to update it. If anybody else needs it, I'd like to know)

_________________
still newbie

I used too but to be honest I just use excel these days as list design isn't particularly complex for epic.

played first game in epic) 1500, tau vs tau
got question: formation of transports(tau devilfishes) comes under fire. 3 fishes destroyed, 6 FW roll for saves. 5 dead, 1 alive
how many blast markers are there? 1 for shots and 3 for dead fishes are obvious. are there 5 more for the dead FWs(as they were not directly killed by shooting)?

_________________
still newbie