One of the big things to come out of the Masters weekend was the concept of "Intent" in relation to gameplay. This is mostly with regard to model placement.
Intent is not a Get Out of Jail Free card. Intent NEEDS to be agreed by BOTH players.
If it is important then it needs to be clearly spelled out and agreed.
In some cases at the Masters I think that there were instances where people didn't want to signal their plan and then fell back on intent....and other cases where suddenly something became evident and then it was "But my intent....."
We all do this at times but with increasing competitive games I believe people need to be aware and precise re intent. It is also an easy excuse when things don't go your way.
The other situation is that what you "intend" has to be actually do-able. For instance, if you want to put three Aggressors in an enclosed ruin and not be charged by units that can't enter the feature then you need to place your models >1" from all inside walls. Mathematics says that the internal footprint of the building needs to be at least 91mm x 171mm to make you immune from a charge from any direction. You will still however be vulnerable to Infantry on 25mm bases.
The key takeaway should be that if it's important, be explicit and to get agreement. Should your opponent be suggesting something you don't think is achievable, get them to place the models
