PDA

View Full Version : Charges and Multiple Combats



samas990
06-10-2010, 20:35
Heya guys. Had a situation come up the other day and I'm not sure I played it right.

I had 2 units of Skavenslaves charge some of my friend's skinks and the combat was a draw. The next turn he charged two huge Saurus units into the combat and could easily have contacted a stormvermin block.

With a little shifting, we noticed that the stormvermin could be avoided and maximum B2B of the models on each side in the overall combat could be maintained. Below is an illustration of how the charge was resolved. Did we do this right? If not, then how would it be done?

Thanks guys! Sorry for the noob question.

Synnister
06-10-2010, 22:39
looks good to me. Just as long as you didn't slide the 'Saurus Warriors 2' unit and performed a wheel prior to move then closed the door.

Yrrdead
06-10-2010, 23:03
Where does it allow you to "slide" the skinks out of the way so that both saurus units can get into combat?

Saurus unit 1 wouldn't be able to combo charge with unit 2. They can't fit. So you should have only charged with SU2 into the flank.

Maybe I'm missing something Synn. Help me out here.

stripsteak
06-10-2010, 23:13
I'm with Yrrdead on this, at least partially, i don't know of anything that would allow the skinks to slide over like that.

although i do think he could still charge with both units, the saurus 2 would just have to declare a charge against both the slaves and the storm vermin.

RanaldLoec
06-10-2010, 23:22
If the skinks had only been in contact with one unit he could try a combat reform after the initial charge to move the skinks to the left. As long he maintains the same number of models in contact.

The faq removed the requirement to maintain the center point of the unit.

But as the skinks contact two units he can't move any models to let the saurus charge without reducing the number of skinks in contact with the 2nd unit that the saurus flank.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yrrdead
06-10-2010, 23:28
@strip

So SU2 would be at a kind of wonky clipping angle with the skinks and the stormvermin would close the door (as much as they can)?

SiNNiX
06-10-2010, 23:34
If the combat reform didn't reduce the amount of skinks in in B2B contact, it's legal. If it decreased the amount of models in B2B by even 1, it's not legal.

Chris_
07-10-2010, 00:25
If he didn't perform a combat reform to get the skinks out of their original position then it doesn't work. (combat reform can only be done at the end of the CC phase)

A multiple charge with the second saurus unit would however be possible.

In 8th there is no more sliding to maximize contact. You have to maximize b2b contact with the whole move, including "closing the door".

Synnister
07-10-2010, 01:10
Oh right didn't see the shift of the skinks on the second picture was just looking at the 2nd unit of saurus'. Pretty sure you can't combat reform to get the skinks out of contact with the second unit of skaven

SiNNiX
07-10-2010, 02:05
Oh right didn't see the shift of the skinks on the second picture was just looking at the 2nd unit of saurus'. Pretty sure you can't combat reform to get the skinks out of contact with the second unit of skaven

As long as you don't reduce the amount of models that are engaged in close combat.

Synnister
07-10-2010, 02:53
well doesn't combat reforming out of contact with a unit reduce the number of models in that close combat on the skaven side?

stripsteak
07-10-2010, 03:40
can't use a combat reform to do it. 'it cannot be used to get a model (friend or foe) out of base contact with the enemy if it was in contact before the reform'

*edit*
also the faq added that you can't use the reform to change the facing you are in contact with...so you could probably say going from in the front facing to not in a facing at all is enough of a change to violate that as well.

mishari26
07-10-2010, 05:01
The 2 saurus warriors units don't have room to fit. As the Skinks are not allowed to be moved during the time of the LM charge.

Also, the reason Saurus Warriors 2 unit can't charge is because it will end up touching both the slaves, as well as the vermin, and the vermin are allowed to "close the door on the saurus2, but in this case it will not resolve the issue, because the saurus2 will still not be able to close the door on the slaves. because the slaves are not allowed to move at all. and can not close the door on the saurus2.

So if the LM player already declared saurus1 and saurus2 charging, he has to choose which one to move first. and it will likely reach and engage no problem. but the 2nd will fail. as there's not enough room.

SiNNiX
07-10-2010, 05:44
Has anyone even had the thought yet that this guy's illustrations were very impressive for quick examples? I'm impressed.

samas990
07-10-2010, 11:31
Has anyone even had the thought yet that this guy's illustrations were very impressive for quick examples? I'm impressed.

Thanks! My Photoshop-fu is speedy and I figured pics were way easier than trying to type it out. That way everyone has a nice clear example to debate over, regardless of the question's merit :-P

Thanks for the answers, guys. Alot to think about. Another hang-up that I had with this scenario (which I should have clarified in the original question) was concerning additional units joining an already exisitng multiple combat. In example one above, both slaves are engaged with the Skinks. That's one combat, right? It has multiple units in that combat, but it's still just one big fight. So units that attack one of the skaveslave units immediately enter that multiple combat. They can't just engage the slaves outside of the combat they are already in and all units on one side are still suceptible to the rules for combat res/break tests and the like. The Saurus are now part of a multiple unit melee.

So do I maximize models in B2B contact with enemy models on the other side of the combat (i.e. the entire scope of the combat) or must I simply maximize model contact just with the unit that the Saurus's touched; the single skavenslave block in this example, leaving the other skavenslave block relatively untouched. Is there any ruling that would let me count the Lizardmen side as one giant front in a multiple combat for the purposes of B2B model coverage ( i.e. take the combined frontage of the skinks and Saurus as my target goal for maximum B2B model contact instead of the individual unit frontage)?

...Or am i an idiot and this is clearly spelled out in the BRB. <facepalm if it is. No book in front of me @ work this morning, disregard question if it is>.

theorox
07-10-2010, 11:37
Saurus Warriors 2 failed the charge i guess? :confused:

Theo

theorox
07-10-2010, 11:38
@strip

So SU2 would be at a kind of wonky clipping angle with the skinks and the stormvermin would close the door (as much as they can)?

Or that, that makes sense! :D

Theo

a18no
07-10-2010, 12:36
Do you guys think that the stornmvermin could have move back?

Like saurus warrior #1 charge, they are a little out on the right of the slave#2.
Then saurus warrior #2 charges both the slaves and the stormvermin, ad the storm moved back to let saurus #2 charge the flank of slaves #2 and the front of the stormvermin...

But moving back is a little weird... can they?

mishari26
07-10-2010, 14:24
Do you guys think that the stornmvermin could have move back?

Like saurus warrior #1 charge, they are a little out on the right of the slave#2.
Then saurus warrior #2 charges both the slaves and the stormvermin, ad the storm moved back to let saurus #2 charge the flank of slaves #2 and the front of the stormvermin...

But moving back is a little weird... can they?

p.22 under "Unusual Situations" they only make an exception and allow the charged unit (vermin in this case) to "close the door" on the charger, and only because the charger could not.

however in this example the vermin would have to move completely off their position and back. which is in no way an instance of "closing the door".

"Closing the Door" as defined under "Aligning to the Enemy" is no more than a "bonus wheel".

If however the Slaves were not engaged. and the Saurus2 would end up cliping both the flank of the slaves and the front of the vermin, then Yes both units will use the p.22 stuff and they will close the door on the Saurus2. and the Saurus2 will end up charging both simultaneously. And this is only allowed if Saurus2 are not able to avoid the vermin.

SiNNiX
07-10-2010, 14:31
So do I maximize models in B2B contact with enemy models on the other side of the combat (i.e. the entire scope of the combat) or must I simply maximize model contact just with the unit that the Saurus's touched; the single skavenslave block in this example, leaving the other skavenslave block relatively untouched. Is there any ruling that would let me count the Lizardmen side as one giant front in a multiple combat for the purposes of B2B model coverage ( i.e. take the combined frontage of the skinks and Saurus as my target goal for maximum B2B model contact instead of the individual unit frontage)?

It's all one combat and you must always maximize the amount of models in B2B throughout the entire combat, on all fronts.

samas990
07-10-2010, 15:18
It's all one combat and you must always maximize the amount of models in B2B throughout the entire combat, on all fronts.

Well that is interesting. So, would that therefore mean I would be forced to shift the Skinks as per illustration 2 in order to conform with RAW? Otherwise I am clearly not maximizing B2B contact across all fronts in a combat while simultaneously avoiding a charge against more than one unit.

I suppose I am assuming that the two rule imperatives are to avoid charging more than one unit if possible and maximize B2B model contact across all units and fronts in the combat (which I realize is not a quote from the rulebook but just my assumption here... as mentioned, don't have it w/me). In the example I gave to start, all units are still being attacked by an equal number of models, still maximizing model B2B contact across all units and fronts of the combat, no model has disengaged from combat, and the stormvermin have been avoided. At a glance, it seems that all RAW have been covered, but I'm sure that there are some RAW that I am missing in my analysis of this scenario. I'll have to double check my BRB when I get home. :-/

SiNNiX
08-10-2010, 00:39
There are two things you need to keep in mind before making combat reforms and when planning out how following rounds of combat will be played out.

1. You can never take a model out of B2B contact with an enemy model in combat. You may reposition him to where he's in B2B with a different enemy unit, but not to where he's not in B2B contact with any enemy unit.

2. You don't have to have the maximum amount of models engaged in combat every single round, just when charging.

Lord Inquisitor
08-10-2010, 00:49
p.22 under "Unusual Situations" they only make an exception and allow the charged unit (vermin in this case) to "close the door" on the charger, and only because the charger could not.

however in this example the vermin would have to move completely off their position and back. which is in no way an instance of "closing the door".

"Closing the Door" as defined under "Aligning to the Enemy" is no more than a "bonus wheel".

If however the Slaves were not engaged. and the Saurus2 would end up cliping both the flank of the slaves and the front of the vermin, then Yes both units will use the p.22 stuff and they will close the door on the Saurus2. and the Saurus2 will end up charging both simultaneously. And this is only allowed if Saurus2 are not able to avoid the vermin.

This. I was thinking the same thing, surely the unengaged enemy unit just gets drawn into the combat but the rules don't allow a shifting of position and it's not ... quite a closing-the-door scenario. If the vermin were just a little further back then this might have been legal.

That said, it seems a bit silly so I would say if both players agree the most sensible resolution is that the vermin simply get pushed back and drawn into combat.

mishari26
08-10-2010, 06:27
Also important to make clear is:

The charger picks a single unit to charge. not the whole multi-combat. so he has to maximize only with the target he picks for charging.

Also, the charger must avoid hitting units other than the picked target for the charge as best he can. (p.18)

charging more than 1 unit is only allowed if it can't be avoided.

Munin
08-10-2010, 08:22
Is it really so that you have to maximize b2b contact all over the battle? Isn't enough that the unit charging is getting max b2b contact? What I'm trying to ask is if (see pic) the Eagle has to position itself against no 3 & 4 because no 1 is already in combat or if it can choose 2&3 instead to give the chaos player one less model to attack with?

mishari26
08-10-2010, 09:41
Is it really so that you have to maximize b2b contact all over the battle? Isn't enough that the unit charging is getting max b2b contact? What I'm trying to ask is if (see pic) the Eagle has to position itself against no 3 & 4 because no 1 is already in combat or if it can choose 2&3 instead to give the chaos player one less model to attack with?

if you choose 3,4, you get more Chaos Warriors in combat (#5), so that's how you must do it.

mishari26
08-10-2010, 09:44
That said, it seems a bit silly so I would say if both players agree the most sensible resolution is that the vermin simply get pushed back and drawn into combat.

actually it's not that silly, it can be a valid tactic to shield the slaves' flank.

if you position the vermin in a way where the charger can't complete his charge on the slaves' flank. then you force him to abandon that charge and charge the vermin instead.

Munin
08-10-2010, 10:49
if you choose 3,4, you get more Chaos Warriors in combat (#5), so that's how you must do it.

Do I really? When I looked up charging rule I didnt check the multiple unit combat section but only the normal charge section. However it said that I need to maximize b2b contact which is not the same as max models in combat (in 1vs1 it is the same). I dont have the book here to check the multiple unit combat section so I dont know if it says otherwise there? But if nothing is mentioned then I would assume 2&3 would be ok.

mishari26
08-10-2010, 11:35
well, you made me check it again, so here it is on p.20:

"..but remember that you must bring as many models into base contact with the enemy as possible, from both sides!" (highlight is mine, exclamation mark is GW's :) )

Chris_
08-10-2010, 11:45
well, you made me check it again, so here it is on p.20:

"..but remember that you must bring as many models into base contact with the enemy as possible, from both sides!" (highlight is mine, exclamation mark is GW's :) )But the problem is, does that refer to only the charging unit and its target/s or all units engaged in the combat?

mishari26
08-10-2010, 13:12
It doesn't matter much either way.. here's why.

You the charger have to pick a target for your charge. also, you have to avoid touching any other enemy units if you can. If you can't, then you can touch them and you're considered as "charging multiple units".

So whether you're charging 1 unit, or multiple, you have to maximize the possible models who can get in combat.

in the example you gave, if you bring your eagle on warriors 2 and 3, then 3 warriors will become newly b2b. (2,3 and 4).

if you however bring him on warriors 3 and 4. then 4 warriors will become b2b. (2,3,4,5).

it's only fair to your opponent to give him the best possible chance to kill your chicken :) that's the intention of the rule I think.

Maybe I'm missing the idea in your head Chris, please explain to me how you can alternatively charge the eagle and satisfy the p.20 rule without engaging warrior #5. so I can understand your point. thanks.

Munin
08-10-2010, 13:18
Mishari: My point in charging 2&3 is that it will then be b2b with 1,2,3 & 4 (it will be b2b with no 1 even tho no 1 is b2b with the WL) which is the same number as if charging 3&4 hence maximizing the number of b2b on both sides. What me and Chris means is that if you only have to consider the charger and its target or if there is some multi unit combat rule that specify that all units must be taken into consideration. If it is the former then charging 2&3 would be ok, if it is the later 3&4 must be charged.

Chris_
08-10-2010, 13:22
What I meant is that if you put it at 2,3 it is in b2b with 4 enemy models, which is just as many as if you put it at 3,4... That is why I asked if one should also count in the models and account for the friendly unit and enemy unit already in combat (that had to maximize its b2b contacts the turn before when it charged).

The rules clearly state what happens if there is a multiple charge (i.e. you charge with both units the same turn) but what I wasn't so sure about (and what I think the guy asking the question originally was after) is that if I need to take in to account and count all the models in the combat or just the ones who become b2b with the charging unit.

Edit: Ninja'd

PurpleSun
08-10-2010, 13:34
In Star Trek: The Next Generation, when things got really sticky, the U.S.S. Enterprise could split apart into two separate ships that could operate independently.

SU2 should do that, take half the unit into the slaves flank and half into the front of the storm vermin.:D

mishari26
08-10-2010, 15:13
ok I understand what you're getting at better this time..

well the rule on p.20 says "..must bring as many models into base contact with the enemy as possible, from both sides!"

So the term "the enemy" is general. it doesn't specify only the "charged enemy". and from the p.o.v. of the Chaos Warriors, they are engaged with 2 "enemies". so I guess we should take it as any enemy model in any unit in the fight, in this case the eagle and the WhiteLion on the right.

so if take it from the side of the Chaos, and you bring the eagle onto 2&3, you have only 4 chaos warriors in b2b with "the enemy" (enemy being any hostile model in the combat I'm interpreting)

if you bring the eagle onto 3&4, then you'll have 5 chaos warriors in b2b with "the enemy".

Then it becomes clear which you must do.

decker_cky
08-10-2010, 16:33
If the skinks had only been in contact with one unit he could try a combat reform after the initial charge to move the skinks to the left. As long he maintains the same number of models in contact.

Center point of the skinks has to remain the same in any reform (including combat reforms). Combat reforms are actually a lot less flexible than a lot of people use.

Lord Inquisitor
08-10-2010, 16:43
Not true Decker, they errata'd that to say the centerpoint rule doesn't apply to combat reforms.

Munin
09-10-2010, 08:53
mishari26

I think that you have explained this well enough. 3&4 it is. Thanx.

SiNNiX
09-10-2010, 15:25
mishari26

I think that you have explained this well enough. 3&4 it is. Thanx.

Yep. To put it in straight forward terms: When charging, you must position your unit to maximize the amount of charging models in combat with enemy models.

DeathlessDraich
09-10-2010, 17:09
Is it really so that you have to maximize b2b contact all over the battle? Isn't enough that the unit charging is getting max b2b contact? What I'm trying to ask is if (see pic) the Eagle has to position itself against no 3 & 4 because no 1 is already in combat or if it can choose 2&3 instead to give the chaos player one less model to attack with?

If I interpreted your diagram correctly, both options are valid choices and therefore you can effectively reduce the Total number of attacks. However this is only true for a 1 to 1 charge (although some players will dispute this).


you have to maximize the possible models who can get in combat.
Maybe I'm missing the idea in your head Chris, please explain to me how you can alternatively charge the eagle and satisfy the p.20 rule without engaging warrior #5. so I can understand your point. thanks.

You've inadvertently misquoted the rule on pg 20 but it may be possible that you've either mixed up 2 sets of rules or incorporated them in a way which some players find acceptable.

Lord Inquisitor
10-10-2010, 21:45
actually it's not that silly, it can be a valid tactic to shield the slaves' flank.

if you position the vermin in a way where the charger can't complete his charge on the slaves' flank. then you force him to abandon that charge and charge the vermin instead.

Hmm. Maybe, but in this particular scenario the flank of the other unit was a perfectly valid charge in a vacuum, it's just that the vagaries of the multiple charge blocked it, not really the vermin themselves. If the vermin actually were in any way in between the slaves and the charger that'd seem like a tactic, as it is, it just feels awkward.

karse88
23-03-2012, 09:23
What happens when you have a lot of units in CC and the enemy goes out of CC with some of them because he dies?
136071
After the charge

a rank dies and the unit of SW goes out of CC with the FH..

136072
Does he move to his back, does he gets another charge ?

T10
23-03-2012, 10:00
The Flesh Hounds will have the opportunity to declare a charge in their next movement phase.

Also, this thread is about 15 months old.

-T10

karse88
23-03-2012, 10:01
awesome! thanks :)

Tarsus
24-03-2012, 10:54
ok I understand what you're getting at better this time..

well the rule on p.20 says "..must bring as many models into base contact with the enemy as possible, from both sides!"

So the term "the enemy" is general. it doesn't specify only the "charged enemy". and from the p.o.v. of the Chaos Warriors, they are engaged with 2 "enemies". so I guess we should take it as any enemy model in any unit in the fight, in this case the eagle and the WhiteLion on the right.

so if take it from the side of the Chaos, and you bring the eagle onto 2&3, you have only 4 chaos warriors in b2b with "the enemy" (enemy being any hostile model in the combat I'm interpreting)

if you bring the eagle onto 3&4, then you'll have 5 chaos warriors in b2b with "the enemy".

Then it becomes clear which you must do.

I disagree with this, you are mistaking the meaning of base contact and in combat, just because model 1 is already in combat he isnt in base contact with the eagle, if the eagle were to charge 2 and 3 he would be entering combat with 4 models, which is the maximum as stated in the rule book, so long as the eagle contacts 4 models it doesnt matter whether one or more of those was already in combat. So the eagle charges and enters combat with the maximum amount of "The enemy", the chaos player doesnt then have the right to make the eagle move as they are also already at this point in contact with the maximum amount of models, in this case 1.

karse88
11-04-2012, 11:14
so the eagle NEEDS to charge 2 and 3 to get most possible units (1,2,3 and 4) in its base contact?!.. thats seems... weird... you ALWAYS need to do this?... and if he wanted, could he then move the eagle to the back? = charge 3 and 4 (2,3,4 and 5)???