PDA

View Full Version : Charging - some ambigious things?

SteelTitan
17-04-2011, 20:03
Hey guys,

After about 10 games of 8th and reading the book twice, I decided to again read the book to make sure I got it right and assure I don't have to look in the book every ten or so minutes during the battle.

I want to post questions as I go through the book and today I read the section on movement and charging in particular. Here is what I came across:

p13. under "one inch apart": 'Occasionally, a unit will have approached to within 1" of a unit it did not charge as the result of moving into contact with a unit it did charge. This is perfectly acceptable.'

p18. under "charging more than one unit": 'If there is no way at all of completing the charge against an enemy unit without touching another then the charging unit must also declare a charge against the other unit'

p20. under "unexpected problems" (left sidebar in italics): 'Sometimes you'll declare a charge thinking that it can be completed, but then discover that the proximity of other units (amongst other things)...prevents the charge from being completed...I find it best to treat the charge as failed...'

p22. under "unusual situations": 'If no amount of finangling can allow the unit to avoid the obstacle, the charge fails. There is one important principle you should always keep in mind when charging: under no circumstance can a unit use its charge move to move into contact with an enemy it has not declared a charge against'.

It's kinda hard to formulate my exact question based on the above abstracts but reading through these creates a sense of ambiguity.

The last abstract says you cannot move into contact with an enemy unless charging but the first one says it's possible to move within 1" (of course in contact aka in combat is not the same as within 1" but ok...).

Then you're not allowed to contact an enemy without charging (ok, duh) but your charge fails when you cannot avoid an obstacle (incl units) when doing so.

Does this mean you will have to charge that second unit if you already see that you cant avoid it? What if you don't realise at the time you declare?

Last battle something like this came up:

http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/1791/unledmj.png

The red unit wanted to charge the blue unit on the right but the Watchtower (grey) was in the way (impassable). It did not however wanted to charge the blue unit on the left. How should we have resolved this?

I think it was a case of "No amount of fiddling could avoid the obstacle (that being both the unit on the left and the watchower) thus a failed charge" but because it was a friendly game we decided he could just charge the intended target.

Was this one of those 'you have to charge both or neither' situations?

Pff quite some text. I hope I were able to make my sense of ambuity clear...

Probably more to come :)

GodlessM
17-04-2011, 20:09
These rules overlap in contradictory ways because the situations they describe are not all the same. The last one for instance would mainly refer to declaring a charge, the enemy fleeing, and you running toward a fresh enemy; unless you redirect you have to stop within 1" of this new enemy as you did not declare a charge against them. Point two also makes it clear that it is a rule to used as a last resort. Rule 1 also applies to friendly units.

As for your situation, looks like you could not charge the larger unit and so if you tried you would fail the charge. There's no issues charging the smaller blue unit however.

T10
17-04-2011, 20:50
Yeah.

It seems you want to charge the larger unit, which would be pretty straight-forward if not for the smaller unit: you'd just need to move up to the corner of the watch tower and wheel past.

If the smaller unit is in the way for that wheel then you can't charge the larger unit.

You can charge the smaller unit, but not in such a way that you can engage both of them with the same charge.

-T10

SteelTitan
18-04-2011, 07:29
Thanks guys!

I can see how my abstracts describe different situations and that the ambiguity comes from me applying them all to a charging situation.

1) Am I right to conclude that based on the rules, sometimes there is no straight answer as to what the 'best/most right' way of resolving a charge is?

2) My situation + diagram: If he were to charge my blue smaller unit, there is a possibility (because of the width of the red unit and the angle of the smaller blue unit) he would clip the larger blue unit. Would you then just move the larger blue unit back so that there is a 1" between them if he only declared a charge against the smaller blue unit? Or could he also charge both if he realises he will clip the larger one when charging the smaller one?

I dont have the book with me right now but in that paragraph it says that if you charge a fleeing unit and you catch them, they are destroyed (straightforward). It then says, that the charging unit is allowed a reform.

3) This reform only applies when you charge an ALREADY fleeing unit right? Not when you charge and they flee as a charge reaction and then catch them.

Thanks!

18-04-2011, 08:55

2) No he can charge the smaller unit on its own. If anything, YOU would wheel towards him for the purpose of maximization. In effect your attempt to finagle facing in this case(which is smart) would fail , of course that is based on a rough diagram but hopefully you get what I'm saying.

3) AFAIK - There is no distinction between catching a fleeing unit that was previously fleeing and a fleeing unit that wasn't previously fleeing. That rule only cares that you caught a fleeing unit with a charge move.

theunwantedbeing
18-04-2011, 13:54
Pretty sure that to hit the larger unit, you need to declare a charge against both the smaller unit and the larger one.

SteelTitan
18-04-2011, 17:28
@ Yrrdead: Why would I (blue left unit) have to close the door? As I said, if the red unit closes the door, he will probably clip the big blue unit on the right, which isn't allowed as he didn't charge that unit specifically. If he still wants to go throw with his charge, wouldn't you apply this rule:

p18. under "charging more than one unit": 'If there is no way at all of completing the charge against an enemy unit without touching another then the charging unit must also declare a charge against the other unit'

Also, it feels like a 'punishment' for me having to close the door if I strategically placed my units in such a way as to create a dilemma for my opponent (not charge at all or both).

@ Destroying Fleeing Enemy: So you're saying that if I charge a unit, that unit flees but I still manage to catch (and thus destroy) it, I get a free reform? That is huge!

@ Theunwantedbeing: Yeah, but it seems that you would always contact the left unit first, i.e. you cannot contact the unit on the right without touching the left one first. I don't know if that matters.

theunwantedbeing
18-04-2011, 17:38
You declare the charge on the unit you cannot quite reach, and then are forced to charge the other unit as well.
Page 18 of the rulebook

H33D
18-04-2011, 18:26
from your example I believe the red unit would advance most of the way straight forward and then wheel away from the building until its corner touches the charged unit. you would then wheel as much as possible to come within 1" of the other unit and then the charged unit would have to close the door the rest of the way. the problem is, the charged unit cannot wheel unless you are contacting the corner it is wheeling along (because it would be basically shoving you forward when wheeling if you weren't). Therefore you would charge both units, contacting the second one as you close the door further.

T10
18-04-2011, 19:57
Thanks guys!

I can see how my abstracts describe different situations and that the ambiguity comes from me applying them all to a charging situation.

1) Am I right to conclude that based on the rules, sometimes there is no straight answer as to what the 'best/most right' way of resolving a charge is?

2) My situation + diagram: If he were to charge my blue smaller unit, there is a possibility (because of the width of the red unit and the angle of the smaller blue unit) he would clip the larger blue unit. Would you then just move the larger blue unit back so that there is a 1" between them if he only declared a charge against the smaller blue unit? Or could he also charge both if he realises he will clip the larger one when charging the smaller one?

I dont have the book with me right now but in that paragraph it says that if you charge a fleeing unit and you catch them, they are destroyed (straightforward). It then says, that the charging unit is allowed a reform.

3) This reform only applies when you charge an ALREADY fleeing unit right? Not when you charge and they flee as a charge reaction and then catch them.

Thanks!

1. It should usually be pretty straight forward: If the distance between the charging unit and the target is less than or equal to the charge distance rolled, you are likely to have a succesful charge. You still have a couple of things that can go wrong: You need to be able to move into contact using a single wheel of up to 90 degrees. This means your charge can fail if you snag impassable terrain or other units. Remember that the back outer corner of a unit wil "slide" during a wheel as the diagonal of the unit is longer than the frontage.

2. The rules allow for charging multiple units, but only if unavoidable. In effect you pick a primary target before you declare the charge and figure out wether or not you can get maximized contact with the unit without also touching additional units. If you can't avoid touching additional units then you must declare the charge to target all these units. This is described on p.18.

So how does this work in practice. Well, it's not spelled out in detail. I assume that the charge is legal if you can make contact with this while closing the door (at the latest!) and if all the units involved (charger and targets) will be able to align properly. That would mean the following scenario should be legal:

1. The charger moves straight forward into left-corner-to-front contact with a secondary target unit.
2. The charger wheels left into right-corner-to-base contact with the primary target.
3. The charger stops with its left corner in contact with the front of the secondary target and its right corner in contact with the front of the primary target.
4. The primary and secondary target close the door with the charger.
5. The three units are now aligned and ready for combat.

3. You seem to have a few things misunderstood. The rules for charging and destroying fleeing units are separate steps that don't tie into each other. When it is time to move the charging unit it may happen that the target unit is fleeing. It may very well happen that the unit was already fleeing when the charge was declared, or it may have decided to flee from a different charge. It doesn't matter.

What matters is that the unit is fleeing when you move into contact with it, align with it and destroy it, then you get to perform the reform. The reason the unit was fleeing doesn't matter, it only matters that is was fleeing.

-T10

19-04-2011, 00:02
My understanding is that (in this specific case) you treat the larger unit like any other obstacle. The first point of contact would appear to be the left edge of the small blue unit. The "close the door" would then appear to bring the red unit into contact with the larger blue unit. Which means that the red unit cannot "close the door" which would force the small blue unit to "close the door" instead. Keeping the larger blue unit out of the combat. And essentially changing the facing that you set up. Again this is only in regards to how the diagram appears to me.

AMWOOD co
20-04-2011, 09:09
Correct me if I'm wrong but the rules say to bring as many models into the combat as possible (ie. maximise models in contact). Would not the red unit be able to charge the smaller blue unit in such a way that no model will contact the larger one? It doesn't seem like a challenge of any kind, just line the corner of the units closest to the large blue unit together (you could have the red unit over a bit more, that's fine). You get as many in contact as possible even though its not as many as could be done in an ideal situation.

...or am I missing something?

mortiferum
20-04-2011, 09:35