Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Redacted

Yes, in that example bridging the gap would be illegal. They are obliged to move to within 2" of a based model if possible.

It's only if they are positioned so that they can't reach the 'engagement zone' that you are free to just move them to within coherency of another model in their own unit, which is what allows the gap bridging.

As I said at the start, it requires very specific placement and spacing for it to work if the enemy units are not very close together.

The order in which you move the models is still a decisive factor. Evidently, the first model moved would be the centre-left hellion. If, however, you moved the models in the right column immediately after the first model, the models in the left column would block up their movement considerably, possibly allowing the models that were on the right to create an impassable wall. Then, the leftmost models would be free to bridge the gap. You'd have to form this wall with only four of the left-column models, though, because you need the fifth to reach the long fangs!

Augustus wrote:Right, and that's what make it impossible to leave strung out models behind, because if they could move into 'engaged' places, they have to.

It is possible but it requires you to position models in the movement phase such that they are not able to get within 2" of a b2b model but can move to a spot which is in coherency with something you've already moved and in the spot you want in order to form a bridge to the other unit.

Very tricky. Requires precise placement in the movement phase and moving into assault in the correct order.

Most people do not follow the procedure correctly.

ToI wrote:

The Green Git wrote:Isn't there a specific clause that states you must end each model's movement in unit coherency with one of the models that has already moved?

Pretty much prevents most of the shenanigans being proposed...

actually no it doesn't, that clause is the very thing allowing you to multichargewith strung out models. Because you use the models that can't engage to string coherency between two units. They get their 6" move and in the process allow you to reach multiple units while still unable to engage on their own.

Yes it does. The very first bullet point on page 34 says that each model moved (after the first) must end it's move in coherency with another model that has already moved. Not units, models. I think you're answering a different question then you quoted.

This particular multi-assault looks pretty easy to pull off.

The main things to remember that makes it easy is this: You don't have to move into base to base with a model in range that is in a unit you have not yet assaulted...in fact you are not allowed to get into base-to-base with a unit you're not assaulting (yet).

If you declare against the top rhino, even though one of the models moved after the first is within 6" of the 2nd rhino, and moving into base-to-base with it would break coheriency, you don't have to move into base to base with the 2nd rhino until you want to. So in the previous illustrations, the yellow line is quite valid.