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.

Context always matters...

Sections can matter. (Not in swooping Vs Grounded because the rules are not written the same as this situation).

The Context exists, you seem to be ignoring it.

I thought the whole army moved as one, shot as one and charged as one, in order to represent a dynamic of a "real" war.

If that is the case all charges would need to be declared, then all units being assaulted would take their snap shot. With multiple units assaulting the one unit, the overwatch can only be applied to a single incoming charge, as the rules for shooting state emphatically that a squad cannot fire at separate units, unless they have a special rule that allows them to split or direct fire. Common sense would dictate that the closest charging squad would be the target, but as a game dynamic, players could possibly ignore a 5" target in favour of an 8" target that is over greater threat in close combat.

Beefmiester wrote:
I thought the whole army moved as one, shot as one and charged as one, in order to represent a dynamic of a "real" war.

If that is the case all charges would need to be declared, then all units being assaulted would take their snap shot. With multiple units assaulting the one unit, the overwatch can only be applied to a single incoming charge, as the rules for shooting state emphatically that a squad cannot fire at separate units, unless they have a special rule that allows them to split or direct fire. Common sense would dictate that the closest charging squad would be the target, but as a game dynamic, players could possibly ignore a 5" target in favour of an 8" target that is over greater threat in close combat.

Cinematically speaking, yes everything happens at the same time. Game-wise things are done in a sequential order. Hence the reason Squad A can destroy a transport, and Squad B can shoot the squishy contents (who were) hiding within.

In a way that is still Realistic dynamic, as if the tank they were in stated burning, they'd evac, regardless of what incoming fire was headed their way. In a sequential turn based dynamic, the unit inside the transport would remain fixed until their next opportunity to move.

But as a resolution to one unit firing at two separate incoming charges, overwatch occurs in what is effectively a single shooting phase, with only one target. Whereas a sequential turn base would allow each separate charge to be treated as an individual instance distinct from previous or later actions, and resolved on a turn by turn basis. Meaning a single unit could be charged by say, 4 units, overwatch each one in turn and snap shot hundreds of rounds in the "time" it takes the 'first' one to reach them.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Context always matters...

Sections can matter. (Not in swooping Vs Grounded because the rules are not written the same as this situation).

The Context exists, you seem to be ignoring it.

Indeed, and your taking a rule and applying it out of Context in another section. Your attempting to stop a Unit charging in mid charge by saying the first model locks it in btb. That is easy to see that it is out of context but you ignore that. That same context means you can only move 1 model per turn, since once the first model moves, then the Unit has moved and you can't move twice in one phase. Mixed unit shooting would be the same "context"

Your attempting to apply the locked in combat rule because that is how you think it should be, not what RAW is.

I'm coming in on DeathReaper's side here

We are told on page 20, that being locked is test later (see page 23).

So we head to page 23, where it tells us the rules for being locked, which does not go into effect until the first Initiative step. We are then told on page 26 that combat is drawn on to the next phase if no one leaves due to falling back.

Again, the first check for being locked is at the first Initiative step, so until then, a unit not engaged in a previous turn cannot be locked in combat.

Overwatch happens in the Charge sub-phase, Locking happens in the Fight sub-phase... you can't take the rules for one sub-phase back to the previous sub-phase and apply them... that's just silly to even defend.

Therefore, I can hold my overwatch in the charge sub-phase in anticipation of another charge. If I'm wrong, I lose out... but I can still do it, RAW

 Lobukia wrote:
I'm coming in on DeathReaper's side here

We are told on page 20, that being locked is test later (see page 23).

That states some reasons for a charge being disallowed. You cannot charge out of a combat you are already in.

So we head to page 23, where it tells us the rules for being locked, which does not go into effect until the first Initiative step. We are then told on page 26 that combat is drawn on to the next phase if no one leaves due to falling back.

Again, the first check for being locked is at the first Initiative step, so until then, a unit not engaged in a previous turn cannot be locked in combat.

So if you dont "check" for locked in combat until the first INI step, does that mean I can charge out of melee combat and charge into another combat ?

Overwatch happens in the Charge sub-phase, Locking happens in the Fight sub-phase... you can't take the rules for one sub-phase back to the previous sub-phase and apply them... that's just silly to even defend.

Therefore, I can hold my overwatch in the charge sub-phase in anticipation of another charge. If I'm wrong, I lose out... but I can still do it, RAW

It does declare in the Charge subphase. It is step 2 in the process laid out on page 20.

The simplest way for your way to be right, would have been for Step 1 to say Declare All Charges. Step 2. Resolve all overwatchs. 3. Make charge moves .... etc.. Charging now has a tactical aspect to it that you have to account for order of charges and deciding whether you think that 8 inch charge from a crappy unit will make it and hold your fire to hopefully hit the 4" charge from the elite melee unit you really want to shoot up.

Fragile wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
I'm coming in on DeathReaper's side here

We are told on page 20, that being locked is test later (see page 23).

That states some reasons for a charge being disallowed. You cannot charge out of a combat you are already in.

True... so what, that has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

So we head to page 23, where it tells us the rules for being locked, which does not go into effect until the first Initiative step. We are then told on page 26 that combat is drawn on to the next phase if no one leaves due to falling back.

Again, the first check for being locked is at the first Initiative step, so until then, a unit not engaged in a previous turn cannot be locked in combat.

So if you dont "check" for locked in combat until the first INI step, does that mean I can charge out of melee combat and charge into another combat ?

Your arguing a timing question on locking. Nothing says it is only checked in the fight subphase. Locking is checked in numerous places.

No it does not... you can only be locked two ways, previously in a fight sub phase and are still locked, or have entered your first fight sub phase...

You are locked when you are in BTB. pg 23 in Bold.

When are you in BTB? Pg 21. Charge Move.

Being in a fight subphase does not "lock" you. You have to be "locked" before you can be in a Fight Subphase.

Fragile wrote:
Your arguing a timing question on locking. Nothing says it is only checked in the fight subphase. Locking is checked in numerous places.

No it does not... you can only be locked two ways, previously in a fight sub phase and are still locked, or have entered your first fight sub phase...

You are locked when you are in BTB. pg 23 in Bold.

And what sub phase is page 23 under... head back until you hit a sub phase in the book

When are you in BTB? Pg 21. Charge Move.

Different phase... its like insisting moral checks go in the fight sub phase because damage can happen then

Being in a fight subphase does not "lock" you. You have to be "locked" before you can be in a Fight Subphase.

Where does it say this? What page, what sentence?

 Lobukia wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Your arguing a timing question on locking. Nothing says it is only checked in the fight subphase. Locking is checked in numerous places.

No it does not... you can only be locked two ways, previously in a fight sub phase and are still locked, or have entered your first fight sub phase...

You are locked when you are in BTB. pg 23 in Bold.

And what sub phase is page 23 under... head back until you hit a sub phase in the book

Now your arguing where the rule is is the only place it affects ? I can show you numerous rules that are defined in one section and used in many.
Again the BRB defines "Locked in combat" as "one or more models in base to base with the enemy."
It is referenced in movement, shooting, assault phase, and probably many more.

When do you get into base to base with the enemy?

Different phase... its like insisting moral checks go in the fight sub phase because damage can happen then

Again your insisting that being in BTB is not "locked in combat" which is clear RAW, page 23.

Being in a fight subphase does not "lock" you. You have to be "locked" before you can be in a Fight Subphase.

Where does it say this? What page, what sentence?

Can you give an example of when you make melee attacks that you are not in BTB ?

Fragile wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Your arguing a timing question on locking. Nothing says it is only checked in the fight subphase. Locking is checked in numerous places.

No it does not... you can only be locked two ways, previously in a fight sub phase and are still locked, or have entered your first fight sub phase...

You are locked when you are in BTB. pg 23 in Bold.

And what sub phase is page 23 under... head back until you hit a sub phase in the book

Now your arguing where the rule is is the only place it affects ? I can show you numerous rules that are defined in one section and used in many.
Again the BRB defines "Locked in combat" as "one or more models in base to base with the enemy."
It is referenced in movement, shooting, assault phase, and probably many more.

When do you get into base to base with the enemy?

Guess what, before the fight subphase (page 23) its referred to 3 times in the BRB. All three time it is referring to something that happened the turn before. This backs up my position, not yours

Different phase... its like insisting moral checks go in the fight sub phase because damage can happen then

Again your insisting that being in BTB is not "locked in combat" which is clear RAW, page 23.

Yes, one page 23, at the beginning of the first fight subphase of a combat, you check to see who is locked... its what it says

Being in a fight subphase does not "lock" you. You have to be "locked" before you can be in a Fight Subphase.

Where does it say this? What page, what sentence?

Can you give an example of when you make melee attacks that you are not in BTB ?

Guess what, before the fight subphase (page 23) its referred to 3 times in the BRB. All three time it is referring to something that happened the turn before. This backs up my position, not yours

You have no support. Your blatantly ignoring the definition of the rule and basing your entire argument on where in the BRB they decided to define it. It never mentions "turn before" It states "locked in combat."

Again, show me where locking happens before the first fight subphase. I've found where it does happen in that subphase, for you to insist otherwise, you need a rule

I have, you choose to ignore it. The Fight Sub Phase section that you say is "locking" them in combat, is determining who is Engaged and can swing blows.

"At the start of each Initiative step, you must work out whether or not a model locked in combat is also engaged, as described below" (Note already locked, from the charge move)

Fragile wrote:
Can you give an example of when you make melee attacks that you are not in BTB ?

Sweep Attacks.

One could argue Vector Strike, but that counts as having fired a weapon.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Context always matters...

Sections can matter. (Not in swooping Vs Grounded because the rules are not written the same as this situation).

The Context exists, you seem to be ignoring it.

I'm ignoring nothing. You are creating context that is not there and expecting everyone to just accept it.

Happyjew wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Can you give an example of when you make melee attacks that you are not in BTB ?

Sweep Attacks.

One could argue Vector Strike, but that counts as having fired a weapon.

Actually it would be really cool if you could use Vector as a melee strike and then combine Smash.. 1-2 Str 10 hits on a flyer would be a great equalizer for not having Skyfire.

From a different thread, but so directly ties into this one

Happyjew wrote:
...here is the problem with a unit being considered locked in combat before the Fight sub-phase.
1. Tac squad declares charge on a unit of Hormagaunts 11" away (don't ask why, just roll with it).
2. Tac squad rolls 12" for charge range.
3. First model moves up and is in base contact.
4. Since there is a model in base contact with the Hormagaunts, the unit is now locked in combat.
5. Since you are only allowed to make Pile-In moves while locked in combat, the rest of the squad can not move until it is their turn in the Fight sub-phase.

If we go by Deathreapers interpretation, since the unit is not locked in combat yet, the rest of the models may move up.

I think people are missing the point here....

If you read the Assault Phase Summary it explains how the Assault Phase works. If you are getting charged by multiple units, you basically get multiple 'Charge Sub-Phase'.

The reason for this is that when a enemy unit completes it charge move, it ends 1" away from the enemy and then completes a Initial Charger move. This will put the unit in BtB contact.

After this action has been completed do you declare the next charge. So you are only able to shoot the 1st unit that assaults.

Pages 20-22 BRB.

halvare wrote:
I think people are missing the point here....

If you read the Assault Phase Summary it explains how the Assault Phase works. If you are getting charged by multiple units, you basically get multiple 'Charge Sub-Phase'.

The reason for this is that when a enemy unit completes it charge move, it ends 1" away from the enemy and then completes a Initial Charger move. This will put the unit in BtB contact.

After this action has been completed do you declare the next charge. So you are only able to shoot the 1st unit that assaults.

Pages 20-22 BRB.

Either you didn't read the thread before posting, or you know that we've already tackled this argument and one side doesn't see it this way, so you are knowingly adding nothing to the debate.