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.

The title is a little vague, but i can't think of a way to express it in a few words. Essentially i want to gauge where people stand on "Model X must do action X if possible rules", there are a few of them but the one that really winds me up is to do with multiple assaults.

So we're told in the BRB that, when multi-assaulting, “..remaining models can charge models belonging to either the primary or secondary target units, as long as they follow the rules for moving charging models. That said, a charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contact with an unengaged model in the primary target” (Emphasis mine)

One of the rules from "the rules for moving charging models." mentioned above is:

"Charging units must attempt to move into base contact with as many opposing models in the enemy unit as possible with as many of their models as possible”. (again, emphasis mine)

So, by my reading you cannot voluntarily position models against the primary target in such a way as to "block" subsequent models from making B2B (allowing them to then charge the secondary unit) the biggest offenders here are big-based models straddling 2 enemy models so that both enemy models are in B2B using only 1 of your own models. However this seems to be common practice, so much so that i see "tactics" articles all the time mentioning this as the best way to make multi-assaults.

What is Dakka's view on this, have i missed something?

You are correct those tactics articles are obviously written by people who don't know the basic rules.

As many models as possible in toto or after I move each model?

NickAtkins wrote:
The title is a little vague, but i can't think of a way to express it in a few words. Essentially i want to gauge where people stand on "Model X must do action X if possible rules", there are a few of them but the one that really winds me up is to do with multiple assaults.

So we're told in the BRB that, when multi-assaulting, “..remaining models can charge models belonging to either the primary or secondary target units, as long as they follow the rules for moving charging models. That said, a charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contact with an unengaged model in the primary target” (Emphasis mine)

One of the rules from "the rules for moving charging models." mentioned above is:

"Charging units must attempt to move into base contact with as many opposing models in the enemy unit as possible with as many of their models as possible”. (again, emphasis mine)

So, by my reading you cannot voluntarily position models against the primary target in such a way as to "block" subsequent models from making B2B (allowing them to then charge the secondary unit) the biggest offenders here are big-based models straddling 2 enemy models so that both enemy models are in B2B using only 1 of your own models. However this seems to be common practice, so much so that i see "tactics" articles all the time mentioning this as the best way to make multi-assaults.

What is Dakka's view on this, have i missed something?

You have to move into base contact if possible. If you're charging multiple units, you can move in to BTB with models in the primary or secondary target, so long as all reachable models within the first unit are engaged. That means you can move in 2-3 models to engage all models in the primary target, and as long as all subsequent models that are in range of BTB with anything actually make it in to BTB with anything, its ok.

What you CAN'T do is move a model which could possibly make it in to BTB with any enemy model and move it in to empty space (presumably to chain towards the enemy).

What is unclear is if you can manipulate the order of charging models in such a way that, if you'd moved that model earlier/later in the charge sequence it would have been able to make it in to BTB with the secondary target, but at the point in time when the model does move it can't make it in to BTB.

Remember that the rules for the basic charge don't specify which of the two units you are charging. The basic charge rule doesn't care whether you're going to primary or secondary, as long as it is possible, get in base contact with one of them.

The multi-charge rule is very clear in that models move one at a time, and the only new restriction is the "base contact with an unengaged primary model" rule. Therefore, the blocking tactics are completely legitimate if both of these are true: The "blocker" is in base contact with an until-then unengaged primary foe, and, the "blocked" won't artificially extend a conga line that wouldn't have have happened anyway.

In other words, if without blocking you would have

5 primary
3 conga line
4 secondary

it is perfectly legitimate to have, through blocking,

2 primary
3 conga line
7 secondary

As long as all the blockers are engaged to the primary and the conga line remains as it would have been.

The reason this doesn't violate the social contract is because of the extreme penalties of multicharging.

 JimOnMars wrote:
Remember that the rules for the basic charge don't specify which of the two units you are charging. The basic charge rule doesn't care whether you're going to primary or secondary, as long as it is possible, get in base contact with one of them.

The multi-charge rule is very clear in that models move one at a time, and the only new restriction is the "base contact with an unengaged primary model" rule. Therefore, the blocking tactics are completely legitimate if both of these are true: The "blocker" is in base contact with an until-then unengaged primary foe, and, the "blocked" won't artificially extend a conga line that wouldn't have have happened anyway.

In other words, if without blocking you would have

5 primary
3 conga line
4 secondary

it is perfectly legitimate to have, through blocking,

2 primary
3 conga line
7 secondary

As long as all the blockers are engaged to the primary and the conga line remains as it would have been.

The reason this doesn't violate the social contract is because of the extreme penalties of multicharging.

I would argue that you can never (or only in extremely rare circumstances) "Conga line" units, because of this clause in the charging rules: "Charging units must attempt to move into base contact with as many opposing models in the enemy unit as possible with as many of their models as possible" (Emphasis mine)

Using your example: If it is possible to make b2b with 12 models, all against the primary unit, but only possibly to b2b 9 of your models if you engage the secondary target (there are now 3 plebs just maintaining coherency) then my reading of the rule is you would fail the multi-assault, because you have not satisfied the clause "with as many of their own models as possible".

NickAtkins wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:
Remember that the rules for the basic charge don't specify which of the two units you are charging. The basic charge rule doesn't care whether you're going to primary or secondary, as long as it is possible, get in base contact with one of them.

The multi-charge rule is very clear in that models move one at a time, and the only new restriction is the "base contact with an unengaged primary model" rule. Therefore, the blocking tactics are completely legitimate if both of these are true: The "blocker" is in base contact with an until-then unengaged primary foe, and, the "blocked" won't artificially extend a conga line that wouldn't have have happened anyway.

In other words, if without blocking you would have

5 primary
3 conga line
4 secondary

it is perfectly legitimate to have, through blocking,

2 primary
3 conga line
7 secondary

As long as all the blockers are engaged to the primary and the conga line remains as it would have been.

The reason this doesn't violate the social contract is because of the extreme penalties of multicharging.

I would argue that you can never (or only in extremely rare circumstances) "Conga line" units, because of this clause in the charging rules: "Charging units must attempt to move into base contact with as many opposing models in the enemy unit as possible with as many of their models as possible" (Emphasis mine)

Using your example: If it is possible to make b2b with 12 models, all against the primary unit, but only possibly to b2b 9 of your models if you engage the secondary target (there are now 3 plebs just maintaining coherency) then my reading of the rule is you would fail the multi-assault, because you have not satisfied the clause "with as many of their own models as possible".

I agree you are correct in that case. IF it is possible to get 12 models into b2b against the primary, and "conga-lining" them to the secondary results in 9 in b2b, the charging player has violated the rule. That is why it is critical for the charging player to move the models in such a way as to thwart this, essentially setting up the conga line before the charge, leaving the tail of the line so far away from the primary that the only chance for b2b is if they go to the secondary.

To address your original concern, I don't really see this as rule manipulation in any way. If you are leading a squad of guys, extending your flank before engagement is a normal military tactic, and works for exactly the same reason as it does in 40k. If you think about it, a rule forces a player to charge the primary over the secondary is far more lawyer-y than just saying "each model can charge whatever it can reach" and leave it at that. The only reason "blocking" exists is because players are trying to compensate for a stupid rule that makes no sense in the first place.

Another thought on this...the initial charger must move to the closest enemy of the primary. This often causes a block by itself, especially if terrain is tight. In that case, "blocking" is not only allowed by the rules but mandated. Just something else to think about.

Another good example is the swooping Hawks grenade pack, where you must if possible shoot the target you grenaded, so if you destroyed them or they're now out of range you can act normally.

Trasvi wrote:

What you CAN'T do is move a model which could possibly make it in to BTB with any enemy model and move it in to empty space (presumably to chain towards the enemy).

What is unclear is if you can manipulate the order of charging models in such a way that, if you'd moved that model earlier/later in the charge sequence it would have been able to make it in to BTB with the secondary target, but at the point in time when the model does move it can't make it in to BTB.

You're given permission to move your models in whichever order you want.

Yes. You absolutely can manipulate in which order you move your models so that they are not in b2b with unit A so that they can attempt to move towards unit B (and therefore strike towards unit B, either now or in a subsequent turn). You only have to do two things when you multi-charge:

1) engage the primary unit with your closest model to the closest model in then primary unit in b2b contact

2) engage the secondary unit with your closest unengaged model to the closest model in the secondary unit in b2b contact. This can even be a model that would otherwise be able to engage the primary target.

3) move a different model in your unit the shortest possible distance towards a model in either the primary target or the secondary target, based on which it can get into b2b with.

4) repeat step 3 until all of your models have moved

For part 3, there are 4 scenarios:

1) you can only engage the primary target in b2b but not the secondary. You must then do so for that model.

2) you can only engage the secondary target in b2b but not the primary. You must then do so for that model.

3) you can engage both targets in b2b. You may then choose which target to engage in b2b and do so for that model

4) you can engage neither unit in b2b. You may then choose which unit you are attempting to engage; however at that point you must move your model as close to b2b as possible with your intended target.

 luke1705 wrote:
2) engage the secondary unit with your closest unengaged model to the closest model in the secondary unit in b2b contact. This can even be a model that would otherwise be able to engage the primary target.

3) you can engage both targets in b2b. You may then choose which target to engage in b2b and do so for that model

As much as I wish this were true, it is not.

Read p. 55 again. There is absolutely nothing in the rules that are anything like that.

a charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contact with an unengaged model in the primary target. BRB p.55

The rule is over complicated as written.

First move assaulting troops in base to base with the primary, if a model cannot do this then it can move in base to base with the secondary.

Yep, but one at a time, and at no time can any model break coherency. As a result, the charge will always blob around the initial charger, who can break coherency for that purpose.

Jim I stand corrected. That's what I get for going off of memory. Thanks for the clarification

 luke1705 wrote:
Yes. You absolutely can manipulate in which order you move your models so that they are not in b2b with unit A so that they can attempt to move towards unit B (and therefore strike towards unit B, either now or in a subsequent turn). You only have to do two things when you multi-charge:

1) engage the primary unit with your closest model to the closest model in then primary unit in b2b contact

2) engage the secondary unit with your closest unengaged model to the closest model in the secondary unit in b2b contact. This can even be a model that would otherwise be able to engage the primary target.

3) move a different model in your unit the shortest possible distance towards a model in either the primary target or the secondary target, based on which it can get into b2b with.

4) repeat step 3 until all of your models have moved

Slightly incorrect: still a few things wrong:

2) If the second (and third and nth) chargers you still make it in to B2B with an unengaged model in the primary unit, they must do so. You can't attempt to charge a secondary target until.
3) You don't have to move the shortest distance possible with anyone other than the first charger.

The most restrictive thing which applies to ALL steps is staying in coherency while at the same time you must move as far as possible towards your main target.

Hence the shenanigans you need to use to multi-charge units that are more than 2-3 inches apart. Holding back, hoping for low charge distances, making a conga line by moving the furthest away models when possible...