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.

How do?

So this came up in my tactics thread where I've been theorising cunning ways for my Mechanicus to deal with a Greentide by simply tying it up.

The plan is to engage the far ends of the unit (the player I'm there to challenge is fond of spreading it out as much as possible) using Sydonian Dragoons. AV11 all round, until he can get a Powerklaw in range, he can't even tickle me.

Now my understanding is that because Pile In is a compulsory move, with a specific set of instructions and steps (for instance, you must Pile In toward the closest enemy model locked in that combat) then I can force, in this specific situation, my opponent to split his Green Tide down the middle - so even if he does nobble my Sydonian Dragoons, he can't do anything else with his Greentide until it's all back in coherency.

But, there's been the suggestion that my tactic is fundamentally flawed, because you can't deliberately break coherency with you unit.

Given this is kind of critical to my cunning plan, I'm looking for opinions, and discussions.

In support of my take?

1. I absolutely accept that one can never voluntarily break unit coherency.
2. But the explanation of coherency on page 18 does state it can be otherwise broken - and gives shooting casualties as the most common reason.
3. My proposed tactic is one of those exceptions, because my opponent must Pile In, and do so according to specific instructions. That compulsory nature takes precedence, because my opponent isn't choosing to break coherency.

Against my take?

1. It's been so long since I played 40k I'm petty much back to NooB, and cannot rule out that I'm missing a related rule elsewhere.

Your thoughts please, folks

Piling in follows the same rules as moving charging models. Those rules are very specific that you have to finish your charge move in coherency.

So yes, Piling In is compulsory movement, but you still have to perform that move within the bounds of the rules.

Oh, arses.

Now I'm tied up in knots.

I get what you say, and I've had a read. Sadly, the wording of the rule isn't great...

Page 46 wrote:A charging model must end its turn charge move in unit coherency with another model in its own unit that has already moved

That wording seems to say it's on a model-by-model basis, rather than the whole unit.

Is there an FAQ, because given how much of initial plan depends on forcing that gap, I don't want to be trying something that can't be done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Have also asked GW via the 40k FB page.

Given that if it does work, it only works because the Greentide is so unusually large, it's perhaps not one that's come up often enough?

I've actually had this come up with a Fifteen-man unit, mostly by my own fault.

I charged with a ten-man unit of Custodes. It also had two Priests, an Inquisitor, and two Astropaths attached. (Effectively, a nu-Paladinstar.) My opponent had MSU, so the only way I was going to take him down was to deal with as many units as possible...
So I did.
By charging five units at the same time.


This leads into how awkward and difficult the multi-assault rules. You have to try and get as many models into base-to-base with your 'primary' target before you're allowed to charge any secondary or tertiary targets. (Or in this case, quintiary.) Aware of this, I'd lined up my models to be only a few inches away from his. I was already in a conga line that was about 20" long, so this wasn't too hard. I charged, partly through terrain, and rolled a 6" - this limited my motion to 4", which was perfect, because it meant that I didn't have to crowd towards my primary target.

Then came a long, very specific game of lining my models up in such a way that I had everyone in legal coherency, while still getting as many into B2B with my opponent as possible. (This is where the Astropaths and Priests came in - I didn't care about their attacks, I just wanted them to sit around keeping me in Coherency.)

It worked! Sort of. I won combat, but he caused some casualties to me, and we ended up in a weird situation.

I had one model on the far end of my conga line who was outside of coherency, but in B2B with an enemy unit - The enemy unit (A single surviving Assault Marine,) was also locked in combat with another of my units.

That enemy unit wasn't allowed to move, because he would have left coherency with a combat. I was not allowed to move, because I would have been walking away from combat.

The models that I had who were not in B2B were required to consolidate towards the primary combat if they weren't already in combat with someone else.

The Primary combat was on the far side of the conga line from my guy who was no longer in coherency.

So... I can't move away from coherency, but I have to move towards a model that will drag me from coherency, he can't move out of combat, my opponent can't move his model, and I can't not move.



We had to go through the rulebook for an hour before determining that my guy at the far end should just break from combat to make things simpler, but we never really came up with a proper solution for what to do. (At that point, we also just called the game because it was getting really late and probably going to be a draw anyways.)

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Is there an FAQ, because given how much of initial plan depends on forcing that gap, I don't want to be trying something that can't be done.

I don't recall this one being covered in the FAQ, although it needs to be, as currently Pile Ins are a little broken.

The fact that they have to follow the same rules as charging actually gives you all sorts of problems. Mostly with the 'already moved' bit... If we assume that the first model to pile in counts as the initial charger (so he gets to skip the 'already moved' clause, as he's the first) then your first pile-in guy actually doesn't have to maintain coherency. However, the next model to pile in would have to finish their pile in move in coherency with that first model, not just anyone from their unit. So the net effect of that is that, in order to follow the rules as they currently stand, a model piling in might actually have to move away from the enemy in order to try to get into coherency with a model at the other end of his unit in order to satisfy the requirements for moving charging models.


The way it is generally actually played is to assume that where pile ins are concerned, the 'already moved' clause would be replaced by just needing to stay in coherency.

I think he would end up with a conga line of boyz all 2" apart stretching between the two dragoons. If you put your most shooty units in the middle of the board though you could just keep shooting out the boyz in the middle to achieve the same effect.

 roflmajog wrote:
I think he would end up with a conga line of boyz all 2" apart stretching between the two dragoons. If you put your most shooty units in the middle of the board though you could just keep shooting out the boyz in the middle to achieve the same effect.

Once in combat they can´t be shot at.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is a requirement that when charging and during pile in moves. All models within a unit must try to stay in coherency. If a model is in base contact with an enemy that model can´t move but will fight as normal. Once the model is free to move it must try to get the the nearest enemy model once it is in coherency. (This could require the model to forgo attacking if it has a long way to go.

IIRC it doesn't apply in multicombat after the initial charge. So, yep, they could split up out of unit coherency.

 rawne2510 wrote:

 roflmajog wrote:
I think he would end up with a conga line of boyz all 2" apart stretching between the two dragoons. If you put your most shooty units in the middle of the board though you could just keep shooting out the boyz in the middle to achieve the same effect.

Once in combat they can´t be shot at.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is a requirement that when charging and during pile in moves. All models within a unit must try to stay in coherency. If a model is in base contact with an enemy that model can´t move but will fight as normal. Once the model is free to move it must try to get the the nearest enemy model once it is in coherency. (This could require the model to forgo attacking if it has a long way to go.

Obviously...
They aren't going to be in combat for the rest of the game though are they?

Until the orc player gets some PK near them that could be quite possible for 2-3 turns at least.

 koooaei wrote:
IIRC it doesn't apply in multicombat after the initial charge. So, yep, they could split up out of unit coherency.

Can you give me rules quote on that one? That's my understanding, but been out the loop so long I'm pretty much NooB.

I'm just looking to settle it one way or another (if I can't split him, I'll just drop that Big Old Radiation Hug, and guffaw as I kill loads of Boyz!)

You just need to look at the rules in issue and work out their priority order.

1. Can´t move from base contact with a model
2. The unit must attempt to get into coherency. (If this means a model 15" away from a gap has to move there because every body else is in base to base so be it. remember your opponent may have to move one of his models back into base with you so you are back to step 1)
3. Move to the closest enemy model to get into base to base.

These are the only 3 rules I believe need to be considered and they have to be considered in that order.

Issue is, Pile In and Move Charging Models have their own specific orders.

Sadly, am at work so don't have the rules to hand. But from memory...

Charging.
1. Closest model to the charged unit must make base contact with the closest model in the enemy unit.
2. Then next closest to next closest etc, and you can only mob models if you can't get into BTB with a model in the enemy unit that isn't already in BTB. Second and subsequent charging models must end up within 2" coherency of another model in their unit.

Pile In
1. Closest to closest first, BTB where possible.
2. If BTB not possible, within 2" of a friendly model that is in BTB
3. Everyone else.

Pile In otherwise has the same caveats as Charging.

And it's the italicised text that's causing the bugbear - because it doesn't state the unit needs to maintain coherency as a whole - and it certainly doesn't explicitly cover the rather unique set of circumstances I'm looking to engineer (which are made possible, if not game legal, because of the singularly unique size of a Greentide)

I see. I still think that an unengaged model must move into base with an enemy unless that move would take it out of coherency. Don´t have my book either but that is how I understand it.

It is irritating because Pile In makes no mention at all of Coherency - just that all models must move as close as possible to the enemy they're engage with.

And being a sub-rule to charging, it could be argued Pile In takes precedence, as it's providing an exclusion.

But hey, I'm happy with however this goes, I'm not sticking doggedly to my own take!

yes but coherency is a general game principle. It doesn´t get ignored because it isn´t mentioned for a particular phase.

 rawne2510 wrote:
yes but coherency is a general game principle. It doesn´t get ignored because it isn´t mentioned for a particular phase.

Current FAQ:
Page 46
– Charge Move, Moving Charging Models
Change the first bullet point to read:
‘If possible, a charging model must end its charge
move in unit coherency with another model in its own
unit that has already moved. If it is not possible for a
charging model to move and maintain unit coherency,
move it as close as possible to another model in its own
unit that has already moved instead.’

Means you don't 'Need' to maintain coherency even when charging. You should try to but if it's impossible to keep up, for example when part of the models got the re-roll for charge ranges and went super far while the rest got a low range move, they don't have to end in coherency. I think the same goes for pile-ins. At least that's how it's been discribed in the previous faq - the one before drafts.

Not 100% sure about all that stuff but that's my reading.

Yes they don´t have to end in coherency but you must attempt to do it.

You can´t just measure and say oh well I can´t get in so I am going to go in a different direction.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its the move it as close as possible that is the clincher here. So my 3 rules I stated earlier and their order of priority still stands in my opinion. Nothing in that FAQ changes my mind but infact make it more resolute.

I disagree. I'll attempt to explain why (beware of my typical waffling!)

In short, Pile In is a compulsory move. You absolutely must pile in, and you cannot reduce your Pile In distance if doing so would stop you being closer to the unit(s) you're Locked In Combat with - and you have to Pile In toward the closest model.

I think the FAQ does support my tactic of forcibly breaking my enemy's unit coherency - but as always it's up for discussion and comment

So you want to ignore the final sentence that states you have to move as close as possible to your own unit.

And I'm not forcing them away from their unit - both ends of the unit have to Pile In toward (in this instance) my Sydonian Dragoons.

Provided none of the Dragoons have been destroyed, that's two different units and two different direction he has to Pile In toward.

And as you must Pile In toward the nearest enemy model, he can't simply choose to Pile In up one end - hence why, if I'm correct, I can indeed force a Coherency breaking divide in his unit.

Tell you what, can you re-list your three points, incorporating the FAQ above? Makes it easier to keep track of the various discussion points so far

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I disagree. I'll attempt to explain why (beware of my typical waffling!)

In short, Pile In is a compulsory move. You absolutely must pile in, and you cannot reduce your Pile In distance if doing so would stop you being closer to the unit(s) you're Locked In Combat with - and you have to Pile In toward the closest model.

I think the FAQ does support my tactic of forcibly breaking my enemy's unit coherency - but as always it's up for discussion and comment

The thing is that Unit Coherency it's not 100% enforced in assault phase, so let me explain.

Moving and Coherency, the rules here are clear if you unit is out of coherency you must move to regain it or even run in the shooting phase. (notice this refers to movement mostly and use run instead shooting for movement)

Assault and coherency, here is when the rules tell you to maintain coherency but don't enforce you to regain it unlike the movement rules.

1: Charging, you must charge to reach BTB with closest enemy model , then you are given 3x orders hwo to perform further movements after the 1st model.
a: charging model must end in unit coherency with another model already moved
b: if possible must reach BTB
c: if cannot reach enemy models move it to within 2" hor 6" ver from another model already BTB

As you see charging is quite clear and still enforces you to keep coherency.

2: pile in moves wich HAPPEN after charging , this provide another different 3 orders to perform it, (notice you are no longer charging so the must move in coherency rules do not apply, just the Pile in ones)
a: First, any models Pile in if this brings them in BTB with enemy already locked. (this allow you to Pile in Out of Coherency as long you reach a locked enemy BTB )
b: Second, Any models Pile In if this brings them withint 2" hor 6" ver of a model already in BTB ( this is the clossest to coherency in the Pile In movement but just enforce it to another model BTB not refers to the whole unit at all)
c: Any remainning models that aren't BTB with enemy and may Pile in must do so to CLOSSEST enemy units locked in combat

Beyond that after the charge move is done Coherency it's mostly ignored at least while the unit is locked in combat (if combat ends the unit must regain coherency by consolidate and if not done yet, resort to move/run in following turn)
So even if you *break* the unit coherency in the Assault phase by forcing him to split his unit by half due charging it from opposing sides, the unit won't be affected at all.

Ok, cool.

Main plan works then. By striking the extreme flanks of the Greentide, I can force him out of coherency over successive combat rounds, so if/when all my 'anchor' units are done, he has to spend time getting back into coherency.

Good stuff!

Lord Perversor wrote:

1: Charging, you must charge to reach BTB with closest enemy model , then you are given 3x orders hwo to perform further movements after the 1st model.
a: charging model must end in unit coherency with another model already moved

If possible. Says the faq.

 koooaei wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:

1: Charging, you must charge to reach BTB with closest enemy model , then you are given 3x orders hwo to perform further movements after the 1st model.
a: charging model must end in unit coherency with another model already moved

If possible. Says the faq.

It's about charging, if no one of your models can reach BTB or end at 2" of a previous model who already charged either your charge failed or the unit was out of coherency to begin with.

Ironically rules do not stop an unit out of coherency from charging. Mostly punish the unit to move or avoid shooting, but charging while out of coherency it's still possible.

Lord Perversor wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:

1: Charging, you must charge to reach BTB with closest enemy model , then you are given 3x orders hwo to perform further movements after the 1st model.
a: charging model must end in unit coherency with another model already moved

If possible. Says the faq.

It's about charging, if no one of your models can reach BTB or end at 2" of a previous model who already charged either your charge failed or the unit was out of coherency to begin with.

Ironically rules do not stop an unit out of coherency from charging. Mostly punish the unit to move or avoid shooting, but charging while out of coherency it's still possible.

There's a third option. For example, you have a jumppack indep in a non-jumppack unit. You want to hcarge something 12" away. You roll 1-1 for the charge move. But the character hasn't used his jumppack in the movement phase and can use it to re-roll a charge distance for himself. He rolls 6-6. The character moves 12. The rest of the unit move 2". Let's say the character kills a model with his hammer of wrath. Piles in towards the next closest enemy - not towards his squad mates cause he HAS to pile in towards the closest enemy as he can reach this closest enemy.

Now what does the rest of the squad do? Do they pile in 3" towards the indep to regain coherence? Or do they pile in 3" towards the closest enemy ignoring coherence? Or they pile in towards the closest enemy while non-engaged models are trying to maintain/regain coherence?

 koooaei wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:

1: Charging, you must charge to reach BTB with closest enemy model , then you are given 3x orders hwo to perform further movements after the 1st model.
a: charging model must end in unit coherency with another model already moved

If possible. Says the faq.

It's about charging, if no one of your models can reach BTB or end at 2" of a previous model who already charged either your charge failed or the unit was out of coherency to begin with.

Ironically rules do not stop an unit out of coherency from charging. Mostly punish the unit to move or avoid shooting, but charging while out of coherency it's still possible.

There's a third option. For example, you have a jumppack indep in a non-jumppack unit. You want to hcarge something 12" away. You roll 1-1 for the charge move. But the character hasn't used his jumppack in the movement phase and can use it to re-roll a charge distance for himself. He rolls 6-6. The character moves 12. The rest of the unit move 2". Let's say the character kills a model with his hammer of wrath. Piles in towards the next closest enemy - not towards his squad mates cause he HAS to pile in towards the closest enemy as he can reach this closest enemy.

Now what does the rest of the squad do? Do they pile in 3" towards the indep to regain coherence? Or do they pile in 3" towards the closest enemy ignoring coherence? Or they pile in towards the closest enemy while non-engaged models are trying to maintain/regain coherence?

1st you must notice that Hammer of Wrath happens at I 10 so charge is already done and we follow Pile In rules.

As Pile In rules gives you 3 orders.
1: Pile In to reach BTB if possible
2: Pile In to get within 2" of a friendly model already BTB with an enemy model
3: if you cannot perform 1 or 2 then Any remaining models must attempt to get as close as possible to one or more of the enemy units locked in this combat.

As i pointed before after the Charge move is done the Fight sub-phase rules absolutely allow to ignore the units Coherence as long you are engaged in combat and follow the Pile In commands.

That's certainly my understanding.

And as I'm intending to engage the very far flanks of an unusually, possibly uniquely huge unit, I'll be able to force a split in his coherency.

Hurrah!

All this to one side. Is green tide even allowed anymore. Is there a new version of it in the new Ghazgull suppliment

 rawne2510 wrote:
All this to one side. Is green tide even allowed anymore. Is there a new version of it in the new Ghazgull suppliment

The FAQ says you can still use the green tide formation