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.

yakface wrote:You keep mentioning the basic movement rules for moving into difficult terrain but those are the basic (general) rules. The assault rules are more specific regarding difficult terrain and therefore must be obeyed.

In particular: Assaulting models *must* end their move in certain ways and doing so may force them to enter terrain. I know you have quoted "where possible" as the exception to them not having to enter terrain, but that doesn't match up with the rule given on page 36:

"If, following the rules for moving assaulting models see page 34), any model in an assaulting unit will have to go through difficult or dangerous terrain as part of its assault move, the unit must take the relevant terrain test before moving."


This passage is crystal clear that when FOLLOWING the rules for moving assaulting models on page 34, any model that HAS TO (i.e. is 'forced to') go through difficult terrain means that the unit will have to take a difficult terrain test.

Depending on what enemy unit you are assaulting you do not have a choice. . .the rules for moving assaulting models may dictate that you must do so.

Yes, if you will have to go through difficult as part of your assault move you have to take the test before moving. That matches with the normal movement rule that you must declare and test for difficult prior to moving.

So, what in an assault move would force you to be in difficult? Well, if you are the closest model, you must travel in a straight line to the closest enemy model. That might force you in to difficult. All the other criteria are "if possible". If the closest to closest isn't forced in (meaning you havn't been forced to declare a test for the assault to succeed in the first place), what in the assault rules forces you to step in difficult?

You may not get a bunch of your models in the fight, but there is no requirement to. The requirement is to attempt to engage by making an assault move. If you aren't allowed in the difficult, you go down the assault move special criteria list, and meet the first one possible without going into difficult.

Now, I will say that I have not played this method yet personally. It seems correct from reading the book to me is all. I'm going to hold off on further comment until I actually play a game or two and use this method over the old method I used that looks rather flawed, and see if there are any discrepancies that become noticeable in play.

An easy solution to this issue would be, in your move phase, to move your entire squad so they were all exactly 6 inches away from the closest enemy model and more than 6 inches away from any enemy in cover.

While it's very much unsupported by any existing rules, I cast my vote for a new ruling stating that one can ignore difficult terrain tests for assault purposes (if not at all times) in exchange for taking dangerous terrain checks for any model moving through the terrain, a second check (or failing on 2's) if the terrain is actually classified as dangerous.

So, what in an assault move would force you to be in difficult? Well, if you are the closest model, you must travel in a straight line to the closest enemy model. That might force you in to difficult. All the other criteria are "if possible". If the closest to closest isn't forced in (meaning you havn't been forced to declare a test for the assault to succeed in the first place), what in the assault rules forces you to step in difficult?

Uh, the requirement that you must endeavor to get as many models in B2B as possible?

I play it as depending on WHICH models you come into base contact with, I they are ALL out of cover then no bonus. If you have to charge THROUGH cover then yes that is I1 for you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Nurgleboy77: Is it?

Nurgleboy77 wrote:

So, what in an assault move would force you to be in difficult? Well, if you are the closest model, you must travel in a straight line to the closest enemy model. That might force you in to difficult. All the other criteria are "if possible". If the closest to closest isn't forced in (meaning you havn't been forced to declare a test for the assault to succeed in the first place), what in the assault rules forces you to step in difficult?

Uh, the requirement that you must endeavor to get as many models in B2B as possible?

If you are not allowed in the difficult terrain because you did not declare and test prior to moving, those models are not possible to get to B2B with. Move down and try and fulfill the next criteria.

You are only forced to roll difficult if there is no possible assault move available to you without going in to difficult. As 'stay in coherency' is a possible assault move, it is very rare that you will be forced to enter difficult, barring the first closest to closest move.

You must end always endeavor to get the most models into b2b. The list of criteria are in order of importance not "pick one to do". so only staying in coherency isn't enough, you must move into models in cover if they are withnin range.

The argument that you failed to declare moving into DT smacks of the idea that a unit with Rage or similar "must Assault" rules could fire Rapid Fire weapons to get around it.

You cannot avoid the DT if models are within range to be assaulted, and there are sufficient models in the attacking squad to get to them.

Measure after declaring the assault intentions, if you must enter DT to fulfill the assault criteria, take the DT test.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:You must end always endeavor to get the most models into b2b.

This is incorrect. What you are told is that you must attempt to engage as many opposing models as possible with as many of your models as possible. Making a legal assault move is engaging.

You are given instructions on how to handle closest to closest. Once that is determined, you must complete a legal assault move with the rest of your models, in any sequence you desire. This follows normal movement rules, except for the 1" rule as well as some additionally defined criteria.

The second criteria being to move to B2B with an unoccupied model starts with "If possible,...". If the assaulting model may not enter difficult terrain as per the normal movement rules, any unoccupied models in difficult terrain are not possible to get to B2B with at that time. Keep going down the criteria list, and fulfill the first criteria you legally can.

The only time you are required to enter difficult terrain to fulfill the assault criteria is for the closest to closest move.

The second criteria being to move to B2B with an unoccupied model starts with "If possible,...". If the assaulting model may not enter difficult terrain as per the normal movement rules, any unoccupied models in difficult terrain are not possible to get to B2B with at that time.

This is a very flimsy argument, the rules for assaulting through cover on page 36 explain that you determine if models must move through cover to reach the enemy and roll for the DT test.

There is no "Declaring" or "not declaring" you have no choice. You determine if you need to go through it before moving, then roll.

Not flimsy in the least. If the only legal assault move available to you is to move through cover, then you must test before moving, absolutely.

As far as declaring difficult or not, of course you do. An assault move is a standard move with a few extra criteria thrown in. In a standard move, you declare if you are attempting to go into difficult before moving your first model. If you don't declare, none of your models may enter the difficult once you start moving.

As far as I can tell, the point of contention here is whether or not the difficult terrain test, and entering difficult terrain, is optional for models after the first.

On the one side, there is the line on page 36 "If, following the rules for moving sassault models (see page 34), any model in an assaulting unit will have to go through difficult or dangerous terrain as part of its assault move, the unit must take the relevant terrain test before moving." and the second bullet point on page 34 "If possible, the model must move into base contact with an enemy model within reach that is not already in base contact with an assaulting model."

On the other side, we have the quote "If a unit starts its move outside difficult terrain, the player must declare if he wants to try to enter difficult terrain as part of their move. If he chooses not to, the unit moves as normal but may not enter difficult terrain."

There should also be an additional point of contention, then, for the lines in the second paragraph on page 34, "Move [the first model] into contact with the nearest enemy model in the unit being assaulted, using the shortest possible route. Roll for difficult or dangerous terrain if necessary..."

Let's assume that there are two one model units, A and B, three inches apart with a 2" x 2" section of difficult terrain exactly between the two models. The question is whether or not model A is required to travel through the difficult terrain to assault B, or whether model A can go around the difficult terrain. So, does "shortest possible path" mean "shortest possible path on the board" or "shortest possible path using all available options".

I assume that if the 2" x 2" section was impassible, it couldn't be part of the shortest path. But now I'm uncertain whether or not the difficult terrain test for the first model is optional if an alternate route exists.

solkan wrote:Let's assume that there are two one model units, A and B, three inches apart with a 2" x 2" section of difficult terrain exactly between the two models. The question is whether or not model A is required to travel through the difficult terrain to assault B, or whether model A can go around the difficult terrain. So, does "shortest possible path" mean "shortest possible path on the board" or "shortest possible path using all available options".

I assume that if the 2" x 2" section was impassible, it couldn't be part of the shortest path. But now I'm uncertain whether or not the difficult terrain test for the first model is optional if an alternate route exists.

Great question! My take on this is, if you declare an assault but don't declare moving in to difficult, the shortest possible route for closest to closest would be up to your assault distance without entering difficult. If there is no possible route around the difficult for closest to closest though, the assault does not automatically fail because there is a special provision that forces you to enter the difficult. The possibilities for what your closest to closest route could be have just changed, so now try and get to B2B through the difficult. If you still can't make it, now you failed.

Kaaihn wrote:

solkan wrote:Let's assume that there are two one model units, A and B, three inches apart with a 2" x 2" section of difficult terrain exactly between the two models. The question is whether or not model A is required to travel through the difficult terrain to assault B, or whether model A can go around the difficult terrain. So, does "shortest possible path" mean "shortest possible path on the board" or "shortest possible path using all available options".

I assume that if the 2" x 2" section was impassible, it couldn't be part of the shortest path. But now I'm uncertain whether or not the difficult terrain test for the first model is optional if an alternate route exists.

Great question! My take on this is, if you declare an assault but don't declare moving in to difficult, the shortest possible route for closest to closest would be up to your assault distance without entering difficult. If there is no possible route around the difficult for closest to closest though, the assault does not automatically fail because there is a special provision that forces you to enter the difficult. The possibilities for what your closest to closest route could be have just changed, so now try and get to B2B through the difficult. If you still can't make it, now you failed.

Ah, but you can't have it both ways. If you can't go into difficult terrain unless you declare it, then you don't have the second chance to decide whether to make the difficult terrain test. If the first model gets a second chance to decide whether to enter difficult terrain, then all of the other models can get a second chance by the same reasoning.

solkan wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:

solkan wrote:Let's assume that there are two one model units, A and B, three inches apart with a 2" x 2" section of difficult terrain exactly between the two models. The question is whether or not model A is required to travel through the difficult terrain to assault B, or whether model A can go around the difficult terrain. So, does "shortest possible path" mean "shortest possible path on the board" or "shortest possible path using all available options".

I assume that if the 2" x 2" section was impassible, it couldn't be part of the shortest path. But now I'm uncertain whether or not the difficult terrain test for the first model is optional if an alternate route exists.

Great question! My take on this is, if you declare an assault but don't declare moving in to difficult, the shortest possible route for closest to closest would be up to your assault distance without entering difficult. If there is no possible route around the difficult for closest to closest though, the assault does not automatically fail because there is a special provision that forces you to enter the difficult. The possibilities for what your closest to closest route could be have just changed, so now try and get to B2B through the difficult. If you still can't make it, now you failed.

Ah, but you can't have it both ways. If you can't go into difficult terrain unless you declare it, then you don't have the second chance to decide whether to make the difficult terrain test. If the first model gets a second chance to decide whether to enter difficult terrain, then all of the other models can get a second chance by the same reasoning.

Nobody gets a second chance to decide. If you decide not to, you may be forced to whether you like it or not for the closest to closest because there is a special rule governing that. That rule does not extend to the rest of the models though; it is only a special condition governing the closest to closest model.

There is one time to check if you are forced to roll difficult, and that is closest to closest having no other path available. The rest of the models are bound by the first ones result. If he moves without choosing or being forced to test difficult, they can't step in to difficult, and there is nothing that would force them to on a model by model basis. They also cannot then choose to test for difficult even if they want to; that opportunity has passed.

SECOND EDIT: I notice I was wrong about the models the assaulter moved having the option to pick and choose models that are not the closest to them. You will probably want to disregard the rest of this particular post.

Maybe I went too far. I was hoping I could demonstrate a case where after declaring the assault you could arrange your model to model movement in such a way that you could restrict a model in your unit from having to enter difficult terrain.



Quality here is atrocious. I am of the school of thought that the assaulting player while following the RAW should be able to assault a unit that is partially in difficult terrain without being able to roll a difficult terrain test provided that they can demonstrate that they can avoid needing to enter it.

EDIT:
I hate paint. I will leave it this image in the case that anyone may want to strain their eyes reading the thought I was trying to share.. Again, I am sorry.

Kaaihn wrote:

solkan wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:

solkan wrote:Let's assume that there are two one model units, A and B, three inches apart with a 2" x 2" section of difficult terrain exactly between the two models. The question is whether or not model A is required to travel through the difficult terrain to assault B, or whether model A can go around the difficult terrain. So, does "shortest possible path" mean "shortest possible path on the board" or "shortest possible path using all available options".

I assume that if the 2" x 2" section was impassible, it couldn't be part of the shortest path. But now I'm uncertain whether or not the difficult terrain test for the first model is optional if an alternate route exists.

Great question! My take on this is, if you declare an assault but don't declare moving in to difficult, the shortest possible route for closest to closest would be up to your assault distance without entering difficult. If there is no possible route around the difficult for closest to closest though, the assault does not automatically fail because there is a special provision that forces you to enter the difficult. The possibilities for what your closest to closest route could be have just changed, so now try and get to B2B through the difficult. If you still can't make it, now you failed.

Ah, but you can't have it both ways. If you can't go into difficult terrain unless you declare it, then you don't have the second chance to decide whether to make the difficult terrain test. If the first model gets a second chance to decide whether to enter difficult terrain, then all of the other models can get a second chance by the same reasoning.

Nobody gets a second chance to decide. If you decide not to, you may be forced to whether you like it or not for the closest to closest because there is a special rule governing that. That rule does not extend to the rest of the models though; it is only a special condition governing the closest to closest model.

There is one time to check if you are forced to roll difficult, and that is closest to closest having no other path available. The rest of the models are bound by the first ones result. If he moves without choosing or being forced to test difficult, they can't step in to difficult, and there is nothing that would force them to on a model by model basis. They also cannot then choose to test for difficult even if they want to; that opportunity has passed.

The exact same logic applies to the first moving model as applies to the second and subsequent models--there exists a path which would be possible if the unit took a difficult terrain test. If it is necessary for the first model to enter difficult terrain because it is possible to do so, whether or not the player wishes to, then it is necessary for all of the models to enter difficult terrain because it is possible to do so, whether or not the player wishes to.

If you see the exact same standard applying to every model, then every model that moves follows the rule of being forced to go to closest. Start the assault by moving closest to closest, then move in any sequence you desire, but whatever the sequence, every model when it moves has to go to the closest unoccupied (DT tests being forced as applicable), or the closest occupied barring that (DT test forced as applicable again), or support range barring both of those, or just be in cohesion.

That is the way I was playing it before, and what it requires is to visualize and/or premeasure the move of every model in the unit before moving. Even if you have more enemies outside terrain than attackers, you still have to eyeball whether there is room for all of them to get to B2B with unoccupied models outside the terrain. Base sizes can be a huge factor here.

I think both can technically be argued as correct, but one is most definitely cleaner and easier than the other. I've started playing it the way I have described in the last few posts (which matches the majority in my local store), and assaults have been far smoother.

solkan wrote:The exact same logic applies to the first moving model as applies to the second and subsequent models--there exists a path which would be possible if the unit took a difficult terrain test. If it is necessary for the first model to enter difficult terrain because it is possible to do so, whether or not the player wishes to, then it is necessary for all of the models to enter difficult terrain because it is possible to do so, whether or not the player wishes to.

I just want to mention that the requirement to move into base to base contact with an enemy model that is not engaged might force one model in the assaulting players unit to come into contact with a model that is in an enemy unit that is not even in the unit that the assault was declare upon. If there is a likelihood you may have an opportunity to move into assault with an enemy model in range that is not in the unit you declared your assault on you would then assert that I would have to roll a DT in that case too? I do not understand how some of you have come to determine that simply having the possibility that you could engage a model in difficult terrain automatically means you have to roll as though you will be entering it. The RAW indicates that it only occurs if any model (singular) in an assaulting unit will have to go through difficult or dangerous terrain as part of its assault move.

I keep seeing people saying that you must move as many models in B2B as possible when assaulting. Kaaihn touched on this, but that is not the requirement of the rules. YOU MUST FOLLOW THE RULES FOR MOVING ASSAULTING MODELS, as detailed on p34.

This part is clear enough, the assaulting attacker determines the sequence of moving models after moving closest to closest. They are still constrained by attaching to unattached enemy models first, any unattached model second, and within 2" of an attached friendly third, but it is at the attacker's discretion as to who goes where.

It's also perfectly clear that if a model , while going through the moving assaulting models process, would have move through cover, the unit must make a DT test before moving.


The part I find less concrete, and therefore disagree with yakface on, is if this condition causes the assault to immediately fail, or whether a DT test is then taken, forcing the models to realign, as per the rules on p34. I don't believe this is cut and dry in either direction, because of inherently ambiguous wording in the Assaulting through cover rules on p36.

By yak's interpretation, since the process on p34 requires movement of models within a unit, then the necessitation of a DT test before the unit moves invalidates the rule. At this point he interprets that the assault fails. Please note that this resolution is not detailed in either Assaulting through cover, or moving assaulting units. The only conditions where the assault concretely fails in the rulebook is during one of 2 conditions:

1. p34, Moving Assaulting Models: "If the closest model is found not to be within move distance of the enemy, that assault does not happen and no model is moved." Do note that this declares that you must roll for DT as necessary, meaning you are NOT forced to declare a DT test before moving closest to closest. Although this only pertains to the rules for closest to closest, it does set precedent for the additional rules on p36.

2. on p36, moving through assault addresses the consequences of a forced DT test. The first downside "...is that such tests might cause the assault to fail altogether IF THE CLOSEST MODEL CANNOT MAKE IT INTO CONTACT WITH THE ENEMY."

The real question arises with the statement that, while moving via p34 rules, "the UNIT must take the relevant terrain test before moving." A second, equally valid interpretation can be derived from the wording of both sections. Preceding this statement, the p34 rules, along with the first portion of the first sentence on p36, were directed at moving MODELS...NOT UNITS. Since this conditional pertains strictly to units which are made up of multiple models. It is rational to reason that since the the unit has not finished its move, it has in fact, not violated the rule of taking a terrain test before moving.

I will say that there is enough ambiguity present for either interpretation to be legitimate. Either way you look at it, however, disallowing an assault from any situation other than the 2 previously listed situations is clearly not RAW.

nardman wrote:I keep seeing people saying that you must move as many models in B2B as possible when assaulting. Kaaihn touched on this, but that is not the requirement of the rules. YOU MUST FOLLOW THE RULES FOR MOVING ASSAULTING MODELS, as detailed on p34.

Exactly. The requirement is that every model must make a legal assault move, not specifically that every model must be in B2B. The requirements for a legal assault move are detailed in the assault rules. You simply fulfill the highest requirement in the list possible with the model you are moving.

As to DT, you do not move the closest to closest at all until you determine if you can make it to B2B without going through DT. This is one of those places where you must measure to determine if a rule will effect you.

-Declare assault
-Determine if closest to closest requires moving through DT. Declare DT if you want to, or if you are forced to based on closest to closest only.
-Move closest to closest
-Move rest of models in any order you want, meeting the highest criteria possible in the list. Remember if you did not roll DT, it is not possible to enter it at this point; enemy models in DT are not possible, so continue down the criteria list until you get to the first criteria you can meet with your assault move.

Nice and easy, you don't have to reset models back to original positions or place markers or any of that kind of thing. For what it is worth to people, I sent this 'flowchart' of assault to GW to see if I had it correct. They agreed I did. That's more than good enough for me.