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.

FOR THIS POLL, PLEASE ANSWER HOW YOU CHOOSE TO PLAY THE GAME, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT THE RULES AS WRITTEN (RAW) SAY.

Feel free to post how and why you voted, but please DO NOT ENGAGE OTHERS IN DISCUSSIONS/ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK THE RULES SAY. Please create a separate thread if you feel the urge to have this kind of discussion.



The rules for the 'Start of the Initiative Step Pile In' say:

Rulebook, pg 23 wrote:"At the start of each Initiative step, any model whose Initiative value is equal to the value of the current Initiative step, that isn't already in base contact with an enemy model, must make a Pile In move...When making Pile In moves, the player whose turn it is moves his unit(s) first. If both players' Pile In moves combined would be insufficient to bring any combatants back together (that's more than 6" -- very unlikely!), the assault comes to an end. All remaining Initiative steps are lost -- work out the assault result as described on page 26."

QUESTION: Do you play that if only one player has Pile In moves at a given Initiative Step, and those moves do not bring any models into contact with each other, then the combat immediately ends and moves to resolution, even though there are other models at lower Initiative Steps who will clearly be able to Pile In 3" into contact with the enemy and be able to attack?


Example:
A unit of Space Marine Bikes (I4) charges a Kroot unit (I3) that contains a single Kroot Hound (I5). At the I10 step, the Bikes resolve their Hammer of Wrath attacks and manage to kill all the Kroot models they are in base contact with. At the I5 step, the Kroot Hound Piles-In 3", but this move is not enough to bring the Kroot Hound into base contact with any Space Marine Bikes (and there are no other Kroot or Bikers still in base contact with each other at this point). In this situation, does the combat immediately end and move to combat resolution, despite the fact that both the Bikes (I4) and the Kroot (I3) are clearly within 3" of each other and would be able to get into base contact with each other on their respective Initiative steps?



OPTION A. Yes, in that situation the combat immediately ends as the rules indicate that you move right to combat resolution at the end of any Initiative Step where the Pile-In moves did not result in any models being in base contact with each other.


OPTION B. No the Pile-In rules refer to ANY combatants, so therefore they're clearly saying that if ALL models in the combat making their Pile-In moves (at every Initiative step) can't come back into contact with each other then the round of combat is done. So in this particular example, the combat would proceed to the I4 step as the Space Marine bikers can reach the Kroot with their I4 Pile-In move.


OPTION C. Something else entirely: reply exactly what it is below.

If the pile in is insufficient to bring the models at that step into base contact and there are no other models in base contact, then the combat ends. Which I think is your option A.

 insaniak wrote:
If the pile in is insufficient to bring the models at that step into base contact and there are no other models in base contact, then the combat ends. Which I think is your option A.

Yep, that's option A.

So you play that Hammer of Wrath can totally screw you if you happen to kill all the models in base contact with it and then there if there is a single enemy character (or other model) with a high Initiative that is unable to make it into base contact with his move...that's it! The combat ends and nobody gets to fight?

Seems like a crazy interpretation of the rules to me personally, but I'm interested to see what percentage of people actually play that way.

I agree its a little odd, but I don't see any point in them pointing out that remaining initiative steps are lost if they intended for you to be able to move those lower initiative models...

 insaniak wrote:
I agree its a little odd, but I don't see any point in them pointing out that remaining initiative steps are lost if they intended for you to be able to move those lower initiative models...

I took it as saying you don't bother moving any further Pile-In moves that won't result in any models getting into base contact with each other and just move right to combat resolution...not that, 'whoopsee. for some odd reason combat isn't going to happen because one guy couldn't make it to his foes'.

All remaining Initiative steps are lost

I think that clears ambiguity, we are indeed during a specific Initiative step, therefor Option B is void.

I choose Option A.

It can be really crap some times where you get stuck but I always played it that way.

Option B is far more sensible in terms of gameplay results. (It also has the nice feature of not directly contradicting clear RaW the way Option A does.)

What rules does option A contradict?
B seems to contradict the immediately end and lose all initiative steps...

Rigeld, while I agree with you 100%, it's not a RAW debate here.

I voted B, mainly becuase that is how my group currently plays it, and because of statement

''the assault comes to an end. All remaining Initiative steps are lost ''

Is only applicable when;

''If both players' Pile In moves combined would be insufficient to bring any combatants back together (that's more than 6" -- very unlikely!)''

If the space marines can pile in, the condition which ends combat is not met


Edit; I see the point about the spercific innitiative step, but still B, as its still how we play it

We usually play it B which is how I voted, but I do think that RAW is "A".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nem wrote:
I voted B, mainly becuase that is how my group currently plays it, and because of statement

''the assault comes to an end. All remaining Initiative steps are lost ''

Is only applicable when;

''If both players' Pile In moves combined would be insufficient to bring any combatants back together (that's more than 6" -- very unlikely!)''

If the space marines can pile in, the condition which ends combat is not met

Exactly, that line shows the intent of the rule IMO, even tho RAW contridicts it.

I might have clicked the wrong option but my understanding would be that the Hammer of Wrath would kill the kroot at I10, the Hound would then move 3'' closer and then the bkies would pile in 3'' closer at I4, which should bring them back in to combat even though the hound essentially misses his attacks.

It pretty clearly says that if both pile ins cannot make it then you end combat.

Why would you end combat if both sides haven't attempted to pile in?

When making Pile In moves, the player whose turn it is moves his unit(s) first. If both players' Pile In moves combined would be insufficient to bring any combatants back together (that's more than 6" -- very unlikely!)

Cos they don't have permission to pile in at that initiative step.

So I have a 6.1" gap between 2 flavours of space marines hitting at I4 as the captains at I5 didn't challenge and cut down a lot of troops. Since they all move in at the same time, beginning with the player who's turn it is, they cannot make it into b2b at initiative step 4.

So if I had a 3.1" gap between some vannilla space marines and some plague marines as the SM captain hadn't been challenged and killed a bit of space. Since at I4 there isn't any model that can bridge the gap. Both player's pile in moves at I4 cannot make the gap as there is only 1 player that can move models.

That is how people that go with A play it and how it appears to a majority of people RAW.

I voted C.

In friendly games, I prefer to have both side at least to swing once. The whole point is to have fun and not getting a chance to swing in CC is no fun :(

Obviously in Tourneys, i play the A option.

The rule is being inclusive of the situation where both sides have models at the same initiative making pile-in moves.
Basically, A is RAW as far as I can tell and is how we play it.
The inclusion of the bit about 6" reads like someone didn't do the maths properly rather than an instruction to wait for subsequent initiative steps.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Rigeld, while I agree with you 100%, it's not a RAW debate here.

I wasn't trying to debate. He made a statement I didn't understand so I was asking for clarification.

"A" is the way we play it, though it rarely comes up.

If no models are in base-to-base contact at the end of an initiative step, then the "fight sub-phase" is over and resolution occurs. If the losing side doesn't flee, then each side makes a 3" pile in move and resume combat next turn.

A is both RAW and how we play it.

I agree with A. It is one of those situations which doesn't come up much... and if it does, welp, should have positioned your unit better to not get your ass handed to you by HoW/HighInit.

If an attacker is smart enough to maneuver and the defender leaves his unit in such a way where he could be exploited by this... so be it.

Seems like mostly a risk for units with characters with HIGHER Initiative. If you get a good HoW or other attacks, and then some sad little Character with a slightly better I is so far away he can't pile in well, then he has just screwed his entire unit.

Nem's right. Combats not done because the lower initiative steps have not been tried. Move the i4 then i3 i2 and1's if ya got them and if no ones left or in contact the combats over. Then do do end of combat pile ins and at that point if no ones in Btb then it's over.

Except that isnt what the rules actually say.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except that isnt what the rules actually say.

Well, that's not what you think the rules say.

But I read the same rules and seem to come up with a different conclusion as to what they say.

 yakface wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
I agree its a little odd, but I don't see any point in them pointing out that remaining initiative steps are lost if they intended for you to be able to move those lower initiative models...

I took it as saying you don't bother moving any further Pile-In moves that won't result in any models getting into base contact with each other and just move right to combat resolution...not that, 'whoopsee. for some odd reason combat isn't going to happen because one guy couldn't make it to his foes'.

I voted for option A. I can see how it might not make sense, but playing it in any other way can screw people over too. I wouldn't be completely opposed to house ruling it, but I'd want to be made aware of it from the start. Let me explain why:

I am a DE player. With high init units like Lileth Hesparax coming into play, if I charge a unit that contains someone armed with a power fist, for instance, and I position my charge so that I take out a good portion of their models, then the subsequent models can't reach base contact, that protects my unit from getting hit with that power fist. That's purely tactical and positioning. By option A, there is a possibility of that happening due to good tactics. Afterwards, all initiative steps are lost, and so the attacking unit in my example would have won the combat. The remaining models roll for morale, and either hold or break, and possibly get sweeping advanced. If they hold, then my high initiative units can make their pile-in moves and possibly do the same thing again next turn. That's one of the benefits of having high initiative models, in my opinion.

Now, in your example, sure, it can also be a detriment to the attacker if you don't account for the possibility of that happening, and position your charge accordingly. This is especially true when charging through cover without assault grenades. The attackers may not get to attack in the first combat phase, or at all. Again, referring to the DE army that I play, this provides yet another benefit for DE jetbikes, as they can move over other models, so when they charge, they don't necessarily have to go into base contact with those in the front line of a unit. If there is room to place them, they can skim over the front line, placing themselves in base contact with the second line for their hammer of wrath attacks. Or, they don't have to. Against a unit that might chew them up, they may WANT the combat to end after hammer of wrath attacks. Unless the defending unit is fearless, this gives the attacker a large benefit in the form of possibility of a sweeping advance after suffering zero casualties.

Further, the hammer of wrath special rule that you're referring to specifically stipulates that the unit doesn't get an additional pile-in move at that initiative, which would indicate to me that they had the effects of such tactics in mind when writing the HoW and Pile-in rules.

 yakface wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except that isnt what the rules actually say.

Well, that's not what you think the rules say.

But I read the same rules and seem to come up with a different conclusion as to what they say.

Only when ignoring context, which is that "both players pile in...." refers to the initiative step of the models piling in. Only by assuming they meant "and all other initiative steps" can you end up completing lower order pile in moves to see if you can make base contact.

I play Option A, but I'm open to B.

Honestly, it has only come up for me in a game a few times so far, and my opponents and I have always been quick to get around it.

Your opponents int. 10 kills everything within 3".

Your int. 4 piles in 3" and doesn't get in base to base so they don't get to attack.

Opponents int. 3 piles in and kills the rest of your unit.

Option B doesn't seem fair and could lead to some screwy tactics.

We play A.

Yeah, after further consideration, I don't think I'm even open to house ruling it to something other than A. It's too unfavorable towards finesse armies, imo. I fully explained my position further in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/519698.page