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.

I have my own answer but wanted to see what others thought after seeing this elsewhere:

a) Does a unit always have to be in coherency?
b) If so, does this affect units within 3" of enemy models?

There is no more "locked in combat" in the traditional sense.

So if you do have to always maintain coherency then retreating in the movement would be the only means to do so if you've taken heavy casualties the turn prior.

Question: Do you have to maintain that 1" coherency at all times?

How would you ever get out of coherency? You can pick which models you remove as casulties. My assumption is that you have to choose them so that you remain in coherency.

 mikhaila wrote:
How would you ever get out of coherency? You can pick which models you remove as casulties. My assumption is that you have to choose them so that you remain in coherency.

You could get out of coherency by purposefully removing models in the center of your unit. The only required time you have to make a choice that maintains coherency is during any sort of move. You don't have to maintain coherency when removing models. The only outcome is that your next move would require that you move back into coherency.

AoS Rules, Page 1 - "Warscrolls & Units" Section - A unit must be set up and finish any sort of move as a single group of models, with all models within 1" of at least one other model from their unit. If anything causes a unit to become split up during a battle, it must reform the next time that it moves."

Ok, so then we have:

-May choose models to be removed as casulties. This may result in your unit being not in coherency.
-A unit not in coherency in the movement phase, and not in 3" of the enemy can move and must do so to end the move phase in coherency.
-A unit that is within 3" of the enemy and not in coherency may choose to remain still, or retreat. If it retreats it must do so in a way to regain coherency.
-A unit not in coherency in the assault phase can either choose not to fight, or must complete pile in moves in such a way that you are in coherency.

Does that cover it all?

 mikhaila wrote:
Ok, so then we have:

-May choose models to be removed as casulties. This may result in your unit being not in coherency.
-A unit not in coherency in the movement phase, and not in 3" of the enemy can move and must do so to end the move phase in coherency.
-A unit that is within 3" of the enemy and not in coherency may choose to remain still, or retreat. If it retreats it must do so in a way to regain coherency.
-A unit not in coherency in the assault phase can either choose not to fight, or must complete pile in moves in such a way that you are in coherency.

Does that cover it all?

That is my understanding.

 Kriswall wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:
Ok, so then we have:

-May choose models to be removed as casulties. This may result in your unit being not in coherency.
-A unit not in coherency in the movement phase, and not in 3" of the enemy can move and must do so to end the move phase in coherency.
-A unit that is within 3" of the enemy and not in coherency may choose to remain still, or retreat. If it retreats it must do so in a way to regain coherency.
-A unit not in coherency in the assault phase can either choose not to fight, or must complete pile in moves in such a way that you are in coherency.

Does that cover it all?

That is my understanding.

I don't understand the 3rd bullet. p1, "Warscrolls & Units" says you have to set up and move in coherency. If something causes the unit to split, it has to reform the next time it moves. It doesn't force you to reform at the first opportunity (ie, you can stay split provided you don't move). p3, Pile-in says a model may move up to 3", it doesn't force the move (if you did pile-in, you would have to reform). I can't see anything on p4 under Attacking that forces a split unit to reform to be eligible to attack. It seems like we're assuming a split unit is not a unit, and I'm not sure there is rule support for that is there?

Actually, the Pile-in rule is not really played as written from what I've seen. It says the attacking models can move up to 3" towards the closest enemy model; what people do in practice seems to be like the 40k pile-in where models move to engage whatever enemy models are in range, but that's not what the AoS pile-in rule says. I'm fine playing the "40k way" though.

Snapshot wrote:


Actually, the Pile-in rule is not really played as written from what I've seen. It says the attacking models can move up to 3" towards the closest enemy model; what people do in practice seems to be like the 40k pile-in where models move to engage whatever enemy models are in range, but that's not what the AoS pile-in rule says. I'm fine playing the "40k way" though.

This is a really interesting point. Playing it to the closest though seems like a real pain, as they will often be multiple candidates that will require decimal measuring and deploying your unit in a conga line would force the enemy to only be able to hone in against one model.

I think playing it the 40k way is going to be the most fun :-)

I think the intention of "closest" was to have you get models into combat. Unfortunately it should read "closest model that you can actually get into combat with."

But most of us are just doing that. and it's working fine.

In a way closest also makes sense as it will benefit those chaps with long reaching weapons.