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.

Why tournaments:
It is easier for some to get a free weekend every 2 months to play 5 games than to get a free evening once a week

Controlled environment, as everyone who goes there has accepted the rules and point size used.
No worries that your store pick up game fails to happen because your opponent is late or does not come at all or wants to play something different than said before

And WAAC is a thing but you know what lits you are going to meet there
In a random pick up game you never know if someone comes up with a "normal" list or "WAAC I don't care about GHB restriction" list.

If you have a fixed local group that meets regularly, tournaments are not a thing of course, but for others they are the only way to get a game

Ooh. I highly approve of official base-to-base measuring now, and the subtle change to Pile In is likewise good. No more getting stuck just because you're already in b2b.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/06/03/3rd-june-rules-preview-measuring-and-piling-ingw-homepage-post-2/

Edit: Some direct pics for easier reference

Took them a while to do that.

That change to pile ins is HUGE, the only way it could be considered slight is in the wording. Seriously I cannot understate how big of a deal that is.

wow that can make for a huge deal when fighting against large models. Monsters just got a bit more scared of infantry. Also you can slightly shift your front lines around to allow for better reach with backline models. Anything that uses a 2" range is going to love this change

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
That change to pile ins is HUGE, the only way it could be considered slight is in the wording. Seriously I cannot understate how big of a deal that is.

Agreed. The wording is subtle and it's a small technical change, but man it is going to have a big impact.

Am I right in thinking it only significantly alters hordes vs. elite units, or single large models? I mean, big unit vs. big unit is still going to have a harder time with models moving in such a way that they aren't further from the nearest enemy model, thus making it unlikely to get to many more attacks in?

Not that it is an issue, I just want to make sure i'm understanding the ramifications correctly.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Am I right in thinking it only significantly alters hordes vs. elite units, or single large models? I mean, big unit vs. big unit is still going to have a harder time with models moving in such a way that they aren't further from the nearest enemy model, thus making it unlikely to get to many more attacks in?

Not that it is an issue, I just want to make sure i'm understanding the ramifications correctly.

I think it will affect large models more, since now you can "orbit" if you're already b2b whereas you couldn't before, but it'll also have some effect on the edges of larger units, too. Hence why I said "subtle" meaning "so delicate or precise as to be difficult to analyze or describe."

But yeah, the impact vs. large based models is definitely significant, and now allows a unit to truly envelop big dudes.

Does this imply that you can now slide around models if you're already in base-to-base?

 Fafnir wrote:
Does this imply that you can now slide around models if you're already in base-to-base?

Yes, that's exactly what it now allows.

copy&paste from 40k
so if charge moves will work the same too it is not that big

Well, the other big changes about charges is that if a unit that charged is pulled out of combat, they can still attempt to pile in.

 Fafnir wrote:
Well, the other big changes about charges is that if a unit that charged is pulled out of combat, they can still attempt to pile in.

That's the same it has always been, as of the 4-page rules.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
Well, the other big changes about charges is that if a unit that charged is pulled out of combat, they can still attempt to pile in.

That's the same it has always been, as of the 4-page rules.

Could have sworn that was a 40k thing, with Sigmar not allowing anything outside of 3" to pile in.

NinthMusketeer wrote:That change to pile ins is HUGE, the only way it could be considered slight is in the wording. Seriously I cannot understate how big of a deal that is.

I haven't played in years. I don't see the change here at all. Can someone explain what the change is? it seems the same to me.

 Fafnir wrote:
Well, the other big changes about charges is that if a unit that charged is pulled out of combat, they can still attempt to pile in.

They already can do that. This is not new.

Davor wrote:

NinthMusketeer wrote:That change to pile ins is HUGE, the only way it could be considered slight is in the wording. Seriously I cannot understate how big of a deal that is.

I haven't played in years. I don't see the change here at all. Can someone explain what the change is? it seems the same to me.

As currently written, if a model is already in b2b with another they cannot move at all during Pile In, since you have to end closer to the enemy model than when you began, and if you're b2b that is impossible. This is confirmed in the FAQ:

Q: If you are already in contact with a model, do you still get to
pile in and rotate around the enemy units?
A: No.

The new wording allows you to move around a model you're already in b2b with, so long as you still end that move b2b.

Been using base to base since day 1, as have I assume most of you all.

So thats cool. But like clockwork a couple hours after this came out I get messaged.

"Now that base to base is official, if you let people play at the store using squares or older smaller bases and not make people rebase, you are allowing cheating."

Even though GW also writes:

Which bases should I use? Whichever ones you want! If you’ve got a collection that’s beautifully based, you can put away the clippers – there’s no enforced, single standard for how you should base your models. However, on release, you’ll be able to download a chart of recommended base sizes for every miniature in the Mortal Realms – if you’re a tournament organiser who wants to ensure a consistent standard for your event, feel free to use this, while if you’re making the jump to putting an older collection on round bases, this should help you out a lot.

auticus wrote:
Been using base to base since day 1, as have I assume most of you all.

So thats cool. But like clockwork a couple hours after this came out I get messaged.

"Now that base to base is official, if you let people play at the store using squares or older smaller bases and not make people rebase, you are allowing cheating."

Even though GW also writes:

Which bases should I use? Whichever ones you want! If you’ve got a collection that’s beautifully based, you can put away the clippers – there’s no enforced, single standard for how you should base your models. However, on release, you’ll be able to download a chart of recommended base sizes for every miniature in the Mortal Realms – if you’re a tournament organiser who wants to ensure a consistent standard for your event, feel free to use this, while if you’re making the jump to putting an older collection on round bases, this should help you out a lot.

Man, it really does sound like your community is pretty toxic. As you said, even GW says straight up you don't have to rebase. I'm sorry.

Edit: And yeah, b2b measuring was the first and most easily agreed upon house rule, especially since it was mentioned in GHB1 anyway.

For reference, a lot of people liked that rule that they didn't have to rebase. Its only 2 or 3 out of fifteen or so that have a big beef with it.

auticus wrote:
For reference, a lot of people liked that rule that they didn't have to rebase. Its only 2 or 3 out of fifteen or so that have a big beef with it.

Always seems to be a very vocal minority that can cast a gak light over everything.

 Valander wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
Does this imply that you can now slide around models if you're already in base-to-base?

Yes, that's exactly what it now allows.

I disagree. Here's the wording for second edition:

... you can move each model in the unit up to 3". Each model must finish its pile-in move at least as close to the nearest enemy model as it was at the start of its move.

Compare that to the wording for piling-in for Warhammer 40,000:

You may move each model in the unit up to 3" – this move can be in any direction so long as the model ends the move closer to the nearest enemy model.

Essentially the same, so I have no problem seeing THIS FAQ being applied to AoS as well:

Note that if a model is in base-to-base contact, it cannot possibly end a move closer to the enemy, and so cannot move when its unit piles in or consolidates.

Applying a previous edition FAQ to a new edition is unwise. Also, I don't think the new wording prohibits it at all; if you start in B2B, you may still move so long as you end still B2B. Also, the 40k wording is different as it still requires ending closer than when you started.

The wording is subtle, but "at least as close" and "closer" are not equivalent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the article even touts this difference:

Where previously, you could only pile in towards the closest enemy model before having to stop, now, you can pile in even if you’re right next to someone – provided you don’t move any further away from the nearest enemy model.

And looks like that's what the FB folks are going with, too. (Yes, I know, they're not really "official" rules people, but ...)

The facebook group already confirmed this lets you move models that are in base to base so long as you are still in base to base.

The GW facebook account said that they liked that about the new rule.

auticus wrote:
The facebook group already confirmed this lets you move models that are in base to base so long as you are still in base to base.

The GW facebook account said that they liked that about the new rule.

And you ninja'ed me as I was posting a screenshot. But yup, definitely seems to be the case and the wording IMO was changed specifically to allow that.

This will be interesting to see now with the additional limitations on shooting, and I think will make melee units a little better off since not only can they tie down shooters (like you intuitively think they should), but may also be able to more effectively surround single large bases and even scooch around edges of other units to get a few more blokes in combat.

 Valander wrote:
Applying a previous edition FAQ to a new edition is unwise.

You did see where I said it was a FAQ for the current edition of 40k? Like I said it's similar enough that I could see them making the same ruling, but if they've already clarified otherwise then that's all the better.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Valander wrote:
Applying a previous edition FAQ to a new edition is unwise.

You did see where I said it was a FAQ for the current edition of 40k? Like I said it's similar enough that I could see them making the same ruling, but if they've already clarified otherwise then that's all the better.

FAQ for a different game is even more dangerous to apply.

Yes, they're similar but the old AOS Pile In rule was far more like the 40k.8 Pile In than the new AOS one.

I would not be surprised to see a clarification, either way, in the new AOS 2.0 FAQ, because it will likely really be a Frequently Asked Question.

 Valander wrote:

auticus wrote:
The facebook group already confirmed this lets you move models that are in base to base so long as you are still in base to base.

The GW facebook account said that they liked that about the new rule.

And you ninja'ed me as I was posting a screenshot. But yup, definitely seems to be the case and the wording IMO was changed specifically to allow that.

This will be interesting to see now with the additional limitations on shooting, and I think will make melee units a little better off since not only can they tie down shooters (like you intuitively think they should), but may also be able to more effectively surround single large bases and even scooch around edges of other units to get a few more blokes in combat.

It also creates a bit more incentive to run 'blocks' of models next to each other to prevent themselves from being wrapped by incoming attackers, which in turn creates more incentive for flanking. I doubt it will be a huge impact in this regard but there is some subtle pushes towards more tactical realism here. That said lining up units as blocks has always been a surprisingly effective way to play, almost as if those real world armies had something figured out

Valander wrote:

Spoiler:

Davor wrote:

NinthMusketeer wrote:That change to pile ins is HUGE, the only way it could be considered slight is in the wording. Seriously I cannot understate how big of a deal that is.

I haven't played in years. I don't see the change here at all. Can someone explain what the change is? it seems the same to me.

As currently written, if a model is already in b2b with another they cannot move at all during Pile In, since you have to end closer to the enemy model than when you began, and if you're b2b that is impossible. This is confirmed in the FAQ:

Q: If you are already in contact with a model, do you still get to
pile in and rotate around the enemy units?
A: No.

The new wording allows you to move around a model you're already in b2b with, so long as you still end that move b2b.

Thank you. That is what I thought but my brain was telling me no it can't be. I am curious as to why they did this. So more models can be moved closer I take it?

Probably so that models can constantly get into contact because its not fun being bottlenecked or something along those lines.