Dreadnought Close Combat

[08ak1]

2 questions regarding Dreadnought CC

1. A Dreadnought being a single model, can it assault multiple units? Recently an Iron Clad assaulted a tank of mine but positioned itself in base to base with my commander squad as well, the player insisted it was ok because he hadn't moved around the tank to get there. It then remained in CC with my Command squad through my turn as it didnt cause any wounds to them, only the tank... Aside from my own ideas about it, the rules aren't seemingly clear, they state the first model moves into the unit you declared assault on, and any models after that may engage other units if they don't break coherency....doesn't that mean the ironclad is ineligible to assault multiple units as a single model unit?


2. Same game, the IronClad assaults a tank, after moving to the tank it then turned around to put its back to the tank. The end result of this maneuver was that i could wail on the back armor in my turn...again it seemed really shady as it made no sense to me that it was fighting backward...but is there a rule back me up? shouldn't a unit be forced to face the target its assaulting?

Thanks

[MarshalAdamar]

I asked that same exact question to a buddy of mine and the conclusion that we came up with is that the BRB does not specifically prohibit it (that we could find) but it is EXTREMELY unlikely. The rules for assaulting are to declare the target of the charge and then move the CLOSEST model in a straight line to get into base to base contact.

So, unless your two units were PERFECTLY positioned the dual charge would be impossible because your opponent would have to move NOT in a straight line to get his Dread into contact with both units.

As for the second one, it’s legal but not legal the way he did it.

The rules for VEHICLE facing is that you can pivot to face any direction you want in the MOVEMENT phase. So to be legal he could move 6 towards the tank, pivot at the END of the movement phase to face his rear armor towards the tank, then charge. (Silly yes, legal... Seems so.) BUT, if he destroys the tank, explodes you remove the model, and his rear armor is still facing where the tank was and he has to stay that way until his next turn. Awesome if he fails to harm the tank just back up a little and shoot him in the arse, or back the tank up to give units behind him a clear shot.

Remember vehicles with out a weapons skill can never be locked in close combat~!!

[Chaosgerbil]

Pg. 34 says that you must move the first assaulter to the closest enemy model in the target squad by the shortest possible route. You could only multi-assault if there was a very specific placement of models, with some overlapping squads. In general I think this would be suspect and you should avoid trying to claim a multi-assualt with one model.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, there's been huge arguments over whether or not a single model unit can multi-assault.

There are no rules regarding the facing of a Dreadnought in close combat. Attackers always hit the walker on the front armor, so facing doesn't matter, and nowhere does it say the walker must face its target (what if the walker is surrounded? can it only kill the models in front of it? no, it can kill all of them, potentially). Rotating the walker is perfectly legal.

[Abominable Plague Marine]

I dont have a problem with a single model assaulting multiple units. How do you assault multiple units with one model? the same way you assault multiple units with more than one model, declare it; you are then forced to move up to 6" to reach a point where both units are close enough to be reached by the one model, a failed assault still applies, its all or nothing.

[08ak1]

There are no rules regarding the facing of a Dreadnought in close combat. Attackers always hit the walker on the front armor, so facing doesn't matter, and nowhere does it say the walker must face its target (what if the walker is surrounded? can it only kill the models in front of it? no, it can kill all of them, potentially). Rotating the walker is perfectly legal.

I understand facing in Close combat doesn't matter to a dread because of their rules, but in this case what matters is that he assaults lets say from East to West, so




Assault Move:
:p <------ :mad: (other tank)


then once he gets to the tank, the dreadnought pivots 180' so he's facing like so.
:p :mad: --> (other tank)

He fights against the tank like this, so then next turn, the tank that was behind him before he assaulted wont be able to shoot him in the back as he wont be engaged with the tank he assaulted anymore.

To me this doesn't seem right because he has only 1 opponent in this CC, and the rules state he must charge in by the shortest route, not charge in by the shortest route then pivot if you want??

[SombreBrotherhood]

2. Same game, the IronClad assaults a tank, after moving to the tank it then turned around to put its back to the tank. The end result of this maneuver was that i could wail on the back armor in my turn...again it seemed really shady as it made no sense to me that it was fighting backward...but is there a rule back me up? shouldn't a unit be forced to face the target its assaulting

As an 'Assault Move' is a special type of movement, with special restrictions, I'd disallow this. The pivot rule is in the Movement phase. By the time you assault, you're 2 phases later and in assault. Once you've made contact with the target of the assault, the 'assault move' is over and the model can't be moved further (ie rotation). Further, while is isn't exactly illegal per se, I definitely think that it's rule shaving at best. Things that are defended with "well, there isn't a rule against it" are usually suspect with good reason.

[SeattleDV8]

As an 'Assault Move' is a special type of movement, with special restrictions, I'd disallow this. The pivot rule is in the Movement phase. By the time you assault, you're 2 phases later and in assault. Once you've made contact with the target of the assault, the 'assault move' is over and the model can't be moved further (ie rotation). Further, while is isn't exactly illegal per se, I definitely think that it's rule shaving at best. Things that are defended with "well, there isn't a rule against it" are usually suspect with good reason.
No so , the Assault move actual removes a restriction, ie moving within 1" of a enemy model.
BRB pg34. "....make their assault move following the same rules as in the movement phase...."
Walkers are allowed to pivot during their movement.They are also allowed to move backward.
It doesn't matter in the closest path as pivoting doesn't count as moving.
Yes doing this is very 'gamey' but also legal.

[MarshalAdamar]

AH, there's that super fun GW word game again, (figure out my rules by process of elimination)

But if it says that the assault move is treated the same as the regular move then the dread could pivot for free as much as he wants on the charge. (Boo)

I think it’s against the spirit of the game but the rules don't seem to specify that models assaulting a unit must face the unit. Which makes sense since it doesn’t matter with regular units, only walkers since they can be shot on rear armor facing.

But I will give kudos for creativity to the player who realized that he could attack the tank and have the tank protect himself by putting vulnerable rear armor by putting his back to it.

[N0rdicNinja]

Power Gaming at its best!

Legal or not, stuff like that completely mutilates the spirit of the game and is a very good example of why I stick to casual.

[RocketRollRebel]

The multi charge part sounds legit to me but turning the dread after it assaults the tank isnt. As mentioned before you can turn in the movement phase all you like and then I suppose "moon walk" your dread at the enemy tank. Although a move like that is a bit douchey in my opinion and pretty shady.

[Gotthammer]

As mentioned before you can turn in the movement phase all you like and then I suppose "moon walk" your dread at the enemy tank.

The key is to show them that you're really not scared, I mean you're playin' with your tank's life, this ain't no truth or dare. They'll kick you, then they beat you, then they'll tell you it's fair. So the trick is to beat it, but you wanna be bad.

I went and had a look at the tank but he'd been hit by, he'd been struck by a smooth criminal. All the Dread had to say was that the sentinel was not his son.

[RocketRollRebel]

The key is to show them that you're really not scared, I mean you're playin' with your tank's life, this ain't no truth or dare. They'll kick you, then they beat you, then they'll tell you it's fair. So the trick is to beat it, but you wanna be bad.

I went and had a look at the tank but he'd been hit by, he'd been struck by a smooth criminal. All the Dread had to say was that the sentinel was not his son.

hahahahahaha cheers to you sir! :p

[MarshalAdamar]

Gotthammer, I almost lost control of my bladder!! Thankfully space marines have an extra sphincter valve. That was the funniest thing I've seen a quite a while.

[08ak1]

alright, thanks for the thoughts folks

[RocketRollRebel]

The key is to show them that you're really not scared, I mean you're playin' with your tank's life, this ain't no truth or dare. They'll kick you, then they beat you, then they'll tell you it's fair. So the trick is to beat it, but you wanna be bad.

I went and had a look at the tank but he'd been hit by, he'd been struck by a smooth criminal. All the Dread had to say was that the sentinel was not his son.

I've been inspired to make a MJ furioso dread with a white sparkly dccw and maybe a fedora haha

[DarkLink]

The multi charge part sounds legit to me but turning the dread after it assaults the tank isnt. As mentioned before you can turn in the movement phase all you like and then I suppose "moon walk" your dread at the enemy tank. Although a move like that is a bit douchey in my opinion and pretty shady.

There are no rules regarding the facing of Dreadnoughts in CC, nor are there restrictions requiring the Dreadnought to face a certain direction when moving or assaulting (only when shooting). It is a perfectly legal move. As far as we know, the Dread could be trying to push the tank over by pushing his back into the tank:p.

Aside from that, I don't know why everyone has such a problem with it. Walkers are allowed to freely pivot when shooting and moving, and protecting the rear armor of the dread is common sense, and perfectly legal. I can't help but think back to a comment Chumbayala said in another thread, about cries of "powergaming" being little more than bullying.

Unless of course, this guy actually cheats (in other aspects of the game, as this is all legal). Then he deserves an appropriate amount of refusals to play.

[N0rdicNinja]

There are no rules regarding the facing of Dreadnoughts in CC, nor are there restrictions requiring the Dreadnought to face a certain direction when moving or assaulting (only when shooting). It is a perfectly legal move. As far as we know, the Dread could be trying to push the tank over by pushing his back into the tank:p.

Aside from that, I don't know why everyone has such a problem with it. Walkers are allowed to freely pivot when shooting and moving, and protecting the rear armor of the dread is common sense, and perfectly legal. I can't help but think back to a comment Chumbayala said in another thread, about cries of "powergaming" being little more than bullying.

Unless of course, this guy actually cheats (in other aspects of the game, as this is all legal). Then he deserves an appropriate amount of refusals to play.

That depends on your perspective, Chumbayala, at least as far as I can tell, is an extremely competitive/tournie style player. So yes I could see someone like him having no problem with something like this, as has already been stated there are no rules against a moonwalking Dread, so it is a valid move. But there are a lot of us who play Warhammer who love playing "fluffy" games, hell in our play group we've actually written up short stories to follow up some of our more impressive sessions.

And in that heart stuff like this makes no sense what so ever in the spirit of the game, what reason would a dread have to scratch its but up against a tank? It just wouldn't happen, the only reason to do it is to take advantage of a rule in a way that wasn't thought about by the people writing the book in the first place. It completely removes you from the experience, especially when it results in debates like I'm sure it did when it happened to the OP.

There's no real write or wrong answer to this, highly competitive/technical people will give it a pass, and they're not wrong, it's technically allowed so they are %100 correct. But come play with a group like mine and you wont have to worry about this "technicality" mumbo jumbo.

[SeattleDV8]

Sigh, you do realize that this forum is to discuss what the rules actaully said and not how we play or house rule the rules.
Of course I will argue strict RAW in these forums....I will make you follow the exact wording of each rule.
Is this the way I play? Of course not, the reality is I'm a very laidbacked player. I'm always up to house rule almost anything, BUT that is based on my understanding of the actual rules.
If someone is tring to game me for advantage I can play them back with interest. It is not how I enjoy playing though, I like a give and take , I will never question an opponent on LOS or cover. Likewise I'm easy on different outlooks on certain rules, as long as it isn't a clear case or rules lawyering for advanage...LOL sometimes I'll even let that go to prove I can overcome the slight advanage they get from tweaking rules.
Please remember that this forum is not for GaP( games as played) or RaI ( rules as Intented) but for RaW (rules as Written).
Once a person knows what the actual rules state you can always house any Silly RAW or rules that don't fit into your local gaming group.

[N0rdicNinja]

I was unaware the entire point of this forum was to discuss RAW, I thought it was to discuss Warhammer as a whole, my bad. But this is a perfect example of rules lawyering to gain the upper hand.

[MarshalAdamar]

One point, I believe that the dread cannot pivot "freely"

You can always choose your facing in the movement phase.

But in the shooting phase I'm pretty sure the rules is that walkers have about a 180 degree arch of fire, but they cannot pivot (I think, no rule book in front of me).

Then in the assault phase they have the same rules as infantry which treats the movement the "same as moving in the movement phase" so they can pivot again if they want.

[Nabterayl]

in the shooting phase I'm pretty sure the rules is that walkers have about a 180 degree arch of fire, but they cannot pivot (I think, no rule book in front of me).
They have a 45-degree arc of fire, but they can pivot before shooting (not after). See page 72:


When firing a walker's weapons, pivot the walker on the spot so that its guns are aimed at the target (assume that all weapons mounted on a walker can swivel 45 degrees, like hull-mounted weapons) and then measure the range from the mounting point of the weapon and along its barrel, as normal for vehicles. This pivoting in the Shooting phase does not count as moving and represents the vastly superior agility of walkers in comparison with other vehicles. Keep in mind however that the walker will probably remain facing in this direction until its next Movement phase, so its facing will determine where its rear armour is going to be when the enemy returns fire!

[xilton]

1. hmm, I think the rules are quite clear here and like someone else mentioned in this thread, unless the 2 targets are placed in a manner where the single model can actually charge both using the shortest route, he won't be able to charge both. Here's why:

As a first, lets settle the argument around charging direction. The rule is very specific, you MUST use the SHORTEST route possible. Unless you have something in your way, it will be the closest route from your base to the target's base or hull in a straight line. So this one is easy, it's not even a question of pivoting, moving backwards ect The only way you can charge a second unit in this case is if the second unit happens to clip the path of your shortest route once in BtB and you can still be in cc with both without deviating from this route. Simple enough. I don't know what is unclear about the rules.

Lets say you have the following where Z is the charging mocel and X are dreadnoughts:

Z
X X

At this angel, Z will never be aloud to assault the 2nd dreadnought even if it is within distance of the assault roll because the shortest route does NOT clip the second dreadnought.

Same goes for a troop, you have to max the number on the primary target in BtB before going to the 2nd target unless the model can touch at the same time the primary target and the secondary target. Move your first model, same rules as above, then move what ever is able to get in BtB with the primary target before even thinking to going to the secondary. The primary target and closest route is the key here.

Assaulting multiple units in 6th is often not possible unless the enemy is placed a certain way and if you have more models then BtB with the primary target will allow.

2. You're in cc, you have to face your opponent when you are the assaulter. But I can understand that the rules doesn't exactly say this.

[bfmusashi]

I guess it depends on how seriously you take the line 'the walker turns to face its enemy and charges into melee' on p. 84. I don't have a real issue with it, the waist joint on a SM dread allows 360 moves so it doesn't hurt my sense of right vs. wrong.

[Aramel]

Oh fantastic, so I can puppet master a dreadnought, have it shoot something behind and as a bonus make it exposes rear armour! This I like.

[DarkLink]

Threadomancy much?

[bfmusashi]

Great, now I'm going to have to check posting dates on these rules queries >.<

[Bob821]

When an Iron clad is ripping chunks out a land raider is he doing it with his fists or exhaust? If his ranged weapons only have a 45 deg field of fire why not his fists as well? It seems differnet to me when actually locked in combat as it is very dynamic but when trying to destroy a tank it should have to face it. Well within 45 degs anyway! I have read and re-read the rules so I'm aware what they say and I agree they don't seem to say you can't turn your dread around after it has charged but they dont say you can either. And whats the first rule? Somthing like don't be a tool and interpret the rules to make the game better.

I would not play a secound game with someone who pulled this trick.

With regards the multiple charge as long as you can get in to BtB with both units while still travling the shortest route to you primary target I dont really see a problem.