Ramming and CC with Immobile walkers

[SeattleDV8]

I had a very odd game with some strange rule questions.

My opponent had 2 dreadnoughts side by side 11" from my gunless Vindicator, so of cousre I rammed them both.

Not quite as silly as it seems, one was immobile the other had lost its DCCW.

The Disarmed dread took the ram and the immobile one went with Death or Glory.

Then with more luck than a person should have my Vindicator survived.

I shook the immobile dread and immobilized the other.

Comes my assault phase he wanted to attack my Vindy with the Dreads

We decided that since they had not assaulted last turn they could not.

Next turn his shooting immobilzed the Vindicator.

Comes his assault phase he wishes to assault the Vindy...LOL even though all the vehicles were immobile and Base to Base.

I agreed that he could at this point.

I wonder if this was the best way to handle this? any other thoughts?

[greatcrusade08]

according to the rules it says if you are in B2B with a vehicle in the opponents assault phase you may still make an attack.

the 'assumption' made by the BRB is that you would have to have been in a combat already to be in this postion.. but it isnt exclusive..

 

id say since the ram was stopped by the walkers then they could have attacked that turn through being in B2B

[Marshal Wilhelm]

The Dreads could not assault the Vindi at all.

 

The 1st time because not assault had been initiated.

The 2nd time because the immobile Dreads cannot initiate an assault, being immobilised.

[Frosty the Pyro]

If they are in BtB with the enemy vehicle during the assult phase they may attack it. This obviously will not count as an assault and will not gain +1A for charging.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

If they are in BtB with the enemy vehicle during the assult phase they may attack it. This obviously will not count as an assault and will not gain +1A for charging.

 

I am confused.

 

BBB pg 63

 

Successive turns

Units that still have models in base contact with a vehicle in its Assault phase may attack it again, just as in a normal ongoing combat....

 

It seems to me that an assault move was needed for an assault to start.

 

As the Dreads never assaulted the vehicle, how can they attack it again?

 

The way the third paragraph reads to me is under the assumption that a unit assaults the vehicle in their turn, for some reason the vehicle doesn't move, and then they attack it again.

 

It doesn't read to me that by merely being in base contact can you assault something. Assaults must be initiated by an assault move somewhere and somehow. Assaults can keep going due to it having been started by an assault move and then perpetuated by being in base contact [as they don't otherwise keep going as per the usual rules]

 

I think the "again" prevents attacks merely by proximity. They can only happen if an assault move has occurred previously.

[Arikel]

What would happen is that after the ram the opposing vehicle would have to move to be at least one inch away from the walkers (or alternately the walkers would have to be moved one inch back from the vehicle), I believe. Otherwise it's violating placement rules where in a unit can only be within one inch of an enemy if it is assaulting.

[Hiro_Protagonist]

The vehicle ramming rules do not require the vehicles to be separated after the ram takes place. Tank shock does however. The two dreads would have been under the ramming rules, hence no movement.

 

As for further rounds...I'm of the opinion that the BtB rule means that combat occurs despite the fact that no assault moves were made. There aren't any clear cut (as in written in the BRB all in one place, not pieced together from multiple sections) rules that go either way.

 

If both you and your opponent were happy with it then you did the right thing. :D

[Grey Mage]

If your in BtB you can attack a vehicle, your just neither of you locked in combat, and call be shot at....

 

I think you handled it about right.

[Jakobus]

Actually reading this poses one big question for me. And maybe it deserves a thread of its own

 

Are Walkers allowed to perform a Death or Glory! ? I would assume after the rule on the Deffroller that ramming is a special kind of Tankshock that you could, but then you have the Ramming rules since it is clearly a vehicle.

 

But if you allow a Walker to do the Death or Glory, you would now have to consider allowing all vehicles a Death or Glory! attack which would definitely be listed under the Ramming rules.

[Hiro_Protagonist]

Actually reading this poses one big question for me. And maybe it deserves a thread of its own

 

Are Walkers allowed to perform a Death or Glory! ? I would assume after the rule on the Deffroller that ramming is a special kind of Tankshock that you could, but then you have the Ramming rules since it is clearly a vehicle.

 

But if you allow a Walker to do the Death or Glory, you would now have to consider allowing all vehicles a Death or Glory! attack which would definitely be listed under the Ramming rules.

 

It's covered in the BRB pg. 73, "Ramming a Walker".

 

A walker can take a Death or Glory attack, but if it fails the ramming attack is resolved against the walker's rear armour, as it is not braced for impact.

 

A walker cannot make a Death or Glory attack if the ram is in its rear arc.

[Jakobus]

Ahh there you go...

[SeattleDV8]

What would happen is that after the ram the opposing vehicle would have to move to be at least one inch away from the walkers (or alternately the walkers would have to be moved one inch back from the vehicle), I believe. Otherwise it's violating placement rules where in a unit can only be within one inch of an enemy if it is assaulting.

 

No , that was the 4th ed. rules.

You do not move a unit 1" away after assault or ramming.

[Legatus]

The way I see it, once two opposing models are in base contact they are assumed to be in a combat situation. The rules are usually very specific in that two opposing models may only touch when in combat, and have otherwise be separate from another to show that they are not in combat. The one exception is ramming, since Vehicles usually cannot engage in combat and thus them touching would not cause confusion. That leaves Walkers as a bit of a problem, as they are vehicles and so can be rammed, but they are also able to engage in combat so would have to stay away from enemy models if they are not in a combat with them.

 

I would say if an enemy tank moved into contact with a Walker, that would be the same as if the walker had assaulted earlier and the tank had not moved away. Contact has been made (though by the tank), and eitherthe tank or the walker could have moved away (unless immobalised). If neither of them has moved away then the walker will be in contact with the vehicle during the close combat phase and thus can make his attacks.

 

 

Units that still have models in base contact with a vehicle in its Assault phase may attack it again, just as in a normal ongoing combat....

 

It seems to me that an assault move was needed for an assault to start.

 

As the Dreads never assaulted the vehicle, how can they attack it again?

The description uses "again" because under normal circumstances if a vehicle and an enemy model are standing in base contact at the end of the turn that would be due to the model having assaulted the vehicle in it's previous turn, so there would have already been one round of attacking. The vehicle initiatinge the contact is obviously not anticipated by this rule. And with Infantry models they could not do that. It could only happen with walkers, which is easy to overlook when you write such a rule.

[shatter]

Most sensible. I agree that it's most likely an error of omission on the writer's part. Game mechanics and keeping it simple trends inherent in the brb support, in my opinion, constant and forced btb equating to CC being enabled.

 

A whisker of a challenge and a roll off must be made though.

 

*shrug*

 

At the time, I'd have suggested giving the walkers a 50% chance per assault phase to get their attacks and considered it an interesting development in the opera of the battle. Even if I was on the receiving end or not. But that's just me.

[thade]

If they are in BtB with the enemy vehicle during the assult phase they may attack it. This obviously will not count as an assault and will not gain +1A for charging.

 

This is how I would've ruled on it; you're in BtB, you can assault it. Just a pocketcase contingency that they didn't find when they play-tested.