Super-Heavy Walker Stomp Attacks

[Disciple of Fulgrim]

The rules for SHW Stomp attacks are pretty straightforward, but lead to a few weird (to me at least) anomalies.

 

1.  It's pretty clear that a SHW can only Stomp if it's in Close Combat - so it needs to have successfully charged at least one enemy unit, with all that goes into making that happen ruleswise, before it can Stomp.  But does the SHW have to Stomp (at least once maybe) the target of its charge/the unit it's in Close Combat with?  Or can it Stomp off to the side, or backwards, to target enemy units other than the one(s) it's in Close Combat with?  RAW it seems to be the latter (can Stomp in any direction you want) which, while incredibly versatile, seems at odds with how the rest of the rules are written.  (i.e. if a SHW shoots at the enemy, it can only charge those units, just like everyone else.)

 

2.  If a SHW destroys the target of its charge before Initiiative Step 1 (with other Close Combat weapons/attacks) does it still get to Stomp?  RAW seems to indicate yes it does (since Stomps are "in addition to" other CC attacks) but again, this seems incredibly versatile.

 

(Reason I'm asking is because I'm going to be trying out my new Brass Scorpion tomorrow, which gets six base CC attacks with its claws before D3+2 Stomps.  I can easily see it ripping up something with the claws before it gets to Stomp, and am wondering if I can then potentially Stomp other stuff too.  For the points it costs that seems reasonable to me, but i'm not sure my opponent is going to agree when I link up Stomps to target some high-value target 12 inches off to the side,)  

[Lucien Eilam]

The only requirement for Stomp is that the first template is placed in contact with the model's base and subsequent templates are placed within 3" of that. So yes, you can technically Stomp in any direction.

 

To attack, you must be engaged - either in base contact with, or within 2" of, an enemy model locked in the same combat. So if you kill all your opponents (or even everything within 2" if you already piled in at your main Initiative step) you don't get to Stomp.

[Disciple of Fulgrim]

A great and very correct answer - so it all hinges on staying "engaged" (which is spelled out in the rules for determining who can fight.)

 

So sort of like how you want to win Close Combat's during the enemy's turn, your SHW might want to almost (but not quite) pummel its opponent(s) during regular Close Combat, so it can also trigger its Stomp attacks.

[shandwen]

Its funny that in your turn it may be better to stomp empty ground than actually kill the enemy.

[ShinyRhino]

As a tangent from this topic, what happens to a non-vehicle unit that took casualties as the result of the Stomp attacks, but was not participating in the melee?

Example: Knight charges a unit of 10 Ork Boyz, kills two, and gets 3 Stomps. The Knight-controlling player uses those Stomp attacks and "Walks" his way into a nearby unit of ten Grots, killing six. The Orks did no damage to the Knight.

The Boyz lose the combat, and would normally test Morale at a -2. The Stomp attacks caused wounds, just not all to the Boyz. Do the Grots take a Morale test? Do the Boyz take their Morale test at -2, or -6 because of the four wounds caused to the Grots?

[Lucien Eilam]

The Assault phase is a specific exception to the general rule that taking 25% casualties in a single phase causes a Morale test.

 

The primary requirement for taking a Morale check in the Assault phase is that you lost the combat. They're not even in a combat, so no Morale check.

[ShinyRhino]

The Assault phase is a specific exception to the general rule that taking 25% casualties in a single phase causes a Morale test.

 

The primary requirement for taking a Morale check in the Assault phase is that you lost the combat. They're not even in a combat, so no Morale check.

Makes sense to me, but at what modifier do the Boyz test?

[Lucien Eilam]

Debatable.

 

 

 

To decide who has won the combat, total up the number of unsaved Wounds inflicted by each side onto their opponents. This includes all Wounds caused during the Fight sub-phase, whether from normal Attacks, the Hammer of Wrath special rule, or other factors.

 

Out of context, the "This includes all Wounds caused during the Fight sub-phase…" seems to indicate that anything you killed counts, but "onto their opponents" could be interpreted as meaning the other side in the combat only.

 

I don't think the writers considered the situation at all, so we're stuck trying to apply rules that were never intended to deal with this situation.

 

Personally, I'd edge toward nothing outside a combat affecting anything inside it, on the basis that multiple combats have no influence on each other and intentionally stomping out of the combat is a gamey exploit that probably wasn't intended, so ignore the Grots entirely. 

[Dam13n]

I'd say that the Stomp Attacks should be directed at the unit(s) that the Super-heavy Walker is engaged with. Anything else is just abusing a rule that, as Lucien has stated, was written with no consideration that anyone would think to stomp a unit that wasn't actually involved in the combat.

If it feels wrong, it probably is wrong. It's just a game, so play nice or don't play at all.

Saying that, if someone were that way inclined () then, as Lucien has stated, the reasonable interpretation is that casualties caused to units not involved in the combat do not affect the combat, including combat resolution. As those wounds were not caused to "their opponents" but to a unit outside the combat.

[Fibonacci]

on the basis that multiple combats have no influence on each other

Well, seperate combats do not influence each other.  Multiple combats affect each other to the extent that they have their own full rules section.

 

In the multiple combat assault resolution rules it says:

 

 

When determining assault results in a multiple combat, total up the number of Wounds inflicted by all units on each side to see which side is the winner. Every unit on the losing side has to check their Morale (they all use the same penalty).

However the rules never mention unengaged units. Personally I think anything not engaged in that combat would be incidental.  Whether from Stomps, exploding vehicles or any other oddity, all the outsde stuff happens but does not count as Wounds caused to the combat.  But that is my personal opinion based on the fact that the assault (and multiple asault) rules only ever refer to the engaged units.

[Lucien Eilam]

Well, seperate combats do not influence each other. Multiple combats affect each other to the extent that they have their own full rules section.

Yeah, obviously I'm talking about multiple separate combats. The rulebook definition of "multiple" combats is actually a single combat.

If it feels wrong, it probably is wrong. It's just a game, so play nice or don't play at all.

Yes, but it's bound to come up sooner or later even if you don't do it on purpose. A second enemy unit close behind the one you're engaged with and suddenly the situation is unavoidable.

[Dam13n]

It comes down to intent.  If it's "collateral damage" from stomping a unit that is engaged then that's one thing.  Intentionally ignoring the units that are engaged in order to stomp an unengaged unit is another.

 

Personally I'd find it distasteful to intentionally stomp an unengaged unit, so I wouldn't do it.

 

But I fear we're drawing this off topic...

[DarkAngeal]

If the stomps killed models in a unit outside the combat, it doesn't apply to the combat results. But if the unit lost more than 25% at the end of the phase, then they take a morale check as normal

[Lucien Eilam]

But if the unit lost more than 25% at the end of the phase, then they take a morale check as normal

 

Nope:

 

 

 

There is an exception: units that lose 25% or more of their current models in the Assault phase do not take a Morale check.

 

Obviously the intention there is to prevent a double check when losing combat, or having to check despite winning, but its coverage is blanket.