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:
<------ (other tank)


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