(Yet another) multiple combat query

[Nabterayl]

We'll have to disagree, as I see no rule allowing ICs to form a unit

First paragraph of page 48 doesn't get you there?

[DarkLink]

I don't understand why you believe this. The IC rules clearly state that the IC may not leave a unit during the Shooting and Assault phases, nor may they leave while the unit is Locked. Even if the rest of the unit was destroyed, the ICs would still be considered part of the unit until such time as they are permitted to leave the unit. So, when making Pile In moves, the ICs would still be a unit, and even if one were unable to reach BtB, it wouldn't revert to being an independant unit.

Anytime you have two units in combat that cannot reach B2B after all pile-in moves are made, the combat automatically ends. It's not a likely scenario, though I think I have seen it happen once before.

Let's say you have a unit that is really strung out. It assaults two enemy units that are really far apart. Both enemy units survive, but the strung-out unit takes a bunch of casualties, all of which are removed from one end of the congo-line. One enemy unit is no longer in B2B, and so attempts to pile in, while the other unit stays where it is, as it is already in B2B. If the enemy unit that is left alone cannot reach B2B after it's pile-in move, it is no longer part of the combat.

Just an example, for illustrative purposes.

We'll have to disagree, as I see no rule allowing ICs to form a unit and I don't believe any model can be called part of something which does not exist, so the moment the unit ceases to exist none of the characters are part of the unit.

As Nab pointed out, IC's can join with any other unit (except Vehicles and whatnot). This includes forming "super-units".

[Jwolf]

Sorry, should have been more clear. I see no rule allowing the ICs who were part of a unit to form a unit during the assault phase after the parent unit is destroyed. If the ICs were joined to each other at the start, they would be a unit still. If the ICs are joined to a unit and the unit is destroyed, they are now 3 individuals, as they cannot belong to something that does not exist.

The unit cannot join an IC, so for the 3 ICs to be joined together with a unit, everyone had to join the unit. Once the unit is gone, they ICs can no longer be part of it and thus revert to being ICs. At least that's the best I can see happening.

I apologize for doing the whole "writing only about what I'm thinking, and not filling in my assumptions or the things I take as otherwise given" thing; that just confuses the issue.

[Nabterayl]

If the ICs were joined to each other at the start, they would be a unit still. If the ICs are joined to a unit and the unit is destroyed, they are now 3 individuals, as they cannot belong to something that does not exist.

It sounds like you're imagining five terminators and three ICs as a unit of terminators that is joined by three "satellite" ICs, and thus, once you destroy the "hub" (the terminators), the three ICs are suddenly no longer joined to anything.

I don't think that's the right way to think about units. If it were, that would make units composed solely of ICs very difficult to analyze. Which IC would be the hub? Or, if units composed solely of ICs don't have a hub, what's the textual basis for giving them a different model than units composed of ICs and non-ICs?

It seems to me like the better model is to say that five terminators joined by three ICs collectively comprise "unit A" and so, if the five terminators are destroyed, the three ICs are still part of unit A. That avoids reading a hub model into the rules, which I don't see a basis for.

[DarkLink]

Sorry, should have been more clear. I see no rule allowing the ICs who were part of a unit to form a unit during the assault phase after the parent unit is destroyed. If the ICs were joined to each other at the start, they would be a unit still. If the ICs are joined to a unit and the unit is destroyed, they are now 3 individuals, as they cannot belong to something that does not exist.

The unit cannot join an IC, so for the 3 ICs to be joined together with a unit, everyone had to join the unit. Once the unit is gone, they ICs can no longer be part of it and thus revert to being ICs. At least that's the best I can see happening.

I apologize for doing the whole "writing only about what I'm thinking, and not filling in my assumptions or the things I take as otherwise given" thing; that just confuses the issue.

Ok, yeah, misunderstood your comment. Though I do agree with Nab's post above.

[BuFFo]

The IC is still part of the unit, even if it is a lone model after combat, because the rules specifically state an IC can leave a unit only in the movement phase.

Whether the Terminators are alive or dead, the Terminator unit still exists as long as the IC is joined to it.

5 Terminators = Unit A

5 Terminators and an IC joined to it = Unit B

IC alone after the terminators die in combat = Unit B

IC declared to be his own unit in owner's movement phase = Unit C

[Denzark]

What Senor la Buey said.

[rle68]

We'll have to disagree, as I see no rule allowing ICs to form a unit and I don't believe any model can be called part of something which does not exist, so the moment the unit ceases to exist none of the characters are part of the unit.

Jwolf is 100% correct on this topic

[Culven]

Jwolf is 100% correct on this topic

Do you have any rules citations to support this interpretation? I have always been under the understanding the a unit is constituted by all models within it, including ICs. If all of the models except for the ICs (and this requires more than one in the unit) are removed as casualties, the ICs are still considered to constitute that unit until such time as they may choose to move out of coherency. I do not know of any rules that clearly address the situation and state definitively that the ICs are or are not still part of the same unit when only they are left, but I may have overlooked something. Is there anything that you can point me to that will provide enlightenment?

I suppose the two sides that I see here could be summarised as: 1) The ICs are joined to the base squad and without it they are no longer attached, lets call this the "Satelite" approach. 2) The ICs and squad are all one unit each model attached to each other with the concept of the "unit" holding them all together, lets call this the "Basket" approach.

It seems that Jwolf is a "Satelite" guy, whereas I am a "Basket" guy. Are there any rules which lend support to one of these?

[Jwolf]

I've not been able to find any, Culven. I suppose that means I'm stuck with a Basket applying to my guys, whereas my opponents have the Satelite, if they so choose.