I would say that you could break away and charge on the same action (provided that you win the roll). A charge is just a move that brings you into base to base with an enemy model. The break away rule allows you to move your MV.
There is a limit to charge though in that you have to charge the closest enemy in LOS (except if that target is already engaged). So unless you can prevent LOS to the model you are breaking away from you wont be able to charge another one since it is closest.
So the way I see it the only way you could break away and charge with the same action would be if the model you are engaged with is engaged in CC with another of your models.
Did that make sense?
You atomatically break LOS with the model youīre leaving if you just turn around (youīve got only 180° to see; provided youīre not mounted, then itīs 360° and you canīt break LOS).Take a look at the LOS rule p.32. LOS is 360°. I thought that just turning would fix things but then I checked the LOS rule to make sure. It would work in Chronopia though since LOS is measured from the front arc there.
I would say that you could break away and charge on the same action (provided that you win the roll). A charge is just a move that brings you into base to base with an enemy model. The break away rule allows you to move your MV.
I would say that you could break away and charge on the same action (provided that you win the roll). A charge is just a move that brings you into base to base with an enemy model. The break away rule allows you to move your MV.
Both states that they cost 1 action to do, and Charge must be declared to be a Charge before you do the movement since it opens up the possibility to counter charge for other units on wait. If Break Away had been a declared Move action perhaps it had been possible to combine but from what I read they are both attack actions that let you move, one away from the enemy and one towards the enemy.
Also... if combining actions like this would be possible would it not open a whole can of worm of other things you could do?
Yes I understand the distinction, but the problem is:
Break away p. 42:
.......lalalal
The model with the
highest score wins. If the rnodel attempting to Break Away
succeeds, it is moved away from the engaged enemy model up
to its MV in inches.
...lalalalal
--> so a break away is basically a move action away from an opponent, which can be countered by the roll (which isnīt applied for auto break away/vehicles/flyers.... - so weīre on a move action again)
Move actions p. 40:
lalalal....
A Move that brings a model into base-to-base contact
wlth an enemy model is considered a Charge. This particular
Move is covered In greater detail in the "Getting Into cIose
Combat" section
--> so a break away is a move action which could possibly end in B2B contact and thus making it a charge
all the other mentionings I found donīt counter these principles.
They only give additional restrictions as having to attack/charge a nearest model in LOS and so on.
So all models that can leave CC by will either being vehicles or on another basis or getting their breakaway roll should be able to do this....
Breaking away is a move action. As such it can be used to charge, and vehicles can move and shoot with the action.
OR
Breaking away is a special action. It can't be used to charge, but that also means that vehicles that are engaged in CC with a model and drives away, can't use that action to shoot while moving. (Since it isn't a move action.)
Page 40: Mounted Troops and Actions
Q: Can a mounted trooper have the mount move and then the rider shoot, like a multi-crewed vehicle?
A: Under normal conditions, if a mount makes a move action, the rider is assumed to be controlling/steering it and thus uses an action as well. A rider may not, normally, fire while its mount moves.
You have three different actions as defined by the rulebook.
Move, Charge and Break Away.
You cannot combine any two of these Actions.
So a model is not able to do a break away and a charge action in one action.
So far so good.
Mounted Hussars:
Mounted Hussars are able to auto brake away from CC.
It isnt mentioned if it is a brake away action or a move action (accourding to vehicles).
But that doesnt matter. You cannot combine either a break away action or a move action with a charge action.
They are different types of actions.
So a Mounted Hussar cannot auto brake away and charge in one action.
but must be a declared charge before movement, while a break away must be a declared break away to let a enemy try and keep you in close combat. The Dinos just let you automatically win the roll. :)
Vehicles do not need to test to break away from close combat.
May automatically break from CC.
When confronted by a close combat weapon that might actually breach the armor, vehicles may simply use a move action to drive away, and automatically break close combat with the enemy.
I guess we ned a FAQ team ruling as to Break Away and Charge.
Can you combine Break Away (with the intent to leave CC) with a Charge (with the intent to enter CC)?
I guess we ned a FAQ team ruling as to Break Away and Charge.
Can you combine Break Away (with the intent to leave CC) with a Charge (with the intent to enter CC)?
A ruling on it would be good yes since it seems there is quite a lot of Grey zones in it.
Are you able to combine two actions, Break Away and Charge, if the first is a automatic success?
Yes they both share that they do not need to test for breaking. But that do not make the Mounted Hussar able to use the Vehicle rules, specially since it's not a vehicle. Skin and living tissue vs Metal and gears.
Unless it's otherwise stated the ordinary rules should apply for Mounted Hussars and Breaking Away, making them count as any other troop and apply to the Break Away rule, with the SR that let them automatically break CC if they want, but they must first say they do so. And doing that is a action.
Meanwhile Vehicles got a special rule that states they can simply use a move action to break combat. This rule relating to that they ain't living beings but machines.
All other units must spend a Break Away Action to break Combat, even if they get a Automatic success in doing so. :)
And for mounted models, the closest model not in CC becomes the model they just left.
So they would just keep bouncing against that model. That seems to violate the intent of the rules (yes, I know we are arguing the letter of the rules, but sometimes it's good to take a look at what that would produce, and what might be intended).
Vehicles, on the other hand, should just have a rule that gets rid of the notion of Breaking Away totally. Currently both the vehicle and the people attacking it in CC can just walk away, no break test roll required for either. That would imply that vehicles just are incapable of getting locked in CC. It isn't that they should auto-succeed in a Break Away, they should never have to contemplate Breaking Away, they should just move. You should not be able to hold a vehicle in CC. (This would also solve the problem with the tangle chains too).
And for mounted models, the closest model not in CC becomes the model they just left.
So they would just keep bouncing against that model. That seems to violate the intent of the rules (yes, I know we are arguing the letter of the rules, but sometimes it's good to take a look at what that would produce, and what might be intended).
Vehicles, on the other hand, should just have a rule that gets rid of the notion of Breaking Away totally. Currently both the vehicle and the people attacking it in CC can just walk away, no break test roll required for either. That would imply that vehicles just are incapable of getting locked in CC. It isn't that they should auto-succeed in a Break Away, they should never have to contemplate Breaking Away, they should just move. You should not be able to hold a vehicle in CC. (This would also solve the problem with the tangle chains too).
Yes, but when considering the intent of the rules, keep in mind that logically cavalry work much like vehicles when it comes to mobility. They too wouldn't usually have to worry about who was attacking them in CC, which is reflected in the MH's special rule. That's how cavalry charges worked. Cavalry rarely stopped to fight the enemy unless they were cornered, instead they kept charging other enemies since they were big and fast enough to not (usually) have to worry about the enemy's counterattacks.
It's really quite clear to me, but to avoid cluttering the thread by repeating myself any more, I'll just drop out of this. ;D
For the mounted its more complicated as i have thought.
The charge action is not a action for itself, it is a combined action of a move and an attack action.
But:
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
But this doesnt aswerif the auto break away is an move or an attack action for the mounted.
It only answers how it works if it is considert a move action
Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45969#msg45969 date=For the mounted its more complicated as i have thought.
The charge action is not a action for itself, it is a combined action of a move and an attack action.
But:
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
But this doesnt aswerif the auto break away is an move or an attack action for the mounted.
It only answers how it works if it is considert a move action
A Charge must be declared prior to a Move Action. In order to Charge a model, the attacker must have line of sight, and be able to Move into base to base contact with the target. Therefore, if a players declares that the auto-breaking model is going to conduct a Charge, has the new target model in LOS (prior to breaking from CC), and can legally Move into base to base contact with the target, then the Charge takes place.
Does that clear it up?
Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45969#msg45969 date=For the mounted its more complicated as i have thought.
The charge action is not a action for itself, it is a combined action of a move and an attack action.
But:
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
But this doesnt aswerif the auto break away is an move or an attack action for the mounted.
It only answers how it works if it is considert a move action
A Charge must be declared prior to a Move Action. In order to Charge a model, the attacker must have line of sight, and be able to Move into base to base contact with the target. Therefore, if a players declares that the auto-breaking model is going to conduct a Charge, has the new target model in LOS (prior to breaking from CC), and can legally Move into base to base contact with the target, then the Charge takes place.
Does that clear it up?
No, because you have to charge the nearest target and that is the one you are leaving by autobreak. So you have to charge him again.
And thats so wirded that I think it isnt possible to break away and charge in the same action
Quote from: dmcgee1 link=topic=5890.msg45994#msg45994 date=Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45969#msg45969 date=For the mounted its more complicated as i have thought.
The charge action is not a action for itself, it is a combined action of a move and an attack action.
But:
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
But this doesnt aswerif the auto break away is an move or an attack action for the mounted.
It only answers how it works if it is considert a move action
A Charge must be declared prior to a Move Action. In order to Charge a model, the attacker must have line of sight, and be able to Move into base to base contact with the target. Therefore, if a players declares that the auto-breaking model is going to conduct a Charge, has the new target model in LOS (prior to breaking from CC), and can legally Move into base to base contact with the target, then the Charge takes place.
Does that clear it up?
No, because you have to charge the nearest target and that is the one you are leaving by autobreak. So you have to charge him again.
And thats so wirded that I think it isnt possible to break away and charge in the same action
Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45997#msg45997 date=Quote from: dmcgee1 link=topic=5890.msg45994#msg45994 date=Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45969#msg45969 date=For the mounted its more complicated as i have thought.
The charge action is not a action for itself, it is a combined action of a move and an attack action.
But:
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
But this doesnt aswerif the auto break away is an move or an attack action for the mounted.
It only answers how it works if it is considert a move action
A Charge must be declared prior to a Move Action. In order to Charge a model, the attacker must have line of sight, and be able to Move into base to base contact with the target. Therefore, if a players declares that the auto-breaking model is going to conduct a Charge, has the new target model in LOS (prior to breaking from CC), and can legally Move into base to base contact with the target, then the Charge takes place.
Does that clear it up?
No, because you have to charge the nearest target and that is the one you are leaving by autobreak. So you have to charge him again.
And thats so wirded that I think it isnt possible to break away and charge in the same action
It's valid, if the target your first in CC with is attacked by another one of your troops. So from what dmcgee1 say if you have:
2 mounted hussars in CC with 1 enemy.
Then 1 mounted hussar is able to perform a auto-break away and charge another enemy, using the rule to ignore a enemy in close combat with another of your units.
And it is worth noting that all the rest of the cav units in the game don't have an auto-break away. So that factor isn't part of being cav, it's just the MH special mount rules.
Just one thing. Does this work for the Fenris bike in the same way or is it no problem in anyway because it is a vehicle? As far as I know the Fenris is the only 100% Close Combat Vehicle.
The Fenris bike can attack after a 1" movement the target it just left (drive by attack) and because of this it can ignore the first target (still in CC caused by the drive by attack) and can attack the next target. Sounds correct in my opinion.
Just one thing. Does this work for the Fenris bike in the same way or is it no problem in anyway because it is a vehicle? As far as I know the Fenris is the only 100% Close Combat Vehicle.
The Fenris bike can attack after a 1" movement the target it just left (drive by attack) and because of this it can ignore the first target (still in CC caused by the drive by attack) and can attack the next target. Sounds correct in my opinion.
Quote from: aoi cobalt link=topic=5890.msg45968#msg45968 date=And it is worth noting that all the rest of the cav units in the game don't have an auto-break away. So that factor isn't part of being cav, it's just the MH special mount rules.
thatīs not the full truth....
Dragonriders can go into the CC with their Naginataīs up to one inch away from the enemy model.
Since they arent in B2B then when trying to leave the Target, they only leave....
Further we are talking here of all the troops leaving CC, inlcuding the ones that do it automatically as flyers and the ones that simply get lucky by rolling. You have to be able to reach B2B, thatīs important.Quote from: micmellon link=topic=5890.msg46009#msg46009 date=Just one thing. Does this work for the Fenris bike in the same way or is it no problem in anyway because it is a vehicle? As far as I know the Fenris is the only 100% Close Combat Vehicle.
The Fenris bike can attack after a 1" movement the target it just left (drive by attack) and because of this it can ignore the first target (still in CC caused by the drive by attack) and can attack the next target. Sounds correct in my opinion.
Not so easy.
Since the Fenris Bike is a vehicle you leave and be done with your last target.
Now you want to hit the last target again using the special rule of charging for FenrisBikes within one inch of the model (not that you lose the strenght of the vehicle for the charge if you donīt move at least.
3".
I would say that this doesnīt work, because you leave the target and thus the facing isnīt right. you canīt attack an enemy in your rear facing, remember vehiclas arenīt allowed to make turns freely.
BUT, have a look here, bolding the important parts:
The driver of a Fenris may move and attack an
enemy within one inch of the bike with hls
sword using a single action. The attack my be
launched at any time during the move. lf the 1
fenris moves a minimum of 3 inches before
the attack, the damage is determined by using
the vehicle's STR instead of the drivers, this is
the unit's primary attack. If the fenris has
adaquate movement remaining atter its attack
to reach basecontacl with another model, it
may attempt a secondary natural attack by
rarnmlng the new target. This is effectively a
charge, with a successful CC roll Indicating the
ram was elfective.
So if you phrase it otherwise it works ;D
Just turn and hit, drive on and ram......
You would lose the strenght of the Bike anyway if wanting to hit the model you leave.
I think you misinterpret the wording another with another (of your own/friendly or anything)....
Iīm not sure if it was ever intended as this, but I read it as follows:
1. the enemy model is in CC with the one wanting to leave per definition (either by b2b or special rules)
2. there is no reference to another friendly/enemy model or anything in your quoting
3. that means that the closest enemy model has only to be engaged in CC with any model ...
4. the direction of the phrase (the causal chain of events/position/condition) in your quoting goes from the target away to another (any other !) model (sorry for the wording, canīt get in better in english...)
5. In the moment you begin the action your enemy/or CC adversary is actually engaged in CC --> with the model leaving it ;-)
6. It is also automatically the closest enemy model
7. meeting all the requirements of your quoted paragraph you are allowed to explicitly ignore this enemy model you leave
I think you misinterpret the wording another with another (of your own/friendly or anything)....
I think you misinterpret the wording another with another (of your own/friendly or anything)....1. Yes
Iīm not sure if it was ever intended as this, but I read it as follows:
1. the enemy model is in CC with the one wanting to leave per definition (either by b2b or special rules)
2. there is no reference to another friendly/enemy model or anything in your quoting
3. that means that the closest enemy model has only to be engaged in CC with any model ...
4. the direction of the phrase (the causal chain of events/position/condition) in your quoting goes from the target away to another (any other !) model (sorry for the wording, canīt get in better in english...)
5. In the moment you begin the action your enemy/or CC adversary is actually engaged in CC --> with the model leaving it ;-)
6. It is also automatically the closest enemy model
7. meeting all the requirements of your quoted paragraph you are allowed to explicitly ignore this enemy model you leave
2. Yes, but in generell you have to attack the closest enemy model. Thats the reference.
3. Not any. Another (Please dont see the colour as a shout. It just should indicate how important this word is)
4. I'm sorry. I don't know what you are meaning here or why this is an argument.
5. Yes
6. Yes and that is why you have to attack it again in this action.
7. No, because the enemy is not engaged with another model and therefore you cant ignore the target priority.
Or are you saying that the declared charge action, is declared before the break away happen, but then happen after the break away is successful?
a. Could I in this way just take any CC model, declare that I want to charge a first into a enemy group and target the first closest enemy.
After that attack I can declare I charge another next to it with the same model (given my break away succeeds) and then once my second charge action is complete I could charge a third enemy the same way?
b. In effect letting me jump up along the enemy line with 3 actions hitting three different targets with full charge bonus on each attack?
Since a charge is a move and attack action and a unit who automatically succeed in the break away is able to combine it with a charge, what prevents my other troops who just have to contest from doing it?
That's way too literal of a translation of Target Priority. The Charge is declared while still in CC, therefore the model with which you are in CC may be ignored. Moving away from it does not, then, make it the closest enemy model for purposes of Target Priority.
The clearest way that I know how to say this is the following:
It is perfectly legal to be in CC, declare a Charge against an enemy model model that is in LOS, break from CC(whether by test or auto-break) and, subsequently, Charge the targeted model.
Can someone explain to me why you would want to break away only to charge another model?
Charge bonus, ferocity, and bonus gained from moving into a charge (strength bonus etc)
*headdesk*
Can someone explain to me why you would want to break away only to charge another model?
From what I recall, CC can only be entered via a Charge Action.
A Break Away action is NOT a charge action.
THEREFORE, one cannot break away and go right into CC on the same action.
Quote from: Pax link=topic=5890.msg45999#msg45999 date=Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45997#msg45997 date=Quote from: dmcgee1 link=topic=5890.msg45994#msg45994 date=Quote from: Enker link=topic=5890.msg45969#msg45969 date=For the mounted its more complicated as i have thought.
The charge action is not a action for itself, it is a combined action of a move and an attack action.
But:
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
But this doesnt aswerif the auto break away is an move or an attack action for the mounted.
It only answers how it works if it is considert a move action
A Charge must be declared prior to a Move Action. In order to Charge a model, the attacker must have line of sight, and be able to Move into base to base contact with the target. Therefore, if a players declares that the auto-breaking model is going to conduct a Charge, has the new target model in LOS (prior to breaking from CC), and can legally Move into base to base contact with the target, then the Charge takes place.
Does that clear it up?
No, because you have to charge the nearest target and that is the one you are leaving by autobreak. So you have to charge him again.
And thats so wirded that I think it isnt possible to break away and charge in the same action
It's valid, if the target your first in CC with is attacked by another one of your troops. So from what dmcgee1 say if you have:
2 mounted hussars in CC with 1 enemy.
Then 1 mounted hussar is able to perform a auto-break away and charge another enemy, using the rule to ignore a enemy in close combat with another of your units.
Your description is accurate, but even one Mounted Hussar may auto-break (or any other model wich successfully tests to break from CC) may, indeed, charge another model.
It all comes down to a Move Action that ends in CC - this, by definition, is a Charge. Charges must be declared. Nowhere in the rules (of which I am aware) does it state that a Charge may not be declared while in CC. If one can perform an auto-break or test to break from CC, then one may perform a charge if able to break from CC.
Since a charge is a move and attack action and a unit who automatically succeed in the break away is able to combine it with a charge, what prevents my other troops who just have to contest from doing it?
Nothing.
Thatīs what I said some times already. That isnīt for a special model. It concerns Close Combat in general.
Vehicles are units that are unable to attack in CC if they don't have a specific ability that let them.
Vehicles do not need to test to break away from CC with enemies.
Enemies do not need to test to break away from Vehicles in CC.
Vehicles do not gain charge bonuses.
May Automatically Break from CC
If the model attempting to Break Away succeeds, it is moved away from the engaged enemy model up to it's MV in inches.
If a Flyer wishes to Break Away from Close Combat, it does not need to roll anything, even if an enemy model wishes to prevent it. Flyer needs only to expend one Action to Break Away and can then Move Freely. Most Vehicles may Break Away without testing--They simply drive over the opposition
A model can only move into base contact with an enemy model by either Charging or Countercharging, both of which are described further in the Close Combat section
A Charge is a combination Move and Attack action. Unless otherwise stated, the only way to enter Close Combat is to Charge.
I know this goes up in circles, but why are you ignoring the word another in the rulebook dmcgee1?
Rulebook page 49
"Unless otherwise stated in a model's profile, a model
must Charge the closest enemy model within its LOS. The only
exception to this rule is if the closest enemy model is already
engaged in Close Combat with another model."
So if you may charge away from CC you have to attack the same model again since it is the closest one!
You only can charge away from CC to another model, if you have two models in CC at the current model.
no worries, i know what you mean! But, here is an example of what can happen:
Mirrormen v. trenchers.
trenchers activate, and charge the mirrormen, attempting to tie them all up in CC, so that the mirrormen cant just shoot them all on secondary attacks.
a mirrorman can now activate, attempt to break away, and if successful, charge another model. presuming he kills that model on the 1st swing, he can now shoot twice with his pistol at 2 others! all on the 1st action... and getting a +1/+1 bonus on the 1st attack that he otherwise would not have had, and a target that was once in cc (with him) to shoot at.
This is my issue with it: the room for abusive situations like that. Granted, mirrormen are quite powerful to begin with... but it still serves as a valid example..
no worries, i know what you mean! But, here is an example of what can happen:
Mirrormen v. trenchers.
trenchers activate, and charge the mirrormen, attempting to tie them all up in CC, so that the mirrormen cant just shoot them all on secondary attacks.
a mirrorman can now activate, attempt to break away, and if successful, charge another model. presuming he kills that model on the 1st swing, he can now shoot twice with his pistol at 2 others! all on the 1st action... and getting a +1/+1 bonus on the 1st attack that he otherwise would not have had, and a target that was once in cc (with him) to shoot at.
This is my issue with it: the room for abusive situations like that. Granted, mirrormen are quite powerful to begin with... but it still serves as a valid example..
I think for a normal break away the situation is clear. You do a break away action and therefore cannot charge, because it is a different action.
The whole discussion is just about the auto break away (correct me if I'm wrong).
I think for a normal break away the situation is clear. You do a break away action and therefore cannot charge, because it is a different action.
The whole discussion is just about the auto break away (correct me if I'm wrong).
I see no difference and I think that the discussion refers to CC-possibilities in general.
no worries, i know what you mean! But, here is an example of what can happen:
Mirrormen v. trenchers.
trenchers activate, and charge the mirrormen, attempting to tie them all up in CC, so that the mirrormen cant just shoot them all on secondary attacks.
a mirrorman can now activate, attempt to break away, and if successful, charge another model. presuming he kills that model on the 1st swing, he can now shoot twice with his pistol at 2 others! all on the 1st action... and getting a +1/+1 bonus on the 1st attack that he otherwise would not have had, and a target that was once in cc (with him) to shoot at.
This is my issue with it: the room for abusive situations like that. Granted, mirrormen are quite powerful to begin with... but it still serves as a valid example..
In get the feeling there are over all two fraction standing in there trenches and shooting always the same arguments against each others. It is time to finish this forth and back argumentation.
In get the feeling there are over all two fraction standing in there trenches and shooting always the same arguments against each others. It is time to finish this forth and back argumentation.
No. I'm just trying to get more posts.
I need a promotion ;D