Pile in - How strict is it?

[Daeron]

Any2d6 made an interesting video on a pile-in trick, or question on it. Right here:


The trick seemed legal to me, but I also see people oppose the concept. From the reactions I've read, and the tricks I've seen on the net, it seems we have three major interpretations of the pile in.

1. The strict pile-in

The strict, most rigid interpretation seems to be that a pile in move has to be executed in a direct line from model to nearest enemy only.
I would conclude that a best practice is to imagine a line between the closest points of the model and its nearest enemy model (or base, if you measure base to base) and that movement is allowed on this line only. As a result:
- Tight formations are likely to have models blocking each other, but don't rely on pile-in as much
- Spread formations are more likely to allow pile-ins, but rely on it to work.
- Even if a model can easily reach its target within 3", but another model is in its way, it has to measure going "over" this model to reach the target.
- It's not permitted to slide one model a bit to the left to let another model stand by its side.

2. The relaxed pile-in

Here, we assume that a model simply has to narrow the gap between itself and its nearest target but this needn't be a straight line. It's permitted to shuffle to the side, and let in another model. It's permitted to slide along a model's base you're in base contact with.

Unfortunately, this would also permit the trick Andy2D6 describes.

This is my preferred interpretation though I acknowledge that the first interpretation is probably more correct. I don't think the advantages one can get by using tricks are game-breaking. But they might feel a bit gamey. I think it makes the battle feel more natural, where some of the front-line minis will be "wading" through the battle.

3. Just move 3" inches

Some players go as far as saying you simply have to move 3" towards a nearby enemy. This effectively permits them to move away from the nearest enemy if it brings them into contact with another. While this seems to be the easiest way to play it, it cancels a lot of the finer tactics of combat.

Your take

What is your take on this? How do you see the pile in move and what restrictions do you think apply?

[Sangfroid]

A simple add to the second option is kinda how we have been intuitively playing it which you can pile in however you like up to the three inches as long as it doesn't reduce the attacks back of the engaged unit (I.e the one you charged).

This still allows shuffle to get more models in, allows pile ins to adjacent units (as long as the original charged unit can maintain its pile in when its turn comes)

Now this doesn't stop me charging unitA piling some models into unitB the enemy attack me and then me removing casualties so as to now minimise or even bring unitA out of combat that's up to enemy for selecting to attack with unitB first and me as to how I remove dead bodies.

Seems to work fine :-)

[Icon hack]

We've also been playing using the "Relaxed Pile In" method. The intent of the rule seems to be to allow both players to maximize contact whenever possible before making attacks during the Combat Phase. This interpretation allows for that.

That being said, I wouldn't have a problem with playing the other ways, as long at it was consistent for both players.

[Daeron]

So I've posted a response video here:

[Calisson]

I have the feeling that people are still in the WH8th mindset that:
- bases matter for the measurement of distances
- being in base contact matters to determine who can attack who.
In AoS, both are false.

Let's quote the relevant rules - there are only 4 pages to read!

A model’s base isn’t considered part of the model – it’s just there to help the model stand up – so don’t include it when measuring distances.

This prevents from sliding along a model's bases. Solution 2 does not respect that.

Step 1: When you pile in, you may move each model in the unit up to 3" towards the closest enemy model. This will allow the models in the unit to get closer to the enemy in order to attack them.

Solution 1 adds a requirement for moving in a straight line, which is not in the rule.
Solution 3 is explicitely not following the rule.

This is how I would interpret the rules above, based on "anything which respects the rules as written is permitted", aka RAW.
My understanding is that it is never allowed to move away from the closest model, and this applies for all portions of movement; so don't say I'll move a bit away but will come closer later on.

Let's take a COK, with the lance forwards, the tail backwards. "A" is the closest model, measured from the lance.
As long as the lance gets closer to "A" at all times, I can rotate the COK. Suddenly, tail gets closer to model "B" than lance to model "A".
Now, I can move away from "A" as long as tail gets closer to "B" at all times.
Next, more rotation could even make model "C" closer to model "B"!

But wait, there are still limits! Remember that:

No part of the model may move further than the model’s Move characteristic.

where the Move characteristic is to be understood as 3", so that limits this "dance of the tail and lance" piling move.


One other issue:
The rule only allows you to move closer to the enemy, otherwise the move could not possibly described as "towards".
As soon as you touch the enemy model, distance is zero, it is not physically possible to get any closer, therefore you cannot move at all.


And don't ask to slide one model in contact in order to get more models in contact. It is not necessary for the next model to be in contact!

an enemy model from that unit must be in range of the attacking weapon (i.e. within the maximum distance, in inches, of the Range listed for the weapon making the attack),

-=-=-

Above was my RAW analysis. But there is one more rule, and... it is the most important one, so it may trump any other one!

there may be times when you are not sure exactly how to resolve a situation that has come up during play (...) apply the solution that makes the most sense to you both

For me, it makes sense to have a fun, storytelling gameplay. I would appreciate my opponent to be in the same mood.
Therefore, I would not like to apply the rules as strictly as above.

Rather, I would love to arrange with my opponent to interpret all rules above as to allow any move with the following limits:

4. Move 3 inches, everyone gets closer.
- no model can move more than 3"
- at the end of all piling movements, all models, friend or foe, must be closer or as close to an enemy model than before the piling started.

So yes, that would allow one model in contact with model "A" to move away and make contact with model "B", as long as another model replaces it in contact with model "A" - and keeps it distracted.
And yes, all my models except one could move away from the dragon and pile on the poor sorcerer. Fun storytelling!
And furthermore, that would allow a unit to penetrate scattered ranks of the enemy in loose formation, and allow more bodies in the intricate melee. "Hey, let's get this warmachine while our buddies behind us take care of the bodyguards!" Epic storytelling!

[Daeron]

I have the feeling that people are still in the WH8th mindset that:
- bases matter for the measurement of distances
- being in base contact matters to determine who can attack who.
In AoS, both are false.

OK. Right off the bat a point of discussion there

Measuring from the base or the model is a different discussion. I'll start that discussion on Druchii.net as well but it doesn't really change this issue. This question and all interpretations given above have an equivalent in base-to-base and model-to-model measuring.

For clarification, the base-to-base contact was never addressed as a requirement to attack a model, but whether or not it disallowed any further movement of the model during pile in.
We are in agreement on that point

Let's take a COK, with the lance forwards, the tail backwards. "A" is the closest model, measured from the lance.
As long as the lance gets closer to "A" at all times, I can rotate the COK. Suddenly, tail gets closer to model "B" than lance to model "A".
Now, I can move away from "A" as long as tail gets closer to "B" at all times.
Next, more rotation could even make model "C" closer to model "B"!

This is where I was confused before, but changed my mind on after reading all the arguments. I'm now quite convinced this is the correct interpretation, as I explained in the video.

My point of confusion was that it was so easy to cheat this system, by using infinitely small changes in distance. It seemed natural to abstract this to a limit of 0 as a legal move, although it would be gamey. I'm convinced now that this is wrong, and you need a measurable "shortening" of the distance.
What changed my mind is seeing how this "cheat" can be blocked: by bringing a model into contact (distance 0) no move is allowed. Limit is reached, and with such an easy counter, the cheat lost its potency anyhow.

4. Move 3 inches, everyone gets closer.
- no model can move more than 3"
- at the end of all piling movements, all models, friend or foe, must be closer or as close to an enemy model than before the piling started.

So yes, that would allow one model in contact with model "A" to move away and make contact with model "B", as long as another model replaces it in contact with model "A" - and keeps it distracted.
And yes, all my models except one could move away from the dragon and pile on the poor sorcerer. Fun storytelling!
And furthermore, that would allow a unit to penetrate scattered ranks of the enemy in loose formation, and allow more bodies in the intricate melee. "Hey, let's get this warmachine while our buddies behind us take care of the bodyguards!" Epic storytelling!

Hm, yeah, but the epic storytelling can be made the other way around as well with the crew's heroic defence their warmachine gun, "This is my gun. There are many like it, but this one is mine!". It might be odd to see them cheated this way.

Remember that it doens't prevent your "keep them busy" tactic, but moves it to the charge move where the only restrictions are:
- the first model moved must be 1/2" of an enemy model
- the unit retains its cohesion of 1"
Technically, you could move a part of your unit to the side, so that they pile-in to the machine with a few brought in base to base with the crew to lock them in place. The pile in completes the tactic.