Hi,
I m going through the compendium.
Page 118 - free charge
I m searching for the the mention, as per mortem and Gloriam official rule change 2019 - forced charge that:
• Any UG with missile weapons does not have to Forced Charge (but may
Free Charge
But I don't find Any such thing in the compendium:
There are mention of « missile focused TUG » - I still search the definition for that.
The drawing with the immortels mention prompted charge required... (Immortals have light spear besides bow if I recall right)
Well I m lost.
It has a tremendous impact On the way to play armies.
(Maya braves with shoot and charge unskilled javelin for instance)
I hope I just missed it.
Please kindly enlighten me.
[attachment deleted by admin]
Quote from: Rino on June 07, 2020, 12:00:40 AM
Hi,
I m going through the compendium.
Page 118 - free charge
I m searching for the the mention, as per mortem and Gloriam official rule change 2019 - forced charge that:
• Any UG with missile weapons does not have to Forced Charge (but may
Free Charge
But I don't find Any such thing in the compendium:
I think what you had there was a slightly badly worded change and that the Compendium now says what was actually intended all along. (The "may" bit in the bit you quote meaning that there were some circumstances where a Free Charge may apply but it was not universal).
Quote
There are mention of « missile focused TUG » - I still search the definition for that.
Its defined in the Glossary which starts on page 212.
Switched to missile-focused with with a definition to clear up am few misunderstanding that were questioned (e.g. does it stop integral shooters charging as they are missile armed?).
No material change.
S
Sorry still not clear for me.
In the official change 2019 a Bowman tug within 1 bw of an enemy is entitled to free charge.
In the compendium can that bowman free charge or should he prompt charge?
Thanks for clarifying.
The impact is massive on all the unskilled and shoot and charge army.
Thx
Just use the Compendium wording that is nice and clear - don't confuse yourself with superseded material.
A bowman within 1 BW must pay a card to charge.
Basically in most circumstances in a game (IMO) a missile-focused troop type will have to pay to charge.
BTW I can see that it may look harsh on Unskilled shooters but it does fit the logic that if you have a "proper" missile classification then you are less inclined to charge and so need prompting - even if you turn out to be a bit rubbish at the shooting it is an important part of the troops doctrine.
Anyway, I'm sure Simon will chip in to confirm (or otherwise, but I hope not) that the rules say what he intends them to mean.
It's a great advantage when you want your opponent to charge. E.g. when you have integral shooters.
But note that having Integral Shooters does not make you Missile Focused - you need a missile capablity with Skilled, Experienced or Unskilled ability for that.
Yes completely as intended. Gives us exactly the right response options.
Missile focused means it is your preferred fighting technique before H-H.
Unskilled just means you are not very good at it. Different.
Missile-focused introduced as a term to stop the confusion that people were paying to charge with integral shooters and I think charge-only as they are all "missile armed".
Definition is now very clear and in the glossary.
Si
The image above is about Battle chariots etc. ... so DC/CLs with bowmen were changed to not need to forced charge. Missile armed troops otherwise have always had to pay to charge. The Compendium has just tidied up those definitions.
All good to check in case we have slipped and error somewhere. SO explain which troop types you mean and what they could do and now what they can't do so I can check.
Infantry bowmen say have never had free charges. Never seen it played that way. But I do recall a big discussion about battle chariots and charging lancers with missile weapons. The redraft has aimed to capture those well with the missile-focused definition but in 240 pages we may have missed something even with 7 checkers.
Si
All triple checked and correct and as intended.
We wanted stability and now we have it :)
I think there may have been some confusion in 2019 that a free charge was allowed with bowmen, but it has never been the case in the official amends and clarries and never been played that way to my knowledge. Apologies if some unforeseen ambiguity had some people playing it so, but never the intent.
Play as it is and we have the stability requested.
Si
What is the situation now for Polish Knights mixed with Mounted Crossbow? In this case, 1/3 to 1/2 of the bases are Charging Lancer with no missile weapon and the remainder are mtd. crossbow. Oh, and the crossbow have Shoot & Charge.
The UG will be missile focussed by the definition on page 217.
As I don't have the Compendium yet, I don't know what it means.
Quote
Troops that have both a missile weapon and skilled, experienced or unskilled shooting. Therefore, the integral shooter characteristic alone does not count, nor does charge-only shooting as designed to shoot immediately before combat, rather than sustained shooting.
Missile focused troops do not get a forced or free charge against TuGs (9.4 B 2 p117). If they have Charging Lancer or Devastating Chargers they get a free charge against enemy SUGs within 3BW directly ahead. (9.4 C1 p 118).
Richard
So they can clear away enemy skirmishers in one with the philosophy of the rules.
All nice and precise now and settled so please all just move on as is.
A great period of growth already happening.
And it hasn't even made the trade yet.
Gaining players form all systems that I haven't even heard of at all.
FB followers has gone from 935 before launch to now 1400 and rising.
Happy days. Onwards and upwards.
S
Good to hear growth in numbers :) :D
Quote from: nikgaukroger on June 09, 2020, 06:36:42 AM
Quote
Troops that have both a missile weapon and skilled, experienced or unskilled shooting. Therefore, the integral shooter characteristic alone does not count, nor does charge-only shooting as designed to shoot immediately before combat, rather than sustained shooting.
Thanks, Nik.
The knights in the mixed units do not meet that definition. To me it is still unclear. Some bases of the TuG have Forced Charge and others to not. How does one know which has precedent? I would argue that the presence of crossbows in the mixed TuGs historically would not have changed the fighting character of the knights, who would still need to be restrained from forced charging.
It's all very clear now in the rules.
If anything should have charge override in style they should be charge-only shooters going forward so this is the option to ponder. I know little of them but suspect that might be a better list interp for them. So open it up as a list consideration if yo think so once you've got the rulebook.
S
Quote from: RobAustin on June 09, 2020, 03:10:13 PM
Quote from: nikgaukroger on June 09, 2020, 06:36:42 AM
Quote
Troops that have both a missile weapon and skilled, experienced or unskilled shooting. Therefore, the integral shooter characteristic alone does not count, nor does charge-only shooting as designed to shoot immediately before combat, rather than sustained shooting.
Thanks, Nik.
The knights in the mixed units do not meet that definition. To me it is still unclear. Some bases of the TuG have Forced Charge and others to not. How does one know which has precedent? I would argue that the presence of crossbows in the mixed TuGs historically would not have changed the fighting character of the knights, who would still need to be restrained from forced charging.
You need to read the forced charge bit in the charge section of the rules which, in conjunction with the glossary bit on missile focused gives you what you need :-)
Quote
The following UGs are forced to charge unless held or claiming an exception below in item 2.2:
• TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
• TuGs that are not missile focused must forced charge enemy TuGs within 1BW directly ahead.
• SuGs with the feigned flight characteristic are treated as TuGs for the purposes of the above.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on June 09, 2020, 05:15:22 PM
Quote
The following UGs are forced to charge unless held or claiming an exception below in item 2.2:
• TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
• TuGs that are not missile focused must forced charge enemy TuGs within 1BW directly ahead.
• SuGs with the feigned flight characteristic are treated as TuGs for the purposes of the above.
Unfortunately the "unless they are themselves missile focused" in the first bullet point could be read as applying to the lancer bases rather than the whole TUG. Also unfortunately the definition of missile focused on p271 talks about troops rather than TUGs so could also be taken as those bases not the whole TUG. So you could argue that a mixed unit like the Poles has a forced charge. I know that's not the intent and I wouldn't play it that way - but I think you now need your second clarrie!
To me, this clearly says they must forced charge:
- TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
The knight bases are are "any bases that are charging lancer..." and they are not themselves missile focused.
Quote from: RobAustin on June 09, 2020, 06:57:05 PM
To me, this clearly says they must forced charge:
- TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
The knight bases are are "any bases that are charging lancer..." and they are not themselves missile focused.
Certainly my reading - the "they themselves" clearly applies to the "bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers" part. Nothing in this section is about a whole TuG.
In respect of Dave's comments I think this is quite deliberate and allows distinctions between troops who are "double armed" with CL/DC and a missile capability and those who are not - even if the latter are in a TuG with other troops who have a missile capability. This allows subtle differences to be made when classifying troops. I see no reason for any clarification. Of course, it may well throw up some troop classifications that could benefit from looking at again.
I'd also suggest that if the Compendium rule reduces the number of cases where a Free Charge applies that is, IMO, a good thing - Free Charge is pretty powerful.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on June 09, 2020, 07:11:45 PM
Quote from: RobAustin on June 09, 2020, 06:57:05 PM
To me, this clearly says they must forced charge:
- TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
The knight bases are are "any bases that are charging lancer..." and they are not themselves missile focused.
Certainly my reading - the "they themselves" clearly applies to the "bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers" part. Nothing in this section is about a whole TuG.
In respect of Dave's comments I think this is quite deliberate and allows distinctions between troops who are "double armed" with CL/DC and a missile capability and those who are not - even if the latter are in a TuG with other troops who have a missile capability. This allows subtle differences to be made when classifying troops. I see no reason for any clarification. Of course, it may well throw up some troop classifications that could benefit from looking at again.
I'd also suggest that if the Compendium rule reduces the number of cases where a Free Charge applies that is, IMO, a good thing - Free Charge is pretty powerful.
Yes. I would argue that the mixed Polish TuG are under Forced Charge until or unless all the knights in the TuG are killed. After that, the remaining bases are all Missile Focused.
Quote from: RobAustin on June 09, 2020, 06:57:05 PM
To me, this clearly says they must forced charge:
- TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
The knight bases are are "any bases that are charging lancer..." and they are not themselves missile focused.
I must admit I hadn't read it that way until now. It is the " they are themselves" bit that I didn't absorb until now. So I agree, the Polish knights are subject to forced charges. I may need to re-think how they are classified - I will start a new topic under list queries.
Richard
I think we tend to look at UGs as a whole generally and not separate base types within them - until this question came up I hadn't really clocked the implication of the wording either. I'd had a look at the rule as I've been looking at Khwarasmians who are CL and Experienced Bow - but the implications were not obvious.
Quote from: lionheartrjc on June 10, 2020, 08:35:18 AM
Quote from: RobAustin on June 09, 2020, 06:57:05 PM
To me, this clearly says they must forced charge:
- TuGs with any bases that are charging lancer or devastating chargers must forced charge enemy TuGs (except flexibles in SuG form) within 3BW directly ahead, unless they are themselves missile focused (does not include charge-only shooters or integral shooters).
The knight bases are are "any bases that are charging lancer..." and they are not themselves missile focused.
I must admit I hadn't read it that way until now. It is the " they are themselves" bit that I didn't absorb until now. So I agree, the Polish knights are subject to forced charges. I may need to re-think how they are classified - I will start a new topic under list queries.
Richard
OK - but this is a change from how it has always been played pre-Compendium times ( ...as far as I know....) so still worth a clarrie or at least a confirmation from Simon that this is intended. On the history - why did the Poles include crossbows with knights? My naive idea was they softened up the opponent with fire and then charged (which would support a free charge) but maybe they went for it pell-mell and the crossbows just added extra sting to the charge (which would support a forced charge). I know it's not just all about the Poles but it's an example of what you are trying to represent with this combination of TUG formation and the rules
Quote from: daveparish on June 11, 2020, 09:44:33 AM
OK - but this is a change from how it has always been played pre-Compendium times ( ...as far as I know....) so still worth a clarrie or at least a confirmation from Simon that this is intended. On the history - why did the Poles include crossbows with knights? My naive idea was they softened up the opponent with fire and then charged (which would support a free charge) but maybe they went for it pell-mell and the crossbows just added extra sting to the charge (which would support a forced charge). I know it's not just all about the Poles but it's an example of what you are trying to represent with this combination of TUG formation and the rules
I agree it is a Compendium change, but from emails from Simon I believe it is intended.
On the history point - I have answered this in the List Queries section.
Richard
Certainly intended from what Simon has said and, IMO, a good thing.
A minor but good change (though material for a few tug types I agree. We now have the stability we want so roll on.
I am tempted to say the Poles should be charge-only in the system. Another stream for that would be good. As we have charge only and shoot& charge we can cover all variants to get the right feel I am sure.
Si
Quote from: nikgaukroger on June 11, 2020, 10:36:38 AM
Certainly intended from what Simon has said and, IMO, a good thing.
OK - I can see that having a free Charge rather than forced gives the player a lot of options and that might be unhistorical
I think so. We have set the rules now for 5 years+.
I really can't think of anything new I would want in there right now.
So onwards and upwards to build a big community.
Going well so far despite Covid.
Should hit the shops in 2-3 weeks time as well.
Si
So Indian short spear first rank and Bowman 2nd and 3rd rank are subject to forced charge if some enemy tug come within 1bw...
Quote from: Rino on June 12, 2020, 12:22:05 PM
So Indian short spear first rank and Bowman 2nd and 3rd rank are subject to forced charge if some enemy tug come within 1bw...
.
all it changes is that you have to anticipate, and play accordingly
Indeed, ands some interesting wrinkles that may allow skill to exploit 8)
Most importantly we have that stability for 5 years you have been asking for. And in a beautiful package. getting a lot of praise at present for it. Well done all who helped it along!
Si
So do we agree :
Mixed units with second or third rank "missile oriented" may be subject to forced charges if
Dev Chargers:CL ...in the front rank and a target within 3 BW to the front
Spear, long spears, polearm to the front or anywhere in the unit and within 1 BW of the ennemy
Or is it a free charge
I ask because the discussion is ....very confusing indeed .
Forced charge but only if the DC, CL etc do not have shooting ability themselves (not counting Integral Shooters or Charge only). I think in both cases it is anywhere in the unit (ie you could put the CL in the second rank if you were crazy enough and it would still be forced)
Correct, it doesn't say the CL/DC have to be in the front rank just that the TuG contains such bases for forced charge to apply.
Other mixed (i.e.part missile) units - such as those with LS, PA, etc. in the front rank are not subject to forced charge as they are Missile Focused; again no mention of the front rank in the rules. These will need to pay to charge unless they qualify under section C on page 118.
I thought we had decided missile focused was done by base not TUG. So a byzantine unit where some bases have LS, bow would not be forced but a chinese unit with front polearm, back crossbow would be?
On page 117 it talks about TUGs that are missile focused and not bases. It is the CL and DC part that talks about bases.
Aah, I think I'm getting it. So the bit earlier in the thread (from Rino and your reply) about Indian short spear/bow mixed tugs being impetuous at 1BW is not true?
Quote from: daveparish on June 19, 2020, 12:40:21 PM
Aah, I think I'm getting it. So the bit earlier in the thread (from Rino and your reply) about Indian short spear/bow mixed tugs being impetuous at 1BW is not true?
That's why I asked
Quote from: daveparish on June 19, 2020, 12:40:21 PM
Aah, I think I'm getting it. So the bit earlier in the thread (from Rino and your reply) about Indian short spear/bow mixed tugs being impetuous at 1BW is not true?
Think that might have been a bit of confusion from Rino as he quoted an old clarrie - pretty sure I've not said such mixed units get forced charges, if I did apologies for the error or if I wasn't clear :-[
No worries - I wasn't getting at you, just getting confused. Think I've got it straight now.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on June 19, 2020, 01:09:11 PM
Quote from: daveparish on June 19, 2020, 12:40:21 PM
Aah, I think I'm getting it. So the bit earlier in the thread (from Rino and your reply) about Indian short spear/bow mixed tugs being impetuous at 1BW is not true?
Think that might have been a bit of confusion from Rino as he quoted an old clarrie - pretty sure I've not said such mixed units get forced charges, if I did apologies for the error or if I wasn't clear :-[
The example with the Indians was to confirm if I understood correctly what was explained with the polish knight.
The last explaination on the mixed troop (only the troop with devastating / CL are subject to forced charge and not others) make more sense to me.
Quote from: Rino on June 19, 2020, 01:53:17 PM
The example with the Indians was to confirm if I understood correctly what was explained with the polish knight.
The last explaination on the mixed troop (only the troop with devastating / CL are subject to forced charge and not others) make more sense to me.
Yes and your example was very much to the point - just took me a while to catch up and get it straight in my head. As you say it now all seems sensible
Good to hear.
Sensible and stable the objectives
S