I'm referring to being able to break off even if flanked as long as you have not turned to face the flanking attacker. If you have enemy bases in frontal contact with your flanks you should not be able to break off. In my humble opinion.
for some reason this particular ability really irritates me, despite ruthlessly exploiting it with my Late Swiss
I believe the intention is that you cannot. However, the rules word it as you cannot if you are fighting to your flank (or rear FWIW) which isn't quite the same thing and can lead to Schroedinger's direction of fighting :o
I have added the following clarification:
4.L:2 (page 55). Fighting to flank or rear refers to an enemy UG in frontal contact with the flank or rear of the UG, unless the file was hit in the flank by a frontal charge. A Keil hit in the flank by a flank charge cannot break off, it is still a flank charge even though the +4/+2 cannot be claimed.
Does that work?
Richard
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 17, 2025, 07:17:53 AMI have added the following clarification:
4.L:2 (page 55). Fighting to flank or rear refers to an enemy UG in frontal contact with the flank or rear of the UG, unless the file was hit in the flank by a frontal charge. A Keil hit in the flank by a flank charge cannot break off, it is still a flank charge even though the +4/+2 cannot be claimed.
Does that work?
Richard
works for me, ta.
Still slightly unclear whether bases that are fighting to their front cause that face of the UG to be a front edge.
Why not make it explicit?
Fighting to a flank or rear means enemy are in combat with the flank or rear of any base (except enemy that contacted by a frontal charge that contacted a flank), or with the front of any base that turned to face enemy in contact with its flank or rear edge.
Do you want to deal with the edge case of an UG that was flank charged and (by MF1 or MF2) all surviving bases are now facing towards the enemy UG?
Quote from: tarnowski1 on October 17, 2025, 09:13:47 AMQuote from: lionheartrjc on October 17, 2025, 07:17:53 AMI have added the following clarification:
4.L:2 (page 55). Fighting to flank or rear refers to an enemy UG in frontal contact with the flank or rear of the UG, unless the file was hit in the flank by a frontal charge. A Keil hit in the flank by a flank charge cannot break off, it is still a flank charge even though the +4/+2 cannot be claimed.
Does that work?
Richard
works for me, ta.
Likewise - although maybe "... an enemy UG in front edge or front corner only contact with the flank or rear of the UG" is even clearer?
Or maybe:
" A unit may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and other enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim".
Is that any clearer?
Lance.
That doesn't prevent Keils breaking off if contacted in the flank which we want to prevent.
I just knew there would be something!
Do we want a Keil to break off anyway, did they do that?
" A unit may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and other enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim, or that could so unless it was a Keil".
Trying to keep it simples....
Lance.
" An UG may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and also has enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim, or could do if it was not a Keil".
Or break the reference to a Keil off into a different sentence for clarity?
Lance.
Quote from: Lanceflint on October 17, 2025, 02:56:26 PM" An UG may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and also has enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim, or could do if it was not a Keil".
Or break the reference to a Keil off into a different sentence for clarity?
Lance.
seems cleaner to say " An UG may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and also has enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim. Keils cannot break off where a enemy flank claim is mitigated by their special rule.".
Indeed. As the Kiel bit is more of an exception then that works for me.
Lance.
Quote from: Lanceflint on October 17, 2025, 02:56:26 PM" An UG may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and also has enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim, or could do if it was not a Keil".
Or break the reference to a Keil off into a different sentence for clarity?
Lance.
Fighting enemy to the front is irrelevant as to whether it can break off or not. It is the enemy in contact with flank (from a flank charge) or rear that prevents the break off.