Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - LawrenceG

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 29
16
I Missed 5.L.1.3:

1.3. Other cavalry, camelry or chariot TuGs that are missile focused (i.e., have a missile
weapon and skilled, experienced, or unskilled) may choose to run away or skirmish or
choose to stand to receive (and may choose to shoot at chargers if they stand).

so cavalry, camelry or chariot TuGs that are missile focused do have an option of not shooting if they stand.

But apparently SUGS charged by SUGS can't choose not to shoot if they stand.

I'll comment on this one as well as it's a quick one.

Must confess I don't think I'd noticed this before, but I believe you are correct and SUGs must shoot (assuming they can, of course) if they stand when charged. Makes sense to me as how skirmishers would behave though  ;D

That contradicts what you said in the previous post about 7.C.5 "Troops are not forced to shoot, they may choose not to" being part of the shooting mechanism.

Note, it doesn't say skirmishers must shoot, it just doesn't say they may choose to shoot.

Usually mounted skirmishers would be better off shooting at other skirmishers and taking the -1 in charge combat, but if it was more important to survive in place than to kill enemy bases, (e.g. to block access to a camp) then it might be worth foregoing the shot and denying the claim. Especially if you are unskilled or the enemy is protected.

17
I Missed 5.L.1.3:

1.3. Other cavalry, camelry or chariot TuGs that are missile focused (i.e., have a missile
weapon and skilled, experienced, or unskilled) may choose to run away or skirmish or
choose to stand to receive (and may choose to shoot at chargers if they stand).

so cavalry, camelry or chariot TuGs that are missile focused do have an option of not shooting if they stand.

But apparently SUGS charged by SUGS can't choose not to shoot if they stand.

18
Clarity and consistency issues around evading and shooting or not shooting.

Mainly with the aim of improving the rule wording next time it is updated, but there are a couple of items that would benefit from a response.

I'm using the term “evade” as shorthand for “run away or skirmish”.

rule references from pdf.

Quote
5.L: RUN AWAY AND SKIRMISH RESPONSES

1. A run away move is a charge response where troops make a fleeting shot and move away
from chargers as far as possible. A skirmish move is a charge response by an UG where the
troops sacrifice some move distance to pour as much fire as possible onto charging troops.
Some troops must make a run away or skirmish response because they are not strong enough
to stand to face a charge. Others are allowed to run away or skirmish but do not have to do
so. These take place at SP2.5, i.e. before charges are moved.

1.1. SuGs (or flexibles in skirmish form) charged by TuGs must run away or skirmish unless:
...


2.1. A run away response represents taking a quick fleeting shot and running away as
quickly, and as far, as possible.
2.2. A skirmish response represents dropping back more gradually while attempting to
maximise firing on chargers, so there is a 2BW reduction in maximum distance moved.

3.1. For each UG, before making any moves, first roll for any shooting effect using the
shooting mechanism. Files shoot if their target’s path of charge is ahead of them (i.e.,
in front of the line extending the front edge of the file shooting) and within 1 BW (see
7.D).


3.4. Move troops to their new position with them ending:
3.4.1. Facing away from the charge if making a run away.
* If charged frontally: after completing the run away move, turn 180o if needed
to face away from the charger.
* If charged in flank/rear: after completing the run away move, turn 90o or
180o to face away from the charger.
* If charged by more than one UG, the owning player chooses which UG to
face away from.
3.4.2. Facing towards the charge if a skirmish response.
* If charged frontally: after completing the skirmish move, turn 180o if needed
to face towards the charger.
* If charged in flank/rear: after completing the skirmish move, turn 90o or 180o
to face towards the charger. If you choose to skirmish when charged only in
flank or rear your shooting is deemed ineffective and you roll no shooting
dice, but it does at least turn you around to face them. The UG counts as
having shot and so cannot shoot in the shooting phase.
* If charged by more than one UG, the owning player chooses which UG to
face towards.
3.4.3. Both cases are still considered to have done a shooting action and cannot
shoot later in the shooting phase – you tried to shoot at them but did minimal
damage.


7.C: FILES THAT MAY SHOOT IN THE SHOOTING PHASE
7.C.5 . Troops are not forced to shoot, they may choose not to (which may be beneficial if an enemy hesitant ally is in range, or if you are hiding in ambush).

8.D: PURSUIT MOVES
8.D.9 If any unbroken enemy are met, they may run away or skirmish as if charged, but do not shoot (we consider there has been a mass of friends running towards them). TuGs that cannot run away or skirmish stand to receive.



Discussion points:

5.L.1.1 (because e.g. long spear flex cavalry in skirmish can do it) and 8.D.9 (explicit) imply that shooting is not an integral part of evading.

5.L.1 , 5.L.2.1 and 5.L.2.2 imply that shooting is an integral part of evading.

Contradictory rules, although it's pretty clear which one must apply. De facto: skirmish is retreat and rally, run away is run away. Both may also involve shooting.


7.C.5 Gives you the option of not shooting in the shooting phase, but there is no such option in the charge phase. Note that this also applies to UGs that do not evade.

Inconsistent, although it might be intended. If intended, why?

“There they are, sitting ducks” … “No, don't shoot, we don't want to give our position away”
“They are charging, we need to get away as fast as possible” … “No, let's stand here and shoot at them for a while first.”




5.L.3.1 gives criteria for determining whether files shoot or not. This establishes that there are files that shoot and there are files that don't shoot. Not files that shoot but with no effect. 

5.L.3.4.1 does not prevent troops that run away from shooting at flank or rear chargers (it is unlikely they would meet the criteria of 3.1, but it is possible). It also does not say they count as having shot when they don't meet the criteria for shooting.


5.L.3.4.2 has “If you choose to skirmish when charged only in flank or rear your shooting is deemed ineffective and you roll no shooting dice, ... The UG counts as having shot and so cannot shoot in the shooting phase.”

5.L.3.4.3 has “Both cases are still considered to have done a shooting action and cannot shoot later in the shooting phase – you tried to shoot at them but did minimal damage.”

Slightly different wording and I suspect the wording in 3.4.2 was accidentally not deleted in an edit when 3.4.3 was added (so this could potentially be added to the errata). However, either way, there is a lack of clarity.

Is it:

Rule:  The UG counts as having shot
Observation: and one of the implications of this is it cannot shoot later in the shooting phase
(another implication (not stated) is the combat claim vs non charging cavalry that shot).

or

Rule: The UG cannot shoot later in the shooting phase
Rationalisation: you tried to shoot in the charge response but did minimal damage.

I note that 7.C.4 also prevents you from shooting in the shooting phase if you evaded (and that is the most logical place for the rule), but there's nothing wrong with a bit of redundancy in restating it in section 5.


Further lack of clarity if the first one is intended: Does a flex TUG in skirmish with no missile weapon count as having shot (i.e. is the intention (in game-effect terms) that the act of evading triggers the +1 opponent claim, or only evading by missile-focussed units) ?

Consistency question that follows if the second is intended: If a path of charge passes within 1 BW of a non-evading UG but not ahead of it, why wouldn't it also try to shoot but do minimal damage, hence losing the ability to shoot in the shooting phase? [I assume the answer is "because that gives the right game effect"].




Another lack of clarity in 5.L.3.4.3:   “Both cases ...”. 
OK, but which “Both cases” ? Both flank and rear charge? Both skirmish and run away? Both frontal charge and flank/rear charge ? The comment “you tried to shoot at them but did minimal damage” suggests it means “Both flank and rear charge” and only when skirmishing, as those are the only cases where shooting is described as occurring, but ineffective.



8.D.9   is obviously intended as an exception to 5.L.3.1  to prevent you shooting when you meet the normal criteria for shooting. Is it also intended as an exception to the "counts as having shot" rule? If not, would the "cavalry that shot" claim apply when the combat is fought in the charge phase of the next turn?

19
Rules Queries and Clarifications / Re: moving a commander base
« on: March 01, 2024, 08:51:13 AM »
Related question: When the general is at the back of a file and the file turns 180 degrees, is he now at the front of the file, or does he flip to the opposite end of the file?


20
Rules Queries and Clarifications / Re: Pursuing into a flank
« on: February 13, 2024, 12:22:00 AM »
Regarding my original post was any official conclusion/consensus reached on this question?

MF1 and MF2 moves can be made in SP 5.5, which can negate the effect of a flank attack from a pursuit in the fighting phase.  Sorry if this got overlooked in the subsequent discussion.

Richard

I thought they wouldn't negate the effect of a flank attack because criteria to qualify for a flank charge are applied at the time you charge, not at the time you fight. (Which SAH implied assent to in the other thread on pursuit hitting enemy, if I understood him correctly)

21
One to add to the mix, when does combat count as starting?

if I pursue in the melee phase and hit fresh enemy can I then expand out in the same melee phase in 5.5 of the turn sequence?

I believe this was discussed and the decision taken that it is immediate.  This has implications for both pursuers and those pursued into.  The pursuers potentially can create new files (MF1) and those pursued into can turn to face a flank (MF2).  Obviously you must have cards to do this.

This is a difference between the charge phase pursuit and the shooting or fighting phase pursuit.

Yes, I think it has been stated before that you are in combat as soon as you are in a position to fight, you don't have to wait until the melee phase, so e.g. a supporting file is a supporting file during the shooting phase before it has fought any combats.

I don't see how this is any different whatever phase you pursued in, although you would obviously have to wait until the appropriate time in the sequence to execute the MF1 or MF2.

An interesting quirk, if I understand the rules correctly, is if pursuers pursue into a flank and the impacted UG turns to face that flank, the pursuers still qualify for the flank charge bonus in the subsequent charge phase (because you qualify at the time you charged). But would the bases that turned get their factors for fighting to their front in the charge phase, or would it be the inverse case of a base hit on the flank edge by a charge that does not qualify as a flank charge?

22
Summary of my understanding so far:

Pursuit hits no fresh enemy:

This UG is treated exactly the same as an UG that did not pursue.


Pursuit does hit fresh enemy:

Not sure if files that did not contact fresh enemy are treated as "Pursuit hits no fresh enemy" above. Simplest to treat the whole UG as having charged for all combats, so I have assumed this, but not sure if it is intended.

This UG
Counts as having charged for combat against that fresh enemy.
Counts as having charged for combat against enemy that pursue into it later in the same phase.
Counts as having charged for combat against enemy that charge it or pursue into it in a later phase.
(pdf 8.D.10.4 is wrong and should be deleted).
Cannot shoot in the Charge Phase, but can shoot in the Shooting Phase if the pursuit was in the previous turn.

The enemy contacted by the pursuit can claim for Integral Shooters, if applicable.


Standing to receive:

An UG is standing to receive unless it declared a charge, marked a forced charge, countercharged, intercepted, skirmished or ran away (whether it actually moved any distance or not in any of those case), or counts as having charged (due to contacting fresh enemy in a pursuit).



Shieldwall:

Shieldwall "cannot be claimed by TuGs that have done a charge, countercharge, or intercept in the current phase".

 "done a charge" means "declared a charge, or marked a forced charge, even if it didn't actually make a charge move because the enemy charged first; or counts as having charged (due to contacting fresh enemy in a pursuit in the current phase)."


Is that correct?


23
OK, so the rule is:

Troops that countercharge or intercept may not shoot in any phase.

It's just not written in the book.

24
Events / Re: 2024-03-02/03 - Kent Clash - Longships: Raiders and Traders
« on: February 05, 2024, 07:44:03 AM »
Hopefully I will accumulate enough GBPs to attend. The previous year was good fun.

Great Britain Pounds, or Girlfriend Brownie Points?

25
Events / Re: Irish nationals MeG competition 2024
« on: February 05, 2024, 07:42:09 AM »
Early Medieval, Later Medieval, African and American periods from 900CE

Does that mean any army in the 3000s, 5000s, or 6000s plus any army in/from Africa; all from 900CE onwards ?

26
MeG Australia / Re: Cancon 24
« on: February 05, 2024, 03:20:09 AM »
It is curious to me to see such a preponderance of later armies. It must have been a very enjoyable few days.

That was also the case in an open tournament towards the end of last year in the UK (Skullrollers).

Possibly players perceive powerbows and/or fully armoured knights as good value for points.


27
OK, so missile focussed troops can shoot at chargers after they have countercharged or intercepted. I had always assumed they couldn't.

Charge only shooters that pursued in the previous turn can't shoot at chargers because (as has now been clarified) they are not standing to receive. However, if they declare a charge of their own, they can use shoot-and-charge if in range.

Is that correct?

28

Troops that countercharge or intercept may not shoot at 2.4 or 2.5.

Richard

Where does it say that in the rules? It's not in 5.M or 7.B.

29
Additional clarification will be useful here because:

An UG could declare a charge but stay in a position because the enemy charges first.

An UG could not declare a charge, have a forced charge, but stay in a position because the enemy charges first.

An UG could stay in a position because it skirmished but moved zero due to a low dice throw.

An UG that pursues in the fighting phase but fights its combat in the charge phase of the next turn stayed in its position during that charge phase.

I think we need additional clarification on what happens if foot pursue, and are charged by mounted in the next charge phase. Does this change if the pursuit hit something or the pursuit hit nothing?

The intention of 10.4 appears to be that the pursuing infantry that hit something count as "stand to receive" any new charges, but RJC's italics contradict that. If pursuers that  hit nothing do not count as "stand to receive" any new charges, then I think this will be a significant change to how we've been playing.  But if the UG's status vs new charges depends on whether they hit something or not in the previous pursuit, that is not mentally ergonomic.

FWIW It is intuitive that pursuers do not count as "stand to receive" versus whatever they pursued into.


30
Rules Queries and Clarifications / Re: Dismountables
« on: January 31, 2024, 09:21:29 PM »
if mounting hoplites in chariots makes them more tactically effective in the game, to the extent mine never dismounted and usually ended the game on the opponents back edge or behind their flank then its broken.

Did they actually kill anything?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 29