the new flank charge

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Same principle for all flank/rear charges.
Its combined concept in the rules with no different between them.
Just puts the 1BW square in a different places.
Will augment the diagram to cover it.


Si

[Jilu]

a consequence of rearcharges :

troops who feel a rear charge end up facing the charger?

[Simon Meg-Meister]

a consequence of rearcharges :

troops who feel a rear charge end up facing the charger?

sorry I don't understand the question.

S

[Jilu]

me neither..

[Rino]

 

[Simon Meg-Meister]

me neither..

And you wrote it  . ok

[badhabum]

Expecting is not the same as written solid black on white .


If a unit approaches to the rear and is 2 MU away from it's target and the target is already facing another ennemy we might end with the following :

The target moves 1,1 MU to the rear and so is less than 1 MU from the charger in it's rear . I f we follow current rule as described, the rear charge becomes a frontal charge ...

And the same unit is charged to the front ...it is sandwiched but both charges would be frontal ..; I would really be curious, to know how to resolve it .

Cheesy things can happen

[lionheartrjc]

Expecting is not the same as written solid black on white .


If a unit approaches to the rear and is 2 MU away from it's target and the target is already facing another ennemy we might end with the following :

The target moves 1,1 MU to the rear and so is less than 1 MU from the charger in it's rear . I f we follow current rule as described, the rear charge becomes a frontal charge ...

And the same unit is charged to the front ...it is sandwiched but both charges would be frontal ..; I would really be curious, to know how to resolve it .

Cheesy things can happen

Unless I have completely misunderstood what you are saying, I think you have misunderstood the rule.  The new rule doesn't affect the rear charge.

[nikgaukroger]

Doing this with pictures to make sure we're getting it right.

If I understand correctly Jacques is talking about something like this:



Blue units are one side, the red is the other. One blue unit has moved to 2BW behind the red unit.

Jacques is asking what happens if the red unit now falls back towards the unit behind it so that it is now within 1BW:



Jacques thinks that if the blue unit which is behind the red now charges the red unit the charge does not count as a rear charge, presumably because the blue bases are within the 1BW x 1BW space required for a flank/rear charge. However, the rule (as I read it) only talks about enemy TUG bases (from the chargers viewpoint) being within that area and not you own. Therefore, it is a rear charge 

[Simon Meg-Meister]

It's not an issue bit I will fix it with a diagram expansion to be super clear.

Si

[badhabum]

Same principle for all flank/rear charges.
Its combined concept in the rules with no different between them.
Just puts the 1BW square in a different places.
Will augment the diagram to cover it.


Si

I misunderstood because of the explanation that I quote.It states : Same principle for all flank/rear charges.

Hence my questioning

[Roger]

i am trialing the new flank charge rules and finding the 1 base width square rule, in some situations not realistic, i have  attached pictures illustrating Charging lancers breaking my archers (and my Line!) ending up behind the  flank of two of my units, i wanted to turn one unit and charge the flank next time, under new rules this would not be allowed ?


[attachment deleted by admin]

[nikgaukroger]

As far as I can see in the last picture there is nothing in the new rule stopping the infantry charging the flank of the cavalry. What makes you think it cannot charge?

[Roger]

they don't have a 1 base width square between them and the flank

[nikgaukroger]

The requirement isn't that there is an empty 1BW square, but a 1BW square that doesn't have any enemy TUG bases in or touching it. Your own bases are irrelevant.