Art De La Guerre

[Zoltan]

[Zoltan]

[Mark G Fry]

So the way I am reading all this is as follows:

1. as the test for routed through occurs after all combats have been resolved (so it is - in my mind - a matter of timing), if the friendly unit that has been routed through has already destroyed the unit it was itself fighting (to its front), there is no test to the general (regardless of whether he is integrated or attached).

2. as the test for the General occurs before any pursuits occur, a unit with a general, that has been routed through by a friendly unit that turn, that is not fighting any other enemy unit, does not have to test for the general, even if that unit has been contacted by the pursuing enemy unit (in a manner that might cause a cohesion loss), in that turn. As the pursuit happens after the test for the general would usually take place.

I think that is right
Thanks
Mark
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[Ramses II]

No Mark, you have completely misunderstood this. 

As Kevin and Zoltan have tried to explain, when the unit suffers a disorder hit, this immediately affects the attached commander (per p28). However, because the unit (and hence the commander) could suffer a disorder at several points in both player’s phases, the commander is only actually tested in the rout / pursuit phase. 

Does that help??

[Neep]

The question hinges on the line on page 27, section Attached commander, bullet 2:

[Mark G Fry]

[madaxeman]

THE ROLL FOR LOSS OF GENERALS IS SUPPOSED TO BE MADE IN THE ROUT PHASE… 

(We all often do it immediately, but that’s so we don’t forget - and because there’s almost no situations in which there could be a second hit.  But even then no one does the rout effects immediately - we all know that’s wrong) 
_________________
www.madaxeman.com

[Ramses II]

Ok Mark, to answer your questions, please re-read p68. The pertinent points are the 1st bp, the 4th bp and the 8th bp:-

• Routs and pursuits are conducted at the end of the player’s sequence after the resolution of all combats
  
• All friendly units directly behind the routing unit after its reorientation and less than one UD from it lose one cohesion point. Those units can in turn be Routed if reduced to zero cohesion points. This can result in a “cascade” of routs. 
  
• Commanders engaged in combat or included in a Routed unit risk being eliminated (see p28 ).
  

These points should answer all your questions. 

So, regarding the timing or sequence of play, all combats and melees are resolved first, ideally marking those units with an included / attached commander that have suffered hits and or been routed.  

Later, in the Rout / Pursuit phase, the commander is tested (including for being routed through). 

[Mark G Fry]

Thanks all
Helpful as always & appreciated

It's the "cascade" issue that I was struggling with, as whilst P.68 and P.69 are clear - adding in the effect caused by the general being integral (or attached) to the unit in melee, and then cohesion losses caused either by pursuits or the subsequent issue of the loss of that general causing a further cohesion loss, that might also rout the unit he was included in, and its possible effect on another unit with it's rout path, was all a bit too much.

Complex melees are all to common in ADLG - especially with lines of infantry turning on each others flanks. So clarity on these points is IMHO critical to avoid misunderstanding.

Cheers
Mark
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[Ramses II]

Ok Mark, I am not sure I understand your ‘complex example’, but I think you are referring to the timing of actions in the earlier phases, which are key and need to be considered carefully. Consider two examples 

1. ’blue’ MI with attached commander is in melee with ‘red’ MC. In the movement phase of Red’s turn, the MC wish to disengage while another unit of ‘Red’ HC attacks the flank of the MI.
   1. If the MC disengages first, the melee is ended, allowing the ‘blue’ commander to cease being in melee before  the HC moves into contact.
   2. If the HC moves first, the melee continues while the MC disengages, keeping the ‘blue’ commander in the melee.
   
   
   
2. Continuing the above example
   1. In the melee phase ‘blue’ MI with attached commander is routed,
      • the unit is removed in the rout phase.
      • Since the commander was participating in the melee, it will test in the Rout phase.
      • If the MI is subsequently routed through (unlikely), the commander only tests once
   2. If the ‘blue’ MI win and rout the ‘red’ HC, the melee ends allowing the commander to be detached. If the ‘blue’ MI is subsequently routed through, the commander does not test since it is no longer attached

I hope this answers your concerns. 

[SteveR]

[quote="][*]If the ‘blue’ MI win and rout the ‘red’ HC, the melee ends allowing the commander to be detached. If the ‘blue’ MI is subsequently routed through, the commander does not test since it is no longer attached[/list][/list]

I hope this answers your concerns. [/quote]


This is the circumstance that I was unsure of. I agree with you, which should concern you.

What you are saying is that if the Unit with a commander attached destroys its opponent during the melee phase, even if the unit he is attached to during the melee phase takes a cohesion hit during the Rout phase, he does not test.

This is a question to me because all routs happen at the same time. The general becomes unattached at the exact same point in the game where his unit is routed through. So it could be called either way.