Art De La Guerre

[Mark G Fry]

I suspect that this might be one of those - sequence of play things, but in a situation where a friendly (non-LF) unit routes through another friendly unit which has a general fighting with that unit this turn, does the general dice for the unit receiving a routed through casualty?

There are other factors to be taken into account, so it assumes that the general has not already had to dice for a similar risk that same turn.
It also assumes that the general is an intergral general, or that if he is an independant general, that he has been fighting in melee, with the routed through general, that turn.

Although, there might be another question around whether an independant general, fighting this turn with the unit he has attached himself to, but which has destroyed the unit it was fighting against, before the rout-through happens, still has to test for rout-through (if that is the case). As technically the routed through unit is no longer in combat and neither is the independant general.

If all that makes sense?
Thanks
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[KevinD]

I think he takes the test. If he is in melee and takes a hit for any reason he must test.

If the general routed his opponent then he is no longer in melee and need not test. (I think.)

[Ramses II]

Agreed Kevin. 
A unit with an attached (or integral) commander may sustain one or more hits. Irrespective of the number of hits, you dice once to see what happens to him at the end of the turn.  (P28)

• If the unit to which the commander is engaged in combat loses cohesion for any reason, the opposing player rolls 1D6 and on a 1 the commander is eliminated
• If the unit to which the commander is engaged in combat is Routed, the commander is eliminated on a result of 1, 2 or 3.
• An engaged commander is only tested once per player’s sequence even if the unit he/she is included in, or attached to, loses more than one cohesion point. This test is made after all combats have been resolved, in the Rout and Pursuit phase.

The key criteria is whether the commander is attached to the unit when it suffers a hit. So an independent commander that ceases to be attached to a unit which has routed its opponent, does not test if the unit subsequently suffers a hit. 

[Mark G Fry]

Thanks guys

So ... it is a timing or sequencing thing, as I suspected.

A). If the friendly routing unit, routes through the unit with its attached (not included) general, and that unit is not in combat at the end of the game turn (other than by being in simple support), does the general still test? The unit has still received a routed through disorder/casualty but it is not actually in combat.

B). In a case where the routed through unit (with its attached/integrated general) is still in active front-edge combat and it hasn't received a casualty from the unit it is actually fighting, then the routed through unit receives a casualty and the general must be dices for (regardless of whether he is attached or integral)?

C). If the routed through unit (with an attached general) destroys its opponent in combat, but it is routed through, surely as all actions take place simultaneously, the rout through occurred when the routed through unit was still in combat (or ... is it all dependent upon the fact that the test for the general occurs at the end of the move?)

D). Further complexity (sorry about this ... but it was a very complex melee). In this instance there was also a follow-up/pursuit involved.
So ... the unit that destroyed the 1st opposing unit, that then routed through its own friend behind it (the one with the included/integral general) then pursued into the flank of that unit. So there was a disorder/casualty for the rout-through and then another disorder caused by the 2nd opposing unit being hit in the flank whilst fighting to its front. Were we correct in the fact that the unit that was routed through received a disorder (casualty) from the rout-through plus an additional a casualty/disorder from being hit in the flank (as the two actions were different, and so the provision that a unit hit in the flank &/or rear more than once in the same game turn is exempt from multiple casualties/disorders - whereas a unit that is routed into by friends multiple times will receive multiple disorders/casualties; and neither cancels out the other)?

Again apologies if this all sounds a bit obtuse but it was a swirling and complex HF v Pike melee.
Thanks
Mark
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[Hazelbark]

To be clear you say routed through. You mean the p68 zone of routed units.

1) A general not in melee is not tested to be loss because the unit takes a cohesion.
2) A general of any type, engaged in combat is at risk if the unit he is with, takes a cohesion loss for any reason.
p28 4th bullet, the test is made after all other combats have been resolved.

Note FAQ
Only commander fighting with the main unit of a melee counts as Engaged in combat for CP purposes, combat bonus and risk of elimination. Commander with a unit in melee support is not Engaged in combat.


A-C Yes

D: A cohesion loss from a rout through is indeed distinct from a cohesion loss from fighting in multiple directions as a result of a pursuit. You are characterizing but not citing the specific rule of p61 last bullet under multiple attacks. Your characterization is not perfect. You only suffer the multiple attack loss once per turn. You may lose cohesion for other resaons in addition.

[Neep]

I believe the answer is that you do not roll until 1) the unit is routed OR 2) all current routs are resolved.
Of course, at least in theory, the roll could cause your unit to rout and set off another chain of routs, so the order of testing would be a choice on your part.

Mark, a general is at risk if they are included and in combat, or if they are attached and engaged in combat. A general is engaged in combat when declared to be engaged in combat until one or the other unit disengages, or routs. Routing is a process and the general remains engaged until the full resolution of the Rout and Pursuit phase.

The engaged general will only make one test regardless of how many cohesion hits were taken during the turn, after all current Rout and Pursuits have been resolved. If the unit to which they are attached has not been routed, they are eliminated on a roll of 1. If included, then the unit must be substituted or marked to indicate the general is no longer present. If it is routed, then they are eliminated if they are included. If attached they are eliminated with a roll of 1-3, otherwise they flee and are possibly captured. The difference between captured and eliminated is simply narrative color or a campaign game consideration.

Thus, your questions A-D all have the same answer - roll once after all current routs have been resolved. On a 1 the general is eliminated. (If attached to a unit, that unit will take another cohesion hit, and if routed will restart the Rout and Pursuit phase.) If the unit to which they were attached to has routed, then the general is also eliminated on a 2 or 3 and otherwise must flee with the possibility then of capture.

(In case D, the unit will take two cohesion hits from two different causes.)

***

I got to thinking about the timing of the elimination rolls especially vis a vis pursuit and have some more observations.

Some principles base on avoiding complications:
The rout elimination roll should take precedence over the hit elimination roll because you only make one roll and it's a wheeze to avoid the more severe rout roll by making a hit roll prematurely.
Rout rolls should occur before pursuits because the pursuit might change the landscape and narratively you want your leader to flee from the pursuit not after it.
Note the preamble on page 69. Pursuits only apply to routs caused by melee results. Routs caused by rout/rampage cascade, multiple attacks, or leader loss during the Rout and Pursuit phase do not trigger additional pursuits.

so:
0. Initially and throughout the process note any (of the three ) commanders who should face rout or hit rolls.
1. Note the potential pursuits due to melee routs.
2. Remove routed units, cascade additional routs caused by rout/rampage-through hits.
3. At this point make rout rolls for affected commanders and resolve elimination, capture, or flight. (Attached but unengaged commanders will flee.)
4. Now conduct Pursuits and apply any Multiple Attack hits. (Note that Pursuit order matters. You can pursue into the potential pursuit path of another unit.)
5. Cascade any rout results.
6. Make and resolve rout rolls for affected commanders.
7. Now you can make the hit rolls for affected commanders, but it becomes a little tricky. Commander elimination causes a cohesion hit, which might trigger a rout cascade, which might change a hit roll to a rout roll for another commander. Okay, to dodge the deserved grumbling, yeah maybe it's a 1 in 100,000 game event. Still, it's good to have an airtight procedure. Thus I suggest make all the hit rolls first. Apply any hits and repeat steps 5-7 as needed.

[Zoltan]

I've found this a rather confusing discussion, so just to be clear:

A unit with an included commander is NOT in melee.

However, a friendly unit just got routed and the included commander's unit is within the rout zone, so takes a cohesion hit (p68).

Is there a test for killing the commander?

[KevinD]

No test if the unit including the commander is not in melee.

[Zoltan]

So:

a. included commander, unit not in melee
If his unit routs (for any reason) - no test: commander is automatically lost (p28).

b. attached commander, unit not in melee
If his unit routs - no test: commander must flee to any friend within 5UD, otherwise he is automatically lost (p28).

c. There is only ever a test for commander loss if that commander's unit is (still) in melee.

d. At the start of the Rout and Pursuit Phase, a unit that has accumulated its maximum number of cohesion points is, well, routed. Ipso facto it is no longer in combat and its (former) opponent's commander is therefore no longer in melee - so no test (per c above).

[KevinD]

Per point d above.

No, if the commander is engaged and the unit routs, then the commander is lost on a 1-3. See bullet #3, p 28.

[Zoltan]

[Neep]

It's open to interpretation, but I think it's better to consider "engaged in combat" holds throughout the Rout and Pursuit phase rather than ends when the opposing unit is lifted from the table. It keeps things simpler. I don't think there are any choices to optimize, but it might give players pause.
Two examples:
Your attached commander is hit front and flank by the enemy. You declare engagement and rout the enemy main unit. But you have received a Multiple Attack cohesion hit. Do you skip the test because the main unit was routed?
Your attached general is engaged with an opponent down to 1 hit left. Unfortunately, a 1:6 leaves you both with one hit left. Then a nearby elephant rampages through you both. Now what?

[Ramses II]

[Zoltan]

[KevinD]

I perfectly understand your point an out timing. It is irrelevant.

If you were in melee during the melee phase and your commander was either included or engaged, you must test if you take a. Hit during the rout phase (on a 1-3 if last hit, otherwise on a 1).