Icaunais
Légat
Inscrit le: 21 Sep 2012 Messages: 649
|
Posté le: Ven Déc 29, 2017 9:53 am Sujet du message: |
|
I agree with fdunadan because Art de la Guerre has not been written for devious mind.
Looks to me like this point will soon appear in the FAQ. _________________ Mes Figurines 15mm |
|
daveallen
Tribun
Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Dim Déc 31, 2017 12:17 am Sujet du message: |
|
fdunadan a écrit: | Only one support unit is autorised on each flank of a melee. So you declare the LI as supporting the fight (and the unitI behind is no longuer a support) and so when your LI is charged, he can evade... and the unit behind act as support for the fight...
simple, elegant, and respecting the spirit of the rule. |
I see your point. However, we've a long history of giving the rule as written primacy over any alleged "spirit."
I'm not convinced you can say a unit in position to support a melee isn't supporting it. Just because you can only get one plus per flank doesn't mean there can't be more than one support per flank.
In the same way you can have five archers shooting at a target, but only the main shooter and three others actually count.
Anyway, as soon as the LI turn to evade they give up their role as supports and so it falls to the unit behind to do the supporting.
If you want it to be otherwise I think you need a formal ruling rather than an ad hoc argument.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Dim Déc 31, 2017 2:00 am Sujet du message: |
|
Hmm, this is a rather grey area.
RAW, The text on ‘Support’ tends towards the provision of bonuses for those units that are actually providing support, rather than those additional units that may also be in position to provide support in their absence. However I do sympathise with daveallen‘s view that should the LI move away (or be destroyed), the unit to their immediate rear would be counted as providing support (until subsequently engaged).
Personally, I would argue that the Technical Board might consider the consequences of adding a FAQ to the effect that all units in position to provide support should be considered to be ‘in Support’, though they only provide +1 for each flank and rear irrespective of the number of units that are actually ‘in support’
So in this position that we are discussing ;
. . MC
. . LI MC
HI HI HI
1) the Medium cavalry charge the right hand Heavy infantry, causing the neighbouring infantry and LI to be considered to be ‘in support’
2) the other MC charge the LI which may no longer evade, because the HI behind them are now ‘In Support’ blocking their evade - so they are destroyed
3) the MC do not pursue onto the HI
4) assuming the other MC survive the second round of melee (unlikely) they disengage and run away.
Note, in the original question, the cavalry were Impetuous and forced to pursue onto an elephant. Assuming they survive two rounds of melee, they could also disengage from the elephant even though they were impetuous.
Does that cover everything? |
|
daveallen
Tribun
Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Dim Déc 31, 2017 8:56 am Sujet du message: |
|
Ramses II a écrit: | Does that cover everything? |
Not really. To avoid confusion, I'll start a new thread to deal with the different question being asked now.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Viking709
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2015 Messages: 87
|
Posté le: Dim Déc 31, 2017 5:50 pm Sujet du message: |
|
2) the light infantry can slide to the left and evade thru the HI that is not supporting. There would have to be another MC to hit the other HI on the left to lock the LI into a non evade situation |
|
Luddite
Archer
Inscrit le: 15 Nov 2017 Messages: 52
|
Posté le: Dim Déc 31, 2017 7:24 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Given the prevalence of this "elephant guarding" tactic, this seems to be a priority to resolve. _________________ http://luddite1811.blogspot.co.uk/ |
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 01, 2018 12:10 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Viking709 a écrit: | 2) the light infantry can slide to the left and evade thru the HI that is not supporting. There would have to be another MC to hit the other HI on the left to lock the LI into a non evade situation |
Or another MC on the left of the unit that charges the LI to prevent it from sliding away.
However, this reinforces the need for the debate.
See the continued discussion Here |
|
Dickstick
Légat
Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016 Messages: 680
Localisation: West Bromwich
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 01, 2018 5:50 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Do we wish LI to be never able to screen units to their rear effectively.
Be careful of where you are going with this.
Some of us are old enough to have seen how this mental road took DBM down from " three point whatever sank your boat "
ADLG is a breath of fresh air
Please don't fart on it. _________________ Player 747 don't call me Jumbo |
|