Art De La Guerre
Bienvenue sur le forum de discussion de la règle de jeu l'Art De La Guerre
 
FAQFAQ RechercherRechercher Liste des MembresListe des Membres Groupes d'utilisateursGroupes d'utilisateurs S'enregistrerS'enregistrer
ProfilProfil Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés ConnexionConnexion
Killing commanders in melee, or not
Page 1 sur 2 Aller à la page 1, 2  Suivante
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Auteur Message
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 9:58 am    Sujet du message: Killing commanders in melee, or not Répondre en citant
The rules are:

Citation:
Page 24, Commander in melee final paragraph, 2nd & 4th sentences:

If the unit to which he is attached loses cohesion in melee, ... on a 1, the engaged commander is lost.

An engaged commander is only tested once per game-turn even if the unit he is included in, or attached to loses more than one cohesion point.


Citation:
Page 25, Commander included in a unit ante-penultimate bullet point:

If the unit loses cohesion in melee, the commander is lost on a roll of 1.


Citation:
Page 57, Presence of a commander penultimate sentence:

If the commander is engaged in melee... ...[it] risks being lost if the unit loses the melee.


So Alex is at the head of his Companion busily munching his way through the Persian levies when some gaudily clad Apple Bearers sneak onto his flank causing the Companions to lose cohesion.

The question is does Darius III get to test for killing Alex? And if so, does the test occur before the melee phase or after the melee?

Dave

PS For consistency,* the bold part of the third quote above should read:

if the unit loses cohesion in melee

* I know, the bugbear of small minds, but what am I going to do about it? It's too late to get a life. Rolling Eyes
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 11:02 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
P59 multiple opponents,
 “When a unit, already in melee on its front edge, is engaged in melee on its flankâ€. . . .
So this occurs during a melee but the cohesion loss is applied immediately before the melee is resolved. 


 
My suggestion therefore is that the opponent may test for the loss of “Alex†the general at risk before the melee is resolved, but irrespective of the result and any further losses, there is only one such test per turn. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1525
MessagePosté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 4:29 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I take that as loss of a cohesion (or is routed) in the melee phase.

I.E. I would not think there is a roll to kill alexander just because a unit fell on the flank in movement of a unit he is fighting with.

Rules appear to say melee. This occurred in movement.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 6:26 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Thanks for your thoughts guys.

This broke down into two arguments.

When the attackers realised they could only test once in a turn for the commander they decided they'd have at least the same chance of killing him after the melee and might even kill the unit thereby tripling their chances.

As luck would have it, they rolled a one for the melee and their opponents then argued from page 57 that the commander was only at risk if he lost the melee.

Such fun!

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Dickstick
Légat


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016
Messages: 680
Localisation: West Bromwich
MessagePosté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 11:04 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Loss of cohesion includes people killed and/or unit disordered. Eg retirement in face of none contacted enemy. No one dies but unit disordered.
Loss of cp hit on flank
Is it disorder or more kills?
It happens before the mêlée as it's disorder will effect the mêlée.

Should a general die when the unit is disordered?
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Mar Jan 23, 2018 5:31 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
This is a tricky one because the rules are silent on when the test should take place. And as we found out on Sunday we can argue until we're blue in the face about whether the cohesion was lost "in movement" or "in melee."

If you allow the test during the movement phase I can see players making this move first and then making other moves dependant on the outcome. Which is getting a bit silly.

Oh very dear.

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Mar Jan 23, 2018 9:17 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
daveallen a écrit:
Thanks for your thoughts guys.

This broke down into two arguments.

When the attackers realised they could only test once in a turn for the commander they decided they'd have at least the same chance of killing him after the melee and might even kill the unit thereby tripling their chances.

As luck would have it, they rolled a one for the melee and their opponents then argued from page 57 that the commander was only at risk if he lost the melee.

Such fun!

Dave

And this is the point isn’t it?
The opponent knows there will be a dice throw for the melee, and he knows the potential odds of this combat, which are probably in his favour even if he lets Alex join in.

Where the odds are even (ie 0-0) perhaps he should try to kill off Alex now while he has the chance. Where the odds are 3-0 in his favour, and this will destroy the unit, he should wait, hoping the opponent doesn’t get lucky. 


Either way, since the disorder hit is applied immediately, the opponent is given the choice of taking the 1:6 chance of killing the general immediately - at the risk of losing the chance of killing him in the later melee . . . 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1525
MessagePosté le: Mar Jan 23, 2018 4:10 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
daveallen a écrit:
This is a tricky one because the rules are silent on when the test should take place. And as we found out on Sunday we can argue until we're blue in the face about whether the cohesion was lost "in movement" or "in melee."


Sorry, I think the rules are clear. Melee phase after the unit he is with fights.

I appreciate where you were on Sunday. I've been there. But it looks very clear to me.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Dickstick
Légat


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016
Messages: 680
Localisation: West Bromwich
MessagePosté le: Mar Jan 23, 2018 10:45 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Yes it's the difference of reading what's in the line over what might be between the lines.
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Mer Jan 24, 2018 1:26 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Yes there's a melee phase and a movement phase, but melee also occurs in the movement phase as does movement in the melee phase.

I think it's unwise to take the concept of distinct phases from the sequence of play and apply it to rules that don't mention the phase. A loss of cohesion in melee can occur in the movement phase as Rameses III pointed out:

Citation:
P59 multiple opponents,

When a unit, already in melee on its front edge, is engaged in melee on its flank. . . .


Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1525
MessagePosté le: Mer Jan 24, 2018 3:45 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
daveallen a écrit:
Yes there's a melee phase and a movement phase, but melee also occurs in the movement phase as does movement in the melee phase.


We are going to have to agree to disagree here.
There is no movement in melee and there are no melee adjudications in movement.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 25, 2018 10:56 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hazelbark a écrit:
daveallen a écrit:
Yes there's a melee phase and a movement phase, but melee also occurs in the movement phase as does movement in the melee phase.


We are going to have to agree to disagree here.

"Agreeing to disagree" might work at a dinner party, but to a wargames umpire it's a recipe for disaster.

Hazelbark a écrit:
There is no movement in melee and there are no melee adjudications in movement.

So your victorious units never pursue?

True, there is no melee adjudication in the movement phase but melee is a continuous activity. Just because it's outcomes are mostly decided in another phase doesn't mean the units in melee are taking a tea break while the others are moving. Wink

In the absence of a statement in or on the rules, I'd give the choice of when to test to the active player.

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1525
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 25, 2018 5:49 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
OK you want an argument. You are wrong and I am right. Cool

Pursuit is not movement.

This seems perfectly clear as you go through it.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 25, 2018 6:32 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
The question is whether the opponent can deprive a player of his general at a crucial point before the melee is resolved, or whether the players wait until the end of the melee resolution, no?

We agree that there is only one test per turn, irrespective of the number of cohesion points lost.

However the rules are clear that there are potentially two points when cohesion points will be lost, before and after melee resolution. 


Since the general could form part of that melee resolution, my understanding is that the opponent has the option of taking the test before the melee resolution - but on the understanding that he may not try again later in the melee. 

However, I also agree that the player may defer the test to the end of the turn (should he so desire), in the hope that the unit is destroyed giving the opponent a greater chance of killing the general. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 25, 2018 7:21 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hazelbark a écrit:
OK you want an argument. You are wrong and I am right. Cool

My charges are reasonable and there's only a 15% surcharge for Paypal. Wink

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Page 1 sur 2 Aller à la page 1, 2  Suivante
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet Toutes les heures sont au format GMT

 
Sauter vers:  
Vous ne pouvez pas poster de nouveaux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas éditer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas supprimer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas voter dans les sondages de ce forum