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
Charge process
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 question V4
Auteur Message
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 706
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Sam Oct 23, 2021 4:02 pm    Sujet du message: Charge process Répondre en citant
Fairly basic query on the charge process when targets evade.

Assume a friendly cavalry unit has an evade capable enemy unit 1UD directly in front, and another enemy unit 2.5 UD's behind that (so 3.5UD from friendly unit). The cavalry declares a charge on the front unit as its initial target, which evades out of the way. In general the way I've seen it played the cavalry can now, if it wants, continue its charge against the remaining unit as its within the cavalry move distance.

However this looks incorrect. The Charge Procedure part 6 (P43) states the charger has to roll for variable move distance if the initial target evades. In this case the initial target of evaded so a variable move roll has to be made. If the charge move is reduced the friendly cavalry cannot make a charge on the second unit even though in charge reach at the start. Is this correct?

The only exception is that an enemy behind light infantry can be selected as the initial target. So a light infantry screen can't be used to force variable move distance tests against main battle line.

It could be argued the friendly unit could have declared its charge against both enemy units to get around this. However the process is clear that only initial target and charge direction are specified in a charge.
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: Dim Oct 24, 2021 10:18 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Was the second unit in charge reach if an enemy unit is in the way? I would say no as the initial target is not a compulsory evade.
This is why defining charge direction to expose secondary targets if initial target evades is important.

I feel the adjusted charge distance roll does kick in earlier than v3 but cannot pin down why that is.
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowhitsky
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2015
Messages: 224
Localisation: Lancaster, UK
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 4:24 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
The cavalry unit was not the initial target and all initial targets evaded therefore you roll for distance. The procedure in the rules is clear on this matter.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 706
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 5:18 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Thanks Julian. I think a lot of people are playing this wrong.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Centurion


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 443
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 9:33 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Just an extension of this discussion (pardon the pun). P.43 section 8 Continuing a Charge talks about chargers who have not made contact or reached a support position being entitled to continue their charge "up to" their "maximum movement allowance".

In a situation where the charger's initial target has evaded and the chargers have rolled a VMD:

1. "Maximum movement allowance" refers to the VMD outcome distance,
2. Impetuous chargers MUST move exactly TO that distance (assuming no obstacles) and non-impetuous chargers MAY move to any point UP TO that VMD outcome distance.

i.e. "Maximum movement allowance" in this context does NOT mean the charger's movement allowance shown in the table on P.29?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 706
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 9:33 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
To be clear, could both enemy units be declared as 'initial' targets?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Centurion


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 443
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 9:51 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
AlanCutner a écrit:
To be clear, could both enemy units be declared as 'initial' targets?


No, I don't think they can. Take the case where the nearest enemy unit is MC bow and the further enemy unit is HC (but still within the charger's P.29 movement allowance). The MC is squarely screening the HC at the time of charge declarations.

The charger can NOT be sure that the MC bow will elect to evade. If the MC elect to stand, by definition the HC could never have been considered an "initial target" as the chargers would first have contacted the MC.

The V.4 introduction of the "initial target" concept seems to be a clear change from V.3 where charging was essentially against everything and anything within my charge path (with some contact prohibitions/exemptions).
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: Dim Oct 24, 2021 9:59 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Look at your copy of v3.

Difficult to find any change in initial target concept.

It's our impetuous brains not waiting for the initial targets to evade before moving on to secondary targets.
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Centurion


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 443
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 10:30 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Dickstick a écrit:
Look at your copy of v3.

Difficult to find any change in initial target concept.



Is the phrase "initial target" used in the V3 rulebook?

In V3 the VMD for chargers is linked to ALL targets evading. In V4 the VMD for chargers is explicitly linked to "initial targets" evading.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 706
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 24, 2021 10:44 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
The big difference is the VMD applies if 'initial' targets evade (V4) as opposed to 'all' targets evading (V3).
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 Oct 25, 2021 1:54 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
The intent behind this has not changed from V3, and Snowhitsky is correct. 

The nearest unit is the target, not the other unit behind that happens to be in charge range. If the target does not evade, this second unit may not evade either. However, if the target unit evades, the other unit may also choose to evade since it can be contacted (assuming a normal move).

Once the evade(s) are made, the chargers roll for their variable move distance which may fall short of where the second unit was located. .
Alternatively, the VMD may go ‘long’ and potentially contact a third unit behind the others which is then given the option to evade before the charge is carried out. 
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 Oct 25, 2021 3:35 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ramses II a écrit:
The intent behind this has not changed from V3, and Snowhitsky is correct. 

The nearest unit is the target, not the other unit behind that happens to be in charge range. If the target does not evade, this second unit may not evade either. However, if the target unit evades, the other unit may also choose to evade since it can be contacted (assuming a normal move).

Once the evade(s) are made, the chargers roll for their variable move distance which may fall short of where the second unit was located. .
Alternatively, the VMD may go ‘long’ and potentially contact a third unit behind the others which is then given the option to evade before the charge is carried out. 



You I think are answering the opposite of snowhitsy but you say its the same.

A--->B___C

A charges B.
B evades.
Now C which is the back of HI (and may not evade) is in normal move distance.

1) You are saying there is no VMD as the new "initial target" is C.
2) Snowhitsky is saying the VMD comes once B evades so could cause A to move short.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Snowhitsky
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2015
Messages: 224
Localisation: Lancaster, UK
MessagePosté le: Lun Oct 25, 2021 7:42 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Everyone.What constitutes an initial target is clearly defined and so is the distance moved. All you you have to do is read the charge/evade procedures through and apply them literally.

Can I suggest that when you query a rule, you also type out the passages in the rules that are causing you confusion? It'll make it easier for those us who don't have them to hand. We can then reply by underlining the bits you should have read in the first place. Thank you.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 706
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Lun Oct 25, 2021 2:22 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
OK. Quoting the rulebook....
"The initial target must be reachable without passing through any enemy units. However heavy troops can choose a target behind enemy LI in open terrain as LI units are forced to evade"

Having read this before making my first post I assumed only the front unit could be an initial target. This generates the change to process from V3. My subsequent post were in response to those suggesting otherwise.
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 Oct 25, 2021 5:00 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ok, quoting from the rules
P43 is slightly confusing, and this is the nub of the debate :-
Citation:
6 - If all initial targets evade, 4th bullet
▪ Units that increase their charge distance may contact secondary targets that were not originally within charge range (see below).
Here, the term "secondary units" refers to all units that will not be contacted as 'the initial target'. The fact that these units may lie within the potential charge range is what is confusing since if the initial target does not evade, these units self-evidently fall outside the actual charge range, since the charge will not reach them.
This bullet also refers to 'increasing their charge range', suggesting that secondary units that lie inside the normal charge range would not be allowed to evade; which I do not think was intended. (see Contacting secondary targets below)

Using Hazelbark's Diag

A ---> B ____ C . . ¦ . . D

A charges B. C (and possibly D) are secondary targets. These secondary targets should be allowed to evade only where B decides to evade, and in the case of D, where the VMD of A extends past it's normal movement distance.
Citation:
Contacting secondary targets
When charging or continuing a charge, a unit may meet a new enemy unit in the path of its charge. These enemies are secondary targets of the charge.
▪ A secondary target can evade if it has the ability to do so. The normal evade procedure is followed (see p 47), except that the charging unit does not move further than its already determined maximum adjusted movement allowance.




So, the actual charge process (from p43) is
  1. Target and charge range (checked)
  2. Direction of the charge (indicated)
  3. Target reaction (Initial target decision)
  4. Charge movement *****
  5. If the initial targets do not evade (no VMD)
  6. If all initial targets evade (check charging VMD)
  7. If not all targets evade (partial continued charge movement, no VMD)
  8. Continuing a charge (where no contact is made)
  9. Conformation
***** the timing of point #4 (Charge movement) is also slightly confusing. In practice I believe the movement of the charging units should take place after the various initial and secondary targets have reacted, as this means the chargers will only move once rather than several times as indicated by the process.


------------------
I will check with the El Kreator and the DT whether the definition of secondary targets and the charge process need any revision / extra clarity
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules question V4
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