Auteur |
Message |
Mark G Fry
Légat

Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2017 Messages: 589
Localisation: Bristol, UK
|
Posté le: Jeu Déc 05, 2024 10:55 am Sujet du message: Activating an Unreliable Allied Commander |
|
This has come up in a couple of games recently.
Scenario A:
An allied corps is sent on a Flank March - and upon its 1st command dice roll it rolls a 1 & becomes unreliable.
In subsequent game turns the allied flank march will need to roll a 6 to reactivate.
Question 1: once it rolls the 6 does that 6 also count as the Commanders command roll? Or will the command need to roll another dice to see if it comes on
Question 2: even though the allied commander is off-table can the CinC still 'bolster' the activation roll by using 2 Command pips to add plus 1 to the allied commanders activation roll?
Question 3: if the flank marching unreliable allied command encounters an enemy flank march (on the same side of the table) does it automatically become reliable? Regardless of whether it is the larger or smaller flank march.
Question 4: if the unreliable allied flank march is larger than the opposition flank march, will it still force the enemy flank-march back on table, and presumable become reliable itself? And vice-versa if it is forced back itself.
Scenario B
An allied command, in ambush in (but on the edge) of terrain that limits visibility (Plantation/Wood/Village) throws an initial command activation roll of a 1 and becomes unreliable.
Question 1: even though it is in terrain that requires an enemy unit to be within 1UD to see it, does it become reliable the moment the enemy unit(s) are within 4UD or must the unit wait until the enemy are at 1 UD?
Question 2: even though the Ambush marker is within the terrain that limits visibility, are enemy units still prohibited from making a 2nd or 3rd move, with 4 UDs of the marker?
Question 3: as long as the units in ambush are in a legal formation/group - do they have to deploy facing the enemy that activates the ambush? E.g. can they deploy facing away from the enemy if required.
Many thanks
Mark _________________ 'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
SteveR
Signifer
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018 Messages: 381
|
Posté le: Jeu Déc 05, 2024 3:30 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Gosh this is a complicated one. Let me give it a try
A1 - it must roll another die to see if it comes on. The good news is that if it rolls to become reliable it gets to roll immediately again that same turn as the rules state that an activation roll does not count as the command's CP roll. Happened to me in a game too. Ref is page 80
A2 - I think so. no reason messengers stop at the table edge
A3 - reread the first paragraph on page 80 about driving back a flank march, making sure to include the errata correction. It explains exactly when and how it becomes reliable. Sometimes it is good to be small
B1 - page 80 is again explicit - the last bullet specific case overrides the penultimate bullet general case. 1 UD is needed
B2. sure. even if the marker is fake that is the case as well
B3 - they may deploy freely and face to the rear like cowards if they wish. Enduring the scorn of their companions |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mark G Fry
Légat

Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2017 Messages: 589
Localisation: Bristol, UK
|
Posté le: Jeu Déc 05, 2024 6:12 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Thanks Steve - all very helpful.
The only bit I am unsure about is A3 - which reads to me as if the unreliable command does also become reliable, regardless of whether it or the opposing flank march is forced back?
SteveR a écrit: | Gosh this is a complicated one. Let me give it a try
A1 - it must roll another die to see if it comes on. The good news is that if it rolls to become reliable it gets to roll immediately again that same turn as the rules state that an activation roll does not count as the command's CP roll. Happened to me in a game too. Ref is page 80
A2 - I think so. no reason messengers stop at the table edge
A3 - reread the first paragraph on page 80 about driving back a flank march, making sure to include the errata correction. It explains exactly when and how it becomes reliable. Sometimes it is good to be small
B1 - page 80 is again explicit - the last bullet specific case overrides the penultimate bullet general case. 1 UD is needed
B2. sure. even if the marker is fake that is the case as well
B3 - they may deploy freely and face to the rear like cowards if they wish. Enduring the scorn of their companions |
B3 was a case of pragmatism over reality. An unreliable command of 3 MF impetuous (in a Gully) were 'discovered' by 4 enemy LF jav, which had moved their full distance to make the discovery. As the MF were within 1 UD of the edge of the gully it seemed sensable to deploy them facing away from the LF jav and for them to pay 3 PIPs to march out of the gully and turn about on the gully rim (in the open ground). We agreed that they'd probably each take 1 disorder for moving out of the ZoC. But I am still not 100% sure we did that right either!
Many thanks
Mark _________________ 'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
SteveR
Signifer
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018 Messages: 381
|
Posté le: Jeu Déc 05, 2024 7:47 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hi Mark,
Let me see if I understand B3.
The LF jav moved up to 1 UD away from the Medium Sword impetuous. Unless the LI were completely within the gully they did not have a ZOC against the Medium foot. page 38
And if they did not have a ZOC then the medium foot could deploy facing the rear and move out without paying 3 CP. Because they do not consider enemy behind a line extending their rear edge as provoking an uncontrolled charge. So just a 1 CP move if they use their entire movement allowance or 2 CP if they move short.
If the LI DID extert a ZOC then they could not move away like that at all. They would need to look at page 37 to see how to move out of a ZOC. And it would cost 2 CP PER UNIT and would put a disorder on each one of them. But the good news is that the move would be the same regardless of which direction they deployed in! Since it includes a free turn. (units that cannot evade, bullets 1, 2 and 3 and above all 4) The last bullet is especially painful |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mark G Fry
Légat

Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2017 Messages: 589
Localisation: Bristol, UK
|
Posté le: Ven Déc 06, 2024 10:45 am Sujet du message: |
|
You are correct Steve, in that the LF jav were entirely within the Gully - so did exert a ZoC on the MF.
The MF's move meant they were at least out of the Gully, out of Javelin range and it meant that as they were on the edge of the Gully they would get an additional +1(for height advantage) if charged. Although, that raises another interesting question as to whether the LF jav could charge the MF even though the combat would take place on the very edge of the terrain piece (but I am not looking to re-open that debate again)
Interesting that you say each of the MF uses up 2 CP to move out of the ZoC, even if they move as a group. But if that is the rules, that is the rules (we did it wrong by applying 3CP to the MF as a group). But we a did apply the resulting disorder to each MF correctly.
The MF fighting the LF jav frontally in the Gully seemed like a very poor option - as the MF lose their impetuous charge (& ferocious charge should they win the combat) and get a -1 for fighting in the Gully - so its a +1 (+ an overlap on one flank) to the LF jav in combat. But as I'd have not had 6 CPs to move them that might have had to have been the only real outcome.
Cheers
Mark _________________ 'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mike Bennett
Légat
Inscrit le: 11 Nov 2017 Messages: 594
Localisation: Carnforth, Lancashire, UK
|
Posté le: Ven Déc 06, 2024 2:07 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Mark G Fry a écrit: | You.
The MF fighting the LF jav frontally in the Gully seemed like a very poor option - as the MF lose their impetuous charge (& ferocious charge should they win the combat) and get a -1 for fighting in the Gully - so its a +1 (+ an overlap on one flank) to the LF jav in combat. But as I'd have not had 6 CPs to move them that might have had to have been the only real outcome.
Cheers
Mark |
Why do you think they lose either the +1 impetuous charger or ferocious. They keep the +1 even in difficult. They keep ferocious in rough, but do loose it in difficult. Also MF have no minus in rough, only HF in rough or MF in difficult. Additionally LF also loose their javelin due to the impetuous charge.
So I make it MF 2 with ferocious v LF 0. The bigger issue is that if the LF evade the MF charge could exit the rough. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mark G Fry
Légat

Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2017 Messages: 589
Localisation: Bristol, UK
|
Posté le: Ven Déc 06, 2024 3:37 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Yes of course - the Gully is rough not difficult - but looking at page 64 I see that I keep both impetuous and ferocious charge - I don't even get the -1 for fighting in Difficult as its in Rough & I am infantry not mounted - hey ho - just goes to show that in the heat of battle is easy to not remember things.
NB: the rear edge (lip) of the gully behind the LF jav was lined with enemy Pikemen - so you are right Mike, charging the LF jav - who would have evaded - would have ended up with the MF in the gully, fighting the Pikemen up on the gully lip in the open. Not a great option.
But good to get it all clarified, so I don't make the same mistake twice  _________________ 'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|