AlanCutner
Tribun
Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 777
Localisation: Scotland
|
 Posté le: Lun Mai 25, 2026 1:24 pm Sujet du message: Continuing a charge |
 |
Query already posted in Facebook group. Posted again here for further views.
Start position -
A friendly group of five pikemen is opposite an enemy group of three knights with three light horse in front of them. An enemy crossbow unit is to the side of the knights but hanging back about 1UD.
______Kn______Pk
______Kn LH___Pk
______Kn LH___Pk
________LH____Pk
__XB__________Pk
The pikemen have declared a charge on the light horse. Light horse have evaded and the diagram below shows the position if the pike advance the minimum 1UD.
______Kn __Pk
______Kn __Pk
______Kn _Pk
___________Pk
__XB_______Pk
The pike roll a 5 for their pursuit which means the bottom pike is within reach of the enemy crossbow. The other pikes want to stop their charge after an advance of 1UD, but allow the bottom pike to continue their charge into the crossbows (see P43). The resulting position is
______Kn __Pk
______Kn __Pk
______Kn _Pk
___________Pk
__XBPk
Is this allowed?
It was ruled against, but the relevant text appears to be (in my view)
The units of a charging group who have not contacted an enemy and who are not in support of a friendly unit in melee can continue their charge up to their maximum movement allowance.
The bottom pike is a unit of the charging group, has not contacted an enemy or gone into a support position (prior to continuing charge). The only issue I could see was whether a unit can continue a charge if the rest of the group has stopped short of its full charge reach – but cannot see anything stating this.
The ruling against was on the basis a charge continuation has to be by a group – because of the word ‘units’ (of a group) as opposed to just ‘unit’. But if this is correct then presumably if the continued charge was by two units on the end of a line would be allowed |
|
Andy Fyfe
Vétéran
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024
Messages: 170
|
| Posté le: Lun Mai 25, 2026 9:37 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| AlanCutner a écrit: | Query already posted in Facebook group. Posted again here for further views.
Start position -
A friendly group of five pikemen is opposite an enemy group of three knights with three light horse in front of them. An enemy crossbow unit is to the side of the knights but hanging back about 1UD.
______Kn______Pk
______Kn LH___Pk
______Kn LH___Pk
________LH____Pk
__XB__________Pk
The pikemen have declared a charge on the light horse. Light horse have evaded and the diagram below shows the position if the pike advance the minimum 1UD.
______Kn __Pk
______Kn __Pk
______Kn _Pk
___________Pk
__XB_______Pk
The pike roll a 5 for their pursuit which means the bottom pike is within reach of the enemy crossbow. The other pikes want to stop their charge after an advance of 1UD, but allow the bottom pike to continue their charge into the crossbows (see P43). The resulting position is
______Kn __Pk
______Kn __Pk
______Kn _Pk
___________Pk
__XBPk
Is this allowed?
It was ruled against, but the relevant text appears to be (in my view)
The units of a charging group who have not contacted an enemy and who are not in support of a friendly unit in melee can continue their charge up to their maximum movement allowance.
The bottom pike is a unit of the charging group, has not contacted an enemy or gone into a support position (prior to continuing charge). The only issue I could see was whether a unit can continue a charge if the rest of the group has stopped short of its full charge reach – but cannot see anything stating this.
The ruling against was on the basis a charge continuation has to be by a group – because of the word ‘units’ (of a group) as opposed to just ‘unit’. But if this is correct then presumably if the continued charge was by two units on the end of a line would be allowed |
Hi Alan,
I see your point.
Re-reading the charge and evade section it does seem to be allowed.
However, I'm not sure that is how it is played.
For example, a unit of six cavalry charge a single light horse which evades out of harms way.
The cavalry roll long.
This interpretation would allow each of the six cavalry units to charge between 2 and 5 UDs, splitting up into as many units as desired. Some of them ZoCing an enemy while other go long into a flanking position. All sounds a bit too good to be true. IMO
Andy |
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1783
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
| Posté le: Mar Mai 26, 2026 9:30 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
For example, a unit of six cavalry charge a single light horse which evades out of harms way.
The cavalry roll long.
This interpretation would allow each of the six cavalry units to charge between 2 and 5 UDs, splitting up into as many units as desired. Some of them ZoCing an enemy while other go long into a flanking position. All sounds a bit too good to be true. IMO
Andy |
If you ever wish to break up a charging group of your cavalry (or indeed any other troop type) into 6 separate units during any game we ever end up playing against one another, just let me know and I'll happily agree to you doing so
Whether that is in line with the intent or the actual wording of the rules, or even if it's downright illegal, if you want to voluntarily break up a group such that it would become almost impossible for you to control them all in any subsequent bound of the game, well, that is something I'm pretty sure I'd be more than happy to let you do (if you so wished ... !!!)
_________________
www.madaxeman.com |
|
FAQ
Rechercher
Liste des Membres
Groupes d'utilisateurs
S'enregistrer
Profil
Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés
Connexion
