Search found 23 matches
- Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:38 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Front rank disordered rear rank in good order.
- Replies: 9
- Views: 1901
Gozerius - thanks for the reminder about the POA bullet points relating to multiple ranks. I don't think I missed any of that in our game - it was specifically the number of dice to be rolled which I was concerned about. Hammy - thanks for the confirmation. That's the way we played it anyway, but I ...
- Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:56 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Front rank disordered rear rank in good order.
- Replies: 9
- Views: 1901
Front rank disordered rear rank in good order.
I just need to check this: on a simple reading of the rules, it seems that only the actual bases in disordering terrain suffer penalties in combat, rather than the whole BG. In a battle, if fighting to break into terrain, the front rank may be disordered while the rear rank is still in open ground a...
- Sun Nov 23, 2008 5:11 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: engaged or committed
- Replies: 4
- Views: 1489
Thanks - I was happy with the definition of close combat (although, had I looked it up again, I would have noticed the bit about overlaps moving away!). It was a reply to someone else's question on this forum that said 'engaged in melee' and 'committed to close combat' were different things, althoug...
- Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:18 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: engaged or committed
- Replies: 4
- Views: 1489
engaged or committed
Marvellous! Why do I always forget about the General Movement Rules section? I looked through impact, manoeuvre... Just call me dumb. Sorry. Thanks very much for that - it certainly clears up any doubt about the situation. However, if anyone can still point me at the definitions of "engaged in ...
- Sat Nov 22, 2008 12:04 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: engaged or committed
- Replies: 4
- Views: 1489
engaged or committed
Hi - could someone please explain the difference between "engaged in melee" and "committed to close combat"? Situation: Legionaries are in frontal close combat with Galatian Warriors A; Warriors B are an overlap with corner contact only. One round of melee has taken place, with W...
- Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:09 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Camps
- Replies: 15
- Views: 3922
Fair enough, Richard, I'm not arguing. I'm happy to go with the workaround. It's just a shame - it's about the only part of the rules which can't be used straight with existing DBM bases. It rather defeats the original point of defining the camp at that size so that an unfortified one can be represe...
- Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:34 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Infantry withdrawal/Breakoff
- Replies: 47
- Views: 10002
I think Peter Conolly got that right - and it's a principle we could all do with remembering. Even in periods with good documentary sources, one can't be entirely certain. Even many of the men who were there in the field may not have been certain exactly what was happening, so I would rather say &qu...
- Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:13 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Sizes of Terrain....
- Replies: 13
- Views: 3194
- Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:10 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Sizes of Terrain....
- Replies: 13
- Views: 3194
Make it easy on yourself - cut three templates: one 16 MU diameter circle - all terrain must fit inside this; one 12 MU diameter circle - small pieces must fit inside this; one 6MUx4MU rectangle - this must be entirely covered by any terrain piece. If you intend to use 'rigid felt' for terrain bases...
- Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:58 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Camps
- Replies: 15
- Views: 3922
Thanks for the reassurance, guys. I confess I hadn't thought of the latter idea - that I could still regard the camp size as just the 6 baggage bases, and regard the extra fortification bases as just 'decorative', while measuring distances from the 'essential' camp. It does get around the issue quit...
- Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:08 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Camps
- Replies: 15
- Views: 3922
- Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:02 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: CT for seeing friends break - cascade?
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1363
Thanks, both - that settles any doubts! And it has to be said that the FoG Cohesion Test does mean that multiple breaks are unlikely unless several BGs are already fragmented - even disrupted BGs are not THAT likely to break; but if it happens, at least it means a quick and decisive finish to the ba...
- Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:08 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: CT for seeing friends break - cascade?
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1363
CT for seeing friends break - cascade?
I can't readily find any earlier post on this - When a unit breaks and a friendly unit within 3 MU fails the Cohesion Test for seeing this, does this become a cause for further units to test? i.e. does the panic spread outwards, or is the original breaking unit the only cause for testing? I'm afraid...
- Fri May 09, 2008 5:48 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Line of Sight Visibility -- Forests
- Replies: 29
- Views: 7687
- Tue May 06, 2008 5:21 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Line of Sight Visibility -- Forests
- Replies: 29
- Views: 7687
- Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:10 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Commander Questions
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1863
I'm not arguing with you - my analysis definitely says he only influences one. :) But, strictly speaking, the rules themselves do not stipulate that a battle line only exists for movement purposes. Mind you, I can't see anywhere that the BG's benefit from being in a BL apart from in movement! Still,...
- Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:33 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: visibility from inside of terrain
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1811
- Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:05 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Commander Questions
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1863
- Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:15 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Anyone for a stake?
- Replies: 12
- Views: 3637
- Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:59 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Anyone for a stake?
- Replies: 12
- Views: 3637