Wheeling in a Charge

titanu · Post by **titanu** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:46 am

I know the topic of wheeling in a charge has been rasied before and Simon replied:

1. You declare a charge, along with a direction if it is going to be important (albeit the rules say if there are potential evaders there are a few other occasions it matter and we clarified somewhere just to do it if in doubt).
2. This direction can include any wheel physically possible at the time of declaration (so is at time slimited by the location of targets - e.g. if 1mm away there is no room to wheel)

This ruling was confirmed at Britcon which is fair enough but I cannot see any justification for this in the rules and it does not appear to be in the FAQs. When I go back to the club after a convention I always have a brief review of any rulings but am asked to 'justify' these and for this one I cannot.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:15 am

Because when a charge is declared you cannot wheel past the targets front edge, since it has not evaded yet.

Once the target has evaded you can then change direction using other rules and circumstances, that I don't have here so may say something wrong.

titanu · Post by **titanu** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:37 am

philqw78 wrote:Because when a charge is declared you cannot wheel past the targets front edge, since it has not evaded yet.

Once the target has evaded you can then change direction using other rules and circumstances, that I don't have here so may say something wrong.

Thanks for the reply but you cannot just say 'Because when they charge etc.' I wanted some justification in the rules or FAQs.

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:00 am

The wheel declares how you will contact the target. You can only declare a wheel that it is possible to make. Rules don't usually include statements about not doing the impossible. There is a specific rule about wheeling to follow evaders. The rules tell you what may be done in a specific situation. If they do not state that you can, then you have to take it that you can't.
As someone once said, there is no rule to say you cannot move through impassable terrain. You just take it as read. In the same way, there is no rule to say you cannot wheel through enemy troops. By implication, you cannot declare your intention to wheel through enemy troops. You may not make an assumption that they will not be there.

spikemesq · Post by **spikemesq** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:38 pm

titanu wrote:
philqw78 wrote:Because when a charge is declared you cannot wheel past the targets front edge, since it has not evaded yet.

Once the target has evaded you can then change direction using other rules and circumstances, that I don't have here so may say something wrong.
Thanks for the reply but you cannot just say 'Because when they charge etc.' I wanted some justification in the rules or FAQs.

Bolded the funny parts.

Are you illiterate or blind?

If not, I recommend the FIELD OF GLORY rule book. It is a great read, well-written with detailed charts and diagrams. If you have additional questions, this site has an excellent FAQ section that you should definitely check out. http://www.fieldofglory.com/file/FAQ_ver5.01.pdf

Now, if you want to quote the rules and then explore some lacuna therein, do that. Otherwise, why would you post a question and then shrilly balk at the answers given? If you want quotes from the rules/FAQ read them yourself. This forum is not story time for foolish wargamers that are too lazy to read their own rule books.

Spike

titanu · Post by **titanu** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:25 pm

Are you illiterate or blind?

If not, I recommend the FIELD OF GLORY rule book. It is a great read, well-written with detailed charts and diagrams. If you have additional questions, this site has an excellent FAQ section that you should definitely check out. http://www.fieldofglory.com/file/FAQ_ver5.01.pdf

Spike[/quote]

Spike - Thanks you for your witty and charming post and I hope that I am neither illiterate or blind, except perhaps to my own shortcomings!
My reply was a little sharper than I meant it to be and if the poster took offence then I apologise. I have read the FAQs and they cover the point.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:30 pm

titanu the rash wrote:
spike the charismatic wrote:Are you illiterate or blind?

If not, I recommend the FIELD OF GLORY rule book. It is a great read, well-written with detailed charts and diagrams. If you have additional questions, this site has an excellent FAQ section that you should definitely check out. http://www.fieldofglory.com/file/FAQ_ver5.01.pdf

Spike
Spike - Thanks you for your witty and charming post and I hope that I am neither illiterate or blind, except perhaps to my own shortcomings!
My reply was a little sharper than I meant it to be and if the poster took offence then I apologise. I have read the FAQs and they cover the point.

I'm very difficult to offend. Though I occasionally offend others due to my thick skin not noticing how offensive things I type are. Its easy to take offense in a forum when it is not meant so I ignore things a lot. So p*ss off the pair of you

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:25 pm

This forum is not story time for foolish wargamers that are too lazy to read their own rule books.

Bugger!! That's me off the forum then!

Actually I think you'll find that is exactly what this forum is for.

Glad you've found it in the FAQs now Bob.

Cheers

spike · Post by **spike** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:57 pm

petedalby wrote:
This forum is not story time for foolish wargamers that are too lazy to read their own rule books.
Bugger!! That's me off the forum then!

Actually I think you'll find that is exactly what this forum is for.

Glad you've found it in the FAQs now Bob.

Cheers

More politeness and less rudeness (unless we are talking about Phil P or Dave "I dont know the rules either" Ruddock )

Spike

david53 · Post by **david53** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:46 pm

spikemesq wrote:
Are you illiterate or blind?

This forum is not story time for foolish wargamers that are too lazy to read their own rule books.

Spike

I thought it was for foolish wargamers look at how many rules questions there are on the site must be a lot off illiterite or blind people here.

I can remember asking some silly questions while trying to learn the rules both on here and at club nights and events I've sure Hammy,Dave R and Phil and Spike have suffered many many silly/stupid questions from me and others. But they all try and help people play the game I'm sure thats how you learn FOG from asking about the rules. I have been playing for a year and I still get things wrong I'm sure others do, no shame there.

To be honest if people were frightened to put up what you think is foolish questions this forum would be half as good as it is.

So more foolish questions I say like Dave R does know the rules he proved it on Monday night

Remember Spike Daves umpire at the Northern doubles in a few weeks.......

Dave

spikemesq · Post by **spikemesq** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:51 pm

Foolish questions are no problem to me.

Fools who dismiss answers to their questions for lack of citation (having presented none of their own) are another matter.

The latter aren't really asking a question. Instead, they merely demand someone else look it up for them.

Spike

The rude one.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:17 pm

spikemesq wrote:Foolish questions are no problem to me.

There is no such thing as a stupid question. There are, however, lots of ignorant people

That was one of my favourite quotes as an instructor. But the conversation normally went

Trainee "This might be s stupid question but......."

Me "Well don't f***ing ask it then"

after which I may resort to the above just to make the student feel wanted and loved and all that tree hugging shit.

david53 · Post by **david53** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:28 pm

philqw78 wrote:
Me "Well don't f***ing ask it then"

after which I may resort to the above just to make the student feel wanted and loved and all that tree hugging shit.

All instructors were just like you from what i can remember............

marioslaz · Post by **marioslaz** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:32 pm

david53 wrote:
philqw78 wrote:
Me "Well don't f***ing ask it then"

after which I may resort to the above just to make the student feel wanted and loved and all that tree hugging shit.
All instructors were just like you from what i can remember............

I worked only one year as teacher, but my technique was quite different. I made test with a method to calculate the final score so complicate that my students were so confused they never ask me justification about their evaluation.

shall · Post by **shall** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:42 pm

Actually the apparently stupid questions are great as we can easily answer them ...

.... its the really tricky ones from you pros that give me a headache

On the question raised, its often a case of following the exact sequence in the rules ... something a lot of experienced people on the forum took a while to get used to. Glad the FAQ and the lovely repsonses helped you out!

Having said that, I wonder if we could organise some mud wrestling next time to settle such disputes.

Si

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:18 pm

spikemesq wrote: Spike

The rude one.

Spike, please do us a favor. Since you KNOW the business of disclaimers and people may not recognize you and your sharpness, how about in that author profile you put something like "Well known for pointed and rude remarks".

That way you don't scare people. Remember you are an acquired taste.

Failure to comply will mean questions about your S&M basement.