non-arriving Flank march

[batesmotel]

Attrition points do not count until they fail the straggling roll though.

This came up pre-Britcon in the practice games. And enemy did flee from straggling flank marchers.

Apparently there are historical instances of troops fleeing from suspected flank marches that never arrived, or indeed never existed. And the general comes on whatever.

The appendix does explicitly say that if all the units straggle then the general is assumed to straggle as well.

Chris

[philqw78]

The appendix does explicitly say that if all the units straggle then the general is assumed to straggle as well.

Chris

Oooooh, missed that

[TERRYFROMSPOKANE]

I guess I mis read Appendix 4. When it says "A battle group is straggling (and will not arrive).." and "Straggling battle groups are assumed to be delayed sufficiently that they will not arrive in time for the battle" I took it to mean they will not arrive. Silly me. I guess they show up in spirit, artillery crews and battle wagon crews flee from and most others evade the flank marching ghosts and then the stragglers are whisked off the table. Is that really the way most players would play this rule if 100% of the flank marching force failed the Straggling Test rolls?

Terry G.

[rbodleyscott]

If you bother to read Appendix 4 it is all quite clearly explained in there i.e. RTFM.

Good advice Dave.

Appendix 4:

"• Straggling battle groups are assumed to be delayed sufficiently that they will not arrive in time for the battle. "

"On the turn when the outflanking march should arrive, roll two dice for each battle group to see if it is straggling. Straggling battle groups will not arrive in time for the battle."

"A battle group is straggling (and will not arrive) if it scores less than 5. Quality re-rolls apply "


i.e. They do not arrive, hence cannot trigger

"• Battle groups within 6 MUs of the point of arrival of enemy flank marchers obey the following rules:"

This explicit wording clearly takes precedence over any assumed (but unstated and counterintuitive) sequence of play derived from the order of the bullets in the rules.

I guess I mis read Appendix 4. When it says "A battle group is straggling (and will not arrive).." and "Straggling battle groups are assumed to be delayed sufficiently that they will not arrive in time for the battle" I took it to mean they will not arrive. Silly me. I guess they show up in spirit, artillery crews and battle wagon crews flee from and most others evade the flank marching ghosts and then the stragglers are whisked off the table. Is that really the way most players would play this rule if 100% of the flank marching force failed the Straggling Test rolls?

Clearly not. The idea is ludicrous, even if it has mysteriously taken root in Manchester.

This came up pre-Britcon in the practice games. And enemy did flee from straggling flank marchers.

Then the umpire was incorrect, and the player who claimed that the enemy would flee is a very silly person/complete chancer/has himself been duped by a complete chancer in a previous game.


----------------------

(I looked at this thread to see if the wording needed changing for FOGR. After trying to think how the wording could usefully be clarified, I came to the conclusion that the "clarification"would merely prove confusing to those for whom the (correct) meaning of the present rules is expletive deleted obvious).

[dave_r]

The main problem with that is how the rules are written. Namely:

- Unless both armies have flank marches ... arrive in any legal formation in the manoeuvre phase of the controlling player's next turn, ... All battle groups must be in command range of their commander at the end of their first move on to the table.

- The player rolls NOW for each battle group to see if any are stragglingf

The "NOW" (my emphasis) does indicate a sequence of events that should be followed.

If this is not required I strongly suggest either an errata or a FAQ.

[rbodleyscott]

The main problem with that is how the rules are written. Namely:

- Unless both armies have flank marches ... arrive in any legal formation in the manoeuvre phase of the controlling player's next turn, ... All battle groups must be in command range of their commander at the end of their first move on to the table.

- The player rolls NOW for each battle group to see if any are stragglingf

The "NOW" (my emphasis) does indicate a sequence of events that should be followed.

If this is not required I strongly suggest either an errata or a FAQ.

Maybe. Just for you. I admit that the rules can be read the way you do, but only by ignoring the rules' specific contradiction of that interpretation, which seems rather perverse.

The rules are specific that the stragglers do not arrive in time for the battle - (they don't arrive and then realise that they left the gas on at home or have a previous engagement).

[batesmotel]

The main problem with that is how the rules are written. Namely:

- Unless both armies have flank marches ... arrive in any legal formation in the manoeuvre phase of the controlling player's next turn, ... All battle groups must be in command range of their commander at the end of their first move on to the table.

- The player rolls NOW for each battle group to see if any are stragglingf

The "NOW" (my emphasis) does indicate a sequence of events that should be followed.

If this is not required I strongly suggest either an errata or a FAQ.

Maybe. Just for you. I admit that the rules can be read the way you do, but only by ignoring the rules' specific contradiction of that interpretation, which seems rather perverse.

The rules are specific that the stragglers do not arrive in time for the battle - (they don't arrive and then realise that they left the gas on at home or have a previous engagement).

I think the confusion in the appendix arises due to the unnecessary inclusion of details about how the troops are moved onto the board in the bullet before stragging is mentioned. I think this confusion could be reduced for FoG(R) if this bullet stopped at "... arrive in any legal formation in the manoeuvre phase of the controlling player's next turn" and left the details for how they are moved onto the table such as finishing up in command range, etc, for the later place in the appendix where the details of how to move onto the board is covered in more detail.

For what it is worth, I originally interpreted the straggling roll as being made before the troops are placed on the table when I read the appendix, but when I re-read the section in the appendix (per Dave's suggestion in his earlier post) I did see where the alternative interpretation did seem to be implied. (Hence the separate topic I started to ask more specifically about this sequencing since it seemed odd from a game mechanic point of view.)

Chris

[rbodleyscott]

I think the confusion in the appendix arises due to the unnecessary inclusion of details about how the troops are moved onto the board in the bullet before stragging is mentioned. I think this confusion could be reduced for FoG(R) if this bullet stopped at "... arrive in any legal formation in the manoeuvre phase of the controlling player's next turn" and left the details for how they are moved onto the table such as finishing up in command range, etc, for the later place in the appendix where the details of how to move onto the board is covered in more detail.

Agreed.

[philqw78]

This came up pre-Britcon in the practice games. And enemy did flee from straggling flank marchers.

Then the umpire was incorrect, and the player who claimed that the enemy would flee is a very silly person/complete chancer/has himself been duped by a complete chancer in a previous game.

No the player who claimed the enemy would flee was to lazy to look at the rule book so asked a passing umpire or 2, both Nik and Hammy, who said the march appears, is fled from and then straggle is rolled, and then 1 of them justified it by quoting some battle were troops had fled from a pecieved flank march that didn't exist.

Jumping to conclusions without the facts is how us mortals get rules wrong.
I would expect better from you Richard.

Laziness is one of MY virtues. Perhaps the only one.

[nikgaukroger]

I doubt I said anything about it as I know fuck all about flank marches other than Ruddocks always arrive on the first or second roll when used against me I couldn't even tell you what you need to roll to come on.

[philqw78]

I doubt I said anything about it as I know fuck all about flank marches other than Ruddocks always arrive on the first or second roll when used against me I couldn't even tell you what you need to roll to come on.

Perhaps you just indifferently agreed with Hammy then. You have the same virtue(s) as me obviously.