charging routers

papsterdino · Post by **papsterdino** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:10 pm

If a unit carges a unit that is allready routing say"from the previous turn" am i right in thinking the routers dont do anything as a response but lose a base in thed JAP phase then run directly away from the pursuing enemy using a variable move?

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:18 pm

Nearly right.

If you charge router then nothing happens until the JAP when you roll a VMD for the routers and pursuers and if the pursuers remain in contact then the routers lose a base.

papsterdino · Post by **papsterdino** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:34 pm

Ta for that

pease1 · Post by **pease1** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:46 pm

Do they lose only one base, or do they lose all bases contacted? I think we may have been playing it incorrectly.

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:04 pm

They lose one base per BG that has maintained contact in the JAP

david53 · Post by **david53** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:04 pm

Why charge? just thought I'd ask as you'll gain nothing and you'll lose control of a BG.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:18 pm

david53 wrote:Why charge? just thought I'd ask as you'll gain nothing and you'll lose control of a BG.

It can be a sneaky way to get one of your BGs deep into the enemy half of the table and it makes sure the routers stay routed.

david53 · Post by **david53** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:28 pm

hammy wrote:
david53 wrote:Why charge? just thought I'd ask as you'll gain nothing and you'll lose control of a BG.
It can be a sneaky way to get one of your BGs deep into the enemy half of the table and it makes sure the routers stay routed.

True but it can leave you in a position to get charged by enemy BG off to your side. I understand about not rallying, but i have been in that position of getting charged in the flank while still stuck to routers.

TERRYFROMSPOKANE · Post by **TERRYFROMSPOKANE** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:15 pm

It can sometimes get you out of trouble by charging out of the range of enemy threatening the flanks or rear of a BG that has broken through the enemy line and pursued beyond its own supports.

Terry G.

marioslaz · Post by **marioslaz** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:51 am

IMO question isn't why charging, or why not charging, which is obvious by the contest, but why can I choose if to charge or not to charge? IMO there would be needing of a rule about. Something like "Troops at charge distance from an enemy BG in rout must pass a CMT not to charge unless they can be intercepted on a flank, they should cross terrain which disorder them, and so on..."

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:11 am

marioslaz wrote:IMO question isn't why charging, or why not charging, which is obvious by the contest, but why can I choose if to charge or not to charge? IMO there would be needing of a rule about. Something like "Troops at charge distance from an enemy BG in rout must pass a CMT not to charge unless they can be intercepted on a flank, they should cross terrain which disorder them, and so on..."

Charging routers is the same as charging any other enemy, shock troops test not to, Foot bow test to charge, others choose.

pease1 · Post by **pease1** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:58 pm

dave_r wrote:They lose one base per BG that has maintained contact in the JAP

Thanks Dave, we were playing it incorrectly. Now I know better!

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Fri Jan 22, 2010 2:22 am

philqw78 wrote:
marioslaz wrote:IMO question isn't why charging, or why not charging, which is obvious by the contest, but why can I choose if to charge or not to charge? IMO there would be needing of a rule about. Something like "Troops at charge distance from an enemy BG in rout must pass a CMT not to charge unless they can be intercepted on a flank, they should cross terrain which disorder them, and so on..."
Charging routers is the same as charging any other enemy, shock troops test not to, Foot bow test to charge, others choose.

Actually, charging routers is easier, because skirmishers and missile troops don't CMT to charge them.

marioslaz · Post by **marioslaz** » Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:32 pm

gozerius wrote:Actually, charging routers is easier, because skirmishers and missile troops don't CMT to charge them.

My idea is you should test not to charge, as in many other rules. BGs in rout were easy kills, so they were very tempting for enemy in charge reach.

expendablecinc · Post by **expendablecinc** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 4:03 am

hammy wrote:
david53 wrote:Why charge? just thought I'd ask as you'll gain nothing and you'll lose control of a BG.
It can be a sneaky way to get one of your BGs deep into the enemy half of the table and it makes sure the routers stay routed.

You can just move into contact in the movement phase cant you - so no VMD?

marioslaz · Post by **marioslaz** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 8:24 am

expendablecinc wrote:
hammy wrote:
david53 wrote:Why charge? just thought I'd ask as you'll gain nothing and you'll lose control of a BG.
It can be a sneaky way to get one of your BGs deep into the enemy half of the table and it makes sure the routers stay routed.
You can just move into contact in the movement phase cant you - so no VMD?

No. You move in impact phase to contact routers by a charge move. Then in JAP you make a VMD to pursuit.

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:26 am

You charge routers if you have lost contact during pursuit or if you just want to keep killing them with a non-pursuing unit. Routers stand and take it, during JAP they roll VMD and the new pursuers will roll their VMD to see if they keep contact.