Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
Why would a BG that cannot be legally contacted by the charge have to take a CT? The LH cannot contact the cav because it did not pass a CMT. The Cav are not a charge target.philqw78 wrote:And the law is an Ass. Perhaps there was a reason the rule was written the way it was. But IMO the revealed target, if fragmented, should have to take a CT for being charged. If it passes then the LH could stop. But that isn't the way it is written.
Thats why the rule is arse. It doesn't have to. But IMO should. IMO you should try reading what you are replying to.gozerius wrote:Why would a BG that cannot be legally contacted by the charge have to take a CT? The LH cannot contact the cav because it did not pass a CMT. The Cav are not a charge target.philqw78 wrote:And the law is an Ass. Perhaps there was a reason the rule was written the way it was. But IMO the revealed target, if fragmented, should have to take a CT for being charged. If it passes then the LH could stop. But that isn't the way it is written.
My thought process on this matter is this, the original target was the LF. No other target during the declaration of charge phase. LF evade using the VMD as does the LH chasing the buggers. IF the LF deviated or originated with an angle so would get out of the original path of the LH and now reveals the Cav as a POSSIBLE target, not the original, the LH has the option to wheel and pursue.madcam2us wrote:as a follow up...
the LF evade and clear the Cav causing the Cav to be revealed within the original charge path. Does the LH roll a VMD in pursuit or normal charge movement cav stopping 1 MU away.(no vmd normal move sj, yes VMD mike)
Can the LH deviate (wheel) to follow the LF had the LF been at an angle.(SJ no, Mike yes) or must the LH follow original path towards the Cv (SJ yes, Mike no) since the CV became a viable target once revealed by the evading LF
... oh what fun...
Madcam
Dan would you be kind enough to give some answers in this multiple question of Scott's......madcam2us wrote:as a follow up...
the LF evade and clear the Cav causing the Cav to be revealed within the original charge path. Does the LH roll a VMD in pursuit or normal charge movement cav stopping 1 MU away.(no vmd normal move sj, yes VMD mike)
Can the LH deviate (wheel) to follow the LF had the LF been at an angle.(SJ no, Mike yes) or must the LH follow original path towards the Cv (SJ yes, Mike no) since the CV became a viable target once revealed by the evading LF
... oh what fun...
Madcam
Sorry for hijacking the thread but the statement above, have I got it right a BG evades from a charge if the BG stays within the direction of the charge the charging BG can not wheel off in a different direction?rogerg wrote:The only targets are the LF so the LH take a VMD.
The LH cannot deviate unless all the targets wheel out of the path of the charge.
If the evading BG is still in the path of the charge the chargers cannot change the path of their charge.david53 wrote:Sorry for hijacking the thread but the statement above, have I got it right a BG evades from a charge if the BG stays within the direction of the charge the charging BG can not wheel off in a different direction?rogerg wrote:The only targets are the LF so the LH take a VMD.
The LH cannot deviate unless all the targets wheel out of the path of the charge.
Roger,rogerg wrote:Cavalry are not a target because the LH could not take a CMT to charge them when the charge was declared.
If all the targets evade, the chargers roll a VMD: The only targets are the LF so the LH take a VMD.
The LH cannot deviate unless all the targets wheel out of the path of the charge.
I did read what I replied to. Do you also believe other BGs that can't be legally contacted by chargers should have to CT if fragged? If a BG cannot be contacted by the charger it is not a target. In this case, even though it lies in line with the original charge path, the fact that skirmishers are required to pull up short means they are not valid charge targets. Since all valid charge targets have evaded out of the original charge path, the LH has the option to wheel to follow the evaders.philqw78 wrote:Thats why the rule is arse. It doesn't have to. But IMO should. IMO you should try reading what you are replying to.gozerius wrote:Why would a BG that cannot be legally contacted by the charge have to take a CT? The LH cannot contact the cav because it did not pass a CMT. The Cav are not a charge target.philqw78 wrote:And the law is an Ass. Perhaps there was a reason the rule was written the way it was. But IMO the revealed target, if fragmented, should have to take a CT for being charged. If it passes then the LH could stop. But that isn't the way it is written.
Fragged skirmishers must test when charged even where their evade move would make them impossible to catch (e.g., LH charged by HF that are exactly 3MU away). So forcing a test by fragged troops that cannot be contacted by the chargers already exists in the rules.gozerius wrote:I did read what I replied to. Do you also believe other BGs that can't be legally contacted by chargers should have to CT if fragged? If a BG cannot be contacted by the charger it is not a target. In this case, even though it lies in line with the original charge path, the fact that skirmishers are required to pull up short means they are not valid charge targets. Since all valid charge targets have evaded out of the original charge path, the LH has the option to wheel to follow the evaders.philqw78 wrote:Thats why the rule is arse. It doesn't have to. But IMO should. IMO you should try reading what you are replying to.gozerius wrote: Why would a BG that cannot be legally contacted by the charge have to take a CT? The LH cannot contact the cav because it did not pass a CMT. The Cav are not a charge target.
Would you give the LH the option NOT to take the follow-up CMT?philqw78 wrote:No, I think the LH should be able to take a CT when the enemy evade has uncovered the fragged BG as a possible target.
This is a different situation. The CT here is in response to the charge. If they stand to receive, and there may be circumstances where you would want to do that, the HF can hit them. In the circumstance above, the LH are not allowed to make contact, so no CT is appropriate.Fragged skirmishers must test when charged even where their evade move would make them impossible to catch (e.g., LH charged by HF that are exactly 3MU away). So forcing a test by fragged troops that cannot be contacted by the chargers already exists in the rules.
No rules at hand, but I am pretty sure that fragged skirmishers may not receive a charge.kevinj wrote:This is a different situation. The CT here is in response to the charge. If they stand to receive, and there may be circumstances where you would want to do that, the HF can hit them. In the circumstance above, the LH are not allowed to make contact, so no CT is appropriate.Fragged skirmishers must test when charged even where their evade move would make them impossible to catch (e.g., LH charged by HF that are exactly 3MU away). So forcing a test by fragged troops that cannot be contacted by the chargers already exists in the rules.
Receiving a charge is slightly different from standing to take it. When fragged they must take a CT for being charged and then, if feeling particularly brave, CMT to stand against non-skirmishers.spikemesq wrote:No rules at hand, but I am pretty sure that fragged skirmishers may not receive a charge.kevinj wrote:This is a different situation. The CT here is in response to the charge. If they stand to receive, and there may be circumstances where you would want to do that, the HF can hit them. In the circumstance above, the LH are not allowed to make contact, so no CT is appropriate.Fragged skirmishers must test when charged even where their evade move would make them impossible to catch (e.g., LH charged by HF that are exactly 3MU away). So forcing a test by fragged troops that cannot be contacted by the chargers already exists in the rules.
Spike
