Commanders: How Many?

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:39 pm

I still find (in the few games I've been playing) that one IC up behind the critical point makes a difference. No, he doesn't affect other troops in combat, but once those troops drop cohesion and either rout

or break the enemy

then he kicks in again and you start to see all those bolsterings being successful.

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:46 am

deeter wrote:For close combat the leader needs to be adjacent to give points. For shooting and CMTs just in range, but I've never seen much difference there.

Deeter

Quotes from the page where cohesion tests are explained:

When battle groups test cohesion:
On receiving more hits than it inflicted in a single impact or melee combat.

A battle group is given a score from the virtual roll of two six sided dice and these are added together to get a based cohesion test score. Then this score is modified as follows:
+2 The battle group in command range of an inspired commander.
+1 The battle group in command range of a field or troop commander.
+1 The battle group is adjacent to a friendly commander.

I can't interpret that any other way then being in command should be of some help with the test also when it comes to impact and melee...
It doesn't mention otherwise on that page in any case but we all know the manual isn't always very clear

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:57 am

If you go to rallying:

How battle groups test to rally
A battle group is given a score from the virtual roll of two six sided dice, and these are added together to get a based cohesion test score. This score is modified as follows.
Test
Modifier Description
-1 The battle group has suffered at least 25% losses.
-1 There are adjacent enemy other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.
+1 There are adjacent friends other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.
+2 An inspired commander is with or adjacent to the battle group.
+1 A field or troop commander is with or adjacent to the battle group.
-1 The battle group is currently disrupted
-2 The battle group is currently fragmented
-3 The battle group is currently routed

It would be nice if the help was gone through and formalized with more clarification/explanation in places.

cothyso · Post by **cothyso** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:58 am

how about the ones of us knowing the rules make an updated manual/wiki?

ianiow · Post by **ianiow** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:00 am

[quote="Blathergut"]
-1 There are adjacent enemy other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.
+1 There are adjacent friends other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.
[quote]

What distance does 'rear arc' cover? Adjacent? 4 hexes? The entire battlefield?

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:43 am

Ya...lots of unanswered questions. I'd almost agree to work up a manual with a couple of you if we could at least get from the designers answers to questions like that.

cothyso · Post by **cothyso** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:46 am

ianiow wrote:
Blathergut wrote:
-1 There are adjacent enemy other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.
+1 There are adjacent friends other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.
What distance does 'rear arc' cover? Adjacent? 4 hexes? The entire battlefield?

that is crystal clear: adjacent friends in their rear arc = friendly BGs in the unit's in any of the two rear hexes

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 2:01 pm

hidde wrote: I can't interpret that any other way then being in command should be of some help with the test also when it comes to impact and melee...
It doesn't mention otherwise on that page in any case but we all know the manual isn't always very clear

You're right, it can't be interpreted any other way. Unfortunately, it's wrong.

For commanders to have effect on CTs inflicted due to close-combat, or for rallying troops, they have to be adjacent.

When it comes to leaders in general, I discovered one more thing (not sure if I'm the only one who didn't know).
A unit with a leader in it, re-rolls *combat* dice as if they were one level higher. Thus, Elite rerolls 1,2,3; Sup. rerolls 1,2; Average rerolls 1s, and Poor don't have to rerolls 6s.
So one more reason for using commanders.

Lars

cothyso · Post by **cothyso** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 2:09 pm

no, it is not wrong, as it doesn't refer to the leaders, but to the units rear enemy/friendly BGs presence in cohesion tests:

Code: Select all

-1 There are adjacent enemy other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc. 
+1 There are adjacent friends other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc.

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:05 pm

cothyso wrote:no, it is not wrong, as it doesn't refer to the leaders, but to the units rear enemy/friendly BGs presence in cohesion tests:
Code: Select all
-1 There are adjacent enemy other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc. 
+1 There are adjacent friends other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc. 

I, and I presume Mr Cheerfull too, wasn't talking about that but of commanders influence on BG:s in combat if they are adjacent or merely within command.
I think however that they should skip the word "arc" in those sentences. Rear is enough.

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:14 pm

hidde wrote: I, and I presume Mr Cheerfull too, wasn't talking about that but of commanders influence on BG:s in combat if they are adjacent or merely within command.
I think however that they should skip the word "arc" in those sentences. Rear is enough.

I was. Kinda why I put the quote in, to emphasize what I was referring to

cothyso · Post by **cothyso** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 5:04 pm

well, you've put a quote and said "it is wrong", which is a false statement. I fail to look at that in any other way.

also, "rear" wording has the same problems as "rear arc", which is how far away is this rear (arc) spanned? a dilemma solved by the use of the adjacent word.

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 5:53 pm

cothyso wrote:well, you've put a quote and said "it is wrong", which is a false statement. I fail to look at that in any other way.

*sigh*

Okay, once more for the rest of the class.
Look at the quote I supplied.......See how it says "hidde wrote"?
Therefore, I was referring to hiddes post, regardless of what has been posted in the meantime.
hiddes post was wrong.
Which I pointed out.
Thus it isn't a false statement.
Whether or not you fail to see it that way is a little beside the point.
The whole idea of supplying a quote is to help people keep track of what is being discussed, so just to reiterate.......

There are *two* discussions going on here, one referring to leaders effects on combat cohesion, and one about rear-arcs.
Will I need visual aids to make it any clearer?

Lars

Triarii · Post by **Triarii** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:58 pm

Blathergut wrote:Ya...lots of unanswered questions. I'd almost agree to work up a manual with a couple of you if we could at least get from the designers answers to questions like that.

I for one would greatly appreciate something of this ilk.
Playing since November I felt a sort of plateau reached as there were too many elements of combat and control remaining a mystery
Opponents (Deeter and Davouthojo in particular) have put me straight on a few unknowns and being guided to the QRS on the tabletop site was a great help.
I have just bought the new Rennaisance rule set which is also helping - after nearly 30 years away from tabletop gaming I'm seriously considering getting involved again.

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 7:19 pm

hiddes post was wrong.

Lars

Hey! I wasn't wrong, the help is.
Your post is wrong

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 7:56 pm

hidde wrote:
hiddes post was wrong.

Lars
Hey! I wasn't wrong, the help is.
Your post is wrong

Okay, okay.....
So I was right in you being wrong, although you were only wrong because you were right about the help being wrong........Right?
Everybody got that?

cothyso · Post by **cothyso** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:03 pm

aaaa.. i want some of that grass too, pretty please! seems to be good..

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:14 pm

cothyso wrote:aaaa.. i want some of that grass too, pretty please! seems to be good..

You need to wait for the next release FOH, Fields of Hippies, with accompyaning expansion books Triumph of The Beetnicks, and Storm of Flowers

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:23 pm

TheGrayMouser wrote: You need to wait for the next release FOH, Fields of Hippies, with accompyaning expansion books Triumph of The Beetnicks, and Storm of Flowers

Where the battles are less violent, but the uniforms are soooo pretty.
Bell-bottom plate-mail, henna-dyed chain-mail, and finger-painted horsies

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:11 pm

CheerfullyInsane wrote:
hidde wrote:
hiddes post was wrong.

Lars
Hey! I wasn't wrong, the help is.
Your post is wrong
Okay, okay.....
So I was right in you being wrong, although you were only wrong because you were right about the help being wrong........Right?
Everybody got that?

Wr...RIGHT!
Finally you're making sense