Pursuing from field fortifications and warriors overlapping

Moderators: terrys, Slitherine Core, FOGR Design

Post Reply
davids
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 7:18 am

Pursuing from field fortifications and warriors overlapping

Post by davids »

I played a game yesterday where I was defending field fortifications. Two of my BGs routed my opponent's two BGs. I didn't pursue as we assumed troops defending didn't have to (not that it would have mattered anyway as it was the last turn) but I was looking for something else in the rules and came across the pursuit section and it seems that defenders have to pursue. Is this correct? Or have I missed an exception to p. 131?

Also my opponent had warriors armed with bow only. Warriors overlapping get an automatic ++ even without a melee weapon - is this correct? He was using Japanese so it would seem that running a late version with medium foot instead of warriors make them less effective as overlaps in combat even though they have the same weapons.

Both of these seem a bit odd to me.
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28411
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Pursuing from field fortifications and warriors overlapp

Post by rbodleyscott »

davids wrote:I played a game yesterday where I was defending field fortifications. Two of my BGs routed my opponent's two BGs. I didn't pursue as we assumed troops defending didn't have to (not that it would have mattered anyway as it was the last turn) but I was looking for something else in the rules and came across the pursuit section and it seems that defenders have to pursue. Is this correct? Or have I missed an exception to p. 131?
I think this is correct, though I don't have the rules with me. Field fortifications are not city walls, and we felt that troops would be likely to pursue routed opponents. (But not break offs, of course).
Also my opponent had warriors armed with bow only.
You mean without a melee POA. Not the same thing.
Warriors overlapping get an automatic ++ even without a melee weapon - is this correct? He was using Japanese so it would seem that running a late version with medium foot instead of warriors make them less effective as overlaps in combat even though they have the same weapons.
Minor anomalies such as this are the the price we pay for keeping the rules simple. However, think of warriors as less disciplined and more likely to break formation and lap round on to the flanks of enemy - which would be more effective in this situation than maintaining strict ranks and files.

Warriors have other disadvantages compared with MF.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”