To evade or not to evade in Maneuver phase

[gozerius]

There are two cases where a BG of skirmishers gets no opportunity to evade from a fresh enemy contact. During the conform segment of the Maneuver phase, the conforming BG may contact a BG of evade capable troops without the evade capable troops having the opportunity to evade; similarly, when a BG feeds bases in to cover an adjacent BG of evade capable troops. In both cases the charger was not in contact with the evade capable BG during the Impact phase. Contrast this with the current rule allowing a BG of evade capable troops suddenly finding itself in corner or side edge contact with an Enemy BG that has just defeated a friendly adjacent BG and can now choose to either shift or turn into front edge / front edge or front edge / side edge contact with the evade capable BG. It seems to me that there should always be an option to evade when a BG of evade capable troops will be contacted by enemy, subject of course to the prohibition of evading more than once per turn segment.

[hazelbark]

I see your point, but the two exception you point out also relat to where teh skirmishers are trying to impact a melee and get sucked in. So I am not too conflicted by it.

[bbotus]

Hmmm, another one I hadn't thought of. I always assumed the conforming movement that contacted additional enemy bases was in the same enemy BG. But maybe not. I have no further comment on this one for the moment.

As for the other 2 situations, I agree with the RAW & FAQ. Evade capable BGs in contact but not committed to close combat should have the evade option. However, evade capable BGs that move into overlap to an existing melee don't and shouldn't get the option to evade. Otherwise you are giving them a free whack at the enemy with absolutely no risk to themselves. If you want to risk your skirmishers to get an extra die against knights, then you risk having them get whacked, too. You can put the skirmishers in line but not touching to prevent the knights (or other heavies) from expanding on that flank. That alone is a very powerful move for skirmishers. But, no, you don't get a free melee die without the potential risk of getting drawn into the melee.

[dave_r]

Hmmm, another one I hadn't thought of. I always assumed the conforming movement that contacted additional enemy bases was in the same enemy BG. But maybe not. I have no further comment on this one for the moment.

As for the other 2 situations, I agree with the RAW & FAQ. Evade capable BGs in contact but not committed to close combat should have the evade option. However, evade capable BGs that move into overlap to an existing melee don't and shouldn't get the option to evade. Otherwise you are giving them a free whack at the enemy with absolutely no risk to themselves. If you want to risk your skirmishers to get an extra die against knights, then you risk having them get whacked, too. You can put the skirmishers in line but not touching to prevent the knights (or other heavies) from expanding on that flank. That alone is a very powerful move for skirmishers. But, no, you don't get a free melee die without the potential risk of getting drawn into the melee.

Well, you can, as long as you are careful about the placement...

[philqw78]

For careful you may wish to read cheesy

[bbotus]

cheesy

I don't know about that. It is a way to prevent someone from stacking their BG 3 deep then expanding for melee. You give up the battle line to do it. Let's call it a useful tactic.

I haven't read anything from the authors on this topic explaining why they made the rule as they did. They did put it in the FAQ so they must have a reason. Anyone know the answer?