Routing as a charge response?

[daveallen]

Had a situation today where a BG of routing English Longbowmen ran past some German Knights.

The Knights (Lancers) failed their CMT so had to charge the Archers - was this right? Do they really need to waste themselves in this way?

Secondly, couldn't find where it said what the routers response was. I extrapolated from the response of a Frag BG that they would make a rout move. Then I had to make another call to rout them in the direction of the charge treating it as an initial rout even though it wasn't and I could see an argument for them going straight back.

My thoughts on this are that the section on Being Charged While Fragmented ought to be expanded to include routers. That is if I haven't missed the relevant rule elsewhere (likely ). And in any case the section logically fits in the Possible Responses to Charges section.

Dave Allen

[shall]

Any routed unit can be charged. There is no "combat". It just loses a base for BG in contact and routs in the JAP away from the contact.

RBS: Just to avoid any confusion: No base losses are inflicted until the routing BG routs again in the JAP and the chargers (now pursuers) remain in contact. This compensates for the routers not getting an extra "free" rout move when being charged. The chargers must be fast enough to keep up with them or they won't inflict any losses.

We consider anyone in contact with a routing BG to be a pursuer - whether they got their through a prusuit move, a forced charge, or a declared charge.

RBS: True, but the rules do not say that the initial charge is a pursuit move, so it would not inflict base losses. (I suspect that this will merit a clarification). As stated above, this compensates for the routers not getting an extra rout move away from chargers when charged. The chargers will pursue in the JAP and will inflict a base loss then if they remain in contact.

The situation is analagous to this section of the rules:

 Pursuers who have lost contact with routers halt and can move normally in their next turn. They can choose to renew the pursuit by charging the routers again in their next impact phase. The routers are not allowed an extra move to escape. This represents the devastating effect of a determined pursuit. No combat is fought and damage is dealt with at the end of the next pursuit move as specified below.

[daveallen]

I seem to be missing a response here...

Dave

[rbodleyscott]

I seem to be missing a response here...

Dave

Ah crap, I accidentally edited Simon's post instead of quoting it. Sorry Simon.

However, the gist of simon's reply is in the quotes above.

[daveallen]

Okay, I get the gist. Seems I worked it out wrong, I can see why you don't want to give extra rout moves.

Is this situation covered in the rules? Should it be?

Any thoughts on including Frag BGs being charged under Charge Responses?

Dave

[rbodleyscott]

Okay, I get the gist. Seems I worked it out wrong, I can see why you don't want to give extra rout moves.

Is this situation covered in the rules? Should it be?

Any thoughts on including Frag BGs being charged under Charge Responses?

I certainly think some clarification is required. We will give it thought.

[rbodleyscott]

The situation is analagous to this section of the rules:

 Pursuers who have lost contact with routers halt and can move normally in their next turn. They can choose to renew the pursuit by charging the routers again in their next impact phase. The routers are not allowed an extra move to escape. This represents the devastating effect of a determined pursuit. No combat is fought and damage is dealt with at the end of the next pursuit move as specified below.

[shall]

Yes Richards expansion of my response is quite right. No worries on the edit etc. AS I said i have to admit we called the pursuers in the rule snot chargers so need to clarify that you just take a base off in the JAP if you keep pace with them. Technology.....always there to get you when you are not looking.

Rather than clog the rules with lots of little details now, we'll put Q&As onto the website to support the rules at launch.

We have just started work on these with a Q&A for BWgs coming together at the mo. We can add such things as we go.

Si

[daveallen]

rules wrote:
 Pursuers who have lost contact with routers halt and can move normally in their next turn. They can choose to renew the pursuit by charging the routers again in their next impact phase. The routers are not allowed an extra move to escape. This represents the devastating effect of a determined pursuit. No combat is fought and damage is dealt with at the end of the next pursuit move as specified below.

Having now had chance to read it in context, I see two problems with the rule.

The first is that it contains two ideas under one BP - what happens to pursuers who lose contact and what happens to routers who are charged. This was the reason I was unable to find it when scanning - saw the first sentence did not apply and moved on.

The second is you've taken a rule that has general application in the Impact Phase (the response of routers being charged), put it into the JAP section and limited it to the actions of pursuers.

Far more sensible in my view to remove the last three sentences from the JAP and put them in Charge Response where they sit well with the other rules.

I also think it would be sensible to relocate the paragraph about Frag BGs being charged to Charge Responses.

Dave

[shall]

Dave

You are probably right that it would be better mentioned in charges and not bundled into a single item in the JAP. We'll need to put something inthe Q&A about "what happens when you charge troops who are already routing" to help people along. I can see why you would miss it and have questions.

But the answers are pretty easy.

The basic philosophy is "lets not waste time working out combat results for routing troops". Hence the whole thing being dealt with in the JAP.

Si

[nicofig]

Yes it's a great idea but this Q&A will be write as soon as the rules will be published ?

[daveallen]

Simon,

not sure what you're reply meant - you're considering moving it or you're leaving it where it is and answer any queries in the FAQ. So not sure what response to make...

Dave

[shall]

Sorry to confuse.

We will put a suitable Q&A entry on the website to clarify it.

Q&A on website will be up and running for launch.

Si