how pursuers follow routers

[domblas]

Hi all,
i'v always been unatease with that rule because i find it subject of divergent interpretations. There is a typical example in madaxeman report battle 2, pirates against pirates. Question is, how do we pursue? does bases stick to bases they were fighting, or are we permitted to choose between a straight forward move or a weel? If you check the photo of the flank attack madaxeman is victim, the answer to this question is crucial as the result of the pursuit can be devastating.
Domblas

[ravenflight]

Hi all,
i'v always been unatease with that rule because i find it subject of divergent interpretations. There is a typical example in madaxeman report battle 2, pirates against pirates. Question is, how do we pursue? does bases stick to bases they were fighting, or are we permitted to choose between a straight forward move or a weel? If you check the photo of the flank attack madaxeman is victim, the answer to this question is crucial as the result of the pursuit can be devastating.
Domblas

I've had this situation before. As strange as it seems routers route first then pursuit happens however to get as close to the routers as possible. This can end up with some odd situations where totally different end in contact, but that's the way of it. Just one of the oddities of your go my go.

[hazelbark]

Here is how I play it. My memory is hazy but someone I once listened to told me, I just forget who.

Routers rout. Obviously in the direction they are compelled to away from contact.

If the pursuers would contact by moving straight, then the must move straight.
If they cannot contact by moving straight they must wheel to re-secure contact.

This may mean that different bases are in contact at end than start. That doesn't matter. In real world it a semi-formation versus mob in flight.
The danger is you can not allow a pursuer to alter course when a straight would contact, because that would open door to lots of evil and unsportsmanlike exploitation. The game key would become herding routers. Which may not have had anything to do with your question.

[philqw78]

I agree with Dan. Pursuers wheel to follow if necessary P116.

[hazelbark]

I agree with Dan. Pursuers wheel to follow if necessary P116.

Keep part IF NECESSARY.

[domblas]

thx folks, it is now clear to me
Domblas

[philqw78]

How much they wheel when it is necessary is up to the driver so may still allow some shennanigans

[domblas]

How much they wheel when it is necessary is up to the driver so may still allow some shennanigans

In the spirit of the rule wouldn't it be: they wheel the minimum necessary to aim the target routers?

[philqw78]

I dont think so. If you are chasing after some smelly enemy and see a better target you can also take out en-route, why not do it.

[viperofmilan]

I dont think so. If you are chasing after some smelly enemy and see a better target you can also take out en-route, why not do it.

Had a situation like this in a recent game. Opponents foot BG situated about 1 MU to the side of another opponent's foot BG routed. He rolled short, so only routed 2 MUs. My pursuing victorious mounted BG rooled even, so pursued 5 MUs. With a very minimal wheel my mounted BG could have remained in contact with the routing BG andsmashed into the flank of the other enemy BG. I argued strongly for the logic of being allowed to do so, but the brain trust ruled against me, claiming pursuit must be straight ahead after the routers.

[hazelbark]

I believe the the brain trust was correct...shockingly.

In this case your target remanined to be hit if you moved straight. Therefore you move straight.

Had he dodged because of angles or avoiding and you needed to charge, then you could alter.

But the pursuit is not a time when you have easy control or gamey manuvers.

[philqw78]

As Dan and the rules say, wheel when necessary, not when you feel like it.