Charge Question

[BrianC]

I have a burning question I hope someone can answer. Say I have a cavalry BG and opposite it is a light horse BG. 2 MU's behind it and to the side is an infantry BG. I declare a charge at the LH and they evade straight back. Now, am I allowed to wheel in order to hit the HF BG if they are in charge distance or do I have to charge past them chasing the LH? By the end of the charge the LH were still about 5 MU's to their rear, while my Cavalry was a few inches behind and 1 stand width to the side of the HF.

Thanks

Brian

[hammy]

I have a burning question I hope someone can answer. Say I have a cavalry BG and opposite it is a light horse BG. 2 MU's behind it and to the side is an infantry BG. I declare a charge at the LH and they evade straight back. Now, am I allowed to wheel in order to hit the HF BG if they are in charge distance or do I have to charge past them chasing the LH? By the end of the charge the LH were still about 5 MU's to their rear, while my Cavalry was a few inches behind and 1 stand width to the side of the HF.

Thanks

Brian

When you declare a charge you can include a wheel but you cannot wheel if by wheeling you would end up with less bases in contact (shoud the enemy stay put) than you would if you charged straight ahead.

Normally a small wheel as part of a charge is fine.

You cannot delcare a charge one way and then another if your opponent evades but with the proviso above you could probably have declared the initial charge such that it would hit the foot.

[stevoid]

Hammy,

I think you've added that "staying put" part!

Steve

[sagji]

You cannot delcare a charge one way and then another if your opponent evades.

However if all your targets evade out of the path of your charge you can instead wheel to persue them (p68, diag p65)
Which doesn't help in this case.

The restriction on the wheel in the charge are that it can't result in contacting less bases.
I suspect that there is an implied restriction that it has to occur before contacting the enemy. In which case the LH may have been too close to permit suffient wheel to contact the Cavalry.

[hammy]

Hammy,

I think you've added that "staying put" part!

Steve

The rules do not mention a potentially evading BG "staying put" BUT they do say that "a wheel cannot be made if this would result in less bases being eligible to fight in the impact combat that would occur if the BG charges straight ahead". As you cannot be certain that the enemy will evade you cannot wheel if by doing so you would end up hitting the taget of your charge (in this case the potential evaders) with less bases than you would if you charged straight ahead.

Consider this:

Code: Select all

C
C
C
  EEEE
  ^^^^

C is the cavarly rady to do horrible things to you
E are the evaders
^ is your BG and it is less than 1" from the evaders.

My understanding is that you cannot wheel the chargers further than the front of E (which will not be a big wheel) and that wheel cannot reduce the number of bases of E you would contact if they don't evade.

[list_lurker]

When the LH evades, you can nominate the direction of the charge (to include the wheel). As long as you can bring the same number of bases to bear in the impact phase as if you went straight ahead. So, in the example if the charge ahead would contact 2 LH bases then I'd say you'd have to wheel suffciently to contact 2 bases of HF

There is is question that in the declaration phase you'd have to nonimate the HF as a target(as they may not be legal targets at the beginning of the phase)

Simon

[hammy]

When the LH evades, you can nominate the direction of the charge (to include the wheel). As long as you can bring the same number of bases to bear in the impact phase as if you went straight ahead. So, in the example if the charge ahead would contact 2 LH bases then I'd say you'd have to wheel suffciently to contact 2 bases of HF

There is is question that in the declaration phase you'd have to nonimate the HF as a target(as they may not be legal targets at the beginning of the phase)

Simon

Where in the rules do you get this from Simon, I have looked through the charges section a couple of times when responding to this anc can't see anything that allows a charges direction to be changed if the initial target evades

[list_lurker]

p66 - first bullet. This is the first mention of the charging player nominating a specific direction. Up until then the charge declaration has been defined against legal targets.

The pertinent point is that the initial wheel would have to contact the evaders legally - as if stationary.

p68 mentions chargers wheeling to contact evaders - but I don't think this is relavent in this case

[hammy]

p66 - first bullet. This is the first mention of the charging player nominating a specific direction. Up until then the charge declaration has been defined against legal targets.

The pertinent point is that the initial wheel would have to contact the evaders legally - as if stationary.

p68 mentions chargers wheeling to contact evaders - but I don't think this is relavent in this case

Hmm, interesting.

If you follow the argument that the direction of the charge is not specified until this point what happens about intercept charges that must be made so that they cross the path of the charge and are on an earlier page in the book?

[list_lurker]

if a charger doesn't enter a ZOI then a intercept can't be triggered.

[hammy]

if a charger doesn't enter a ZOI then a intercept can't be triggered.

But interception charges happen BEFORE evade moves so you have to declare your direction of charge before the intercepts and evades and you don't at that point know if your target is going to evade.

My understanding is that if you charge a BG that could evade you cannot wheel to reduce the number of bases of the potential evader that you would contact compared to a direct charge. Your argument that this is not the case seems to revolve around the direction of charge not being specified until you know if your target is evading which I believe is not the case.

[terrys]

My understanding is that if you charge a BG that could evade you cannot wheel to reduce the number of bases of the potential evader that you would contact compared to a direct charge. Your argument that this is not the case seems to revolve around the direction of charge not being specified until you know if your target is evading which I believe is not the case.

That is correct. The defining paragraph in the rules is:

When troops who can evade are charged, their player must decide whether or not they will evade. If they are to evade, the charger then uses a measuring stick or tape to indicate the direction of the charge, which must be achievable by wheeling and which would “legally” contact the evaders had they remained stationary.

To 'legally' contact the evaders (had they remained stationary) you cannot wheel in such a direction that would reduce the number of figures hitting them.

[list_lurker]

But if you can contact the same number of bases (of the original target @ starting position) then you are allowed to wheel (by nominating a charge direction) - to avoid triggering ZOI or contact new enemy

Tangentally. Pg 62 diagram. The Romans go straight foward and contact 1 base. If an ordered charged then they could wheel clockwise to contact the same end element, but o avoid entering the CV ZOI? no?

[hammy]

But if you can contact the same number of bases (of the original target @ starting position) then you are allowed to wheel (by nominating a charge direction) - to avoid triggering ZOI or contact new enemy

Agreed but my intial post did include the premise that the chargers may not be able to do that. It depends on the exact situation. If I had put that you could wheel the chargers so that they contacted the second BG that would not be true for all situations hence I tried to explain an exception as not mentioning the exception could cause confusion.

[BrianC]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for all the info above. I will try to attach some pics of the situation I mean specifially. I hope this works

First - Cavalry declares charge against LH opposite it.


Second - LH evades and moves out of charge distance of Cavalry.


Third: this is the way I understand the rules.


Fourth - Can this be done instead of above (3)


I think the photos are self explanatory. But in a nutshell can the cavalry wheel to charge a target who was not its original declared target seeing that it can no longer reach that target? It can reach the HF BG.

Thanks

Brian

[hammy]

Cheers Brian, photos make things so much easier.

In this case I believe that you could choose to declare your charge as wheeling to the right an MU or one and a half MU such that you would still hit two bases (probably still 2 LH) If the LH stand they get hit full on by the cavalry, if they evade the cavalry hit the end of the line of MF.

If you wheel 3 MU you may end up not having enough move to hit the MF but if you could and would hit the light horse and the medium foot you may find that the light horse might want to stay and fight as you will be charging into a double overlap (I think the LH standing is a bad idea even in this situation.

If you declare the charge as straight forwards you cannot wheel in the middle. You can delcare a charge as forwards then wheel but once you have declared your direction that is it.

[list_lurker]

Yes I agree - much easier with pictures!

[BrianC]

Thanks for the reply Hammy. And now that I found my camera I will post pics of situations to clarify, it looks way better.

So if the LH evade to the rear are you saying that I can wheel up to a point where my charging bases would still have hit 2 LH bases had they been there still. In this case I could wheel to the right just enough to make contact with the MF? Then I would step forward as allowable?

Thanks

Brian

[rbodleyscott]

I think the photos are self explanatory. But in a nutshell can the cavalry wheel to charge a target who was not its original declared target seeing that it can no longer reach that target? It can reach the HF BG.

No, it cannot wheel to hit a target which was not an originally declared target.

However, it could have declared a charge on both BGs in the first place, if both are in charge reach. In this case this would inevitably require a wheel.

So if the LH evade to the rear are you saying that I can wheel up to a point where my charging bases would still have hit 2 LH bases had they been there still. In this case I could wheel to the right just enough to make contact with the MF? Then I would step forward as allowable?

No. If you want to hit the MF you need to declare your charge on both BGs in the first place.

You can wheel to follow evaders, but not wheel to "not follow" them.

But you can legally declare a charge on 2 BGs in the first place provided that they are both in charge reach.

To add to the complication, you cannot declare a charge on the MF if you could only hit them by dicing up on a VMD, however, you could declare your original charge on the LH to include a wheel provided that this would not reduce the number of bases that would make contact if the LH stood. Then if you threw up on your VMD you might hit the MF after all.

While the rules don't strictly say that you have to declare a wheel at the time of declaring charges, the spirit of the rules is that you declare your charge targets at the time of declaring your charge and don't try to wangle extra targets later. Therefore, if you want to do something "cunning" like the above wheel you would be well advised to declare it when declaring the charge.

[BrianC]

So the key is originally declared target, thanks for the clarification.

I did not think of charging 2 battlegroups. Hmmm that can be good and bad depending on the situation but a good tactical problem. So if a BG can legally hit 2 enemy BG's then it can declare charges on both and if one routes away it can alter its charge to hit more head on with the one that stayed. In this case the MF.

I think I have it now.

Brian