Question concerning disengaging from melee

shall · Post by **shall** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:14 am

If charging evaders choos a direction that will contact what you are really aiming at. It a bit limited by the wheels but usually enough to make sure the skirmishers bugger off and you hit the heavies behind

Si

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:15 pm

Hi Si,

I'll post up some pics of the situation I am talking about to make it clearer, start and finish sort of thing. From my understanding of the rules I can see room for a gamey or Cheesy result if done right. I hope you can set me straight. Will post this evening.

Thanks

Brian

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:15 am

Ok here is the situation I am envisioning. This occurred in my last game but not in this way. My Italian ally to the right defeated its opponent and was poised to break the Carthaginian left flank and roll up the line. Skirmishers nearby seeing this then positioned themselves in such a way to stop my BG from wheeling during the maneuver phase. The only way I can see to proceed is to charge them within the context of the rules. But in so doing I cannot wheel anymore to the left as it would force me to hit less enemy bases than I would if I move forward. So I have to charge forward. The skirmishers evade away of course and I am left moving in a direction I really don't want to chasing something we cannot catch anyway while the real target is now behind us potentially.

Here is the pic showing the situation

Is there anyway I can wheel towards my real intended target? I know I cannot charge this turn due to distance but want to set up for a juicy flank charge. I can't see why skirmishers would bother heavier BG's at all.

I know the rules talk about routers contacting enemy skirmishers during the JAP and they have to evade or do a CMT, does the same hold true for the maneuver phase? Can I maneuver the way I want by wheeling to the left and when I contact the skirmishers, they must then evade or do a CMT to stay?

I know that I have an alternative move after the initial charge that will allow me to charge the enemy but I am focusing strictly on this one issue.

Any insight would be appreciated,

Thanks

Brian

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:45 am

Looks to me as though in this situation you can wheel to the left somewhat as long as the front corner of your right hand base would still contact the base in front of it and the next 2 of your bases to its left would also contact by stepping forward (assuming the skirmishers were in their start position that is) which would take you somewhat towards the engaged enemy BG.

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:50 am

Hey Nik,

That is what the charge direction stick is indicating, there will be a slight wheel. The skirmishers are placed in such a way that the Roman cannot wheel more than is indicated, otherwise less stands will be contacted than if they simply charged forward straight ahead. This was done on purpose by the skirmishers to lure the Romans away from their vulnerable flank because they knew the Romans would have to chase them or not move at all or very little as they cannot be simple swept aside during maneuver.

Brian

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 8:39 am

BrianC wrote:Hey Nik,

That is what the charge direction stick is indicating, there will be a slight wheel. The skirmishers are placed in such a way that the Roman cannot wheel more than is indicated, otherwise less stands will be contacted than if they simply charged forward straight ahead. This was done on purpose by the skirmishers to lure the Romans away from their vulnerable flank because they knew the Romans would have to chase them or not move at all or very little as they cannot be simple swept aside during maneuver.

Brian

Seems an effective use of skirmishers then.

Of course if you don't mind a delay, (and don't fail a CMT not to charge) you could wheel without charging (there is no restricted area from skirmishers for non-skimishers). Then you would probably be able to hit the enemy MF in your next turn.

shall · Post by **shall** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:04 am

lets look at this in broader game/military terms...

1. If your real target was the enemy MF then in trueth you are misplaced a few 00 yards in the approach
2. If there were no enemy skirmishers around then you could fix this quite easily by getting close enough to charge them

But your situation is quite complicted by 3 things that are very realistic:

a) you have no general with them - this would solve your wheel problem
b) enemy skimishers well placed to annoy and obstruct you - well done them
c) you have undrilled troops who struggle to wheel when close to enemy

The rules are set up to give you exactly the issues you note and to take away your freedom a bit. The above is bacically good use of skirmishers to block an attack when you are a little out of ideal positoin with your MF

This leaves you with a puzzle that you note of do I charge and risk getting further out of position or do I wait and CMT to whell with the risk I may have to stand there .... thus the true soluition is elsewhere in a/b/c above.

All very much the intent and a fine example that shows how these mechanisms add to the realistic puzzles and options in FOG. IMHABO. (nd biased)

Si

Tiger · Post by **Tiger** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:12 am

I used a Mid Republican army 600 points in which I made my velites protected with the intent to engage my opponents skirmish line. It worked the armoured + in melee made all the difference that plus poor CT rolls by my opponents, hot knife through butter.

I noted that any broken enemy BG carries the same VP factor therefore I deliberately aimed to outmatch my opponents skirmish line with this intent, it worked.

Quality is critical in FOG it makes all the difference.

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 2:55 pm

shall wrote: ...
a) you have no general with them - this would solve your wheel problem
b) enemy skimishers well placed to annoy and obstruct you - well done them
c) you have undrilled troops who struggle to wheel when close to enemy...

My wheel problem would be solved with a commander because it would be a difficult advance since they would whell less than their full move? Due to having to stop short of the skirmishers.

Is the above the same reasoning for c? A single wheel is a simple move for undrilled other.

If there were no other units in the area then it looks like the skirmishers could reposition each maneuver phase in such a way to stall me for about 3 turns as I can only wheel enough to not contact them. And this makes it a difficult move to boot. I just wanted to verify what skirmishers can and cannot do to heavier troops. I was struggling before to find a good use for the LF, now I am seeing their use and it adds a whole new dimension to the game.

Thanks

Brian

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:39 pm

BrianC wrote:If there were no other units in the area then it looks like the skirmishers could reposition each maneuver phase in such a way to stall me for about 3 turns as I can only wheel enough to not contact them.

As far as I can see they can only stall you for this turn. If you wheel such that you don't quite touch them this turn, then a straight ahead charge in your next turn might not contact the enemy MF, but a slight wheel would. It is hard to see that the LF could find any position to prevent this slight wheel.

shall · Post by **shall** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:51 pm

As far as I can tell RBS is right.

If you wheel max right this move you can charge next move and hit the enmy heavies.

But to wheel ideally you want drilled troops or undrilled with a general so that it isn't a difficult move. You sound like they are undrilled with no general so they need a CMT and have good odds of failing such that they stand still...

Thus is reflected quality and C&C problems. Skirmishers cna mess around undrilled foot more than drilled because of that - which is realistic.

Si

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:31 pm

Ok so as I see it I can wheel to just almost touching the LF. Just to keep things simple I am not including CMTs or Commanders etc. Assume all needed rolls are made.

This is at the end of my maneuver phase.

At this point I can not threaten the skirmishers further.

Now its my next impact phase, nothing else has happened. So I declare a charge against the skirmishers and I lay down a direction marker in such a way that when I wheel I could still hit as many skirmisher bases as I could have if I charged straight ahead.

The skirmishers evade and I continue to charge in the direction of my marker as follows:

Again, nothing else happens to change the above so I now declare a charge on the LF and lay down a direction marker

Then charge home

This is how I can see it playing out within the rules, does this sound reasonable? Sorry for being so picky but I'm just trying to fully understand so that I can apply it in different situations. Also if the skirmishers were to come back and try to block the charge, I could then declare a charge on both and step forward to contact both as needed?

Hope the pics are helping.

Thanks

Brian

shall · Post by **shall** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:47 pm

Lost you at the end

If the last diagram was a continuing charge that reach the MF then it should have stayed on the chosen direction and just hit them. So take Diag 2 and keep advancing on that line til you hit em. IF charge pretty much dead ahead in diag 2 you would hit the heavies.

If ther last two daigs are another round a later and a completely fresh charge into the flank then fair does. Bit not all 4 in one go. It would be 1 correct and now carry on along that line to contact.

Si

Ironhand · Post by **Ironhand** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:50 pm

That of course presumes you get enough on the Variable Move Roll to contact the heavies. As I understand it you declare the one charge, your opponent rolls for his evade move, and the charger rolls for his charge - getting as much as 2 inches more or as little as 2 inches less than his normal move. So you couldn't hit the heavies unless you had enough move in hand, if I understand it correctly.

In any event, this has been a very useful and informative discussion. Thanks to all participating.

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:55 pm

Hi Si,

I did do a measurement on the game table and I moved as far as I could in the first charge. So I had to wait till the next Impact phase to perform another charge.

Glad its helping someone else out too, I was beginning to think my mind is going as I get older : )

Thanks

Brian

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:05 pm

This is good play by your opponent. However, once you have chased off the LF skirmishers, you are free to turn 90 degrees to your flank. The LF cannot charge and your BG is unlikely to suffer many casualties from their shooting.

The skirmishers have slightly delayed your flank attack and may have hurt you with some missile fire. This seems about the right effect.

shall · Post by **shall** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:21 pm

That of course presumes you get enough on the Variable Move Roll to contact the heavies. As I understand it you declare the one charge, your opponent rolls for his evade move, and the charger rolls for his charge - getting as much as 2 inches more or as little as 2 inches less than his normal move. So you couldn't hit the heavies unless you had enough move in hand, if I understand it correctly.

In any event, this has been a very useful and informative discussion. Thanks to all participating.

Not quite

You only roll a VMD if all your targets evade - see evade section.

What happens is this..

1) You charge the skirmishers
2) They evade
3) If the heavies are in normal range and path of the charge they become a target (and react accordingly)
4) If they stand and are in range then all targets have not evaded, so you don't roll a VMD you just contact them

This reflects the fact that the VMD concept is there to randomise the interaction of troops running away and chasers, not to be a random factor on what is effectively a normal charge at heavies with light troops in the way. In reality you would be largely ignoring the skimishers and trying to get to the enemy heavies. Allowingf skirmishers to over disrupt this would be too much....

In the game design you would get funny situations...e.g. imagine putting a bunch of LF 2.8MU in front of your line and waiting for the enemy to charge 3MU with heavies. If you rolled a VMD for this just becuase there were evaders as the initial target you would get the odd result of 1 in 3 charges not making it when they would with no skirmishers there. This would slow down the game as nobody would be keen to charge du to the risk of giving away too many overlaps and in my view it wouldn't be a historically realistic use of skirmishers just a gamey manouvre.

Hence the above which I have today drafted into FAQ 3.0 which should be out soon

Si

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:32 pm

I agree Si, skirmishers are disruptive enough now : ).

But thanks for the additional info on VMD during charges. Thats an easy one to overlook. I too would have rolled a VMD once the evaders left and charged the MF with the result. If I rolled a 1 then my charge would have petered out till next time. Eagerly looking forward to the FAQ,

Thanks

Brian

Seldon · Post by **Seldon** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:56 pm

This has been a great example for me, thanks to both the parts asking and answering the question

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:52 pm

Thanks for that Seldon, glad to have helped in my small part. But I think this is a great way to gain a better understanding of the rules. It is awesome that the rules designers and beta testers are here to help out and seem so willing to do so.

In this process I am still finding little things that I missed in previous readings. And when you hear someone else ask a question it may tell you something about a rule that you did not know about or a different application.

I hope I was not being too simple in how I was asking and saying things but I wanted to keep it down to a low level and take away some of the assumptions or to at least clarify the assumptions. Its nice to know that other people are in the same boat and potentially have the same questions. Sometimes I feel I am the only one not getting this or that. But at least now I can say that I finally feel that skirmishers LF can have their use on the gaming table and need to be used properly to be effective which they can be.

I'm sure I will continue to embarrass myself with more questions and my lack of flocked Roman bases : ). BTW does anyone know where I can buy Flocking Gel in Canada : )?

Thanks

Brian