Charging Routers/Broken Troops

stevoid · Post by **stevoid** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:06 am

If you charge routing troops you don't undertake impact combat or melee combat but adjudicate losses in the JAP phase.

If in the JAP phase the routers outdistance you, then you have spent a whole turn in contact without fighting or removing a base, is that correct?

Or are we missing something?

Steve

neilhammond · Post by **neilhammond** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:18 am

My reading of the rules is that is correct.

Ironhand · Post by **Ironhand** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:22 am

That's my understanding also.

shall · Post by **shall** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:58 pm

Good news as thats because its right

Si

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:53 pm

stevoid wrote:If in the JAP phase the routers outdistance you, then you have spent a whole turn in contact without fighting or removing a base, is that correct?

It is correct, but the sequence of events is only a game mechanism. You don't need to think of them as spending any time actually in contact. In reality if you fail to maintain contact in the JAP it represents them not making significant contact at all.

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:00 pm

Hi Guys,

Can someone explain the reasoning for this? I ran into this situation a lot. I am pursuing but lose contact during the JAP phase so no base loss. I then impact then get outdistanced again in the JAP with the vmd, and so on. So in reality I am not in contact even though I have charged this broken BG a number of times. I would have thought that each time you contact it regardless of phase you should remove 1 base. It just seems like routers get a free move card so to speak.

Thanks

Brian

stevoid · Post by **stevoid** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:23 pm

Thanks guys. It seems we all read it right (hooray).

The reason I raised it is that we are in the middle of a tournament (Braveheart) with quite a few new players. A few were surprised at that the way that situation played out as per the rules. I did mention that they at least got the benefit of making it harder to rally the routers.

Despite a few grumblings over the above situation all the new players seem to be enjoying FOG and thinks are going smoothly. There is one situation which I will post separately when I can arrange some figs for photos that is a geometric doozy!

Cheers,

Steve

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:26 pm

BrianC wrote:Hi Guys,

Can someone explain the reasoning for this? I ran into this situation a lot. I am pursuing but lose contact during the JAP phase so no base loss. I then impact then get outdistanced again in the JAP with the vmd, and so on. So in reality I am not in contact even though I have charged this broken BG a number of times. I would have thought that each time you contact it regardless of phase you should remove 1 base. It just seems like routers get a free move card so to speak.

In real terms, rather than game terms, why should routers move slower than pursuers/chargers? And if they don't, how do troops that didn't start the turn in contact with them kill them (with swords)?

Moving the chargers "into contact" is just a game mechanism. Whether they are still in contact at the end of the JAP decides whether they really ever contacted at all.

shall · Post by **shall** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:09 pm

the mechnism is set up so that you will damage routers in general if you are equal or faster troops.

If you are not then despite the apparent positions you would be unlikely to have ever caught them inthe first place.

Wargames are by their nature and abstraction and always we work top down to get the right overall effects and this mechanism is an example. So if you charge LF routers with HF you are unlikely to do much wiping out as in reality you probably never got near them. If you charge any routers with LH you are almost certain to cut a lot down. This is surely realistic in overall effect which is what we want.

If you took bases of at contact then it wouldn't make sense and then you are into "evading" routers as an alternative which is mare and a waste of time better spent elsewhere.

Hope that maketh sense.

Si

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:09 pm

But the Romans don't have light horse : ) and seeing that is the army I am playing at the moment it doesn't really help : ). Its tought being outclassed in cavalry all the time. But the part that really got me was that in the book it talks about the devastating effect of a determined pursuit. Hmm I read the rules and don't see devestation anywhere. If you can impact routers and cause them a base loss then too, then yes I can see much devestation and nashing ot teeth. But the way the rules are now I think you would have to really stretch it to think of it as devastating. I think the writer of that section was being a little over zealous : ).

Allowing a fresh enemy BG to impact routers are allowed on the same page 108, but if you lose contact and decide to renew pursuit by charging in the impact phase but not allowing the adjudication simply because they are renewing a pursuit doesn't make any sense within the context of the rules. To me its the same thing as a fresh enemy contacting the routers. If your going to make a rule, it should be applied in all cases. The fresh enemy then should be forced to pursue as well and not adjudicate anything.

I guess we will have to just agree to have a differeing opinion, which is ok.

Thanks

Brian

patwarg · Post by **patwarg** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:13 pm

Just to ask a related point on this topic, when outdistanced pursuers charge the routers again in their impact phase do they do this as per a normal charge? That is do they have a variable move distance or is it simply their normal move distance?

I also read the removing bases from routing battle groups as meaning that at the end of any pursuit move the routed troops remove a base. I have been playing it that this applies at the end of the phase when they break, if the pursuers are in contact and at the end of any subsequent impact phase when I recharge them.

Any comments,

Pat

shall · Post by **shall** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:15 pm

The logic is that you take base off anytime you pursue and keep in contact. If you look at it that way then all 3 mechanisms :

Charging routers
Initial pursuits
Pursuits in the JAP

All work in exactly the sae way. If you keep up you take a base.

It can be devasting indeed but you are right that you don't have the ideal pursuit army

- but a great one for getting the little blighters running away in the first place.

My pecheneg army was the ultimate for pursuit once. Broke a sup 6 base BG of Romans that had ony lost one base and therefore reallyable. Hit it with 3 BGs of LH in one go and it vanished in the next bound having lost 3 bases. And the general couldn't get away either.

So it can be devastating - we didn't say it always was!

In your army you would need t use the LF to do that but it ain't as easy.

Si

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:54 pm

If you charge existing routers you don't cause a base loss in the impact phase. You only cause a base loss if you keep up with them in the JAP.

You do cause a base loss if you keep up with them when they break and rout first time, whatever phase it is.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:55 pm

shall wrote:The logic is that you take base off anytime you pursue and keep in contact. If you look at it that way then all 3 mechanisms :

1) Charging routers
2) Initial pursuits
3) Pursuits in the JAP
All work in exactly the sae way. If you keep up you take a base.

In case 2 and 3, but not in case 1

shall · Post by **shall** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:45 am

? Richard

Your last post says they are different

Your one before that they are the same?

Confused? They are all the same as far as I am concerned. Am I missing something?

Si

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:01 am

shall wrote:? Richard

Your last post says they are different

Your one before that they are the same?

Confused? They are all the same as far as I am concerned. Am I missing something?

I think we are talking at cross purposes. Your earlier posts in the thread were correct.

If a BG charges a routing BG it causes no bases losses in the impact phase. It only cause base losses if it remains in contact after pursuing in the subsequent JAP.

You confirmed this in your early posts in this thread. However, your more recent post appeared to contradict it. I am sure that is not what you meant, but it is how it reads.

shall · Post by **shall** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:06 am

Ok Thought it said eactly that all 3 are the same - you take bases off if you keep up.

Anyway seems we are singing form the same sheet - even if we drifted off key for a bit! Hurrah!

Si

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:17 am

But the part that really got me was that in the book it talks about the devastating effect of a determined pursuit. Hmm I read the rules and don't see devestation anywhere

Remember that if you keep charging and making contact (even if you don't keep up in the JAP and cause a base loss) then the BG can never be rallied as there are enemy within 6 MU's. This is much more important than taking bases off.

Of course, the key decision is whether the BG keeping up is making best use of it's time preventing the rally or whether it can be better employed elsewhere in the battle... A BG of four LH is superb in this respect, but a BG of four Knights is probably best of somewhere else.