90 degrees turns in evades

[JanChris]

Hi,

As I read it, an evading BG has the choice (players choice) whether to turn 180 degrees or 90 degrees when charged, if the evading group evades "in the direction of the charge". I don't understand why it's the players choice. E.g.:

AAAAX

.BB..
.BB..

A is a BG of 4 heavy cav facing down, B is a BG of 4 LH facing up. The LH decide to charge the Cv, declare direction. As I read it, the Cv can decide not to turn 180 degrees, as seems logical, but can also choose a 90 degrees turn. Let's say the Cv decide to evade "in the direction of the charge", turning 90% (to column) and then wheeling at point X in the direction of the charge and moving their MVD. Now, the LH most likely bypass the Cv , who expand in their own turn.

Is there something in the rules preventing this?
Thanks

[philqw78]

A very dodgy thing for the Cav as they will end up in a 4 deep column and the LH have a longer move chasing them and can change direction to follow

____A
____A
____A
____A
aaaaX
___BB
___BB


_bb
_bb

Original position in lower case

[bigdamnhero]

There is a certain amount of unit autonomy at the players discretion depending on factors such as terrain or units behind the evading unit. It may be simpler to run 90 degrees as opposed to a full 180, but there are consequences to both decisions.

If you are charged in flank or rear you must if evading, run away in the direction of the charge.

If you are charged to the front, you can either turn 180 and run towards your rear. or in the direction of the charge as i understand it.

[WhiteKnight]

I hope the rules ( stupidly didn't bring them to work today! ) are as the bigdamnhero just described and that by and large, people turn and run or run away from the direction of the charge when they evade! No tricksy sideways stuff, eh?

Martin

[babyshark]

I think that the rules (and accompanying diagrams) make it pretty clear that the 90 degree or 180 degree turn is only in aid of evading directly away from the direction of the charge. Once the evading BG turns it then must wheel to run directly away, counting this distance against the total move distance of the evade. Thus, with a turn, the BG loses some evading distance and is more likely to get caught.

Marc

[SirGarnet]

Phil's got it. Wheeled to evade parallel to charge direction. Getting all 4 Cav elements past the wheel point will require a high VMD roll, which means the Cav probably get hit in the rear.

A very dodgy thing for the Cav as they will end up in a 4 deep column and the LH have a longer move chasing them and can change direction to follow

____A
____A
____A
____A
aaaaX
___BB
___BB


_bb
_bb

Original position in lower case

[philqw78]

Tho why the cav run away is beyond me. Even being caught in the arse they hav a good chance of winning.

at impact

LH 1 dice at ++
Cv 2 dice at --

in melee

LH 2 dice probably -
Cv 4 dice as cav may expand to meet overlap. and usually better armed and armoured, so probably +

[peterrjohnston]

Tho why the cav run away is beyond me. Even being caught in the arse they hav a good chance of winning.

I did wonder. Although there may have been other factors, like sacrificing the LH to catch skirmishing Cav with Kn next,
or the Cav weren't steady... etc etc.

[JanChris]

A very dodgy thing for the Cav as they will end up in a 4 deep column and the LH have a longer move chasing them and can change direction to follow

Thanks, so the pursuers first declare direction and then change the direction after their targets are no longer in front of them? That would solve things nicely.

If not it is a definite problem as wider BG's would always be able to evade even faster opponents.

The LH charged because the Cv were fragmented. LH charging with Light spear got a + POA, get full dice vs fragmented enemy, etc.

[pyruse]

How can the cavalry evade in the first place?
Cavalry can only evade if one deep.

[philqw78]

They are, AAAA, but when they turn they become a column 4 deep