Interception charge contacting other troops

[titanu]

An interception charge cannot contact other non-charging troops. I have played this for as long as I can remember but I played a new chap the other day and he asked me to justify this. I read the rules confident that it would be there. But it was not. Is it 'implied' in the text?

[zoltan]

Surely it's a case of:
- an enemy charger gives your BG the reason to declare an intercept charge
- an intercept charge is a charge and all the usual rules apply about plowing into anything in its path?

[titanu]

...an intercept charge is a charge and all the usual rules apply about plowing into anything in its path?

Well no - exactly the opposite, an interceptor CANNOT contact the battle group it is intercepting unless it is a flank attack.

[petedalby]

This is from the V1 FAQ:

When does an interception charge step forward?
Charges are declared, interceptions are responses to such charges.
If the interceptors are intercepting the chargers from the front, both chargers and interceptors are in reality charging semi simultaneously.
However, for the sake of simple game play the interception charge is moved sufficiently to get in the way
of the original charge and then the original chargers are moved into contact. The interceptors do not make contact – they
therefore do not step forward. The original chargers step forward as usual.
Where an interception catches a BG in the flank or rear this is a different situation. The chargers’ move is cancelled and
effectively the interceptors charge them instead. In this case it is the interceptors that are making contact so they do step
forward.

So we know that the intercept charge cannot hit the chargers (unless flank or rear) but no mention of other enemy. Easy to see how the concept that you do not hit the chargers could be extrapolated for all enemy.

[philqw78]

Are you not inventing complexity that isn't there. The path to the intercept point must be clear. The intercept does not contact the chargers. What else can be contacted?

[dave_r]

To answer the original point. It's not quite as easy as it sounds....

Pg 82 details that you cannot move into contact with enemy battle groups in the manoeuvre phase "Battle groups can move into contact with enemy battle groups in the manoeuvre phase, but only join an existing melee in an overlap position only"

Pg 56 breaks down the impact phase into four stages:
- Declaring Charges
- Troops responding to charges by intercepting or evading the chargers.

It is therefore important to note that an intercept is _not_ a charge.

Pg 57 details charging with your battle groups stating "a charging battle group moves up to the full extent of its move to "legally" contact any part of the target battle group(s)"

Pg 66 details the interception charge. Pg 67 states "if an enemy battle group attempts to charge through the ZOI of a battle group that is no itself a target of any charge this turn, that battle group has the option of making an interception charge on the chargers"

Therefore, the interception is against the chargers only and cannot be used to contact any other battle group. As detailed on the last bullet point of pg 67, unless contacting the flank or rear of the charging battlegroup the interception charge does not contact the charging battle group either.

Bit long winded, but that's how it is

[petedalby]

I don't disagree with your conclusion Dave but your argument is a bit tenuous. The move is called an Intercept Charge after all.

But like Phil I'm struggling to envisage a situation where this could happen.

Bob - you are normally so good at providing photos. Could you show us how this happened please?

[dave_r]

I don't disagree with your conclusion Dave but your argument is a bit tenuous. The move is called an Intercept Charge after all.?

I've given the logic and it clearly states you intercept the charger, not other enemy battle groups.

This happens all the time whereby an intercept is prevented by another non-charging friendly battle group being in the way.

[titanu]

...you are normally so good at providing photos. Could you show us how this happened please?

The cavalry beside the pen are charging straight ahead ( see the nice white line). They have a unit of friendly bowmen beside them. The charge is against the green Burmese Mon spearmen. The jolly lads with red/yellow helmets want to intercept. See the grid line they move along, so they can intercept without a problem.



But the other chap wants to contact the bowmen as well as a bonus. He uses the argument that it is an 'interception CHARGE' and hence he can hit anybody to their front so long as it is ALSO an intercept (which indeed it was). I totally agree with DR but it is an implicit within the rules rather than in black and white.

[grahambriggs]

top of page 67: "...that BG has the option of making an interception charge on the chargers." So this gives the interceptors the ability to do that. It does not give them the option of charging anyone else. Not the best written rule perhaps.

If you allow the interceptors to contact the foot "because it's a charge" then they would need to step forward into the mounted as well, which they are specifically not allowed to do.

[philqw78]

The rules say what you can do, not what you can't, they don't say you can't teleport, but you can't

[petedalby]

Perfect - thanks Bob. I can see why the question arose and it is good to revisit these things.

From your photo it is clear that the intercept is allowed and FWIW I agree there is no justification to continue into the bowmen.

Good to see that you boys are practicing for Derby already.

[AlanCutner]

If the interception was on flank or rear of the chargers could it then contact the bowmen? The question is based on the v1 FAQ which suggests a rear/flank interception becomes a charge in its own right.

[dave_r]

If the interception was on flank or rear of the chargers could it then contact the bowmen? The question is based on the v1 FAQ which suggests a rear/flank interception becomes a charge in its own right.

Yep - covered on pg 68. "It cancels the enemy battle group's charge completely and despite the fact it happens in the enemy's turn is treated as a normal flank/rear charge. The intercepting battle group steps forward as it would in a normal charge"

[prb4]

"It cancels the enemy battle group's charge completely and despite the fact it happens in the enemy's turn is treated as a normal flank/rear charge. The intercepting battle group steps forward as it would in a normal charge"

Which is fine, but does this mean that for a flank/rear charge the interceptor could contact the foot bowmen first and step forward into the cav?

[dave_r]

"It cancels the enemy battle group's charge completely and despite the fact it happens in the enemy's turn is treated as a normal flank/rear charge. The intercepting battle group steps forward as it would in a normal charge"

Which is fine, but does this mean that for a flank/rear charge the interceptor could contact the foot bowmen first and step forward into the cav?

No, because you aren't allowed to initially contact the other BG as you intercept the charging BG.

[philqw78]

"It cancels the enemy battle group's charge completely and despite the fact it happens in the enemy's turn is treated as a normal flank/rear charge. The intercepting battle group steps forward as it would in a normal charge"

Which is fine, but does this mean that for a flank/rear charge the interceptor could contact the foot bowmen first and step forward into the cav?

No, because you aren't allowed to initially contact the other BG as you intercept the charging BG.

That would be more debatable based upon your quote that the flank/rear charge is now treated as a normal charge

[paullongmore]

IMHO If you are contacting the bows first its not a flank charge and therefore you don't step forward even if this step forward would result in a contact with the flank of the cavalry.

If it was a flank charge on the cavalry without contacting the bows then you would step forward into the bows.

[ravenflight]

I think allowing the intercept opens a whole can of worms. I remember earlier discussion about intercepts being stopped by skirmishers (for example) even tho skirmishers would, in all other circumstances, need to evade out of the way, they still prevent an intercept.

Putting it into a 'real life' example, if a few dozen dudes with shaprpened sticks can prevent an intercept, then surely a formed body should as well. Isn't there something about 'completing the move' also... so you can't have a situation where the intercept path crosses but leaves the charge path and so the intercept is not valid in this instance.

[zoltan]

So in the photo example provided above do the interceptors stop a GT short of the bowmen but still far enough forward so that the original chargers crash into them (the interceptors)?