Possible erratum - bursting through

[lawrenceg]

Page 48 says, of being burst through by frinedly shock troops:

...IF necessary shift back the entire battlegroup being passed through so that they are behind the shock troops.


The diagram on p49 shows only the bases passed through shifted back (unless there are a couple of 2-base LF battle groups at the ends of the line).

[lawrenceg]

The erratum for page 84 appears to be redundant. In my copy of the rules it already says "disorder(ed)" in both cases.

[hammy]

It looks like there is an error in the diagram on P49 to me

[lawrenceg]

It looks like there is an error in the diagram on P49 to me

I am sure it is the diagram, rather than the text, that is wrong. Either that, or there are a couple of 2-base LF BGs there.

If only the burst through bases shift back, a partially shifted BG could not reform and hence can't move until the shock troops get out of the way some how.

[madaxeman]

at Ascot I had a rather erroneous breaking through situation

My spearmen routed a unit of enemy pikemen in my turn, and their rout move just reached a 2nd line of enemy spearmen some way back - bursting through them (moving a lot further than usual as a result - 4 ranks deep and all - and so comfortabley outdistancing my pursuit) and disrupting the 2nd line of spears.

However the "burst through" troops then had an opportunity to rally in "their" turn - which they did - and the pikemen routed again after which they were so far away they were now "rallyable" quite quickly.

So, routing pikemen - or deep formations of anything - bursting through is actually quite a useful thing to have happen in some situations. Anyone burst through by a thinner formation would have less time to fix the disruption (maybe none) and also the routers would not get as far away so quickly...

I definately felt this must have been an errata !!

[hammy]

Tim, I suspect that this may have been played wrongly. My understanding is that only the bases that reach the obstruction burst through so if just the front rank of pikes reaches the BG being burst through only the front rank makes it through and the remaining three ranks of pike are placed adjacent to the 'near' side of the pike.

[lawrenceg]

Tim, I suspect that this may have been played wrongly. My understanding is that only the bases that reach the obstruction burst through so if just the front rank of pikes reaches the BG being burst through only the front rank makes it through and the remaining three ranks of pike are placed adjacent to the 'near' side of the pike.

It seems to me that what Tim reports is consistent with the rules for routers or evaders bursting through other battlegroups that they cannot normally interpenetrate on page 48-49.

The split BG that you described is only for permitted interpenetrations, described on page 48.

I note that LF routing or evading would be making a permitted interpenetration and therefore would end up as a split group - particularly dangerous in the case of an evade. But they are allowed to go up to a normal move plus 2MU to get clear of the obstructing group if possible. Ironic that only troops who are normally allowed to pass through have a chance of not passing through completely.

[hammy]

Hmm, another one for the memory banks. I am sure I rules the other way in Helsinki, although it did lead to an interesting situation when a BG was left partially burst through and unable to react and also to the issue of does a BG drop cohesion twice if it is partially burst through in one phase then the burst through completes in another.

I suppose it is cleaner as it stands but can lead to some slightly odd situations as described by Tim.

[lawrenceg]

Hmm, another one for the memory banks. I am sure I rules the other way in Helsinki, although it did lead to an interesting situation when a BG was left partially burst through and unable to react and also to the issue of does a BG drop cohesion twice if it is partially burst through in one phase then the burst through completes in another.

I suppose it is cleaner as it stands but can lead to some slightly odd situations as described by Tim.

Let's face it, there are a number of bits of FOG (especially "conforming") that do occasionally lead to some slightly odd situations.



"It's not a bug, it's a feature."

[madaxeman]

I forgot to mention, the troops "burst through" were actually in column, and at 90 degrees to the battleline (marching across the back of it).

So a full unit of routing pikemen burst through them side-to-side.

They then turned 90 degrees and rallied in their turn, and then proceeded to beat my pursuers after that !!

But, there are odds and ends in any ruleset as Lawrence says. This was a little irritating however

[rbodleyscott]

The erratum for page 84 appears to be redundant. In my copy of the rules it already says "disorder(ed)" in both cases.

You probably have a copy from one of the later print runs, after this erratum was detected.

[rbodleyscott]

It looks like there is an error in the diagram on P49 to me

Also the one on P.59