Really basic rules question from new(b) convert.

[Fayzer0]

Hi All,
Please can you clarify some basic melee questions:

In a multi BG melee - say 4 vs 5 -
1. After the overall winner is determined ( say the 4BG side), how many cohesion tests must the loser (5 BG) take ?
2. How many death rolls must the loser make - 1 or 5 ?

I can't seem to find the definitive answer in the book for when more than 1 BG is involved on each side

Thanks

Martyn

[carlos]

Losing is by BG not by side fighting. So each BG that took more hits than it dished out will have to take a cohesion test and a death roll. Remember each BG that dished out as many or more hits than it took will still need to do a death roll although w/ a +2.

[BrianC]

Hi All,
Please can you clarify some basic melee questions:

In a multi BG melee - say 4 vs 5 -
1. After the overall winner is determined ( say the 4BG side), how many cohesion tests must the loser (5 BG) take ?
2. How many death rolls must the loser make - 1 or 5 ?

I can't seem to find the definitive answer in the book for when more than 1 BG is involved on each side

Thanks

Martyn

Don't feel bad, I initially found it a hard concept to understand. What I do now is I use different colour dice and put them behind each BG and then divide them between opponent BGs if its fighting more than one. I roll the dice then determine BG by BG which ones took more hits than it caused. Those that did LOSE. Only BGs that lost a close combat must take a cohesion check as per page 112. Only 1 cohesion check is taken as only 1 close combat was fought even though there can be multiple enemies.

Regarding the death rolls, you roll once but if you took 5 hits then you must roll >5 ( or a 6 or better) to not lose a base.

One thing I did initially is just line up a number of BGs and walk really slow through the process until it makes sense. Then try it in a starter army game. It will get better and faster I promise. But your head must hurt a little first

Brian

[babyshark]

That's because you are asking the wrong question.

Each BG loses or does not lose on its own, regardless of whether the rest of its friends are doing well or poorly. Check for each BG separately, using the following protocol.

For each of your BGs, total up the number of incoming hits to the BG from all opposing BGs. Then compare that number to the total outgoing hits inflicted by your BG on all opposing BGs. If your BG inflicted an equal or greater number of hits than it received then it does not lose and need not take a CT. (It still must deal with a death throw, but at +2.) If your BG received more total hits than it inflicted, then it lost the combat and must take a CT (as well as a death throw).

Does that clarify for you?

Marc

[SirGarnet]

As Babyshark said. Each BG does Cohesion Tests and Death Rolls and determines whether it wins or loses on its own based on hits taken and given.

It may help to visualize one result of this which is that two opposing BGs can both Not Lose, though in a one-on-one fight only one can Lose.

In a fight with at least 3 BGs involved, it can also happen that two opposing BGs can both Lose, and even break simultaneously.

[gozerius]

In a multi BG combat it is often best to roll dice one file at a time, applying all POA mods relevent to that matchup. mark the number of hits inflicted behind each file. Then, when all dice are rolled compare the number of hits inflicted on the BG with hits inflicted by the BG. If the number you inflicted is equal or greater than the enemy inflicted on you, Congratulations! You did not lose so do not have to take a CT. If your score is lower, take a CT. Then, if you took hits, roll a Death roll and add in any appropriate mods. Then, If your general was fighting in the front rank, and you took two or more hits, roll to see if your general bought it.

[Fayzer0]

Many thanks for your quick replies - that has cleared up one misconception on my part (probably first of many!)
I have been playing Warmaster Ancients which I still enjoy but this 'looks right' on the table and manoevering/movement seems less extreme.

Regards

Martyn