Pikes..Ranks fighting?

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 11:34 am

When a pike block is fighting to its front, are the first and second bases fighting or all four bases fighting? Could the 3rd and 4th be frontally charged at the side?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 12:30 pm

I believe the answer is yes they can be.

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 12:37 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:I believe the answer is yes they can be.

so then only the 1st and 2nd ranks are initially fighting?

shall · Post by **shall** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 1:40 pm

All side contacts count as if a frontal charge unless they qualify for flank or rear. So they would be consdiered as if fighting 4 rank pike for 1 round at impact and then conform to an overlap to help the initial combat.

Si

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 2:14 pm

shall wrote:All side contacts count as if a frontal charge unless they qualify for flank or rear. So they would be consdiered as if fighting 4 rank pike for 1 round at impact and then conform to an overlap to help the initial combat.

Si

I understand this. The question that came up was when a file of 4 bases of pikes is fighting to its front, which bases are considered to be fighting?

I had thought the rules stated that the 1st and 2nd bases were fighting, but deadtorius thought all 4 bases would be considered fighting and therefore none would be eligible to be removed to front ranks elsewhere in the BG to replace casualties.

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:00 pm

Blathergut wrote:
shall wrote:All side contacts count as if a frontal charge unless they qualify for flank or rear. So they would be consdiered as if fighting 4 rank pike for 1 round at impact and then conform to an overlap to help the initial combat.

Si
I understand this. The question that came up was when a file of 4 bases of pikes is fighting to its front, which bases are considered to be fighting?

I had thought the rules stated that the 1st and 2nd bases were fighting, but deadtorius thought all 4 bases would be considered fighting and therefore none would be eligible to be removed to front ranks elsewhere in the BG to replace casualties.

Only bases eligible to contribute dice are fighting (ignoring dice dropped for disruption, etc). So the front two ranks of pikes in this case.

Chris

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 11:06 pm

so only the first 2 are assumed to be fighting but the 3rd and 4th are needed for the POA's, how does that work out?

A normal BG fighting 3 deep only gets moral support from the 3rd rank, it never counts dice or POA's which is where the whole pike block confusion sets in. How can you need at least 3 ranks to get a POA and not count as fighting?

I think Pikes may be the exception to the rule of 2 ranks, at least thats my thought.

kal5056 · Post by **kal5056** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 11:16 pm

I have long maintained that once a pike block 2 x 4 is engaged in combat that it should count as an 8 for hits per base as all 8 are contributing to the melle.
I am sure it has been play tested and decided that this would over power the pike. It just seems to me if they have to stay there to contribute they should count as being there. We have seen lately how in sync I am am with the Authors so I would not count on this becoming a new rule in Version 1.1. LOL
Gino
SMAC

willb · Post by **willb** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 5:02 am

Only the first two ranks provide dice for combat - page 93. 3rd and 4th ranks provide POA only. Only first three ranks count when determining hits per base - page 135

Ghaznavid · Post by **Ghaznavid** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:53 am

Blathergut wrote:I understand this. The question that came up was when a file of 4 bases of pikes is fighting to its front, which bases are considered to be fighting?

I had thought the rules stated that the 1st and 2nd bases were fighting, but deadtorius thought all 4 bases would be considered fighting and therefore none would be eligible to be removed to front ranks elsewhere in the BG to replace casualties.

I think your question is covered by the FAQ, Paragraph 4/iii.

shall · Post by **shall** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:04 am

3 and 4 are fighting the contact to the side, 1 and 2 to the front. If a base is lost the front rank is removed and the back 3 shuffle up, or if there are spare bases in a non-front rank they can be used.

I can imagine an oddball if the side hits rank 4 but there I would just be a sensible umpire and do the same knowing that after conforming any apparent break of contact has been solved, and if they couldn't conform then they fiht anyway as if they are.

Si

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:29 am

Ghaznavid wrote:
Blathergut wrote:I understand this. The question that came up was when a file of 4 bases of pikes is fighting to its front, which bases are considered to be fighting?

I had thought the rules stated that the 1st and 2nd bases were fighting, but deadtorius thought all 4 bases would be considered fighting and therefore none would be eligible to be removed to front ranks elsewhere in the BG to replace casualties.
I think your question is covered by the FAQ, Paragraph 4/iii.

thank you...knew i'd seen it somewhere!!!...so the FAQ as well would suggest that ranks 3 and 4 are not in combat since they could be charged but not in the flank

lawrenceg · Post by **lawrenceg** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:25 pm

Blathergut wrote:
Ghaznavid wrote:
Blathergut wrote:I understand this. The question that came up was when a file of 4 bases of pikes is fighting to its front, which bases are considered to be fighting?

I had thought the rules stated that the 1st and 2nd bases were fighting, but deadtorius thought all 4 bases would be considered fighting and therefore none would be eligible to be removed to front ranks elsewhere in the BG to replace casualties.
I think your question is covered by the FAQ, Paragraph 4/iii.

thank you...knew i'd seen it somewhere!!!...so the FAQ as well would suggest that ranks 3 and 4 are not in combat since they could be charged but not in the flank

You can use bases that are fighting to replace losses. So ranks 2,3,4 can all be used. ven rank 1 can be used if no other ranks available.
You can't use bases that are fighting (with dice or contributing to POA) for "feeding extra bases into melee". So you can't feed in from ranks 1-4 if the front rank is in combat.
You can't charge the flanks of ranks 1-2 with a frontal charge, but you can charge ranks 3 and 4.

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:33 am

lawrenceg wrote:You can't use bases that are fighting (with dice or contributing to POA) for "feeding extra bases into melee". So you can't feed in from ranks 1-4 if the front rank is in combat..

Where does it say in the rules that contributing to POA = fighting and not able to be fed into melee?? The rules mention 1st and 2nd ranks...the faq mentions you can charge the 3rd and 4th ranks frontally from the side...so they can't count as fighting then.

Ghaznavid · Post by **Ghaznavid** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:16 am

Blathergut wrote:
lawrenceg wrote:You can't use bases that are fighting (with dice or contributing to POA) for "feeding extra bases into melee". So you can't feed in from ranks 1-4 if the front rank is in combat..
Where does it say in the rules that contributing to POA = fighting and not able to be fed into melee?? The rules mention 1st and 2nd ranks...the faq mentions you can charge the 3rd and 4th ranks frontally from the side...so they can't count as fighting then.

Under "Feeding more bases into an existing melee"? 3rd Bulletpoint states that a base already contributing to combat by dice or POA may not be moved to feed more bases into melee. Note that this bulletpoint does not use the term 'fighting' (although it's used in other parts of the section).

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:28 am

Ghaznavid wrote:Under "Feeding more bases into an existing melee"? 3rd Bulletpoint states that a base already contributing to combat by dice or POA may not be moved to feed more bases into melee. Note that this bulletpoint does not use the term 'fighting' (although it's used in other parts of the section).

I see...hmmm....so was Simon wrong when he said it was up to the owner player to decide whether to move the 4th rank base up into the 3rd spot in the other column?

ahh...maybe that was casualties...am kinda getting blurred with all the different discussions!!!....think i will just let it pass as is....

thanks for the help, all!

Ghaznavid · Post by **Ghaznavid** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:42 am

Blathergut wrote:I see...hmmm....so was Simon wrong when he said it was up to the owner player to decide whether to move the 4th rank base up into the 3rd spot in the other column?

I don't think so. We are talking about two unrelated mechanisms. One is voluntarily adding more bases to the fight. The other is about losing and replacing bases, which is a compulsory thing, although one where you have some limited liberty where the replacement bases come from.

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:44 am

Ghaznavid wrote:
Blathergut wrote:I see...hmmm....so was Simon wrong when he said it was up to the owner player to decide whether to move the 4th rank base up into the 3rd spot in the other column?
I don't think so. We are talking about two unrelated mechanisms. One is voluntarily adding more bases to the fight. The other is about losing and replacing bases, which is a compulsory thing, although one where you have some limited liberty where the replacement bases come from.

ya...think i have it straight

...late night in germany! ...thanks for the help!

shall · Post by **shall** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:51 am

I see...hmmm....so was Simon wrong when he said it was up to the owner player to decide whether to move the 4th rank base up into the 3rd spot in the other column?

I don't think so. We are talking about two unrelated mechanisms. One is voluntarily adding more bases to the fight. The other is about losing and replacing bases, which is a compulsory thing, although one where you have some limited liberty where the replacement bases come from.

NOTE EDITED RESPONSE ...

Now I understand the point I was indeed correct. The POA and dice issue is for feeding more bases into contact, but note it is not mentioned for replacing base casualties.

There are two possibilities only for replacing csualties in the front rank and you must replace them - shuffle up so the ones behind move forwards, or take a non-front rank base from somewhere and use it (obviously take a rear not something in the middle!!)

Simon

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 12:19 am

Just to see if I got this one right, as per our game situation, my pikes (2 wide 4 deep) are engaged by 2 enemy battle groups. Enemy 1 hammers me for 3 hits, enemy 2 gives me 1 hit. I miss the death roll so the casualty comes off the colum against enemy 1.

Next turn enemy 1 hammers me for another 3 hits, enemy 2 does no hits. Once again I blow the death roll and must lose another base. It must come from the 3 deep colum against enemy 1 reducing it to 2 deep while the colum against enemy 2 is still 4 deep.

Since all 4 rows of my pikes against enemy 2 are adding POA's to the combat I can not pull a stand from the back of the 4th row to fill in behind the 2 deep row and bring it back up to 3 deep and get that +POA for pikes 3 deep across the whole unit.

My thought was that they all add to combat so can't be used to fill in rear losses from the unit.

Hope that was clear enough for you.