Slitherine

MatthewP wrote:No worries Dave. Didn't stop you winning. Next time you wont be so lucky!

lawrenceg wrote:

MatthewP wrote:As Daves opponent last night I think I need to put the record straight. Things were not quite as Dave explained. Firstly and most crucially Light Horse FF were facing in the opposite direction to D and E, with their rear to my light horse C. By charging C at an angle (which was declared straight away) i forced them to evade across the path of D and E. A and B both then had to charge, straight ahead to force D and E to evade into their freinds F, creating a nice mess against the table edge. When all the evades were complete I rolled for my charges, A and C rolled normal and B went long. With C at an angle there was not enough room for both A and B and I decided to move A and C first which meant there was no room for B to complete its charge. This was not in any way intentional, I'm really not clever enough to plan that far ahead. Forcing your opponents bgs to evade into each other is in my opinion not at all cheesy, just good tactics. Now down to the real question. B was unable to complete its charge and therefore had its charge cancelled. This was not an issue as it states this in the rules. However the real question is can it then make a normal move. In my opinion it is allowed to do so as it hasn't charged. Cancelled means just that. Dave thought othewise. I hope this makes things clearer.


Matthew

B's charge is cancelled only if contact is not possible owing to the reasons stated on page 54. If it can't make contact because the targets evaded out of range then the charge is not cancelled. Not being able to complete the charge move is not, on its own, sufficient to cancel the charge.

It's a subtle point and quite easy to miss, so I'm sure you didn't do it deliberately.

I agree that if a charge is genuinely cancelled then cancelled means cancelled. BGs can move in the manoeuve phase if they didn't charge in the impact phase. That is perfectly clear.

By the way, if Dave's LH had not evaded, would the interference between your BGs have resulted in fewer bases getting into contact than if they all went straight ahead?

bertalucci wrote:

lawrenceg wrote:

MatthewP wrote:As Daves opponent last night I think I need to put the record straight. Things were not quite as Dave explained. Firstly and most crucially Light Horse FF were facing in the opposite direction to D and E, with their rear to my light horse C. By charging C at an angle (which was declared straight away) i forced them to evade across the path of D and E. A and B both then had to charge, straight ahead to force D and E to evade into their freinds F, creating a nice mess against the table edge. When all the evades were complete I rolled for my charges, A and C rolled normal and B went long. With C at an angle there was not enough room for both A and B and I decided to move A and C first which meant there was no room for B to complete its charge. This was not in any way intentional, I'm really not clever enough to plan that far ahead. Forcing your opponents bgs to evade into each other is in my opinion not at all cheesy, just good tactics. Now down to the real question. B was unable to complete its charge and therefore had its charge cancelled. This was not an issue as it states this in the rules. However the real question is can it then make a normal move. In my opinion it is allowed to do so as it hasn't charged. Cancelled means just that. Dave thought othewise. I hope this makes things clearer.


Matthew

B's charge is cancelled only if contact is not possible owing to the reasons stated on page 54. If it can't make contact because the targets evaded out of range then the charge is not cancelled. Not being able to complete the charge move is not, on its own, sufficient to cancel the charge.

It's a subtle point and quite easy to miss, so I'm sure you didn't do it deliberately.

I agree that if a charge is genuinely cancelled then cancelled means cancelled. BGs can move in the manoeuve phase if they didn't charge in the impact phase. That is perfectly clear.

By the way, if Dave's LH had not evaded, would the interference between your BGs have resulted in fewer bases getting into contact than if they all went straight ahead?

Page 54 is in reference to a charge being cancelled because it was illegal in the first instance because the required turn or expansion is not allowed during a charge.
Surely the only way a Legal charge can be cancelled is if a CMT is required and the roll is failed!

david53 wrote:

MatthewP wrote:No worries Dave. Didn't stop you winning. Next time you wont be so lucky!

You did roll some very bad dice you did make me feel like Dave R(sorry dave just joking )

dave_r wrote:I would just like to point out that in the game on Monday, I lost four generals.

The game didn't last too much longer after that...

gozerius wrote: and any that cannot move their full move toward the target BGs even by dropping back a base, must wheel to avoid the friendly BGs in front of their path. Simple . And fraught with cheese

gozerius wrote:No. It's right there on page 53. "Any troops can wheel during a charge without taking a CMT. Unless required to avoid friends, a wheel cannot be made if this would result in fewer bases being able to fight in the Impact phase than if The BG charged straight ahead." Admittedly, I may be reading a lot into it. But then, a BG is allowed to wheel after an evading BG, and there is nothing in the rules to indicate that a charging BG can pull up short if it's path is blocked by friendlies