Slitherine

kevinj wrote:In the iPad version each page has a 2 part number, the first part being the Chapter (which aren't numbered in the Contents ) and the second being the Page within the Chapter. Hopefully this will be consistent across versions. So, on 9-10 (9 being the Chapter for the Impact Phase) is the section on Attempts to Charge or receive a Charge with Skirmisers, is confirmation that light troops must evade a charge by enemy non-skirmishers unless already in combat or in terrain.

Wait, there's more...
The definition of threatened flank now explicitly states (on page 20-5):
"There are enemy non-skirmishers currently in charge reach and capable of charging the battle group's flank/rear in their next turn. (No account is taken of any possible movement by any battle group that might occur in the interim)."

So while it's true that skirmishers MUST now evade, no account of this is taken! So it would appear that under v2 the skirmishers are effectively protecting the crossbow flank from the HF.

Umpire!!!

Good spot! Also very pleased to note that your Mac page reference is the same as my iPad one!

zoltan wrote:

kevinj wrote:In the iPad version each page has a 2 part number, the first part being the Chapter (which aren't numbered in the Contents ) and the second being the Page within the Chapter. Hopefully this will be consistent across versions. So, on 9-10 (9 being the Chapter for the Impact Phase) is the section on Attempts to Charge or receive a Charge with Skirmisers, is confirmation that light troops must evade a charge by enemy non-skirmishers unless already in combat or in terrain.

Wait, there's more...
The definition of threatened flank now explicitly states (on page 20-5):
"There are enemy non-skirmishers currently in charge reach and capable of charging the battle group's flank/rear in their next turn. (No account is taken of any possible movement by any battle group that might occur in the interim)."

So while it's true that skirmishers MUST now evade, no account of this is taken! So it would appear that under v2 the skirmishers are effectively protecting the crossbow flank from the HF.

Presumably "the interim" refers to the gap between when the CHT is taken and the enemy's next turn. The LH would not be moving in that interim period. They would move during the enemy's turn.

From a purely common sense point of view this makes sense - the crossbows would not be aware of the threat to their flank/rear with friendly horse archers sitting there.

Terrific - we have different interpretations already.

FWIW I agree with Graham. The chargers are capable of hitting the unit in the flank/rear in their next impact phase because the LH must evade.

Since the evade move will occur before the charge, I suggest that the movement would be in the interim period between taking the test and the charge.

kevinj wrote:Since the evade move will occur before the charge, I suggest that the movement would be in the interim period between taking the test and the charge.

It would indeed but the rule seems to be talking about a different interim period; between the test and the next turn. So by the time you get to charge declarations that interim period would seem to be over?

I can live wth it either way, but I don't think it's clear.

Can the HI charge the crossbowmen in the rear? In v1 the answer is 'No' since the LH are in the way and must be the object of the initial charge. I don't have the new rules. What does v2 say about charge targets? Since, apparently, all skirmishers must evade non-skirmish charges, can the HI ignore the LH for charge declarations and declare directly on the crossbowmen knowing that the LH will evade? If not, then there is still a screen protecting the crossbowmen.

grahambriggs wrote:

kevinj wrote:Since the evade move will occur before the charge, I suggest that the movement would be in the interim period between taking the test and the charge.

It would indeed but the rule seems to be talking about a different interim period; between the test and the next turn. So by the time you get to charge declarations that interim period would seem to be over?

Clearly the new rule is not clear! I can already hear RBS scolding us for reading too much into his simple wording.
My view is that the interim period is the period between the point the testing BG tests and the point the chargers make their charge move (not the point the chargers declare their charge). Thus an evade would fall within the interim period and therefore no account is taken of the evade when considering whether or not the flank is threatened.

I would take the apporach that the wording "capable of" indicates exactly that. The LH does not stop the capability of the charge whoever the initial target is. But the more I write this I realise that a battle group who is adjacent to the threathened BG could realistically be charged in the flank too - if the flank charge went brilliantly the enemy BG could convert and is "capable" of charging it too in flank! Yikes!

Any charge must be declared against the Light Horse (who must then evade).
So the infantry are not 'capable of' declaring a charge against the crossbows as they are not a legal charge target.

pyruse wrote:Any charge must be declared against the Light Horse (who must then evade).
So the infantry are not 'capable of' declaring a charge against the crossbows as they are not a legal charge target.

The rule quoted did not say there had to be enemy capable of declkaring a charge against the rear. Just enemy capable of charging it.

Sure, but the rule says:
There are enemy non-skirmishers currently in charge reach and capable of charging the battle group's flank/rear in their next turn. (No account is taken of any possible movement by any battle group that might occur in the interim).
---------
The rule says 'in charge reach and capable of charging'. The infantry are not in charge reach as the light horse are in the way.
No account is taken of movement by the light horse (to evade) - so the infantry are not currently a flank threat.

But it needs clarification, I agree.

It does need clarification. See my earlier posting, it all depends what "interim" means. I would read that as the time between the CHT and the start of the next turn myself.So the LH evade does not occur in this interim.

Why are so many people trying to complicate this so much?

zoltan wrote:

grahambriggs wrote:

kevinj wrote:Since the evade move will occur before the charge, I suggest that the movement would be in the interim period between taking the test and the charge.

It would indeed but the rule seems to be talking about a different interim period; between the test and the next turn. So by the time you get to charge declarations that interim period would seem to be over?

Clearly the new rule is not clear! I can already hear RBS scolding us for reading too much into his simple wording.

Not in this case. This one really is ambiguous.

grahambriggs wrote:It does need clarification. See my earlier posting, it all depends what "interim" means. I would read that as the time between the CHT and the start of the next turn myself.So the LH evade does not occur in this interim.

Agreed.

I would rather express this as an erratum rather than an FAQ, so how would the wording need to be changed to make it clear?

Well, it depends what you want the rule to do. What is the intention?