@Pete,
Indeed, it can and is resolved locally for most, however, much like the other thread concerning routs and pursuits, this can rear its head since it is never addressed for evaders-but singles out interceptions in the FaQ.
Since it is covered in the FaQ for a near identical situation (interception charges) the pathat declaration really should be included much like myself and others have requested in order to resolve the situation.
That is what I thought this forum and FaQ were designed to handle....
While its great that some consider it conventional wisdom, I thought the same for interception charges and find it curious for the need to post that in the FaQ.
Madcam.
charge path redux
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
-
madcam2us
- Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:54 am
- Location: Searching for the meaning of "Authors Intent"
More like the FAQ being incomplete....petedalby wrote:I have no major problem with it - but this is an example of one FAQ leading to another FAQ - although to be fair they've been kept mercifully small thus far.
Madcam.
There goes another crossing the Rubicon!
W/D/L
2008
CoA - 3/0/0
C.I. - 1/1/1
2009
Ottoman - 6/0/1
Khurasian - 3/5/2
2010
Catalan - 4/0/0
W/D/L
2008
CoA - 3/0/0
C.I. - 1/1/1
2009
Ottoman - 6/0/1
Khurasian - 3/5/2
2010
Catalan - 4/0/0
Charge Sequence of Play
This really is charge path redux as we’ve been through this all before a year ago and more.
The rules actually work well as is. The problem is that the sequence of play should be more detailed in the FAQ. The sequence of play is actually rather simple and actually common sense but unfortunately needs to be pieced together from different parts of the rules as it is not laid out step by step (which I attempted to do in the thread quoted below). I hope for a more complete sequence of play page in the future, or a charge sequence page in the FAQ.
First of all, charge declaration is declaring a charge against targets, not necessarily declaring charge direction or charge path.
Second, charge direction and charge path are two different things.
Charge direction is the direction from which you will hit your target. It may require a wheel somewhere along your charge path. Charge path is the exact path you will take, including the wheel at some point.
The general design concept was that charge direction and charge path only need be declared when necessary for the opponent to respond. If there is a possible interception move, the charge PATH must be declared so the inactive player can see if it will cross any ZOI. This fact may affect evade and other decisions made by each side.
Evaders don’t need to know charge direction or path to decide to evade – all they know is the enemy is commencing a charge in their general direction that will hit them if they don’t get out of the way. They don’t need to choose their evade direction until it is time to make evade moves, which is why the charger must declare charge direction for all charges right before evaders make their evade moves, which requires them to choose evade direction at that time.
Depending on the position on the table, the charger might have no flexibility or significant flexibility in charge direction. The charge direction might not be the exact one the evader expected. This is the reason it is useful for skrimishers to keep a clear path directly to their rear as an evade option. Facing other angles for tactical advantage poses some risk. Deciding to evade without a safe evade option may risk burst through. Encouraging skirmishers to keep clear evade paths actually simplifies the game since lights that do so are unlikely to decide to burst through friendlies, reducing complexity and saving time.
People often declare direction or path immediately, and often it does not matter. Sometimes it does, particularly so if interceptions are possible and if there are multiple charges in the same local area. Not declaring direction and path until necessary saves time for calculating players who don’t need to premeasured and precompute all the scenarios of interceptions, evades, and charge results at the moment of declaring a charge – it’s easier and quicker to decide later based on the situation on the table.
The most important tip for playing FOG is print and follow the sequence of play that is the magic of the system. The charge sequence works if followed, but many people including me have been confused because the sequence is not laid out in one place and players often skip ahead in practice (some without knowing what they are skipping).
Accordingly, I’m copying the following charge SOP from post viewtopic.php?t=8752. It is the work of uncounted hours of toil and discussion and is based on the rules as written and the rules works. If there are any comments/issues/updates directly on the sequence, please post in that thread and I’ll clean it up, though proposals for changing the rules belong here.
DETAILED IMPACT PHASE SEQUENCE OF PLAY FOR CHARGES
1. Charge Declarations: For each declaration,
Designate BG that will charge and at least one legal target.
Declare on as many enemy as can be legally contacted within the charge distance, but an enemy BG is a target even if not declared if it can be legally contacted by the charge (including stepping forward), but not if friends intervene unless it later becomes a target because revealed by friends evading or routing.
There must exist some possible Charge Path that hits all declared targets assuming they stand.
2. If an interception is possible for a charge declaration, Declare the Charge Path by marking it. It must comply with the Base Hit Rule on p53. (FAQ practice)
3. Charger rolls any necessary CMTs for charges based on any legal targets (not counting ones that might be revealed by evaders later).
4. Charger rolls CMTs to charge without orders for any shock troops who have not declared a charge.
NOTE: If they can’t contact ALL potential legal targets in charge range, then they charge all those straight ahead, or if that is not possible, the ones requiring the least wheel (p59). This may involve burst-throughs (pp48, 58-59).
5. Potential evaders now in turn declare an[ EVADE, and roll any required CMT to not Evade.
6. If any targets declare an Evade, Declare the Charge Direction if not already done (p66).
7. Resolve CTs for Fragmented troops being charged, then any tests triggered if they break, then any initial routs.
8. Non-charging player declares eligible INTERCEPTIONS based on declared Charge Paths.
9. Make INTERCEPTION MOVES (it is possible after charging is done that Interceptors don’t contact any Chargers). An interception that counts as a flank or rear charge cancels the target's charge (p63).
10. Make EVADE MOVES directly to “rear” or parallel to Charge Direction (p66). Evaders roll VMD (Variable Move Dice).
11. FRAGMENTED BGS which become a target because revealed by evasions now cohesion test and make an initial rout move if they fail.
For each charging BG, do steps 12 through 14 before continuing to the next charging BG:
12. IF, after Evades and after any other BG in the Charge Path becomes a target, is charged and responds as in (6)(7)(10), ALL targets have Evaded out of the Charge Path (note this means no Interceptors or revealed targets may remain are in the Charge Path), ONLY THEN
First, Charger rolls a charge VMD, and then
Second, Charger may choose to Declare new Charge Direction/Path by changing the timing and/or degree of the wheel in an attempt to catch a selected evader (p68) unless the Base Hit Rule prevents this because the change would mean fewer base contacts than by continuing the initial charge path. The changed wheel must bring the BG closer to the final position of the evader rather than farther away compared with continuing on the original charge path. Because the BG must attempt to catch evaders, it must select an evader the BG can catch in preference to one it can't and the changed charge path must be one that contacts an evader in preference to one that does not contact an evader or that contacts a new target.
13. Make all charge moves including contractions to avoid friends and stepping forward, but charges unable to make legal charge contact are cancelled.
14. Ready to continue to Impact Phase combat resolution.
The rules actually work well as is. The problem is that the sequence of play should be more detailed in the FAQ. The sequence of play is actually rather simple and actually common sense but unfortunately needs to be pieced together from different parts of the rules as it is not laid out step by step (which I attempted to do in the thread quoted below). I hope for a more complete sequence of play page in the future, or a charge sequence page in the FAQ.
First of all, charge declaration is declaring a charge against targets, not necessarily declaring charge direction or charge path.
Second, charge direction and charge path are two different things.
Charge direction is the direction from which you will hit your target. It may require a wheel somewhere along your charge path. Charge path is the exact path you will take, including the wheel at some point.
The general design concept was that charge direction and charge path only need be declared when necessary for the opponent to respond. If there is a possible interception move, the charge PATH must be declared so the inactive player can see if it will cross any ZOI. This fact may affect evade and other decisions made by each side.
Evaders don’t need to know charge direction or path to decide to evade – all they know is the enemy is commencing a charge in their general direction that will hit them if they don’t get out of the way. They don’t need to choose their evade direction until it is time to make evade moves, which is why the charger must declare charge direction for all charges right before evaders make their evade moves, which requires them to choose evade direction at that time.
Depending on the position on the table, the charger might have no flexibility or significant flexibility in charge direction. The charge direction might not be the exact one the evader expected. This is the reason it is useful for skrimishers to keep a clear path directly to their rear as an evade option. Facing other angles for tactical advantage poses some risk. Deciding to evade without a safe evade option may risk burst through. Encouraging skirmishers to keep clear evade paths actually simplifies the game since lights that do so are unlikely to decide to burst through friendlies, reducing complexity and saving time.
People often declare direction or path immediately, and often it does not matter. Sometimes it does, particularly so if interceptions are possible and if there are multiple charges in the same local area. Not declaring direction and path until necessary saves time for calculating players who don’t need to premeasured and precompute all the scenarios of interceptions, evades, and charge results at the moment of declaring a charge – it’s easier and quicker to decide later based on the situation on the table.
The most important tip for playing FOG is print and follow the sequence of play that is the magic of the system. The charge sequence works if followed, but many people including me have been confused because the sequence is not laid out in one place and players often skip ahead in practice (some without knowing what they are skipping).
Accordingly, I’m copying the following charge SOP from post viewtopic.php?t=8752. It is the work of uncounted hours of toil and discussion and is based on the rules as written and the rules works. If there are any comments/issues/updates directly on the sequence, please post in that thread and I’ll clean it up, though proposals for changing the rules belong here.
DETAILED IMPACT PHASE SEQUENCE OF PLAY FOR CHARGES
1. Charge Declarations: For each declaration,
Designate BG that will charge and at least one legal target.
Declare on as many enemy as can be legally contacted within the charge distance, but an enemy BG is a target even if not declared if it can be legally contacted by the charge (including stepping forward), but not if friends intervene unless it later becomes a target because revealed by friends evading or routing.
There must exist some possible Charge Path that hits all declared targets assuming they stand.
2. If an interception is possible for a charge declaration, Declare the Charge Path by marking it. It must comply with the Base Hit Rule on p53. (FAQ practice)
3. Charger rolls any necessary CMTs for charges based on any legal targets (not counting ones that might be revealed by evaders later).
4. Charger rolls CMTs to charge without orders for any shock troops who have not declared a charge.
NOTE: If they can’t contact ALL potential legal targets in charge range, then they charge all those straight ahead, or if that is not possible, the ones requiring the least wheel (p59). This may involve burst-throughs (pp48, 58-59).
5. Potential evaders now in turn declare an[ EVADE, and roll any required CMT to not Evade.
6. If any targets declare an Evade, Declare the Charge Direction if not already done (p66).
7. Resolve CTs for Fragmented troops being charged, then any tests triggered if they break, then any initial routs.
8. Non-charging player declares eligible INTERCEPTIONS based on declared Charge Paths.
9. Make INTERCEPTION MOVES (it is possible after charging is done that Interceptors don’t contact any Chargers). An interception that counts as a flank or rear charge cancels the target's charge (p63).
10. Make EVADE MOVES directly to “rear” or parallel to Charge Direction (p66). Evaders roll VMD (Variable Move Dice).
11. FRAGMENTED BGS which become a target because revealed by evasions now cohesion test and make an initial rout move if they fail.
For each charging BG, do steps 12 through 14 before continuing to the next charging BG:
12. IF, after Evades and after any other BG in the Charge Path becomes a target, is charged and responds as in (6)(7)(10), ALL targets have Evaded out of the Charge Path (note this means no Interceptors or revealed targets may remain are in the Charge Path), ONLY THEN
First, Charger rolls a charge VMD, and then
Second, Charger may choose to Declare new Charge Direction/Path by changing the timing and/or degree of the wheel in an attempt to catch a selected evader (p68) unless the Base Hit Rule prevents this because the change would mean fewer base contacts than by continuing the initial charge path. The changed wheel must bring the BG closer to the final position of the evader rather than farther away compared with continuing on the original charge path. Because the BG must attempt to catch evaders, it must select an evader the BG can catch in preference to one it can't and the changed charge path must be one that contacts an evader in preference to one that does not contact an evader or that contacts a new target.
13. Make all charge moves including contractions to avoid friends and stepping forward, but charges unable to make legal charge contact are cancelled.
14. Ready to continue to Impact Phase combat resolution.
Give me a scenario where a charging BG will not contact an intercepting BG, since in order to qualify for an intercept, the BG must be able to enter the charge path. Just how does the charging BG avoid them, as they are now legal charge targets? I suppose if there were more than one intercepting BG, one could block the charger from contacting another.9. Make INTERCEPTION MOVES (it is possible after charging is done that Interceptors don’t contact any Chargers). An interception that counts as a flank or rear charge cancels the target's charge (p63).
After all, to intercept you just have to be able to get in the path of the charger.
This is a poorly written area of the rules and this thread has been very interesting but by no means conclusive.
How could you not contact on intercept? Well, if you were charging LF slightly on the flank [ but not formally flank ] with LH it has 90 degrees of options.
On the original charge direction the intercepting unit only has to cross the original charge path minimally to qualify.
However if the charged LF takes the rear evade option [ for whatever reason ] the charging LH could wheel and catch it if the LF threw low.
The wheel takes the charging LH out of the original charge direction and away from the intercept limit.
As it says on p68, " if all TARGET battle groups evade out of the original path the chargers can wheel in an ATTEMPT to catch them"
That doesnt say you have to contact a unit that has intercepted into the original charge path.
Now against that on p53 is " cant wheel if less bases are contacted than straight ahead "so it's a bit contradictory.
Although in this example not relevant because at least the same bases would be contacted.
Ultimately how can you fully define interception charges so early in the sequence if you dont know the full and final path of the charger.
Without enforcing a pretty strict direction defintion which appears to be against the my perceived spirit of these rules.
How could you not contact on intercept? Well, if you were charging LF slightly on the flank [ but not formally flank ] with LH it has 90 degrees of options.
On the original charge direction the intercepting unit only has to cross the original charge path minimally to qualify.
However if the charged LF takes the rear evade option [ for whatever reason ] the charging LH could wheel and catch it if the LF threw low.
The wheel takes the charging LH out of the original charge direction and away from the intercept limit.
As it says on p68, " if all TARGET battle groups evade out of the original path the chargers can wheel in an ATTEMPT to catch them"
That doesnt say you have to contact a unit that has intercepted into the original charge path.
Now against that on p53 is " cant wheel if less bases are contacted than straight ahead "so it's a bit contradictory.
Although in this example not relevant because at least the same bases would be contacted.
Ultimately how can you fully define interception charges so early in the sequence if you dont know the full and final path of the charger.
Without enforcing a pretty strict direction defintion which appears to be against the my perceived spirit of these rules.
Hmmm...but the interception move is made before the evade. The charger cannot change direction to follow the evaders, since they have not moved as yet. Therefore if it was a valid intercept declaration, the chargers cannot avoid contacting the intercepters when it comes time to make the moves on the table. At least, that's how I've always thought of it.
The reason the charger can't change direction to follow evaders is that it is being intercepted. If an interception is declared that does not automatically cancel the charge, the interceptor moves, then evaders evade, and then the charger moves along the original charge path and hits the interceptor (and anything else in the way of the charge or step forward. See p64 1st bullet.ShrubMiK wrote:Hmmm...but the interception move is made before the evade. The charger cannot change direction to follow the evaders, since they have not moved as yet. Therefore if it was a valid intercept declaration, the chargers cannot avoid contacting the intercepters when it comes time to make the moves on the table. At least, that's how I've always thought of it.
This could happen when there are multiple intercepts. The first interception enters the charge path. The second interception then enters the (now shortened) charge path and blocks the charger's ability to contact the first interceptor.gozerius wrote:Give me a scenario where a charging BG will not contact an intercepting BG, since in order to qualify for an intercept, the BG must be able to enter the charge path. Just how does the charging BG avoid them, as they are now legal charge targets? I suppose if there were more than one intercepting BG, one could block the charger from contacting another.9. Make INTERCEPTION MOVES (it is possible after charging is done that Interceptors don’t contact any Chargers). An interception that counts as a flank or rear charge cancels the target's charge (p63).
After all, to intercept you just have to be able to get in the path of the charger.
-
expendablecinc
- 2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:55 pm
I agree. Because anything in the charge path is a target of the charge regardless of whether they were declared so at declaration. This woudl include intervening interceptors (but obviously not flank or rear charging interceptors).ShrubMiK wrote:Hmmm...but the interception move is made before the evade. The charger cannot change direction to follow the evaders, since they have not moved as yet. Therefore if it was a valid intercept declaration, the chargers cannot avoid contacting the intercepters when it comes time to make the moves on the table. At least, that's how I've always thought of it.
anthony
expendablecinc wrote:I agree. Because anything in the charge path is a target of the charge regardless of whether they were declared so at declaration. This would include intervening interceptors (but obviously not flank or rear charging interceptors).ShrubMiK wrote:Hmmm...but the interception move is made before the evade. The charger cannot change direction to follow the evaders, since they have not moved as yet. Therefore if it was a valid intercept declaration, the chargers cannot avoid contacting the intercepters when it comes time to make the moves on the table. At least, that's how I've always thought of it.
anthony
I am not sure that this is stated in the RAW. Specifically, do interceptors become "targets of the charge?" The RAW do include BGs that are revealed/exposed by targets that rout/evade. I don't recall them adding interceptors to the "target roster." This also raises the question of whether inception results remove targets from the charge (because they will not be contacted because of the interception).
This makes a difference in certain circumstances. If interceptors are not targets, then a VMD may be available to a charger where all targets have evaded, even though there is a new possible contact. Rolling short on the VMD could "save" the chargers from hitting an interceptor.
Similarly, with or without a VMD, there are situations where wheeling to pursue an evader could both deviate from the declared charge path AND avoid an otherwise legit interception. For instance, an interception may just clip the original charge path but not prevent contact with the original target (e.g., the diagram in the FoG rulebook). If that original target evades, a wheel to pursue could avoid the interceptor.
Spike
-
babyshark
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 1336
- Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:59 pm
- Location: Government; and I'm here to help.
Is not an intercepting BG per se not a charge target? Any BG that is a charge target cannot intercept.
Marc
Marc
Last edited by babyshark on Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Spike's logic is about squaring behavior with references to "target" which would work if it became a "target" after it intercept charges. Of course the next step is to say a target can't intercept so it's moved back, but then it's not in the charge path so it's not a target and can intercept and so round in a circle.
Looking at this as a flowchart instead, an interception charge shunts the charge off the main sequence to a line where there is no VMD whether or not targets evade.
Looking at this as a flowchart instead, an interception charge shunts the charge off the main sequence to a line where there is no VMD whether or not targets evade.