Routing in Impact phase

[philqw78]

Awesome. Even without the rules at hand (left them at the office), I know that is about 50 pages past from the impact phase rules. So folding them into the charge rules is clear as mud.

In fact, from earlier posts, I see that is from the routs/pursuits rules. So charges that exceed normal move are now pursuits?

Read the rules again, second paragraph of impact phase

an enemy battle group in the path of a charge counts as being charged if it can be legally contacted, even if it was not one of the originally declared targets of the charge.

[philqw78]

(I did concoct a huge post here but then realised it all comes down to this.)

Spike,

Your use of the VMD to ensure none targets do not evade precludes your use of the VMD. Your argument is contradictory.

You state
A BG contacted by VMD cannot evade as it was not an original target.
The VMD may only be rolled if all targets evade.

(so most of the above posts are pointless as you have not thought out your own argument since: "an enemy battle group in the path of a charge counts as being charged if it can be legally contacted,even if it was not one of the originally declared targets of the charge".)

[marioslaz]

In addition to the circular problem noted above, the rules cited don't quite work.

Chargers are not pursuers, so a special rule for evades on pg. 108 offers little guidance.

I agree with you. I read again chapter of charge and response. It seems I played (and I suppose most of other players) joining chargers and pursuers concepts, but this there isn't in the rules. Following rules steps, when you roll VMD for charger all is over, chargers are moved and this is the end of charge sequence. Whoever can be contacted cannot do anything, incluse a CT because FRAG.

[hammy]

I started to try to reply to some of Spike's latest wild theories and then just gave up.

Nobody I have ever played with has any problem playing this part of the game the right way. I really can't see where this madness has come from.

When a charge is declared any BGs that will be contacted by the charge are the targets of the charge. Note that at this point the only possible targets are those that are within charge reach and that can be contacted with the enemy BGs in the possition that they are currently in.

Now all CMTs for BGs that might not charge or that might be forced to charge or for skirmishers that wish to stand in the open are made. The CTs for fragmented targets are rolled and any rout moves are made.

If a BG routs a series of CTs and additional possible routs may occur. A routing BG may also 'reveal' additional charge targets if it does so these additional targets react to the charge in the normal way.

At this point after charge declarations and all tests any BGs that are not the target of a charge but that have a charge passing through their ZoI can if they wish make an interception charge.

Then interceptions move followed by evades.

Any new targets revealed by any evades now have to react. This means another set of evades, CMTs, CTs, rout moves etc.

If all the targets of a charge have now evaded out of reach then chargers have to make a VMD roll (note that if the targets rout there is no VMD which to be honest is a bit odd). If the VMD brings in new targets then ...

Any new targets revealed by any evades now have to react. This means another set of evades, CMTs, CTs, rout moves etc.

Eventually chargers contact their targets and you resolve impacts.

If any BGs break at impact then you resolve CTs and then make rout and pursuit moves.

Any BGs charged by pursuers then get to react and if contact is made then you have another round of impacts

If any BGs break at impact then you resolve CTs and then make rout and pursuit moves.

repeat......

[hammy]

In addition to the circular problem noted above, the rules cited don't quite work.

Chargers are not pursuers, so a special rule for evades on pg. 108 offers little guidance.

I agree with you. I read again chapter of charge and response. It seems I played (and I suppose most of other players) joining chargers and pursuers concepts, but this there isn't in the rules. Following rules steps, when you roll VMD for charger all is over, chargers are moved and this is the end of charge sequence. Whoever can be contacted cannot do anything, incluse a CT because FRAG.

Actually they can.

I know that I and others are forever pointing people at the sequence of play but there are extra opportunities in the sequence where CTs, routs and evades might happen. Essentially whenever a BG is charged it has to react, that reaction will be either to stand, to take a CMT to stand, to evade or if fragmented to pass a CT or break.

Some time ago I tried to produce a totally definitive count on how many times a BG could take a CT in one turn. When I reached 30+ I decided that it was a silly exercise.

[philqw78]

I agree with you. I read again chapter of charge and response. It seems I played (and I suppose most of other players) joining chargers and pursuers concepts, but this there isn't in the rules. Following rules steps, when you roll VMD for charger all is over, chargers are moved and this is the end of charge sequence. Whoever can be contacted cannot do anything, incluse a CT because FRAG.

And this brings us around again that you can't roll a VMD as all targets have not evaded. Paradox if you interpret the rules that way.

[spikemesq]

I started to try to reply to some of Spike's latest wild theories and then just gave up.

Why are my theories so wild? Dan's quips about "case law" are pretty absurd. Similarly, the "everybody plays it this way" is just groupthink that might support interpretation, but cannot support wholly creating new rules and/or ignoring the explicit rules. I submit that my questions about the impact sequence cite particular rules, explore fairly basic scenarios, and seek legitimate clarity.

Now that you have laid out the impact phase, you will see that my "wild-eyed" view matches yours for the most part.

When a charge is declared any BGs that will be contacted by the charge are the targets of the charge. Note that at this point the only possible targets are those that are within charge reach and that can be contacted with the enemy BGs in the possition that they are currently in.

Agreed.

Now all CMTs for BGs that might not charge or that might be forced to charge or for skirmishers that wish to stand in the open are made. The CTs for fragmented targets are rolled and any rout moves are made.

Got it.

If a BG routs a series of CTs and additional possible routs may occur. A routing BG may also 'reveal' additional charge targets if it does so these additional targets react to the charge in the normal way.

Agreed. Note that the "revealed" targets must be within normal move distance of the charging unit.

At this point after charge declarations and all tests any BGs that are not the target of a charge but that have a charge passing through their ZoI can if they wish make an interception charge.

OK.

Then interceptions move followed by evades.

Still with you.

Any new targets revealed by any evades now have to react. This means another set of evades, CMTs, CTs, rout moves etc.

Yes. But again, "target" still means BGs within the charging unit's normal move.

If all the targets of a charge have now evaded out of reach then chargers have to make a VMD roll (note that if the targets rout there is no VMD which to be honest is a bit odd). If the VMD brings in new targets then ...

Now we disagree. This "new target" concept is not in the rules and deviates substantially from the sequence of play.

Any new targets revealed by any evades now have to react. This means another set of evades, CMTs, CTs, rout moves etc.

Even if you can swallow this new (and unwritten) segment of the play sequence, where do the rules support this subset of available charge responses?

According to this, the extended charge path creates new targets (including troops that might have had an intercept option because they were NOT targets of the charge) that do not fit the definition of target stated on pg. 52.

Moreover, if the VMD expands the charge and its targets, where do the rules strike any added interceptions of this new charge path? Pg. 62 merely says that "If an enemy battle group attempts to charge through the ZOI of a battle group that is not itself a target of any charge this turn, that battle group has the option of making an interception charge on the chargers."

If you hold that the VMD converts outliers into charge targets, why don't you recognize ZOI's that cover the extended charge path even though they did not cover the original charge path?

Eventually chargers contact their targets and you resolve impacts.

If any BGs break at impact then you resolve CTs and then make rout and pursuit moves.

Any BGs charged by pursuers then get to react and if contact is made then you have another round of impacts

If any BGs break at impact then you resolve CTs and then make rout and pursuit moves.

repeat......

The rout and pursuit portions are not really in dispute. They do not address the results of basic charges and the VMD.

Spike

[hammy]

I started to try to reply to some of Spike's latest wild theories and then just gave up.

Why are my theories so wild? Dan's quips about "case law" are pretty absurd. Similarly, the "everybody plays it this way" is just groupthink that might support interpretation, but cannot support wholly creating new rules and/or ignoring the explicit rules. I submit that my questions about the impact sequence cite particular rules, explore fairly basic scenarios, and seek legitimate clarity.

Now that you have laid out the impact phase, you will see that my "wild-eyed" view matches yours for the most part.

I never said it didn't

<snip>all the bits you seem to be happy with .

Any new targets revealed by any evades now have to react. This means another set of evades, CMTs, CTs, rout moves etc.

Yes. But again, "target" still means BGs within the charging unit's normal move.

If all the targets of a charge have now evaded out of reach then chargers have to make a VMD roll (note that if the targets rout there is no VMD which to be honest is a bit odd). If the VMD brings in new targets then ...

Now we disagree. This "new target" concept is not in the rules and deviates substantially from the sequence of play.

Sadly I don't think I will be able to convince you on this. All I can say is that this is the way it has been played in every game I have ever played. It is the way the game was played during playtesting and it is the way the game has been played in every game that I have perosnally played against the rules authors.

Any new targets revealed by any evades now have to react. This means another set of evades, CMTs, CTs, rout moves etc.

Even if you can swallow this new (and unwritten) segment of the play sequence, where do the rules support this subset of available charge responses?

According to this, the extended charge path creates new targets (including troops that might have had an intercept option because they were NOT targets of the charge) that do not fit the definition of target stated on pg. 52.

Well if you look at the rules on evades which I quoted either in this thread or in the other similar one when a BG that can evade is charged the owner of said BG MUST decide if they are going to evade or not.

I hope you agree that you cannot move into frontal contact other than by charging and that if a BG gets an extended move as a result of its VMD that it is still infact charging. If that is the case then when it contacts or could contact another BG then that BG is being charged so MUST decide if it is going to evade etc.

Moreover, if the VMD expands the charge and its targets, where do the rules strike any added interceptions of this new charge path? Pg. 62 merely says that "If an enemy battle group attempts to charge through the ZOI of a battle group that is not itself a target of any charge this turn, that battle group has the option of making an interception charge on the chargers."

You may have an interesting point here, as things stand there is no provision as far as I can tell for such a delayed interception. I have never seen such an interception attempted or even considered the possibility. It may infact be OK to do so.

If you hold that the VMD converts outliers into charge targets, why don't you recognize ZOI's that cover the extended charge path even though they did not cover the original charge path?

As I said, good question. I shall have to think about that one.

[hammy]

Thinking further about this most of the VMD related stuff actually happens in the make charges section of the sequence of play. If your charge move extends (which you will only find out when you come to make the charges) then other BGs may end up as targets and have to respond.

Interceptions are made well before you move the charges so can't happen at that point in the turn.

OK you could argue that the sequence of play does not say make evades for BGs that will be hit by extended charges but then it also doesn't say the same for BGs that are fragmented and break as the result of such a charge yet the rules clearly state that such BGs do test and do rout.

[spikemesq]

Thinking further about this most of the VMD related stuff actually happens in the make charges section of the sequence of play. If your charge move extends (which you will only find out when you come to make the charges) then other BGs may end up as targets and have to respond.

Interceptions are made well before you move the charges so can't happen at that point in the turn.

OK you could argue that the sequence of play does not say make evades for BGs that will be hit by extended charges but then it also doesn't say the same for BGs that are fragmented and break as the result of such a charge yet the rules clearly state that such BGs do test and do rout.

Hammy, you're killing me.

The same rule that puts interceptions before charge moves also put evades before charge moves. See pg. 61.

This brings us back full circle. If the VMD is part of the move segment, then all responses (evades and interceptions) are done and "new targets" do not get to respond.

Per contra, if the VMD extends the charge and adds targets who can now evade, then the response segment should reopen such that new intercepts may be possible.

Frankly, the rules give more support for the former, but whatever. The rules do not support a hybrid response segment.

Of course, this expansion by VMD creates the oddity of BGs that have the ability to intercept and evade in the same impact phase.

Spike

[philqw78]

The same rule that puts interceptions before charge moves also put evades before charge moves. See pg. 61.

Yes, roll the VMD and find you have a new target, evade the new target, if it wants, move the charge after all evades.

If you stick to the sequence ao play its easy and a lot less confusing and paradoxes do not occur.

Move intercepts. Move evades, roll VMD before moving charger, find new target, all new targets react, move chargers.

[hammy]

Hammy, you're killing me.

The same rule that puts interceptions before charge moves also put evades before charge moves. See pg. 61.

This brings us back full circle. If the VMD is part of the move segment, then all responses (evades and interceptions) are done and "new targets" do not get to respond.

Per contra, if the VMD extends the charge and adds targets who can now evade, then the response segment should reopen such that new intercepts may be possible.

Frankly, the rules give more support for the former, but whatever. The rules do not support a hybrid response segment.

Apart from the bit on P62 which says that a BG that can evade and that is charged MUST choose if it is to evade or to stand.

If that is what you want to think then fine. All I can do is to repeat that you are wrong and get Richard, Si, Terry and JD to send the boys round and sort out out.

[marioslaz]

Sadly I don't think I will be able to convince you on this. All I can say is that this is the way it has been played in every game I have ever played. It is the way the game was played during playtesting and it is the way the game has been played in every game that I have perosnally played against the rules authors.

What you likely didn't notice is you are both right. You say we always played so (and WE include ME) and this is right. Instead, Spike are saying rules are written in a different way, and I must say, after reading again the chapter, he is right. So you are both saying a right thing, but which are not compatible. Better you both accept this because otherwise you'll go on at infinite.

FWIW, sequence of charges and responses need a look to make wording in line with played rules.

[spikemesq]

Hammy: Apart from the bit on P62 which says that a BG that can evade and that is charged MUST choose if it is to evade or to stand.

I think you mean pg. 66.

In any event, "When troops who can evade are charged" is the heart of the matter. Unless they are targets of the charge, no troops can evade. Indeed, the rest of that bullet point confirms that this event occurs before the VMD when it explains that the charging player then lays a measuring stick to indicate the direction of the charge.

[Of course, that text is lagniappe because WE ALL KNOW that you have to designate a charge path long before this at the declaration stage. That rule is so clear that nobody felt it necessary to write it down in the book.]

Plus interceptions use the same triggering language. "If an enemy battle group attempts to charge through the ZOI . . . " on pg 62.

So leaving aside our disagreement on whether outliers are part of the charge or not, there should be equal dignity for responses to the augmented charge -- i.e., previously unavailable evades and previously unavailable interceptions.

Spike

[philqw78]

Now we disagree. This "new target" concept is not in the rules

Yes it is how many times does this have to be written. You keep quoting pages that you are obviously not reading, just to prolong the argument. What about troops that were uncovered within normal charge reach. They are new targets.

and deviates substantially from the sequence of play.

How? See uncovered above. There is not an extra bit written into the sequence for those either, but both sets of 'new' targets are treated the same. Just follow the sequence of play at the top of P52. And Anybody that can be legally contacted counts as charged, middle P52, and lights must then test to stand if against battle troops, 4th bullet P60.

[spikemesq]

Now we disagree. This "new target" concept is not in the rules

Yes it is how many times does this have to be written. You keep quoting pages that you are obviously not reading, just to prolong the argument,

and deviates substantially from the sequence of play.

How, targets that were within normal
charge reach but not original targets must also react when they are uncovered. There is no extra bit written into the sequence of play for that.

Targets within reach and uncovered by evades are expressly covered by an "extra bit" on pg. 52. Targets not within reach absent a VMD are not.

Spike

[philqw78]

So leaving aside our disagreement on whether outliers are part of the charge or not, there should be equal dignity for responses to the augmented charge -- i.e., previously unavailable evades and previously unavailable interceptions.

Interceptions happen before evades. So no further interceptions become possible since the extra move distance of the charger only becomes possible due to enemy evading.

[philqw78]

Targets within reach and uncovered by evades are expressly covered by an "extra bit" on pg. 52. Targets not within reach absent a VMD are not.

Spike

Where?
There is a bit which I have typed out at least twice for you stating
"Any enemy Battle Group in the path of a charge counts as being charged if it can be legally contacted, even if it was not one of the originally declared targets of the charge"

[spikemesq]

So leaving aside our disagreement on whether outliers are part of the charge or not, there should be equal dignity for responses to the augmented charge -- i.e., previously unavailable evades and previously unavailable interceptions.

Interceptions happen before evades. So no further interceptions become possible since the extra move distance of the charger only becomes possible due to enemy evading.

VMD happens during moves, which happen after interceptions and evades (p. 61). VMD only happens if all charge targets have evaded. (p. 68)

Thus, by your own logic, outliers cannot evade because their contact only becomes possible because all evades have occurred.

In fact, following your logic, a BG of LH that is the target of a charge would lose his evade response if an interception blocked the charger's path to the LH.

I don't think the rules remove charge targets as a consequence of interceptions. Is that also part of the groupthink that is so obvious?

Spike

[spikemesq]

Targets within reach and uncovered by evades are expressly covered by an "extra bit" on pg. 52. Targets not within reach absent a VMD are not.

Spike

Where?
There is a bit which I have typed out at least twice for you stating
"Any enemy Battle Group in the path of a charge counts as being charged if it can be legally contacted, even if it was not one of the originally declared targets of the charge"

If "path" includes VMD distance, then that same path (now extended) should cross new ZOI and be an "attempt to charge through a ZOI" under pg. 62.

The sentences following your citation state:

"This applies even if it can only be contacted by bases stepping forward (see below). It does not apply if, due to intervening friends, it could no be contacted even by stepping forward bases - unless the situation changes, as follows: If a battle group is revealed and can now be contacted due to friends evading or breaking and routing, it becomes a target of the charge and will therefore take any required tests once the evade or rout move has occurred." Pg. 52.

The outliers at issue are not revealed by evades, routs, etc. They are clear to the charging unit but are not within the normal move distance.

Spike