Losing Dice

[grahambriggs]

Say I have two disrupted HF off spear BGs each of 2 bases fighting an enemy BG. Both my BGs are disrupted. How many dice do I roll for melee. Is it:

1. 3 dice because I have 4 bases therefore 4 dice and lose 1 per 3 due to disruption.

2. 4 dice because each BG has 2 bases so 2 dice. Disruption means I lose 1 per 3 but I don't have 3 so I don't lose a dice. Same applies for my other BG so I have 4 dice.

Can anyone point me to the rule(s) that helps sort this out please?

I guess it boils down to whether dice are lost per BG or overall. I can't seem to find the rule that says which it is.

[stenic]

Which nicely ties in to my question

[SirGarnet]

Per the recent last thread on this - p 93-94 has the dice allocation rules. Shooting phase dice against the same target can be combined, the rest is about how you lose dice in a BG with multiple foes or multiple POAs. So 2 dice per BG.

[WhiteKnight]

Yes this is an easier case! In non shooting combat, the dice loss is per battle group affected so you roll 4 dice, 2 for each group and just hope neither group ends up losing a base!

Martin

[grahambriggs]

Per the recent last thread on this - p 93-94 has the dice allocation rules. Shooting phase dice against the same target can be combined, the rest is about how you lose dice in a BG with multiple foes or multiple POAs. So 2 dice per BG.

I don't think that's correct. The "Allocating Combat Dice" section doesn't talk about losing dice in a BG. It talks about allocating the combat dice that the BG has against different enemies/POAs. It's the earlier "Deciding How Many Dice to Roll" section that talks to losing dice. Trouble is that it just says lose 1 per 3. Doesn't talk about BGs at all.

I'm reading those pages now. I can see lots on how you lose dice, and about how you then allocate those dice against the enemy but nothing that says you lose them in a BG.

The way I read the pages one could equally well use the following process:

1. Decide how many dice. 4 disrupted bases from 2 BGs so 3 dice.

2. I decide whih BG will have 2 dice and which 1.

3. If we were needing to allocate dice (say fighting 3 enemy BGs) we'd have to work it so one dice against each.

[SirGarnet]

How about "If a battle group which is losing shooting or close combat dice . . ." on p94.

[WhiteKnight]

whoa...I was sure about this til your last post, Graham, and I don't have the rules here...shame on me! Since beta-test days I would have allocated dice as in my last post, dividing the four dice two and two if my units were each fighting a different enemy. However, you've made me wonder as I am always finding a new point!

Martin

[grahambriggs]

How about "If a battle group which is losing shooting or close combat dice . . ." on p94.

Well, if my four dice are reduced to three of course one of my BGs will lose a close combat dice. The trouble with the rule you've quoted is it doesn't help tell me whether my BGs lose a dice or not. Just what happens on allocation if they do.

[grahambriggs]

Yes this is an easier case! In non shooting combat, the dice loss is per battle group affected so you roll 4 dice, 2 for each group and just hope neither group ends up losing a base!

Martin

Well that's the question Martin ain't it? Is it per BG? Can't see anything that says it is.

[hammy]

I have to say that I don't think that anywhere in the rules it explicitly states that dice in impact and melee are per BG. It does however state on P93 in the allocating combat dice section:

"It is sometimes necessary to split up a battle groupd combat dice ..."

In a later bullet it states:
"If more than one BG is shooting at the same target then add the total number of bases to which a '1 dice per x bases' rule applies..." and then goes on to explain how POAs and quality are calculated in this situation

There is no similar explanation on how you would treat split dice at impact or in melee hence my belief (and this is the way I have always played) that los of dice at impact and in melee is per BG not per total dice.

[grahambriggs]

I have to say that I don't think that anywhere in the rules it explicitly states that dice in impact and melee are per BG. It does however state on P93 in the allocating combat dice section:

"It is sometimes necessary to split up a battle groupd combat dice ..."

In a later bullet it states:
"If more than one BG is shooting at the same target then add the total number of bases to which a '1 dice per x bases' rule applies..." and then goes on to explain how POAs and quality are calculated in this situation

There is no similar explanation on how you would treat split dice at impact or in melee hence my belief (and this is the way I have always played) that los of dice at impact and in melee is per BG not per total dice.

Perhaps a hangover from beta testing - maybe it was more specifically worded and got edited out. Would be good to have author qualification and perhaps put the on the FAQ. It will be quite common. e.g. two disrupted hoplite 8 base units would be either 12 dice or 11 depending on the interpretation.

G

[SirGarnet]

The rules are not going to allow an enemy BG to steal combat dice just by cleverly engaging multiple BGs in close combat. Shooting is a totally different matter since it's not BG on BG and is about adding fractional dice, not losing dice.

[petedalby]

As before I'm with Hammy on this one - but the rules are not explicit.

Everyone I've ever played has always deducted dice per BG at impact or melee.

Pete

[grahambriggs]

As before I'm with Hammy on this one - but the rules are not explicit.

Everyone I've ever played has always deducted dice per BG at impact or melee.

Pete

Never follow a multitude into folly

I don't really mind which way it's played but it would be good to get it definitive. Otherwise we'll find (as happened in DBM) that some groups play it differently and when they mix with people who play it the 'normal' way they'll feel cheated and there'll be a row and more work for umpires etc..

I would point out that the current 'per BG' style does give small BGs an advantage in a few situations which the other interpretation would stop. Consider the following situation of identical troop types and numbers fighting under the 'per BG' method:

2x2 BGs vs 1x4 BG all disrupted is 4 dice vs 3. If all fragged then we are 2 dice vs 2. So the small BGs are better when disrupted but on par when steady or fragged.

2x4BG vs 1x8 BG all disrupted is 6 dice vs 6. So here bothe groups are on a par whether steady, disrupted or fragged

The current method sort of encourages gamey tactics too. Say I have a battle line of hastati BGs in 4s facing Gauls and there's a key corner of disordering terrain two files wide. If I happen to have a BG of 4 in that terrain I'll lose a dice due to disorder. So I'll shift across one file so that two BGs share the burden. Hey presto! I get full dice and my opponent doesn't. I have an edge, though a small one.

I'd say that's a bad thing. I've exploited the rules to give me an advantage. My opponent might well think it's cheesy and be put off the rule set.

[Dyeeles]

Each battle group fights individually against each other. The BG of 4 V's the 2 BG's of 2 would actually be two seperate combats that just both happened to include the BG of 4.

[grahambriggs]

Each battle group fights individually against each other. The BG of 4 V's the 2 BG's of 2 would actually be two seperate combats that just both happened to include the BG of 4.

Well, kind of, in that each BG assesses hits received vs hit inflicted for CHTs and base losses. But I'm not disputing that. Just trying to get some clarity on how many dice are thrown.

[Dyeeles]

What I meant is, if each battle group fights individually, then it works out it's own dice individually. That's my take anyway.

[petedalby]

Never follow a multitude into folly

Very good advice!!

All the points you make a fair - and I'm not saying that you're wrong - but the opportunities to wring some advantage from a different interpretation will be few and far between.

With Si and Terry both at Ascot at the weekend we have the perfect opportunity to get their view - and a FAQ if appropriate?

Pete

[marioslaz]

What I meant is, if each battle group fights individually, then it works out it's own dice individually. That's my take anyway.

But if your BG fight multiple BGs, first you calculate reduction then allocate dice (first bullet p94). In this way they avoid advantages, or disadvantages, due to splitting dice. There should be a trade-off also against small BGs, otherwise they would be advantaged (as for some examples posted).

[hammy]

I still stand by the argument that if it was intended that close combat dice lost due to dissorder or disruption was intened to be based on all the dice in a combat rather than BG by BG that there would be a rule explaining how you work out the POA and quality that should be used for such 'split' dice. There is exactly that for shooting (i.e. missile fire in the shooting phase) but there is nothing relating to this in any other type of combat.