Question about charges

caliban66 · Post by **caliban66** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:08 am

Hi. I´ve been reading my spanish rulebook carefully and I have a question about declaring charges.

AAAA AAAA AAAA
AAAA AAAA AAAA
........................BBBB
........................BBBB
........................BBBB
........................BBBB
A (six bases) and B (non-shock troop, four bases in column) are friend units, and B is touching A´s rear side. Well, let´s suppose I want to declare a charge with B to a visible for B unit. Rules say that you can´t declare a charge if you cannot contact in a way allowed by the rules. So, if A doesn´t charge, B can´t interpenetrate A, so B can´t declare a charge. But if A charges, the rules say that you resolve the charges in the order you prefer, so you may move A before, and then move B, so B can declare a charge. Is the later statement correct?

sagji · Post by **sagji** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:53 pm

No - B can't contact enemy at the point at which charges are declared so can't declare a charge.

WhiteKnight · Post by **WhiteKnight** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:02 pm

I agree, B cannot declare a charge at all.

It could if it were two bases wide as it is then allowed to to contract by a base to pass friends...

Martin

caliban66 · Post by **caliban66** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:48 pm

sagji wrote:No - B can't contact enemy at the point at which charges are declared so can't declare a charge.

Yep. That´s what I use to hear, but I can´t find it in the rules. It says that the charge can be declared if the enemy can be contacted applying the rules. And the rules state that you can decide the order the charges are resolved.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:54 pm

They are all declared before being resolved.

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:30 am

B cannot declare a charge. The rules specifically state that a charge cannot be conditionally declared based on the actions of other battlegroups.

caliban66 · Post by **caliban66** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:07 am

That may be the key, but I just can´t find such statement in the spanish version, nor any other saying that all charge movements are considered as simultaneous, or something similar. Would you please tell me the page and paragraph where that can be read?

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:36 am

I don't recall anything more explicit than that the charger must be able to legally contact the target, which should be sufficient and is implicitly at the time of charge declaration.

There are a number of things that may or may not happen between declaring and moving charges that may even prevent them or change targets, so you can't anticipate or speculate. On a related issue, you can declare multiple charges on the same target if it is chargeable even if moving one charger to contact could cancel the other charge. You don't anticipate what might happen. A good thread on the nuances of multiple charges on a single BG is at viewtopic.php?t=9288.

caliban66 · Post by **caliban66** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:44 am

I see your point. In fact, I think in that way. But I can´t find that the "legal" contact must be at the time the charge is declared. In fact, the paragraph below states that a "legal" charge contact is the one that ends with your bases in contact with the enemy by your front base or with your front corners. So, if a "legal" charge contact is defined as this, i.e., only by the way it must end, but not in the way it must begin, then, if A charges, B may be allowed to do so.
Thanks for the link, Mikek.

sagji · Post by **sagji** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:11 am

I believe the requirement to be able to contact at the instant the charge is declared was given by the authors as a reply to a similar question on this forum - but it isn't covered by the rules, erratum, or FAQ.

shall · Post by **shall** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:50 pm

The rules talk about what you need to decalre a charge and wasn't 100% clear about it but indeed we did clarify on here that you must decalre charges and all BGs must be able to charge legally at the time of declaration. I don't think it ebcamse and FAQ as 98% were already reading it this way IIRC.

It is to encoruage simpler lines. Otherwise people do unrealsitic things like hide troops behind others to shelter them from bowfire - e.g. in the ultimate hide some unrpotected lancers behind some armoured spearmen and then charge the spearman them having benefited unhistorically from the "mobile fortifications".

Si