Charge moves

[Scrumpy]

From a game this evening.

A unit of drilled Kn charge a unit of my Lh, the Lh evade away in the direction of the charge. The Kn then swerve away from the evade to manouvere closer to the flank of my line of Kn. As it turned out their move put them within a move of some open fields, which meant next turn they did not need to test to not charge any troops I put in front of them, as going into the field would have disordered them.

Is it legal for them not to pursue a single bg they charge ? Seems to give them a hell of an advantage, as they could never have gotten to there with a normal move.

Cheers

[MCollett]

A unit of drilled Kn charge a unit of my Lh, the Lh evade away in the direction of the charge. The Kn then swerve away from the evade to manouvere closer to the flank of my line of Kn.

Chargers only get to 'swerve' if all targets evade out of the line of the charge, which is unlikely to happen if the LH are evading directly away. (It might if they shift or contract to avoid friends in such a way that none end up directly ahead of the Kn, but then those friends are themselves probably a target.)

The desired 'swerve' could however have been part of the original declaration of charge direction.

Best wishes,
Matthew

[philqw78]

If all targets evade out of the charge path the charger may alter his path to follow at least one of them. When the charge is declared it must be in a direction to contact at least as many bases as it would if it went directly forwards. So I think something went wrong in your situation.

[grahambriggs]

Scrumpy the charge direction must be indicated prior to rolling the VMD. As Phil say there are some restrictions on direction.

If all targets evade then you are allowed to change direction if that would allow you to hit any in range.

So essentially, your opponent can angle a charge and that might get them closer to bad going enough to prevent future charges.

Sounds that the shock enmey has had a bit of a wasted journey in any case!

[philqw78]

If all targets evade then you are allowed to change direction if that would allow you to hit any in range.

I thought you were (only) allowed to wheel to follow one of your original targets or stay on the same route Graham, even if you wouldn't reach them. and if it took you into someone else great.

[Scrumpy]

Also from last night...

My Kn charge into some archers, the archers have a unit of LF on their flank who will form an overlap on my Kn during melee. Can my 2nd rank Kn who is not fighting legally move into contact with the overlapping unit during my move ?

Cheers



Nice to know we find so many rules we are not certain of so close to the IWF.

[hammy]

Also from last night...

My Kn charge into some archers, the archers have a unit of LF on their flank who will form an overlap on my Kn during melee. Can my 2nd rank Kn who is not fighting legally move into contact with the overlapping unit during my move ?

Cheers



Nice to know we find so many rules we are not certain of so close to the IWF.

Yes, you can expand into contact with another BG and if you do it does not get the chance to evade.

The moral being if your opponent has spare bases don't extend your line with lights.

[hammy]

If all targets evade then you are allowed to change direction if that would allow you to hit any in range.

I thought you were (only) allowed to wheel to follow one of your original targets or stay on the same route Graham, even if you wouldn't reach them. and if it took you into someone else great.

IMO you are only allowed to wheel to follow evaders.

[hazelbark]

If all targets evade then you are allowed to change direction if that would allow you to hit any in range.

I thought you were (only) allowed to wheel to follow one of your original targets or stay on the same route Graham, even if you wouldn't reach them. and if it took you into someone else great.

IMO you are only allowed to wheel to follow evaders.

I think you mean in this example as you can wheel to hit an initial target as well.

[hazelbark]

Nice to know we find so many rules we are not certain of so close to the IWF.

What is this "we"

The rules are clear. As Hammy said "you can feed bases into an enemy in overlap". Print out a set of the FAQ that i think helps a lot in this area.

[hammy]

I thought you were (only) allowed to wheel to follow one of your original targets or stay on the same route Graham, even if you wouldn't reach them. and if it took you into someone else great.

IMO you are only allowed to wheel to follow evaders.

I think you mean in this example as you can wheel to hit an initial target as well.

No, a charge can include a wheel. The wheel must both be such that it will not result in fewer bases contacting the enemy than a directly forward charge would result in (if the enemy do not evade) and possible without passing through enemy location (if the enemy do not evade). This is the charge direction and cannot be changed unless all targets of the charge evade out of the path of the charge in which case the charge can wheel to 'follow' the evaders.

You cannot charge forwards at an enemy light BG then when it evades wheel to hit something else that was not in the intial path of the charge unless the evaders happen to have evaded such that they are no longer in the charge path and following them will result in the new target being hit.

[Scrumpy]

Nice to know we find so many rules we are not certain of so close to the IWF.

What is this "we"

The rules are clear. As Hammy said "you can feed bases into an enemy in overlap". Print out a set of the FAQ that i think helps a lot in this area.

The 3 of us who were there last night !

[gudin]

Nice to know we find so many rules we are not certain of so close to the IWF.

What is this "we"

The rules are clear. As Hammy said "you can feed bases into an enemy in overlap". Print out a set of the FAQ that i think helps a lot in this area.

The 3 of us who were there last night !

As one of those there last night . . .

The rules seem to say the active player can expand into troops who will be an overlap against them, and that the active player can move troops into an overlap position. I didn't think it said anything about whether the active player who charged this turn can expand into un-contacted enemy who are standing in an overlap position. Looks likely, but it's not all that clear to me.

So to clarify these points, CAN a knight unit initially declare the direction of a charge against light horse such that the corner of each of the two front rank bases would theoretically contact near the corner of the light horse bases (i.e. the knights wheel slightly, so the charge would be at the desired angle, but only a corner of the bases contacts rather than straight ahead . . .)?

This theoretically would result in the LH evading away, and the Knights choosing to continue their charge at the initial angle.

Another issue that came up in the game and may have been discussed here. . . Scrumpy had a LH unit charge two units of LF. The LH was at a slight angle, and the LF were 1 inch in front of ANOTHER LH unit, and their rear bases were touching a friendly pike unit to the rear. If the FIRST LF unit stood, the LH would not have been able to contact the SECOND LF unit. Is the second unit a valid charge target? Or would that depend on whether the first unit evaded? IF the first unit evaded, and the LH wanted to charge the second unit, could the Pike intercept?

Just curious. I'm relatively new to this.

[hammy]

The rules seem to say the active player can expand into troops who will be an overlap against them, and that the active player can move troops into an overlap position. I didn't think it said anything about whether the active player who charged this turn can expand into un-contacted enemy who are standing in an overlap position. Looks likely, but it's not all that clear to me.

If the enemy are in an overlap then they are contacted, albeit only corner to corner. The alternative of having a BG of LF extending your line and your opponent not being able to expand is silly. The same for a BG of anything else, if it can fight as an overlap then it can be expanded in to.

So to clarify these points, CAN a knight unit initially declare the direction of a charge against light horse such that the corner of each of the two front rank bases would theoretically contact near the corner of the light horse bases (i.e. the knights wheel slightly, so the charge would be at the desired angle, but only a corner of the bases contacts rather than straight ahead . . .)?

Yes as long as by charging straight ahead the knights would only contact 2 bases. The amount of contact doesn't matter, just the number of bases that contact.

Another issue that came up in the game and may have been discussed here. . . Scrumpy had a LH unit charge two units of LF. The LH was at a slight angle, and the LF were 1 inch in front of ANOTHER LH unit, and their rear bases were touching a friendly pike unit to the rear. If the FIRST LF unit stood, the LH would not have been able to contact the SECOND LF unit. Is the second unit a valid charge target? Or would that depend on whether the first unit evaded? IF the first unit evaded, and the LH wanted to charge the second unit, could the Pike intercept?

The second LF is not a target until the first LF evade at which point it would need to react to the charge. The pike cannot intercept as if you check the sequence of play you will find that intercepts happen before evades and as you can't intercept (or charge) through friends (unless shock troops bursting through) the intercept is not allowed.

[Scrumpy]

If I recall the Pk were not facing in my direction at that time, it would have been a flank charge for me into them. OK not a very good idea as after my initial 2 dice at 3, I would have been down 2 poa in melee, assuming my heroic lights never disrupted the sods.

[rtaylor]

Hi folks; I was the player with the charging knights. By my reckoning I wheeled the knights to contact the LH had it stood, then went straight. Ethan Zorick had taught me that a charging BG was not required to wheel to maintain pursuit of an evading BG. That is, skirmishers cannot park in front of enemy and angle themselves to force chargers any further out of position or expose their flanks when the skirmishers evade.

As for the extension/overlap question, here's a diagram. The charging knights are at the top; the front rank of the defenders are on the bottom. Left = impact, right = after expansion:

Code: Select all

  Kn
KnKnKn      KnKnKnKn
MfMfMfLf    MfMfMfLf

Does the right-hand knight fight the LF in melee?


Finally: Welcome to the forum, Andrew!

[philqw78]

Hi folks; I was the player with the charging knights. By my reckoning I wheeled the knights to contact the LH had it stood, then went straight. Ethan Zorick had taught me that a charging BG was not required to wheel to maintain pursuit of an evading BG. That is, skirmishers cannot park in front of enemy and angle themselves to force chargers any further out of position or expose their flanks when the skirmishers evade.

providing you continue on your declared path or wheel to follow evaders its OK.

As for the extension/overlap question, here's a diagram. The charging knights are at the top; the front rank of the defenders are on the bottom. Left = impact, right = after expansion:

Code: Select all

  Kn
KnKnKn      KnKnKnKn
MfMfMfLf    MfMfMfLf

Does the right-hand knight fight the LF in melee?

yes. And the LF gets no chance to evade. Although I think its the left hand knight base fighting the LF.

[petedalby]

Does the right-hand knight fight the LF in melee?

Yes - check out the FAQ - this is specifically covered.

Pete