Slitherine

Hi there,
A question on pursuit into new enemy

BG A has routed towards the top of the page from BG X in the JAP. BG A slides one base width to the right to avoid friendly BG B. BG A's pursuit takes it into BG B which is facing down the page.

-- AA
-- AA
BB
BB
--XXX
--XXX

Assuming that A is still within 2MUs of X, is X obliged to step forward with 4 bases into the routing A as this will put X at a distinct disadvantage in the mellee phase where B will get 4 dice and X only 2.

John

Assuming that A is still within 2MUs of X, is X obliged to step forward with 4 bases into the routing A

I believe so - yes.

Although pursuers can always CMT not to contact fresh enemy.

Yes they have to step forward and be at a disadvantage until the next JAP when the broken unit has to run again. You have to contact fresh enemy in a pursuit unless it is something you would have to take a CMT to charge.

Did Simon not state somewhere else in the forums that Pursuit was not considered a charge and thus stepping forward was not applicable?

I don't think you have to step forward, once you contact new enemy the pursuit is over and it is treated as a new impact. The only way to recontact a routing enemy once contact has been broken is to charge them in your turn. Looked under the joint action phase for pursuits and it does not say anything about having to step forward to maintain contact with a routing enemy so I would have to say fresh enemy would occupy ones attention more than the fleeing mass you were chasing.

contact during pursuit technically takes place in the next turn's impact phase and the routers will have gone by then so I do not think you should step forward.

Keith

petedalby wrote:

Assuming that A is still within 2MUs of X, is X obliged to step forward with 4 bases into the routing A

I believe so - yes.

Although pursuers can always CMT not to contact fresh enemy.

Not sure and without rules at hand, but I think rules say pursuer can CMT to stop pursuing.

BlackPrince wrote:contact during pursuit technically takes place in the next turn's impact phase and the routers will have gone by then so I do not think you should step forward.

Keith

Contact phisically takes place in JAP, but impact is resolved in next turn's impact phase. This would permit step forward, technically, but IMO it wouldn't be historical even if we consider FOG scale is quite large (a base of FOG represent near an unit of Hoplite Warfare and similar games).

Not sure and without rules at hand, but I think rules say pursuer can CMT to stop pursuing.

Yes you can try to voluntarily stop a pursuit with a CMT.

If you hit a new unit during a pursuit the actual resolution occurs during the next impact phase. Also stepping forward in this case might break contact with your battle groups bases which you could not do either so you would not step forward since you have to end up both in contact with enemy and in corner to corner contact with your own BG. My guess is in this case the pursuers would break contact with themselves so would not step forward.

Hope that helps to clear things up a bit

If this is in the JAP it must be a continued pursuit (X was in contact with A at the start of the phase). Therefore
at the start of the JAP, X can take a CMT to stop pursuing. This takes place before either A does a rout move,
or X pursues. If they pass the test, they halt on the spot.

In this case they chose to pursue. Normally you would contact fresh enemy in your path. But if X are skirmishers,
they can stop 1MU short of enemy non-skirmishers, and anyone else can do so if passing a CMT. All of the BG
front rank stops in line 1MU away.

If X does pursue, through choice or failing a CMT, it contacts B as fresh enemy. This is treated as a charge, with
impact combat taking place in the next impact phase. If you can step forward in a charge, you MUST do so, assuming
not exempted by the rules covering stepping forward (see page 54-55). Impact will be 2 dice against 2
dice (assuming all steady).

In the movement phase following, you may now be able to feed more bases into the existing melee. So X could
expand on the left to match the overlap. Obviously I can't know the formation X is in, but see the criteria on
p73 for which bases can be moved. Note that if their are bases in contact with A as a result of stepping forward,
they do not count as in combat (for the purposes of the rules, see the definition of close combat, p134). Nor are
enemy bases in front edge contact with them (I read this as the enemy bases having their front edge in contact; if
it is otherwise it is poorly worded).

Regards,
Peter

Also the CMT to stop pursuit overall, and the CMT to stop at 1MU are separate CMT's.

Thanks gents, but the point I was trying to clear up was that assume, for example, X are lance armed cavalry and B are bow armed medium foot. X does not want to stop. He wants to hit B and ride them down with superior numbers. According to my reading of the rules the pursuit into the new enemy is treated as a charge therefore any bases of X which can step forward must do so. He will then be at a disadvantage in the melee, despite having superior numbers, the majority of which can do nothing.

Pete's answer raises further questions: Pg 73 states that to feed bases in to a melee "They must not have any enemy bases in front edge contact with them...". Does this refer to the front edge of the enemy base or the front of the base to be fed in. If it refers to the front edge of the enemy base then X can be fed in, if it refers to the front edge of X then it can't be fed in.

However, having re read the relevant sections of the rules, under the definition of an overlap (pg 86 ) the bases of X which are in side edge contact with B would appear to be able to fight as an overlap since they are in a position to do so and cannot contribute to any other close combat to their front. Assuming that the bases of X which were not in overlap can be fed in as Pete suggests, this would allow all six bases of X to fight in the melee phase.

Does this seem right.

John

It does 'seem' right according to the rules as they are providing no dice against the routers. However I think it is in historical terms wrong as most of X are too busy butchering the routers to care about anyone else.

You've posed an interesting scenario which I haven't seen happen on table. Typically the routers aren't witin 2 MU - but I guess it could happen.

On the upside, the lancers are still on a ++ against the bowmen at impact, so hopefully that should go well.

As you describe, since the right hand file of lancers aren't contributing dice or POAs against the routers, they could be fed into the subsequent melee. There is no melee as such against the routers.

So I think what you propose is reasonable but at this point I step aside and invite an author to give an informed view.

petedalby wrote:You've posed an interesting scenario which I haven't seen happen on table. Typically the routers aren't witin 2 MU - but I guess it could happen.

Anyway this scenario last after one turn, for precision in the next JAP phase, since pursuer must break pursue because it is engaged in melee.