Slitherine

Commanders in close combat. The rule I found odd is that after losing a combat with a BG that have a general fighting in the first line you first make a cohesion and death roll test and then roll for commanders dead. I think that the general would die at the same time as the others and that the commander’s dead must be a crucial factor in the cohesion test for losing the combat. We were playing that way for months and only a few weeks ago discover we were doing it wrong. We have tried to change but found the new way very odd. After all what better for -more than 1 reason to test- that lose the combat and the general!

Rekila wrote:Commanders in close combat. The rule I found odd is that after losing a combat with a BG that have a general fighting in the first line you first make a cohesion and death roll test and then roll for commanders dead. I think that the general would die at the same time as the others and that the commander’s dead must be a crucial factor in the cohesion test for losing the combat. We were playing that way for months and only a few weeks ago discover we were doing it wrong. We have tried to change but found the new way very odd. After all what better for -more than 1 reason to test- that lose the combat and the general!

You only test if you have recieved two or more hits due to combat, should your general dies that BG and any within three MU test for seeing a general dying. It seems to work fine CT for battle group that loses at same time throw any dead roll and then test for general takes no time at all very quick and painless unless your general dies.

Rekila wrote:I think that the general would die at the same time as the others and that the commander’s dead must be a crucial factor in the cohesion test for losing the combat.

A very interesting opinion. I would say, following your thought, the correct sequence should be: death rolls, roll for commander losses and then CT. In such way, if a BG suffer a casualty, this must count immediately, not from next turn.

With the rules as written you risk 2 CTs if you fight with a general, which could be potentially disastrous. In my view this encourages you to consider that possibility before committing him.

I think it works fine as it is.

If you need a justification for it (these are games mecahnisms, folks, not a detailed simulation of reality...your troops don't really die simultaneously in neat groups of 4 ), consider that it takes some finite time for the realisation that the commander has been killed to spread throughout the unit, and then to other units, and it may take a a little longer still for the troops to collectively react.

Also, let's not introduce too many features into the rules that make the order in which combats are fought important!

I know it isn’t a critical point of the rules. We continue to play the” incorrect” form because the other way, often forgot to roll for commanders.

Rekila wrote:I know it isn’t a critical point of the rules. We continue to play the” incorrect” form because the other way, often forgot to roll for commanders.

TBH why roll two dice for CT one for death roll once thats out the way roll for any general fighting front rank. If you get re-rolls in your impact, melee you've top suffer the chance of losing a general. I'm sure I would remind people this mind its not nice loseing a CT lose a base and lose the general as well thats when the average seems to go out the window.