Confirmation request
Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:47 pm
Hi there! I played a game with some newbies and a raised a situation that I had surprisingly never seen before, and that I tried to solve using the manual. Please confirm if I did it correctly.
BB .- Enemy LF 9 MU far.
BB
CC
CC .- Enemy LF 7 MU far.
AA My LH.
Well, I declare a charge with A unit on C unit. It flees, and, since with VMR I could advance up to 9 MU, I could charge B, so B becomes a target, as it reads on "Charge declaration" paragraph, pg 52 of spanish rulebook.
So, B must decide if stays or flees. Stays, so now I make my charge movement. But now I doubt. On page 68, describing flee movement, I read: "Chargers now complete their movement, adjusting it with a VMR IF ALL ITS targets have evaded. SO, since B has not evaded, I must not make a VMR, so my LH ends its movement 2 MU in front of B.
Is it correct?
What surprise me is that, applying my reasoning, if B had been a FRAG unit, it would had to test not break, but, if passed, my unit would not have been able to reach it, so I think it's a kind of paradox
BB .- Enemy LF 9 MU far.
BB
CC
CC .- Enemy LF 7 MU far.
AA My LH.
Well, I declare a charge with A unit on C unit. It flees, and, since with VMR I could advance up to 9 MU, I could charge B, so B becomes a target, as it reads on "Charge declaration" paragraph, pg 52 of spanish rulebook.
So, B must decide if stays or flees. Stays, so now I make my charge movement. But now I doubt. On page 68, describing flee movement, I read: "Chargers now complete their movement, adjusting it with a VMR IF ALL ITS targets have evaded. SO, since B has not evaded, I must not make a VMR, so my LH ends its movement 2 MU in front of B.
Is it correct?
What surprise me is that, applying my reasoning, if B had been a FRAG unit, it would had to test not break, but, if passed, my unit would not have been able to reach it, so I think it's a kind of paradox