Weird LF Charge & Response

[Blathergut]

Morbio may be better suited to explain what he saw in his turn, but basically, the Cretans were charged from behind by the LF bows. Instead of taking a cohesion loss for being hit in the rear, the Cretans spun, fought frontally, and disrupted the LF bows. Should this be possible?



Are there situations where units charged from behind have time to spin?

[Blathergut]

Morbio: from the HELP

"A battle group contacted to their rear at the start of a melee combat by an enemy battle group, usually automatically turns to fight any opponents at the instant of combat.

A battle group other than light foot or light horse, with an adjacent enemy battle group other than light foot or light horse, in their rear arc after turning will suffer a penalty in melee combat.

If there is an adjacent friendly battle group other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc when the battle group has to take a cohesion test it will gain a benefit taking the test.

If there is an adjacent enemy battle group other than light foot or light horse in their rear arc when the battle group has to take a cohesion test it will have a penalty taking the test."

[batesmotel]

This sounds like an artifact of the change to have troops able to evade from being charged in the rear. It looks like th e LF archer made a 0 hex evade (the artifact) and then turned to face the way evaders do at the end of their evade. Sounds like a bug to me.

Chris

[edmuel2000]

"A battle group contacted to their rear at the start of a melee combat by an enemy battle group, usually automatically turns to fight any opponents at the instant of combat."

Blathergut cited the above rule. I've seen that rule as well, but in my experience, I don't think I've ever seen a battlegroup turn to face a rear attack (or even a flank) under these circumstances. What I've seen is that the unit suffers the rear attack in the opponent's turn, and in its own turn faces about. I guess this has to do with the confusing distinction between impact and melee combat in this system. I believe that the first round isn't "melee" but impact, so the thing doesn't (or shouldn't) turn; the second round is "melee" so it does. Anybody reading the above, however, would think that uncommitted units would turn to meet their attackers under both circumstances.

If there was going to be a rules revision, some consideration may be given to clearing this up by eliminating the distinction and just calling them "melee rounds." In the first round of melee, some units get impact effects. In second and subsequent rounds of melee, units like swordsmen get close combat bonuses. And units that begin a melee round in contact, and which aren't otherwise engaged, turn to face their attackers. Just a thought (if I've got the mechanics correct).

Ed M

[batesmotel]

Morbio,

Did the Cretans evade at all? I assumed they just spun in their initial hex in my previous reply. If they evaded even one hex and were then caught, it is normal for evaders to face about after evading.

Chris

[Morbio]

The unit did not evade at all.

What I perceive as 'normal' behaviour is that the charged unit takes the hit, usually, but not always with a 'Rear' and a cohesion loss, displays the losses, then will turn and face the unit for the next turn.

In this instance, the charged unit spun around immediately, suffered no 'Rear' and then then resolved the battle, with the rear-charging attacker suffering a large loss and losing a cohesion level.

[pantherboy]

I've seen this too. If you close down the evade path of the LF then they will just not evade but simply turn in place and take the charge frontally. Once pinned then you can hit them in the rear. I prefered the previous system where people charged in the rear didn't usually evade. I dislike the idea that LF and mounted units operate with a 360 degree arc where they react equally well to threats from the rear as the front.

[batesmotel]

I've seen this too. If you close down the evade path of the LF then they will just not evade but simply turn in place and take the charge frontally. Once pinned then you can hit them in the rear. I prefered the previous system where people charged in the rear didn't usually evade. I dislike the idea that LF and mounted units operate with a 360 degree arc where they react equally well to threats from the rear as the front.

The problem with the previous version was that these units had a 360 arc but only for "better" troops. That was more broken than the current behavior where all troops that can evade will do so from a rear charge (except when they don't). The remaining issue here is really that evaders turn around at the end of the evade move in FoG PC when they shouldn't. They do not in FoG PC and this works much better. Once you've evaded you should be hit in the rear if you are caught.

Chris

[TheGrayMouser]

All this is quite confusing, what was, what is and what should be!

That being said I have seen these behaviors as well...

Likly related, has anyone ever seen an enemy light stuck in melee combat with one of your units, you then bring up another unit to impact it, and the little bugger evades!

I have also seen a drilled light, 2 hexes in front, 1 hex offset of my own light cavalary, both facing eachother... My opponet on his turn was able to move that light foot BEHIND my cavalry and get a rear hit! This seams to violate the rule where you need to start your turn behind a "plane" in order to get a rear hit.

It seems that most issues in game have to do with lights and the mechanics of evading.
Fortunately they are more of an annoyance than anything else

[batesmotel]

All this is quite confusing, what was, what is and what should be!

...game without end. Amen.

That being said I have seen these behaviors as well...

Likly related, has anyone ever seen an enemy light stuck in melee combat with one of your units, you then bring up another unit to impact it, and the little bugger evades!

I have also seen a drilled light, 2 hexes in front, 1 hex offset of my own light cavalary, both facing eachother... My opponet on his turn was able to move that light foot BEHIND my cavalry and get a rear hit! This seams to violate the rule where you need to start your turn behind a "plane" in order to get a rear hit.

It seems that most issues in game have to do with lights and the mechanics of evading.
Fortunately they are more of an annoyance than anything else

To my mind evading in terms of making it more predictable when troops will or won't evade, and the mechanics of evading, is the single remaining area in the game most in need of work. this is something that works much better in the TT version where poor skirmishers are useful but not as good as better quality ones as y ou would expect, and where cavalry that has an option to evade if you want them to is just a positive feature as opposed to the very mixed bag that it is on the PC where they often evade when you don't want them and won't evade in circumstances where you would. I watched some superior, light spear, sword, armoured cavalry just stand yesterday as some Seleucid elephants stepped all over them because my cavalry refused to evade. Seem like if cavalry was going to evade from anything, elephants would be the obvious case to do so!

Chris

[batesmotel]

...
I have also seen a drilled light, 2 hexes in front, 1 hex offset of my own light cavalary, both facing eachother... My opponet on his turn was able to move that light foot BEHIND my cavalry and get a rear hit! This seams to violate the rule where you need to start your turn behind a "plane" in order to get a rear hit.
...

Note that there are two levels of rear attack. The first is just contacting the target BG in the rear. This causes the "rear" message to pop up and gives the attacker a ++POA and the target a --POA. The second level is where the attacker started behind the target's front line. This causes an automatic cohesion drop in the target before combat and then gives the benefits as above for contacting the target in the rear. I suspect what you saw was the first type of attack without the automatic cohesion drop.

Chris

[TheGrayMouser]

Ah, that makes sense for the actual combat results, and now i do recall reading that somewhere in the combat charts(always forget the game DOES factor in flanks rear etc) ...
However somehing makes me think even a drilled light should not have been able to maneuver that way, he had to go to 3 hexes fwrd , one vertix change and one fwrd and then another vertix change and fwrd to get me in the rear...

[Morbio]

I've seen this too. If you close down the evade path of the LF then they will just not evade but simply turn in place and take the charge frontally. Once pinned then you can hit them in the rear. I prefered the previous system where people charged in the rear didn't usually evade. I dislike the idea that LF and mounted units operate with a 360 degree arc where they react equally well to threats from the rear as the front.

I think Pantherboy has spotted the real reason/problem for this. The unit wanted to evade, but couldn't. I was expecting that therefore I would get a nice 'Rear' charge and disrupt (I also had another LF I was going to charge the other rear hex after this - hopefully routing), but rather than this it rotated and fought frontally, this must be wrong.

[76mm]

I had a similar occurence in a recent game. I had three MF units in melee with an enemy medium/heavy cav unit. I had one of my heavy cav units charge the enemy cav unit in the rear, and instead of getting the "rear" message as I expected, the enemy cav unit spun around (even though already engaged with 3 units!) to face my charging unit. The enemy cav unit did not lose cohesion, etc. I had never seen this before. This is with version 1.26. Is this a bug, or what?

[76mm]

Just happened again...an enemy heavy cav unit was engaged in melee with one of my pike units. I charged the rear of the heavy cav unit with another pike unit, and the cav unit spun around to face the second attacker...it didn't used to work like this, and this way doesn't seem right...

[IainMcNeil]

No thats not right. We'll have to check it out.