Slitherine

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:31 am**

Slight Cheese alert as I spend my last couple of games looking to engineer certain geometric/contact events.

Shooting at BG in Melee.

By carefully aligning my BG so they are only initially contacting on end files of 6 element BG I can shoot at them after impact and before melee. The end result was on 2 occasions having lost the impact phase and been disrupted I was able to also disrupt my opponent in the shooting and in one case give them a -1 on the CT due to 25% lossses.

felt wrong that my opponent having taken the advantage in the impact phase is knocked out of a favourable position merely because the game mechanics/flow allow me to force a test prior to the next combat event. Also that I'm jockeying to create positions on the table that driven by rule sequences and manipulation rather than 'playing the game'

I would have prefered the shooting at a meleeing BG to be included in the combat results. So he retains his advantage won in the impact phase but could mean that with the shooting hits both mine and his close combat BG could have effectively 'lost' combat and be forced to test.

Routing Cohesion tests

another funny to my mind, I rout an enemy BG, the BG next to it is beaten by me in Combat but passes its CT with flying colours. End of the combat phase it tests again and drops a cohesion level. It looked wrong because it was the last combat of the phase so the unit took its CT for lost combat and Immediately took another for the rout which it failed. Not sure its a problem but it did look/feel odd.

Regards
Matt

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:40 am**

Thanks for this useful feedback.

I wonder if the answer might be to adjust the shooting POAs:

"-1 If shooting at a BG that is charging or in close combat". (Or words to that effect).

This would make it unlikely that shooting at the end of a BG would cause a CT (except rarely - perhaps not often enough to be worth the trouble of cheesily engineering it), but would avoid "fiddling" with the basic mechanisms.

Another point is that the enemy could have moved the 3rd file to counter your overlap at the other end in the movement phase before you can shoot. So your "cheese" only works against enemy who are 4 or more files wide.

-------------------

On your second point, all the combats are assumed to be simultaneous (perhaps this needs to be explicitly stated), so the unit reacts to losing the combat before it can be aware of the rout.

Aside from this, 2 tests simply mean more chance of dropping 1 or more cohesion levels. So the result is the effect that we want even if it may appear "odd".

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:11 am**

rbodleyscott wrote:Thanks for this useful feedback.

I wonder if the answer might be to adjust the shooting POAs:

"-1 If shooting at a BG that is charging or in close combat". (Or words to that effect).

That would certainly make the situation less attractive for me to try and engineer. I'd be more likely to send the bow to shoot at something else.

This would make it unlikely that shooting at the end of a BG would cause a CT (except rarely - perhaps not often enough to be worth the trouble of cheesily engineering it), but would avoid "fiddling" with the basic mechanisms.

Another point is that the enemy could have moved the 3rd file to counter your overlap at the other end in the movement phase before you can shoot. So your "cheese" only works against enemy who are 4 or more files wide.

true, however I wanted that to happen in one occasion as it would remove a protection from the flank of another of his units, disrupting his battle line and allowing my reserves to get an extra overlap in (eventually) when they charged his other BG.

-------------------

On your second point, all the combats are assumed to be simultaneous (perhaps this needs to be explicitly stated), so the unit reacts to losing the combat before it can be aware of the rout.

it does mean though you can have a disrupted BG that has routed its melee opponents hare off into pursuit fragmented as it fails its CT for friendly routers. It gains no advantage for carving its way through an enemy BG that bound.

Aside from this, 2 tests simply mean more chance of dropping 1 or more cohesion levels. So the result is the effect that we want even if it may appear "odd".

Slitherine

Leeds issue: Cohesion Tests

Leeds issue: Cohesion Tests