Rout moves

[hammy]

In last night's game we had an odd situation with a routing BG

Code: Select all

aaaabbbb
cccc1111    22
        dddd22

        3333

a,b and c are Swiss (a&b pike, c handgun)
d is a BG of Lorainer knights
1 are some of my ghilmen
2 are my lancers
3 are more ghilmen

2 charges d in the flank and breaks it.

d routs directly away from 2

Code: Select all

aaaabbbb
cccc1111 22
      ddd22

        3333

At this point 2 stops pursit and d routs some more directly away from 2 as it started in contact.

leaving

Code: Select all

aaaabbbb
cccc1111 22
   ddd   22

        3333

In the next interbound d has to rout towards it's own baseline but if it turns towards the baseline it will need to shift two bases to avoid ghilmen 1. We tried to work out what should happen from the rules but as the rout move rules essentlially say that routers behave like evaders it would seem that the routers actually hardly move at all and as a result block the evade of ghilmen 1.

I have a couple of photo's but can't get them on the board from work so if the ASCII isn't up to it getting the photo's up will hgave to wait till tonight.

Hammy

[rogerg]

Having them remain in place 'looking for an exit' is not necessarily a bad thing. I suppose if there is no obvious safe place to run to, that is what might be expected.

The fact that they block an evade is just unfortunate. Some might say that forcing enemy into the path of your own evaders is not a good strategy.

[hammy]

Having them remain in place 'looking for an exit' is not necessarily a bad thing. I suppose if there is no obvious safe place to run to, that is what might be expected.

The fact that they block an evade is just unfortunate. Some might say that forcing enemy into the path of your own evaders is not a good strategy.

What we did in the end was let the knights continue to flee in the direction they were going in until they could turn. This meant that by the time they turned the infantry line had made a gap for them.

My cavalry chose not to evade anyway (because the pike were 2 deep and if I could disrupt them I would have been at ++) unfortunatley I forgot that a single rank of cavalry even with a ++ (which it didn't get) is rather at a dissadvantage against anything... Still I got to break off with half the BG still alive

[rogerg]

My knowledge of history doesn't run to examples of troops looking for an exit off the battlefield when the obvious route is blocked by the enemy.

What is required is a clear rule to make the game work. I think that going nowhere, when the route to the base line is blocked, is the best option. By having routers carry on in the direction they were going you have to start ruling about what happens if that direction is blocked too.

It is not a bad rationalisation to suggest that if the way you want to go is blocked, and no-one is chasing you, then you just stop running.

[hammy]

My knowledge of history doesn't run to examples of troops looking for an exit off the battlefield when the obvious route is blocked by the enemy.

What is required is a clear rule to make the game work. I think that going nowhere, when the route to the base line is blocked, is the best option. By having routers carry on in the direction they were going you have to start ruling about what happens if that direction is blocked too.

It is not a bad rationalisation to suggest that if the way you want to go is blocked, and no-one is chasing you, then you just stop running.

I agree that what we need is to know where troops would go in this situation. I wouldn't have much of an issue with them dithering if that is what the rules say. To be honest I suspect in this situation the logical move would be for the knights to make a wheel as far right as they can in column and then burst through whatever is in the way. The situation is complicated by the fact the knights are in a single element column. If they had been two wide then I think the whole group would have wheeled and pushed partly through the light foot.

Hammy

[rogerg]

After impetuous moves the 'where do these routers/evaders go' must be the most common query in DBM. I think 'dithering' might be a big step forward (or a big step on the spot ) .

[lawrenceg]

What we have here is the AOW equivalent of DBM "Buttocks of Death".

The simplest way to handle it would be to handle routers or evaders meeting enemy with the existing rule for meeitng terrain they could not enter. If routers end in contact with such enemy, they lose a base as per normal.

Having a mass of fleeing enemy in the way of your escape would, I think, have been bad news historically. Probably similar in obstructive effect to a hostage screen.

[nikgaukroger]

My knowledge of history doesn't run to examples of troops looking for an exit off the battlefield when the obvious route is blocked by the enemy.

Sun Zi recommends leaving a route for routers so that they don't fight like cornered rats and cause your army needless casulaties.

However, Cannae is a pretty good example of what happens - prolonged butchery.