Slitherine

Forthcoming Changes from 5.01-

RBS asked for comments on the revision to Generals being in fixed position withing a BG irrespective of the bases actual position.

I just dont get it!

A generals base is where a generals base is, I can see absolutely no reason for adding even more obscurity to the rule mechanisms.

If there is a concern over generals commanding from one exreme end of a BG then simply make it a requirement for a generals base to be centre back (or front if leading) of a unit to count as with it. Although I personnaly dont see the need for this either - what does it add to the game?

If there is a concern over generals commanding from one exreme end of a BG then simply make it a requirement for a generals base to be centre back (or front if leading) of a unit to count as with it. Although I personnaly dont see the need for this either - what does it add to the game?

The main concern is that generals can "get in the way" when either moving troops or more importantly when evading or charging. If the general is freely moved around the unit then there is no possibility of "cheese" whilst performing either of these actions. I.e. what happens if you evade with a BG who has a general attached (possibly at the rear of the unit at the back) and the pursuers make contact only with the general?

I am fully in favour of making the general to be freely moved with the unit he is with - i.e. if you want to join another unit in the movement or interbound phase then as long as the two closest points are within 7" then he can move to the other unit. He should also be moved to another part of the unit if wished - so as to avoid contacting enemy, being contacted by enemy, allowing extra elements to fire etc etc

After all the general only really has an effect in morale and a bonus in close combat. By the way can we remove the necessity of placing the general in the front rank? I have not had any problem during a game regarding generals being in and out of combat and I am sick of having to shift models just to show the general "is in". I am aware of the "gameyness" of waiting a few seconds to decide whether he is in or not, but there must be a better way? i.e. force everybody to declare it before any dice are thrown?

but there must be a better way? i.e. force everybody to declare it before any dice are thrown?

We always play, phasing player declares General is in/out, non-phasing declares, do combat. Seems sensible.

13) Movement by generals to and from battle groups, and measurement of command range has changed. See ???Movement of Generals??? section and the Glossary entry on ???Command Range???. Generals with BGs are assumed to be in a fixed position within the BG irrespective of the actual position of their base. Command range and movement if the general leaves the BG are measured from that point. (Comments welcome on this change as the authors are not unanimous on it).

It's a bit difficult to comment when we haven't seen the exact rule. Where is this fixed point? How has movement to battlegroups changed?

Initial thoughts:

I suspect it might lead to strange effects if the general is in combat but the fixed point is at an unengaged part of the BG.

Presumably the fixed point is also used to measure "A general in LOC is lost within 3 MUs"

What happened to the idea of changing the terminology from "General" to "Commander"?

The new rule looks better than the current "can be assumed to be anywhere" which is not definitive enough - if he dies, I'll assume he is more than 3 MU from another BG, my opponent will assume he is within 3 MU for example.

I think the "He is where he is" proposal would be better still. You would need to add the ability to move (unless in front rank close combat) to any position with the BG in any phase provided he stays with the BG for the whole phase. This is to avoid the "getting in the way" issue without giving free extra move when leaving a BG.

The main concern is that generals can "get in the way" when either moving troops or more importantly when evading or charging. If the general is freely moved around the unit then there is no possibility of "cheese" whilst performing either of these actions. I.e. what happens if you evade with a BG who has a general attached (possibly at the rear of the unit at the back) and the pursuers make contact only with the general?

Would it not be simpler to allow the general to reposition himself during the charge / evade within the unit if he so wished - this could be limited to centre front for an evade and centre back if in a charge. He is already influencing the Unit it is reasonable to expect him to be able to react with it.

On a more general note; A lot of problems could be solved if a general in contact with a BG could not be engaged singularly, i.e. he must move out of the way if contacted first.

On a more general note; A lot of problems could be solved if a general in contact with a BG could not be engaged singularly, i.e. he must move out of the way if contacted first.

He can't .......... and does? In fact a general can never be engaged singly - if it ever happens he dies.

Si

Yes I relaised this after I'd posted the comment

In light of this I really dont understand the need for any more rules on a generals position.

'He is whers is' works for me!

It willbe interesting to see what you all think.

The issue came from seeing 3 different interpretation of where generals can be at Leeds.

It wasn't so much about where he was, as where he could be put at what times if you see what I mean.

The lack of precision seemed to be creating too much flex for some people - e,g, move a 6 base wide BG and reposition general from one end to the other and then move him off.

Also artificial effects where he wouldn't fit and needed to be repositioned being used to fudge a new position. or causing hm to bave a bG out fo range jst because his base didn't fit.

It is certainly one of the areas where awe are keen to see if the tighterning helps.

It also has some interesting side effects that make a TC less god relative to and FC - i.e. by being positioned in the centre of BG the TC struggles to control BLS of certain types if with BG.

Anyway see what you think when t all hits the streets.

Si

I've just rebased some generals on 40mm x 40mm bases but with the general's figure itself detachable.

This allows the base to be in one place and shows where the general joined the BG. When he goes into combat I can detach the figure and place him in the front rank of the BG. It's not perfect but the base stays where it is and that's where the figure returns to when he wishes to move away.

What do you think?

Pete