Slitherine

....XXXX

OOO

.......ttttt


Ok, XXXXX are Knights facing down the screen 3 MU's from OOO which are MF, tttt are PIke (Friendly to OOO) facing up the screen as is OOO


XXXX declares a charge on OOO....By my previous definition ttt's intercept charge only takes them flush with OOO's front edge.

Can tttt declare an intercept and advance into the Impact? (Note XXX is only 1 rank deep so a step forward will break up the BG so ttt cannot be a valid target of the charge.


The real question is does "Cross the Path of the Charge" include the exact end point of the charge?


Thank You
Gino
SMAC

My reading of the rules is that tttt would have to be <2" from the frontal edge of OOOO to count as intercepting. Even if they were EXACTLY 2" fron the frontal edge they wouldn't be crossing the path would they?

Must cross the path so if 2MU is exactly flush it does not so no intercept

And terrys agreed in:
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=8429

The rule states that the intercepters must:
"Cross the path of the charging enemy battle group."

To cross the path they must end up between the chargers and their target. This will mean that the chargers MUST contact the intercepters with a front edge or front corner, and therefore will fight the intercepters with at least one base.
It the intercept stops exactly level with the target base they are not 'crossing the path' - therefore this is not allowed.
If you want a continuous front, then position them earlier!!

philqw78 wrote:Must cross the path so if 2MU is exactly flush it does not so no intercept

Isn't that what I said?

ravenflight wrote:

philqw78 wrote:Must cross the path so if 2MU is exactly flush it does not so no intercept

Isn't that what I said?

No, you asked the poster a question

Isn't that what I said?

Yes, I was just adding that the authors had posted an earlier comment saying the same thing. It is always good to know when we are in agreement with the authors since it is their game.

P.S. I do not like this new font. The coloring is terrible. I hope everyone complains at viewforum.php?f=31. Look at the URL reference. Green on green, it's camouflaged.

I didn't quote you though bbotus.

bbotus wrote:I do not like this new font. The coloring is terrible. I hope everyone complains at viewforum.php?f=31. Look at the URL reference. Green on green, it's camouflaged.

It must be your monitor compared to mine. The colouring seems fine to me. That doen'st mean I like the new format, I don't, but not because of the colour. I don't like it because I saw nothing wrong with the old system. I get totally tired of having to find where everything is when people change web-design. It's like re-inventing the wheel. If it improved things fine, but it didn't. I notice no improvement what-so-ever. Maybe it improved things behind the scenes?