Slitherine

Today I had the situation of a BG of pursuers contacting a BG of previously routing troops. Here's how it went down:
In the Impact phase a BG of knights charged two BGs of English longbow. One had previously been reduced to fragmented and broke immediately. During the ensuing impact and melee, the other BG of longbow broke and routed, resulting in the first broken BG being contacted by the pursuing knights. We ruled that as the knights had not started in contact with this BG it did not lose a base. Is this correct?

That is correct. However if they remain in contact after the routers and pursuers portion of the Joint Action Phase an element will be removed.

awesum4 wrote:That is correct. However if they remain in contact after the routers and pursuers portion of the Joint Action Phase an element will be removed.

The references are on page 65 "BEING CHARGE WHILE ROUTING" and page 106 "FIGHTING BROKEN TROOPS".

If any pursuers contact routers then they lose a base - so in that case you are incorrect. Reference is on page 108 (13-12):

"Pursuers who remain in contact with routers at the end of the pursuit move inflict losses"

bbotus is referring to charges with the references above, but this is an initial pursuit.

dave_r wrote:If any pursuers contact routers then they lose a base - so in that case you are incorrect. Reference is on page 108 (13-12):

"Pursuers who remain in contact with routers at the end of the pursuit move inflict losses"

bbotus is referring to charges with the references above, but this is an initial pursuit.

Agree. I went back and reread the original question more closely. I see now that he says a previously routing BG but means a BG that routed earlier in the same impact phase. So they would lose a base.

If the previously routing BG had broken in a previous phase, then my answer would stand.

bbotus wrote:

dave_r wrote:If any pursuers contact routers then they lose a base - so in that case you are incorrect. Reference is on page 108 (13-12):

"Pursuers who remain in contact with routers at the end of the pursuit move inflict losses"

bbotus is referring to charges with the references above, but this is an initial pursuit.

Agree. I went back and reread the original question more closely. I see now that he says a previously routing BG but means a BG that routed earlier in the same impact phase. So they would lose a base.

If the previously routing BG had broken in a previous phase, then my answer would stand.

I beg to differ sir All the rule states is that (paraphrasing) if pursuers remain in contact after the pursuit move then the routers lose a base.

I am prepared to admit it's not hugely clear - but I have had this ruled this way.

My, my, my! Page 117 (version 2) does say that pursuers who are in contact with a routing enemy BG at the end of any pursuit move inflicts 1 base loss. So if I charge a routing BG, nothing happens and i pursue in JAP hoping to stay in contact. But if I pursue a BG that I break in the melee phase and just happen to contact a different BG that was broken in a previous phase, since I'm pursuing, I get to remove a base. I see what you are saying. It doesn't matter whether or not they are making an initial rout. It only matters that a broken unit is contacted by any unit making a pursuit move in any phase.

Thanks for your comments. I wonder why the authors wrote it that way.

bbotus wrote: I wonder why the authors wrote it that way.

They are crazy englishmen.

Subtle nuances of the English language that you colonials will never understand

philqw78 wrote:Subtle nuances of the English language that you colonials will never understand

So that's why it's called a 'loo'. It's a blo.dy nuance. Oops, can't use that word either.

philqw78 wrote:Subtle nuances of the English language that you colonials will never understand

May be you can understand the difficulty to read english language for the natives...

Natives are just the population of future colonies

philqw78 wrote:Natives are just the population of future colonies

Will it be possible to keep our gastronomy?

LEmpereur wrote:

philqw78 wrote:Natives are just the population of future colonies

Will it be possible to keep our gastronomy?

You can certainly keep your flatulence to yourselves.

dave_r wrote:

LEmpereur wrote:
Will it be possible to keep our gastronomy?

You can certainly keep your flatulence to yourselves.

I thought gastronomy was French for snails

philqw78 wrote:

dave_r wrote:

LEmpereur wrote:
Will it be possible to keep our gastronomy?

You can certainly keep your flatulence to yourselves.

I thought gastronomy was French for snails

Snail flatulences are the best!!!