Page 1 of 1
Fragmented Pursuers
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:09 am
by philqw78
Must Fragmented BG's pursue? Those BG's that break all their opponents must pursue and a fragmneted BG would then pursue and even contact fresh enemy to be, normally, slaughtered. However, it says somewhere else in the rules that unless moving away from enemy within 12MU fragmented BG's must pass a CMT to move. So can they only pursue after passing a CMT, or could this be used as a cohesion test to bolster them? Probably not but its worth a try.
TIA
phil
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:24 am
by shall
No they pursue in their weakened state. One of the prices of a close run thing.
Si
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:29 am
by philqw78
So the rule about fragmented BG's having to test to move, unless away from enemy, is ignored?
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:41 am
by nikgaukroger
That is for voluntary moves in the manoeuvre phase, a pursuit is not a voluntary move and does not take place in that phase.
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:43 am
by shall
Ok let me rephrase... I have always played that they pursued
I suspect our intent on the test is for "conscious moves" rather than outcome moves. But I will bounce it around the other authors and see what we come to. I can see where you are coming from.
Si
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:52 am
by rbodleyscott
shall wrote:Ok let me rephrase... I have always played that they pursued

I agree
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:15 pm
by terrys
To complete the concensus of the authors - Fragmented troops do pursue.[/quote]
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 8:57 pm
by Ghaznavid
terrys wrote:To complete the concensus of the authors - Fragmented troops do pursue.
Ok, but do they also have to take a CMT to avoid contacting fresh enemies in their path? Usually Fragmented can't charge even if they want to.
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:35 pm
by rbodleyscott
Ghaznavid wrote:terrys wrote:To complete the concensus of the authors - Fragmented troops do pursue.
Ok, but do they also have to take a CMT to avoid contacting fresh enemies in their path?
No
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:27 pm
by philqw78
Two parts of the rules contradict each other on this then. The pursuit and the effects of cohesion. The effect of cohesion says nothing about compulsory or voluntary moves just that fragmented troops can only move away from enemy within 12MU unless they pass a CMT. The pursuit part does not specifically mention fragmented pursuers. Just because you play it that way does not mean that is the way it is written...... Like so many other rule sets.
So to carry on being pedantic Fragmented BG's cannot charge. " If pursuers contact fresh enemy in any phase this is treated as a charge on the contacted enemy". Again contradictory but may give the fragmented pursuers an advantage if impact foot, not having charged, because they are not able, impact foot would gain a + against shock mounted on contact.
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:19 am
by rbodleyscott
philqw78 wrote:Two parts of the rules contradict each other on this then. The pursuit and the effects of cohesion. The effect of cohesion says nothing about compulsory or voluntary moves just that fragmented troops can only move away from enemy within 12MU unless they pass a CMT. The pursuit part does not specifically mention fragmented pursuers. Just because you play it that way does not mean that is the way it is written...... Like so many other rule sets.
I agree that there is an apparent contradiction. However:
P 101 Says that troops who break their opponents
always pursue and lists the exceptions. Being fragmented is not one of them.
P 108 Says that pursuers contact fresh enemy in their path. It also says that if they contact enemy it is treated as a charge. Arguably, if we are being pedantic, it is not treated as a charge until they have actually contacted, by which time it is too late to not contact. Note that there are no rules specifiying what the fragmented troops would do if they didn't contact.
However, all this is beside the point. Our intention is (unless my colleagues say otherwise) that they should pursue and should contact fresh enemy. The rules on this now appear to be ambiguous, so it probably needs to go into the FAQ.
It is our policy to do this rather than allow our intentions to become distorted as a result of unanticipated interpretations of the wording.
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:44 am
by shall
What Richard said ..... we'll FAQ it I think.
Si
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:32 pm
by philqw78
Excellent