Charge direction question

[hammy]

A charge can include a wheel but can that wheel carry on past the point where the chargers would contact a BG that may evade?



Can the HF BG wheel past the first point of contact with the LF (assuming the LF evade) or is their wheel limited to the distance they can wheel before contact?

[nikgaukroger]

IIRC when your target(s) declare they are evading you then indicate the direction of your charge which will include any wheel (usual bit about the wheel must not mean you would have contacted with less bases had the target stood still). So as far as I can see you can wheel further than your theoretical impact - assuming I haven't forgotten something

[shall]

Yes you can - such that wimpy evaders don't cause too much of an obstacle to thumping into things behind them but not with such a big wheel - see later comments.

NOTE EDITED SUBSEQUENT TO INITIAL POSTING

Si

[peterrjohnston]

Although don't forget you can't wheel more than 90°, IIRC. Which might be relevant in your diagram above for which bases contact.

[frederic]

What happens if the HF wheel (only a few eg : 5°) then go straight ahead and contact the MF in the flank with their left front corner during the charge.

[hammy]

What happens if the HF wheel (only a few eg : 5°) then go straight ahead and contact the MF in the flank with their left front corner during the charge.

As the HF have not started their charge with one base wholy behind the line extending the front of the MF then it counts as a frontal charge.

[peterrjohnston]

What happens if the HF wheel (only a few eg : 5°) then go straight ahead and contact the MF in the flank with their left front corner during the charge.

It wouldn't count as a flank charge, just as a one-on-one base impact combat (unless stepping forward resulted in more bases in combat).

In the movement phase, the HF would pivot and slide by the minimum necessary to move into contact with the front rank base of the MF. See the conforming section of the movement rules.

[hammy]

Thinking about the exact situation from my game, the HF were in a position to flank charge the MF (just) but they needed quite a big wheel to hit them. The MF couln't turn to face because they would have been charged in the flank by another BG that was infront of them to start with and they couldn't wheel to line up as they were in the restricted zone of the troops to their front and you can only wheel to be parallel in that situation.

[peterrjohnston]

Thinking about the exact situation from my game, the HF were in a position to flank charge the MF (just) but they needed quite a big wheel to hit them. The MF couln't turn to face because they would have been charged in the flank by another BG that was infront of them to start with and they couldn't wheel to line up as they were in the restricted zone of the troops to their front and you can only wheel to be parallel in that situation.

So you supplied us with a misleading diagram!

If they could count as a flank charge, obviously my explanation is not correct in that situation.

[hammy]

Thinking about the exact situation from my game, the HF were in a position to flank charge the MF (just) but they needed quite a big wheel to hit them. The MF couln't turn to face because they would have been charged in the flank by another BG that was infront of them to start with and they couldn't wheel to line up as they were in the restricted zone of the troops to their front and you can only wheel to be parallel in that situation.

So you supplied us with a misleading diagram!

If they could count as a flank charge, obviously my explanation is not correct in that situation.

The diagram is perfectly fine for the question in hand but after I posted it I realised that it wasn't quite right. The key is can the HF wheel through the LF.

Thinking about escape options Mr Porters fine contract away option may have worked here....

I will redo the diagram and show what I think I might have been able to do with a cheesy move and a passed CMT.

[MarkSieber]

It wouldn't count as a flank charge, just as a one-on-one base impact combat (unless stepping forward resulted in more bases in combat).

In the movement phase, the HF would pivot and slide by the minimum necessary to move into contact with the front rank base of the MF. See the conforming section of the movement rules.

We had a question about this the other day: a BG of elephants hit a 2x2 BG of Roman Cavalry on the side, but it was not a flank charge (the depth of the elephant stands preventing them from being entirely behind the front line of the cavalry.) We reasoned that since it wasn't a flank charge, the rear base of the cavalry couldn't be hit--so we did not step forward the second base of elephants. In the maneuver phase, we swung the elephants around to the front of the cavalry, one base in contact and one in overlap.

In this case, that second base became an overlap, which makes sense, but if there were a longer line stepping forward into a physical flank, but not as a legal flank charge, there could be more bases in contact in the impact phase than would be able to fight in melee, after conforming to the front. Somehow this seemed wrong, but now as I write I think we may have overthunk it.

Should we have stepped forward the second elephant base on the 'flank' during impact?

Thanks!

[terrys]

Sorry Guys, but the afformentioned attempt to wheel though the evading LF is illegal.

The following paragraph prevents it:

When troops who can evade are charged, their player must decide whether or not they will evade. If they are to evade, the charger then uses a measuring stick or tape to indicate the direction of the charge, which must be achievable by wheeling and which would “legally” contact the evaders had they remained stationary.

In order to make a legal contact 'had the evaders remain stationary' the wheel cannot cross their base.
Once the evaders have moved, the chargers may choose to wheel in an attempt to catch them. This would obviously not take it in the direction of the MF

[sagji]

Sorry Guys, but the afformentioned attempt to wheel though the evading LF is illegal.

The following paragraph prevents it:

When troops who can evade are charged, their player must decide whether or not they will evade. If they are to evade, the charger then uses a measuring stick or tape to indicate the direction of the charge, which must be achievable by wheeling and which would “legally” contact the evaders had they remained stationary.

In order to make a legal contact 'had the evaders remain stationary' the wheel cannot cross their base.
Once the evaders have moved, the chargers may choose to wheel in an attempt to catch them. This would obviously not take it in the direction of the MF

Surely they would have been contacted at the point where the wheel touches the un-moved LF.
The fact that they define their move to continue wheeling if the LF evade doesn't alter their move before hand.

[frederic]

So here is what happened to my cavalry a few weeks ago.

The Pk has charged the LH with a small wheel.
The LH has made a CMT to stand the charge, but they failed it and so evaded away.
The Pk get a 6 on their VMD and so charge 5 MU and contact the Cv as drawn.

What should happen ?
Cause I'm not sure we played it right.

[nikgaukroger]

Sorry Guys, but the afformentioned attempt to wheel though the evading LF is illegal.

The following paragraph prevents it:

When troops who can evade are charged, their player must decide whether or not they will evade. If they are to evade, the charger then uses a measuring stick or tape to indicate the direction of the charge, which must be achievable by wheeling and which would “legally” contact the evaders had they remained stationary.

In order to make a legal contact 'had the evaders remain stationary' the wheel cannot cross their base.
Once the evaders have moved, the chargers may choose to wheel in an attempt to catch them. This would obviously not take it in the direction of the MF

Surely they would have been contacted at the point where the wheel touches the un-moved LF.
The fact that they define their move to continue wheeling if the LF evade doesn't alter their move before hand.

That was certainly my thinking.

[nikgaukroger]

So here is what happened to my cavalry a few weeks ago.

The Pk has charged the LH with a small wheel.
The LH has made a CMT to stand the charge, but they failed it and so evaded away.
The Pk get a 6 on their VMD and so charge 5 MU and contact the Cv as drawn.

What should happen ?
Cause I'm not sure we played it right.

I believe that the pike and cavalry fight an impact phase treating the cavalry base contacted as a front rank element - it is not a flank charge for the obvious reasons and so the cavalry do not drop a cohesion level.In the manoeuvre phase the pike will conform and, as it was not a flank charge, they will conform to the front of the cavalry battle group if they are able - yout LH would be shifted sideways to allow legal contact.

[terrys]

I disagree with the above assumptions - I'll discuss it with Richard and Simon though - if you want the conclusive decision.

As quoted above:

When troops who can evade are charged, their player must decide whether or not they will evade. If they are to evade, the charger then uses a measuring stick or tape to indicate the direction of the charge, which must be achievable by wheeling and which would “legally” contact the evaders had they remained stationary.

Basically it says that you MUST be able to achieve a legal contact - in the direction of the charge had the evaders remained stationary.
To wheel beyond the first point of contact with the evaders is NOT a legal contact.
The 'legal' contact is the point at which the charging BG first touches the evaders (had they remained stationary).

The fact that someones performed an illegal move in a previous game (either yourself or your opponent) doesn't make it legal.

[shall]

Now I have taken a look at the detail of this stream and I 100% agree with Terry and he has cited the first critical part of the rules. Thus you can wheel but only up to the level that you could achieve before the evaders evade. It is easily forgotten and I bet I have a few times too But this is deliberate in that it means you have more flex to wheel the further you are away - as you get very close your options become limited.

THEN if all targets evade out of your path of charge you could wheel to try to contact them

Page 68 "If all target battlegroups evade out of the original path of the charge, the chargers can whel in an attempt to catch them."

So....

In the original example:
a) only a slight wheel is possible in the original charge
b) the LF evade
c) it is unlikely that they get out of the path of the charge as they evade to rear, and any such wheel would be away from the MF

In the second example
a) again only a slight wheel allowed
b) the LF evade is likely to stay within path of charge
c) no change of direction and miss the Cv

In the second case if the were at an angle such that they evaded bckwards behind the Cv then they may go out of path of charge and the Pkl in wheeling to cahse them may find they hit the Cv.

Once impact occurs...if ...Nicks point of view is correct on what happens

Si

[peterrjohnston]

Now I have taken a look at the detail of this stream and I 100% agree with Terry and he has cited the first critical part of the rules.

Can I disagree? The section Terry quotes is to indicate the initial direction of the charge for the evaders response only. It doesn't say the chargers must follow that direction - as indeed later it states they can do a further wheel to follow the evaders.

Earlier on, under declaration of chargers, about the situation changing, it says "...If a battle group is revealed and can now be contacted due to friends evading, it becomes the target of the charge..." (Which begs the question, what is "revealed"?)

If you stick to the above reading I can see cheese developing where, for example, someone places the LF with their right corner just covering the right corner of the HF and immediately in front. This would prevent the HF charging the MF, whereas my impression was the intention is HF and MF essentially ignore LF.

[shall]

Ok Peter, interesting, will take another fuller look when time is free later in the week

Si