Page 1 of 2
Wheel and Charge Problem
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:11 pm
by bayouwars2001
I would appreciate some help with the following tactical situation. My BGs are CAV-A and HF-B facing up, my opponent’s BGs are facing down. He had KN-1 in frontal contact with CAV-A and LF- 2 on its flank. (See below):
KN-1 KN -1
KN-1 KN- 1 LF- 2 LF– 2 LF- 2
CAV-ACAV-A LF – 2 LF- 2 LF- 2
CAV-ACAV-A
HF– B HF-B
HF -B HF-B
In my bound, I wanted to support the CAV-KN melee with my HF BG by bringing it into overlap position. Unfortunately, The LF BG prohibits a move into that position during the manoeuvre phase. So, I wanted to declare a charge with my HF, start the charge with a very slight wheel up to the LF (hoping they evaded) and thus contacting the KN BG (again anticipating that the LF would evade). Here’s the rub, the charge would end up with the HF contacting the KN BG with its front corner to the KN’s side edge. The rule at page 53 prohibits such a charge as the KN BG is already in melee to its front. Does everyone agree that I am stuck or could I have declared a charge on the LF, wheel towards the KN and still contact. (My gut feeling says “no” because the KN can never be “legally” contacted as per the Rule at page 53). I appreciate any advice (also, was there some other way to accomplish my goal).
Regards,
Chris
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:15 pm
by bayouwars2001
hmmmm...the diagram didn't come out right when I posted my question. Let's try again.
KN1 KN1
KN1 KN1 LF2 LF2 LF2
CAVCAV LF2 LF2 LF2
CAV CAV
HF(B)HF(B)
HF(B)HF(B)
Sorry.
Chris
Damn%^$^%##@#^
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:18 pm
by bayouwars2001
OK, I still can't do it right.
Please move the HF BG out from behind the CAV BG and facing the LF BG
KN KN
KN KN LF LF LF
CAVCAV
CAVCAV HF HF
Sheesh I am really sorry!
Re: Damn%^$^%##@#^
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:22 pm
by babyshark
bayouwars2001 wrote:OK, I still can't do it right.
Please move the HF BG out from behind the CAV BG and facing the LF BG
Is this what you are after?
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:26 pm
by bayouwars2001
Boy, I am truly sorry...it looks like the diagram is not picking up the spaces. The LF is not in overlap position.
OK, here goes one last time:
KN KN.........
KN KN.........LF LF LF
CAV CAV........LF LF LF
CAV CAV.........
......................HF HF
......................HF HF
Three's a charm, I hope.
Chris
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:05 pm
by lawrenceg
bayouwars2001 wrote:Boy, I am truly sorry...it looks like the diagram is not picking up the spaces. The LF is not in overlap position.
OK, here goes one last time:
Code: Select all
KNKN
KNKN....LF LF LF
CVCV....LF LF LF
CVCV....
.........HF HF
.........HF HF
Three's a charm, I hope.
Chris
As the second rank of knights can't fight in the melee, you should be able to charge them, as long as your wheel is allowable (would not result in less of your bases fighting than if you went straight ahead).
If not, then you will have to charge the LF and then move into overlap in your following turn (this can include a half base sideways shift).
Alternatively you could do a left turn with the HF ready to do a flank charge when the knights pursue your broken cavalry.
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:11 pm
by madcam2us
When all else fails, just declare Hilton a cheater and claim moral victory....
As to your question, you didn't declare a charge vs the KN but rather the LF, correct?
Then you can only wheel when able to bring the same amout (or more) stands into impact combat as you would had you gone straight ahead. If that applies then you could have charged since the target of said charge was the LF
The part about not being able to declare the charge applies only to the BG that you declared the charge versus. In this case your contact of KN was incidental.
IMO you could have met the KNs and fought a impact but wouldn't have counted as flanking since those requirements were not met...
Madcam.
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:35 pm
by hammy
Interesting....
It is not a situation I had considered and looks like it could be one that introduces a degree of gorgonzola.
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:11 pm
by dave_r
It is not a situation I had considered and looks like it could be one that introduces a degree of gorgonzola.
Really? I do this all the time with LF to try and prevent an overlap for as long as possible. I hadn't regarded it as cheese as I think it is a valid function of LF to get in the way until the HF charge to get rid of them. Once done they can turn left and batter the cavalry. If the melee is over then the LF have done their job and distracted their opponent until the fight was over.[/list]
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:26 pm
by BrianC
dave_r wrote:It is not a situation I had considered and looks like it could be one that introduces a degree of gorgonzola.
Really? I do this all the time with LF to try and prevent an overlap for as long as possible. I hadn't regarded it as cheese as I think it is a valid function of LF to get in the way until the HF charge to get rid of them. Once done they can turn left and batter the cavalry. If the melee is over then the LF have done their job and distracted their opponent until the fight was over.[/list]
To take this tactic a step further, couldn't this lead to a situation where the LF who have just evaded can turn around and move up to within the HF's charge distance then in the next turn the HF that wants to now turn to the left and charge the enemy HF but must first roll to not charge the LF because they are within charge distance? And the LF can shift over just enough to force the HF to be turned away from the main fight.
Brian
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:28 pm
by jre
I want to make sure I would be doing it right...
The HF declares "Charge!" at the start of the impact phase. No need for directions (maybe a quick distance check if the LF is a bit far away).
After all the charges, conditional charges and spontaneous charges status are cleared, the LF has to decide if it will evade or not. If it evades, the HF must indicate a charge direction (including a starting wheel, if wished) within the maximum bases contacted limitation. In the example above it would not be difficult to aim towards the second rank of the knights, though having enough MUs to actually reach there would be difficult with HF, but I would usually choose straight ahead (see below).
The LF (supposing it evades) chooses its evade direction, rolls the VMT and moves away.
The HF rolls VMT, wheels (if any) towards its charge direction and it can wheel further if it will get more contacts, which may mean an opportunity charge against the knights, if they are in range including the wheel, as the LF has, most likely, moved out of charge range, so no contacts are possible in that direction.
You would still need enough MUs to hit the second rank of knights, and they will still fight with all favorable modifiers, and the HF would conform on overlap besides the cavalry as it is a frontal charge.
In brief, you start charging (without a clear target), BGs start moving away before they even know if they are your actual target or towards you (interception) and you try to hit one or more of the BGs remaining in range (or the new, intercepting ones).
Is this right?
José
[Edited to correct a pesky "it" instead of "if"]
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 5:27 pm
by grahambriggs
jre wrote:I want to make sure I would be doing it right...
The HF declares "Charge!" at the start of the impact phase. No need for directions (maybe a quick distance check if the LF is a bit far away).
After all the charges, conditional charges and spontaneous charges status are cleared, the LF has to decide if it will evade or not. It it evades, the HF must indicate a charge direction (including a starting wheel, if wished) within the maximum bases contacted limitation. In the example above it would not be difficult to aim towards the second rank of the knights, though having enough MUs to actually reach there would be difficult with HF, but I would usually choose straight ahead (see below).
The LF (supposing it evades) chooses its evade direction, rolls the VMT and moves away.
The HF rolls VMT, wheels (if any) towards its charge direction and it can wheel further if it will get more contacts, which may mean an opportunity charge against the knights, if they are in range including the wheel, as the LF has, most likely, moved out of charge range, so no contacts are possible in that direction.
You would still need enough MUs to hit the second rank of knights, and they will still fight with all favorable modifiers, and the HF would conform on overlap besides the cavalry as it is a frontal charge.
In brief, you start charging (without a clear target), BGs start moving away before they even know if they are your actual target or towards you (interception) and you try to hit one or more of the BGs remaining in range (or the new, intercepting ones).
Is this right?
José
I think this is right. The key point being that the LF evade decision is _before_ the direction of charge being indicated ()though the are some restictions on that charge - the bit about making sure you would clobber into the LF properly had they not charged). If the Kn are a valid target (second rank not fighting and you can reach seems OK to me.
I managed to get this comprehensively wrong at Roll Call at the weekend. Some LF snuck up real close to my hoplites, who really wanted to charge someone else who was just slightly outside of my path. So I played it that the hoplites couldn't wheel because of the closeness of the LF, whereas it's not that way at all.
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:51 pm
by babyshark
lawrenceg wrote:As the second rank of knights can't fight in the melee, you should be able to charge them, as long as your wheel is allowable (would not result in less of your bases fighting than if you went straight ahead).
Oooh, good point. I completely missed that, seeing only that the BG was in two ranks, not that they were Kn. What were Kn doing in two ranks?
Marc
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:17 pm
by jre
I do not have the rules on me, but I think it should work if you hit the second rank even if it is Cavalry, as the charge would be cancelled only if you actually hit a base in contact with enemy, and the second rank is not in contact with the enemy, even if it provides dice to the melee.
As for knights, I use them very often two deep, both to reduce shooting vulnerability and to maximize impact randomness when I do not have an advantage at impact. That way my small BGs suffer less dice, therefore easier death rolls. Depends on the target, the PoAs and the possibility of a break-off.
José
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:09 pm
by BrianC
babyshark wrote:lawrenceg wrote:As the second rank of knights can't fight in the melee, you should be able to charge them, as long as your wheel is allowable (would not result in less of your bases fighting than if you went straight ahead).
Oooh, good point. I completely missed that, seeing only that the BG was in two ranks, not that they were Kn. What were Kn doing in two ranks?
Marc
I am at work with no rules handy, but don't you run into the problem of hitting less bases than you would have if you charged straight ahead, even knowing that the LF evaded? I thought you would then have to either wheel and charge a new target if you can hit at least the same number of bases as you could have in the original charge condition (declaration)
Brian
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:58 am
by bayouwars2001
As Homer Simpson would say:"DUH!"
When we were playing this out I misread the rules. Indeed it says that the charge cannot be declared if it would contact an enemy BASE in frontal melee contact, not an enemy BG in frontal enemy contact. Damn, what was that again about a dull 6 year old? Oh, wrong rule set.
Thanks for the great advice!
It appears that I could have declared the charge and then wheeled the HF ever so slightly so that the HF would contact the Kn if the LF evaded (and I didn't roll a 1 or 2 on the VMD test). (Whether ultimately that would have been a better strategy would never be known). ;^D
Thanks again,
Chris
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:17 am
by lawrenceg
jre wrote:I do not have the rules on me, but I think it should work if you hit the second rank even if it is Cavalry, as the charge would be cancelled only if you actually hit a base in contact with enemy, and the second rank is not in contact with the enemy, even if it provides dice to the melee.
José
There was a discussion on here about what you are allowed to contact in this situation (i.e. what qualifies as "already in melee to its front") and how they fight. The result was this FAQ:
FAQ wrote:iii) CHARGES NOT QUALIFYING AS A FLANK CHARGE CONTACTING THE FLANK EDGE OF AN ENEMY BASE
What POAs are used?
The normal POAs are used as if the charge had contacted the front of the enemy file. Thus, for example, if the 3rd rank
base of a 4 rank deep pikemen battle group is contacted, the pikemen use their normal POAs for 3 ranks deep pikemen
and for the 4th rank.
Which enemy ranks cannot be so contacted if the front base in the file is already in melee to its front?
The first two ranks.
The FAQ would prohibit charging the second rank of knights, but I suspect they hadn't considered the possibility when they wrote it. Second rank knights do not provide dice or contribute to POA, so IMO there is no way to interpret "already in melee to its front" as applying to 2nd rank knights and I would give the rule book priority over the FAQ for this.
However, it is clear that you cannot charge 2nd rank cavalry in this way.
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:46 pm
by pyrrhus
ok so what is the offial ruling on this and how do we handle this situation correctly?
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:43 pm
by BrianC
I still think that even if you could attack the second rank in the flank that you would not be allowed to. I'm at work right now and don't have the rules with me.
But my above comment is still true I believe. If the HF move straight ahead they would hit 2 stands of LF. Now if they wheel to hit a new target don't they also have to hit at least 2 bases? The given situation they would hit 1.
Also it was mentioned that the HF get a VMD to follow pursuers. But I thought that you only get it if you actually pursue the evaders. If you charge another target doesn't it have to be done with your regular movement rate? 3 in this case.
Sorry to go over this again, but bits of it are still FOGGY. Where is Possum when you need him
Thanks for any clarification.
Brian
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:02 pm
by lawrenceg
BrianC wrote:I still think that even if you could attack the second rank in the flank that you would not be allowed to. I'm at work right now and don't have the rules with me.
But my above comment is still true I believe. If the HF move straight ahead they would hit 2 stands of LF. Now if they wheel to hit a new target don't they also have to hit at least 2 bases? The given situation they would hit 1.
Also it was mentioned that the HF get a VMD to follow pursuers. But I thought that you only get it if you actually pursue the evaders. If you charge another target doesn't it have to be done with your regular movement rate? 3 in this case.
Sorry to go over this again, but bits of it are still FOGGY. Where is Possum when you need him
Thanks for any clarification.
Brian
Charge direction must be declared before the evade takes place. When deciding if you can wheel or not, you assume the targets do not evade. In this case as long as two of your bases would hit something they can fight, the wheel is permitted. The situation after the evade is not relevant here as your wheel has already been declared.
If all your targets evade, you have the option to wheel in order to chase them, or you can carry on in the original direction. Whichever choice you make, if there is a new target within your normal move distance then you hit it without doing a VMD. If there is no new target in range, then you must roll VMD.