Slitherine

A rules dispute happened that I was asked to rule on. It concerned a Route Move in the JaP

Situation, The cavalry are routed and were charged by the foot. No action has taken place until the JaP. The cav must rout directly away from the foot. The question is the manner of the movement. Do the cav wheel away? Or do they turn, then move away?

Starting Position



Option 1



Option 2



I ruled that it was option 2 but I would like to know if that was a correct ruling.

Mark

I don't think the rules specify how routers turn onto the direction of rout, so any reasonable method would be acceptable.

I'd have said wheel but agree with Lawrence so either would work for me.

I am missing a rule bookto hand but i think they move as evaders so they would turn and wheel or just wheel depending on which most quickly got them onto the direction required. 6 of one and half a dozen of the other by the looks of it in this case.

Si

Actually, in the game where this happened, the routers would have ran into a friendly unit and burst through them if they were required to turn and flee, if they were allowed to wheel, they would avoid the friendly target.

So it isnt quite the same thing, or cant go either way. What is needed, is a clarification on how this movement is plotted.


Any help is appreciated.


Clay

shall wrote:I am missing a rule bookto hand but i think they move as evaders so they would turn and wheel or just wheel depending on which most quickly got them onto the direction required. 6 of one and half a dozen of the other by the looks of it in this case.

Si

Under Initial Rout - p100 - it says they avoid obstructions as would evaders as it does on p108 for routs in the JAP; perhaps that is what you recall?

Otherwise I assume it is covered by p107 in the section on broken troops with enemy in contact at the start of the phase - which says they move directly away from the enemy in contact.

Move directly away being the expression in question.

Is that move away by wheel?
Is that move immediately away perpindicular to the fornt edge of those in contact?

Also since the contact is behind the front edge almost by definiation in the generic case of routers do they move as if being charged on the rear etc?

Wouldn't the contacted base be turned to conform to the charging unit, then when the rout occurs it would look exactly like the 2nd picture?

n10cd12 wrote:Wouldn't the contacted base be turned to conform to the charging unit, then when the rout occurs it would look exactly like the 2nd picture?

Well there are pursing situations in general that would not have a conforming opportunity.

It sounds like this is a new charge from the non-pursing unit. I could be wrong though.

The new charge, I think, should cause an impact phase rout move, similar to "being charged while fragmented". They should have a "being charged while broken" section to cover this situation.

Then remove a base if the charging/now-pursing BG still ends in contact with the routing BG. If you don't allow the impact phase rout from a newly charging unit, should the new contact remove a base for free, or would that still not happen until the new charger is still able to stay in contact up after another JAP?

---

Even if you are not allowing the broken BG to move during the impact phase, I don't think this removes the fact that during the manoeuvre phase the units must "conform to the enemy in close combat".

---

In all pursuit moves (during JAP, or BGs broken in the melee or impact phase) the broken unit would move directly away from the the enemy BG in contact (directly opposite of its facing). - Which is the 2nd picture

Now have rulebook to hand ...

No we specifically avoid Impact phases against anything already broken. It simply routs away and gets pursued. See age 100. All resolved in the JAP.

Under Initial Rout - p100 - it says they avoid obstructions as would evaders as it does on p108 for routs in the JAP; perhaps that is what you recall?

Otherwise I assume it is covered by p107 in the section on broken troops with enemy in contact at the start of the phase - which says they move directly away from the enemy in contact.

Yes Nik that's the section and as it only says they avoid obstructions by evade mechanisms they would indeed just wheel to get directly onto the line of rout and go as far as they can. One important thing there is that there is no choice about how they move, they are by this stage a law unto themselves.

I will pop this on across to the authors forum as well. Troops have to turn as part of an initial rout, even though it doesn't explictly say you can do so in the rules (unless I am missing something we put in). So how do troops who start their rout fighting and facing the enemy make their rout move if you can only wheel as part of a rout move?

Personally my intent for situations such as the one raised (i.e. where there is a direction change) was that the evade mechanism whould be used to find the shortest way to get onto the path of rout; its quite an elegant option to mix turns and wheels to get as far as possible. We use it for evade direction changes. We also put it in on page 100 when changing direction to move towards the base edge while routing (2nd bullet up on right hand side). The standard rout moves have sort of assumed you are lined up with enemy facing them as the normal situation, and not stated what happens to get you away.

Here is an example of why I think we need the turn/wheel combination. Imagine a line of 4 Cv routing. Now charge them from the front with some of your troopsin the middle. How do they move? If they can only wheel, they have to wheel 178 degrees, say. But they can't as the new enemy are in the way. I suspect most of us would turn them 180 to run away, and then wheel them onto the line. But do the rules actually currently allow that? Otherwise they are simply destroyed as unable to complete a rout move (assuming you make sur the new contact is beyond the ability of the evade mechanisms to solve it). I would prefer our evade mechanism to turn them around and move them away.

So to surmise ... as written literallyat preset I think you would wheel in the situation raised ... but I am of the opinion that the evade direction change mechanism is a better method where direction changes are needed. More anon after discussing with Terry and Richard. Stick to the as worded version for now I would suggest.

Si

n10cd12 wrote:It sounds like this is a new charge from the non-pursing unit. I could be wrong though.

The new charge, I think, should cause an impact phase rout move, similar to "being charged while fragmented". They should have a "being charged while broken" section to cover this situation.

Then remove a base if the charging/now-pursing BG still ends in contact with the routing BG. If you don't allow the impact phase rout from a newly charging unit, should the new contact remove a base for free, or would that still not happen until the new charger is still able to stay in contact up after another JAP?

---

Even if you are not allowing the broken BG to move during the impact phase, I don't think this removes the fact that during the manoeuvre phase the units must "conform to the enemy in close combat".

---

In all pursuit moves (during JAP, or BGs broken in the melee or impact phase) the broken unit would move directly away from the the enemy BG in contact (directly opposite of its facing). - Which is the 2nd picture

I was going to mention this when the post first appeared but decided not to as I felt it could easily divert the discussion.

I think what has happened is that the routing cavalry were charged by the infantry which left them in the possition photographed. When routers are charged nothing happens at that point but in the JAP the routers rout and the chargers pursue, if the chargers keep up the routers lose a base.

Where I think an error has been made is that as you pointed out during the movement phase the chargers chould have conformed to the cavalry.

hammy wrote:
Where I think an error has been made is that as you pointed out during the movement phase the chargers chould have conformed to the cavalry.

If they are deemed to be in close combat they must conform IIRC.

Is such a contact (i.e. with broken troops) deemed as close combat - discuss ...

They charge in the impact phase, conform at the start of the manouver phase and then that makes it easy for the Cav to rout directly away you mean.

Nice simple solution.

Surely there is no 'impact phase' when you charge routers?
It's not close combat. How can there be an impact phase?

You can only charge in the impact phase, though you can catch routers in melee and JAP, but in either of these the routers should already be moving directly away.

There is no impact or melee combat when you charge routers though.

Indeed - but there's no charge in this case.
You don't charge routers - you just move into contact with them

No you must charge them to make contact. You can only move into contact with enemy as an overlap

edit[/]

The impact phase ends with the charge contact. The rules say there is no further damage assessment against the routers. There is a manouvre phase when the chargers conform, but no damage there either. Then there is the JAP when the routers move and are pursued, losing a base(s) if caught. As noted, a very nice and easy solution.

Where I think an error has been made is that as you pointed out during the movement phase the chargers chould have conformed to the cavalry.

Only if they re in close combat at the time of the movement phase - whoch means they have to have already fought an impact of melee combat. Its defined in the glossary specifically this way.

So in this case they don't conform. This is deliberate so that you can drive routers away from you rather than having your own direction somehow manipulated by their facing.

Si