Slitherine

Is this correct?

A unit of LF bow is standing inside a gully. (LF can see out and therefor shoot)

A unit of MF, undrilled, offensive spear is outside the gully, facing the LF and within 4 MU's (they can't see any troops in the gully until they are within 1 MU)

The MF want to charge the LF, however they cannot see into the gully until they are within 1 MU of the edge, therefore one assumes they can't charge what they can't see. There only option is to move within 1 MU of gully before they can charge. However being undrilled, moving less than their full move is a 'difficult forward move' requiring a CMT. They can't charge and if they fail their CMT they can't move, all the time getting shot to pieces by the LF.

Sounds about the long and the short of it to me.

Now all you need is some crackers, and some players to whine. Maybe invite them to your Swiss Cheese Fondue evening?
I shoot you from a gully!!!! While they're asking an umpire if it's legal - ask them if they "want some cheese with that whine??"

Nik, I presume if they shoot, they become visible and therefore an eligible charge target.

Jim

I assume from the original post that the LF are deployed and not in ambush.

Gino
SMAC

Never presume anything

Maybe they just se a hail of arrows come flying out of the gully

you are correct Kal

This could also happen in brush (i think, I don't have the rules handy)

gibby wrote:Nik, I presume if they shoot, they become visible and therefore an eligible charge target.

Jim

Don't believe the rules say anything about that - just the blanket in a gully cannot be seen from over 1MU ouutside and troops inside can see out.

I know we have played where a BG shooting out of a Gully can not be shot at by the incoming BG until they are within visibility range. I have not encoutered the question of the charge. The undrilled troops requiring a CMT to move short adds a level to it.
Gino
SMAC

One other point once 2 enemy BG's are both in the same gully do both have a visibility range of 1MU?
The original BG is no longer looking out of the gully but rather at another part of the gully.

Gino
SMAC

Ok, I will not presume. Does the page 132 statement that
"In some cases light foot can see out bit not be seen. If they shoot, however, they become visible to the battle group shot at, who can then shoot back."
therefore mean that you are now visible for charges as well.

I would think that is the logical conclusion is my take.

If the guys in the gully have made themselves visible enough to shoot with a degree of accuracy then they're visible enough to be seen and charged! If the guys in the gully choose to shoot all but blind, then maybe they should get a chance to hit but only on 6's?

Martin

gibby wrote:Ok, I will not presume. Does the page 132 statement that
"In some cases light foot can see out bit not be seen. If they shoot, however, they become visible to the battle group shot at, who can then shoot back."
therefore mean that you are now visible for charges as well.

I would think that is the logical conclusion is my take.

Splendid, I'd previously missed that little bit

The possible problem, as you mention is that it only actually mentions shooting - also worth noting that the bit you quote oddly only talks about LF whereas any troops in a gully can see out without being seen is enemy are over 1 MU away.

However, I think the answer is that it says "they then become visible to the battle group shot at" comma ... the bit after the comma is a result of the visibility which can be taken to be then ongoing as it is not said to be time bound, and so they can be charged by BGs they shot at IMO.

Would also be the instinctive solution which is nice

As a separate question, what happens if the MF decides to make a full forward move and then actually runs into the LF that it could not "see" before going the full move? (Assume the LF weren't actually shooting so aren't visible.) So does the MF have to make a retroactive CMT when there move is stopped by enemy they could not see? (I assume they would stop epsilon short of the LF if they are able to make the forward move with or without the retroactive CMT.)

fatismo wrote:Is this correct?

A unit of LF bow is standing inside a gully. (LF can see out and therefor shoot)

A unit of MF, undrilled, offensive spear is outside the gully, facing the LF and within 4 MU's (they can't see any troops in the gully until they are within 1 MU)

The MF want to charge the LF, however they cannot see into the gully until they are within 1 MU of the edge, therefore one assumes they can't charge what they can't see. There only option is to move within 1 MU of gully before they can charge. However being undrilled, moving less than their full move is a 'difficult forward move' requiring a CMT. They can't charge and if they fail their CMT they can't move, all the time getting shot to pieces by the LF.

Nice spotting Gibby.

I agree with Nik's view, however, I know those who would argue that the statment only applies to LF (what if it was MF shooting) and that it also applies to shooting back not charging. Hopefully an umpire would have more sense

CMT to move within 6" of an ambush marker in a gully, and do not reveal the ambush till troops are 1" away?
Mmmmmm aged cheddar, go Javelinman posts!!

In a role as Ref. I would infer the statement from this page and use the common sense sniff test-
I would apply this statement to MF shooting out of a gully and the ability of an enemy troop to charge them.

So you cannot be charged unless you have shot (in which case you can be charged if withing charge range through the terrain)

Same would apply to enemy wanting to return fire into the gully.
At some point a ref has to use thier interp of the author's intent and just be consistent.

Gino
SMAC

gibby wrote:"...If they shoot, however, they become visible to the battle group shot at, who can then shoot back."

Gibby has it I believe. It makes perfect sense...but for those rules-lawyers out there I offer the following;

"The royal foot will advance towards that gully!"
TWANG!!! Hundreds of voices cry out in pain as a hail of arrows find thier marks.

"CHARGE!"
"Charge who sir? We don't see anyone...just arrows flying out of that there gully..."
TWANG!!! Hundreds of voices cry out in pain as a hail of arrows find thier marks.

"CHARGE THOSE ARCHERS! NOW!!! THAT'S AN ORDER!!!
"We can't see anyone Sir! Perhaps we should move closer?"
TWANG!!! Hundreds of voices cry out in pain as a hail of arrows find thier marks.

"FINE! THE ROYAL FOOT WILL ADVANCE TOWARDS THAT GULLY WITH ALL THE ARROWS FLYING OUT OF IT!"
"It's only 50 yards away sir not 100...should we trot? Jog? Meander? I mean we have to cut our normal speed a little or we might fall into that gully...so just kind-of....you know...shuffle forward?"
TWANG!!! Hundreds of voices cry out in pain as a hail of arrows find thier marks.

DAMMIT I SAID CHARGE!!!
"Charge who sir?"
Rinse and repeat until nauseated

Henry the V

I always assumed that the visibility due to shooting was a temporary effect which applied only for return shooting during the shooting phase.

gozerius wrote:I always assumed that the visibility due to shooting was a temporary effect which applied only for return shooting during the shooting phase.

I always assumed that shooting is continuous, and that it is only resolved in a phase because it's a game and it has to have mechanics like this.

I cannot imagine a situation where people stop shooting because 'it's the manouver phase don't you know'.

Ian