Breaking off from close combat

[Xavi]

Hi there,

In one of our tests games on Friday we had this situation: A Cataphract charged a Bow element and forced it to turn. That caused the bow to end up in good going (having been on a swamp before). The combat ended in a tie (much cheering on the Bow side of the table).

After that the Bow decided to break off to get into the swamp. In the swamp the Cat would move 3 MU, so we thought it was OK for it to retreat there. However, checking the rules later we found that you need to move MORE than the enemy (3MU each in this case) to break off. We found the Bow tactic to be fairly sensible at the time since it was like 0,1 inch from the swamp, so the question is if it MUST be greater or EQUAL or greater? The current rule is OK as it is, but just to make sure it is not an oversight.

Thx

Xavi

[Roland Fricke]

Must be greater than the opposing unit's movement in the terrain it ends in. Equal to is not good enough.

[Xavi]

Thanks for the confirmation.

Xavi

[ferrency]

Originally Posted by Xavi

Hi there,

In one of our tests games on Friday we had this situation: A Cataphract charged a Bow element and forced it to turn. That caused the bow to end up in good going (having been on a swamp before). The combat ended in a tie (much cheering on the Bow side of the table).

After that the Bow decided to break off to get into the swamp. In the swamp the Cat would move 3 MU, so we thought it was OK for it to retreat there. However, checking the rules later we found that you need to move MORE than the enemy (3MU each in this case) to break off. We found the Bow tactic to be fairly sensible at the time since it was like 0,1 inch from the swamp, so the question is if it MUST be greater or EQUAL or greater? The current rule is OK as it is, but just to make sure it is not an oversight.

Thx

Xavi

Also: I believe that when a single element is in bad going, it does not conform to a group. This is to avoid the situation you found, where it could be pulled out of the bad going by mounted to avoid the terrain penalty.

Finally, it isn't clear whether the cataphract was making a group move or not. Single elements only conform to groups.

This is just like HOTT in these respects.

Alan

[Xavi]

The cataphract made a single element move. It made a perfect flank contact with the bow (right front corner to right front corner). More than half of the bow was outside bad going, so when it turned to face at the end of the movement phase the whole of it was in good going. You do not need groups to pull people, just good flank contacts. We do that all the time is someone is careless enough to leave an element where it turning to face will mean that it ends out of bad going.

We have been playing DBA for a while and know how the turn to face when your are contacted in the flank works, heheh This has not changed in 2.2+. We have never played HOTT, though.

I am still waiting for the other guy to send me the pictures, so no report on Friday's battles available yet

Xavi

[Lobotomy]

Originally Posted by Xavi

We do that all the time is someone is careless enough to leave an element where it turning to face will mean that it ends out of bad going. Xavi

That's why we (The Stooges and those we've tutored to stooge) started saying exactly where the element is if there would be any question on the subsequent move. It is just not worth getting into an argument about whether the element is more or less than half out of the BG.

But, then, there are times when one is just not paying attention close enough!

[ferrency]

Originally Posted by Xavi

The cataphract made a single element move. It made a perfect flank contact with the bow (right front corner to right front corner).

I'm sorry, my mistake!

I thought this was an example of 2.2+ "single element conforms" and not the standard 2.2 "flank contact turns to face" rule.

Alan

[Xavi]

No, it was a case of "breaking from combat", not flank move. Anyway, to make things 100% clear, the event in images:

PHASE 1: the 4Kn moves to put himself unsuspiciously by the side of ther Bw, and provide overlap support.


PHASE 2: the SCh breaks the ZOC of the Kn element so the 4Kn can turn and engage the Bw. The bow turns to face at the end of the movement phase and he happens to be in the open now The bastard refused to die when it was proper that he should (damn northern barbarians...) but tha tis another matter entirely



Cheers,
Xavi

[colinrice]

This is another one of those rules that I disagree with. It places a needless constraint on the mechanics of play that seems to be entirely artificial. If a player wishes to break from contact they should be permitted to instead of just dumbly waiting to get hammered. I have no idea what the justification for this rules constraint is.

[kontos]

Originally Posted by colinrice

This is another one of those rules that I disagree with. It places a needless constraint on the mechanics of play that seems to be entirely artificial. If a player wishes to break from contact they should be permitted to instead of just dumbly waiting to get hammered. I have no idea what the justification for this rules constraint is.

Breaking off from combat remaining ordered is a difficult maneuver to pull off. 2.2 allowed it at will. I think that grants too much control. 3.0 restricts it...period. 2.2+ allows it IF you are faster than your opponent. Simply stated. I happen to find this an excellent compromise.