Art De La Guerre

[madaxeman]

[MarkK]

You get Impact +1 in the first round, if you win you get an extra point of damage=.[quote]

So it is cumulative then - you can have both things. That's great thank you

[Mark G Fry]

But certain attribute always remain - regardless of what happens to a unit. Such as HCW, Armour* or Elite (or Mediocre) and the rules are very specific about that.
But others are removed dependent upon circumstances. Such as Impact for example.
(*except against Elephants)

So a unit of HC impact elite that is hit frontally by an enemy HF armoured spear unit, but in the flank simultaneously by a LC unit, loses its Impact (& therefore its ferocious charge).
But it retains its own Armour and elite status. However, as it lost its +1 for Impact (at the start of the combat), if it then win the melee why does it now get its Ferocious charge & therefore negates the HF spears armour and adds an extra casualty - sorry it's completely illogical (IMHO).

It's the same as Spears losing their +1 for being charged frontally by mounted, if they are also hit in the flank by LC.
Do the Spears get that +1 back if they win the melee? I think not.

Surely, it's once again about consistency across mechanisms and outcome. But I will delve into the details of the rules to see if there is actually a rules reference for any/all of this

Cheers
Mark
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[Neep]

Careful reading of the third bullet on page 63 gives an instance when Special Abilities are only partially canceled. [I read this section about a dozen times before I realize what the second sentence meant, so I think it is badly in need of revision, but maybe that's just me.]

For example, Foot Kn charges medium Kn impact on the front, while revolting peasant Levy attacks their flank. Because of the flank attack, the medium Kn do not get the +1 Impact bonus, nor the Furious Charge extra hit should they win. But they retain the Furious Charge cancellation effect, so, win or lose the Foot Kn Heavy Armor counts as no armor, and the med Kn benefit from better armor - effectively a +1.

[vexillia]

You persist in linking impact and furious charge despite their separation in the rules. Different rules and exceptions apply to both abilities.

As a result there are lots of situations where furious charge doesn't apply which leave impact unaffected.

Plus I can't find anywhere in the rules that says if you lose impact (your phrase) you lose furious charge. No cause & effect statement at all. There are instances where both are in lists of cancelled abilities and ones where terrain affects both but nothing remotely like an "if, then" statement.
_________________
Martin Stephenson

Subscribe via email or rss.

[Mark G Fry]

[vexillia]

[madaxeman]

A unit with Furious Charge can sometimes lose the “benefits” of Furious charge due to the circumstances in which it finds itself. 

But it still has Furious Charge. 

So … its opponents own abilities will sometimes still need to take into account the fact their current circumstances include facing a unit with the (innate) ability of furious charge. 

That’s the theory anyway, at least I think it is !
_________________
www.madaxeman.com

[vexillia]

[Mark G Fry]

FFS Martin - stop being such a pendant!

Some units with Impact have Ferocious charge - because it says they do on P18 (in certain circumstances)

Some Impetuous units have Impact - because it says they do on P18 (in certain circumstances)

Impetuous units have Ferocious charge - because it says they do on P18 (in certain circumstances)

Some units without Impact or Impetuous gain Ferocious charge - because it says they do on P18 (in certain circumstances)

All units lose Furious charge in certain circumstances - because it says they do on P18 (in certain circumstances)

Happy now

The important bit in all this is that (as Neep has highlighted) there is a contradiction between P18 and P63.

For a unit not to have Ferocious charge as P18 states it doesn't, but for that to be directly contradicted on P63 is a clear rules contradiction.
You either have Ferocious charge at the start of a melee or you don't.
As the only benefit of Ferocious charge applies if you win, what P63 actually says (in effect) is that you always have the benefit of Ferocious charge and can never lose it (or maybe other special characteristics) as long as you win your initial melee, regardless of what it states on P18. So it directly contradicts P18.

You point about the 1st sentence of Ferocious charge is irrelevant as a unit of HF swd impetuous charging in a marsh doesn't have a particularly fierce or powerful charge.
Just as a unit of HC impact hit in the front and flank by 2 enemy pike blocks doesn't have a particularly powerful charge IMHO.
What P63 appears to be implying is that in both cases if the unit with Ferocious charge (or Impact if HC) wins the melee, it always keeps its Ferocious charge.
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[vexillia]

To move matters on, as well as return to the initial situation:

Background:

• Armour ability does not apply if enemy has Furious charge (p17)
  
• Furious charge of mounted does not apply (not cancelled) against Missile support (p20)
  
• It is not clear whether or not Missile support affects Furious charge throughout the melee.
  

Situation:

• Armoured foot with missile support receive a charge from impetuous cavalry to their front.

Question:

• When exactly during melee resolution does missile support negate Furious charge?

Possible answers:

• From the beginning.
• Only once the Cv have won the melee (p62).
• Some other juncture.

Then, without spurious other guff getting in the way, we stand a chance of answering the initial question:

• Do the foot apply the bonus for armour if they are behind (at stage 4, p17) in the resultant melee? Yes or no?

Fingers crossed. This shouldn't be so hard.
_________________
Martin Stephenson

Subscribe via email or rss.

[vexillia]

[Mike Bennett]

[Mark G Fry]

Example 1:

Unit A: HF swd, impact, armour, missile support (Legionaries)
Unit B: MC impetuous, (Sarmatians)
Combat in the open - no supporting units on either side

Unit A (factors): +1 (v all) +1 (Impact as stationary & receiving charge on front edge) = +2
Unit B (factors): 0 (as the effect of Impact for being Impetuous is cancelled by Unit A's Missile support) = 0
Dice are rolled and the score is 6-1 to Unit B (just to illustrate the point)

Unit A (adjusted factors): +2 (basic factors) +1 (for dice roll) = 3
Unit B (adjusted factors): 0 (basic factor) +6 (for dice roll) = 6
Unit A has lost the combat, so now adds +1 (for Missile support) but doesn't add +1 for better Armour (as P17 states 'Armour ability is cancelled during the 1st round of melee if the enemy has Furious charge - even though Page 18, 2nd column, 4th bullet, states that Furious charge doesn't apply 'Against, foot with Missile support ability when charged by mounted units.' ).

So as neither side has better Armour, Unit A's score is only to 4
Outcome = a win by +2 for the Sarmatian MC and an additional CP is inflicted upon Unit A, as despite Furious charge being cancelled (P18 ) the affect of Furious charge is not (all a bit odd but if that's the interpretation that's the interpretation).

Are we saying that the Sarmatian MC, who have had their Furious charge negated (by P18, 2nd column, 4th bullet) now gets the 'effect' of Furious charge, as per P18, 1st column 'If the unit wins the first round of a melee, it inflicts the loss of one additional cohesion point on the enemy'?

So what has actually been cancelled by Missile support is not the Furious charge, but the effect of the Impact associated with Furious charge, as the melee outcome is still affected by Furious charge.

Example 2:

Unit A: HF swd, impact, armour, missile support (Legionaries)
Unit B: MC impetuous (Sarmatians)
Unit C: LC bow (Sarmatians) engaging the flank of Legionaries
Combat in the open - Sarmatian MC + melee support from LC

Unit A (factors): +1 (v all) (but the legionaries lose Impact as they are hit in the flank by the LC) = +1 (however, P63 states that 'The unit still cancels the abilities of any enemy unit attacking it to its front - see below)
Unit B (factors): +0 (as the effect of Impact for being Impetuous is still cancelled, by Unit A's Missile support, as this is not cancelled by the LC - as per P63) = +0
Unit C (adds) +1 to Unit B for hitting the Legionaries in the flank

Dice are rolled and the score is 6-1 to Unit B (to illustrate the example)

Unit A (adjusted factors): +1 (basic factor) +1 (for dice roll) = 2
Unit B (adjusted factors): +0 (basic factor) +1 (LC in flank) +6 (for dice roll) = 7
Unit A has lost the combat (by 5), but does it or doesn't it add +1 for missile support?

P63 states that 'Missile support abilities are cancels as the unit is hit in the flank'.
But P63 also states that 'The unit still cancels the abilities of any enemy unit attacking it from the front, even if the unit has other enemy units in melee support on its flank'.
So, now we have a situation where Unit B gets its Furious charge (as it has won the melee) so negates Unit A's armour; but Unit A also gets its Missile support, as it states on P63 that it does.
What the rules appear to be saying is that the Sarmatian MC who have had their Furious charge negated (by P18, 2nd column, 4th bullet) now gets the 'effect' of Furious charge, as per P18, 1st column 'If the unit wins the first round of a melee, it inflicts the loss of one additional cohesion point on the enemy'.
Although, I still don't actually understand why as P18 2nd column clearly states that 'Furious charge does not apply in the following case:

bullet 4 - against foot with Missile support abilities when charged by mounted units

So what has actually been cancelled by Unit A's Missile support is not the Furious charge overall, but the effect of the Impact associated with Furious charge.
Hence my 'going on' about Impact.
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

[vexillia]

This issue is confusing because you have two phases of melee and two end points. The primary effect of furious charge is after the first phase with its ability to inflict an extra CP. However, a problem arises because furious charge applies in both phases: it cancels armour in the first.

Yesterday, I reframed this the question about armour and missile support to focus on when, during melee resolution, the missile support negates furious charge. Basically always or only once the melee has been won (p62).

Re-reading the rules, assuming it is an accurate translation and looking at V3 to see if anything had changed (other than missile support,) has led me to wonder if the timing issue is more general and could help explain the confusion.

So here goes.

The 1 CP bonus of furious charge is consistently referred to as having an effect when the unit with furious charge wins the first round of melee. This separates it from melee resolution thereby raising the possibility that, in general, the restrictions on p18 only apply after the melee has been won or lost. This scenario would mean:

• Furious charge negates armour (win or lose).
  
• Missile support only impacts furious charge when the unit with missile support has lost.
  
• Furious charge applies even in terrain until the melee is over and it has won.
  
• Likewise it applies when the unit has enemy on a flank or its rear, is fighting across stakes etc.
  

To reiterate: this treats the restrictions on p18 as only applying when the melee has been won and not during the melee itself. It avoids convoluted arguments about specific situations laced with assertions and conjecture.

This interpretation has the benefit of being simple, and easy to remember and apply. Now how do I raise this with someone from the Technical Committee?
_________________
Martin Stephenson

Subscribe via email or rss.