| Auteur |
Message |
Andy Fyfe
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 129
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 23, 2025 12:50 pm Sujet du message: Loss of the camp |
|
Hi Guys,
I think this came up at Codgers this year but I did not hear directly and wanted to check.
When does the loss of a camp count towards army rout?
I thought it counted immediately like the loss of any unit; however, I have heard that it does not count until the end of the turn. So if time is called before turn end then the loss is not counted (this would only be in the UK where a 'dice-down' end of game approach is the usual).
The wording under 'Unfortified camp' on p66 would support that is counts immediately:
If an unfortified camp is attacked in melee by an enemy unit it is automatically lost and looted.
Andy |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1684
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 23, 2025 3:23 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: | Hi Guys,
I think this came up at Codgers this year but I did not hear directly and wanted to check.
When does the loss of a camp count towards army rout?
I thought it counted immediately like the loss of any unit; however, I have heard that it does not count until the end of the turn. So if time is called before turn end then the loss is not counted (this would only be in the UK where a 'dice-down' end of game approach is the usual).
The wording under 'Unfortified camp' on p66 would support that is counts immediately:
If an unfortified camp is attacked in melee by an enemy unit it is automatically lost and looted.
Andy |
Normally the game continued to the end of the (or "a") turn, so all combats and outcomes are totted up and "army break"for both sides is assessed at the end of the turn.
"dice down" is a UK convention, so isn't covered by the RAW.
It does however seem fair that a camp that has been contacted (if unfortified) and/or captured (ie contacted and then also rolled for succesfully if fortified) by the enemy at the time of the "dice down" call should count as "lost".
Anything else and the rules cart would be very much driving the common sense horse... _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1709
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 23, 2025 3:56 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Anything less than counting all losses after dice down, perverts dice down into a gamey tactic even worse than it is.
Imagine
I know i am broken because of a 1-6 melee roll, but i spend 10 minutes deciding which of the remaining combats i want to roll first and whether to put my general into combat.
Dice down. I am not broken.
This would be insane even by old Reigate Dice Down Gamey Muppetry. I doubt this is how it would be adjudicated.
There are many different solutions to needing to stay on schedule than dice down but people have their preferences. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 129
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 23, 2025 4:18 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| madaxeman a écrit: | | Andy Fyfe a écrit: | Hi Guys,
I think this came up at Codgers this year but I did not hear directly and wanted to check.
When does the loss of a camp count towards army rout?
I thought it counted immediately like the loss of any unit; however, I have heard that it does not count until the end of the turn. So if time is called before turn end then the loss is not counted (this would only be in the UK where a 'dice-down' end of game approach is the usual).
The wording under 'Unfortified camp' on p66 would support that is counts immediately:
If an unfortified camp is attacked in melee by an enemy unit it is automatically lost and looted.
Andy |
Normally the game continued to the end of the (or "a") turn, so all combats and outcomes are totted up and "army break"for both sides is assessed at the end of the turn.
"dice down" is a UK convention, so isn't covered by the RAW.
It does however seem fair that a camp that has been contacted (if unfortified) and/or captured (ie contacted and then also rolled for succesfully if fortified) by the enemy at the time of the "dice down" call should count as "lost".
Anything else and the rules cart would be very much driving the common sense horse... |
Hi Tim,
I agree; it seems the only logical way.
IIRC it was Mike Bennett at Codgers who had been told that his taking of the camp didn't count because they had not reached the end of that turn. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mike Bennett
Légat
Inscrit le: 11 Nov 2017 Messages: 600
Localisation: Carnforth, Lancashire, UK
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 7:43 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
Hi Tim,
I agree; it seems the only logical way.
IIRC it was Mike Bennett at Codgers who had been told that his taking of the camp didn't count because they had not reached the end of that turn. |
The ruling was that I had not got it as it is destroyed in melee and time was called whilst I was still in moving phase. I would have won if I had ceased all movement as soon as I hit the camp, gone straight to shooting and then started the melee phase.
So it was the start of melee phase which was key, not the end of the turn. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 129
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 8:10 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Mike Bennett a écrit: | | Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
Hi Tim,
I agree; it seems the only logical way.
IIRC it was Mike Bennett at Codgers who had been told that his taking of the camp didn't count because they had not reached the end of that turn. |
The ruling was that I had not got it as it is destroyed in melee and time was called whilst I was still in moving phase. I would have won if I had ceased all movement as soon as I hit the camp, gone straight to shooting and then started the melee phase.
So it was the start of melee phase which was key, not the end of the turn. |
Understood Mike - unlucky! |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 524
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 8:34 am Sujet du message: |
|
| So if during Mike’s Movement Phase his battle unit had contacted an enemy on its side edge and immediately inflicted the final cohesion hit required to rout it (enemy already fighting in melee on its front edge), would that be ruled “no rout†if dice down was called prior to the Melee Phase? |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 129
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 9:07 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Zoltan a écrit: | | So if during Mike’s Movement Phase his battle unit had contacted an enemy on its side edge and immediately inflicted the final cohesion hit required to rout it (enemy already fighting in melee on its front edge), would that be ruled “no rout†if dice down was called prior to the Melee Phase? |
That sounds like what they would call.
I don't agree with it. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 524
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 9:23 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: | | Zoltan a écrit: | | So if during Mike’s Movement Phase his battle unit had contacted an enemy on its side edge and immediately inflicted the final cohesion hit required to rout it (enemy already fighting in melee on its front edge), would that be ruled “no rout†if dice down was called prior to the Melee Phase? |
That sounds like what they would call.
I don't agree with it. |
And similarly, if during the shooting phase the final cohesion hit was inflicted to rout a unit, but dice down was called before the melee phase - no rout! |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Three
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2017 Messages: 223
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 11:09 am Sujet du message: |
|
What utter nonsense.
If time/dice down is called then losses as they stand are counted up and the result is then determined, not back counted to the start of the current phase.
Anything else is unfair to both players. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 129
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 5:01 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| Three a écrit: | What utter nonsense.
If time/dice down is called then losses as they stand are counted up and the result is then determined, not back counted to the start of the current phase.
Anything else is unfair to both players. |
I think this might need to be made clear at the start of the competition.
All loses incurred during the last turn will be counted even if the required phase has not been reached. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 524
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 24, 2025 5:42 pm Sujet du message: |
|
P.69 Army Rout states: "At the end of each player's sequence, a check is made to verify whether one or both armies are routed."
Event organisers who use the "dice down" approach are arbitrarily cutting the phasing player's sequence short (to manage event time). This hard-stop should still count as the end of a sequence, and the losses be tallied in full to determine whether or not any armies are broken at that point. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1684
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Sam Oct 25, 2025 10:39 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: | | Mike Bennett a écrit: | | Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
Hi Tim,
I agree; it seems the only logical way.
IIRC it was Mike Bennett at Codgers who had been told that his taking of the camp didn't count because they had not reached the end of that turn. |
The ruling was that I had not got it as it is destroyed in melee and time was called whilst I was still in moving phase. I would have won if I had ceased all movement as soon as I hit the camp, gone straight to shooting and then started the melee phase.
So it was the start of melee phase which was key, not the end of the turn. |
Understood Mike - unlucky! |
Looking at the RAW more carefully, I may have gotten this one wrong - although there is some genuine ambiguity here to think through.
p66 - "If an unfortified camp is attacked in melee by an enemy unit it is automatically lost and looted" is the operative rules reference.
I guess it's whether we consider that an enemy moving into melee with the camp (aka "attacked") or being in the subsequent melee phase (aka "in melee") is the thing that causes the loss of the camp according to the RAW.
In retrospect I am more leaning towards the "attacked" being the trigger for loss... although to be fair this is the first time I'm aware of this happening in all my time running events !
Either way, "dice down" means everything stops and losses are added up at that exact point in time - no going forwards or backwards.
Hitting someone on two sides causes an "immediate" cohesion loss (p61) in the phase it is contacted by the enemy, so that type of loss absolutely happens in the movement phase - it's only unfortified camps that have this slight ambiguity around them. _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1684
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Sam Oct 25, 2025 10:41 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: | | Zoltan a écrit: | | So if during Mike’s Movement Phase his battle unit had contacted an enemy on its side edge and immediately inflicted the final cohesion hit required to rout it (enemy already fighting in melee on its front edge), would that be ruled “no rout†if dice down was called prior to the Melee Phase? |
That sounds like what they would call.
I don't agree with it. |
This is incorrect Andy - multiple attacks trigger immediate cohesion losses. _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1684
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Sam Oct 25, 2025 10:43 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Three a écrit: | What utter nonsense.
If time/dice down is called then losses as they stand are counted up and the result is then determined, not back counted to the start of the current phase.
Anything else is unfair to both players. |
What you have described is exactly what happens - the issue here is that Mike B has now uncovered a degree of previously unforseen ambiguity over the timing of the loss of a contacted, unfortified camp. _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|