Art De La Guerre

[Nostrebor]

Is this the correct application of the rules?

At the beginning of the turn a foot unit "X" is engaged to the front by a mounted (non-elephant) "A".
Unit "B" (a friend of "A") charges "X" in the flank.
"X" takes one hit (charged in flank while engaged to the front).
"A" then disengages.

During Melee
"X" is at -1 (0 for hit in flank, -1 for disordered).
"B" gets its basic factors +1 for attacking a flank or rear.

[lionelrus]

Elémentaire my dear nostrebor!
_________________
"Quand on a pas de technique, faut y aller à la zob"
Perceval à Yvain et Gauvain.

[ciofo]

Are you sure you can charge AND disengage in the same phase?

it sounds VERY strange!
_________________
Fabio Ciofini - Arezzo
"Non si smette di giocare quando si invecchia, si invecchia quando si smette di giocare!"

[ethan]

1) X is already engaged to front with A
2) B hits X in flank causing a hit
3) A disengages

So there is no charge and withdraw in the same phase. This is a neat trick if you can pull it off - especially handy for cavalry fighting knights...

[Commodore]

Ethan is right, units are played in sequence, not only one corps after one other. Another example is when you try to provoque melee with LH againtst another LH hoping it will not evade, permitting a support with 2 well placed CV.....
_________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead"
Cdr Farragut,Mobile 1864

[Ramses II]

Agreed, it is a correct interpretation of the rules, though it also needs a 'perfect storm' of events to achieve;
- you need the correct units engaged in the first place,
- an unengaged unit on the flank of the melee
- and sufficient CP to move these two units / groups as well as other potentially more important actions elsewhere in the corps . . . .