Art De La Guerre

[Mike Bennett]

[Mark G Fry]

[Neep]

Mark, you missed the part of Dave's reply where he pointed out the Special cases bullet. If you move, including conform, into a multiple attack situation, you do not take the hit. Presumably the unit is not "surprised".

[Mark G Fry]

[daveallen]

[Neep]

Hmm. Doesn't look like LI can make a multiple attack against El, SCh, Arty, or other lights, if the target is already engaged on the front edge. Well I guess LH can't do it against anyone either.

[Mark G Fry]

[daveallen]

Not quite, but we're getting there

[KevinD]

Dave, I disagree.

See p 61.

“When a unit ALREADY IN MELEE, or melee support, is attacked by a NEW enemy (OTHER THAN LIGHT TROOPS, artillery or WWg) on its flank or rear edge, it immediately loses one cohesion point.”

If the new enemy is light troops they do not cause a cohesion drop.

If the pikes are not ALREADY in Melee (including earlier in the same phase) the HSw do not suffer a drop.

[lionelrus]

[KevinD]

As Google Translate says:

It depends if there is an enemy on the front line or not.
If yes, then regardless of that enemy on the front who is then the main fighter, contact with another troop from the flank or rear causes loss of cohesion, unless the troop in melee support is a troop light.
Note that, in this case, the unit loses any javelin, impact, 2-handed weapon etc...

If there is no enemy on the front, the main fighter is the first to contact. But if an LH contacts first and another non-light troop contacts next, then there is a loss of cohesion. Indeed, the loss of cohesion is not caused by the main fighter, but by the troop in melee support. Therefore, if the troop in melee support is not a light troop, there is a loss of cohesion.

[lionelrus]

Google traduction' english is better than mine is.
And it's good!
_________________
"Quand on a pas de technique, faut y aller à la zob"
Perceval à Yvain et Gauvain.

[daveallen]

Hi Lionel,

helpful as always

My problem is that the way the rule is written bullet point 4 seems to be a separate case to bullet point 1. If, as you suggest, it is a subordinate clause then perhaps it should be amended to make this clear:

From:

[Neep]

Or to ask the same question differently,
if an unengaged HISw is attacked first on one flank by LH and then on the other flank by Pike, clearly it loses a cohesion point.
If an unengaged HISw is attacked first on one flank by Pike and then on the other flank by LH, does it lose a cohesion point?

[Mike Bennett]