Auteur |
Message |
SteveR
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018 Messages: 287
|
Posté le: Sam Mai 28, 2022 9:35 pm Sujet du message: Incendiary LI vs War Wagon |
|
I played against a Byzantine today with Incendiary LI.
Incendiary troops get a +1 when fighting War Wagons in Melee.
Which would be nice but per page 42 the light infantry cannot charge the War Wagons.
And non blade War Wagons cannot contact the Light Infantry either.
So unless of course the wagons are running around in rough or difficult terrain I'm not sure how useful that +1 is.
Probably would not matter as the LI is almost always better off shooting but I do wonder if this is an oversight.
V3 the LI could not contact WWG. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Dickstick
Légat
Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016 Messages: 682
Localisation: West Bromwich
|
Posté le: Sam Mai 28, 2022 10:25 pm Sujet du message: |
|
LI go in as simple support .
Wwg usually pick on LI second round not so keen v incendiary. _________________ Player 747 don't call me Jumbo |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1546
|
Posté le: Dim Mai 29, 2022 5:44 pm Sujet du message: |
|
So the +1 is for "shooting and fighting against war wagons and elephants."
There were put together for simplicity.
You are correct there are very few situations that the fighting vs WWG would apply.
Dickstick:
There have been some subtle changes to the LI rules in v4, to note.
p62, right column. once the LI becomes the main unit they go poof. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Dickstick
Légat
Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016 Messages: 682
Localisation: West Bromwich
|
Posté le: Dim Mai 29, 2022 10:05 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Now that is bizarre.
LI left on their own at the end of a melee break off.
LI helping a mate who fails to kill the WWg gets picked on and dies automatically. _________________ Player 747 don't call me Jumbo |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
SteveR
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018 Messages: 287
|
Posté le: Dim Mai 29, 2022 10:51 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Thank you Dan, I had not figured out how that bit with page 62 worked into the situation.
a +1 shooting factor against a protection of +2 that is set to zero is a pretty good deal anyway. No reason to take your canister of naphtha into a fight.
but if the LI does choose to come in to remove an overlap, well "If you come for the king, you best not miss" |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Za Otlichiye
Signifer
Inscrit le: 07 Sep 2021 Messages: 341
Localisation: Lovecraft country (and you Dan?)
|
Posté le: Lun Mai 30, 2022 1:17 am Sujet du message: |
|
Note that page 62 does not match page 13. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
KevinD
Légat
Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2021 Messages: 501
Localisation: Texas
|
Posté le: Lun Mai 30, 2022 1:43 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Za Otlichiye a écrit: | Note that page 62 does not match page 13. |
The QRS also does not list WWg as one of the troop types that destroy LI in the open. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun
Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Mer Juin 01, 2022 1:40 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: | So the +1 is for "shooting and fighting against war wagons and elephants."
There were put together for simplicity.
You are correct there are very few situations that the fighting vs WWG would apply.
Dickstick:
There have been some subtle changes to the LI rules in v4, to note.
p62, right column. once the LI becomes the main unit they go poof. |
Dan,
As has been pointed out there is a contradiction between pages 13 and 62.
Also it seems to defy the internal logic of the rules to allow Light Infantry to make contact with units in a way that will lead to their automatic destruction it in the next bound.
And what would be the purpose of the +1 for Incendiaries v WWg if they could never be used against WWg?
Can we get a ruling on this from the responsible parties? Ideally before next weekend*
Dave
* As Hindu Indians have neither WWg nor Incendiaries, it's really not that urgent _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1546
|
Posté le: Mer Juin 01, 2022 3:08 pm Sujet du message: |
|
daveallen a écrit: |
Can we get a ruling on this from the responsible parties? Ideally before next weekend*
Dave
* As Hindu Indians have neither WWg nor Incendiaries, it's really not that urgent |
Why ever would you want to know that for next weekend.
Tell me more about your Hindu Indians, including your list and how you would run it?
Also don't Hindu have something else they prefer to fight WWGs with?
Seriously:
The request is on file, I do not speak for exact timing. Responsible parties are present at weekend in question so we can address one way or the other. I know that is not the best answer, but it is an honest answer. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Za Otlichiye
Signifer
Inscrit le: 07 Sep 2021 Messages: 341
Localisation: Lovecraft country (and you Dan?)
|
Posté le: Mer Juin 01, 2022 3:20 pm Sujet du message: |
|
The factors would count in rough/difficult, but that's not very persuasive,
It is possible that bladed and un-bladed WWg are treated differently. I assumed that like elephants they are lethal but clumsy so LI can avoid damage.
It would also be helpful to know if Incendiary is or is not canceled by flank/rear attack.
And if LI with Incendiary should count against SCh as Javelin does.
And should Incendiary cancel Armour like Furious Charge does?
Dernière édition par Za Otlichiye le Mer Juin 01, 2022 4:46 pm; édité 1 fois |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun
Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Mer Juin 01, 2022 4:23 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: |
Tell me more about your Hindu Indians, including your list and how you would run it?
|
They both have elephants. I won't know how I'll run it until after the first game. It could go either way.
Hazelbark a écrit: | Seriously:
The request is on file, I do not speak for exact timing. Responsible parties are present at weekend in question so we can address one way or the other. I know that is not the best answer, but it is an honest answer. |
Thanks, that's good to know as always.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Laurence
Gladiateur
Inscrit le: 31 Mar 2017 Messages: 44
|
Posté le: Mar Juin 07, 2022 9:48 pm Sujet du message: |
|
daveallen a écrit: | Hazelbark a écrit: |
Tell me more about your Hindu Indians, including your list and how you would run it?
|
They both have elephants. I won't know how I'll run it until after the first game. It could go either way.
Hazelbark a écrit: | Seriously:
The request is on file, I do not speak for exact timing. Responsible parties are present at weekend in question so we can address one way or the other. I know that is not the best answer, but it is an honest answer. |
Thanks, that's good to know as always.
Dave |
Hazelbark: could you clarify last weekend? Would be good to clarify, the world championship in Rome is on next weekend... |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1546
|
Posté le: Ven Juin 10, 2022 9:38 pm Sujet du message: |
|
El Kreator and I discussed. So i am here the imprefect conveyor of information.
The next FAQ will delete from p62 right column first bullet "wwg". ie P 13 is accurate.
This will need to be scrutinzed in other places as well. The idea is LI may move to support another unit fighting a WWG. The LI can not be the first to charge. So the LI moves into support front edge contact. Then if the WWG makes the LI the main combat unit, you will then use bullet 3 on p 62 and p54 and the LI is moved away 1 UD |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
SteveR
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018 Messages: 287
|
Posté le: Sam Juin 11, 2022 6:38 pm Sujet du message: |
|
We'll see what the FAQ update says, but if all it does is delete "WWG" from page 62 that still leaves me with a question.
When the WWg designates the LI as the primary opponent and the LI is forced to move away does this then take the place of the melee that turn, and no dice are rolled against the other unit? Can't have two primary units in one turn after all.
Because if this is the case all that happens is a turn with no dicing. The next turn the LI can move back into contact as that player will designate the other unit as the primary one in the melee. And if the LI are less than one UD away it does not even cost a CP. (Page 54 specifies that distance as "up to" one UD) |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1546
|
Posté le: Lun Juin 13, 2022 10:46 am Sujet du message: |
|
SteveR a écrit: | We'll see what the FAQ update says, but if all it does is delete "WWG" from page 62 that still leaves me with a question.
When the WWg designates the LI as the primary opponent and the LI is forced to move away does this then take the place of the melee that turn, and no dice are rolled against the other unit? Can't have two primary units in one turn after all.
Because if this is the case all that happens is a turn with no dicing. The next turn the LI can move back into contact as that player will designate the other unit as the primary one in the melee. And if the LI are less than one UD away it does not even cost a CP. (Page 54 specifies that distance as "up to" one UD) |
Will get your first part sorted, good point. My guess now is that will be "combat" effectively. But that was not discussed.
Yes the LI could reenter a support position but not charge as the main melee unit. That appears to be a clear option |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|