| View previous topic :: View next topic | 
	
	
		| Author | Message | 
	
		| joncleaves Moderator
 
  
  
 Joined: 29 Mar 2006
 Posts: 16447
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:26 am    Post subject: Re: break-through ? |  |  
				| 
 |  
				| In a message dated 4/2/2001 23:22:59 Central Daylight Time,
 eforbes100@... writes:
 
 << Can a unit break through if they are attacking a units rear?  >>
 yes.
 
 
 _________________
 Roll Up and Win!
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Phil Gardocki Centurion
 
  
 
 Joined: 12 Apr 2006
 Posts: 893
 Location: Pennsylvania
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2001 7:20 am    Post subject: Re: break-through ? |  |  
				| 
 |  
				| Sorry Jon, you are in error as outlined in 11.2 
 Who May (or Must) Break-through
 A body inflicting three times as many hand-to-hand casualties than it receives without its opponents breaking can choose to break-through them from front to rear.
 
 
 << Can a unit break through if they are attacking a units rear?  >>
 yes.
 
 
 
 
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Phil Gardocki Centurion
 
  
 
 Joined: 12 Apr 2006
 Posts: 893
 Location: Pennsylvania
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2001 7:20 am    Post subject: Re: break-through ? |  |  
				| 
 |  
				| The rules always said no.  The reasoning is easy to see from the perspective of the figures fighting.  Who would want to get to a position where the enemy could hit him better?   Phil
 
 
 No option seems to be given for break through back to front.
 Can a unit break through if they are attacking a units rear?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Ed Forbes Centurion
 
  
 
 Joined: 12 Apr 2006
 Posts: 1092
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2001 7:23 am    Post subject: break-through ? |  |  
				| 
 |  
				| I see in the rules that breakthrough is only allowed front to back.
 I can, and have, seen a large unit charged both from the front and from
 the rear not break.
 
 No option seems to be given for break through back to front.
 Can a unit break through if they are attacking a units rear?
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Ed F
 
 
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| joncleaves Moderator
 
  
  
 Joined: 29 Mar 2006
 Posts: 16447
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2001 10:27 am    Post subject: Re: break-through ? |  |  
				| 
 |  
				| In a message dated 4/3/2001 03:21:57 Central Daylight Time, PHGamer@...
 writes:
 
 << The rules always said no.  The reasoning is easy to see from the
 perspective
 of the figures fighting.  Who would want to get to a position where the
 enemy
 could hit him better?
  >> 
 Since it is voluntary, choose no.
 
 
 _________________
 Roll Up and Win!
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| joncleaves Moderator
 
  
  
 Joined: 29 Mar 2006
 Posts: 16447
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2001 10:34 am    Post subject: Re: break-through ? |  |  
				| 
 |  
				| << Sorry Jon, you are in error as outlined in 11.2
 
 Who May (or Must) Break-through
 A body inflicting three times as many hand-to-hand casualties than it
 receives without its opponents breaking can choose to break-through them
 from
 front to rear. >>
 
 Yes, I know what it says in the rules section (numbered greater than 6.0) as
 of now.  The rules are not done.  One of the reasons they are not done is
 because I take the time to stop and deal with rules larger than 6.0 when I am
 supposed to be getting the first part of the rules finished.  :(
 
 I have a stack of notes I am working through about a foot high.  On one of
 those pages is a reminder to change 11.2 to allow the player to break through
 from the rear.  The current draft on the egroup is not as up to date as this
 stack of fixes.  However, if a question is asked of me here I always answer
 with what I know the rule WILL BE, regardless of what the egroup draft says.
 This gives players a glimpse into the future.  I could have said nothing or
 regurgitated the rule as written there, but that would not seem to be very
 helpful or truthful.
 This, from an editing/development standpoint, is a work in progress, and I am
 trying to respond with the most up-to-date info possible.
 
 I tried to get away with the very time-saving 'yep' rather than the
 explanation above.  Oh well....
 
 Besides, I can't be in error.  :)
 
 Jon
 
 
 _________________
 Roll Up and Win!
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		|  |