View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Frank Gilson Moderator

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1567 Location: Orange County California
|
Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: Routers, Diverting |
 |
|
Reference the attached image, with unit in 'red' pursuing unit in 'lime green', and unit 'yellow' forcing a divert to the rout path...with a gap between it and unit 'blue'.
Does the Lime Green routing unit drop back elements and just continue straight forward? (the gap is wider than it’s width, so it shouldn’t be able to drop back)
The Lime Green routing unit can’t ‘make the wheel’ to go around the ‘yellow’ unit.
The gap in question meets all the requirements for rout diversion through (2 elements wide within 240p).
I can't find where routers would be considered 'dispersed'...in fact 6.37 states for resolving Evades, Break-offs and Routs that we "Retain, as much as possible, the same positioning of elements relative to each other (formation) that the body possessed before the move."
Frank Gilson |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
joncleaves Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447
|
Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
You are looking for:
"5.23 BROKEN troops have temporarily lost all cohesion and
will to fight. This is indicated visually by turning all elements
away from the enemy and fanning them out in disarray."
I know some people keep them in block and use a marker, but that is incorrect. Nothing really wrong with it, so long as it does not cause one to play broken troops incorrectly.
The rule that handles the rout move is 6.32B:
"Routers, other than
elephants or expendables, who would contact friendly
bodies in the rout path will interpenetrate them if they are
normally allowed to do so (6.52). If the rout path is blocked
by a friendly body that cannot normally be interpenetrated,
the routers may deviate the minimum necessary to pass
around it if there is a gap at least two elements wide within
240 paces of the point the rout path met the friendly body."
J _________________ Roll Up and Win! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Frank Gilson Moderator

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1567 Location: Orange County California
|
Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:57 pm Post subject: thanks |
 |
|
thank you for this explanation...ummm...
Does this mean that routing elements each on their own determine the 'minimum deviation'...and so could go to either side of a unit?...perhaps fully separating out?
Frank Gilson |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
joncleaves Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447
|
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:16 am Post subject: |
 |
|
No, it does not mean that. _________________ Roll Up and Win! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Mark Stone Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 2102 Location: Buckley, WA
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:12 am Post subject: |
 |
|
joncleaves wrote: |
No, it does not mean that. |
How then, is "minimum necessary" to be determined in the diagram Frank provides?
(And that's Frank's unit routing, by the way, not mine. Even if he did win the game overall.) |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
joncleaves Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:17 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
In the diagram above, the green unit would make a rout move into the gap between the yellow and blue units. It would be as close to the yellow unit as possible to meet the "minimum necessary" criterion. _________________ Roll Up and Win! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|