Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Raphael]

Hi,

Following our last game the following queries arose so some advice would be most helpful.

1) Two mounted units both declare a charge on the same unit of LMI. as this is counted as one charge action does the LMI only waver test once?

2) A unit routs in H-t-H combat. Does the friendly unit next in the combat direction waver test for seeing the rout before its own H-t-H is resolved?

3) A unit of LC (A) is fighting frontally (but unopposed) against a unit of MC (1). The LC is then charged in the flank by an enemy unit of LC (2) which causes 1 CPF on unit (A), which is a break-off result.

How is this resolved;

Is break-off not now an option because it was caused by a flank charge?

Does unit A turn only 90 degrees away from unit 2 then break-off?

Does unit A halve the angle and then break-off?

As unit A is in contact to both front and flank is the outcome now a recoil instead, but with no actual movement taking place?

I hope this is clear.

Thanks,

Raphael

[Ed Kollmer]

I love this . It is great to see how much I know. (Not much)
I got a 50% on the last quiz.
Here Goes!!


Hi,

Following our last game the following queries arose so some advice would be most helpful.

1) Two mounted units both declare a charge on the same unit of LMI. as this is counted as one charge action does the LMI only waver test once?

>>> I say one test. One charge, one test



2) A unit routs in H-t-H combat. Does the friendly unit next in the combat direction waver test for seeing the rout before its own H-t-H is resolved?

>>THis one I am sure of . It has happened to me on MANY occasions. YOU TEST WAVER. That is why there is a fighting direction. So that it influences the next combat.



3) A unit of LC (A) is fighting frontally (but unopposed) against a unit of MC (1). The LC is then charged in the flank by an enemy unit of LC (2) which causes 1 CPF on unit (A), which is a break-off result.

How is this resolved;

Is break-off not now an option because it was caused by a flank charge?

>>It is an option I think regardless whether it is a flank charge or not. My question is what does"unopposed" mean.


Does unit A turn only 90 degrees away from unit 2 then break-off?

>>>not sure.

Does unit A halve the angle and then break-off?

>>>I think this is the way. but need a more authoritative source.


As unit A is in contact to both front and flank is the outcome now a recoil instead, but with no actual movement taking place?

>>>>I think we need more info: like how many Fatigues each unit takes.


I hope this is clear.


>>>>I hope I do better this time.


Ed/Leonidas
[/i]

[scott holder]

1) Two mounted units both declare a charge on the same unit of LMI. as this is counted as one charge action does the LMI only waver test once?

Only tests once.

2) A unit routs in H-t-H combat. Does the friendly unit next in the combat direction waver test for seeing the rout before its own H-t-H is resolved?

Yes.

3) A unit of LC (A) is fighting frontally (but unopposed) against a unit of MC (1). The LC is then charged in the flank by an enemy unit of LC (2) which causes 1 CPF on unit (A), which is a break-off result.

The information provided is incomplete and confusing. If the LC (A) is fighting MC (1) "frontally but unopposed" I read that to mean it's fighting the rear of MC (1), otherwise, MC (1) fights back.

LC (A)'s reaction to all of this is dictated by the total HTH results: how many casualties did it inflict and how many did it take.

scott

[Raphael]

O.K. To hopefully clarify the situation,

6E British LC (A) charged the flank of 2E Gallic MC (1). So, unopposed, LC (A) caused twice as many H-t-H casualties but not 3CPF so only recoiled MC (1).

In the following turn MC (1) failed to counter (p40 6.14) so LC (A) was again unopposed and inflicted 10 casualties on MC (1).

But, LC (A) was charged in its own flank by 4E Numidian LC (2) which caused 16 casualties. This is both more h-t-h casualties and 1 CPF on LC (A).

So the combat outcome for Light Troops is Break-off.

6.34 p56 says 'A break-off move is made directly away from hand-to-hand opponents...' and 'Mechanically a break-off move is made in the same way as an evade directly to the body's rear.'

As LC (A) is in contact to both front, fighting MC (1), and flank, (LC 2), in which direction, if any, does it break-off?

I hope this is clearer.

Raphael

[scott holder]

That's better.

The LC unit has the option of making the break off move directly to its rear or halving the angle between the two enemy units. Remember that HTH opponents is considered both enemy units.

scott

[Raphael]

Thanks Scott.

So Ed, that's at least a two out of three this time!

(In the game itself I actually went with halving the angle. They were then caught by the Numidian pursuit, and the 4 failed waver tests of nearby friendly units caused the demoralization of the entire command. As their initial flank charge had been against a shaken MC unit which then successfully passed 4 waver tests of its own my opponent guessed that it just wasn't his day).

Raphael

[Ed Kollmer]

AHHHHH!!!!
I am getting better.
Watch out all you guys out there.
Thanks Raphael!
I love those questions.

ED/Leonidas

Ps
What list were you playing????
Sounds interesting.

[Raphael]

Hello Ed,

Glad you are enjoying the questions. There might be a few more after our next game because even though I think I know the answers the group I play with still sometimes want it direct from this forum ( probably to keep me in line).

For your information, the armies we used in our last game were Ancient British vs Early Imperial Roman, 2,000 points per side, which was basically all the British could put on the table, the Romans had much they couldn't use yet (still needs re-basing).

If interested I can post more detailed lists and a brief rundown of the game in the battle reports section to avoid drifting off topic here.

Regards,

Raphael