Questions

[Guthwine]

Had a double game today and after some time since the last game, a surprising amount of questions came up.

So here are the big ones, maybe some of you can clarify it for us, since it feels like everyone plays after his own rules sometimes. (even within our small group. )

Question No1:

When pursuers are moved, the first stand moves strait forward and maintains edge contact, but then do the other stand have to make edge contact (no matter how small) as well or can pursuers just choose to stay in corner to corner contact as well?

Id say: Edge contact is mandatory

Situation No.1:
Chariots Z and Y charge (allthough Y cant get into full contact, because of lack of movement) the 2 cavalry units A and B. A&B do nothing to YZ but they both get 6 hits. So 2 stands are removed and the losers withdraws.
Can unit Y pursue in this way so it also gets into contact with B?
Example:
http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/8199/18280302.jpg


Id say: That is illegal and whoever does it should feel bad.

Situation No.2:
Infantry unit Y and cavalry unit Z charge cavalry unit A. No stands are removed but A looses combat by one and withdraws. But since they have to move sideways because they had more contact in the flank they still remain in contact with the infantry. Is unit A now destroyed or does the infantry unit just fall back and fighting continues between the cavalry:
Example:
http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/8172/63341253.jpg


Id say: Infantry retreats, combat continues. (since A does not move through an enemy unit, just in front of it)

So what do you think??

[Dave]

Question 1: I believe corner to corner is fine, there's no stipulation for edge contact. If you move directly forward and contact a corner you're good there, alternatively you can flank.

Situation 1: in the first paragraph on 47 (using the latest PDF) "Where possible, these stands must also be positioned against the same enemy unit as stands that have already pursued directly forward". So I'd say Y can't do that, as one stand isn't in contact with unit A. Z's pursuit on B is illegal as well for the same reason.

Situation 2: I'd actually play it that A falls back by going down 1cm, not to the left 1cm. The reason being that it's facing 4.5 cm on enemy to the front and only 4cm of enemy to the right. In either case your question still stands though as A would be in contact with an enemy. The first paragraph in the right hand column on page 45 stipulates that a retreat is blocked if part of the units stand is obliged to move "through ... enemy units". Since A isn't moving through either enemy it's good, it fights in the next round.

The paragraph after that stays it's destroyed if it comes into contact with unengaged enemy units, but since both Y and Z are engaged that doesn't apply here.

[Lex]

Question 1: I believe corner to corner is fine, there's no stipulation for edge contact. If you move directly forward and contact a corner you're good there, alternatively you can flank.

By the rule, move direct forward, moving into contact and make edge contact, if no other option possible move into C2C.

So if you CAN goto flank, maintain unit integrity !! and have "some" front edge contact you should, otherwise C2C is ok.

Situation 1: in the first paragraph on 47 (using the latest PDF) "Where possible, these stands must also be positioned against the same enemy unit as stands that have already pursued directly forward". So I'd say Y can't do that, as one stand isn't in contact with unit A. Z's pursuit on B is illegal as well for the same reason.

You can!  make accidental combat, but you WILL loose all bonuses !! for those stands opting to fight a new enemy

Situation 2: I'd actually play it that A falls back by going down 1cm, not to the left 1cm. The reason being that it's facing 4.5 cm on enemy to the front and only 4cm of enemy to the right. In either case your question still stands though as A would be in contact with an enemy. The first paragraph in the right hand column on page 45 stipulates that a retreat is blocked if part of the units stand is obliged to move "through ... enemy units". Since A isn't moving through either enemy it's good, it fights in the next round.

The paragraph after that stays it's destroyed if it comes into contact with unengaged enemy units, but since both Y and Z are engaged that doesn't apply here.

Correct (and the rule does say AWAY from the most attacks, not from the largest point of contact), but the interpretation is correct, sliding contact allows units to stay in a fight they would normally NOT be able to. We do drop the pursuit-bonus as it is deemed to be accidental contact.

[docdom]

I just checked the rules and here's my interpetation.

Situation 1: One stand of unit Y pursues straight forward to maintain front edge contact. The other two stands of unit Y have to maintain edge contact with unit A aswell if possible. So you could move both stands on the left flank of stand A or one on each side or both on the right flank. In case you choose to place them in the right flank there would be an accidental combat with B. So yes.

Situation 2: Unit A is not killed automatically because they were already in combat with Y and Y is not an unengaged enemy unit. Unit Y cannot pursue but it can choose between a fallback and to hold ground. If they choose  to stay there I would say it's also an accidental combat with no bonus for the infantry unit.

[Guthwine]

So if you CAN goto flank, maintain unit integrity !! and have "some" front edge contact you should, otherwise C2C is ok.

But if you take the RAW you have to make edge contact and are only allowed C2C if edge contact cannot be achieved, isnt that so?

You can!  make accidental combat, but you WILL loose all bonuses !! for those stands opting to fight a new enemy

I would certainly agree with Dave as that paragraph clearly states that the enemy you had contact with before has priority over a new enemy.
This is hardly accidental contact, as Y doesnt accidentaly come into contact with B , the player here chooses to contact them by rearranging all his pursuers.
 

Correct (and the rule does say AWAY from the most attacks, not from the largest point of contact), but the interpretation is correct, sliding contact allows units to stay in a fight they would normally NOT be able to. We do drop the pursuit-bonus as it is deemed to be accidental contact.

Wait what? Does that mean the infantry has a second round of combat if cavalry slides in front of them? Im pretty sure that cant be as pursuit is defined as:

A unit engaged in combat can pursue a retreating enemy and fight a further round of combat immediately.

and it also states:

Infantry never pursue retreating cavalry or chariots. They can pursue other infantry and retreating monsters and machines as described in the rules.

So in my opinion the only option they have is a fall back or a hold (where they do nothing). But they can fall back and block the way for the second round of combat between A and Z.

[Dave]

and the rule does say AWAY from the most attacks, not from the largest point of contact)

I'm going by the second paragraph on 45 Lex, "the unit retreats from the greatest number of touching enemy stands", where's the part about attacks?

[Edmund2011]

Id say: Edge contact is mandatory

Situation No.1:
Chariots Z and Y charge (allthough Y cant get into full contact, because of lack of movement) the 2 cavalry units A and B. A&B do nothing to YZ but they both get 6 hits. So 2 stands are removed and the losers withdraws.
Can unit Y pursue in this way so it also gets into contact with B?
Example:
http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/8199/18280302.jpg

Id say: That is illegal and whoever does it should feel bad.

I think the pursue of the diagram is not allowed. All stands of Y unit should try to be in contact with A unit when pursuing, so the stand not in contact with must be placed corner to corner with A. The two stands of Yalready in contact must keep their position when pursuing

YYYZZZ
  A    B

[Lex]

and the rule does say AWAY from the most attacks, not from the largest point of contact)

I'm going by the second paragraph on 45 Lex, "the unit retreats from the greatest number of touching enemy stands", where's the part about attacks?

Probably just in my mind .......   

[Dave]

OK, so what I'm getting out of this is all the following are legal pursuit moves in situation 1, anything else isn't.

[Lex]

There are actually several more options, as pursuit has NO obligation to maximize frontage (as charge DOES).
Also, there may be good reason to split the combat into two separate combats !
And take note that you will in some case be losing attacks on account of fighting to other edge then front.

[Dave]

pursuit has NO obligation to maximize frontage (as charge DOES).

That's what I thought, so moving pursuers into corner to corner is fine? As is putting stands in support positions? So long as those that can contact by moving directly forward do so?

Also, there may be good reason to split the combat into two separate combats!

Who decides this and when? I thought that if it's one combat at the start of the command phase it stays one combat for the remainder, regardless if units separate or not.

[Lex]

pursuit has NO obligation to maximize frontage (as charge DOES).

That's what I thought, so moving pursuers into corner to corner is fine? As is putting stands in support positions? So long as those that can contact by moving directly forward do so?

As long as move into some kind of front edge while maintaining unit coherency is done!

Also, there may be good reason to split the combat into two separate combats!

Who decides this and when? I thought that if it's one combat at the start of the command phase it stays one combat for the remainder, regardless if units separate or not.

The player that "wins"  the combat resolution will work deciding to move participating units ONE at a time, and while adhering to the primairy rules of pursuit CAN create a situation where a combat is split into several "smaller"  combats. These combats are then determined in the sequence of HIS choice, before ANY other combats on the table are handeled.

NOTE: the player WINNING combat might be the non-phasing player, so you do ALL out of phase combat, before moving to the remaining combat IN PHASE.

[Dave]

So whether or not a combat is one or more combats is determined after every round then, after pursuits have been moved?

[Lex]

Most definitely so !!  And I guess that it will make a huge difference for some players......

[Guthwine]

There are actually several more options, as pursuit has NO obligation to maximize frontage (as charge DOES).

No need to maximize but still a need to make at least some edge contact. If c2c is also a viable option shouldnt diagram 47.2 (and 47.5 for that matter) show a third option with the stand in c2c?

Two pursuers move directly forward – the remaining pursuers can maintain edge contact by moving forward and must move to either side