Pursuit question - side-to-side contact?

[Dave]

Now, I'm also a bit confused about the last part:

Dave: "Edge-to-edge like that wouldn't even block a retreat (if green were an enemy of blue), as no part of blue's stand is obliged to move through green and blue was already in contact with green."

A retreat is also blocked if a stand’s move brings it into contact with a stand from an unengaged enemy unit. Note that in this case contact alone is sufficient to block a retreat – the retreating stand does not need to move through the enemy stand.

I know it wouldn’t move in the direction "into" the enemy unit, but it still gets into contact.

Check the part I bolded, with them already being in contact they would have been engaged and so your quote would not apply. If they weren't touching at at the start and blue fell back into green and touched it like that, then yes is would be destroyed because the retreat would be blocked.

I know that it's not really a gap in this case

Which is exactly why 3B is correct.

[Grimnir]

Well, OK.
Thanks Dave, Lex and everyone else.

[Lex]

Both of the rules quoted or mentioned above say that path is blocked by contact with enemy units. To me, that means that the pursuit move would be blocked by contact with a unit that wasn't part of the same combat in the previous turn. So it is impossible to maintain edge-to-edge contact my moving directly forward.

Lex, Dave and Aldhick, what do you think about it?

Thanks!

I think the perception issue here is that you asume the pursuit can be blocked for a PURSUER where the rules on blocked units apply to units being purseud or driven back.

Also, for the pursuit part make sure you are looking at the LRB. In essence the steps are:

- retreats the stands of unit that lost combat ONE-BY-ONE, and consider its path is not block, if it is then it goes POEFF
- winner decided IF his unit(s) pursue. If they do, decide which unit goes first and apply the following
1) any stand that can move back into contact with the same enemy unit it fought before BY MOVING DIRECTLY FORWARD does (note that is is the PURSUING stand that moves straight forward into with ITS front moving in contact !!
2)all other stands that can legally move into contact with that enemy do so (note that UNLIKE CHARGING !!  there is NO obligation to extend and maximize frontage!
3) all other stands are placed "in formation" with the stands fighting (which in some cases results in allowable corner2corner placement

[Lex]

Well, OK.
Thanks Dave, Lex and everyone else.

When in doubt, this IS a good place to adress things

In general it goes like this !

- does the scenario have a special rule that covers this situation
- does the event-pack have a special rule that covers this situation
- does the unit have a special rule that covers this situation?
- does the unit-type have a special rule that covers this situation
- does the army have a special rule that covers this situation
- does the relevant rules section have a special rule that covers this situation
- do the general rules have a special rule that covers this situation

Damm... I need to interpret the situation myself or ask the guys at the forum.....

[jchaos79]

Yep, Dave and Lex right. It is 3B. Sorry for making confusion (long time without playing....)

Now I have a question, is the same answer if it is multiple combat than if green does not belong to the original combat?

[Lex]

Green did not face an enemy, nor was it in support

[Grimnir]

In general, does it matter if a unit is in support or not? If it's not touching an enemy, it's not part of a combat. Or am I wrong?

[Lex]

If it is in support is it part of the combat (as it is part of the Combat Resolution).

Strictly speaking it is not IN CONTACT with the enemy, for those situations where that is a prerequisite.

[Getlord]

Hmm... I mixed up Bs and Cs - sorry

I have nice interpretation for you Grimnir. If you assume that the path is somehow blocked by the corner of unengaged unit you are temporarily (formally) going around it like in 3C but finally you are using the rules as below, you are placing stands centre-to-centre and finally ends pursuit move as in 3B. 3C is against the spirit of the rules.

"Occasionally, you will find that no stands can pursue
by moving directly forward. When this happens take
the stand that is closest to the retreating unit and
move it against the closest accessible edge of the
closest enemy stand. In this case, place the stand
centre-to-centre where possible in the same way as if
it were charging – though note that it does not
necessarily have to see its enemy. Note also that the
stand still needs a clear path past other units or
obstructions."

Of course here comes the question what happen if there is third enemy unit, placed in the same way but BELOW. Then you have to agree if two corners 2cm from each other are blocking the pursuit or not. The answer is it depends. If the unit can stay coherent at the end of pursuit move then it does not block. If it cannot stay coherent then it blocks. It is different than in rules for charging. And it is not written expicitly anywhere I guess.