|
Post by goldenhord on May 24, 2022 17:52:56 GMT
Just for more detail, we agree there is only one combat and that the LH give a malus of -1 due to his flanking. The queston is only on the pike support which applies or not. §10;7 said When an element is in close combat both to front and to flank or rear or in close combat to its front and overlapped; only it and the enemy in front fight each other. Others only provide tactical factors. Could explain this sentence according your understanding ?
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Jan 20, 2022 11:05:25 GMT
ok thanks as yoiu cannot enter in a BW ennemy the threat zone question is unaccurate?
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Jan 17, 2022 9:43:40 GMT
In fact the discussion is just over one point: When the camp is a standard camp occupied but camp followers, this camp is attacked by a LH. Which base factor is used: 0 against mounted + 2 if camp followers or other foot defending their camp or denizens their city and either in close combat or shot at so it gives a +2 in total and +4 (2+2) if infantry attacking the camp? OR the camp followers fight always when using their foot combat factor ... in this last case what is the meaning and use of 0 if against mounted (outside the camp)?
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Jan 17, 2022 9:34:11 GMT
Let summarize If a LH is already in a TH zone it could make several moves (3 pips) outside TH and Bow zones and could not enter again in a another TH zone But the LH could create a TH zone with the last zone. Right ?
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Jan 11, 2022 11:32:36 GMT
HI Guys, I have a question Let say we are in good going, a LH has 3 pips. It moves out the theat zone of a first element with recoiling full move with the 1st pip. The second pip LH moves out any bow and threat ennemy threat zone. The Third mouvement LH goes to another element. Does LH has to remain out the new threat zone or in at the limit and prevents the enemy to do something else (except std counter moves) ? thx.
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 30, 2021 15:49:10 GMT
i do agree with you stevie that most of the rules are logical and realistic after so many years. I know that so people would like to modify some rules. It is not the purpose here it is just to clarify in that case. Letting one mn of course prevent to pursue but it is a trick of the rule and not convenient to my taste. i will apply the rule of 2 elements as a column but i am still thinking this is not correct.
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 30, 2021 14:17:21 GMT
sure the rules is written like that and you should applying without thinking but the logic exists in every country ! But defends a column with 12 elements and the 12 e should follow is also a nonsense and good if is realistic for you even the others points appears logical. no problem with rough going as the warbands have no support with as the pikemen. the flanks are already without problem so i do not see why you bring it. This forum exists because during last 3ç years the wrinting are not so clear and it is a man who wrote this simulation so it is hard to give an equilibre !
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 30, 2021 8:14:20 GMT
So let assume that a column is one element wide no minimum , no maximum elements. So a 6 or 12 elements in open in column have to pursue as their 1st element has won the fight, very realistic ! This is better to consider that only the supporting element who already engaged in the fight have to pursue. It could 2 or 3 depending the type of element (still in open). If you are not supporting ,you are not engaged so you do not pursue. It is not more strange that a unit who stop if the field is bad or if we need to interpenetrate or not while recoiling. It is at the element unit decision. As in the common langage you make the difference between 2 you said one behind the other and you start to speak about a column at a minimum of 3. Top of page 12 : When recoiling when you are over 2, you can’t so the 1st element is destroyed as you are considered in a column (start at 3) ? it seems logical and realistic. Considering the double element, this 2 elements who are jointed together who fight and die together, i do not see a problem. If they have to pursue the do, the element who fighted not the others. If their have to recoil it is a like they were 4 elements so the second double lement is destroyed. About the river crossing it depends on the die, if the river is difficult, no problem, if the river is good you could apply the rule, i do not see the problem. So the column definition is an issue, as it impacts rules and create inconsistencies ( 2nd lines). my nane is without an e, so please writ it correctly.
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 23, 2021 21:44:08 GMT
one element wide is a column we agree but not the lenght
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 23, 2021 21:34:43 GMT
figure 14 b said a g(roup when talking of 2 elemnts and a columln when talking of 3 elements.
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 23, 2021 21:32:04 GMT
this not obviously as you said as the leading elment could be consider alone and the others are diffrent. Use the book if you want tro argue not just sentence. I never said so; I just said that a column is 3 elements minimum composed as stated in many pages in the book rules and not only 2. A group is 2 elements minimum based and a column is 3 element minimum. Just show me wher in teh book it could be wrong ?
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 23, 2021 20:55:49 GMT
in any case there is no pursuit in a bad going and as the 3 elements in column was on a road and 2 were been flanked they turned and they won the combat but no one pursue as the opponent was coming from a bad going so no purssuit of anyone, even from a single element.
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 23, 2021 20:35:29 GMT
page 8 last $ "the leading element move forward, the otherS successively join behind it" so the minimum with a S of a column is 3 and not 2 ! by the way a column could not recoil as a group could do! so i strongly disagree with your post.
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Sept 23, 2021 20:20:00 GMT
Does a column composed of 2 or 3 elements ?
|
|
|
Post by goldenhord on Jul 5, 2021 9:53:10 GMT
ok guys thank you so 1 , yes 2, +1 most fo the time except 1st round 3. Not applicable as no special going.
|
|