Post by jdesmond on Feb 28, 2019 3:16:04 GMT
Salutations, gentlefolk !
Tried to post this last night, guess I &^%$# up, so trying again...
A dumb rules question: In the section 'Combat Outcomes'
" ... If its total is equal to that of its opponent: ...
"Solid" foot Destroyed by foot
if CP, CWg or Lit
and in contact
on 2 or more edges
by enemy front edges,
otherwise no effect."
All right, there seem to be two ways to read this. First, if 'solid foot' is attacking an enemy 'CP' (an abbreviation here for all three types) and manages to find itself counterattacked front and flank, it's in trouble. IE, the ‘CP’ is the ‘solid foot’ that is doing the destroying.
Second, the more logical reading, it seems, to me (the problem with this reading, of course, is if the rule effects only CP units, why does it say "solid foot" at beginning ?); is that deploying a CP general where he can be attacked, without flank protection, is Not A Good Idea.
A CP deployed in isolation - Brian Boru at Clontarf, eg - where he can be attacked - note the 'by foot units', here - is vulnerable if enemy is able to fight 10 to 11 on main front and send 2 to 1 against him - but alternatively can fight 12 to 11 on main front.
A CP as part of the main front - a Hussite war wagon, eg - if its flank unit is killed In Its Own Turn, and that enemy can then 'close the door' - bad. If this CP's flank unit is eliminated in the enemy turn, and there's no reserve unit to fill gap - also bad.
My conclusion is that if you are using Lit, CWg, or CP units for your general - you should get bonus points for adding visual appeal to battlefield, because this rule means you're giving yourself a combat handicap.
Your conclusions on this matter are requested.
Tried to post this last night, guess I &^%$# up, so trying again...
A dumb rules question: In the section 'Combat Outcomes'
" ... If its total is equal to that of its opponent: ...
"Solid" foot Destroyed by foot
if CP, CWg or Lit
and in contact
on 2 or more edges
by enemy front edges,
otherwise no effect."
All right, there seem to be two ways to read this. First, if 'solid foot' is attacking an enemy 'CP' (an abbreviation here for all three types) and manages to find itself counterattacked front and flank, it's in trouble. IE, the ‘CP’ is the ‘solid foot’ that is doing the destroying.
Second, the more logical reading, it seems, to me (the problem with this reading, of course, is if the rule effects only CP units, why does it say "solid foot" at beginning ?); is that deploying a CP general where he can be attacked, without flank protection, is Not A Good Idea.
A CP deployed in isolation - Brian Boru at Clontarf, eg - where he can be attacked - note the 'by foot units', here - is vulnerable if enemy is able to fight 10 to 11 on main front and send 2 to 1 against him - but alternatively can fight 12 to 11 on main front.
A CP as part of the main front - a Hussite war wagon, eg - if its flank unit is killed In Its Own Turn, and that enemy can then 'close the door' - bad. If this CP's flank unit is eliminated in the enemy turn, and there's no reserve unit to fill gap - also bad.
My conclusion is that if you are using Lit, CWg, or CP units for your general - you should get bonus points for adding visual appeal to battlefield, because this rule means you're giving yourself a combat handicap.
Your conclusions on this matter are requested.
