Post by zendor on May 16, 2020 17:08:49 GMT
I noticed that "Close Combat example 2" on page 36 in HOTT 2.1 rulebook does not comply with the rules (I've attaced photos below).
As you see on the first photo, the last sentence explains, that if element B is destroyed, then both Warbands G and E will have to pursue meeting in the middle. And this claim despite the rules clearly say that element in rear contact does not pursue (p.26).
To compare I opened HOTT 2.0 rulebook and the same example (in 2.0 book it is on page 76) is treated in a different way!
Сuriously enough, this is not just a typo, but someone intentionally changed the description of this example in 2.1 book.
So, there can be only two possibilities: the description is incorrect or the rules are incorrect.
What do you think?
Here are the photos. First from the HOTT 2.1 and second from HOTT 2.0 book:
As you see on the first photo, the last sentence explains, that if element B is destroyed, then both Warbands G and E will have to pursue meeting in the middle. And this claim despite the rules clearly say that element in rear contact does not pursue (p.26).
To compare I opened HOTT 2.0 rulebook and the same example (in 2.0 book it is on page 76) is treated in a different way!
Сuriously enough, this is not just a typo, but someone intentionally changed the description of this example in 2.1 book.
So, there can be only two possibilities: the description is incorrect or the rules are incorrect.
What do you think?
Here are the photos. First from the HOTT 2.1 and second from HOTT 2.0 book:
