Well, the relevant sections seem to be page 8 paragraph 6 and page 9 paragraph 3:-
Road PIP cost [8.6]: In each bound, the first move of each single element or column uses 0 PIPs if it is entirely by road, moves until it contacts an enemy (and conforms) or friends or moves its full tactical move distance, and does not reverse direction. Each other tactical move uses 1 PIP.
Extra Moves [9.3]: Some elements or groups that have already moved this bound can make a second or subsequent tactical move if there are enough PIPs and only if this does not start or go within 1 BW of enemy (unless while moving along a road) and is entirely by:- (see diagram 5) (c) Troops moving along a road if making a second or subsequent move.
So I would say yes you can... ...providing that at the start of the second or subsequent move that bound the element is already astride the road. (You are not allowed to move 1 BW to get on the road, then claim the second BW of movement to be also on it, because that would not be moving entirely by road...half the move is cross-country.)
Post by medievalthomas on Mar 29, 2017 18:05:10 GMT
We have played that both moves must be along a road (and yes astride) but see that once again we did not make that clear.
Interesting concept - moving onto a Road and then using a subsequent move.
Would like to get player feedback on which concept is prefered. Road movement as a continuous process so that the second move is a sort of force march or being able to move onto a Road form up into a Road column and then take advantage of a subsequent move.
For the subsequent move on the road, I would opt for the second and following move being on the road, but the first can be used to reach the road. This follows the idea that any first move is different, for example, for LH, it can start first move within a BW, while subsequent ones cannot. Second on road must start astride.
Hi guys, I posted the question as the subject is closer to the subject
- do any troops allowed to make multiple moves on road ? i mean other than LH, mounted infantry and Ps ? to simplify just assume that trops are entirely on the road !
I notice that no-one has answered goldenhord’s question, so I’ll take the liberty of doing so.
Yes, any troops are allowed to make multiple moves on a road, if they have the PIP’s to pay for them. Page 9 paragraph 3 item ‘c’ makes no distinctions…it just says “(c)Troops moving along a road…” Indeed, page 9 paragraph 2 says “Art and WWg cannot deploy or move off-road in bad going.”
I just want to clarify what Tony Aguilar and others have said about moving onto a road then using subsequent moves. We must remember that DBA is a ‘positional’ gaming system, where the location and orientation of our elements conveys important information rather than using paperwork or on-table markers like other rulesets do. This means that our elements have no ‘memory’…where they currently are and which way they are currently facing gives all the information that they need.
So an element that starts the bound astride a road makes its first road move for zero PIP cost. Elements that want to move onto a road must spend PIP’s to move cross-country to reach and be astride said road. When it’s time to determine who is eligible for subsequent road moves, both of the above elements are the same. Yes, both have already moved, and yes both are now astride a road, so both are eligible to make extra road moves. In other words, the element that moved cross-country to reach the road has forgotten how it got there. All that matters is that it meets the requirements for subsequent road moves based on it’s present situation.
I admit that roads are one item I bleieve the game can do without. I see they are critical for determining the attacker's choice of edge, but beyond that, I am not sure that what they add to the game is worth the verbiage. That said, as the only viable way for artillery and WWg to cross bad going, roads serve a clear additional purpose. Would their use for these two purposes suffice for their existence as a terrain type, or do you guys feel that as guidance paths for the road torpedo, they are needed in the game?
Declaring a War on Terror in response to 9/11 is like declaring a War on Torpedo Bombing in response to Pearl Harbour...
I must admit that I primarily use roads purely for their ability to limit the invader’s choice of table edge. (When defending, having a road allows me to have bad going as large as possible, 6 x 3 BW, with the longest side facing the invader, for maximum battlefield coverage that my opponent can’t easily avoid. A good plan for Ax armies.)
However I do find the road extra movement useful in some historical battles, such as Metaurus in 207 BC, where the Romans shifted a large chunk of their right wing around the back of their own battleline to reinforce their left wing and take the Carthaginians by surprise. This manoeuvre is impossible to achieve without some sort of boost to the normal move rate. (But even then I have to break the rules by having the road going from side-edge to side-edge.)
But I agree with you about ‘road torpedoes’…I wish these weren’t in the rules.