Staggered line combat pursuits question

Hi,

Where you have two battle lines fighting each other (obviously offset) and a unit falls back - can the unit facing it pursue or is it blocked from doing so by its partial contact with the other enemy unit?

XX
YY

X
  X
YY


Cheers

Nick

Given the partial overlap the second unit becomes a support unit to the other. Assuming they win the next combat then both units can pursue.

Thanks - thats how we play we've played it but a question was raised after our last game.

Cheers

Nick

I agree with Granicus that the overlap prevents the victorious unit in the first melee from pursuing, so they become a support unit in the second melee.

However, I'm not sure they'll necessarily pursue if they (and their friendly main unit) win the second melee. I read the last sentence of rule 7.7.3 as enabling a support unit to pursue only if it is impetuous, CP or chariot. So if the support unit in a melee is eg FP or non-impetuous FL, it cannot pursue.

Do others think a support unit can always pursue?

RogerC

Quite correct Roger. Only impetuous / CP / and chariot support units follow up, and only if the main has followed up.

TD

Interesting.  I would disagree that 7.7.3 limits the followup to ONLY those units, as I (and also the common interpretation over here) read it it is mandatory for them.  There is nothing to say others cannot choose to follow up if they so desire (assuming main unit does so).  i.e. Normal melee rules apply, support units that would have to follow up if they were the main unit must do so, others are not restricted in any way.

Found this thread from 2012 on the old forum,

http://impetus.forumsland.com/impetus-about3860.html

It is only impetuous / CP / chariots that follow up as supports, and then only if the main followed up.

TD

Bear in mind that the only posts from Lorenzo (as opposed to others' interpretations) say:

As a broad blanket:
"if you can charge you can also pursue."

If the Main in a multi melee is blocked:
"correct, if the main unit doesn't support (for any reason) the supporting unit does the same.
Always roll first for the Main unit."

An interesting difference of interpretation.

I too looked on the old forum for a ruling from Lorenzo on this point, but couldn't find anything that made the position certain. In the link from Aurelius I thought Lorenzo was answering the point about pursuit by an I=0 unit, rather than pursuit by a supporting unit.

Here is another link where people said they thought pursuit by support units was limited to specific unit types, but again not a Lorenzo ruling.
http://impetus.forumsland.com/impetus-about4931.html&highlight=pursuit

It seems entirely reasonable to me to say that a support unit can pursue if the main unit pursues (but not on its own) so my interpretation the other way has been influenced by what others have said. I guess it takes some new eyes to look again at such things

RogerC

Aurelius is correct. Only Impetuous units, CP and Chariots pursue as support units and the main unit must also have pursued.

The wording in 7.7.3 is clear. It doesn't say that Impetuous units, CP and Chariots must pursue and by implication others can choose to do so. It says they follow. Other unit types do not follow the pursuit of the main unit.

As an aside, with respect to the link Aurelius offered I've noticed that Lorenzo will often let the comments of other posters stand if they are correct and only respond if there is confusion or a misunderstanding. In the above link Lorenzo was part of the conversation and left stand comments by myself and DAX (a more experienced player than myself.)

Once again GC your method of debate involves several elements:

1: You present your voice as a final or higher authority. It is not.

2: You claim that the wording is clear in support of your view. Again, it is not. 7.7.3 says "If the Main Unit pursues, Impetuous, Heavy Cavalry or Chariot Units follow...". That is very clear,contrary to your claim they MUST follow if the Main pursues, it does not say others do not follow. There is nothing in 7.7.3 that modifies the ability of other troops to follow or not. All we have, of authority, is Lorenzo's statement "if you can charge you can also pursue." as mentioned previously.

That does not seem to be an illogical position. If we ask ourselves the questions "Is there a logical reason support troops could follow up if the main unit does?" and "Is there a logical reason the support unit could not follow up if the main unit does?" then it seems reasonable to take the position that a unit that can follow up if it is a main could do so if fighting alongside another unit of their fellows whilst there is no logical reason that a unit that joined in a fight with their fellows would not under any circumstances chase a beaten opponent. In short, there appears no logical reason to prevent troops who could normally follow up from doing so just because they are acting as support.

3: Once again you seek to speak for Lorenzo. I prefer to take Lorenzo's own statements rather than your interpretation of what you think Lorenzo believes or how he acts. Currently Lorenzo's position is a very specific "if you can charge you can also pursue." in response to the question.

Lorenzo may wish to clarify that if he so desires, until he does I will quite happily accept the norm here that support units will pursue if the main unit does. If Lorenzo states differently, or if someone can point to a rule clearly stating that the pursuit rules are changed for other units, then so be it. But until then your voice is just another in the debate no matter how much authority you seek to bestow on yourself and impose on others.

GG, Impetus is written in a very literal sense (more so than most sets I've seen.) The wording of 7.7.3 is quite specific. Impetuous, heavy cavalry and chariots support units follow the main unit if it pursues. Unit types not listed do not follow when the main unit pursues (were they to follow as well they would have been included in the listing.) Remember we are talking about multiple melees so any maxims must be modified in this context.

Now now boys play nicely.
We play [and will continue to play] that Impetuous, chariots and HC must pursue, others in support can pursue. That is how we read the rules, and how we imagine things would occur in a real life situation. Why would a support unit not pursue, would it really just stand by whilst the main unit set off ? I think not.

Been digging in the old forum again, found this buried in the 2009 strata;

http://impetus.forumsland.com/impetus-about998.html&highlight=support

It is one of the distinguishing features between CP / impetuous and chariots that they are the more "aggressive" troop type, perhaps less disciplined, that they will always follow up. It gives the player another interesting decision when a non-impetuous main unit wins, should I follow up to maintain momentum? Or should I hold a disciplined line with my supports? It adds a great piece of detail and colour to the aggression vs. discipline dynamic.

TD

"Been digging in the old forum again, found this buried in the 2009 strata."

Thank you, Aurelius for the best line I've read on this board. I only wish you had written Forum and made it absolutely archaeological.

Well done. I'm still chuckling.

I think I'm with Gaius on this one.
The only supporting troops allowed to pursue are Impetuous types, heavy cavalry and chariots and then only if the main pursues.
Pretty sure this was talked about on the old forum.
It's also been cleaned up on the last version of the QRS.

Thanks Aurelius for your digging! This topic is a good lesson in how Impetus is written and I learned this lesson myself the hard way. As I said in an earlier posting Impetus is probably the most literally written set of gaming rules I've come across and I've had to readjust my interpretations many times because I've taken certain liberties or read into them something that wasn't there (so GG what you describe as arrogance is actually the hard knocks of 4 years of active involvement on the Forum.)

When the rule says Impetuous, Heavy Cavalry and Chariots follow as a support unit when the main unit pursues that is exactly what it means. While it is tempting to read into that sentence "must" that would be to construe a meaning that is not intended.

Good point Tarty about the latest QRS which states under Pursuit, "Supporting CP, Impetuous, and Chariot units may pursue if main unit does on a separate Die
roll. [7.7.3]"

I don't use this version of the QRS because my eyes no longer can read 8 font!

Vegetius wrote:Now now boys play nicely.
We play [and will continue to play] that Impetuous, chariots and HC must pursue, others in support can pursue. That is how we read the rules, and how we imagine things would occur in a real life situation. Why would a support unit not pursue, would it really just stand by whilst the main unit set off ? I think not.

More succinctly put than I did, thanks.

Granicus Gaugamela wrote:

Vegetius wrote:Now now boys play nicely.
We play [and will continue to play] that Impetuous, chariots and HC must pursue, others in support can pursue. That is how we read the rules, and how we imagine things would occur in a real life situation. Why would a support unit not pursue, would it really just stand by whilst the main unit set off ? I think not.

More succinctly put than I did, thanks.

The problem with Vegetius' interpretation is that 7.7.3 doesn't say that Impetuous, chariots and HC support units must pursue (and by implication that others may pursue.) It says that when the main unit pursues impetuous, chariots and HC follow. This is what I mean by reading into the rules more than is there (and I say this as one who has frequently read more into the rules than I should have.)

As an aside the QRS should say that when the main unit pursues impetuous, chariots and HC must pursue (not may pursue.)

Gaius Cassius wrote:

I don't use this version of the QRS because my eyes no longer can read 8 font!

Got mine blown up onto an A3 sheet Gaius   ... for the visually impaired.

Gaius Cassius wrote:This is what I mean by reading into the rules more than is there (and I say this as one who has frequently read more into the rules than I should have.)

I would politely suggest that is what you are doing here.  You are using non existent words to modify rules for pursuit, the end result of which is that disciplined troops will simply not be able to follow up a beaten enemy no matter how sensible a decision that is.

The missing link that Aurelius dug up from 2009 strata explains it GG  

http://impetus.forumsland.com/impetus-about3860.html

Don't think anyone is trying hit anyone else over the back of the head with the rule book here... just clearing up something that has been confusing     and for a few of us. Hopefully all sorted now   

Tarty wrote:The missing link that Aurelius dug up from 2009 strata explains it GG  

http://impetus.forumsland.com/impetus-about3860.html

Don't think anyone is trying hit anyone else over the back of the head with the rule book here... just clearing up something that has been confusing     and for a few of us. Hopefully all sorted now   

The official words in that thread from Lorenzo being "if you can charge you can also pursue."?

Pause for review.

The link Tarty gave is for the later thread, the 2009 thread in my earlier post is entirely unambiguous.   

From Granicus Gaugamela;
"You are using non existent words to modify rules for pursuit, the end result of which is that disciplined troops will simply not be able to follow up a beaten enemy no matter how sensible a decision that is."

There are a number of assumptions in this quote:

The non existent words do not modify the rules for pursuit, there never has been any presumption of disciplined support troops following up. Some players have assumed the follow up, and not noticed that the rule does not say or imply that. It simply lists those that follow up and the condition that provokes it.

Disciplined troops will be able to follow up, in their next initiative after an opportunity to rally. The follow up is frequently not a sensible option.

Regards to All,

TD