Latest topics
» A few questions on large units, pilums and multiple melees
General at Risk modifier EmptyTue May 21, 2019 2:06 pm by Gaius Cassius

» Interpenetration and Displacement
General at Risk modifier EmptyFri May 17, 2019 6:19 pm by RogerC

» Measurement Question In Basic Impetus 2.0
General at Risk modifier EmptyFri May 17, 2019 5:46 pm by Zombiefy

» Base Depth: 40mm vs 60mm for FP and FL?
General at Risk modifier EmptyThu May 16, 2019 2:31 pm by Gaius Cassius

» Battle of Harzhorn Salute 2019
General at Risk modifier EmptySun May 12, 2019 5:24 pm by Marcus Aurelius MD

» The Illiad = The Wrath of Achilles
General at Risk modifier EmptyThu May 09, 2019 8:04 pm by ejc

» Charges/ counter chares
General at Risk modifier EmptyWed May 08, 2019 2:32 pm by dadiepiombo

» Can a general move with a unit after attaching same turn
General at Risk modifier EmptyWed May 08, 2019 2:23 pm by dadiepiombo

» Byzantine 28mm
General at Risk modifier EmptyMon May 06, 2019 5:38 pm by stecal

Battle of Harzhorn Salute 2019

Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:13 pm by ejc

Our group is putting on the above at the EXcell Centre London being the SAlute …

Comments: 14

The Illiad = The Wrath of Achilles

Thu May 09, 2019 12:41 pm by ejc

We will be putting this game on at one of the Autumn shorws probably Colours or …

Comments: 1

The Battle of Apamea at Hotlead

Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:50 am by Gaius Cassius

Hotlead is Canada's leading Miniature Wargames Convention. It is held in 2019 …

Comments: 2

BI2 tournament - 12 May 2018 - CANCELLED

Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:26 am by RogerC

EDIT I am very sorry, but I’ve had to CANCEL this tournament. I’ve …

Comments: 9

Vapnartak. Sunday 4th February 2018 Knavesmere Stand York Racecourse

Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:54 am by Cyrus The Adequate

Hi Gents

York is the usual first event in the UK Impetus calendar. This year …

Comments: 28

Basic Impetus 2 Comp, January 2018?

Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:03 am by Aurelius

I've brought the confirmed details for the Basic Impetus competition to the …

Comments: 32

May 2019
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Calendar Calendar


General at Risk modifier

Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty General at Risk modifier

Post by Granicus Gaugamela on Thu Mar 10, 2016 4:15 am

Umpired a game last night and had a "first" come up.

A unit of cavalry gets around the flank of an army containing Large Units and undertakes a flank charge.

Hits are scored, attacking cavalry pass their cohesion test and are disorderd, large unit flank attacked rolls a 6 taking 2 losses (critical number was a 4 obviously).  They have thus lost the combat and are automatically routed.

Which is nasty.

Now, the Large Unit also contained the Commander.

So the 6 represents a threat to him.

What modifier should we have used for the losses the Large Unit took that melee?

Do we use the 2 that occurred because the cohesion test roll was 2 above the critical number

OR

Do we use 8 because that represents the total losses suffered because the Large Unit routed from fresh as a result of losing a Flank Attack melee?



We went with 2 but I can see an argument for the other case as well.  Your leader has just been rolled up from the flank, his brand new unit that was so confidently advancing just got smashed to oblivion and fled the first time they engaged in combat, so you get real shaky real fast.

Granicus Gaugamela
VBU 4
VBU 4

Posts : 443
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by starkadder on Thu Mar 10, 2016 9:12 am

Page 44: "+ Losses taken by the General's Unit calculated in the last Cohesion Test."

I would say eight ( 8 ), given that the losses would have been calculated as part of the cohesion test if it had been survivable. The cohesion test incorporates losses at the point of defeat, retreat or rout.

Interesting.

I understand why you went for two ( 2 ). 

Eight makes a more fun story though, doesn't it?
starkadder
starkadder
VBU 4
VBU 4

Posts : 303
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19
Age : 65
Location : Tahmoor, NSW, Oz

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by Granicus Gaugamela on Thu Mar 10, 2016 10:03 am

Heh heh Starkers, you know my propensity for attacking flanks so I'm all keen for 8 but it does fundamentally change the game based on a single poor dice roll....

Granicus Gaugamela
VBU 4
VBU 4

Posts : 443
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by starkadder on Thu Mar 10, 2016 11:09 am

I don't know about fundamentally changing things. It does reinforce the risks of large units with exposed flanks. And that's a Good Thing.
starkadder
starkadder
VBU 4
VBU 4

Posts : 303
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19
Age : 65
Location : Tahmoor, NSW, Oz

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by Granicus Gaugamela on Thu Mar 10, 2016 12:17 pm

starkadder wrote:I don't know about fundamentally changing things. It does reinforce the risks of large units with exposed flanks. And that's a Good Thing.

On the latter, not so sure, that should be reinforced by autodestruct anyway.

On the former - it makes it a whole heck of a lot easier to rout an entire army as the result of a single 6 being rolled at the wrong time.

Granicus Gaugamela
VBU 4
VBU 4

Posts : 443
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by Gaius Cassius on Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:43 pm

We would use 2. The actual loss is only 2 but because it is a flank attack the effect causes the unit to rout.
Gaius Cassius
Gaius Cassius
VBU 7 h.c.
VBU 7 h.c.

Posts : 965
Reputation : 36
Join date : 2014-05-20
Location : Guelph, Ontario, Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by Cyrus The Adequate on Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:02 pm

I'm with GC on this one - the losses are 2, the rout is an effect of the cohesion test not the result of the test itself
Cyrus The Adequate
Cyrus The Adequate
VBU 5
VBU 5

Posts : 566
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

General at Risk modifier Empty Re: General at Risk modifier

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum