Group Counter-Charge; Oh No - Not another Disorder!

Sorry, what?

Opportunity is a Reaction - any action not in your turn is a reaction, whether your unit is placed on opportunity, has it's ZOC infringed or takes one of several other reactions they are all Reactions.

The opening statement in 5.9 is just a general header. by your logic groups charging on opportunity would not get Impetus because the next line only mentions "Units".

You're forgetting I think that Groups are made up of Units and that it is perfectly possible to discuss a Unit within a Group as a Unit and not have to make special clauses for Units within groups.

I used the term "reaction" in quotation marks for a reason; the term has a specific application in the rules. Counter-charging is not one of the specific circumstances that gives rise to a reaction response in 4.2. I think we all agree that only units can react with regards to ZoC violations. I don't see how 4.2 helps us in determining whether groups can counter-charge without being on opportunity.

On the face of it, I don't understand what Opportunity has to do with whether a Group can counter-charge or not. Opportunity is not a condition for being a group. I always presumed that Opportunity simply meant one didn't need to make a DT.

Thanks Zippee for the clarification on whether all units in the Group need to contact the charging opponent. Should have read the section again. Your questions are relevant. Also, since counter-charging is measured to the middle point between the two sides does that mean all the units in a Group counter-charging move the same distance to that point? I presume so.

I am enjoying the discussion. It is helping me to clarify concepts.

Sorry but I have to disagree with Zippee and his assertion that 5.9 is a place-holder. 5.9 explains that Units & Groups on opportunity can countercharge. Nowhere in the section that deals with reaction to zone of control triggers does it mention Groups, so to me it is clear that the inclusion of groups in 5.9 is unique to groups on opportunity.

The problem with other interpretations is that they are simply unworkable - if you apply the idea that all of a group not on opportunity can counter charge when ANY element of it is charged it rewrites the whole system - a line of 10 elements of Hoplites "counter charging" because the first has been charged?

Why can a group on opportunity charge when a group not on opportunity has to test individually? - because it is on Opportunity - it has sacrificed its own activation to activate later. It is prepared, steady and ready

Zippee is accurate when he speaks about placeholders in the rules. I don't think one can make too much of the absence of groups in 5.9 when it refers to non opportunity units counter-charging but not groups. It could mean what you think Cyrus about counter-charges but not necessarily.

I don't see your example of a line of 10 elements of Hoplites counter-charging as a group being influential to the discussion. The whole concept of such a group counter-charging is a bit ridiculous, opportunity or not.

I do see your point Cyrus. I hope that Lorenzo returns to this subject and answers this question:

Are units not on opportunity capable of responding to a charge by making a group counter-charge?

Cyrus The Adequate wrote:Sorry but I have to disagree with Zippee and his assertion that 5.9 is a place-holder. 5.9 explains that Units & Groups on opportunity can countercharge. Nowhere in the section that deals with reaction to zone of control triggers does it mention Groups, so to me it is clear that the inclusion of groups in 5.9 is unique to groups on opportunity.
 

5.9 is about counter-charging not about ZOCs. Reference to 4.2 is irrelevant in understanding what 5.9 is telling us.

5.9 tells us that groups or units can counter charge, if they are on opportunity they can do this freely at the owner's choice, if not on opportunity they must make a DT and failure results in lack of a counter-charge and disorder.

Of course the discussion of ZOCs does not mention groups, groups don't exert ZOCs, only units exert ZOCs and units can only react to ZOC infringement individually but this tells us nothing about counter-charges which are not triggered by ZOC infringement but rather by being charged. And where we are specifically told they can be undertaken by groups.

If 5.9 is to be interpreted as you suggest then units charging as a group do not get Impetus bonuses because 5.9 says "a unit that counter-charges. . ." not " a single unit, or one that is part of a group that counter-charges. . . " (so why would you group counter-charge?)

Likewise by your logic an infantry group can counter charge a mounted charge because the restriction only applies to a unit not a group.

You are creating a false dichotomy - the rules are not written in machine language that means every iteration of "group and/or unit" is written in such a way.

5.9 clearly tells us that groups and units may counter-charge, it then tells us more stuff about how counter-charging affects the units undertaking a counter-charge. it is igenerally rrelevant at this point whether the units are in a group or not. Where it is relevant (in terms of describing the corridor) we are told how this refers to groups.

A unit within a group is still a unit and rules referencing one still apply to the other.

Ok looks like we're split 50/50 on this one

Cyrus The Adequate wrote:Only if countercharging from Opportunity NOT as a reaction - the critical sentence is the first in 5.9 which allows a group to counter charge on opportunity. Units not on opportunity can react as per 4.2 but this is specific only to units NOT groups

Yes I believe that first line in 5.9 says it all as well and the reason we've only allowed groups to counter-charge if all members have been placed on opportunity. Otherwise the normal counter-charge rules apply....... so unless those involved are actually a target of the charge they don't get the chance to counter-charge - staying still.

GC's question should clear it up once and for all hopefully

Boy I'm looking forward to a new reaction system

I've lost a few discussions arguing from the text so I'm not hedging my bets one way or the other. Even Lorenzo's initial comment is hard to decipher in the context of our discussion.

"A Group can countercharge as a Group, as well as single Units (of a Group or not) can countercharge alone. You can always "split" a Group. Was this the question?"

Still I believe Zippee and I are a 100% correct!

I don't have a problem with the current reaction system. You've been reading too much Baroque lately!

Gaius Cassius wrote:
Still I believe Zippee and I are a 100% correct!

You've been reading too much Baroque lately!

... fair enough on both accounts

Tarty wrote:Boy I'm looking forward to a new reaction system

On this I can agree

but in doing so it appears I disagree with GC and thus the forum fragments

Tarty wrote:
Yes I believe that first line in 5.9 says it all as well and the reason we've only allowed groups to counter-charge if all members have been placed on opportunity. Otherwise the normal counter-charge rules apply....... so unless those involved are actually a target of the charge they don't get the chance to counter-charge - staying still.

GC's question should clear it up once and for all hopefully    

Trouble with the "first sentence" argument is what do you make of the second?

A unit that Counter-charges will combat the charging Unit using its own Impetus bonus

Reading this as you insist on reading the first means that a group that counter-charges does not add its impetus and a unit that counter-charges a group doesn't either.

You are alleging that

The Counter-charge is allowed if the charged Unit is not on Opportunity, as long as it is not Disordered and as long as it passes a Discipline Test

does not apply to groups because it only mentions units. If that is true then so is the absence of impetus for groups counter-charging or units charging groups.

You can't have one without the other.

Oh and by the way these are

the normal counter-charge rules

that's the problem

Tarty wrote:Boy I'm looking forward to a new reaction system

I wasnt so much til I got involved in this, now, bring it on.

The problem I have with the assertions Zippee is making is that they are false statements. I don't accept that exclusion of non opportunity groups in opponents turns (if such even exist bearing in mind the temporary nature of groups) in 5.9 also applies to impetus etc - Straw Men etc and we know from experience playing the game, including playing WITH Lorenzo that this is not the case. I cant see how any other interpretation can be applied that does not produce the whole "ten Hoplites" stupidity. Insisting on such comparisons is simply complicating the situation for no productive end.

They most assuredly are not false statements, nor are they straw men.

They may be wrong, but that's a different issue.

Your "first sentence" argument does not stand scrutiny - doesn't mean the result is incorrect. It does mean that as written 5.9 is unclear which was the point from the start, your assertion that it is clear. Now that's a false statement!

Hey Cyrus, you use the example of the 10 Hoplites again counter-charging as a Group. In your interpretation, if all 10 Hoplites were on Opportunity couldn't they counter charge as a Group? The "stupidity" argument applies to both examples (units marked on Opportunity or not) and I don't see how this helps us in discerning the correct answer.

Sorry Gents but Occams razor, PLUS the fact that it is the situation that has been applied for the last 5 years suggests that's the case. Its clear that this has (shock horror) broken down into a discussion about semantics and punctuation rather than common sense.

Simple put I cannot see how you can apply reaction to ZOC triggers as a group action without creating a whole new set of circumstances - indeed the ramifications are immense - what happens to a unit in a group that is triggered to counter-charge by a ZOC reaction that contacts an entirely different unit?? (for instance). There could be massive implications across the board as you cant react to a reaction so a charge at one point could trigger a counter-charge 4 feet away! Is that REALLY what you think the rules are about?

Anyway, they always say dont feed them, so I'm leaving this parked til Lorenzo gets here

Cyrus The Adequate wrote:Sorry Gents but Occams razor, PLUS the fact that it is the situation that has been applied for the last 5 years suggests that's the case. Its clear that this has (shock horror) broken down into a discussion about semantics and punctuation rather than common sense.

Simple put I cannot see how you can apply reaction to ZOC triggers as a group action without creating a whole new set of circumstances - indeed the ramifications are immense - what happens to a unit in a group that is triggered to counter-charge by a ZOC reaction that contacts an entirely different unit?? (for instance). There could be massive implications across the board as you cant react to a reaction so a charge at one point could trigger a counter-charge 4 feet away! Is that REALLY what you think the rules are about?

Anyway, they always say dont feed them, so I'm leaving this parked til Lorenzo gets here

Are we talking about the same thing Cyrus? It doesn't sound like it. First, where did ZOC reactions come into the discussion? We are talking about Counter-Charging, not ZOC reactions (which we all agree on done unit by unit even when they are on opportunity.) Second, I have never seen a Group or a potential Group four feet wide in all my play so your concern on this matter is a bit far fetched. Third, you didn't answer my question about the 10 hoplite  Group. If they are all on Opportunity then according to your understanding, they could Counter-Charge as a Group. Is this correct? If it is then wherever the absurdity my lie (I doubt it could ever really happen in Impetus) it has nothing to do with the ability to Counter-Charge as a Group from a non opportunity status.

As I said from the beginning, in all my play I have never this situation come up. So, for us at least, there is not an established application of the counter-charge rule with respect to Groups.

I know I should leave it here but

Firstly let me apologise - I was using the phrase ZOC reaction as a shorthand to indicate all reactions triggered by an enemy action in their turn rather than reaction from opportunity.

I have seen a group four feet wide - Saxons and some warband come to mind. Ok it may only have been 3 and a bit feet wide, but the point is still valid.

Groups on opportunity can counter charge - actually they can move, shoot, or charge, and a charge against a charge becomes a couonter charge. I see no evidence that the rules allow non opportunity "groups" (again I'm unsure if a "group" can exist in an opponents turn if not on opportunity) to do so.

5.9 says a unit or group that is being charged may counter charge if on opportunity - we all agree that. What then follows is the crux as I see it, that a unit (singular) may also counter charge if it passed a D test. No mention of groups because they dont exist in this circumstance - if you are not on opportunity you are reacting as a unit. The para then goes on to explain the mechanics of the counter charge by that either of those two circumstances. That differentiation is important, but it is only be applied in relation to counter charges, other circumstances have their own rules. I would also point out that groups are temporary groupings of units so any suggestion that only units may count impetus is to me a false argument - for instance it is perfectly possible to have different impetus values applied to different units in a group - impetus is a combat mechanic centred on units, charging and counter charging are in essence movement which can be achieved by groups. You don't apply rules that apply to units to groups just the individual units within those groups. Applying one to the other is not appropriate - and if you think it is what happens when you get a line of deep hoplites charged on a flank and lose - does the whole line rout?

The effect of this is giving troops on opportunity an advantage in that they may counter charge as a group. Troops not on opportunity may choose to counter charge if subject to the charge by testing individually as units.

So lets assume that I am wrong and you can form a group at the moment a charge is declared on you. What are the implications there? Well first it partly removes the initiative from the active player as he can no longer choose to attack in a specific place along a line as in doing so he risks triggering a general counter charge (to which he has no chance of reacting as you cant react to a reaction). Secondly the counter charge is going to become much more powerful if you can automatically take your neighbours with you. Thirdly it increases the power of better quality troops, particularly those with an attached general, and proportionally devalues opportunity, with A class troops now capable of counter charging almost at whim

The problem with your counter charge as a group proposal is that you test once for the counter charge - I appreciate you may not counter charge that often but others clearly do. I'm convinced that where the rules mention groups and units counter charging that should be applied to groups that are not on opportunity because that's what the rules say. Of course I could be wrong, certainly wont be the first time, but I cannot see how the rules interpretation you are proposing can be applied without some dramatic ramifications to the game. If we have been playing this wrong, then when Lorenzo has played with us he hasn't pointed it out.

Cyrus The Adequate wrote:
The effect of this is giving troops on opportunity an advantage in that they may counter charge as a group. Troops not on opportunity may choose to counter charge if subject to the charge by testing individually as units.

Agreed. This has also been one of my concerns the 'watering down' of opportunity status. Haven't brought it up before as I thought we had enough on the table as it is ....that's if we're wrong Cyrus

Thanks Cyrus. To be honest I think it is a 60/40 call in favour of your understanding. I don't think it really has that much influence on the play of Impetus so I think some of your observations are a bit exaggerated.

I don't think allowing Groups to counter-charge from a non opportunity state gives the reacting player that much influence on the game. Any player contemplating a Group Counter-Charge in this situation has to consider the risks of failing the DT. All his units will remain in place and become disordered. Also, in a Group Counter-Charge, I suppose that any counter-charging unit that fails to contact an opponent will disorder. A pretty risky maneuver to my thinking.

A class troops fail DTs 1/3 of the time. Even with a commander it is risky. But let me ask you this, how many Groups of Class A troops does one see in a game? Not many and I've never seen one greater than 2 units/large units. So A class troops are not going to be overly dominate should Lorenzo rule in favour of allowing non opportunity units the option of a Group Counter charge.

Personally, I think allowing Groups to counter-charge with or without opportunity is in the spirit of Impetus. Impetus gives players a range of options with degrees of risk and uncertainty. The advantage of Opportunity is that the player has certainty in his choices. That is a huge advantage to the player facing uncertainty through the need to make a DT. The active player should, in my opinion, be forced to share in the uncertainty that comes with advancing against the enemy.

As an update, I have played against commands with 3 units of A class legions.

Would that one of my battle reports generated even a third of the interest!

Back to the keyboard . . .