|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2022 23:39:14 GMT
Rule Book Page 51 - says third round of combat happens next turn
Rule Book Page 55 - says up to 4 rounds if pursuing
Bugger - looks like I'm going to have to type this all out
|
|
|
|
Post by cthulhu on Jul 26, 2022 10:18:46 GMT
2rounds unless you manage to wipe out unit in 1st round of combat, then you can charge and have 2 rounds against second unit for a total of 3 rounds!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Jul 26, 2022 11:24:47 GMT
ooooh ,got its own thread  Get the Popcorn But on a serious note, be interesting debate to clear up the vagaries of the old rule book |
|
|
|
Post by Balgin on Jul 26, 2022 13:03:06 GMT
ooooh ,got its own thread Get the Popcorn But on a serious note, be interesting debate to clear up the vagaries of the old rule book The main vagary I'd like to clear up is the physical location of my old copy. |
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Jul 26, 2022 16:27:57 GMT
ooooh ,got its own thread Get the Popcorn But on a serious note, be interesting debate to clear up the vagaries of the old rule book The main vagary I'd like to clear up is the physical location of my old copy. It ll be easier to buy a new one !! From what yuove said about that stock levels in your warehouse, sorry, House  ) |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 26, 2022 22:23:38 GMT
Raff I have an answer to that -- it costed me £15.53
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 26, 2022 22:44:23 GMT
Still back on topic - and I think this is different from the original Warmaster where (if i was told correctly) combat continued until there was an outcome.
I think it is 4
Charge have combat Round 1: bish bosh bash, loser falls back and winner pursues
Round 2: bish bosh bash, loser falls back and winner pursues (page 47 WMR) - combat continues next combat phase
but if loser was destroyed (page 50-51 WMR) Winner can Advance [which is allowed once per combat phase], which is essentially a new charge of 20cm
An Advance might initiate a new combat engagement - unless it advanced into an unresolved (meaning one which has kicked off but not concluded) combat which means it fights in the next turn
Round 3: If advancing into an existing unfought engagement or a new combat engagement, the advancing unit fights as part of the engagement that turn.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 26, 2022 22:45:42 GMT
ooooh ,got its own thread Get the Popcorn But on a serious note, be interesting debate to clear up the vagaries of the old rule book Yep - best to get this sort of thing out of the way before there be fisticuffs |
|
|
|
Post by philiusgrumpus on Jul 27, 2022 19:31:31 GMT
Still back on topic - and I think this is different from the original Warmaster where (if i was told correctly) combat continued until there was an outcome. I think it is 4 Charge have combat Round 1: bish bosh bash, loser falls back and winner pursues Round 2: bish bosh bash, loser falls back and winner pursues (page 47 WMR) - combat continues next combat phase but if loser was destroyed (page 50-51 WMR) Winner can Advance [which is allowed once per combat phase], which is essentially a new charge of 20cm An Advance might initiate a new combat engagement - unless it advanced into an unresolved (meaning one which has kicked off but not concluded) combat which means it fights in the next turn Round 3: If advancing into an existing unfought engagement or a new combat engagement, the advancing unit fights as part of the engagement that turn. That’s exactly how I read it too. |
|
|
|
Post by philiusgrumpus on Jul 27, 2022 19:34:41 GMT
Though the argument we were having was over whether the multiple units involved were considered one combat or two separate combats to fight. My view was that my units though not touching each other were connected by bens units that were touching and were either fighting or providing support. And therefore all of my units and all of his units were one combat and would fight simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
Post by Balgin on Jul 27, 2022 20:08:33 GMT
Though the argument we were having was over whether the multiple units involved were considered one combat or two separate combats to fight. My view was that my units though not touching each other were connected by bens units that were touching and were either fighting or providing support. And therefore all of my units and all of his units were one combat and would fight simultaneously. Did his unit fight back against each of your units separately (as in two separate fights)? If so then he got to fight twice as much as you did. Or did his unit only get to choose one of your to fight back against? In that case everyone would have had the same amount of fights. If you'd had each of your units fight once and he'd had his fight back twice I can see why this could look different depending on which side you're looking at it from. This could explain why the two of you were at odds about it. Last week when one of my units was fighting 3 of Nemesis' units (3 in column against 1 in line but with plenty of support) I only fought back against 1 of the attacking units. Should I have fought back against all 3 separately? I doubt it. That feels wrong somehow. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 27, 2022 23:01:25 GMT
I will think on it
But as the active player chooses the order of combats - it seems to me that once a combat has resolved it can't be re-fought that turn. the new arrivals will have to wait until next turn.
The answer is single combat
|
|
|
|
Post by philiusgrumpus on Jul 28, 2022 18:12:03 GMT
Though the argument we were having was over whether the multiple units involved were considered one combat or two separate combats to fight. My view was that my units though not touching each other were connected by bens units that were touching and were either fighting or providing support. And therefore all of my units and all of his units were one combat and would fight simultaneously. Did his unit fight back against each of your units separately (as in two separate fights)? If so then he got to fight twice as much as you did. Or did his unit only get to choose one of your to fight back against? In that case everyone would have had the same amount of fights. If you'd had each of your units fight once and he'd had his fight back twice I can see why this could look different depending on which side you're looking at it from. This could explain why the two of you were at odds about it. Last week when one of my units was fighting 3 of Nemesis' units (3 in column against 1 in line but with plenty of support) I only fought back against 1 of the attacking units. Should I have fought back against all 3 separately? I doubt it. That feels wrong somehow.I think in the example you give both Ben and I would agree that’s one combat. I can’t remember the exact layout of bens units in this one but the disagreement arose over whether my cavalry unit, which I had rolled the dice for and wiped out a unit, should then advance into contact with the next unit and roll again along with my spearmen contacting the same unit or the spearmen should roll before before removing any bases and therefore at the same time the cavalry rolled their dice. Ironically bens view gave me an advantage and mine gave him one. Not that it really matters now, if such a situation arises again then we’ll have to work it through from the start and agree before rolling any dice. |
|
|
|
Post by philiusgrumpus on Aug 4, 2022 11:59:36 GMT
So I didn’t realise that heroes and wizards, for all armies, have a limited command range. 60cm for heroes, 20cm for wizards. Generals are unlimited. That’s gonna make things trickier for tomb kings which only have wizards and a general. There’s a small possibility that they will be table ready, if not very painted, for Monday evening.
|
|
|
|
Post by Balgin on Aug 4, 2022 12:00:50 GMT
So I didn’t realise that heroes and wizards, for all armies, have a limited command range. 60cm for heroes, 20cm for wizards. Generals are unlimited. That’s gonna make things trickier for tomb kings which only have wizards and a general. There’s a small possibility that they will be table ready, if not very painted, for Monday evening. Additionally fliers need to be within 20cm of a hero to receive orders. |
|
)