PDA

View Full Version : EITw... again...



lparigi34
19-07-2008, 02:35
Not that I've ever had this crystal clear, I found this at http://www.remanlegions.com/

IŽd like to hear opinions...

Rules: Enemy's in the Way -

[one paragraph omitted]

* If the path between the charging unit and the fleeing unit is blocked (even if the fleeing unit is too far to reach), then the charging unit must either declare a new charge against the unit in the way or stop 1" in front of the unit in the way.

* The charging unit only ever fails a charge (goes normal movement distance rather than double) when there are no enemy's within their charge distance.

Atrahasis
20-07-2008, 09:31
The second point should be modified to "...no enemies in their charge path" but otherwise it looks correct.

T10
20-07-2008, 10:22
Just a quick check to see if there is a common agreement on the issue of the "charge path" here.

Please see the attached illustration. A unit of cavalry (blue) is faced with a monster and a unit of infantry (red). The cavalry have declared a charge against the infantry who in turn have decided to hold.

The most direct path to the target passes through the monster (creating an "enemy in the way" situation). The longer path sees the cavalry move forward past the monster, wheel 90 degrees and then move forward to engage the infantry head on.

Which path (or paths) would you be allowed to use in your gaming group?

Around here it is assumed that if you have declared a charge against a target then you must attempt to reach that target and that target only.(Excepting charges against multiple targets, a different topic.)

Here, "enemies in the way" only factor in when the target flees. Since you are then compelled to move towards (and through) the target's final position then it is always clear as to wether there are other enemies you can charge along the way.

In the example given: The cavalry unit would be required to take the longer path past the monster to reach the infantry unit. If it does not have sufficient move to reach the target it suffers a failed charge.

-T10

Atrahasis
20-07-2008, 10:32
By the first point in the OP ("If the path between the charging unit and the fleeing unit is blocked..."), only the second path is permitted, ie the longer path that goes around the monster. If there is any unblocked path, then the charge path is not blocked.

T10
20-07-2008, 10:34
But would you say the path was blocked if the charge move is insufficient to complete the longer path?

Edit: My point being - there is in most cases a "path" that leads to the target, but the charger's may not have enough movement to successfully complete it.

-T10

Atrahasis
20-07-2008, 11:05
No, I wouldn't say the path is blocked. If any potential path exists that is unblocked, then the charge path is not blocked (even if the potential path is too long to complete).

The removal of "after a unit flees from a charge" didn't change EitW as much as it initially appears.

T10
20-07-2008, 11:57
No, I wouldn't say the path is blocked. If any potential path exists that is unblocked, then the charge path is not blocked (even if the potential path is too long to complete).


In this we agree. :)

Now let's add some terrain into the mix. Please see the attached diagram. Let's assume the gap between the monster and the building is less than the width of the cavalry unit.

Is the charge path blocked by the monster ("enemy in the way") or does no charge path exist (failed charge)?

-T10

Gazak Blacktoof
20-07-2008, 14:24
I would disagree with the resolution of T10's original scenario. A charge is being blocked by an enemy in the way. The rules for EITW aren't any more difficult to interpret than that statement.

If you can avoid the enemy unit and successfully make a charge on the original target of a charge then the enemy is not in the way. If you can not complete your charge because an enemy unit is in the way then you can declare a new charge.

In the second scenario if it were obvious that the cavalry could not reach the infantry (for example the terrain is impassable) then you shouldn't be declaring a charge against them if this would grant you a bonus as its effectively cheating (you know you can not reach them).

If the terrain were merely difficult and it appeared that there might be a charge route then you could declare a charge. If this charge fell short you could then declare EITW against the closer enemy which is preventing you from reaching your target.

Atrahasis
20-07-2008, 14:43
In this we agree. :)

Now let's add some terrain into the mix. Please see the attached diagram. Let's assume the gap between the monster and the building is less than the width of the cavalry unit. Well, in the diagram as you've posted it the player has declared a charge that obviously can't be completed (as the gap between monster and building is too small), and so should never have been allowed to declare.

Assuming that the gap is of a size that makes it unclear whether the charge could be declared, I'd say that EiTW is possible, on the condition that the only path using a single wheel to reach the intended target passes through the monster.

The only legal charge paths all pass through the monster's position, and so it is in the way.

lparigi34
20-07-2008, 23:08
Ok, thanks a lot guys.

Just few hours ago the following happened, It felt really bad and to my disadvantage I believe we played it right.

One Blue Cavalry charger, against my Red Empire Swordmen and its Militia Detachment.

The Cavalry first declare a charge against the Detachment, that I elect to flee. However, due to the EitW rules, they then change the target to the main Swordmen unit.

Is this Ok? It feels broken, specially for Empire Players as most of the Detachment rule advantage is lost due to this way of ruling it (well, at least for single foot unit detachments).

Gazak Blacktoof
20-07-2008, 23:58
When the detachment flees its centre should flee directly away from the centre of the charging cavalry.

Once the detachment has completed its flee move I would resolve it as follows.

1 Can the cavalry move in such a way as to catch and destroy the detachment? If so then they can not declare EITW and the charge is completed.

2 If the cavalry can not catch the detachment would a move by the shortest possible route toward the fleeing detachment bring them into contact with the parent unit? If so they may opt to declare an EITW charge.

3 If the cavalry can not reach the detachment and the parent unit does not block their path then they have failed their charge and are moved (as per a failed charge) in a direction that would if extrapolated enable them to complete their charge against the detachment.

lparigi34
21-07-2008, 03:47
Nice, thanks a lot, any further comments are appreciated. Now, and after careful reading and analysis of previous posts I think I have a better grasp of the rule and how to play it.

I think we played it ok in my most recent game.

alextroy
21-07-2008, 04:24
Is this Ok? It feels broken, specially for Empire Players as most of the Detachment rule advantage is lost due to this way of ruling it (well, at least for single foot unit detachments).

As Gazak Blacktoof noted, the detachment should have fled along a line from it's center to the charger's center. Once the flee move was performed, the charge path of the charger should have been determined by looking at what would happen if you wheeled the charger to point directly at the detachment and then moved it directly towards it. If that path would intersect with the the parent unit, then it would be permissable to charge it. Otherwise, they would charge after the detachment, either reaching it and therefore moving their full charge distance, or performing a failed charge move.

lethlis
21-07-2008, 04:24
remember that your units run directly away from his unit, i usually go from the middle of the unit line. Now in your drawing after he wheeled to go in the direction of your unit it looks like he just nicks your parent unit, however if after the wheel the unit was not in his direct forward path then it would not have hit you so no enemy in the way. A failed charge with the bonus of giving you the flank.

It is not a free redirect for enemy. So after wheel towards your unit it is straight line from there.

Tarax
21-07-2008, 07:50
@T10: Great illustration, gets thing clear. I think the best way to react to the monster is to see it as another piece of (impossible) terrain. If the enemy holds, you will move around the monster.
With the addition of the house (or any other piece of terrain), it becomes more difficult. First of all, you can't use the house to move through, like you would with a wood. In which case I see it as a failed charge as you have 'estimated your charge incorrectly' (as by p.21 BRB, 'A Failed Charge').
This all changes when the target flees. Then it will become an Enemy in the Way-situation. No rules, just MHO, and I will get flagged by some. ;)

@Gazak: A flee from the charge move is directed in the line from the center of the charging unit to the center of the fleeing unit. In the diagram this will take the charging unit into the other block, if they decide to use EitW, as they can also decide to hold 1" away. If the enemy did not flee, the charging unit would have to wheel past the other unit. (Based on the FAQ.)

Gazak Blacktoof
21-07-2008, 10:05
@Gazak: A flee from the charge move is directed in the line from the center of the charging unit to the center of the fleeing unit. In the diagram this will take the charging unit into the other block, if they decide to use EitW, as they can also decide to hold 1" away. If the enemy did not flee, the charging unit would have to wheel past the other unit. (Based on the FAQ.)


Whether the most direct charge takes you into the parent unit doesn't matter. You can only decalre EITW if you can't reach your intended target at all.

For example, if the detachment only fled 2" (or if it held as a charge reaction) it could be possible that the charging unit could wheel to avoid the parent unit and complete its charge. If the enemy doesn't prevent you completing your charge then they are not "In The Way".

T10
21-07-2008, 10:12
Well, in the diagram as you've posted it the player has declared a charge that obviously can't be completed (as the gap between monster and building is too small), and so should never have been allowed to declare.

Assuming that the gap is of a size that makes it unclear whether the charge could be declared, I'd say that EiTW is possible, on the condition that the only path using a single wheel to reach the intended target passes through the monster.

The only legal charge paths all pass through the monster's position, and so it is in the way.

I agree that an obviously impossible charge should be disallowed.

However, things are fairly fluid on the battlefield, and the player may have reason to believe (or hope) that by the time it comes to move the chargers the path towards the target will indeed be clear.

Example: The player might have declared a charge against the moster from a different unit. It is conceivable that the monster would declare a Flee! reaction and thus move out of the way before the player would move his chargers.

If this gamble fails the chargers should suffer a failed charge. They should not be given the opportunity to claim "enemies in the way" and select a new target to charge. This just allows players to attempt to seek advantages without risk.

-T10