i |
Open
for Discussion:
|
Discussion MenuNext DiscussionPrevious Discussion |
This is the place to discuss the rule system,
particularly with questions! Greg Laubach writes: In answer to Neil Wakefield's questions: [22.12] The three extra movement points is the Double Time. If the
Double Time Restrictions [22.2] are not met, then the extra movement
is not available. casualties as troops that are rendered ineffective. Now in enfilade fire, the GBACW games represent the disorder that occurs in a line formation due to any fire coming from the sides or rear as an increased chance for ineffectives or losses. In many of the games there is also a morale penalty. 3/07/08 Russ Gifford writes: In answer to Neil Wakefield's questions: [7.23] Good way to say it Greg. The concept they are trying to show is how much more impact the fire has on the unit when it comes through one of the enfilade hexsides, which in GBACW are the three 'rear' hexsides of a unit. 3/06/08 Russ Gifford writes: In answer to Neil Wakefield's questions: Well, I am more than willing to talk about this, but please remember,
most of these questions deal with design choices, rather than rules, so I
not really saying 'this is how it is,' only 'here's why I think they did
this.' So none of what I write will be worth anything more than 'my
opinion.' But some of these were discussed when the original rules were
written for TSS, so here's what I think they were asking. Your example seems more apropos here. The concept of Berg and company is good: a single stone wall can't protect everyone, can it? But as your example states, 'wait a minute!' But remember, in most GBACW games, and I am certain in GOB, there is a relatively low limit to the number of regiments in a hex, not just the number of men. So with the changes, and the restrictions, it just doesn't work out that you often have lots of 1 SP point regiments in a single hex. The rules steer you away from mixing regiments of different brigades, and that's generally where small regiments come from! But as I said above, in reality in these games, you don't have the regiments breaking into 100 unit groups and then crowding together, due to the fact it is more deadly to them. Is it historical? Well, it is certainly helps as you think about a stone wall to know that 1000 men aren't hiding behind a single 120 yard wall! [22.12] Double Time OK, not certain if I understand you on this one. I can start my units moving to get them out of non-Double Time terrain, and then declare DT to get an additional 3 MP. Technically, I can't use the 3 MP until I am going to DT, so those points will only be used when I am Double Timing. (In other words, I can use up to 6 points to get to a clear hex where I am in column - and then if I am double timing, I'll have 3 more points. I cannot use 7 points to be 'ready' to double time. [22.22] DT continued The organization of a unit into DT status takes some time, and that means getting them moving requires some work. The problem is to DT, units were being placed into column, and fast marched to their location. DT gets them extra points, but they will be tired afterwards - at least winded. They get the points to simulate their ability to move faster - well, I can't fast march in terrain that is too cluttered or broken to keep up my speed, and no one fast marches in the woods! So, once I start DT (and I have to be in column) I can't tell them to not DT. If I did I'd be doing what you were afraid of - using DT points when I wasn't Double Timing! And I only get the points for Double Timing, not for anything else! This also keeps people from DT into the battle. Your troops are winded after a DT march. They would not go from a DT march, shake out into a battle line and directly march into the fight! This rule says if I go from column to line, my movement ENDS. Done. If this makes sense.... 3/06/08 Greg Laubach writes: Re: Neil Wakefield's questions, and Russ' answers: Yes, it makes sense. And I think you hit upon part of the problem in your
second answer, Russ. 3/04/08 Neil Wakefield writes: I’m playing A Gleam of Bayonets with a friend at the
moment. Here are some rules that we find curious that it would be good to
hear the views of others on: 2/25/08 Greg Laubach writes: At the end of November, I asked about how you played the retreat before melee and advance sequence, melee by melee or all retreats at once and all advances at once. 12.8 is ambiguous. Russ Gifford writes: "It certainly is. I think there is more multiple methods to play this section than any other in the system! "As Greg pointed out in his letter, the Melee rules in GBACW were open to interpretation. As the system continued, the designers tried to expand the rules as necessary to clean up the vague points. That method continued in Corinth, as they worked to evolve the Melee into a firm set of steps. TSS2 continued that process, so we will use that series of steps to examine the choices. "And also, let's remember, the Designer and Developer of Corinth were, respectively, Richard Berg (TSS, et. al.) and Eric Lee Smith (GBACW). So if we can't trust these two, who can we trust? ;) Me, anything I think is just me talking. But here is how I see it: The Melee rules are not truly changing from game to game, but being expanded to clarify what the designer originally intended. First - what are we trying to achieve? I am suggesting the rules as evolved for TSS2 be used for all games in the GBACW/TSS2 system. This is not a stretch. There are no real changes, just explanations to make it clear what you are supposed to be doing in melee - and more specifically, in the Retreat Before Melee phase that precedes Melee. So - let's turn to the TSS2 Sequence of play. For the Retreat Before Melee phase, it spells things out clearly, in a sequential fashion. It lists sub-phases G1, G2, and G3 in the Retreat before Melee phase. Obviously, just as all parts of A have to happen before B on the Sequence of Play, all parts of G1 have to come before G2, etc. The Retreat Before Melee phase:
Next - the Melee Phase. The melee phase follows, where the attackers (attempt to) enter the hexes, and melee is resolved. So - let's break it down, step by step! Retreat Before Melee has its own Phase, so it will certainly happen for
ALL troops before ANY Melee happens. In fact, according to the multi-step
sequence in TSS2, page 15, middle column, which is pretty
similar to the Corinth list -
Then we get Step B, which says:
(The rule says ALL - so to me that means no advance is going to happen
after one unit leaves allowing other units to be cut off before they can
retreat - which is also reinforced by a line I'll point out in a moment.)
Casualties are taken at the moment of Withdrawal Fire, as are pin checks - but not a morale check. (See below.) If they fail the Pin check, they are pinned in the original hex, and have to stand for the Melee. [12.87]
And remember, mounted Cavalry and limbered Horse Arty can Retreat Before Melee and not take a morale check!) AND THEN I think then next step happens because the previous point makes it clear they have to option to NOT be trapped.
So, that's step B taken care of! It also was the final step in the Retreat before Melee phase - so in my mind, all of the above steps HAVE to happen before the next step. Now the start of the Melee phase, and Step C:
And on to Step D:
Since the Melee rules demand the unit that declared go through with the attempt, this gets us to the moment of truth: melee now occurs between any enemy units who share the same hex. And the phasing player resolves these melees in any order he chooses. At least, that's how I read all this. Russ Gifford adds: And now, in practical terms, from experience, the actual sequence most of us use in is something like this: (I'm not saying it is right, just how it happens.) 1. The attacker announces all melees.
4. Repeat from step 2 until all of the retreats and melees are executed. PS: This does bring up the rule that allows even out of command units to retreat before melee. It is a rule I ALWAYS forget! [12.81] TSS2, [12.89] in GBACW. Of course, pinned and routed units may not Retreat before Melee... 2/20/08 Russ Gifford writes: "In TSS2, they make it clear that the increased Leadership
effectiveness bonus does NOT count in the Rally phase! [17.22] Todd Baker showed us the next one: "Speaking of changes in TSS2, another big shock is in the Seeing the Elephant rules. In GBACW, you do this once for units with a '?' for a morale. In TSS2, you use the Seeing the Elephant table to determine their morale EVERY PHASE a unit with a '?' takes a morale check! [13.14] Tom Gaul notes: "Withdrawal and Retreat Fire are similar, but here's a rule of thumb to keep them straight: Withdrawal Fire generally happens during the enemy's Movement Phase, or the Withdrawal Before Melee Phase It occurs when a unit LEAVES an enemy ZOC. Retreat Fire generally happens during a Fire Phase (Defensive Fire Phase or the Offensive Fire Phase) since it most often is a routing unit or units displaced by routing units. It occurs when a unit ENTERS an enemy ZOC." "Why does the difference matter? Retreat Fire pins a unit in the hex it took the shot in. If Withdrawal Fire pins a unit, it pins in the hex it was trying to enter, not the hex it was shot in. (Unless it was a Retreat Before Melee shot. If it fails a Pin check, it cannot leave the hex and must accept Melee! [12.87]) Russ Gifford adds: "Speaking of Retreat Before Melee, did you know even out of command units can attempt to Retreat Before Melee??? [12.81] BUT - units cannot enter an Enemy ZOC using Retreat before Melee! [12.83] Want to add your thoughts? Click here! Return to Tactics Menu Page | Return to SPI Games | Return to RussGifford.net |
|
This site was last updated 01/13/13