From: Adrian Johnson <ajohnson@i...>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:52:19 -0500
Subject: SG Close Assaults revisited...
Hi folks, ok, we jump into the fray again... I'm getting the list in the digest version, so I'm responding to several posts on this subject at once... hence the length. > From: Derk Groeneveld <derk@cistron.nl> > This is something we discussed last weekend, as well. It struck me But I > couldn't find anything that said the target HAS to be reachable? I don't think the rules do state that specifically, despite Owen's interpretation. However, I think Owen is absolutely right in what he's getting at. Declaring a close assault when you obviously have no chance of reaching the target should not be allowed. We don't let it happen in our games. > To overrun, you really need to reach the position to start with Hmmm. I don't think so. The relevant bit here is on the top of the right hand side of page 41 of the rule book. Someone else quoted it: "Should the defender withdraw... the attacker immediately occupies the vacated position..." I read this as saying that if the defender withdraws, the attacker *does not need to roll his combat movement at all* - the attacker just moves his models to the defenders' position - he "immediately occupies" it. Given that the time frame of the game turn is approximately five minutes, what I believe is meant by this is that the defending unit gets freaked out and runs away, and the attacking unit has the time to be more careful about reaching the position they were attacking, so they don't suffer the dangers of failing the combat movement roll and not running the correct distance. The optional overrun and follow-through rules apply after the attacker has reached the defenders' position, and are an exception to the normal turn sequence. Though that paragraph says that the attacker may pursue the retreating enemy on his next activation, the overrun and follow-through rules clearly apply prior to the next activation and if used, are an exception to the normal turn sequence. > And this is the confusing bit. First of all, on page 41: Yes, it's within the main rules section, but JT is pretty clear about them being optional rules... The wording of the overrun/follow-through section pretty strongly suggests that it takes place immediately after the Close Assault action ends (as the defender withdraws or is destroyed) - and it is a "special option" JT says. I think it happens right away, at the end of the close assault. The attacker does not have to wait for another activation to take place - but again, only if you are using the optional follow-through rule. > "If a Close Assault ends with the Defending unit withdrawing (or Hang on though... You're missing a word in your quoted bit. It says "If a close assault ACTION ends with the..." In this case, the Close Assault action ends when the attacker arrives at the defenders' position - either by running there and winning in a round of combat forcing the defender to withdraw or wiping them out, or by the defender failing their confidence test and withdrawing before the fight takes place. At that point the action has ended, the attacking unit is sitting on the defenders' position, and the Overrun/Follow-Through rules kick in. The attackers are already at the defender's position, and what I believe he means by saying that "Instead of occupying the recently vacated enemy position..." is not just that the models have been placed there (physically occupying the space on the gaming table) but that *in game* the attackers are not choosing to settle into the now vacated position, but are ignoring it and continuing their advance. > Cheers heh. thanks for the vote of confidence Beth:) I'm glad I'm not speaking gibberish... I was writing my response quite late at night and it could very well have been... > er, I'm sorry but the rules state quite plainly that you have to be in Well Owen, I have to agree and disagree with you on this one... Disagree: the bit you are quoting finishes "...for the assault to take place." And goes on to say "If the score from the unit's combat move action is sufficient to reach the defenders' position, the assault continues as below - if the distance rolled is not enough, the assaulting unit may use its second action to repeat....etc". I think that the bit in your quote about the movent distance being sufficient for the assault to take place is NOT saying that the distance before moving must be within the maximum movement of the attacking unit for the assault to be DECLARED, it is just starting off the idea that ends with how the defender gets to have their final defensive fire. In other words, when it says "...must be sufficient...for the assault to take place" it does not mean for the assault to be DECLARED, but rather means for the FIGHT to take place immediately after the first movement, and before the defender gets their round of defensive fire. It's the "sufficient" in both sentances... You could rewrite this as: "If the score from the attacking unit's first combat move action is sufficient to reach the defenders' position then the fight takes place without the defender having an opportunity for defensive fire. If the first move is not sufficient to reach the defenders, then the defenders may take their defensive fire action. After defensive fire, the attacker may take a second combat move with their second action to try to reach the defenders." It *doesn't* say that the distance between the attacker and defender must be reasonable for the close assault to be declared in the first place... Agree: But it *should* say that. I completely agree with the spirit of your interpretation of that paragraph, and that's how we play it. If your unit doesn't have a chance of making the distance, then you can't declare a close assault. Otherwise you can have just silly situations like one unit right across the board declaring a close assault that you know you can't make, just to force a morale test. That *reeks* of cheesy gaming, and we won't allow it. > From: Frits Kuijlman <frits@pds.twi.tudelft.nl> Yes, absolutely! > Close assault can be at most 3 combat moves, including followup move. Well, unless the defending unit retreats, is caught, retreats again, and is caught again, etc... > The sequence: Add in: -- If defender retreats, attacker "immediately occupies the vacated position and his activation ends" - so he does not have to roll anything. He just gets to move to the defended position. You can't have a situation where the attacker makes his reaction test, the defender fails his confidence test and withdraws, and then the attacker still fails to reach the objective... > - - Attacker does first combat move. ...unless he gets the position automatically by the withdrawl of the defender. > - - If attacker doesn't reach defended position, defender can give The only time it won't result in one side being destroyed or captured is if they retreat and the attacker doesn't catch them (blows the roll on the follow-up movement). Then you wait for the next turn as you say, and hope like hell you get to activate before someone blasts you.... > The tricky thing is to figure out what happens when the defender Well, as I've said before, I don't think it works this way (your section B.) If the defender retreats immediately, then the attacker just moves his figures to the position now abandoned by the defender, and he can then choose to use the follow-through or not, if the game is being played using the optional follow-through rules. You don't have to do your first one or two combat moves to see if you make it to the defender's position. You DO have to take a reaction test to see if you can follow-through, and then can make a combat movement if you pass the test. > 2. Defender retreats after hand-to-hand combat. Attacker can again do 2 Well, your limitation there on the "no more followup moves" would be a house rule - that's to stop the "charge all the way across the table" situation. Again, I don't think that it is normally necessary due to the self-limiting nature of the cumulative morale losses in close-combat. If a unit loses TWO rounds of combat, they are going to be pretty close to broken. If not, then the third should put them away for good... We've never felt the need to limit this because we've never seen a close assault go beyond two (or maybe three, on a very unusual occasion) rounds. But it makes sense as a house rule, that's for sure... Ok, that's it for this opus...