Reasons for Death

[william]

  Is there grounds for specifing the reason for killing elements to apply zones of death?

Killed in combat, Killed from missile fire, Killed for being unable to recoil for flee result etc.. Of all of the reasons for a killed element which is and is not as a result of combat.

  Now I do not want to kick off a nasty debate but am thinking that all kills need to be specified as combat or not and I am not trying to refer to the ' floating zone of death once more '. The issue may just need a reasonable discussion thats all.

William

[andrew]

Hi William

I'm not sure I'm following you.  Page 40 states the situations in which elements die in the 'zone of death' as a result of 'close combat'.  In answer to your first question (assuming I am understanding it correctly), I suppose specifying the outcome as a result of death in combat, prevents a single element at the head of a column wiping out the entire column behind should he be unfortunate to die (i.e. no domino effect).

Andrew

[william]

  What I am really trying to figure out is zones of death behind troops that have had flee or recoiled results converted to kills.

One of the examples I think of ( but not the only one saving some till later ) would be a cavalry (a) element in line next to 2 elements of bow (b and c )

                               aaaabbbb
                                     cccc
If an expendable or superior camel contacts a in the flank this turns to face, if the cavalry is beaten but not doubled unit a recieves a flee result, which because it can not complete it's initial recoil, I can not see any problems yet.

Do b and c die due to the zone of death after all it was a flee result and not a kill?

In DBM they would have died I am not sure what is intended or meant in DBMM.

William

[Marcel Bos]

Do b and c die due to the zone of death after all it was a flee result and not a kill?

I understand the difficulty. B and C are only destroyed if A was destroyed in CC.
So the question is, is A destroyed because of CC or just because A couldn't flee.

For myself, I think that because the flee was an direct outcome-move of the CC it is destroyed because of CC and therefore B and C are destroyed also.

Greetings,

Marcel

[MikeCampbell]

Recoil results are not converted into kills any more - so you can forget that one!

Have a look at the combat results - having enemy in contact with your flank/rear now means that a "beaten" result results in death - all those seperate results for the various troop types are now exceptions to the "comon" results listed initially.

As for unable to flee - death is a combat result IMO - it occurs if you "cannot complete the initial recoil" (but note this is not a recoil combat result so my comment above still applies!) - so death is a possible outcome from a flee combat result.

[william]

Recoil results are not converted into kills any more - so you can forget that one!

Have a look at the combat results - having enemy in contact with your flank/rear now means that a "beaten" result results in death - all those seperate results for the various troop types are now exceptions to the "comon" results listed initially.

As for unable to flee - death is a combat result IMO - it occurs if you "cannot complete the initial recoil" (but note this is not a recoil combat result so my comment above still applies!) - so death is a possible outcome from a flee combat result.

I think your hitting a nail on the head Mike, so it if it a killed result from fleeing is there still a 'zone of death'.

William

[william]

Recoil results are not converted into kills any more - so you can forget that one!

Have a look at the combat results - having enemy in contact with your flank/rear now means that a "beaten" result results in death - all those seperate results for the various troop types are now exceptions to the "comon" results listed initially.

As for unable to flee - death is a combat result IMO - it occurs if you "cannot complete the initial recoil" (but note this is not a recoil combat result so my comment above still applies!) - so death is a possible outcome from a flee combat result.

I suppose I asked this question for when I use expenables or camels ( and to a lesser degree knights ) and elements are made to flee, if the elements die as result of this flee ( being unable to complete a recoil or trickie flee into an unfrozen marsh ) do they still create a zone of death for elements that this would apply to ( eg Ps, Hd and Art or Bw or  if the opponent was Knights, expendables or Cm(S) ).

If in combat a Lh flees into an unfrozen marsh and where it would end it's move ( or even on entering the sticky stuff ) it was in front of Ps, Hd, or Art would there be a zone of death. Personally I think not as death occours as a result of fleeing into the bog, therefore destroyed as a result of being unable to complete a recoil from a flee move may not also create a zone of death because the reason for the destuction is being unable to complete a recoil.

William

[william]

Recoil results are not converted into kills any more - so you can forget that one!

Recoils are coverted to kills in 2 cases ( there maybe more ), unable to complete a recoil ( I have been taking this as a full recoil move ) for a flee result and being unable to recoil when defending fortifications.

I think my ideas on the first case is up for consideration as it says under fleeing elements on page 41, 'It is destroyed if if it cannot complete the initial recoil. but as whether this means a full recoil or not is not clear to some ( I think the confusion comes from complete rather than start the initial recoil ).

When defending fortifications it gets more complicated ( if possible ), for example an expendale assaults a spear defending a fortification the factors ( ignoring any overlaps ) are 4 for the mounted 7 for the spear, if the spear is beaten and recieves a recoil result, it then recoils it's base depth, the recoil depth is not enough space for either the  expendable to enter does this mean the expendable stradles the TF ( which is now difficult going therefore the expendable is killed ( another zone of death behind form combat? ) ) or does the spear move further back to allow the expendable to enter, if it is unable to make space ( due to being able to move back any further) is it destroyed ?

I have dreams about assaulting Roman field fortifications with Hannibal's expendable untrained elephants ( I see them crossing the TF's on rope brigdes or tunnelling underneath making them well trained indeed ).

William

[MikeCampbell]

Yes I agree that you must be ale to complete the entire recoil to be killed when fleeing - recoils that stop short are ended "prematurely" - which to me clearly means that completing a recoil requires the full distance.

the death when defending a fortification is when "unable to recoil" - to me this means they cannot recoil AT ALL - not even 1 that ends prematurly - so a any gap at all is enough to prevent death in this case.

AFAIK pursuers on deeper base depths straddle the fortification.

I have a vague memory that it says somewhere that fortificatiosn count as DGo when crossing them?  If that was the case tehn yuor Exp would e destroyed by the pursuit - since they ar destroyed if their pursuit reaches DGo ......but I may be remembering a DBM or DBR rule...

[william]

 

the death when defending a fortification is when "unable to recoil" - to me this means they cannot recoil AT ALL - not even 1 that ends prematurly - so a any gap at all is enough to prevent death in this case.

AFAIK pursuers on deeper base depths straddle the fortification.

I have a vague memory that it says somewhere that fortificatiosn count as DGo when crossing them?  If that was the case tehn yuor Exp would e destroyed by the pursuit - since they ar destroyed if their pursuit reaches DGo ......but I may be remembering a DBM or DBR rule...

An assaulting element that destroyd a defender or forces it to recoil, or scores higher than an undefended fortification , must pursue into the space vacated, [ either on to or along a PF or beyond a TF ].

This is where the muddle occours, the expendable in my example must pursue beyond the TF, but there is no room, but you are right about the difficult going for TF to a certain degree.

On page 11 A TF section that has been crossed by enemy is removed and the space vacated treated as difficult going . which in it self problematic as the TF becomes difficult going after being passed through not while being passed through. The other problem this brings up ( and I should branch out into a seperate topic for this ) is how deep should fortifications be ( I know in DBM they were considered no depth but if they are converted to difficult they must be some thickness ). It also brings up pursue moves as if an element assaults a fortification defended by double ranked Bge(O) and wins it will no longer be able to follow up into contact with the second Bge(O) element as it is more than a base width away.

But all this is digression on my behalf. The topic was reasons for Death and there would seem to be more reasons than combat or fleeing off table that causes death and the subject of this topic should have been ' How many of these reasons of death/destroyed are considered in combat so therefore apply a zone of death where the rear ranks ( or troops behind ) make it appropiate'  { excuse spelling }.

I am waiting to flee something mounted into a marsh creating a zone of death in or on entering a marsh.

  William

[andrew]

I'm not sure about the depth of fortifications (one would expect this to be on page 11) but hidden obstacles are 40 paces wide and boundaries are 20 paces wide (acknowledge little/partial relevance though to fortifications) - so I would expect somewhere between 20-40 paces inclusive for TF and possibly even larger, if desired, for PF.

I am waiting to flee something mounted into a marsh creating a zone of death in or on entering a marsh.

I don't think this scenario would create a 'zone of death' in the DGo given that the element wasn't destroyed while in close combat.

Andrew

[william]

I am waiting to flee something mounted into a marsh creating a zone of death in or on entering a marsh.

I don't think this scenario would create a 'zone of death' in the DGo given that the element wasn't destroyed while in close combat.

Andrew

  I think this is where I was going from the start, if an element gets a flee outcome and is unable to complete a ' full ' recoil it is killed and an element flees from combat into a marsh so is killed ( taken these elements as mounted ) my thinking is either both circumstances create zones of death or not.

It might be easier to consider the first part as being able to start but not complete it's recoil ( therefore it may not be getting killed in combat ).

Ah it's a good job I am so happy with this game otherwise the stress would kill me ( no zone of death for stress )

William

[andrew]

Ah it's a good job I am so happy with this game otherwise the stress would kill me ( no zone of death for stress )

To me part of the enjoyment is the complexity.  I have tried the other recently released ruleset and it doesn't really do anything for me - too gamey for my liking.