Feigned Flight Squared

[DaveMather]

One issue that arose at Rampage last weekend was regarding feigned flight

Player 1 announces a feigned flight and carries it out

Player 2 reacts to it in his bound but at the end of his bound he also initiates a feigned flight - the troops that reacted (were held or went sponno)  to the feigned flight now flee themselves .

From a rules perspective this seems Ok but historical?

There was an arguement that the only response is hold or go impetuous so you cant initiate a feigned flight but this was ruled against.

Comments/thoughts

Regards


David Mather

[Valentinian Victor]

My thought would be that your opponent cannot undertake a feigned flight until he successfully halts all those troops who went impetuous and spontaneously moved as a result of your feigned flight.
So, he cannot feign flight in his bound after you initiate the feigned flight in your bound as he has to halt those troops spontaneously moving forward towards you.

[DaveMather]

Fair comment but is that substantiated anywhere in the rules

He made necessary halts and subsequent sponno moves in response to player 1s feigned flight

Then he spent his 3 PIPs that he held back to trigger his own feigned flight

So troops from that command that had been halted or had gone sponno now fled as per feigned flight

It was a surprising counter and there were many shouts of foul-  but seems to be perfectly valid from a rules perspective (unless someone can prove otherwise)

Regards


David Mather



 

[MikeCampbell]

Seems fine to me - I can imagine one lot running back thinking "This'll sucker them..."....then they see the other lot running away and thing "yippee...it worked - lets go get 'em boys..."

I won't vouch to it ever having happened, but it dosen't seem unreasonable & it requires a particular set of circumstances to occur in terms of enough PIPs, both having the FF stratagem, etc. so shouldn't be common.

[Valentinian Victor]

I could see it happening if say you feigned flighted on your right wing, and then your opponent feigned flighted on his right wing. That way you would have your right wing running and him pursuing, and on your left you would be pursuing whilst he  is running. The difficulty I perceive is if you both feign flight in your repective center's.

[DaveMather]

Someone sent me the following off list -

Reading of the rules is below,
 
On page 28 there is a para about halts.
 
"Halts are voluntary temporary cessations of movement expending pips used to prevent spontaneous advances,routs or naval drifting. No element can both halt and move in the same bound. A halt is not a move."

For me the problem with that is that would mean any troops that were halted could never make a feigned flight -

Regards


David Mather

[Valentinian Victor]

But, as a feigned flight is a 'flee outcome', it would not matter if you had halted or moved as flee moves are outcomes and not 'made' moves?

[DaveMather]

I would agree with that

Looks like it is perfectly feasible - as Mike says it will not happen very often given the circumstances required and/or the advantage to be gained.

Regards


David Mather

 

[gibby]

Sorry guys I'm not sure I agree. Under feigned flight it says Flee outcome move. Whilst it may be a flee outcome, it is still a move. So my reading of this as it is written, is that you halt or move. Not halt, then declare a feigned flight then move. Whilst I agree that its occurence may be rare. Feigned flight never the less is from what I have seen one of the most used strategems

cheers
Jim

[toby]

By that argument you could then Halt some elements in a command then then declare a feigned flight and only the rest of the command would flee away. The enemy would then go hareing after the fleeing elements, setting you up to hit them with the ones that you held.

It strikes me this could open the door to a lot of cheese.

[Valentinian Victor]

Page 41- Fleeing Elements, makes things a lot clearer.
You can indeed make any kind of move, halt etc before declaring a Feigned Flight as Feigned Flights are considered flee outcome moves and not moves requiring pips.

[gibby]

I agree with your following statement Valentinian Victor said

"My thought would be that your opponent cannot undertake a feigned flight until he successfully halts all those troops who went impetuous and spontaneously moved as a result of your feigned flight.
So, he cannot feign flight in his bound after you initiate the feigned flight in your bound as he has to halt those troops spontaneously moving forward towards you."
So I'm not sure if we are at cross - purposes here or you have changed your mind and now think that you can Feigned flight in the same bound as you have halted your troops in response to a Feigned flight to stop them going impeteous.

Toby, what would you suggest then. Can you or can you not Feigned flight a command which has halted some elements to stop them going after a fleeing enemy command who has just used Feigned flight.
FWIW It does not seem quite right that you can and for me that was the cheese.

[Valentinian Victor]

Having looked at all the movement rules, and at Feigned Flight and Page 41, I have come to the conclusion that you can institute a feigned flight even if you have made tactical, march or spontaneous moves. This is on the basis that feigned flights are flee outcomes, which always take place as the last action of a bound and are not conditional on troops having moved before hand.
For example- You can move into combat using a full tactical move, be beaten and having then to flee if your a certain troop type. All a feigned flight allows you to do is to flee without having had a combat or flank attack/march outcome etc.

[gibby]

So does that also mean that troops that have spontaneously advanced after feigned flight fleeing troops can themselves Feigned flight and then flee.

I'm still not squaring that circle

[Valentinian Victor]

Ridiculous as it might seem, it would appear so. I don't like that idea much either, but that's the rules it would seem.