Attacking fortified camp

[foxgom]

Hi

My camp ist fortified wth TF.
I defend it with Hd.
The enemy attacks with Kn.
My result is less than the Kn.
Page 38 "recoil if foot..across..fortifications".
The Hd recoils 40mm. (Page 40 "moves...base width..if...back from a TF"
In doing so it reached the Bge(O) in the centre of the camp.
Page 42 page centre "defenders unable to recoil are destroyed".

Question
Does "unable to recoil" mean unable to complete the recoil or unable to start the recoil?
Note the Hd cannot pass through the Bge, as the Bge is more than one element deep (P32, 8th ".").

I read it as unable to complete the recoil.
This makes it very difficult to defend a camp with elements other than Bge, as as soon as they recoil, they die.  It is also very difficult (cost and lack of TF available) to build a camp big enough to allow defenders 40mm space to recoil.

neil fox

[LawrenceG]

I would say that if you can recoil any distance then you are not unable to recoil, hence not destroyed.

However, you may be doing it correctly as I suspect that the longer recoil distance was specified to ensure that there is space for the attacker to pursue over the fortification. Allowing a shorter recoil that does not alow enough space would defeat this object.

One for Phil to tidy up, I think.

[william]

Hello Neil,
       I have to agree with Lawrence, on page 41 for flee moves it states ' cannot complete the initial recoil ' and Mr Barker would have probably used the same wording here if this was what he wanted.

       I think that Mr Barker may have restricted TF for Bg(O) to make it difficult to defend with other troops ( after all Bg(O) has the same combat factor as Hd(O) defending fortifications ).

    But does TF in dbmm have to form a complete perimeter to the table edge ? it can be placed between 2 terrian features to block passage between them ( how far ahead of the Bg(O) it can be I do not know ).

       At first glance I had to also agree with Lawrence that the Hd(O) has to die to make room for the Kn to enter the TF but now I am not as sure, the Kn only pursue into the space vacated by the Hd(O) and as the Kn crosses the TF it destroys it replacing it with difficult going, it might be the case that in the next bound of combat the Kn fights the Hd(O) once again but at 2 for the Kn ( in difficult going ) and I think 1 for the Hd(O) ( as it probably can not recoil ), but I could be talking complete rubbish once more.

William

[MikeCampbell]

Looking under recoiling on page 40 it says:

A recoiling element ends its recoil prematurely if its rear edge ....[etc]

So IMO any recoil distance constitutes a recoil - and if it is less than the prescribed amount then it is a recoil that has ended prematurely.

TF or PF for a BUA must abut the table edge or a water feature and "completely fortify its perimeter" (pg 11) but I can't see any such requirement for camps.

[Mithridates]

Mike

This raises a DBMM Idiot's Guide question for me.  How does one completely loot/destroy a camp (consisting of say 6 Bge elements).   I presume that to completely destroy the camp all Bge elements have to be attacked & destroyed or caused to flee?   

In the case quoted what does the Bge do?   Would they assist the pushed back Hd as an overlap against the following up Kn element?

Regards

Garry

[Mithridates]

Mike

Sorry - just checked the DBMM List and found a sermon from the mount (17/2/2007) - 41178.  This is repeated on the Home Page as well I see!

"There is a total of 6 Bge elements.  Each of the 3 fighting commands contributing is credited with 3ME.  The baggage command is 6 elements, so is 3ME.  Loss of more than 1 (i.e 2) Bge elements breaks the Bge command.  All baggage is then lost, and each other command loses its 3ME. The army has lost 6 Bge elements, worth a total of 3 to each contributing command, but also 3ME to
the Bge command, so 12ME.

Moral: if you are using Army Bge, put it in a strong fighting command, or fortify it, or keep it well out of the way."

So that answers one of my questions at least!

Garry

[Valentinian Victor]

Don't the Bge elements suffer a -1 penalty in combat due to the fact that if they are in a 3 x 2 element formation behind the defences the first elements, the ones defending the defences, cannot recoil due to the presence of the Bge elements behind them/to their side?

[william]

Don't the Bge elements suffer a -1 penalty in combat due to the fact that if they are in a 3 x 2 element formation behind the defences the first elements, the ones defending the defences, cannot recoil due to the presence of the Bge elements behind them/to their side?

 :-[Yes but this is one thats needs clarification, on P37 in combat factors it states -1 IF TROOPS OR TERRAIN ALREADY IN CONTACT TO ITS REAR EDGE OR REAR CORNER WOULD PREVENT ANY RECOIL,
This sounds very straight forward,

BUT on P40 under RECOILING ELEMENTS, in the second paragraph it states that A MOUNTED OR FOOT ELEMENT UNABLE TO START A RECOIL IS PENALIZED IN COMBAT, WETHER OR NOT A RECOIL IS A POSSIBLE COMBAT OUTCOME.

This does not say train ( I also assume it applies to all combats distance, close or other ).

Also Mr Barker seemed to be hinting recently that only foot and mounted are actually troops ( this is definitly not in the rule set ). Am open to correction on this one.

And some people still think there are no clarifications needed.

William

[foxgom]

I would say that if you can recoil any distance then you are not unable to recoil, hence not destroyed.

Hi

If 1mm of recoil is sufficient for the Hd not to die, it would be a good idea to leave the Hd little space to recoil.
The Hd recoils a few mm, the Kn follows up and finds himself standing where the TF was.
The TF has been removed and is now difficult going (P11, last sentence under FORTIFICATIONS).

Hmmm.

Think this is topic for the Commentries.

neil

[Valentinian Victor]

'Also Mr Barker seemed to be hinting recently that only foot and mounted are actually troops ( this is definitly not in the rule set ). Am open to correction on this one.'

Actually, in the rules under troop definitions it quite clearly states that troops are classified into three groups- Foot, Mounted and Train. Therefore, it would appear to the case that Train are immune to the -1 for being unable to recoil.

[william]

'Also Mr Barker seemed to be hinting recently that only foot and mounted are actually troops ( this is definitly not in the rule set ). Am open to correction on this one.'

Actually, in the rules under troop definitions it quite clearly states that troops are classified into three groups- Foot, Mounted and Train. Therefore, it would appear to the case that Train are immune to the -1 for being unable to recoil.

The rules seem to conflict over this as I already mentioned in my post.

William