Routing and Fleeing

[foxgom]

Hi

would like to see I have understood the following (for me non-intuitive) rules correctly....

CASE 1
An irregular cavalry element fights camels, marginally loses and must flee.
A friendly irregular Cavalry is standing in reserve 120p behind it.
To the left and right are more enemies, so the fleeing Cav cannot change direction and must burst through the reserve Cav.  The reserve Cav flees with it.
[ P41 FLEEING ELEMENTS, 3 Para, "Friends it cannot pass throu or avoid are burst through and flee in front of it...."]
[P 32 PASSING THROUGH FRIENDLY ELEMENTS: Irr Cav cannot pass through irr Cav]


CASE 2
An irregular cavalry element is broken and must rout.
A friendly irregular Cavalry is standing in reserve 120p behind it.
To the left and right are more enemies, so the fleeing Cav cannot change direction and must burst through the reserve Cav.  The reserve Cav recoils [P32 Para 4].

Have I missed something?
The result seems strange to me.

neil

[vexillia]

This may help http://tinyurl.com/cu36a5

--
Martin Stephenson
Vexillia: Wargames Miniatures & Accessories
http://vexillia.ltd.uk
http://pikeandplunder.blogspot.com/
Personal web logs
http://vexillia.blogspot.com/

[MikeCampbell]

Why do you think there is a different result?

As I read it in both cases the friends are burst through and flee with it - in front or behind depending on the relative move distances.

The comes from page 41:

Last para: "A rout move is the same as a flee move, except..." (none of the exceptions seem relevant)

When fleeing: (3rd para of "Fleeing elements")
"Friends it cannot pass throughor avoid are burst through and flee in front of it if after both have moved it's front edge would be in ahead, otherwise behind it."

Have I missed something?

[andrew]

CASE 2
An irregular cavalry element is broken and must rout.
{snip}
The reserve Cav recoils [P32 Para 4].

Hi Neil

Why have you quoted p32 para 4 - if I am reading the rules correctly para 4 is for spontaneous advances.......which this isn't.......was your interpretation based on being spontaneous?

Cheers
Andrew

[foxgom]

Hi

I thought the same way as all you guys until I re-read the text in the middle of P32....

"When a spontaneous advance or routing element passes through any troops.....

other non impetuous troops are spent if...., otherwise recoil....."

The first cavalry routs and passes through a non-impetuous second cavalry element, which recoils, according to page 32.

P32 also means that routing Kn cause burst through friends to become spent.
P32 also has the strange logic that if an element routs through impetuous troops that have not moved this bound, they follow behind in spontaneous advance.   

P41 states that fleeing elements bursting through friends cause these friends to flee with them.
It also states that routs are the same as flees except being twice as far.
But do routing elements bursting through friends cause these friends to flee with them?
Up until now, I thought so and this is intuitively right for me, but P32 has confused me.

I must be misreading P32, but can?t get my head round it.



Can?t say I like the English on P32 anyway.....
It could read
"When a spontaneous advance or a rout passes through....."
or, more to my taste
"When a spontaneously advancing or routing element passes through....."

neil

[MikeCampbell]

There is nothing contradictory there - the routing elements makes the friend recoil per page 32, then it gets to flee with it as well per page 41 - they are not exclusive.

It would be better if htey were in the same place tho!

the recoil will also apply if the routing element can pass through the friends, eg if it were 2 elements of regular cavalry - in that case the "blocking" element would still recoil, but would not have to flee with the routing one.

[andrew]

"When a spontaneous advance or routing element passes through any troops.....

My mistake - well spotted.

[foxgom]

There is nothing contradictory there - the routing elements makes the friend recoil per page 32, then it gets to flee with it as well per page 41 - they are not exclusive.

Thank you ! 

Phew! 


tho still a bit puzzled by the strange logic that if an element routs through impetuous troops that have not moved this bound, they follow behind in spontaneous advance. 


neil

[MikeCampbell]

lol - I don't think there is any logic - an unintended consequence!

However you might also consider that if they do follow behind routers "in spontaneous advance" then they have done their sponno advance and don't get to turn around and charge back at the enemy, as they might if it said something else?

Again I'd bet dollars to donuts it's unintended consequence

[LawrenceG]

lol - I don't think there is any logic - an unintended consequence!

However you might also consider that if they do follow behind routers "in spontaneous advance" then they have done their sponno advance and don't get to turn around and charge back at the enemy, as they might if it said something else?

Again I'd bet dollars to donuts it's unintended consequence

I suspect that in a lot of cases, following routers would not be one of the directions permitted for a spontaneous advance.

Looks like another thing to be tidied up in the next rules version.