Search found 398 matches

by Rod
Fri Apr 19, 2019 9:15 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

Kontos, That is correct the fight is always to the front if there is front contact, so in this case the skirmisher is not the fight. So the pike gets rear support to the front, unless the active player chooses to fight with the skirmisher first to attack the rear rank first to peel them off, but he ...
by Rod
Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:43 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

Sorry, no insult to the Gasgan Warband meant, I was actually carrying over the Skirmisher term from the previous discussion without thinking.

Busy proofing the hardcopy version so slightly distracted :P
by Rod
Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:28 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

not exactly, Check out 77.4b under a stand that provided rear support to a supporting stand. Since the front stand recieved support is does pursue, but since the rear stand has an enemy in contact with it' flank either as an unresolved combat or a even a tie, it does follow. If the pike wanted to tr...
by Rod
Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:19 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

Exactly, it just depends.

In this case the trade off is that if the Skirmisher loses, it would have backed off and the front attack is not longer overlapped and the door is open for falling back.

But Skirmishers cannot take a pike block apart simply by touching it, they have to do something.
by Rod
Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:44 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

- The combat factors before rolling are Pk: 2 (+3 vs foot, no rear support because of flank contact, -1 for flank contact) vs HF: 4 (+4 vs foot) Bill, you are right, I skimmed this line to fast because there is rear support. The skirmisher attack has to be done first and only if it wins does it str...
by Rod
Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:55 pm
Forum: Terrain and Map Building
Topic: Villages for Histroricon Themed Events
Replies: 0
Views: 92

Villages for Histroricon Themed Events

Gave me reason to base these 6mm buildings up.
by Rod
Mon Apr 15, 2019 5:37 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

Skirmishers, Light Foot and Raiders all more expensive, but I try not to let Big Al leave home without some :)
by Rod
Mon Apr 15, 2019 3:03 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

Check out the Rabble Troop type, available in many hoplite armies.

Cheap, but very useful for covering the flanks of Pike block formations.
by Rod
Sat Apr 13, 2019 2:38 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

This particular situation illustrates one of the reasons for the flank rule in Triumph. In Triumph an stand of troops is a large enough body of troops that it does actually have a flank, i.e. a single element getting hit in the flank suffers a flank penalty. there is no free turn to face when touche...
by Rod
Sat Apr 13, 2019 1:39 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Column flank attack clarification
Replies: 27
Views: 601

Re: Column flank attack clarification

Alan, If I understood your details correctly, yes I would say you got is all right. - The question: This close combat can still happen, even though the Sk has already provided a flank contact penalty to the other Pk and may have caused it to be destroyed when it fell back? Yes, keep in mind the play...