Shattered vs. Destroyed

[Texus Maximus]

I am trying to make sure I understand the difference between 'shattered" and "destroyed" under section 75. The difference seems to be in the idea of "doubling" the opponents score. A unit that is shattered is removed from the game but has not been doubled. Therefore the stand that wins the close combat is not required to pursue under section 77.2. Do I have this right?

[Rod]

Essentially yes, some troop types shatter others, which means they are killed if beaten by 1 point. They do not pursue unless they are a unit that always pursues like knights.

All units pursue if they double an opponent and destroy it or cause it to fallback, panic or, flee.

[coopman]

So the five unit types listed in 78.1 are "impetuous" and always pursue.
Plus, ANY stand that doubles its opponent in close combat pursues per 78.2 (except for art. & WW).

[Rod]

Exactly correct.

An example of shatter but not pursue would be, Horse Bow beating Bow Levy in the open by 1 point.

Horse Bow Shatter the Bow Levy in the open, but unless they doubled the score the Horse Bow do not charge forward.

[skc]

In DBM & DBA we used to call it "quick kill." To destroy without doubling. (We still tend to use that term.)

[Rod]

Yup, but that is more of a game mechanism like description.

Shatter is meant to be more descriptive of what happens to the unit in the battle, i.e. the chariots charge up and unleash a deadly volley of arrows, the formed foot of the enemy waivers and opens gaps in their line as some men lose their nerve.... the Chariots ride into the gaps as the unit Shatters!

[David Schlanger]

In DBM & DBA we used to call it "quick kill." To destroy without doubling. (We still tend to use that term.)

Right, back when we played DBA (and a little DBM) we used to call it that too. Much easier than Dead if Beaten but Not Doubled or something along those lines. Seems like a lost opportunity to call it something more interesting and appropriate!

DS