Maneuver Rating 2
Maneuver Rating 2
Only seems half useful. I realize it is a modifier to determine the advantaged player but is equal to a 0 or 1 rating when it comes to flank marches. Is this intentional as we don't want Maneuver 4's flank marching 67% of the time?
-
David Schlanger
- Grand Master WGC
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:01 pm
Re: Maneuver Rating 2
Flank marches as designed are not intended to happen that often. Historically, a well coordinated flank march as represented in Triumph! was very difficult to pull off effectively. Plenty of flank marches happened accidentally.
Anyway, the bottom line is that the primary function of Maneuver is not to validate flank marches (that is a side benefit). Maneuver 2 gives you a better chance than Maneuver 1 and 0 to get the tactical advantage during setup. This advantage lets you have more control over terrain density and placement. That is the primary thing!
DS
Anyway, the bottom line is that the primary function of Maneuver is not to validate flank marches (that is a side benefit). Maneuver 2 gives you a better chance than Maneuver 1 and 0 to get the tactical advantage during setup. This advantage lets you have more control over terrain density and placement. That is the primary thing!
DS
-
David Kuijt
- Grand Master WGC
- Posts: 1488
- Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:44 pm
- Location: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Re: Maneuver Rating 2
To expand upon what DS said a little.
Flank Marches (in the rules) represents two different real-world events that play out the same in game resolution. "Accidental" flank marches (where part of the army was off doing something else, the battle started, then they showed up and surprised the enemy) and "deliberate" flank marches (where the same events occurred, but it was a successfully executed plan rather than an accident).
Accidental flank marches occur throughout the historical record. Just off the top of my head, Adrianople 378 AD (where Emperor Valens was killed) and Dorylaeum 1097 AD (First Crusade) are both examples. The chance of an accidental flank march is fairly constant (independent of maneuver rating) -- it could happen with any army.
Deliberate flank marches tend to only appear in the historical record for the best (most trained, most adept, most maneuverable) armies. Their success (indeed, their existence) is directly correlated with maneuver rating.
If you combine both of those together (as they are absolutely identical in game terms) you have a combined probability that looks quite a bit like the current rule mechanism -- a small chance of a "flank march" that is true for all armies (an accidental flank march), and the best armies can sometimes have a deliberate flank march. So yes, 0/1/2 maneuver ratings are all the same for the purposes of flank marches. That's on purpose -- in practice, those armies were not advanced enough in the military sciences to have any reasonable chance of achieving a successful deliberate flank march. In an era where there is no long-range communication method better than sending a dude on a horse with a message and hoping he finds the person he's supposed to, deliberate flank marches were only really an option for the best armies. But accidental flank marches could happen even to the Goths at Adrianople.
Hopefully that helps explain the situation.
Flank Marches (in the rules) represents two different real-world events that play out the same in game resolution. "Accidental" flank marches (where part of the army was off doing something else, the battle started, then they showed up and surprised the enemy) and "deliberate" flank marches (where the same events occurred, but it was a successfully executed plan rather than an accident).
Accidental flank marches occur throughout the historical record. Just off the top of my head, Adrianople 378 AD (where Emperor Valens was killed) and Dorylaeum 1097 AD (First Crusade) are both examples. The chance of an accidental flank march is fairly constant (independent of maneuver rating) -- it could happen with any army.
Deliberate flank marches tend to only appear in the historical record for the best (most trained, most adept, most maneuverable) armies. Their success (indeed, their existence) is directly correlated with maneuver rating.
If you combine both of those together (as they are absolutely identical in game terms) you have a combined probability that looks quite a bit like the current rule mechanism -- a small chance of a "flank march" that is true for all armies (an accidental flank march), and the best armies can sometimes have a deliberate flank march. So yes, 0/1/2 maneuver ratings are all the same for the purposes of flank marches. That's on purpose -- in practice, those armies were not advanced enough in the military sciences to have any reasonable chance of achieving a successful deliberate flank march. In an era where there is no long-range communication method better than sending a dude on a horse with a message and hoping he finds the person he's supposed to, deliberate flank marches were only really an option for the best armies. But accidental flank marches could happen even to the Goths at Adrianople.
Hopefully that helps explain the situation.
DK
Re: Maneuver Rating 2
Thought so. Gaining an Advantaged status is sufficient. Rarity of flank marches is preferred. I agree. Thanks!