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 strip the rear support. Just touching the pike block does not unpack it, you have to conduct the combat. The active player decides the order and you take the results immediately for each battle.- 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)
Column flank attack clarification
Re: Column flank attack clarification
-
Bill Hupp
- Sergeant
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:55 pm
- Location: Glen Ellyn, Illinois
- Contact:
Re: Column flank attack clarification
Thanks Rod. We had a lot of these situations in the all the warband battles we played in the last 3 months including Telemon and I was never totally sure that was the right answer. It makes sense because they are working together.
That would really have made the flank attacks disruptive to the charging barbarians!
I did pick up a nuance in the desription and discussion above though. Even if you have a unit who can shatter an opponent straight up in front base contact with an opponent with support, stripping the back stand off to fight the flanking stand might be worht it. So you could do the flank attack on the back stand first, and if you win you weaken the front stand it was supporting.
That would really have made the flank attacks disruptive to the charging barbarians!
I did pick up a nuance in the desription and discussion above though. Even if you have a unit who can shatter an opponent straight up in front base contact with an opponent with support, stripping the back stand off to fight the flanking stand might be worht it. So you could do the flank attack on the back stand first, and if you win you weaken the front stand it was supporting.
Bill Hupp
Thistle & Rose Miniatures
Thistle & Rose Miniatures
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.
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.
Re: Column flank attack clarification
Since we are on the topic of pikes, do I have this situation correct?
The Gasgan player had an unsuccessful round of attacks and they both "locked". The now active Sumerian player chooses to attack the Warband to its front with rear support.
Sadly it only pushes the Warband back and follows up. The supporting pike, not yet having fought combat, is eligible to pursue as well thus losing flank edge contact with the Gasgan Warband so no combat occurs.
Do I have this correct? I am ok either way. I just need to know the result and why. Thanks!
The Gasgan player had an unsuccessful round of attacks and they both "locked". The now active Sumerian player chooses to attack the Warband to its front with rear support.
- Sumerian attack
- 20190419_093232_1555687787946_1555687902248.jpg (1016.8 KiB) Viewed 8207 times
- Pursuit
- 20190419_093310_1555687823747_1555687877550.jpg (1.06 MiB) Viewed 8207 times
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 try to keep things together, it could have chosen to fight the skirmisher first (hoping it would bugger off) and if it won, then the block would have followed up after defeating the front element.
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 try to keep things together, it could have chosen to fight the skirmisher first (hoping it would bugger off) and if it won, then the block would have followed up after defeating the front element.
Re: Column flank attack clarification
Damn eyes getting old. Missed 77.4b. And how dare you call a Gasgan Warband "skirmisher"! 
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
Busy proofing the hardcopy version so slightly distracted
Re: Column flank attack clarification
War averted. 
Re: Column flank attack clarification
Hi,
The loss of rear support is indeed in a different section: “Fighting to the Flank or Rear”, not Rear Support.
Unless I missed something, this does not change the Gasgan vs Sumerian result, because in that example the element receiving rear support was not contacted in the flank, even though the supporting element was.
Alan
The loss of rear support is indeed in a different section: “Fighting to the Flank or Rear”, not Rear Support.
The original combat factors in my example took this into account.65.1 A stand that is fighting to its flank or rear may not receive rear support in this close combat phase.
Unless I missed something, this does not change the Gasgan vs Sumerian result, because in that example the element receiving rear support was not contacted in the flank, even though the supporting element was.
Alan
Re: Column flank attack clarification
I am not sure that applies as "fighting to its flank or rear" is different than "contacted on its flank or rear". I believe that is an important distinction. A pike element fighting to its front can receive rear support even if contacted on its flank. Am I wrong here?