Outriders + Halberdiers - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 45

Thread: Outriders + Halberdiers

  1. #21

    Default

    Correct. The point is that you are not initiating a melee attack (with re rolls aka charge attack), you are resolving one. The requirements were already met to reach the point of attack resolution. Last step of charge action:

    "Resolve Attack: Once in their final positions, the attacker willthen resolve 1 Melee Attack against the defender (see ResolvingAttacks, pg. 19). This Charge attack gets the bonus of being ableto re-roll any attack dice."

    If you do exactly as the steps say, you do not have to once again fulfill any other requirements, you go straight to Resolving Attacks, page 19, and Determine Attack Dice. As far as "making thematic sense" goes, you explained it yourself when you explained Ride-By-Attack. Sneaking in that free retreat doesn't mean the attack never happened, for practical reasons, you resolve the attack last, after you complete the triggered abilities that interrupted the sequence.

  2. #22

    Default

    Not really.
    The halberdiers ability happens when they are successfully charged
    And before the •resolve attack.
    It says on the card , before resolving the charge attack
    The charge attack is a melee attack.

    So . Before resolving the charge attack.

    The outriders will now suffer a full melee attack from halberdiers.
    After panic test (incase of wounds) the outriders triggered their swift retreat!
    A retreat specifically disengages you
    The retreats only job is to disengage you from enemy.
    So you disengage from enemy and now you want to resolve your charge attack.
    You can't because you are no longer engaged.
    Any other reading of this is a stretch.
    Both timing and game mechanics.
    If the intention of this ability is to perform how you are understanding it , then the designers need to make an FAQ to clarify it, because it's interpretation is very far fetched. In my opinion.
    But since we are both not agreeing then perhaps an FAQ is necessary both ways. Because just like for me it's obvious I bet for you it's also obvious and I sound crazy to you.
    Last edited by Purple hyena; 10-08-2018 at 11:54 AM.

  3. #23

    Default

    Sorry if I sound assertive. As if I know the game better. I am rereading what I wrote and I sound like an arrogant prick. I am not. I get why you are understanding it the way you do and one of two things are needed
    Either an FAQ to explain that instance
    Or an FAQ to explain ride by internal mechanics.

    Sorry again if I sound like an arrogant prick I promise I am not!
    I have no idea how to write it in a way that doesn't make me sound like one!
    If I was speaking in my native language it would sound much better!

  4. #24

    Default

    I appreciate your effort in preventing a negative outcome from this discussion, sometimes that is needed when these get heavy, but I am definitely in the same boat your are friend. No worries. Just trying to define the source of how the original post sequence made sense to me. It doesn't matter to me whatsoever which way this ends up, I just like to understand the bare bones of the rules, which I can then apply to all abilities, effects, cards, and future things that come out. The last thing I will say to my point is to remember at no point are the Outriders performing a melee attack. The Outriders are performing a charge action. All of those first steps of an attack action (melee version) are not applied... ever. You made it to the last step of the charge action, why would you not perform it? There is no engaged requirement, as this step is just resolving attack (pg 19). Anyways, I'm happy to discuss and open to debate, but in this case I don't seem to be budging for some reason. I will add this rule from page 7:

    "FREE ACTION: Many effects will allow a unit to make a free action(such as a free Attack action or Maneuver action). These actions do notinterfere with a unit’s normal activation in any way, and they maybe performed even if the unit has already activated this round."

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple hyena View Post
    Should be working now
    , If I press on it it opens up. I have no idea why it just doesn't show up without pressing on the blue link

    Here is what I see when I press the blue link:

    vBulletin Message

    Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

    T W
    To the Iron Throne!

    T W

  6. #26

    Default

    I asked my wife ,who is English , to let me know if I sounded like an arrogant dick , she said that I did.
    I'm sorry . That was not my intention.
    I think an official ruling would be great and perhaps an errata or a rewording.

    As for the attachment ... I have no idea why it's not working... It's working on my browser ....

  7. #27

    Default

    It seems the positions have been clearly stated. Hoping to see a response soon

  8. #28

    Default

    Purple hyena , the concern is appreciated, we are all fans of the game and just having friendly discussion until we get official reply, Nothing I noticed was out of line, no worries friend, I just hope I dont sound that way, hard to tell through text, but I dont intend that either

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRedGod View Post
    Purple hyena , the concern is appreciated, we are all fans of the game and just having friendly discussion until we get official reply, Nothing I noticed was out of line, no worries friend, I just hope I dont sound that way, hard to tell through text, but I dont intend that either

    Here here!!


    T W
    To the Iron Throne!

    T W

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple hyena View Post
    I asked my wife ,who is English , to let me know if I sounded like an arrogant dick , she said that I did.
    I'm sorry . That was not my intention.
    I think an official ruling would be great and perhaps an errata or a rewording.

    As for the attachment ... I have no idea why it's not working... It's working on my browser ....
    Your wife will always answer yes if you ask her if you sound like an arrogant dick. This is the wife's job.

  11. #31

    Default

    My first reaction was no attack after retreat. However, I read the rules and I don't see anything that supports it.

    The outriders are charging. They are physically contacting the Halberdiers, otherwise the Halberdiers cannot attack them with their ability. Yes, they are allowed to retreat but contact was made so they do get their attack.

  12. #32

    Default

    Not sure how much I can add here without benefit of an official response, but I don't think you can make a melee attack if you are not engaged unless your unit has an ability that would make that the case, such as Ride-By Attack.

    As you may have seen from prior charging threads, the sequence listed in the rules matters, and each bullet point is a separate phase within that sequence. This is why Halbediers are able to attack first when they are charged in the first place, as they are interrupting Resolve Attack. If you then take a Retreat action as a response to that attack, you are further interrupting that sequence. As such, you are no longer engaged, and no melee attack is possible. It does not matter that you *were* engaged, only that you are no longer when you go to resolve your attack.

    It's an extension of the rules that apply to charges in general. If you have clear line of sight, have pivoted, rolled and moved and you come up short, you do not get to continue the sequence *because you no longer meet the requirements.* Same rationale should apply here.

    At least, in my opinion. ;-)
    "Distrusting me was the wisest thing you've done since you climbed down off your horse." -Littlefinger

  13. #33

    Default

    I agree with the sentiment, that only offcial answer can bring clarity to this.

    Still, you brough some points in, that I have counter for:
    Quote Originally Posted by serbaelish View Post
    I don't think you can make a melee attack if you are not engaged unless your unit has an ability that would make that the case, such as Ride-By Attack.
    See my message #14 in this topic, bottom half of the text. Ride-by Attack does not say that you do or do not need to be engaged, thus Ride-by Attack is actually perfect example why also this scenario would be valid (not an example why this scenario would be invalid as you present) http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/...l=1#post872801

    Reading that "Resolving attack" phase requires engagement if resolving an charge attack is reading into the rules, as there is no such rule mentioned in resolving attack rules (page 19).

    Quote Originally Posted by serbaelish View Post
    It's an extension of the rules that apply to charges in general. If you have clear line of sight, have pivoted, rolled and moved and you come up short, you do not get to continue the sequence *because you no longer meet the requirements.* Same rationale should apply here.
    Rules clearly state what happens if Charge comes short:

    • Failed Charge •
    Many things can lead to a unit not contacting its target when
    it charges, the most common of which is failing to roll high
    enough for its total charge distance. Whatever the reason, if
    the attacker does not contact its target during its move, the
    result is a Failed Charge. The attacker suffers a Panic Test (see
    Panic Tests, pg. 20), and then its activation immediately ends.



    Failed Charge leads to "Panic Test and then End activation immediately".
    Successfull Charge leads to "Resolve Attack" (= do the dice rolls).

  14. #34

    Default

    Snipping for clarity...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fronx View Post
    See my message #14 in this topic, bottom half of the text. Ride-by Attack does not say that you do or do not need to be engaged, thus Ride-by Attack is actually perfect example why also this scenario would be valid (not an example why this scenario would be invalid as you present) http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/...l=1#post872801
    There is some inference required here, because Ride-by Attack is specifically superseding the rules in two ways: it is allowing you to move through an enemy unit, and it is allowing you to make an attack after a march. The entire point of the card is to allow you to make an attack when you are not engaged--explicitly stating such on the card would require the text to be reduced to the point of illegibility.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fronx View Post
    Reading that "Resolving attack" phase requires engagement if resolving an charge attack is reading into the rules, as there is no such rule mentioned in resolving attack rules (page 19).
    The last bullet in the Charge action is "Resolve Attack," which specifically states that this is a melee attack. And melee attacks cannot be performed if a unit is not engaged.

    The retreat action can only be undertaken when a unit is engaged, and results in that unit no longer being engaged. I don't think you can have it both ways here: either the unit has retreated and is no longer engaged (thus, no melee attack), or the unit does not retreat and continues on to attack resolution.

    Tactically, I don't see the advantage of using the order in this particular situation. Since the order allows you to make the retreat for free, I would save the unit's activation until after I'd been attacked, then give the order. Then, I'd activate the unit and charge, which is going to allow me a chance to re-roll misses, which I wouldn't have if I'd made the attack without the charge bonus. But that's another topic...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fronx View Post
    Rules clearly state what happens if Charge comes short:
    True, but Charges are one of a number of activities in the game that happen in a set sequence: resolving attacks, the clean-up phase, unit deployment, and so on. Many of these can be affected by tactics cards or orders, and I don't think it'd be reasonable to have all the exceptions captured in the main rulebook or FAQ.
    "Distrusting me was the wisest thing you've done since you climbed down off your horse." -Littlefinger

  15. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serbaelish View Post
    The last bullet in the Charge action is "Resolve Attack," which specifically states that this is a melee attack. And melee attacks cannot be performed if a unit is not engaged.
    Yes, and that bullet says "See Resolving Attacks on pg 19"

    If you read that section it says nothing about being engaged.

    Melee Attacks, which is a separate action, specifies engaged. This means the engaged state is specific to the action being performed, which is a charge.

    I think people are confusing Melee Attack action as defined by the rules and melee attack as a general description of hand-to-hand combat with weapons.

    A charge could be described as a maneuver but if the rules grant you a free Maneuver you cannot charge. A Charge action lets you perform a melee attack but it is not a "Melee Attack" action as defined by the rules.

  16. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coyote View Post
    Yes, and that bullet says "See Resolving Attacks on pg 19"

    If you read that section it says nothing about being engaged.

    Melee Attacks, which is a separate action, specifies engaged. This means the engaged state is specific to the action being performed, which is a charge.

    I think people are confusing Melee Attack action as defined by the rules and melee attack as a general description of hand-to-hand combat with weapons.
    The entirety of the first sentence of the Resolve Attack bullet for the Charge action states:

    "Once in their final positions, the attacker will then resolve 1 Melee Attack against the defender (see Resolving Attacks pg. 19)." The emphasis is mine, but the capitalization is as printed in the rulebook.

    Further, the engaged state is not specific to the action being performed, rather it determines what actions you can and cannot take. For example, you cannot perform a Charge, Maneuver, March, or Ranged Attack if you are engaged. The rules do not have to specify that you have to be engaged, because the only time you may make a Melee Attack is if you are "in contact with with one or more enemy units." (Common Game Terms, pg. 7).

    Quote Originally Posted by Coyote View Post
    A charge could be described as a maneuver but if the rules grant you a free Maneuver you cannot charge. A Charge action lets you perform a melee attack but it is not a "Melee Attack" action as defined by the rules.
    A charge should absolutely not be described as a maneuver as defined by the rules, as both charges and maneuvers are distinct actions. And yes, the Charge action specifies that you must make a Melee Attack.

    I don't know how good a job I'm doing at restating what Purple Hyena has noted previously, but I'll give it a shot. Tactics cards and orders are designed to interrupt (you know, like a Magic card) the sequence of an Action. So:

    1. Outriders activate
    2. Outriders declare Charge action
    3. Outriders determine Line of Sight arc
    4. Outriders Pivot
    5. Outriders roll charge distance and move enough to become Engaged.
    6. Outriders Align with Enemy
    7. Halberdiers INTERRUPT the Charge Action with the Set for Charge order
    8. Halberdiers make and resolve Melee Attack
    9. Outriders INTERRUPT the Charge Action with Swift Retreat. As a result, they move away from the Halberdiers and are no longer considered engaged.
    10. Outriders attempt Resolve Attack portion of Charge. As this is specifically stated to be a Melee Attack, and they are no longer engaged as a result of their Retreat, the attack fails.
    11. End of Outriders activation.
    "Distrusting me was the wisest thing you've done since you climbed down off your horse." -Littlefinger

  17. #37

    Default

    Sorry, post-script.

    I should also note that the rules also occasionally state "Charge attack," with capitalization as presented. I believe this might lead to conflating a "Melee Attack with a Charge bonus" with a "Charge Attack," but I'm fairly (reasonably? somewhat?) certain that Charges are not to be viewed as a type of attack, but rather as an action that ultimately results in a melee attack.

    Provided, of course, that you're still engaged at the end of it.
    Last edited by serbaelish; 10-12-2018 at 05:23 PM. Reason: added quotes for clarity
    "Distrusting me was the wisest thing you've done since you climbed down off your horse." -Littlefinger

  18. #38

    Default

    So you whom resolve Charges Resolve Attack phase reading into page 17, Melee Attack chapter, you also, after charge aligning do all those other steps again stated in page 17?

    So after doing all the things in Charge before resolving Attack dice, you then before resolving the attack check the things from page 17: if you are engaged, then check if you want to change facing, then check if you want to re-align yet again (after just aligning as part of Charge action)?

    You cant just pick the engaged part from the page 17 and ignore the rest, if you say you follow the page 17 rules then you follow them all. Sounds reduntant to do all those things. An whole action inside another action, two at the price of one.

    ..

    One thing I must agree as strange is, that on Charge action players do not check, if the charging Unit has a Melee Attack option at all available. In Attack actions Melee Attack sub-chapter, this is checked.

  19. #39

    Default

    So you're saying, if let's say a unit started a turn engaged, and the player chose attack action. Then the defender interrupted the action when beginning the resolve attack step and somehow disengaged, the attacking player could no longer resolve the attack.... ?

  20. #40

    Default

    I'm not certain what you're objecting to here. "Resolve Attack" is the last phase of the Charge action. It would be step 10 in the points I listed above. Nothing is being repeated.

    The Outriders attempt to resolve a Melee Attack, which is the only kind of Attack they can make as a result of their Charge. They are no longer engaged, the Attack fails.

    There's no need to refer to the details on page 17, as an enemy that's not engaged doesn't have a Melee Attack option.

    And yes, there is redundancy, as you are resolving the entirety of the halberdiers Melee Attack before the Outriders have finished their Charge. That's the purpose of the Order.

    I don't recall the exact wording of the Swift Retreat action, but if it only triggers after an Attack, then you either use it and lose your Melee Attack (with Charge bonus) or you don't and you successfully resolve your attack. Having both seems WAAAAY too overpowering.
    "Distrusting me was the wisest thing you've done since you climbed down off your horse." -Littlefinger

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Privacy Policy  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Contact Us  |   The Legion


Copyright © 2001-2018 CMON Inc.

-->