| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=14645 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Morgan Vening [ Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal |
It occurred in today's game where both sides inflicted significant casualties on each other. In this case, who removes casualties first? Counter charge moves for ties favor the attacker, but there doesn't seem to be any mention in 1.12.5 about this. If we've mucked up and should be assigning and rolling separately, who assigns first? Is there a templated instruction set for this? Assaults seem very complykayted.  Morgan Vening |
|
| Author: | fredmans [ Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal |
The simplest answer is: unless first strike is involved, you allocate hits after every unit (on both sides) have made their attacks. Hits are allocated from front to back, just like shooting, meaning that most of the time, hits are first allocated to units in base-to-base contact and then proceed to those within 15 cm:s of an attacking unit. Then saves are made on both sides and both sides remove casualties simultaneously before rolling for assault resolution. Naturally, one of you will make his rolls for saves before the other, but it has no effect on the assault. You can tip "hit" models over, to remember which units that are required to make a save. The assault mechanics might seem complicated at first, but after playing a couple of games, you will get the hang of it. /Fredmans /Fredmans |
|
| Author: | frogbear [ Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal |
This issue with this combat is that it went for 3 turns as we equalled the score twice. In this case, I was in HTH with the hearthguard. This mattered because I wanted to free people up to attack the thunderers at the back that were using their FF value. So the question is a valid one. If I remove first (as the player that charged), that allows my opponent to plan his removals to protect the hearthguard. If my opponent removes casualties first, then I can remove only the ones left in BtB in order to counter-charge into the Thunderers. We like to be specific in our combats, (we like rules I guess), hence the need to work this one out for future games. So does anyone know how this works? |
|
| Author: | fredmans [ Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal |
If you check Henas's excellent assault resolution guide, you both assign hits before removing any casualties. The Hearthguard cannot "free" himself from being in base-to-base contact. If the Hearthguard was the only unit in base-to-base, it would take the first hit, then you would proceed allocating hits until every enemy unit within 15 cms had taken one hit. Therefore, the removal of casualties has no impact on hit allocation. As 3 and 4 informs, both sides assign hits before you take armour saves. Hope this helps, EDIT: I see your point. Speed-dicing is not a rule, but only a suggestion, so by the rules you should roll armour saves separately for each affected model. Therefore, you cannot "plan" unit removals. They just happen. To simulate the randomness but still speed up things in large assaults, we roll as many dice as there are units affected and then remove the units depending on the physical positions of the dice involved. I hope that made sense, /Fredmans |
|
| Author: | Ginger [ Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal |
As already outlined, you allocate the hits to units and later you test for saves. The "quick" method is:- - Allocate the hits from front-to-back, - Save groups of units with the same factors - Then remove the casualties from front-to-back. This eventually leaves a gap between the opposing formations where the leading units have been removed. However it can produce some anomalies like the one you are highlighting. Where the 'detail' matters, we allocate hits by placing small dice (or counters) against the relevant units, then resolving each unit in turn (so throwing the dice and removing the unit if it dies). This way there is no dispute over the order that units are removed. |
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rules Clarifications - Assault Casualty Removal |
I think Fredman's hit the nail on the head. By the strict letter of the rules, you do not assign casualties. You allocate hits to units and each unit rolls its own save(s). The owning player has very little control over allocation and none over which units fail their saves. The only choice that ever comes up in allocating hits is when you have several equally distant units, e.g. 2 hits allocated to 3 units that are all in base contact. The way the allocation rules are written, players assign hits to their own units so they decide ties.. However, the instances in which that makes a difference are few and far between, and which units fall as casualties would still be based on the armor saves. As a side note, even if you are using the "speed rolling" option, the casualties are assigned in the same way as normal hit allocation, front to back. There could provide more player control than in allocating hits and rolling saves by the strict letter, but it should still be fairly limited for potential "gamey" manipulations like you describe. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|