"Rules issue" Topic

Tonight we had a rules issue that cropped up. Using the newest edition of the rule set (which I really enjoy)

Please see diagram to visualize.

link

MOVEMENT phase
1. Brit Cavalry comes onto the board and attacks Dervish Rifles from the rear

2. a metric -ton of dervish cavalry also come on to the table and attack the cavalry from the rear. Fuzzy Wuzzies pile in just to add insult to injury.

The rules state that the combats have to occur in the order in which they took place.

In our interpretation of the rules. The British cav who moved into combat first and so resolved their combat first. They routed the riflemen, then took their position, and reformed to face the oncoming Dervish Cav.

As a result they did not have to suffer the -2 from fighting from the rear and whipped all 3 units in turn.

My questions are.

1. Is this interpretation correct? by the rules it seems to be

2. If our interpretation was correct, In the older version of the game was this multiple combat interpreted differently?

Thanks for your help

If your solution worked for both you and your opponent, then all's well. Sounds about right to me. Although, I'm not sure the Brits would have time to re-form completely given the situation.

It sounds correct to me. As I recall,

1) Each melee is fought in the order that they are declared.

2) When you are successful in melee you can "assume any formation or facing direction" on the spot of the melee.

Since formation and facing are two different aspects I take the "or" as an element of the positioning.

BTW – good results.

Vince

Seems correct to me as well.

Thanks for your input

Although, I'm not sure the Brits would have time to re-form completely given the situation.

That's the rub. The rules as written seem to say each combat is resolved to it's fullest which would allow the victor to reform and/or take the position of the losers.

Does anyone know if the rules were changed on this from the older editions to the newer ones?

I have an edition from 1984 and the latest. This issue is the same in both. Most of the changes from the one to the other are clarifications, or additions.