"Throw me a 6 battle report" Topic
7 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please do not use bad language on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Blogs of War Message Board Back to the Ancients Battle Reports Message Board Back to the Game Design Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral Ancients
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleThe fascinating history of one of the hobby's major manufacturers.
Featured Workbench ArticleThe Army for Bill was a collective project in which TMP'ers came together to jointly paint an Ancients army for yours truly.
Featured Profile ArticleThe Editor is invited to tour the factory of Simtac, a U.S. manufacturer of figures in nearly all periods, scales, and genres.
Current Poll
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Who asked this joker | 15 Oct 2014 7:21 p.m. PST |
You can find it here. link The game played pretty well. I have most of the rules written but need to add a couple of items. One question…should skirmishing types be allowed to charge the flank of an enemy if they are engaged with another unit? |
Coyotepunc and Hatshepsuut | 15 Oct 2014 7:49 p.m. PST |
Is there historical accounts of skirmishers breaking from harassing one unit to attack another? It makes sense from the God's Eye View we have as players, but would they be able to coordinate such a breakoff and reorganization in real time? My preference is to make it so, but I am biased towards skirmish-intensive armies. |
Who asked this joker | 15 Oct 2014 7:55 p.m. PST |
I definitely don't think they should be able to break off and fight another unit in a single turn but breaking off from heavy infantry is definitely in the game. Cavalry can break off from any infantry. You have a point though. It's a game so why not allow them to nip at the heels. |
Coyotepunc and Hatshepsuut | 15 Oct 2014 8:45 p.m. PST |
That becomes its own issue, however. If it is allowed just because it is a game, that opens the floodgates. But, if they can break away from a heavy infantry unit, there is no reason they cannot engage a different unit at a later time. I was envisioning breaking off from one and engaging another in the same move. |
Sobieski | 15 Oct 2014 8:56 p.m. PST |
Your question is ambiguous. Do you mean skirmishers who are engaged with another unit but discontinue their harassment to attack another (I'd say they wouldn't do that), or skirmishers who may not normally seek contact at close quarters but have an opportunity for a safe flank attack against an already engaged enemy whom they could disorder and render vulnerable to the frontal attack (which is what some types are skirmishers exist for)? |
Kmfisher | 15 Oct 2014 10:53 p.m. PST |
I gotta say I'm really looking forward to getting this on the table. |
|