I have used it and I really like that rule, it gives a bit more defence against bad initiative roll.
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Commanders and intermingling http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=11446 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | rpr [ Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
A question concerning new rule that defending commander can force formations to be intermingled: If an enemy unit charges formation A and formation B with commander is within 5cm, can the commander then declare that these two formations are intermingled, or must the commander be in formation A? |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
At what point was this rule adopted/voted upon? |
|
| Author: | Markconz [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
(Evil and Chaos @ Jan. 06 2008,20:56) QUOTE At what point was this rule adopted/voted upon? At the same time as all the others. Remember as Hena says the whole idea of experimental rules is to get feedback on them. So far I haven't even seen this used in a game yet though. Has anyone else? At face evaluation I don't see anything wrong with it, but then I don't put my trust in face evaluation. |
|
| Author: | rpr [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
(Markconz @ Jan. 07 2008,08:07) QUOTE So far I haven't even seen this used in a game yet though. Has anyone else? I was planning to have some real defensive use for this but obviously it does not help here... (have commander-fitted CC/FF unit intermingled with artillery unit to be able to protect it against air assaults - but no use, enemy can still pick to assault just the artillery) |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
I was completely unaware of this proposal (And it looks like it hasn't been voted upon either). However I am provisionally in favour of it. |
|
| Author: | Charad [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
I have used it and I really like that rule, it gives a bit more defence against bad initiative roll.
|
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
Hmm... As it's worded, the Commander must be assaulted before it triggers. However, the intent was more along the lines of what rpr describes - prevent the enemy from being able to pick out a single weak formation from a cluster of enemy formations. I'd say try it both ways and see how it works. I've used it only to the extent that I have intermingled Commander formations that I wouldn't have otherwise in the hopes of using it. To my recollection, I've not used it defensively and can't recall a successful offensive combined assault that has resulted from it, either. |
|
| Author: | Ginger [ Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Commanders and intermingling |
Personally, I like the idea of allowing the commander of an adjacent formation to countercharge an assault on his own initiative, so will definately be trying this. It will definitely boost commander a bit, but IMO the countercharge restrictions will probably limit the effects to an acceptable level. However, should the Commander be allowed to drag another uncommitted formation into the fray as well?? (gut reaction suggests not, but I thought I would raise this red herring anyway) |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|