$30.00
Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

The Guns of August» Forums » Rules

Subject: "Big Push Q" rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Stu Carson
Canada
Halifax
Nova Scotia
flag msg tools
Suppose an attacker is eligible to initiate a "big push", (1916, 3 defenders etc). Further, the attacker has 3 hexes adjacent to the defender, one of which is a fort. Is it legal to attack roll once without the occupants of the fort participating (so they stay under the marker), and then, if another roll is allowed depending upon the first combat result, to then add the fort occupants to the second roll (bringing them above the marker)?

My opponent says that this is OK, (i.e., each combat is resolved separately).

I hold that the "big push" is a single combat - but with a special provision allowing multiple rounds - and that therefore no "new" units can be added.



Anyone?
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Elkins
United States
Richlands
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't know which edition you're using, but the 4th ed. rules are fairly clear:

17.13. A unit may only be placed under a Fort marker during the Friendly Movement Phase. Units that are under a Fort marker may be placed above the marker during their Movement Phase, or during any Combat Phase.





1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Cundiff
United States
St. Bernice
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The question isn't whether or not he can change the units to above or below the Fort Marker.

The question is "can he commit adjacent units that were previously not involved in an attack, to a 2nd Round of combat in an attack to which they were not previously a party?"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick Bauer
United States
Reading
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Waste Water too
badge
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
mbmbmbmbmb
Evil Stu wrote:
Suppose an attacker is eligible to initiate a "big push", (1916, 3 defenders etc). Further, the attacker has 3 hexes adjacent to the defender, one of which is a fort. Is it legal to attack roll once without the occupants of the fort participating (so they stay under the marker), and then, if another roll is allowed depending upon the first combat result, to then add the fort occupants to the second roll (bringing them above the marker)?

My opponent says that this is OK, (i.e., each combat is resolved separately).

I hold that the "big push" is a single combat - but with a special provision allowing multiple rounds - and that therefore no "new" units can be added.



Anyone?


26.3 “Big Push” Attacks
NOTE: A “big push” attack is the equivalent of the British Somme or German Verdun Offensives of 1916. It allows a player to attack the same defending units more than once in a single Combat Phase (see §13.17). Beginning in 1916, the phasing player may announce that an attack against three or more combat units will be a “big push” attack provided no attacks against this many units have been conducted yet in the combat phase. This attack continues until an “AE”, “AA”, or “AD” combat result occurs. Units from one country may only participate in one “big push” attack per turn.
EXCEPTION: An amphibious invasion may not be a “big push” attack.
EXAMPLE: In July 1916, three British 4-6-4 infantry and one 3-3-3 artillery each in hexes H9 and H10 (30 factors, +1DRM) attack three German 4-6-4 infantry entrenched in hex I10 (18 factors, -1DRM) at 1-1 odds with a 0DRM. The Allied player declares the attack will be a “big push” attack.
The first attack results in a BD; the Germans and the Allies each eliminate one 4-6-4 infantry rather than retreat. The odds are now 2-1 (26-12)
The second attack also results in a BD; each side again eliminates one 4-6-4 rather than. The odds are now 3-1 (22-6).
The third attack results in an AD: the British eliminate a 4-6-4 rather than retreat both stacks of units and the battle is over.


If this is the rule (1.3 26.3) that you're using; I read it as a single attack. It is referred to as "an" attack and says "...the attack continues...".

The word "continues" is what makes me vote for a single attack with no ability to add other units. I'd play that they have to be committed up front.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Cundiff
United States
St. Bernice
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with Patrick. Committing units to an attack is done from the very beginning.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Popejoy
United States
Potomac Falls
Virginia
flag msg tools
GWX Dev Team
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi!

I agree that the "Big Push" is one "attack" that occurs in several "waves." No other units may join the battle once the attack begins.

In fairness, the use of the word "attack" can be confusing under the "big push" optional rule since a normal "attack" is resolved with one roll of the die, so the "big push" could be construed to consist of a number of consecutive attacks rather than one attack that occurs in multiple phases, although maybe "waves" might be more appropriate in the context of the First World War.

This may be one reason this rule remained "optional."

I will add clarification to the next revision of the Augmented Rules.

Hope this helps!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stu Carson
Canada
Halifax
Nova Scotia
flag msg tools
Patrick, I agree completely. This is exactly my reading.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.