Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Napoleon's Triumph» Forums » Rules

Subject: Confused by Attack Example 1 - Help! rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
John Labelle
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was reviewing the examples in the rulebook the other night getting ready for an upcoming game when I saw something in Attack Example 1 that made me question how I’ve been playing cavalry attacks via road.

Attack Example 1 shows a French cavalry unit declaring an attack threat against a lone Allied unit in an adjacent locale. Both units are in the reserve of their locales. The locales are connected by a road. The Allied unit decides to retreat before combat.

Now what comes next confuses me:

The French player makes his attack declaration: “to move the reserve unit by road using a Unit Move command. The unit is briefly turned face-up to confirm that it is cavalry, and is moved into the defense reserve. Because the defender retreated before combat, the attacking unit can continue moving by road after the attack.”

So, is this saying that even if it’s an adjacent locale, if I want to have the OPTION to continue attacking by road I FIRST have to specifically say while declaring my move command that “I’m moving via road”?
I can’t just say “I’m moving using a Unit Move” and that’s it. And if I don’t start out saying “via road” for the very first locale, I can’t then elect to declare another attack threat and after another retreat move up the road, etc?

Next, the other thing I’m very confused about in Attack Example 1 is that the cavalry unit is turned face up briefly NOW and then moved into the defense reserve. The example then goes on to say that it can continue to move after the attack.
Section 11. Attacks in the rulebook states that cavalry “units must be briefly turned face-up after their move is over to confirm that they are cavalry”.
In Attack Example 1, the move isn’t over. It says that the cavalry unit can continue to move but this is stated AFTER it says to flip the unit. I always thought it was after ALL locales have been traveled through via road and your entire move is done that you briefly flip the unit for confirmation.

I figure I’m missing something. I would appreciate any insight and clarification.
Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rusty
msg tools
Avatar
Momoshiro wrote:
So, is this saying that even if it’s an adjacent locale, if I want to have the OPTION to continue attacking by road I FIRST have to specifically say while declaring my move command that “I’m moving via road”?

Well, if by "FIRST" you mean "during the second step in the attack sequence," then yes. I declare a threat on an approach; you decide to retreat; then I say "OK, my attack command is this guy, moving by road," reveal it as cavalry, and move it into the defense locale.

Momoshiro wrote:
I can’t just say “I’m moving using a Unit Move” and that’s it. And if I don’t start out saying “via road” for the very first locale, I can’t then elect to declare another attack threat and after another retreat move up the road, etc?

(I believe that's correct, although personally, if my opponent moves a unit into a locale, thinks for a minute, and then says, "you know, let's say that was an attack by road" and reveals his attacking units to be cavalry, I'd allow it, because nothing in the game state has changed, and I think a more relaxed style lets people play faster.)

Momoshiro wrote:
Next, the other thing I’m very confused about in Attack Example 1 is that the cavalry unit is turned face up briefly NOW and then moved into the defense reserve. The example then goes on to say that it can continue to move after the attack.
Section 11. Attacks in the rulebook states that cavalry “units must be briefly turned face-up after their move is over to confirm that they are cavalry”.
In Attack Example 1, the move isn’t over. It says that the cavalry unit can continue to move but this is stated AFTER it says to flip the unit. I always thought it was after ALL locales have been traveled through via road and your entire move is done that you briefly flip the unit for confirmation.

Here's why I think you flip it up after moving into the first locale: your opponent doesn't get to know whether the attacking unit(s)' "move is done" at that point. I declare a threat; you retreat; I reveal as cavalry & move in; then I declare a threat on another approach in that locale. Maybe that threat is coming from the unit which just moved in, and maybe it isn't; but you don't get to find out until after you name defenders or retreat from that second attack.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Gene Ammons - Boss Tenor
badge
The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil - George Saunders
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's a link that may prove helpful: Re: Technicalities of rolling cavalry attack

And yes, I'm quoting myself but plead forgiveness because Rachel confirmed I had it right. If you're going to read the whole thread top to bottom, you'll want to have some aspirin handy.
8 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rusty
msg tools
Avatar
Sphere wrote:
Here's a link that may prove helpful: Re: Technicalities of rolling cavalry attack

BOGUS

EDIT: specifically, Rachel's reply to that post:

bowen wrote:
Thus, if cavalry is moving by road and makes three attacks, the cavalry doesn't have to be revealed until after the last attack, depriving the defender of the knowledge of what kind of cavalry they are until after that last attack.

It seems to me that the knowledge of what kind of cavalry they are is a lot less important than the knowledge of whether they're the ones making the second attack!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Gene Ammons - Boss Tenor
badge
The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil - George Saunders
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kuhrusty wrote:
Sphere wrote:
Here's a link that may prove helpful: Re: Technicalities of rolling cavalry attack

BOGUS

EDIT: specifically, Rachel's reply to that post:

bowen wrote:
Thus, if cavalry is moving by road and makes three attacks, the cavalry doesn't have to be revealed until after the last attack, depriving the defender of the knowledge of what kind of cavalry they are until after that last attack.

It seems to me that the knowledge of what kind of cavalry they are is a lot less important than the knowledge of whether they're the ones making the second attack!

If you've already moved in and declared it a road attack in step 2, how can there be any doubt that they're the ones still attacking? If they were finished, you would have had to reveal them before declaring the next attack.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Gene Ammons - Boss Tenor
badge
The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil - George Saunders
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
And don't be bringing Mr. Cloppy into this one. If Rachel never delivered him I'm not responsible. devil
3 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rusty
msg tools
Avatar
Sphere wrote:
If you've already moved in and declared it a road attack in step 2, how can there be any doubt that they're the ones still attacking? If they were finished, you would have had to reveal them before declaring the next attack.

If you reveal at the end of the attack, this is possible:

1. I am in locale A; you are in locale B. I declare a threat on the A/B approach; you retreat into C; I declare the attack command to be a unit move, reveal cavalry moving by road into B. I then declare a threat on the B/C or B/D approach. You retreat (or not, doesn't matter).

2a. I declare the attack to be that same cavalry continuing its move.

Or,

2b. I declare the attack command to be a unit move, a different cavalry unit moving by road from A, through B.

If, instead, you reveal at the end of the move (which I do concede is what the rules actually say) then, when I declare that second attack, you already know whether it's coming from the cavalry which made the first attack. WHICH IS BOGUS

Sphere wrote:
And don't be bringing Mr. Cloppy into this one. If Rachel never delivered him I'm not responsible.

OH GOD, I NEVER OPENED THE BOX, I ASSUMED IT WAS JUST 1440 COPES OF THE GAME
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Gene Ammons - Boss Tenor
badge
The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil - George Saunders
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kuhrusty wrote:
Sphere wrote:
If you've already moved in and declared it a road attack in step 2, how can there be any doubt that they're the ones still attacking? If they were finished, you would have had to reveal them before declaring the next attack.

If you reveal at the end of the attack, this is possible:

1. I am in locale A; you are in locale B. I declare a threat on the A/B approach; you retreat into C; I declare the attack command to be a unit move, reveal cavalry moving by road into B. I then declare a threat on the B/C or B/D approach. You retreat (or not, doesn't matter).
With you so far (forgetting the reveal for the moment).

kuhrusty wrote:

2a. I declare the attack to be that same cavalry continuing its move.

Or,

2b. I declare the attack command to be a unit move, a different cavalry unit moving by road from A, through B.


If, instead, you reveal at the end of the move (which I do concede is what the rules actually say) then, when I declare that second attack, you already know whether it's coming from the cavalry which made the first attack. WHICH IS BOGUS

I'm not sure why it's bogus - there must be some razzle dazzle I'm missing. You sent some cav from A along the road and I retreated, now you want me worry that you might be sending more cav from A along the same road to make the 2b threat I didn't see coming?

It looks to me more like 2b results in you showing me both lots of cav when you only needed to show the first. Also, as the 2nd lot will have had to wait a beat for the road, I won't have to worry about a threat into D should I retreat again.

I'd think you'd want to keep pushing with the first lot, then bring the others along the road afterwards if you choose. That way I'd have no idea what sort of units they are.

Seriously, I don't see how you gain anything with 2b. What I do see is what you lose by revealing your cav before the end of your move, and that is making my decision whether to retreat again from the second threat far easier. I might make a different decision about whether to join you in the approach if I knew whether I was facing a 1 or a 3.


kuhrusty wrote:

Sphere wrote:
And don't be bringing Mr. Cloppy into this one. If Rachel never delivered him I'm not responsible.

OH GOD, I NEVER OPENED THE BOX, I ASSUMED IT WAS JUST 1440 COPES OF THE GAME

Have you noticed any unpleasant odors? I'm assuming you didn't freeze it...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rusty
msg tools
Avatar
Sphere wrote:
I'm not sure why it's bogus - there must be some razzle dazzle I'm missing. You sent some cav from A along the road and I retreated, now you want me worry that you might be sending more cav from A along the same road to make the 2b threat I didn't see coming?

Yeah, but-- Well, but... See, I could--huh.

Ah! I've got it: showing my opponents two cavalry, when I could achieve an identical outcome by showing them only one cavalry, has two psychological effects. In our first game or two, my opponent will be heard to mutter, "Jesus, this guy doesn't know what he's doing." (Also, four or five times during the game, I'll feint at units which are already in the approach; in extreme cases, I may even reveal one leading piece when defending a wide approach and then have to be convinced that that doesn't make it a narrow attack. I've never had to do that twice in one game, though.) This causes my opponents to ease up, to go easy on me, to play less attentively.

After I win the first two or three games that way, the pointless reveal takes on a more sinister cast. Of course I know I didn't need to do that, so why did I do it? What am I planning? Did I just do it to get into your head? Did it work--am I in your head right now? Who are you talking to? Distracted--discombobulated--perhaps even discomfited--by game five or six, at the first morale loss, my opponents collapse into sweaty, blubbering heaps of indecision & self-doubt and concede. We can knock out a game in twenty minutes this way, including setup.

See, I'm aaaaalways thinking.

Sphere wrote:
Also, as the 2nd lot will have had to wait a beat for the road, I won't have to worry about a threat into D should I retreat again.

(Are you thinking of Marengo here? MY TECHNIQUE IS WORKING)

Sphere wrote:
Have you noticed any unpleasant odors?

This too has two psychological effects. In our first game or two--
5 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Gene Ammons - Boss Tenor
badge
The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil - George Saunders
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kuhrusty wrote:
See, I'm aaaaalways thinking.

And I dearly love reading about the process! Never stop.

kuhrusty wrote:
Sphere wrote:
Also, as the 2nd lot will have had to wait a beat for the road, I won't have to worry about a threat into D should I retreat again.

(Are you thinking of Marengo here? MY TECHNIQUE IS WORKING)

Marengo indeed. Your technique and my incipient dementia, hand in glove.


[edit] When I was younger, I would have worked in "2b or not 2b, that is the question" right out of the gate, and not had to come back and add it as an edit.
3 
 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.