Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
16 Posts

Paths of Glory» Forums » Rules

Subject: 2 questions : Flank attack and retreat from a fort rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Damien Constant
France
flag msg tools
Hi everyone !

I'm quiet new to PoG and my first game was kind of chaotic, trying not to go back too much to the rulebook to keep the dynamic, but then I checked many things.
I was wondering two things about the rules :

1) Regarding Flank attacks, it says :
"12.3.3 The attacking player rolls one die to determine the success of the Flank Attack Attempt. If the modified die roll is 4 or
higher, the Flank Attack succeeds and the Attacker will resolve
steps 6 through 8 before the Defender. This means the Defender’s
fire will be affected by the losses he takes. If the modified die
roll is 3 or lower, the Flank Attack fails and the Defender will
resolve steps 6 through 9 before the Attacker. "

Why is there a difference between attacker and defender ? Shouldn't it be from steps 6 to 9 for both ? Step 9 is taking the loss, so does that mean a successful flank attack still take fire from defender loss-to-be ?

2) Regarding losing while defending in a fort : should I retreat ? I don't think, but I can't find the rule. If I have to, then can the attacker advance ? If so, he get the control of the fort ?

Thanks in advance !
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Martin
United States
GENEVA
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
1.) If a flank attack succeeds, the attacker will battle and cause the defender to resolve any losses before the defender battles back. If a flank attack fails, the above is reversed; i.e., the defender fires first and causes the attacker to suffer any losses before battling back. Combat is only simultaneous when no flank attack is involved.

2.) Unless the fort has a trench marker on it, or is in terrain that would allow you to ignore a retreat in exchange for an additional step loss (e.g., mountains), you must retreat if you lost the combat. Forts by themselves have no power to cancel a retreat.

See 12.2.12 Defender Retreat and 12.5.3 Ignoring Retreats for further details.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Gregorio
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmb
Just to add on to David's response #2, the AP "They Shall Not Pass" combat card can also negate an AP required retreat from a non-destroyed fort space.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John D'Angelo
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmb
To add on further to the above replies, when an attacker advances onto an undestroyed enemy fort, he does not gain control of that fort but besieges it
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Freedman
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dmartin1982 wrote:
1.) If a flank attack succeeds, the attacker will battle and cause the defender to resolve any losses before the defender battles back. If a flank attack fails, the above is reversed; i.e., the defender fires first and causes the attacker to suffer any losses before battling back. Combat is only simultaneous when no flank attack is involved.

2.) Unless the fort has a trench marker on it, or is in terrain that would allow you to ignore a retreat in exchange for an additional step loss (e.g., mountains), you must retreat if you lost the combat. Forts by themselves have no power to cancel a retreat.

See 12.2.12 Defender Retreat and 12.5.3 Ignoring Retreats for further details.


And to add in case you don't have the rule handy...

The defender only must retreat in the above scenario if the attacker has a unit (corp or army) at full strength after losses. Geesh, I haven't played in eons. As I type that I hope I'm right.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Zrimsek
msg tools
I've been assuming that it's a typo, since the sentence immediately following the procedure for a successful flank-- "This means the Defender's fire will be affected by the losses he takes"-- would not be true if they really meant for only steps 6-8 to be resolved for the attacker first. It clearly should read "steps 6-9" for both. (Well, "steps 7-9" actually, since the rule for step 6, determining DRM, says you do that simultaneously, period. But this other difference doesn't really matter because of 12.3.4.)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristian Thy
Denmark
Taastrup
flag msg tools
Together, we are the United Nations
badge
Gunulfr ok Øgotr ok Aslakr ok Rolfr resþu sten þænsi æftir Ful, felaga sin, ær warþ ... døþr, þa kunungar barþusk.
Avatar
mb
MajorPsycho wrote:
1) Regarding Flank attacks, it says :
"12.3.3 The attacking player rolls one die to determine the success of the Flank Attack Attempt. If the modified die roll is 4 or
higher, the Flank Attack succeeds and the Attacker will resolve
steps 6 through 8 before the Defender. This means the Defender’s
fire will be affected by the losses he takes. If the modified die
roll is 3 or lower, the Flank Attack fails and the Defender will
resolve steps 6 through 9 before the Attacker. "

Why is there a difference between attacker and defender ? Shouldn't it be from steps 6 to 9 for both ? Step 9 is taking the loss, so does that mean a successful flank attack still take fire from defender loss-to-be ?

I think that is a typo. If you look at 12.2.5, it says 6 through 9.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien Constant
France
flag msg tools
Thanks for the reply so far !

So, if defeated in a fort, and the enemy has at least one full streght army/corps, the defender must retreat...

So, the attacked can follow the retreating army, therefore entering the fort, and use it for its own defense, right ? Or does he have to "fight the empry fort" and destroy it ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristian Thy
Denmark
Taastrup
flag msg tools
Together, we are the United Nations
badge
Gunulfr ok Øgotr ok Aslakr ok Rolfr resþu sten þænsi æftir Ful, felaga sin, ær warþ ... døþr, þa kunungar barþusk.
Avatar
mb
MajorPsycho wrote:
So, the attacked can follow the retreating army, therefore entering the fort, and use it for its own defense, right ?

No, it becomes besieged. Then you can attack it in a later impulse, or wait for it to surrender.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien Constant
France
flag msg tools
I can also besiege an occupied fort, right ?

So, if I'm getting it right :

1) if the fort is inoccupied, I can either besiege it or attack it to destroy it

2) if the fort is occupied, I can either besiege it or attack it
a) if I attack it and the defender suffer a number of loss equal to ALL its units PLUS the fort loss factor, the fort is destroyed
b) if I attack it and win, except if trench/terrain/event allow a "no retreat", the enemy has to retreat, but I cannot advance, and I instantly besiege the inoccupied fort. I can, during another AR, attack it if I want.

Moreover, do we agree that you cannot move units on a friendly besieged fort (to help the defender) ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristian Thy
Denmark
Taastrup
flag msg tools
Together, we are the United Nations
badge
Gunulfr ok Øgotr ok Aslakr ok Rolfr resþu sten þænsi æftir Ful, felaga sin, ær warþ ... døþr, þa kunungar barþusk.
Avatar
mb
MajorPsycho wrote:
I can also besiege an occupied fort, right ?

Wrong. There can never be units from both players in the same space.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien Constant
France
flag msg tools
Oh, yes ! So I can attack a fort, occupied or not, and if it's not occupied (or destroyed !), I can besiege it. I can besiege it with the advancing units, after a victory (if full strenght army or enough CF full strenght corps can advance there, of course).

So besieging is just to save the loss from a combat against a 1-3 CF enemy, rolling on the corps/fort table, right ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristian Thy
Denmark
Taastrup
flag msg tools
Together, we are the United Nations
badge
Gunulfr ok Øgotr ok Aslakr ok Rolfr resþu sten þænsi æftir Ful, felaga sin, ær warþ ... døþr, þa kunungar barþusk.
Avatar
mb
MajorPsycho wrote:
So besieging is just to save the loss from a combat against a 1-3 CF enemy, rolling on the corps/fort table, right ?

That's one thing.

The other is that in order to attack the fort you have to be adjacent to it. You can start 3-4 spaces away and besiege it after a move action. You can also move onto it and move extra units past the now besieged fort in the same AR.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien Constant
France
flag msg tools
Crystal clear !

Thank you very much for all you answers !
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MajorPsycho wrote:

12.3.3 The attacking player rolls one die to determine the success of the Flank Attack Attempt. If the modified die roll is 4 or higher, the Flank Attack succeeds and the Attacker will resolve steps 6 through 8 before the Defender.


This will have to be updated in the errata or next rule update to say "...will resolve steps 6 through 9 before the Defender.

turbothy wrote:

I think that is a typo. If you look at 12.2.5, it says 6 through 9.


This is correct.

turbothy wrote:

The other is that in order to attack the fort you have to be adjacent to it.


An attacker can also attack a Fort if it occupies the same space as a Fort. An attacker cannot move onto a Fort space, then attack that Fort in the same action phase.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Monkman
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
new user
Thanks for asking these questions - I played my first game this week (experience much the same as yours, I think we got half way thru turn 1 in about 2 hours... ). I was reading the rules again last night and had the same question re: flanking

Hoping to play more soon as experience is the best teacher for games like this...just need to find folks to play with!

Nick
1 
 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.