Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
4 Posts

Crusader Rex» Forums » Rules

Subject: option to retreat if no defenders in field (section 7.2) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
C Sandifer
United States
Lutherville
Maryland
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hello.

The timing of retreats that occur during combat makes sense to me. Blocks that retreat during combat (storms and field battles) retreat in A/B/C order instead of firing.

Also, the withdrawing of defending blocks into a castle before combat makes sense to me (in terms of timing): it is an instantaneous action, in the sense that the opposing player can’t respond to the withdrawal in any way.

There’s one type of retreat that I don’t understand in terms of timing, however. It’s the retreat listed in section 7.2: "The Attacker has the option to Besiege if there are no blocks defending the field, or Retreat as normal."

Example 1:

I move 3 Saracen units (1 A2 block, 2 B2 blocks) into Acre to attack a B3 Frank unit. The Frank unit withdraws into the castle before combat. Per 7.2, since there are now no blocks defending the field, I can opt to retreat the Saracen blocks right away to prevent them from being tied up in a siege. However, is this retreat instantaneous (i.e., the Frank block can’t fire in response), or does the retreat happen in A/B/C order as if this were a combat round? That is, would the Frank B block get to fire on the Saracen B blocks before they retreat?

I wouldn’t expect the defending block to be able to fire because, in this case, the attackers/defender are in different locales (attackers in field, defender in castle) - whereas in "normal" combat retreats the attacking/defending units are in the same locale in the sense that they’re either both in the castle (during a storm) or both in the field (during a field battle). I’m not sure that this is the correct interpretation, however.

Example 2:

Saracen blocks are mustered to an existing siege (i.e., a siege started during a previous game turn) to help the besieging Saracen forces storm the Frank blocks that are inside the castle. Round 1: The storming Saracen blocks are decimated by the defending Frank blocks - so all storming Saracen units are either killed or withdraw back to the field (in A/B/C order) in round 1. At this point, at the start of round 2, there are no defenders in the field - so the Saracen blocks in the field are free to retreat, per 7.2? (And if so, same questions as above - does this retreat occur in A/B/C order or is it instantaneous?)

In addition, what if there had been no pre-attack muster to the existing siege? Would retreat by the attackers be completely prohibited, because no friendly units had moved into the area this turn? (Retreats by the attacker must be along roads used to enter the area, per the retreat rules.)

Anyway, sorry about the technical questions. But thanks for your help.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Buccheri
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
If you love America, you through money in it's hole!!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Cody, you could view this as a free move back since there is no Combat. The wording of "Retreat as normal" refers to retreating restrictions based on halved roads, and move back on roads that you attack from. This is't in A/B/C order since both players choose not to fight in Combat.

This could take place in a later turn when the Besieger has the option to Storm or Siege. If the Besieged player chooses not to Sally after the Besieger decided to Siege, than the Besieger could retreat or simply move away. Only road restriction apply in this case. Another reason to fight in the field is to slow down mobility.

Tweaks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
C Sandifer
United States
Lutherville
Maryland
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bobby Tweaks wrote:
The wording of "Retreat as normal" refers to retreating restrictions based on halved roads, and move back on roads that you attack from. This isn't in A/B/C order since both players choose not to fight in Combat.

This could take place in a later turn when the Besieger has the option to Storm or Siege. If the Besieged player chooses not to Sally after the Besieger decided to Siege, than the Besieger could retreat or simply move away.


The way that I read section 7.2, though, is that it doesn't matter what the besieged player chooses. Player 2 doesn't have the option of sallying (before the immediate retreat) because the choice by the attacker to retreat in the face of an empty field happens at the point where he decides to either retreat or besiege (siege or storm). The option to sally can't come until after the attacker decides to stay put, and then decides to siege rather than storm.

Also, I'm not clear how the besieger could "simply move away" during combat. I can see how the besieger could move away during the move phase of the next game turn - as he is simply moving away from a friendly area - but I'm not clear how he would be able to move away in the way that you describe (during combat resolution).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Buccheri
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
If you love America, you through money in it's hole!!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wkover wrote:
Bobby Tweaks wrote:
The wording of "Retreat as normal" refers to retreating restrictions based on halved roads, and move back on roads that you attack from. This isn't in A/B/C order since both players choose not to fight in Combat.

This could take place in a later turn when the Besieger has the option to Storm or Siege. If the Besieged player chooses not to Sally after the Besieger decided to Siege, than the Besieger could retreat or simply move away.


The way that I read section 7.2, though, is that it doesn't matter what the besieged player chooses. Player 2 doesn't have the option of sallying (before the immediate retreat) because the choice by the attacker to retreat in the face of an empty field happens at the point where he decides to either retreat or besiege (siege or storm). The option to sally can't come until after the attacker decides to stay put, and then decides to siege rather than storm.

Also, I'm not clear how the besieger could "simply move away" during combat. I can see how the besieger could move away during the move phase of the next game turn - as he is simply moving away from a friendly area - but I'm not clear how he would be able to move away in the way that you describe (during combat resolution).



Sorry for my responce. It is wrong and misleading. Here is how I understand it to work under the 1.4 rules:

If you attack an area with a castle the defender can choose "before combat" to withdraw. It is at this point that you, the attacker, can do 1 of 3 things:

1)You could Storm.2)You could Besiege.3) You could Retreat as normal.

Anytime after this point in a separate turn you can Move away during the Move Phase with a group move, sea move ect... If you stay the area can be activated for Combat under 7.3 Seige Combat in the order listed. If activated by Storm or Sally you can retreat in A/B/C order during the combat rounds. The option to Besiege is a one time option at the time the defender withdraws into the castle. This could happen at the beginning of combat or during the combat rounds. The criteria for Besiege is :

1) You need to be the attacker.
2) No blocks defending the field.

I believe this is a one time option because it is listed under 7.2 Besieging. 7.3 Siege Combat list the option for an existing Siege in a specific order. Retreat is not an option under this and if you wanted to move your Besieging blocks, you would have had a chance during the Move Phase. Does this make sence?

Tweaks

 
 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.