Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Bonaparte at Marengo» Forums » Rules

Subject: Manuever attack clarification rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Scott Henshaw
United States
East Bridgewater
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If I manuever attack 3 units to the next area [cp], and my opponent blocks, may I then decide how many go to the approach and how many stay in reserve without an additional CP?
i.e.: Can I leave 1 or 2 in reserve and move 1 or 2 to the approach without spending an additional command limit?
Thank you,
ScottH.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
The Herbie Nichols Project - Dr. Cyclops' Dream
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ScottH wrote:
If I manuever attack 3 units to the next area [cp], and my opponent blocks, may I then decide how many go to the approach and how many stay in reserve without an additional CP?
i.e.: Can I leave 1 or 2 in reserve and move 1 or 2 to the approach without spending an additional command limit?
Thank you,
ScottH.


Scott,

The same thing was asked recently on ConsimWorld. I believe that if you split the group, you have to pay an extra cp, just like any other time you split a group.

From a philosophical standpoint, doing it the other way would remove a difficult and interesting decision for the attacker. I hope Bowen will weigh in with the official verdict.

George
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
I think the existing rules answer the question already.


The attacking player may in turn choose
to have ****any or all**** of his moving pieces block
their side of the approach (a cavalry piece moving
by primary road does not lose its command
limit exemption by doing this) or remain where
they are (if the attacking pieces remain where
they are, the movement attempt still counts
against the command limit). This ends the
friendly pieces’ movement for the turn.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
The Herbie Nichols Project - Dr. Cyclops' Dream
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The rules also state that activation of a group costs a command point, and that a group consists of units that start in the same place and end in the same place.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Garry Haggerty
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
When I asked this question last May on ConsimWorld (CSW), Bowen said that splitting a maneuver attacking group cost an additional command.

As George noted, this question just came up again on the game's board on CSW and the cites can be found there.

Also, the blocked attacker rule quoted above does not actually explicitly address the effect on command limits when the player opts to split his group.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hey my edit of my post got lost! Oh well.

My reasoning was this. It costs 1 CP to split and move a
group from reserve to an approach. I see a failed manuever attack
as the same idea. In essence you start moving troops and the
opponent responded, so the rest of the troops were told to remain
where they are. They were still mobilized by the initial command
so they are not available for other orders.

But in terms of game balance, you're right that we better wait
for official word.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Splitting a group when a maneuver attack is blocked requires a command. The rules require a clarification on this point - the confusion is quite understandable.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Thanks for the answer.

However, this seems to make manuever attacks of limited usefulness. The two primary tactics seem to be calvary using road movement and when exhausting units through multiple flanks to force a retreat. This makes it more cost effective to spend 1 CP blocking an approach to force the opponent's expenditure of 1 CP to retain the locale rather than giving them a free move to block the approach. The manuever attack also would tend to force you to allocate excessive units to an approach so you are not forced to retreat and get burnt retreat penalties.

Using blocking gives you the option to reinforce with units from reserve if need be (since your opponent can't assault until after they move into the approach), or to allocate the units in reserve to another locale/approach.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
The Herbie Nichols Project - Dr. Cyclops' Dream
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Glenn,

Play a few games and I'm sure you'll conclude that maneuver attacks are a powerful option that works quite well in practice. Yes, you have to think about how many units to commit, but that is part of the fun.

George
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff K
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree. Allowing someone to decide afterward which units to fill the approach gives an unfair advantage to the attacker. You can go "fishing" to see what your opponent does before you commit, which does not seem realistic for this type of warfare. Part of the burden for the attacker in this game is that once you commit, that decision is not easily undone. Allowing a free choice in this situation goes against that grain. You already get a choice on whether to fill that approach or not.
 
 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.