Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

Napoleon's Triumph» Forums » Rules

Subject: Attack by road movement rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Cam Platell
Australia
Perth
Western Australia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Could some one please clarify this point for me.

The rules state that an attack can be made by road movement if the attacking units are cavalry.

The rules then state under the feint option that, if the attack is by road move, it must be declared a feint.

Why can't cavalry attack by road movement.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Evans
United States
Richmond
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
They can, it just must be resolved as a feint. cool
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
John Coltrane - Both Directions At Once: The Lost Album
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Platell wrote:
Could some one please clarify this point for me.

The rules state that an attack can be made by road movement if the attacking units are cavalry.

The rules then state under the feint option that, if the attack is by road move, it must be declared a feint.

Why can't cavalry attack by road movement.

I think you're implying an inconsistency in the rules where there is none. Attack is a complex procedure which begins with a threat. If the defender does not retreat, the attacker must choose whether to feint or proceed with combat. In the case of an attack by road (which can only be made by cavalry) a feint is required at that point. That ends the attack procedure.

If you're asking about design intent, the short answer is that at this scale (a single cavalry piece represents ~1400 men) the unit would have to deploy before fighting. That is represented by stopping adjacent and launching a non-road attack on the following turn.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cam Platell
Australia
Perth
Western Australia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for that, I was trying to understand the design intent. It just didn't seem logical at first. But now I understand.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hansen
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mb
I know this has been addressed elsewhere, but since this thread is fresh, I'll ask again.

Let's say I have a detached cavalry unit acting as a screen along the main highway. The allies have a corps in an adjacent locale along the road. The Allies threaten this approach with the corps; I retreat my cavalry screen laterally (that is, not further down the road) before combat, thus opening the rest of the road to the Allied corps.

The allied corps can now move freely on the main road, yes? And the corps need not be all cavalry, right?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scipio O.
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
That's right. What Alan said.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Richbourg
United States
Arlington
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
This is Kyoshi, our adopted Shiba Inu.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DeathMosque wrote:
Let's say I have a detached cavalry unit acting as a screen along the main highway. The allies have a corps in an adjacent locale along the road. The Allies threaten this approach with the corps; I retreat my cavalry screen laterally (that is, not further down the road) before combat, thus opening the rest of the road to the Allied corps.

The allied corps can now move freely on the main road, yes?

Yes, unless something else prevents the move.

DeathMosque wrote:
And the corps need not be all cavalry, right?

It must be all cavalry. If there is an attack (i.e. an attack threat was involved) and road movement, then it must be all cavalry.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hansen
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mb
How strict is the procedure during a road feint? In some videos, I see players threatening an approach before moving a cav piece by road to an adjacent locale, in others I see people first moving their cav block by road, then threatening the approach.

Does it even matter which happens first?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Evans
United States
Richmond
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
you threaten first, then after the enemy retreats, you make your road move. In isolation, the order of events doesn't matter so much but in the context of multiple units on the attacking side (and capable of making the attack) it could be very important. Basically, the attacker gets the right to see what the defender is going to do before declaring exactly which of his units is making the attack. This can be very handy if you expect the defender to do one thing but he ends up doing something else.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hansen
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mb
Interesting.

This seems conceptually strange to me. How does a cavalry unit pose a threat to a locale from a distance of one mile or more?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Evans
United States
Richmond
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
French horses are bad ass. That's how. cool
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hansen
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mb
Gosh, I guess.

It just seems strange to me that a cavalry unit could pose a threat from such a distance. Certainly I can understand a cavalry unit galloping up a road and THEN threatening at a more plausible range (abstracted by a cavalry block FIRST moving on the road, THEN threatening an approach).

Anyway, thanks for the ruling.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Richbourg
United States
Arlington
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
This is Kyoshi, our adopted Shiba Inu.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It's no more odd than not knowing whether a threatening attacker is infantry, cavalry, or artillery, or indeed a detachment vs. a large corps. It's all part of the abstraction, which includes time-of-action vs. time-of-decision abstraction.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jan Ozimek
Denmark
Aalborg
flag msg tools
badge
Must resist M:tG. Boardgames are my methadone :)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When the defending commander sees the dust cloud he probably doesn't know exactly which enemy unit is approaching, so that part makes sense.

On the other hand the commander behind the attacking units certainly won't know the defender's reaction before he decides which unit to attack with..

I think the conclusion is: Don't think too hard about it. The game works perfectly as a game, and is fairly plausible as a simulation, at least at the overall level.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
I think of a threat as a potential battle in which the commitment of both parties are not yet known. It only become a battle when both sides agree to commit. By retreating, the defender denies a battle which he deem unfavorable. The game also permits levels of commitment for the attacker. For example, the attacker may feint (a very weak attack) to tie up some of the defenders. Try this next time: note down how many threats were made in the duration of your game, and how many of them developed into battles (the defender didn't retreat and the attacker didn't feint).
 
 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.