Question on Charges and Melee Contact

[felixs]

Hello everybody,

I am new here. Have been gaming miniature wargames for about 15 years. My favourite game at present is DBA. I also like Impetus a lot.

Played a game a few days ago against myself and then again yesterday against a friend.

The rules work quite well, there are only some minor points that I need to clear up.

1) Direct Charges
As per the rules, a direct charge would be any kind of charge that has the target of the charge in the front lane of the charging unit at the start of the charge. So, it still is a direct charge in these three cases: a) There can be terrain or other units in-between the charger and its target. b)The charger does not have to be able to "see" (I realize that this is not a concept of these rules) its target. c) Charge movement does not have to be straight forward, but can slide and pivot around terrain or units.
Correct?
Or should the rules be interpreted less literal here?

2) Melee Contact
Short version:
To charge a unit and get locked in melee, it is enough to bring as much as only a front corner into contact with the target unit. Sliding and wheeling part (or the whole of) an edge into contact with a target unit's edge is optional.
Is that correct?
Long version:
In my game alone, this was not a problem, as I played both sides and did whatever looked good. In the game against my friend, it got quite geometric and the result was somewhat less than pretty. It is in most cases better to make only minimal (corner) contact with the target of the charge, as that makes it harder for other units to get in your flank. Plus your chances to charge other units in a pursuit move after destroying the enemy unit (especially with undead) might get better Also, you want to leave space for a fall back move in case of getting two or more hits.
Is that how the game is played, or am I missing any reason to bring more than a front corner into contact?

[Chieftain]

Hi felixs and welcome to the forum.   

1) Direct Charges
As per the rules, a direct charge would be any kind of charge that has the target of the charge in the front lane of the charging unit at the start of the charge. So, it still is a direct charge in these three cases:

a) There can be terrain or other units in-between the charger and its target.

Yes, there can be intervening terrain.

b)The charger does not have to be able to "see" (I realize that this is not a concept of these rules) its target.

Yes, that is correct.

c) Charge movement does not have to be straight forward, but can slide and pivot around terrain or units.

Yes, that is correct.  Although remember that a charge move must be by the shortest route possible.

2) Melee Contact
Short version:
To charge a unit and get locked in melee, it is enough to bring as much as only a front corner into contact with the target unit.

Yes, this is correct.

Sliding and wheeling part (or the whole of) an edge into contact with a target unit's edge is optional.
Is that correct?

Yes, this move after contact is optional.

Long version:
In my game alone, this was not a problem, as I played both sides and did whatever looked good. In the game against my friend, it got quite geometric and the result was somewhat less than pretty. It is in most cases better to make only minimal (corner) contact with the target of the charge, as that makes it harder for other units to get in your flank. Plus your chances to charge other units in a pursuit move after destroying the enemy unit (especially with undead) might get better Also, you want to leave space for a fall back move in case of getting two or more hits.
Is that how the game is played, or am I missing any reason to bring more than a front corner into contact?

Tactics are fun aren't they?   

Cheers
Chieftain

[felixs]

Thank you for the clarifications. Seems I am reading the rules correctly then. 

That should result in awkward-looking melee contacts being the norm. However, from looking at the pictures in the battle reports, that does not seem to be the case. Now, have I discovered something that others have not?

What motivation is there to make full-own-front-edge to full-enemy-edge contact? It is hard to think of a situation where it is not advantageous to refuse one flank as much as possible. Or at least: Situations where actual edge-to-edge contact would be advantageous would be very few.
Do people do it for aesthetical purposes nevertheless?

In our game, we switched to a house rule ruling it mandatory to make edge-to-edge contact if possible - but that is quite dodgy and surely not suitable for competitive play. Competitive play however (even on a rather low level) seems to lead to "ugly" contacts being the norm, units just barely touching as they try to stay as far away from other units or try to get as near as possible, already preying on the next target.

Sorry for this rather verbose post that does not really add to the above. It is just that I would like to hear some thoughts on that from people who play and enjoy the rules.

[Techno]

Welcome, Felix !
Cheers - Phil

[fred.]

That should result in awkward-looking melee contacts being the norm. However, from looking at the pictures in the battle reports, that does not seem to be the case. Now, have I discovered something that others have not?

What motivation is there to make full-own-front-edge to full-enemy-edge contact? It is hard to think of a situation where it is not advantageous to refuse one flank as much as possible. Or at least: Situations where actual edge-to-edge contact would be advantageous would be very few.
Do people do it for aesthetical purposes nevertheless?

I've not played many games, and certainly not any competitive ones yet. But I was coming to the same sort of conclusions - there seems little point to contact full face. You nearly always start at an angle to the enemy, so may as well maintain that angle. But I suppose sometimes maintaining that angle will be a disadvantage, and then you will want to flatten out.

The key is that you must go the shortest route - so I don't think you can rotate feely on contact. But this is an assumption.

[felixs]

The melee contact rules state that:  "A charging unit stops on contact with the first enemy unit, but it may then wheel, pivot, and/or slide up to its remaining move in order to maximise contact and combat advantage with this and/or additional enemy units if desired." (p. 22)
Plus the combat examples in the rule book seem to assume that you do so.

[fred.]

Good point. I'd not read/remembered the second part of that.

I don't really understand the path unit C takes in the diagram on the bottom of p22. This does not seem the shortest route, I would have expected a pivot, then move to contact. Not the move forward, pivot, then move to contact.

[Nosher]

I can see the points being made about maximising frontal contact and indeed it makes tactical sense to hit with as little as possible at odd angles to create havoc within your enemies battle lines.

I have quite a few games under my belt now and find its swings and roundabouts.

Early on when there are lots of clearly defined battle lines full frontal is normally the only option unless you have been canny enough to get around the flanks or your opponent has left units isolated. If you start going in at weird angles at this stage you often cramp your own troops for space and then they cant join the fight easily

Later on when the game breaks up a bit charges at odd angles help clear out units that are hanging on.

That's my take on it anyway

[felixs]

If you start going in at weird angles at this stage you often cramp your own troops for space and then they cant join the fight easily

Given that the movement rules are so free, how can that happen? Is there anything that would prevent you from squeezing in other troops at very odd angles too?

[Chieftain]

Given that the movement rules are so free, how can that happen? Is there anything that would prevent you from squeezing in other troops at very odd angles too?

No, nothing to prevent you, and in certain circumstances this can be a viable tactic.  The downside is often blocked fall back moves though.  It can be a risk worth taking.

It helps I think to remember that although your bases are nice rectangles, the units they represent aren't.  Troops can 'pile in', and this can result in odd contacts.

Having played many games, I'd suggest that generally, maintaining good formed lines, and making 'conventional' contacts is more beneficial than going in at odd angles.

The positioning during contact will have tactical considerations around maximising your combat advantages, but also looking for free rear areas for fall back moves, and good positioning for pursuit moves.

I think its also worth noting that this movement after contact is to 'to maximise contact and combat advantage with this and/or additional enemy units if desired'.  Wiggling about to move your own flanks away from a subsequent enemy charge, I think is unlikely to be considered maximising your combat advantage against the contacted enemy unit.  Manoeuvring prior to contact is similarly restricted by the requirement to 'move by the shortest, most direct distance'.

In a straight-up fight (rather than scenario), if you deploy your army effectively the opportunity for 'ugly' contacts and the advantages of doing so are generally minimal.



Note: the errata http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11473.0.html

p22  Melee charge
Second pargraph, after third sentence, insert: 'A charging unit that makes this move after initial contact cannot break contact with the first enemy unit edge that it contacted'.

[felixs]

Wiggling about to move your own flanks away from a subsequent enemy charge, I think is unlikely to be considered maximising your combat advantage against the contacted enemy unit. 

Yes, but the angle at which you make contact can be chosen more or less freely. Plus you can decide how much you slide or wheel.

Manoeuvring prior to contact is similarly restricted by the requirement to 'move by the shortest, most direct distance'.

Good point. If that rule is enforced rather strictly it might limit such opportunities a bit. On the other hand, you could still stop the movement at any point after making contact.
BTW: Does that rule mean that you can only charge a unit in the flank or rear if this is the result of the shortest possible move in a charge?

"Shortest move" would mean a movement straight forward if at all possible? If that is not possible, I can see a lot of wiggle room in practise for what is "shortest move, as it would be more or less up to the charging player where exactly he pivots or shifts - which in turn would affect where he makes contact.

I think the potential problem for competitive geometric play is a certain vagueness in these concepts, which can be exploited. Are the rules meant to be played that way, or is there a certain gentlemanly code about not getting too bogged down in these things?

I hope all this is not too tiresome. Most movement rules have these kinds of "issues". I might be much more aware of them and more prone to see a problem in this area because of my specific opponent, who is very quick at finding ways to exploit options for geometric play.

[felixs]

Played another game. Another issue: What if you want to make melee contact with two units that are straight lined up next to eacth other with front corners touching, The charging unit starts at an angle from the right side and only wants to contact the unit to the left. A move straight forward would result in the unit's front left front corner touching the right enemy units front edge, thus initiating melee contact.
Now: The rules state that you must charge in the most direct way towards the unit you want to charge. Are you allowed to take a less direct way if that is necessary to avoid contact with enemy units that you do not want to contact? (In my example, are you allowed to make a shift to the left that would allow contacting the left unit only? Note that this would be a longer way and, I assume, thus "less direct" than a move straight ahead, which would result in contact with the intended unit, where it not for the other unit that stands in the way and is thus contacted first.)

I find this quite unclear.