Sequence of Combats

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

Post Reply
User avatar
Chasseur
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:53 am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Sequence of Combats

Post by Chasseur »

Hi,

We had 2 adjacent groups of Britons charge 2 adjacent groups of Romans.
In the first close combat the left group of Britons were pushed back.
We then went to fight the first round of the other pair before fighting their 2nd round.
We also assumed that the first round involving the right group of Britons took place prior to the left group of Britons being pushed back.

Essentially fighting all first round combats "simultaneously" before applying any push-backs or routs.

Is this correct that
1. All 1st round combats are completed before all 2nd round combats.
2. Factors are worked out assuming each round of close combat is simultaneous? Or are results applied to each pair one at a time so that the order of fights may matter?

Regards,
John

User avatar
Quackstheking
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cheshunt, Herts

Re: Sequence of Combats

Post by Quackstheking »

Number 1 is correct as the fights are simultaneous and the results after round one may affect round two.

Remembrance that a supporting group straddling two fighting groups may choose which group it supports in each round of combat. 7.2.6

Hope that helps

Don

User avatar
Chasseur
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:53 am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Sequence of Combats

Post by Chasseur »

Hi,
Thanks for answer on no.1. Does help.
Also interested in opinions on no. 2.
I may not have made it clear.
What I was getting at for question 2 was the following
Roman1 Roman2
Briton1 Briton2
are fighting.
In the first round of combat Briton1 was pushed back.
Roman1 Roman2
Briton2
Briton1

When you come to fighting the 1st round between Roman2 and Briton2
A. Do you have Roman1 providing flank support
OR
B. Do you assume the push back does not occur until the end of all the 1st round combats?

If A then the order of combats matters. If B then the order does not matter.

Regards,
John

Archdukek
Posts: 5355
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: Sequence of Combats

Post by Archdukek »

Hi John,

As Don has said all fights in any Combat round are simultaneous so the situation you describe cannot arise. The bottom paragraph in the first column on page 56 under section 7.2.6 says that a combat result may possibly affect other fights “in subsequent rounds.”
So in your example Roman 1 cannot support Roman 2 in the first combat round as its engaged with Barbarian 1.

John

User avatar
Quackstheking
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cheshunt, Herts

Re: Sequence of Combats

Post by Quackstheking »

It is exactly as John (Archdukek) says, the impact is in future rounds.

Often the Romans will have a tough decision, where Briton group 1 has been pushed back does the Roman Group follow up and hope that the adjacent combat is a draw and in the second round they will provide an overlap or do they follow up to keep the pressure on! Not an easy choice as it is only the Romans who can choose to follow up or not and that choice must be made as soon as the result is decided - they cannot wait to see the result of the adjacent combat!

Don

User avatar
Chasseur
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:53 am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Sequence of Combats

Post by Chasseur »

Thanks. Excellent. Full simultaneous is best as it stops gamey choices about the order of combats.

Regards,
John

Post Reply