honorforONEFilms wrote:

Stupid goblins. Unless you keep them in triangles there worthless. 

Plodding dwarves...good luck building a battle plan around those ass-draggers

Dirge said:

Yup - "bold" stacks.  Any type of bold that can be had is added to any other type of bold that can be had.  In the example you have there, bold1 from support + bold1 from Stronghold gives a bold2 to those archers.  If other circumstances also allow a flag to be ignored, those would stack on top. 

Only exception (that really isn't an exception) is that a unit which is supported by two friendly units is bold1, but a unit that is also supported by two more units is not bold2 - still bold 1.  A unit receives the same benefit of support regardless the number of units providing that support, as long as it is 2 or more.  If a goblin band is involved, it provides half support, but if 2 or 3 units are also providing support to the unit in question - still bold1.  The embedded drummers are different - the provide bold1, and if that embedded unit is also supported, bold2.

Once one has played often enough, it really does become second nature.  Very consistent rules, not any exceptions really.  (well, except creatures ;) ).

HonorforONEFilms said:

Young and inexperienced you are. Much to learn you have. Lethal Goblins are when in the hands of a Master.

Another question that came up today:

My friend had a bold unit and I rolled 2 retreat flags against it.  It could not retreat because there were friendly units behind it, so it lost 1 figure.  At that point, my friend argued that he could fight back because he was still bold and I said he could not because, while he was bold (or bold-1), it would be against the spirit of the game to use that logic because in reality he SHOULD have been retreating, not getting to attack back.

What is the correct ruling on this?

He wins. 

Bold = Ignore Flags.

Bold + Remain in Hex = Battle Back

Because he did not vacate the hex and he remained supported by two units, he gets the opportunity to battle back.  Dem's da breaks.

Oh man, I was hoping it wouldn't be that way. :-(  Okay, thanks.  I guess that's the rule, even though I disagree with it in spirit.

paladinz said:

I don't know if this helps you with the spirit part, but I tend to separate the individual die rolls from the story that is being told on the board - that is the second flag didn't break the bold spirit of the units being attacked, but the loses were due to standing fast and fighting back.

Often in the game deciding to prevent retreats in ones own units by standing them up infront of two units behind is a good tactic for holding ground.  Taking a hit from an extra Flag roll is a good trade for a battle back that results in a hit, followed by the next turn to hopefully take advantage of the situation.

I'm with paladinz on this one. Just doesn't seem right that they get to fight back anyway.

HonorforONEFilms said:

Sorry but you would be on the wrong side then.   If a unit is bold and doesn't move off it's square and in close combat with the unit and still has a figure left in the unit, the unit does get to battle back.     Them are the rules.   

The only exception is in the 2nd follow up attack for a mounted unit.   But since in it's first attack the unit moved, if the mounted unit attacks the same unit that moves, the moved unit still doesn't get to battle back even if it is bold.    Since it is a continuation of the first mounted attack.

Cab

HonorforONEFilms said:

What doesn't seem right about it?  Good faith question, not trying to engage you in argument for argument's sake.  I really feel that the rules are well designed and consistent in this game, but am certainly open to dissenting opinion.

I fully agree that the rules say that they get to battle back. I just don't think it is realistic.

HonorforONEFilms said:

But why would "1 flag rolled okay to battle back"  be any more realistic than "2 flags rolled, held ground, okay to battle back"?

Imagine this

One flag = The soldiers stand shouldar to shouldar knowing there are units behind them to protect them. The enemy charges down on them crashing into there ranks. They shrug off the onslaught and battle back fighting there way into the renemys ranks.

Two flags but no retreat space = The sloidlers stand shouldar to shuoldar reading to withstand the charge assurd that there are troops behind them. The enemy charges. They crash into the lines forceing them to lose ground. The men start to panic. They start to lose ground. A trickle turns into a stream as every one starts to scream and run for there life. They crash into the battalion behind them unable to force there way into there ranks. Just then the enemy caths them and crashs into there paniced and dissorganized rear.

Now what would they do. Suddendly group together form ranks and fight back, or run to the sides and run for there life again.

That's one possible interpretation of the roll.  But I believe the rules support this interpretation:

toddrew said:

Which I don't feel is any less realistic of an outcome. 

Realism.. hmm, not entirely sure we should use that word in a game with a fantasy theme, but hey.. maybe thats just my take 

So to the rules bit. 

If a unit is busy running away, not much time to be battleing back, or counter attacking/defending themselves, take your choice of word. Take away the chance to run away cos the ground is already occupied and it seems to me there isnt much choice but to attack back .. the alternative is to meekly let yourself be killed. Doesnt sound like its likely even in a fantasy themed game. These guys dont need to stand shoulder to shoulder and organise to fight back, they just need to realise its fight or dig your own grave time. The question of spirit gets raised here, but i dont think its incosistent with the spirit. Most wargames assume a round is a set amount of time in which you are allowed to do a certain amount of actions/attacks/moves etc. If these units arent running away then they certainly have the time to do something in that time they would have spent running away but were not able. 

Next, its a game, doesnt need to be realistic, just consistent so everyone plays by the same rules throughout the game. The strategy of the game is to best use whatever rules are there so that you are ahead at the end of the game.

Its all interperatation of the what the rule might be trying to do in game terms. Its subjective as to what it might actually represent in real life terms.

Flags are a measure of the amount of fear/self preservation instinct overcoming the units discipline and desire to stand and fight. The more flags they are subject to represents the fact they were in greater danger and thus the amount of fear that generated in them took longer to overcome and for them to calm down and rally. You could say they felt the need to run further away before they felt they were then safe enough to stop.