Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Rules dispute on assaults

Expand Messages
  • vtsaogames
    During an otherwise enjoyable re-play of Kurudere (AAR to follow), a dispute arose over an interpretation of the assault table. On a victory of +4-6; Attacker
    Message 1 of 14 , 11 Aug

      During an otherwise enjoyable re-play of Kurudere (AAR to follow), a dispute arose over an interpretation of the assault table. On a victory  of +4-6; Attacker may Exploit or occupy defender's position.


      The opposing point of view was that the attacker may exploit, or may occupy. Since the attacker may do either, this implies the attacker may do neither and stand their ground. Those holding this interpretation held that the my version should read: Attacker may either Exploit or occupy...


      I maintained the attacker could exploit or occupy, period. I did this in an obstinate and mule-headed fashion and wore down the opposition.


      The game did not hang on this point, though some future situation might be more critical.


    • bbbchrisp
      The intention is that the attacker must do one or the other; but the way this is done effectively permits standing one s ground. See p23: If the defender is
      Message 2 of 14 , 11 Aug
        The intention is that the attacker must do one or the other; but the way this is done effectively permits standing one's ground. See p23:

        "If the defender is defeated, the Assaulting unit must advance so that its Front Centre Point (FCP) is somewhere on the area formerly occupied by the defender’s bases."

        As the attacker's FCP must have been in contact with a defender's base in order to assault, then merely moving 1mm forward would be sufficient to place it "somewhere on the area formerly occupied by the defender’s bases".

        Chris
      • ktravlos
        No you must exploit or occupy the defenders position. The whole point is to take away some CnC from your units which in the heat of the close firefight and
        Message 3 of 14 , 11 Aug
          No you must exploit or occupy the defenders position. The whole point is to take away some CnC from your units which in the heat of the close firefight and assault are likely to be taken by battle rage and move in ways you do not like. Giving a third option of just staying where you are would violate the spirit of the rules. And it violates also how Chris writes his rules:

          Chris is very clear in his rule. He is no Baker. If it was the way your friends argued it would had said "May remain in place, or may exploit, or may occupy enemy position" It does not. If the rule does explicitly offer the option it is not to be inferred in BBB. Either it is written there or it does not exist.
        • Francis Facciolo
          Vincent, I don’t think you were obstinate and mule-headed although perhaps a bit miffed off. In fact, you had a very clear rationale based on the results
          Message 4 of 14 , 11 Aug
            Vincent, I don’t think you were obstinate and mule-headed although perhaps a bit miffed off. 

            In fact, you had a very clear rationale based on the results under the +1-3 results and making them consistent with the +4-6 results. I am happy to get Chris, etc.’s view, but you actually persuaded me.Thank you for so clearly explaining Ken’s and my initial rationale.

            Jay

            On Aug 11, 2017, at 7:10 AM, vtsaogames@... [BBB_wargames] <BBB_wargames@...> wrote:


            During an otherwise enjoyable re-play of Kurudere (AAR to follow), a dispute arose over an interpretation of the assault table. On a victory  of +4-6; Attacker may Exploit or occupy defender's position.


            The opposing point of view was that the attacker may exploit, or may occupy. Since the attacker may do either, this implies the attacker may do neither and stand their ground. Those holding this interpretation held that the my version should read: Attacker may either Exploit or occupy...


            I maintained the attacker could exploit or occupy, period. I did this in an obstinate and mule-headed fashion and wore down the opposition.



            The game did not hang on this point, though some future situation might be more critical.




            Francis J. Facciolo (Jay)
            307 President Street 
            Brooklyn, NY 11231 USA
            718-596-3949 (US tel) 
            718-522-6791 (US fax)
            01748 220 046 (UK tel)
            francis.facciolo@...





          • bbbchrisp
            Have you guys considered drinking more alcohol while you game? Surely that always helps to smooth out any disagreement? More seriously: good to see that you
            Message 5 of 14 , 11 Aug
              Have you guys considered drinking more alcohol while you game? Surely that always helps to smooth out any disagreement?

              More seriously: good to see that you resolved this so amicably. As I reported in my last blog post, this week I inflicted an erroneous application of my own rule on my opponent:
              http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/yiannitsa-1912-greco-turkish-balkan-war.html
              Crispin was a true gentleman about it, granting me latitude at the time and accepting my subsequent apology.

              The spirit in which games are played is so important. Fortunately in my experience BBB being so historically-focused generally tends to attract players who are more interested in the content of the game, rather than tournament-minded folks who are into winning for its own sake. I'm happy that this seems to be the case among the Corlears Hook Fencibles too!

              Chris
            • vtsaogames
              Hmm. Solomon and the baby?
              Message 6 of 14 , 11 Aug
                Hmm. Solomon and the baby?
              • Francis Facciolo
                Indeed. 1 mm forward it is. ... Francis J. Facciolo (Jay) 307 President Street Brooklyn, NY 11231 USA 718-596-3949 (US tel) 718-522-6791 (US fax) 01748 220 046
                Message 7 of 14 , 11 Aug
                  Indeed. 1 mm forward it is.


                  On Aug 11, 2017, at 9:44 AM, vtsaogames@... [BBB_wargames] <BBB_wargames@...> wrote:

                  Hmm. Solomon and the baby?


                  Francis J. Facciolo (Jay)
                  307 President Street 
                  Brooklyn, NY 11231 USA
                  718-596-3949 (US tel) 
                  718-522-6791 (US fax)
                  01748 220 046 (UK tel)
                  francis.facciolo@...





                • bbbchrisp
                  Yep, I believe the very words Solomon used were, I m sorry, ladies, but the rules on page 23 definitely say ... Chris
                  Message 8 of 14 , 11 Aug
                    Yep, I believe the very words Solomon used were,
                    "I'm sorry, ladies, but the rules on page 23 definitely say ..."

                    Chris
                  • Ronan R
                    ... I agree ! -- Ronan
                    Message 9 of 14 , 11 Aug
                      On 11/08/2017 13:26, ktravlos@... [BBB_wargames] wrote:
                      > No you must exploit or occupy the defenders position. The whole point is
                      > to take away some CnC from your units which in the heat of the close
                      > firefight and assault are likely to be taken by battle rage and move in
                      > ways you do not like. Giving a third option of just staying where you
                      > are would violate the spirit of the rules.


                      I agree !


                      --
                      Ronan
                    • vtsaogames
                      Re the 1mm advance: OK, that s what the rules say, which indicates that a minor nudge forward will suffice. That s the rule but I will let out one last protest
                      Message 10 of 14 , 11 Aug
                        Re the 1mm advance: OK, that's what the rules say, which indicates that a minor nudge forward will suffice. That's the rule but I will let out one last protest and then go silent (at least on this topic).

                        My take on successful assaults of this period is the attacker advanced against the defender through fire. At some point the will of the defenders wavered, as the attack either didn't stop or got going again after a firefight. The attackers sensed this, perhaps as the defensive fire slackened, perhaps as some saw enemy soldiers abandoning the ranks or the enemy shouting began to taper off. This spurred the final rush, which further spurred the final collapse of the defense. There might even be some actual bayonet fighting, though in most cases the threat of the bayonet sufficed. The defenders fell back in defeat and disorder and were disrupted. The attackers, exhilarated by having survived this fight and by the sight of the backs of their enemies, were also disrupted. The natural human impulse is to seize the disputed ground. The chance to loot the enemy dead and wounded is also a factor. I would posit that very seldom did a successful assault just advance into the enemy picket lines and halt there when the main enemy force gave way. What I read of again and again is an advance into the vacated position followed by celebrating, such that Du Picq said if no troops were kept in reserve a small squad and a drummer could recapture the position.

                        The general tenor of the rules is against catering to the exception, such as Ramsey's Royal Horse Artillery troop evading through French cavalry at Fuentes D'Onoro. Just because it happened once (in 20 years of war) doesn't mean the rules should allow it.

                        The way we have played it for two years (in part because of my opinion voiced above and in part because I never digested that part of the rule on pg.. 23) is that the victorious attacker had to move at least a base-width into the captured position.

                        That off my chest, I will now get off the soap box.
                      • ktravlos
                        This is how I played it and this is how I will play it! :) Here I stand!
                        Message 11 of 14 , 11 Aug
                          This is how I played it and this is how I will play it! :) Here I stand!
                        • Alan Millicheap
                          ... Pictures of soapbox or I don t believe it ;) On 11 August 2017 at 20:05, vtsaogames@rcn.com [BBB_wargames]
                          Message 12 of 14 , 11 Aug
                            >That off my chest, I will now get off the soap box.

                            Pictures of soapbox or I don't believe it ;)


                            On 11 August 2017 at 20:05, vtsaogames@... [BBB_wargames] <BBB_wargames@...> wrote:
                             

                            Re the 1mm advance: OK, that's what the rules say, which indicates that a minor nudge forward will suffice. That's the rule but I will let out one last protest and then go silent (at least on this topic).


                            My take on successful assaults of this period is the attacker advanced against the defender through fire. At some point the will of the defenders wavered, as the attack either didn't stop or got going again after a firefight. The attackers sensed this, perhaps as the defensive fire slackened, perhaps as some saw enemy soldiers abandoning the ranks or the enemy shouting began to taper off. This spurred the final rush, which further spurred the final collapse of the defense. There might even be some actual bayonet fighting, though in most cases the threat of the bayonet sufficed. The defenders fell back in defeat and disorder and were disrupted. The attackers, exhilarated by having survived this fight and by the sight of the backs of their enemies, were also disrupted. The natural human impulse is to seize the disputed ground. The chance to loot the enemy dead and wounded is also a factor. I would posit that very seldom did a successful assault just advance into the enemy picket lines and halt there when the main enemy force gave way. What I read of again and again is an advance into the vacated position followed by celebrating, such that Du Picq said if no troops were kept in reserve a small squad and a drummer could recapture the position.

                            The general tenor of the rules is against catering to the exception, such as Ramsey's Royal Horse Artillery troop evading through French cavalry at Fuentes D'Onoro. Just because it happened once (in 20 years of war) doesn't mean the rules should allow it.

                            The way we have played it for two years (in part because of my opinion voiced above and in part because I never digested that part of the rule on pg.. 23) is that the victorious attacker had to move at least a base-width into the captured position.

                            That off my chest, I will now get off the soap box.


                          • andrew.fuller48
                            However, the rules very clearly state that the base represents the centre of the unit, be it brigade, division or whatever, and the pickets are 3 out from
                            Message 13 of 14 , 13 Aug
                              However, the rules very clearly state that the base represents the centre of the unit, be it brigade, division or whatever, and the pickets are 3" out from that, therefore when a unit wins an assault the picket lines have already been overrun and the winners are already in the area occupied by the bulk of the losing unit, therefore the 1mm advance makes sense. Secondly the mindset for playing BBB requires the dropping of the old wargame notion that the units are battalions. The group of bases represent large bodies of troops - an entire brigade or division is unlikely to rush off willy-nilly after retreating enemy. In such a body there will be a large number of officers and NCOs directing the troops. In a battalion level  game a few hundred troops may well rush forward enthusiastically, but a battalion level game is running at a different ground scale to BBB. In a BBB unit there may well be some troops who have rushed forward enthusiastically, but there will be others following up in a more measured fashion acting as a reserve - see the concurrent discussion of basing 2mm figures.
                            • vtsaogames
                              ... Food for thought.
                              Message 14 of 14 , 13 Aug
                                the base represents the centre of the unit, be it brigade, division or whatever, and the pickets are 3" out from
                                > that, therefore when a unit wins an assault the picket lines have already been overrun and the winners are
                                > already in the area occupied by the bulk of the losing unit

                                Food for thought.
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and will be delivered to recipients shortly.