[Rules] 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me

[russ]

Awesome, Vince, thanks very much for that helpful quick reply!

I'm glad that it seems I understood the basic overall concept of required recovery and fleeing correctly, yay! (I.e. about not being forced to activate demoralized units as long as there are still other possible activations, and about checking recovery each turn you do activate a demoralized unit.)

And thanks very much for correcting me overlooking this important rule:

Your first error here. If he succeeds in recovery, he becomes DISRUPTED not good order (14.41).

I was indeed incorrectly simply removing the demoralized marker, returning the recovered unit to good order. Doh! This rule is very clear; I just forgot it.

And I like your short simple summary of fleeing preferences:

Flee further away when you can
Flee the same distance in hexes away if unable to flee further
Stay in place if neither of the above options occur.

Very clear and useful; I shall apply it.

I think I'm now ready to go once more into the breach and try scenario 3 ...

[Memenne]

Vince,

I live in Auderghem, south-east of Brussels.
Indeed, not very far from Kampenhout.

And you ? Are you from UK ?

Manu

[Memenne]

Gents,

I was wondering if someone should separate the thread in various sub-threads, one for each question (elevations, OBA, fleeing, ...). Is this possible and useful ?

[campsawyer]

One more fleeing point that might be inherent but it is important is that they must move a there full MP away from the enemy until they reach a safe hex. It is important as they are in a state of being out of control and are just running away.

[Hugmenot]

"one where English is not his first language"

Oui, c'est moi !

Et moi aussi!

J'écrirai mon premier AAR en français un de ces jours après une bonne revue des régles de grammaire. Dix-sept ans aux E-U, de quoi de perdre son latin.

[Hugmenot]

To be clear, I wasn't looking for loopholes or trying to twist the rules. The language used (e.g. "Up to three offboard bombardment fire values may combine into one fire value") genuinely led me to naturally interpret it that the fire values represent distinct artillery guns firing, and the verb "may" instead of "must" suggests optional choice about combining, and my natural assumption is that independent guns may fire at the same target or at different targets. The artillery rules were something about which I didn't even feel conscious uncertainty until they came up tangentially in this thread and I discovered that I was doing it wrong!

I apologize Russ, I was not my intent to say you or anyone else were trying to find loopholes.

I will post some examples of play once 4th edition rules are out and I will make sure this issue is covered.

[russ]

No problem! Thanks.

[zaarin7]

I sincerely hope 4th ed clears all this up.

[tlangston28]

One thing on that. If in an assault, a DEM unit that fails will have to leave the hex. Again, per the fleeing rules, (if he survives any allowed free hits that might occur) ... Make sure he exits to a hex further from the enemy. If that does not apply, he will still need to leave the hex. The only reason I can think he would remain in the hex was if there were 6 assaults in the hexes surrounding his hex (can not leave an assault and enter another) OR he is in an ENTRENCHMENT. Remember, DEM units do not need to flee from entrenchments.

Vince, one slight thing here, 12.13 does state that if the surrounding hexes in an assault all contain enemy units and he cannot flee, he is eliminated. I think that answers your question about remaining in the hex. Unless in an Entrenchment, He must ALWAYS try to flee or be eliminated.

[vince hughes]

Thanks for the correction .......... It was a long post and therefore fraught with danger !!!