BLB2 rules interpretation
Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:12 am
Yesterday evening this rules interpretation problem arose:
situation in 1690:
2 Dutch "bullet horse" squadrons in "all or nothin charge (aonc)" charged a single French "blade horse" squadron; the French countercharged. It was the first time any of our horse did the "aonc".
Combat was a tie, no threading allowed with aonc so a second bound of combat occured.
questions:
- how does the second squadron of Dutch horse count: still in aonc (we thought not) but what then, are they reinforcing combat (so +2 to the fist-principal squadron)?
- after fighting a bound the units are disordered but is counting disordering for the second bound after the adding of the +2 of reinforcing melee.
in combat dice for the dutch principal unit:
one stand of combat (1), reinforcing (+2), disordered divided by two = 1,5 (question: rounding down =1 or rounding up = 2 ?). Is this correct?
any help please.
greetings
Jan
situation in 1690:
2 Dutch "bullet horse" squadrons in "all or nothin charge (aonc)" charged a single French "blade horse" squadron; the French countercharged. It was the first time any of our horse did the "aonc".
Combat was a tie, no threading allowed with aonc so a second bound of combat occured.
questions:
- how does the second squadron of Dutch horse count: still in aonc (we thought not) but what then, are they reinforcing combat (so +2 to the fist-principal squadron)?
- after fighting a bound the units are disordered but is counting disordering for the second bound after the adding of the +2 of reinforcing melee.
in combat dice for the dutch principal unit:
one stand of combat (1), reinforcing (+2), disordered divided by two = 1,5 (question: rounding down =1 or rounding up = 2 ?). Is this correct?
any help please.
greetings
Jan