RE: [Epic] 40K/IG infantry Detachments

From: John Erickson <erickson_at_...>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 10:56:31 -0500

Scott Shupe <shupes_at_...> writes:
> John Erickson wrote:
> >
> > This is not a flame, but what you said is not entirely correct.
> > The bike detachment could charge the farther unit as long as the bikes
> > didn't move past the nearer unit.
> > Ex: Enemy A
> > |
> > Bikes---------------Enemy B
> > In this case the bikes could assault Enemy B even though it is farther away.
>
> But then they're moving past Enemy A. When moving
> in the assault phase, you must move towards an enemy det.
> It can be any enemy det., as long as you're not moving away
> from unengaged dets. In your example the bikes are moving
> away from det. A.

        While this stacks the odds against you, can you send one bike
out to engage Enemy A, and then send the rest at enemy B?

Mark
OK, it's official I have to bring my books to work if I am going to read these
e-mails. Mark your question depends on the wording of the assualt move.
Do you declare an assualt against a specific detachment or just declare that
the unit is assualting and go from there. I don't know because as I said no
books.
        Scott, I see your point and I am going to go over the sections again,
but I think the problem is in our different interpretation of "going past" the enemy.
It seems that you think of it as moving away from the enemy while we decided
that it was moving toward then away from the enemy. I'll reread the rules sections
tonight and either agree with you or insult you endlessly tomorrow.
John
you know I was kidding about the insulting right? <g>
Received on Wed Apr 30 1997 - 15:56:31 UTC