| Auteur | Sujet |
|---|
andrewgr
Messages: 28
Enregistré(e) en :
September 2006
|
|
Foot Onslaught question
|
Sun, 31 December 2006 02:54
|
 |
The card says you can move 2 hexes and still battle.
Does this mean that blue banner foot units, which are normally allowed to move 2 hexes and can't battle, are allowed to move 2 hexes and battle, but that red banner units can still only move 1 hex? Or does it mean that red banner units gain the ability to move 2 hexes, and both blue banner units and red banner units can move 2 hexes and battle?
I assume the latter, but wanted to be sure.
|
|
|
JMcL63
Messages: 305
Enregistré(e) en :
August 2004
|
|
Re:Foot Onslaught question
|
Sun, 31 December 2006 03:34
|
|
It means that all units- red, blue or green- may move 2 hexes and battle. 
|
|
|
Kaivosmies
Messages: 4
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2006
|
|
|
Tsugo
Messages: 94
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2007
|
|
Re:Foot Onslaught question
|
Mon, 22 January 2007 03:48
|
|
| JMcL63 wrote on Sat, 30 December 2006 18:34 |
It means that all units- red, blue or green- may move 2 hexes and battle.
|
And that's what makes this card so awesome.
Actually this is a bump for the topic since I had the same question as the TC.
|
|
|
Andy_B
Messages: 14
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2006
|
|
|
JMcL63
Messages: 305
Enregistré(e) en :
August 2004
|
|
Re:Foot Onslaught question
|
Mon, 22 January 2007 14:08
|
|
| Andy_B wrote on Mon, 22 January 2007 11:06 |
| Quote: |
and all those ordered units must be adjacent.
|
Do they have to stay adjacent as well? After moving?
|
No. The card only states that they must be adjacent when they are ordered.
|
|
|
GBF640
Messages: 31
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2007
|
|
Re:Foot Onslaught question
|
Tue, 23 January 2007 01:29
|
|
Foot Onslaught was discussed in another thread in which ColtsFan (congrats to the Colts, btw!) said:
| Quote: |
"Adjacent" means touching. It could be a block, a squiglle, or a straight line - one unit has to be touching anouther unit has to be touching another unit, etc.
|
and I would add that it may be helpful to think of "adjacent" as meaning "contiguous". If units were states in the U.S. and you had 5 command cards (including Foot Onslaught), California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana could participate in a Foot Onslaught, but Alaska and Hawaii could never join any of the contiguous states in a Foot Onslaught.
Alternatively, if Alaska were the only unit on your left wing and you REALLY REALLY needed to conduct a left wing manuever, you could use Foot Onslaught to order Alaska to move and/or battle. For newbies I think it's worth noting that you CAN order LESS than the maximum units allowed by a command card, if you want.
|
|
|
blindspot
Messages: 110
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2006
|
|
Re:Foot Onslaught question
|
Wed, 21 February 2007 00:32
|
|
| GBF640 wrote on Mon, 22 January 2007 16:29 |
and I would add that it may be helpful to think of "adjacent" as meaning "contiguous". If units were states in the U.S. and you had 5 command cards (including Foot Onslaught), California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana could participate in a Foot Onslaught, but Alaska and Hawaii could never join any of the contiguous states in a Foot Onslaught.
|
Ok, I almost got it. Please bear with me. What if, in the above example, Idaho was friendly Cavalry unit and the rest were foot units? Would Montana still get to participate?
[Mis à jour le: Wed, 21 February 2007 00:33]
|
|
|
player21912
Messages: 34
Enregistré(e) en :
June 2004
|
|
Re:Foot Onslaught question
|
Wed, 21 February 2007 00:42
|
|
Adjacent foot units. If you've got a line, and cavalry or a creature is one link in the chain, it breaks the chain.
Likewise you can use archers and crossbows as one of the links for describing the adjacent group... but they can't battle. But they still eat up one of your orders allowed. 
|
|
|
