GBoH Q&A
Some of the recent Q&A from the Consimworld GBoH forum…
Answers given by the series developer, Alan Ray
Contents
Advance after Combat ........................................................................................................................ 2
Attacking two enemy units or one enemy unit after the pre-shock TQ check ................................... 2
SPQR: Cavalry Pursuit.......................................................................................................................... 2
Collapse Sequence .............................................................................................................................. 3
SPQR: Facing change and cohesion hits.............................................................................................. 3
H&R and Cavalry Pursuit ..................................................................................................................... 3
Orderly Withdrawal for combat units vs. leaders............................................................................... 3
Orderly Withdrawal: definition of front, flank and rear hexes ........................................................... 4
Orderly Withdrawal: direction ............................................................................................................ 4
SPQR: Routing and Rallying stacked units .......................................................................................... 4
SPQR: Rout Path Query ....................................................................................................................... 5
Roman leaders’ ability to direct shock combat .................................................................................. 6
Triarii – getting them in into action... ................................................................................................. 6
1|Page
Advance after Combat
8.4 Advance After Combat
8.41 Attacking units must advance into any
hex vacated by enemy
Q: This seems to indicate to me, that if two
one-hex units attack a two-hex unit that is
routed in the Shock Combat Phase, both onehex units that now have a hex vacated by the
retreating two-hex unit in front of them
advance.
However, later the rules say:
8.44 If there was more than one attacking
unit, the unit that had Superiority (if any) must
advance. If no such unit, the one with the
highest TQ must advance.
This discusses the attacking units in the
singular as in, only one unit advances.
So, simply put, in the above situation can both
units advance, or only one?
A: No. Both combats were designated as
separate attacks, so (SPQR) 8.32 bullet #5
applies -. "a defending unit may be shocked
attacked only once per Shock Combat
segment (Exception: Cavalry Pursuit 10.41)".
The remaining friendly unit continues with its
designated attack. See 8.32.
SPQR: Cavalry Pursuit
Q: The last paragraph of 10.42...
If all the enemy units are eliminated , either in
the original or subsequent shock combat , the
victorious cavalry unit moves 1/2 of its MA in
the direction the enemy unit was headed...
If a pursuing cavalry runs into the ZOC of a
new enemy unit:
1: Can the enemy unit reaction fire?
2: Does the pursuing Cavalry have to stop in
it's ZOC if it still has MP's available?
A: Both must advance per 8.41. 8.44 covers
the case where there are two attackers and
only one vacated hex.
Attacking two enemy units or one
enemy unit after the pre-shock TQ
check
Q: Two adjacent friendly units are attacking
two adjacent enemy units through their
frontal hexes. After pre-shock check, one of
the friendly attacking units routs. The
surviving friendly unit is now in the ZOC of
both enemy units. The friendly unit is not
now required to attack both enemy units in
this phase, correct?
3: If #2 is true does it Shock Attack that unit?
A: 10.42 Replace last paragraph with: “If a
cavalry unit eliminates an already Routed unit,
either in the original or subsequent Shock
combat, the victorious cavalry is moved onehalf (rounding up) its printed MA (or into an
enemy ZOC, whichever comes first) in the
direction it was heading at the time (if in
doubt head for the enemy Retreat Edge) by
the most direct route. It must immediately
Shock attack any unit encountered (as part of
the pursuit). The defending unit may use Entry
Reaction fire (8.22) if eligible. If there is no
2|Page
attack, the player may reface the pursuing
unit at no cost.”
changing the target of pursuit ? Thanks for
clarifying this P.S. can the LC use OW?
Collapse Sequence
A: No. The HC performs its pursuit and the FR
unit performs it duties at the end of the
pursuit. All other units stay where they are.
See 6.75 and note 6.73 #3.
Q: In a 1 unit vs 1 unit shock, if the attacker
ends up with TQ-1 hits and the defender routs
away is the attacker still required to resolve
step 2 and check TQ if in the ZOC of an enemy
that wasn't involved in his shock resolution?
I resolved it as yes but it created some
sequencing confusion on my part with ZOC's
overlapping and changing as I moved thru the
resolution.
A: Yes. As for sequencing, use the order in
which the shocks were resolved using the
approached suggested in the 8.3 procedure.
For 8.37 you do step 1 for all units (Rout),
then step 2 for all units (Check), and then step
3 for all units (Advance).
SPQR: Facing change and cohesion
hits
Q: Although it costs a movement point to
change facing, I'm not clear whether a change
of facing counts as extra movement and thus
causes a cohesion hit. Here's the specific case
in question: a combat unit has moved in a
previous activation phase. In another
activation phase in the same turn, a leader
orders the unit to change its facing in clear
terrain. As the unit has already moved this
turn, does the facing change lead to a
cohesion hit?
Orderly Withdrawal for combat units
vs. leaders
Q: Question regarding Orderly Withdrawal for
combat units vs. leaders in the GBoH series,
i.e. why can a combat unit withdraw when it
sees in enemy approaching from two hexes
away, but a leader does not get to withdraw
until the enemy is adjacent, resulting (in
Devil’s Horsemen, Cataphract, and Chariots of
Fire, anyway) often in the leader getting
captured/eliminated? What's the rationale for
the two types of units being treated
differently?
A: The two hex unit OW trigger mechanic
sidesteps all sorts of issues with ZOCs that are
not relevant to leaders who have no ZOC.
Having a leader alone in a hex is risky
business, especially in the fast moving cavalry
battles. Keep in mind that a leader stacked
with a combat unit that uses Orderly
Withdrawal may withdraw with the unit, so it
best to keep your leader's stacked.
Given that a leader's MA is 9, and there is a
host of MA 9 LC in Cat and DH, even the
standard two hex OW wouldn't be much help
if he is caught alone in hex ....
Q: Yes
H&R and Cavalry Pursuit
Q: Just started The Indus battle, a line of
Mongol LC moves and conducts H&R. If an
enemy HC unit reacts what happens to the LC
line? Can they use feigned retreat and if yes
does the HC checks for reaction again
3|Page
Orderly Withdrawal: definition of
front, flank and rear hexes
Q: We're still having a debate about the OW
thing. The LC is the target, the HC is the
moving unit.
We've marked the front hexes of the LC with
"pre-arranged withdrawal" markers, the flank
hexes with "fired no-move", and the rear with
"leader bypassed" markers. Is this correct?
A: No - Hexes 2204 and 2207 are front. 2404
and 2407 are rear.
Q: If the HC moves into 2207, is it approaching
the flank or the front of the LC?
A: Front. Hexes 2204 and 2207 are front. 2404
and 2407 are rear.
Start with the target unit. The two hexes in its
ZOC and all the hexes in that row are to that
the units front, as are all the hexrows further
in that direction. Any other direction is
flank/rear. Since OW is triggered at a distance
of two hexes, the relevent hexes are the two
ZOC hexes and the hexes on either side in the
same hexrow, and then the three hexes in the
next hexrow away from that unit.
Similar logic for the rear. The flank is in
between the two.
Could you make the corrections and then
repost the picture? I think the principle will
perhaps then be obvious ....
Corrected image:
Orderly Withdrawal: direction
Q: I just have got back from playing
Hydaspes... and after bloody business all that
remains is to ask about possible directions for
performing OW. Is it only possible to
Withdraw to the rear hexes (Play Note at the
end of 6.72 - GBoAlex 4th edition - suggests
this to my friend)? Maybe only toward your
Retreat Edge? What are in fact the legal
possibilities - going forward/flank/rear?
A: The only direction requirement is that the
OW should be away from the unit that
triggred the OW. The absolute direction does
not matter. "Away" means to hex hex further
from the advancing unit if possible or one that
is no closer to the advancing unit.
SPQR: Routing and Rallying stacked
units
Q: A 2 unit stack of LG are routed when the
top unit hit its TQ limit. Does it take 2
Individual Orders to Rally this stack or 1? I
paid the 2 as the Leader had an extra IO to
use anyway but I can see this being an
important savings later on once a side gets
closer to the withdrawal limit.
4|Page
A: An Order allows you to rally one unit -- see
5.22 #4
Q: Now as I you look at the stacking chart I
think the bottom unit should've continued on
1 additional hex as it was a Same Color LG.
Correct?
A: The stacking chart applies. Yes.
Q: And given the above the top unit would
take a TQ check using it's rout TQ of 1?
A: Actually, it takes 1 hit per the chart and is
eliminated. No need to roll. From the errata:
10.27 Replace last bullet with: “Routed units
that incur any additional cohesion hits are
immediately eliminated and removed from
play.”
SPQR: Rout Path Query
Q: A question about a legitimate Rout Path
has arisen in an ongoing game of Heraclea.
The relevent rule is 10.22, which says in the
first two sentences (as amended by the
November 2011 errata):
"A unit which is routed is immediately faced
toward and then moved two hexes toward its
side's Retreat Edge (as defined in the special
rules for each battle). No Movement Points
are expended but the unit must take the most
direct path towards its Retreat Edge that is
not blocked by enemy units, enemy ZOC
(unless occupied by a friendly unit), or
impassable terrain, even if this means moving
into and/or through friendly units."
The position of the unit which is about to start
its initial Rout move (Epirote Heavy Cavalry) is
shown in the image below.
One interpretation of the Rout Path is derived
from = 1. the opening sentence to move the
unit: "two hexes towards its side's Retreat
Edge" + 2. the second sentence: "must take
the most direct path towards its Retreat
Edge" + 3. also second sentence: "even if this
means moving into and/or through friendly
units."
On this interpretation, the Rout Path is
restricted by the combined effect of the
words "the most direct path" and "even if this
means moving into and/or through friendly
units". And so after the initial 2 hex rout, the
routing Heavy Cavalry should be located in
Hex A. However, a looser interpretation,
especially of the words "most direct path",
would allow the routing Heavy Cavalry to end
its initial rout in Hex B.
Alan, which is the correct interpretation? And
thanks again for your help.
A: What is the "direct path" that got you to
"B"? The most direct path to the retreat edge
is through one or the other of the hexes
occupied by the PH unit. The next hex would
be 2637, 2636 - "A", or 2635. Hex 2437 is no
closer to the retreat edge, so how is that a
direct path given the Retreat Edge is on the
bottom? To get to "B", you would have to
5|Page
change facing, so how could that be a more
direct path?
Q: Is the first priority to move in the most
direct path towards the retreat edge [which
should usually give 60° to shift one way or
another] and the second priority to avoid
enemy units?
Or is the first priority to avoid enemy units
and the second priority to move [in the most
direct path - or not] towards the retreat edge?
Suppose, hypothetically, that two armies have
cut each other off. So each army's retreat
edge is past the other army. Do they retreat
away from each other [and away from their
retreat edges] or towards their retreat edges
[and often towards gaps in each other's
lines]?
A: Given the rules as written, it’s the retreat
edge and if the routing unit doesn't have a
path clear of enemy units it's eliminated.
However, buried in the design notes there is
an "escape" clause for veering away from
enemy units/impassable terrain. I will be
addressing this "conflict" in the Alex rules and
then update the errata for SPQR and other
titles. The exact wording is still in process.
Roman leaders’ ability to direct shock
combat
Q: Which units can Roman leaders cause to
shock, when within command range but not
ordered? The gist of the answers on BGG
seemed to be that the same restrictions as for
individual orders apply, which seemed
reasonable to me. Nevertheless, I've been
playing a battle involving Samnites
(Sentinum), which have a similar army
composition, but better leaders and
apparently no command restrictions, which
seems to put the Romans at some
disadvantage.
A: The restrictions for orders apply.
Q: When a leader gives a line command, can
units outside the leader's command radius,
that are part of the line but have otherwise
done nothing choose to shock enemy units in
their ZOC? A strict reading of the rules seems
to indicate they can't (haven't moved, are
outside command radius), but I've since
realized that if they fire missiles then per
7.25C they're allowed to, which seems to be
slightly odd. How do people usually play this?
A: No. The rules mean what they say. Note
that the Shock markers are placed during
movement as the unit moves adjacent to the
enemy unit whether via orders or Line
command. Units that don't move or fire can
only Shock if in command range of the active
leader provided that the leader can command
them.”
Triarii – getting them in into action...
Q: Am currently engaged in a game where the
Triarii are more than six hexes from the
nearest Roman unit, thus invoking SPQR rule
9.71, second bullet. As the Roman force is way
off from losing half of its Rout Points and so
invoking rule 9.72 and unless the first bullet of
9.71 is invoked, I assume that when the Triarii
have moved within six hexes of any Roman
unit they must come to a halt and may not
move again until one or more of the
conditions specified in rules 9.71 and/or 9.72
apply. Am I correct?
A: Once either 9.71 bullet 1 or 2 is met, the
Triarii are no longer under any movement
restrictions. They cannot, however, move and
Shock unless the condition in 9.72 is met -which means that a Triarri cannot move
adjacent to an enemy unit until the condition
in 9.72 is met.
6|Page