[Ammon Jon]

I have been searching through the forums quite a bit to make sure my understanding of Conflict Bonus is correct. I'm pretty sure I understand everything correctly, so I'm going to explain some different scenarios I've run into and would just like it if someone more experienced could let me know if my reading of the rules is correct.

1)My opponent and I are at range (1st Duration) on a terrain with a range of 2. My frontline is Ang Archers and his is made up of Dzaa Gunners. My Archers have the range advantage.


A) If I win Conflict Resolution: We calculate Damage, Extra Damage, and finally CB (he takes 2 CB damage). If the combination of all 3 of these is greater than his chosen troops DV then he Instant Discards.

B) If I lose CR then: Because I am at a greater range than he is capable of firing at, I take no damage and instead take 5 damage to my troop morale (5 MP). I can take actual damage from his Combat Master, but take no damage from the "Extra Damage" step if he played a high card. During Step 7 we calculate CB and he still takes 2 dmg, even though he's attacking.

C)If we draw: We take turns attacking and defending with our lowest ML Troops. He likely takes 5 dmg, and I take 5 MP loss. Combat Masters function as normal. He cannot do Extra Dmg but I can. We calculate CB like normal, causing him to take 2 CB damage for the Draw Round.


2) Same as scenario #1, my Archers versus his Gunners. It is 2nd Duration and we are at normal Ballistic Range now. We are now fighting in Woods, giving defenders a chance to guard using the Guard Bonus of trees.

A)He wins, but I guard: Because I guard we skip the Dmg and Extra Dmg steps. We calculate CB normally and he takes 2 dmg from my Conflict Bonus even though he won.

B)If I win CR, but he guards: He takes no damage from guarding, but takes 2 dmg from my CB.


These were my interpretations of the rules during these situations. Though he was rather annoyed that I had such a ridiculous advantage those first 2 durations, it did make sense in a way. If I was correct, than the Ang Archers have the distint advantage of having more range with their bows and being able to effectively use their home turf against the invaders.

This leads me to ask whoever reads this: Do you build your army after you've already decided on your terrain so that you can gear it towards taking advantage of the terrain? Or do you surprise yourselves with the terrain after you've already set your armies against each other? I figured that, as a leader, you would know where you're sending your troops and would outfit them accordingly. As such, once my friend gets the game I can almost guarantee that when Woods come up again we'll both be using archers or some new rule that allows people with shields to block or whatnot. Thank you in advance for any input on this!

[illuminator]

Hi Ammon Jon

Sorry about the delay in response
To cover off some of the points above:

1A This is correct
1B As combat is simultaneous in WfE what you're showing at the end is that your guys are worse off, though both sides have been firing at each other. The CB shows that because of the higher rate of fire of bows, the archers are more likely to cause more damage to their opponents.
1C as above

When you bring in the rules for formations and the Dzaa get to form ShieldCover, this helps alot in surviving to fight at melee, regardless of Terrain.

You could play either way, knowing the Terrain in advance or not. In a story sense, you could have been forced to face your enemy on Terrain you're not prepared for, or your Scouts never came back to tell you what you were getting into, or they fed you false information because they work for the enemy! etc

I hope you're enjoying your games.