Correct. You could also have used the corps command Detach Move to make the same attack.



Correct.

Now do that again but this time have units adjacent to more than one approach. After he names all of his units as defenders of the first approach, he won't have any left over to defend an attack from the second approach.

Or be even trickier and have cav two locales away that can get there by road (across a different approach, of course).

Thanks for that fast help! I´ll see what I can do with your advice (as a working title I mused "crush the enemy")

However, I have already found a little weakness in this probe attack. The enemy can comfortably name two 2 strength Inf or even less as leading units and still be sure to win an engagement by counterattack. I initially thought he might have to reveal the vital information whether there is a 3 strength unit in that corps, because he has to fear attack of my full corp.

This is why most attacks take more than one turn, often in conjunction with flank maneuvers.

Very true. This all depends on the situation; time of day, where your other units are, where his are (especially if he has any more in the same locale as opposed to that one lone corps). The situation will help determine how one attacks and how one defends in the situation you describe. For example, and as charsep and I were alluding to in our previous posts, if an attack is made across an approach and the defender has one corps as the only units in the locale (and they're in the reserve), and a second attack can be made across a different approach of that locale (even if only a feint), the attacker desperately wants the defender to defend with their whole corps, counterattack notwithstanding. They're committed to defending only that approach, once they declare it. If they do so, and then if even a lone cav unit from two locales away attacks (which would normally be a feint) across a second approach of the defender's locale, the entire defending corps has to skedaddle (and break apart, more importantly).

My apologies if you're already aware of this, as it does become very apparent very soon in learning the game.

But yes, it can be a long slog, two strong corps going at it across a locale.

There are of course many more subtleties to even just the defense declaration portion of the rules. If the defender breaks off only a couple of units to defend an approach (learning from a corps that had, in its entirety, defended a single approach only to be attacked through a second approach) and those units win the attack and stay in the defense locale (and no other units move in to support them later in the turn), only those two units can defend across that approach; even if there are some huge corps in the reserve, they can't help defend, and if an attack breaks through those two defending units, well, see the shattered corps thing above.

This is a beauty of a game to behold.

I'm still trying to master the rules of NT, so I have a quick question about this situation. (Keep in mind that I'm not a BaM player, so my apologies if the answer is obvious.)

It's not clear to me what happens when a cavalry unit executes a feint attack in the situation (described above) where there are no units in either the defending approach or in the defending reserve, but there are units in other approaches in the defense locale. Is it an automatic loss/retreat for these units, as you describe above? I couldn't find anything in the "feint" rules to address this situation.

My problem, I think, lies in the stated rules that all road attacks (a) must be feints and (b) must be executed by cavalry. To me, this leaves open the possibility that a lone cavalry unit would (per the normal feint rules) be forced to stop in the attacking locale or move to the attack approach - even if there were no units to defend.

Now that I think about it - and which you seem to imply - the attack never reaches the "feint" stage, since the defender isn't able to name any defending units. Therefore, the following rule comes into effect: "If no defending pieces are named, then the defender must retreat." Is that correct? Does this rule in effect supercede the "road attacks must be feints" rule?

That's exactly right. Note that at the end of Step 2 before Step 3 (feints) it says "A retreat before combat ends the attack: the remaining steps in the combat procedure are ignored." The best way to learn the rules is follow the procedures like a recipe or like a computer executing a program. After a few games it will become automatic.