|
Post by paulisper on Jun 25, 2020 21:01:48 GMT
For my penn'orth, the LCh recoils. In its bound it can either turn to face the cavalry in combat, move directly to its rear, or stand still. If it stands still it must conform to the cavalry at the end of the movement phase. Having now read h rules, it always helps, and discussed it, and what's more encountered it in real play, I am now firmly of the opinion that the LCh is not able to recoil and is destroyed. I think that is Paulisper option 1. The Facebook discussion has ended up with rejecting option 1 and has moved to a broad acceptance of option 2, which I’m comfortable with 😄 P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 25, 2020 20:59:17 GMT
No
P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 22, 2020 21:13:24 GMT
About 3/4 of the way through Dan Jones’ Crusaders and, like his other work, it’s a cracking read - highly recommended 👍 P same here, Saladin just entered the picture spoiler alert - he was not good news for those crusading boys 🤣😱 P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 22, 2020 16:36:03 GMT
About 3/4 of the way through Dan Jones’ Crusaders and, like his other work, it’s a cracking read - highly recommended 👍
P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 22, 2020 7:19:21 GMT
In addition to the Saxons, which I received late on last year, I took hold of some of their new Byzantine range a couple of weeks ago and they’re very nice indeed.. 😎
P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 22, 2020 7:15:59 GMT
I would say yes, as the conforming rules would apply here... the combat would then be resolved next bound P Unless the victor pursues, obviously. In that case, presumably the contacted element conforms either to the side or the rear edge of the recoiling element? That’s an interesting case and logically I would say that it keeps fighting the unit to its front that has pursued and remains in contact. The other element will conform to the rear of the pursued element and contribute a -1. P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 21, 2020 21:10:46 GMT
Three of the 6x7Hd for the Sassanid Persians now done and, for a quick change up, I'm painting up the 2 cataphract figures required, and rebasing the rest, to sort out the 3x4Kn elements needed before returning to the horde
P.
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 21, 2020 18:12:00 GMT
Just to expand the discussion: A recoiling element which contacts an enemy element ends its move there. So far, so clear. If it contacts the front edge of an enemy element with, for example, its rear corner, does it then turn to face that element? I would say yes, as the conforming rules would apply here... the combat would then be resolved next bound P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 21, 2020 12:27:11 GMT
The key to this is two-fold: 1 - Does the corner-to-corner contact apply here? If so, then the chariot cannot recoil and is destroyed. Initially, I was opposed to this perspective, but if you apply the concept of overlapping in combat to this situation, then you could say that the chariot and Cv are in corner-to-corner contact and the chariot is destroyed, as it cannot start its recoil move 2 - If you do allow the recoil, then I believe the chariot should turn at the end of the combat round and fight the Cv next bound P. If the front corner counts as part of the front edge, which I think it would have to for 1 to apply, that would create other difficulties. Consider fig 16c. Ax B's front corner is in contact with the side edge of Ps Y. If we treat the corner as part of the B's front edge, the Ps will be unable to recoil and so would be destroyed if it loses the combat against Ax C. My view is that edges are edges and corners are corners and never the twain......Oh, hang on a minute. Well you know what I mean. ("Meet me on the point where the edges join when the lights are coming on and I'll be there...." etc etc) I'm with you on this one - I think if you say that the two corners are in contact and this causes the recoiling unit to be destroyed, then we're opening up a whole can of worms. For me the 'rear corner' or 'rear edge' aspect is if the element cannot physically recoil, because it has one or the other of these actually in contact with a friendly or enemy element at the start of the recoil and thus cannot move at all. The chariot, in the example, can recoil easily by sliding into the 40mm square gap, so should be able to do so... P.
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 20, 2020 22:18:23 GMT
My own view is the situation is contrived and/or illegal. The likelihood of all these elements being in exactly the required configuration is improbable. Any deviation from the perpendicular of the recoil, even the slightest, would either stop the recoil or leave a sliver of space between the chariot and the cavalry. If not, the chariot is destroyed by being unable to recoil, its rear corner already having rear corner to front corner contact with an enemy element at the point the combat is resolved. This is my preferred resolution. It's improbable, yes, but not impossible. In the example, it looks like the Cv had recoiled the first chariot and then the Bd recoiled the second chariot. You have to ask how the player commanding the chariot force had got himself into this mess in the first place!! P.
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 20, 2020 22:15:05 GMT
The key to this is two-fold:
1 - Does the corner-to-corner contact apply here? If so, then the chariot cannot recoil and is destroyed. Initially, I was opposed to this perspective, but if you apply the concept of overlapping in combat to this situation, then you could say that the chariot and Cv are in corner-to-corner contact and the chariot is destroyed, as it cannot start its recoil move
2 - If you do allow the recoil, then I believe the chariot should turn at the end of the combat round and fight the Cv next bound
P.
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 20, 2020 16:10:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 20, 2020 8:45:49 GMT
I do understand what you are saying Tom, that geometric ploys should not be used to prevent contact. But consider Zendor’s diagrams from the opposite perspective...should the Blade lined-up with the Psiloi be allowed to bypass the Aux (which is closer and who’s TZ it is in) so that it can contact the Psiloi? HoTT wouldn’t allow it, as you’d have to contact the closest TZ generator. DBMM wouldn’t allow it, as you’d only be allowed to move in a straight line into contact. So why should DBA 3.0 allow it? I have to say that I’m not comfortable with the Bd being allowed to do this, as it is moving away from being lined up in the TZ to then swing back to contact the Ps. You could use some of the same arguments as previous for the reverse move, but I don’t believe that this is in the spirit of what was intended... P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 19, 2020 13:22:15 GMT
So remind me about rivers Oh, sweet Jesus, please don’t go there... P
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 18, 2020 19:23:29 GMT
I don't think it does if you use stevie's "designated target" interpretation, Baldie. You just designate the element to the side as the target and get stuck in. But if we dont kill the one we were fighting we can only choose that one to go in against and ignore any of the other, possibly three elements on our flanks and rear. No, you can choose to fight anything that you’re in the TZ of, irrespective of whether they’re to your front, flank or rear 😊 P
|
|