|
|
Post by woodrow on Dec 8, 2018 14:58:53 GMT
So the idea that each wheel counts as a move a group move is based on logic but not explicitly stated. Ok. That's helpful because I didn't know where this idea was coming from.
So with individual elements, movement is calculated by measuring the starting position and the final position to determine if is a legal move, but not so in group moves. In group moves, one measures the starting and final positions of one element in the group that moved the farthest; and that is the maximum distance the group can travel, even if some elements have not moved their full distance. Is this correct?
I always thought it was the final position of each element in the group that was measured, and that each element could move its full distance.
I understand the possible logic behind this but just don't see it in the text. Is this new to 3.0?
Thanks everyone for being patient. I really am just trying to figure this out and not be difficult. I played the other way for 15 years, hundreds of games and I only heard about this on Thursday.
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Dec 8, 2018 15:20:14 GMT
Yes, that is correct.
This is not new to DBA.
It is not in the rules.
It is in the FAQ as it was a Frequently Asked Question (but of course!).
The FAQ team is comprised of members of the DBA development team and friends of that team. It also has on occasion had input from the authors.
I hope this helps.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Dec 8, 2018 18:38:42 GMT
Joe,
What is it that is not said in the rules?
P8: "Tactical moves" para 3: "A group can only move forwards. it moves as if entirely of the slowest type included. Each of its elements must move parallel to or follow the first to move, move the same distance, or wheel forwards through the same angles with the group's entire front edge pivoting around a front corner."
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Dec 8, 2018 19:24:02 GMT
"Any movement by the group is counted against the entire group."
That is not explicitly stated in the rules.
We included it in the FAQ because folks were asking Woodrow's exact question.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 8, 2018 19:41:35 GMT
Perhaps using the word "counted" is causing a problem. This is a Phil Barker word. It means that distance moved by any element in the group is considered to be moved by all. If the outer front corner of an element moving at the end of the line goes 2BW then all are considered (are counted) as moving 2BW even if they do not actually move that distance when measured on the table. Measure the outermost element and apply it to all.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Dec 8, 2018 22:14:33 GMT
While we are on the subject, I’d just like to say a quick word about ‘inclining’. Take the following diagram:- Bd Bd Bd \ \ \ \ \ \ Bd Bd Bd Why is this not allowed? At first glance it seems to fulfill all the group movement requirements of page 8 paragraph 10:- The elements have all moved forwards... The elements have all moved parallel to each other... The elements have all moved the same distance... The elements have all moved through the same angles... ...ah, but the last sentence of page 8 paragraph 10 says “No other changes of direction are allowed”. That’s why it is not permissible...‘inclining’ like this is clearly a change of direction. (i.e. the group is not facing in exactly the same direction as it is moving). Having said that, it is possible to end a move so that it looks like a group has inclined...if you have enough movement that is. Cv and LH could wheel a group 2 BW to the left then wheel back 2 BW to the right to get the same effect. But that is a double-wheel...not a single inclining move. And please note that it is possible to move a group sideways...see page 8, paragraph 10, last sentence once more:- “No other changes in frontage, direction or facing can be made, even if within a TZ, except to pivot, wheel and/or slide sideways to line-up in an enemy TZ, or to conform in close combat.” (Isn’t this a bit contradictory? First it says “No changes in direction or facing can be made, even if within a TZ”...
...but then its says “except to pivot or wheel (thus changing facing/direction) or slide sideways to line-up when in a TZ”!
The bit in red seems superfluous and redundant...or am I missing something?) Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on Dec 9, 2018 3:11:23 GMT
Perhaps using the word "counted" is causing a problem. This is a Phil Barker word. It means that distance moved by any element in the group is considered to be moved by all. If the outer front corner of an element moving at the end of the line goes 2BW then all are considered (are counted) as moving 2BW even if they do not actually move that distance when measured on the table. Measure the outermost element and apply it to all. When checking what PB might mean when using a word I check my circa 1905 dictionary.
Count is to enumerate; to compute; to consider; to judge; to reckon. So counted can mean to be considered or taken into account.
David Constable
P.S. - PB probably has a bigger problem with words than I do, it is surprising how often I find a word I learnt at school is now obsolete. In this case compute has a very different meaning.
|
|
|
|
Post by woodrow on Dec 9, 2018 4:50:26 GMT
Joe, What is it that is not said in the rules? P8: "Tactical moves" para 3: "A group can only move forwards. it moves as if entirely of the slowest type included. Each of its elements must move parallel to or follow the first to move, move the same distance, or wheel forwards through the same angles with the group's entire front edge pivoting around a front corner." Scott Thanks Scott. I'm confued how you think that quote says anything about the rule that has been developed by the FAQ team. That is the reason I started this post. There is nothing there to substantiate this rule. Don't get me wrong, I'm ok with it if that understanding has developed and that is the way people wish to play. I'm just saying that rule is not found in that sentence or that paragraph, or anywhere else in the book. It is a rule by convention. |
|
|
|
Post by woodrow on Dec 9, 2018 4:52:50 GMT
Joe, What is it that is not said in the rules? P8: "Tactical moves" para 3: "A group can only move forwards. it moves as if entirely of the slowest type included. Each of its elements must move parallel to or follow the first to move, move the same distance, or wheel forwards through the same angles with the group's entire front edge pivoting around a front corner." Scott I'd like to add that it actually says that the elements in the group move the same distance. I guess the fact is that it is unclear, hence the need for interpretation. |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Dec 9, 2018 10:47:30 GMT
Joe, What is it that is not said in the rules? P8: "Tactical moves" para 3: "A group can only move forwards. it moves as if entirely of the slowest type included. Each of its elements must move parallel to or follow the first to move, move the same distance, or wheel forwards through the same angles with the group's entire front edge pivoting around a front corner." Scott I'd like to add that it actually says that the elements in the group move the same distance. I guess the fact is that it is unclear, hence the need for interpretation. I would suggest it says that the elements move the same distance OR wheel through the same angle. So your double wheel consists of a pivot around one front corner, so half a move, accounting for 7.5 minutes, the outside element moving 1BW (assuming there are some heavy foot in there), and the rest of the group pivoting through the same angle, followed by a pivot in the other direction about that element's outside front corner, accounting for the rest of the time allocated for the bound. The group has then moved forwards 1BW and shuffled sideways a tiny bit. I think the bit about the whole group counting as having moved as far as the furthest moving element is a way of saying that the pivot (where all elements specifically do not move the same distance) accounts for that particular fraction of time allocated for the bound. |
|
|
|
Post by woodrow on Dec 9, 2018 14:21:32 GMT
Thanks everyone for your time and patience walking me through this concept and putting up with my objections. I'm not easily convinced sometimes, but I fully understand it now and I get where the faq team is coming from.
You are all gentlemen. Much appreciated.
Cheers,
Woodrow
|
|
|
|
Post by Vic on Dec 10, 2018 12:56:08 GMT
It makes intuitive sense that group movements count against all elements in them: after all, if a line is wheeling while maintaining formation, the elements in the non-moving end still have to wait for the far end to move - limiting the time they have available for moving.
The case can be made that instead of just waiting there for the other end to move they could break formation and rearrange at the end position, but that "time cost" for retaining formation is essentially what the PIP discount for group moving represents - the lessened need for organisation and command by sticking to formation. If you want the elements to move separately and possibly utilise more of their movement allowance than by wheeling, you can always move them element by element - paying the additional PIP cost for organising the move separately.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluestone28 on Dec 12, 2018 9:00:20 GMT
While we are on the subject, I’d just like to say a quick word about ‘inclining’. Take the following diagram:- Bd Bd Bd \ \ \ \ \ \ Bd Bd Bd Why is this not allowed? At first glance it seems to fulfill all the group movement requirements of page 8 paragraph 10:- The elements have all moved forwards... The elements have all moved parallel to each other... The elements have all moved the same distance... The elements have all moved through the same angles... ...ah, but the last sentence of page 8 paragraph 10 says “No other changes of direction are allowed”. That’s why it is not permissible...‘inclining’ like this is clearly a change of direction. (i.e. the group is not facing in exactly the same direction as it is moving). Having said that, it is possible to end a move so that it looks like a group has inclined...if you have enough movement that is. Cv and LH could wheel a group 2 BW to the left then wheel back 2 BW to the right to get the same effect. But that is a double-wheel...not a single inclining move. And please note that it is possible to move a group sideways...see page 8, paragraph 10, last sentence once more:- “No other changes in frontage, direction or facing can be made, even if within a TZ, except to pivot, wheel and/or slide sideways to line-up in an enemy TZ, or to conform in close combat.” (Isn’t this a bit contradictory? First it says “No changes in direction or facing can be made, even if within a TZ”...
...but then its says “except to pivot or wheel (thus changing facing/direction) or slide sideways to line-up when in a TZ”!
The bit in red seems superfluous and redundant...or am I missing something?)
it said that wheel must be forward only, so "slide" result is limited, i can understand that a group move is difficult (slower and hard to have all units moving in the right way) thanks for that, as for now i moved quite freely, too much freely in fact!  if i want to move freely on a slide i have to pay more pips... ok thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Dec 12, 2018 13:38:49 GMT
"...you can always move them element by element - paying the additional PIP cost for organising the move separately."
That's great if you roll a lot of 6's for PIPS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vic on Dec 12, 2018 14:37:33 GMT
"...you can always move them element by element - paying the additional PIP cost for organising the move separately." That's great if you roll a lot of 6's for PIPS. Exactly... which is why wheeling groups are so important  |
|
